Massive Destruction of Meghalaya Forests

New Delhi, Feb 7 : The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) appointed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Meghalaya forest department to submit details of timber seized in the state between 2002 and 2009 to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF).

The committee was hearing a case filed by Ranjit Singh Gill, a joint director level official at Forest Survey of India (FSI), who has alleged roughly 12 million cubic feet of timber worth thousands of crores was taken out of reserved forests in Garo hills.

Gill had first written to the director general of FSI in November 2010 that Meghalaya's forest cover, as reported in the state of forest report (SFR) in 2009, did not match with what he had seen on the ground. He also charged that the SFR did not record that two reserved forests were greatly ravaged.

Following Gill's 2010 complaint, FSI had sent a team of four officials, including Gill, to Meghalaya. The team inspected Dibru hills reserved forest and Holloidonga beat in the West Garo hills districts. It found the area "littered with huge stumps" of felled trees and all but confirmed Gill's charge that there had been massive destruction of forests in East Garo hills.

"Based on the area of forest wiped out and the size of stumps we saw, it's estimated that 12 million cubic feet of timber worth thousands of crores was taken out of Dibru hills reserved forest in Garo between 2004 and 2006," said Gill.

The FSI's 2009 report, it is learnt, was based on satellite imagery collected in October 2006. It had concluded that Meghalaya's forest cover was 77.23% of the state's total geographical area, and had glossed over the destruction of reserved forests that Gill was pointing at.

A Meghalaya government representative, who was at the CEC hearing, said, "We have all the records of seized tree stumps. We will submit these to MoEF as soon as we reach Meghalaya." The CEC observed that if the state government were willing, then proceedings of the case will go on until the tru extent of Meghalaya's forest cover is established.

"We do not deny that there could be over-assessment of forest cover. This is because bamboo, orange orchards and areca nut plantations are also recorded as forests. But agricultural land cannot be called forest. There is an issue with the technology used to assess forest cover by FSI. We would like to know what exactly is the forest cover of Meghalaya?" said a Meghalaya forest official, G F Shullai.

The next hearing is on February 28.