Kasturirangan report on Western Ghats threatens livelihoods: Karnataka CM
Why in news?
Karnataka CM says Kasturirangan ESA plan threatens livelihoods; Centre seeks State’s decision by September 27.
UPSC Relevance
- Prelims: Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA), Western Ghats (UNESCO World Heritage Site, biodiversity hotspot), Gadgil vs Kasturirangan panels, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, rivers rising in the Western Ghats.
- Mains: GS-III:
- Conservation, environmental degradation, EIA, disaster management (landslides).
- GS-I: Physical geography; changes in critical geographical features and flora-fauna.
- Essay: Development vs environment.
Western Ghats – why does it matter?
- About 1,600 km long hill chain across six States: Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
- UNESCO World Heritage Site (2012, 39 sites)
- Biodiversity and endemism: About 5,000 flowering plants, 325+ globally threatened species, ~290 freshwater fishes, ~219 amphibians and ~227 reptiles. Flagship endemics include the lion-tailed macaque, Nilgiri tahr, purple frog, Malabar civet (critically endangered) and Neelakurinji, which blooms once every 12 years.
- Water tower of peninsular India: Godavari, Krishna, Kaveri, Tungabhadra, Periyar and Vaigai originate here. Shola forests and grasslands act as sponges that feed these rivers through the dry season. Along with many west-flowing rivers, they sustain drinking water, irrigation and hydropower (Koyna, Idukki, Sharavathi) for roughly a quarter-billion people.
- Climate regulator: The range acts as a barrier that channels southwest monsoon rain onto the coastal plains, making Agumbe the “Cherrapunji of the South” and leaving the Deccan in rain shadow. Its evergreen forests are also a major carbon sink.
- Economy: Pepper, cardamom, coffee, tea and rubber plantations, fisheries downstream, and eco-tourism in places like Munnar, Coorg and Mahabaleshwar.
- Culture and communities: Tribal groups live here, including PVTGs such as the Todas, Kurumbas and Kadars. Sacred-grove traditions include the devarakadu of Kodagu and the kavu of Kerala. The Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve (1986) was India’s first biosphere reserve.
- Disaster prone : Steep, rain-soaked slopes are prone to landslides (e.g. Wayanad and Shirur, July 2024).
The Two Expert Panels
| Point | Gadgil Panel (WGEEP), 2011 | Kasturirangan Panel (HLWG), 2013 |
| Area proposed | Entire Western Ghats as ecologically sensitive, graded into ESZ-1, 2 and 3 | About 37% (~60,000 sq km) as ESA |
| Approach | Bottom-up; key role for gram sabhas | Top-down; remote sensing, village as unit |
| Main curbs | Wide curbs incl. new dams, mining, GM crops in ESZ-1 | Ban on mining, quarrying, thermal power, red-category industries, big townships |
| Status | Rejected by States as too strict | Base of draft ESA notifications (latest 2024); not final |
Law behind ESA
- ESAs are notified by the Centre under Section 3(2)(v) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 read with Rule 5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 – power to restrict industries and processes in any area.
- Draft notifications have been issued six times (2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2022, 2024); none has become final.
- Latest draft (July 2024) covers about 56,825 sq km across six States; Karnataka has the largest share (20,668 sq km).
- The Centre’s draft says agriculture, plantations and daily livelihood activities will not be banned; mining, quarrying and some industries will be.
Why Karnataka objects?
- CM D.K. Shivakumar told the Legislative Assembly the Kasturirangan report could hit livelihoods in 10 districts.
- He said the proposals have created an “atmosphere of fear” among farmers and called them unscientific.
- He toured the coastal and Malnad regions before the session; farmers wanted the report rejected and a new committee formed.
- Fear of curbs on land use, housing, roads and plantations (coffee, arecanut) in Malnad and coastal districts.
- Demand: physical ground survey on the “Kerala model” – Kerala got plantations and settlements excluded after field verification.
- Missed irony: The same special session (Sept 21–23) is discussing drought in 124 taluks. The Ghats forests feed the Kaveri and Krishna catchments – weaker protection may worsen water stress.
- Policy limbo: Twelve years of draft notifications without a final one create uncertainty – itself a livelihood problem. A “new committee” would be the third review after two expert panels.
- Federal angle: Forests and wildlife moved to the Concurrent List by the 42nd Amendment, 1976 (Entries 17A, 17B). The Centre has legal power under EPA, but implementation depends on States.
- Judicial anchors
- Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996) – precautionary principle and sustainable development;
- T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad case – continuing SC oversight on forests consercation
- The National Green Tribunal has repeatedly set deadlines for Western Ghats ESA.
Threats to ecological integrity of Western Ghats
- Deforestation and fragmentation: About 40% forest loss was estimated between 1920 and 1990. Plantations, encroachment and roads have broken the forest into isolated patches, cutting off wildlife corridors.
- Mining and quarrying: The Shah Commission (2010) exposed illegal iron-ore mining in Goa, and the Supreme Court banned mining there in 2012 (Goa Foundation case). Thousands of stone quarries in Kerala destabilise slopes.
- Landslides and floods: Examples include the Kerala floods of 2018 (about 480 deaths), Kavalappara and Puthumala in 2019, Pettimudi in 2020, Irshalwadi (Raigad) in 2023, and the Wayanad landslide of July 2024 (Mundakkai–Chooralmala, 200+ dead). Quarrying, cutting slopes for construction and land-use change on fragile ground all worsen extreme rainfall events.
- Dams and hydropower: The Athirappilly project and Sharavathi pumped storage (inside a lion-tailed macaque sanctuary) remain contested. The Mullaperiyar dispute shows how dams also create inter-state conflict in ecological governance.
- Monocultures and invasive species: Tea, rubber, eucalyptus and acacia plantations replace natural forest. Invasive species such as Lantana, Senna spectabilis (Wayanad) and wattle (Nilgiris) choke native grasslands.
- Tourism and urbanisation: Unregulated resorts and homestays have spread in Munnar, Ooty and Kodagu. The Lavasa hill city became a symbol of speculative development in the hills.
- Human–wildlife conflict: Shrinking and fragmented habitat pushes elephants and other animals into farms and settlements. Kerala declared human–wildlife conflict a state-specific disaster in 2024.
- Climate change: Rain now comes in short, erratic cloudbursts. Species on “sky islands,” such as the Nilgiri tahr and shola birds, are being squeezed upslope with nowhere left to go.
- Governance deadlock: In July 2026 the MoEFCC reissued the draft ESA notification for the 7th time (first issued in 2014) after the previous draft lapsed. Karnataka opposes the notification.
Way forward
- Finalise the ESA– The draft’s phased, state-wise notification provision should be used now rather than waiting for all six states to agree.
- Cadastral-level ground survey and satellite forest-cover tracking, long-term ecological observatories, and climate-refugia mapping to show where species can shift.
- Put communities at the centre via participation of gram sabhas (Gadgil committee)
- Secure and restore corridors – Protect the Wayanad–Mudumalai–Bandipur–Nagarhole complex. Build elevated or underpass crossings on highways and railways. Restore shola grasslands, as with the wattle removal in the Nilgiris ordered by the Madras High Court.
- Payment for ecosystem services to farmers such as the Madras High Court’s e-pass system for Ooty and Kodaikanal (2024).
- Recognise rights under the Forest Rights Act, 2006
- Landslide zoning using GSI maps for disaster risk reduction.
The Gadgil vs Kasturirangan debate is really about the balance between conservation and livelihoods. The durable answer is graded, participatory protection: strict protection for natural landscapes and sustainable-use rules for cultural landscapes.
Practice MCQ
Q1. Consider the following statements about the Kasturirangan High-Level Working Group (HLWG):
- It recommended declaring about 37% of the Western Ghats as an Ecologically Sensitive Area.
- It proposed a complete ban on agriculture and plantations within the ESA.
- It used the village as the unit for demarcating the ESA.
How many of the above statements are correct?
(a) Only one
(b) Only two
(c) All three
(d) None
Answer: (b). Statement 2 is wrong – farming and plantations are not banned.
Q2. Consider the following statements:
Statement I: Ecologically Sensitive Areas in the Western Ghats are notified under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
Statement II: The Act empowers the Central Government to restrict areas where industries, operations or processes may be carried out.
(a) Both correct, and II explains I
(b) Both correct, but II does not explain I
(c) I correct, II incorrect
(d) I incorrect, II correct
Answer: (a). Section 3(2)(v) of EPA is the source of ESA notifications.
Mains Practice Question
“The repeated failure to finalise the Western Ghats ESA notification shows the unresolved tension between ecological security and livelihoods.” Critically examine in the light of the Gadgil and Kasturirangan reports, and suggest a way forward. (15 marks, 250 words)