Campaign Against Illegal Tree Felling In Bangalore

Background

“The forest is a peculiar organism of unlimited kindness and benevolence that makes no demands for its sustenance and extends generously the products of its life activity; it affords protection to all beings, offering shade even to the axe-man who destroys it” – Gautam Buddha

Bangalore, the “Garden City” once boasted a skyline of trees, the towering canopies a source of constant pride to Bangaloreans. But over the years, urbanization and a fast growth rate have taken their toll on the city and it is now common to see more and more buildings and structures poking out above the trees. Bangalore’s image is gradually changing from a “garden city” to a high tech, “silicon city” image. According to the State of Forest Report 2001, Bangalore city has only 7.4% of its total geographic area as forest cover.

This haphazard growth has typically ignored the ecology of the city which has failed to keep pace with this rapid urbanization. The result is that the once lush avenues are now slowly but surely being bereft of the tree cover in the guise of road space, highways, housing and transportation projects and technical infrastructure to match the growing needs of the city. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka stepped in to provide guidelines to check the loss of green cover in Bangalore.

Our Tree Helpline has been set up to ensure wider awareness and regulation of the rampant tree felling incidents in Bangalore.

See Hasire Usiru – Concerned people unite against tree felling for more details.

Development sans trees?

The foresight in planning developmental projects is lacking; trees face the axe when these projects are executed with little thought given to replenishing these resources. Why can’t saplings be planted at the planning stages itself when the tree cutting is inevitable? This would ensure that when the trees are cut some years later, the saplings are on their way up.

Bangalore City’s flyovers have already accounted for cutting of 9,800 trees (Source: Deccan Herald 18 Nov, 2003) and thousands more are threatened to make way for an expanding metropolis. Recently, the Turahalli minor forest area in South Bangalore has been experiencing such a threat to its biodiversity. Encroachment and tree felling in the name of development by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) has scarred the area and threatens the very existence of the forest.

Sheshadri Road Flyover

The up ramp starts from Khoday’s Circle (At the end of Platform Road – the road on which the main entrance to the City Railway Station stands). It is a 5-lane one-way flyover. One lane breaks away into a loop and descends towards RC College and Janata Dal Secular office. The remaining four lanes pass over the stretch of Seshadri Road running from Ananda Rao Circle to Subbanna Circle (at the intersection of Gandhinagar 5th Main Road, Seshadri Road and Race Course Road – also known as Gandhi Square) and descend into a down ramp and meet the surface a few metres ahead of the fire station, aligned to the left half of the Seshadri Road.

Although the flyover seems inevitable, many questions remain unanswered such as where are the saplings which are to be planted in lieu of the trees being chopped, why are such projects not made public at the planning stage, how many more such projects are in the offings, etc.

You can see the plan for the flyover and Salient Features (Page 1, Page 2, Page 3)

A vigilant society up in arms

Various civil society organisations, environmental groups, the judiciary and media have been vigilant on this issue. Vide its interim order WA 8178/1999, dated 24-07-2003, a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court severely restricted ongoing tree felling and directed immediate end to this activity barring a few cases. In a strongly worded judgment, the Bench comprising, Justice M F Saldanha and Justice M S Rajendra Prasad pulled up the state government and public authorities for the wanton destruction of green cover in various parts of the state. It ordered that two trees must be planted before any tree was felled. Read more.

The KFD on the basis of the HC directions and under Sec 8(1) of the The Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, 1976 issued a Govt order (No. A9.V.CR.912/2003-04.Dated:02.08.2003) withdrawing with immediate effect all orders issued previously to fell trees. Now any tree felling or pruning in the city on private or public land needs the Deputy Conservator of Forests’ (DFO, Bangalore Urban) permission. Also two saplings have to be planted before a tree is cut. Failure to comply with these orders would invite imprisonment or heavy fine or both according to Sec 22 of the Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, 1976. Read more.

[expand title = “Documentation” tag =”h4″]

April 2004: On reports of felling Ashoka trees on Cubbon Road, per the opinion expressed by His Excellency the Governor of Karnataka without following the procedures per law and High Court directions, we expressed our concerns in writing to the Chief Secretary who ordered the felling and all the other concerned authorities. The Governor’s office through a communication to ESG confirmed no authorisation from their side to cut these trees. We have since written to the Karnataka Forest Dept for necessary action.

Mar 2004: We are following up with the Forest Dept on the issue of illegal land acquisition of forest land and tree felling by BDA in Turahalli minor forest area in South Bangalore. In this case the Karnataka Forest Dept had booked two Forest Offence Cases (FOC No 19 and 20 of Jan 2004) against the Land Acquisition Officer of BDA and the contractor.

Jan 2004: The latest case files of the complaints received on our helpline were submitted to the DFO. We requested him to give us an “action taken” report on the cases filed and he assured us of the same in a couple of weeks time. We are following up with the Forest Dept to provide us the report.Nov 2003ESG has written to the complainants about their cases being taken to the DFO and the assurances that he gave to attend to the illegal tree felling cases in Bangalore. Read the letter.

Oct 2003: The complaints received on ESG’s tree helpline were documented and taken to the DFO. Case files were compiled on the complaints received and a request was made to legal action on the perpetuators of law. Read the request letter. As ESG was providing phone numbers of the Forest Dept to the complainants on ESG’s helpline for reporting tree felling in the city, we expressed concerns over calls of illegal tree felling cases not being attended to properly and no prompt action being taken by the Forest Dept. The DFO hence directed his staff to keep a written record of all complaints and in case of any urgent action needed, he directed them to immediately fax the details to the Range Forest Officers to visit the site at once. Read the minutes of the meeting with the DFO.

Aug 2003: A request was made for a copy of the FIR filed in Nanda Road case and a demand was made in the context of the Karnataka High court’s directive on tree felling that the DFO’s office should come out with an order immediately withdrawing all orders authorizing felling of trees in the Bangalore, be they issued in the past or present. Following our demand, the DFO’s office issued an order to the effect. Read our request and the DFO’s order.

Jul 2003: ESG witnessed a criminal act of felling full-grown and healthy Rain Trees on the Nanda Talkies Road, Jayanagar, Bangalore South. We filed a complaint with the District Forest Officer, Bangalore Urban and decided to follow up this rampant destruction of Bangalore forest cover. The Forest Dept booked the culprits. Read the Complaint.

[/expand]

[expand title = “The Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, 1976″ tag =”h5”]

Sec 8(1): Restriction on felling of trees.-

With effect on and from the appointed day, notwithstanding any custom, usage contract or law for the time being in force, no person shall fell any tree or cause any tree to be felled in any land, whether in his ownership or occupancy or otherwise, except with the previous permission of the Tree Officer.

Sec 22: Penalty.-

Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or orders made thereunder shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both. Upon such conviction the court may order any penalty in respect of which offence is committed to be forfeited to the State Govt.

---

(First published in the Karnataka Gazette Extraordinary on the fourth day of December 1976)

(Received the assent of the governor on the first day of December 1976)

An act to make better provision for preservation of trees in the state.

Whereas with the growing pace of urbanization, industrialization and increasing population, there has been indiscriminate felling of a large number of tree in the rural and urban areas of the state of karnataka leading to erratic to rainfall, famines and floods, soil erosion and consequent ecological disturbances;

Whereas it is expedient to provide for the preservation of trees in the state by regulating the felling of trees and for the planting of adequate number of trees to restore ecological balance and for matters connected therewith;

Be it enacted by the Karnataka State Legislature in the twenty-seventh year of the Republic of India as follows: –

CHAPTER-1

1. Short title, extent and commencement –

(1) This act may be called the Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act, 1976.

(2). It extends to the whole of the State of Karnataka.

(3). This section shall be deemed to have come into force on the seventeenth day of July 1976 and other provisions shall come into force on such date as the state government may by notification appoint and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this act and this act for different urban areas or rural areas or parts thereof.

2. Definitions –

(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires. –

1. ‘appointed day’ in relation to any area means the date notified under sub- section (3) of Section 1;
2. ‘local authority’ means a Municipal Corporation or a Municipal Council or a Notified Area Committee or a Taluk Development Board;
3. ‘preservation of trees’ means, maintenance and protection of tree to encourage normal growth and prevent damage or cutting of felling and includes planting of new trees and transplanting trees;
4. ‘relevant act’ means the enactment under which a local authority is constituted;
5. ‘rural area’ means an area and of the kind specified in Schedules I and II;
6. ‘to fell a tree’ means severing the trunk from the roots, uprooting the tree and includes burning or cutting or girdling or applying arboricides to a tree to cause substantial damage thereto or destruction thereof;
7. ‘tree’ means any woody plant whose branches springs from and are supported upon a trunk or body and which trunk or body is not less than five and a half centimeters in diameter and not less than one metre in height from the ground level and includes palms, bamboos, stumps, brushwood canes and seedlings of such tree but does not include sandal and rosewood trees;
8. ‘tree officer’ means a forest officer appointed as such by the Chief Conservator of Forests (General) for the purposes of this Act;
9. ‘urban area’ means an area comprising a Municipal Corporation, a Municipality or a Notified Area Committees;
10. ‘wood lot’ means any piece of land of which trees from the main crop, the average number of such tree in each hectare being not less than twenty-five.

(2) Words and expressions used herein but not defined shall have the meanings assigned to them in the relevant Act.

CHAPTER-II
TREE AUTHORITY

3. Establishment of the tree authority –

(1) the State Government shall, by notification, constitutes a Tree Authority for each area and for rural area.

(2) Such Authority shall consist of five members as follows:-

1. For an urban area —
   1. The Mayor President of the Municipal corporation, the Municipal council or the Notified Area Committee, as the case may be;
   2. The Divisional Forest Officer or his nominee;
   3. The District Horticultural Officer having jurisdiction;
   4. The Municipal Commissioner or the Chief Executive Officer, as the case may be; and
   5. one member of the Municipal Corporation, the Municipal Council or the Notified Area Committee, as may be, nominated by the Mayor or the President, as the case may be:
2. For a rural area specified in Schedule I: –
   1. the concerned Conservator of Forests having jurisdiction;
   2. the Special Deputy Commissioner and where there is no Special Deputy Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner of the district.
   3. the Superintending Engineer, Communication and buildings having jurisdiction; and
   4. two non-official members appointed by the State Government
3. For a rural area specified in Schedule II-
   1. the President of the Taluk Development Board;
   2. the Block Development Officer having jurisdiction;
   3. the Assistant Conservator of Forests nominated by the Divisional Forest Officer;
   4. the district horticultural officer having jurisdiction;
   5. one member of the Taluk Development Board nominated by the President;

(3) The State Government shall appoint one of the members to be the Chairman.

(4) The Tree Authority may co-opt in such manner and for such period as it may determine not more than three representatives of non-official organisations having special knowledge or practical experience in the preservation of trees.

4. Meetings of the Tree Authority.—

(1) The Tree Authority shall meet at least once in three months at such place and time as the Chairman may decide and shall conduct its business in such manner as may be prescribed.

(2) The quorum to constitute a meeting of the Tree Authority shall be one-third of the total number of its members.

CHAPTER III
OFFICERS AND SERVANTS

5. Appointment of tree officer. –

(1)The chief conservator of forests (General) may, subject to sub-section (2) appoint for each urban area and rural area one or more Forest Officers as Tree Officers for the purpose of this Act.

(2) Such tree Officer shall —

1. in an urban area comprising of a Municipality Corporation, be not below the rank of an Assistant Conservator for the Forests;
2. in an urban area comprising of a Municipality or Notified Area Committee, be not below the rank of a Range Forest Officer;
3. in a rural area of the kind specified in Schedule II, be not below the rank of a Range Forest Officer;
4. in a rural area of the kind specified in Schedule I, be not below the rank of Divisional Forest Officer.

6. Appointment of other officers. – The Chief Conservator of Forests (General) may from time to time, appoint such other officers and servants to assist the Tree Officer as he may consider necessary be subordinate to the Tree Officer.

CHAPTER IV
DUTIES OF TREE AUTHORITY

7. Duties of tree authority. – Notwithstanding anything in the relevant Act any other law for the time being in force, the Tree Authority shall, subject to any general or special orders of the State Government, be responsible for –

1. the preservation of all trees within its jurisdiction;
2. carrying out a census of the existing trees and obtaining, whenever considered necessary, declarations from all owners or occupants about the numbers of trees in their lands;
3. specifying the standards regarding the number and kind of trees which each locality, type of land and premises shall have and which shall be planted subject to a minimum of five trees per hectare in the case of rural areas;
4. development and maintenance of nurseries, supply of seeds, saplings and trees to persons who desire or are required to plant new trees or to replace trees which have been felled;
5. planting and transplanting of trees necessitated by construction of new roads or widening of existing roads or replacement of trees which have failed to come up along roads or for safeguarding danger to life and property;
6. organisation of demonstration and extension services for the purposes of this Act and assisting private and public institutions connected with planting and preservation of trees;
7. planting and maintaining such number of trees as may be considered necessary according to the prescribed standards on roads, in public parks and gardens and on the banks of rivers or lakes or seashores; and
8. undertaking such schemes or measures as may be directed from time by the state government for achieving the objects of the Act.

CHAPTER-V
RESTRICTION ON FELLING OF TREES AND LIABILITY FOR PRESERVATION OF TREES.

8. Restriction on felling of tree. –

(1) With effect on and from the appointed day, notwithstanding any custom, usage contract or law for the time being in force, no person shall fell any tree or cause any tree to be felled in any land, whether in his ownership or occupancy or otherwise, except with the previous permission of the Tree Officer.

(2) Any person desiring to fell, a tree shall apply in writing to the concerned Tree Officer for permission in that behalf. A site plan or survey sketch specifying clearly the site or survey number shall accompany the application, the number, kind and girth of the tree sought to be cut and the reasons therefor along with the consent of the owner or occupant.

(3) On receipt of the application, the Tree Officer may, after inspecting the tree and holding such inquiry as he deems necessary, either grant permission in whole or in part or refuse permission.

Provided that permission shall not be refused, if the tree,-

1. is dead, diseased or wind-fallen; or
2. has silviculturally matured; or
3. constitutes a danger to life or property; or
4. constitutes obstruction to traffic; or
5. is substantially damaged or destroyed by fire, lightning, rain or other natural causes; or
6. is required in rural areas to be removed either for extension of the cultivation in areas specified in schedule II or for the bona fide use of the applicant.

(4) If the Tree Officer fails to inform the applicant of his decision-

1. In the case of an application in respect of a tree in an urban area and in rural area of the kind specified in Schedule II, within sixty days; and
2. In the case of an application in respect of a tree in a rural area of the kind specified in schedule I, within one year from the date of receipt of the application by him or, if the receipt of the application has been acknowledged by him from the date of such acknowledgment, such permission shall be deemed to have been granted.

(5) Where permission to fell a tree is granted, the Tree Officer may grant it subject to the condition that the applicant shall plant another tree or trees of the same or any other suitable species on the same site or other suitable place within thirty days from the date the tree is felled or within such extended time as the Tree Officer may allow.

(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sections- (1) to (5) but subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed, for bona fide domestic use of a family, one or more members of such family may, if they are otherwise entitled to do so, would fetch 1[not more than 2.8 cubic meters of timber and five tonnes of firewood.]

2[(7) Nothing in this section shall apply to felling of 3[Casuarina, Coconut, Erythrina, Fucalyptus, Glyrecidia, Hopea, Wightina, Prosipis, Rubber, Sesbania, Silver Oack and Subabul trees]

1. Substituted by Act, 21 of 1977, S, 2 (29th July 1977)
2. Inserted by Act, 21 of 1977, s, 2 (29th July 1977)
3. Substituted by Act No 39 of 1987 Dt. (1-12-1987)

9. Planting of adequate number of trees. –

(1) Every owner or occupant of a land shall, within a period of five years from the appointed day or within such extended period as the Tree Authority may specify, plant trees so to conform to the standards prescribed by the tree authority under clause © of Section 7.

(2) If in the opinion of the Tree Officer the number of tree in any land is not adequate according to the standards referred to in sub-section (1), the Tree Officer may by order giving a reasonable opportunity to the owner or occupier of the land of making representation, require him to plant such trees, or additional trees, as the case may be, and at such places in the land as may be specified in the order.

(3) The owner or occupier of the land shall comply with such order within thirty days from the receipt thereof or such extended time as the tree officer may allow in this behalf.

10. Planting in place of fallen or destroyed trees: –

(1) Where any tree has fallen or is destroyed by wind, fire lightning, torrential rain or such other natural causes, the tree office may suo moto or on information given to him, after holding such enquiry as he deems fit, by order, require such owner or occupier to plant a tree in place of the tree so or destroyed, of the same or other species at the same or other suitable place as may be specified in the order.

(2) The owner of the occupier of the land shall comply with such order within thirty days from the receipt thereof or such extended time as the tree officer may allow.

11. Preservation of trees. – Subject to the provisions of section 12, it shall be the duty of the owner or occupier of the land who is required by an order under section 8, 9 or 10 to plant a tree or tees to ensure that they grow properly and are well preserved.

12. Adoption of trees. – Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, the tree authority may, subject to such terms and conditions as it may specify in that behalf, permit any individual, body corporate or institution to adopt any tree for such period as may be specified therein and during such period the said individual, body corporate or institution shall be responsible for the maintenance and preservation of the said tree.

13. Recovery of expenditure on failure to comply with order for planting trees. – Where the owner or occupier fails to comply with an order made by the Tree Officer under section 8, 9 or 10, the tree officer may, after giving a reasonable opportunity to such owner or occupier of making representation and without prejudice to any other action which may be taken against the defaulter under this Act take necessary action himself and recover the expenditure incurred therefor from the owner or the occupier, as the case may be. If such expenditure is not paid within the time specified by the Tree Officer, the amount along with interest at six per cent annum and other expense, if any, shall be recovered as if it were an a arrear of land revenue.

14. Appeal. –

(1) Against the order of the Tree Officer under section 8, 9 or 10, an appeal shall lie to the Tree Authority.

(2) Such appeals shall be filed within thirty days from the date the decision is communicated to the owner or occupier of the land and shall be accompanied by a fee of one hundred rupees.

(3) The Tree Authority shall decide the appeal after giving to the appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The decision of the Tree Authority shall be final.

(4) Where an appeal is made in time, the period for compliance specified in the order of the Tree Officer shall be reckoned from the date on which the appeal is decided against the appellant and where the appeal is allowed the fee paid under subsection (2) shall be refunded to the appellant.

(5) Every appeal shall be heard by not less than three members of the Tree Authority.

CHAPTER VI
PENALITIES AND PROCEDURE

15. Seizure of property. – Where the tree officer has reason to believe than an offence under this act is committed in respect of any tree, he may seize the tools and any boats, vehicles or other conveyances or animals used for the commission of the said offence along with the tree or part thereof which has been severed from the ground or the trunk, as the case may be.

16. Power to release property seized under section 15. – The Tree Officer may release the properties seized under Section 15 if the owner or occupier executes a bond for their production whenever required.

17. Power to arrest without warrant. –

(1) Any Tree Officer may arrest without warrant any person reasonably suspected of having been concerned in any offence under this Act, if such person refuses to give his name and residence or gives a name or residence which the Tree Officer has reason to believed is false if he has reason it believe that person will abscond.

(2) Any person arrested under this section shall be informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest and shall be produced before the nearest magistrate having jurisdiction in the case within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest, excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond in the said period without the authority of a magistrate.

18. Power to release a person arrested. – Any tree officer who has arrested any person any person under the provisions of section 17 may release such person on his executing a bond with proper surety to appear, if and when so required, before the magistrate having jurisdiction in the case, or before the police or the Tree Officer concerned.

19. Power to prevent commission not barred. – Every Tree Officer or his subordinates or any forest, revenue or police officer shall prevent and may interfere for the purpose of preventing, the commission of any offence under the Act.

20. Operation of other laws not barred. – Nothing in this act shall be deemed to prevent any person from being prosecuted under any other law for any act or omission which constitutes an offence under this Act or from being liable under such other law to any higher punishment or penalty than that provided by this act or the rules made thereunder: Provided that no person shall be punished twice for the some offence.

21. Power to compound offences. –

(1) The State Government may, by order, empower a Tree Officer, –

1. to compound on payment of a sum not exceeding five thousand rupees any offence under this act;
2. to release any propriety seized or liable to confiscation, on payment of the value thereof, as estimated by such officer.

(2) On the payment of such sum or such value or both, as the case may be, to such officer, the offender, if in custody, shall be released. The property, if any, seized shall be released and no further proceedings shall be taken against such offender or property.

22. Penalty. – Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or orders made thereunder shall, on conviction be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both. Upon such conviction the court may order any property in respect of which the offence is committed to be forfeited to the State Government.

CHAPTER VII
MISCELLANEOUS

23. Rules. –

(1) The State Government may, by notification, make rules to carry out the purposes of this Act.

(2) Every rule made under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each house of the state legislature, while it is in session for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid, both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or both Houses agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall from the date on which the modification or annulment is notified by the Government in the Official Gazette have effect only in such modified from on be of no effect, as the case may be, so however that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under such rule.

24. Indemnity. – No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against any officer for anything done or omitted to be done by him in good faith under this Act or the rules or orders made thereunder.

25. Investing tree officer with certain powers. –

(1) The State Government may, by notification, invest the Tree Officers and other officers with all or any of the following powers, namely: –

1. power to enter upon any land and to survey, demarcate and make a map of the same;
2. powers of a Civil Court to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and material objects;
3. power to issue a search warrant under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973;
4. power to hold inquiries into offences under the Act and in the course of such inquiry to receive and record evidence;
5. power to take possession of property under the Act;
6. power to direct release of property or withdrawal of charges;
7. power to insist any person to plant tree or trees of suitable species in adequate numbers on any land owned or occupied by him.

(2) Any evidence recorded under clause (d) of sub-section (1) shall be admissible in any subsequent trial before a magistrate if such evidence has been taken in the presence of the accused person and recorded in the manner provided by section 355, section 356 or section 367 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

26. Transit of felled materials – The provisions of section 50 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (Karnataka Act 5 of 1964) and Chapter XVI of the Karnataka Forest Rules shall, mutatis mutandis, apply to the transit of the felled trees under this Act.

27. Power of state government and the tree authority to give directions – The state government may from time to time give to the Tree Authority any Tree Officer and officers subordinate to him and the Tree Authority may give to the Tree Officer or officers subordinate to him, such general or special directions regarding the discharge of their functions and for carrying out effectively the purposes of this Act and such Tree Authority or Tree Officers shall comply with the directions issued.

[/expand]

[expand title = “Articles” tag =”h4″]

The media has been actively involved in covering and exposing rampant tree felling in the city and making people aware of the importance of our precious green cover. Journalists of major newspapers have taken outstanding initiatives in taking up cudgels against the culprits and have become a force to reckon with. This in conjunction with the tough stand taken by the judiciary and conscientious activism of concerned citizens has curbed this menace to a great extent.

The Changing Face of Bangalore: World Environment Day

• How green will my city be, 20 years hence? – Bangalore Times, June 5 2004
• How Green is my valley – Deccan Herald, Sunday, June 6 2004

Cubbon Road Case

• Trees trimmed for better visibility – The Hindu, 11 April 2004
• Unkindest cut of them all – Vijay Times, 10 April 2004
• Green trim for clearer view – New Indian Express, 10 April 2004

Helpline Reports

• Healthy tree gets the axe – The Times of India, July 2003
• Tree-felling comes to halt – Vijaytimes, Aug 14 2003
• Tree felling in City banned – DCF, Deccan Herald, Aug 15 2003
• Felling of trees an offence – The Hindu, Aug 16 2003
• Helpline to protect trees – Deccan Herald, Aug 21 2003
• Tree felled? Call 6534364 now – Vijaytimes, Aug 23 2003
• Why are so many trees being uprooted? – The Times of India, Sep 3 2003
• Trees still being cut in city – The Times OF India, Oct 21 2003
• Where have all the trees gone? – The Deccan Herald, Dec 29 2003

Related Articles on the issue

• Census in all wards to count green heads – DH News Service, Aug 12
• Forest dept fiddles as tree is felled – DH News Service, Oct 31
• BMP goes chop-chopping, but who cares? – DH News Service, Nov 7
• Apathy threatens magnificent mahogany – DH New Service, Nov 14

In the High Court

• No more flyovers, HC suggests to BMP, BDA – DH News Service, Nov 17
• BMP’s permission to axe old trees, HC orders Lokayukta probe – DH News Service, Nov 18
• Nothing wrong in cutting trees for traffic flow : HC – The Times of India, July 12 2005

[/expand]

[expand title = “Helpline Reports” tag =”h4″]

Healthy tree gets the axe – The Times of India, July 2003

Bangalore: A healthy rain tree was felled on Jayanagar 4th main road between 32nd and 36th cross. The authorities ordered the felling of the tree on Thursday following a request from a resident in this regard. They also ordered the chopping down of some dead branches of two trees in the locality the environment support group opposed the cutting, terming it “illegal” the environmentalists contended the tree felled was not dead while the residents had complained it was about 40 years old and almost dead. The resident wanted ‘tree no. 704’ and dead wood from other trees cleared in the area. He had also said the tree would prove a nuisance were not taken. While the felling continued despite protests, the police said they were not responsible for it. By noon, most branches of the tree had been felled. The eco group has lodged a complaint with the district forest officer in this connection.

Tree-felling comes to halt – Vijaytimes, Aug 14 2003

Tree-felling by the Bangalore city corporation (BCC) has come to a grinding halt in the city with the Karnataka forest department, Bangalore urban division, withdrawing all Orders giving permission to fell trees, that have been issued till date to the BCC, with immediate effect. The directive which was issued by the office of the deputy commissioner of forests (DCF), Bangalore urban division, stated that permission granted hitherto by this division of the forest department to the horticulture department of the BCC was being withdrawn with immediate effect under section 8 (1)of the Karnataka Preservation of tree act, 1976. further, it stated that it would pertain only to those cases of trees –felling orders given till date, where the trees have not yet been felled. DCF, Parameshwara, said that this order was taken in view of the recent HC judgement which has prescribed rules and procedures to be observed before felling trees.

Tree felling in City banned – DCF BANGALORE, Aug 15 2003

The State Forest Department, Bangalore Urban Division, has withdrawn, with immediate effect, all orders to fell trees. The move comes in wake of a complaint filed by the Environment Support Group (ESG) to the Karnataka High Court alleging “illegal” felling of trees by the BMP and BDA officials. In a press statement, the ESG has noted that Karnataka High Court judges Mr Justice M F Saldanha and Mr Justice M S Rajendra Prasad had set out clear guidelines that would have to be complied with by all agencies before any tree is felled. In effect, this would involve planting two saplings prior to felling any tree. Deputy Conservator of Forests (Bangalore Urban Division) Parameshwara in a letter to the Horticulture Department of Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) and the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) dated August 2, 2003, has stated that there should not be any further felling of trees.

Felling of trees an offence – The Hindu, Aug 16 2003

BANGALORE: Felling of trees in Bangalore would now bear consequences such as contempt of court and action as per the Karnataka Tree Protection Act, 1976. The Karnataka Forest Department, Bangalore Urban Division, has withdrawn with immediate effect all orders issued to fell trees. This action was taken after a complaint from Environment Support Group, an NGO, based in Bangalore.

According to Mr Leo Saldanha, Co-ordinator, ESG, he had filed two complaints in the last few months after finding that several trees were being chopped in the city. Mr Parameshwara, IFS, Deputy Conservator of Forests (Bangalore Urban Division), in a letter addressed to the Horticulture Department of Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and Bangalore Development Authority, has stated that any violation of this order would bear consequences such as contempt of court and action per the Karnataka Tree Protection Act, 1976.

Reasons for felling of trees in Bangalore have commonly included widening of roads, infrastructure development and layout formation. But the environmental consequences have been significant, according to the release. The High Court has observed that about 20,000 trees have been felled for the expansion of the Bangalore-Mysore highway alone. Meanwhile, ESG has set up a helpline (6534364) to receive complaints of tree felling that would be forwarded to the Forest Department.

Helpline to protect trees – Deccan Herald, Aug 21 2003

Environment support group, a city based non-profit organization, has set-up a helpline to encourage progressive citizen engagement for protecting Bangalore trees. The organization has requested all residents of Bangalore to call (080)-6534364 and report cases of vandalism and unnecessary tree felling ESG would periodically gather evidence and follow up with the Karnataka forest department, après release said. The helpline has been set up in light of many complaints of tree felling in spite of directions by the Karnataka high court and the forest department against indiscriminate tree felling.

Tree felled? Call 6534364 now – Vijaytimes, Aug 23 2003

If denizens had their way the KPTCL would soon be in the dock for their erratic chopping of trees in the city. This statement might not come as a shock to many readers because at some point in time or the other residents in various localities in Bangalore have borne the brunt of the haphazard tree felling by the power department. A few conscientious citizens far from merely complaining got together and established a help line to address matters related to tree felling. And all this was done in the light of a Karnataka high court ruling in July that pulled up the state government and public authorities for indiscriminate axing of tree in the state. The environment support group (ESG) that has been actively involved in campaigning for lung spaces and credited for the above mentioned help line has thus far received nearly being “top priority.’’ “Following the chopping of nearly 9,000 trees this year, ESG and other environment organizations began receiving a flurry of calls from concerned citizens. Our help line aims to provide solutions to anyone who has a complaint against civic authorities or private owners cutting down trees,” explains Deepashree, Research Assistant. At present, ESG functions on a basic level, in that; they direct the caller to the concerned forest officials or other authorities who would be in a position to guide them. “Since we launched the help line just a few days ago we need more time to chalk out our plans. Resources are a major crunch here,” says Deepashree.

Though all the calls that ESG receives are tree-related, the reasons vary. While some people call to report a termite-infested tree, others want to know how to combat overnight felling. The more serious complaints are courtesy the KPTCL against whom several people want to initiate legal action. “We are campaigning to see that even pruning of trees is completely stopped. Trees often get weak following the shoddy treatment meted out to them by the linesmen” rues Deepashree. Right now though, for every tree that is axed, two new saplings have to be planted in their place. That’s not all; they have to be looked after for a period of two years after that. Only time will tell if the help line is successful in protecting the city’s trees from destruction.

Why are so many trees being uprooted? – Times Of India, Sep 3 2003

At least eight trees were uprooted during the last month alone, when heavy rains lashed the city. While many of the trees that get uprooted are old and diseased, of late even young trees are falling experts say random road widening in the city is the reason why healthy trees fall after heavy rains. Former IFS officer SG Neginhal says the corporation KPTCL and telephone, department are the main wrong- doers. When these trees face the axe even partially, the chopped tree doesn’t die. “While widening the road, even irregular chopping damages the crown of tree and affects its growth. Eventually the tree will rot and fall over” says Neginhal. Environmentalist Leo Saldanha of the Environment Support Group says that during road widening if the roots of a tree are exposed to a substantial extent, it weakens the tree. “With widening, though a tree is not cut, it is packed in with tar or cement. This way no water will percolate due to lack of soil and the moisture will be lacking this will obviously weaken the roots. Tar is a black body which absorbs and keeps heat inside; when roots are packed with tar and cement on one side and there is a building on the other side, the tree cannot even send its roots out for water.” Saldanha adds that there are scientific ways by which roads can be widened without damaging roots of tree and the BCC must use those methods. Former environmental secretary N. Yellappa Reddy adds that a census must be undertaken to keep track of old, dying and bending trees. “That way preventive action can be taken and trees can be saved in time.”

Trees still being cut in city – Times News Network,Oct 21 2003 – Ruma Singh

RECENTLY, the Environment Support Group (ESG) received a complaint that over 600 trees were being cut on private land by a developer on Bellandur road. In another case, beautiful old trees on Vani Vilas Road are being cut to make way for a flyover largely regarded as unnecessary. This leads us to the question: does Bangalore still deserve the title of Garden City? The ESG has received innumerable complaints since starting up their tree helpline. Deepashree, ESG, says, “Some want trees cut because of the nuisance factor. Or because trees have fallen because of a storm. Some report illegal tree felling.” The ESG provides legal advice and support in case of unauthorised tree felling. The number has gained momentum since July this year when a high court directive was passed (WA 8178/99 dated 29/7/2003) stating no tree should be cut unless inevitable, and that two saplings must be planted to replace each felled tree. “But tree felling is carrying on regardless,” says Deepashree. “We are compiling all the complaints which we plan to take to the DFO’s office.” Eighty per cent cases, she says, are witnesses to illegal felling. This might pertain to trees on public land, like roadsides, or on private property. The ESG has taken some photographs of trees being illegally cut. For example, in BTM Circle, BDA contractors were cutting trees to facilitate flyover construction. “They stopped after we took action, but a week later, the trees were gone.” Deepashree offers tips to those wanting to prevent tree felling. “Check the permission letter and understand why the tree is being cut. Note the type of tree and the state of its health. Everyone has to obtain the DFO’s permission before cutting.”

Where have all the trees gone? – The Deccan Herald, Dec 29 2003 – Pravin D Shiriyannavar

The City seems to be fast losing the sobriquet of Garden City. Statistics have it that 19,800 trees have been axed on the Bangalore-Mysore road in the last one year and 9,000 trees chopped in the City itself. The High Court has been quick to react, though. It has come up with a “first replace, then chop” formula for preserving greenery in the State. The State government has planted 10,782 saplings on the Bangalore-Mysore highway, which has earned praise by the court. There are several policies on paper to check tree-cutting. But while a tree is being chopped, one hardly finds anyone questioning the act. The problem is negligence and lack of awareness about environmental rules. The BMP conducted a census, to calculate the number of trees to be planted and the space available for them. As many as 25,543 saplings need to be planted in the City, according to the census. The BMP has also chalked out a plan of action to conduct a census of existing trees in all the 100 wards of the City. Out of the total saplings planted, the survival rate is around 70 per cent. There is a variation every year. Though the lawn near the dividers and the road joints are watered, very little care is taken about the newly planted saplings. Often the tree guards are robbed or they collapse along with the sapling.

The Bangalore Mahanagar Palike is constructing footpaths leaving no place for the roadside trees to absorb water or even an alternative for the trees to absorb rain water. The KPTCL and Bescom chop the trees on one side forcing the tree to lean on to the other side, posing dangers to the houses on the streets. There are instances where residents are known to jab at the trunks, pour acid into them and eventually axe them. The tree opposite the Food World at Koramangala is a case in point. As many as 4000 trees have fallen victim to the dreaded axe thanks to the flyovers coming up in the City, sources said. The forest department in the month of July had directed the BMP’s horticulture department to withdraw all the orders, issued under sec (8) of the Karnataka Preservation of Trees Act 1976, to fell trees for which permission has been given till now, which means that the trees which have not been chopped yet, cannot be chopped. But there seems to be hardly any check on the culprits, who seem to be wielding their axes left, right and centre to fell the trees.The forest department has booked seven cases of illegal tree felling, four against the BCC and horticulture department. The forest department started patrolling against tree felling in the city. The public can dial the tree unit squad on ph: 3343543 to tip off the squad. An NGO Environment Support Group has started a helpline (6534364) to receive complaints and forward them to the forest department and follow up on the action taken. The NGO has received 32 complaints of illegal felling so far. The helpline also educates the public on the kinds of trees to be planted in particular areas, Leo Saldanha, the co-ordinator of the NGO said.

[/expand]

[expand title = “Related Articles” tag =”h4″]

Census in all wards to count green heads – DH News Service BANGALORE, Aug 12

In a bid to improve the City’s green cover, the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike will conduct a tree census in all the wards through a private agency and undertake comprehensive tree planting in a planned manner. Commissioner M R Sreenivasa Murthy told the BMP Council today that an inspection has been carried out in every street, road and school compound to take a count of number of trees and different species planted so far and make an assessment of how many saplings are required. “According to a report presented on the matter, our requirement is for 25,543 trees. Our officials have prepared a list of which wards need how many trees and what species of trees can be planted. This is the first time that the BMP is undertaking such a planned tree planting programme. “We will also conduct a survey on how many trees have been planted in the last one year and their survival rate to minimise replanting,” he said. He was replying to a question by B R Nanjundappa (JD-S) on action being taken by the BMP to check trimming of tree tops by KPTCL and Bescom to avoid contact with overhead electrical wires, indiscriminate felling of trees by owners of vacant plots before constructing houses and what was being done to replenish the degrading green cover in the City. Deputy Commissioner (Development) K R Niranjan said the BMP had planted 18,900 saplings last year and a survey has found a survival rate of 70-80 per cent. Leader of the BJP in the Council B S Sathyanarayana suggested that before saplings are planted, the BMP should take corporators into confidence and the width of the street into account, apart from giving preference to medicinal plants and use of metal tree guards. Mr Nanjundappa suggested the BMP to bring in a legislation making it mandatory for the Forest Department to take the BMP’s permission before allowing trees to be cut.

Forest dept fiddles as tree is felled – DH News Service BANGALORE, Oct 31 – Joseph Hoover

When Rome burned, Nero fiddled. Closer home, when a 70-year-old ficus tree was being felled, the Forest Department preferred to enjoy a tea party as it bid farewell to a Principal Chief Conservator of Forests. Any number of attempts to get the Bangalore Urban Division and the City Tree Unit to stop the “murder” of a gigantic tree fell on deaf ears. And even if someone responded, the buck was passed, numbers were furnished asking the caller to talk to the people concerned. It was around 1.30 this afternoon when this correspondent noticed a contractor felling the magnificent tree in Gattigere Layout, Rajarajeswarinagar. The Forest Department was immediately alerted. In fact, there was a call from the Range Forest Officer (cell number 98456-34712), confirming that the mobile squad would arrive in an hour’s time to stop the mayhem. An hour went by. Another call went through to the Department. The RFO reassured that the squad would soon be there at the spot of destruction. RUTHLESS: Though the contractor was beseeched to stop the destruction, he ruthlessly continued to wreak havoc on the lower trunk of the tree, the only specimen of its magnitude and girth in an expanse of over two kilometres, ensuring that even if forest department personnel were to arrive by evening, the tree would die a natural death in due course of time. Desperate, help was sought from the Rajarajeswarinagar police outpost, where policemen are on deputation from other stations. Even as the two constables arrived at the scene of devastation, the RFO called to say that one would need to get in touch with the Tree Unit. The contact number was provided (3343543). “I can’t do anything as the officers in charge are not around,” said the lady at the Tree Unit. The Bangalore Urban Division was contacted again. But the lady, who identified herself as the attender, said: “Everybody has gone to the guest house to attend the farewell party of one of our big officer. It would be better if you could contact them on Monday.”Desperate, the Conservator of Forests (Urban) was contacted. Pat came the “he is attending a send off party” reply, accompanied with a discouraging “please contact on Monday”. Meanwhile, the policemen engaged the wood cutters, dissuading them from felling the tree, a refuge not only to endangered species of birds and insects, but also a place of rest for quarry and construction workers. Considering that no help was coming from the Department, Forest Secretary Deepak Sharma was approached over phone. Calm and measured at the start of the conversation, he was pretty annoyed when he was told that nobody was around to attend to the distress call at the DFO’s office as they were away at a farewell party. “Party time is in the evening, not in working hours. If no one is responding, then you should inform Mr S N Rai, the PCCF,” shot back Mr Sharma. No wonder, Greens see red whenever the Forest Department is commended. “What is the big point in the Tree Unit RFO (Jilani Pasha) inspecting the spot after the tree is completely felled? In most cases, they respond five to six hours later, only to collect the residual remains of the dead tree,” is the refrain of NGOs. “We can understand that the staff at the Nagarhole and Bandipur national parks cannot arrive at the spot of smuggling or poaching on time as they have rickety jeeps and outdated communication systems. But for the Forest Department to respond belatedly in the vicinity of the technology-savvy Bangalore, is ridiculous,” said the greens. God save our trees.

BMP goes chop-chopping, but who cares – DH News Service BANGALORE, Nov 7 – Joseph Hoover

Until April this year, egrets and night herons would roost and breed in a cluster of trees in a BMP-maintained park in the IAS Officers’ Colony near BTM Layout. Now, with the young trees ripped out of their moorings and a concrete pathway made for the people to walk, the birds have moved home. As the story goes, the destruction was wreaked on the triangular mini-forest as the wife of an IAS officer desired that the pathway be extended to facilitate her morning walks. Swayed by the powers-that-be, the Bangalore Mahanagar Palike executed the “project” without a care in the world, despite protests. Apart from destroying the flourishing tree cover, the BMP, though aware of the stipulations laid down by the High Court, blatantly transgressed the Karnataka Tree Protection Act of 1976. More significantly, the BMP disregarded the Karnataka High Court order (WA 8178/1999, dated 29-7-03), which had directed the Karnataka Forest Department that two saplings had to be planted if it was to fell a tree. HC DECREE: Complying with the decree given by Justice M F Saldanha and Justice M S Rajendra Prasad, the KFD had written (August 2, 2003; No AP.V.CR.912/ 2003-04) to BMP, BDA and PWD, explaining that all orders that it had issued for felling trees for developmental activity stood cancelled. “Orders given till date where trees have not been cut are being withdrawn under Section 8 (1) of the Karnataka Preservation of Tree Act, 1976. Violation of the order would bear consequences such as contempt of court and action as per the Karnataka Tree Protection Act, 1976,” read the KFD communique. Mr S G Hegde, Deputy Commissioner, BMP (South) agreed that his officials were aware of the HC order, but wasn’t sure whether the trees were felled by BMP contractors. “I will personally visit the spot and assess the damage,” said Mr Hegde. Though Mr Hegde claimed that the residents were keen that the BMP go ahead with the ‘pathway’ project, the locals said quite the contrary. “We did not ask for it. Though we have been persistently asking the higher authorities to visit the spot, they did not show up,” said Dr Manjula Rao. Strangely, the KFD also did not respond to the call to protect the trees. The KFD is rankled that the BMP went ahead with the felling of trees without taking its clearance to do so. “From our records we gather that the BMP did not approach us in this regard. Evidently, it has not planted any saplings since executing the covert act,” said a KFD source.

Apathy threatens magnificent mahogany – DH New Service BANGALORE, Nov 14 – Joseph Hoover

About the distance of a cricket pitch from the Anil Kumble circle stands a gorgeous mahogany tree. It has been a part of our heritage, selflessly providing refuge to birds and shelter to vendors who sell their wares from fruits to dry flowers under its canopy. But, now the 70-year-old specimen is being threatened by a wood-cutter’s axe, notwithstanding the decree of the Karnataka High Court that no tree shall be felled without two saplings being planted in its immediate vicinity. That the tree is still around is a credit to a few entrepreneurs — Koshy’s, Barista and K C Das — who alerted Justice M F Saldanha about the indiscriminate act of a wood-cutter, armed with a contract handed to him by the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP). Well, if Justice Saldanha had not asked Karnataka Chief Secretary B S Patil to intervene, it could have well been reduced to a heap of fire wood. It would have added to the 30,000-odd trees that have fallen a prey to development works — widening of roads, infrastructure development — over the last few years. The story does not end here. It just about narrates how the government machinery works and how protecting trees in our ‘Garden City’ is becoming a dilemma for “tree samaritans” and active NGOs. So much so, that even the order of the High Court is disregarded. Even an individual in a commanding position of a judge is driven to despair by the BMP. Let’s read what Justice Saldanha has to say. “It is indeed a victory that the tree is still around. Mr Patil immediately sent a posse of policemen to stop the contractor from completing his task. However, there is no guarantee that other trees in our city could be protected as the BMP tells me that the High Court order (WA 8178/ 1999, dated 29-07-2003) has no bearing on the contracts issued much earlier by it (BMP). We seriously need to look into this,” said Justice Saldanha. What the BMP does not seem to understand is that it is bound by the HC ruling, though it may be acting indifferently under the compulsion of enraged contractors. The High Court does not create a new law. It only explains or clarifies the law. To that extent the HC order has retrospective effect. Therefore, the HC order would cover all contracts which would have been signed before the HC delivered its decree. The old contract would therefore have to comply to the law as laid down by the HC,” said Padam Chand Khincha, an expert in company law. The Karnataka Forest Department, which had sent a communique (No A9.V.CR.912/2003-04, dated August 2, 2003) to the BMP, BDA, PWD and other agencies, is baffled by the civic body’s stance. “We have clearly stated that we have withdrawn with immediate effect all orders issued to fell trees. “We have also informed that all tree felling orders given till date where the trees have not been cut are being withdrawn under Section 8 (1) of the Karnataka Preservation of Tree Act, 1976 with immediate effect,” said Bangalore Urban Division Deputy Conservator of Forests, Parameswara. But these arguments don’t hold good for the BMP and its contractors. It is also intriguing that a wood-cutter bags a contract for barely Rs 3,000 while wood harvested by felling invariably fetches Rs 50,000 to Rs 1,00,000 in the market. And, coming to think of it as a live and vibrant tree is priceless.

[/expand]

[expand title = “In The High Court” tag =”h4″]

No more flyovers, HC suggests to BMP, BDA – DH News Service BANGALORE, Nov 17

A division bench of the Karnataka High Court has suggested to the State Government, Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and Bangalore Development Authority that they should stop construction of anymore flyovers in the City which are destructive and instead resort to construction of underpasses. The bench comprising of Justice M F Saldanha and Justice M S Rajendra Prasad observed that Bangalore City’s flyover have already accounted for cutting of 9,800 trees and the City cannot afford to lose its green cover. The Court has emphasised that road engineers and city planners the world over has discontinued the construction of road bridges and flyover within cities and instead underground tunnels are preferred. The Court also pointed out that flyover have limited utility whereas underpasses can be diverted into several directions. The Division Bench noted that city planning engineers in advanced countries have found that in the case of a flyover the entire load factor rests on the bridge which causes causes cracks, moisture and the life span is hardly 18 to 20 years after which heavy maintenance is required. In the case of of an underground tunnel the load rests on the earth and the life-span is over one hundred years without maintenance, the Bench added.

BMP’s permission to axe old trees, HC orders Lokayukta probe – DH News Service BANGALORE, Nov 18

Taking serious exception to the attempts made to cut a Mahogany tree on St Mark’s Road here, the Karnataka High Court has ordered for an investigation by the Lokayukta into the permission given to the wood-cutters by the Mahanagara Palike to cut old trees in the city. A division bench comprising Justice M F Saldanha and Justice M S Rajendra Prasad passed the order after receiving complaints from the public that fraud being committed in the process of auctioning of tree cutting. It has been reported to the HC that when citizens protested and refused to allow the wood-cutter to cut the Mahogany tree, he (the contractor) produced documents whereby the tree has been auctioned to him by the BMP for Rs 3,000. It was also informed to the HC that the “wood-cutter disclosed to the people that he was one of corporation’s regular wood-cutter and he stands to lose Rs 5 lakh because that is the actual market value of the 70-year-old Mahogany tree”. The bench observed that “the matter requires a proper investigation, preferably by Lokayukta.”

[/expand]

[expand title = “Press Releases” tag =”h4″]

• August 13, 2003 – Forest Dept. withdraws Treefelling orders in Bangalore – ESG Helpline to Prevent Tree Felling
• August 19, 2003 – Helpline to save Bangalore’s trees

[/expand]

[expand title = “Take Action” tag =”h4″]

What you can do when you see a tree being felled

• Ask the person cutting / pruning a tree(s) for a permission letter which should be authorised by the Deputy Conservator of Forests (Bangalore Urban Div) only.
• If they do not possess such a permission letter, then it is a case of illegal tree felling / pruning. You must lodge a complaint with the concerned authorities. (See below for their details)
• You can also call up ESG @ its helpline – Telephone 22441977 which would guide you on further action. ESG would periodically gather this evidence and follow up with the Karnataka Forest Dept. for necessary legal action.
• Take down all details of the incident as per our checklist.
• If the land is private property then please consult the list of trees which can be cut in private land and don’t need permission.
• Mob and involve the media, concerned citizens and residents of the area and try to stop the vandalism till the concerned authorities reach the spot.
• Always record what you witnessed by writing to the DFO (Deputy Conservator of Forest – Bangalore Urban, Aranya Bhawan, 18th Cross, Malleshwaram, Bangalore – 560003) and dispatch your letter under Regd post Ack due. You may send a copy to ESG for follow up action.
• Remember that even if there is a permission letter, two tree saplings have to be planted before cutting the tree. As per a Supreme court order, this is a prerequisite to granting the permission. As a general rule the same procedure applies in all districts.

Details of concerned authorities (hierarchically)

For reporting illegal tree felling contact,

• District Forest Officer (Bangalore Urban Div) Office: Phone – 3343464 / Fax – 3344686 (Contact persons Sumana and Jagdish)
• Range Forest Officer (Malleshwaram) – 3343543 (office) / 36766720 (Personal mobile of Mr Jeelani Pasha)
• Range Forest Officer (Ulsoor) – 94480-82889
• Range Forest Officer (BTM Layout) – 94482-01406
• RFO Kaggalipura – Srinivas: 9448088811
• RFO Bangalore North Range (Peenya to Hessarghatta, Mekhri Circle to Vidhan Soudha) – Chinappa: 9845210780
• RFO Banashankari – Govindraj: 9845832690
• Forest Mobile Squad Office – 3344672
• Other important Helplines in case of Tree fall: BCC – 22221188 / 22975595 / 22210031 – 35. BESCOM – IVRS – 12660 / 22267118 / 22267119 / 22267180 (24 Hour customer complaint cell)

See how you can help more…..

• For saplings, list of nurseries in Bangalore and Karnataka and for tree guards contact Deputy Conservator of Forest (Social Forestry) – 23343090 / Conservator of Forests (Social Forestry) – 23345447
• Observe cases other than tree felling; like pavements choking the tree roots, illegal construction around the tree trunk, nailing of ads on the tree trunks, no tree guards for young trees, indiscriminate pruning of the tree, ill-conceived planning of flyovers, BDA acquisitions felling trees en masse, Pvt. developers / builders indiscriminately felling trees in acquired land for construction w/o sparing a thought on alternatives, any bribery cases pertaining to getting the trees felled etc
• Plant more trees, but first find out which are the tree types planted on roadside / residential areas / parks, etc in cities. You can read “City Trees – A handbook on City Trees and Urban Planning (Urban Forestry)” by S. G. Neginhal ([email protected]; Phone No:080-23223981) for further information.
• Write regularly to the press, concerned authorities and organise public forums / meetings to address the issue, inviting officials and eminent personalities.

[/expand]

Images