Andhra’s Khammam Alone Accounts For Almost 50% Loss: FSI Report. India recorded a net loss of 367 sq km of forests between 2009 and 2011, with Khammam district in Andhra Pradesh alone losing 182 sq km of green cover in the period, the latest ‘state of forest’ report has found. The report, prepared biennially by the Forest Survey of India — the Dehradun based wing of the environment and forests ministry — was released on Tuesday. Environment secretary T Chatterjee attributed the loss to Left-wing extremists chopping off forests illegally, and the paper pulp industry harvesting old eucalyptus plantations in Khammam. He claimed the forests in Khammam had been cleared in less than six months with plantations being cut and the extremists egging people on to cut the forests as well. The report, though, noted that the loss of forest cover was largely due to the felling of eucalyptus plantations. Officials were unable to explain how vast swathes of forests could disappear from one district in just six months. Khammam had also recorded a 56% loss of forests between 2007 and 2009, as per the ministry’s reports. This reduction too had been apportioned to the cutting of plantations by the government in 2009. The explanation — blaming loss of green cover on Naxals — was also odd, considering Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand, which currently witness a far stronger presence of Left-wing extremists, have either seen growth or stagnation of their forest cover. In Chhattisgarh, a net loss of 4 sq km of forests was recorded, while Jharkhand saw a net gain of 83 sq km. The report noted that the largest loss of forests, excluding northeastern states, occurred in Andhra Pradesh, which lost 281 sq km of forests in just two years. While the northeastern states show huge changes annually in their forest stocks, these are reflective of the large-scale shifting cultivation practiced in the region, and the figures do not reflect a permanent loss of green cover. A forest survey official said at the meeting that the Andhra government in its own report had recorded more than 100 sq km of forest loss in the state inside lands controlled by the forest department. The central survey report records changes in forest cover all through the geographical area of the country and does not limit itself to land that is officially recognized as forest land. Asked by when the government expected to achieve the mandated 33% forest cover, director general of forests P J Dilip Kumar said that would require a structural change in the economy, where more people migrated to the cities and the agricultural lands left fallow could then be used to grow forests. The responses from the government raises serious questions about the value of the report which does not demarcate natural forests from plantations. The director general of Forest Survey of India said that neither had they been mandated to do the demarcation, nor did they have the technological ability to do so. UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), however, does segregate statistics for the two types of forests for India, based on reports submitted by the government. The weakness of the report in bringing out the health of forests in India was evident when officials admitted that the 100 sq km of forests added over two years were really agro-forestry patches and not real forests.