TN wildlife board recommended Vedanthangal denotification without consent of members
CHENNAI: The State Board for Wildlife (SBWL) recommended the forest department's controversial proposal to denotify 40% of the famed Vedanthangal Bird Sanctuary without putting it for discussion and seeking comments from its members.
In March, the Tamil Nadu government had informed the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) that the proposal was placed before the SBWL and got the concurrence of its members through the "circular agenda" following which the Board recommended the proposal.
The New Indian Express spoke to a couple of SBWL members, who revealed that they never gave their consent to reduce the core area of the Vedanthangal Bird Sanctuary.
Kodaikanal-based animal rights activist Janani Krishnamurthy, who is one of the three NGO representatives in SBWL, told The New Indian Express, "In February first week, a two-page agenda note detailing proposed denotification of parts of Vedanthangal Bird Sanctuary was delivered to me at my residence in Kodaikanal by forest officials, who insisted that I receive it and affix my sign acknowledging receipt of the agenda note. The agenda note was not accompanied by any supporting documents to justify the proposal. I have not given any comments or concurrence."
In fact, based on The New Indian Express article published on June 3 that exposed the forest department's Vedanthangal denotification plans, Janani has written to Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, who is the member secretary of SBWL, seeking clarification.
In the email, Janani wrote, "Matters as weighty as the denotification or alteration (to reduce) of the boundary of a notified sanctuary should not be treated lightly and be undertaken with due diligence. I would be grateful if the Honourable Chairman can put the decision of the Board on hold and share with me the full documents on the basis of which a decision on this matter can be taken. In particular, I would be grateful for a copy of the comments received from the other members regarding the downward revision of the boundary of the Vedanthangal Sanctuary." Janani said she was yet to receive a response.
In defence, a senior forest official said the agenda was submitted for circulation and members have signed it. However, Prerna Singh Bindra, former member of NBWL, says SBWL should have discussed the proposal in a regular meeting rather than recommending it through a circular agenda. "Denotifying a major chunk of a sanctuary is a big decision. The forest department should not worry about hurdles for real-estate or industrial growth in the area. The department's primary responsibility should be to protect the sanctuary," she said.
Agenda note contradicts forest department's 'no denotification' claim
Meanwhile, the two-page agenda note circulated in February contradicts the forest department's 'no denotification' claim. The note clearly states, "Other than Vedanthangal tank, surrounding 5 kms revenue land being declared as sanctuary is the reason for non-cooperation of local people. Whole of surrounding 5 km zone consisting of 28 villages is patta land of farmers, private land holdings and some poramboke areas. Local people, farmers and other private landholders are unable to carry out any land conversion, diversion, unable to construct any house on their own land, unable to get drainage, water supply or electric connection. There was zero scope for establishing small scale factories, industries in the vicinity for local employment.
"Hence, it is proposed that the 5 km zone surrounding the main tank area of 29.51 hectares of Vedanthangal Bird Sanctuary may be brought down to 3 km in which first 1 km zone may be notified as Core Zone including main lake/tank and next 2 km boundary may be notified as Buffer Zone and outer 2 km zone of the existing 5 km shall be denotified," the note, undersigned by PCCF, Chief Wildlife Warden and member secretary of SBWL, reads.