Experts point to legal flaws in Sharavathy project

A media release by the Wildlife First said Section 8 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, mandates that it shall be the duty of the SBWL to ensure protection and conservation of wildlife and its habitat.
Sharavathi sanctuary.
Sharavathi sanctuary.(File Photo)
Updated on
2 min read

BENGALURU: Conservationists and wildlife experts have opposed the recent State Wildlife Board (SWLB) decision to give clearance to the Sharavathy pumped storage plant within the Lion Tailed Macaque Sanctuary in the Western Ghats falling within Shivamogga district.

Some experts have also written to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC), pointing to SWLB’s decision and the recent orders issued by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.

A media release by the Wildlife First said Section 8 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, mandates that it shall be the duty of the SBWL to ensure protection and conservation of wildlife and its habitat.

Section 29 of the WLPA specifies that there shall be no destruction of wildlife or damage or diversion of habitat or stopping or enhancing the flow of water into or outside the sanctuary except for the improvement and better management of wildlife.

“The Chief Wildlife Warden (CWLW) is the statutory authority appointed under Section 4 of the WLPA. It is his duty under Section 33 to ensure protection to wild animals in the Sanctuary and the preservation of the Sanctuary. But the project is not addressing this as the pumped storage project involves blasting, drilling, road construction etc. which may cause landslips, fragmentation of wildlife habitat and felling of several thousand trees. The recommendation is also not in compliance of Section 33 which is to ensure protection to wild animals in the sanctuary and the preservation of the Sanctuary,” Wildlife First pointed out.

The release stated that there is no mention of the power transmission lines/ upgradation of the existing lines in the project proposal. Further, the proposal of constructing a 12.3km road within the sanctuary, by felling over 12,000 trees, is against the Supreme Court orders.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com