DEHRADUN: Marking 'Harela' with an unusual protest, social activist Anoop Nautiyal on Thursday released RTI data showing that Uttarakhand has diverted 46,203 hectares of forest land for development projects since the state was created in November 2000.
The disclosure came as Uttarakhand celebrated Harela, a traditional festival dedicated to nature, conservation and prosperity. The occasion also symbolises the union of Goddess Parvati and Lord Shiva.
Families harvested green shoots sown in baskets nine days earlier and placed them on relatives’ heads while offering blessings. The state government also launched a campaign to plant 10 lakh saplings across Uttarakhand.
Nautiyal, however, said the festival must also prompt scrutiny of forest loss.
“Harela should not only be celebrated as a festival of greenery but should also serve as an occasion for introspection on the future of Uttarakhand’s forests, rivers, mountains and natural resources,” he said.
Citing a June 16, 2026, RTI response, Nautiyal told TNIE that road projects accounted for 10,070.03 hectares, or 22% of the diverted forest land, while mining accounted for 9,289.81 hectares.
“Transmission lines used 3,005.51 hectares, power projects 2,250.08 hectares, irrigation works 456.18 hectares and drinking water schemes 294.56 hectares,” he said.
Another 20,837.63 hectares, or 45% of the total, were classified as “Others”.
Describing the figures as startling, Nautiyal told TNIE, “District-wise data show that Dehradun alone accounted for 21,618.32 hectares, nearly 47% of Uttarakhand’s total forest diversion over the period under review. Haridwar followed with 6,002.32 hectares, Nainital 3,603.83 hectares, Chamoli 3,065.34 hectares and Tehri Garhwal 2,555.29 hectares.”
Nautiyal warned that the concentration of nearly half the state’s forest diversion in a single district could have serious consequences, stressing that “the ecological carrying capacity of the Doon Valley and the surrounding Shivalik landscape cannot be treated as limitless”.
Referring to the ongoing felling of thousands of trees for the Rishikesh–Bhaniyawala four-lane highway, Nautiyal said the project had come to symbolise a development model exerting mounting pressure on natural forests and the fragile Himalayan ecosystem.
He urged the Centre and the Uttarakhand government to review and discontinue infrastructure projects involving avoidable, large-scale destruction of natural forests.
“The ecological costs of poorly planned development are ultimately borne by ordinary citizens, particularly economically weaker and marginalised communities, who have the least resources to recover from disasters,” he said.
Anoop Nautiyal stressed that the debate should not be framed as a choice between development and conservation.
Uttarakhand, he said, needs a development model that advances economic growth while strengthening ecological security.
He called for scientifically determined carrying-capacity regulations for tourism, pilgrimage and urban expansion, and strict compliance with environmental, forest and wildlife laws before infrastructure projects are undertaken.
Nautiyal also noted that although the RTI response provides detailed data on forest diversion, it does not furnish the information sought on compensatory afforestation.
