Joint Forest Management-a Review free essay sample

Joint Forest Management Joint Forest Management  often abbreviated as  JFM  is the official and popular term in  India  for partnerships in  forest  management  involving both the state forest departments and local communities. Joint Forest Management (JFM) programme in the present form can be traced to the Arabari experiment initiated by foresters in the state of West Bengal. This experiment provided a strong feedback for incorporation of the system in the National Forest Policy of 1988. In many locations people’s voluntary groups were engaged in protection of forests without any initiative from the Government. Subsequently, based on the experience, the process of institutionalizing people’s participation in forest protection and regeneration began. This type of collective endeavour in protection and management of forests through people’s involvement was later termed as Joint Forest Management. The objectives of JFM 1. To elicit active participation of villagers in (a) creation (b) management and (c)  protection of plantations; 2. We will write a custom essay sample on Joint Forest Management-a Review or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page To achieve ecological needs consonant with sustainable productivity of wood and other  non-timber forest resources ; 3. To wean away the land owning communities from shifting cultivation by adopting an  alternative i. . Tree Farming ; 4. To productively utilise the degraded jhumland thereby checking soil erosion; 5. To conserve Biodiversity through people’s action ; 6. To create and generate forest –based economy for the villagers  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Merits of JFM †¢ Fuel wood in the form of dry and fallen twigs and leaves from the forests is now available to participating communities. The proportion of the harvest that goes to the communities share varies across States. †¢ Some States like Gujarat, Haryana and Punjab have banned grazing completely, other States have allowed for rotational grazing. These practices have helped the regeneration and survival of vegetation in forests, and in increasing supply of fodder grasses. †¢ All NTFP, barring few nationalized products, are now available to the people free of royalty in all states. People have a right to collect even the nationalized products like Kendu leaves, Sal seeds etc. †¢ VFCs are also entitled to a share in the timber harvest in varying proportions. There are provisions for contribution to Village Development Fund from a portion from people’s share from final harvest proceedings. There has been a significant shift in the labour utilization patterns in communities across various States owing to the increased supply of fodder and fuelwood, this is more significant with respect to women. †¢ At the state level there are Corporations such as Forest Development Corporations, Forest Industries Development Corporations, etc for marketing of specific forest products and apex agencies like Marketing Federat ions such as Tribal Marketing Federation of India, which organise the marketing of forest products. There are co-operatives of the forest gatherers such as Girijan Co-operative Societies as in Andhra Pradesh. †¢ In case of timber marketing, provisions in the JFM resolutions and government regulations require the VFCs to take permission from FD for felling and transport of timber and thus, they are unable to get involved in timber marketing. †¢ On an average, 40% of the sites across the four study states showed improvements in the regeneration status owing to protection against biotic pressure, fires and illicit felling; another 20% are showing positive trends. On an average high plant densities were observed in regeneration class at 70% sites and remaining sites had high plant densities in recruitment class. JFM sites that were provided better protection and where the institutions were strong had maximum augmentation of volume and density per hectare in the lowest class owing to better regeneration. †¢ In order to provide incentives to communities for economic returns to sustain forest protection and management efforts, different states are adopting practices for augmenting supply of NTFPs. Improved agriculture is being promoted with the creation of irrigation infrastructure in many states. Status of JFM Programme Government of India on June 1, 1990 issued guidelines to the state governments for involving local communities in the protection and development of the degraded forests. Based on this,the JFM programme has now been widely adopted in twenty two states of the country. These states are Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Jammu Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Nagaland, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. As per information received by the Ministry from the various State Governments as on 1. 1. 2000, there are 36130 JFM Committees managing 10,248,586. 41 ha. of forests under the JFM programme in these 22 states of the country. The primary objective of JFM is to provide a visible role to the local communities in planning, management and protection of forests and to give them a share in the benefits from these forests. On operational parameters, JFM is a concept of developing partnership between forest department and fringe forest user groups on the basis of jointly defined roles and responsibilities. JFM in India is gradually emerging as a powerful tool of sustainable forestry. It recognises the livelihood and sustenance needs of the people through the principle of ‘care and share’. The concept of JFM has been interpretted in various ways but the basic element in this concept is to establish grass-root community based institutions for protection and management of the forests. The programme aims at empowering local people for their active participation as partner in the management of forest resources and sharing the benefits derived from its protection and management. The JFM approach optimises the returns, minimises conflicts and links the forestry development works with over all development of the land based resources. It also aims at acquiring technical and managerial capability available at the grassroot level.

Coordinate vs. Noncoordinate Adjectives

Coordinate vs. Noncoordinate Adjectives Coordinate vs. Noncoordinate Adjectives Coordinate vs. Noncoordinate Adjectives By Mark Nichol Whether to punctuate between two or more adjectives preceding a noun can be a difficult decision to make. Consider these points next time you are confused about what is appropriate. In the sentence â€Å"Many great artists were not recognized as such during their lifetimes,† many and great, though they are both adjectives, are not coordinate. The notion of many artists and the notion of great artists are not equivalent, because great is essential; the reference is not to any artists, but to great artists, and many modifies the phrase â€Å"great artists,† so no punctuation precedes the phrase. This is true regardless of how many adjectives precede the noun, if they are essential to describe the noun. â€Å"Many great Renaissance artists were not recognized as such during their lifetimes† does not require punctuation, either. However, if more than one adjective modifies a noun phrase such as â€Å"great artists† (or â€Å"great Renaissance artists†), or an adjective in that role is repeated, the two (or more) adjectives should be separated by a comma: â€Å"Many, many great artists were not recognized as such during their lifetimes.† Also, when we speak of a wide stone floor, we don’t punctuate the description, because the adjectives are not coordinate. Wide and stone are two ways to describe a floor, but the composition of the floor is the pertinent point, and its expanse is simply an additional detail; that’s why we wouldn’t refer to a stone wide floor. The distinction between coordinate and noncoordinate adjectives is usually clear, even if in various examples, different adjectives precede the same noun. In many cases, the noun is a standing noun phrase. Consider the noun table. If it is preceded by low, we understand that â€Å"low table† is not a standing noun phrase. (You won’t find that open compound in a dictionary, because it hasn’t acquired a permanent utility in the English language; â€Å"low table† does not conjure a uniform image in our minds.) The same is true of â€Å"long table.† Therefore, when a table is described as long and low, we write â€Å"long, low table† using the comma to signal that long and low are equivalent in modifying table: They describe two characteristics of the table. (The order in which various types of adjectives appear is fixed; see this post for a discussion of the royal order of adjectives.) However, when table is preceded by dining, we understand that â€Å"dining table† is a standing noun phrase. Though dining tables differ in appearance, the concept, as opposed to long or low tables, is precise; a table can be more or less long or more or less low, but one cannot discuss how dining it is. Therefore, long and dining, and low and dining, are not coordinate, and therefore we write â€Å"long dining table† â€Å"or low dining table† (or â€Å"long, low dining table†). Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Grammar category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:100 Mostly Small But Expressive InterjectionsDisappointed + PrepositionEnglish Grammar 101: Sentences, Clauses and Phrases