The Climate Ministry has told the IHC that paper mulberry trees in Islamabad are non-native and can be removed, but criticised CDA for cutting them without prior environmental approval.
Paper Mulberry Declared Non-Native, Cutting Termed Permissible
Pakistan’s Ministry of Climate Change has defended the removal of paper mulberry trees in Islamabad, telling the Islamabad High Court (IHC) that the species is classified as non-native and can be legally cut under existing guidelines. The ministry’s position was outlined in a written reply submitted in an ongoing case about tree cutting in the federal capital.
According to the response, a review of recent activity showed that the cutting operation focused only on paper mulberry trees. Other species, including kachnar, sumbal, pine and sukh chain, were reportedly marked and preserved. Officials argue that, because paper mulberry is an invasive species linked to pollen allergies and other environmental concerns, its removal is considered acceptable when carried out under proper procedures.
Ministry Says CDA Replanted but Skipped Mandatory Approval
The Climate Ministry also informed the court that the Capital Development Authority (CDA) carried out plantation at alternative sites after removing the paper mulberry trees. This replanting, it said, was intended to compensate for the loss of tree cover and maintain the city’s green character.
However, the ministry made it clear that prior approval is mandatory for any tree-cutting activity in Islamabad, regardless of species. In this case, it noted that the operation was conducted without consultation with the relevant environmental and wildlife authorities. The Islamabad Wildlife Management Board visited the Shakarparian area for a field inspection after receiving public complaints about the cutting.
Under the rules, the CDA is required to obtain clearance from the Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency (Pak-EPA) before undertaking large-scale tree removal. Consultation with the Wildlife Management Board is also mandatory to assess potential impacts on local habitats and biodiversity. The ministry’s reply suggests that these procedural steps were not properly followed.
Letters to CDA Highlight Need for Joint Planning
Once the Climate Ministry became aware of the tree-cutting operation, it wrote to the interior secretary to express its concerns and highlight gaps in coordination. The ministry also told the IHC that Pak-EPA had sent a formal letter to the CDA’s member environment, reminding the authority that environmental approval and joint planning are essential before any such activities are carried out.
According to the ministry, the letters stressed the need for better communication between CDA, Pak-EPA and the Islamabad Wildlife Management Board. Joint planning is seen as crucial not only for protecting tree cover but also for ensuring that future development or clearance work is aligned with wider environmental and climate objectives. The ongoing court case has therefore become a test of how seriously civic agencies treat these procedural requirements.
Islamabad’s Shrinking Green Cover Fuels Public Anger
The legal challenge over tree cutting comes against a backdrop of growing public concern about the loss of greenery in Islamabad. Once famous for its tree-lined avenues and forested hills, the capital has seen significant vegetation cleared for new roads, housing projects and other infrastructure schemes. Residents and environmental activists argue that many of these projects have gone ahead with insufficient environmental review.
Global Forest Watch estimates that Islamabad lost around 14 hectares of tree cover between 2001 and 2024—an area roughly equal to 20 football fields. This figure does not include any gains in tree cover over the same period, but it underscores the pressure on the city’s natural landscape.
For critics, the paper mulberry case illustrates a wider pattern: even when tree cutting is justified on technical grounds, weak coordination and limited transparency can erode public trust. The Climate Ministry’s stance—that removing non-native paper mulberry is permissible, but must be done with prior approval and proper consultation—highlights the balance Islamabad now has to strike. As the IHC continues hearing the case, many citizens will be watching closely to see whether stricter enforcement and better planning emerge from the controversy, or whether tree loss continues to be treated as a side issue in the rush for development.
