In a detailed representation submitted to the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC), power and climate policy analyst Shankar Sharma has called for outright rejection of a proposal seeking forest clearance for a 2,000 MW Pumped Storage Project (PSP) in the Sharavathi Lion-Tailed Macaque (LTM) Wildlife Sanctuary in Karnataka.
The proposal, which involves the felling of approximately 15,000 mature, high-value trees in a dense tropical rainforest of the Western Ghats—a globally recognised biodiversity hotspot—has raised alarm among conservationists, citing irreparable ecological damage and violation of legal mandates protecting wildlife sanctuaries.
The submission, addressed to the FAC and copied to the Union Environment Minister and the Prime Minister, argues that the project directly contradicts the provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act. The Act permits human interventions within Wildlife Sanctuaries (WLS) only if they contribute to the welfare of flora and fauna. “Under no stretch of even the wild imagination can anyone assume that such a large-scale destruction of thick natural forest within a WLS can benefit flora and fauna,” Sharma states.
Further, the representation questions the rationale of the project proponent, Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL), for bypassing alternative technologies such as Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS). Advocates argue that BESS offers a more environmentally sustainable, techno-economically viable solution that does not entail the loss of a single tree.
Particularly striking is the on-ground assessment by Deputy Inspector General of Forests, Praneeta Paul, who visited the sanctuary in May 2025. Her report to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) strongly recommends against granting approval, citing disproportionate ecological impacts and listing 14 specific concerns. The letter warns that ignoring such an expert recommendation from within the ministry would be both "unthinkable" and contrary to sound governance.
In addition to the main project site—covering over 100 hectares of protected and eco-sensitive land—the representation points to the project’s exclusion of required forest areas for evacuation and transmission lines. This omission, it argues, runs afoul of a Supreme Court ruling against piecemeal clearances that create a fait accompli scenario. The Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation’s own letter from July 2023 confirms the necessity of an additional 58.8 hectares of forest land for such power lines, if the project is pursued.
Concerns have also been raised over the feasibility of compensatory afforestation. The signatories argue that recreating a rainforest of such density and ecological complexity elsewhere in the state is not only impractical but conceptually flawed. “There is no evidence that compensatory afforestation has successfully recreated even a fraction of what has been lost from the Western Ghats since independence,” Sharma notes.
Calling for the FAC to view this proposal in the broader context of a growing number of PSP and other linear infrastructure proposals threatening the Western Ghats, the submission asserts that the social, environmental, and financial costs vastly outweigh the purported benefits. It concludes that the project, which fails the tests of necessity, legality, and sustainability, must be summarily rejected in the public interest.
Comments