Chandigarh: Punjab’s tree protection bill lacks teeth, say green activists

Introduced in response to National Green Tribunal directives, the bill aims to regulate tree felling in urban and non-forest areas

Environmentalists have raised strong objections to the draft of the Punjab protection of trees bill, which the state government plans to table in the legislative assembly before November. Introduced in response to National Green Tribunal directives, the bill aims to regulate tree felling in urban and non-forest areas. However, experts say it lacks teeth and fails to address Punjab’s broader environmental concerns.

Environmentalists say it lacks teeth and fails to address Punjab’s broader environmental concerns. (HT File)

Speaking at a press conference at the Press Club on Wednesday, a panel of environmentalists criticised the bill for limiting its jurisdiction to urban areas, which comprise just 4.16 percent of the state’s geographical area. With 95.84 percent of Punjab being rural, the exclusion of these regions significantly undermines the bill’s impact.

Activists also flagged the lenient penalties proposed in the bill. The maximum fine for illegal tree felling is capped at ₹50,000 — an amount they say is too low to deter commercial exploitation. The bill mandates the planting of only two trees for every tree cut, with a care period of three months, a measure deemed insufficient for genuine reforestation.

Environmentalist Samita Kaur pointed out that the bill permits tree felling for “development,” a term that remains undefined. “This vague clause could be easily misused,” she said. Citing official data, she added that Punjab’s green cover has declined sharply — forest cover dropped from 4.80 percent in 2001 to 3.67 percent in 2023, while tree cover fell from 3.20 percent to 2.92 percent over the same period. The combined green cover now stands at just 6.59 percent.

Kapil Arora, another panellist, criticised the bill’s failure to include incentives such as carbon credits or agroforestry models, which have been effective in states like Uttar Pradesh. “Farmers there are earning from planting trees. Punjab’s bill misses that opportunity,” he said. He also noted that unlike Maharashtra and Delhi, the bill does not include imprisonment provisions for illegal tree cutting.

Dr Manjit Singh highlighted the absence of any reference to heritage trees in the draft. “There is no mention of preserving trees that are valuable due to their size, age, rarity, or cultural association,” he said, calling it a major oversight.

Col. Jasjit Gill underscored the need for a comprehensive tree census and geotagging, calling these measures “the need of the hour.” He also recommended preparing a state-wise list of heritage trees to ensure their protection.