Skip to main content

The long road to growth (Hindu Editorial)

As power lines and roads slice up forest cover, it becomes clear that a knowledge economy must tackle development with a wider perspective than that of mere short-term gains

In just two meetings in August 2014 and January 2015, the National Board for Wildlife considered projects involving over 2,300 hectares of land in and around wildlife sanctuaries and national parks. In four meetings between September and December 2014, the Forest Advisory Committee considered diversion of over 3,300 hectares of forests for 28 projects. All the proposals were for linear projects and most of them are likely to be cleared.
Linear infrastructure projects — roads, trains and power lines that make long intrusions into forests and stretch ribbonlike over thousands of kilometres — are the new threat to our forests, in addition to submergence by dams or clearing for mining and agriculture.
The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change has been gradually diluting the norms for such projects. It has, for instance, recently permitted Central agencies executing linear projects in forests to cut trees after ‘in-principle’ or first stage approval under the Forest Conservation Act of 1980; that is, with just an approval from a Divisional Forest Officer, without waiting for second stage clearance related to compensatory afforestation and related procedures.
Double-edged sword

Roads and power lines support economic growth and other needs such as mobility and delivery of services, and are vital in a developing country. But they also bring a host of associated problems that affect natural ecosystems and rural and tribal communities. They cause habitat fragmentation. Wildlife species avoid roads, as they become wider and busier, and the roads effectively form barriers separating forest areas. Expansion projects and the four-laning of highways affect wildlife corridors — for instance, National Highway 7 slices crucial corridor forests between Pench and Kanha Tiger Reserves in Central India.
In mountains, roads may lead to severe forest destruction, landslides, and erosion, as seen everyday during road construction in many parts of the Himalayas and the Western Ghats. A 2006 study noted that on steep hillsides, roads may increase landslides and surface erosion fluxes by ten to over hundred times as compared to undisturbed forests. Along hill roads in forests, natural vegetation often helps stabilise slopes and mitigate landslides. Road construction, dumping of debris, and slashing of roadside native plants, when carried out in a manner insensitive to terrain and local ecology, destroys natural cover, and increases erosion and weed proliferation.
Millions of animals, too, are killed along roads due to collisions with vehicles. Indian field research studies have documented that the spectrum of wildlife killed or injured ranges from small invertebrates, frogs, and reptile species — many found nowhere else in the world — to birds and large mammals such as deer, leopard, tiger, and elephant. Estimates from a few studies put it at around 10 animals killed per kilometre per day, but numbers could be higher, as injured animals are overlooked and many kills go undocumented.
Power lines also kill unknown numbers of wildlife everyday. Poachers draw live wires to kill animals such as rhino and deer, while accidental electrocution kills many species from birds such as Sarus cranes and flamingos to elephants and bison. Railways, too, take their toll, gaining attention only when large animals such as elephants are killed along the tracks. The daily death of wildlife shows that linear projects are undertaken with scant attention to conservation needs.
The daily death of wildlife shows that linear projects are undertaken with scant attention to conservation needs
Sadly, linear intrusions affect areas much larger than the actual area set aside for the project, because of negative ‘edge effects’ that diffuse to varying distances on either side. Each kilometre of road may affect at least 10 ha of adjoining habitat. In Bandipur Tiger Reserve, a 2009 study found that tree deaths are two and a half times higher along roads than in forest interiors. Similarly, wildlife populations and behaviour are affected up to a kilometre or more in the adjoining landscape. Even for species attracted to the vicinity of roads — reptiles that come to bask or deer and monkeys that come to feed — roads act as ‘ecological traps’, literally drawing them to their death. In 2009, a comprehensive scientific review of the effect of roads and traffic on animals found that negative effects were five times higher than positive ones. With trees and forests cut, tree-living animals are forced to cross roads or use electric wires to cross canopy gaps, leading to a double jeopardy of electrocution and road kill.
With multiple linear intrusions — roads, canals, power lines and railways — together slicing up the landscape, the cumulative impact on wildlife and habitat is deadly.
Finding the balance

Linear infrastructure projects are needed for the economy but so are forests. They are not mere fungible assets to be compensated by artificial plantations, but unique living systems of plants, animals, and dependent human communities. A knowledge society will tackle development with an approach that uses the best technical resources and digital tools at its command. It must consider wider issues and a larger perspective than that which falls within the purview of a Divisional Forest Officer, as in the Ministry’s recent orders.
Besides espousing economic benefits, linear projects must measure and mitigate long-term costs and ecological effects in a credible and transparent manner. The pursuit of mega-projects, often associated with lucrative contracts and corruption, spurs an undue emphasis on quantity and size (such as road width), which detracts from other priorities such as quality, efficiency, and safety. Worldwide, a growing body of applied research in the field of road ecology and interdisciplinary efforts, involving engineers, ecologists, and economists, is documenting the subject, pinpointing road and rail realignments, more sensitive designs, and sustainable alternatives.
In India, the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife prepared a detailed background paper and draft guidelines on linear intrusions in 2011, partly incorporated in the December 2014 subcommittee guidelines for roads in protected areas. The guidelines accord primacy to the ‘Principle of Avoidance’, whereby wildlife protected areas and valuable natural ecosystems are not unnecessarily disrupted by linear intrusions; and where alternative alignments, routed around wildlife corridors, can provide or enhance connectivity to peripheral villages and towns. Site-specific inputs from wildlife scientists can help design overpasses, culverts, and underpasses to facilitate animal crossings, while speed and traffic regulation can reduce animal-vehicle collisions. Infra-red animal detection systems coupled to mobile messaging technology can alert train drivers and help prevent track deaths. Structural modification of power line heights and visibility in risk-prone areas can save elephants and birds from electrocution. Measures to retain overhead tree canopy continuity and roadside native vegetation help conservation while also enhancing the aesthetics along roads.
If linear infrastructure can be scientifically informed, ecologically sensitive, and well designed, it can promote economic development and safeguard the habitat as well.
(T. R. Shankar Raman is a scientist with the Nature Conservation Foundation, Mysore.)
Keywords: Forest Advisory Committeediversion of forest landMinistry of EnvironmentForests and Climate ChangeForest Conservation Act of 1980

Popular posts from this blog

Cloud seeding

Demonstrating the function of the flare rack that carries silver iodide for cloud-seeding through an aircraft. 
Water is essential for life on the earth. Precipitation from the skies is the only source for it. India and the rest of Asia are dependent on the monsoons for rains. While the South West Monsoon is the main source for India as a whole, Tamil Nadu and coastal areas of South Andhra Pradesh get the benefit of the North East Monsoon, which is just a less dependable beat on the reversal of the South West Monsoon winds.

Indian Polity Elections (MCQ )

1. Who of the following has the responsibility of the registration of voters
a) Individual voters
b) Government
c) Election commission
d) Corporations

2. Democracy exists in India, without peoples participation and co operation democracy will fail. This implies that
a) Government should compel people to participate and cooperate with it
b) People from the government
c) People should participate and cooperate with the government
d) India should opt for the presidential system

3. Which of the following are not the functions of the election commission
1) Conduct of election for the post of the speaker and the deputy speaker, Lok sabha and the deputy chairman, Rajya sabha
2) Conduct of elections to the state legislative assemblies
3) Deciding on all doubts and disputes arising out of elections

a) 1 and 2
b) 1 and 3
c) 2 and 3
d) 2

4. Which of the following electoral systems have not been adopted for various elections in India
1) System of direct elections on the basis of adult suffrage

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”.

The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya.

It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests.

The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach it in …