CIVIL ENGINEERING · ARBORICULTURE · ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Tree Transplantation in Indian Highway Projects: Species Suitability, Root Architecture, Feasibility Assessment and Tree-Felling Decisions

A technical guide with special reference to Maharashtra, highway widening, ring roads, bypasses and urban infrastructure.

How should engineers decide whether an existing tree should be retained, transplanted or removed? The answer depends on species biology, root architecture, tree health, soil, climate, machinery, safety, destination-site suitability and applicable statutory permissions.

Research and technical references reviewed up to 23 October 2026.

Scope and terminology: In this article, “transplantation” means relocating an established tree with a viable root system and root ball. It does not mean cutting a tree into a stump and planting a replacement sapling. “Removal” means felling or other authorised removal after alternatives and permissions have been considered.

1. Executive summary

Tree transplantation is a specialised operation involving the excavation, protection, lifting, transportation and re-establishment of an existing tree. The principal challenge is not merely moving the trunk; it is preserving sufficient functional roots and restoring the tree's capacity to absorb water and nutrients.

The Forest Research Institute (FRI), Dehradun, prepared a report on tree translocation for infrastructure projects using information from 17 States and Union Territories, including Maharashtra. The report notes that practices were not standardised nationally and that survival varies by species, tree size, location and implementing agency.

In the report's compiled dataset, several species—including Ficus species, Dalbergia sissoo, Cassia fistula, Pongamia pinnata, Delonix regia and others—had reported survival exceeding 80% after two years in the collected cases. This is evidence of potential, not a universal prediction for a Maharashtra highway project. The report also found lower survival in trees exceeding 70 cm in diameter compared with smaller diameter classes.

Practical conclusion: Small-to-medium, healthy trees with recoverable roots and a suitable destination often offer better transplantation prospects than very large, mature trees. However, no single trunk-girth limit can reliably decide every case. A large tree with favourable roots and specialist handling may be feasible, while a smaller tree with severely damaged or inaccessible roots may not be.

Recommended order of preference

1. Retain in situ: adjust the alignment, median, drain, utility route or construction method wherever reasonably feasible.
2. Transplant: select healthy trees for which root-ball preparation, transport and aftercare are technically feasible.
3. Remove only where necessary: obtain the applicable permissions and implement the prescribed mitigation, compensatory planting and monitoring.

2. What does the research actually establish?

2.1 Forest Research Institute / ICFRE report

The report Tree Translocation in India: Feasibility of Transplantation of Trees While Developing Infrastructure Projects is one of the most directly relevant national technical references. It compiles reported experience, discusses root-ball feasibility and provides species lists based on observed outcomes.

Its principal findings for project engineers are:

• Species and regional climate influence survival.
• Reported outcomes differ between States, agencies and projects.
• Ficus species and certain other species have performed favourably in multiple reported programmes.
• Large tree diameter is associated with lower survival in the dataset.
• Tree health, structural defects, soil conditions, access and the feasibility of lifting a sufficiently large root ball matter.
• Post-transplantation care is essential; transplantation is not complete when the tree is placed in the new pit.

Reference: Download the FRI Tree Translocation report.

2.2 MoRTH Green Highways Policy

The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways' Green Highways (Plantation, Transplantation, Beautification and Maintenance) Policy, 2015, promotes retention and transplantation of existing trees wherever feasible, alongside planned roadside planting and maintenance.

The policy discusses advance preparation, including preliminary treatment at least three months before transplantation, and recommends identifying a translocation site within 5 km of the original tree location. These are policy recommendations that should be read with the current project contract, applicable instructions and site-specific arboricultural advice.

Reference: MoRTH Green Highways Policy, 2015 (PDF).

2.3 NHAI implementation guidance

NHAI's Master Circular compilation includes a section on Tree Transplantation Guidelines—Standard Operating Protocol, along with subsequent green-highway plantation instructions. Engineers should obtain the applicable SOP and latest circulars from the competent authority before finalising the method statement.

Reference: NHAI Master Circular compilation, 2023.

2.4 More recent supporting research

• 2025 — Tree surgery: Singh et al., in Indian Horticulture, discuss tree surgery as a means of managing damaged trees, including old trees at risk near roads. This supports evaluating preservation and risk management before assuming that felling or transplantation is the only option. ICAR article record.
• 2020 — Root architecture: Thakur and Sehgal describe differences in lateral and proximal root parameters across tree species and the influence of canopy management. This supports the principle that root architecture is species-dependent rather than uniform. Indian Journal of Agroforestry.
• 2026 — Adventitious roots: Gautam and Pant review adventitious root formation and its role in propagation and stress response. This is useful background on root regeneration, but it is not direct evidence that a particular mature highway tree will survive relocation. DOI: 10.56093/aaz.v65i3.168965.

Evidence-quality caution: A published species list is not a guaranteed survival table. Some evidence is observational, and there is no universally validated equation that predicts the survival of every mature tree in every Indian agro-climatic zone. Do not quote survival percentages from another project as guaranteed outcomes for a new project.

3. Decision hierarchy for highway projects

Every tree within the proposed construction footprint should be individually inventoried and assessed. A blanket instruction to transplant every tree is as technically unsound as a blanket instruction to cut every tree.

Decision	Typical situation	Required action
Retain in situ	Healthy tree outside unavoidable earthwork, clear zone or essential structure footprint	Protect the root protection area and trunk; prevent compaction, excavation and material storage.
Design modification	Important mature or heritage tree; small alignment or utility adjustment may preserve it	Review geometry, drainage, slope, retaining structures, utility ducts and available ROW.
Transplant	Healthy tree with a viable root ball, accessible machinery route and compatible receiving site	Prepare a species-specific method statement, schedule, budget and monitoring plan.
Specialist assessment	Very large tree, poor access, unstable crown, unusual root system or uncertain health	Obtain arborist, forestry, lifting and structural-risk assessments.
Authorised removal	Tree cannot reasonably be retained or transplanted, or presents a verified unmanageable safety risk	Secure the required permissions and implement mitigation and compensatory planting.

A highway safety requirement does not automatically mean that a tree must be felled. Evaluate the actual hazard, sight distance, available recovery area, barrier arrangement, slope and applicable road-safety design standards. Conversely, a biologically transplantable tree cannot be retained in a location where it would create an unacceptable and unmitigable safety hazard.

4. Root systems: why some trees are difficult to transplant

The functional root system includes structural roots, transport roots and fine absorbing roots. The visible trunk and crown may remain intact during lifting, but loss of fine roots can severely reduce water uptake. The tree must regenerate roots while simultaneously maintaining its remaining crown and living tissues.

4.1 Major root-system types

Root architecture	Typical characteristics	Transplantation issue	Engineering interpretation
Taproot-dominant	Prominent descending primary root, especially in young trees	The primary root may extend below a practical excavation depth	Large specimens may be difficult to lift with an intact functional root system. Confirm actual architecture before deciding.
Deep and spreading	Deep anchoring roots plus extensive lateral roots	A sufficiently large root ball may be extremely heavy or impossible to excavate	Requires soil investigation, lifting calculations and specialist feasibility review.
Shallow, extensive lateral roots	Major roots spread close to the ground surface	Roots extend beneath pavement, drains, utilities or adjacent trees	Underground obstructions may prevent formation of an adequate root ball.
Fibrous roots	Many relatively fine roots distributed through the soil	Fine roots can be lost during excavation or allowed to dry out	Potentially favourable when sufficient roots and soil can be retained; fine-root sensitivity still matters.
Adventitious or aerial roots	Roots develop from stems or branches; some Ficus species form aerial roots	Root arrangement can be extensive and irregular	Some species may regenerate well, but a large irregular root network may complicate lifting.
Buttressed roots	Large flared structural roots around the base	Bulky root flares may exceed practical excavation or transport dimensions	Large root-ball diameter, mass and lifting clearance may become limiting.
Root-suckering or coppicing species	New shoots may arise from roots or cut stems	Regrowth can be mistaken for successful transplantation	Confirm that the original transplanted tree remains alive; distinguish it from root suckers or new shoots.

Important distinction: These categories overlap. A species may develop a taproot when young and a more complex lateral root system as it matures. Soil depth, compaction, rock, groundwater, irrigation and previous excavation can alter root architecture substantially.

4.2 Root-to-crown water balance

Before transplantation, a tree's absorbing root system supports the transpiration demand of its crown. Excavation reduces the absorbing area. If water uptake becomes insufficient to replace transpiration losses, leaves wilt, stomata close, photosynthesis declines and branches may die back.

\[ Q_{\mathrm{uptake}} \geq Q_{\mathrm{transpiration}} \]

This is a simplified conceptual condition for maintaining water balance. It is not a direct design equation for root-ball dimensions. Actual water demand depends on leaf area, weather, wind, vapour-pressure deficit, soil moisture, species and tree condition.

4.3 Why roots near highways are especially problematic

• Rocky subgrade: excavation may fracture major roots before a suitable ball can be formed.
• Compacted shoulders: dense soil can restrict root distribution and reduce infiltration.
• Concrete drains and utilities: root paths may be constrained by ducts, culverts and foundations.
• Repeated road widening: past root cutting can leave an asymmetric or compromised root system.
• Waterlogged ground: root damage combined with poor aeration can increase transplant stress.
• Dry, exposed receiving sites: high evaporative demand can overwhelm a reduced root system.

Field rule: Do not classify a tree as transplantable solely from its species name or trunk girth. Inspect the root collar, excavatable soil volume, underground utilities, root spread and machinery access. Where necessary, use non-destructive root investigation or carefully supervised exploratory excavation.

5. Essential criteria for transplantation feasibility

The following criteria should be documented in a tree-wise assessment sheet before tendering or commencing work.

Criterion	Favourable condition	Unfavourable condition	Verification
Species	Documented regional experience; suitable climatic adaptation	Little evidence, poor local performance or unsuitable ecology	Botanical identification and project-specific survival records
Health	Healthy crown, sound trunk, viable cambium	Severe decay, extensive dieback, root disease	Arboricultural inspection; diagnostic tests if needed
Size	Root ball and crown can be safely handled	Excessive mass, dimensions or crown spread	Measured girth, height, crown width and lifting study
Root architecture	Adequate viable roots can be retained	Deep, severed, entangled or inaccessible structural roots	Root-collar inspection and soil/root investigation
Soil	Stable, workable soil; suitable drainage	Solid rock, contaminated soil, severe compaction or waterlogging	Trial excavation and soil assessment
Access	Crane, excavator and truck can reach the tree	Restricted headroom, overhead lines, steep slopes or narrow passages	Site logistics and lifting plan
Destination	Compatible soil, adequate space and water	Insufficient rootable volume, utility conflicts or unsuitable drainage	Receiving-site survey and soil inspection
Season	Lower atmospheric demand and reliable establishment water	Extreme heat, drought or waterlogged conditions	Local rainfall, soil moisture and weather forecast
Aftercare	Dedicated irrigation, mulch, monitoring and replacement budget	No reliable water, access or accountable maintenance agency	Approved maintenance plan and funded contract
Safety and compliance	Approved transport, lifting and statutory arrangements	Unsafe load, prohibited route or missing permission	Competent engineer, relevant authorities and approved method statement

5.1 Tree size: use girth carefully

Measure girth at breast height (GBH) at the locally prescribed measurement position, generally around 1.3 m above ground where appropriate. Record multiple stems separately and document unusual buttressing or branching.

\[ D=\frac{G}{\pi} \]

where \(D\) is trunk diameter and \(G\) is trunk circumference measured at the same cross-section. This conversion assumes a circular cross-section. For irregular or buttressed trunks, diameter derived from circumference is only an approximation.

FRI's reported observations suggest lower success in larger diameter classes, including trees above 70 cm diameter. This is a useful warning for feasibility screening, not a statutory maximum or a universal cut-off.

5.2 Season in Maharashtra

• Monsoon: soil moisture is generally favourable, but saturated soils, unstable root balls and waterlogging can make lifting hazardous.
• Post-monsoon: may offer workable soil moisture and moderate conditions, provided the root ball can be excavated safely and irrigation is assured.
• Hot pre-monsoon months: elevated heat and evaporative demand can increase stress, particularly in exposed sites.
• Dry-season transplantation: may be feasible with specialist methods and dependable irrigation, but should not be assumed suitable without a water-balance and aftercare plan.

Schedule according to species, local climate, soil moisture, rainfall forecast and site access—not by calendar alone. Advance root pruning or preparation should be species-specific and supervised by a qualified arborist.

6. Species-wise transplantation guidance for Maharashtra and India

The classifications below synthesise FRI's national observations, general arboricultural principles and common Indian species. They are intended for preliminary planning. They are not a new experimentally validated Maharashtra survival ranking.

Classification key: “Higher priority” means assess for transplantation early; “conditional” means individual assessment is essential; “low priority” means transplantation may be difficult or poorly supported, so retention in situ and specialist review deserve particular attention. None of these classifications independently authorises felling.

Common name	Scientific name	Preliminary assessment	Key considerations for highway works
Peepal	Ficus religiosa	Higher priority	Favourable transplantation experience is reported for Ficus species. Large lateral and aerial root systems, crown mass and the need for adequate root-ball volume must be assessed.
Banyan	Ficus benghalensis	Conditional	May regenerate well under suitable conditions, but mature aerial roots and extensive structural roots make large specimens difficult to lift. Retain mature trees wherever possible.
Other fig trees	Ficus* spp.	Higher priority	Species-specific performance varies. Identify the exact species and examine root extent, crown mass and receiving-site suitability.
Neem	Azadirachta indica	Conditional	Hardy and drought-tolerant once established, but tolerance of dry conditions does not guarantee survival after root loss.
Karanj / Pongam	Pongamia pinnata	Higher priority	Included among species with favourable reported transplantation outcomes. Confirm local experience, size and root-ball feasibility.
Amaltas	Cassia fistula	Higher priority	Favourable survival was reported in the FRI compilation. Protect roots and avoid severe unplanned crown pruning.
Gulmohar	Delonix regia	Higher priority	Reported favourable performance in multiple regions. Broad crown, asymmetric roots and wind exposure at the new site require attention.
Peltophorum / copperpod	Peltophorum pterocarpum	Higher priority	Included among species with favourable reported outcomes. Evaluate canopy size, root spread and local climate.
Shisham	Dalbergia sissoo	Conditional	Favourable survival was reported in some regions, but performance can be geographically variable. Do not transfer another region's result directly to Maharashtra.
Jamun	Syzygium cumini	Conditional	Reported favourable outcomes in some datasets and regions. Mature trees can have substantial root systems and heavy crowns.
Arjun	Terminalia arjuna	Conditional	Favourable outcomes are reported in the national compilation, but other regional accounts report difficulty. Large specimens require careful root and moisture assessment.
Teak / Sag	Tectona grandis	Conditional	Favourable reported outcomes exist. Age, size, soil depth, root architecture and the intended season are decisive.
Bael	Aegle marmelos	Conditional	Included among species with favourable reported outcomes. Examine root condition and species-specific seasonal response.
Rain tree	Samanea saman (syn. Albizia saman)	Conditional	Reported favourable outcomes do not remove the challenges of very broad crowns, heavy root balls and large lateral roots.
Siris	Albizia lebbeck	Conditional	Reported favourable outcomes; inspect crown structure, root integrity and actual handling limits.
Indian date palm	Phoenix sylvestris	Conditional	Favourable outcomes were reported in the FRI dataset. Palm relocation requires specialised handling of the root mass and growing point.
Mango	Mangifera indica	Conditional	Some trees can be transplanted, especially smaller specimens with manageable root balls. Large mature trees may be difficult; preserve valuable trees in place if possible.
Sheesham-like rosewood species	Dalbergia spp.	Conditional	Identify the exact species; evidence for one species cannot be applied automatically to all members of the genus.
Shirish / Siris variants	Albizia spp.	Conditional	Root spread and crown size vary. Confirm species identity and inspect the root collar.
Palash / Dhak	Butea monosperma	Low priority	Some field accounts describe poor transplantation performance. Verify regional evidence and inspect root architecture; do not use species name alone to justify felling.
Mulberry / Shahtoot	Morus spp.	Low priority	Some reports identify difficulty in transplantation. Results depend on species, size, dormancy, root-ball integrity and aftercare.
Semal / silk cotton	Bombax ceiba	Conditional	Favourable tolerance is described in some Indian accounts, but large size, trunk form, crown mass and root-ball logistics may limit feasibility.
Hirda	Terminalia chebula	Conditional	Prioritise retention and species-specific assessment. Confirm the applicable tree-felling schedule and permissions.
Ain	Terminalia elliptica (syn. T. tomentosa)	Conditional	Assess root-ball feasibility, tree size and ecological value; avoid assuming that a forest species will respond like a nursery-grown tree.
Moha / Mahua	Madhuca longifolia	Conditional	Large mature trees deserve strong retention consideration. Check local transplantation evidence, root integrity and statutory status.
Khair	Senegalia catechu (syn. Acacia catechu)	Conditional	Examine thorns, root structure, soil depth, tree health and applicable legal requirements.
Arjun-like riverine trees	Species-specific identification required	Conditional	Riverine adaptation does not guarantee tolerance of transplantation into dry, compacted roadside soil.

The higher-priority category is based partly on favourable reported outcomes in the FRI compilation, not on a universal ranking for all tree sizes or all Maharashtra districts. The table is a screening aid, not a substitute for a signed tree-wise feasibility report.

6.1 Species selection for new roadside planting

Choosing species for new plantation is a different task from selecting existing trees for transplantation. New planting should consider native status, local ecological suitability, drought tolerance, available soil volume, mature crown dimensions, road visibility, root conflicts, biodiversity and maintenance requirements.

For Maharashtra projects, native or locally appropriate species should generally be prioritised over a uniform plantation of ornamental exotics. A forestry or ecology specialist should prepare the site-specific species palette; the species listed above should not automatically be treated as suitable for every median, slope or roadside location.

7. Trees with low transplantation priority: when should removal be considered?

There is no scientifically defensible universal list of Indian species that must always be cut down. The table below identifies circumstances in which transplantation may be technically difficult. Removal remains a last-resort, permission-dependent decision.

Situation	Examples or indicators	Recommended decision
Very large mature tree	Large trunk diameter, extensive crown and heavy root ball	First investigate alignment adjustment and retention. If transplantation is proposed, require a lifting study and specialist feasibility report.
Taproot-dominant specimen	Deep primary root cannot be retained at a practical excavation depth	Assess actual root architecture. Consider transplantation only if an adequate viable root system can be preserved.
Severely compromised tree	Advanced decay, extensive dead crown, major root damage	Undertake a tree-risk assessment. A compromised tree may be unsuitable for transplantation, but removal must follow applicable safety and legal procedures.
Root ball impossible to excavate	Solid rock, major utilities, retaining wall or inaccessible root zone	Explore design or utility changes. If these are not feasible, document why transplantation is impracticable.
Unsafe lifting or transport	Insufficient headroom, no crane setup area, prohibited transport dimensions	Obtain a specialist logistics assessment. Do not improvise lifting or excessively prune the tree merely to fit a vehicle.
Unsuitable receiving site	No adequate soil volume, persistent waterlogging, severe drought or incompatible land use	Identify an alternative site before approving transplantation. Do not transplant without a credible establishment plan.
Species with poor local records	Species reported as difficult in some regions, including Palash or Mulberry in certain accounts	Seek local evidence and expert advice. Species reputation alone is insufficient grounds for removal.
Unacceptable residual road hazard	Verified hazard that cannot be managed by feasible design or protection measures	Document the safety assessment and consider authorised removal and mitigation if no acceptable alternative exists.

Do not specify “cut down” merely because a tree has a deep taproot, is old, is large, or belongs to a difficult species. The decision must document the alternatives considered, actual site constraints, ecological significance, transplant feasibility, safety requirements and the competent authority's approval.

8. Recommended transplantation methodology

Stage 1 — Inventory and tagging

1. Assign a unique tree ID and record GPS coordinates.
2. Record the common name and botanical name, with identification confidence.
3. Measure girth, total height, crown spread and approximate age class.
4. Record health, lean, hollows, dead branches, root-collar condition and visible root damage.
5. Photograph the tree and its surroundings from consistent directions.
6. Overlay the inventory on the proposed carriageway, median, drain, utility and structure drawings.

Stage 2 — Root and site feasibility

1. Inspect the soil profile, rock, utilities, drainage and nearby structures.
2. Determine whether a sufficiently large and stable root ball can be excavated.
3. Check lifting access, crane capacity, overhead clearances and transport route.
4. Identify a compatible receiving site with adequate soil volume and irrigation.
5. Evaluate the ecological and heritage value of the tree and options for in-situ retention.

Stage 3 — Advance preparation

Where appropriate, prepare the tree in advance under specialist supervision. Depending on species and condition, preparation may involve staged root pruning, root-ball stabilisation, irrigation and limited crown management. Advance root pruning is not appropriate for every tree and should not be performed without a tree-specific plan.

Stage 4 — Excavation and lifting

• Mark the approved root-ball boundary.
• Excavate carefully to avoid tearing major roots.
• Make clean root cuts using suitable tools.
• Secure and protect the root ball against collapse and moisture loss.
• Lift from a properly engineered arrangement that does not load the trunk or branches inappropriately.
• Use suitable equipment and a documented lifting plan for heavy or irregular trees.

Stage 5 — Transportation

Minimise the time between lifting and replanting. Protect the root ball from vibration, disintegration, heat and drying. Ensure that load dimensions, route restrictions, overhead clearances and traffic-management arrangements are satisfactory.

Stage 6 — Planting at the destination

• Prepare a pit wide enough for the root ball and surrounding soil management.
• Set the root collar at the correct level; avoid burying the trunk flare.
• Backfill with suitable soil, eliminating large voids without excessive compaction.
• Stabilise the tree where necessary using an appropriate support system.
• Water thoroughly, provide mulch while keeping it away from the trunk, and protect the site from vehicle damage.

Stage 7 — Establishment care

Provide a watering schedule based on soil moisture, tree demand, weather and drainage. Inspect regularly for wilting, leaf scorch, crown dieback, pests, trunk instability, root-ball settlement and support-system damage. Adjust irrigation and remove supports when the tree is sufficiently stable.

9. Engineering equations and worked examples

9.1 Convert girth into equivalent diameter

\[ D=\frac{G}{\pi} \]

Example: If measured girth is \(G=180\text{ cm}\), then:

\[ D=\frac{180}{3.1416}=57.30\text{ cm} \]

This is an equivalent circular diameter, not a direct measurement of the root system.

9.2 Approximate root-ball volume

If the proposed root ball is approximated as a cylinder:

\[ V=\pi r^2h \]

where \(r\) is root-ball radius and \(h\) is root-ball depth. This geometric estimate is useful for preliminary logistics only; an actual root ball may be tapered, irregular or structurally reinforced by roots.

For a hypothetical root ball of diameter \(1.6\text{ m}\) and depth \(0.9\text{ m}\):

\[ V=\pi(0.8)^2(0.9) =1.81\text{ m}^3 \]

9.3 Approximate soil mass

\[ M_s=\rho_b V \]

where \(M_s\) is soil mass and \(\rho_b\) is the assumed bulk density of the soil. For illustration only, if \(\rho_b=1.6\text{ t/m}^3\):

\[ M_s=1.6\times1.81=2.90\text{ tonnes} \]

The tree, retained water, wrapping, lifting frame and other components add to the load. Actual wet soil density can be higher. This estimate is not a crane-capacity specification; a qualified lifting engineer must determine the design load, centre of gravity, rigging arrangement and required safety factors.

9.4 Root-ball volume and soil moisture

The amount of soil retained is not equivalent to the amount of functional absorbing root retained. A large ball may contain relatively few fine roots, while roots may extend beyond the excavation boundary. Root-ball dimensions must be determined from the tree's actual root architecture and handling constraints rather than by applying one universal diameter-to-girth ratio.

9.5 Transplant survival percentage

\[ S_t=\frac{N_t}{N_0}\times100 \]

where:

• \(N_0\) = number of trees initially transplanted;
• \(N_t\) = number of those trees confirmed alive at assessment time \(t\);
• \(S_t\) = survival percentage at time \(t\).

Example: Of 40 trees transplanted, 34 remain alive after 12 months.

\[ S_{12}=\frac{34}{40}\times100=85\% \]

Report the assessment date and define what counts as “alive.” A leafless deciduous tree may still be alive, while temporary leaf flushing may not prove long-term establishment. Multi-season monitoring is more informative than a single inspection.

9.6 Survival is not the same as establishment

For robust monitoring, track survival alongside crown condition, new shoot development, stability, root establishment and water demand. A tree that remains alive but suffers extensive crown loss or structural instability should not automatically be recorded as a successful transplant.

9.7 Preliminary feasibility score

A transparent weighted score can help compare candidate trees, provided the score is used for screening and not presented as a scientifically validated probability of survival.

\[ F=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}w_i s_i}{5\sum_{i=1}^{n}w_i}\times100 \]

Here \(s_i\) is the assigned rating from 0 to 5 and \(w_i\) is the assigned importance weight. Higher values indicate more favourable assessed conditions.

A score cannot override a fatal constraint, such as an unsafe lifting operation, an impossible root-ball excavation or the absence of required permission. Any such constraint should trigger a separate hold or rejection decision regardless of the numerical score.

10. Interactive preliminary transplantation assessment

Use this tool to document a first-pass assessment of an individual tree. It calculates a weighted feasibility index from your ratings. It does not predict actual survival probability and must not be used as the sole basis for approving transplantation or felling.

Species / tree identification Measured girth (cm) Tree health (0 = very poor, 5 = excellent) 0 — Very poor 1 — Poor 2 — Fair to poor 3 — Fair 4 — Good 5 — Excellent Root-ball feasibility (0–5) 0 — Cannot be formed 1 — Very difficult 2 — Poor 3 — Uncertain / moderate 4 — Good 5 — Highly favourable Machinery and transport access (0–5) 0 — Unsafe / impossible 1 — Very difficult 2 — Restricted 3 — Moderate 4 — Good 5 — Excellent Receiving-site suitability (0–5) 0 — Unsuitable 1 — Very poor 2 — Poor 3 — Moderate 4 — Good 5 — Excellent Water and aftercare commitment (0–5) 0 — None 1 — Very limited 2 — Inadequate 3 — Moderate 4 — Good 5 — Fully planned Local species-specific evidence (0–5) 0 — Adverse evidence 1 — Very limited / poor 2 — Limited 3 — Some evidence 4 — Good local evidence 5 — Strong relevant evidence Critical constraint identified? No known critical constraint Yes — unsafe lifting, impossible root ball, or another unresolved critical constraint

Enter the tree information and calculate the preliminary feasibility index.

Weights: health 20%, root-ball feasibility 25%, access 15%, destination 15%, aftercare 15%, species-specific evidence 10%. These are illustrative project-screening weights, not an official Indian standard.

11. Decision flowcharts for site engineers

11.1 Overall tree decision

flowchart TD
    A["Tree identified within project influence zone"] --> B["Inventory, photograph and assess"]
    B --> C{"Can the tree be retained in situ?"}
    C -->|Yes| D["Modify design or protect tree"]
    C -->|No| E["Investigate transplantation feasibility"]
    E --> F{"Healthy tree and viable root ball feasible?"}
    F -->|Yes| G["Check lifting, access and destination"]
    F -->|No| H["Document technical constraints"]
    G --> I{"Safe operation and funded aftercare?"}
    I -->|Yes| J["Prepare method statement and obtain approvals"]
    I -->|No| H
    J --> K["Transplant and monitor"]
    H --> L{"Any feasible retention or relocation alternative?"}
    L -->|Yes| E
    L -->|No| M["Seek statutory permission for necessary removal"]
    M --> N["Implement prescribed mitigation and monitoring"]
    D --> O["Record final tree-wise decision"]
    K --> O
    N --> O
    style D fill:#d8efdf,stroke:#176b45,color:#17352a
    style K fill:#d8efdf,stroke:#176b45,color:#17352a
    style M fill:#fae9e7,stroke:#a33a32,color:#54201d

11.2 Root-ball feasibility

flowchart TD
    A["Inspect root collar and surrounding soil"] --> B["Map utilities, structures and pavement"]
    B --> C{"Can adequate roots and soil be retained?"}
    C -->|Yes| D["Estimate ball geometry, mass and lifting needs"]
    C -->|No| E["Consider design change or in-situ retention"]
    D --> F{"Safe excavation and transport feasible?"}
    F -->|Yes| G["Specialist method statement and trial preparation"]
    F -->|No| E
    G --> H["Inspect roots during excavation"]
    H --> I{"Root system remains viable?"}
    I -->|Yes| J["Proceed under approved lifting plan"]
    I -->|No| K["Stop, reassess and document options"]
    style J fill:#d8efdf,stroke:#176b45,color:#17352a
    style K fill:#fff0c8,stroke:#bd8618,color:#5e430c

11.3 Aftercare and survival monitoring

flowchart TD
    A["Tree planted at approved destination"] --> B["Baseline photograph and condition record"]
    B --> C["Water, mulch, support and protect"]
    C --> D["Scheduled inspections"]
    D --> E{"Healthy new growth and stable condition?"}
    E -->|Yes| F["Continue establishment care"]
    E -->|No| G["Diagnose moisture, roots, pests and stability"]
    G --> H["Implement corrective treatment"]
    H --> D
    F --> I["Periodic survival and condition reporting"]
    I --> J["Confirm establishment using project criteria"]
    style F fill:#d8efdf,stroke:#176b45,color:#17352a

If Mermaid diagrams do not render in your Blogger theme, load Mermaid.js once at the end of the article or convert the diagrams into static SVG before publication. Avoid loading a separate copy of the library for each diagram.

12. Highway project implementation checklist

Use the following checklist during DPR preparation, pre-construction surveys, environmental clearance coordination, utility shifting and site handover.

Before tendering

• Prepare a georeferenced inventory of affected trees.
• Identify species, dimensions, health, ecological importance and likely root architecture.
• Overlay the tree inventory on the approved alignment, cross-sections, drains, culverts, bridges, junctions and utility plans.
• Document opportunities for alignment or design modification to retain trees.
• Obtain a tree-wise transplantation feasibility report from competent specialists.
• Identify destination land and confirm landowner or agency consent.
• Prepare an itemised estimate for excavation, root-ball protection, lifting, transport, planting and aftercare.
• Define responsibility for irrigation, inspections, replacement and survival reporting.
• Obtain the required tree-felling, forest and other statutory approvals as applicable.

Before transplantation

• Confirm tree identity and ID tag against the approved schedule.
• Verify the receiving pit, access route, soil and drainage.
• Approve the method statement, lifting plan and traffic-management plan.
• Confirm crane/excavator capacity and safe operating conditions.
• Arrange irrigation, mulch, root-ball materials and protective supports.
• Record baseline photographs and tree health.
• Check weather and ground conditions before excavation.

During transplantation

• Protect the root ball against drying, vibration and disintegration.
• Avoid tearing major roots and uncontrolled crown reduction.
• Record unexpected roots, utilities, rock and other constraints.
• Stop if the operation becomes unsafe or the root system is materially worse than anticipated.
• Record lifting time, transport time, destination and planting time.
• Inspect final root-collar level, support and initial watering.

After transplantation

• Maintain a tree-wise register and geotagged photographs.
• Inspect moisture, crown condition, pest symptoms, settlement and stability.
• Adjust watering to weather and soil conditions.
• Record mortality and corrective actions.
• Audit survival at specified milestones and after seasonal stress.
• Ensure any replacements meet the applicable project specifications and approvals.

Suggested tree register fields

Field	Required record
Identification	Tree ID, species, common name, GPS coordinates and photographs
Dimensions	Girth, height, crown width, stem count and relevant measurements
Condition	Health, defects, lean, root damage and risk assessment
Decision	Retain, design modification, transplant, further assessment or authorised removal
Feasibility	Root-ball estimate, soil, utilities, access, lifting and destination
Approvals	Competent authority, permission number, date and conditions
Execution	Contractor, equipment, dates, destination coordinates and cost
Monitoring	Inspection dates, condition, survival status, treatment and photographs

13. Survival monitoring and performance indicators

A highway project's tree-management performance should not be assessed solely by the number of trees lifted or the number of saplings planted. Monitor the actual survival and condition of transplanted trees separately from newly planted saplings.

Indicator	Calculation or record	Purpose
Transplant survival	Living transplanted trees ÷ original transplanted cohort × 100	Measures survival of the original relocated trees.
Mortality	Confirmed dead trees ÷ original cohort × 100	Identifies losses and supports corrective action.
Crown condition	Recorded leaf retention, dieback, shoot growth and branch condition	Assesses recovery beyond simple survival.
Structural stability	Root-ball movement, lean, support condition and trunk defects	Checks safety and establishment.
Watering compliance	Scheduled versus completed watering, adjusted for weather and soil moisture	Checks aftercare implementation.
Replacement performance	Replacement trees tracked separately by planting cohort	Prevents replacements from concealing mortality in the original cohort.
Cost per surviving tree	Total transplantation and aftercare cost ÷ surviving original trees	Supports cost-effectiveness review.

For a cohort of \(N_0\) original trees and \(N_t\) confirmed living trees at time \(t\), use:

\[ S_t=\frac{N_t}{N_0}\times100 \]

Set inspection intervals in the contract, for example immediately after planting and at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, with additional inspections after extreme weather. These are suggested project-monitoring milestones, not a universal statutory schedule. Longer monitoring may be appropriate for large mature trees.

New saplings and transplanted mature trees must have separate performance records because their establishment processes, mortality risks and ecological contributions differ.

14. Legal and approval considerations in Maharashtra

Technical feasibility and legal permission are separate tests. A tree that can be transplanted is not automatically exempt from approval requirements, and a tree that is difficult to transplant cannot automatically be felled without permission.

• Urban areas: check the applicability of the Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act, 1975, as amended, the competent Tree Officer and the relevant local authority's procedures.
• Rural and non-urban areas: verify the applicable Maharashtra tree-felling legislation, schedules, amendments, exemptions and permissions for the precise location and species.
• Forest land or protected areas: determine whether forest-diversion, wildlife, protected-area or other special approvals apply.
• National Highway works: check the applicable MoRTH/NHAI policy, contract specifications, environmental conditions and current circulars.
• Compensatory planting: comply with the actual approval conditions, including species, number, location, maintenance and survival obligations.

The Maharashtra urban tree legislation includes restrictions on felling and provisions concerning compensatory planting and survival. Requirements depend on the applicable statutory provisions and circumstances. Do not assume that the same rules apply identically to every rural, urban, forest and highway parcel.

Official starting points:

• India Code — legislation and amendments
• Ministry of Road Transport and Highways
• National Highways Authority of India
• Maharashtra Forest Department

Approval note: Before issuing a tree-felling or transplantation instruction, verify the current law, amendments, applicable tree schedules, ownership, land category and delegation of powers with the competent authority. This article is technical guidance, not a legal opinion or a substitute for project-specific statutory approval.

15. References and further reading

1. Forest Research Institute, Dehradun / ICFRE. Tree Translocation in India: Feasibility of Transplantation of Trees While Developing Infrastructure Projects. The core national reference for reported species performance, root-ball feasibility and implementation experience.
   Read the report (PDF)
2. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. Green Highways (Plantation, Transplantation, Beautification & Maintenance) Policy, 2015.
   Read the policy (PDF)
3. National Highways Authority of India. Master Circular compilation, 2023. Includes a section on tree-transplantation SOP and highway plantation guidance.
   Open the circular compilation (PDF)
4. Singh, L., Singh, M. C., Amala, E. & Arzoo, E. (2025). “Tree surgery: A boon for damaged tree species.” Indian Horticulture, 70(1), 30–32.
   ICAR publication record
5. Thakur, P. S. & Sehgal, S. (2020). “Effect of Canopy Management on Root Parameters in Agroforestry Tree Species of Temperate Region.” Indian Journal of Agroforestry.
   ICAR publication record
6. Gautam, A. & Pant, M. (2026). “Adventitious Root Formation and its Utilization for Sustainable Plant Propagation.” Annals of Arid Zone, 65(3), 17–30.
   https://doi.org/10.56093/aaz.v65i3.168965
7. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways / Press Information Bureau. Official information on highway plantation and environmental mitigation.
   Read the official release
8. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways / Press Information Bureau (2026). Official update on green highway projects and plantation programmes.
   Read the official release

Research note: The references above provide a starting point for a technical review, not an exhaustive systematic review of all published transplantation trials. Before adopting numerical acceptance criteria in a DPR or contract, verify the latest applicable circulars and retrieve the original study data relevant to the species and climatic region concerned.

Final engineering recommendation

For every highway project in Maharashtra, prepare a tree-wise inventory and apply a documented decision hierarchy: retain in situ where feasible → investigate transplantation → obtain specialist assessment where uncertain → seek authorised removal only where necessary.

The strongest transplantation programme is not the one that relocates the largest number of trees. It is the one that protects existing trees wherever possible, selects genuinely feasible candidates, executes transplantation safely, funds aftercare and transparently reports long-term survival.

Disclaimer: This article is for technical education and preliminary planning. Species-specific performance, engineering design, statutory permissions and site decisions must be verified by qualified professionals and the competent authorities.

Yogendra Gopal Borse

Civil Engineer | Assistant Engineer Grade-I, Maharashtra PWD

B.Tech (Civil) from VJTI Mumbai. Experienced in bridge design, road works, estimation, project monitoring and digital engineering tools. Creator of YogiPWD – practical technical resources for civil engineers.

Read full About →