By Shankar Sharma*
Recent decisions made by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) regarding environmental issues in Karnataka have stirred significant discussion in the local media.
Environmentalists have welcomed the rejection of the Kalasa Nala Diversion project across the Mahadayi River (photo) and the Ministry's request for the Karnataka government to clarify the use of forest land for the Yettinahole Water Project.
However, the conditional approval for the Goa-Karnataka power line cutting through the Mahaveer Wildlife Sanctuary has raised serious concerns among conservation advocates.
This apparent contradiction has led many to question the government's environmental policies, suggesting they may be influenced by political factors. Critics point out the inconsistency in reasoning, noting that while the Kalasa Nala Diversion was rejected due to the expected felling of approximately 200,000 trees in a densely forested area, an even larger number of trees—many within a legally protected area—will likely need to be cut for the power line.
Moreover, questions have emerged about the MoEFCC’s prolonged silence regarding the environmental impacts of the Yettinahole project, which has been in discussion for over a decade.
Residents are alarmed by the fact that over the past six years, the MoEFCC has granted approvals for more than 270 projects within protected regions, contributing to the diversion of around 120,000 hectares of original forest land. Reports indicate that between July 2014 and April 2020, the Ministry approved 87% of the environment clearance requests made, leading to significant deforestation.
Impartial approach to evaluating various project proposals in Western Ghats is essential for maintaining ecological integrity
Some political leaders are now using these reports to challenge the MoEFCC's inconsistent policies and its perceived lax enforcement of the Wildlife Protection Act and the Forest Conservation Act.
There are growing fears that the Ministry may fail to address these political criticisms and uphold its responsibility to acts of forest conservation. To restore public confidence, the MoEFCC must reaffirm its commitment to safeguarding forests, rivers, and protected areas by rejecting all proposals for forest land diversion in these critical regions.
This includes re-evaluating project proposals that threaten biodiversity and wildlife sanctuaries and ensuring a consistent application of environmental laws.
In light of these challenges, MoEFCC and NBWL must promptly and permanently reject any proposals that would lead to the destruction of significant forestland in Karnataka's wildlife sanctuaries for hydropower projects.
A comprehensive and impartial approach to evaluating the various project proposals in the Western Ghats is essential for maintaining ecological integrity.
---
*Power & Climate Policy Analyst, Karnataka. This article reflects the author’s representation to the Minister of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and the Vice-Chairperson of the National Board for Wildlife
Comments