Goa Tree Authority Alarms Over 33,000 Pending Saplings, Issues Fortnight Ultimatum
Goa Tree Authority Alarms Over 33,000 Pending Saplings

Goa Tree Authority Raises Alarm Over Massive Tree Plantation Backlog

The Goa Tree Authority has sounded a serious alarm. It highlights a massive backlog in compensatory tree plantation across the state. Authorities report a staggering pendency of more than 33,000 saplings. This backlog stems from tree-felling permissions granted over the last five years.

Major Defaulters Identified in Review

A recent review by the authority pinpointed the major defaulters. Several government departments and private agencies feature on this list. Key defaulting divisions include multiple sections of the Public Works Department (PWD). The Goa State Infrastructure Development Corporation (GSIDC) is also a significant defaulter.

Other notable agencies with pending plantations are Rail Vikas Nigam Limited and the Goa Medical College. The Goa Tourism Development Corporation and various municipal councils also show defaults. Several private projects have failed to meet their replantation obligations as well.

The review presented a clear and concerning number. A total of 33,723 saplings remain unplanted against permissions granted.

Fortnight Ultimatum Issued to Defaulting Agencies

Following detailed deliberations, the Tree Authority has taken a firm stance. It issued a strict directive to all defaulting user agencies and project proponents. These entities must provide detailed information within a fortnight.

The required details include the precise location for planting the pending saplings. Agencies must also submit other essential planting details. They must send this information to the concerned Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF).

The authority delivered a strong warning alongside this ultimatum. It stated that non-compliance will have serious consequences. Any agency failing to meet the Tree Authority's terms and conditions will face adverse ramifications. Specifically, the authority may reject their future project proposals.

Scrutiny of Major Public Project Permissions

The authority also conducted a review of permissions for major public projects. It examined several high-profile cases requiring tree felling.

In Tivim, proponents sought permission to fell 1,449 trees for the MIT–World Peace project. However, the DCF (North) granted a much more restricted permission. It allowed the felling of only 535 trees. This permission came with a strict compensatory condition. The project must replant 1,605 tall saplings.

For the development of the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Museum at Farmagudi in Ponda, permission was granted. It allows the felling of 195 trees at Bandora village. This permission is subject to significant replantation efforts. The project must replant 585 tall saplings. It must also undertake translocation of trees as recommended by the Tree Authority.

Another project, the Unity Mall at Chimbel, received similar conditional permission. It can fell 97 trees. In return, it must replant 291 tall saplings and carry out translocation work.

New Guidelines for Infrastructure Projects

The authority considered several major infrastructure proposals during its meeting. These included road widening projects from Cortalim to the Margao bypass at Verna. The widening of NH-66 from Navelim to Cuncolim was also reviewed.

For these projects, the authority has mandated a series of strict environmental measures. It ordered joint inspections of the proposed sites. The directive includes selective translocation of existing trees.

A key requirement is threefold compensatory plantation. This means for every tree felled, three new trees must be planted. The authority specifically emphasized the use of indigenous species for this replantation.

Furthermore, the authority introduced a monitoring mechanism. It requires geotagged documentation of all compensatory plantations. All projects must strictly adhere to existing High Court guidelines on tree conservation.

The Goa Tree Authority's actions signal a tougher stance on environmental compliance. It aims to ensure that development does not come at the cost of the state's green cover.