Forests

[cooked]

Kind of a half baked question: anybody know who legally owns the forests in Thailand? I know that HM the king of Thailand was once owner , is this still the case?

I had no success with Google, please don't tell me 'the government'.. thanks

[slapout]

OK, I won't tell you who owns the forest land then.

[xen]

From what I understand The King "owns " on behalf of the Nation of Thailand the forests that are on sloping ground over a particular angle. So in effect it is Crown Land .

And the Hill tribes amogst others have the right to use the forests somwhat akin to the forests being "ancestral lands".

There is probably a lot more to it but that is what i understand from what a few Thais have told me. Please correct me if i am wrong .

[BobGecko]

^ Unfortunately it's no so clear, it seems the new head of the Forest Department is trying to rewrite the rules. Until now people who were living in the forest before the national parks were established had the right to remain and live there but not anymore.

I can't post the reference per forum rules but you can google " Crackdown on forest dwellers sheer injustice"

[cooked]

I was having a problem with terminology, I suppose you mean the Royal Forest department, which I have now found, thanks. However they are responsible for management and protection, as are the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation, and I still don't know who actually 'owns' the forests. There is apparently also a difference between upland forests, forests and national parks as far as jurisdiction is concerned.

I know it sounds like a silly question, I am tending to think that HM the king is in fact the owner despite the formation of the Royal Forest Department in 1896. If this is the case all sorts of thoughts cross my mind when I think about illegal deforestation and so on... subversive ones I know...