Harela amid shrinking forests: Celebration or ecological contradiction?
Every July, Uttarakhand celebrates Harela, a festival that symbolizes the inseparable bond between people, forests, water, and the Himalayas. Saplings are planted, speeches are delivered, and pledges are taken to protect nature. Yet, an uncomfortable question deserves to be asked:
Can Harela retain its true meaning when large tracts of forests continue to be diverted for roads, highways, transmission lines, mining, and urban infrastructure?
According to available official records, 46,203 hectares of forest land have been diverted in Uttarakhand since the state’s formation, with Dehradun accounting for a disproportionately large 47% share (Courtesy: RTI by Anoop Nautiyal) because it has become the epicentre of highways, expressways, defence establishments, urban expansion, and tourism infrastructure.
Dehradun has witnessed repeated proposals involving the felling of thousands of mature trees. Recent official information indicates that the Jhajhra–Asharodi road project alone involves the felling of 6,574 trees and the diversion of around 20 hectares of forest land.
This year’s Harela has itself become a symbol of this contradiction. Citizens observed a “Black Harela” protest against the proposed felling of over 4,300 trees for another highway project, arguing that celebrating forests while simultaneously destroying mature forests sends conflicting messages.
The ecological issue extends far beyond counting trees. A mature Sal, Deodar, Oak, or Peepal tree stores enormous quantities of carbon, moderates local temperatures, supports biodiversity, stabilises fragile Himalayan slopes, and helps recharge groundwater. A newly planted sapling cannot replace these ecosystem services for several decades.
Therefore, compensatory afforestation should never be viewed as an ecological equivalent of cutting mature forests. Plantation drives are important, but they cannot justify the avoidable destruction of natural forests.
The government deserves appreciation for undertaking large-scale plantation programmes, including the recent target of planting nearly 59 lakh saplings during Harela. However, the success of Harela should not be measured merely by the number of saplings planted but by the reduction in forest diversion, the survival rate of plantations after five years, the protection of mature native forests, transparency in district-wise tree-felling data, and independent monitoring of compensatory afforestation.
Development and environmental conservation need not be opposing objectives. Uttarakhand requires roads, connectivity, and economic growth. But development in the fragile Himalayas must respect geological stability, biodiversity, and ecological carrying capacity.
Harela was never intended to become a ceremonial photo opportunity.
It should become Uttarakhand’s annual environmental accountability day—a day when the government publicly releases district-wise data on forest diversion, tree felling, compensatory afforestation, plantation survival, and ecological restoration.
The true spirit of Harela lies not in planting thousands of saplings while simultaneously losing thousands of mature trees. It lies in ensuring that every development project first asks a simple question:
Can this objective be achieved while saving the forest?
Only when the answer increasingly becomes “Yes” will Harela truly honour the ecological wisdom that has sustained Uttarakhand’s mountains for centuries.
Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author’s own.
