SOCIAL FORESTRY

* Introduction and concept

* Difference between Agro and Social forestry

* Social forestry in India

* Farm Forestry

1. Block Planting

2. Peripheral Planting

1. Extension Forestry

* Case Studies

* Problems in social forestry

Introduction and Concept
The National Commission on Agriculture, Government of India, first used the term social forestry in 1976. It was then that India embarked upon a social forestry project with the aim of taking the pressure off the forests and making use of all unused and fallow land. Government forest areas that are close to human settlement and have been degraded over the years due to human activities needed to be afforested. Trees were to be planted in and around agricultural fields. Plantation of trees along railway lines and roadsides, and river and canal banks were carried out. They were planted in village common land, Government wasteland and Panchayat land.
Social forestry also aims at raising plantations by the common man so as to meet the growing demand for timber, fuel wood, fodder, etc, thereby reducing the pressure on the traditional forest area. This concept of village forests to meet the needs of the rural people is not new. It has existed through the centuries all over the country but it was now given a new character
Social forestry is a concept or mission and a program that aims at providing social, economic and environmental security to the people especially those who are poor and more so to the downtrodden, by involving them as beneficiaries right form the planting stage to the harvesting stage. It envisages the use of village land, community land, wasteland and degraded land to raise crops that will be useful for the community as a whole. Concept of social forestry will be different in different regions.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOCIAL AND AGRO FORESTRY


Agro ForestrySocial Forestry

Combines with the production of agriculture, crops, forest, forest plants and fodder species simultaneously or sequentially on the same units of landInclude forest crops including food, fodder, fuel wood and small timber to meet the multifarious demands of the society

It is a different package of technology that has to be developed before implementationThis is not required in social forestry and fallow lands are utilized for raising forest crops

There is a close crop relationship whose cultivation is determined by the demands of region, demands of person etc.Forest crops are raised either independently or in combination with other forest crops including legumes and grasses. This does not require such a deep research on the interrelationships.

Guided generally by economic consideration taken into account the combined yield of trees and agriculture cropsSocial demands and requirement are more important than any other economic conservation.

It is done on dry-lands water logged, alkaline and saline soils and nearly all cultivable areas and forest blocks.It is practiced around field bunds, palm pond unproductive land and village common.



FARM FORESTRY IS A PART OF AGRO FORESTRY

Social forestry in India took the form of farm forestry. Farm forestry has two components:

(i) Peripheral Planting: it involves the planting of the forest at the edge of the form. The selected trees were of mulberry.

Advantages:

1. Requires little amount of space

2. It acted as an umbrella for the farm

3. It was used to improve the productivity of marginal lands

4. Judicial selection of the trees helps and encourages the biological pest control

Disadvantages:

1. The shadow reduced the productivity

2. The leaf litter derived there called for some type of weed control.

(ii) Block Planting

Advantages

1. It helps to utilize the farmers fields which have reduced to agricultural efficiency

2. It provides substantial income to the farmers

Disadvantages

1. It has a mono-cultural plantation that provides nutrition deficiency.

2. Eucalyptus trees planted under this were responsible for the lowering of the water table.

Both components of farm forestry were part of centralized sachems of the government. This has been one of the most successful aspects of the social forestry in which saplings were distributed to the farmers for afforestation on their field bunds.

Further, in order to encourage poor farmers to undertake afforestation, saplings were distributed free. The department established large centralized nurseries primarily of eucalyptus for distribution to farmers. Eucalyptus was selected not because the poor farmers wanted it for fuel and fodder but because it was easier and cheaper to raise eucalyptus sapling and because they were non-browsable and had a ready market.

In reality farm forestry became subsidized program for the bigger farmers and they came in their trucks and tractors and collected thousand of free saplings planting them in their fields. Many converted agricultural lands to eucalyptus plantation because of their higher profits and when the trees were ready they sold produce in markets as poles or wood for paper and pulp industry. The mission of fuel wood and fodder for the rural poor seemed sight fact by the strategies followed.

Another reason for large centralized nurseries and free distribution was the pressure to achieve targets. What land, what survival rates, who benefited all of these became inconvenient questions. The major beneficiaries have been larger farmers on one hand, and paper and pulp and building industry on other. Acute shortages of fuel wood and fodder continued to persist.

CASE STUDIES

Chipko Movement

It is a successful story of afforestation and sustainable use of forests and the principle of equality in the distribution of equal resources. In the chipko villages in the Himalayas, the women in villages have organized themselves for safeguarding their ecosystem and developing their fuel wood and fodder resources in their common land. They identified fragile slopes and planted them to prevent landslides. The species were planted by the liking of the people. Chipko woman have developed an equity approach to sharing the biomass. They all are entitled to ahead load of the commons on a given day date of the week and this is strictly adhered to.

Sukhomadri

It is another successful example of local organization based on equitable sharing of resources in the Shivalik hills. The sukhomadri village has been able to protect its watershed and saved the village from falling into a widening gauge because of massive erosion. Apart from it they have been also able to achieve social well-being of the village people in the span of 3-4 years. This village also established the water users association which provide equal share of rain water collected by building a small dam. Even the landless are entitled to eco-share which they can barter for share cropping, money etc. Everyone in the village has vested interest in safeguarding watershed so that the dam does not get silted. Although the forest department did try to impose certain restrictions but realized later on that unless the people themselves do not show concern and the communities did not get involve, they will hardly be able to safeguard their watershed. When the community established its own organization and assured equitable distinction of benefits, only then the every member of the community endeavored to safeguard afforestation in the watershed.

However, Social foresting program of government dominated by bureaucracy eliminated wider participation of people in their own programme. Lack of land use policy and market for minor produce of beneficiaries further accentuated the problem.

PROBLEMS WITH SOCIAL FORESTRY


1. Social forestry was conceived as people centered program. A program to empower poor people for the fuel wood, fodder and other timber needs. But it actually became a government program and the program of the forest department.

2. Peoples participation was the major causality and it was realized later on that peoples participation cannot be achieved through bureaucratic structure.

3. There had been a neglect of land use policy especially for the forest lands, revenue lands and community lands and the price for this had been paid by the poor.

4. Different administrative jurisdictions of land have led to property and custodial approaches to land use policies, irrespective of their best use and contribution to social welfare.

5. There is a lack of appropriate policy regarding access of land for afforestation purposes. Deformed act and laws hindered rather than motivate people, resulted in vested interest controlling social forestry program. Instead of fuel wood and fodder, social forestry has largely provided raw materials to paper, pulp and building industry by passing rural poor.

6. The structure of marketing arrangements and pricing of minor fodder produce has been totally ignored in comparison of production efforts under social forestry program. The forest cooperatives which have once played a significant role have now been disappeared.

7. The employment programs under anti-poverty schemes have specific target provision to cover forest development work which could be easily linked to social forestry program. Such linkage is missing due to lack of coordination among government departments.

8. Social forestry programs did not involve the women who had to collect the fuel for the family everyday. It has also not involved the tribals who are deeply interested in promotion and protection of forests.

Details-
Raj Singh Yadav
URL-
http://edugreen.teri.res.in/explore/forestry/social.htm/
http://www.preservearticles.com/
http://www.google.com