The Karnataka government finds itself in hot water after making significant changes to the compensatory afforestation land allocated for the controversial Yettinahole project. This move has drawn sharp criticism from environmental activists and local communities who question the transparency of the decision-making process.
Controversial Land Swap Decision
According to documents accessed by environmental groups, the state government has decided to change the location of compensatory afforestation land that was originally earmarked for the Yettinahole drinking water project. The project, officially known as the Yettinahole Integrated Drinking Water Project, aims to supply drinking water to several drought-prone districts in Karnataka.
The original compensatory afforestation plan involved specific forest areas that have now been replaced with different locations, raising concerns about the ecological impact and the validity of the environmental clearances obtained for the project. Environmentalists argue that such changes undermine the very purpose of compensatory afforestation, which is to offset the loss of forest cover due to development projects.
Environmental Concerns and Legal Requirements
Compensatory afforestation is a mandatory requirement under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, for any project that involves diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes. The law stipulates that for every hectare of forest land diverted, an equivalent area of non-forest land must be developed into a forest, or twice the area of degraded forest must be improved.
The Yettinahole project involves diversion of approximately 130 hectares of forest land, making the compensatory afforestation component crucial for maintaining ecological balance. Environmental activists point out that changing the location of compensatory afforestation after obtaining environmental clearance raises serious questions about the project's compliance with legal requirements.
Several environmental organizations have written to the Union Environment Ministry, highlighting that the land swap violates the conditions under which environmental clearance was granted. They demand immediate intervention from the central government to ensure proper implementation of forest conservation laws.
Political Fallout and Public Response
The controversy has sparked political debates in Karnataka, with opposition parties questioning the transparency of the ruling government's decisions. Local communities in the project-affected areas have expressed concerns about the long-term environmental impact of changing compensatory afforestation sites.
Farmers and residents of drought-affected districts that are supposed to benefit from the Yettinahole project have also joined the discussion, worried that delays caused by these controversies might affect the timely implementation of the drinking water scheme. The project is crucial for providing drinking water to parched regions including Tumakuru, Chikkaballapur, and Kolar districts.
Environmental experts emphasize that compensatory afforestation is not merely a bureaucratic formality but a vital ecological compensation mechanism. They stress that the quality, location, and maintenance of compensatory afforestation sites significantly impact their effectiveness in preserving biodiversity and maintaining ecological services.
The Karnataka Forest Department officials have defended the decision, stating that the changes were made after proper assessment and that the new sites are equally suitable for afforestation. However, they have not provided detailed explanations for why the original sites were replaced or how the ecological value of the new sites compares with the original ones.
As the controversy intensifies, all eyes are on the state government's next move. Environmental activists have threatened legal action if the government fails to address their concerns and maintain transparency in the compensatory afforestation process for the Yettinahole project.
