Kasturi Rangan Report on Western Ghats Part -1

REPORT OF THE HIGH LEVEL WORKING GROUP
ON
WESTERN GHATS
Volume I

Ministry of Environment and Forests
Government of India
15 April 2013

Cover: Portion of peninsular India showing Western Ghats region depicted using
multi spectral image of advanced wide field sensor (AWifs) on board
RESOURCESAT-1 as natural color composite

Contents
Volume I
Submission Certificate of the Report of HLWG
Preface
Acknowledgement
List of Tables
List of Figures
Summary of Recommendations and Action Plan

i
ii - iv
v - viii
ix
x - xi
xii - xxiii

1. Introduction
1
2. Evaluation of comments of the Stakeholders, State Governments
9
and Central Ministries
3. Impact of Climate Change on the Ecology of Western Ghats
18
4. Definition and Delimitation of the Western Ghats Region
27
5. Identification of Ecologically Sensitive Areas in Western Ghats Region 43
6. The Paradigm for Sustainable and Inclusive Development and the
98
Framework for Governance
7. Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats
126
8. Review of specific cases
133
a. Athirappilly Hydropower Project
b. Gundya Hydropower Project
c. Moratorium on development projects in Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg
Districts
d. Mining in Goa
References
Appendix 1: Peer-review report
Appendix 2: Approach for biodiversity characterization at landscape level

Volume II
Appendix 3
Annexure 1
Annexure 2
Annexure 3
Annexure 4
Annexure 5
Annexure 6
Annexure 7
Annexure 8

List of Villages in ESA of the Western Ghats
Composition and constitution of the High Level Working Group (HLWG)
Minutes of the HLWG and Visit Reports
Summary of the Comments received on the WGEEP report from Stakeholders before
constitution of the HLWG
Summary of Comments received on the WGEEP report from Stakeholders before
constitution of HLWG classified under various heads
Analysis of the Responses received by the HLWG on the WGEEP report
Statement of Major comments of the six State Governments on the Sectoral
recommendations made in the WGEEP report
Statement of the comments received from the Central Ministries
Responses from the State Governments and Central Ministries

PREFACE
Western Ghats is a magnificent mountain range next only to Himalayas and is a
biological treasure trove with a high degree of endemism (11% to 78%) and scenic
beauty. This unique eco-system has been threatened by continuously increasing
habitat pressures and declared as one of the world’s hottest hotspots of biodiversity.
Realizing the need to protect and rejuvenate the ecology of and for sustainable
development in Western Ghats, the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF)
constituted a Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP). The mandate of
WGEEP was to demarcate ecologically sensitive zones and suggest measures to
conserve, protect and rejuvenate the ecology of Western Ghats region. Taking into
account the comments and suggestions made by different stakeholders including
State Governments and Central Ministries on WGEEP Report, the MoEF constituted
a High Level Working Group (HLWG) to suggest an all-round and holistic approach
for sustainable and equitable development while keeping in focus the preservation
and conservation of ecological systems in Western Ghats.

The Working Group has carefully examined the different approaches available

for

characterizing the Western Ghats System to get an insight so as to make pragmatic
recommendations. The Working Group followed a detailed geospatial analysis for
identification of Ecologically Sensitive Areas at a fine resolution of 24 m with village
as unit. After extensive discussions with experts, the Working Group also defined
the extent of Western Ghats; and as per HLWG’s definition, the Western Ghats
region spreads over an area of 1,64,280 km2 and extends from North to South over a
distance of 1500 km traversing Six States. Our analysis also revealed that already
close to 60 per cent of the Western Ghats region is under cultural landscape - human
dominated land use of settlements, agriculture and plantations (other than forest
plantations) - and only 41 per cent of the land area can be currently classified as
natural landscape. Of the natural landscape, the biologically rich area, with some
measure of contiguity is roughly 37 per cent of the Western Ghats which is about
60,000 km2. We have identified this 37% of natural landscape having very high and

ii

high biological richness and low fragmentation and low population density and
contain Protected Areas (PAs), World Heritage Sites (WHSs) and Tiger and Elephant
corridors as Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) and recommend it to MoEF for
notification.

Because of unprecedented threats to natural landscape of Western Ghats region by
development projects and urban growth, the Working Group has recommended a
non-tolerance policy with respect to highly interventionist and environmentally
damaging activities like mining or polluting industries and made specific
recommendations about prohibited activities and those that require high level of
scrutiny and assessment before clearance within ESA. While recognizing the fact
that list of non-permissible activities recommended may not be enough to fully
manage the environmental fallout of development and also being fully aware that
management through prohibition and fiat is often detrimental to the interests of the
very people, the environment policy is aiming to protect. The Working Group has
suggested a balanced and nuanced approach – to say no to the most damaging and
high impact activities and at the same time creating an enabling process to
incentivize environmentally sound development that benefits local livelihoods and
economies.

The Working Group also took note of the environmentally friendly practices in
coffee plantations in Kodagu and cardamom plantations in Idduki and Wayanad
where integration of natural landscapes with human settlements exists. Indeed, it is
because of this harmony between people and nature in the Western Ghats, the
HLWG recommended policies to incentivize green growth that promotes sustainable
and equitable development across the Western Ghats region. The future lies in
working on green growth strategies that build on the natural endowment of the
Western Ghats region to create a vibrant economy, while preserving, conserving and
rejuvenating the ecology. As a part of the governance of Western Ghats ecology, the
Working Group also recommended to MoEF for setting up of a “Decision Support
and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats’’.
iii

Even as we take urgent steps as outlined in this report, the future planning and
regulations would call for constantly updating and improving our understanding of
this multi-dimensional Mountain System. The Western Ghats ecosystem has a high
degree of complexity arising out of a variety of non-linear interactions between its
component elements such as rich Biodiversity (Flora & Fauna), Hydrological
Systems, Geological and Geomorphological characteristics and Climatic Variations
coupled with impacts of human interventions. Understanding of such a system and
evolving specific strategies for sustainable development, after duly factoring
conservation and preservation imperatives, demand insights into the behavioural
pattern of this complex entity. Against this backdrop, our own understanding of the
system behaviour has not even scraped the surface of the huge embedded
knowledge bases and their interrelationships. The work of WGEEP and our own
work can help to highlight the need for understanding this complex system in its
variety of manifestations as we seek for maximum possible internal self-consistency
between competing demands of development, conservation and local livelihoods.
This is an area of research that can be carried out for several years involving some
of the most brilliant minds. In this context, we feel that we should inspire
generations of researchers to work on aspects relevant to the functioning of
Western Ghats Ecosystem for greater insight into its behaviour. This in turn can also
open up multiple pathways for decision making and facilitating the application of
criteria like multi-parameter optimization.

In short, the WGEEP report together with the present Report can be, indeed, a
starting point in a long and what could be an eventful odyssey to understand the
man-environmental relations through the eyes of Western Ghats which in the view
of its Creator can be a gift or a curse depending on how we judge and act.
Recognizing this aspect should truly make us humble.
Members
High Level Working Group

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Members of the High Level Working Group (HLWG) would like to record their
deep gratitude to the Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge) for
Environment & Forests, Smt. Jayanthi Natarajan for entrusting this important task to
us, a task which was challenging and called for finding a right balance between the
imperatives of conservation ecology and development for the complex Western
Ghats System.

The task entrusted to the HLWG involved development of multi parameter criteria,
analysis and modelling of different types of data and information. In executing this
aspect of the activity, the HLWG relied heavily on the expertise of Indian Space
Research Organization (ISRO) in general and National Remote Sensing Centre
(NRSC) in particular. Specifically, the Working Group would like to express their
sincere appreciation to the guidance provided by Dr. V.K. Dhadwal, Director, NRSC.
Further, nearly all the important aspects of this specialized effort were carried out
by Dr. Chandrasekhar Jha and Shri G. Rajashekar of NRSC who tirelessly worked on
various aspects of analysis and interpretation. The high levels of expectations of
HLWG were fully responded to by these scientists. We also recall with gratitude the
special interest Dr. K. Radhakrishnan, Chairman, ISRO took in extending all the
required support of ISRO for this purpose.

As a part of getting a second opinion through a peer review mechanism, the HLWG
requested a committee of Dr. Y.V.N Krishna Murthy, Director, Indian Institute of
Remote Sensing, Dr. V.B. Mathur, Dean, Wildlife Institute of India and Prof. Subhash
Ashutosh, Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy for the critical evaluation of the
methodologies used for identification of the Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESA). We
appreciate the high degree of professionalism brought to bear by these scientists in
reviewing the methodology adopted.

v

The HLWG had contacted the Governments of the 6 States of Western Ghats to seek
their specific views on the various recommendations made in the WGEEP report and
their implications. The States not only responded to these enquiries with quality
analytical inputs but also in most of the cases facilitated meetings of the working
Group with the concerned State Government officials who made excellent
presentations besides insightful discussions. Further, the HLWG had the privilege of
meeting with Chief Ministers of Maharashtra, Goa and Kerala along with their
Cabinet colleagues and elected representatives (MPs and MLAs belonging to
different parties). This aspect of interaction with the State Governments, their
elected representatives, functionaries and officials, provided the most valuable
inputs for the Working Group to draft its recommendations. The Working Group
would like to acknowledge with thanks the concerned functionaries at the State
levels and in particular Chief Secretaries and Secretaries of relevant Departments.

The HLWG also made similar request to the Ministries/ Departments of the Central
Government in the context of the WGEEP report. We would like to record our
appreciation for the exhaustive responses that we received from the Central
Ministries and Departments of the Government of India.

At the individual level, several important experts, professionals, NGOs and Activists
interacted with the HLWG. Whereas, it is not possible to exhaustively acknowledge
all the names, a few of them nevertheless merit mention. On the aspect of
delineation of the Western-Ghats, the very illuminating discussions HLWG had with
Prof. R. Vaidyanathan, Retd. Prof. of Geography and Geology, Andhra University, Dr.
Balakrishna, Deputy Director General, Geological Survey of India and Prof. K.R.
Subramanya of Geological Society of India are gratefully acknowledged. Further, the
invaluable technical inputs and advice on Wildlife corridors provided by Prof. V.B.
Mathur and Dr. Y.V. Jhala of Wildlife Institute of India are appreciated. Dr.
Jayaraman of ISRO provided excellent inputs on the concept of Decision Support and
Monitoring Centre for the Western Ghats.

vi

One of the most important meetings that HLWG had at the individual level was with
Prof. Madhav Gadgil, Chairman of WGEEP. The very extensive interaction of the
individual Members of HLWG with Prof. Madhav Gadgil was deeply insightful even
as we could glean his passion and commitment for the conservation of the Western
Ghats ecology. Discussion with Prof. Madhav Gadgil provided valuable inputs for the
HLWG, which also had discussions with many Members of WGEEP.
Many institutions provided useful information which were used by HLWG in
conducting analysis and assessment. The State Biodiversity Boards, State Forest
Departments, State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) and Tropical Botanical Garden
Research Institute (TBGRI), Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) and Karnataka
Power Corporation Limited (KPCL), to mention a few, provided valuable data on
different issues ranging from Hydropower projects to biodiversity conservation.

HLWG also met a number of stakeholders including experts, experienced and
knowledgeable citizens, associations of trade organizations, scientists and
academicians, who offered valuable suggestions on the different facets of the
Western Ghats. The HLWG also benefitted from meetings with some notable NGOs
and Activists.

The HLWG thanks the Planning Commission, particularly Smt Indu Patnaik, Joint
Advisor and Ms Urvana Menon, Young Professional (E & F) for their help in
providing data inputs on Western Ghats Development Programme and analysis of
the responses received.
Dr Amit Love, Deputy Director, Ministry of Environment and Forests, has been the
major force behind the functioning of HLWG and it would have been impossible to
accomplish the enormous task entrusted to HLWG without him.
The HLWG acknowledges the invaluable support provided by the scientists and
staff, particularly Dr Rakesh Kumar and Shri Pankaj Kumar working at the Centre of
Excellence Programme of the Ministry of Environment and Forests at the Centre for
vii

Environmental Management of Degraded Ecosystems, University of Delhi in
compilation and finalization of the report.
From the Ministry of Environment and Forests, we would like to particularly
recognize the excellent presentation made by Dr. G.V. Subramanyam on the various
aspects of WGEEP recommendations. Some of us also benefitted by the
comprehensive briefing by Dr. Nalini Bhatt on the history of evolution of the several
issues related to Athirappilly and Gundya projects. HLWG also acknowledges the
inputs given by senior officers of the MoEF viz. Dr. S.K. Khanduri, Dr. Satpathy, and
Dr. Burman. The HLWG would also like to express our thanks to Dr. V. Rajagopalan,
Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, for his keen interest in the progress
of the HLWG and also extending the support of the Ministry whenever called for.

viii

List of Tables
Table 1: Elevation and rainfall data at various sections of Western Ghats Region
Table 2: Different approaches followed in delimitation of Western Ghats
Table 3: Datasets (Layers) used in geospatial analysis and their sources
Table 4: Vegetation and land cover types in Natural and Cultural Landscapes of
Western Ghats Region.
Table 5: Number of villages and population density in ESAs and non ESAs of
Western Ghats Region
Table 6: Area under Natural and Cultural landscapes, ESA, PAs+WHSs and total area
of ‘talukas’ under Western Ghats region in different States of the Western Ghats Region
Table 7: Number of villages with ESA in each taluka, the total geographical area of
taluka and the area occupied by ESA in a taluka across the States of Western Ghats
Region

ix

List of Figures
Figure 1: Percent Responses and distribution pattern under categories ‘Not in
favour’ (A) and ‘in favour’ (B), to WGEEP Report.
Figure 2: Frequency distribution of responses under the two categories of
Responses ‘in support’ and ‘not in support’ to WGEEP Report.
Figure 3a: Distribution pattern of responses classified into identified issues under
category ‘not in favour’.
Figure 3b: Distribution pattern of responses classified into identified issues under
category ‘in favour’.
Figure 4: Frequency distribution pattern of responses to different aspects of
WGEEP Report under each of the two category.
Figure 5: Map of peninsular India showing the boundary of Western Ghats Region
and origin of major rivers, with Tapti river as the northern boundary of Western
Ghats.
Figure 6: Map of peninsular India showing 188 talukas of Western Ghats Region
that includes 7 talukas of Gujarat located to south of Tapti river – the northernmost
limit of Western Ghats Region.
Figure 7: Schematic representation of geospatial analysis carried out using different
datasets for identification of ESAs.
Figure 8: Mudigere taluka showing vegetation and land cover types.
Figure 9: Mudigere taluka showing natural and cultural landscapes.
Figure 10: Mudigere taluka showing ESAs.
Figure 11: Mudigere taluka showing ESZs of WGEEP overlaid on ESAs.
Figure 12: Vegetation and Land cover types in WG region.
Figure 13: Western Ghats region showing Natural and Cultural Landscapes and
water bodies.
Figure 14: Western Ghats region showing different levels of biological richness in
natural landscape.

x

Figure 15: Western Ghats region showing different levels of forest fragmentation in
natural landscape.
Figure 16: Western Ghats region showing different population densities.
Figure 17: Western Ghats region showing ESAs, PAs and WHSs.
Figure 18: Wildlife corridors (Tiger and Elephant) in ESA of Western Ghats region.
Figure 19: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Gujarat.
Figure 20: ESA in Western Ghats region of Gujarat.
Figure 21: Natural and cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Goa.
Figure 22: ESA in Western Ghats region of Goa.
Figure 23: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Maharashtra.
Figure 24: ESA in Western Ghats region of Maharashtra.
Figure 25: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Karnataka.
Figure 26: ESA in Western Ghats region of Karnataka.
Figure 27: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Kerala.
Figure 28: ESA in Western Ghats region of Kerala.
Figure 29: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Tamil Nadu.
Figure 30: ESA in Western Ghats region of Tamil Nadu.
Figure 31: Components of the proposed Center

xi

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION PLAN

The observations and discussions presented in different chapters of this Report
clearly indicate unambiguously that the eco-system of Western-Ghats is in need of
urgent attention and action. Out of the estimated 1,64,280 km2 of the Western-Ghats
area, the natural landscape constitutes only 41 per cent. The area identified as
ecologically sensitive is about 37 per cent i.e., about 90 % of the natural landscape. It
is against this backdrop of a fast dwindling unique ecosystem, that we make these
recommendations. Needless to emphasize, there is a great sense of urgency, in the
implementation of the tasks arising out of these recommendations, even though, we
fully recognize the sincere commitment that each of the Six States has displayed in
the context of protecting the rich Bio-diversity of this mountain range. In making
some of the general and sectoral recommendations, we are also aware that many of
these are already inbuilt into the present strategies of the respective States. In
repeating such recommendations, we are only underscoring the imperatives of
implementing such recommendations in letter and spirit. The summary of
recommendations are given below:

A.

Delineation and demarcation of ecologically sensitive area in Western
Ghats region

1.

In the absence of accepted definition and delimitation of Western Ghats in
terms of geology and geomorphological features, the talukas under Western
Ghats Development Programme of Planning Commission and under Hill
Development Programme and talukas located at the traditionally accepted
northernmost boundary of Western Ghats (south of Tapti river) in Gujarat
have been included in defining and delimitation of Western Ghats Region by
HLWG. The delimited area of 188 talukas in 6 States of Western Ghats has
been designated as Western Ghats Region which spreads over an area of
1,64,280 km2 between 8˚0’– 22˚26’ N and 72˚55’– 78˚11’ E and extends over
a distance of 1500km from Tapti River at the north to Kanyakumari at the
south, with altitudinal range (ellipsoid) from 0 to 2674 m above sea level and
xii

width ranging from 10km (at narrowest point) to 200km (at widest point).
HLWG recommends the adoption of the boundaries as demarcated in the
Report.

2.

About 60,000 km2 of natural landscape (approximately 37% of the total
geographical area of Western Ghats Region) has been identified as
Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) by HLWG, which represents more or less a
contiguous band of vegetation extending over a distance of 1500 km across 6
States of Western Ghats region and includes Protected Areas and World
Heritage Sites. The demarcation unit of ESA is the village. IRS LISS III derived
spatial layers on vegetation type and landscape level indices (with a fine
spatial resolution of 24 m) were used as the basis for identification of
ecologically sensitive areas (ESAs).

To facilitate sustainable development in the WG region, which is inhabited by
about 50 million people, the non ESA comprising mostly cultural landscape is
also demarcated. HLWG recommends that the Central government should
immediately notify the ESA area, demarcated by HLWG in public interest.
The need for urgent action is evident. In this notified area, development
restrictions as recommended in this report will apply.
3.

MoEF should put the ESA map in the public domain, which will enable
scrutiny and transparency in decisions.

B.

Development Restrictions in proposed Ecologically sensitive areas

4.

HLWG is recommending a prohibitory and regulatory regime in ESA for
those activities with maximum interventionist and destructive impact on the
ecosystem. All other infrastructure development activities, necessary for the
region, will be carefully scrutinized and assessed for cumulative impact and
development needs, before clearance.
xiii

5.

There should be a complete ban on mining, quarrying and sand mining in
ESA. All current mining areas should be phased out within the next 5 years,
or at the time of expiry of mining lease, whichever is earlier.

6.

No thermal power projects should be allowed in ESA. Hydropower projects
may be allowed but subject to following conditions:
(a) Uninterrupted ecological flow at atleast 30 per cent level of the rivers
flow in lean season till a comprehensive study establishes individual
baselines.
(b) After a cumulative study which assesses the impact of each project on the
flow pattern of the rivers and forest and biodiversity loss.
(c) Ensuring that the minimum distance between projects is maintained at 3
km and that not more than 50 per cent of the river basin is affected at any
time.

7.

HLWG recommends that wind energy should be included in EIA notification
and brought under purview of assessment and clearance.

8.

All ‘Red’ category industries should be strictly banned. As the list of
industries categorized as ‘orange’ includes many activities like food and fruit
processing, there will not be a complete prohibition on this category. But all
efforts should be made to promote industries with low environmental
impacts.

9.

Building and construction projects of 20,000 m2 and above should not be
allowed. Townships and area development projects should be prohibited.

xiv

10.

All other infrastructure and development projects/schemes should be
subject to environment clearance under Category ‘A’ projects under EIA
Notification 2006.

11.

Additional safeguard for forest diversion in ESA should be introduced. In
cases of forest clearance required in ESA, all information of the project, from
application stage to approval should be placed in the public domain on the
website of MoEF and of the forest department of the respective States.

12.

All development projects, located within 10 km of the Western Ghats ESA
and requiring Environment Clearance (EC), shall be regulated as per the
provisions of the EIA Notification 2006.

13.

HLWG recommends a framework for governance and regulation of ESA,
which draws on current regulatory institutions for decision-making, but
simultaneously, strengthens the data monitoring systems and the
participation and involvement of local communities in decision-making.

14.

Existing regulatory institutions and processes for environment and forest
clearances and project monitoring would need to be greatly strengthened for
the governance framework to be enforced and monitored effectively.

15.

The villages falling under ESA will be involved in decision making on the
future projects. All projects will require prior-informed consent and noobjection from the Gram Sabha of the village.

The provision for prior

informed consent under the Forest Rights Act will also be strictly enforced.
16.

The State Governments should also ensure consultation with local
communities while planning for protection of wildlife corridors.

17.

State Governments should immediately put in place structures for effective
enforcement of development restrictions and ensuring sustainable
development in ESA.

xv

C.
Financial arrangements and Incentivising Green Growth in Western
Ghats region

18.

HLWG recognizes that the Western Ghats even in those areas categorized as
natural landscapes, is inhabited. It is not wilderness area, but the habitat of
its people, who share the landscape with biological diversity. Conversely, the
cultural landscape is also biologically rich and the economic growth of the
entire region comes from its natural endowment of water, forests and
biodiversity. For this reason, HLWG has recommended policies to incentivize
environmentally sound growth across the Western Ghats.

19.

HLWG recommends that the Western Ghats States should come together to
negotiate for a grant-in aid from the Centre. The financial arrangement
should be of the nature of a debt for nature swap. This is a mechanism
whereby part of the outstanding debt of a State is swapped for new
constructive initiatives by it to protect its natural resources. A part of these
payments be retained by the State Governments and a part be used to
finance local conservation trust funds (as in several countries), which
disburse grants to community projects for improving forest productivity and
ensuring sustainable forest based livelihoods in ESAs. In addition, the 14th
Finance Commission should consider substantially increasing the fund
allotted to States by the 13th Finance Commission for forest and
environmental conservation.

20.

HLWG recommends that there should be arrangements for Payments for
Ecosystem Services accruing from ESA and non-ESA regions within the
Western Ghats. HLWG also recommends that individual State Governments
pursue such initiatives which may create possibilities for a dialogue on this
issue between municipalities and relevant Panchayats within their States.

xvi

21.

HLWG recommends considering extending Entry 20 (Economic Planning) in
the Concurrent List, and introduce an appropriate new entry, say 20A,
suitably titled, to ensure that developmental projects and activities are
undertaken within an overarching environmental and ecological framework.

22.

The Planning Commission should create a special Western Ghats Sustainable
Development Fund, as proposed in this Report. This fund will be used to
promote programmes specifically designed to implement an effective ESA
regime and incentivize green growth in the region.

23.

The 14th Finance Commission should consider options for ecosystem and
other service payments in the Western Ghats as well as allocation of funds to
ESA areas. It should also consider how these funds for environmental
management would be made available directly to local communities who live
in and around Western Ghats ESA.

24.

The Planning Commission is currently working on a ranking of States based
on Environmental Performance Index (EPI) developed by it. The EPI could be
used to devolve funds to the States. ESA should get ‘plus payments’ which
should be paid directly to the village community.

25.

The strategy evolved for the continuation of the Western Ghats Development
Programme, in the 12th Plan centres around, besides watershed based
development, fragility of the habitat, and development needs of the people
i.e. a Watershed + approach – an approach which emphasizes conservation,
minimal ecological disturbance, involvement of locals along with sustainable
model of economic development and livelihood generation with enhanced
allocation. After a careful consideration of the strategy proposed, the HLWG
recommends the following:
(a) Continuation of the WGD program with an enhanced allocation of Rs.
1000 crores,

xvii

(b) Continuation of the special category status to the program i.e. cost
sharing of 90:10 between Centre and State,
(c) Revival and reconstitution of the High Level Committee consisting of CMs
of the six States, for monitoring the implementation of the recommendations
/suggestions of the HLWG and existing legislations and periodical review the
status report of the Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western
Ghats Region,
(d) Setting up / strengthening of the State WG cell with a mandate to liaise
with SPCB, State Department of Forests, SEAC and SBA, and Regional office of
the MoEF and service the information and decision support needs of the
State Government.

26.

Forest management for inclusive development should require policies to
integrate forest accounts, including measurement of the tangible and
intangible benefits into State and National economic assessments and
policies to improve productivity of forests for economic benefits for local
communities.

27.

The current rules of timber transit, which do not incentivize forest
production on private lands and community forestlands, should be reviewed
and revised. The Forest Rights Act’s categorization of minor forest produce,
including bamboo should be promoted to build forest-based local economies.

28.

To promote sustainable agriculture, HLWG recommends a focused
programme to incentivize growers in the Western Ghats to move towards
organic cultivation and to build a unique ‘brand’ for such premium products
in the world market.

29.

In order to promote sustainable tourism, HLWG recommends the following:

xviii

(a) Existing regulatory provisions to assess environmental impact of tourism
projects must be strengthened.
(b) The tourism policy for Ecologically Sensitive Area of the Western Ghats
must provide local community ownership and benefits.
(c) All tourism hotspots in the Ecologically Sensitive Area should be
monitored for compliance with environmental conditions and development
restrictions and assessed in terms of impact.
D.

Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats

30.

The management of Western Ghats ecology involves conservation,
protection and rejuvenation as well as sustainable development in Western
Ghats through periodic assessments of environment and ecology on a long
term basis across the Six States of Western Ghats region using state-of-art
geospatial technologies. The information generated will be used for wide
range of purposes including planning and policy formulation from time to
time, keeping in view of changes monitored both in time and space. A Centre
with the mandate to: (i) use the existing and new knowledge to build a
vibrant political dialogue in the region as a whole on the need to make shifts
in development paradigm, given its particular vulnerability, (ii) assess and
report on the state of ecology of the entire region, and (iii) provide a decision
support function in the implementation of ESAs is essential. With this
objective in view, HLWG recommends for setting up the “Decision Support
and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats” by MoEF and it will be hosted by
one State and will have joint management of all Six States of the Western
Ghats region for conservation of the ecology and sustainable and equitable
development in Western Ghats Region.

31.

For the first time in conservation ecology and sustainable development,
HLWG with the help of NRSC developed a scientific, objective and practical
way of identifying Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESAs) at a fine resolution of
xix

24 m with village as a unit, using IRS LISS III derived spatial layers of
vegetation type and landscape indices (based on ground truthing involving
100’s of sampling sites under DBT-ISRO project on Biodiversity
Conservation). The maps generated on GIS platform having different layers
have a wide range of applications. Consequently, the HLWG recommends
that the approach followed for identification of ESAs serves as a model for
replication elsewhere in the region and country.
E.

Climate change and Western Ghats

32.

The predictions on climate change have been made using Global Climate
Models (GCMs) and Regional Climate Models (RCMs) with resolutions at
100km and 25km, respectively, which are very coarse for Western Ghats, the
width of which varies from 10 to 200km. There is a need for downscaling of
the data for ecosystem change models such as Dynamic Vegetation Growth
Models (DVGM) and Ecological Niche Models. HLWG recommends that the
proposed Centre may undertake these studies. In any case, the likely
increase in temperature regime, rainfall and extreme events, besides
decrease in the duration of precipitation which alone has serious concern for
Western Ghats ecosystem - increased water stress to the forests, in fire
incidences, evapo-transpiration and surface runoff. As a adaptive measure to
these changes, a number of adaptive strategies such as (i) species-mix
plantations, (ii) planting of hardy species that are resilient to increased
temperature and drought risk, and (iii) launching of a few adaptive projects
such as anticipatory plantation along altitudinal and latitudinal gradient and
linking of PAs and forests fragments and implementing advance fire warning
strategy, which have been outlined in Chapter 3, should be taken into
account while formulating policies across Western Ghats region

xx

F.

Specific cases referred to HLWG

33.

HLWG is of the view that while the importance of the proposed Athirappilly
hydropower project for meeting the peaking power requirements of the
State cannot be disputed, there is still uncertainty about ecological flow
available in the riverine stretch, which has a dam at a short distance
upstream of the proposed project. It recommends that given the increased
variability due to unpredictable monsoon, the project must be revaluated in
terms of the generation of energy and whether the plant load factor expected
in the project makes it viable against the loss of local populations of some
species. Based on this revaluation and collection of data on ecological flow,
the Government of Kerala, could take forward the proposal, if it so desires
with the Ministry of Environment and Forests.

34.

As the proposed Gundya hydropower project is located in the ESA, it must be
proceeded upon with extreme caution. HLWG recommends that the
Government of Karnataka should reassess the ecological flow in the
downstream areas, based on a thorough evaluation of hydrological regimes
in the area. The project should not be given the go-ahead, till such a review
and reassessment is made. The Government’s review must also assess local
damage to all forests, which will emanate from the construction work and if
at all, this can be mitigated. The HWLG has not proposed a complete ban on
the construction of hydropower projects in the ESA, but its recommended
conditions that balance the needs of energy with environment, must be
followed.

35.

HLWG has recommended that there should be a complete ban on mining
activity in ESA and that current mining activities in ESA would be phased out
within five years, or at the time of expiry of the mining lease, whichever is
earlier. In view of the fact that the matter of iron ore mining in Goa is

xxi

pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, HLWG does not find it
appropriate to make any other recommendation in the matter.

36.

Sindhudurg and Ratnagiri districts have three categories of areas: (i) area
under ESA, (ii) area under non ESA within Western Ghats and (iii) area
outside Western Ghats region. HLWG recommends that the moratorium
imposed should be lifted with the following conditions. As per the
recommendations of this report, in the area of these two districts, which has
been categorized as ESA, the sectoral restrictions and regulations will apply.
In addition, all development projects located within 10 km of the Western
Ghats ESA and requiring Environment Clearance (EC) shall be regulated as
per the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006. In the remaining area,
including the area outside ESA but within Western Ghats, environment and
forest processes and regulations will continue to apply. However, in order to
ensure that such development projects do not adversely impact the
environmental balance of the two districts, MoEF should monitor on regular
basis the cumulative impact of projects, which may come up in these districts
and take policy decisions at appropriate time based on such findings.

Action Plan
I

Considering the urgency in protecting and safeguarding the remaining biodiversity rich areas in Western Ghats, MoEF needs to notify ESA
recommended by HLWG and also issue other notifications, regulations etc.,
as may be required to implement the aforesaid recommendations as soon as
possible in public interest.

II

The aforesaid recommendations clearly bring out the requirements for their
implementation. MoEF should be the overall nodal Ministry to ensure timely
implementation of these recommendations. Each of the Six State

xxii

Governments may identify the nodal department to co-ordinate the
implementation of these recommendations in the State.

III

On recommendations relating to financial arrangements and incentivising
green growth in Western Ghats region, co-ordinated action needs to be taken
by MoEF, Planning Commission and Ministry of Finance. In particular, the
14th Finance Commission should be persuaded to provide sufficient
allocation of funds to the States in the Western Ghats for forest and
environment conservation. Further, as recommended above, the Planning
Commission should strengthen the implementation of Western Ghats
Development Programme.

xxiii

CHAPTER 1

Introduction
The Western Ghats (WG) or the Sahyadri is the majestic mountain range on the
fringes of the west coast of India. It is one among the seven great mountain ranges in
the country and is next only to the Himalayas. Its landscape is unique in terms of
geology, biology and ecology. The mountain range extends over a distance of 15001600 km from Tapti river in the north to Kanyakumari in the south with an average
elevation of more than 600 m and traverses through Six States viz. Gujarat,
Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. Its geology and
geomorphology coupled with high rainfall makes the Western Ghats as one of the
most ecologically diversified landscapes. It is this ecological diversity of WG that
supports: (i) a wide range of forest types ranging from tropical wet evergreen
forests to grasslands, (ii) some 4000 species of flowering plants with high degree of
endemism and (iii) rich fauna with endemism ranging from 11% to 78% among
different groups. Consequently, Western Ghats constitutes not only one of the
hotspots of biodiversity in the world, but also one among world’s eight hottest
hotspots.

The Western Ghats is the home for about 50 million people belonging to the Six
States of the Country. It is the source of water for the entire Peninsular India, and
also influences the monsoons. The life supporting and biodiversity rich ecosystems
of Western Ghats are threatened today due to habitat pressures.

1.1

Background and Constitution of HLWG

The Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF), Government of India, has been
concerned with degradation of Western Ghats in the past due to increasing
population pressure. Keeping in view of the ecological sensitivity and significance of
the region, complex interstate nature of its geography and also possible impacts of

.

climate change, the MoEF constituted a 14- member Western Ghats Ecology Expert

1

Panel (WGEEP), with Professor Madhav Gadgil as its Chairman, on 4th March 2010.
The Panel submitted its report on 30th August 2011.

Considering the complex interstate character of the Western Ghats and the
recommendations of WGEEP which involved demarcation of Ecologically Sensitive
Zones (ESZ) and zonal regulations of important sectors of activities, the Ministry
sought comments/suggestions of all stakeholders. Over a thousand and seven
hundred responses were received by the Ministry when the WGEEP Report was
made public and put on the website of the Ministry.

It is in this background that the MoEF constituted the High Level Working Group
(HLWG) vide office order dated 17th August 2012 (Annexure 1) with inter alia the
following terms of reference:

(i) examine the WGEEP Report in a holistic and multidisciplinary fashion in the light
of responses received from the concerned Governments of States, Central Ministries
and Stakeholders, keeping in view the following matters: (a) sustainability of
equitable economic and social growth in the region while preserving the precious
biodiversity, wildlife, flora and fauna and preventing their further losses; (b)
ensuring the rights, needs and developmental aspirations of local and indigenous
people, tribals, forest dwellers and most disadvantaged sections of the local
communities while balancing equitable economic and social growth with
sustainable development and environmental integrity; (c) the effects and impacts of
climate change on the ecology of Western Ghats region, (d) the implication of
recognizing some sites in Western Ghats as world heritage sites in the conservation
and sustainable development in Western Ghats and (e) the constitutional
implications of Centre –State relations with respect to conservation and sustainable
development in Western Ghats; (ii) to interact with the representatives of the Six
States

of

Western

Ghats

region

and

other

stakeholders,

particularly

for further course of action on WGEEP Report; (iv) any other relevant matter that
2

.

environmentalists and conservation specialists; (iii) to suggest to the Government

may be referred to it by the Central Government; and (v) submission of Action Plan
to implement WGEEP Report in the most effective and holistic manner.

1.2

Working of HLWG

During its tenure HLWG held 10 meetings, undertook four field visits and had
interactions with State Governments and stakeholders (Annexure 2).
In the first meeting of HLWG, the MoEF presented an overview of the WGEEP Report
and responses of State Governments, Central Ministries and Stakeholders. The
Group decided to carefully review the Report of the WGEEP submitted in line with
the terms of Reference assigned / its given TORs .

To achieve this and to address the issues raised by stakeholders on WGEEP Report,
the HLWG decided to adopt a number of approaches. These approaches are
described below. One approach followed was to visit different States in Western
Ghats region and interact with democratically elected State Governments and other
stakeholders. During its tenure, HLWG visited Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala and
Goa.

In Maharashtra, HLWG held discussions with the Hon’ble Chief Minister Shri
Prithviraj Chavan, his Cabinet colleagues, Chief Secretary and Secretaries of relevant
Departments.

In Karnataka, the HLWG held discussions with Chief Secretary and Secretaries of
relevant Departments and Forest Officials. Chairman HLWG also met the Hon’ble
Chief Minister Shri Jagadish Shettar.

In Kerala, HLWG had discussions with Hon’ble Chief Minister, Shri Oommen Chandy,

.

his Cabinet colleagues, Chief Secretary and Secretaries of relevant Departments and

3

Chairperson of State Biodiversity Board. The HLWG also met elected representatives
of Parliament and State Legislature.

In Goa, HLWG had discussion with Hon’ble Chief Minister Shri Manohar Parrikar and
Secretaries of relevant Departments.

During these visits, HLWG also met Stakeholders including representatives of civil
society, NGOs, professionals, industry and trade associations, planter associations,
professionals, academicians and local communities.

The second approach followed was to elicit responses from State Governments and
Central Ministries to a questionnaire formulated by HLWG based on its ToRs. The
third approach adopted was to make field visits to the sites of the developmental
projects activities which were to be reviewed as per the ToR. As a part of wider
consultations, HLWG also visited Pune and held discussion with Professor Madhav
Gadgil, Chairman, WGEEP.

HLWG couldn’t visit the States of Tamil Nadu and Gujarat as no convenient dates for
the visit could be finalized in consultation with the State Governments. However,
their inputs were received and were duly considered by HLWG while firming up its
recommendations.

HLWG undertook field visits to assess the ground reality with respect to two
proposed hydropower projects (Athirapilly and Gundya), development activities in
Sindhudurg and Ratnagiri, Mining in Goa, and area specific issues related to Idukki
and Wayanad. During these visits, HLWG interacted with Stakeholders, NGOs and
activists besides the project staff and officials of district administration and
concerned Departments of the States.

consideration (i) Ministry of Steel, (ii) Ministry of Mines, (iii) Ministry of Urban
4

.

The following ten Central Ministries provided their comments to the HLWG for

Development, (iv) Ministry of Commerce, (v) Ministry of Railways, (vi) Ministry of
Power, (vii) Ministry of Agriculture, (viii) Ministry of Tribal Affairs, (ix) Ministry of
Rural Development, and (x) Ministry of Tourism.

HLWG solicited help of National Remote Sensing Centre (NRSC), Indian Space
Research Organization (Hyderabad) to undertake geospatial analysis of Western
Ghats region to demarcate and evolve scientific, objective and a practical approach
for identification of Eco-Sensitive Areas (ESA) in Western Ghats, at a finer resolution
with the village as the unit. HLWG had a number of detailed discussions with the
Director and Scientists of NRSC for selection of criteria and the methodologies to be
followed for geospatial analysis.

A one-day intensive brainstorming session was held at NRSC to look into the
following technical issues viz. (i) the definition and demarcation of boundaries of
Western Ghats in terms of geology and geomorphology, (ii) review of geospatial
data sets available on WG and (iii) improvement of methodologies used in
geospatial analysis for identification of eco-sensitive areas. Eminent geologists,
geomorphologists, wildlife experts from Wildlife Institute of India (WII) and Wildlife
Trust of India (WTI), University Departments and Geological Survey of India
participated in the brainstorming session.
Based on these extensive and intensive discussions with experts, HLWG critically
examined (i) the geospatial layers to be used, (ii) the data sets available and their
compatibility at the level of resolution, (iii) the level of resolution, (iv) the
processing load within a reasonable time frame, (vi) quality of analysis and (vii)
optimization of 24 m resolution. After taking into account the evaluation of these
parameters, it was decided to use the data sets generated under DBT-ISRO project at
landscape level on natural and cultural landscapes, biological richness,
fragmentation, human population density, the data sets of Protected Areas (PAs)

.

and World Heritage Sites (WHSs), Tiger corridors available at WII, and dataset of

5

Elephant corridors of WTI for identification of ecologically sensitive areas, at a fine
resolution of 24m using village as a unit.

The geospatial analysis carried out at NRSC and the results obtained were reviewed
by a three member peer-review Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. Y.V.N.
Krishnamurthy, Director, Indian Institute of Remote Sensing, Dehradun (Appendix I).
1.3

Scope of the Report

The HLWG Report provides a set of recommendations and Action Plan for the
conservation of the unique ecology and sustainable and equitable development in
Western Ghats region based upon: (a) careful examination of the WGEEP Report, (b)
the submissions received from State Governments, Central Ministries and
Stakeholders on the Report, (c) direct interactions of HLWG (during field visits) with
Four State Governments at different levels (Chief Ministers, Chief Secretary), elected
representatives of State Legislative Assemblies and Parliament and other
stakeholders, and (d) written responses submitted by all the Six States and Twelve
Central Ministers to the questionnaire sent by HLWG.

This report is organized in two volumes. Volume I is the main Report and Volume II
contains the Annexures to the main Report. The main Report has eight Chapters.
The first chapter details the uniqueness of Western Ghats, the background that led
to the constitution of HLWG by the Government and its ToRs, working of the HLWG
and scope of the Report.

Chapter 2 covers the evaluations of Comments /

Observations of State Governments, Central Ministries and Stakeholders and
provides statistical analysis of the responses received on WGEEP Report including
the questionnaire sent to State Governments and Central Ministries. It also
highlights the issues of concern communicated by the Six States and Twelve Central

.

Ministries.

6

Chapter 3 outlines the impacts of climate change on the ecology of Western Ghats
and provides the likely impacts of climate change in key sectors such as forests and
biodiversity, agriculture, water, irrigation and hydropower in Western Ghats, and
also suggests adaptive strategies to overcome some of the impacts. Chapter 4
explains the procedure adopted by HLWG to define and demarcate the boundaries
of Western Ghats for identifying Ecologically Sensitive Areas in the absence of
accepted definition of Western Ghats. The Chapter reviews the different approaches
followed in the past for demarcating the boundaries of Western Ghats based on the
geological origin and structure, geomorphology, altitude, vegetation cover and
rainfall. Chapter 5 deals with the need for scientific, objective and practical strategy
for delimiting Ecologically Sensitive Areas in the light of comments received on the
shortcomings of the method of zoning in WGEEP Report. It explains the geospatial
methodologies followed by HLWG and the procedures followed in delimitation of
Western Ghats region into Natural and Cultural landscapes. It explains the methods
of delineation of ESA within the natural landscape with village as a unit and at a fine
resolution of 24 m, including the overlaying of PAs, WHSs and Wildlife corridors on
the ESA. The results obtained based on the methodology adopted by HLWG are
analyzed for 188 talukas in terms of the area covered under ESAs and number of
villages falling under ESA. Maps of Western Ghats showing vegetation and land
cover classes, natural and cultural landscapes, biodiversity richness, fragmentation
and human population density and ESA, and Maps of each of Six States showing
natural and cultural landscapes and ESAs are also provided.

Chapter 6 deals with the strategies proposed by HLWG for sustainable and inclusive
development with environmental integrity in Western Ghats region. The Chapter
also outlines recommendations for sector level planning and development
restrictions in ESAs for major sectors such as mining, energy, industry, and
infrastructure. It also explains the mechanisms and financial arrangement for
incentivizing green growth and the challenges of having world heritage tag for 39

.

sites in Western Ghats region. It also recommends a frame work for governance and

7

regulation, with a key recommendation on the setting up a “Decision Support and
Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats”.

Chapter 7 outlines the details of proposed “Decision Support and Monitoring
Centre” for Western Ghats to build a knowledge base and provide technical/decision
support to the State Government. The Centre would enable monitoring, using
geospatial technologies and this would lead to sustainable development of the
region. The objectives of the proposed Centre and the modalities for its
establishment are also detailed.

Chapter 8 reviews the two proposed hydropower projects at Athirappilly in Kerala
and Gundya in Karnataka, development activities in Sindhudurg and Ratnagiri and
mining in Goa, keeping in view the: (i) assessment made by WGEEP, (ii) discussions
held with State Governments and local stakeholders, and (iii) field visits to the sites
by HLWG.

In summary, this report has addressed the Terms of Reference mandated to
the HLWG, reviewed the current status of Western Ghats including the
contents of WGEEP Report, outlined the approaches adopted for defining
Western Ghats boundaries, described the methodology used for delineating
the ESA and has provided the details for interpretation and conclusions

.

leading to a set of recommendations and the follow up actions.

8

CHAPTER 2

Evaluation of Comments of Stakeholders,
State Governments and Central Ministries

2.1

Introduction

To elicit the views of the Stakeholders, concerned State Governments and Central
Ministries and to assess the implications of the WGEEP Report for the Western
Ghats region both in terms of Conservation of Ecology and Sustainable
Development, the MoEF hosted the WGEEP Report on the website on 23rd May 2012.
The HLWG evaluated the responses received from the stakeholders and further
called for detailed comments and views through a questionnaire drafted by the
Group from the six Western Ghats States (Gujarat, Goa, Maharashtra, Karnataka,
Kerala and Tamil Nadu) and held discussions with Four State Governments, viz.
Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala and Goa. Discussions with the State Governments
of Tamil Nadu and Gujarat were not held as mutually convenient time could not be
fixed. However, their inputs were duly considered by HLWG while firming up its
recommendations.

Secretaries of twelve concerned Central Government Ministries, i.e., Power, Steel,
Agriculture, Commerce & Industry, Urban Development, Railways, Rural
Development (Department of Land Resources), Tribal Affairs, Tourism, Water
Resources, Mines & Surface Transport were also requested by the HLWG for
comments

on the

WGEEP Report. This Chapter provides an analysis of the

.

responses received.

9

2.2

Analysis of Responses received from Stakeholders

2.2.1 Responses received from Stakeholders on the WGEEP Report before the
constitution of HLWG
Over a thousand seven hundred and fifty responses were received from
stakeholders including local Self Governments, Industry, Experts, local individuals
etc. The summary of the comments /suggestions received on the WGEEP Report are
given in Annexure 3. The responses received were analysed and were assigned
under two major groups viz: Responses ‘not in favour’ and ‘in favour’ to WGEEP
Report. Eighty one percent of the communication received expressed concerns
regarding the recommendations and also the methodology followed. All the
responses were further analysed for issues of concern and categorized under the
above two major categories of responses.

Responses “not in favour” of the WGEEP report could be classified into six heads
namely 1. Zoning Methodology, 2. Moratorium on Lote Parshuram, 3. Mining in
Sindudurg , 4. Mining in Goa, 5. Establishment of WGEA and 6. General Comments.
While the Responses “in favour” of the report dealt with, Gundiya Hydropower
project, implementation of the WGEEP Report, translation of the report in local
languages

and extension of time limit for responses and General Comments

(Annexure 4). The percentage responses under both the heads category wise is
illustrated in (Fig 1a & Fig-1b).

.

Figure 1: Percent of Responses under categories ‘Not in favour’ (A) and ‘in favour’ (B), to WGEEP
Report and distribution pattern of percent responses to different aspects of WGEEP Report

10

2.2.2 Responses received from Stakeholders after the constitution of HLWG
A hundred and forty five responses were received by the HLWG till the end of March
2013 from stakeholders. The Group carefully analyzed the responses received and
made an attempt to address the concerns expressed. Of the 145 responses received,
only 30.34% of the responses supported the WGEEP Report. Of the remaining 69.66
% responses, most of them commented on the inappropriateness and un
implementable nature of the recommendations made in the Report. A few also
suggested modifications to enable acceptance of the report to some extent. The
responses received include specific comments on large Grid Size used, boundaries of
talukas, cultivation of GM crops , livelihood issues and project specific comments
especially w.r.t. Athirappilly and Gundya HEPs. The issue of moratorium on new
clearances for mining, setting up of red and orange category industries in Ecosensitive Zones, establishment of an authority for monitoring and implementation of
the recommendations, enforced organic cultivation, Cumulative EIA and
decommissioning of dams and HEPs have been extensively mentioned among these
responses.
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

69.66

Category of responses: ‘not in favour’ (69.66%)
Technical
Comments

13.79

15.17

30.34

Project Specific
Comments

11.72

10.34

In support of the WGEEP Not in support of WGEEP
Report
Report + Responses with
suggested modifications

18.62

Recommendations
/Regulatory
Framework
Socio Economic
Issues
General
Comments

Figure 3a: Distribution pattern of
response classified to different aspects of
WGEEP Report under category ‘not in
favour’

Figure 2: Frequency distribution of
responses under the two categories ‘in
support’ and ‘not in support’ to WGEEP
Report

Figure 2 depicts distribution of percent responses under ‘in support’ and ‘not in
support’ which also includes the ones which support the WGEEP Report with
.

suggested modification.
11

The responses received to WGEEP Report were grouped under two categories- ‘in
favour’ and ‘not in favour’ and then analysed. The percent distribution of responses
to five aspects viz. Technical, Project/Area Specific, Socio-economic Concerns,
Recommendations/ Regulatory Framework and General are given in Figure 3a & b
(Annexure 5).
Detailed analysis of the two categories of responses ‘for’ and ‘against’ to specific
concerns on eco-sensitive zones, need and acceptability of Hydel Power, new
institutional mechanism for approvals, monitoring and implementations, scientific
methodology and cumulative EIA was also carried out (Figure 4).
Category of responses: ‘in favour’ (30.34%)

30

Response %

28.4

25
20.9

7.59

General responses
supporting the WGEEP
Report

22.76

Project Specific
Responses supporting
the WGEEP Report

20

10

14.9

13.4

15

For
Against

9.0
7.5

5

3.0

3.0

0
Zonation
Need and
Establishment
Methodology Acceptability of
of WGEA
Hydel Power

Figure 3b: Distribution pattern of percent
responses to different aspects of WGEEP
Report under category ‘in favour’

2.3

Reform i n EIA

Figure 4: Frequency distribution pattern
of responses to different aspects of
WGEEP Report under each of the two
categories

Comments received from State Governments

A comparative statement of major comments of the six State Governments to
Sectoral recommendations and the WGEEP Report is at Annexure 6.

The comments received were grouped under mining, quarry and sand mining, land
use, transport, non conventional energy (wind energy etc), power/ energy including
hydro power, water – irrigation and inter basin diversion of water from rivers,
.

polluting industries (red/orange), agriculture, tourism, forestry on public and

12

private land, biodiversity, waste treatment, animal husbandry, area development,
green buildings and Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).

The responses received from the States on the above sectors/issues are summarized
below:
1. Citing socio economic development needs, possible law and order situation
and livelihood imperatives, a complete ban on mining in ESZ 1 has not been
agreed to by the States except Karnataka which has stopped the issue of
permissions for mining in Western Ghats.
2. The need to allow quarrying and sand mining with Environmental Impact
Mitigation measures without compromising ecological and environmental
balance and on institution of a special scheme for regulating mining has been
stressed by the States of Maharashtra, Kerala and Gujarat.
3. Recommendations regarding no change in land use in ESZ areas, no new
permission for Special Economic Zone and no new hill stations in public land
have not been agreed to by the State of Maharashtra. The State of Kerala has
accepted the recommendation subject to the relevant provisions of law as
existing legal provisions do not permit such conversion in the State.
4. The States of Maharashtra, Kerala and Gujarat have clearly indicated that
restriction on transport infrastructure recommended in the Western Ghats
Region is unacceptable.
5. The States of Maharashtra, Kerala and Gujarat have indicated the need to set
up solar and wind energy infrastructure which are sources of green energy.
6. The embargo on new Hydroelectric projects and the conditions imposed on
them are unacceptable to the States of Kerala, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu.
7. The State of Karnataka has indicated that the recommendation on
Hydropower projects will be taken into consideration while taking up
projects in the WG Region in the State. Restriction on dam height and
recommendation regarding decommissioning of dams and thermal power
projects has been strongly opposed by the States of Kerala, Maharashtra,
.

Tamil Nadu and Gujarat.
13

8. Indicating that the recommendation on no inter basin diversion of water
from rivers is against the Water Policy and suggesting that water needs to be
allowed for human needs from water surplus to water deficit basin, the
States of Maharashtra, Kerala and Tamil Nadu have strongly registered their
objection to this recommendation.
9. Many of the recommendations especially w.r.t. water sector like catchment
area treatment, protection of high altitude valley, swamps, water bodies,
water conservation measures, rehabilitation of mined areas and improved
river flow and scientific water quality management have been accepted by
the States of Maharashtra and Kerala.
10. Maharashtra State has clearly indicated that the complete ban on red and
orange industry imposed would greatly affect the 37 MIDC areas falling
under the ESZ. Hence it is strongly opposed to such a move.
11. The States of Kerala and Maharashtra have suggested imposition of stringent
pollution standards and monitoring of red and orange category industry.
12. The States of Karnataka, Kerala and Maharashtra have accepted promotion of
organic agricultural practices including phasing out of use of insecticides,
promoting ecological farming etc. They have, however, recommended
incentives for farmers shifting to organic farming including budgetary
support.
13. With a caveat that the ecotourism policy of the MoEF shall be refined by the
State of Karnataka, Karnataka and Kerala have accepted the safe tourism
practices advocated.
14. Recommendations

with

regard

to

forest

and

biodiversity

and

implementation of the Forests Rights Act, have been accepted by the States of
Karnataka, Kerala and Maharashtra. The State of Kerala has suggested
possible introduction of incentives for maintaining natural vegetation.
15. Introduction of incentives for biodiversity conservation has been accepted by
the State of Kerala subject to Special Funds being made available to
Biodiversity Management Committees and devolution of funds to the State
.

Department of Environment.
14

16. The State of Kerala has accepted the recommendation regarding no
hazardous and toxic waste processing unit in ESZ1 and ESZ2.
17. Recommendations regarding introduction of incentives for maintenance of
land races of livestock, redeploying subsidies for chemical fertilizers and
related recommendation w.r.t. Protected Areas have been accepted.
18. The State of Kerala has also accepted the need for best practices for
construction, top soil conservation, green building certification etc. regarding
area treatment and development subject to legislation in the State and local
conditions.
19. The State of Kerala has stated that exclusive building code for the Western
Ghats region is unacceptable.
20. Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu have accepted the recommendation that
Genetically Modified Crops should not be allowed in the Western Ghats. The
State of Kerala has however qualified the acceptance subject to State policy.
21. The State of Kerala has indicated that the plastic bags are being managed and
would be managed as per existing rules ‘The Recycled Plastic (Manufacture
and Usage) Rules” notified under the Environment Protection Act, 1986.
22. The Govt. of Tamil Nadu has constituted a Hill Area Conservation Authority
(HACA) in 1990/2003. HACA is a regulatory authority for Thirty One talukas
in Nine districts which fall in Western Ghats of the State.
23. The recommendations on the establishment of Western Ghats Ecology
Authority (WGEA) has not been accepted by all the State Governments.
2.4

Comments received from Central Government Ministries /Departments.

Ten out of the twelve concerned Central Government Ministries, viz; Power, Steel,
Agriculture, Commerce & Industry, Urban Development, Railways, Rural
Development (Department of Land Resources), Tribal Affairs, Tourism, Water
Resources, Mines and Surface Transport have communicated their views/

.

comments on the WGEEP Report.

15

The Ministry of Power has indicated the need to examine individual projects
especially hydro power on the merits and demerits and take a decision on a case to
case basis, instead of a blanket ban which is recommended. They have also
suggested a review based on the need and progress made on Athirappilly and
Gundya projects. An omnibus ban on mining activity in the ecologically sensitive
zones of the WG is considered inappropriate by the Ministry of Mines.
As per the Ministry of Commerce, if the recommendations of Gadgil Committee are
accepted, species indigenous to India like cardamom, pepper and some of the tree
spices might suffer heavily, which will adversely affect our trade in spices.

Ministries of Urban Development, Tourism and Tribal Affairs suggested that
recommendations and action points mentioned in the WGEEP Report on
demarcation of WG, Sustainable tourism and implementation of FRA, may be
adopted. The Gist of the Comments received from Central Ministries is given in
Annexure 7.

Annexure 8 givers responses received from State Governments and Central
Ministries.
2.5

Summary

The foregoing analysis of responses from the Stakeholders, the Six WG States, and
the Ten Central Ministries indicate, that delineation of Western Ghats, Zonation of
Eco-Sensitive Zones, moratorium on Mining, establishment of Western Ghats
Ecology Authority, restriction on infrastructure development and decommissioning
of dams are areas of great concern to all the stakeholders, however the need to
promote Organic farming,, phasing out pesticides, banning Red category industries
in eco-sensitive zones found acceptance. The locals including members of the local
bodies and elected representative were categorical about specific issues such as

.

translation of WGEEP Report in to local language and extension of time for

16

comments, restriction on mining in Goa and Sindhudurg, inclusion of certain talukas
in ESZ and non grant of permission for Gundya Hydroeclectric project.

The concerns expressed and comments/suggestions made by the State
Governments, Central Ministries and Stakeholders on the WGEEP Report and on the
implications of its recommendations have, after careful scrutiny and scientific

.

analysis, been addressed in various chapters of the Report of the HLWG.

17

CHAPTER 3

Impact of Climate Change on the Ecology of Western Ghats
3.1
Introduction
Climate change is not only a major global environmental problem but is also an
issue of great concern and challenge to a developing country such as ours. The
earth’s climate has demonstrably changed on both global and regional scales since
the pre-industrial era, with some of these changes attributable to human activities.
The observed changes in regional climate have already affected many of the physical
and biological systems and there are also indications that social and economic
systems have also been affected.

Climate change is likely to threaten food

production; increase water stress and decrease its availability; lead to sea level rise
flooding crop fields and coastal settlements; and increase the occurrence of disease
such as malaria. India has limited capacity to develop and adopt strategies to
reduce their vulnerability to changes in climate in the wake of adequate resources,
access to technology and finances (NATCOM, 2012).

Assessment of impacts of projected climate change on natural and socio economic
systems is central to the whole issue of climate change. Climate change impact
assessment involves the following:

-

Identification, analysis and evaluation of the impact of climate
variability and change on natural ecosystems, socio economic systems
and human health

-

Assessment of the vulnerabilities which also depend on the
institutional and financial capacities of the affected communities such
as farmers, forest dwellers and fishermen

-

Assessment of the potential adaptation responses

-

Development of technical, institutional and financial strategies to

.

reduce the vulnerability of the ecosystems and populations.

18

India has low adaptive capacity to withstand the adverse impacts of climate change
due to high dependence of majority of the population on climate sensitive sectors
such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries, coupled with poor infrastructure
facilities, weak institutional mechanisms and lack of financial resources. India is,
therefore, seriously concerned with the possible impacts of climate change such as:

-

Water stress and reduction in availability of fresh water due to
potential decline in rainfall

-

Threats to agriculture and food security since agriculture is monsoon
dependent and rainfed agriculture dominates many States in India

-

Shifts in area and boundary of different forest types and threat to
biodiversity with adverse implications for forest dependent
communities

-

Impacts on human health due to increase in vector and water borne
diseases such as malaria

-

Increased energy requirements and impacts on climate sensitive
industry and infrastructure.

Assessment of climate change impacts, and vulnerability and adaptation to climate
change, requires a wide range of physical, biological and socio economic models,
methods, tools and data.

Principally, the studies on impact of climate change on Western Ghats have been
undertaken on forests and crops grown in the region. The methods for assessing the
vulnerability, impacts and adaptation are gradually improving but are still
inadequate to help policy makers to formulate appropriate adaptation measures,
due to uncertainties in regional climate projections, unpredictable response of
natural and socio economic systems and the inability to foresee future technological

.

development.

19

3.2

Impacts of Climate Change on Forests and Biodiversity

3.2.1 Impacts on Forests
The impacts of climate change on forests in India have been assessed based on the
changes in area under different forest types, shifts in boundary of forest types, and
net primary productivity (NPP). The Assessments in India’s Second National
Communication to UNFCCC was based on (i) spatial distribution of current climatic
variables, (ii) future climate projected by relatively high-resolution regional climate
models for two different periods for the A1B* climate change scenario, and (iii)
vegetation types, NPP, and carbon stocks as simulated by the dynamic model IBIS
v.2, or Integrated Biosphere Simulator. The vegetation distribution simulated by
IBIS illustrates an expansion of tropical evergreen forests in the Eastern India
Plateau and in Western Ghats.

The assessment of climate impacts show that, at the national level, about 45% of the
forested grids are likely to undergo change. Vulnerability assessment showed that
the vulnerable forested grids are spread across India. However, their concentration
is higher in the upper Himalayan stretches, parts of central India, northern Western
Ghats, and Eastern Ghats. In contrast, north- eastern forests, southern Western
Ghats, and the forested regions of eastern India are estimated to be least vulnerable.
Currently, within the forested area of 69 Mha, only 8.35 Mha is categorized as very
dense forest. More than 20 Mha of forest is monoculture, and more than 28.8 Mha of
forests are fragmented (open forest) and have low tree density. Low tree density,

*A1B scenario:
This scenario assumes significant innovations in energy technologies, which improve energy efficiency and
reduce the cost of energy supply. Such improvements occur across the board and neither favour nor penalize the
particular groups of technologies. A1B assumes, in particular, drastic reductions in power generation costs
through the use of solar, wind, and other modern renewable energies, and significant progress in gas
exploration, production, and transport. This results in a balanced mix of technologies and supply sources with
technology improvements and resource assumptions such that no single source of energy is overly dominant.

.

Source: IPCC (2000)

20

low biodiversity status as well as higher levels of fragmentation contribute to the
vulnerability of these forests. Western Ghats, though a biodiversity hotspot, has
fragmented forests in its northern parts. This makes these forests additionally
vulnerable to climate change as well as to increased risk of fire and pest
attack.

Forests are likely to benefit to a large extent (in terms of NPP) in the northern parts
of the Western Ghats and the eastern parts of India, while they are relatively
adversely affected in the western and central India. This means that afforestation,
reforestation, and forest management in the northern Western Ghats and eastern
India may experience carbon sequestration benefits.

Impact on Net Primary Productivity (NPP): An increasing trend over India of NPP
based on A1B Scenario has been predicted. An increase on an average of 30.3% by
2035 and 56.2% by 2085 is predicted.

3.2.2 Implications for Biodiversity
In the Western Ghats climate change is expected to increase species losses. Changes
in phenology are expected to occur in many species. The general impact of climate
change is that habitats of many species will move poleward. Species that make up a
community are unlikely to shift together. Ecosystems dominated by long-lived
species will be slow to show evidence of change and slow to recover from the
climate related stress.

3.3

Impact of Climate Change on Agriculture

Even though there are not many recorded observations on the impact of climatic
extremes in the past on crops grown in the area, some of the striking effects have
been the adverse impact of the drought of 1983 on many plantation crops.

coconut growing Western Ghats areas and yield data from the respective districts,
21

.

The analysis of past weather data from different locations representing the major

indicates warming trends in most of the areas . The increase in average maximum
temperature varies from 0.01 to 0.040C /year. On the other hand, average minimum
temperatures are decreasing in many places. The range in change varies from –
0.030C to +0.030C/ year. Dry spells are in increasing trends in districts of Karnataka
and Kerala, whereas reducing trends in coastal Maharashtra. Change in dry spells
varies from –1.98 to 0.27 days/year. Change in coconut yields across the country
range from –114 to 270 nuts/ha/year.
Agriculture in the relatively high elevation areas (average elevation 1200 m) is
characterized, in general, by four typologies:
(i) Large tea, coffee and rubber estates; (ii) Other plantations and spices, which are
generally grown as inter crops; (iii) Annual crops-based farming consisting of
mainly paddy, vegetables, pulses, tuber crops and millets and (iv) Homestead
farming. The homestead farming is one of the key features of WG area, wherein a
large number of species of trees (jackfruit, mango, papaya, guava, kokum etc), spices
(pepper, nutmeg etc), medicinal plants, plantation crops (coconut, areca nut etc.),
biennials and annuals including banana, pineapple, paddy, vegetables and tuber
crops are grown.

The key findings of the Indian Network of Climate Change Assessment (INCCA 2012)
for scenarios of 2030 are as under:

Rice: The simulation analysis indicates that the productivity of irrigated rice in
Western Ghats region is likely to change +5 to –11% in PRECIS A1B 2030 scenario
depending upon the location. Majority of the region is projected to lose the yield by
about 4%. However, irrigated rice in parts of southern Karnataka and northernmost districts of Kerala is likely to gain. In these areas, current seasonal minimum
and maximum temperatures are relatively lower (20-220C Tmin; 27-280C Tmax).
The projected increase in temperature is also relatively less in these areas (0.50C-

to +35% with a large portion of the region likely to lose rice yields up to 10%. The
22

.

1.50C). In the case of rain-fed rice, the projected change in yield is in the range of –35

results thus indicate that, irrigated rice is able to beneﬁt due to CO2 fertilization
effect as compared to rain-fed rice, which is supplied with less amount of fertilizers.
Farmers in Western Ghats regions falling in north-west parts of Tamil Nadu,
northern parts of Kerala and in some parts of Karnataka can reduce the impacts of
climate change and can reap higher harvests by adopting crop management
strategies and by growing varieties tolerant to climate change.
In addition to Rice, Climate change is likely to reduce the yields of maize and
sorghum by up to 50%, depending upon the area in this region. These crops have C4
photosynthetic systems and hence do not have relative advantage at higher CO2
concentrations.

Coconut: Coconut yields are projected to increase by as much as 30% in the majority
of the region by the 2030. Increase in coconut yield may be mainly attributed to the
projected increase in rainfall (~10%) and relatively less increase in temperature,
apart from CO2 fertilization beneﬁts. However, some areas like south-west
Karnataka, parts of Tamil Nadu, and parts of Maharashtra may show reduction in
yields by up to 24%.

Cocoa: Cocoa is grown as the intercrop either under areca nut or coconut. Being a
shade-crop, cocoa is influenced only indirectly by the increase in atmospheric
temperature. Analysis indicates that a rise in temperature by 1°C should be
beneficial for crop productivity. The improvement is likely to be about 100 kg of dry
beans/ha. The cocoa growing foothills of the Western Ghats of Karnataka are more
likely to benefit than central Kerala. However, crop management and irrigation
supply should be maintained or improved to exploit this benefit. Further, an
increase in temperature beyond 3°C is likely to reduce cocoa yields

Livestock Productivity: The Heat Stress Days per annum are likely to increase with

.

the Temperature – Humidity Index (THI) above 80 in 2030s in the Western Ghats.

23

This would lead to severe thermal discomfort to livestock resulting in negative
impact on the productivity.

Agriculture Crop Diversity is important as it can be used to combat risks such as
pests, diseases and variations in Climate. Other impact of crop diversity is on
nutrition.
3.4

Water, Irrigation and Hydro Power

The potential impacts of climate change on water yield and other hydrologic budget
components are quantified by performing SWAT hydrological modeling with
current and future climate scenarios for the regional systems. Impacts of climate
change and climate variability on the water resources are likely to affect irrigated
agriculture, installed power capacity, environmental flows in the dry season, and
higher flows during the wet season, thereby causing severe droughts and flood
problems.

Detailed outputs have been analysed in the 2nd NATCOM report with respect to the
two major water balance components of water yield and actual evapo-transpiration
that are highly influenced by the weather conditions dictated by temperature and
allied parameters. Majority of the river systems show increase in the precipitation at
the basin level. The only two river basins that show some decrease in evapotranspiration under the EC scenario are Cauvery and Krishna rivers which originate
from the Western Ghats.

It is also seen that there is an increase in the moderate drought development for
Krishna, Pennar, and Cauvery basins, which have either predicted decrease in
precipitation or have enhanced level of evapo-transpiration.

The maximum water withdrawal takes place from Godavari and Krishna river

between water availability and water demand indicates a comfortable position, but
24

.

basins in Western Ghats in all the years. Though at basin-level, the comparison

due to wide temporal and spatial variation in the availability of water, there exists a
water crisis-like situation in most areas of the country. It is expected that due to
climate change, water availability situation is likely to be aggravated.

Hydro capacity is expected to increase, but its share decreases from the total
installed capacity by 2100. The slow growth in capacity is due to barriers of high
investment requirements and long gestation periods. A number of socioenvironmental issues are related to dam construction, flooding of areas, damages to
the ecology, and resettlement and rehabilitation of the population.

3.5

Adaptation Strategies and Measures

Several measures/strategies have evolved during the Eleventh Plan period to
address various issues pertaining to Climate Change which have been further
improved in the 12th plan outlined as under:
1. In respect of Agriculture in the medium term, the focus is on improving
yields with the existing available technology, timely availability of water
through expansion of the irrigation system, and also improvement of existing
irrigation systems.
2. A species-mix plantation that maximizes carbon sequestration is suggested.
3. Hardy species, which are resilient to increased temperature and drought risk,
be planted in Forests of the western and central India.
4. A few pilot adaptation projects could be launched, incorporating adaptation
practices, particularly in the most vulnerable regions identiﬁed. These
include:
Modifying the forest working plan code, preparation process
and incorporating the projected climate change and likely
impacts,

.

(i)

25

(ii)

Initiating research on adaptation practices, covering both
conservation and forest regeneration practices,

(iii)

Linking Protected Areas and forest fragments,

(iv)

Anticipatory planting of species along the altitudinal and
latitudinal gradient,

(v)

in situ conservation,

(vi)

adopting mixed species forestry in all afforestation programs,

(vii)

Incorporating fire protection and management practices and
implementing advanced fire warning systems.

According to the Second National Communication on Climate Change (NATCOM,
2012), the Western Ghats is expected to experience increase in temperature regimes,
rainfall and extreme events due to climate change. There is also a high probability of
significant decrease in the duration of the precipitation (NATCOM, 2012). This may have
serious consequence for the Western Ghats ecosystems which may face decrease in the
moisture regimes and increase in fire incidences due to low moisture content in the
ecosystems. The projected changes in the precipitation may also induce changes in the
hydrological regimes especially increase in evapo-transpiration and increased runoff
(Hamlet et al., 2007). Although the projections are modelled using robust climate models
which include Global Climate Models (GCMs) and Regional Climate Models (RCMs)
with best possible resolution of 100 km and 25 km respectively, the data are very coarse
for any study on ecosystem level changes in the Western Ghats which has a width
ranging between 10 to 200 km. There is need for downscaling of the data for ecosystem
level change models such as Dynamic Vegetation Growth Models (DGVM) and
Ecological Niche Models (Franklin et al., 2012). Availability of accurate downscaled
projected climate data will help in modeling accurately the decline in the density and
abundance of the moisture sensitive species in the Western Ghats. This will also help in
modeling the migration or shift of the moisture sensitive species up the moisture gradient
.

as well as in increase and spread of the invasive species (IPCC, 2007).

26

CHAPTER 4

Definition and Delimitation of Western Ghats Region
4.1

Introduction

Although, references to the Western Ghats have been made several millennia ago, its
definition and delimitation is still controversial due to complexity of its geology and
geomorphology, and there is also no consensus on its origin and evolution. From a
scientific perspective, understanding of the geology and geomorphology is critical
for defining and delimitation of any landform. But the attempts made to define and
delimit Western Ghats on this basis in the past have thus far met with little success.

A review of different approaches followed for defining and delimiting Western
Ghats has been presented in this Chapter. The definition and delimitation of
Western Ghats Region as adopted in the present Report by HLWG are also given.

4.2

Geology and Geomorphology

Gross landforms are defined in terms of geological and geomorphological features;
physiographic features have also been used for defining landforms. The delimitation
of Western Ghats is problematical because of diverse opinions on the origin of
Western Ghats among geologists. The Memoir 47 (1 & 2) of the Geological Society of
India (Bangalore) on “Sahyadri –The Great Escarpment of the Indian Subcontinent”
edited by Y. Gunnell and B.P. Radhakrishna (1967) gives details on the geology and
geomorphology and origin of Western Ghats. Radhakrishna defined WG as the long
unbroken wall extending for a length of 1600 km paralleling the West Coast and
marking an important physiographic feature of Indian Peninsula. He observed that
its origin is one of the major unsolved problems of Indian Geology. Traditionally this
magnificent range which fringes the west coast of India is also known as Sahyadri.
The Western Ghats of Indian Peninsula extend in a NNW-SSE direction for a distance
of over 1600 km lying between latitudes 08˚ and 21˚ 06 and longitudes 73˚ and 78˚

.

(Radhakrishna, 1967).

27

Radhakrishna (1967) described WG as follows: “Western Ghats starts as a bold
westerly escarpment south of the Tapti estuary in Gujarat, reaching almost
immediately to a height of over 3000 feet (914.4 m) and then extends in the form of
a wall down to Kanyakumari (Cape of Comorin) with only one break or gap at
Palghat (Palghat gap); throughout this length the Ghats retain an average elevation
of 900 m above sea level with peaks as high as 1800-2400 m, and traverse many
geological formations of differing physical and structural characteristics. According
to him the WG are not true mountains ranges but represent only the precipitous
western edge of a plateau uplifted to its present position and represent as an edge of
an upraised disrupted continental block, with early Miocene as its probable date of
formation. The Ghats form the dividing line between two erosional surfaces - the
low-lying plains of marine denudation and a peneplaned plateau at elevations of
over 900 m”.

Wadia (1975) considered that the greater part of the Peninsula is constituted by
Deccan plateau, which is a central table land extending from 12˚ to 21˚ north
latitude raising above 600 m mean elevation above sea, and to its west are Sahyadri
or Western Ghats which extend unbroken to the extreme south of Malabar, where
the WG merge into uplands of the Nilgiris, and from Nilgiris the WG extend (after a
solitary Palghat Gap) through Anaimalai hills to extreme south of the Peninsula,
with mean elevation of 900 m.

Dixit (1981) explained the geomorphic aspects of Western Ghats and suggested that
the origin of Western Ghats is in-separably linked with the origin of west facing
scarp (escarpment), which is not fully explained and remains hypothetical;
consequently, the origin of Sahyadri also remains unsettled question. Three
hypotheses are proposed to explain the origin of escarpment by different geologists
– (i) the Fault escarpment hypothesis, (ii) the Erosional escarpment hypothesis, (iii)

.

the hypothesis of a dead cliff. Dixit also pointed out that most of the passes

28

recognized as Ghats are located at an altitude of 600 m. He also discussed relief of
Western Ghats in terms of three parallel but contrasting components:
(i) the relief of the plateau – east of the continental divide,
(ii) the relief of the crest zone of Western Ghats proper, and
(iii) the relief of the Western face and the projecting escarpment.
The last two aspects are explained by him with respect to Sahyadri divide line /
Western Ghats divide line.
Valdiya (2010) in his paper entitled “Geological framework and tectonics of Western
Ghats” defined Western Ghats as the zone of escarpment representing seaward
western flank of the mountainous Sahyadri range extending 1600 km south from
the Tapti valley to Kanyakumari with broken multiple precipitous scraps alternating
with irregular terraces. The Western Ghats consisting of Sahyadri range, the
Western Ghats escarpment and the coastal belts constitute one geological domain or
province. In other words, there are units within the Western Ghats – (i) the high
linear mountain ranges of Sahyadri stretching 1600 km from the Tapti river in the
north to Kanyakumari in the south and form the western border of the Peninsular
India, (ii) the escarpment in the form of ‘landing stair’ of sorts of the seaward
western bank flank of Sahyadri called as Western Ghats because of resemblance of
shape and pattern of 600-700 m high scraps alternating with irregular terraces to
the bathing ghats on the banks of river and shores of ponds or lakes and (iii) the
undulating terrain with smaller hillocks and spurs known as Konkan- KanaraMalabar coastal belt. This concept of WG has not been accepted by geologists.

The published map of Geological Survey of India shows that the geology of northern
and southern segments are different. They are affected by Western Ghats tectonic
process after the origin of these formations. The northern segment is covered by
Deccan traps (basalts) and southern segments by Charnockites, Khondalites, and
Granulites etc. However these two diverse set of rocks were affected by the Western

.

Ghats faulting events and hence has more or less same regional structural imprints.

29

It is evident from the above that WG can not be demarcated using geological and
geomorphological features because of the complexity of geological and
geomorphological features, and whatever maps available on WG are conceptual. But
it can be defined as a physiographic unit, as physiographic aspects of WG are not
influenced by underlying geology or rock structure.

4.3

Delineation of Western Ghats for Western Ghats Development

Programme of the Planning Commission

The Planning Commission initiated Hill Area Development Programme (HADP) with
prime objective of promoting socio-economic development of the Hill people in
harmony with the preservation of ecological balance. Activities on eco-restoration,
eco-preservation and eco-development have been emphasized in the programme
and the focus is on fulfillment of basic needs of hill people i.e. food, fuel, fodder,
health, education and drinking water. The list of Hill areas were identified for the
first time by the Committee of National Development Council (NDC) on Hill areas in
its meeting held on 12 March 1965. The States or Union Territories identified Hill
Areas in their jurisdiction. In this exercise, Tamil Nadu identified Nilgiris as a Hill
area under the programme.

The Planning Commission constituted a Working Group on Hill Area Development
during 7th Plan. In its first meeting it was decided to use scientific criteria for
delineating hill areas in the country. A subgroup of the Working Group was
constituted for removal of the anomalies and to suggest inter alia delineation of hill
areas on uniform and scientific basis. A Technical Committee of the subgroup was
constituted to work out the scientific criteria for delineation of Hill areas. Based on
the scientific criteria suggested by the Technical Committee, the working group
adopted the following criteria for delineation of new Hill areas in the country for
inclusion in the National Programme of Hill Development in the country other than

.

Himalaya and Western Ghats (1986).

30

“A geographical area must satisfy two conditions to qualify as hill area namely it
should contain an area (a) with an average slope of 30˚ or more which may be
designated as the core and (b) the relative relief of 300 m or more”. These criteria
were not applicable for Himalayas and Western Ghats Development Programme
(Planning Commission, 1986).

For the first time Western Ghats Development Programme (WGDP) was conceived
at a meeting taken by the then Minister of Planning, Shri C. S. Subramaniam on
31.05.1972 with Chief Ministers of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Planning Minister of
Goa, Tamil Nadu and Kerala were associated in subsequent meetings. In the
delineation of Western Ghats, ‘Contiguous talukas/blocks along the Ghats having at
least 20% of their area at an altitude of 600 m or above were included in WGDP and
covered under HADP since 1974-75.’ The unit of demarcation of Hill Areas in
Western Ghats is taluka.

The High Level Committee constituted (vide, Report of the Expert Group on
Delineation of New Hill Areas, 1986) for the development of the Western Ghats
identified various districts/talukas falling in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil
Nadu and Gujarat and subsequently included Goa, as per the Map of Second
Irrigation Commission Report Atlas showing Western Ghats in the scale of
1:60,00,000, which was a replicate of the Map of Physiographic Regions of India
prepared by National Atlas Organization of Ministry of Education, Government of
India (1964). According to this map Western Ghats is one of the 5 subdivisions of
the Peninsular Plateau which constitutes the fourth and largest Physiographic
divisions of India which has been divided into Seven such broad Physiographic
divisions. The map gives broad outlines of Western Ghats based on the earlier works
by Baker, Dudley Stamp and others. To identify the districts and talukas in Western
Ghats based on the map, it was ‘necessary to define the boundaries so that no area
that should be included is omitted and area not really falling in the Western Ghats is

Western border of the Deccan Peninsula formed of different geological formations of
31

.

not included’. Western Ghats was defined in geological terms as the uplifted

varied origin and structure running about 1600 km along the Western border of
Peninsular plateaus from the mouth of the river Tapti to Cape Comorin
(Kanyakumari). It was divided into 3 physiographic subunits – the northern part
which is built of horizontal sheets of lava which on erosion have given rise to a
typical trap landscape; Ghats, which runs from a little south of 160 N parallel latitude
to the Nilgiris, are formed of granitold gneisses which on weatherly have given rise
to a more rugged topography; and the southern part of the Ghats (Southern Ghats)
is separated from the main Ghats by the Palghat Gap which appears to be a rift
valley. Three ranges of Southern Ghats radiate in three different directions from
Anai Mudi Peak (2695 m) – the Anaimalai range to the north, the Palni to the north
east and the Elamalai (Cardamom hills) to the south.

After a detailed study of the map of Western Ghats area (1:1,00,000) the Committee
found that the Ghats proper (dissected belt) was only ‘a few km wide as a rule and
have height of 760-915 m’. Taking this area as the Western Ghats, the Committee
imposed it on the administrative maps of talukas and districts of the same scale and
thus led to the inclusion of all areas with an elevation of 600 m or above also which
were contiguous to the higher altitudes and formed part of the administrative
boundaries of the talukas. This led to the omission of talukas which were wholly
coastal or only marginally hilly (having less than 20% of the taluka area) and
inclusion of talukas which had high altitudes as defined above and actually
constitute Western Ghats (Source: Report of the Expert Group on Delineation of
New Hill Areas, Planning Commission, 1986).

4.4

Definition and Delineation of Western Ghats as Proposed by WGEEP

WGEEP defined Western Ghats from an environmental view point in the following
way:

“The term Western Ghats refers to the practically unbroken hill chain (with the

direction, for about 1500 km parallel to the Arabian sea coast from the river Tapti
32

.

exception of the Palakkad Gap) or escarpment running roughly in a north-south

(about 21˚ 16’ N) down to just short of Kanyakumari (about 8˚ 19’ N) at the tip of the
Indian Peninsula”. WGEEP adopted the term Western Ghats in broad sense and
included the entire tract of hills from the Tapti to Kanyakumari. It also discussed the
problems of boundary demarcation in relation to Eastern Ghats, which meet
Western Ghats (Nilgiri), and the presence of eastern and Western spurs. It also
mentioned that there is no consensus among different workers on the precise
boundaries of Western Ghats due to differences in the drivers used for defining
boundaries. WGEEP used the altitude and forest area or vegetation as drivers
defining the boundaries and used forest area above a certain altitude as the
operational definition of Ghats. On the eastern side, the cut off elevation was above
500 m as the WG rise discretely from the Deccan plateau and on the west this cut off
of forested area was at 150 m and above or the coastline itself in case the forests
spring from the edge of the coastline. The land-use map developed by Forest Survey
of India was used to demarcate forest areas and GTOPO30 (Global 30 ArC – Second
Elevation Data set) for altitude details at 1x1 km resolution was used. NDVI
(Normalized Differential Vegetation Index) values were also used as a surrogate for
vegetation or forest cover.

About 150 km stretch of Biligirirangan range of Eastern Ghats of Karnataka and
Tamil Nadu running in a north-south direction was also included as a part of WG. As
per these boundaries, the WG as delimited by WGEEP spreads over an area of
129037 sq. km between 8˚ 19’ 8” - 21˚ 16’ 14” N and 72˚ 56’ 24”- 78˚ 19’ 40” (E) and
extends to 1440 km from Tapti in the north to Kanayakumari in the south, with the
width ranging from 48-210 km (excluding Palghat).

Western Ghats as defined by WGEEP do not correspond exactly to particular
administrative units such as districts and talukas. WGEEP also mentioned about the
Western Ghats Development Programme of Planning Commission and the
delineation of Western Ghats at taluka level under that programme. WGEEP

.

considered that talukas do constitute a reasonable administrative unit for defining

33

the Western Ghats. Infact, taluka was used as unit for zonation of ecologically
sensitive areas.

WGEEP, however, writes that, “We must however admit that the Western Ghats
Ecology Authority, which put in place, will have to take another look for boundaries,
we suggest, since we have not been able to find time to examine and refine these
with enough care”.
4.5

HLWG’s definition and delineation of Western Ghats region

HLWG examined the definition and delimitation of WG proposed by geologists,
geomorphologists, geographers, ecologists and conservationists. Most of these
definitions are conceptual in nature and precise boundaries are not demarcated
(Table 1). It is difficult to define and demarcate WG in terms of geology and
geomorphology because of its complex geology and geomorphology and unsolved
problem of its origin. As has been explained above under section 4.2 of this chapter:
(i) the mean elevation of Deccan Plateau is 600 m above sea level; (ii) the WG has
mean elevation greater than 600 m (about 900 m) through its length from Tapti
estuary on the northern most tip to Kanyakumari at the south end; and (iii) the
elevation of most of the Ghats is 600 m and above.

An attempt was initially made by HLWG to define WG geologically and
geomorphologically, keeping in view of the observations made by geologists. For
this purpose one full day meeting of geologists (Dr K. Vinod Kumar) from NRSC,
Geological Survey of India (Dr Balakrishnan) and University Departments of Geology
and eminent Geomorphologists (Professor R. Vaidyanathan, who was also a member
of Expert Committee constituted for identification of Hill Areas under Hill Area
Development Programme of Planning Commission) was held at NRSC, Hyderabad.
All the geologists and geomorphologists confirmed that it is not possible to define
Western Ghats and demarcate its boundaries geologically and geomorphologically.

.

Though it is possible to define WG in terms of north-south band (the ridge) but the

34

same would require substantial time to work it out. The other alternative is to look
for physiographic features such as altitude, slope, topography rainfall and others.

Further, the High Level Working Group also requested the State Governments to
share with the HLWG any exercise done by them to demarcate Western Ghats region
in their respective jurisdiction. The HLWG noted that no information has been
received except from the State Government of Karnataka. The Karnataka Forest
Department had used (i) forest and land use pattern, (ii) rainfall and (iii)
geomorphology as variables to define the Western Ghats in Karnataka. The Group
felt that the Karnataka methodology is very specific to the State and the criteria
adopted may not apply to the other States.

HLWG, in the absence of geologically and gemorphologically sound criteria in
demarcating WG, decided to adopt the criteria followed by the Western Ghats
Development Programme of Planning Commission which defined WG in terms of
geology conceptually, but has taken altitude as the criterion for identification of
talukas/blocks under Western Ghats Development Programme of Planning
Commission as recommended by High Level Committee, because the Ghats are
usually 760-915 m high. All those talukas/blocks at 600 m and above elevation and
those talukas having more than 20% of the area at 600 m and above elevation that
are contiguous to higher altitudes and formed part of the administrative boundaries
of Western Ghats Development Programme are listed under Western Ghats
Development Programme. This criterion has geological connotation – that at 600 m
on the east the WG springs from Deccan Plateau, on an average the mean elevation
of WG all along its length from north to south is greater than 600 m, and most of the
Ghats have height of over 600 m.

The data on elevation and rainfall in different districts of Western Ghats (Table 1)
also support the criterion used by Western Ghats Development Programme of

.

Planning Commission.

35

Table 1*: Elevation and rainfall at various sections of Western Ghats region
Elevation

Elevation

Rainfall

Rainfall

West (m)

East (m)

West (cm)

East (cm)

1

150

955

200

80

2

170

695

240

200

3

60

1030

240

80

4

130

790

320

240

5

65

970

320

80

6

50

840

320

140

7

40

540

280

120

Hassan

8

70

940

320

200

Ratnagiri & Satara

9

80

720

240

160

11

60

640

240

280

12

150

150

320

80

13

95

110

140

120

Districts (West to East)

Sections

Dangs & Nashik
Thane & Nashik
Thane &
Ahmadnagar
Sindhudurg &
Kolhapur
Kozhikode, Wayanad,
Nilgiri, Erode &
Salem
Trishshur,
Coimbatore &
Dindigul
South Goa, Uttar
Kannad & Dharwad
Dakshin Kannad &

Sindhudurg &
Kolhapur
Pattanamtitta &
Tirunelveli
Kanniyakumari &
Tirunelveli

.

*Source: DBT-ISRO Project (Roy.et al 2012)

36

Table 2 provides a comparative evaluation of different approaches followed in
defining and delimiting Western Ghats.
Table 2: Different approaches followed in delimitation of Western Ghats

Geology and
Geomorphology

Topography,
Temperature and
Rainfall

Delimitation of Western Ghats boundaries
Western Ghats is the most important orographic feature of the
peninsula, fringing the Western coast from the Tapti estuary to
cape comorin (Source: E. H. Pascos in A Manual of Geology and
Burma ed. 3 1950 and also in Memoir of Geological Society 47:6769, 2001). No boundaries were demarcated.
Valdiya (2010) demarcated a conceptual boundary of Western
Ghats based on homogeneity of geological structural elements
especially the northern, southern and extreme eastern boundaries.
As the geology of northern and southern segments are quite
different and were effected by tectonic process after the origin of
these formations. The northern segment is covered by Deccan
traps (basalts) and southern segments by Charnoclites,
Khondalites, Granulites, etc. These diverse set of rocks were
affected by the Western Ghats faulting events and hence more or
less the same regional structural imprints. It is not possible to draw
a boundary based on these structural imprints without ground
truthing. Further, the definition of Western Ghats by Valdiya also
includes coastal plain which was formed by the recent geological
processes and hence cannot be a part of Western Ghats block
faulting process. Consequently, the Valdiya’s definition has not
been accepted. According to Radhakrishna (2001) Western Ghats
traverse many geological provinces and structural elements and
defined that it extends from 8 to 21.06 degree and 75 to 78 degree
(Source: Dr K. Vinod Kumar, NRSC).
No boundaries were demarcated.
Western Ghats are influenced by topographic variations and
tropical south-west monsoon system; the Western Ghats show
diverse bioclimatic conditions at macro and micro levels.
Exacerbated by orographic effect, windward side of the Ghats
receives full intensity of summer monsoon, with rainfall
sometimes exceeding 7000 mm. However, the climatic conditions
along the Ghats are not uniform. Since the monsoon arrives from
the south and retreats in the reverse direction, the rainy season is
longer in the south than in the north. The second aspect is that the
monsoon rains diminish rapidly once they cross the Ghats summit
(includes rain shadow zone). The third climatic gradient is the fall
.

Delimitation Criteria
Physical geographical
definition

37

Forest/Vegetation

Forest Vegetation
Cover
Geomorphology
Isohyets greater than
800 m

Vegetation cover and
altitude

The Western Ghats harbors one of the best ‘non-equatorial’
forests. These types are closely correlated with the temperature
and rainfall regimes. Wet evergreen, dry evergreen, moist
deciduous and dry deciduous climax types are clearly distinguished
along the mean annual rainfall gradient; whereas low, medium and
high elevation wet evergreen types are found in areas
characterized by decrease in minimum temperature with the
increase in altitude. Since the rainfall, temperature and altitude
varies from north to south, uniform criteria of vegetation cannot
be used for delineation of Western Ghats.
Western Ghats region of Karnataka has been defined as an
administrative unit based on the three criteria: (i) all villages
having more than 25% of the area under forest cover, (ii) areas
with isohyets greater than 800 m on the eastern edge, with village
as the unit and (iii) the three regions of hilly tracts - the
escarpment (Ghats), Malanad, (including semimalanad) and hilly
hinterland. These criteria were used only for identification of
fringe villages which form the boundary of Western Ghats and all
those areas within the boundary of Western Ghats, irrespective of
whether they fulfil above criteria or not are included in Western
Ghats region (Source: Report submitted by B. R. Ramesh and G.
Muthasankar (French Institute of Pondicherry) to Karnataka
Western Ghats Task Force in 2011 and information provided by the
Forest Department of Karnataka). It may be noted that the first
layer used was the talukas recognized under Western Ghats
Development Programme. The criteria are not applicable to the
entire Western Ghats that traverse Six States, as the criteria vary
significantly across the Western Ghats.
WGEEP defined WG from environmental point of view. It uses
forest cover (FSI, 2009) and altitude as criteria for delineating the
Western Ghats region. NDVI has also been used as surrogate for
vegetation or forest cover. On the eastern side the cut off
elevation was above 500 m as the WG rise discretely from the
Deccan plateau and in the west this cut off of forest area was at
150 m and above or the coastline itself in case the forests spring
from the edge of the coastline. The conventional northern and
southern limits (Northern limit is south of Tapti river extending up
to Kanyakumari in South) have been used. According to K. R.
38

.

of temperature with altitude. High rainfall, dense network of
drainage and substantial forest cover made the Western Ghats as a
‘water sink’ of the Southern Peninsula.

Altitude
(under
Western
Ghats
development
Programme of Planning
Commission),
slope
and relief (under Hill
development
Programme of Planning
Commission)
and
traditional
northernmost talukas
of Gujarat located on
the south of Tapti river

Subrahmanya (personal communication), consideration of 500 m
as the eastern edge by WGEEP would cover 90% of the Deccan
Plateau which is not appropriate in delimitation of boundaries.
The natural forest cover of evergreen forest on the western slope
also changes from moist to dry deciduous types on the eastern
slopes, and as such it is difficult to make a clear geographical
boundary. WGEEP also included Biligirirangan (Eastern Ghats) as a
part of Western Ghats because of topographic and forest
contiguity and this also makes it difficult to make a clear
geographic boundary.
No unit was used to delimit boundaries. However, for assigning
three layers of ecological sensitivity, taluka was used as a unit.
A review of criteria for delimitation of Western Ghats was
undertaken by eminent experts in brain storming session at NRSC.
It was decided that Western Ghats can not be defined in terms of
geology and geomorphology. The experts suggested a multicriteria
approach (vegetation, rainfall, slope, geology, landform and
altitude) can be used to delineate Western Ghats. In the absence
of such delineation, topographic aspects were followed for
delimitation of talukas/blocks under Western Ghats Development
Programme and Hill Area Development Programme of Planning
Commission. The criteria adopted have also geological connation that beyond 600 m in the east the WG springs from Deccan
Plateau, on an average the mean elevation of WG all along its
length from north to south is greater than 600 m. In addition most
of the Ghats have height of > 600 m. A total of 188 talukas
constituted Western Ghats region and the boundaries are
demarcated using outer boundaries of peripheral talukas.

A GIS map of delineated WG was generated by using the outer limits of peripheral
talukas as boundary of Western Ghats on all sides (Figure 5). The method used for
delineation of map is given below.

4.6

Generation of Spatial Layers on Western Ghats

The administrative spatial layer indicating boundary of India (International and
coastal), States, districts, talukas and villages have been taken from Survey of India
spatial layer. Talukas identified by Planning Commission for Western Ghats
Development Programme and Hill Area Development Programme and seven talukas
.

of Gujarat (annotated separately from the existing database on the basis of their

39

location to south of Tapti river from where Western Ghats starts at the north) were
mapped using standard GIS software (Figure 6). This spatial layer has been used for
further analysis and modeling Ecologically Sensitive Areas as per the details given in
Chapter 5.

Figure 5: Map of Peninsular India showing Western Ghats region and origin of major

.

rivers, with Tapti river as the northern boundary of Western Ghats.

40

T h e W e s t e r n G h a t s R e g i o n : Ta l u k s

±

Legend
National Boundary
State Boundary
Taluk Boundary
Western Ghats Development Program
Hill Area Development Programme
0

75

150 Km
NRSC, Hyderabad

Figure 6: Map of Peninsular India showing 188 talukas of Western Ghats region that
includes Seven talukas of Gujarat located to south of Tapti river – the northernmost
.

limit of Western Ghats region.
41

To sum up, the WG region defined by HLWG has the following features:
Northern Limit

: 8˚ 0’ N 22˚ 26’.

Eastern Limit

: 72 ˚ 55’’ E 78 ˚ 11’

Area

: 1, 64,280 km2

Length

: 1500 km

Width: 10 km (at narrowest point) – 200 km (at widest point)
Altitudinal range (minimum and maximum) (*Ellipsoid height) : 0 to 2674 m
* estimated by NRSC using public domain
ASTER DEM.

The list of 188 talukas that constitute Western Ghats region are given in the Table 6
of Chapter 5.

The merits of WG delineation by HLWG are (i) that taluka is taken as unit to
demarcate WG, (ii) that the talukas identified as geological (scientific) connotations,
and (iii) that talukas listed are based on criteria used by WGDP and HADP of
Planning Commission and Seven talukas of Gujarat located on the south of Tapti

.

river which forms the northern most boundary of Western Ghats.

42

CHAPTER 5

Identification of Ecologically Sensitive Areas in
Western Ghats Region
5.1

Background

As a part of environmental protection, the Ministry of Environment & Forests
(MoEF), Government of India has been developing strategies for conservation of
ecologically sensitive or fragile areas. In 1990, the MoEF brought out a report on
parameters for determining Ecological Fragility. The Task Force set up by Planning
Commission also brought out a Report on ‘Conserving Ecologically Fragile
Ecosystems’ in 1996. In 1999 the MoEF constituted a committee under the
Chairmanship of Dr Pronab Sen (the then Advisor in Planning Commission) to work
out parameters for designating an area as ecologically sensitive which require
special protection under Environment (Protection) Act 1986 (EPA) in a way that the
processes of designation of such areas is objective, scientific and transparent.

The Pronab Sen Committee submitted its Report in 2000 and defined Ecological
Sensitivity ‘as the imminent possibility of : (a) permanent and irreparable loss of
extant life forms (species); or (b) significant damage to ecological processes
affecting natural evolution and speciation’. The Committee also clarified that it is not
the intention to curtail activities while defining the ecological sensitivity and
pointed out that India has a special responsibility to conserve and use resources in a
sustainable manner. The Committee listed three primary criteria of Ecological
Sensitivity and these criteria were grouped into 3 categories – (i) species based
criteria (endemism, rarity, endangered species and centres of evolution), (ii)
ecosystem based criteria (specialized ecosystems, special breeding sites/areas,
frontier forests, areas with intrinsically low resilience, sacred groves and wildlife
corridors), and (iii) geomorphological features based criteria (uninhabited islands
in the sea, steep slopes and origins of rivers) besides Seven auxiliary criteria such as
centres of less known food plants, wetlands and grasslands, upper catchment areas,
.

not so steep slopes, high rainfall areas and other uninhabited islands. To ensure

43

additional protection to the protected areas such as National Parks, Sanctuaries and
Tiger Reserves, Protected and Reserve Forests, Biosphere reserves, Coastal
Regulation Zone I (i) and Hill Stations which are already known as ecologically
Important or under ecological stress, the Sen Committee recommended to prioritize
such areas and accord them wholly or partly the status of Ecologically Sensitive
areas after applying the criteria listed by it.
The Committee also remarked that ‘the nuances of ecological sensitivity are such
that excessive rigidity on this count could defeat the very purpose of this exercise,
which seeks to strike a balance between preservation of our ecological endowments
and the needs of development’. The Committee recommended that the protection
under EP Act should not be restricted to only areas satisfying one or more of these
criteria, and other environmental concerns should be appropriately addressed and
hence a separate exercise should be undertaken to frame parameters to delineating
environmental sensitivity.

The Committee also mentioned that the system presently being followed for
notifying environmentally sensitive areas under EPA is appropriate and adequate,
subject to only minor modifications.

WGEEP adopted Pronab Sen Committee’s concept of Ecologically Sensitive Area and
designated the entire Western Ghats as an Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) and
assigned three levels of sensitivity to different regions within the ESA. The WGEEP
discussed the Twelve primary criteria and Six auxiliary criteria proposed by Pronab
Sen Committee in very general way and with one or two examples from entire
Western Ghats and with a remark “incomplete information” under each
parameter and recommended the entire WG as ESA (Part II of WGEEP Report). In
the absence of any guidelines by Pronab Sen Committee on management regime for
ESA and since it is not feasible to evolve a uniform regime for entire Western Ghats,

ecological sensitivity to areas based on 8 parameters using 9x9 km or 5’x5’ grids.
44

.

the WGEEP adopted 3-layered approach and attempted to assign relative levels of

WGEEP recognized Three Ecologically Sensitive Zones (ESZ) – ESZ1, ESZ2 and ESZ3
based on a scoring system assigned to the states/variants of each of the 8
parameters on a scale of 0-10, and average score for each grid was calculated.
Similarly the average scores of grids of PAs were calculated and ranked them in
descending order in each State. If the average score of the grid was equal or higher
than the lowest rank grid of PAs then it was treated as ESZ 1, and about 25% of grids
having average scores of grids equal to lowest rank grids of PA were treated as ESZ2
and the remaining ones were treated as ESZ3. This was done based on the
stipulation that protected areas (PA)+ESZ1 in each State should not exceed 60% of
the total area and PA+ ESZ1 +ESZ2 should make it 75% of the total as forest cover.
Using the following ESZ assignment algorithm the grids were assigned to different
ESZs:
p+x+y+x =100, where
p=percentage of area falling in existing protected area
x=percentage of area assigned to ESZ1
y=percentage of area assigned to ESZ2
z=percentage of area assigned to ESZ3
Three scenarios were generated in terms of p based on the existing percent forest
cover. For example in scenario 1 where p>75%, all the grids outside PA were
assigned to ESZ3 and no grid was assigned to either ESZ1 or ESZ2; similarly in
scenario 2 when p<60<75%, lowest scoring 25%, grids were assigned to ESZ3 and
the rest were assigned to ESZ2 and no grid was assigned to ESZ1; and in scenario 3,
the 25%, lowest scoring grids were assigned to ESZ3 and the rest were assigned to
ESZ1 and ESZ 2.

If the desired results are not met under any of the scenarios, WGEEP also made
provisions to rank the parameters selected in order of their importance after
ignoring the least important parameters and then rework the scores so that the
desired results are achieved. WGEEP slightly modified the zonation criteria for Goa

for taluka which was taken as a unit in mapping. The parameters selected by WGEEP
45

.

and used 1’x1’ grids rather than 5’x5’ grids. The ESZ were extrapolated and reported

for zonation were (i) number of endemic species, (ii) number of IUCN red listed
mammal species (iii) percent of area covered by unique evergreen ecosystem, (iv)
percentage of forest area, (v) elevation (vi) slope and (viii) riparian forest
vegetation. WGEEP generated geospatial maps for taluka wise ESZ for each State of
Western Ghats. Regulatory regimes for different ESZs were also formulated.

WGEEP did not completely use the methodology outlined in their Current Science
Paper.

To ensure conservation of ecological systems and sustainable development in
Western Ghats region as per the mandate given by MoEF to HLWG and in light of
responses received from the stakeholders, State Governments and Central
Ministries on WGEEP Report (see also Chapter 2), the HLWG examined critically the
basis for identifying entire WG as Eco-sensitive area, the criteria selected in
identifying different eco-sensitive zones (ESZs) within the ESA of WG and mode of
assigning ESZs to talukas in each of the districts of each State included in WG as
defined by WGEEP. The HLWG, while appreciating the efforts made by WGEEP in
designating WG as ESA and assigning the talukas to different ESZs, found the
following limitations: (i) using criteria with incomplete back up information for
designating entire WG as ESA and (ii) identifying ESZs without taking into account
the human cultural component which is a part of biodiversity, livelihood and
developmental needs of human populations, and disturbance regime, and (iii)
coarse grid size used for zonation. There is also some redundancy in criteria
selected, subjectivity in zonation and inclusion of entire talukas having only a small
area of ESZ1/ESZ2 as a part of ESZ1/ESZ2. Realizing these limitations, the WGEEP
itself suggested that ESZs designated require refinement and further examination.

Keeping this in view and the need for sustainable development approach for the
conservation of Western Ghats ecology, the HLWG in their deliberations decided:

applicable at fine spatial resolution for demarcating ESA and (ii) involving NRSC for
46

.

(i) to utilize geospatial methods and the best available spatial datasets that would be

geospatial analysis. The HLWG also constituted a subgroup consisting of Professor C.
R. Babu, Professor P. S. Roy and Dr Indrani Chandrasekharan to interact with NRSC
for evolving scientific, objective and a practical method for geospatial analyses
leading to identification of ecologically sensitive areas in WG region.

The ecological glory of Western Ghats, the methodologies adopted for geospatial
analyses, and the results and outputs generated from geospatial analyses are given
in this Chapter.

5.2

General Aspects of Western Ghats Region

5.2.1 Geographical Features
The magnificent range fringing the west coast of India in the form of a gigantic wall
is the Western Ghats. It is great escarpment of Indian subcontinent and stretches
nearly 1600 km in length from Tapti river in north to Kanyakumari in the south and
abruptly rises to a height of 2000 m above sea level. Western Ghats traverse through
Gujarat, Goa, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu run parallel to the
west coast at a distance of 40 km, on an average, from the shore line.

The mean elevation of the Western Ghats is higher than 600 m and exceeds 2000 m
at some places. The Nilgiri plateau has several peaks above 2000m and the most
prominent one is Dodda Betta (2637m). The Anaimudi peak in the high ranges of
Kerala rises to the height of 2695m and is the highest peak south of the Himalayas.
There is a major discontinuity in this otherwise continuous hill tract stretching from
the north to south and is known as the Palghat gap which is about 30 km long and
100m high above mean sea level. The Western Ghats correspond to two major
categories of rock formation, one is the highly varied Pre-Cambrian shield, and the
other, to the north of Goa, is the basaltic lava flows of the Deccan Trap. The Western
Ghats are essentially the Western edge of the Indian peninsular plateau, which is the
stable mark of Archaean and Pre-Cambrian formations, where the mountain
.

building was ceased in the Pre-Cambrian times (Radhakrishna, 2001). Nine

47

geological landscapes are recognized in Western Ghats. The region is rich in
minerals and has high potential for hydroelectric power generation, besides
containing rich bio-resources.

The Western Ghats form the major watershed in Peninsular India and as many as
Fifty Eight major Peninsular Indian rivers originate from it. Forty seven of these
rivers flow towards the west, Eight rivers flow east ward and Three rivers flow
south wards. The Godavari, the Krishna, the Cauvery, the Kali, the Bedthi, the Tadri
and the Sharavati are major rivers in the region (Tewari, 1995). Ghats are an
important source of water for the entire Peninsular India. The area receives
between 2,000 and 8,000 millimeters of rainfall annually within a short monsoon
period

and

performs

important

hydrological

and

watershed

functions.

Approximately 245 million people live in the peninsular Indian states that receive
most of their water supply from rivers originating in the Western Ghats. The great
range of Western Ghats – the most striking feature in the geography of India –
influence the climate of India, particularly the rainfall pattern.

Fast running rivers and steep slopes have provided sites for many large hydropower plants. There are about Fifty major dams along the length of the Western
Ghats and the earliest hydro-power plant setup was in 1900 at Khopoli in
Maharashtra. Most notable hydro-power plants are the Koyna Hydro-power plant in
Maharashtra, the Parambikulam Dam in Kerala, and the Linganmakki Dam in
Karnataka. There are hill torrents that discharge their monsoon flows into Arabian
sea within 48 hours after precipitation.

The hot and humid tropical climate coupled with heavy precipitation from
southwest monsoon and favorable edaphic factors create ideal conditions for the
luxuriant growth of plant life, which can be seen only in few parts of the world.
Forestry is the second largest user of land. The high western slopes of the Ghats

vegetation changes to moist and dry deciduous forest types along the rainfall
48

.

harbor evergreen forest, and as one moves from western to eastern slopes the

gradient. The vegetation attains its luxuriant development towards the southern tip
in Kerala, where rich tropical rain forests flourish. The commercially most
important species, teak, grows best in tracts of moderate rainfall where the natural
vegetation consists of moist deciduous forest. The commercial plantations of coffee,
cardamom, tea, Acacia and Eucalyptus, cashew, rubber, bananas, arecanut, coconut,
etc. occupy large area and also make the forest landscape highly mosaic.
The exact total area under Western Ghats varies due to lack of well-defined
boundaries of Western Ghats. For example, according to WGEEP the total area under
WG is 1,29,037 km2, but others put the area under WG anywhere between 1,36,800
km2 to 260,962 km2. About Fifty million people inhabit Western Ghats. As per
HLWG’s definition, Western Ghats spreads over an area of 1,64,280 km2 and
traverse across Six States of Peninsular India.

5.2.2 Biogeography
The Western Ghats region stretches from 8˚ N to 22˚ N along a 1500 km north west
gradient. The region has a considerable temperature and rainfall gradients, and this
permitted the evolution of several distinct species associations. Longitudinally, the
Ghats spring from sea level in the west, rise abruptly to a highly dissected plateau
upto 2700 m and then descend often equally abruptly to the dry Deccan plateau. The
elongated mountain chain has been cut by wide valleys at few places, and thus
preventing dispersal of less motile species and favouring local speciation. This zone
harbours one of the major formation of tropical evergreen forest of India and it is
also a zone of ecological stress due to anthropogenic pressures. The Western Ghats
are divided into Twelve regions (Rogers and Panwar, 1988). These are:

(i) Dangs-Below Ghat areas, (ii) Upper Krishna Drainage, (iii) Kanara, (iv) Coorg,
(v) Mysore–Lower Nilgiris, (vi) Wyanad Plataeu, (vii) Nilgiri, (viii) Anamalai, (ix)

.

Palni, (x) Periyar-Cardamom, (xi) Varushanad-Andipatty and (xii) Agasthyamalai

49

5.2.3 Biodiversity
The Western Ghats has unique taxonomic hierarchies, remnant ecosystems and
strong endemic associations. The sholas, mangroves, kans, dry evergreen forests,
swamps, reeds and riverine belts represent the unique ecosystems. The forests of
WG are some of the best representatives of non-equatorial evergreen forests in the
world. The resource value of this mega diversity centre spans from timber-non
timber category through wilderness–ecotourism to gene pools of plants of
medicinal-aromatic-food-industrial value.

This kind of luxuriant biotic communities evolved over geologic time scale and
witnessed various land use practices depending upon the resource demand and
ingress of human dimension. This has induced considerable alteration in the
Western Ghats biogeography bringing in commercial agriculture, commercial
forestry, hydropower, mining and biotic pressures within the forest ecosystems.
Consequently there is a need for sustainable development approach that enable
ecological protection and development takes place in tandem.

Floristically the Western Ghats is one of the richest areas in the country and
harbours as many as 4000-4600 species of flowering plants of which 56 genera and
2100 species are endemic. Gramineae (Poaceae) has the highest number of endemic
genera and the genus Nilgirianthus has the maximum number (20) of endemic
species. In Western Ghats Bamboos are represented by 8 genera with over 24
species; out of 8 species of Ochlandra (Bambusae) found in India, 6 species occur in
Western Ghats. Among herbaceous plants, the genus Impatiens has about 175
species in India, out of which 77 species are reported from the southern Western
Ghats alone. The leguminous genus Dalbergia has about 100 species in the world, of
which 22 species are from Western Ghats. Of the known orchids of Indian Peninsula,
37 percent are endemic to the Western Ghats region. Taxa with extremely restricted
distribution are found in Western Ghats. A number of endangered or rare plant

Peak area in the Agasthyamalai Range is the type locality for half a dozen endemic
50

.

species have their type locations in Western Ghats. For example, the Chemmunji

species. Diversity as well as endemism is equally high among animals species of the
Western Ghats. Blanford recorded 48 genera of mammals, 275 genera of birds (with
28 endemic forms) and 60 genera of reptiles from Western Ghats (Tewari, 1995).

The Biodiversity in Western Ghats is threatened due to habitat pressures. The
existing forests are highly degraded and facing the prospect of increasing
degradation. The area covered by Protected Areas is 16,930 km2 which constituted
10% of the total Western Ghats. The Western Ghats is one of the two biogeographic
zones in India with the highest level of coverage by Protected Areas and other one is
Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

5.2.4 Vegetation Types and Land Cover
There are four major phenological forest types in the Western Ghats,

moist

deciduous forests occupy the largest area followed by semievergreen, evergreen and
finally dry deciduous.

Evergreen forests:

The highest levels of endemism are found in the

evergreen forests. These forests occur in areas having annual rainfall of
2,500- to 5,000-millimeter. The habitat types of the southern Western Ghats
tropical evergreen forests include the wet montane evergreen forests and
shola-grassland complexes in the higher elevation (1,200-2,200 m). More
than half the tree species found in these forests are endemic, especially
among the families Dipterocarpaceae and Ebenaceae.

Semi-evergreen forests: Semi-evergreen forests occur primarily in the
states of Maharashtra, Goa, and Karnataka of Western Ghats (IIRS 2002).
This forest type includes secondary evergreen Dipterocarp forests, lateritic
semievergreen forests, bamboo brakes, and riparian. These forests also tend

.

to have high levels of tree diversity and endemism

51

Moist deciduous forests: The moist deciduous forest type occupies the
largest area within the Western Ghats. It occurs in areas with mean annual
rainfall of 2,500-3,500 mm.

Dry deciduous forests: The dry deciduous forests occur on the leeward side
of the Western Ghats Mountain Range in areas with 900-2,000 millimeters
mean annual rainfall. They extend across the southern Indian states of
Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.

5.3

Methodologies (Geospatial Analyses)

Remote Sensing, GIS, spatial statistics, photogrammetry and models are the tools to
execute the principles of the landscape ecology. Landscape ecology helps in
understanding the priority in conservation and resolves conflicts, as it emphasizes
that land use/cover types, amounts and arrangement of these on the landscape
elements, ultimately determines the dynamics and landscape structure. The spatial
datasets, their scales and resolution of satellite data are important for analysis and
modeling. Remote Sensing satellite data provides resolution from <1 m to 1000 m.
The landscapes are best depicted and mapped using medium resolution (20-50 m)
satellite data. Indian Remote Sensing satellite; Resourcesat I and II provide three
resolutions in AWifs (50 m), LISS III (24.5m) and LISS IV (5.4 m). The LISS III sensor
is widely used for regional mapping of resources and landscape ecological analysis.
ISRO has been undertaking such mapping under various projects and has access to
required geospatial datasets. Accordingly, HLWG requested ISRO for geoprocessing.

The subgroup of HLWG interacted with scientists of Forestry and Ecology Group of
National Remote Sensing Centre (NRSC) of ISRO for two days at Hyderabad to work
out methodologies for identification of Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESAs) in
Western Ghats region defined by HLWG. The Director of NRSC also participated in

.

the discussion.

52

The group discussed the different options available for scientific, objective and
practical ways of delineating ecologically sensitive areas at the landscape level using
different layers representing ecological characteristics. The group examined the
datasets available for different layers at NRSC and other Institutes at the fine
resolution level. Finally, after a thorough discussion, it was decided to utilize the
datasets generated in the DBT-DOS project (Appendix 2; Roy et al 2012) and these
datasets cover: (i) the landscape level characteristics of existing land use /land
cover (habitats), (ii) fragmentation, (iii) disturbance, and (iv) ecological parameters
(endemicity, ecosystem, species diversity and total bioresource value index)
collected from ~20000 ground sample points and used these date sets to map
biologically rich areas (Appendix 2).

Using these data sets, a pilot proof of concept project was undertaken for
identification of ecosensitive area in three districts – Uttarkannada in Karnataka,
Idduki in Kerala and Ratnagiri in Maharashtra. The methodology adopted and the
GIS maps thus generated were explained to HLWG. The HLWG reviewed the results
of the pilot project and recommended landscape level evaluation for demarcating
eco-sensitive areas.

The key premise is that the landscape level indicators would be based on the
vegetation, particularly the primary vegetation types.

The HLWG approach for the delineation of eco-sensitive area starts with the natural
vegetation consisting of major vegetation types, the scientific reasons for it are
several. Primarily, the only fine scale, spatially consistent information on plant
species distribution for the Western Ghats is the vegetation type map. These
vegetation types are generated using multi-spectral remote sensing data in
conjunction with suitable ground inventory of plant species. Finally the spatially
consistent species surrogate information, that vegetation types provide, can be used
as the basis for estimating landscape level metrics such as biological richness and
.

forest fragmentation.
53

The HLWG effort for the identification of ecologically sensitive areas based on
landscape level indicators have utilized the layers generated from the national
project on landscape level biodiversity characterization under the collaborative
study of the Department of Space and Department of Biotechnology, based on multiseason IRS LISS-III data. It provides spatial information on the vegetation types
consisting of natural and managed vegetation. The satellite image elements were
correlated on ground with the sampling intensity varying from 0.002% to 0.005%,
depending upon the vegetation heterogeneity. Details of the study methodology,
sampling technique and biological richness modelling have been published (Roy et
al 2012). Besides the remote sensing data, other collateral databases used include
phytosociological data collected from 16,578 field sample plots (with 7596 plant
species, wherein 648 species are endemic, 23 are endangered, rare or threatened
(ERT), 1879 medicinally important and 2803 are economically important species).
The datasets were collected during 1998-2010 under Department of Biotechnology
and Indian Space Research Organization joint programme (Roy et al 2012).

The project combined the spatial information generated on vegetation types with
the species level information and landscape level parameters to generate modelled
layers on biological richness and disturbance regimes stands. The spatial database
of these layers have served as the baseline data for habitat suitability assessment,
prioritization for microscale habitat studies, corridor connectivity and landscape
planning, identification of species-rich areas, conservation methods for protection of
rare species. These databases have been used for identification of ecologically
sensitive areas.

The geospatial analysis for the identification of ESZ uses two of the landscape level
spatial layers - forest fragmentation and biological richness. The geospatial analysis
for the generation of theses layers is described in Appendix 2. The different datasets
used in the analysis and their sources are given in Table 3. The analysis carried out

.

is schematically represented in Figure 7.

54

Table 3: Datasets (layers) used in geospatial analysis and their sources
S.No. Layer/Data
Source
Remarks
1.
Forest and
Department of SpaceBased on interpretation of
Vegetation
Department of
ortho- corrected IRS LISS III
Types
Biotechnology (DOS(23 m) data of 2005-2006;
DBT) Project on
Projection: LCC, Datum:
Biodiversity
WGS84
Characterisation at
Landscape level (2007)
Natural and
Cultural
Landscapes

Derived from forest and
vegetation types layer
(S. No. 1)

WGS84

3.

Forest
fragmentation
and biological
richness

Department of SpaceDepartment of
Biotechnology (DOSDBT) Project on
Biodiversity
Characterisation at
Landscape level (2007)

WGS84

4.

Village
boundaries

Survey of India

The village boundaries and
areas are indicative;
Everest

5.

Population
density

Village-level Population:
Census of India (2001);
Village boundary layer:
Survey of India

Spatial data organisation and
tagging of census data with
village layer by NRSC,
Hyderabad

6.

Administrative
boundaries

Survey of India

Western Ghats landscape as
defined by the Planning
Commission, Govt. of India,
under WGDP and HDP
(consisting of 188 Talukas)

7.

Protected Areas,
World Heritage
Sites and Tiger
Corridors

Wildlife Institute of
India

Everest

8.

Elephant corridor

Wildlife Trust of India
.

2.

55

Satellite Remote Sensing Data
LISS III (24 m Spatial Resolution)

Vegetation type map
(Using intensive Ground
Truth Data)
(ISRO-DBT database)

Stratified Field Sampling
(Probability Proportion
to sample size (PPS))

Geospatial modelling
(Sampled to 24 m)
• Biological Richness &
• Forest Fragmentation
(ISRO-DBT database)

Decision Matrix
Selection of villages with ESA > 20%
of village area

Protected Area & World heritage
site

Ecologically Sensitive
Area (ESA)
Figure 7: Schematic representation of geospatial analysis carried out using different
datasets for identification of ESAs.

landscape patterns, biodiversity and ecological processes. The biological richness
56

.

The fragmentation layer provides insights into the effects of forest fragmentation on

layer identifies areas that should be treated on a priority basis for the conservation
of biodiversity. The biological richness layer is spatially modelled by combining
information on disturbance metrics (fragmentation, juxtaposition, porosity and
patchiness), ecosystem uniqueness, total importance value, and endemicity. It
covers only natural landscapes. It may be noted that disturbance metrics included
as one of the components of biological richness index and it includes not only
fragmentation but also juxtaposition porosity and patchiness. Consequently,
fragmentation used in biological richness index is insignificant and does not
represent double count. The spatial layers categorize biological richness in four
classes (low, medium, high and very high) and forest fragmentation in three classes
(low medium and high). Figure 7 explains the steps in processing the datasets for
generating eco-sensitive areas.

While very high biological richness with low and medium fragmentation and high
biological richness with low fragmentation has been taken as ESA as such, the high
biological richness medium fragmentation class was included only where the
population density was lower than 100 persons/km2. The population data from the
2001 census (Govt. of India, 2001) was combined with spatial data on village
boundaries (Survey of India) to prepare a spatial layer on population density. The
reason that less than 100 person/km2 was chosen because in hilly areas the usual
density is<100 persons/km2.

The Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESAs) thus identified are at the smallest
administrative unit - the village. Village was taken as the unit of ESA. Villages were
selected on the basis of the proportion of ESA to the geographic area of the village. A
threshold of 20% proportional ESA was used to mark villages as ESU. This approach
is much more conservative, and indeed meaningful, than treating an entire taluka as
an ESA. Finally all protected areas and World Heritage sites (spatial data provided
by the Wildlife Institute of India) are treated as Ecologically Sensitive. It should be

spatial resolution used was 24 m. The observation made from data set on Tiger
57

.

noted that the village boundaries from SOI used in the study are indicative. The

corridor (from WII) and Elephant corridor (from Wildlife Trust of India) were used
to overlay on ESA.

The methodologies described above were discussed at HLWG meetings and also
used to map ESAs in Mudigere taluka of Chikmagalur district in Karnataka as
another case study.
5.4

Observations

5.4.1 The observation made from geospatial analysis are given below:

5.4.2 Case Study on the Identification of ESAs in Mudigere Taluka of
Chikmagalur District of Karnataka
Chikamagalur is a district in the Western Ghats region of Karnataka. The rivers
Tunga and Bhadra originate from this district. The first coffee plantations in the
country were established in this district. The Kudremukh National Park and Bhadra
Wildlife Sanctuary are located in the area. The District is divided into seven talukas
grouped into two Revenue Sub-Divisions viz., Chikmagalur and Tarikere. Out of
seven talukas, five talukas Chikmagalur, Koppa, Mudigere, Narasimharajpura and
Sringeri are part of the Western Ghats region delineated.

The forests in the taluka are of evergreen, semi evergreen, sholas and moist
deciduous types.

Figures 8 & 9 shows that a little over a third of the taluka is occupied by orchards
and plantations and constituted the cultural landscape (54% of the taluka). The
natural landscape accounts for 46% of the taluka area.

About 63% of the natural landscape is characterized by high and very high

.

biological richness, with almost 60% of it falls under low fragmentation category.

58

The village database shows that there are 140 villages in the taluka and 58 of them
harbour population density below 100 persons/km2.
Figure 10 indicates that ESA constitutes 570 km2 covering 27 villages. These villages
include all those having 20% or more of the area covered under ecologically
sensitive area. The total ESA includes 184 km2 of the Kuderemukh National Park
located at the north western part of the taluka.

ESZs of WGEEP was overlaid on the ESA of HLWG (Figure 11). As per WGEEP
methodology, out of 28 grids of 9x9 km, 17 were assigned to ESZ 1 and 10 were
assigned to ESZ 2.
These results on the case study substantiate that the methodologies followed for
identification of ESA are objective, scientific and practical in delineation of ESAs at
fine resolution with village as a unit. This is further confirmed by Peer Review

.

Committee (see item 5.5 of this Chapter).

59

¯

Vegetation Types and Landcover
Mudigere Taluk, Chikamagalur District

KARKAL

SRINGERI

KOPPA

NARASIMHARAJPURA

CHIKMAGALUR

KARKAL
MUDIGERE

BELUR

BELTHANGADI

BUNTWAL
SAKALESHPUR

Legend
Evergreen

Sholas

Orchard/ Horticultural Plantations
PUTTUR

Semi-evergreen

Scrub

Moist deciduous

Grassland

Water body

Agriculture

Settlement
0

5

10 Km

Barren land

.

Figure 8: Mudigere taluka showing vegetation and land cover types.

60

¯

Natural and Cultural Landscapes

KARKAL

SRINGERI

KOPPA

NARASIMHARAJPURA

CHIKMAGALUR

KARKAL
MUDIGERE

BELUR

BELTHANGADI

BUNTWAL

Legend

SAKALESHPUR

Natural
Cultural
Waterbody
Orchards/ Plantations

PUTTUR
0

5

10 Km

.

Figure 9: Mudigere taluka showing natural and cultural landscapes.

61

¯

Ecologically Sensitive Area

KARKAL

SRINGERI

KOPPA

NARASIMHARAJPURA

CHIKMAGALUR

KARKAL
MUDIGERE

BELUR

BELTHANGADI

BUNTWAL
SAKALESHPUR

Legend
Ecologically Sensitive Units at Village Level
Village Boundary
PUTTUR
0

5

10 Km

.

Figure 10: Mudigere taluka showing ESAs.

62

¯

WGEEP Zones for

Legend
WGEEP
ESZ1
ESZ2
ESZ3

HLWG Ecologically Sensitive Units at Village Level
HLWG Ecologically Sensitive Units at Village Level

0

5

10 Km

.

Figure 11: Mudigere taluka showing ESZs of WGEEP overlaid on ESAs.

63

5.4.3 Identification and Delineation of ESAs in Western Ghats Region

5.4.3.1 Different layers used in the delineation of ESA across Western Ghats
region
The methodologies thus tested by HLWG were used in the identification and
delineation of ESAs in Western Ghats Region as defined by HLWG.
The vegetation and land cover classes found in natural and cultural landscapes are
given in Table 4 and Figure 12. The area under natural and cultural landscapes is
68,249 km2 and 96,031 km2 respectively and thus making the total geographical
area of Western Ghats as 1,64,280 km2. The four forest types (49,926 km2),
grasslands (5,549 km2) and scrub (8,972 km2) cover most of the natural landscape;
of the four forest types, moist deciduous forest is predominant (25,479 km2).
Agriculture (81,239 km2) and orchard/horticultural plantation (7,815 km2) are
dominant land uses in cultural landscape.

Landuse and landcover data clearly depict that the Western Ghats are prominently
dominated and deeply integrated by cultural landscapes along with unique and
ecologically sensitive natural landscapes (Figures 8 & 9). Therefore, any
strengthening of conservation efforts in Western Ghats should also take into
account this integrative practice and sustainable development that makes
conservation very effective.

It may be noted that the total area under water bodies is 4,351 km2, of which 3,617
km2 area of waterbodies shares boundary with atleast one polygon of natural
landscape in Western Ghats region. Consequently, the area of 3,617 km2 under
waterbodies is included under natural landscape and the remaining area under
waterbodies is part of cultural landscape. Of the 3,617 km2 area under waterbodies,

.

1,526 km2 area falls under ESAs (Source: NRSC).

64

Table 4: Vegetation and Landcover classes in Natural and Cultural Landscapes

.

Natural Landscape
Cultural Landscape
Sl No Class
Sl No
Class
1 Sholas
1 Agriculture
2 Evergreen
2 Arecanut
3 Semi-evergreen
3 Orchard/ Horticulture
4 Moist deciduous
4 Water Body*
6 Teak
5 Settlement
7 Bamboo
8 Dry deciduous
12 Grassland
13 Kans
14 Mixed plantation (forest)
15 Sacred groves
16 Riverine
18 Scrub
19 Mangrove
*Also found under natural landscape (see also section 5.4.3.1 of this Chapter)

65

.

Figure 12: Vegetation and Land cover types in WG region.

66

Figure 13 depicts area of Western Ghats region covered by relative portions of
Natural and Cultural Landscapes. Out of the total 1,64,280 km2 area, the ratio of
Natural to cultural landscape is 68,271 km2: 96,008 km2.

Figure 13: Western Ghats region showing Natural and Cultural Landscapes and

.

water bodies.

67

Figure 14 illustrates the different levels of biological richness in natural landscape
across Western Ghats region. Figure 15 gives pattern of forest fragmentation layer
across the Western Ghats region.

Figure 14: Western Ghats region showing different levels of biological richness in

.

natural landscape.

68

Figure 15: Western Ghats region showing different levels of forest fragmentation in natural

.

landscape.

69

70

.

Figure 16: Western Ghats region showing different population densities.

The population densities across the Western Ghats region are given in Figure 16.
Table 5 gives the number of villages and population densities in ESA and non-ESA
areas. The ratio of village area in ESA to non-ESA is 59,940 km2 (36.49%) : 1,04,340
km2 (63.51%). The ratio of population size in ESA to population size in non-ESA is
52,12,244 (10.82%): 429,46,841 (89.18%). The number of villages in ESA to
number of villages in non-ESA is 4156 (22.88%): 14009 (77.12%). The ratio of
population density in ESA to population density in non-ESA is 86.9: 411.61.
Table 5: Number of villages and population density in ESAs and non ESAs of Western
Ghats region
Village
Population Number Population
Area
Size
of
Density
Villages
CAT
ESA
59,940 52,12,244
4,156
86.96
36.49%
10.82% 22.88%
NON
ESA
1,04,340 429,46,841 14,009
411.61
63.51%
89.18% 77.12%

.

The list of villages in ESA is given in Appendix 3 in Volume 2.

71

5.4.3.2 ESA, PAs, WHSs and Wildlife Corridors in Western Ghats Region
ESA, PAs and WHSs in Western Ghats region are mapped in Figure 17. As indicated
in Table 6 the area under ESA (including PAs and WHSs) is approximately 59,940
km2 (about 60,000 km2) out of the total 68,271 km2 of natural landscape. This
constitutes 36.49% (about 37%) of the Western Ghats region. Out of 59,940 km2
ESA, 16,902 km2 area is occupied by PAs and WHSs (Table 6).

.

Figure 17: Western Ghats region showing ESA, PAs and WHSs.

72

The Western Ghats (WG) region includes an extensive Protected Areas network
covering about 10% of the geographic area of WG. However, the PAs cannot
safeguard viable populations of landscape dependent species such as tiger and
elephant over long term, unless they remain connected by habitat corridors.
Corridors facilitate movement of individual wild animals amongst PAs so as to
minimize the ill effects of inbreeding, genetic drift, demographic stochasticity, and
are essential to ensure long-term survival of wild animal populations. This is in tune
with the well understood fact that wildlife populations need to be managed as
‘metapopulations’.

Wildlife Institute of India (WII) report on the ‘Status of Tigers, Co-predators, and
Prey in India -2010’ identifies important tiger corridors, their spatial context, and
potential bottlenecks affecting their functioning. Similarly the Wildlife Trust of India
(WTI) has identified elephant corridors.

Tiger and elephant corridors mostly fall in the ESA of the Western Ghats as defined
by HLWG in this report. However, some parts of corridors traverse through the
cultural landscape in the WG outside ESA. HLWG urges the State Governments to
ensure the integrity of the wildlife corridors, and not permit alteration in present
landuses in cultural landscape that would make these areas impermeable to the
wildlife movement. This can better be ensured by the WG States by devising a
workable joint action plan for securing the wildlife corridors especially in cultural

.

landscape.

73

Figure 18: Wildlife corridors (Tiger and Elephant) in ESA of Western Ghats region
(Datasets of Tiger Corridor from WII and dataset of Elephant Corridor from WTI

.

were used).

74

5.4.3.3 Delineation of ESA in each of the Six States of Western Ghats region
For each State of the Western Ghats region, one map depicting natural and cultural
landscape and another map showing ESA are provided (Figures 19 to 30). Table 6
gives number of villages falling under ESA and area under ESA in each taluka of
Western Ghats region and the districts to which the taluka belongs for each State of

.

Western Ghats region. The list of villages is given in Appendix 3 in Volume 2.

75

.

Figure 19: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Gujarat.

76

.

Figure 20: ESA in Western Ghats region of Gujarat.

77

.

Figure 21: Natural and cultural landscape in Western Ghats region of Goa.

78

.

Figure 22: ESA in Western Ghats region of Goa.

79

.

Figure 23: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Maharashtra.

80

.

Figure 24: ESA in Western Ghats region of Maharashtra

81

.

Figure 25: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Karnataka.

82

.

Figure 26: ESA in Western Ghats region of Karnataka.

83

.

Figure 27: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Kerala.

84

.

Figure 28: ESA in Western Ghats region of Kerala.

85

.

Figure 29: Natural and Cultural landscapes in Western Ghats region of Tamil Nadu.

86

.

Figure 30: ESA in Western Ghats region of Tamil Nadu.

87

Table 6 gives statistical data on ESA, PAs+WHSs, natural and cultural landscapes
geographical area of talukas falling in Western Ghats region in each of the 6 States of
Western Ghats region. The State of Goa has highest percent of ESA (83.57%), of
which nearly half of it is under PAs + WHS. The State of Karnataka and Kerala have
high percent of area under ESA. Gujarat has least percent of ESA area.

Table 6: Area under Natural and Cultural landscapes, ESA, PAs+WHSs and total area of
‘talukas’ under Western Ghats region in different States of the Western Ghats region
(area in km2)

Total
Geographic
Area of State

State

Goa
Gujarat
Karnataka
Kerala
Maharashtra
Tamil Nadu
Grand Total

3,702
1,96,024
1,91,791
38,863
3,07,713
1,30,058
8,68,151

Western
Ghats
Taluka
Area

1,749
5,977
44,448
29,691
55,345
27,069
1,64,280

No. of
Villages

Natural
Landscape

99
64
1,576
123
2,159
135
4,156

1,558
2,553
21,529
12,477
21,185
8,947
68,249

Cultural
Landscape

191
3,423
22,919
17,214
34,161
18,122
96,031

Village
Sharpened
ESA

PA +
WHS

655
64
5,660
4,913
2,242
3,369
16,902

1,461
449
20,668
13,108
17,340
6,914
59,940

ESA to
WG
Taluka

83.57%
7.52%
46.50%
44.15%
31.33%
25.54%
36.49%

Table 7: Number of villages with ESA in each taluka, the total geographical area of
taluka and the area occupied by ESA in a taluka across the States of Western Ghats

State
Gujarat

District
Navsari
Surat

The Dangs
Valsad

Taluka
Bansda
Chikhli
Songadh
Uchchhal
Vyara
The Dangs
Dharampur

Gujarat
Total

Taluka
Area
(km2)
571
553
1,111
559
782
1,700
699

No. of Villages
with ESA
5

95
5
30
285

13
1
5
40

449

64
.

5,976

ESA
35

88

State
Goa

District
North Goa
South Goa

Taluka
Satari
Kankon
Sanguem

Goa
Total

Nandurbar
Nashik

Pune

Taluka
Area
(km2)
1,433
1,630
2,333
498
265
651
913
454
536
630
539
912
1,008
911
1,400
1,266
838
811
875
538
1,292
802
889
987
863
1,203
1,285
1,373
1,205

ESA
453

No. of
Villages
with
ESA
42

47
165
208
319
340

5
20
24
28
21

140
558
539
13
238
42
92
219

14
34
51
2
15
5
8
28

145
53
262
329
326
318
37
281
220
511

23
5
42
30
37
56
4
32
22
51
.

Dhule
Kolhapur

Taluka
Akola
Sangamner
Sakri
Ajra
Bavda
Bhudragad
Chandgad
Gadhinglaj
Kagal
Karvir
Panhala
Radhanagari
Shahuwadi
Nawapur
Baglan
Dindori
Igatpuri
Kalwan
Nashik
Peint
Sinnar
Surgana
Trimbakeshwar
Ambegaon
Bhor
Haveli
Junnar
Khed
Mawal

99

ESA

1,749

State
District
Maharashtra Ahmadnagar

406
284
771
1,461

Taluka Area
(km2)
515
362
872

No. of
Villages
with
ESA
56
5
38

89

Raigarh

Ratnagiri

Sangli
Satara

Sindhudurg

Thane

Mulshi
Purandhar
Velhe
Karjat
Khalapur
Mahad
Mangaon
Poladpur
Roha
Sudhagad
Chiplun
Khed
Lanja
Pajapur
Sangameshwar
Shirala
Jaoli
Khandala
Khatav
Koregaon
Mahabaleshwar
Patan
Satara
Wai
Devgad
Kankavli
Kudal
Sawantwadi
Vaibhavvadi
Jawhar
Mokhada
Murbad
Shahapur
Vada

550
85
325
266
133
409
238
179
383
319
428
495
405
444
626
201
582

66
9
60
45
22
68
47
36
86
52
43
74
47
48
80
24
119

23
202
626
103
108
230
409
475
613
252
331
291
475
911
367
17,340

2
40
96
25
18
21
39
48
50
34
29
21
57
92
62
2159

.

Maharashtra Total

957
1,049
556
634
395
796
675
354
603
444
1,096
1,026
744
1,190
1,244
609
831
488
1,350
877
243
1,312
842
597
760
792
834
842
414
663
563
930
1,489
801
55,345

90

Chamaraja
nagar
Chikmagalur

Coorg

Dharwar
Hassan

Karwar

Mangalore

Mysore
Shimoga

Taluka
Bailhongal
Belgaum
Hukkeri
Khanapur
Savadatti
Gundlupet
Chikmagalur
Koppa
Mudigere
Narasimharajpura
Sringeri
Mercara
Somvarpet
Virajpet
Dharwar
Alur
Belur
Hassan
Sakaleshpur
Ankola
Bhatkal
Honavar
Joida
Karwar
Kumta
Siddapur
Sirsi
Yellapur
Belthangadi
Puttur
Sulya
Heggadadevanakote
Hosanagara
Sagar
Shikarpur
Shimoga
Thirthahalli

1,377
1,586
568
1,139
800
445
1,441
1,013
1,661
1,095
429
842
927
1,021
905
342
718
1,861
703
553
851
1,300
1,293
1,387
1,029
846
1,616
1,406
1,918
901
1,099
1,233

ESA

No. of
Villages
with
ESA

15

1

857

62

574
579
251
571
566
337
963
193
926

21
27
32
27
35
26
23
11
21

2

1

408
809
185
561
1,835
628
374
535
903
1,168
633
331
479
844
1,069
1,363
98
477
853

34
43
28
44
110
39
43
107
125
87
17
11
18
62
126
134
12
66
146
.

State
District
Karnataka Belgaum

Taluka
Area
(km2)
1,101
1,006
960
1,700
1,536

91

Udupi

Karkal
Kundapura
Udupi

Karnataka Total

450
834

13
24

20,668

1576

Taluka
Area
District
Taluka
(km2)
ESA
Kothamangalam
316
Ernakulam
Kunnathunad
476
Muvattupuzha
449
Devikulam
1,808 1,808
Idukki
Peerumade
1,310 1,146
Thodupuzha
888
463
Udumbanchola
1,094 1,094
Taliparamba
1,329
Kannur
Thalassery
1,212
304
Hosdurg
976
Kasaragod
Kottarakkara
571
Kollam
Kunnathur
143
Pathanapuram
1,271
942
Kanjirappally
429
51
Kottayam
Meenachil
689
106
Kozhikode
1,031
234
Kozhikode
Quilandy
745
170
Vadakara
580
112
Ernad
816
Malappuram
Nilambur
1,383 1,012
Perinthalmanna
511
Tirur
418
Alathur
578
66
Palakkad
Chittur
1,170
648
Mannarkad
1,226
857
Palakkad
726
272
Adoor
336
Pathanamthitta
Kozhenchery
958
616
Ranni
1,097
924
957
457
Thiruvananthap* Nedumangad
Neyyattinkara
585
165
Kodungallur
150
Thrissur
Mukundapuram
1,326
708

No. of
Villages
with
ESA

13
8
4
23
3

8
1
3
5
2
2
10

1
3
7
3
2
4
4
3
1
.

State
Kerala

1,361
1,554
926
44,448

92

Mananthavady
Sulthanbathery
Vythiri

Kerala
Total

District

Taluka

Coimbatore

Avanashi
Coimbatore north
Coimbatore south
Mettupalayam
Pollachi
Udumalaipettai
Valparai
Dindigul
Kodaikanal
Oddanchatram
Palani
Dharapuram
Kangeyam
Agastheeswaram
Kalkulam
Thovala
Vilavancode
Usilampatti
Coonoor
Gudalur
Kotagiri
Kundah
Panthalur
Udhagamandalam
Andipatti
Bodinayakanur
Periyakulam
Theni
Uthamapalayam
Ambasamudram
Nanguneri

Dindigul

Erode
Kanniyakumari

Madurai
The nilgiris

Theni

Tirunelveli

749
770
619

4
2
7
123

Taluka
Area
(km2)
656
525
827
625
1,168
1,460
712
1,451
1,048
782
711
1,412
823
340
703
325
378
505
199
472
400
309
268
924
941
545
392
250
781
1,225
921

ESA

No. of
Villages
with
ESA

150
140
205

4
2
10

460
528
327
500
70

7
7
5
9
1

2
286
298
79

1
4
14
1

18
413
239
233
92
480
311
263

2
5
7
5
1
5
1
3

167
639
272

7
5
2
.

State
Tamil
Nadu

364
301
287

29,693 13,108

Wayanad

93

Virudhunagar

Radhapuram
Sankarankoil
Shenkottai
Sivagiri
Tenkasi
Rajapalayam
Sattur
Srivilliputhur

Tamil Nadu Total

1,003
1,058
210
537
519
514
499
654
27,069

74
187
149
126

5
1
5
5

207
6,914

11
135

5.5
Peer Review on delimitation of ESA in Western Ghats region
A 3-member Peer Review Committee consisting of Dr Y.V.N. Krishnamurthy,
Director, IIRS (Chairman), Dr V.B. Mathur, Dean, WII and Dr Subhash Ashutos,
Professor, IGNFA was constituted by HLWG to review the geospatial analysis carried
out by National Remote Sensing Centre (NRSC) for identification of ecologically
sensitive areas in the Western Ghats region and also to provide comments on the
draft Chapter 4 (Definition and delimitation of Western Ghats Region) and Chapter 5
(Identification of Ecologically Sensitive Areas in the Western Ghats region)of the
Report of HLWG.

The Committee met on 4 April 2013 at the Indian Institute of Remote Sensing,
Dehradun. The meeting was also attended by other experts of IIRS in areas of
geospatial analysis, forestry and ecology – Dr S.K. Srivastav, Dr S.P.S. Kushwaha and
Dr Sarnam Singh. Dr C.S. Jha and Shri G. Rajasekhar from NRSC presented the
databases utilized and methodology adopted in identifying the Ecologically Sensitive
Areas (ESAs) in the Western Ghats region.

Based on the discussions held in the meeting and information presented in Chapter
5, the Committee made the following comments (Appendix 1):

“It is noted that the primary inputs used for identifying ESAs are taken from
DOS-DBT project on “Biodiversity Characterization at Landscape Level”
.

(BCLL), in which different spatial layers, example vegetation type and

94

landcover, biological richness, forest fragmentation, etc. were generated on
1:50,000 scale using IRS LISS-III images and ancillary data. These inputs are
appropriate for identifying the ESAs as they are the best possible seamless
datasets available at present with acceptable accuracy. The biological richness
and forest fragmentation layers along with population density, village
boundary, Protected Area (PA) and World Heritage Site (WHS) maps have
been used to identify the ESAs using a suitable decision matrix”.
The effort made by the Task team in carefully collating and analyzing the best
possible/available datasets for identifying the ESAs is appreciable. The
datasets used are adequate and approach followed for geospatial analysis is
technically sound in meeting the objective of identifying the ESAs. Further the
large area covered for analysis in limited time frame is also commendable.

The Committee also concluded: “that the datasets used and methodology
followed for geospatial analysis within the given timeframe and resources are
adequate for identification of ESAs in the Western Ghats region”.

However, the Committee also suggested to provide logic for using certain criteria in
the analysis such as: (i) the use of population density of <100 per km2 as a layer in
identifying ESA, (ii) the inclusion of forest fragmentation in biological richness, and
(iii) sources of primary and secondary data used in the analysis. They also made
some minor corrections in the Chapters 4 and 5 of the Report. These are adequately
addressed at appropriate places in Chapters 4 and 5.

The Committee also mentioned that the State Governments: (i) must also ensure
protection of wildlife corridors while implementing the programmes for
conservation and preservation of ESAs, and (ii) may use forest type map published
by Forest Survey of India on 1:50,000 scale for final refinements and prescriptions
for conservation of ecological sensitive forest type and rare and threatened endemic
.

species (Appendix 1).
95

5.6

Conclusions

(i) The total area (1,64,280 km2)under Western Ghats region as defined by HLWG is
higher than that reported by WGEEP. The area under ESA (59,940 km2) is about
90% of the total area under natural landscape (68,249 km2); the ESA (including PAs
and WHS) constitutes 36.49% of Western Ghats area; The demarcation unit of ESA
is the village.
(ii) IRS LISS III derived spatial layers on vegetation type and landscape level indices
(with a fine spatial resolution of 24m) were used as the basis for identification of
ecologically sensitive areas (ESAs). The LISS-III sensor is a sensor of choice for
natural resource management studies at a mapping scale of about 1:50,000. The
spectral and spatial resolution of this sensor captures the vegetation types even at
small patch size (≈ 1 Ha). Typically this sensor is not used for village/micro level
studies; however this sensor was employed for delineation of ecosensitive area
because of its compatibility with the scales available for other collatoral data and
also given the large area to be covered with a consistent time base.
(iii) The landscape indices (biological richness and forest fragmentation), derived
from the geospatial analysis of IRS LISS-III satellite data include details on species
richness of vegetation, endemicity, ecosystem uniquness, disturbance indicators,
adjacency and patch characteristics. This enabled delineation of ESAs in a objective
and scientific fashion at a much finer scale with village as a unit and thus paved the
way for actionable and implementable approach for the conservation of ecology and
equitable and sustainable development of WG, as envisaged by WGEEP. The model
developed in this Report and authenticated by a Peer Review Committee consisting
of experts can be replicated elsewhere at the national and regional levels.
(iv) The exclusion of large cultural landscapes enable protection of ecologically
sensitive natural landscapes outside PAs and WHS effectively and make them
conflict free.
(v) The remote sensing derived vegetation maps are not without limitations. For

.

instance under-story plantations (for eg. cardamom) or naturalized forest

96

plantations cannot be discriminated. The natural landscape identified, however, are
still conservative.
(vi) Wildlife habitats are not explicitly included in the demarcation of ecologically
sensitive areas; the forested and natural landscapes are the best available fine
resolution and spatially consistent proxies in the absence of high resolution data on
faunal distributions. We have added all protected areas and world heritage sites,
and the combination of the two data sets account for all habitats. Further, tiger and
elephant corridors are also overlaid on ESA.
(vii) The village boundary layer taken from Survey of India and the derived aereal
extents are indicative.
(viii) The ESA identified, may be notified by MoEF with development restrictions
proposed in Chapter 6.
(ix) It may be noted that PAs and WHSs and Reserve Forest Areas (RFAs) are
included in ESAs. These are regulated by the extant provisions of the Indian Forest
Act, 1927, Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1922 and the Forest Conservation Act,
1980 and their amendments thereof. Inclusion of these areas under ESA provides
additional protection to them.
(x) The State Governments should also ensure consultation with local communities
while planning for protection of wildlife corridors.
(xi) The State Governments may also use the recently published forest type map by
FSI in 1:50,000 scale for finer refinements and prescriptions for conservation of
ecologically sensitive forest types. (and rare and threatened endemic species).
(xii) The conclusions on the delineation of ESA presented in the Report are
based on the best of the contemporary analytical approaches and latest
databases. Therefore, there is high confidence in the details used in the

.

demarcation of ESA in WG region.

97

CHAPTER 6

The Paradigm for Sustainable and Inclusive Development and the
Framework for Governance
6.1

Introduction

The Western Ghats is a biological treasure trove that needs to be protected and
regenerated, indeed celebrated for its enormous wealth of endemic species and
natural beauty. The analysis of current land-use data, using remote sensing
technology at 24-meter resolution, reveals that already close to 60 per cent of the
area defined as Western Ghats is under cultural landscape. The cultural landscape –
as different from natural landscape – is human dominated land use of settlements,
agriculture and plantations (other than forest plantations). Therefore, only 41 per
cent of the land area can be currently classified as natural landscape – with different
classes of vegetation cover and medium to high biological value.

The biologically rich area, with some measure of contiguity is roughly 37 per cent of
the Western Ghats boundary – roughly 60,000 sq km. The HLWG has recommended
designation of this identified area as, Ecologically-Sensitive Area (ESA).

The message of this report is serious, alarming and urgent. It is imperative that we
protect, manage and regenerate the lands now remaining in the Western Ghats as
biologically rich, diverse, natural landscapes. We have reached a threshold, from
which we cannot slip further. This has to be the objective of future planning and
regulation in this recognized center of biodiversity in our country.
What is also clear is that natural landscapes face unprecedented threats because of
development projects and urban growth. HLWG emphasizes a non-tolerance policy
with respect to highly interventionist and environmentally damaging activities like

.

mining or polluting industries. The HLWG also proposes to bring specific

98

recommendations about prohibited activities and those that require high level of
scrutiny and assessment before clearance.

HLWG recognizes that the proposed non-permissible activities may not be enough
to fully manage the environmental fallout of development. However, it is also clear
that management through prohibition and fiat is often detrimental to the interests
of the very people and environment policy is aiming to protect. Therefore, we need a
balanced and nuanced approach to say no to the most damaging and high impact
activities and at the same time working of systems to incentivize environmentally
sound development that benefits local livelihoods and economies.

It is important to note that the Western Ghats even in the areas, categorized as
natural landscapes, is inhabited. It is not wilderness area, but the habitat of its
people, who share the landscape with biological diversity. It is not possible to plan
for Western Ghats, only as a fenced-in zone, with no human influence. This is the
difference between the natural landscapes of a highly populated country like India,
against the wilderness zones of many other countries.

Within the area defined as ESA, there are some 4156 villages. The villages included
have 20 per cent of more of ecologically sensitive area within their boundary. The
people living in these settlements have undoubtedly built a deep relationship and
coexistence with the natural environment. However, these practices need to be
supported and incentivized. People living within the rich biodiversity have nurtured
nature. They must benefit from conservation. This should be the aim of future
programmes.

The area defined as ‘cultural’ has been deliberately identified and segregated from
the ‘natural’ landscape. This does not mean that these settlements, plantations or
agricultural fields do not co-exist on the biological diversity of the natural area or

.

that these areas have an open license to pollute or degrade the environment. It is for

99

this reason that HLWG proposed to recommend a higher level of scrutiny and
monitoring for projects within 10 km of the ESA.

HLWG also recognizes that this cultural landscape is biologically rich. For instance,
the coffee plantation areas of Kodagu have high biological diversity in the cultural
landscape. The sacred groves of many settlements are scattered and so not
detectable through remote sensing. But these groves are the most abiding symbols
of people’s belief in the protection of nature. HLWG has recommended policies to
incentivize these practices so that growth across the Western Ghats can be
environmentally sound.

This is the opportunity for the future. The Western Ghats, are recognizably, one of
the world richest regions of biodiversity. The economic growth in these regions
comes from natural endowment – the water that irrigates the commercial
plantations or rich manure that fertilizes the agricultural fields, the forest wealth
that brings industry or tourism that generates jobs. The future lies in working on
green growth strategies that build on the natural endowment to create a vibrant
economy. This Chapter provides prescriptions for sustainable and inclusive
development framework for governance in Western Ghats region.

6.2

WGEEP recommendations for sector level planning and their

implications
The WGEEP has recommended guidelines for sector-wise activities, which would be
permitted in categorized ecologically sensitive area of the region. In this way,
regions with the highest ecological sensitivity would have restricted developmental
activities – from a total ban on mining to large hydroelectric projects or inter-basin
transfer of water and even plantations. The listing is comprehensive and provides
an important direction to what will constitute environmentally sound development
in this ecologically rich region. The question is how such a development plan will be

development should be incentivized and not only practiced through fiat.
100

.

implemented. Furthermore, it is also important that environmentally sound

It is also clear that this recommendation of the WGEEP has evoked the strongest
criticism from many quarters. There is apprehension that this ‘blanket prescription’
could be detrimental to economy and livelihoods. For instance, the Kodagu coffee
growers and planters association made a strong representation to the High Level
Working Group that the district should be kept out of the Gadgil committee
recommendations. Their argument was that they have a strong tradition of
cultivation of coffee, cardamom and other crops. They practice techniques, which
protect the soil, recharge groundwater through ponds and use organic manure.
Their way of life is not harmful to the environment.

While WGEEP does not contain a specific reference to plantations in Kodagu, the
sector wise guidelines stoke fears of selective interpretation and misuse. In this
case, WGEEP specifies that in ESZ1/ESZ2 change in land use would not be permitted
from forest to non-forest uses or agriculture, except where it is needed for extension
of village populations. It also specifies that even on private lands, there will be no
monoculture plantation of exotics like eucalyptus and existing plantations should be
replaced by planting endemic species. Therefore, even though, there is no detailed
description of the ecological problems of coffee, the implication of this
recommendation is that all plantations would have to be replaced with natural
forests in the foreseeable future. This is clearly unacceptable to the plantation
owners.

It is important to consider that environmentally sound development cannot
preclude livelihood and economic options for this region. The role of plantations in
the local ecology and economy is critical. The answer will not lie in removing these
economic options but in providing better incentives to move the plantations
towards greener and more sustainable practices. The plantation owners of Kodagu
(as well as the entire region) have challenges – labour shortage is growing and they

.

do not the premium for organic and certified products without expensive

101

certification. There is also no clear incentive to move towards organic plantations in
the domestic market. These issues need to be addressed.

It is also a fact that permit-based regulations are often open for misinterpretation
and misuse. A similar issue was raised with the High Level Group on its visit to
Maharashtra, when officials explained that there was concern that the WGEEP, if
implemented could lead to complete halt of all economic activity. “It would condemn
people to live in stone-age”. According to them, the guidelines would not allow for
any infrastructure development, from renewable energy to inter-basin transfer of
water. This would be a problem, they explained, as many regions of the Western
Ghats lie in the rain shadow area and need water to be diverted for irrigation and
drinking. Clearly, their concern was the impact of the sweeping nature of the
recommendations on the region’s economy.

It is not possible to design an effective framework for sustainable development
based on such an approach. For instance, WGEEP has discussed at length the specific
problem of a private windmill project, which was allowed in the Bhimashankar
Wildlife Sanctuary. This project was unsanctioned and has had a hugely adverse
impact on the rich biodiversity of the sanctuary, which is also home to
Maharashtra’s state animal, the Malabar Giant Squirrel. The project has lead to
large-scale erosion and landslides in the area. This observation has led the
committee to recommend that there “should be no large scale wind power projects
in ESZ1 and projects after cumulative environmental impact assessment in ESZ2
and ESZ3.” It is clear that while the Committee has not recommended a blanket ban,
the application is open to misinterpretation. It is obvious that the wind energy
projects should be brought under the purview of environment and forest clearance
(EC and FC)– which is currently not the case. It is also obvious that wind energy
projects should not be allowed in ecologically fragile areas, where there is
possibility of irreversible damage. Similarly, it is clear that large -scale water

be allowed. However, this recommendation should not imply that all water
102

.

diversion projects, which have impacts on the environment and forests, should not

diversion would be stopped even without any study or scrutiny about the individual
project or cumulative impact of the projects.

What particularly concerns the HLWG is that these rules could easily work against
the very communities – poor tribal and agriculturists – whose interest WGEEP is
working to safeguard. For instance, WGEEP refers to the confusion created because
of the rules issued for Ecologically Sensitive Zones (ESZ) near protected areas. It
finds that the rule, no artificial lighting will be used in ESZ has been interpreted by
forest department to imply that no kerosene or oil lanterns are allowed inside
homes located within 10 km of the protected area. “The only fallout of such a
programme is that the poor suffer harassment and extortion while the wealthy and
powerful successfully flout the regulations”, rightly observes WGEEP. This is what
needs to be avoided as far as possible in the regime of management that is
implemented for the Western Ghats.

6.3

Sector Level Planning

The HLWG is of the view that the vision of what constitutes environmentally sound
and inclusive development is not in dispute. What is in dispute is as follows:

a. How can environmentally sound growth be promoted – what are the policies
needed to encourage development that is inclusive and also sustainable and
equitable in this ecologically rich region?
b. How can the adverse impacts of development projects be rigorously assessed
and regulated. What are the institutions of governance that are required to
ensure compliance? Should we agree to set up another institution, which will
regulate and permit development in the Western Ghats, modeled on the
Coastal Zone Authority (as recommended by WGEEP)? Or should the effort
be to strengthen the existing institutions and regulations for effective
functioning?

making? In other words, how can local communities including tribals play a
103

.

c. How can development be based on decentralized planning and decision-

greater role in discussing and deciding on the economic future of the region,
which is classified as ecologically sensitive?

HLWG has used high resolution mapping to segregate land use classes in the
Western Ghats. This has allowed it to separate the natural landscape from cultural
landscape – settlements, commercial plantations and agriculture. The ESA is the
presently available medium and high biodiversity region in the Western Ghats. This
identified area must be conserved and regenerated and further depletion or
degradation must not be allowed. In the Eco-Sensitive Area (ESA), there is a need to
maintain integrity of the natural systems. In this region, minimal disturbance will be
allowed. It is for this reason that the ESA will not be open to polluting industry,
mining or thermal power plants. All other infrastructure development, necessary for
the region, will be carefully scrutinized and assessed for cumulative impact and
development needs, before clearance.

In this way, HLWG has deviated from WGEEP by not recommending a blanket
prescriptive on what constitutes good development, which will be implemented
through a prohibitory regime. Instead, HLWG has considered and recommended
prohibitory and regulatory regime only for those activities with maximum
interventionist and destructive impact on the ecosystem. These activities, as listed
below, will be prohibited in the area classified as ESA in this report.

It is our understanding that other economic sectors, such as land use, agriculture or
forestry, can best be approached through programmes that provide incentives to
change practice. It therefore, recommends that state governments should take into
account the need for green growth in the entire Western Ghats during the
preparation of regional plans. The regional plan will provide the opportunity to plan

.

for other sectors such as land use, agriculture, water and forestry.

104

6.4

Development restrictions in ESA

6.4.1 In the area classified as ESA, including its settlements, the following
development restrictions will apply:

Mining: Complete ban on mining, quarrying and sand mining in ESA. All current
mine areas will be phased out within the next 5 years, or expiry of mining lease,
whichever is earlier.
Power/Energy, including hydropower and wind: No thermal power projects will
be allowed; hydropower projects must be based on conditions of ecological flow and
distance (as provided in section 6.3.2) and will be subject to environment and forest
clearance. All projects will require cumulative impact assessments before appraisal.

Industry: All ‘Red’ category industries will be strictly banned.

Settlements: Building and construction projects of 20,000 sq. m and above will not
be allowed. Townships and area development projects will be prohibited.
Other infrastructure and development projects/schemes: Will be subject to
environment clearance under Category ‘A’ projects.

Additional safeguard for forest diversion in ESA: In cases of forest clearance
required in ESA, all information of the project, from application stage to approval
will be put in the public domain – on the website of MoEF and of the respective
forest department of the State. This transparency will add to the scrutiny of the
projects, particularly in light of the fact that all information on the ESA will also be in
the public domain.

6.4.2 Mining
The mining sector is categorized as ‘red’ industry and therefore, would be

sector has grown without consideration for impacts on the ecology and livelihood
105

.

prohibited in the Eco-Sensitive Area of the Western Ghats. It is also clear that this

security. The unplanned and unregulated boom in the mining sector have led to
protests, which in turn, had resulted in bans and prohibitions in different states.
Quarrying and sand mining will also be banned in ESA.

HLWG has received many representations regarding the problems created because
of the ban on mining on the availability of laterite stone used for local building
purposes in Sindhudurg and Ratnagiri districts of the Western Ghats. HLWG has
considered this demand and while it understands the concerns regarding cost of
material for housing in this region, it finds that it is unable to make an exception for
this material to be mined in ESA. It believes that as the area of ESA has been
accurately defined, there will be areas outside which can be used for laterite mining.
However, it would recommend that the state government must enforce strictly the
guidelines for mining in all cases, including laterite mining.

6.4.3 Power/Energy, including hydropower and wind
Hydroelectric projects, proposed and planned in the forested regions of the Western
Ghats have often come in for opposition. It is clear that as much as the country needs
hydroelectric power, which is renewable and clean, but it also needs to balance this
requirement with the loss of biodiversity in forests and the need for ecological flow
in rivers. Both are essential components and policy must determine that these
elements are safeguarded. It is also clear that rivers in India play more than just
basic ecological functions. These are lifelines for local livelihood, nutrition and
water security. The desire to use the river for generating electricity cannot be at the
cost of the value of the river. It is this balance that needs to be maintained.

In fact, the potential of hydroelectric power has remained the sole driver for
management of the river, particularly in its upper reaches. In the lower reaches, the
use of the river for large-scale water diversion projects for irrigation and industrial
uses becomes the criterion for development. But these single focus objectives must

account at the time of planning and management.
106

.

be enlarged so that the competing – and often the primary needs – can be taken into

It is also clear that rivers do not know boundaries. Therefore, the conditions for
hydropower will be stipulated for the entire Western Ghats and not just for ESA.

HLWG recommends that future hydroelectric projects in the ESA and the entire
Western Ghats must only be considered on the basis of the following policies:
a. Hydropower development must be based on the acceptance of uninterrupted
ecological flow at 30 per cent level of the rivers flow in lean seasons till a
comprehensive study establishes individual baselines. The 30 per cent
ecological flow is mandated in Western Ghats keeping in mind the shorter
length of rivers in this region. The compliance with this condition will
require rigorous and seasonal data collection in upper reaches of rivers to
prepare a hydrological mapping of the basin. It is also clear that this
hydrological assessment is critical given the changes in rainfall patterns
because of climate change.
b. Hydropower projects must be considered only after a cumulative impact
assessment on the flow pattern of the rivers and forest and biodiversity loss.
Currently,

individual

projects

are

planned

and

executed

without

consideration of these impacts. The Environment Assessment Committees
will only consider proposals for individual projects after cumulative impacts
have been studied.
c. Current and future hydropower development in the Western Ghats must be
based on clear rules that stipulate distance between projects and that do not
allow for over-exploitation of the basin. The minimum distance between
projects must be maintained at 3 km in most cases (shorter distance
requirement because of the short length of the rivers in Western Ghats as
compared to other regions) and not more than 50 per cent of the river basin
should be affected at any time. This will require reworking the current

the need to balance development with ecology.
107

.

projects to provide for optimized energy generation but it is necessary given

d. Better and more balanced planning for hydropower will lead correct tariff of
energy, taking into account the cost of raw material of water. Energy costs,
world over, take into account the cost of raw material. It is imperative that
the current subsidies and distortions in raw material supply for energy are
minimized. It is in this context that water, as the raw material for generation
of hydropower, must be factored in the project design. The ecological, social
and cultural health of the river is a price that cannot be discounted at the
time of planning for the feasibility of power.
e. There is a need to redesign and reevaluate small hydropower projects –
below 25 mw as these often have limited impact on energy generation and
can lead to huge impacts on ecology. The rationale for small projects must be
considered within a policy framework, which provides for mini-grids and
local energy distribution.

Thermal power projects are categorized as ‘red’ and therefore would not be
permitted in the Eco-Sensitive Area.

However, wind energy projects are allowed, conditional to study of environmental
impact. HLWG recommends that wind energy should be included in EIA notification
and brought under purview of assessment and clearance. It is only when the impacts
are understood and efforts made to mitigate damage – both environmental and
social – that this sector can grow.

6.4.4 Industry
Under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 and Air (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, all industrial and development projects are
categorized as red, orange, green. Industries categorized as red or orange have a
high pollution load and environmental impact. In the Eco-Sensitive Area of the

.

Western Ghats, red category industry will be completely prohibited.

108

As the list of industries categorized as ‘orange’ includes many activities like food and
fruit processing there will not be a complete prohibition on this category. But all
efforts should be made to promote industries with low environmental impact. The
mandatory Consent to Establish (CTE) given by the State Pollution Control Board
under the Water, Air Act and Hazardous Waste Rules before a unit can be
established must take into account this condition. The proposed Decision Support
and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats will put on its website all industrial units,
which have been granted permission to establish and operate in ESA. In case if there
is a breach on regulation cases to the CTE condition stipulated for industries with
low environmental impact, MoEF may consider imposing ban on orange category
industries in the ESA based on the information provided by the proposed Centre.

6.4.5 Settlements
Under EIA notification 2006, there are two levels of regulations for settlements, to
ensure that urban growth is managed and is sustainable:

-

building and construction projects above 20,000sq. m and below 1,50,000 sq.
m, which are categorized as ‘B’ and require clearance from the State
Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA).

-

township and area development projects with built up area of above 50 ha
and above 1,50,000sq. m are categorized as B1 and require detailed
environmental impact assessment and clearance from State Environment
Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA).

In the ESA, which is well-defined area, emanating from the natural landscape of the
Western Ghats, building and construction projects 20,000sq. m and above will not
be allowed. Townships and area development projects will be prohibited. Therefore,
only projects, which are not currently under the EIA notification and therefore, not

.

considered to have adverse impacts on the environment, will be permitted.

109

6.4.6 Infrastructure including transport
There is no doubt infrastructure is critical for economic growth and livelihood
security in any region. But the question is how impacts can be mitigated and most
importantly, how the infrastructure development can be planned so that it is
cognizant of the biodiversity value of the ecosystem. The important requirement is
to strengthen the public hearing and environmental assessment procedures so that
people’s concerns are heeded and there is careful scrutiny of impacts.
It is also important that cumulative impacts of the development projects are
considered before moving ahead. HLWG recommends that all proposed
infrastructure projects, including transport, must be considered only after
cumulative impacts are studied and assessed. All these projects will be considered
by the Central government under Category A.

Railway projects do not require EIA clearance. It is also clear that railways, while
providing an environmentally sound transport option, can have major implications
on wildlife, forests and biodiversity. In the recent past, many incidents of accidents
involving wild animals because of railways has come to light. It is clear that future
planning for railways must be cognizant of environmental safeguards.

6.4.7 Additional safeguard for forest diversion in ESA
Within the ESA, forest landscapes are a key component. It is clear that forest
clearance will need careful scrutiny and assessment to ensure that the area under
ESA is not decimated or degraded further. The HLWG has already recommended for
development restrictions, in which case, no forest clearance can be given. But there
will be other cases, such as infrastructure projects, which will need to be considered
for approval.

In all these cases of forest clearance required in ESA, all information of the project,

of MoEF and of the respective forest department of the State. This transparency will
110

.

from application stage to approval will be put in the public domain – on the website

add to the scrutiny of the projects, particularly in light of the fact that all information
on the ESA will also be in the public domain.

6.5

Incentivizing green growth in Western Ghats

6.5.1 Forest management for inclusive development
The rich ecological diversity of the Western Ghats is intrinsically linked to the forest
wealth of the region. Water security of the region is also linked to the forest wealth.
Equally importantly, economic and livelihood options are enjoined to forest wealth.
Therefore, the imperative to protect, conserve, regenerate and grow forest wealth in
this region cannot be underestimated or undermined. The objective has to be to
build an effective framework of governance and management, which will allow for
this resource to be both protected as well as sustainably utilized for livelihood
security. It is clear that regime for forest management will determine the economic
future of the region. This is what needs to be reviewed and reworked.

The Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats should study and
suggest policies on the following:

Integrate forest accounts, including measurement of the tangible and
intangible benefits into state and national economic assessment. It is time to
re-position renewable resources like forests in the economic and development
discourse of the country. Today the constituency for the protection of forests is
shrinking. This is when the forestlands of India are under huge threat. Over time, the
infrastructure imperative will take away forests, which are the last remaining
common lands in the country. At the very outset it is important to value benefits
derived from forests and to incorporate this into state and national accounts. But
this valuation must not stop at carbon storage or other important intangible
benefits of forests. It must account for the million reasons why forests play critical

.

roles in the current livelihood support of people.

111

Improve productivity of forests for economic benefits for local communities. It
is important to improve the productivity of forests for economic benefits. The region
needs to plant, to harvest and then to build economic value-addition from forests,
including minor forest produce. But it is also clear that this ‘business’ of planting
trees that survive cannot be successful without people who live in the forest areas.
Currently, India’s imports of forest produce are increasing – from pulp to timber;
revenues from forests are declining in state budgets. State Government’s do not
value the forest resource as a natural asset, which can be utilized for economic gains
in a sustainable and renewable manner. The diversion of forests for uses,
considered to be productive and remunerative, becomes the norm. The objective of
working plans in forest areas is to improve economic productivity – from timber to
non-timber produce –on a sustainable basis. But most importantly, the income from
forests must provide benefits to villages living around the forests. It is important the
current rules of timber transit, which do not incentivize forest production on private
lands and community forestlands, should be reviewed and revised. The Forest
Rights Act has brought welcome changes in the categorization of minor forest
produce, including bamboo, and these efforts to build forest-based economies
should be promoted.

Compute forest ecosystem services to make payment for standing forests in
Eco Sensitive Areas/Zones. The ecosystem service fund should go to villages living
around the forests. These local communities are taking the burden of conservation –
as declaration of ESA/ESZ is reducing their developmental options. This move will
build local support for forest protection and local economies. This will also ensure
that forests are demarcated in terms of productive and conservation functions.

At the moment the country has a provision to pay the “net present value” once
permission has been given for diversion of forestland to non-forest uses. But there is

demanded that they be paid to protect forests. Finally, the 12th Finance
112

.

no payment for standing forests. For the past many years, chief ministers have

Commission, in 2004, agreed that states must be paid for the maintenance of
forests—some Rs 1,000 crore between 2005 and 2010. The amount is not
substantial, but the principle was established.

In 2010, the 13th Finance Commission reiterated the need to compensate states and
enhanced the allocation to Rs 5,000 crore over the next five years. This must be
supported. In addition, the 14th Finance Commission should substantially increase
the fund and also consider how local communities living in and around forest areas
and ESA/EZA should be allocated money directly.

Compute the hydrological service provided by forests and their livelihood
benefits on local communities. Unfortunately, there has been little work done to
thoroughly assess the role of forests in provisioning and modulating the
hydrological cycle that determines the economic wellbeing of the entire region. Yet,
we know that without the forests, economic growth will be severely jeopardized.
For instance, the city of Mumbai, gets its water supply from the forested watersheds
located over 100-110 km away. The city, which is already water stressed, will be in
dire straits, if the forests of Western Ghats, are not protected or regenerated.
Currently, the city also does not pay for the ecological cost of conservation of the
forests. Similarly, irrigation and hydroelectric projects depend on forests to
modulate flows and storage. The fact that the hydrological service is not computed
ensures that there is little understanding of the role of forests and the necessity for
protection.

6.5.2 Promoting sustainable agriculture
The demarcation of Eco-Sensitive Area has taken care to exclude the cultural
landscape – agricultural and plantation areas. This is important, as both activities
are critical livelihood and economic mainstays of the region. But agriculture cannot
be sustained without forests, which provide nutrients and water. It is in the
interests of agriculturists and plantation owners to protect and safeguard
.

biodiversity in and around the forests.
113

HLWG recommends a focused programme to incentivize growers in the Western
Ghats to move towards organic cultivation and to build a unique ‘brand’ for such
premium products in the world market. These practices could be built on the
‘Kodagu’ coffee type plantation, which make best use of local biodiversity protection
in economic activity generation could be incentivized. It would also recommend
that different agencies – APEDA, Spice Board, Coffee Board etc – should convene a
meeting to discuss and resolve the barriers to organic and sustainable production in
the region. APEDA’s Tracenet programme, which builds an electronic database of all
practicing organic farmers and facilitates certification could be used as the basis for
further work in this area.

6.5.3 Ecotourism for local benefits
It is clear that tourism, particularly, after the declaration of portions of the Western
Ghats as a world heritage site, can be an important source of livelihood and
economic growth in the region. But it is equally clear that tourism industry, if not
regulated, can be the cause of environmental degradation. The January 2011 report
on Tourism in Forest Areas of Western Ghats equations lists the problems created
by unplanned and unregulated tourism and urbanization in the ecologically
sensitive region. According to this assessment, tourism has been promoted beyond
the carrying capacity of the settlements and has led to scarcity of water, increased
sewage and solid waste and forest degradation. Clearly, the way ahead is to promote
this important economic activity, but in ways, which mitigate damage.

In order to promote sustainable tourism HLWG would recommend:
a. Existing regulatory provisions to assess environmental impact of tourism projects
must be strengthened: The Forest Conservation Act and the environment impact
assessment under the Environment Protection Act allow for careful scrutiny of
projects, before clearance. However, these processes have often being bypassed and

environment; inadequate consultation with local communities and poor monitoring
114

.

certainly been weakened because of poor institutional abilities to assess

of the stipulated conditions for environment and forest management. In future, all
projects that fall under the Eco-Sensitive Area must be identified as those require
extra scrutiny and assessment. All these projects, before assessment and clearance,
must be identified as situated in the Eco-Sensitive Area of the Western Ghats and
this information must be available prominently on the website of the Central and
state ministries.
b. The tourism policy for Eco-Sensitive Area of the Western Ghats must provide local
community ownership and benefits: Key State Governments – Karnataka, Kerala,
Tamil Nadu – have ecotourism policies to govern the growth of this sector with
responsibility to the environment. The MoEF has also recently issued guidelines for
State Governments to develop tourism policies around national parks and
sanctuaries to promote conservation, which benefits local communities. In the EcoSensitive Area of the Western Ghats, policies must actively promote homestead
tourism and ensure that there is a substantial cess imposed on large tourist
establishments to pay for environmental management of the fragile region and for
local community benefits.

c. All tourism hotspots in the Eco-Sensitive Area will be monitored for compliance
and assessed in terms of impact. The proposed Decision Support and Monitoring
Centre of Western Ghats will monitor these policies annually and all hotspots of
tourism will be regularly audited for compliance. The Centre will also develop
benchmarks for good tourism – sustainable and equitable – to check performance
and take corrective steps.

6.6

UNESCO Heritage tag for Green Development

In 2012, the UNESCO World Heritage Committee declared specified areas
comprising 39 serial sites of the Western Ghats as World Heritage sites of
outstanding universal value. Under its declaration, it cited that the “significant

.

feature of the Western Ghats is their exceptionally high level of biological diversity

115

and endemism. This mountain chain is recognized as one of the world’s eight
‘hottest hotspots’ of biological diversity along with Sri Lanka.”

The key criterion for the declaration of the Western Ghats as heritage site was
endemicity. In this biodiversity hotspot 54% of tree species; 65% of amphibian
species; 62% of reptile species and 53% of fish species are endemic. In addition, a
large number of flagship mammals and ecosystems are found in the Ghats.
The nominated sites include 39 hotspots, including 14 important bird areas and 3
Alliance for Zero Extinction sites and a number of forest reserve areas of high
conservation value. The IUCN tasked to evaluate the nomination noted that the
submitted maps show a number of disturbed areas – including settlements, artificial
reservoirs, plantations and agricultural areas, which do not qualify for heritage
status. Based on these observations, in May 2012, months ahead of the final
committee meeting, IUCN had recommended that Government of India should
revise the nominated area by further refining the boundaries to ensure exclusion of
disturbed areas and to enhance contiguity (IUCN, 2012). The Government of India
satisfied the World Heritage Committee on the observations of the IUCN, and finally
succeeded in getting the UNESCO heritage tag for the 39 serial sites.

The UNESCO Heritage Tag provides global recognition of the enormous natural
wealth of the Western Ghats. Countries want the heritage tag because it provides for
high tourism value – people all over the world want to visit these areas, which have
been classified as outstanding.

But the tag also comes with responsibility. Under the Operational Guidelines to the
World Heritage Convention, “the state parties are invited to inform the secretariat of
their intention to undertake or to authorize major restorations or new
constructions, which may affect the outstanding universal value of the property.” In

possibility of deletion of any property from the list.
116

.

addition, there is a provision for ‘reactive monitoring’, which is done if there is

While granting approval World Heritage Committee of UNESCO-WHC stated that the
India would:
1. Take into account the outcomes of scientific studies of institutes specialized
in the field, and their recommendations,
2. Ensure proactive tourism management in anticipation of increased future
visitation, and to ensure that visitation remains within the capacity of the
property,
3. Ensure any proposed infrastructure developments are subject to rigorous
prior impact assessments, to determine if they are appropriate, including via
reporting to the World Heritage Committee in line with paragraph 172 of the
Operational Guidelines to the World Heritage Convention,
4. Establish improved coordination and integration between the components,
particularly through the preparation and implementation of an overarching
management plan or framework for the serial property as a whole.

The HLWG notes that the UNESCO Heritage tag is an opportunity to build global and
domestic recognition of the enormous natural wealth that exists in the Western
Ghats. The 39 sites are located across the Western Ghats and distributed across the
states (Kerala 19), Karnataka (10), Tamil Nadu (6) and Maharashtra (4). The
boundary of the sites, are in most cases, boundaries of the legally demarcated
national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, tiger reserves and forest divisions and
therefore, already accorded with high level of protection. The Eco-Sensitive Area
mapping and demarcation done by HLWG also indicates that all sites are within this
area. The state government’s should view this development and build a plan to
protect, conserve and value the resources and opportunities of the region.

6.7

Incentives to individuals, communities and states

Environmentally sound development cannot preclude livelihood and economic

the ESA, the model for protecting livelihoods of local people includes:
117

.

options for this region. While some kinds of economic activities have been banned in

(a) Collection and value addition for non-timber forest products with facilities or
small establishments for value addition. Collection and transport from within
ESAs with local community involvement may need infrastructural and
financial support. This activity should be implemented through a network of
community based organizations throughout the Western Ghats with S&T
support from organizations like DBT, DST and CSIR.
(b) Eco-tourism as per MoEF guidelines involving local communities as
stakeholders as well as making use of the World Heritage tag to which some
parts of the Western Ghats now have.

Most of the activities mentioned above will generate household incomes and profit
in the long run. In the short run, they may need support, which may be provided to
individuals and communities through the mechanism of “viability gap funding”.

Furthermore, there is a lack of incentives as there is no payment for standing
forests. The fact that forests are a part of the natural capital of the country is not
built into current financial arrangements. Estimates of the value of forests in all
Western Ghats states exist and should be used appropriately to leverage payment
mechanisms.
The HLWG recommends that the Western Ghats States should come together to
negotiate for a grant-in aid from the Centre. The financial arrangement should be of
the nature of a debt for nature swap. This is a mechanism whereby part of the
outstanding debt of a state is swapped for new constructive initiatives by it to
protect its natural resources. A part of these payments be retained by the state
governments and a part be used to finance local conservation trust funds (as in
several countries), which disburse grants to community projects for improving

.

forest productivity and ensuring sustainable forest based livelihoods in ESA.

118

HLWG recommends that there should be arrangements for Payments for Ecosystem
Services accruing from ESA and non-ESA regions within the Western Ghats. For
example, hydrological services to urban areas. A direct link between urban and rural
local governance bodies will need to be created to enable negotiation between them.
Further, a part of the budgets of municipalities be set apart for newer initiatives
under this head, with provision of disincentives for non-implementation. The HLWG
recommends that individual State Governments pursue such initiatives creating
possibilities for a dialogue on this issue between municipalities and relevant
panchayats within their states.

There is a need for convergence of rural development and conservation. The
greening rural development report of the government has enormous relevance for
the Western Ghats. The HLWG notes that the convergence of conservation with rural
development is now a part of the government’s forward-looking agenda. A recent
(December 2012) report from the Ministry of Rural Development asks for funding in
development programmes funded through MNREGA and other such programmes to
promote activities that conserve water and soil and promote organic agriculture.
People also demand for such activities.

However, the pervading understanding of ‘economic planning’ does not extend to an
area based ecological planning. The HLWG perceives and recommends that one way
forward is to consider extending Entry 20 (Economic Planning) in the Concurrent
List, and introduce an appropriate new entry, say 20A, suitably titled, to ensure that
developmental projects and activities are undertaken within an overarching
environmental and ecological framework.

The Western Ghats Development Programme (WGDP) cell in the Planning
Commission co-ordinates the Program. Major activities covered under WGDP are
watershed projects, schemes for livelihood, critical gap filling infrastructure projects

.

like foot / hanging bridge, vented Dams, projects for SCs/STs and upliftment of

119

tribals and forest based programs. During the 11th plan (2007-12) Rs. 533.59 crores
were released to the 5 states (175 talukas) covered under the program.

The strategy evolved for the continuation of the WGDP, in the 12th plan include
going beyond the Watershed based development, considering the fragility of the
habitat, and development needs of the people i.e. a Watershed + approach – an
approach which emphasizes conservation, minimal ecological disturbance,
involvement of locals along with Sustainable model of economic development and
livelihood generation with enhanced allocation.
After a careful consideration of the strategy proposed, the HLWG recommends the
following;
a) Continuation of the WGD program with an enhanced allocation of Rs. 1000
crores.
b) Continuation of the special category status to the program i.e. cost sharing of
90:10 Centre and State.
c) Special dispensation by the 14th Finance Commission for the WG based on
Ecologically Sensitive area (ESA) in the states.
d) Revival and reconstitution of the High level Committee consisting of CM’s of
the six States, for monitoring the implementation of the recommendations
/suggestions of the HLWG and existing legislations and periodically
reviewing the status report of the Decision Support and Monitoring Centre
for Western Ghats.
e) Setting up / strengthening of the State WG cell currently functional in the
Planning /RD Departments in the states with a mandate to liaise with SPCB,
State Department of Forests, SEAC and SBA, and Regional office of the MoEF
and service the information and decision support needs of the State

.

Government.

120

6.8

The Framework for Governance and regulation of ESA

6.8.1 The Eco-Sensitive Area, once identified and demarcated, will need an
effective governance framework to ensure that can be protected, regenerated and
managed sustainably to meet livelihood needs. We need institutions, which are
capable of responding to local concerns and can take timely decisions, to balance
people’s developmental needs with environmental protection. This, when it is clear
that resource management issues are complex, with competing interests and
require careful scrutiny and assessment. Furthermore, any system, which is based
on a permit and prohibitory regime, needs careful and nuanced decisions,
particularly when they impact the poor.

The WGEEP had a specific Terms of Reference to “recommend the modalities for the
establishment of Western Ghats Ecology Authority under the EP Act, which will be a
professional body to manage the ecology of the region and to ensure its sustainable
development with the support of all concerned states.” Based on this, the WGEEP
recommended a structure, which included a national and state level authorities as
well as district ecology committees.

All State governments, who have formally responded to the WGEEP report, have
rejected the creation of yet another centralized authority. They have pointed out
that the federal system of the country allows states to take decisions and have
expressed concern at the attempt to centralize decisions through the creation of this
Authority.

HLWG recommends that there is clearly a need to strengthen as well as reform the
current system of environmental governance to enhance effectiveness. The HLWG
recommends that this be done first before new institutions and authorities are
created. Otherwise, the problems of current institutions will continue to weaken

will recommend a framework for governance and regulation of ESA, which draws on
121

.

decisions in the future as well. Given this situation, HLWG has taken the view that it

current regulatory institutions for decision-making, but simultaneously, will
strengthen the data monitoring systems and the participation and involvement of
local communities in decision-making.

The current environmental management system is either based on a single projectbased approach or an area-based approach. Given the scale of interventions and
given the urgency for protection and regeneration, HLWG would recommend the
need to shift to regional based approaches and cumulative assessments, which
determine combined impacts of projects across the region or the river-basin.

6.8.2 Strengthening existing regulatory institutions
It is clear that we need to fix the current institutional system and make it more
effective. It is for this reason that HLWG is of the strong opinion that the country
must reform and strengthen the current institutions of environmental regulation
and management in the country in general and in Western Ghats region in
particular.

State Pollution Control Boards:
The State pollution control boards are the foundation of the environmental
governance infrastructure. But these institutions lack regular in-service training of
personnel, funds, and systems of management that are accountable and transparent.
Without attention to these issues of institutional strengthening we cannot move
ahead in dealing with the enormous challenges of sustainable resource management
and development.

State Forest Departments:
The State Forest Departments of the Western Ghats need to be sensitized towards
the importance of biodiversity, ecosystem services and local bioresources. The State
frontline staff of Forest Departments needs to be equipped with modern systems of

to be undertaken in the area of wildlife management.
122

.

communication and surveillance. Regular in-service training of Forest officials needs

State Biodiversity Authority:
Establishment of Biodiversity Management Committees (BMC) at the Panchayat
level especially in the rich biodiversity areas is a priority. The BMCs so established
should take up preparation of Peoples Biodiversity Register in mission mode so as
to document local biodiversity, bioresources and traditional knowledge. The BMCs
should become a focal point for peoples participation with reference to local ecology
and biodiversity. The concerned State Government should provide adequate funds
to the State Biodiversity Boards and BMCs.

Environment and Forest Clearance Systems:
Similarly, environment and forest clearance systems both at the Centre and State
must be strengthened to deepen the process of public assessment and scrutiny of all
projects. In addition, there is an urgent need to build capacity to monitor
compliance with conditions set for clearance. The strengthening of monitoring
procedures is needed for credible deterrence for non-compliance and for
environmental integrity. This agenda is urgent and must get the highest attention.

HLWG recommends that it is important that MoEF should review the functioning of
the institutions so that they have necessary powers to ensure compliance. Most
importantly, MoEF must direct state governments to complete the process of
preparation of zonal plans, with maximum consultation with local people. The ESA
mapping should be put in the public domain so that plans are based on current
developments, which exist on the ground. It is critical that eco-sensitive area
mapping must be sensitive to the livelihood and developmental needs of the
poorest. There should be an annual assessment based on the changes in the ESA,
which is prepared and presented to the public.

6.8.3 Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats
The HLWG recommends for setting up a “Decision Support and Monitoring Centre”
for Western Ghats as a part of Governance of the region. The details on the proposed
.

Centre are given in Chapter 7.
123

6.8.4 Conclusions

To sum up, the HLWG recommends the following:

1. The Central government should immediately notify the ESA area, as
demarcated by HLWG in public interest. It must be noted that there is an
urgency to protect and safeguard the remaining biodiversity rich areas of
Western Ghats. In 2011, recognizing this imperative, the Central government
had set up the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel under Professor Madhav
Gadgil to recommend how this can be done. The Panel in its deliberations
spread over 18 months had large number of public consultations across the
different states of the Western Ghats. It recommended the need for effective
action to protect the region.
2. The HLWG has also had a number of consultations, particularly with state
governments and their agencies. After extensive deliberations and efforts to
determine the ESA, it has been found that the natural area of the Western
Ghats is 41 per cent and ESA only 37 per cent. The need for action is evident.
For this reason, HLWG is recommending for immediate notification, the
identified area as ESA. In this notified area, development restrictions as
recommended in this report will apply.
3. State Governments will immediately put into place structures for effective
enforcement

of development restrictions and

ensuring sustainable

development in ESA. The MoEF will ensure that all projects located in the
districts comprising the Western Ghats are required to submit information
about distance and proximity to the ESA.

4. The Planning Commission should create a special Western Ghats Sustainable
Development Fund, which will be used to promote programmes specifically
designed to implement an effective ESA regime and incentivize green growth
.

in the region.
124

5. The 14th Finance Commission should consider options for ecosystem and
other service payments in the Western Ghats as well as allocation of funds to
ESA areas. It should also consider how these funds for environmental
management would be made available directly to local communities who live
in and around Western Ghats ESA.
6. MoEF should set up the Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western
Ghats, with the mandate to assess and report on the state of ecology of the
entire region. The Centre will be hosted by one state and will have joint
management of all six states of the Western Ghats. The Centre will have a
decision support function in the implementation of ESA. Its reports will be in
the public domain.

7. MoEF should put the ESA map in the public domain, which will enable
scrutiny and transparency in decisions.

8. All development projects located within 10 kms of the Western Ghats ESA
and requiring environment clearance (EC) shall be regulated as per the
provisions of the EIA Notification 2006. .
9. The villages falling under ESA will be involved in taking decisions on future
projects. All projects will require prior-informed consent and no-objection
from the gram sabha of the village. The provision for prior informed consent

.

under the Forest Rights Act will also be strictly enforced.

125

CHAPTER 7

Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats Region
7.1

Introduction

In this chapter, we discuss the rationale for establishing a Decision Support and
Monitoring Centre in Western Ghats, to address the multiple dimensions of
managing the ecological complexity of Western Ghats landscape. For the sake of
completeness we elucidate the broad features of this complex landscape, at the
expense of some repetition from earlier chapters.

Western Ghats (WG) are the majestic mountains range that fringes the west coast of
India and is one among the seven great mountain ranges in India. It is a unique
landscape geologically, biologically and ecologically. The lithology coupled with high
rainfall make WG as one of the highly ecologically diversified landscape on earth.
WG supports wide range of vegetation types ranging from tropical wet evergreen to
grasslands on plateau. It is designated as world’s hottest hotspots. The Western
Ghats represent unique taxonomic hierarchies, remnant ecosystems and strong
endemic associations. The Sholas, Mangroves, Kans, Dry evergreen forests, swamps,
reeds and riverine belts etc. represent the unique repositories of diverse genomes.
The resource value of this mega diversity center spans from timber-non timber
category through wilderness–ecotourism to medicinal-aromatic-food-industrial
gene pools. Such luxuriant vegetation compositions have evolved over geological
time scale, witnessed various land use practices depending upon the resource
demand and ingress of human dimension. This has induced considerable alteration
in the Western Ghats biogeography bringing in commercial agriculture, commercial
forestry, hydropower, mining and biotic pressures within the forest ecosystems.
Mention of human presence and land use practices in WG is found in records >2000
yrs. Trade and cultivation of spices in Malabar and Canara region of WG is due to the

.

unique climatic and ecological setting. This pressure on the WG has been on rise in

126

modern era. Conservation Planning and Development have often got into conflict
due to absence of scientific reliable data base and proper monitoring mechanisms.

7.2

Importance of GeoSpatial Modeling and Analysis

The complexity of a Decision Support and Monitoring Centre arises as the goal calls
for an inter-disciplinary understanding of ecological processes in relation to
taxonomy, physiology, reproductive biology, conservation biology, forest hydrology,
soils as well as socio-economic and climate change dynamics to cite only a few
dimensions necessary for a holistic understanding of the natural system. Bringing all
the subject experts and the administrators to a common page to have a synoptic
understanding of biodiversity and the other ecological settings in the Western
Ghats, and the tools through which such processes could be understood is the
essence in managing the fragile Western Ghats ecosystem while ensuring economic
development to the community at large. The data requirements for such
understanding are both of spatial and non-spatial nature and also of various time
scales covering multi-thematic domains and terrain characteristics.

This is where the geospatial modeling comes into forefront. This approach
integrates the existing geo-databases at relevant scales and in locally meaningful
ways to provide informed decision support for adaptive management efforts, linking
the ecology, environment and development. Today, it is well recognized globally and
in our own country that geospatial technologies provide a viable means to carry out
the above monitoring, periodic assessment, and impact analysis which is objective,
and replaces the subjectivity from the decision-making process.

7.3

Technology Convergence on Geo-Informatics

Geo-informatics, as it is called, combines the geospatial analysis and modeling, and
effectively makes use of the convergence of information and communication
technologies, complimenting the efforts on the space and ground segments to

.

provide updated, near-real time information to the decision-makers. Significant

127

advances made over the past few decades in the geospatial enabling techniques such
as satellite-based remote sensing and aerial photography, image processing,
Geographical Information System (GIS), Space-based Positioning System like GPS,
and photo-grammetry and other cartography services. Further, the advances made
due to the advent of disruptive technologies such as internet, location-aware mobile
phones, social networking and broadband connectivity as well as development of
web portals have made this mechanism widely accessible and affordable as well.
Today, with the advances in Cloud Computing with the increasing emphasis on
providing ‘Geography as a Service’, and ‘Crowd Sourcing’ which ensures active
participation from the community through social networks and smart mobile
devices, along with the wide availability of Open Source GIS software, geospatial
technologies have penetrated all aspects of natural resources, environment
management, climate change adaptation studies as well as aspects related to
disaster risk reduction. With satellite remote sensing advances reaching to submeters with corresponding developments in computational analytical capability to
understand relationships among the various processes involved in the interactions
of the fragile resources spatially coupled across the landscape, one is in a position to
identify scientifically such disturbances, narrowing down the areas to watershed
level and even at parcel level appropriately overlaid with administrative units
where adaptive management might be most beneficial. For example, due to high
relief and terrain complexity, mountainous areas require 3-dimensional information
for spatial modeling for management inputs, and it is immensely possible with the
type of imaging sensors available from space technology.

7.4

Spatial Decision Support System (SDSS) for Informed Decision-making

Today’s technologies in a convergent environment allow spatial information in 2D
and 3D, periodically updated, in a seamlessly integrated manner. Such a Spatial
Decision Support System (SDSS) with appropriate broadband communication
linkages to various stake-holders making available the geo-data bases on the fly,

.

allows the decision-makers to access timely inputs to prioritize efforts and take up

128

the developmental activities more scientifically without fear of affecting the
ecological setting in fragile ecosystems like Western Ghats. It also enables the
decision-makers effectively address in a participative manner, the sustainable
livelihood concerns, mitigate vulnerability, and helps towards building necessary
resilience to the community. In short, it is expected to develop a dynamic, unified
scientifically validated knowledge-base which can be accessed by planners, policy
makers, conservationists, economists and the social scientists as well as the
community itself in their effort to bring in holistic development to Western Ghats.
The system also brings the much needed transparency in the decision-making
process and thus, helps enhance the confidence of the community in the overall
process. The challenge for the scientists and the technologists in developing such an
adaptive SDSS is essentially in domesticating the technological advances in such a
way that the ultimate delivery system is absolutely user-friendly and less
jargonized. The challenge for the administrators is to appreciate the difficulties
involved in precise information gathering and effective information sharing in an
operational setting involving multiple agencies and stake-holders; and to support
such endeavors in all possible manners.

Establishing such a Centre (Fig. 31) would entail among other things:


Creating a knowledge network comprising of scientific institutions and
academia for creating and sharing the scientific knowledge base for
conservation and developmental perspective of Western Ghats. The
institutions

could

comprise

of

NRSC/ISRO,

NIO/INCOIS/MoES,

SOI/IMD/NCMRWF/IITM/DST, MoEF, CAOS/IISc., State Remote Sensing
Centres to name only a few.
Developing a geospatial data repository and data analytics system with
periodic updates. Distributed data centres with broadband connectivity to
access the databases on the Cloud with provisions for Crowd Sourcing inputs
from community

.



129



Establishing a Spatial Decision Support System (SDSS) using existing and real
databases with Open Source Software and validated models. SDSS should
provide decision alternatives to enable informed decision-making in
consultaion with State Governments, regulatory bodies and implementing
agencies.

The different components of the proposed Centre are given in Figure 31.

7.5

Role of the Centre

The Centre will be located within one Western Ghats state, but its mandate will be to
assess and monitor changes across the geographical spread of the Ghats. It will
provide authoritative, relevant and timely information to governments and to the
public about state of environment and ecology of the Western Ghats. The Centre will
update and improve upon the current data repository and analysis system to track
changes in the ecosystem. The reports of the Centre will be publicly available. The
objective of the Centre will be to understand the nature of the challenges that are
emerging in this ecologically fragile region, using the best of our scientific and
research capabilities. This research must also build upon the traditional knowledge
of the region and the unique understanding of its people on how to survive and cope
with adverse conditions and build economic futures, which are sustainable.

It will publish an annual report on the state of the ecology of Western Ghats in
collaboration with other research institutions and scientists, and it will be placed in
the state legislature for discussion and review.

The role of the Centre will be to use the existing and new knowledge to build a
vibrant political dialogue in the region as a whole on the need to make shifts in
development paradigm, given its particular vulnerabilities. It will do this by
facilitating a high-level political dialogue on the Western Ghats, which could be

.

chaired in rotation by different chief ministers of the states and include key

130

ecologists and researchers. The dialogue will be an important forum to discuss
common concerns and ways ahead.

It will also build a repository of all projects in the Western Ghats, including
industrial projects and will link with state pollution control boards to build a real
time database on monitoring and performance data. Currently, this information is
scattered and does not provide for effective decision support systems. The aim will
be to network with existing institutions so that changes can be monitored and
appropriate decisions taken for mitigating damage.

The Decision Support and Monitoring Centre for Western Ghats will be the decisionsupport for ensuring the enforcement and regulation of ESA. It will facilitate the
process of regional planning; conduct research studies to incentivize green
economic growth and set up a monitoring system to track project clearance and

.

monitoring in the ESA.

131

.

Fig. 31: Components of the Proposed Centre.

132

CHAPTER 8

Review of Specific Cases
During 2011, MoEF referred four specific cases to the Western Ghats Panel for its
observations. These are:



Athirappilly hydropower project in Western Ghats of Kerala;



Gundya hydropower project in Western Ghats of Karnataka;



Moratorium on development projects in Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg District;
and



Mining in Goa

HLWG has reviewed all the four cases, and had extensive discussions and field visits
to ascertain the facts. The following are its observations and recommendations.

8.1

Athirappilly Hydropower Project

Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) proposed a hydroelectric dam across
Chalakudy River in Trichur District to generate 163 MW of power to augment
energy requirement of the State and also to provide water for drinking and
irrigation. The details of concrete gravity dam are as follows:


Dam is 23 m in height and 311 m in length.



Submergible area (water spread area) would be 104 ha.



Forest area diverted would be 130 ha.



Water passes through 4.69 km tunnel of 6.4 m diameter from the dam to the
power line located northwest of the dam site and above Kannankuzhithodu
river into which tailrace water will be emptied and it will join Chalakudy
river at a distance of 1.5 km.

.

The project has been under review for some years now:

133



MoEF gave Environmental Clearance (EC) to the project on 20.1.1998 and the
project received forest clearance (stage II) on 16.12.1999.



The High Court suspended the EC, due to procedural irregularities and asked
KSEB to conduct public hearing in response to PIL. At the public hearing
conducted by KSPCB at Trichur, reliability of EIA prepared by WAPCOS was
questioned and was also challenged by Kerala State Biodiversity Board.



KSEB secured EC again from MoEF with the EIA prepared by WAPCOS.
Another PIL was filed in the High Court on the ground that public hearing
was not conducted for second modified EIA. The court again questioned the
EC issued by MoEF and the court directed KSPCB to conduct public hearing
again. At the second public hearing conducted at Chalakudy there was no
unanimous decision among the public hearing panel.



Meanwhile a five member committee of EAC (River valley and Hydroelectric
projects) of MoEF visited the site and interacted with local communities and
based on the Report submitted by it the MoEF again gave the EC for the
project on 18 July 2007.



Again two PILs were filed against the clearance for the project on the ground
that the hydrological data presented in the WAPCOS’s EIA are not correct and
the impacts of project on ecology and biodiversity are not adequately
covered. The court heard the case twice, in 2008 and in 2009 by two Division
Benches and the judgment is awaited.

The HLWG along with the officials of Kerala State Electricity Board and Kerala
Forest Department visited the Athirappilly Hydropower Project, after hearing the
presentations made by Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) and also a local NGO
(River Research Centre, Trissur). The team visited the dam site, the settlement of
Kadar tribes impacted by the dam, rapids and waterfalls and irrigation dam site.

During presentation, the KSEB explained the upstream run of the river hydropower

.

projects - the Sholayar project on the Sholayar river which is tributary of Chalakudy

134

river, the tail water of which is discharged into downstream that flows into
Poringalkuthu project which is on the main river itself, the tail water of which is
discharged into downstream of Chalakudy river and is used for the proposed
Athirappilly project which is about 40 km away from the backwaters of Cochin. All
these projects are run of the river projects and there are no dry stretches of the
rivers. If these streams/rivers are not dammed, the excess monsoon run off cannot
be stored and enters into sea within 48 hours. The average annual inflow, based on
32 years data at Athirappilly, is 1169.Mm3. This is confirmed from the flow data of
Chalakudy river at Arangals collected by Central Water Commission. The tail water
from Athirappilly will be released into Chalakudy via its tributary at
Kannankuzhithodu.
The fluctuations in the water flow in different months and the plant load factor were
also explained. The issues relating to Kadar tribal families living close to the
submergible portion of the dam were explained to HLWG and it was informed that a
package has been worked out for their welfare without rehabilitation as the areas
inhabited by them does not come under submergible zone.

The NGOs, who met with HLWG, brought to its attention that project would have
irreversible impact on the rich biodiversity value of the forest; particularly, along
stretch of 7.89 km between dam site and the point where the tail race water joins
Chalakudy river. They said that the habitat of the Kadar tribal population would be
adversely hit and that people had not yet given their consent. In addition, they said
that this project, being built in an area of biodiversity value, would have minimal
benefits. The technical feasibility of the project was doubtful with meager amount of
power obtained at high cost. In addition, plantation owners and farmer
representatives located below the proposed project said it would have adverse
impacts on downstream irrigation and drinking water.

The HLWG examined the status of forests, including the riparian forests and

in all hydropower projects, there is a need to balance the need for energy,
135

.

submergible slope forest, a small swampy area and the plantations. It is clear that as

particularly peaking power, water supply and irrigation with the loss of
biodiversity, forest habitat, displacement of tribal communities and the need for
ecological flow in the river.

HLGW, after detailed deliberations on each of the critical issues, is of the view that
while the project’s importance for meeting the peaking power requirements of the
State cannot be disputed, there is still uncertainty about ecological flow available in
the riverine stretch, which has a dam at a short distance upstream of the proposed
project. Given the increased variability, in flow from catchments due to
unpredictable monsoon rains, the project may be revaluated in terms of the
generation of energy and if the plant load factor expected in the project makes it
viable against the loss of local populations of some species. Based on this
revaluation and collection of data on ecological flow, the Government of Kerala,
could take forward the proposal if it so desires with the Ministry of Environment
and Forests.

8.2

Gundya Hydropower Project

The Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) has proposed a hydroelectric
project in the Gundya River basin in the Hassan and Dakshina Kannada district in
two phases: Phase I of 1x 200 MW and Phase II of 1x 200 MW. The project is on
Gundya river – a tributary of west flowing river of Netravathi; phase I involves
pooling of waters by linking Yettinahole, Kerihole, Hongadhalla and Bettakumari
and water from these streams will be intercepted by small weirs and will be drawn
through a tunnel running from Yettinahole leading to Bettakumari reservoir. From
the foreshore of this reservoir, 7.8 km long head trace tunnel takes water to a surge
tank and from there to a underground powerhouse. The Phase II will have two
tunnels – one tunnel will take water from Kadumanehalla and surrounding areas by
13 km long unlined tunnel and discharge into tunnel that takes water from
Yettinahole weir, and another tunnel of 15 km long will take water from Lingath

.

hole and Kumaradhara to Bettakumari reservoir.

136

The submergible area will be 184.64 ha. An additional 560 ha will be needed for
infrastructure. KPCL is not going ahead with the Hongadhalla dam because of the
extensive submergible area of 523.80 ha. The project has got necessary clearances
from different regulatory agencies; EAC of MoEF has asked KPCL to conduct also
public hearing in Dakshna Kannada District, as project area falls in both the districts.
The public hearing was conducted at Siribagiln village of Puttur taluka on
25.03.2009. Meanwhile the Malenadu Janapara Horata Samithi made a
representation before the subcommittee of EAC during its visit to the site on
5.12.2009. The EAC has recommended clearance but the MoEF has not issued the
environmental clearance.

The land required for the project includes forest area of 113 ha, revenue land of
263.63 ha, which also includes forests (though mostly degraded); and 71.5 ha of
private land making it a total of 448.13 ha. The site has unique forest types with
high biodiversity values (endemic, rare, threatened and new species) and also the
cardamom and coffee plantations with scattered forest patches, which will be
impacted adversely by land use changes and changes in hydrological regimes in the
river basin due to project.

The major impacts of the project would be: (i) submergence of patches of riparian
forest, (ii) land degradation/fragmentation of forest patches for tunneling and road
construction; (iii) the drying up of down streams of three Yellinahole (with 60.50
km2 catchment area), Kerihole (27.00 km2 catchment area), Hongadahalla (8.50 km2
catchment area) and Bettakumari (35.00 km2 catchment area) before they join
Gundya river, although each of them has small catchments, and a stretch of 34 km of
Gundya river; and (iv) the apprehension of shortage of water at Subramanya Swami
temple.

HWLG notes that the Gundya hydel project is run of the river project, which must

area of the submergible portion of forest is small, the construction of the project and
137

.

ensure ecological flow in the affected stretch of the river. Furthermore, while the

tunneling in the region will have adverse impacts on both government forests and
green areas on private land.

As the Gundya hydropower projects is located in the ESA, HLWG recommends that it
must be proceeded upon with extreme caution. It would recommend that the
Government of Karnataka should reassess the ecological flow in the downstream
areas, based on a thorough evaluation of hydrological regimes in the area. The
project should not be given the go-ahead, till such a review and reassessment is
made. The Government’s review must also assess damage to all forests, which will
emanate from the construction work and if at all, this can be mitigated. The HWLG
has not proposed a complete ban on the construction of hydropower in the ESA, but
it’s recommended conditions that balance the needs of energy with environment
must be followed.

8.3

Moratorium on Development Projects in Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg

Districts
MoEF referred the matter regarding developmental trends in Ratnagiri and
Sindhudurg Districts of Maharashtra to WGEEP. MoEF also imposed a moratorium
on consideration of projects under the EIA Notification 2006 for ToR and/or EC
from these two districts vide O.M. dated 12.08.2010. The moratorium, which was
initially made applicable till December 2010, has been extended till 30.04.2013.

As per the WGEEP, only portions (eastern parts) of Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg
districts of Maharashtra fall within Western Ghats, as both the districts have plains
and coasts on the west which do not constitute a part of Western Ghats.

The WGEEP highlighted a number of environmental issues facing both the districts.
Some of them are: (i) local isolated incidents of effluent discharge into rivers, (ii) air
and water pollution as reported by local individuals, (iii) failure to comply with EC

Board, and the State Government of Maharashtra on the implementation of: (a) Acts
138

.

conditions by industries, and (iv) the lapses on the part of State Pollution Control

relating to rights of tribal people, (b) Zoning Atlases for Siting of Industries, (c)
failure to establish Biodiversity Management Committees (BMC), and (d) not
involving Gram Panchayats and Panchayat Samitis in decision making, etc.

HLWG noted that the areas under these two districts fall in three categories; area
falling under ESA, area falling outside ESA, but within Western Ghats region and the
area outside the Western Ghat region.
HLWG recommends that the moratorium imposed should be lifted with the
following conditions. As per the recommendations of this report, in the area of these
two districts, which has been categorized as ESA, the sectoral restrictions and
regulations will apply. In addition, within 10 km of the ESA, , all development
projects that require environment clearance will be regulated as per the provisions
under EIA Notification, 2006.

In the remaining area, including the area outside ESA but within Western Ghats,
environment and forest processes and regulations will continue to apply. However,
in order to ensure that such development projects do not adversely impact the
environmental balance of the two districts, MoEF should monitor on regular basis
the cumulative impact of projects, which may come up in these districts on regular
basis and take policy decisions at appropriate time based on these findings.

8.4

Mining in Goa

A number of public interest litigations have been filed against mining in Goa due to
its adverse impacts on agriculture, natural drainage, air pollution and damage to
protected areas. It was brought to the notice of the HLWG that the Ministry of Mines,
Government of India, vide Notification No.S.O.2817(E) dated 22.11.2010, had
appointed a Commission of Inquiry consisting of Shri Justice M.B. Shah, retired Judge
of the Supreme Court, for the purpose of making an inquiry into mining of iron ore

and regulations issued thereunder, in various States including the State of Goa. The
139

.

and manganese ore in contravention of the provisions of various statutes and rules

Commission has since submitted its inquiry report relating to illegal mining of iron
ore and manganese ore in Goa. Ministry of Mines has laid Action Taken Report
(ATR) on the recommendations contained in the Shah Commission report in the
Parliament on 7 September 2012.

Following this, the State Government of Goa, vide their order dated 10.09.2012,
ordered the suspension of mining operations of all mining leases existing in the
State until further orders, apparently with a view to scrutinizing the clearances
obtained by the mining lease holders.

Subsequently, MoEF decided to scrutinize and examine the details of each of the
mining case and take appropriate decision thereon following due procedure. The
Shah Commission, in its report, has mentioned various illegalities and irregularities
in respect of 139 mining cases in Goa. Pending detailed scrutinize and action on
each of these 139 cases, MoEF on 14.9.2012 issued directions under section 5 of the
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 to keep environment clearance in abeyance for
all these cases. The project proponents were directed to submit the documents to
the Ministry to show the legality of the ECs issued to them.

In the meanwhile on a writ petition filed by the Goa Foundation in the Supreme
Court on Shah Commission’s report, the Court, vide order dated 5.10.2012 asked
CEC to look into the matter and ordered that till further orders, all mining
operations in the leases identified in the Shah Commission’s report and
transportation of iron ore and manganese ore from those lease areas, whether lying
at the mine head or stock yards, shall remain suspended. The CEC has submitted an
interim report to the Supreme Court on 7.12.2012. The stay on mining operations in
Goa continues.

MoEF has constituted a separate Expert Appraisal Committee to examine the

appropriate recommendations to MoEF for consideration. MoEF intends taking
140

.

documents in respect of each of the aforesaid 139 mine lease cases and make

appropriate view in each of these cases subject to the approval of the Supreme Court
in view of the pending litigation.

It was also brought to the notice of HLWG that the State Government of Goa is yet to
send their proposal to MoEF for notifying Ecologically Sensitive Areas around
notified Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks in the State.

MoEF has also

requested the State Government to use high-resolution imagery and maps, to be
followed by ground-survey, to establish the distances, to the best accuracy possible,
of each of aforesaid 139 mines from the various notified Wildlife Sanctuaries and
National Parks and share the information with MoEF. This information is still to be
received from the State Government.

HLWG has recommended that there should be a complete ban on mining activity in
ESA and that current lease mining areas in ESA would be phased out within 5 years,
or at the time of expiry of the mining lease, whichever is earlier. In view of the fact
that the matter is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the HLWG does not

.

find it appropriate to make any recommendation in the matter.

141

References
Conservation
International.
2013.
http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/Pages/
default.aspx. Accessed on 07 January 2013.
Dikshit, K.R. 1981. The Western Ghats: A geomorphic overview. In L.R. Singh’s (ed)
New perspectives in Geography 1981, and in Memoir Geological Society of India 47
(1): 159-183. 2001.
Franklin, J., Davis, F.W., Ikegami, M., Syphard, A.D., Flint, L.E., Flint, A.L. and Hannah,
L. 2012. Modeling plant species distributions under future climates: How fine scale
do climate projections need to be? Global Change Biology, doi: 10.1111/gcb.12051.
Gunnell, Y. and Radhakrishnan, B.P. 1967. The Western Ghats of the Indian
Peninsula: In Proceedings of the Seminar on Geomorphological Studies in India,
Sagar, and in Memoir Geological Society of India 47 (1):133-144. 2001.

Hamlet, A.F., Mote, P.W., Clark, M.P., Letermaier, D.P. 2007. Twentieth-Century
Trends in Runoff, Evapotranspiration, and Soil Moisture in the Western United
States. Journal of Climate 20: 1468-1486.
IPCC: 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working
Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change. [Pachauri, R.K. and Reisinger, A. (Eds).] IPCC, Geneva,
Switzerland, 104 pp.
NATCOM. 2012. India: Second National Communication to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change. Ministry of Environment and Forests,
Government of India, 2012.
Roy, P.S., Kushwaha, S.P.S., Murthy, M.S.R., Roy, A., Kushwaha, D., Reddy, C.S., Behera,
M.D., Mathur, V.B., Padalia, H., Saran, S., Singh, S., Jha, C.S. and Porwal, M.C. 2012.

Institute of Remote Sensing, Dehradun, India, pp. 140. ISBN 81-901418-8-0.
142

.

Biodiversity Characterisation at Landscape Level: National Assessment, Indian

Rodgers, W.A. and Panwar, H.S., 1988. Planning a Wildlife Protected Area Network in
India. Ministry of Environment and Forests and Wildlife, Government of India.
Tewari, D.N. 1995. Western Ghats Ecosystem. International Book Distributor, Dehra
Dun.

Valdiya, K.S. 2010. Geological Framework and Tectonics of Western Ghats 1-32.
Wadia, D.N. 1975. The Western Ghats in Geology of India (ed. IV) and in Memoir

.

Geological Society of India 47 (1): 87-88. 2001.

143

Appendix I

Peer Review Report on Geospatial Analysis for Identification of
Ecological Sensitive Areas in the Western Ghats Region

•

Based on the D.O. letter no. 1-4/2012-RE dated 26" March 2013 from the Joint
Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, the
following three member committee met on 4th April 2013 at Indian Institute of
Remote Sensing (IIRS), Dehradun, to review the geospatial analysis carried out
by National Remote Sensing Centre (NRSC) for identification of ecological
sensitive areas in the Western Ghats region.
Dr. Y. V. N. Krishna Murthy, Director, IIRS, Dehradun;
Dr. V. B. Mathur, Dean, Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun;
Or. Subhash Ashutosh , Professor, Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy
(IGNFA), Dehradun.

•

•

,

The draft report consisting of two chapters (Chapters 4 and 5) were provided to
the members prior to the meeting. The committee has gone through the draft
report and heard the PowerPoint presentations made by Dr. C. S. Jha and Shri
G. Rajasekhar from NRSC on 4" April 2013 at IIRS, Dehradun, about the
databases utilized and methodology adopted in identifying the Ecological
Sensitive Areas {ESAs} in the Western Ghats. The experts available at IIRS in
geospatial analysis and forestry and ecology studies, Dr. S.K Srivastav, Dr.
S.P.S. Kushwaha , and Dr. Sarnam Singh , also participated during the
presentation and deliberations.
The members mainly focused on the chapter dealing with geospatial analysis for
'Identification of ecological sensitive areas in Western Ghats region ' (Chapter 5).
It is noted that the primary inputs used for identifying ESAs are taken from OOSDBT project on 'Biodiversity Characterisation at landscape Level ' (Bell), in
which different spatial layers, e.g. vegetation type and land cover, biological
richness, forest fragmentation , etc. were generated on 1:50,000 scale using IRS
LlSS-111 images and ancillary data. These inputs are appropriate for identifying
the ESAs as they are the best possible seamless datasets available at present
with acceptable accuracy. The biologica/ richness and forest fragmentation layers
along with population density, village boundary, protected area (P~) and world
heritage site (WHS) maps have been used to identify the ESAs using a suitable
decision matrix.
The effort made by the task team in carefully collating and analys'ing the best
possible/available data sets for identifying the ESAs is appreciable. The data sets
used are adequate and approach followed for geospatial analysis is technically
1

sound in meeting the objective of identifying the ESAs. Further, the large area
cove red for analysis in the limited time frame is also commendable.

•

The following observations are made by the members
included/taken care while finalising the report.
(i)

which

may be

While the inputs used in the geospatial analysis are adequate and the
references of such data sources are provided , it is felt that a clear description
of the primary and secondary data sources including the mechanism,
accuracies and constraints is needed as they form the basis for the entire
analysis. This may be explicitly mentioned in the report as text and table.

(ii) For identifying the ESAs , biological richness map and forest fragmentation
layer along with population density have been used. While the forest
fragmentation layer has been used as one of the several inputs in the
geospatial modeling of biological richness, it has also been used again as an
independent layer because of its key impact on eco-sensitivity. This point

could be highlighted in the report.

'

(iii) The population density of <100 persons/km' (as per Census, 2001) used as
the cut-off for identifying the ESAs in the 'high' biological richness class with
'medium' forest fragmentation , need to be discussed appropriately in the

report.
(iv) The village boundary layer taken from Survey of India and the derived areal
extents are indicative. This needs to be mentioned.

(v) While protected areas (PAs), wortd heritage sites (WHSs) have been
considered for identifying the ESAs , a remark may be included in the report

that PAs, WHSs and recorded forest areas (RFAs) are regulated by the
extant provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, Indian Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972, and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and their amendments
thereof.

(vi) The process of identifying the ESAs based on ESZs obtained from geospatial
analysis needs to be explained in more detail (chapter 5, page 14, para 5

•

and 6).

(vii) It is observed that the figures , tables and text on rainfall and elevation (based

on ASTER OEM) given in Chapter-4 are not used for defining tHe boundary
of the Western Ghats region and hence may be excluded from this chapter.

2

{viii)The inputs used and their sources may also be included in the figures
(maps). Other minor suggestions are made in the draft report (two chapters)
and have also been discussed with NRSC team during the presentation for
appropriate modifications.
The committee concludes that the datasets used and methodology followed
for geospatial analysis within the given timeframe and resources are
adequate for identification of ESAs in the Western Ghats region.

The followi ng points may be considered while implementing the programmes for
conservation and preservation of ESAs by the respective State Governments.

(i) As mentioned earlier, ESAs have been identified based on a 'decision matrix'
created using biological richness , forest fragmentation , village layer, PAs and
WHSs. The members feel that while PAs and WHSs do help in conserving
wildlife, conservation of landscape dependent species, such as tiger, needs
the corridors and connectivity areas outside the PA and WI;iS boundaries to
be adequately safeguard ed. Recently, the Wildlife Institute of India (WI I) has
published a report providing detailed information and spatial data on
corridors and connectivity areas in the context of tiger. These spatial data
could be used by the respective state governments to ensure that
permeability required for perSistence of wild animal populations for perpetuity
is taken care.
(ii) The forest type map recently published by the Forest Survey of India on
1:50,000 scale may also be used by the state governments for finer
refinements and prescriptions for conservation of ecologically sensitive forest
types and rare and threatened endemic species.

(iii) A sample of ESAs in the fringe villages identified using geospatial analysis
may also be validated .

The members thank the Chairman and Members of the High Level Working Group
(HlWG) on Western Ghats for giving us the opportunity to peer review the
geospatial analy 's aspect in identifying the ESAs in the Western Ghats region .

•

rJM£I/'/~
b

(V. B. Mattrur)b .

3

I ,
l'

~Q..9w~ ~i3

'-« - - .-(Y. v. N. Krishna Murthy)

,

Appendix 2
Approach for Biodiversity Characterization at Landscape Level
1. Data Inputs
Cloud free IRS 1C, 1D and P6 LISS-III Satellite data (23.5 m spatial
resolution) for two season (moist- Oct-Dec; and dry Feb-April) have been used
for vegetation type mapping. Topographic maps, Climatic maps, Biogeography
maps, Socio-economic data, Management Maps/Stock Maps, and Protected Area
Network were also used as additional inputs for the study.
2. Vegetation Type Mapping
The vegetation type mapping was carried out using two season (dry and
wet period) satellite images of IRS LISS-III data, based on the phenology of the
vegetation cover. On screen digitization was adopted for the vegetation type
mapping as the delineation of the finer phenological and type variation was
possible. The vegetation types were classified according to their separability on
the satellite imagery. Climatic and physiognomy based classification principles
were used to develop vegetation classification scheme and broadly fits into the
existing Champion and Seth’s forest classification scheme followed in the Indian
sub continent. Tone and texture of the satellite image were correlated with
ground based observation and corresponding image chips were made for
reference for on-screen digitization. The biogeography and altitude zone maps
are also used to define classes. Wherever necessary, field knowledge was used to
delineate the locale specific types of ecological significance.
2.1. Landscape Analysis
2.1.1. Fragmentation
Fragmentation was computed as the number of patches of forest and nonforest types per unit area. The forest type map was reclassified into two classes,
i.e., forest and non-forest, resulting in a new spatial data layer. A user grid cell of
n (e.g., n = 500 m) is convolved with the spatial data layer with a criterion of
deriving the number of forest patches within the grid cell. The iteration is
repeated by moving the grid cell through the entire spatial layer. An output layer
with patch numbers is derived and a look-up table (LUT) associated with this is
generated, which keeps the normalized data of the patches per cell in the range
from 0 to 10 (IIRS, 2003).
(Eq. 1)
where Frag = fragmentation; n = number of patches; F = forest patches; NF = nonforest patches.

4.4. Disturbance Index
Disturbance is a manifestation of the impact of anthropogenic activities and
natural disturbance on the landscape change. The disturbance is manifested in

the spatial extent and distribution of the vegetation cover as well as species
composition. In this model for generation of disturbance surface, as a first step,
Cumulative landscape metric surface is prepared as a combination of different
landscape metrics viz., fragmentation, Juxtaposition, Interspersion, Fractal
Dimension, contagion etc. In the next step biodiversity driver surface, which
reflect the spatial distribution of the anthropogenic/natural forces on the
landscape is prepared using disturbance generating factors viz, proximity to
roads, villages, fire intensity, shifting cultivation, mines and disturbance
indicator parameters (diversity, invasive species, regeneration potential etc.)
using ground based sampling data. Using these two surfaces, we run the model
to generate the disturbance surface. A user grid cell of nxn (e.g. n=500 m) is
convolved with the spatial data layer with a criterion of deriving a specific
landscape metric value within the grid cell. The iteration is repeated by moving
the grid cell through the entire spatial layer. An output layer with the specific
landscape metric value of a parameter is derived and associated to this a lookup table (LUT) is generated which keeps the normalized data of the landscape
metric values per cell in the range of 0 to 10.

(Eq. 2.2)
where DI = Disturbance Index; Frag = fragmentation, Por = porosity; Patc =
Patchiness; Int = interspersion; Jux = juxtaposition; Wt = weights.
4.5. Biological richness surface
Biological richness computed as a function of ecosystem uniqueness, species richness,
biodiversity value, terrain complexity, and disturbance and depicts the potential for
harboring the maximum number of ecologically unique and important species. This
helps in assigning conservation priorities to threatened, rare, endemic, and
taxonomically distinct species and to different types of habitats or landscape elements
on the basis of the richness and significance of threatened species. As a part of this
project, the biologically rich areas were spatially identified for the purpose of
conservation and saving the existing gene pool from extinction. Since the disturbance
index, which is a part of the ecosystem process, is also a function of the biological
richness, so the level of stress on the biologically rich areas is also ascertained and
adequate remedial measures can be taken while implementing conservation strategies.
The biological richness at the landscape level was computed as a function of ecosystem
uniqueness, species diversity, biodiversity value, terrain complexity, and Disturbance
Index (Roy et al., 2012):
(Eq.
2.3)

where BR = biological richness, DI = Disturbance Index, SR = species richness,
BV = biodiversity value, EU = ecosystem uniqueness, and Wt = weights.

Fig 2: Schematic representation of Spatial Landscape Analysis Modeling
(SPLAM) (Roy et al., 2005)

Kasturi Rangan Report on Western Ghats Part -1

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Kasturi Rangan Report on Western Ghats Part -1 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Kasturi Rangan Report on Western Ghats Part -1