Editor,

I wish to express my concern over the ongoing demands of the Forestry Students' Association concerning forestry service recruitment. While their demand to include forestry as a subject in the APPSCCE syllabus deserves serious consideration, the demand to exclude other science streams and restrict eligibility exclusively to forestry graduates calls for a balanced reconsideration.

My concern is particularly about graduates in chemistry, botany, and zoology (CBZ). Botany and zoology graduates possess foundational scientific knowledge of plant and animal life, biodiversity, and ecosystems, which is directly relevant to forest conservation, sustainable resource management, and balancing ecological needs with those of local communities. The administrative and practical skills required for the role can be developed through appropriate professional training, provided candidates have the necessary scientific foundation and aptitude. Their suitability should therefore be duly considered on the basis of their foundational knowledge of relevant subjects, scientific understanding, aptitude, capacity to learn, and potential to fulfil the responsibilities of the post.

Moreover, reservation provisions for forestry graduates already exist under the applicable recruitment framework. Further restricting eligibility exclusively to forestry graduates could create an additional barrier for candidates from other relevant life science disciplines.

General life science graduates may also have limited alternative technical recruitment opportunities, particularly those without the BEd qualification required for certain teaching posts. While this does not automatically entitle them to any particular position, their circumstances deserve consideration when assessing the broader impact of restrictive eligibility criteria.

This appeal is not intended to undermine forestry education or the aspirations of forestry students. Rather, it seeks to encourage a fair and inclusive approach that recognises specialised forestry subject while giving due consideration to other relevant scientific backgrounds. It is therefore humbly requested that, should the eligibility criteria be reviewed in the future, the government may kindly consider the actual duties of the post and relevance of the academic foundations before excluding any discipline from consideration.

I appeal to the Forestry Students' Association to consider the concerns of fellow life science graduates with an open mind. Creating opportunities for one group should not unnecessarily close the doors for another when both may possess relevant knowledge and the capacity to serve. A fair recruitment policy should prioritise the requirements of the post, merit, and equal opportunity, while ultimately serving the interests of forest conservation and the public.

A concerned citizen