Green clearance for Arunachal hydel projects fast-tracked

Expert panel clears Reliance's Kalai-II, to take up Jindal's Etalin; silent on cumulative impact study requirement 

The Indian Express, 25 February, 2015

Moving to fast-track environment clearance for hydel projects in Arunachal Pradesh, an expert panel of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has shown the green light to a 1200-MW project on the Lohit river and is set to consider for clearance a 3097-MW hydel project in Dibang Valley later this week. But in giving the go-ahead, the ministry appears to have bent its own guidelines.

On January 28, the expert appraisal committee (EAC) of the ministry recommended environment clearance for the 1200-MW Kalai-II hydro electric project of Reliance Power subsidiary Kalai Power Pvt Ltd.

The ministry has listed the 3097-MW Etalin hydro electric project for the next EAC meeting on February 27. The Etalin Hydro Electric Power Company Ltd is a joint venture company of Jindal Power Ltd and Hydro Power Development Corporation of Arunachal Pradesh Ltd. The project is on the Dri and Tangon, tributaries of the Dibang river which meet near Etalin village.

The clearances go against the ministry’s own guidelines. In May 2013, the ministry issued an order that after the first project in a river basin, all subsequent ones would be considered for clearance based on a cumulative impact assessment. Further, in two orders on August 20 and September 26, 2014, the ministry said that approval of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) for projects within 10 km of national parks and sanctuaries would form part of environment clearance.

The cumulative impact assessment of the Lohit basin by IIT-Roorkee is still to be completed and the Kalai-II project has not even come up before the NBWL. But the ministry listed the project for environment clearance in the January 27-28 meeting of its EAC. Clearance for the Etalin project too is subject to the cumulative impact assessment study.

When his comments were sought, B B Barman, Director, MoEF, and Member-Secretary of the EAC, said: “The committee recommended Kalai-II HEP for environment clearance. But there are a number of conditions to be met. The case is the same with Etalin. The ministry’s May 2013 order asked for carrying capacity studies to be initiated for all rivers within three months and completed in two years, after which it would become mandatory for considering every project. That deadline is still a few months away.”

He declined comment on the requirement of a cumulative impact assessment for each project stipulated in the same order and the merit of considering Kalai-II and Etalin HEPs for environment clearance without meeting this condition.

Days before Pillai row, Environment told Coal: Stop Mahan block auction

The Indian Express, 24 February 2015

Three weeks before Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai was stopped from travelling to London where she was to speak on the alleged violation of forest rights of tribals in the Mahan coal block area of Madhya Pradesh, the Ministry of Environment and Forests asked the Ministry of Coal not to auction the block as it is “located in inviolate forest area”.

Pillai was stopped at Delhi airport on January 11 on the basis of a look-out-circular issued by the Intelligence Bureau. She was headed to London for a meeting of the British all-party parliamentary group.

In an office memorandum to the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Coal — the OM dated December 22, 2014 was obtained by Greenpeace India under the RTI Act — the Director, Forest Conservation Division of the MoEF, stated: “Though Stage II FC to Mahan coal block has already been accorded, mining in the block has not been started. The block may, therefore, not be auctioned as the block is located in inviolate forest area.”

In the note, FC stands for forest clearance.

The MoEF office memorandum also stopped auction of the Marki-Mangli II block in Maharashtra, citing the same reason — “the block is located in inviolate forest area — and sought phasing out of mining “with expiry of the mining lease” in the Namchik-Namphuk coal block of Arunachal Pradesh.

On December 25, when it launched the auction process of the first batch of coal blocks deallocated by the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Coal dropped Mahan from its list of 24 blocks.

When The Indian Express sought a comment from the Environment and Forests asked the Ministry, Director H C Chaudhary said the OM conveyed the ministry’s considered stand on not mining inviolate forests. The Ministry of Coal, Chaudhary said, had not written back.
Mahan Coal Limited is a 50:50 joint venture of Hindalco (Aditya Birla Group) and Essar Power. It proposes to supply coal from the Mahan block of Singrauli to fuel two captive power plants being set up by Essar (2×600 MW) and Hindalco (900-MW).

Activists opposed to the proposed Mahan mines say the project will impact nearly 1200 hectare of sal forests, ending the contiguity of one of central India’s best un-fragmented forest zones spread over 20,000 hectares.

NDA pulls out UPA report to restrict gram sabha veto

The Indian Express, 23 February, 2015

The NDA is banking on a report submitted by a panel set up by the previous UPA government to justify its refusal to grant statutory veto powers over certain infrastructure projects to gram sabhas under the Forest Rights Act (FRA).

During a meeting on January 12, the PMO overruled objections raised by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) and asked the Environment Ministry to draft revised guidelines to let district collectors clear diversion of forest land, while restricting the scope of gram sabhas to decide on such projects.

On December 12, 2012, in a report approved by then PM Manmohan Singh, a three-member committee had noted that the “FRA did not mandate or authorise statutory veto of Gram Sabhas over infrastructure projects”.

Last month’s meeting, according to minutes accessed by The Indian Express, was chaired by Nripendra Mishra, principal secretary to PM Narendra Modi. It noted that “in light of” the UPA report, the Environment Ministry “will formulate a draft guideline delineating the FC (Forest Clearance) process and will send the same to the DoLA (Department of Legal Affairs) for legal vetting and to MoTA for its views. MoTA will send their views directly to DoLA. DoLA will finalise the draft revised guidelines and send the same to the (Environment Ministry) for issue”.

On February 17, the Environment Ministry sent the draft to DoLA and the Tribal Affairs Ministry, giving the latter ten days to send its comments to the department. Echoing the 2012 UPA-II report, the draft noted that “none of the these Acts (the FCA, FRA, PESA and Land Acquisition Act) stipulates that processes stipulated under any other Act shall first be initiated or completed, before. granting approval under any of these Acts”.

As listed in the 2012 report, the latest Environment Ministry draft has exempted projects under five categories from obtaining the gram sabhas’ consent: those where statutory mandated consultation has been carried out; projects that require public hearing for environmental clearance; linear projects; those on private forest land; and minor public utility projects.

Earlier, on December 4, 2014, after repeated interventions by the Tribal Affairs Ministry on this issue, Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar wrote to Tribal Affairs Minister Jual Oram, attaching a draft guideline for comment.

On December 28, Oram’s ministry responded with its own guidelines that differed from the draft on three key issues: a District Level Committee under FRA, not District Collector, to certify if process of recognition and vesting of forest rights is complete; no exemption to linear projects, and no exemption to projects in areas that house scheduled tribes since the FRA also applies to Other Traditional Forest Dwellers.

On January 2, the Environment Ministry replied, asking the Tribal Affairs Ministry not to move forward on its draft before the January 12 meeting.

Interestingly, the FRA had been touted as an achievement of the UPA I regime before the UPA II set up a committee in November 2012 to revisit the legislation.

The UPA II panel that studied the issue comprised the then principal secretary to the PM Pulok Chatterjee, then environment secretary T Chatterjee and former tribal affairs secretary Bhiba Puri Das.

January’s NDA meeting was attended by secretaries of the ministries of Environment, Tribal Affairs, Mines, Power, Coal, Transport and DoLA and Land Resources.

NGT stays govt order on ‘simplified’ green clearance for projects

The Indian Express, 20 February, 2015

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) stayed Friday an August 2014 order of the Ministry of Environment and Forests that “simplified” the forest clearance process for linear projects by allowing tree-felling and commencement of work on the basis of in-principle approval with a provision allowing five years for final clearance.

The five-judge principal bench of NGT headed by Justice Swatanter Kumar stayed the operation of two orders of the ministry and restrained all agencies involved in linear projects — railway lines, roads, canals, power and pipelines — from felling trees and diverting forest land on the basis of in-principle or stage-two approval.

In January this year, the MoEF, in its publication ‘Towards Transparency and Good Governance’, highlighted how it “amended relevant guidelines for linear projects allowing the user agency to start work after in-principle approval subject to payment of compensatory levies”.

The same month, the MoEF issued another circular saying that an official not below the rank of divisional forest  officer (DFO) could be authorised to issue permission for felling trees.

Under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation (FC) Act, 1980 and its interpretation by the tribunal, no forest land can be diverted — and trees felled — until and unless the state government concerned issues an order to that effect following stage one (in-principle) and stage two (final) approval from the Centre. Also, under Section 16 of the NGT Act, 2010, no forest clearance can be challenged before the tribunal till a state government issues an order notifying
the clearance.

Wildlife biologist Milind Pariwakam, applicant before the NGT, challenged the August 2014 ministry order saying it allowed tree-felling and diversion of forest land before final clearance in violation of the FC Act; an executive order could not override provisions of statutory law; stage two (final) clearance was irrelevant since five years would be enough for not only felling of trees at a project site but also completion of the project; and, that it left no room for remedial action.

The tribunal has asked the ministry to file a reply within a week. The next hearing is scheduled for March 11.

The lonely tiger of Motichur

Against all odds, tiger numbers have almost doubled in Uttarakhand. But widening highways and new townships threaten the big cat’s lifeline of interconnected forest corridors. From Rajaji to Ramnagar forests, Jay Mazoomdaar follows the obstacle course that is the tiger’s trail.

Sunday Express, 8 February, 2015

IT IS COLD and misty in the Rajaji National Park. The sun is about to set on the Ganga lumbering through the woods. I am standing by a wide canal running south from Rishikesh along the eastern bank of the river. Its steep embankments are encased in concrete, leaving no toehold and making it impossible for the best of swimmers to haul themselves up on either bank.
Behind me are the forests of Chila. In front, parallel to the swelling canal and the somewhat depleted river, runs a railway line. If an animal from Chila somehow makes it this far, it must then negotiate the blinding traffic of NH 58 before reaching the forests of Motichur, the other half of the national park.
Not surprisingly, few make it. The series of deathtraps — canal-railway-highway — ensured that in the last decade or so, no large mammal, not even the super cat, moved to the west of the river. The lone, ageing tigress deep inside Motichur has been waiting all these years. With her, the tiger will disappear from the western bank of the Ganga in Uttarakhand.
The forest guard in Motichur I spoke to in the afternoon smiled wistfully as he pointed to the giant pillars of a half-made flyover meant to divert the traffic and allow safe passage to animals through the forests below. He wondered if a young male would arrive in time. “Imagine how many tigers Motichur could have had if there was a breeding couple, or if a male from Chila could have made it till here,” he said. He did not sound too hopeful though. The flyover has been a perpetual work-in-progress.
Just like the two other flyovers near Dehradun — at Teen Pani and Lal Tappar — sanctioned to secure elephant corridors. As a result, channels of minor rivers flowing to the Ganga from the west remain the only tenacious links between the two halves of the Rajaji National Park. But if the rapid growth of the Haridwar township to the north continues at the present rate, even the last passages will be lost soon.

FROM THE western boundary of Chila, beyond which tigers have long stopped venturing out, I tried to follow the routes a big cat might take from the eastern edge of Uttarakhand’s tiger map.
The preliminary findings of the latest tiger census have once again established Uttarakhand as the most tiger-rich state in north India. Only Karnataka has more tigers (408) than Uttarakhand (340).
Cats are prolific breeders. Given undisturbed breeding areas and protection from poachers, tiger numbers do multiply very fast and the abundance of this large, charismatic species rarely goes unnoticed. So one did not need a census to “reveal” that in certain pockets of Karnataka (the Western Ghats), Maharashtra (Tadoba) or Rajasthan (Ranthambhore), the numbers were up. Elsewhere, such as in Kerala, large forest areas were checked for tiger presence for the first time, and that, in turn, boosted the numbers. Uttarakhand’s remarkable success — from 178 tigers in 2006 to 340 in 2014 —is on both counts. It has protected its tigers and their habitat better from poachers and encroachment, and errors in enumeration have been weeded out.
For example, in 2006, ill-trained field staff in Ramnagar forest division across the Kosi river, east of Corbett National Park, went for unique pugmark identification and failed to report each individual tiger track. As a result, not more than half-a-dozen tigers were counted in the entire division. In the next national census, a WWF-India team used its own camera traps and estimated the presence of more than 23 tigers. This time, the Lansdowne forest division connecting Rajaji and Corbett national parks has thrown up 30 tigers — a number not many tiger reserves boast of — thanks to steady dispersal from Corbett, a happy breeding ground.
But growing numbers do not tell the entire story. For all the boom in the state, the Rajaji National Park has barely 18 tigers. To be viable, a tiger population must have 25 breeding females, which requires a population size of 100-plus. Since very few individual populations are that large, the only way smaller populations can fight extinction due to genetic bottlenecking is by staying linked through interconnected forests. Unlike many tiger states where the big cat mostly survives — or even flourishes — as pocket populations in isolated tiger reserves, almost every tiger sub-population of Uttarakhand are interconnected through forest corridors. At the heart of this matrix is Corbett National Park with its 150-plus tigers, dispersing young adults to Lansdowne and Rajaji forests to the west and Ramnagar forests to the east, through corridors that run along villages and urban settlements.
So does the future of every tiger population in Uttarakhand, including the 18-odd cats in Rajaji, depend on this uninterrupted flow of genes from Corbett?

JIM CORBETT could not hunt the tiger of Devidhura. To be fair, it was no man-eater, but a cattle-killer. Having travelled all the way from Dehradun to Kaladhungi, a couple of miles from Corbett’s winter home at Chhoti Haldwani, I am reminded of The Temple Tiger. Devidhura is a short drive from Kaladhungi but tigers are believed to have disappeared from the oak and deodar forests of Uttarakhand long ago.

The tiger’s historic range has shrunk but all is not lost yet. From Rajaji, a forest road leads to Kotdwar via Lal Dhang town and Chilar Khal. Along this route, villagers insist that tigers lurk in the vicinity though crop-raiding elephants evidently are their primary concern. A horizontal line drawn roughly 25-30 km north of Kotdwar, passing through Dugadda, would be the northern limit of this tiger map.
A little east of Kotdwar, a town expanding into a city, is Sona Nadi wildlife sanctuary, which is part of the Corbett Tiger Reserve. Further south-east are the Kalagarh forests with lead to the Corbett National Park. Along the eastern boundary of Corbett, runs a highway and parallel to it flows the Kosi river. Across the river is the Ramnagar forest division. A tiger can still very well walk from east to west between the Ramnagar and Chila forests.
By definition, a source population must consistently produce cubs and be able to maintain a surplus turnover. With only a few breeding females on record so far, the 30-strong tiger population of Lansdowne forest division is not there yet, agrees divisional forest officer (DFO) NK Tripathi. But, he points out, the future of Rajaji’s tigers depend on the uninterrupted journey of tigers through these forests.
To the east, the picture is brighter. The tiger density in Ramnagar forest division is almost on a par with that of Corbett’s. Ramnagar DFO Kahakashan Naseem lists a number of cubs to argue that her forests are not just a “sink” for the Corbett’s “source” population. She is backed by her boss, Kumaon’s chief conservator of forests Param Jeet Singh. “Not all forest units get the attention and funds like Corbett does. So you may not become Corbett but you can always better Corbett (in results).”
Samir Sinha, field director of Corbett Tiger Reserve, says he is happy as long as dispersal happens irrespective of the direction it takes. “Corbett’s challenge is to remain the success it is while other areas have a lot of room for more tigers. But be it a ‘source’ or ‘sink’, a tiger boom in unsecured forests is just an invitation to poachers,” he says.
And unlike Corbett, which is virtually free of human habitation, other forest divisions know that growing tiger numbers also means increasing conflict with villagers.
The young teacher at the primary school in Leti village of Ramnagar forest division walks away from the camera the moment I mention “conflict”. A live wire placed in the field by a villager electrocuted an elephant last year.
But she finds her voice the moment I mention tigers: “Yes, they keep taking our cattle and compensation takes ages.” On prodding, she confirmed that no one in the village lost any cattle in the last year or so. The uniformed children sitting in the sun shout in chorus: yes, tigers are here; no, they haven’t seen any.
A few kilometres uphill, Raju and his family harvest ginger in a terrace field of Amgarhi. They complain of wild boars, nilgais and elephants. Amgarhi is probably the highest the elephants dare to reach. But the livestock is not safe from tigers even in the higher reaches. Roughly 4km above Amgarhi, Simli village is visible if one looks up from Raju’s fields. In 2009, a family of four tigers killed five cows in one night in the village.
A man in his sixties who has just made a steep 7km descent on his own from Amothi village to Patkot, claims there is nothing to fear during the day. “Whether tiger numbers go up or down, we have no option but to walk. But we avoid going out after dark when tigers are more active,” he says. Yet, rare fatal encounters happen. On the current list of compensation at the Ramnagar forest office, there are two human deaths.
Two days ago, I met principal chief conservator of forests (wildlife) AK Dutt in his Dehradun office. He agreed that the risk of conflict and poaching grows with rising tiger numbers. “But the human population is also growing, isn’t it? People can be impatient, even intolerant, at times. But it’s about maintaining a balance,” he says. Compensation amounts for loss of cattle or attack on people have been increased. “Forest connectivity eases conflict and we are in the process of adding two ranges of Lansdowne forest division each to Rajaji (Laldhang and Kotdwar) and Corbett (Kotdi and Dogadda). Protection is a big issue outside Corbett but we are pumping in the funds ,” he says.
On the ground, though, there are few checks in place in the forests of Lansdowne or Ramnagar. There are tell-tale signs of tree-felling and illegal entry of tractors along the Pawalgarh-Musabangar forest road rarely patrolled by forest staff. With tigers flourishing in this forest division, lax protection can rapidly unravel the story.
The forest connectivity between Chila in the west and the forests adjoining the Nepal borders in the east is not free of hurdles. The haphazard growth of Lal Dhang town is one bottleneck. The massive expansion of Kotdwar’s suburbs, particularly to the south, is another concern for forest connectivity. Then, the Kalagarh power complex stands on the thin forest link south of the Ramganga reservoir.
If tigers cannot take this southern route out of Corbett, their only option is to climb up, and try the other corridor north of Kotdwar. The catch: to reach north Corbett from the south, a dispersing tiger would have to cross the territories of a number of resident tigers and is unlikely to survive the turf battle.
The third major bottleneck is on the Kosi corridor between Corbett and Ramnagar forests, courtesy a series of adjoining walled resorts. Also, vast tracts of village land have already been procured inside Ramnagar forests by the tourism industry which plans to shift bulk of its business from Corbett to these forests where the strict regulations of a national park do not apply. Already, below-the-radar night safaris are on offer.

GIVEN THE odds, whatever be the numbers, the tiger and its keepers have done reasonably well in Uttarakhand. While the big cat is very much a victim of encroachment and poaching in the state, the net turnover is positive and, more importantly, there are few isolated populations, if any. Man willing, tigers do have a future here.

Driving back from Sitabani forests, I chance upon an old forester from Dehradun in Ramnagar. In an ideal tiger world, he asks, how far do I think the tiger would roam? Maybe as far as those frosty deodar and oak forests where Corbett tracked them a century ago? “Next time, head north from Dehradun. Check out the Mussoorie forests.” That’s a journey for another day.

Demwe hydel project in Arunachal Pradesh: Tourism objects to Environment ministry

The Indian Express, 16 January, 2015

Pushing for a hydel power project in Arunachal Pradesh, the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF) has ignored a letter from Tourism Minister Mahesh Sharma conveying his ministry’s objection to the project.
Wary of being seen as blocking a development project, Sharma now claims he has been assured by Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar and Power Minister Piyush Goyal that the project will be modified to address concerns.
On December 22, Sharma wrote a letter to Javadekar “to kindly place on record the objection of the Tourism and Culture Ministry to this 1750 MW Demwe Lower Hydroelectric Project” and convey it to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) hearing a case filed by “local stake holders against the project”.
Being executed jointly by Athena Energy Ventures and the Arunachal Pradesh government, the project was granted environment clearance in 2010.
In 2012, then environment minister Jayanthi Natarajan granted wildlife clearance by overruling all seven independent members of the National Board for Wildlife who opposed the move citing potential downstream impact on the Dibru-Saikhowa National Park in Assam. Forest clearance followed in 2013.
But in a two-page letter last month, Sharma argued that “if this project is allowed to be constructed, it will generate 23 lakh truckload of debris which will not only destroy the holy site of Parashuram Kund but also the beautiful ambience of the site, which will be converted into a dump yard”.
He said Rs 462.68 lakh had already been spent to build a tourism complex at Parashuram Kund and the construction of the dam “will be disastrous for Parashuram Kund, which is important from both cultural as well as tourism angle”.
But the MoEF did not mention the tourism ministry’s stand while arguing in favour of the project before the NGT on January 7 and January 12.
When The Indian Express sought his comment, Sharma said he had received assurances from both Javadekar and Goyal. “There is no fight and the issue has been resolved. We discussed it and they told me that certain minor adjustment could be made to ensure no damage is caused to the Kund site,” he said.
But the MoEF’s latest submission before the NGT does not reflect any modification in the project plan. Ministry officials maintained that mitigation measures to safeguard Parashuram Kund had been prescribed at the time of environmental clearance.
Javadekar said: “I have not given any assurance to modify the project.” He said he would look into the issue of placing the tourism ministry’s stand before the NGT.
On January 13, the NGT dismissed an appeal against environmental clearance to the project. In a two-line order, the tribunal said “reasons will follow”.

Forest clearance to the project is also under challenge and there is currently a stay on the project. The case will be heard again in February.