Forest Policy and Tribals

FOREST, TRIBALS, AND FOREST POLICY

          Forest occupies a central position in tribal culture and economy. Forests not only provide them home, shelter, food, dress, material for house building, cultural equipment, medicines, spiritual life/ pleasure, but also dictate their way of life from birth to death. The Hari Singh Committee (1967) said that 60% of Indian tribes live in forests and rest 40% live in the vicinity of forests. They treat the forest as “Mother goddess”. Moreover, the tribal existence has been linked to forests due to historical factors. It has been their abode and source of livelihood centuries together. In fact there existed a “symbiotic relationship” between forests and tribes. Thus it has been a unanimously held view that forest economy is “tribal economy” and vice versa.  

          Not only their economic life but the religious and religio-magical beliefs of the tribal people have been rotating round the forests. Many a flora and fauna have been their objects of worship-totems. They also dedicate some of the forest tracts to their deities – sacred grooves. Several proto-austroloid tribes marry the mango trees before their main marriage sites. They require many roots, tubers and leaves for magico-religious rites. For their recreational life, they sing folk songs, and dance and roam in the forests. They also organize the annual hunt in the forest for maintaining a harmonious relationship with nature. Because of their intimate and harmonious relationship with nature they are called as “Vanyajati”, “Vanabasi” and “Vanaputra”.

          They were the lords and masters of forests until the establishment of British rule in India. The British policy of commercial forestry first shattered the rights of the tribals over forests. This started on 3.8.1855 when the then Governor General, Lord Dalhousie issued a memorandum on forest conservation showing their concern about the destruction of forests by the slash and burn cultivation. He emphasized teak production for earnings and exports to England for ship building in Royal Navy.

          Following is the chronicled narration of evolution of forest policy along with various measures taken by state to manage the forests.

The first Forest Act of 1865. This act was the first attempt in the direction of regulation of collection of forest produce by the forest dwellers. In the process, the socially regulated practices of the local people were restrained by law.

The Forest Act 1878. This act further extended the states authority over forests. It prohibited certain acts such as trespass (or) pasturing of cattle and declaring certain activities as forest offences. Imprisonment and fines were also prescribed for these offences.

The first Forest Policy 1894.

The first forest policy envisaged, for the first time, the regulation of rights and restriction of privileges of the users in the forests. It also stated that the public benefit was the sole objection of forest administration. However, several regulations were made for forests under British control for commercial use.

          Due to this fact, the people of India particularly the forest dwellers faced serious problems as they were deprived of forest resources. The British forest policy was mainly based on commercial interest and aimed at supplying timber and other resources to colonial forest based industries. The commercial exploitation of forests was encouraged at the cost of forest – dwellers in the name of greater national interest.

The Indian Forest Act, 1927.

This act was further curtailed the rights of people over forest land and forest produce. It created an extremely powerful and adequately protected executive, consisting of forest officers of Indian forest service, State Forest Service, Rangers, Foresters and Forest guards. These officers enjoy legal powers. According to this act, any forest officer without a warrant could arrest any person against whom a reasonable suspicion exists of his motive to pilferage forest or forest wealth and his act was punishable with one month or more imprisonment. The officials could also seize and impound the cattle of the offender under cattle Trespass Act, 1871.

It further states that no suit shall be instituted against public servant for acts done in good faith and that all forest officials are deemed public servants. They played havoc with the lives of forest dwellers. This policy led to the infiltration of traders, contractors and non-tribal labour into forest areas in substantial number. This led to the depletion of forest cover, soil erosion and decline of soil fertility. This further widened socio-economic gulf between tribals and non-tribals. In 1935, forest was transferred to the State list according to the Government of India Act, 1935.

The National Forest Policy, 1952.

          The National Forest Policy, by and large followed the lines of British administration where the tribals had virtually no statutory right but enjoyed only certain concessions / privileges. These privileges include right to take water for agricultural processes, digging of wells and canals for agricultural processes, free grazing in open forests, removal of timber, bamboos, seeds, canes etc. for construction and repair of houses and for agricultural implements, collection of deadwood for fuel, collection of grass for cattle and for thatching their huts, fishing and hunting excluding protected farma and cultivation of forest land.

Wild Life Protection Act, 1972:

Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 empowered Government to declare any area to be constituted as a "protected area", namely a national park, wildlife sanctuary, tiger reserve or community conservation area where the operations tribals are greatly restricted and the killing of all the protected animals is a non-bailable offence. This Act has also usurped the lands which were held by the tribes and restricted the pastoral tribal movement in the protected areas.

Under the Indian Forest Act 1927 and Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, the rights of people living in or depending on the area to be declared as a forest or protected area are to be "settled" by a "forest settlement officer." This basically requires that officer to enquire into the claims of people to land, minor forest produce, etc., and, in the case of claims found to be valid, to allow them to continue or to extinguish them by paying compensation.

Studies have shown that in many areas this process either did not take place at all or took place in a highly faulty manner. Thus 82.9% of the forest blocks in undivided Madhya Pradesh had not been settled as of December 2003, while all the hilly tracts of Orissa were declared government forests without any survey. In Orissa, around 40% of the government forests are "deemed reserved forests" which have not been surveyed.

 Those whose rights are not recorded during the settlement process are susceptible to eviction at any time. This "legal twilight zone" leads to harassment, evictions, extortion of money and sexual molestation of forest dwellers by forest officials, who wield absolute authority over forest dwellers' livelihoods and daily lives.

 The recommendations of National Committee on Agriculture – 1976 and Tribal rights:

          The NCA recommended a drastic reduction in the peoples’ rights over forests and forest produce. It stated that free supply of forest produce to local communities and their privileges have brought destruction to the forests, because they are contributing much to the maintenance of forests. It further recommended strengthening of forest legislation by the enactment of a revised All India Forest Act.

          These recommendations were rejected by Forest Ministers Conference in 1982. In 1976 by 42 Amendment Act of Constitution, the forests were brought into the concurrent list.

The Committee for review of Rights and Concessions – 1980

          The Ministry of Agriculture constituted a committee under the Chairmanship of Sri M.S. Chaudary, the former Chief Secretary of Madhya Pradesh in 1961, to review the rights and concessions of tribals over forests.

          This committee recommended that the exercise of rights and concessions should be restricted to those tribals and other rural people residing within the distance of 8 K.M. from the existing forests that to non-reserved forests. The task of collection of MFP (Minor Forest Produce) should be taken by State and that should be distributed to tribals through departmental depots opened outside the forest for this purpose. The committee also recommended that the grazing of cattle in the forests should be restricted to the carrying capacity of the forest.

B.K. Roy Burman Committee on Forests and Tribals :

          The Ministry of Home Affairs under the chairmanship of Prof. B.K. Roy Burman, an eminent Anthropologist, appointed a committee in 1980 to re-orient the forest policy to serve the tribal economy. The committee submitted its report in 1982. It emphasized importance of forests in tribal life. It stated that besides getting free fuel, fodder and wood for house construction, the tribals earn one third of their income from the sale of MFP.

          The committee expressed it regret over the little importance given to the tribal economy in previous forest policies. It stated that benefits should flow to the tribal people through the imagination forestry programmes and conservation and recognition of their skills. In other words, the individual tribal the local tribal community and national interest should be regarded as the three corners of a triangular forest policy.                                                             

 Forest policy must fulfill three sets of needs – (a) ecological security (b) foods, fruit (c) fuel, fodder and other domestic needs of particularly the rural and tribal population.

          The committee also recommended that wherever the community rights exist on the forest land they should be recognized and adopted to serve the urgent needs of soil and water management and reforestation of tracts by suitable plants.

New National Forest Policy – 1988 and Tribal rights :

          It is pro-tribal forest policy in which most of the recommendations of Prof. B.K. Roy Burman committee are accommodated. It envisages environmental stability, and maintenance of ecological balance through the active involvement of local communities. This policy may be called “ENVIRONEMNT POPULATION” policy. This is the first forest policy which recognized the needs of the forest dwellers for the first time since the forest administration began in India.

          This policy recognized the symbiotic relationship of tribals with forests and directed all the agencies involved in the forest management including the forest associations should involve tribals in the protection, regeneration, and development of forests as well as to provide gainful employment to the tribals living in and around the forest. It assumes that customary rights and concessions are fully protected, adding to the domestic requirement of firewood, fodder and MFP. Though it relates the rights and concessions of tribals to the carrying capacity of forests, it also mention ‘need for optimizing this carrying capacity by increased investment, silvicultural research and eco development. This policy strongly desires for the re-establishment of the symbiotic relationship with tribals for the protection, regeneration and development of forest.

          [This policy took some essential decision regarding the development of tribals. They are (1) “to reduce the illegal cutting and for the exploitation of forest, the contractors should be replaced by the forest corporation, labour co-operatives and tribal co-operatives.

(2) Special attention should be paid to the protection, regeneration and optimum collection of MFP along with institutional arrangement for its marketing

(3) Family oriented schemes for the improving the status of tribal beneficiaries and

(4) integrated area development programmes to meet the needs of the tribal economy in and around the forest areas”.]

          The Ministry of Environment and Forest on June 1, 1990 issued a circular to the Forest Secretaries of all the States and UTs providing guidelines for the “involvement of village communities and voluntary organizations in the regeneration of degraded forests.” As of May 1996, 16 states initiated “Joint forest management” measures by issuing orders and guidelines.

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006:

It is a key piece of forest legislation passed in India on December 18, 2006 which is intended to redress the historical injustice done to the tribes and traditional dwellers of the forest, as a result of the continuance of colonial forest laws in India. It has also been called the Forest Rights Act, the Tribal Rights Act, the Tribal Bill, and the Tribal Land Act.  This Act, for the first time has

Ø  recognised and vested the forest rights and occupation in the forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional dwellers who have been residing in such forest for generations but whose rights could not be recorded,

Ø  provide framework for recording the forest rights so vested and the nature of evidence required for such recognition and vesting in respect of forest land and

Ø  recognition of rights of the forest dwellers includes the responsibilities and authority for sustainable use, conservation of biodiversity and maintenance of ecological balance and thereby strengthening the conservation regime of the forests while ensuring livelihood and food security of them.

This Act came into effect from 1.1.2008. 

1. The Types of rights vested by this Act can be summerised as under.

1.    Title rights - i.e. ownership - to land that is being framed by tribals or forest dwellers as on December 13, 2005, subject to a maximum of 4 hectares; ownership is only for land that is actually being cultivated by the concerned family as on that date, meaning that no new lands are granted

2. Use rights - to minor forest produce (also including ownership), to grazing areas, to pastoralist routes, etc.
3. Relief and development rights - to rehabilitation in case of illegal eviction or forced displacement; and to basic amenities, subject to restrictions for forest protection Forest management rights - to protect forests and wildlife
4. Any other traditional right customarily enjoyed by the forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes or other traditional forest dwellers, as the case may be, but excluding the traditional right of hunting or trapping extracting a part of the body of any species of wild animal

2. Eligibility criteria and processing of rights:

The eligibility to get rights under the Act is confined to those who "primarily reside in forests" and who depend on forests and forest land for a livelihood. Further, either the claimant must be a member of the Scheduled Tribes scheduled in that area or must have been residing in the forest for 75 years.

3. Role of gram sabha in recognizing the beneficiaries: The Act is intended to recognise lands that are already under cultivation as on December 13, 2005.[not to grant title to any new lands, as claimed by certain opponents of the Act]. The gram sabha, or village assembly, will initially pass a resolution recommending whose rights to which resources (land, MFP, pasture lands etc.) should be recognised, i.e. which lands belong to whom, how much land was under the cultivation of each person as on Dec 13, 2005, etc.. This resolution is then screened and approved at the level of the sub-division (or taluka) and subsequently at the district level. The screening committees consist of three government officials (Forest, Revenue and Tribal Welfare departments) and three elected members of the local body at that level. These committees also hear appeals.

4. Resettlement for wildlife conservation

Section 4(2) of the Act lays out a procedure by which people can be resettled from areas if it is found to be necessary for wildlife conservation. The first step is to show that relocation is scientifically necessary and no other alternative is available; this has to be done through a process of public consultation. The second step is that the local community must consent to the resettlement. Finally, the resettlement must provide not only compensation but a secure livelihood.

Grey areas of the Forest Rights Act:

The Act did not specify any time limit before which the process of settlement of claims over land, pasture lands and Minor Forest Produce (MFP) required to be concluded. It is applicable to only those tribals who are cultivating or grazing or collecting MFP, but not to those who are already displaced by the different development projects. Further, recognition of land rights is restricted to 10 acres or 4 hectares which is meager when compared to larger land holdings held by the tribals and the un-productive nature of the land. The Act would not recognize any new claim on the forest land and therefore the landless at present continue to be so. Further, it did not address the issue of land alienated to non-tribals. This act is applicable to tribals and non-tribals and therefore the non-tribals, given their bargaining power with the gram sabha as well as corrupt revenue and forest administration, the tribals voice may be silenced. But for these shortcomings, the Act is landmark legislation for empowerment of tribals and sustainable development in India.

Implementation of the Act:

Details rules were framed and released during 2008 and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs had issued guidelines inter-alia require the State Governments to ensure recognition of the forest rights relating to minor forest produce and to bring the State policies in alignment with the provisions of the Act, do away the monopoly of the Forest Corporations in the trade of minor forest produce in the States, play the facilitation role in not only transferring unhindered absolute rights over minor forest produce to forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers but also in getting them remunerative prices for the minor forest produce collected and processed by them.

The Ministry had also observed certain procedural lacunae in the existing FR Rules, 2008. In order to overcome those lacunae and strengthen the existing FR Rules, 2008, the Ministry has also notified the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Amendment Rules, 2012 in the Gazette of India on 6.9.2012 and forwarded copies of the Amendment Rules to all the State/ UT Governments on 7.9.2012 for initiating necessary action as per the Amendment Rules, on priority.

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Amendment Rules, 2012 notified by the Ministry on 06.09.2012 provide interalia for

(i)                  identification of hamlets or settlements and process of their consolidation for holding Gram Sabha meetings,

(ii)                 disposal of minor forest produce within and outside forest area through appropriate means of transport,

(iii)                modification of the transit permit regime in relation to transportation of minor forest produce and issue of the transit permit by a Committee constituted by the Gram Sabha or the person authorized by Gram Sabha,

(iv)               making the collection of the minor forest produce free of all royalties or fees or any other charges,

(v)                 convening of the quarterly meetings of the State Level Monitoring Committee for monitoring the process of recognition, verification and vesting of forest rights and addressing the field level problems,

(vi)               recognition of the individual and community rights, etc.

The Ministry also organized five Regional Workshops, nationwide, in order to explain and discuss the amendments in the FR Rules and the guidelines to the officials of the key State Government Department and the way forward at State level including drafting of consequent Action Plans for individual States.

     As a result of the efforts, more than 32.37 lakh claims have been filed and 12.79 lakh titles have been distributed as on 31.12.2012. Further, 14 thousand titles were ready for distribution. A total of 27,91,330 claims have been disposed of , which is 86.21% of the total claims received. As per the information available from 14 States, the extent of forest land for which 12,70,404 titles have been distributed, is 18,78,358.39 hectares  [46, 41,479.94 Acres].

Destruction of the forest environment and the tribes :

          Tribals have symbiotic relationship with forests and they were the saviors of forest protection. They had communal ownership rights over forest and the forests remained their lifeblood. With the advent of British their rights over forests were shattered. But they could not evacuate them from forest because they found to be cheap labour for commercial exploitation of forest. This legacy of British continued even after Independence. The revenue from the forest exploitation was increasing year after year. The profit of the state turned out to be doom for the tribal. The satisfaction of their basic needs was considered illegal and attracted penalty. Their interdependence with forest was never understood properly. Their survival was increasingly put in jeopardy by the contractor-money lender combine and they themselves were acted as cheap labour and a safe cover for illegal felling.

          The alienation of tribal lands continued unabated due to the importance of forests for mining, construction of multipurpose projects, thermal projects, industries depending on the one available in forest areas and wild life projects. This resulted in dislocation of their traditional habitat and ruining of their economy. Often the compensation is very meager. The illiterate tribals did not know the laws. They owned the forest lands in the forest for what they had no records. The customary rights of the tribals over their land are in the form of community ownership. The Government while recording rights looks for the records and no general rights on a community basis are recognized.

          Because of these reasons, the tribals were completely alienated from his ancestral lands. They lost the consciousness that jungle is their security. Therefore, they had little stake for the protection and preservation of forests. Neither they resisted destruction nor did they visualize preservation. In the name of scientific forest management the fruit trees, medicinal trees which have great significance in their life were replaced by monoculture such as Teak and Eucalyptus plantation which are almost of no use to tribals or support the wild life.

          This type of short sighted monoculture methods and unscientific destruction of forest resulted into the soil erosion and less productivity of forest lands and extinction of most of the wild life. Thus the forest management deprived the tribals, game (wild animals), land and Minor Forest Produce and completely ruined thir life.

Importance of involvement of local tribes protection of the Environment:

          India’s forest and wild life policy, till the Forest Rights Act 2006, is essentially an extension of colonial policy that considered forests and ecological assets as profit making entities and tradable commodities. The commercial exploitation of forests was encouraged at the cost of forest dwellers in the name of greater national interest. The unscrupulous traders, contractors and money lenders exploited the forests as well as tribals to the maximum. This led to the continued depletion of forest cover, soil erosion, and decline in soil fertility. So, the “non-sustainable centralized and bureaucratic approach” to the management of forests, parks, sanctuaries, and protected areas that excludes local communities is clearly obsolete.

          The Forest Rights Act, 2006 is a result of untiring efforts of several anthropologists, NGOs, environmentalists, ecologists and social activists over the years in making serious efforts to create public opinion in favour of involving local communities in the management of national parks and forests had made the Forest. This Act has recogised the twin concepts of conservation, viz., conservation of biodiversity and the livelihood security of local communities. It is universally accepted principle that the polity of the government that it shall do justice to the local communities both tribal and non tribal, and to the nature – vegetation and wild life and to the future generations in sustainable manner. Sustainable development of forest is possible if local people are protected who in turn protect the flora and fauna. If they were protected and made saviors of the forest, the natural forests will be saved and justice to the nature would be done and future generation will not face the brunt of forest degradation. It is pertinent to see certain case studies explaining the symbiotic relationship between the tribals and nature. 

Case studies:

1. The Bishnoi communities of Rajastan who live in and around deserts have been zealously guarding lush green forest stretches and the black bucks for centuries, in the arid region of Rajastan, Punjab, Haryana and Madhya Pradesh, from rapacious human encroachers. The word Bishnoi is derived from bis (twenty) and nai (nine) i.e. followers of 29 principles given by Guru Jambheshwar. The latter gave the message to protect trees and wildlife around 540 years ago when nobody could predict that harming the environment means harming yourself. He formulated twenty nine tenets. The tenets were not only tailored to conserve bio-diversity of the area but also ensured a healthy eco-friendly social life for the community. Out of 29, eight tenets have been prescribed to preserve bio-diversity and encourage good animal husbandry. These include a ban on killing animals and felling green trees, and providing protection to all life forms. The community is also directed to see that the firewood they use is devoid of small insects. Wearing blue cloths is prohibited because the dye for colouring them is obtained by cutting a large quantity of shrubs. In 1730, 363 Bishnoi men, women and children gave their lives to protect trees from cutting by the then king's men. This incident happened in Khejarli which is a village in Jodhpur district of Rajasthan, India 26 km south-east of the city of Jodhpur. In this incident 363 Bishnois sacrificed their lives while protecting trees, by hugging to them, this incident is the first event of the Chipko movement in history. [The Bishnois are presently spread over the western parts of Rajasthan, Haryana, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh. They are teetotalers and normally they wear a white shirt, dhoti and turban. This dress pattern is ideal for the hot dry desert climate. They pay special attention to cleanliness in their houses. Only one crop of pearl millet (bajra) is grown during the monsoon season. The bushes, which grow in the fields, protect the loose sand from wind erosion and provide the much-needed fodder for animals during a famine. Bisnois often live in little hamlets called Dhani and villages, with just a few round huts with intricate thatched roofs. The mud floors are plastered with cow dung to keep vermin away. The interiors are airy and clean. There is a granary to guard their rations and a sump for stored water. Bishnois in Haryana and Punjab are much wealthier than other castes.]

2. Many tribes have plants and animals as their totems whose killing is tabooed and also it is their bounden duty to protect their totems by providing congenial growth environment and stopping encroachments and poaching. This method is just tip of the iceberg, in biodiversity conservation by tribals.

3. The Talakona experiment of Joint Forest Management (JFM) in Sheshachala hills of Eastern Ghats is worth emulating elsewhere for wonderful results. Talakona is a famous eco-tourism centre for its waterfalls and lush green forest, used for shooting films. Here, the Forest Department of Andhra Pradesh has built a conference hall and guest houses, called “log-huts”. These guest houses are maintained by local self help group of indigenous tribe, “Yanadi”, called “Vana Samrakshana Samithi” (VSS). It is responsible for protecting the forest and not to allow felling of the trees and poaching of animals. The sales proceeds of log-huts and catering services are received into a joint account held by the chairman of VSS, who is invariably a Yanadi tribal and the concerned “Forest Ranger” and the same is used for paying salaries to yenadi people who are involved in the maintenance of guest house and restaurant. They are also entitled to collect Minor Forest Produce such as honey, fruits of Amla, Tamarind, plums etc. and tubers such as “Maredu gadda’’ & “Pala gadda” and certain roots used in making perfumes.  This is quite successful in a way that local communities are empowered and environment is also protected.

4. The beliefs and religion of around 8000 Dongria Kondh’s of Niyamgiri Hills in Berhampur and Raigarh districts of Odhissa have helped the growth of dense forest and unusually rich wildlife. The Dongrias worship the top of the sacred mountain, the ‘mountain of law’ as the seat of their god, “Niyamaraja”. They call themselves Jharnia, meaning ‘protector of streams’, because they protect their sacred mountains and the life-giving rivers that rise within its thick forests. They strongly believe that any disturbance in the hills such as mining is tantamount to angering their god who has been protecting them for ages and therefore doom them. The fought a heroic battle against mining giant Vedanta Resources and Odisha Mining Corporation to save their sacred mountain. The Supreme Court in its landmark decision in 2013, had told Vedanta that the Dongria must decide whether to allow mining or not. Consequently, Gram Sabhas are conducted in their hamlets and all 6 Gram Sabhas, locally called as “palle sabhas” had rejected the mining of $2billion worth of bauxite deposits. This is the first ever environmental plebiscite conducted in India.  In one of the Gram Sabhas, one of the tribal women has stated that they buy only kerosene and salt and the remaining is provided by the hills for their livelihood. This summarizes the intricate relationship between the nature and tribal life and tribal way of protecting the environment and forests. 

Conclusion:  

The Rio Earth Summit, 1992 and Rio Earth Summit 2012 [United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development or Rio+20] has rightly acknowledged the customary rights of “indigenous communities” or “the ecosystem people” to live in forests and use its resources in a sustainable manner. The summit also brought into the focus the immense knowledge of the local communities about the biodiversity and their inherent traditional methods they practice for conserving ecological diversity of the area they inhabit. The summit had advocated that States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable development. The Forest Rights Act, 2006 is a right step in this direction, but alone may not be suffice to do the needful. The need of the hour is to change the policy of Government towards joint forest management with traditional skills and new technological techniques. The tribals should be made real stake holders in the forest and wildlife management with immediate stoppage of habitat destruction and enhancement of forest cover and growing of the traditional plantations which not only provide green cover, but also enhances the carrying capacity of the forest for sustainable livelihood needs of the tribals and other traditional forest dwellers. The rights over the forest land, pasture lands and MFP shall be implemented in true spirit and the indigenous communities to be given reasonable veto power in exploitation of forests and mining in those areas.  It is to be noted that India is going to emerge as most populous country in the world by 2045 with 1.5 billion population and to sustain the needs of such huge population, we have to take ample measures at least from now to increase the forest cover in place of destructed ones and enhance its carrying capacity. Hence, in the interests of country as a whole and specially in the interest of marginalized tribals, let us save them from the contractors, industrialists, money-lenders and from the red tape inflicted beaurocracy, especially at cutting edge level  and march towards Joint Forest Management and Sustainable Development by blending the indigenous knowledge with innovative technologies.

*****

Tribal population as per 2011 census: According to the 2011 Census of India, Bhil is the most populous tribe with a total population of 4,618,068, constituting 37.7 per cent of the total ST population. Gond is the second largest tribe, with a population of 4,357,918 constituting 35.6 per cent. The next four populous tribes are: Kol, Korku, Sahariya and Baiga. These six tribes constitute 92.2 per cent of the total ST population of the State. Pardhan, Saur and Bharia Bhumia have a population ranging from 105,692 to 152,472; together, they form 3.2 per cent. Four tribes, namely, Majhi, Khairwar, Mawasi and Panika having population in the range of 47,806 to 81,335 account for another 2.2 per cent of the ST population; remaining thirty three tribes (out of total of 46 tribes) along with the generic tribes constitute the residual 2.5 per cent of total ST population.