Chapter: 2

FORESTS AND THE EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL

FOREST POLICIES IN UNITED PROVINCES

In this chapter an attempt is made to trace the types of forest and the evolution
of colonial forest policies in United Provinces. The first section deals with the various
types of forests and its commercial importance in United Provinces. The second
section is about debate among the historians over colonial forestry. The third section
is on colonial forest policy and fourth section focuses on the response of the people to
the policy and how this led to adjustments and modification in this policy.

The word forest is derived from Latin word ‘folish’, meaning outside, the
reference bring to a village boundary or fence, and it must have included all
uncultivated and uninhabited land. Today a forest is any land managed for the diverse
purpose of forestry, whether covered with trees, shrubs, climbers etc. or not. The
Indian word ‘jungle’ has been adopted in the English language to describe a collection
of trees, shrubs, etc. that are not grown in regular manner as contrasted with ‘forest’,
which is any vegetation under a systematic management. Technically forest has been
defined as: (a) In general term an area set aside for the production of timber and other
forest produce, or maintained under woody vegetation for certain indirect benefits
which it provides, e.g. climatic or protective; (b) In ecological term a plant
community predominantly of trees and other woody vegetation, usually with a closed
canopy; and (c) In term of law an area of land proclaimed to be a forest under a forest
law.1

Division of Forests:

The forests of United Provinces may be divided into five broad zones on the
basis of commercial importance under colonial rule: (i) The forests of the Himalayas
(ii) The forests of Submontane siwaliks (iii) The forests of Bhabar (iv)The forests of
the Tarai and Plains (v) The forests of Jhansi and Banda.2

1 H.G. Champion, Forestry, London, 1954, p. 1.

2 C.G. Trevor and E.A. Smythies, Practical Forest Management: A Handbook with special
Reference to the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, Allahabad, p. 23 [Govt. Press United
Provinces].

11
(i)The Forests of Himalayas: The Himalayan forests of United Provinces are
confined to districts of Nainital, Almora and Garhwal and an area in Chakarta. In
these area the northern boundary is practically the great crystalline (granite & gneiss)
was of the Himalayas, and although three rivers (Alaknanda Gori & Kali) have cut
through crystalline exist, there are no forest of importance to be found in their upper
reaches. Much of the great crystalline axis, which contains the great peaks of the
Himalayas, is above the level of forest growth, but wherever the attitudes fall below
12,000 feet the coniferous forests of deodar, spruce, silver fir, and blue pine are to be
found frequently mixed with the evergreen oaks.

Between the crystalline rocks and the southern boundary of the Himalaya lies
a wide stretch of purana or pre-cambrian sedimentary rocks on which the principal
forest occurs. In the great middle belt of pre-cambrian (purana) rock are to be found
the important forests of chir pine at the lower elevations and in ascending order the
forest of banj oak, blue pine, mora oak, kharsu oak, spruce.3 The term ‘Siwalik hills’
was used by Cautley in 1832 to designate the sub-Himalayan hill ranges, occurring
between river Ganga and Yamuna.4

(ii) The Submontane Siwaliks: The great boundary fault of the Himalayas runs from
end of the Sub-montane areas of the province (i.e., between Nepal and Punjab
frontier), and absolutely limits the distribution of the Precambrian Himalayan rocks
and the Tertiary Siwaliks, this often inconspicuous fault sometimes running along
some small and insignificant ravine forms a stratigraphical break of almost
inconceivable duration. This great fault, except for one or two areas, e.g., lansdowne
division, for all practical purposes forms a clear cut northern boundary of the
distribution of the sal, the occasional patches of scrub sal also found on the older
Himalayan rocks.

Middlemiss has classified the Tertiary Siwalik formation into the following:
(a) upper Siwalik conglomerate (b) middle Siwalik sandrock (c) lower Siwalik sand
stone.5 The sand rock consist of soft friable sands and occasional clay beds have
become so indurate with lime that they have become hard and usually form a very

3 IGI, Provincial Series, Vol. II, p. 264.

4 A.C. Nanda, Upper Siwalik Mammalian Faunas of the Himalayan Foothills, Paleontological
Society of India, Vol. 58(1), June 2013, pp. 75-86 [Journal].
5 Trevor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., p. 25.

12
distinctive escarpment and needle like pinnacles towering up precipitously for 100
feet or more. The sand rock areas are clothed with a poor quality of sal forests, patchy
and open, with a large admixture of sain, bakli and khair, while a high percentage of
chir is found on the conglomerates. The sand rock of Saharanpur Siwalik is
characterized by a profuse growth of Chir pine. The sal forest on this tertiary
formation varies according to the moisture content of the locality from good quality to
scrub, indeed the sal is entirely absent from large areas of the hills, its place being
taken by zerophytic species, Bhabar and Bamboo.6

(3) The Bhabar is adjacent to the foothills of the Himalayas and consists of boulders
and pebbles which have been carried down by the river streams. As the porosity of
this belt is very high, the streams flow underground. The Bhabar is generally narrow
with its width varying between 7 to 15 km.7 As Smithies wrote about it that the
“Bhabar” is the term applied to the waterless tract of country at the foot of the hills
where the rivers have deposited their loads of boulders, gravels and silt, and formed
great cones of detritus. It is characterized by a porous gravelly soil, with boulder
deposits sometimes of enormous depth, e.g. the depth of boulder strata at Haldwani
deposited by the Gaula river runs to hundred of feet and the boulder deposit of the
small. Nihal stream are over 1,000 feet deep.”8The forest vegetation of the bhabar is
exceeding by variable. In the broad gravelly river beds are found thickest and
stretches of sissoo (Dalbergia Sissu) and Khair (Acacia Catchu); on the next level are
found forests of Holoptelea integrifolia; on the higher level riverain plateaux occur
miscellaneous forests with large number of mixed species of growing economic
importance, while on the highest plateaux are found sal forests in their best and finest
development.9

(4) The Tarai: Belt lies next to the Bhabar region and is composed of newer
alluvium. The underground streams reappear in this region. The region is excessively
moist and thickly forested. It also receives heavy rainfall throughout the year and is
populated with a variety of wildlife. Smythies described the Tarai as “where the
Bhabar gravels stop the Tarai begins. A belt of country characterized by numerous
springs and swamps by its malarial and unhealthy climate, and by numerous stretches

6 Stebbing, Forest in India, op.cit., pp. 292-98.

7 Travor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., p. 26.
8 Ibid.
9 Stebbing, Forest in India, op.cit., Vol. II, p. 293.

13
of heavy elephant grasses interspersed with band of sal and miscellaneous forests, in
which Simal (Bombax malabarium) is an important species. The soil is deep fertile
loam, the beginning of the characteristic loam of the Gangatic plain. The Tarai
produces valuable sal forests on the higher and older alluvium, the lower and newer
plains being covered with miscellaneous forest or grass.” 10 Apart from a few small
patches of forest in the Jhansi division to the south of Gangatic plain, the United
Provinces forests are confined to these four geological formations.

The main types of forest found during the colonial period in United Provinces
are: (a) scrub forests of Bundelkhand (b) Sal (c) Chir Pine (d) Deodar (e) Spruce and
Silver fire (f) oak.11

(a) Scrub Forest of Bundelkhand (Thorn Forests): These forests come under
Tropical thorn forests, which are scattered over a large extent of country and occur on
various geological formation. This type of forest met within the states of Gujarat,
Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Mysore, Madras and Uttar Pradesh.
The Thorn forests of United Provinces are mainly found in the Bundelkhand Division
and known as ‘Scrub forests of Bundelkhand.” The major towns of Bundelkhand are,
Jalaun, Jhansi, Hamirpur, Mahoba, Chitra Koot, Lalitpur and Banda. Natural
vegetation and soil of Bundelkhand region was densely forested until the late 18th
century. After the turn of the century, rising demand for wood and agricultural
expansion led to increasing levels of deforestation. These factors, combined with poor
land management and ruthless government approved commercial logging, have
drastically reduced forested area in the region. Today, only small patches of dry
miscellaneous and thorn forests comprised of dhak, teak, mahaua, Chiranji, Khardai,
dhau, khair thar trees remain. Vegetation primarily consists of scrub forest (Siari,
katai, gunj, bel, ghout, trees) and scrub brush, much of it open canopy with large
tracts of land classified as “wastelands”. Prevailing soil types are a mix of black and
red; the latter being relatively recently formed, gravely and shallow in depth, and thus
unable to retain moisture well.12 About the forests Smithies stated that:

“The forests are scattered over a large extent of the country

and occur on various geological formations… The only

10 Smythies, op.cit. p. 27.

11 Travor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., p. 23.
12 100 years of Indian Forestry: 1861-1961, Issued on the Occasion of the Celebration of Indian
Forest Centenary,18 Nov.1861, Dehra Dun, p. 71.

14
 species of trees besides figs, to attain a fairly large size are
the mahwa (Bassia latifolia), bahera (Terminalia belarica),
Salai (Boswellia serrata), Karar (Sterculia urens) of the more
valuable species the teak is confined to the forests within a
few miles of the Dhassan and Betwa rivers.”13

(b) Sal (Moist Deciduous Forests): Sal is a large deciduous tree. The sal of Indian
commerce Shorea robusta is in many ways a typical of the genus shorea. Sal is one of
a handful dipterocarp species, which can tolerate periodic drought. It typically occurs
in forests where precipitation is strongly seasonal. It is generally more aggressive than
any of its associates and competitor in gregarious habit, copping power, resistance to
burning, regeneration under burning and grazing, adaptability to soil and site
conditions and longevity; though it suffer from forest, it survives where other species
could.14 These characteristics have allowed Shorea robusta to expand its
distributional range into large area of United Provinces. As stebbing mentioned that
“It is found in the kangra valley, and the regular continuous forest commences in the
Umbala Siwalik, West of Jamuna, whence it passes through Dehradun, Saharanpur,
Bijnor, Kumaon, Oudh, and Gorakhpur…”15

It grows gregariously in pure wood over considerable tracts of country from

the Yamuna river to Gorakhpur.16 It covers extensive area in UP, e.g.

Sal Type Approximate area

Hectares Acres
Moist Siwalik Sal 179,000 4,42,000
Moist High Level Alluvial Sal 125,000 3,08,000
Moist Low Level Sal 18,000 44,000
Forest Chandar 5,300 13,000
Transitional Moist/Low Level Sal 22,000 54,000
Moist Western Low Level Clayey Alluvial 34,000 84,000
Sal
Western Tarai Sal 4,200 10,500
Total 4,72,500 111,65,500
4.725 sq.km. 1.820 sq.km.
From 100 years of Indian Forestry

13 Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., p. 30.

14 G.S. Puri, Indian Forest Ecology: A Comprehensive Survey and its Environment in the Indian
Subcontinent, New Delhi, 1960, Vol. I, p. 186.
15 100 years of Indian Forestry, op.cit., p. 68.
16 Travor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit.

15
 Troup had classified the sal forests into five types i.e., forest of the (a) Hills,
(b) River terraces, (c) Duns, (d) Bhabar, (e) Tarai and Plains while, Smithies
disagreed with him and classified it into three types (a) The Hill Sal (b) The Bhabar
Sal and (c) The Tarai Sal.17

Sal can develop into a tree of considerable dimensions with a long clear bole
Mature sal on first-class sites typically reaches 40-45 meters, but trees forms average
sites (canopy height 18-30 meters) still provide excellent timber for most commercial
purpose.18 Sal timber is usually strong and durable wood. It transverse strength,
hardness and modules of elasticity are higher than those of teak.19 The sapwood of sal
is valuable to termites and fungal attack, but its heart wood highly resistant to this
agent of decay is prized as construction material. Pearson in a 1913 monograph on the
economic uses of sal, estimated the working life of protected sal structural timbers
within buildings as a century.

(c) Chir pine (Pine Forests): Chir Pine scientifically known as Pinus roxburghii
(family conifer) is one of the six pines of India and the most widely occurring. It is
also known as Himalayan long needle pine, long leaved Indian Pine, Indian chir pine,
chir or chil. The vernacular names of the species are Kulhdin, sarol, sirli at Garhwal
and jaunsar.20

In India the forests are found in Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh,
part of Sikkim, West Bengal, Arunachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh (United
Provinces). In UP chir forests are by far the most extensive, next only to sal.21 It is
abundant in both Garhwal and Kumaon of UP. Chir forests in Chakarta and Jaunsar.
Bawar area occurred in the valley of the river Tons and its tributaries. The upper limit
of gregarious chir forests is about 1950 m through the species is found scattered on
warm aspects up to 2300 m. It also occurs over Dehradun, Saharanpur Siwaliks
between 600-900 m, Laduakot and Malkot hills between 1200-1800 m, other valleys
of Jaunsar Bawar and Tehri Garhwal between 900-1950 m.22 Webber stated about the
Chir Pine forests of Kumaon that it “situated at 4000 to 6000 feet. This typically

17 Travor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., pp. 29-34.

18 R.S. Throup, The work of the Forest Department in India, Calcutta, 1917, p.26.
19 Ibid.
20 Troup, The Work of Forest Department in India, op.cit., p. 24.
21 Ibid, 100 years of Indian Forestry, op.cit., p. 65.
22 O.P. Khaduri, ‘The Himalayan Environment: A Study in Vegetational Pattern of Garhwal’ ,(ed.)
Geography of the Mountains, Delhi, 1970, pp. 55-70.

16
Himalayan species extends at the lower attitudes on the hot dry slopes and tops from
Nepal to the Western Punjab … the areas of forests, according to Webber’s survey
were follow: in Kumaon 433,951 acres; in British Garhwal, 253,472 acres; or a total
about 1074 square miles. Of this area he computed that the Chir occupied 152,264
acres.”23

It is the fastest growing among the conifers found in the Himalaya. The
species is hardly, frugal in its requirements and adapted to degraded sites which are
deficient in nutrients. It grows with affluence both on deep soils which should be well
drained as well as on undernourished soils. Bring a light demanding species; it easily
rehabited exposed sites where most of the broad leaved species rarely succeed. Chir
pine being highly resistant to fire, better suited for tracts where complete fire
protection is difficult to ensure. About its fire resistant characteristic, Smithies stated
that “these forests are very liable to damage by fire. This pine is mixed with sal where
both species meet and is even extending its range into the true hill sal zone as a result
of fire protection”.24

The best plantation of Chir pine was raised in Almora division of UP on dry
shallow or sandy soil on south-west to south-east aspects. Several plantations were
raised in Kumaon hills where these have done well.25 Chir pine provides a variety of
wide ranged goods and services to the people. In fact all parts of the tree are valuable
and are used in one form or the. It is a popular timber of Unite Provinces, especially
in hills and is used for various purposes including house building, as rafters, poles and
door and windows, flooring blocks, packing boxes, boards, railway sleepers 26 and in
the manufacture of pulp and paper.27 It is suitable for boat building matchsticks, tea
chests.

Economically, pine is important source of wood, paper, resins, charcoals etc.

Troup said about the commercial value of chir pine under colonial rule that

“the commercial exploitation of the resin of the Indian pines

serves as a wide range of subsidiary industries. It provides
resin for shellac making, soap manufactures, paper concerns,

23 Stebbing, Forest in India, op.cit., Vol. I, p. 507.

24 Travor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., p. 35.
25 O.P. Khaduri, ‘The Himalayan Environment’, op.cit., pp. 55-70.
26 Troup, The Work of Forest Department in India, op.cit., p. 24, 42.
27 Ibid, p. 48.

17
 printing links electric insulation, gramophone records and
wheel grease. And it also provides turpentine, which is the
chief thinner and solvent employed in the paint and vanish
trades, a mordant in print goods manufacture in wartime
resin used in setting sharpness bullets in shells.”28

(4) Deodar Forests (Indian Cedar): Cedrous deodara, commonly known as deodar,
Himalayan cedar devdar or diar, belonging to family panacea is a large evergreen tree
with dark green or silvery foliage. Branches are horizontal or slightly ascending or
descending, arising irregular from main stem. When young, the crown is conical with
a definite leading shoot but later; it becomes broad and flat topped especially under
exposed conditions. Leaves are stiff and spirally arranged on long shoots but in
pseudo-whorls in short arrested shoot. The tree reaches large dimensions of up to 76
m height and 13.7 m girth.29 It has religious significance and Hindus refer to it as the
‘tree of God’. Among Hindus, as the etymology of deodar suggests, it is worshiped as
a divine tree.30

Deodar occurs throughout the western Himalaya and are found in states of
Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, UP (including Uttarakhand) Himachal Pradesh at 15,
00-3,200 m altitude. However, the species occupy considerable area as it is often
mixed with conifers like silver fir, spruce, kail etc. The best growth of deodar occurs
on deep, porous and fertile soil in river valleys and mountainous area, avoiding badly
drained shallow and rocky grounds.

In United Provinces, deodar forests occurs in Chakarta, Tons, Yamuna, Uttar

Kashi and East Almora Divisions. About the deodar forests of United Provinces,
Smythies stated that

“the deodar is found above the Chir at elevation of 5,000 to

8,500 feet towards the west. It reaches its furthest point
eastward in Garhwal although it is planted in Almora and
Nainital.”31

During colonial era foreign forces occupying India, particularly the British,
took advantage of the strength and ubiquity of deodar cedar lumber by using it in
myriad infrastructural projects. Colonial uses of deodar lumber included the

28 Ibid, p. 42.
29 Ibid, p. 21.
30 Stebbing, Forest in India, op.cit, Vol. 2, p. 502.
31 Travor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., p. 36.

18
construction of military barracks, public buildings, bridges, canals and carriages.
Deodar Cedar was also used extensively in the construction of railways in India.
Railway uses included wooden lies, railway bridges and freight and passenger cars.
As Smithies said that “the timber (of deodar) is very valuable and is the most sought
after coniferous wood for railway sleepers and all structural purposes.”32

(5) Silver fir: Abies Pindrow, commonly known as fir, silver fir, low level fir or
belonging to family pinaceae, is a tall evergreen tree with dense conical crown, which
frequently extend to almost ground level. The tree can reach large dimensions of upto
75 m heights and 7.5 m girth under exceptionally ideal conditions.

The species occurs throughout the western Himalaya. 33 This high level conifer
forests occur in the states of Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, West Bengal, Himachal
Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh (United Provinces). In United Provinces mainly
concentrated in the Chakarta division.34 It is often mixed with various conifer and
broad leaved species in its natural habitat. Fir prefers cool, moist areas with deep, rich
soil found most commonly on northern aspects, though at higher elevations, it is
found on all aspects. The precipitation in its range varies from 1106 cm to 250 cm /
year including heavy snowfall from December to April. The maximum and the
minimum shade temperature of the species vary from 32oC to well below freezing
point in the winter.35

The wood of silver fir is white and not very durable. It is used for planking,
match manufacture, wood pulp, singles etc. and to some extent for railway sleepers
and building purposes when properly treated. The growth rate fir is initially slow, but
after the normal growth begins, it is maintained at about 30 to 40 cm/year upto 100 to
120 years, after which it again slows down.36

(6) Spruce: Picea smithiana commonly known as spruce, Himalayan spruce or rai, is
a tall, evergreen tree with conical crown, horizontal or drooping branches and slender

32 Troup, The work of Forest Department in India, op.cit., p. 21.

33 Troup, The Work of Forest Department in India, op.cit., p. 20.
34 100 years of Forestry in India, op.cit., p. 65.
35 Stebbing, Forest in India, op.cit., Vol. III, pp. 159-60.
36 Puri, Indian Forest Ecology, op.cit., Vol. I, p. 243.

19
pendulous tassel like branchlets upto 5 ft in length. The tree reaches large dimension
of upto 60 to 65 m height with 6 to 7 m girth under ideal conditions.37

Spruce occurs mixed with silver fir and khasru oak at higher altitudes and
deodar, kail and mohru oak at lower elevations. Like fir, it is associated with heavy
snowfall, especially during December to March. The precipitation in its zone varies
from 100 to 240 cm/year. The minimum temperate in its zone goes well below
freezing point while maximum temperature can reach up to 32C.

(7) Oak: is the most common name for trees listed in the genus quercus. There are
few species that exhibit a shrub type growth form instead of a tree form. There are
both deciduous and evergreen species and some are semi evergreen currently there are
approximately 600 different species listed in the quercus genus. The Himalayan moist
temperate forests are characterized by extensive oak and coniferous forests extending
from 1500 to 300 m elevations. They are divided into three attitudinal zones in United
Provinces.38

(a) The Ban or Banj oak (Quercus leucotrichophora).

(b) The Moru oak (Quercus floribunda).
(c) The Kharsu oak (Quercus semecarpifolia).

(a) Ban or Banj oak: is a moderate to large evergreen tree. It is capable of growing
on the hottest and driest hill sides and in such situations it is stunted and gnarled
(deformed). It is distributed all along the outer Himalayas except the Kashmir valley.
In United Provinces, especially in Kumaon Ban oak forests were found as Smithies
and Trevor mentioned that

“Above the chir zone and extending up to the highest peak is a

dense evergreen forest in which the various oaks are the
predominant tree species. The distribution of this type seems to
depend almost entirely on suitable moisture conditions which
are indicated by luxuriant epiphytic and are met with
generally from 7,000 feet upwards. The lower limit coincides
with the upper limit of chir the dividing line being often very
vague and it may be said that the oak is still the predominant
species down to about 6,200 feet … it runs down the nalas to
3,000 feet, whilst at higher elevations it is gradually replaced

37 Ibid, p. 133.
38 Travor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit., p. 37.

20
 by other species though occurring even upto 9,500 feet on
southern aspects.”39

This description of the ban oak of Kumaon is generally applicable to this

species throughout United Provinces. However, ban forests are found above chir
forests upto about, 2,250 m but do not cover extensive tracts. It formations come
down a dump nullahs between the altitudes of 1,500 m and 2,100 m in chir forests
zone.40

Moru oak: is a large evergreen tree in Western Himalaya. In United Provinces the
Moru forests occur only locally and are usually confined to nullah and damper and
moist sites and below temperate moist deciduous forest at an altitude of 2.250 m.
These forests are rarely pure and are generally mixed with ban in the lower reaches
and either with spruce kharsu etc.41 In United Provinces this species predominates
on the outer ranges of the Himalayas in Nainital and also covers a large area in the
west tract of northern Garhwal.

Kharsu oak forests: The forest is a part of the upper temperate forest described by
Champion, Seth & Negi. It is an almost pure forest that is dominated by kharsu oak. It
occupies the highest elevation amongst the three Himalayan oaks. Its altitudinal range
is from 2500 to 3500 m.42 The canopy is dense in tracts where the forests is relatively
undisturbed and an individual tree may attain a height of 20 m or more. In dry patches
there occur conifers such as blue pine and deodar. 43 However, the proportion of
kharsu oak is by far the highest as compared to the other species.

It occurs commonly in Western Himalayas. It occupies extensive areas in

Garhwal, to a less extent in Almora and on the highest hills of Kumaon. Oak wood is
very resistant to insect and fungal attack because of its high tannin content. It was
used for the construction of ships, especially naval men of war under colonial rule.44
Ban oak is in great demand for fodder, firewood and charcoal due to its nutritive and
high calorific value, respectively. The wood is very hard, tough apt to wrap and split.
It is used locally for construction, ploughs and other agricultural implements. The oak

39 Ibid, p. 37.
40 Stebbing, Forest in India, op.cit., Vol. I, p. 503.
41 J.C. and S.P. Agarwal, Uttarakhand, Past, Present and Future, New Delhi, 1995, p. 250.
42 S.S. Negi, Cold Deserts of India, New Delhi, 2002, p. 112 [2nd edition].
43 Ibid, Stebbing, The Forest of India, op.cit, p. 142.
44 Trevor and Smythies, Practical Forest Management, op.cit. p. 37.

21
leaves contain good amount of crude protein, crude fiber, calcium and phosphorus
making it an excellent winter fodder, for which the tree is heavily loped. Oak bars
produce low grade tannin which is used for tanning low-grade leather in hilly areas.
The leaves are also used for rearing tassar silk worms.45

45 Ibid, p. 113.

22
DEBATE: In the last three decades, historical writings on colonial forest policies
proliferated phenomenally in India. Three broad historical approaches exist to study
scientific forestry. The first is generally referred to as nationalist Marxist approach to
study modern Indian history. According to this approach scientific forestry is an
exploitative instrument devised and executed by colonial state to exploit the forest of
India. It is argued; scientific forestry not only exploited forest but also unleashed the
process of alienation of forest dependent communities from nature. And it is this
process that is perceived as reason for depletion of forest and poverty among forest
dependent communities in India.46 Ram Chandra Guha has argued that commercial
and strategic interests played a crucial role in the evolution of colonial forestry.
Initially the demand for that for the navy and later timber for railway sleepers led to a
large scale destruction of forests.47 Pre-colonial governments did not strictly regulate
control and exploit forests. People had free access to forest resources except that the
village community had devised customary restraints on users.48 The industrial mode
of production had been generally identified as ecologically disastrous since it made
heavy demand on natural resources.49 Gadgil, and Guha argued that, colonial rule
marks a crucial watershed in the ecological history of India. 50 Their study shows that
many forests were considerably altered and later recognized in the colonial model of
selective commercialization of species. These writings are mostly concerned with
delineating the history of British imperialism in relation to the environment as a
defining moment and identifying the British and their policy as the premier agent in
shaping the conservation policies in the 19th and early 20th centuries in India. Forest
policy became the means to expand British political hegemony as the British
government acquired control over Indian forests resources.51

Some historians have questioned this sharp break between the pre-colonial and
the colonial period. David Hardiman has rejected the view that people lived in total
harmony with forests in the pre-colonial period. Society, he argues, was hierarchically

46 Madav Gadgil and Ramachandra Guha, This Fissured Land: An Ecological History of India, New
Delhi, 1992, pp. 113-45.
47 Gadgil and Guha, ‘State Forestry and Social Conflict in British India’, Past and Present, Vol.
CXXIII, 189, pp. 141-77.
48 Guha, The unquiet woods: Ecological change and peasant resistance in the Himalaya, Delhi,
1991, pp. 24-31.
49 Gadgil and Guha, This Fissured Land, op.cit., pp. 51-52.
50 Ibid, p. 5.
51 Gadgil and Guha, State Forestry and Social Conflict in British India, op.cit., pp. 145-46.

23
divided and an individual’s access to resources depended on his status within the
hierarchy. He has shown that the Bhill Chiefs allowed cutting of forests on payment
in the pre-colonial period. However, he agrees that the colonial state decisively
intervened in forest management and exploited forests for commercial purposes.52

The second is an antithesis to the aforementioned approach spearheaded by the

historians who subscribe to neo-colonialist approach to Indian history. Scientific
forestry according to this approach was introduced in India for the following reasons:
moral conviction of colonial scientific community to save fragile eco-system of
colonies on which the existence of the empire was depended upon, colonial notion of
progress of humanity to be brought with scientific forestry and finally scientific
forestry in India constitutes an essence of origin of modern environmentalism.53
According to this approach the root of scientific forestry lie principally in the
desiccations movement. Most of those who played a crucial role in setting up forest
department in South Asia were not only botanists and medical men but also
desiccationists.54 The Guha and Gadgil thesis has been strongly criticized by Richard
Grove in his work, Green Imperialism.55 Grove makes two propositions. One: the pre-
colonial period also saw large scale deforestation; second: colonial forestry was
dictated more by a genuine concern for conservation rather than just material concern.
Deforestation, argues Grove, has taken place since the early period of Indian history.
He argues that similar forms of forest exploitation for commercial value could be
traced back to the pre-colonial period. Grove refers to the example of Maratha rulers
in western India who found it necessary to acquire control over large tracts of forest
land to set up plantation for the purpose of shipbuilding and revenue. 56 But more
‘scientific conservation propaganda’ emerged out of the ideological commitment of
the East India Company surgeons who established a link between deforestation and
drought and famine, seeing conservation as essential for the long term interest of
agriculture and consequently significant for the stability of the empire. Williams

52 David Hardiman,, op.cit., ‘Power in the Forest The Dangs, 1820-1940’.

53 David Arnold and Hardimani (eds.), Subaltern Studies, Vol. 8, pp. 89-147.
54 G.A. Barton, Empire Forestry and the Origins of Environmentalism, Cambridge, 2002; R.
Drayton, Nature’s Government: Science, Imperial Britain and the Improvement of the World, New
Delhi, 2005.
55 Richard H. Grove, Green Imperialism: Colonial Expansion, Tropical Island Edens and the Origin
of Environmentalism, 1600-1860, Cambridge, 1995, Chapter 8.
56 Richard Groves, ‘Conserving Eden: the Eastern India Company and their environmental policies
on St. Helena Mauritius and in Western India, 1660-1854’, Comparative Studies in Society and
History, 35, 1993, p. 331.

24
Roxeburgh Nathaniel Wallich Alexander Gibson, etc., were influential surgeons and
botanists who systematically developed the idea of conservation and were able to get
the attention of the company government.57 Grove’s arguments appear persuasive as
far as the emergence of the ideas of conservation are concerned but he has not been
able to establish the link between ideas and policy that took practical shape in the
second half of the 19th century. Rangarajan has suggested that the actual impact of
such ideas on policy was limited, even in the period from the 1830 to 1850s.58 For
later period, when commercial interest became important, this argument is more
difficult to sustain.

Mahesh Rangarajan explains the differences between Guha and Grove in

terms of differences in the ecological focus of their research the former focus on the
late 19th century and the latter on the early colonial period. 59 He argues that there was
simple polarity between ideological and material influences on policy. The
desiccation fear had only a limited impact and was only one of the influence that
shaped the course of early 19th century Indian forestry. While Indian forests were
undergoing significant changes long before the British entered the picture, the validity
of colonial rule as an ecological watershed, argued Rangarajan, cannot be denied.60

No doubt deforestation has a long history. But it is difficult to know its scale
and dimension. In the medieval period zamindars were encouraged to bring more and
more land under cultivation. They did not have any special interest in the conservation
of forests. Forests were cut on a large scale for strategic reasons and during the march
of the army.61 Many medieval towns often felt that scarcity of fuel and fodder, which
had to be transported from the long distances. During the reign of Akbar a large
amount of fuel was brought from outside the town for the royal kitchen. 62 Fodder was
sold by professionals to marching Mughal army. High price of timber for house
construction due to its shortage invited state intervention in control of prices.63

57 Grove, Green Imperialism, op.cit., Chapter 8.

58 Mahesh Rangarajan, Imperial Agenda and India’s Forests: The Early History of Indian Forestry,
1800-1878, IESHR, Nov. 1994, pp. 147-67, esp. p. 166.
59 Ibid, p. 148.
60 Ibid, pp. 165-7.
61 Chetan Singh, ‘Forests, Pastoralists and Agrarian Society in North India’, in Arnold and Guha
(eds.) Nature, Culture, imperialism: Essays on the Environmental History of South Asia, Delhi,
1995, pp. 21-48; Rangarajan, op.cit., p. 149.
62 Chetan Singh, ‘Forests Pastoralists and Agrarian Society’, op.cit., p. 44.
63 Ibid, pp. 44-7.

25
 Scarcity of timber, fuel and fodder, however, was not widespread, nor were
forests receding rapidly. Chetan Singh shows that many areas within the Mughals
Empire were densely forested and were ruled by autonomous rajas and zamindars.64
Uncultivated and forested areas under the Mughals were considerable. Arable
expansion was not continuous; there were periods of recession as well when
cultivated area retreated.65 From the above discussion it follows that the pre-colonial
period was not characterized by ecological equilibrium. Yet, the state, in pre-colonial
period, does not appear to have directly exploited forests on a large scale for
commercial purposes or intervened decisively in regulating rights of the people in the
forests. Forest exploitation intensified in the 19th century due to increased demand for
timber and fuel wood. This increased the possibility of generating large revenue from
forests; the state did not miss this opportunity.

The evolution of colonial policy and the nature of it implementation varies

from region to region depending upon accessibility and quality of timber. For
instance, the teak forests of Malbar were depleted for ship building in the early period
of Columbus rule, the Himalayan pine forests started being exploited for railways in
the second half of 19th century.

Evolution of the policy: This section examines the factors that contributed to the
evolution of the forest policy in United Province. The evolution of the policy is
discussed in two phases. The term forest policy connotes actions of a Government for
the preservation, maintenance enhancement of forests and the optimum utilization of
forest resources to attain national welfare. It is defined as a set of principles or
guidelines adopted by a Government to attain fixed objectives in forestry for the
welfare of the nation. Forest policy has to undergo certain changes according to the
changing circumstances.

The British administration remained indifferent towards the problem of

forestry in the early years of their rule. They, themselves, were new to the ideas of
systematic forestry as they had no developed forest organization then in England.
Reckless exploitation of forests had continued and they were under the impression
that the forest wealth of India was inexhaustible.

64 Ibid, pp. 23-4.

65 Ibid, pp. 42-43.

26
Phase I: In the early colonial period the British made no serious attempt to manage
forests. They continued the pre-colonial policy in which the role of the state was
restricted to imposing certain duties on the export of forest products. The writings of
the early British administrators suggest that rajas imposed two types of taxes. One
was on the export of the forest products, and another was on the cattle grazing coming
from the plains in the Tarai in the summer.66 In the pre-colonial period it appears that
local thokdars collected these duties along the border and passed on a nazrana as the
share of the raja.67 The Gorkhas attempted to organize the duties68 but the British
made them broad based by imposing duty on the hill cattle coming into the Tarai as
well. All cattle were subjected to a standardized tax of 3anna.69 However, perhaps due
to social opposition cattle of some privileged people were later free from grazing tax
in 1823.70

Besides grazing tax, efforts were made to increase the revenue base of the
government. The state wanted a ‘legitimate’ share in the income drawn from the
export of the forest products. For this intention to a great extent forests were opened
up for lease. However, there were certain compulsions: first, leases of all forests were
not attractive as attractiveness depended on the possibilities of return; second, it was
not easy to get a lease. The lease was expected to have a certain amount of capital
base so as to pay security money, an advance for the collection of dues.

Until the 1840s leases were not very attractive except for rich and accessible
forests, from which the government got good revenue. The hasty growth of timber
trade in the 1840s was reflected in an increase in the extent of area under leases which
gave good revenue to the government. But there was a feeling among officials that
contractors were making good ‘profit’ and the government not getting a good share in
it. This gave rise to a debate in the official circles over the takeover of the forests by
the government.

66 G.W. Traills, Statistical Sketch of Kumaun, J.H. Batten, edt. Official Report on the Province of
Kumaon, 1851; pp. 1-69, [rpt. Calcutta, 1878] reproduced from Asiatic Researches, Vol. 16, 1828.
67 Batten, Report on the Bhabar of Kumaun Proper, dated 10.02.1846, pp. 212-13.
68 Ibid.
69 16 annas constituted a rupee.
70 Batten, Report on Bhabar, op.cit., p. 209.

27
 Before the takeover of the forests administration, the government claimed to
sovereign right over forests,71 remained largely theoretical. Batten was the first to
state in 1842 that all forests belong to the government irrespective of their inclusion
within the village boundaries.72 He argued this right of the government in the light of
the tea planter’s demand for land. However, nothing was changed before the takeover
of the forest administration. There was neither any effort to ‘protect’ forest nor any
restriction on people for the use of forests.73 There was only one exception to this
when in 1826 the right to cut sal on the thaplas74 was controlled to ensure supply of
sal to the government. These limitations were lifted soon when people of the
surrounding areas in the Tarai began to desert the area.75

The policy of farming out carried revenue to the government without incurring
any expenditure. At the same time the government could never able to know about the
real collections. Officials made their own assessments of the collection by contractors
and felt, particularly from the 1840s when timber trade picked up, that collection was
much bigger than the amount of lease. This was particularly applicable to the rich and
accessible forest like Dehradun. Dehradun forests were on lease to Alamgir between
1839 and 1844 on an annual payment of Rs. 33,500 while according to an official
guess he was collecting about Rs. 80,000.76 Such official guess made a strong case for
the takeover of the collection of timber duty of Dehradun forests Vansittart was made
incharge of these forests.77 The result of takeover was encouraging as the average
annual revenue from these forests were between 80,000 and 100,000 from 1844 to
185578 and prompted officials in other districts to claim similar takeover.

Apart from the consideration of revenue other factors also motivated the
decision of takeover. The concern for careless felling of trees was one of them. It was
often argued that there was no control over traders and they felled trees carelessly. In
the absence of a clearly defined policy, official vacillated. Some sort of control was

71 G.W. Traill, Statistical Sketch of Kumaun, in J.H. Batten (ed.) Official Reports on the Province of
Kumaon, Calcutta, 1878, pp. 1-69 [Reproduced from Asiatic Researches, Vol. 16, 1828].
72 E.K. Pauw ,The 10th Settlement Report of Garhwal ,Allahabad, 1896, p. 36 (Quoted).
73 Traill, Statistical Sketch of Kumaun, op.cit., p. 47; Batten, Report on Bhabar, op.cit., pp. 209-11.
74 Raised plateau lands in the Tarai which usually contained sal.
75 Batten, Report on Bhabar, p. 211.
76 Brandis, ‘Suggestions Regarding the Management of the Forests Included in the Forest School
Circle, NWP’, Sept. 1879, A. Progs. 21-24, Home, Rev. & Agri. Dept., Forest Branch, p. 37, NAI .
77 J. Thorton, Secy. Govt. NWP to H.M. Eliot, Secy Sudder Board of Revenue, No. 3614, 26-8-1845,
in Correspondence Relating to Forests and Forests Dues, Vol. 84, File 17(II), R.A. Dehradun.
78 Brandis, Suggestions Regarding the Management of Forest of School Circle, op.cit., p. 37.

28
often required on fellings but it was said that this might go against the spirit of the
contracts.79 However, at the same time it was feared that ban on the cutting of trees
would lead to decline in receipts.80

Other factors also motivated the decision of takeover. The government was
facing difficulty in obtaining great scantlings for various purposes.81 Roads were
necessary to make forests accessible and thereby increased trades were not being
built. Contractors were neither interested in investing nor in a position to invest
enough money on road building. The government, it was argued, would invest forest
revenue on road building which would improve communication, make timber
economical and give a boost to trade.82 The leases were not renewed after the decision
was taken for the government takeover. In Garhwal Bhabar the patlee Dun lease was
for 20 years and was expired in 1859. After a prolonged discussion in 1853 the
government decided to purchase the lease from the leasee, Padam Singh, for Rs.
15,000,83 and gave over the charge of the forests to captain. Read, the Deputy
Superintendent of the Roorkee workshop. He was busy for a long time in procuring
timber from these forests for public works and had a excellent knowledge of these
forests.84

Now the forests came under the direct control of the government and the
concern was no longer confined to revenue. As the superintendent, Read was to give
permission to cut wood, to grant contracts, oversee felling of timber and its removal, 85
construct roads and bridges to made forests accessible. 86 He was later blamed of
excessive fellings.87 He could not transport out all the timber felled the left over was

79 Vansittart to W. Jameson, Supdt Botanical Garden, NWP, Saharanpur, No. 4, 01.01.1843,

correspondence related to Forests and Forests Dues, Vol. 84, File No. 17(II), PMR, Coll.
Dehradun.
80 Strachey to Batten No. 73, 06.11.1854, Vol. 12.
81 Strachey to Batten No. 9, 04.08.1853, Vol. 11.
82 Strachey to Batten, No. 9, 04.08.1853 and No. 73, 06.11.1854, Vol. 12.
83 Ibid, No. 4, 24.03.1854; also see attached translated resignation letter of Padam Singh.
84 Strachey, ‘Memorandum Regarding the Forests of Patlee and Kotree Doons in Garhwal’, dated
22.08.1854.
85 Strachey, Memorandum on Forests of Patlee and Kotree Doons, Officiating Sac Garhwal to
Commr. Nos. 29, 30 and 31 all dated 07.03.1855, RLI, Vol. 12, Coll. Pauri, RA Dehradun.
86 Strachey to Batten, No. 73, 06.11.1854, Vol. 12, op.cit., Backett to accountant, NWP, No. 11,
01.01.1861, RLI, Dehradun.
87 G.F. Pearson, Sub Himalayan Forests of Kumaon and Garhwal, dated 31.01.1869, in Selection
from the Government Records of the NWP, 2nd Series, Vol. II, Allahabad, 1871, pp. 127-29, 132.

29
later exported by Henry Ramsay.88 The system under Read focused exclusively on the
problems of fellings and transportation of trees, not on other issues.

In the year 1857, the Indian Mutiny occurred. The year 1858 saw the end of
the East India Company and rule by the Court of Directors. The Royal Proclamation
in 1858 declared the sovereignty of Queen Victorian as Empress of India. The Mutiny
brought out the want of facilities for quick communication, and the tremendous
pressure given to railway construction, caused heavy demands on forests while in the
early period of British rule timber extraction was mainly towards supplying the needs
of the British Navy.89 The years following the Mutiny saw the exploitation of forests
throughout the country for supplying the enormous quantities of railway sleepers and
other material required for railway construction in different parts of the country.
Forest devastation went apace, generally.90

In the North Western Provinces and Awadh no attempts at forest protection

were made till the middle of the 19th century, when the commissioners were appointed
as ex-officio conservators of Forests. After the mutiny, in 1858 the overall charge of
the forest was taken over by Henry Ramsey, the commissioner of Kumaun and
Garhwal, who become the first conservator of the hill forests. In 1860, he was the
commissioner of Kumaun and Garhwal took energetic steps to check devastation of
the forests in the Hills districts. He continued as conservator of the forest, till the
Forest Department started and later G.F. Pearson took the charge in 1867-68. Colonial
Baugh helped Ramsay in management of forests.91 He issued various regulations for
forest administration felling without license was banned; trees were marked for
felling; fine was imposed on felling of unmarked trees; cattle were excluded from the
sub-montane forests and cultivators were given another sites outside these forests. He
also introduced fire protection, constructed roads to make forests accessible. G.F.
Pearson during his tour of these forests in 1869-70 found them very well converted.92

88 Ramsay to Secy. Govt. NWP, Railway Dept. No.184, 17.10.1861 (Report on Kumaun and
Garhwal Forests), in Feb. 21, 1861, Progs. 23, PWD (Agriculture) NAI, (hereafter Report on
Kumaon and Garhwal Forests).
89 100 years of Indian Forestry, op.cit., Vol. I, p. 74.
90 Ibid, p. 76.
91 Ramsay, Report on Forests of Kumaun and Garhwal; Pearson, Sub-Himalayan Forests, op.cit.,
Forest Settlement Report of the Tarai Bhabar Civil Forests, in file 32/1899-1900, box 67, COR,
Nainital, RA.
92 Pearson, Sub-Himalayan Forests, op.cit., p. 149.

30
 Thus, Ramsay made the first attempt to impose limitations. Though limitations
were wide ranging, their application was united to the submontane sal forests. These
efforts were basically directed to the reproduction of sal, whose demand for railway
sleepers was increasing. These efforts for conservancy were hardly in response to
desiccationist propaganda, they were directed to the reproduction of forests to ensure
better supply of timber in anticipation of future requirements. Strachey, Ramsay and
Pearson in their reports93 talked about the future possibility of timber supply from
these forests which were indicative of the future trend towards ‘scientific forestry’. In
the first phase there was a noticeable shift in the official policy towards forests
farming out of revenue to state takeover.

Phase-II: Scientific Forestry and Its Agenda:

A whole administration of ‘scientific forestry’ was unfolded to manage and

increase the productivity of forests. The stress was on the exclusion of people from
forests. Thus Dietrich Brandis, a trained forest officer who had proved himself from
1856 in managing the teak forests of Pegu region in Burma, was invited in 1862 to
advice Government on forest matters, and in 1864, he was appointed as the first
Inspector-General of Forests to the Government of India. He initiated the management
of forests on scientific lines. A Forest Department was formed, and a forest law
enacted which provided for the settlement, demarcation, protection and management
of forests. The Indian Forest Act of 1865 came into being as the first attempt at forest
legislation by the British in India.94 The Act empowered the government to declare
any land covered with trees, brushwood or jungle as government forest by
notification. The government was empowered to make rules concerning to the
preservation of trees etc. The state governments, then called local governments, were
empowered to prescribe punishments for the breach of the provisions of the Act and
rules were laid down for confiscation of implements used in infringing rules and
arrest of offenders.95

However, under the Act, the Local Governments were empowered to draft
local rules for enforcement in their respective regions. Steps were taken accordingly

93 Discussed in details in next chapter.

94 B. Ribbentrop. Forestry in British India, Calcutta, 1900, p. 66 [reprint, New Delhi, 1989].
95 Sharad Kulkarni, Encroachment on Forests: Government, Versus People, Vol. II, p. 305, EPW,
Vol. 17, No. 3, Jan. 16, 1982, pp. 55-59.

31
to prevent acts which caused damage or destruction to the forests. In NWP, the forest
conservancy was continued in the hands of commissioners until 1868. Pearson, 96 the
first conservator of forests in the Central Provinces, was transferred as its first
conservator to the NWP. According to Stebbing the forest report of 1866-7 furnished
plentiful evidence of how backward NWP was at that time in all that related to the
true forest conservancy.97 The appointment of Pearson helped in rectifying matters.
During the period 1865-70 large qualities of timbers were made available from NWP.
In Awadh forests, which were under the management of Reid, who was appointed as
conservator of forests, forest conservancy was introduced on systematic lines as a
series of valuation surveys by Brandis.98

A revised Indian Forest Act (Act VII of 1878) was passed in the year 1878 and
it extended in all the provinces of British India with the exception of Madras, Coorg,
Burma, Bihar, the Hisar District of Punjab, Ajmer and Baluchistan. This Act expected
at improving on the inadequacies of the Indian Forest Act of 1865 99 and was more
comprehensive than the earlier one. Forests were divided into (1) reserved forests (ii)
protected forests and (iii) village forests.

The net outcome of these Acts was that the British government progressively
took over all the major forests, classifying them under two categories: (i) Reserved
Forests, which were to be totally maintained for supplying timber and other products
to government those contracting with it. Here private rights or privileges were either
completely prohibited or allowed only under severe conditions. (ii) Protected Forests,
where the government permitted some rights of the local populations or private
persons to be exercised, e.g., for wood cutting, grazing or firewood collection, but
which it hoped in due course to bring under the category of reserved Forests. Forests
that were uncategorised were left to take care of themselves, but many of these
categories too continued to be brought under government control. Hence, with the
enactment of these Acts, there was a major shift in forest policy. These acts
empowered the state to reserve any forest and determine rights and privileges of users
in them. Redefinition, curtailment and denial of user’s rights created hardship for
people. These measures were not only resisted by the people but opposed by a section

96 E.P. Stebbing, Forest in India, op.cit., Vol. II, p. 305.

97 100 years of Indian Forestry, op.cit., Vol. I, p. 78.
98 E.P. Stebbing, Forests of India, Britain, 1923, p. 356.
99 Sharad Kulkarni, Encroachment on Forests, op.cit., pp. 55-59.

32
of colonial bureaucracy as well. In this section I will discuss various facet of the
policy and examine the extent to which the policy was modified through this
criticism.

‘Protection’ of forests was essential for production of timber and its

regeneration: it was essential against fire, unauthorized grazing, fellings and
cultivation.100 For ‘protection’ forests were to be reserved. In United Provinces,
Awadh was constituted as a separate circle for efficient management of forests.
Awadh forests were originally administrated under the waste land rule, but were
declaring to be state forests in 1861. Mr. F. Read was the conservator of Awadh
forests and the Secretary of State gave sanction to the appointment of an assistant
conservator in Awadh in 1865. On the Brandis suggestions, 101 conservancy had been
introduced on systematic lines. The reserved forests had up to that date been limited
to areas containing the three species sal, sissu and Tun. Wood had reported that there
were in addition grasslands within the forests and uncultivated tracts containing
miscellaneous forest produce which might with advantage be included. Sanction had
been given during the year to the inclusion of the latter within the reserves. 102 As
Stebbing mentioned that Mr. Read recommend that all timber within forest limit
should be considered reserved and placed under departmental control. He objects to
the partially authorized entrance of villagers into the reserved forests for the purpose
of obtaining timber for domestic purpose and attaches much importance to the
separation of villages from reserved forest lands … viz. the definition of limits by the
excavation of a ditch in lieu of boundary posts or pillars.”103 Similarly, many forests
in hills of United Provinces were declared reserved in 1879. Initially forests of the
submontane tracts constituting mainly sal tree were reserved. Deodar forests of the
Bhagirath, the Yamuna and the Tons Valleys, most of which were on lease from the
Tehri Kingdom, were also brought under the Forest Department. Forests around
Nainital and Ranikhet were initially announced, to be protected forests but later were
reserved in 1892. Fire protection had an important place in colonial forest
conservancy. Fire was considered harmful by forests for regeneration as it killed
saplings. This was directly in conflict with local conceptions in which firing of forest

100 F.C. Osmaston, Forest Protection, in Idem and H. Champion (eds.), E.P. Stebbing’s The Forests of
India, Vol. IV, op.cit., p. 69.
101 E.P. Stebbing, Forests of India, Vol. II, op.cit., pp. 353-54.
102 Ibid, p. 355.
103 Stebbing, op.cit., Vol. II, p. 356.

33
was important to get new grass, to drive away carnivores, clear forest floors of pines
needles which made hill sides slippery and dangerous for cattle as well as people.104
While the people opposed and protested against the measures, many officials
questioned the usefulness of the fire protection. The Deputy Commissioner of Almora
wrote. I emphatically express the opinion that fire protection in hill forests is not only
unnecessary, but actually pernicious, that annual fire do not damage even a young
forest. N. Hearl, the forest officer, however, disagreed and argued: ‘the forest fires are
pernicious is accepted as an axiom by all forest officers … and whenever there is a
danger of such a fire occurring, they took stringent measures to prevent them.’…He
further argued that reserved forests of Ranikhet which were fire protected were
superior to civil forests which were burnt annually.105

Fire protection, however, remained a complicated task.106 After a prolonged

debate the Forest Department adopted a policy of selective and controlled
departmental firing of forests around March when inflammability remained low. This
was to prevent extensive damage caused by uncontrolled firing. 107 But this did not
solve the problem since firing was important for villagers only in May when pine
needles covered the forest floors. Despites the measures and penalties people
continued to fire forests. Rangarajan argued that later generation foresters had a
critical view of the earlier policy of total prevention of fire.108 In the hills of United
Provinces the shifts were more complicated on the one hand, rules were made more
stringent in the later years: first in 1907 after extensive firing of forests by the
people,109 then in 1918110 On the other hand role of fire in the forests came under
inquiry, fire protection in some forests was seen by many foresters as a problem since
it made regeneration of some species like sal and teak difficult. So fire protection was
given up in many forests but retained in others. Osmaston wrote “… in many forest
types full fire protection remained an essential part of management. In these forests

104 The Deputy Commissioner Almora quoted in APRFD, NWP & Oudh, 1897-98, p. 17.
105 Ibid., p.18.
106 APRFD give annual figures of the fire protected area. The rate of success varied annually; Guha,
Unquiet Wood, op.cit., pp. 51-3.
107 Osmaston, Fire Protection, op.cit., pp. 69-70.
108 Rangarajan, Fencing the Forest: Conservation and Ecological Change in India’s Central
Provinces 1860-1914, Delhi, 1996, p. 89.
109 Progs. No. 27-32, File No. 172/1908, September 1909, Forest Department, Lucknow, UPSA.
110 Notification No. 76/XIV-51 of 1918, dated February 1918, Progs. No. 69, Serials 4, Forests Dept.
File No. 51/1917, Lucknow, UPSA.

34
controlled burning, involving early burning111 before the time of greatest
inflammability, became a fairly common feature.’112 In Awadh forests too, by the
rules VI, IX, X and XII, burning grass, lime or charcoal etc. were forbidden.113

Soon after the forests were declared reserved, the grazing of cattle, especially
goat and sheep, which are voracious feeders, was stopped as the first step towards
conservancy and improvement of forest. Shortly afterwards it was found that
unrestricted grazing of even oxen and buffaloes and detrimental to young tree growth.
Large areas were therefore, entirely closed to grazing similarly. There were too
conflicting views on the impact of grazing on forests. Many foresters thought that
protection against cattle grazing was essential for ‘scientific’ management of forests.
But local people, who were involved in herding the cattle strongly, resented the
exclusion of cattle from reserved forests. So many foresters felt that total exclusion of
cattle was not politically feasible. Measures of controlled entry were worked out and
limited grazing rights were settled after a prolonged debate problems faced by the
people on account of grazing restrictions constituted one of the most serious
grievances of the people against the Forest Department.114

Successful reproduction of timber and promotion of selective species

necessitated exclusion of cultivation and restrictions on cultivation in reserved and
protected forests. Sal deodar and chir were promoted at the cost of other species
which were often preferred and widely used by villagers. This not only adversely
affected the peasant economy but had lead to serious consequences for the ecology of
the region.115

Scientific forestry sought to exclude rural timber users from reserved forests.
Total exclusion was difficult, however, certain limited rights were granted in the
reserved and protected forests. Quantitative specification of these rights-rights to
timber for house construction wood for agricultural implements, fuel wood, bamboo
and charcoal, was not a simple task and gave rise to prolonged debate on the
criterions. Initially, when colonel Gaestin settled these rights he just mentioned them

111 Osmaston, Forest Protection, op.cit., pp. 69-70.

112 Stebbing, Forests in India, op.cit., Vol. II, p. 359.
113 Under which deliberate burning was done at a particular season to avoid wholesale damage.
114 Notification No. 761/XIV-83 of 1914, quoted in the Working Plan for North Garhwal Forest Div.,
1921, p. 87.
115 D. Gaur, ‘Dynamics of Vegetation of Garhwal Himalayas’ in Paliwal, ed. The Vegetation of
Wealth of Himalaya, Delhi, 1984, p. 9 (Chapter 4, p. 129).

35
and quantitative specification was taken up later Oakeshott specified the rights in
certain reserved forests.116

Fear of popular opposition delayed settlement of these rights. B.D. Joshi who
was assigned the specifying rights, found Oakeshott’s specification defective. Joshi
argued that the timber granted annually to an entire village was not sufficient to build
even a single first class house. The difference in the durability of sal and chir117 was
not taken into account the temporary houses and cattle sheds actually lasted only three
years instead of six years as assumed by oakeshott.118 Consequently the scale of
demand was seriously underestimated.

Joshi’s view led to an extensive official debate on the criteria to be followed in

timber allotments. D’Archy, the conservator of forests, objected to Joshi’s view and
thought that Oakeshott’s specification was ‘quiet liberal’. Joshi proceeded to specify
rights by modifying earlier scales.119

The emphasis of ‘scientific forestry’ on elimination of people and redefinition

of their rights gave rise on the one side to a debate within the bureaucracy and, on the
other, to a discontent among people. Many officials criticized the forest policy for its
severity. Captain W.G. Murray, Assistant Surveyor General, Wrote to the GOI that
while touring Jaunsar he found simmering discontent among Jaunsaries against fire
protection elimination of cultivated land from forests and refutation of grazing
right.120 Colonel A. Frazer responding to these charges on behalf of the Lt. Governor
wrote that these complaints were overstated.121 Fire protection and grazing restrictions
he wrote were important and people would gradually become used to to them. The
Forest Department, he argues, was not insensitive on people but was taking care of
them. Ramsay, who initiated forest ‘conservancy’ in the hills, criticized the Forest

116 J.E. Goudge, The Forest Settlement in Kumaun and Garhwal 1879-1895, File No. 2/1894-95, Cor,
Nainital, p. 2, RA.
117 The durability of Chir is half to that of sal.
118 Goudge, The Forest Settlement in Kumaun and Garhwal, op.cit., p. 4.
119 Joshi, Narrative of Forest Settlement in the Reserved of the Kumaun, Garhwal and Ganges
Divisions, in Basta, 1891-95, Forest Dept. Fire in ERR Coll. Pauri Garhwal, pp. 2-3.
120 Col. A. Frazer, Offg. Secy. Govt. NWP, PWD to Secy. GOI, No. 8 FC 04.01.1873, February 1873,
A Progs. No. 18-9, RAC (Forest), NAI.
121 Ibid.

36
Department for high handedness.122 Most of the forests being reserved people were
left with only a small area to meet their necessities.123

There was awareness of the hardship caused to the people by forest regulation.
D. Ibettson, secretary GOI wrote ‘there is no doubt that certain provinces, the strict
forest administration which have prevailed to late years have given rise to serious
discontent among the agricultural classes’.124 The government had to solve these
grievances. This he felt would, ‘do much to strengthen the reliance which the people
repose on the Government and to confirm their feeling of attachment to it’. 125 He
wrote:

But apart from the benefit that must ensure to Government

from the general promotion of contentment among the classes
which are its mainstay, there is a very special benefit to be
derived from a relaxation to the restrictions that have hitherto
been too often imposed on grazing.126

Similar sentiments were expressed by the secretary of state. He expressed

satisfaction over the progress in demarcation of the reserved forests in definite regions
including Kumaun and Garhwal and argued that the operation would be valuable ‘so
long as the wishes of the people were taken care of’.127 He further argued that in the
unreserved forests ‘immemorial and hitherto undisputed rights’ of the people be
respected along with Government’s right. But these should compatible with
‘Conservancy’.128 A meeting was held at Simla to review these issues and a resolution
was passed by the GOI on Oct. 19, 1894 recommending a relaxation of policy.129

The circular noted that the forests of India were the property of the State and
clearly spelt out the primacy of the state’s interest over that of people’s interest. By
the resolution, forests were divided into four classes:

(a) Forests, the preservation of which is essential on climatic or physical grounds.

122 Ramsay to SAC, Kumaun, 24.04.1877, File No. 7/1882-83, COR, Nainital.
123 Ibid.
124 Letter to Secy. Govt. NWP & O, 31.10.1894, Dept. IV A, File No. 244/1863-81, PMR, Coll.
Dehradun RA.
125 Ibid.
126 Ibid.
127 Comments by the Secretary of State on the Annual Report of the Forest Dept., No. 12, 16.09.1872,
Dated February 1873, A Progs. 15-7, RAC (For.), NAI.
128 Ibid.
129 Resolution No. 22F of GoI, Dept. RAC (Forest), in Dept. IVA File No. 244/1863-81, PMR of Coll.
Dehradun, pp. 349-55, RA.

37
(b) Forests, which afford a supply of valuable timber for commercial purpose.
(c) Minor forests containing somewhat inferior kinds of timber and managed for the
production of wood, fodder grazing and other produce for local consumption.
(d) pasture lands.130

Forests of the first group were to be found on hill slopes. They must be
preserved on account of their indirect effects and without any mention to their
commercial value. These indirect effects of forests are on climate, rainfall, water
storage and prevention of denudation.131 The forests of the second class included the
great tracts which provided valuable timbers like teak, deodar sal and so on. They
were to be managed mainly on commercial lines as profitable properties in order to
obtain revenue to the state.132 The third class of forests produced only the inferior sort
of timber. It was meant for small timber, fuel wood, fodder and grazing grounds to the
people residing in the neighboring area of forests.133 The forests of the fourth class
were pastures and grazing ground. These were not forests in the general sense of the
term but grazing grounds managed by the Forest Department simply as a matter of
convenience.134 On way of achieving the goals of the forest policy in United
Provinces, some officials considered to extend control over forest and implemented
regulations slowly in stages. For instance, Jaunsar forests were being reserved in
accordance with the advice of Brandis, the conservator of Forest required the closure
to be gradual. He argued that the 1872 settlement had already created discontent
among people and they could not be alienated further. 135 We are of the opinion that it
would be wise not to upset them again as soon by depriving them of a large area of
grazing land all at once. Any harsh measure, he argued: ‘…would rouse the whole
country against us, and that is what we particularly wish to avoid, for, without the
goodwill of population. Our fire conservancy, & .c, would be almost impossible’.136
There was nothing incorrect in going slow, admitted A.O. Hume, but the suggestions
made by Brandis should not be ignored.137 Commenting on the suggestions made by

130 Govt. of India, The Old Forest Policy, Circular No. 22F, 19 October 1894, Para 3.
131 Circular, Government of India to Local Governments, No. 4-F-70-1, 27 February 1915.
132 The Old Forest Policy, 1894, op.cit., Para 4-5.
133 Ibid, Para 9.
134 Ibid, Para 12.
135 Conservators NWP to Secy, Govt. NWP, PWD, No. 24, 21.04.1876, July, 1876, A Progs. 9-10,
RAC, Forest Branch NAI.
136 Ibid.
137 Hume, Secy. GoI, RAC to Secy Govt. NWP, PWD, Forest Branch, No. 641, 17.07.1876, NAI.

38
the conservator, Brandis pointed out that ‘going slow was alright, but as I happen to
know (this) country well, I cannot help feeling that the conservator will find the task
more difficult if its accomplishment is delayed too long.’ 138 ‘Delaying’, he said,
‘would not reduce the number of sheep and goats and increase area under the Forest
Department and ‘where the area is so small it is not good to defer settlement too
long.’139

For a while the process of redefining of rights slowed. However, the debate
recurred later as the Forest Department extended control over forests. In 1893 all
‘unassessed lands’ in the hills of United Provinces was constituted as the ‘District
Protected Forests’ (DPF) and located under the Deputy Commissioners.140 Justifying
the complex rules and limitations141 the Forest Department said:

“The first and immediate effect of placing these lands under

the Forest Act has been to arrest the reckless fellings and
clearings for sporadic cultivation (especially potato
cultivation), which formerly prevailed to so large an extent
throughout the Kumaun and Garhwal hills, and to introduced
at least some degree of order into the fellings and utilization of
the produce by the people. What remains to be done is to mark
off all those areas which by their size, their situation, their
content, call for permanent upkeep, and consequently a special
form (Sic) of treatment, either because they are commercially
important, or because they constitute the only”

As is evident various justifications were given for constituting the District

Protected Forests. These included, to ‘arrest reckless fellings’ and protect forests for
climatic or physical reasons. Thus desiccationism also emerged as a reason. But the
question arises whether forests were really preserved. We would discuss it in next
chapter. Desiccationism was frequently used as an argument to legitimize the
elimination of local communities from forests and then use the timber commercially.
Commercial considerations as is evident in the above quote were never hidden. And it
was said, ‘Eventually it might be found desirable to convert the commercially
important among these forests into reserves and hand them over to the Forest

138 Comments by Brandis dated 08.07.1876, PWD, Forests Branch, NAI.

139 Ibid.
140 Progress Report of the DPF, 1896-97, June 1998 Progs 27, File No. 1/1897-98, box 63, COR,
Nainital, p. 32, RA.
141 Ibid,

39
Department.’142 To extend control, the District Protected Forest were first separated
into ‘closed’ and ‘open’ civic forests in 1903 and finally a large part143 of the District
protected forests was brought under the reserved category in 1911.144 Among other
reasons, improvement in resin distillation techniques and the possibility of cheap
chemical treatment of chir for sleepers by the early 20th century which made chir,
extensively found in these forests, commercially valuable also prompted this
reservation.145

Before the new reservation policy, the main hill forests of United Provinces
were largely unreserved and were under the civil administration. The new reservation
encompassed them and noticeably reduced the area of civil forests, which were used
by the people for their day to day necessities. Increased adversity led to strong
opposition to the new settlement by the people, which finally developed into the
1921-22 forest protest.

A section of colonial bureaucracy also considered the new reservation unkind

on the people and bitterly criticized it. V.A. Stowell, the Deputy Commissioner of
Garhwal, opposed the idea of the new reservation from the very beginning. He wrote,
‘the more I consider the question, the more convinced I am that making the main hill
forests into reserves will be very grave error of policy, especially if carried out on the
wider lines…’146 He further said that he fully supported the wish of the Forest
Department to ‘get profit from forests’ but in the hills villages and forests were
closely linked and the economic life of the former essentially bound up with latter
everywhere’ which made it difficult to separate them. He mocked the Forest
Department for their lack of concern with the rights of the people.147

There was a rivalry between the civil and forest department over the forests
control. Official Civil of department in general were against handling over forests to
the Forest Department because they considered that the Forest Department was not

142 Ibid., Appendices B and C.

143 About 36 percent miles out of a total 9225 sq.miles.
144 Report of the Kumaun Forests Grievances Committee, June 1922. A Progs 19-24, Rev. & Agr.
Dept. Forest Branch, NAI, Para 26.
145 Guha Unquiet Woods, op.cit., pp. 43-4.
146 Stowell to J.S. Campbell, the Commissioner, Kumaun, 17/31 July 1911, Forest Dept., File No.
163/1916, box 218, Lucknow, UPSA.
147 Ibid.

40
sensitive to the problems of the people. And frustration of the people might result in
political unrest.

There was a broader concern for the hardship people faced and political
implications that might have. E.C. Allen, the District and Session Judge of
Moradabad, as touring the area came across a mixture of complaints against the new
settlement and argued in his letter to J.S. Meston, the Lt. Governor, that it was unkind
on the people. Meston was particularly concerned about the reactions of the sepoys of
Garhwal Battalion.148 The Deputy Commissioner of Garhwal, clay,149 and Wyndham
were also in against of it.150 Wyndham said that these forests had no prospects of
providing timber for export and the Forest Department could only make the forests
paid by charging high price locally and bleeding the villagers and pilgrims’. 151 He
totally disagreed with the claim that these forests were being preserved for ‘benefit of
Kumaun.’

As an outcome of this wide criticism, a meeting of officials was held by the

Lt. Governor at Nainital on 28th August 1916 to discuss the new settlement. At the
meeting Meston found two groups, anti-reservationist (mainly civil officials) and
reservationist (mainly forest officers except J.S. Campbell, a former Commissioner of
Kumaun). Most of the issues discussed earlier reappeared in the debate. Meston said
that he was not questioning the ‘wisdom’ of his predecessors John Hewett who ‘knew
things better’ and since the decision for the settlement had already taken place 5 years
back it could not be rolled back now.152 He suggested that present faults of the
settlement be solved after consultation with the commissioner and the Deputy
Commissioners. He, however, ordered a re-demarcation of the northern Garhwal.153

After the meeting, Meston went on a tour of north Garhwal and came across
various complaints of the people. He realized that regulations were not suited to the
condition of Kumaun. Not much land was left for expansion of cultivation, and

148 Maston to Wyndham, 05.03.1916, Forest Department, Lucknow, UPSA.

149 Letter to Wyndham, 20.03.1916, Forest Department, Lucknow; Letter to Meston, 27.03.1916,
op.cit.
150 Wyndham to Meston, 26.06.1916, op.cit.
151 Ibid.
152 Report on the Meeting by Meston. op.cit., Forest Department, Lucknow.
153 Report on the Meeting by Wyndham, op.cit., Forest Department, Lucknow.

41
herders were badly suffered. He found that forests were not fit to be exploited
commercially and thus scientific management’ were not desirable. 154

Before such a review could take place, the frustration of the people
snowballed into forest agitations. People adopted a wide range of strategies to protest
the forest reservation policies of the government. They broke almost all the rules
which they were supposed to follow. Although hill peasants occasionally used labour
strikes to cripple the administration, burning the forests continued to be their main
method of protest. The protest gained wide popular support, and the administration
was incapable to detect people involved. Consequently a committee was set up to
examine the new reservation.

However, attempts were made to resolve the interests of people where possible
without neglecting the overall imperial interest. There were many instances of
dereservation of forests and granting of more rights in reserve forests. Departmental
firing of forests was adopted. Moreover in many cases rules were not strictly
imposed.155 When the breaches of forest laws increased after 1911-17 settlement and
culminated in the forest agitation of 1921 the government was forced to reconsider the
new reservation. The Kumaun Forest Grievances Committee was formed in 1921 to
enquire into the grievances of the people and suggest revision in the policy. The
committee composed a set of nearly 30 recommendations from the resulting evidence.
The recommendation advocated a cutback in the area of forests under control of
Forest Department and a repeal of all regulations on grazing and collecting of fodder
from the forests. Finally the committee divided the newly reserved forests into three
categories: class I, II and III. In class I only some restrictions were retained while in
class II which were commercially exploitable the control of the Forest Department
was to be wider.156 Class I forests were later handed over for management to the
people and were constituted into Panchayat forests in 1930 inspite of strong
disagreement from some forest officers. Panchayat were to control grazing, supply
green leaves from shrubs for manure arranged and sell fuel enquire into the offences
and report.157 It was officially stated that panchayats planted a large number of trees

154 A Note by Wyndham dated 09.01.1917, Forest Department, Lucknow.

155 Report of Kumaun Forest Grievances Committee, June 1922, A Progs. No. 19-24, ARC, Forest
Branch, Para 7.
156 RKFGC, Para 32-3 and other follow up correspondence in the file, op.cit.
157 Annual Progress Report of the Forest Department, 1933-34, Unite Provinces, pp. 1-2.

42
and they were well preserved. By 1934 there were 20000 acres of forest under
panchayats. Changes were made in the policy without compromising the overall
imperial interest. In many instances the changes reduced the suffering of the people
but did not remove it. The rights enjoyed by the people in the forests were
substantially controlled under the colonial rule.

43