Ambiguity rules when it comes to identification of core or critical habitat in the Amrabad Tiger Reserve and grant of forest rights as per the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act - 2006 or ROFR Act.
The State Forest Department and the Integrated Tribal Development Agency (ITDA) under the Tribal Welfare Department are providing diametrically opposite versions with regard to both.
As per the guidelines, relocation package is only for people in the core/critical areas of tiger habitat. While the Forest Department claims that all the villages scheduled for relocation, namely Sarlapally, Kudichintalabailu and Vatvarlapally of Amrabad mandal, fall under the core/critical habitat, the ITDA documents categorise Sarlapally and Vatvarlapally as ‘plain area’, and Kudichintalabailu as ‘forest area’.
ADVERTISEMENT
Guidelines also say forest rights of the villagers need to be recognised and allotted in full before relocation.
The ROFR Act provides individual as well as community forest rights to the STs and other forest-dwellers which include rights to live in forest and cultivate, community tenures, rights over minor forest produce, fish, grazing, among others.
As per assertions by the Forest Department officials, such rights have been granted in full to Chenchus and Lambadas in all the villages as soon as the Act came into force.
ADVERTISEMENT
Information obtained from ITDA speaks otherwise. Only 662 individual claims, and no community forest rights were granted in the first phase in Mahabubnagar.
After amendment of rules in 2012, according more rights to Forest Rights Committees (FRCs) and ‘gram sabhas’, 622 claims have been forwarded, but only 76 have been approved by the district-level committee. No pending claims were shown, thereby indicating that the rest of the claims stood rejected. Of the 42 community claims, only 11 have been approved.
Forest Department and ITDA differ on identification of core or critical habitat in Amrabad Tiger Reserve