Editorial
Felling of trees in the tea gardens
Reconsider decision
IT is not surprising that the large-scale felling of trees in a tea garden in Srimangal has outraged people everywhere. We wonder whether the forest department's order, issued in 2008 permitting the cutting down of the trees, had considered all the relevant pros and cons of the issue. It may be recalled that the order was held in abeyance (by then more than 1000 trees had been cut down) by the forest department in the face of opposition from the locals living in the area and environmental activists, only to be allowed again, this time with enhanced rate of royalty.
We understand that tea gardens and the adjoining areas are pruned from time to time as a part of the process of maintenance and upkeep; and with every tree chopped down a new sapling has to be planted. In this case the fact is that the clearing is being done as part of the expansion plan of the garden.
One should not have any reservations about development of the tea garden except that the area under expansion is inhabited by Khasias who have been living there for a long time. The forest is not only their home but also provides for their livelihood and daily needs. It goes without saying that the deforestation will adversely affect the Khasias who risk displacement from their ancestral homes. It will have adverse impact on their traditional way of living apart from the negative consequence on the environment as well as on the fauna and flora in the area. We must also consider how extremely important it is to maintain our forest coverage and do everything in our capacity to keep as many trees alive as possible. This is needed for us -- the inhabitants of this land.
We could not empathise more with those affected by the order and also with the environmentalists with whose voice of concern we would like to add ours. We feel that the government should prefer an appeal against the HC verdict because there may be merit in the comments of Bangladesh Paribesh Andolon that not all the facts were produced before the court, and those that were produced were incomplete and one-sided.
And in this regard, it would be our request to the HC, although it had given the go ahead to the felling of the trees on a writ by the owner of the tea garden, to reconsider its decision, given that there are precedence of the HC's taking suo moto notice, particularly of matters relating to the environment and human rights.
Comments