example of this is Switzerland. This hilly country’s forest cover had been largely decimated by 1860’s. But when landslides began to devastate the land, people awakened, and began a concerted effort to grow back forest. Today Switzerland has an excellent forest cover, all of it owned by local communities; none of it by a state forest department.
Banning shifting cultivation
Since no Britisher could be found, the British invited Dietrich Brandis, a German botanist to head the newly set up forestry establishment. A major question confronting Brandis was the extent to which village communities should continue to manage forests, and how much should be taken over as state property. Brandis favoured a major role for village communities.! Many other government officials also supported him. Thus, the Madras Revenue Department dubbed state takeover of forests as a “confiscation, not conservation”. Shifting cultivation was another bone of contention. At that juncture, it was widely prevalent, especially in hilly and malarial tracts. People cultivated millets for 2-3 years after clearing much of the tree growth while leaving economically important trees intact and buming the brushwood. They then moved to another patch, leaving the land fallow for 15-20 years to grow back the tree cover. Many British officials opined that this provided good livelihood for poor peasants. Besides, the peasants never completely cleared the forest, leaving mango, mahua, myrobolan and other such valuable trees standing. But the British tea-coffee estate owners
14
