The latest report of Ministry of Forests, Environment and Climate Change (MoFECC) has noted that up to 1,41,747 forest fires were detected in 20 districts of India over a span of thirteen years, between 2003 and 2016. The report, co-authored by World Bank, seeks to understand how forest fires are deterring India's efforts to meet its climate change goals.
The report says that Central India and North-eastern states are the ones severely affected by forest fires. While states in the Northeast account for the greatest share of fire detections, the largest area affected by fire is in the Central region, the report adds.
Of 1,41,747 forest fires, up to 13,453 (9.49 per cent) occurred in Lunglei district of Mizoram alone. In central India, Gadhchiroli in Maharashtra had the largest area affected by forest fire – almost 4106 square kilometers and 8.24 per cent of the share of burnt area, followed by Bijapur in Chattisgarh at 2,633 square kilometers (5.29 per cent) and Khammam in Telangana at 1923 square kilometers (3.86 per cent).
In India, one estimate shows that nearly 49,000 square kilometers of forests – an area larger than the size of Haryana – were burned in 2014 alone (a mild year compared to others in the recent past), it mentions.
Challenges
A shortage of dedicated funding for forest fire prevention and management (FFPM) at the central and state level has been a perennial issue, which has been documented by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in various states. “Along with a lack of public engagement, forest officers surveyed for the assessment cited insufficient equipment, labour, and financial resources as one of the main challenges,” the report says.
The CAG in 2017 pointed out that shortages of equipment, accessories and vehicles required for fire-fighting in the fire season ranged from 31 to 100 per cent while shortage of manpower ranged from 16 to 55 per cent in cadres of foresters and forest guards.
In the MoEFCC report, Rajender Mahajan, Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and Head of Forest Force for the Uttarakhand state forest department states said, “There was meagre budgetary support to tackle forest fire. Just ₹5 crore in 2015 and, during massive forest fire of 2016, it was ₹22 crore, we place demand of ₹446 crore before the state government but were sanctioned merely ₹ 22 crore. It is next to impossible to depute manpower, purchase equipment, maintain fire lines or hire people for controlled burning.”
An online survey with senior officers and field-level staff in the forest departments of the 11 states in the sample was conducted between April and August 2017. The survey gathered information on forest fire causes, incidence, prevention, community engagement, and suppression in each of these states. More than 100 responses were received and were analysed.
According to MoEFCC's own admission, its guidelines released in 2000 were not widely known by the forest department staff interviewed for this study and are no longer being implemented. Under reporting post-fires of causes, extent of burnt area, and economic damages needs to be addressed, recommends the report. “One of the reasons for such under reporting is institutional disincentives (field officers who report large fires may create additional work for themselves and their superiors in filing and prosecuting a forest offense, and the department may receive less financing),” it states.