117 



iowever, allowed to unite their cattle ander one shepherd, as too great a number of 

 -animals grazing together injure the soil. 



The shepherds appointed are directly responsible for breaches of tffe regnlationsj 

 or for injuries done by the animals in their charge ; and, if fined, the comninne 

 -appointing them are responsible for the payment of the fines (former Article 72)- 



It is provided by Article 119 of the general rules made under the' Law that 

 every year the local Forest Officer ehall, having due regard to the nature, age and 

 situation of the trees, report, in a formal written proceedings, the condition of the 

 hlooks of forest under the rigime forestief which can be made over for grazing, 

 yhey are to indicate the number of animals that can he admitted to these blocks, 

 and the dates on which the exercise of the rights of user may Joonomence and must 

 end. The proposals of the Forest Officers are submitted for the approval of the 

 ■Conservator before the Ist February in each year. 



There are very severe penalties for a breach of any of these grazing rules. 

 Eight-holders introducing goats or sheep are subjected to a double fine. Eight 

 holders who introduce more animals than they are entitled to, or who graze in closed 

 portions of the forest, are treated as if they had no rights, and are subject to the 

 «ame penalties as if they were outsiders. 



Section IV. — Eegtjlation of kishts in wood. 



1. General remarks — Where there is merely a right to a 

 •certain quantity- of produce from any part of a forest there 

 is no difficulty, as the produce would come from the pre- 

 scribed fellings for the year in the coupe set apart for 

 the purpose. But in India it rarely happens that the right 

 is in this form : the right is usually a servitude over a com- 

 paratively small area. In such oases it is not so easy to 

 arrange for the supply to a number of scattered villages of 

 the given quantity from the coupe of the year. Where the 

 demand is inconsiderable, it may often be conveniently met 

 hy fellings of scattered trees independent of the main fellings. 

 The produce delivered to right-holders must either be deducted 

 from the available crop, in calculating the possible yield 

 or, when the demand is considerable, the area burdened with 

 the riglit must be formed into a separate circle to be worked 

 ■solely with a view to furnishing the produce required. 



A village has a right, every year, to 60 standing trees of a certain size and kind 

 in one block only of a forest which is to be worked, we will suppose, by the selection 

 method. The annual possibility of the forest, including the trees to be given to the 

 right-holders, is calculated to be 500 trees a year. Therefore, in determining the 

 size of the annual coupes, the coupe containing the area burdened with the right 

 should be capable of furnishing the 450 trees onoe during the felling rotation plus 

 the 50 trees each year. That is to say, if the felling rotation were 10 years, the 

 coupe bound to famish 50 trees a year ought to be capable of furnishing every 10 

 jears 500 in addition to the 450 trees furnished by other coupes every 10th year. 



Another way of providing for the right would be to set aside an area_ capable of 

 furnishing 50 trees a year. This area would be formed- into a separate circle or fell- 

 ing series. Such a course would, however, as a rule be impossible in mountainous 

 couritry, where each small scattered forest has to furnish a few standing .trees each 

 jear for the repairs of neighbouring hamlets. 



In such cases the regulation may be best accomplished by sacrificing equality 

 of yield, and by deducting the number of trees felled for the right- holders in a given 



