The tree felling continues extensively

The RA Working Committee wrote a letter to the Chairman and members of the Governing Board, as well as to the Chairperson and members of the International Advisory Council, urgently bringing to their notice the “unfortunate and unnecessary cutting of Service Trees” on the Crown.

In this letter, they clarified that “The Service Trees were planted in the year 2002 by Aurofuture, the planning office of Roger Anger, the Chief Architect of Auroville, and in accordance with the indications in the Master Plan. The plantation and the alignment were decided in anticipation of the construction of the Crown Road so that it could already be shaded with avenue trees at the time of its construction.

“The European Commission, recognizing that this was an innovative way of planning, contributed to the cost of their plantation with a partial grant-in-aid through the Asia Urbs project, IND-015. The road in this area has already been completed and the street lights and other infrastructure has already been installed so why is it necessary to cut these trees that provide shade and beautify the area, and have been funded by a specified grant from the EC?

We respectfully request that this operation of tree cutting along the existing built portions of the Crown Road is halted and reconsidered in view of the above considerations.”

The Chairman and Secretary of Auroville International echoed this request in a letter to the Governing Board in which they expressed “shock and dismay” at the “unjustified massive tree felling in Auroville on a built section of the Crown Road between the Solar Kitchen and Mahalakshmi Home in the centre of the city”, noting that “Auroville's good international reputation, which has been built up over decades and is based in particular on its unique achievements in the restoration and reforestation of a formerly barren stretch of land, is being damaged to the utmost by this act of violence against nature. These actions are particularly incomprehensible at a time when green city centres are seen as one of the most effective countermeasures against the overheating and drying out of cities and their surroundings as a result of climate change.

“It is especially painful to learn about this situation as the trees that are now falling victim to the chainsaws were all offsprings of the one big Service Tree standing at a sacred place, the Samadhi of The Mother and Sri Aurobindo in the Pondicherry Ashram, as they were planted with seeds from this very tree.”

They concluded, “We believe that this is one action too far against which all Aurovilians, friends of Auroville and also Ecology’s and Nature's friends must speak out. That’s why we urge you to put a stop to any further useless tree felling and to work towards developing plans that avoid unnecessarily harsh interventions in Auroville's natural environment.”

Two members of the Auroville International Advisory Council, the third Authority of the Auroville Foundation, also registered strong protests [see box].

On 5th January, an article on the issue appeared in The Hindu newspaper. It reported that resumption of tree felling for the Crown Road project had triggered another round of protests by “a section of residents who alleged that the process is being undertaken in an arbitrary and unsafe manner”.

It also quoted a spokesperson for the Auroville Foundation who dismissed the charges as unfounded, saying that the entire operation was being carried out under the supervision of designated teams, in compliance with law, and with reverence for the Master Plan. The spokesperson also explained that as the Auroville Foundation had obtained a stay in the Supreme Court on the order of the NGT, “there is no bar on implementing development of projects as per the Auroville Master Plan”.

“In response to a question,” the article continued, “a Foundation official said that by no stretch could it be claimed that the interim stay was being used as a carte blanche to indiscriminately bring down trees. On the contrary, the operation is being undertaken based on a proper CPWD survey, thorough mapping and clear markings for facilitating the Crown right-of-way”.

The spokesperson was also reported to have said that the objectors were ignoring proportion and perspective as hardly 0.16 % of the total number of trees in the township would be affected – for which compensatory forestry was ongoing – and when the city plan itself had clearly marked green belts and corridors.

“Only trees that were planted in the Right of Way, either for timber or by residents as a means of obstructing city development, are the ones being cut.”

In a subsequent The Hindu article, headlined ‘Tree clearing for Auroville’s Crown Road sparks claims, counter claims’, a Foundation spokesperson explained that “the Crown was never a forest area, right from the time of the 1969 study carried out and approved by the Mother. A majority of trees that need to be felled…are self propagating Work or neem trees.

“The rare ones should never have been planted there, and certainly did not have the accord of the chief architect of Auroville, whose sketches of the Crown show that it was a plaza and urban corridor, not an avenue flanked by trees on both sides. The ongoing work to prepare the infrastructure to serve the needs of an estimated 50,000 people was being carried out in a coordinated fashion with CPWD with Town Development Council inputs.”

On the claims of damage to offshoots of the Service Tree, the Foundation stated that these saplings were planted in Pitchandikulam forest. If newer generation seeds had been planted somewhere, they had not been documented.

The Foundation made other statements in their press release which were not included, or referred to only in passing, in The Hindu articles. These included that Auroville is being implemented as per its approved Master Plan as provided for in the Auroville Foundation Act; that only “a few residents of Auroville have raised hue and cry that trees are indiscriminately felled”; that the trees that were planted with the knowledge that they would need to be cut are mainly of aggressive-invasive species, such as the Work tree Acacia auriculoformis; and that surveyors have marked these project sites and the felling is being undertaken in a coordinated fashion.

The press release concludes, “It may be appreciated that Auroville was planned to be a city for 50,000 people from its very inception and hence needs infrastructure to be developed to make it a vibrant city as dreamt by the Mother – the founder of the (sic) Auroville”.

In response, the RA Working Committee and ‘Other Concerned Residents’ wrote a letter to the Governing Board and International Advisory Council making what they stated to be a point by point rebuttal of these claims. Among other things, it noted that objections to what was happening were not being made by a few residents but by a vast array of people both inside and outside Auroville, including from six neighbouring villages; that no unconditional or absolute permission to fell trees indiscriminately had been given by the latest court order; that the surveys have been unprofessional and haphazard and the cleared areas were not accurately pre-marked, and this, along with the haste in which the operation is being implemented, is causing inaccurate and unnecessary clearing; that almost 100 different rare indigenous and other rare tree species have been cut in different areas of Auroville; that the location of the roads along which the trees are being cut is not mentioned in the Master Plan 2025; and that Auroville is not being implemented as per its approved Master Plan because multiple deviations, changes and errors regarding this Plan have been documented so far.

It concludes, “The plans currently being implemented for the laying of infrastructure are extremely detrimental for a city that is under development as they require roadsides and sidewalks to be dug up each time a repair or new connection is required. There are simpler, and more sustainable and cost effective, methods that are available and were proposed for roads and other development but these proposals were ignored…. Mother stated that Auroville should be the city the earth needs. Objections from residents are because developing a sustainable city is the call of the moment and how Auroville does things is as or more important than what is done. Roger Anger stated Auroville should be built by Aurovilians, this sub contracting out of the work is seen as diminishing the care, quality and consciousness in the creation of the material aspect of the city.”