Sacred Groves and Legal Developments
The Supreme Court of India mandated the Rajasthan Forest Department to map and classify all Marseille as 'community reserves' under the Wildlife Protection Act (WPA) 1972, which transfers them from community to forest officialdom for conservation. This action potentially conflicts with the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006, which prioritizes traditional rights and community governance over forest lands.
Sacred Groves in Rajasthan
- The sacred groves, locally known as ‘orans’, ‘malvan’, ‘deo ghat’, and ‘baugh’, number approximately 25,000, covering about six lakh hectares.
- They are traditionally managed and conserved by local communities, often associated with religious and cultural significance.
- These groves serve as biodiversity hotspots and are important for medicinal resources, cultural identity, and ecological stability.
Legal Interpretations and Challenges
The Supreme Court’s directive stems from the T.N. Godavarman v. Union of India case, where 'forest land' was to include any area recorded as forest, irrespective of ownership.
- This conflicts with the Rajasthan government's past identification criteria, which only considered larger sacred groves as deemed forests.
- The Central Empowered Committee disagreed with Rajasthan’s narrow classification and prompted a more inclusive approach in 2018.
- Rajasthan’s 2023 Forest Policy lacks detailed protection frameworks for sacred groves, unlike its 2010 policy.
Community Reserves under WLPA
The WPA 2002 introduced ‘community reserves’, areas on community or private land conserved for their ecological and cultural values, with specific prohibitions and management structures.
- A ‘Community Reserve Management Committee’ is established for each reserve, including local government and department representatives.
- The Chief Wildlife Warden holds overarching control over the reserve's management plan.
- Local communities are obligated to aid in conservation and report violations.
Conflict with the Forest Rights Act
If governed by the FRA, sacred groves would be managed as community forest resources, emphasizing community governance and protection of cultural and ecological heritage.
- Gram sabhas would have the authority to manage these resources, opposing the state's control under WPA.
- FRA supports community-led conservation, which aligns with traditional customs and practices.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's directive to classify sacred groves as community reserves could create governance conflicts with existing community-based management under the FRA. This highlights the tension between traditional rights and state-driven conservation methods.
