Even as cities around India gradually lose their trees, their green cover, to the construction boom and local authorities pay only lip service to nature while planning and designing cities, it is the people’s voices and actions that protect the trees. From environmentalists and ecologists to homemakers, teachers, students, social activists, these are the tree warriors or green crusaders that become the voice of the voiceless trees.
Question of Cities featured Anitha Santhi from Thiruvananthapuram,[1] and many from Thane and Navi Mumbai[2] in the last edition. We spotlight a few more in this one. In the past, we have written about the tree warriors of Mumbai.[3] The city’s worst loss of trees was possibly in 2019 when more than 2,400 trees, including old and rare ones, were hacked overnight in the Aarey forest to make way for the car shed of Metro 3.
Over the years, activists like Stalin D battled it out in the courts while Sanjiv Valsan conducted weekly plantation drives there. Along with social activist Zoru Bathena, who was also a part of the movement to save Aarey’s trees, residents of Malabar Hill recently managed to save 389 trees and the iconic Hanging Garden.[4] Bathena filed a PIL in the Bombay High Court, after approaching the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and its Tree Authority to stop the destruction of road side trees which led to the court asking the civic body to disclose its policy on roadside tree cover.[5]
Vanashakti, an NGO in which Stalin D is a director, among other tree protection work, has mapped 18 urban forests in Mumbai with a total spread of over 1,378 hectares.[6] Activist Rohit Joshi’s PIL led to the removal of lights as decorations across the Mumbai Metropolitan Region.[7] And Hutokshi Rustomfram, Shubhada Nikharge, Dr Sheila Tanna and Katie Bagli were successful in getting the Veermata Jijabai Bhosale Botanical Udyan and Zoo listed as a heritage spot, saving its historic trees.[8]
Question of Cities continues this focus with green crusaders of Dehradun, Delhi and Bengaluru.
Florence Pandhi, Dehradun
Environmentalist, chairperson of NGO Pramukh
Tell us about your work.
We, in the NGO, started off with urban planting but whatever we planted has been uprooted or neglected. Unless it’s organised by a government body, tree planting is not successful, we find. But in schools, colleges, government buildings and similar places, where there is a protective area like a fence or a wall and some care can be given by gardeners, the plantation we have done has been successful.
When we start our plantation, usually in May and long before the monsoon, we first find and choose appropriate sites. Then, we get full compliance from the person with control over that area – owners, school headmasters, government officials – who sign an agreement with us. Only then we provide them with trees and share our expertise. We have a monitoring programme too through which we take care of about 20-25 chosen sites every year to nourish the trees. We also have a Nature and Environment Awareness Programme, meant for children where children, especially from low-income schools, are taken to riverbeds and for walks to explain what’s around them.
Photo: Pramukh
How has urbanisation affected ecology in Dehradun?
You don’t have to live here to realise that this is happening like throughout India. I categorically dispute the figures given in the recent National Forest Report.[9] There are ways of fudging statistics but you can tell what’s happening on the ground.
Not long ago, when the UPA government was in power, it was difficult for us to buy a house because the government stipulated that one had to have at least five bighas (approximately one-third of an acre) of land for each building erected. So, the orchards of mango, lychee, peaches, and plums were protected. Now, the successive governments cut that down to two-and-half bighas. That’s when we were able to afford a house but the stipulation no longer protected the trees. The municipality here, in many ways, changed rules so that you don’t have to have any (open) land when you construct or purchase a building. Last year, it stipulated that people have permission to cut trees in the plot they are planning to buy or build; before this, we could not cut trees without explicit permission.
Dehradun is completely and utterly different now from what I saw initially. There were no high-rise buildings at all and the assumption was that this came from the region being highly prone to earthquakes. Now, high-rises, some 70 storeys high, have come up and there are plans to build the government secretariat within the urban area too. Although the municipal bylaws require that each building sanctioned must have a minimum tree cover, this is completely ignored. Between 1996 and 2019, according to an IIT Roorkee study, the built-up area in the city and its surrounding areas have increased from 26 square kilometres to 46 square kilometres. At the same time, vegetation declined from 19 square kilometres to 13 square kilometres, and fallow lands from 18 to 7 square kilometres.[10]
How has the government helped, if at all?
I’m a member of the Supreme Court Monitoring Committee for the environment of Doon Valley. In the last two meetings, I found that the Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority (MDDA) had a grand plan for plantation in 2024. I asked for details, particularly on finances, because trees need up to five years of care to survive. They gave me details of where they would plant but nothing more. Six months went by with repeated requests from the committee, in vain. This shows the seriousness. Moreover, their plantations are often suspect. This is not a priority for governments. It’s a priority for people like us who spare the time and get involved; we have to trouble the government as much as we can.
*****
Aditya N Prasad, New Delhi
Lawyer, committed to environmental justice
Tell us about your work to protect trees.
I’ve been advocating for trees since I was in school. Whether in my colony or along the roads, I am concerned about trees surrounded by concrete. My grandparents deeply influenced me to respect trees as living beings and this sensitivity grew as I became a lawyer. Now, 90 percent of my work revolves around tree protection. There are two main aspects to tree protection. The first is the groundwork to ensure that trees aren’t cut or vandalised and documenting it all. The second is executive action or working within the system to approach the relevant authorities or take the matter to court. For the past decade, I have been actively doing both.
In 2013, I realised that writing to the authorities wasn’t enough. A forest officer took me to a site behind his office to show me the state of affairs; they lacked equipment and uniforms. Even if the officer wanted to, he did not have the means to protect trees. The authorities tasked with tree protection need to be strengthened but the government resists it lest they become impediments in construction projects. The fewer the people on the ground, the easier the authorities can violate laws and get their way; that’s why groundwork is important.
We learned that taking cases to court could actually strengthen the department. I have filed about 14 cases demanding improvement in the forest department. Initially, the court questioned the validity of these cases. On December 10, 2015, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) ruled that the forest department must fill existing posts, create new ones, and improve infrastructure. Nearly a decade later, we are still trying to get it implemented in Delhi.
Photo: Aditya N Prasad
What kind of stress has Delhi’s urbanisation put on trees?
I don’t think Delhi was well-planned. Initially, plots were allotted and people were asked to plant two trees outside their houses. There was no government intervention; residents were expected to green their own spaces. The colonies built in the 1950-70s now have lush triple-canopy trees. However, if you plant today, it won’t grow as much because the soil lacks the necessary strength. That’s why protecting the older trees is crucial. In redevelopment projects, the two trees outside a house are cut down.
Trees have become disposable to make way for new construction. They are rid through illegal poisoning, bribing authorities for cutting, or filing official applications for felling which are rarely denied. If this continues, there will be no tree avenues left. There may be laws but the system is broken. The process for cutting trees has become as routine as buying a stamp at the post office, nobody asks why you need this stamp. There’s a difference between protection and preservation. Protection addresses the present while preservation is for the future.
Even if there are court orders, it’s the men on the ground who will implement them. Otherwise, orders mean nothing. The government is confident that nothing will happen if orders are not implemented for 10 years. This creates a culture of plausible deniability. With each passing day and month, we are inching towards the threshold where it will not matter whether a tree is cut or not.
Despite ongoing concerns about air pollution, data presented to the Delhi High Court shows that five trees were being cut every hour until 2021. This number has likely increased to seven, based on recent data. Yet, a 300-year-old tree at Delhi University, older than the institution itself, was recently earmarked for felling for a new building and it was saved through the intervention of the Delhi High Court. We’ve reached a point where cutting even one tree affects the environment. Temperatures rise, shade disappears, and pollution worsens.
Delhi’s failure to protect trees isn’t due to a lack of funds—it’s an economic and political issue. The problem lies in the lack of checks and balances to prevent illegal felling. This is compounded by the absence of a functioning forest department.
What needs to be done?
We are beyond the stage of stopping constructions but if the law on preservation is followed, we could save most trees from being cut unnecessarily. For instance, there is an undertaking by the Delhi government that permission to cut trees will not be given for individuals or projects without first approaching the Delhi High Court. Despite this, it was revealed in May 2024 that an overly confident officer granted permission to fell 916 trees. This was stopped by the Delhi High Court. This kind of audacity undermines the court’s authority and majesty and thus, sends the wrong message. Citizens lose hope.
Despite going to the court with genuine concerns, they see no accountability from those causing harm to trees. The courts acknowledge the problem and pass detailed orders. There is a compendium of orders on protection of trees; it runs into hundreds of pages but the implementation of those orders remains a challenge. Irrespective of people making an effort, the destruction does not stop. This erodes public trust.
India’s cities don’t have road berms or road shoulders — the green space between the footpath and the road—essential for water absorption and dust control. In cities like Delhi, Mumbai, and Bengaluru, where most of these spaces are now concretised apart from cutting trees which were planted 30-40 years ago, there is no place for the water to go either. There is nothing much left to concretise. And then we seek out technological solutions when we have destroyed the natural solutions left.
Photo: Aditya N Prasad
*****
Vijay Nishanth, Bengaluru
Founder, Project Vruksha Foundation
Tell us about your work?
I have been working for trees for around two decades now. I started as a teenager. My uncle and my mother told me to get into engineering. Later, I found out about my calling. Initially, as a volunteer with Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), I had been rescuing animals. Without flora, fauna can’t exist. I understood the importance of saving trees. I could have saved one bird in a day but if I saved one tree, it would benefit humans, animals, and many birds. Because of my knowledge and understanding of trees, people call me Tree Vijay.
I realised that there was no accountability in the way Bengaluru was losing trees. I told my friend, unless we know what we have, we can’t save much. There were a lot of issues apart from cutting trees such as acid attacks on trees. To bring accountability, there had to be a tree census. Bengaluru, like Mysuru, has voluntarily done a tree census. Now, Vadodara has invited me to do a tree census.
If the reason to cut a tree is not valid, it has to be saved. That’s how the idea of starting Project Vruksha Foundation came about. Now, if there is an acid attack, I am able to prove whether the tree is unhealthy. I grew up with the trees in Bengaluru. Amma used to send me to Lakshman Rao Park in Jayanagar where we lived. These days, people don’t have a connection with their environment.
Photo: Vijay Nishanth
What stress has urbanisation put on Bengaluru’s ecology, particularly trees?
Too much stress, actually. Constructions, cable lines, and unplanned designs have damaged it. Bengaluru, like other cities, is growing in an unplanned manner. There are buildings planned and constructed but the surrounding area has no trees and green spaces. Officials don’t have proper knowledge about tree pruning and trimming, the government does not initiate green activities or spread awareness.It’s a never-ending fight for us.
What is the way ahead?
The first thing is to teach the children about trees and ecology in school. The government should introduce curricular activities for children to understand the environment. Researchers, rather than studying everything and sitting quiet, should be a part of the action. They should be bold. When they say something, it should be converted into action.
People should inculcate utmost respect towards the greens and see trees and their biodiversity as one family. The government should also encourage people to constructively suggest ways for sustainable development, rather than only looking at the profiting of development. People should start owning their city and its ecology.
Cover illustration: Nikeita Saraf
