Pune: Citizens have challenged PMC’s consolidated Oct tree-felling notice for Kasba Peth, alleging that it incorrectly stated that no heritage trees are involved, despite three peepal trees listed as 60-70 years old in one of the applications.A total of 20 trees are in the crosshairs for felling here, as requested under various applications.One of the objecting citizens, Kharadi resident Gangotri Chanda, told TOI, “The protection and conservation of heritage trees across the state is among the duties of the Maharashtra state tree authority under Section 6A (ii) of the Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act, 1975. I went through the PMC tree-felling docket for Kasba Peth and found several irregularities. The number of compensatory trees proposed also appears to fall short of the legal requirement.”Under Section 8(5)(a) of the 1975 Trees Act, the number of replacement trees to be planted must equal the estimated age, in years, of each tree being felled. However, residents pointed out that in one application, while the total sum of ages of trees to be felled is 81, the number of compensatory trees cited is 60.Flagging this and other lacunae in detailed objections submitted to the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) tree authority earlier this month, members of citizens’ forum ChaloPMC alleged several procedural lapses. The objections include inadequate information in public notices, inaccessible tree census records, non-scientific assessment of tree ages and the lack of details about compensatory plantation and transplantation.“The Kasba Peth docket lists three peepal trees, numbered 1, 3 and 7, with their ages recorded as 65, 60 and 70 years, respectively. The ages are marked ‘andaze’, or approximate, yet the notice advertisement dated Oct 9 stated that there are no heritage trees in the docket,” said Chanda. She added that as per a local resident, one of these peepal trees is at least 85 years old.The objectors further alleged that PMC’s tree census website was not accessible, preventing citizens from checking publicly available information, including the geotagged locations of trees. They said the absence of accurate location details and maps in the docket made it difficult to visit the sites and raise objections based on their findings.“We have questioned whether PMC examined alternative site plans that could save trees, assessed if pruning could address obstructions, or provided scientific reports to establish the trees’ ages. We have also sought records of transplantation success rates, locations of compensatory plantations and monitoring of replacement trees to ensure their survival,” said another objecting resident, Sanaa Shaikh.Shaikh added, “PMC needs to show us audit reports of previous compensatory plantations and transplantations with their geotagged photos. Are these done under the guidance of any botanist? Does the tree authority have tree census records? As per the Trees Act section 7(b), a local tree authority must conduct a census of all existing trees within its jurisdiction once every five years. Further, according to the National Forest Policy, the minimum recommended tree and forest cover is 33% (one-third) of a country’s total land area to maintain ecological balance and environmental stability.”Rekha Joshi, a resident of Somwar Peth, said, “Our opposition to tree felling is part of a larger concern about Pune’s rapidly shrinking green cover amid increasing concretisation in the name of development. With a large part of the city covered by buildings and cemented roads, rainwater has fewer opportunities to seep into the ground. At a time when Pune is facing water cuts and several parts of Maharashtra are grappling with drought, further reducing the city’s tree cover will only add to its environmental stress. Development projects must take into account the need to preserve trees and protect the city’s green cover.”The group has sought a joint hearing for citizens who have objected to the docket, adequate advance notice of the hearing, access to the relevant project documents and written responses to their objections. It has also urged the PMC tree authority to examine alternatives to felling and ensure that compensatory plantations are carried out and monitored.In response, a civic official pleaded anonymity and said, “We had given a 10-day period, from Oct 12-22, for citizens to submit their objections, accepted both online and offline. We will compile all the objections and decide on the next course of action. Those who submitted objections, as well as the applicants who proposed the tree felling, will be called for a hearing. The objections will be heard in their presence, and further action will be taken after considering the same. Whether a tree is a heritage tree or ordinary one, all are included in the hearing process.”
About The Author
