Above: Illustration by Rajendra Kumar
In a scathing indictment, a Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee has said that the Project could threaten the Panna Tiger Reserve as forest land would be diverted for it
By Rakesh Dixit in Bhopal
India’s first major river linking project, the Ken-Betwa Link Project (KBLP) in Bundelkhand, is in serious jeopardy with the Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) red-flagging it. The panel submitted its 93-page report to the apex court recently and observed that the project could threaten Panna Tiger Reserve’s status as a source area for tigers.
The CEC said that 6,017 hectares of forest land—part of a national park and a core tiger habitat of Panna Tiger Reserve—would be diverted for the Project. “It will result in the loss of a wildlife habitat of 10,500 hectares because of submergence of large tracts of forests and their fragmentation,” it said.
The report cautioned that disturbance to wildlife during the construction phase would extend beyond the 6,071 hectares of forest proposed for the diversion and would last for more than a decade, exerting tremendous biotic pressure on the core of the national park and a critical tiger habitat.
The Standing Committee of the National Board of Wildlife (NBWL) had recommended clearance to the project on August 23, 2016. Senior BJP leader Uma Bharti, who hails from the Bundelkhand region, was the Union water resource minister then. She exerted pressure on NBWL and the state governments of MP and UP to implement the project which, she claimed, would bring about agricultural prosperity in drought-prone Bundelkhand. She once even threatened to commit suicide if the project was not cleared expeditiously.
However, in 2017, environment activists Manoj Mishra and Bittu Sehgal filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court challenging clearance to the KBLP-I given under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The petitioners contended that Phase 1 of the Project should be considered only after independent and objective scientific studies.
In response to the petition, the Court appointed the CEC headed by wildlife biologist R Sukumar and directed it to file a report on the environmental impact of the Project on tiger habitat. After talking to all concerned parties and visiting the Project area in March this year, the Committee submitted its report.
The Ken-Betwa project was conceived to be a multi-purpose project by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government in 2003. It envisioned providing irrigation and drinking water supply to Bundelkhand region of both MP and UP. The aim was to divert 1,020 cubic mm water from the Ken river basin to the water-deficit Betwa basin through a concrete canal by constructing several barrages and dams. The estimated cost of the project was about Rs 28,000 crore.
“The forest land involved in submergence is a unique ecosystem of morphological significance with unique and rich biodiversity in the region and which ecosystem cannot be recreated,” the report said. It also said that the government had not considered alternative plans to avert destruction of the rich diversity of the region.
For example, the CEC highlighted that water harvesting or conservation at the local level by providing drip irrigation or resorting to less water-demanding crops haven’t been explored. “The cost of irrigation at present works out to Rs 44,983 lakh per hectare. However, the cost per hectare of irrigation by adopting mini/micro water harvesting projects at the local level will not only be substantially lower but will also save the forests and the habitat of wildlife including tiger,” the report said. The total cost of irrigation at present works out to Rs 27,000 crore, covering 6,06,980 hectares.
Emphasising that better options exist, the CEC said: “The uncertain rainfall pattern and reduced flow of water should force the planners to encourage the farmers to revisit tradition and opt for crops such as pulses and horticulture produce. Construction of check dams along the course of the rivers and other soil and water conservation measures can rejuvenate the aquifers. This approach is likely to improve agricultural productivity in a much larger area at lesser cost per unit area.”
The CEC recommended to the top court that another detailed study be carried out to examine and report whether the alternative measures could effectively offset the adverse impacts of the river linking project. It also mentioned that the Project did not satisfy the requirements of the provisions of Section 35(6) of the Wildlife Protection Act 1972. Under this Section, any activity destroying, damaging or diverting wildlife, including forest produce, is prohibited.
The Project involves construction of a dam and a two kilometre-long tunnel inside the core of the Panna Tiger Reserve, which can have a very damaging impact on the vulture habitat as well as the downstream Ken Gharial Wildlife Sanctuary. The report concludes that the Project could not be permitted in the light of the “irreversible and irreparable” harm that would be caused to the unique ecosystem of the Panna Tiger Reserve, which is heavily dependent on the Ken river system.
The Project has also given rise to a dispute with regard to sharing of the proposed dam water between UP and MP. UP is demanding more water from the Project, which remains unsettled. The state in its response filed before the CEC claimed 50 per cent share of 659 MCM of water to be transferred to Betwa basin, as per the inter-governmental agreement. It also sought 402 MCM additional water yield assessed as per the NWDA study of 2010.
MP is opposed to yielding to UP’s demand and contends that if its claims are accepted, then sufficient water will not be available for transfer to Betwa basin for development of the targeted command area for irrigation.
The CEC has said that the catchment areas of Ken and Betwa rivers, on an average, receive about 90 cm of rainfall only. This has a serious implication as during drought, the availability of water in both the river basins may be much less than what has been projected in various studies. Therefore, the projection of availability of surplus water in Ken basin for transfer to Betwa basin without first exhausting the possibilities for development of irrigation facilities in Upper Ken basin appears to be premature, particularly considering that an investment of Rs 28,000 crore of public fund is involved.
Environmentalists have been raising objections to the project on the grounds that it involves felling around 23 lakh trees in the National Park which is a huge loss. “The very objective of declaration of this unique ecosystem with special morphological significance and unique biodiversity as national park to ensure operation of laws of nature including natural evolution unhindered by human intervention will be defeated and will result in complete breakdown of the evolutionary process of millions of years,” the report said.
The Supreme Court is expected to take a decision on the report soon. Given the cogent arguments in the report against the Project, a green signal for its implementation looks unlikely.