User:Hajn3621/sandbox

Please don’t bite me, I’m a newbie!

I’m a university student in a Wikipedia Education class, and I’m currently learning how to contribute to Wikipedia.
This page is a work in progress and I am approaching my subject in good faith.

Thanks!

Evolution of the Compensatory Afforestation Scheme

this figure shows the ecology

In its basic form, the compensatory afforestation program is a way of coming up with alternative replacements for land being used for non-forestry purposes. Non-forestry purposes consist of all artificial activities such as gentrification or cultivation taking place in a previously forested area. In retrospect, compensatory afforestation is carried due to agriculture and any other land use other than reforestation like industry building. Compensatory afforestation cannot be applied to development, conservation, and management of wildlife and forests such as fire lines, the establishment of check-posts, wireless communication, and construction of fences, culverts, bridges, and other similar purposes. The entity funding the project bears the cost incurred by the compensating forest.

Details Governing the Compensatory Afforestation Scheme

• Name of the institution or individual responsible for the project
• Delineation of the proposed area to be covered by the project
• Details of work schedule
• A detailed proposal of the compensating mechanism
• Details of the lad to be used for compensatory purposes.
• Cost of the plantation means for financing the project and proposed efficient use of funds

Diversification of Community Forests—Legal Parameters

the forest

On 2017 November 8th MoEF&CC Ministry of environment, forest, and climate change issued detailed parameters that should be followed when selecting land for compensation. The guideline highlighted the suitability and the process for identification of the land bank for compensatory afforestation (Pib.nic.in., 2019). The Forest Conservation Act of 1980 stipulates that afforestation is to be carried out only when land is provided for compensation when the land is diverted for non-forest purposes. Compensation can be done over an equivalent area or a degraded area twice the land of the forest if the non-forestland is not available. Any entity looking to deforest an area must seek clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests before the intended project commencing. The proposal is submitted through the relevant state or government Ministry of Environment and Forests official. The proposal should be comprehensive and address all aspects of the project extensively. The proposal should contain the magnitude of the project both financially and physically, an area map detailing the coverage of the project, details of flora and fauna covering the area, cost structure, and certificate from a relevant practicing official. Once the clearance is issued, the compensation for the forest is decided by the relevant regulators and the ministry.

Brief History of national CAMPA and Compensatory Afforestation bill

in 2002, the Supreme Court noted the misappropriation in the funds collected for the afforestation claim and how the states underutilized the funds. In regard to the failing system of fund usage and appropriation, the Supreme Court Ordered for a better and centrally organized pooling of funds, and hence National CAMPA took on the role. In 2009 states had begun setting up state CAMPA offices to streamline the flow of services (Anon, 2019). The state offices received 10% of funds form the National CAMPA to use for forest conservation and afforestation purposes. In 2013, a CAG report revealed that the funds were still underutilized by the states. The Bill of Compensatory Afforestation in 2015 was brought forward by the government as a remedy to regulate and monitor the collected funds. Raiya Sabha passed the bill after an examination by the standing committee.

The efficiency of the Compensatory Afforestation Guidelines

The guidelines from MoEF detail that in case the land proposed as a site for the relocation of the existing forest already contains a portion of vegetation or substantial density, the scheme will not adequately balance as there will not be enough space to plant the requisite trees on the suggested area. Rather than directly turning down the application from project managers and overseers, the Ministry of Environment and Forests suggests that at least one thousand plants per Hectare should be planted on the non-forested land. The compromise to some extent provides relief by further detailing that if the 1000 plants per hectare are not possible due to cramped space and preexisting vegetation on the non-forested land, the number of “carried over” plants can be relocated to degraded forests.

Problems arising from the Implementation of the Scheme

Between 1980 and 2004 approximately 9.21 lakh hectare of land for forest use had been converted for non-forest purposes and land adding up to 2.19 lakh hectare had been saved after the creation of the Ad-hoc Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) up to March 2015 (Downtoearth.org.in. 2019).

image show the land after afforestation program

Nonetheless, much for the funds designated for the CA scheme remained idle due to conflict among states and the center over the use of the large sum of money. Much of the money had remained frozen for an extended period without any substantial improvement to the situation. Moreover, the failure of the states to collect funds from the agencies concerned with the appropriation of the finances contributed to the delay. Amidst the disagreements by the state and the agencies, some NGOs had made a move to find relief in the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court in an April 3rd, 2000 ruling fixed the details surrounding the proper operation of the compensatory Afforestation on the Ministry of Environment and Forests. The Supreme Court further ordered the Ministry of Environment and Forest to govern issue stipulation that provides delineation of responsibilities during the time of grant of forest clearance ("Landmark Supreme Court Judgment- Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India", 2019).

In October 2002 the Supreme Court directed the making of a CA fund in which the funds received from the user agencies towards the Compensatory afforestation, penal compensatory (any afforestation work undertaken without the lawful procedure applied in lieu with the extent of the area to be covered by the project), future compensatory afforestation, net value of the forest land, treatment plans for catchment areas, etc. were to be collected.

CAMPA was thus instructed by the Ministry OF Environment and Forests, under the powers conferred by section 3(3) of the Environment Protection Act of 1983 at the bidding of the Supreme_court ("International Environment Protection Act of 1983 (1983 - S. 1067)", 2019). The Hon’ble Supreme Court on July 10th, 2009 issued a mandate that the CAMPA would have a National Advisory Council under the leadership of the Union Minister of Environment and Forests Monitoring, evaluation and technical assistance of the Compensatory Afforestation activities.

References

1. Pib.nic.in. (2019). “Release of compensatory afforestation fund to states will help in meeting Nation’s INDCs”: Dr. Harsh Vardhan. [Online] Available at:
2. “Release of compensatory afforestation fund to states will help in meeting Nation’s INDCs”: Dr. Harsh Vardhan. (2019). Retrieved from http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=181889
3. Anon, (2019). [Online] Available at: http://moefrolko.org/ [Accessed 7 May 2019].
4. Arthapedia.in. (2019). Compensatory Afforestation - Arthapedia. [Online] Available at: http://www.arthapedia.in/index.php?title=Compensatory_Afforestation [Accessed 7 May 2019].
5. Downtoearth.org.in. (2019). Centre’s new guidelines on compensatory afforestation ignore communities’ concerns. [Online] Available at:
6. Centre’s new guidelines on compensatory afforestation ignore communities’ concerns. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/forests/centre-s-new-guidelines-on-compensatory-afforestation-ignores-communities-concerns-59077
7. International Environment Protection Act of 1983 (1983 - S. 1067). (2019). Retrieved from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/98/s1067
8. https://www.livemint.com. (2019). Business News, Shares Market, Stock Markets News LIVE - IPO, Mutual Funds, Income Tax and Finance News. [Online] Available at: https://www.livemint.com/ [Accessed 7 May 2019].
9. Landmark Supreme Court Judgment- Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India. (2019). Retrieved from https://lawnn.com/parivartan-kendra-v-union-of-india/