chapter case studies on conflict in green...
TRANSCRIPT
CHAPTER 6
CASE STUDIES ON CONFLICT IN GREEN POLICIES
In the name of development, the government is
undertaking so many projects connected with forests. For
the industrial and infrastructural development power is
essential. The various governments of Kerala have seen
the hydro electric projects as the only source of power
generation. The political parties always view development
only as a process of starting industries, and developing
the transport and communication systems of a country.
The year 1996 came with a heavy blow of powercut on
Kerala. Many political party leaders have already
expressed their opinion regarding the solution for the
powercut. The All India President of the CITU,
E. Balanandan UP, even demanded rethinking on the Silent
Valley and Pooyamkutty Projects. He has further added
that the power shortage of Malabar area could be solved
only by seeking permission for large scale hydro electric
projects from the centre. He even criticised the Central
Government saying that they always were trying to find out
lame excuses for rejecting these hydro electric projects.
Meanwhile a report in the -i dated 29
January 1996, said that more than 40 small scale and
medium scale hydro electric projects were pending and
steps were being taken to start them as a solution to the
35 per cent powercut in the state. All political parties
have welcomed the proposal. Moreover the political
activists are more interested in finding immediate
solutions to problems rather than time consuming solutions
due to the mass appeal of the former. 2 As the
environmental impacts of developmental projects come out
only after a long period, these impacts are seldom
reflected in the political decision making process. Hence
all development projects are undertaken irrespective of
their environmental consequences.
The conflict on issues arises when the environmental
experts project the long term consequences of every
developmental project in terms of its impact on
environment. The conflict of interests in the Pooyamkutty
Project, Agastyavanam Biological Park and the Rudravanam
Project are taken as case studies here. The opinion and
arguments of government in support of the projects
represent the government's interest. All political
parties belonging to the opposition and ruling fronts
support these projects. There are only slight differences
of opinion regarding the method of implementation of these
projects among these parties. But all of them are of the
opinion that these projects are to be implemented.
The environmental experts and NGOs oppose these
projects based on the long term consequences of these
projects on the ecology and forests. They are thinking in
terms of sustainable objectives of development activities,
not in terms of immediate eflfects. Hence, the conflict is
between the interest of government and political parties
which represent only the immediate economic benefits of
development activity and the interest of environmental
experts and NGOs which represent long term sustainable
benefits of development.
Case Study I
The Pooyarkutty Project Versus The Pooyarkutty Forests
Even after the victory of conservation movements in
Silent Valley a decade ago, the silent, calculated and
deliberate destruction of the green natural cover in the
state is going on unabated. The governments have designed
and put forward more and more projects for the development
of the state. One such project is the nPooyamkutty Hydro
Electric Project" which has become the centre of the post
Silent Valley environmental debate in the state.
The original proposal of the Kerala State Electricity
Board was the construction of a set of dams for power
generation in two stages. This involves the construction
of 5 more dams above the proposed Pooyamkutty and
utilising them in an integrated manner to increase the
installed power generation of 750 MW, spread over an area
of 300 sq. Irm. of forest and involving a submergence of over
6000 hectares of prime forests.
The first stage of Pooyamkutty Project involves the
construction of a dam across the Pooyamkutty river, a
tributary of Periyar at a place called Pindimedu, situated
in Devikulam Taluk in Idukki District. Construction of a
148 metre high main dam and a 50 metre saddle dam will
create a reservoir with an effective storage of 1021 M M ~ .
The catchment area of the first phase is 272 sq. km and
the submergible area 28 km (2800 hectare). The estimated
cost (1982-83) is Rs. 250 crores. 4
The much acclaimed and talked about capacity of the
project to generate 240 MW of power is possible only after
constructing the five other dams and diverting the water
to the Pooyamkutty reservoir down below. Thus the 240 MW
is only a built in provision.
The Kerala State Electricity Board prepared one
Environmental Impact Assessment of the project as early as
in 1983-84. An Environmental Impact Assessment is a
statement which is usually made on the basis of an
exhaustive analysis of several environmental parameters
following certain commonly accepted guidelines. Such a
statement is intended to help the decision makers to
examine the desirability or otherwise of a proposed
project under c~nsideration.~ This report of the KSEB was
a "flimsy one, prepared hastily, which even went on to say
that the area did not contain much of wild animals or
plants. 116
The Kerala State Electricity Board Report
The KSEB taking the power supply situation of the
state into consideration, strongly argued for the
construction of the Pooyamkutty Hydro Electric Project.
They also argued that the Pooyamkutty Project was given
instead of the Silent Valley Project. When Government of
India on ecological and environmental considerations,
dropped the Silent Valley Hydro Electric Project, to
compensate the deficiency in power generation, the
Pooyamkutty Hydro Electric Project had been proposed.
In the early chapters the KSEB argues that power
generation is the basic requirement for the industrial
progress of the state. As hilly terrains and numerous
rivers are available in Kerala, the best source of energy
is hydro electric projects. It is in the 12th chapter of
the Study Report that ecological and environmental factors
are dealt with.
Justification for Locating the Project in the Forest Area
The report finds hydel power as constituting Keralals
mainstay, as coal fields are far away and as no fossil
deposits could be traced here. An expert team of the
KSEB visited the area several times to make a scientific
study. From the angle of the 'quantum of water with
regulating facility and drop' the proposed site for the
construction of the dam is the best available one.
According to the report "there is no other site in the
Valley which could offer storage development with lesser
involvement of forest than the proposal for the
benefits. *18
The proposed reservoir would be spread out covering
an area of 2800 ha. ~ccording to the report the
submergible area does not contain many wild animals, birds
and there are no breeding or feeding or migratory route
and there are no rare and endangered species of flora and
fauna .
An environmental team was formed consisting of
experts from various scientific fields to study the socio-
ecological aspects of the environmental impact that are
likely to crop up with the implementation of the project.
The team has concluded that the project will not, in any
way, adversely affect the biotic and abiotic components of
the forest system; they do not anticipate any ecological
backlashes or ecological boomerangs in the project area
upsetting ecosystem balance. "' In the environmental impacts listed in the report in
the form of questions and answers, ecological or
environmental problems arising from the construction of
the dams in Pooyamkutty are not found.
The Kerala Forest Research Institute ~e~ortl'
The Kerala Forest Research Institute at peechi
initiated a study about Pooyamkutty as a preconstruction
stage analysis of certain environmental and ecological
aspects of the area. "The basic objective was to generate
benchmark data pertaining to these aspects before the
construction of the dam so that the impact of construction
of the dam can be assessed more realistically than was
possible in the case of the Idukki Hydro Electric
~roject.*'ll The Study is made in such a way that the
decision makers can have the benefit, before taking a
final decision.
At the time of initiating this study, the second
stage of the project was still at the investigation stage.
Therefore the study focused on the area covered by stage
I. According to the study, the impacts of the Pooyamkutty
Hydro Electric Project can be classified into two major
kinds: (1) direct impacts, i .e. , those that occur as a
direct result of the dam either immediately or over a
period of time and which cannot be prevented, and (2)
indirect impacts which can be prevented to a considerable
extent.
The study was initiated in January 1985 at a time
when the proposal for the Hydro Electric Project submitted
by the Kerala State Electricity Board was under
consideration, for clearance by the Department of
Environment, Forest, and Wildlife. The report of KFRI is
organised into the following sections:12
1. Land use pattern
2. Vegetational status
3. Soil conditions and properties
4 . Wildlife status, and
5. Existing human settlement and human impact of
the project.
The Pooyamkutty and allied river basins represent the
only large contiguous stretch of thick forests south of
the Palakkad gap on the Western Ghats. Soil studies in
the KF'RI reveal that the head water zone (35 per cent of
the watershed) of the Pooyamkutty is already under human
pressure, compared to other parts of the basis. Further
deforestation can trigger very high rates of sedimentation
and premature siltation of the reservoir.
The botanical aspect covered in the KFRI Report
revealed that over 175 species in Pindimedu area are
endemic and 50 per cent of this belong to the South
Western Ghats alone. According to K. K. N. Nair, the Chief
Botanist, the regions that came under the submergible and
catchment areas of the proposed Pooyamkutty Project are
from a conservation point of view, worth preserving to
save a larger percentage of endemic species depicting the
affinity of the Peninsular Indian flora with that of
Malaysia and Sri Lanka. The area also contains 100
species of timber, 174 species of medicinal plants, 90
species of food and fodder yielding plants, 35 species of
oil yielding plants, 39 species of gum and resine yielding
plants, 40 species of tan and dye yielding plants and 5
species of spices yielding plants. At present, the
indigenous timber species and medicinal plants are the two
categories of plants getting fast depleted from our
natural forests. Hence, the flora of the two regions with
a good representation of these two groups of plants is
quite significant as the habitat of indigenous
economically important plants.
An area of 160 sq. km. situated in and around the
submersion area of the main reservoir was chosen for
studying the status of wildlife and availability of water.
Construction of the main dam at Pindimedu on the
Pooyamkutty river is not likely to affect the wild animals
very adversely. But, the construction of feeder dams
would lead to the establishment of a network of roads
linking Pinavur, Idamalayar, Pooyamkutty, upper
Idamalayar, Anamala, and Mankulam and thus opening up
almost all inaccessible forests in the Pooyamkutty region
to encroachment and destruction. Thus the construction of
feeder dams would very adversely affect the forests and
animals of the region. 13
The impact of the dam on human life is at its
maximum. The Economist of KFRI, Mammen Chundamannil says
that the most outstanding negative impact of the project
will be 'Man versus Man' controversy unlike in the Silent
Valley where it is \Man versus Monkey controversy.'14
The submergible areas are rich in reed resources
which represent an important raw material for mat and
basket weaving in the traditional sector and for paper
making in the modern sector. The annual reed extraction
from the region is around 2 3 , 5 0 0 tonnes, which provided
2.6 lakh mandays of employment annually for reed
extraction and 20.6 lakh mandays for processing which
makes a total of 23.2 lakh mandays per year. About 43 per
cent of the annual reed supplies of the Kerala State
Bamboo Corporation and about 26 per cent of the
requirement of the Hindustan Newsprint Ltd. are met from \
Pooyamkutty. Local production of mats (independent of the
Bamboo Corporation) at Pooyamkutty is around 52 lakhs
square feet annually. It has been calculated that over
3,00,000 people in Kerala are dependent on reed for their
existence.
Already, the availability of reed is below
requirements as a result of the destruction of forests
in Idamalayar, Thenmala, Adimali and Kallada areas.
Therefore, it is not possible to make good the shortfall
in supply, if the Pooyamkutty area is submerged by the
proposed reservoir.
There are three human settlements in the submergible
area of the proposed project . They are Anakulam,
Mettanpara and Kurathikudi. Together, they comprise 233
households with 931 members. The powerhouse site is at
Pinvoor where 34 families with 152 members face eviction.
There is still no clearcut rehabilitation programme for
the tribals and non-tribals in the project area. As the
government does not say anything about the nature of
eviction (whether below the Full Reservoir Land (FRL) line
or even on the edge of the reservoir), the rehabilitation
programme also is not clear.
Most of the tribal households in this area had been
displaced already once in the early sixties, from their
original homes in Anayirangal owing to power projects.
A historical review of forest use in Pooyamkutty indicates
that development of accessibility promotes forest land use
changes. The impact of the proposed dam on the forests
will be much more than the clearance of 2800 hectares.
Indirect impacti
The indirect impacts arise due to unintended but,
unavoidable human influences and may consist of the
following.
(a) Large labour force and their food, fuel and
accommodation requirements naturally result in the
destruction of forests. Even they hunt wild animals
for their food.
(b) Increased human activity will lead to increased soil
erosion and improved accessibility will trigger a
series of uncontrollable land use changes and
conversion of land for other uses.
"The history of other hydro electric projects in
relation to forest use and conservation in Kerala shows
clearly that the indirect impacts of the hydro electric
projects are more detrimental than the direct impacts. "I6
This objective and scientific study about the
Pooyamkutty Project highlights the real aspects of forest
destruction. The publication and publicity given to this
study report was a morale booster for many Non
Governmental Organisations and persons engaged in the
fight against the Pooyamkutty Hydro Electric Project.
A Comparative Study of the Two Reports
A comparative study of the two Reports--one made by
the KSEB and the other by KFRI--depicts entirely different
pictures of the Pooyamkutty Project. The KSEB report is a
hastily prepared one and most of the arguments put forward
are without scientific basis. For example, the KSEB
report says that the magnitude of the impact owing to
population pressure would be only negligible. l7 But the
KFRI report says that there would be direct and indirect
human impacts for the project.
The KSEB report emphasises on hydel power as the only
available source of energy in Kerala. But the KFRI
proposes alternative sources of energy like solar, wind
and wave. The KSEB report even went on to say that the
area did not contain many wild animals or plants. But the
KFRI report reveals the existence of 466 species of flora
in the area. In the KSEB report, the settlements to be
rehabilitated were not identified. But the KFRI report
brings out the seriousness of the impact of the project on
human settlements. The data for soil erosion given in the
KSEB report were extrapolated from other regions. But the
KFRI report, which is the result of strenuous efforts of
four years gives the real data of the region.
"The hasty preparation of the KSEB study itself made
it uns~ientific."~~ The conflicts of interests
represented on one side by the Kerala State Electricity
Board and on the other by the Scientific Community (KFRI)
are very clear in these two studies made by them. The
purpose of a scientific study is to reflect the realities.
But the purpose of a study made by a vested interest group
would always result in hiding the real situation.
Political Interests and Pooyamkutty h-oject
On 13 July 1993, the desirability of the taking up of
the Pooyamkutty hydel project was a subject of animated
discussion in the Assembly. The LDF (Opposition)
taunted the Government for its failure to get forest
clearance for the Pooyamkutty Project. But the
Congress(1) MLA and former Forest Minister said that he
was personally not in favour of cutting any more forests
for any kind of project. He was of the opinion that
decisions on clearing forests should be taken keeping the
needs of the future generations also.
The CPI leader K. V. Surendranath stood strongly
against any destruction of forest, but V. V. Raghavan of
the same party held the view that Pooyamkutty was
for Environment. This pressure tactics worked and
conditional sanction was given by the Ministry of
Environment and Forests for Pooyamkutty Hydro Electric
Project. 22
The Electricity Minister C. V. Padmarajan even
alleged that "a very strong lobby was working within the
state to scuttle the proposed Pooyamkutty Hydro Electric
Project." The Minister also blamed the Kerala Forest
Research Institute for the centre's refusal to grant
sanction for the scheme. 23
The above statements made by and opinions expressed
by the majority of politicians make clear their view of
Pooyamkutty Project. The MPs are even chalking out
programmes for using pressure politics at the centre. The
MLAs are taunting one another for the delay caused in the
implementation of the project. Thus, the interest of the
politicians is clearly in favour of the project.
An all party committee with V. J. Paulose MLA, was
formed for the implementation of the Pooyamkutty Project.
This State Committee for the Implementation of Pooyamkutty
Project submitted a memorandum and urged the Union
Minister for Forests and Environment, Kamal Nath to
sanction environmental clearance immediately. 24 This
further clarified the favourable stand of the political
parties in the state for the Pooyamkutty Hydro Electric
Project. In the Election Manifesto of the LDF (1996),
hydro electric projects are projected as a solution to the
present power crisis in the state.
The NGO Interests: A Conflict with Political Interests
The Pooyamkutty Samrakshana Samithi is in the
forefront fighting against the proposed hydel project.
The conflict of interests of politicians and bureaucracy
on the one side and the experts and environmentalists on
the other side becomes obvious when we study these two.
The retired chief engineer of the Irrigation
Department P. H. Vaidyanathan argues25 that hydel projects
like Pooyamkutty are very costly due to the long gestation
period. In the traditional large hydel projects, the cost
of producing 1 MW of electricity is Rs. 3.5 crores. But
in the small hydel projects the same unit of electricity
could be produced with only Rs. 1 crore. He calculated
that by spending Rs. 6000 crores on small hydel projects,
6000 MW electricity could be generated during the monsoon
period and that about one-third of this could be produced
during the summer.
This expert opinion is against the arguments raised
by the KSEB officials. They argue that only projects like
Pooyamkutty will be able to solve energy crisis of Kerala.
Against this stand taken by the KSEB, Sugathakumari in her
article in the Kathru- daily dated 14 Hay 1994,
stated clearly and logically, why Pooyamkutty forests
should be preserved. In her view, there are no more
forests left in Kerala to be destroyed. She also
suggested the alternative of using the excess natural gas
that is being burned out at Bombay High. Quoting the
report of the Hindu daily, she claimed that per day
seventeen million cubic metres of gas worth Rs. 2400
crores is being burned. 2000 MW of electricity could be
generated using this gas, whereas the capacity of the
Pooyamkutty Project is only 240 MW in the first stage.
The Prakriti Samrakshana Samithi an NGO engaged in
the preservation of nature and natural resources is deadly
against large dams. K. V. Surendranath, President of this
organisation said, "large dams mean construction
activities and catchment area on a large scale. The
benefits of timber contractors and construction
contractors are directly proportional to the size of dams.
These benefits are ultimately shared by politicians
also.n26 So, as there are other alternative sources for
generation of electricity such as wind, wave, sunlight,
and natural gas, without probing these possibilities, the
government and political parties are pressing for large
scale dams. his brings out the conflict of interests
between these two groups.
The Kerala Environmental (Protection) Council also
requested the Government to drop the Pooyamkutty Project.
The Council General Secretary U. K. Gopalan wanted
"environmental decisions to be free from political
considerations. lt2' The Idukki based Coordination
Committee for Environmental Protection also conducted
agitation against the moves for the revival of the
proposed Pooyamkutty Hydel Project. The organisation
opposes the Pooyamkutty Project on the ground that there
is a high pressure of dams exerted on Idukki District.
The Idukki District already possesses nine dams and
if the entire Pooyamkutty Project comes, there would be an
addition of another eleven dams. h his would result in the submergence of 100 sq. km. and can lead to seismic
imbalances in the region. Tremors had already been
reported from Idukki and one could not easily predict the
impact of formation of large water bodies in a hil.1~
terrain within a small area."28
The Pooyamkutty Samrakshana Samithi is very active in
organising activities against the Project.
The Pooyamkutty Samrakshana Samithi is the frontal
organisation fighting against the proposed Pooyamkutty
Project. The Samithi has succeeded in coordinating all
the organisations in Kerala under the Umbrella of the
Pooyamkutty Samrakshana Samithi. According to M.P. Mathai
who is the convenor of this organisation, the Samithi
prepared a 'fact sheet' of the project and made it
public. 2 9
The Samithi conducted relay fasting and satyagraha in
Kothamangalam from 30 April 1994 to 14 May 1994.
Environmentalists like V. R. Krishna Iyer, Sugathakumari,
Sukumar Azhikode and K. V. Surendranath participated in
this function. The relay fasting and satyagraha aimed at
catching the attention of the public by making the
implicit dangers of the project public. Also it aimed at
forming public opinion against the vested interests of the
political and bureaucratic lobby who are pressing for the
project. The Samithi organised the following action
programmes against the implementation of the Pooyamkutty
Project . 30
(a) Writing 'letter to the editor' to all newspapers
in Kerala.
(b) Writing letters to the Minister for Environment
and Forest.
(c) Pasting posters against the project all over
Kerala.
(d) Conducting processions and corner meetings.
(e) Printing and circulating news letters of the
Pooyamkutty Samrakshana Samithi.
(f) Printing and distributing pamphlets about the
environmental impact of the project.
(g) Opening the Pooyamkutty Samrakshana Samithi head
office at Kothamangalam to coordinate and
supervise the activities.
As a result of the above-mentioned activities, the
Central Government seriously looked into the
implementation of the project. A scientific expert team
was sent to evaluate and assess the impact of the project
correctly. Before this central team the Pooyamkutty
Samrakshana Samithi explained its stand on the project and
expressed its worries over the project.
The Samithi found out that the vested interests
behind the project succeeded in connecting the development
activities of Pooyamkutty area with the project. For
example, the people of Pooyamkutty-Kattampuzha areas have
been demanding the construction of the Thattekkat Bridge
and the KSEB authorities have succeeded in making the
local people believe that the construction of the bridge
would be done only as a part of the construction of the
dam. Against this Samithi members contacted the people
and propagated the true facts about the project.
The political parties and the bureaucracy view
construction of large scale hydro electric projects as the
only solution to the energy crisis in the state. Even the
KSEB don't approve and encourage the alternative sources
of energy. This is clear from the statement made by the
Union Minister for Non Conventional Energy, P. J. Kurian.
He lashed out at the KSEB officials for not giving
sanction t o non conventional energy sources
deliberately. 31 These non conventional energy sources
could have generated 300 MW of electricity within a period
of six months. Therefore it is clear that the purpose of
sticking on to large scale hydro electric projects is not
for generation of power, but owing to some other vested
interest. The environmental experts are fighting against
these vested interests by bringing out the realities of
each project proposed by the KSEB and supported by the
political parties, and thus the conflict of interests
takes place.
Case Study I1
The Agastyavanam Biological Park
The Kerala Forest Department prepared a final Project
Report on the controversial Agastyavanam Biological Park
(first phase) in the year 1992 and submitted it to the
then Forest Minister K. P. Viswanathan. According to the
report, the Project is to come up on 23 sq. km. on the
foothills of Agastyamalai forming part of the Kottoor
reserve forest and comprising of 18.5 sq. km. of degraded
natural forests, 1.5 sq. km. of evergreen forests and
3 sq. km. of plantations. A township and recreational
facilities for tourists will come up on 20 hectares. The
total cost in the first phase to be taken up during the
Eighth Plan period will be Rs. 5 crores.
The final report mentions that the objectives,
programmes and activities mentioned in the preliminary
report have been reoriented in view of the controversy
over project. 3 2 The report describes the primary
objectives of the project as ecoforestation, afforestation
and conservation. Moreover, preservation and propagation
of numerous animal species and scientific arrangements for
soil and water conservation are among the other
objectives. In order to attain these objectives, a number
of enclosures, termed conservatories are planned to be
built in the forest area, with roads, buildings and other
infrastructural facilities for tourists.
The Agastyavanam Biological Park has been officially
declared by the Forest Department under the wildlife
section by a Government Order GAD 17/91 dated 16 January
1991. A special conservator was appointed to look into
the matter as per the above order. 3 3
It is said in the report that the biological park is
framed in such a way that in any way it does not hurt the
basic ecological framework of the region. Sight seeing
opportunity for tourists and research facilities for
students and researchers are also provided in the park. 3 4
~eintroduction of Animals
The programme for the reintroduction of animals in
the first phase covers lion tailed macaque, gaur, sambar
deer, spotted deer, barking deer, mouse deer, slender
loris, Malabar giant squirrel, small Travancore flying
squirrel, leopard cat, rusty spotted cat, and black naped
hare. The captive breeding of various rare, threatened
and endangered animals endemic to the Western Ghats is
also proposed. These include the flying lizard,
Travancore tortoise, cane turtle, crocodiles, and
porcupins.
The project also envisages the construction of an
aviary, an ibex park, an elephant breeding ground, fish
ponds, reptile conservatory and butterfly park. About 25
Nilgiri tahrs (an endangered mountain goat protected in
the Eravikulam National Park) also are planned to be
procured and released on 20 hectares at Kathirumudi Malai,
at one end of the park. Mass breeding of various types of
butterflies is proposed to be undertaken in the butterfly
park.
Recreational ~acilities~~
The recreational facilities in the park will include,
according to the final report, nature trails and gradient
trails for trekking, adventure tourism, ireas of retreat,
swimming and boating facilities, artificial lakes, bathing
ghats, ropeway (connecting Neyyar, Peppara, and Kottoor),
sunbathing facilities, elephant riding, and indoor and
outdoor games. The adjoining township will have an
ornamental gateway, a children's park with overhead
trains, chariots, children's corner aquarium, public
garden, pond, Mahatma Gandhi monument, national
integration house and games.
The botanical projects include building an orchid
conservatory, a conservatory of medicinal plants, bamboo
villas, aquatic plants, fernery, indigenous grasses and
fruit plants, palm groves with large collection of
indigenous and ornamental palms and sanctuaries of
carnivorous plants, succulent plants and cycads, and a
herbarium and museum. A library and documentation centre
and a laboratory would also be set-up.
An ecodevelopment programme also is proposed to be
undertaken for the benefit of tribals and the local
communities affected by the project. The proposal for the
introduction of exotic species like Nilgiri langur has
been dropped from the final report. 36
Thus, in the opinion of the then Forest Minister
K. P. Viswanathan, "The Agastyavanam Biological Park is a
scientific approach towards preserving and conserving the
natural resources and at the same time providing
opportunities for enjoying the natural environment and
entertainment. 37
Government Sponsored Debate
Agastyavanam Biological Park Project was Strongly
opposed by many environmental experts and scientists by
raising many issues involved in the project. The Forest
Department even organised a debate at the regional level
in Thiruvananthapuram on the expert committee report on 16
February 1993. Two other such debates/discussions on the
project were conducted in Kochi and Kozhikode as the
project proposal had invited much criticism over its
"feared environmental impact, heavy infrastructural
expenses envisaged and the unsoundness of some of the
conservation proposals and the illegality of constructing
a \modern zoo' inside reserve forests.n38 The priority
accorded for the project was also questioned.
The Government appointed an expert committee to look
into the proposals as public protests against the project
mounted. But, even the amended proposals made by the
committee in the final report did not satisfy the
environmental activists. The Forest Department, which is
canvassing support for the project, has organised already
a number of programmes including conducted tours to
convince opinion leaders of the desirability of the
project. It is for the first time that the Department
launched such a prolonged and intense campaign to canvass
support for one of its programmes.
Claims of Government
Inaugurating the discussion on the project, the then
Chief Minister of Kerala, K. Karunakaran said, "The
objective of the project is to improve the status of the
forests in the project area and to make money out of
ecotourism. But, a project such as this could not move
forward because of opposition from environmental
activists. 39
The then Finance Minister Oommen Chandy, who spoke at
the valedictory session, said that the project had been
designed with good aims and many of the criticisms against
it were the result of inadequate understanding. 40
The government opinion is that, they want to protect
the forests and wild animals scientifically. The
Biological Park is a new concept which involves protection
of all wild species along with provision for enjoying the
forests in its own natural background. n41
As the Government and its machinery are convinced
about the necessity of the Biological Park, it has
announced the formation of the advisory, steering and
construction committees for the Agastyavanam Biological
Park project. 4 2
These committees have been set-up to speed Up
implementation of the first stage of the project. The
Advisory Committee has 30 members including politicians
and bureaucrats. All policy matters relating to the park
are to be discussed by this committee. The Steering
Committee is constituted with only bureaucrats. The Chief
Secretary is the chairman. The head of the Construction
Committee is the Secretary, Forests and Wildlife.
In none of these committees is an environmental
expert included. This shows the government's lopsided
attitude towards formulating and implementing policies.
Counter Arguments
Environmentalists and social workers reject the idea
of a biological park and question the very interest of
government in establishing a biological park. In a
lengthy article by K. V. Surendranath, President of the
Prakriti Samrakshana Samithi, in the Mathrubhoomi daily
dated 6 September 1992, he totally rejected the concept of
the Biological Park.
According to him, evergreen forests are left only in
Arunachal Pradesh, Andanam and Nicobar islands and Kerala
in the Indian peninsula. These forests could be preserved
only by leaving them untouched. For the last one and a
half centuries, we have been exploiting the forests with a
commercial attitude. The Biological Park also is a
project with commercial motives behind it and hence it is
to be rejected.
The project envisages an initial investment of Rs. 10
crores and it expects an annual return of Rs. 45 lakhs
from the tenth year onwards. Surendranath argues that the
number of people who are to enter the forests in the name
of ecotourism to bring in an annual revenue of 45 lakhs
would be sufficient to disturb the wildlife and destroy
the forests. Hence he says that the idea of ecotourism
cannot be accepted from the preservation point of view.
The construction activities that are going on in the
Agastyavanam forest area itself are a proof of what is in
store for future activities. Construction of main roads
and by-roads is taking place in the area along with the
quarters for the officials. Construction of shopping
Centres and restaurants is also planned as part of the
biological park. The inflow of a large number of tourists
coupled with the completion of construction activities
that are going on in the area will result in the formation
of a township in the midst of forest. The forests are not
safe in this type of an environment.
The officials are in the pursuit of purchasing 17
vehicles in the initial years for supervising the works in
the project area. 43 The sound pollution and air pollution
caused by these vehicles inside the forests will certainly
be against the basic norms of protecting the wild animals.
In the Project Report, the authorities have earmarked
only Rs. 11 lakhs for the rehabilitation of tribals. This
meant that each tribal family would get only Rs. 19,600, a
pittance compared to the losses they would have to bear by
moving out of the area which they had been cultivating for
years.
The Forest Department itself is divided over the
issue of the eviction of tribals from their land. One
section argues that the tribals should be allowed to
remain in their settlements even after the park came into
being. There is another group expressing the view that it
would be a crime against the tribals if they were made
'exhibits' at the park.
Tribal Opposition
Meanwhile the 56 tribal families who are faced with
eviction by the Forest Department to facilitate the
establishment of the Agastyavanam Biological Park opposed
the proposed biological park. The tribals from various
settlements in the Kottoor forests had urged the then
Chief Minister to offer protection for them. The
'Kanikkar' Mooppan said, I9Our culture and beliefs are
rooted in this forest area. The 'Vettukallu-Mappi peaks,
where the Gods of the hills reside, are here. If we are
pushed out of our homes, we would lose everything."44 The
tribals staged a dharna in front of the Secretariat on 31
December 1991 and submitted a separate memorandum to the
Chief Minister and Governor.
The 'Ashambu Greens' an environmentalist group
working in the Agastyavanam area remarked that the
tribals, if uprooted from their natural environment will
find it very difficult to survive. They earn their
livelihood by depending fully on forests and forest
products. Therefore the interests of the tribals are
clearly in conflict with the policies of government in
this case.
The Biological Park would affect not just the
tribals, but the entire population of Thiruvananthapuram,
which depend on the waters from small rivulets like
Anchunazhi thode and Kottoor thodu originating from the
Agastyakoodam ranges for their drinking water needs. When
the city experienced a severe water scarcity in 1975,
water was routed from Neyyar to Aruvikkara through the
Kottoor thodu. With the construction of roads, gardens
and check dams within the proposed park area, these
rivulets too would die out.
The Ashambu Greens in a news conference45 questioned
the Government's assertion that the park was being set-up
on the basis of a scientific study. The status paper
prepared by the Forest Department had said that it had
received assistance from several experts and institutions
in the preparation of the project. But it was doubtful
whether any of these individuals or institutions had
conducted any scientific study about the implications of
the project or was fully aware of its dimensions. The
change in the size of the project area and the steep
increase in its estimated cost were indicative of the
absence of a scientific study.
Further it is alleged by the activists of Ashambu
Greens that the person in charge of the project was one
who had been remaining under suspension on charges of
corruption and this too raised serious doubts about the
real intentions of the authorities.
As against the meagre provision for rehabilitation,
the department had earmarked Rs. 70 lakhs for acquiring a
private estate, Rs. 242 lakhs for various construction
activities and Rs. 42 lakhs for buying vehicles. Though
the government asserted that the project was being funded
by the centre, the entire fund was coming from the state
exchequer.
Raising all these issues, the environmentalists who
want to protect the forests of Agastyamala formed the
Agastyavanam Protection Council. In connection with the
Earth Day celebrations of 1993, the members of this
organisation adopted a resolution urging the government to
declare the Agastyavanam area in Thiruvananthapuram
district as a biosphere reserve and suspend the work on
the proposed biological park there. 46 The resolution
further expressed concern over the brisk pace of
construction activities in the area ignoring the pleas of
environmental organisations and environmentalists to
abandon the project.
The Sastra Sahitya Parishat member who participated
in the function47 warned about the adverse consequences of
the promotion of tourism in the name of ecotourism. He
added that those who visit the forests in the name of
ecotourism "need not be conservation oriented, but they
are consumption oriented." It is easy to calculate the
casualties that could be inflicted on forests by such a
group. Thus, the group strongly protested against the
concept of ecotourism.
Environmentalist and poetess Sugathakumari who
participated in the discussions said that the Bekkal Fort
Project and the Agastyavanam Biological Park are examples
of selling our own body to foreigners for money. She
severely criticised the Forest Department's new objective
of Tourism Promotion.
Court Decisions
Petitions were filed in the High Court of Kerala
against the Biological Park Project, saying that the
project is against the Forest Protection Act and
environment. But Justice M. M. Pareethupillai rejected
the petitions48 saying that the Government could prove
beyond doubt that the objective of the project is to
maintain the biodiversity of the region and to protect the
forests. The additional Advocake General who appeared
before the Court on behalf of the Kerala Government argued
that not even a single tree would be felled for the
implementation of the Biological Park Project.
But in September 1993, a Division Bench of the Kerala
High Court through its order prevented the implementation
of the project. 49 The Court observed that the Forest
Department should convince the court that they had
observed the directions of the Central Government while
implementing the project.
The Agastyavanam Biological Park issue brings out the
conflict of the interests of the Government authorities
and the environmental experts and NGOs obviously. But,
there is a conflict, the real one, between the poor
tribals and the Government. The tribals have no land
other than forests to live on. But, they have no
votebanks and affiliation to any political parties. So,
there are only few persons to argue for them. Quite often
these arguments fall on the deaf ears of the Government
officials. As Sugathakumari had rightly remarked, "The
Adavasies are born to wage always a losing war with the
higher echelons of power. " 5 0
Case Study 111
The Rudravanam Project
The Rudravanam Project which has been included in the
15 point programme of Chief Minister A. K. Antony is
another example of the conflict of interests of the
Government and environmentalists. The 15 point programme
is the list of the development programmes to be
accomplished by the present government during a period of
two years.
The Sabarimala Shrine of Lord Ayyappa is a famous
Hindu pilgrim centre in the midst of forest where lakhs of
devotees assemble during the Makara Vilakku season. The
Rudravanam Project is proposed to increase the amenities
of these lakhs of devotees who come over there for darsan.
In order to complete this project 100 hectares of forest
land is demanded.
Forty, five-storied concrete buildings are proposed
to be constructed in the areas around the Sabarimala
Shrine. 5,000 persons in each of these buildings are able
to take rest, constituting a total of 2 lakh persons in 40
concrete structures. The Project also proposes the
construction of roads and parking grounds of vehicles near
the Shrine. The road from Pamba to Rudravanam, with a
width of 12 metre and length of 7 kms through the forest
will certainly be a threat to the forests. Moreover a
shopping complex is also proposed as part of the project.
All these construction activities, if carried out, will
change Sabarimala into a tourist centre from a pilgrim
centre. Rs. 300 crores is the estimated expenditure.
The Devaswom Board which is in charge of the
administration of the Sabarimala Shrine is also supporting
the Rudravanam Project. They say that the project is
highly necessary as it envisages the increase in the
amenities of the devotees. In the words of N. Bhaskaran
Nair, President of the Travancore Devaswom Board,
"increasing the facilities of lakhs of devotees is the
immediate concern of the Board. The Rudravanam Project is
a creative project of the present government to minimise
the difficulties of the de~otees."~'
The Devaswom Board authorities even submitted a
memorandum to the Prime Minister through the Samkaracharya
of Kanchi in order to get sanction for the Rudravanam
project. 5 2 The Devaswom Board had already approached the
Central Government through the State Government and they
felt that the p~litical pressure was insufficient to get
things done at the Ministry of Environment and Forests.
Hence they decided to pressurise the Central Government
through spiritual leaders. The State Government and the
Devaswom Board are of the opinion that the Rudravanam
Project is very necessary to increase the welfare of the
devotees.
Views of Fmvironmental Experts
The views expressed by the experts in the field of
environment regarding the Rudravanam Project completely
depict a different picture.
R. V. G. Menon is of the opinion that the Rudravanam
Project is a different development project for Sabarimala
from the earlier ones as it has an integrated approach.53
This integrated approach to solve the problems of the
devotees assumes the shape of a township and in future as
the inflow of persons increases, the size of the township
at Sabarimala will demand more forest land for its
expansion. He also added that the spiritual fulfilment of
the pilgrimage lies in having very simple and humble visit
to the shrine suffering all difficulties. Modern
transport facilities and concrete structures will turn the
pilgrimage into pleasure trip.
Larry Baker, the proponent of the idea of low cost
construction activities in Kerala, also criticised the
Rudravanam Project saying that the project in its present
form will be a nuisance to the wildlife. 54 He suggested
that the basic necessities of the Ayyappa devotees should
be increased not at the cost of forests. He also
cautioned about the possible destruction of forests after
the completion of roads.
Vishnu Narayanan Nampoodiri categorically stated that
the Rudravanam Project would bring an end to the forest
culture (Aranya Samskaram) of India. 5 5 The multistoried
buildings and the modern amenities would be useful only to
a handful of rich devotees who could afford the
expenditure. He alleged that as forest wealth cannot be
exploited easily as in the past, new projects are
formulated by the vested interest groups by influencing
the government. The real beneficiaries of the project
would be the wood cutters and timber lobby of the state.
No organisational activity has been so far reported
against the Rudravanam Project. But the members of so
many environmental organisation have expressed their views
against the Project.
K. V. Surendranath, the President of the Prakriti
Samrakshana Samithi pointed out that every project
proposed by the Government in the name of development
involved large scale construction activities. 56 This is
because construction activities constitute a roaring
business for contractors and forest is to be destroyed in
the area where construction is going on. In both ways the
contractors and the connected political lobby are
benefited.
Thus, the case studies prove that the projects
proposed and supported by the Government quite often
deviate from the path of sustainable development. The
environmental experts and NGOs have raised objectives to
these projects only on the ground of environmental
protection. Therefore, the study of these projects really
depict the picture of the conflict of interests between
the environmentalists and the government.
Consequences of the Conflict of Interests
The tug of war between environmentalists and the
political-bureaucratic lobby is going on in the case of so
many other projects also. It seems that the politicians
are very much fond of undertaking large scale construction
activities in the name of development projects. They have
also succeeded in creating an impression among the public
that large scale construction activities are the symbols
of economic progress.
But, construction activities in forests are a curse
to the tribals. construction activities for hydro
electric projects and biological park have adversely
affected the livelihood of thousands of tribals in Kerala
forests. Their bare necessities are in conflict with the
comforts and luxuries of the civilised men. AS the
tribals are illiterate, they cannot calculate the
financial loss incurred by the displacement from their
settlements. As they are politically unorganised, they
are unable to exert any pressure on political parties and
Government during the decision making process. In the
words of Medha Patkar, the leader of the Narmada Bachao
Andolan, "The urban ruling machinery is imposing
exploitation on the poor tribals all over the world, in
the name of modern development. 1157
The tribal culture and modern civilisation are in
constant conflict with each other. A democratic set up is
expected to protect the interests of the poor and weaker
sections of the society. But the vested interests in the
name of development have only increased the number of
environmental refugees all over the world.
The picture of the conflict of interests of
politicians and environmentalists is clear and complete
with the recent statement of the Electricity Minister and
Congress leader, G. Karthikeyan. He said, "It is the
blind opposition o f development projects by
environmentalists that put Kerala in darkness. It was the
environmentalists who have objected the Silent Valley and
Pooyamkutty Projects. The Kakkad Project also could not
be completed due to their ir~tervention."~~ He also
appealed the environmentalists of Kerala not to oppose the
hydro electric projects in future.
Against this allegation of the Minister,
Sugathakumari reacted sharply by writing an article in
&&&!&hoorni daily dated 29 February 1996. She said that
it was due to the negligence and go slow process of the
successive governments in power that 18 small and medium
hydel projects were left incomplete. She attributed this
fact as the main reason for the power shortage in the
state and not the interference of the environmentalists as
the Minister had alleged.
Sustainable development is the only solution found in
the present set up to overcome the conflicting interests.
Political authorities have to seek environmental wisdom.
Based on this wisdom the traditional concept of
development is to be replaced by the most modern concept
of sustainable development. The commercial attitude of
treating natural resources is to be replaced by the
conservationist attitude. The incorporation of
environmental interests in political and economic policy
making will help to redefine the developmental concepts.
This redefinition will be a solution to the present
conflict of interests and help promote development and
protect environment, which is the essence of sustainable
development.
References
1. Mathrubhoomi (24 January 1996).
2. From the ~nterview of the district presidents of
various political parties.
Ibid.
T h e m (28 March 1994).
K. S . S. Nair, Preface, KFRI Rewort on PoovamkuttY
proiect (Peechi: KFRI, 1989).
The Hindu (28 March 1994).
KSEB, s y
Proiect, Chapter 12 (1983), p. 117.
Ibid.
Ibid., p. 118.
- K. S. s . Nair (ed.), LQLlg term Environmental and
Ec --ttv Kydro Electric
E~oiect in the Western Ghats of Kerala: Pr-
c- sis (Peechi: KFRI, 1989).
Ibid., Preface.
Ibid., p. 2.
Ibid., p. 179.
The Hindu (28 March 1994).
K. S . S . Nair, n. 10, p. 236
Ibid., p. 237.
KSEB, Q a , p. 129.
The Hindu (24 March 1994).
The Hindu (14 July 1993).
20. Mathrubhoomi (3 March 1994).
21. The Hindu (12 January 1994)-
22. Mathrubhoomi (20 March 1994) - 23. The Hind3 (16 July 1993).
24. The Hindu (14 February 19941.
25. Mathrubhoomi (20 September 1994).
26. Interview with X. V. Surendranath on 6 December 1995
at the MLA Quarters, Thiruvananthapuram.
27. ( (7 June 1995).
28. The Hindu (8 October 1993).
29. From the interview with M. P. Mathai on 3 February
1996 at Pala.
30. The Pamphlet of the Pooyamkutty Samrakshana Samithi
dated 13 April 1996.
31. Mathrubhoomi (6 February 1996).
32. The (5 September 1992).
33. Government of Kerala, Administration Re~0rt of
Forests (1991), p. 27.
34. Ibid., pp. 27-28.
35, The ( (5 September 1992).
36. Ibid.
37. T h e a ( 6 September 1992).
38. The Hindq (9 February 1993).
39. lQ2&b& (20 February 1993).
40. Ibid.
41. The Hindu (15 April 1993).
Excerpts from the speech of the Commissioner and
Secretary of forest. The (20 February 1993).
Mathrubhoomi (6 September 1992).
The Hindu (1 January 1992).
Ibid.
The Hindu (23 April 1993).
From the proceedings of the meeting of Agastyavanam
Protection Council held on 22 April 1993 in
Thiruvananthapuram.
blathrubhoomi (17 March 1993).
Mathrubhoomi (11 September 1993).
From the interview with Sugathakumari conducted on 20
December 1995 at Thiruvananthapuram.
From the interview conducted with N. Bhaskaran Nair,
President of Travancore Devaswom Board on 4 February
1996.
Mathrubhoomi. (14 June 1995).
Mathrubhoomi (21 June 1995).
Mathrubhcomi (20 July 1995).
Mathrubhoomi (23 June 1995).
Interview with K. V. Surendranath on 6 December 1995.
~nterview with Medha Patkar on 8 February 1996 at
Thiruvalla.
Mathrubhoomi (13 February 1996).