Gurgaon: Haryana lost eight hectares of natural forests and 13 hectares of tree cover just last year, according to Global Forest Watch, which uses satellite data and other sources to monitor deforestation world over.
This loss, the organisation said, represents a 1% decrease in tree cover in the state since 2000 and has resulted in emissions of 181 kilotons of CO₂.The tree cover loss of 2023 was the highest drop that the state recorded in the last 11 years.
The highest tree cover loss in 2023 was recorded in Panchkula, at 6 hectares, followed by Yamunanagar at 2 hectares and Ambala at 1 hectare. Faridabad, Kaithal, Kurukshetra and Jind recorded losses of less than 1 hectare.
Global Forest Watch data also showed that the state's tree cover declined by 412 hectares in the period between 2000 and 2023.
Gurgaon and Faridabad were among the top 10 districts to lose tree cover in this duration, but Panchkula topped the list, with a loss of 170 hectares of tree cover.
Tree cover is defined as patches of greenery, which don't exceed 1 hectare in area, and are located outside recorded forests.
This data underlines the damage the state's ambiguity on defining forests has caused over the years despite the Supreme Court's repeated interventions.
According to the Forest Survey of India's latest report from 2021, Haryana ranks at the bottom among all Indian states.
Though it is home to the Aravalis range, just 3.6% of the state's total area is recorded as forest.
The FSI report, which is prepared by the Union environment ministry, also calculated that tree cover in Haryana was down 8% from 1,565 sqkm (1.5 lakh hectares) in 2019 to 1,425 sqkm (1.4 lakh hectares) in 2021.
On Thursday, experts pointed out that decades of delays by Haryana govts in recognising the Aravalis as ‘recorded forests' have left the hills prone to exploitation.
"Without legal protection, a huge portion of the Aravalis is at risk of illegal mining, encroachments, and other commercial activities," said RP Balwan, former forest conservator, Gurgaon.
The issue came to fore last year, when an amendment in the Forest (Conservation) Act said that all areas, which have not been recorded or identified as ‘forest' in govt records as of Oct 25, 1980, would be excluded from the law's ambit.
This change was criticised by environmentalists, who said it violated the Supreme Court's 1996 ruling that defined forest as per its dictionary meaning, and not necessarily based on govt records.
SC earlier this year scrapped the amendment and told Centre and state govts to go by its broader "dictionary definition" of forests given in its 1996 ruling.
The top court also directed that all states must forward to the Union environment ministry reports made by expert committees after the 1996 ruling.
These committees were supposed to identify all forests under the dictionary definition, but compliance lacks 27 years on.
TOI had reported that the forest department has recommended that any area of 5 or more hectares in size with ‘uninterrupted forest-like elements' should be identified as ‘deemed forest'.
"We are still waiting for the state government's approval regarding this proposal. As soon as we get it, we will establish committees in every district to identify such deemed forests," a senior forest official said.
According to estimates, over half of the Aravalis in Haryana – which span over 1 lakh hectares of area across the state – are not recognised as forests. Instead, Aravali lands are owned by panchayats, urban bodies or private owners.
The only Aravali areas protected by FCA are those notified under the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA) and the Aravali Notification of 1992.
Debadityo Sinha, lead for climate and ecosystems at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, said SC's latest directions should prompt Haryana govt to complete the process of identifying and notifying all forest land in a "time-bound manner."
"States are required to identify and recognise forests, regardless of ownership, as per the 1996 ruling. Although Haryana submitted records of its notified forests, such as reserved and protected forests, large tracts of forest-like areas in the Aravali region – which are categorised as revenue lands such as Mangar Bani are still awaiting legal recognition. As a result, protecting these areas from being converted to non-forest land remains challenging," he said.