COVER STORY (Spotlight Weekly)

TERAI'S FOREST
Challenge For Management

Forest management in the terai has always lacked accountability and transparency, often sparking controversy. Encouraged by the successful experiment of community forestry programs in the hills, donors are pressing for the introduction of a similar concept in the terai forests. Unlike in the hills, however, users groups in the terai are so large that it is virtually impossible to conduct affairs in an open way. For its part, the government is drafting a Forest Act Amendment Bill that would give greater authority to the District Forest Office to manage national forest in the terai. Whether policy makers can find a way of harnessing Nepal's economically valuable forests without hurting the interests of users groups remains to be seen.

By KESHAB POUDEL

Community-managed forests at the Chula Chuli region in Ilam and Jhapa districts are on the verge of ruin as some members of local users group are allegedly hobnobbing with timber smugglers.

There is a similar situation in parts of Rupandehi, Bara, Rautahat, and Kapilvastu districts, as some members of users groups are allegedly involved in the felling of trees in the national forests and selling them.

Interestingly, community forestry programs in the interior hills that border all the terai districts are going on without any problem and generating forest products in keeping with the demand of the local community. The illegal felling of trees in the community forests of the terai is understandable. Compared to the hills, forest products in the terai have economical potential because of the easy access to markets across the border and within the country.

A woman felling the branch : Reaching out for fodder

This does not mean that all is well with government-controlled forests in the terai. The illegal felling of trees and encroachment of forestland are rampant in areas managed by the government. Senior officials at the District Forest Office are allegedly involved in the illegal cutting of trees with support from their political masters. The recent incidents in Morang and Banke districts have exposed the vulnerability of government forests. Whether they are national or community based, forests are not free from controversy and mismanagement.

The forests in the terai are facing greater threats in recent times, with many dense forests vanishing fast. The thick forests in the northern parts of Bara district, which were recognized as commercially viable a few years back, have now turned into bushes. Almost all biologically mature trees have either been smuggled out or are in various stages of decay. Although young saplings are coming up and the process of natural regeneration continues, the use of this patch of forest for commercial purposes has now become impossible.

At a time when the national forest in the terai is being successfully managed neither by the community nor by the government, an effective solution needs to be found. By amending existing laws, the government claims it can pave the way for national forest management with the participation of the local community. Moreover, officials say, the national treasury would have access to a share from forest products.

"We don't want to disturb the community forestry programs. What we want is the participation of the community as well as a participatory forest development program in the terai," says K.B. Shrestha, divisional chief of the community forest division of Department of Forest. "Natural resources need to be managed and harnessed properly in the terai."

Users groups based in Kathmandu valley are against any kind of government intervention in forest management. They stress the need to hand over the entire forests of the country to local communities. "We will oppose any amendment that would pave the way for greater intervention by the government," says Hari Prasad Neupane, president of the Federation of Community Forestry Users Group Nepal (FECOFON).

Shrestha : Committed to community forestry

Because of sheer lack of resources and poor implementation of well-planned policies, Nepal's valuable national forests in the terai are either decaying or being destroyed by smugglers. Hundreds of cubic feet of timber are being smuggled across the border every day. While forest resources worth billions of rupees are being lost, the Ministry of Forest has to survive on annual subsidies from the government. Because of the dilemmas in policymaking, the forests in the terai are neither used for commercial purposes nor managed in keeping with the objectives of conservation. Even the government does not know how much forestland it wants to hand over to the local communities and how much it wants to retain in its control.

"The government wants to manage the forests in the terai with the support from the community to distribute the resources equally among the users group of the north and south," says Shrestha. "We will also hand over forests to the community, but they have to harvest them themselves."

User groups oppose the move. We will not tolerate any effort that restricts the rights of the community," says Neupane. "Some things may be wrong with some users groups, but the same holds true with the District Forest Office officials."

What is the Problem?

One of the major problems in forest-sector management is lack of transparency and sense of accountability among officials and user groups. Although these groups are elected from among the users, many do not follow a proper election process. In the terai, the users groups are so big that holding elections is akin to holding elections for local bodies. In many areas, the general assembly cannot be convened because of the sheer size of the users group. Even a small users group has at least 3,000 members and encompasses a large swath of land from north to south.

The situation is different in the hills, where community users groups are small and homogeneous, so people can easily convene meetings to take vital decisions. However, as the users groups are not accountable to anyone after the elections, they take decisions on their own.

Women carrying fire-wood : Important energy source

Transparency is virtually non-existent, as there is no one to monitor the activities of the users groups and their income. In most cases, the users groups are composed of members of all national political parties. It seems that there is a national consensus on the misuse of resources.

District Forest Officials are beset with similar problems. They are not held accountable for the work they do and often do not act in a transparent manner. In the terai, District Forest Officials are changed as soon as a new minister takes charge. There is said to be hectic competition among DFOs to seek positions in the terai.

As their tenure is uncertain, few care about their roles. Worse, they don’t have to face the consequences for having made wrong decisions. No one can question how a DFO decides to clear the forest or how he decides to manage it. Making forest officials accountable and transparent should be the primary goal of an effective forestry plan.

The government needs to establish clear-cut duties and responsibilities for the users groups and District Forest Officials in an effort to make them accountable to the people. If such a system were developed, the possibility of forest mismanagement would be reduced to a considerable extent.

Debate On Amendment As the government seems determined to amend the Forest Act of 1994, users groups are making an all-out effort to block the move. According to the FECOFON, the amendment would place more restrictions on the mobilization of resources by the community and provide more rights to forest officials.

"This amendment will completely ruin the system of community forestry management. If the bill is passed, it will bring a situation similar to that of the Panchayat days," says Neupane.

The Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation rejects such charges, saying that the proposed amendment would further strengthen the 20-year experience of community forestry in Nepal. "The government does not want to intervene in community forestry. We are still committed to community forestry," says Dr. Udaya Raj Sharma, the ministry's spokesman.

Ministry officials argue that the new act would seek greater participation from the community in forest management. It contains a clause that would allow the sharing of forest resources among user groups, village development committees, district development committees and the government. The government also intends to spend 60 percent of the revenue collected from the forests in the terai and Chure on local development projects. The bill contains similar other beneficial provisions, officials say.

Major Resources Forests are a major natural resource of Nepal, providing 81 percent of total fuel consumption and more than 50 percent of livestock fodder. For several industries in the country, forest products provide vital raw materials.

Until 1970, Nepal generated more than 30 percent of its annual revenue from forest products. Today that figure has declined to less than two percent.

For many years, the forest of the terai was a major contributor to the national exchequer. After the indiscriminate felling of trees during the national referendum of 1979, the government declared illegal the cutting of green trees. Utilization of forest products was totally stopped. Following the restoration of multiparty democracy in 1990, the government began using forest products.

A community-managed forest : Example of success

Forest products did not come free for the community even during the Rana regime, although for some time the forest sector was left without any governing laws. Traditionally, villagers had to obtain the revenue collectors' permission before collecting fodder, feed or thatching material or felling trees for timber. With the fall of Rana regime in 1951, the revolutionaries started clearing the terai forests recklessly. The government enacted the Forest Nationalization Act in 1957, which placed forest management under the government's control. Following the eradication of malaria in the terai, the rate of deforestation for shelter and agricultural purposes saw a rapid increase, causing a major decline in the forest cover.

Forest Management Policy Forest management practices in Nepal have change from being exploitative - with major forest products being sold to India - to becoming protective under a program introduced in 1987. At the same time, export of forest products was tightly restricted and a felling ban was imposed. The ban hampered the development of good forest management practices, and the

oscillation between exploitation and protection has resulted in a lack of experience in practical forest management.

The government developed 18 Forest Management and Utilization Development projects for the terai. Because of weak implementation, however, they never achieved their goals. The result: continuous depletion of the existing resource base.

During the exploitation period, less attention was paid to regeneration, as the major purpose was to clear land for settlement. Forest management responsibilities lay with the DFOs. The harvesting and transportation was normally carried out by the Timber Corporation of Nepal (TCN), which was operating under the Ministry of Supplies.

Even after the restoration of multiparty democracy, the TCN's monopoly in this sector continues. The Forest Development Board is operating plantation areas under separate rules in Sagarnath and Nepalgunj. This effort has turned out to be the best alternative from among those tried during the 1990s. However, the DFOs are unable to perform well because they have to face political pressure.

The timber is sold to middlemen much below the market prices and sometime under political pressure. The Auditor-General's Report for 2000 noted how mismanagement resulted in the loss of wood worth millions of rupees. In many cases, TCN officials sell the timber at throwaway prices. According to a study, the prices of the TCN are up to 50 percent lower than the prevailing market prices. The TCN supplies 40 to 50 percent of the logs saw mills use.

The remainder originates from private sources, including the illegal felling of the national forest. The total value of Nepal’s forest is estimated at Rs. 879 billion, of which fuelwood forms Rs 230 billion.

Forests supply 90 percent of fuelwood needs and about 40 percent of fodder requirements. In 1994\95 about 12 million tons of fuelwood was consumed, of which 96 percent went for household consumption.

South Vs North A major argument of the Ministry of Forests is that there are growing disparities between the north and south in the use of forest products. As most of the traditional users live in the south, the forest is accessible to the northern residents. "We need to manage the forests because the people of the southern areas do not have access to the forests in north," said Shrestha. "If all the forests in the terai are handed over to the community, who will supply fuelwood to the southern population?"

According to a study, dung and agricultural residues form the principal source of household energy in the southern terai, with only 43 percent of the people using wood. This indicates greater fuelwood scarcity in the terai. Siraha and Saptari districts have the lowest per capita forest cover among the terai districts of the eastern region. The Strategic Guidelines for Forest Utilization report prepared with Finland's support also shows growing disparities in the use of forest resources. According to the report, terai households closer to the forests use fuelwood for cooking at twice the rate of households living farther away. Households with less than two hectares of land are reported to supplement their income through the sale of fuelwood collected primarily from government forests.

It is estimated that 68 percent of the people collect fuelwood from government forests and 13 percent from community forests. Sixteen percent harvest fuelwood from their own land and the remaining three percent use kerosene and gas, according to the CBS. In the mid hills, about 77 percent of poor households rely more on government forests compared to the more well-off who depend on on-farm trees and community forestry.

The contribution of community forestry in the hills is immense in terms of protecting the environment and supplying fuelwood and fodder. Some users groups are even spending the resources on the welfare of their communities. In the hills, there is no need for additional resources for the plantation and protection of trees.

"Some users groups are even self-reliant and generate a huge amount of resources to run their community work in hills. But I don't think a similar trend can be seen in the terai," says Amrit Lal Joshi, a community forestry expert.

Unlike forests in the hills, experts argue, the national forest in the terai cannot be managed in a simple way because the situation is different. The forests in the terai need intensive management. Experience has shown the need to hand over forests to the community in order to support and manage them properly. However, the community does not have the capability to manage national forests in the terai. As the area is densely populated and the users groups are fairly big, it becomes an impossible task. The terai's forests need a strategy that would encourage equitable distribution, community participation as well as resource mobilization.

Donors have played an important role in supporting community forestry programs in the hills. But they have not shown similar interest in the terai. Although American and German donors are involved in managing forests in some terai districts, the results have fallen short of expectations.

According to the Forest Resources Utilization Strategy Project-Final Report, every year 10,000-15,000 tons of non-wood forest products are harvested from the mid-hills and high mountains. The terai areas harvest much more than that. The forests in the terai are commercially valuable especially because there is a big market just across the border. However, since they are away from human settlements, terai forests are not accessible to all.

The Forest Resources Utilization Strategy Project found in 1998 that Nepal had 4.2 million hectares of forest representing 29 percent of total land area, compared to the 37 percent figure stated in the Master Plan for the Forestry Sector of 1988. The annual rate of loss is about 0.5 percent in the terai and plains. The annual deforestation rate is 1.3 percent. According to the Forest Resources Information Project, reachable forest in the eastern development region is 112.8 cubic meters. The result shows that stocks per hectare are much higher than previous estimates. The total available saw log volume is 59 million cubic meters. The sal forest of the terai is vanishing fast because of high market demand.

Donors in Terai As donors are not heavily involved in supporting forest management in the terai, the primary responsibility rests with the government. Five years ago, Finland proposed to develop a model project for forest resources management and showed a willingness to start it from Bara district. After opposition from FECOFON and other environmental organizations, Finland pulled out of the project. The World Bank, too, later withdrew from community forestry in the terai because government officials opposed some conditions set in the program. One of the conditions put forth by the World Bank was to end the monopoly of the TCN and begin log sales based on market competition. It also proposed to generate resources through the utilization of forest products.

Stung by the bitter experiences of past, when politicians encouraged settlements in government forest areas, officials did not agree to cut green trees and leave forest areas to regenerate. "Actually, it was a major mistake on our part not to accept the limited conditions set by the World Bank. Had we accepted the proposal, the country's forest resources would have started to contribute to the national economy." Since the withdrawal of donors, forest management efforts in the terai have faced a resource crunch.

Although the government has forest management programs for all the districts in the terai, it simply doesn't have the money to implement them. Other donors have been talking about the need for sustainable forest management but have not shown an interest to support such programs in the terai. "We have altogether 18 plans for forest management in the terai. When there is no money, how can we implement them? In the current budget each district has been given Rs.200,000 for forest management, but that is too little to start any task."

"Frankly speaking, we have adequate expertise for community forestry but we don’t have manpower for forest management," says Joshi, who has worked for more than two decades in the Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation. Because of lack of money and technical expertise, economically and environmentally valuable forests in the terai are vanishing at an alarming rate.

Values of Terai's Forest

The terai's forests are valuable for timber production and cultivation. In the middle hills, the forests are growing very fast because they are attached to households. There they are valuable for grazing, inter-cropping and fuelwood. The mountain forests are valuable in terms of tourism, bio-diversity and herbal products.

The terai's forests are diverse in terms of vegetation and species and have easy accessibility. In the terai, forest and settlements are not closely linked. The people of the northern terai are relatively new settlers, whereas those in the south are older.

Some experts argue that the government should not depend on donor-driven forestry policies, maintaining that those who provide the money often impose their ideas. "Resources are always considered in terms of economic value not in terms of physical existence," says Keshav Kandel, a forest resources economist. "Nepal has not made any effort to cash in on the economic value of its forests. The country is losing about Rs 11 billion a year from the forests because of lack of institutional support and distribution. If we view this in terms of market value, the cost will be between Rs 22 billion and Rs 44 billion."

FECOFUN"s Role

Although users groups claims that they can manage forests more efficiently than the government, they, too, do not have the kind of manpower and resources needed for the job. Like government officials, the tendencies of some forest users groups in the terai are questionable. They have not shown new ways of regenerating forests but continue to enjoy exploiting the natural cover that exists.

FECOFON claims it is the sole body set up to safeguard the interests of forest users groups. But others question its intentions. There are allegations that FECOFON often ignores the larger interests of the country while standing up for the cause of users groups. Some argue that users groups should not be allowed to manage the forests in the terai because they have almost become political organizations.

"We are purely representatives of users groups," says Neupane. Officials are using the political label to discredit us. This is the only organization that has a nationwide network of supporters," he claims.

In the terai, 226 forest users groups are managing 35,539 hectares of forests. According to forest officials, many of the users groups are misusing the resources. Officials even accuse users groups of selling trees from national forest areas.

In one users group in Ilam, all members are accused of corruption. Since the group has members representing all major parties, no one can take action against them.

"We want to introduce two models in the terai - collaborative forest management and community forest management. The collaborative effort will be directed by the government, whereas the community forestry will be placed under the community," said Shrestha of the community forest division. Solution

The solution to the problem of forest management in Nepal can be found not in identifying who will control and manage forests but in ensuring accountability and transparency in the institutions involved. Even the Auditor-General's Annual Report 2001 points out the need for a proper mechanism for accountability in forest management. Even today, timber worth of billions of rupees is decaying in forest areas and in the yards of the TCN. In such a situation, simply amending the law to provide more authority to the community or the government would not work.