Karnataka Forest Department Internal Evaluation Report of 2007-08 Works Copy Right Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HOFF) Aranya Bhavan, 18th Cross, Malleshwaram Bangalore – 560003, Phone: 080 23343770 Web: http://www.aranya.gov.in April, 2014 PREFACE Karnataka Forest Department was one of the earliest departments to adopt internal evaluation as a mechanism for improving the quality of works. The idea was floated as early as 1972. But it took some time to formalise and the first report was submitted to the state government in 1986. Since then, the department has been periodically conducting internal evaluations, discussing the findings internally and attempting to bring in reforms to improve the effectiveness of the development programs. This report is fifth in the series of internal evaluations. There was some delay in finalizing the report. But it is gratifying to note that it has been brought out quite well. The content and presentation are very appealing and easy to understand. I hope that all the officers concerned will go through the report and benefit from the evaluation study. Over the years, development programs have been expanding and diversifying in numerous ways. Even the methodology for evaluation has been evolving fast and many professional organizations are emerging. The state government has recognized evaluation as an important tool for policy and program review. A new evaluation policy was brought out by the state government in 2011. According to this policy, independent external evaluation of all development programs and policies is mandatory. It will be immensely useful to the department to usher in new professionals from diverse fields to induce fresh thinking and innovative ways of looking at conservation and expansion of the forest resources which have become so vital on account of climate change. I look forward for an ealry strategic change in the evaluation approach. G. V. Sugur IFS Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Head of Forest Force) Karnataka Forest Department i FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Action to evaluate 2007-08 works was launched on time in May, 2011. However the progress of works remained slow as the department went through a major but informal restructuring by upgrading the posts of conservators in the circles to that of chief conservators. It resulted in change of guard in many circles. Fresh efforts had to begin from scratch every time such a change happened. It was difficult for the officers in head office to persuade the new incumbents to prioritize the evaluation work because reports from other circles have already arrived. The new evaluation team leaders grudgingly accepted the additional responsibility, organised and supervised the evaluation work and submitted their reports over a period of 15 months starting from December 2012 to March 2014. There was not much change in the evaluation methods and protocols. In a way this facilitated the completion of evaluation work. Not only the evaluation team leaders but even the incumbent officers at head office changed a number of times and the progress was hampered. It took nearly three years to finalise this evaluation report. I had to accept the pleasant duty of finalizing the evaluation report for 2007-08 at the end of March 2014. By then a rough draft was available. We felt the need to rewrite it to make it more meaningful and easy to understand. We redrafted it very quickly in about a month’s time. The report has a few gaps in the data and information because the field teams did not furnish the same. Since finalization of report was already delayed and some of the officers who did the field work were also transferred, we decided to go ahead with the available information. The gaps are retained deliberately so that in the next evaluation report they can be made up. Even ignoring the gaps, there is a lot of information available in the report. Officers who are interested to bring in improvements will find the report quite useful. The evaluation wing in the head office has done its duty. It is now for the circle CCFs and divisional officers to find time and see what the shortcomings were, how to retrieve the situation and improve the effectiveness of public programs in future. They have to file an action taken report with the PCCF. The APCCFs who are acting as the nodal officers of the circle are expected to review the action taken reports submitted and confirm the closure of issues to PCCF. I hope everyone benefits from such an exercise. The report could not have been brought out without the help and support of PCCF (HoFF). We thank him immensely for all the support. We also thank the 12 circle CCFs and their sub-teams of DCFs and ACFs for their hard work; officers and staff of all divisions who supported the evaluation work; and Sri Ashok B Basarkod, CCF Evaluations, Ms M. S. Chaitra and Ms U. J. Pavithra, both probationary RFOs and the staff of CCF Evaluation who put in their hard work for compiling and publishing this report in the shortest possible time. K. N. Murthy IFS APCCF (EWPRT) 21st April, 2014 ii Table of Contents Chapter Title Page no 1 Summary of Findings 1 2 Bangalore 15 3 Belgaum 36 4 Bellary 56 5 Chamarajanagar 68 6 Chickamagalur 78 7 Dharwad 90 8 Gulberga 103 9 Hassan 126 10 Kanara 132 11 Kodagu 149 12 Mangalore 160 13 Mysore 176 14 Shimoga 195 15 FDPT Mysore 208 Annexures I. Guidelines 220 II. List of Teams 227 III. Evaluation Formats 229 IV. Chronology of Field Reports Submissions 241 iii 1. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 1. Background This is an internal evaluation report on the developmental activities implemented by the Karnataka Forest Department during the financial year 2007-08. Afforestation was the major development activity of the department in addition to protection and conservation of natural forests. Evaluation work is taken up after the regular maintenance of the plantation ceases. Plantations are normally maintained for three years. Evaluations are therefore initiated in the fourth or fifth year to know the outcome of the development work. Karnataka Forest department has a legacy of evaluating its development works internally since 1986. The main focus of evaluations is the survival rate and performance of plantations because that constitutes the bulk of development expenditure of the department. Internal evaluation of all plan and non-plan works for the three year period 2004-07 was completed in June 2009. The process for evaluating the works of 2007-08 began in May 2011. To start with, a set of revised guidelines and data collection formats were issued. Copy of the guidelines and templates of data collection formats are furnished in Annexure I and II. It was followed by constitution of internal evaluation teams headed by the Chief Conservators of the circles as per the list in Annexure III. Essentially the circle level teams were exchanged for doing the evaluation work. The teams were also briefed appropriately before the evaluation work began. Because the evaluation work was in addition to the routine duties and responsibilities, the teams took quite some time to complete the assignments and submit their reports. First field report was received in December, 2012 and the last one was received in March, 2014. A chronology of the receipt of field reports is furnished in Annexure IV. 2. Methodology adopted for the evaluation The Evaluation Wing secured complete list of works from each one of the territorial, social forestry and wildlife divisions in the state for the year 2007-08. A team of officers selected about 10% of development works randomly for evaluation. For plantations the sampling intensity was 2% of the selected plantations. For others, the entire work forms the unit of evaluation. The selected list was conveyed to the evaluation team leaders and also to the divisional officers who were expected to keep the records ready and also mark the locations for laying sample plots inside the plantations as per the guidelines circulated. The evaluation team leaders were given the liberty to constitute sub-teams to inspect the works 1 division-wise. This was necessary as there were as many as 4 to 10 divisions in each forest circle and team leaders alone can’t accomplish the entire evaluation task. The team leaders were certainly expected to oversee the evaluation process, cross check/test check the evaluation results, compile the report and submit the same to the head office. There were large numbers of works spread throughout the state. Evaluation work was hampered by routine transfers and other urgent engagements of team and sub-team members. Hence there was much delay in undertaking evaluation work and also in submitting circle-wise reports. 3. Coverage of the evaluation report This evaluation report covers development works undertaken under 39 plan and non- plan schemes of 2007-08 in all the thirteen territorial forest circles and the Project Tiger Circle, Mysore (total of 14 circles). There are 40 territorial forest divisions, 30 social forestry divisions and 11 wildlife divisions in the state. Plantation work was the main activity in the territorial and social forestry circles. Protection and conservancy works were the main stay in wildlife divisions and circle. Other works included an assortment of civil works related to roads and buildings of the department, soil moisture conservation works, fire protection work etc., which were common in all the forest divisions. In this report all the works are categorised into three broad groups namely (a) Departmental plantation activities; (b) public distribution of seedlings; and (c) other works. This report covers the evaluation work completed in all territorial forest divisions except Koppal, all social forestry divisions except Hassan and all wildlife divisions except Badra Tiger Reserve.