Western Ghats under direct threat from Sharavathi project: Report
Western Ghats
Karnataka Power Corporation Limited
Lion-Tailed Macaque
biodiversity conservation
environmental clearance
Varahi Pumped Storage Project
A report from a city-based non-governmental organisation has highlighted that legally protected wildlife sanctuaries in theare under direct threat from various projects, especially the Sharavathi Pumped Storage Project.According to the report by Mapping Malnad, the's (KPCL) Sharavathi Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project is advancing based on 'inadequate, misleading, and flawed data,' raising significant environmental and legal concerns. The project, which proposes to divert 279 acres of dense evergreen and semi-evergreen forests in the Sharavathi(LTM) Wildlife Sanctuary, has already been approved by the State Wildlife Board and the Karnataka government. It now awaits Stage-I approval from the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF&CC).'This project will create a system that consumes eight hours of coal-powered energy to generate just six hours of hydropower. It is fundamentally inefficient and results in a net energy loss,' said Nirmala Gowda, founder of Mapping Malnad. 'More critically, it opens up dense evergreen forests—vital carbon sinks and turns them into carbon sources.'The report argues that the project, while marketed as a green initiative to stabilise the power grid, is actually a setback to climate goals and. It also warns that the project'shas been obtained by misrepresenting forest land use. KPCL claimed a requirement of 39.79 hectares in its application, but clearance was granted for 54.155 hectares. As per the Forest (Conservation) Rules, any diversion above 50 hectares necessitates a Biodiversity Impact Assessment—one that KPCL successfully avoided through underreporting.Moreover, while KPCL claimed only 20 trees would be felled, Mapping Malnad estimates the true number at over 16,000, including massive girth evergreen trees. The project also involves the use of 18,000 tons of industrial explosives and will generate approximately 14.49 lakh cubic metres of excavated muck adding to the environmental burden.The sanctuary is a crucial habitat for numerous endangered species, particularly the Lion-tailed Macaque, a primate found only in the Western Ghats. The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 allows diversions within sanctuaries only if they are in the interest of wildlife, a standard that, the report argues, this project fails to meet.Gowda said that project documents submitted to authorities contain misinformation and key omissions that compromise the integrity of the clearance process. The project has also been fragmented into smaller components, which environmentalists say is a tactic used to bypass comprehensive review of its ecological impact.Worryingly, the Sharavathi project is not an isolated case. The report flags that the proposedwill require about 612 acres from the Someshwara and Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuaries. It warns that the approvals granted so far are setting a dangerous precedent, with at least 11 more such projects potentially targeting protected areas across the Western Ghats.'No hydroelectric project that clears 279 acres of evergreen habitat, fells nearly 15,000 trees, and disrupts a fragile forest ecosystem can credibly claim to be in the interest of wildlife,' Gowda said. 'Yet, the Karnataka government has greenlit it.'The report was developed in consultation with grassroots activists and reflects growing citizen concern over weakening environmental governance. Gowda called for the immediate establishment of a 'Western Ghats Ecology Authority' to strengthen protections and ensure accountability.'These forests are not just ecological treasures—they are also Bengaluru's most vital water infrastructure,' she said. 'We hope the authorities will reconsider this project in light of the facts. It simply doesn't make sense.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
20 hours ago
- Time of India
Only state can decide on declaring Samanatham tank as sanctuary: HC
Madurai: Madras high court on Wednesday observed that it is for the state govt to take a decision to declare Samanatham tank in Thiruparankundram in Madurai district as a bird sanctuary. A division bench of justice S M Subramaniam and justice A D Maria Clete observed that no doubt bird migration activities are going on in Samanatham tank. However, such decisions have to be taken by the govt on the recommendation of the competent authorities and after obtaining reports from the experts. The declaration of a tank as a sanctuary requires certain procedures to be followed under the Statute and Rules in force. The court, not being an expert body, cannot substitute the expert views. Therefore, the court may not be in a position to issue a positive direction to declare the tank as a sanctuary. The court is of the considered view that the authorities may take note of the facts reiterated by the division bench while initiating the suo motu proceedings and, if necessary, process the same in the manner known to law, the judges observed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trending in in 2025: Local network access control [Click Here] Esseps Learn More Undo The court passed the order while disposing of a suo motu proceeding seeking a direction to the state to declare Samanatham tank as a bird sanctuary in terms of Section 18 of the Wildlife Protection Act. The tank is presently under the control and maintenance of the public works department (PWD). The waterbody provides habitat for more than 150 species of birds. The tank also provides habitat for two vulnerable species, namely the Indian spotted eagle and great spotted eagle. Owing to the biodiversity and, in particular, the unique natural bird habitat, there were various appeals to protect the tank by declaring it as a bird sanctuary. The action is necessitated in light of the fact that the waterbody is vulnerable to poaching, loss of natural habitat, and is easily accessible to the public, which gravely threatens the natural habitat of these birds. If the said waterbody is declared as a sanctuary, it would be subjected to restrictions as to entry in terms of Section 27 of the Act and various other protective measures as envisaged under Chapter IV of the Act of 1972, as a protected area. Earlier, a public interest litigation was filed by R Manibarahti seeking a direction to the govt to declare the tank as a bird sanctuary. The court closed the petition after the state submitted that a proposal was sent in this regard to the govt.
The Hindu
a day ago
- The Hindu
HMT land: Govt. orders suspension of IFoS officer Gokul
The State government has suspended Additional Principal Conservator of Forests R. Gokul in connection with a case filed in the Supreme Court seeking permission to denotify 443 acres of HMT forest land. The suspension order states that the IFoS officer without obtaining the approval of the then Minister in-charge or sanction from the State Cabinet, filed an interlocutory application (IA) before the Supreme Court seeking permission for denotification of lands granted to HMT measuring 443 acres 6 guntas at Peenya Jalahalli Plantation. Following this the Forest, Ecology and Environment Department issued preliminary notices to former IAS officer Sandeep Dave, then Additional Chief Secretary in the department, former IFoS officer Vijay Kumar Gogi, then Principal Secretary in the department, IFoS officer Smitha Bijjur, then Principal Secretary in the department, and Mr. Gokul, then Chief Conservator of Forests and Litigation Conducting officer, in the said IA. 'The replies received by the said officers have been examined by the department and referred along with the opinion of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms to examine and initiate necessary action,' stated the order. It further stated that after the issue of preliminary notice by the department, Mr. Gokul wrote to the CBI without prior intimation or obtaining permission of the State government for seeking protection with reference to Belekeri port iron ore theft cases and also to investigate the reasons for issuing a notice and defaming through news articles and to provide him adequate protection. The State government then examined the necessary files and records in the said matter and sought a report on the denotification of lands granted to HMT under Forest Conservation Act, 1980. It also investigated if there are any lapses and any irregularities committed by the officers in the said matter. 'In violation of Rule 17 of A11 India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 and the State government is prima facie satisfied that it is necessary to place R. Gokul, IFoS under suspension with immediate effect, pending inquiry,' the order stated. It also directed that the officer during the period of suspension to not leave the headquarters without the written permission of the State government.
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
HC orders closure of Tasmac shop causing nuisance to public
Madurai: It is contradictory for a welfare govt to establish more hospitals on the one hand and simultaneously establish Tasmac shops on the other hand, observed Madras high court while directing the authorities to close a Tasmac shop situated in Dindigul district. The court was hearing a public interest litigation filed by K Kannan. The petitioner stated that a Tasmac shop on Trichy Road in Dindigul, is causing nuisance to the public, especially children using the road to go to schools. Hence, the petitioner moved court seeking to immediately close the shop. In the counter, the Dindigul district Tasmac manager submitted that the petitioner's claim, is incorrect. The shop is located within the corporation limits, where the prohibited distance is 50m as per Rule 8 of Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (in Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003. However, since the shop is situated in a commercial area, the proviso to Rule 8 of the Rules states that the distance restriction shall not apply. A division bench of justice S M Subramaniam and justice A D Maria Clete observed that mere adherence to the distance criterion is insufficient when certain mitigating circumstances are raised by an aggrieved citizen. Undoubtedly, a Tasmac shop might cause nuisance to the road users in the locality, particularly to the children during school hours. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Switch to UnionBank Rewards Card UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo It is the duty of the state to ensure that no such nuisance is caused to the citizens and road users. The judges observed that Article 47 of the Constitution directs that the state shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties. "Constitutional philosophy and the directive principles insist that a welfare govt should strive wholeheartedly to enforce prohibition, rather than establish more Tasmac shops which adversely affect public health. It is contradictory for a welfare govt to establish more hospitals on the one hand and simultaneously establish Tasmac shops on the other. This is not in consonance with Constitutional ethos. When the right to health is a fundamental right, the state must ensure that the prohibition is slowly implemented in a phased manner to reduce harm to public health," the judges observed. The judges observed that in the present case, the road is used by the children to reach their school and it serves as a direct pathway. Consequently, the Tasmac shop would undoubtedly cause public nuisance to the road users and school children. "The closure of one Tasmac shop would not cause any prejudice but would rather benefit the public at large," the judges observed and directed the authorities to close the shop within two weeks.
