Karnataka’s forest officials face a tough dilemma over proceeding with a tribal relocation programme to preserve forests. The programme is under the aegis of the Forest Rights Act, a central law aimed at protecting forests while ensuring that the tribals relocated to protect nemorous ecosystems are adequately compensated. It came into force on January 1, 2008 in response to the historical injustice of not recognising the rights of tribal communities.
The National Tiger Conservation Authority and the forest, environment and ecology ministry have directed the forest personnel in all states to relocate tribals wherever necessary to minimise man-animal conflict and protect the forest ecosystems.
In November 2024, after a review meeting of the forest, revenue and rural development and panchayati raj departments, Karnataka’s chief minister directed providing facilities like roads, power, water, sewage, schools and below-poverty-line cards to tribals dwelling on the fringes of forested areas.
The forest officials’ dilemma is that they have to choose between being a tool of what they consider political appeasement by providing facilities to tribals in the forests—especially after being threatened by some MLAs with criminal proceedings for not providing them—or face action if they do not relocate the tribals.
Experts point out that providing facilities inside forests and their fringes is a dangerous proposition. Drawing power lines has proved dangerous to elephants, who are victims of a rising number of electrocution cases, besides a noticeable increase in man-animal conflicts due to some of the tribals returning, lured by the promise of new facilities.
This is happening despite the state government enhancing the compensation to tribals from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 15 lakh along with agricultural land and pukka houses.
This goes against the efforts of protecting forests and compromises tribal communities’ constitutional rights to settle anywhere for proper livelihood opportunities.
Forest ecosystems face threats from multiple factors such as infrastructure development, land diversion, mining, poaching and degradation. The state government needs to take a holistic approach that encourages tribal forest dwellers to engage in forest-based livelihoods that does not degrade forests, and give clear-cut, non-conflicting directives to the forest department. The need of the hour is to ensure that forests as well as tribal communities are well protected.