IN FORCE undated

एनबीडब्ल्यूएल की 23वीं बैठक के एजेंडा आइटम, 14 अक्टूबर 2011 को आयोजित की गई

Document text

STANDING COMMITTEE OF
NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILDLIFE

TWENTY THIRD MEETING

SEPTEMBER 2011

AGENDA NOTES

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS

INDEX

SL. NO. AGENDA ITEM

PAGE NO. 1. Agenda Item No.1
Confirmation of the Minutes of Meeting of the Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife held on 25th April 2011.

Agenda Item No.2
Action taken report on the recommendations of 22nd Meeting of the Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife held on 25th April 2011

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6 Agenda Item No. 3 Agenda item proposed by Dr M.K. Ranjitsinh, Member, NBWL

Agenda item proposed by Shri Biswajit Mohanty, Member, NBWL

Agenda item proposed by Dr A.J.T. Johnsingh, Member, NBWL

Agenda item proposed by Dr Shankar Raman, Member, NBWL

4.1

4.2 Agenda Item No. 4

Proposals for diversion of forest land of PAs

Proposals for taking up activities within 10 kms from the boundaries of Protected Areas

Agenda Item No.5 Any other item with the permission of the Chair

AGENDA NOTES FOR THE TWENTY THIRD MEETING OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE OF NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILD LIFE

Dated: September 2011 Venue: Paryavaran Bhawan, New Delhi

AGENDA ITEM NO.1

Confirmation of the minutes of the 22nd Meeting of Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife held on 25th April 2011.

The minutes of the 22nd Meeting of Standing Committee of NBWL, held on 25.04.2011 were circulated to the members on 06.05.2011. Since, no comments were received, the Standing Committee may confirm the Minutes.

The Standing Committee of NBWL may confirm the minutes of 22nd Meeting held on 25.04.2011.

AGENDA ITEM NO.2

Action Taken Report (21st Meeting of Standing Committee)

The Action Taken Report on the decisions of the Standing Committee of NBWL taken in its 22nd Meeting held on 25.04.2011 is appended below:

Agenda Item No. Action Taken 2{2[3.1]}: Wildlife Conservation Issues (a) Framing ecologically sound policy for dealing with linear intrusions.

During the 5th Meeting of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) held on 18th March 2010 under the Chairmanship of Hon’ble Prime Minister, some decisions were taken requiring follow-up by Standing Committee of NBWL through a consultative process. Framing ecologically sound policy for dealing with linear intrusions was one such issue flagged in the 5th NBWL Meetings.

The matter was discussed by the Standing Committee in its 22nd Meeting, and it was decided that draft guidelines with respect to laying of transmission lines and construction of roads impacting the Protected Areas be framed in the first instance. The Committee assigned the task of preparation of draft guidelines to Dr Shankar Raman, Member, NBWL, and decided to take a view in the matter once the draft guidelines were ready.

Dr Shankar Raman has informed that he will shortly circulate a draft of the guidelines on the subject, for discussion in this meeting of Standing Committee. He has assured to circulate the draft guidelines to all committee members before 14th September 2011. The same agenda item is included under Agenda Item No. 3.4. (b) Measures to check damage to environment on account of extraction of minerals Measures to check damage to environment on account of extraction of minerals was one such issue flagged in the 5th NBWL Meeting.

The matter was discussed by the Standing Committee, in its 22nd Meeting. However, the Committee had decided to defer it to the next meeting.

The Standing Committee may like to take a view in the matter. (c) Central funding to be restricted to Protected Areas directly under the Wildlife Wing and managed by trained officers This agenda item was placed before the Standing Committee in its 22nd Meeting. However, the Committee had decided to defer it to next meeting.

The Standing Committee may like to take a view in

the matter. The agenda has been included in Agenda No. 3 as item no. 3.1.1 (Page to )

2[4.2(2)] Proposal for development of 8 lane access controlled expressway on right bank of Upper Ganga Canal (UGC) from Sanauta Bridge (Bulandshahar) to near Purkazi (Distt. Muzaffarnagar) near Uttar Pradesh-Uttarakhand border.

The Member Secretary informed that a report on the proposal was sought from the Regional CCF, Lucknow which was received only on the day of the meeting. The Committee desired that it would be imperative to first carefully examine the report of the Regional Office so that it could reach an informed decision on the subject. Since, the matter was under consideration in the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC), it was decided that the report be first considered by the FAC and, thereafter placed for consideration by the Standing Committee. Subsequently, the FC Division, MoEF, has informed on 5.9.2011 that the matter was placed before FAC in last meeting and it was decided that the inspection of the site would be conducted by Regional CCF with all concerned stakeholders including wildlife experts as the proposed project is very close to Hastinapur Wildlife Sanctuary which is the habitat of the endangered Hog Deer.

2[3.3] Agenda items proposed by Shri Biswajit Mohanty, Member, National Board for Wildlife.

The Committee decided to defer the agenda for consideration in its next meeting.

The same agenda items are again being included under Agenda item No. 3.2 (Page to ) 2 [4.1 (25)] Diversion of 6.07 ha of forest land from Rajaji National Park for establishment of Ayush Gram, Uttarakhand. Dr A. J. T. Johnsingh along with representative of the Director, Wildlife Institute of India (WII) had conducted the site inspection and the report had been circulated to the members along with the agenda notes. The Standing Committee took on board the report and desired that the conditions proposed in the report should be brief, focused and explicit and decided that Director, WII may review the report. Accordingly, Director, WII, reviewed the report and informed that three issues required focused attention. The copy of correspondence received from Director, WII is placed at ANNEXURE I.

The Standing Committee may like to take a view on the proposal. 4.1 (2) Diversion of 79.474 ha of forest land in Kutch Desert Wildlife Sanctuary and Wild Ass Sanctuary for Construction of Gaduli to Hajipir-Odma-Khavda-Kunriya- Dholavira-Maovana-Gadakbet- Santalpur Road (S.H. Road) Gujarat. The proposal was for construction of Gaduli to Hajipir- Odma-Khavda-Kunriya-Dholavira-Maovana-Gadakbet- Santalpur Road (S.H. Road) passing through the Kutch Desert and the Wild Ass Sanctuaries.

The Committee decided that the site be inspected by Dr M.K. Ranjitsinh, Dr Divyabhanusinh Chavda and Dr Asad Rahmani all Members, NBWL, and that the decision would subsequently be taken by the Standing

Committee based on their report.

Site inspection report is awaited. 4.2 (1) Proposal for setting up Captive Thermal Power Plant (4x60MW) with 1 MTPA Cement Grinding Unit and 1 MTPA Coal Washery-proposal within 1.5 Kms from boundary of Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary, Uttar Pradesh.

The proposal was related to setting up of captive thermal power plant with 1 MTPA cement grinding unit and 1 MTPA coal washery unit which was located 1.5 Kms away from the Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary.

The Committee had decided that the Wildlife Institute of India would undertake an impact assessment study of the proposed project on the biodiversity of Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary and submit a report. A decision would, thereafter be taken by the committee based on the findings of the study report.

To facilitate the study, Director, WII had vide his letter dated 30th June 2011 suggested for constituting a committee of officials from the WL Division, FC Division, WII and one member of Standing Committee of NBWL, to carry out the field visit, and submit the report based on the site visit and evaluation of the EIA Report furnished by the project proponents. Suggestion of the Director, WII was agreed to, and he was requested to organize the site inspection and submit the report based on the site visit as well as the evaluation of the EIA report submitted by the project proponents.

Simultaneously, while examining the EIA report submitted by the project proponent Wildlife Division noted that the said report erroneously indicates that “No forest is present in 10 kms radius of the project and no National Parks and Sanctuaries within 25 kms from the project site”.

This fact has been brought to the notice of IA Division of Ministry of Environment and Forests, who has reportedly taken note of the observation of Wildlife Division and also informed that Environmental Clearance has not yet been given in the case.

The Report of Wildlife Institute of India has now been received in the Ministry, which is placed at ANNEXURE-II (Page to ). 5.2 Construction and Upgradation of 2.5 km. road from Khatola to Kisli, M.P. 5.3 Construction and Upgradation of 2.6 km Road from 14 km off T-2 to The Government of Madhya Pradesh had forwarded 13 proposals pertaining to construction/repair of roads passing through various Sanctuaries.

Standing Committee while according ‘in principle’

Mukki, M.P. 5.4 Construction and Upgradation of 5.13 km Road from Rajomal to Manoharpur, M.P. 5.5 Construction of Stop dam cum Causeway on Rehti- Tendukheda Road at Km 82/2, M.P. 5.6 Construction and Upgradation of 6 km Tendukheda- Taradehi- Sarra to Kudpura Approach Road, M.P. 5.7 Approach road from Somkheda to Hinouti – Ramgarh, M.P.
5.8 Construction and Upgradation of
4.20 km of Bamhori to Kotkheda Road, M.P. 5.9 Construction of MDR to Mokla Road, M.P. 5.10 Construction of 14.20 km road for NH-12, 7 km. to Malkuhi Jhilpani Dhana, M.P. 5.11 Construction of 4.73 km Somkheda-Suhela Approach Road, M.P. 5.12 Upgradation of 8.55 km road from Bineka to Borpani, M.P.
5.13 Widening of State Highway 59 from Indore to Gujrat Border, M.P. 5.14 Upgradation of Bhiapur to Amchhekala Dam Road, M.P. approval for construction/up gradation of above mentioned 13 roads desired that Chief Wildlife Warden would submit details separately about (i) roads that are to be newly constructed, (ii) roads that are to be upgraded, (iii) roads that are to be repaired, and (iv) roads that are already tarred or otherwise. A final view on individual proposal would be taken on receipt of the information by the Chairman, Standing Committee in consultation with Members of the Committee.

The State Government has forwarded the details of the 13 road proposals, which is placed at ANNEXURE-III (Page to ).

Gist of the proposals is as follows:

No. of the Roads Forest Area to be diverted (Ha.) Present Condition of Road Proposed work 5.2 1.26 Murram Cement Concrete Road 5.3 1.56 Murram Cement Concrete Road 5.4 1.92 Murram Cement Concrete Road 5.5 0.015 N.A. Construction of Stop Dam cum –Causeway only
5.6 1.80 WBM
(Water Bound Macadam)

Tarring of Road 5.7 3.345 -do- Cement Concrete Road 5.8 0.576 -do- Tarring of Road 5.9 0.90 -do- Tarring of Road 5.10 3.285 -do- Cement Concrete Road 5.11 1.42 -do- Cement Concrete Road 5.12 2.055 Murram Tarring of Road 5.13 Nil 2 lane Tar Road 30M. wide Widening to 60M 4 lane Tar Road 5.14 0.09 or 0.10 Murram Cement Concrete Road 5.25 Widening and upgradation of National Highway No. 69 from Obaidullahganj to Betul, M.P.

The Member Secretary informed that the proposal was for upgradation of National Highway No. 69 passing through the Ratapani Sanctuary.

The Committee decided to defer the proposal for consideration in its next meeting. The proposal is included in new agenda item 5.12 placed at ANNEXURE-IV item 12 (Page to )

AGENDA ITEM NO.3

3.1 AGENDA ITEM PROPOSED BY DR. M.K. RANJITSINH, MEMBER, NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILDLIFE

Framing of rules for the functioning of the Standing Committee of the NBWL.
In view of the fact that the NBWL itself meets very infrequently, it is its Standing Committee which is its main functioning body. At present, there are no regulations, directives or rules for its periodic meetings and functioning. It is essential that these be formulated. It is, therefore proposed that this recommendation be given approval in principle and a committee/group be appointed, which will frame the requisite procedures and rules, which will be submitted to the Standing Committee in its next meeting. This committee/group will also study the forms and procedures presently being used for proposals submitted to the Standing Committee, for taking up non-forestry and non-wildlife activities in protected areas and recommend amendments if required.
Mechanism to ensure implementation of conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee while approving proposals.
The main purport of the Standing Committee has been to approve proposals for undertaking non-wildlife activities in PAs and a very large number of proposals have been approved by it over the years. There is, however, no real monitoring mechanism to oversee and ensure the implementation of the conditions that the Standing Committee invariably imposes whilst clearing these proposals. These stipulations, therefore, mostly remain only on paper and are tantamount to transgressions of the clearances given by the Standing Committee. Only in very few cases such as in the Subarnarekha case do the project proponents come back

with some compliance reports. But the MoEF itself has no real mechanism to monitor the implementation of the conditions. This aspect must also be covered in the rules and procedures that are proposed to be framed and must be considered by the committee/group that is being proposed in the previous item recommended.

Simultaneously, a mechanism must be installed to monitor regularly and enforce implementation of the stipulations. It is recommended that special unit, headed by a senior officer be appointed in each of the Regional Offices of the MoEF whose mandate will be to periodically monitor and report the compliance of the various stipulations laid down in all project clearances given by the Standing Committee in the past and in the future. This function cannot be carried out by the existing Regional Offices, who are already over burdened with work related to clearances under the Forest Conservation Act and other duties and in any case, what would be required are people on deputation from State Wildlife Wings.

3.1.1: Central funding to be restricted to Protected Areas directly under the Wildlife Wing and managed by trained officers

Wildlife Wings under the Forest Departments were set up in 1970s with the purpose of managing the Protected Areas (PAs) of the country by dedicated and trained personnel of long standing experience and expertise. There was also a move during that period to create a specialized sub-cadre of the Indian Forest Service for this purpose, as well as to, interalia, control illegal trade and taxidermy in wildlife. This creation of a special cadre of managers within the IFS has not been allowed to happen. But to further worsen matters, the numbers of officers which were annually to be sent from the states to the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) for training in wildlife management, have reduced, despite the fact that all charges of this training are

now being borne by Government of India and not the concerned states. As a result, the seats earmarked for the states each year for such training are now being given to the SAARC countries. Indeed, there was a move afoot to close the nine-month training course for senior staff altogether, as it was not being utilized. Currently, in the said WII nine-month training course for officers, only two trainees out of 20 are from the states and the rest from SAARC countries & elsewhere. This is a totally unacceptable situation. To further compound matters, officers which have been trained in wildlife management at the WII are working on non-wildlife assignments in the states. Approximately only about 3% of our PAs are being managed by trained officers and this has contributed significantly to the current mismanagement of our PAs. Furthermore, guidance and advice was issued in the past from time to time
from the MoEF, to place the PAs under the direct supervision of state wildlife wings. Earlier on this was done, albeit rather slowly, and a number of PAs, including in some cases the buffer areas of PAs, were placed directly under the respective wildlife wings. This process has not only stopped long ago but the reverse step of transferring back the financial and administrative control of PAs from the Wildlife Wings to the territorial forest divisions has been in progress. The result is that the Chief Wildlife Warden (CWLW) has neither the responsibility of the PAs, but often neither the financial nor the direct administrative control of the PAs within his state. This administrative diarchy is disastrous. The above mentioned situation has to be set right. The PAs have to be managed professionally and effectively. Past record has proved that requests from Government of India will not be heeded by the states unless the MoEF uses a very pertinent financial leverage. It is, therefore, proposed that the GOI under the centrally sponsored schemes for financially assisting wildlife sanctuaries, Tiger Reserves & Biosphere Reserves, will be given to only those PAs which :

are totally under the control of the Wildlife Wing, with the drawal & disbursual powers with officers of the wildlife wing and the confidential reports (CRs) of all the staff of PAs written by CWLW/ Wildlife Wing officers, from the financial year 2009-2010 onwards.
the ACF/DCF rank officers in charge of the PAs having been trained at the WII or an equivalent institution abroad, from the financial year 2010-2011 or onwards.
where all the range officers posted in the PAs have received the three month
training course of WII, from the financial year 2011-2012 onwards.

The staggered datelines mentioned above are to enable the state governments to get the required numbers of officers and rangers trained by the WII, which could even conduct the three month training course for rangers at regional levels to facilitate the task.

Comments: It is necessary that the Protected Areas are under the control of the Chief Wildlife Wardens. The need of trained staff is of utmost importance for effective wildlife conservation. The Ministry is of the opinion that, there is an urgent need for training of Officers in Wildlife Conservation from a reputed Institute like the Wildlife Institute of India. However, at this stage, it would not be possible to stop the funding support to those States who have not posted staff trained in wildlife in the Protected Areas as the State Governments have limited number of Officers, trained in Wildlife Conservation.

Protected Areas are generally far away from the district H.Q. It is very necessary to provide incentives to the officers and staff to serve in such areas. It is proposed to provide 30% of total salary as incentives for all officers/frontline staff posted in all the Protected Areas. It is also mentioned that a Committee of the Ministry, formed to look into the needs of the wildlife training to IFS Officers has also recommended financial incentives to the staff serving for wildlife conservation in Protected Areas .

It is also recommended increase in training hours with changed modules of wildlife conservation for IFS probationers at the Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy (IGNFA), Dehradun. The IGNFA has already modified the syllabus of wildlife conservation along with increase in the modules for IFS probationers as suggested by the committee.

3.2

AGENDA ITEM PROPOSED BY DR. BISWAJIT MOHANTY, MEMBER, NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILDLIFE

Declaration of ESA:

Most states have yet to declare and notify the ecologically sensitive areas/ecologically fragile areas under Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 within 10 kms of areas bordering PAs. A status report should be placed before the Standing Committee to assess the level of implementation by the State. Standing Committee may also propose steps which should be taken to get the States to declare the ESA zones forthwith before further loss of such habitats to development projects.

Reason: Most States are proposing development projects including polluting industries, mines, reservoirs adjacent to PAs. Without the legal protection being accorded to the surrounding zones, such projects cannot be rejected. Allowing these projects will imperil the wildlife living in the PAs and their habitat.

Elephant electrocution deaths:

The Standing Committee should form a sub committee comprising of members from NBWL, Power Ministry, CEA to assess level of implementation of existing guidelines for protective measures/safety features to be installed in rural electrification distribution systems to protect elephants. The Standing Committee should also come up with measures to add to the existing guidelines framed by Central Electricity Authority to comply with the suggestions contained in the report submitted by the expert group set up by the MoEF to probe into causes of electrocution deaths of elephants in Orissa.

Reasons: Under the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutkaran Yojana (RGGVY), the Ministry of Power, Govt. of India has provided massive funds to states to boost the rural power network to enable remote villages to get electricity. While such a program is welcome to provide the rural residents with power, without adequate safeguards, this shall result in huge loss of wildlife, especially the highly endangered elephants. Already Orissa has lost 90 elephants due to electrocution during the last 10 years most of which could have been avoided if adequate safety guidelines had been adopted and followed.

Protection of wildlife from CAMPA work practices:

The Standing Committee should set up a sub committee comprising of NBWL members, MoEF officers and WII Scientists to tour the country in major CAMPA beneficiary states of Orissa, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra to verify the harmful plantation practices or other civil works carried out inside reserve forests and PAs. This sub-committee can file reports with the MoEF about such activities that imperil wildlife and MoEF can issue appropriate directions to the States.

Reasons: Under the CAMPA program, many harmful forestry practices are being carried out for plantations, clearing and burning of weeds, civil works including plush rest houses, barracks in the core areas of Tiger Reserves, PAs, etc. Such activities impact wildlife and its habitat. There is no monitoring by the MoEF about such activities in the forest areas. We have found that in Orissa, there is rampant burning of forest undergrowth to clear them for plantations. This destroys ground dwelling fauna including jungle fowl, hares, mongoose, snakes, turtles, etc. Similarly, cutting of creepers like bahunia, etc. which are useful fodder species for elephants is leading to increase in man elephant conflict.

3.3

AGENDA ITEM PROPOSED BY DR. A.J.T. JOHNSINGH, MEMBER, NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILDLIFE

Strengthening conservation in the southern Western Ghats The southern part of the Western Ghats (the forests stretching from the newly notified Megamalai Wildlife Sanctuary to the southernmost Kannyakumari WLS) is an area of nearly 5000 sq.k m and is extremely vital for large mammal (elephant, tiger, Nilgiri tahr, Nilgiri langur and lion-tailed macaque), bio-diversity and water conservation. This tract includes forest divisions such as the Theni (part), Ranni, Konni, Achankoil, Tirunelveli, Thenmala and Trivandrum (part); wildlife sanctuaries such as Megamalai, Grizzled Giant Squirrel, Shendurney, Peppara, Neyyar and Kannyakumari and two tiger reserves, Periyar and Kalakad- Mundanthurai. The break in this vast tract of biodiversity-rich and scenic forested landscape is along the Ariankavu Pass which has been brought about by the Madurai- Quilon National Highway (NH-208), the century-old, heritage Shencottah-Punalur metre-gauge railway (which is being converted into a broad-gauge line) and human habitations on both the sides of the railway track and the highway. The major tiger breeding habitat in this landscape is the Periyar TR (925 sq. km) and this note deals with strengthening conservation in the southern part of the Western Ghats landscape. This landscape has the potential to support 100 adult tigers provided the following recommendations are implemented and wild prey are protected which is likely to result in appreciable increases in numbers for both tigers and their prey.

Acquisition of estates along the interstate border Periyar TR has a 90km border with Tamil Nadu where there are 23 cardamom estates and 18 passage routes into the Reserve. In the Reserve within Kerala also there are an additional nine estates. The laborers residing in these estates may have illegal guns and indulge in poaching using guns as well as snares. It is desirable to explore means to acquire these estates in due course of time. This will significantly reduce the amount of disturbance on Periyar TR.
Acquisition of key estates There is an urgency to acquire key estates such as Downton (208 ha, between Ranni FD and Periyar TR), Kattlamalai (13 km2, KMTR) and Bonaccord (5 km2, Peppara WLS) which are in the heart of tiger land. With a boom in ecotourism such estates, particularly Downton and Bonaccord, can grow as a cancer in the heart of wildlife habitats and can be a cradle for activities that are inimical to conservation. Acquisition of Downton estate would immensely strengthen the conservation value of Periyar TR and this needs the urgent attention of the Government.
Stay order on the construction of Thora-Kokkathodumuzhy road
An immediate stay order on the construction of the 20km all-weather tar road from Thora to Kokkathodumuzhy (Konni FD) is urgently needed till a final decision is taken by the Central Empowered Committee on the petition submitted by One Earth One Life, a local conservation NGO. Unfortunately without waiting for the final decision by the CEC work on this road has already been started. It is rumored that the major purpose of building this tar road is to make a resort on this stretch of road accessible to the public. It is unsure as to how this land was acquired to build this resort in the first place. In the long run, the construction of this road can convert the infrequently-used Achankoil-Thora-Kokkathodumuzhy- Konni-Pamba forest road into a State Highway, catering to the needs of the growing number of garbage- spewing pilgrims going to the Lord Ayyappa shrine. This will gradually pave way for

the destruction of the stretch of intact forest that now exists between Periyar TR and Achankoil. 4) Establishment of a corridor across the Ariankavu Pass Elephants in this landscape remain separated into two populations by a break along the Ariankavu Pass. The northern population is around 700 animals and the southern population c. 200. Athough this separation happened over a hundred years ago, it is high time we establish a corridor to enable the two populations to merge. This corridor will be extremely beneficial for other large mammals including the tiger. The three corridors that are in discussion across Ariankavu are the following: a) Achankoil – Harrison Malayalam Rubber Estates (e.g., Nagamala) – 13-arch rail bridge – Shendurny WLS, referred to as ‘13-arch Corridor’ b) Achankoil – Priya Estate – Ambanad Tea Estate – Suvarnagiri Estate – Senagiri Estate – Murugapanchal – Bedford Estate – Shendurny WLS, referred to as ‘Murugapanchal Corridor’. c) Kottavasal (Achankoil) – Puliyarai Beat of Kadayanallur Range – Kottavasal (Ariankavu) – Karkudi Beat of Courtalam Range – Shendurny WLS, referred to as ‘Kottavasal Corridor’. Among the three, we observe that the establishment of Kottavasal Corridor will be much more sound ecologically and viable economically. We are aware that there are efforts to establish the Murugapanchal Corridor for elephants and the proposal regarding this suggests plans to relocate people from the Murugapanchal area and create a 100m wide corridor. The proponents of this proposal believe that once Murugapanchal area is freed of settlements, elephant populations, which are now ca.10 km apart, because of settlements such as Bedford Estate (in the south) and Priya, Suvarnagiri, Senagiri, Kuzhirkadu, Pandianpara and Kadamanpara (in the north), would start using this corridor. We should remember that in a fragmented elephant landscape only bull elephants roaming between the fragments can link the

populations. One should be aware that there are not many bull elephants in the Ariankavu area to move from habitat to habitat across disturbed habitats. We may be able to help the wild elephants to use this corridor if all the above-mentioned habitations are resettled and if the human habitations are removed for a kilometer on both the sides of the Murugapanchal bridge. In comparison, the Kottavasal Corridor, along the main ridge of the Western Ghats, seems to be much more promising for the movement of large mammals including the tiger and elephant. This aspect was explained to us by Mr. Radhakrishna Pillai (DFO, Achankoil FD, now retired) who had a clear understanding of the landscape. The slopes along the main Western Ghats ridgeline harbor most of the remnant forests across the gap, and thus wildlife habitats on either side of the corridor are much closer in the suggested Kottavasal Corridor (5 km) than in the Murugapanchal Corridor (10 km). There is also more forest cover within the Kottavasal Corridor. The fact that the Kottavasal Corridor appears to be more suitable for large mammal movement and that comparatively fewer households (approximately 60 in Kottavasal, compared to over 200 at Murugapanchal) would be affected by its creation suggests that resources and efforts to conserve connectivity in this landscape should first be directed at this corridor. Efforts should also be made to remove the encroachments from the Puliyarai (Kadayanallur Range) and Karkudi (Courtallam Range) beats (both in Tirunelveli FD) which will strengthen the proposed corridor immensely. 5) Establishment of c. 500 km² Kuzhathupuzha Conservation Reserve There is enough data from India to show that rich habitats, that are undisturbed by people, are much more used by species such as elephants (particularly groups), gaur, sambar and tiger. Including Kuzhathupuzha and Palode Ranges (220 km² and 108 km² respectively) and Shendurney WLS (170 km²), we have an opportunity to establish a nearly 500 km² Conservation Reserve if people of this area, living far from facilities such as school and hospital, are willing to be resettled. Our enquiries with a

few residents of Rosamala Estate in Shendurney WLS, eight kilometers from Ariankavu with such facilities, indicate that sincere efforts to provide better healthcare, education and job opportunities would persuade them to consider such a resettlement. We feel that the Government should not hesitate to “sacrifice” several square kilometers of plantation forests near townships to establish a large tract of priceless wildlife habitat. Only creation of such a productive undisturbed habitat which should be connected by a functional corridor with the Periyar landscape (north of Ariankavu Pass), would enable the tiger to thrive in the forests south of Ariankavu Pass. Presently the mountainous Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, with a large tract of evergreen vegetation, south of the Pass can at the most support 10 adult tigers. 6) Strengthening anti-poaching measures In April 2011 accompanied by Sanjayankumar, Deputy Director, Periyar TR and some of my colleagues (R. Raghunath, NCF and Professor E. Unnikrishnan, University College, Trivandrum) we walked from Theerthampara in Tirunelveli FD to Vazhayar in Kanayar Range (Achankoil FD) covering a distance of nearly 57 km. In the foothills of Tamil Nadu we saw several signs of sambar and gaur and while we traversed the forests in Kerala (c. 50km) 6-8 gaur signs (dung and tracks) were seen. Elephant dung was seen all along. We also saw a poachers' camp where we found the remains of at least two lion-tailed macaques that had been killed and eaten. Although Nilgiri langur calls were heard all along, we saw only one group of lion-tailed macaques. It appears that poaching could be a reason for the low abundance of ungulates in the tract we covered. Poaching in the entire landscape should be controlled to support adequate populations of sambar and gaur as prey base if we are to have 100 tigers in the Periyar-KMTR landscape. Control of poaching can be effective if there is greater co-ordination between Tamil Nadu and Kerala Forest Departments and assistance from the EDCs in the landscape to monitor the activities of the poachers and poaching groups.

3.4

AGENDA ITEM PROPOSED BY DR. A.J.T.JOHNSINGH, MEMBER, NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILDLIFE

Save Coimbatore's kulams The city of Coimbatore has a unique system of tanks (locally called kulams) developed hundreds of years ago by the ancient Tamil kings for irrigation, flood control and possibly for recharging ground water. There are eight such wetlands located within the city and are replenished by the Noyyal river during the rainy season. These include Narasampathy, Krishnampathy, Selvampathy, Kumarasamy, Selvachinthamani, Big tank, Valankulam and Singanallur. In the past, there were numerous tanks in the surrounding areas but most got filled up. Coimbatore receives a moderate amount rainfall (around 650 mm annually). A burgeoning population and expanding industries have impacted these tank landscapes primarily in the form of encroachment and dumping of municipal waste and construction debris. Over the decades these tanks have given way to slums, housing units, bus depots, roads, railway tracks and electricity sub-stations. Even the river has been encroached and is used as a dumping site municipal waste and construction debris. The area under cultivation around the tanks has declined as a result of the receding water table making agriculture using ground water more expensive. Babul (Acacia nilotica) trees planted in the tank bed under the Farm Forestry scheme of Tamil Nadu Forest Department, which provided roosting and resting sites to numerous species of birds, were felled and removed as part of cleaning of the tanks carried out six years ago. Encroachment by water hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes), mesquite (Prosopis juliflora) and pink morning glory (Ipomoea carnea) has become a problem. Large quantities of municipal effluents including dyes and electroplating effluents are discharged into the lake making it

prone to metal pollution on one hand and eutrophication on the other. In the southern, western and northern parts of the city, there has been reports of heavy metal pollution (including cadmium and mercury from the dyeing electroplating and jewellery industries) which has affected biotic life in the tanks as well as the Noyyal. Physical encroachment by people is also a major issue along the banks of the wetlands and their supply channels. There has also been reports of hospital waste being dumped on the banks. Human waste make the water highly unhygienic with faecal E coli and several other pathogens. Since drinking water for the city comes from Western Ghats (Siruvani, Pilloor reservoirs) , civil society groups and government agencies of the city do not seem keen on conserving these wetlands.

Neglected and abused by the humans, preferred by the birds While humans ignore the tanks, birds throng Coimbatore's tanks. A study by L. Jospeh Reginald et al.( 2006) has reported 116 species of birds from Singanallur tank alone. Globally near threatened species such as spot-billed pelicans, painted storks and oriental white ibis still flock to the tanks as winter visitors from July to January. Rare birds like the western marsh harrier, little crake, pallid harrier, gadwall, whitenecked stork, Eurasian spoonbill, marsh sandpiper and black-bellied tern were also reported in this study. A total of 5,777 spot-billed pelicans and 3,146 painted storks were counted in the tanks five years ago, proving that Coimbatore tanks were a preferred foraging site for these birds. However, currently, their numbers have dwindled to almost a fifth of what they were five years ago. With an aim of conserving the wetlands, the Coimbatore Corporation drafted a Rs.128 crore proposal under JNNURM (Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewable Mission) in 2010. It seems this proposal is not a plan to develop the wetlands for their ecological values; but it is an investment proposal to make money out of it: real estate, speed boats, etc. The plan needs to be revisited to improve upon the wetlands and their ecological services.

This is of concern not only for environmentalists but also for all who appreciate Coimbatore city's ecology, climate and bird life.

The following suggestions have been made by local conservationists led by P.A. Azeez, Director, SACON and C. R. Jayaprakash, Nilgiri Wildlife and Environment Association The tanks, which were handed over to the Coimbatore Corporation last year (2010), need to be given back to the Public Works Department. Sufficient funds must be allocated to set up effluent treatment plants at the inlets of each tank. Encroachment along the supply channels also need to be evicted. However, encroachers need to be provided with alternate residences not very far from the city limits.
• Local fishermen here belong to largely a single caste and could be enlisted to conserve the wetlands and birds. Awareness programs need to be undertaken. The contracts given by the authorities for fishing rights need to be clearly spelt out. Stocking of Tilapia, an exotic invasive which outcomptes native species, could be avoided, since the fishermen source fingerlings largely from the fisheries department. If the industrial pollution is not controlled fishes reared here could eventually become unsuitable for human consumption. • Concrete structures in the form of bunds or roads around the tanks should not be promoted in the name of development. Tourism, involving motor boating, kayaking, which will disturb the birds, should not be promoted in the name of eco/adventure tourism. The 128 crore proposal should be revisited to make it more ecologically sensitive with development plans for the wetlands. • Watch dog committees should be formed for each tank represented by members of civil society groups, researchers, fishermen and local villagers since government agencies have so far miserably failed in their duty to protect the tanks. • Conservation of the tanks can significantly enhance the much wanted and rapidly declining underground water availability in and around the growing city of

Coimbatore. This was one of the major ecological functions of the tanks possibly conceived by the far-sighted Tamil kings in the past. • There has been a plea from local conservationists that the Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Environment & Forests should visit Coimbatore to observe the status of the tanks in person to take appropriate conservation measures.

3.5

AGENDA ITEM PROPOSED BY DR. A.J.T.JOHNSINGH, MEMBER, NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILDLIFE

Taxonomical studies in India – need for a change in thinking Taxonomical studies on the various forms of biota in India have been largely neglected since the independence period. This is particularly true in the cases of mammalian taxonomical studies. Perhaps the last detailed and comprehensive taxonomical study done in India was the one done more than 100 years back by the BNHS, viz, the BNHS Mammal survey from 1907 to 1914. This has brought in considerable amount of useful data on the taxonomy of the Indian Mammals and which later resulted in the publication of the beautifully illustrated and well written book on Indian Mammals, viz. “Book of Indian Animals” by SH Prater in 1971. However, after the BNHS Mammals survey in 1914, there has not been any concerted efforts to study the taxonomy of Indian mammals. Under these circumstances, particularly in the context that we have just celebrated the International Year of Biodiversity in 2010, we should initiate a programme similar to that what was done about 100 years back. A national level drive on systematic collection and taxonomical studies on the Indian Mammals. This has to be a centrally sponsored programme, which should involve networking of various institutions and individual scientists spread across the country. The whole exercise has to be coordinated by one reputed agency .In this context the recommendations of the National Consultation on ‘Advancing the Science of Taxonomy in India for Biodiversity Conservation’, held at Bangalore on 24 February

2010 would be worth considering (Bhaskaranand Priyadarsanan2010Advancing the science of taxonomy in India”, Current Science. 99 : 157-58). This suggestion has come from P.O. NAMEER Ph.D. Associate Professor (Wildlife) & Head, Centre for Wildlife Studies, College of Forestry, Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur.

3.6

AGENDA ITEM PROPOSED BY DR. SHANKAR RAMAN, MEMBER, NATIONAL BOARD FOR WILDLIFE

Guidelines for linear intrusions in natural areas (specifically roads and power lines).
The draft guidelines for linear intrusions in natural areas shall be circulated soon (before 14th September 2011) among the Standing Committee members.

AGENDA ITEM NO.4

4.1. PROPOSALS FOR DIVERSION OF FOREST LANDS OF PAs

FRESH PROPOSAL FOR DIVERSION OF FOREST LAND OF NATIONAL PARKS AND SANCTUARIES.

After the 22nd Meeting of the Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife held on 25th April 2011, twelve proposals have been received in the Wildlife Division.
The proposal for widening and upgradation of National Highway No. 69 from Obaidullahganj to Betul, M.P. which was deferred in last Standing Committee meeting is also placed as item no. 13.

The details of the proposals are at ANNEXURE-IV (page to )

4.2. PROPOSALS FOR TAKING UP ACTIVITIES OUTSIDE BUT WITHIN 10 KM FROM THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROTECTED AREAS

After the 22nd Meeting of the Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife held on 25th April 2011, seven proposals have been received in the Wildlife Division with respect to activities outside but within 10 km from the boundary of the Protected Area.

The details of the proposal are at ANNEXURE-V (page to )

ANNEXURE-IV

PROPOSALS FOR DIVERSION OF FOREST LANDS OF PAs

List of proposals for diversion of forest land from National Parks and Sanctuaries

S. NO. STATE FILE NO. SUBJECT

A&N Islands 6-18/2011 WL

Proposal involving erection of 2mt x 2mt structure within Tillanchang Sanctuary for temporary use of test firing of dummy missile from submarines by Indian Navy, A&N Islands.

A&N Islands

6-67/2011 W L Proposal for investigation & survey involving 5.25 ha of Galathea National Park by Border Roads organization for construction of road from Shastri Nagar to Indira Point, A&N Islands.

A&N Islands 6-73/2011 WL

Permission for installation of Coastal Surveillance RADAR and power supply source at Narcondum Island Sanctuary, A&N Islands involving 0.6736 ha of Narcondam Wildlife Sanctuary

Kerala 6-89/2011 WL Diversion of 0.2583 ha of forest land from Periyar Tiger Reserve for conversion of Ariel High Tension Power Line to underground cable for power supply to Mullaperiyar Dam, Kerala..

Sikkim 6-39/2010 WL-I Diversion of 6.00 ha of forest land from Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary for construction of Skywalk at Bhaleydunga (South) Sikkim.

Rajasthan 6-87/2011 WL

Proposal for repair of Rawatbhata-Jawahar Nagar Road (Periphery Road) 20 MM PMC & Seal Coat under PMGSY (for 24 kms), Rajasthan, involving 15.60 ha of Bhainsroadgarh Sanctuary.

Rajasthan 6-92/2011 WL Permission for diversion of 1.99 ha of forest land falling within the Critical Tiger Habitat of the Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve for construction of channel from Kushalipura Nalla to Mansarowar dam (in length 2010 m) at RD 210 m to 2220 m, Rajasthan.

Uttarakhand 6-1/2003 WL-I (pt) Diversion of 19.5 ha of forest land from Rajaji National Park for use by Shri Raghavendra Sewashram Samiti, and transfer of an equal area of private land to Rajaji National Park.

Maharashtra 6-95/2011 WL Diversion of 0.204 ha of forest land from Gantala Autranghat Wildlife Sanctuary for laying of water pipeline, Maharashtra.

Maharashtra 6-102/2011 WL Renovation of 220 KV old electricity transmission line passing through Tungareshwar Sanctuary and Sanjay Gandhi National Park, Borivali, Maharashtra.

Rajasthan 6-20/2010WL-I (pt) Proposal for clearance of converting earthern shoulder into hard shoulders of existing Beawar (km 58.245) to Gomti chauraha (km 177.00) section from km 58/245 to km 177/000 of NH-8 in Todgarh-Raoli Wildlife Sanctuary, Rajasthan.

Madhya Pradesh 6-47/2011 WL-I The proposal is for rehabilitation and upgradation to lane configuration of Obaidullahganj to Betul Section of National Highway No. 69, at Ratapani Sanctuary, Madhya Pradesh.

(1)

1 Name of the Proposal

The proposal is for erection of structure of 2 mt x 2mt as target for testing missiles from submarine and involves Tillanchang Wildlife Sanctuary, Andaman & Nicobar Islands. 2 Name of the protected Area involved Tillanchang Wildlife Sanctuary 3 File No 6-18/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Andaman & Nicobar Islands

5 Whether proposal is sub-judice Not indicated

6 Area of the protected area 16.83 Sq. Km.

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
Circular error of Probability- 50 m

Approx. area required- 2m x 2m and depth of 0.5 m

Erection of target: maximum dimension of 0.5 m mounted on dismountable platform.

As required by the trial firing parameters for safety, the entire island needs to be isolated of all activity.

8 Name of the applicant agency Indian Navy

9 Total number of trees to be felled NIL 10 Maps depicting the Sanctuary and the diversion proposal included or not
Yes

11 Recommendation of State Board for Wildlife

The State Board for Wildlife has recommended the proposal on 28th March 2011.
12 Brief justification on the proposal as given by the applicant agency.

The proposal is for temporary use of forest land in Tillangchong Island by Indian Navy for missile testing. The proposal involves erection of structure of 2m x 2m as target for testing missiles from submarine. It has been indicated that there will be no impact or little impact on flora and fauna of the Sanctuary.

The Divisional Forest Officer, Nicobar Division, in his site inspection report has mentioned that the area proposed for diversion is 4 Sq. kms whereas the effective requirement of the area is 50 Sq. meters. The DFO has recommended the proposal. The trials/test firing is

proposed to be carried out once every year for a duration of 7 to 10 days.

13 Rare and endangered species found in the area The proposal indicates the presence of Sea Eagle, Cormorant, Sea Tern, Nicobar Pigeon, Skunk, Reticulated Python etc. in the region

14 Opinion of the Chief Wildlife Warden

The Chief Wildlife Warden has recommended the proposal. 15 Comment of Ministry

The Standing Committee may like to take a view on the proposal.

(2)

1 The proposal is for taking up recce survey and investigation in the Galathea National Park by Border Roads Organization for construction of road from Shastri Nagar to Indira Point, A&N Islands.

2 Galathea National Park 3 File No 6-67/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Andaman & Nicobar Islands

5 Not indicated

6 110 Sq. Km.

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
5.25 ha 8 Border Roads Organization

9 NIL 10 Yes 11

The State Board for Wildlife has recommended the proposal on 28th March 2011.

The proposal is to carry out Recce survey for construction of road from Shastri Nagar to Indira Point through Galathea National Park. Indira Point on the Great Nicobar Island is the southernmost tip of Andaman and Nicobar Island territory and is isolated and cut off along the land route due to damage to North-South road by the Tsunami of December 2004.
There is a very large stretch of Air Force land located in the southern part of Great Nicobar island which is not approachable due to damage by Tsunami. The proposed road will, therefore, provide connectivity to the southernmost tip of India which is strategically important from security point of view. Furthermore, this proposed road will also improve management of the Galathea National Park, because at present there is no easy access to the Park due to absence of any road connectivity.

The proposed alignment has been decided, as the alternative alignment entails diversion of forest land that is not only larger in extent (60 ha) but also significantly higher cost of construction.

13 The proposal indicates presence of Giant robber crab, Megapode and Nicobar Pigeon etc. in the area. 14 The Chief Wildlife Warden has recommended the proposal with the following conditions:

The user agency shall not establish any camp in the National Park area.
The officials/workers of User Agency shall not take any cattle/domestic animal inside the Park during the course of execution of the work. 15 Comment of Ministry Proposal relates to providing road connectivity to parts of A&N Islands ravaged by Tsunami in December 2004.

(3)

1 The proposal is for permission for installation of coastal survellience RADAR and Power Supply Source at Narcondam island sanctuary, A&N Islands.

2 Narcondam Island Wildlife Sanctuary 3 File No 6-73/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Andaman & Nicobar Islands

5 Not indicated

6 6.812 Sq.km. 7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
0.6736 ha 8 Indian Coast Guard Headquarters Region, A&N.

9 An area of 0.6736 ha is required to be cleared. However, number of trees required to be felled has not been indicated. 10 Yes 11 The State Board for Wildlife has recommended the proposal on 28.3.2011.

The project is for installation of static radar, power supply source (DG set) and other establishments in Narcondum Island by the Indian Coast Guard for remote monitoring activities all along Indian Coast.

Narcondam Island is located at strategically important location. The area is often frequented by poachers, intruders and also witnesses continuous maritime activities. Therefore, continuous maritime domain awareness is necessary to ensure security of the area. A joint survey was carried out by Coast Guard and BEL to find out the feasibility of setting up the coastal surveillance radar at Narcondam Island. The Team had identified two positions for installation of the radar as well as the DG Set and other associated facilities.

The proposal indicates the presence of Narcondam hornbill, White bellied sea eagle etc

The user agency shall not use the land for any other purpose than the one for which diversion of forest land in the Sanctuary area was sought.
The officials/workers of User Agency shall not take any cattle/domestic animal inside the sanctuary.

15 Comment of Ministry Proposal is related to national and maritime security.

(4) 1 Requirement of 0.2583 ha of forest land of Periyar Tiger Reserve for conversion of Ariel High Tension Power Line to underground cable for power supply to Mullaperiyar Dam, Kerala.

2 Periyar Tiger Reserve (Project site fall under the Core or Critical Tiger Habitat of Periyar TR)

3 File No. 6-89/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Kerala

5 Not indicated

6 777 Sq .km

7 Area proposed for diversion/denotification
0.2583 Ha. 8 K.S.E. Board

9 Not required 10 Maps depicting the sanctuary and the diversion proposal included or not
Yes 11

Recommended on 30.11.2010

The project site is in core or critical tiger habitat of Periyar Tiger Reserve. The present proposal is only for digging trench for underground cabling (11 KV) in a length of 5.165 km, with 1m. depth and 50 cm width and filling with earth after laying the cable. The area proposed for digging trench is along the edge of the road that leads from Vallakkadavu -4th Mile Road to Mullaperiyar Dam, having no vegetation except a few eucalyptus stands. The proposal involves dismantling the existing overhead 11 KV line and providing an underground 11 KV line for supply to the Mullaperiyar dam site.

Tiger, Elephant, Guar, Leopard, Wild dog, Malabar Giant Squirrel etc

14 The Chief Wildlife Warden had recommended the proposal subject to the following conditions:

(i) Instruments/machinery that cause noise shall be avoided as it will disturb the wildlife there.

(ii) The work should remain suspended between 5.00 PM and 8.00 AM on all days and workers should leave the place before 6.00 PM.

(iii) Camping of the workers cannot be permitted inside the Protected Area/work site and it shall be illegal to cook food/making fire/collecting firewood or any other resources from the Protected Area.

(iv) The supervisory staff shall comply with Section 27 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

(v) The Department that is executing the work shall comply with all provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

(vi) The work shall be completed within the specified timeframe.

(vii) The trenching and filling would be done simultaneously.

(viii) Kerala Forest Department will not be responsible for any untoward incident due to
wildlife attack or otherwise.

(ix) Overhead line at the dam site should be minimum and lights will be allowed in
houses and inside the camp.

(x) Once the work is completed, road will be closed and will not be open for inspection or regular entry.

(xi) Any kind of littering at the work site shall be avoided.

(xii) Care should be taken that the workers should abstain from using loud musical instruments, liquor etc. in the camp site.

(xiii) The Chief Wildlife Warden while recommending the proposal has also indicated that other alternatives for power viz, solar energy, wind energy may be enough for the benefit of the staff and maintenance. The proposal for the high tension 11 KV connection may be intended for raising the water level of the Periyar lake which would be against the interest of the wildlife and biodiversity there and also would be against the interest of Kerala State considering the safety aspects of the dam which has already been questioned.

15 Comments of NTCA

The transmission line has caused deaths of elephants and tiger in the past. The construction of 5.165 km of 11 KV underground cable line alongwith road, without involving the tree felling, may be considered favourably.

(5)

Development of Skywalk for promotion of Wildlife Tourism” at Bhalleydhunga, Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary, South Sikkim.

Name of the Protected Area involved Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary 3. File No. 6-39/2010 WL-I 4. Name of the State Sikkim

Not indicated

Area of the Protected Area 35.34 Sq km

Area proposed for diversion/denotification 2.10 ha

Tourism & Civil Aviation Department

Total number of trees to be felled Not mentioned in the proposal

Maps depicting the Sanctuary and the diversion proposal included or not Yes 11.

Yes, Recommended on 20.5.2010

Brief Justification on the proposal as given by the applicant agency

The proposal is for development of Skywalk and Ropeway for promotion of Wildlife Tourism at Bhalleydhunga, Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary, South Sikkim and involves 2.10 ha of forest land from Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary. The development of eco-tourism infrastructure named “Skywalk and Ropeway” at Bhaleydunga, South Sikkim is a unique eco tourism destination product planned in consonance with the natural landscape of the area. The Skywalk is a site- specific project as Bhaleydunga being the only imposing and highest peak in the surrounding hills at the location. The Bhaleydunga peak falls inside the Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary and no other suitable alternative for the project is available. This project would achieve threefold objectives, viz, environment, social and economic.

The proposal involves construction of an environment friendly glass bottom cantilever Skywalk beyond the edge of Bahheydhunga with rain shelter and public conveniences at the Bhalleydunga peak. An area of 0.90 ha of the Maenam Sanctuary would be required for this purpose. Further, an eco-friendly ropeway has been proposed for access to Bhalleydunga Peak from the base area called Mahadeo Than. The total land requirement for the Ropeway in the Maenam Sanctuary is 1.20 ha.

The project would not disrupt the regional ecology and natural habitat of the area and has been strategically planned to blend with the regional environs that would eventually earn large scale revenue for the state not only to sustain the project but also to support the wildlife zone and forest cover in the region.

Red panda, Musk deer, Leopard, Himalayan black bear etc. 14. Opinion of Chief Wildlife Warden i. No labour camps will be permitted to be set up inside the sanctuary.

ii. All workers need to obtain permits for working in the project site inside the sanctuary.

iii. Construction materials should be stored in the identified area.

iv. No felling of tree or destruction of wildlife habitat, exploitation or removal of any wildlife including forest produce from the sanctuary should take place.

v. The project should be completed within the stipulated period.

vi. Authorized sanctuary personnel will check the construction sites as and when required.

vii. The project implementing authorities and workers will obey Dos and Don’ts of the sanctuary.

viii. All tourism receipts collected from the development in the sanctuary should go to the Eco-Development Committee fund of the sanctuary in the proportion of 70% for community benefit works and 30% for Sanctuary management/development activity. It is consistent with the policy imperatives laid down in the National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016) (Refer to VIII ensuring People’s Participation in Wildlife Conservation).

Comments of Ministry

The proposal was considered by the Standing Committee of NBWL in its meeting held on 13th October 2010. Since the Committee did not find merit in the proposal from the point of view of wildlife conservation and also since the proposal was not site specific, it was rejected.

Subsequently, the PCCF cum Secretary has resubmitted this revised proposal on 28th May 2011 for development of skywalk for promotion of wildlife tourism at Bhalleydhunga, Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary, South Sikkim for reconsideration of proposal for Standing Committee of NBWL as according to him the project promotes the concept of ecotourism benefiting the local communities.

(6)

1 Repair of Rawatbhata-Jawahar Nagar Road (Periphery Road) 20 MM PMC & Seal Coat under PMGSY (for 24 kms) 2 Bhainsroadgarh Wildlife Sanctuary 3 File No 6-87 /2011 WL

4 Name of the state Rajasthan

5 Not indicated

6 229.14 Sq. Km.

7 Area proposed for diversion/denotification
15.60 Ha. 8 PWD

9 The proposal indicates that no trees will be affected.

10 Maps depicting the sanctuary and the Yes 11

Recommended on 22.09.2010

The proposal is for repair of Rawatbhata-Jawahar Nagar Road (Periphery Road) 20 MM PMC & Seal Coat under PMGSY (for 24 kms). The total land required for this purpose is 15.60 ha forest land. This road is badly damaged and requires urgent repairing. The villagers of this area have created several katcha paths through forest area which is disturbing the habitat and wildlife. Repair of this road will reduce the disturbance from villages by closing the katcha paths and hence improving the habitat.

Panther, Python, Wolf, Bear, Jackal etc.

The Chief Wildlife Warden had recommended the proposal with the following conditions:

i. No night camping shall be allowed during the construction of road by labour and

construction activity will be permitted only during day time only. ii. No construction material should be stored in sanctuary boundary. iii. No construction material, like stone, sand, etc should be taken from the Sanctuary or forest area iv. To check the speed of the vehicles, speed breakers will be constructed at an interval of 500 mts. in sanctuary area by user agency. v. The underpass should be constructed by user agency at an interval of 1 km. vi. The user agency will put and maintain signboard on both sides of the road mentioning that the road is passing through sanctuary. vii. Plantations in three rows on both the sides along the road, should be maintained by user agency. viii. No tree cutting will be allowed. ix. The user agency will not create barrow pit in sanctuary area, for the construction of road. x. User agency will clear all the debris left after construction activity.

15 The proposal indicates repair of road only. However, it appears to be a case repair and widening of road which requires 15.60 ha of forest land.

(7)

1 Permission for covering of diversion channel from Kushalipura Nalla to Mansarowar dam (in length 2010 m) at RD 210 m to 2220 m, Rajasthan.

2 Diversion of channel lies outside the Sawai Mansingh Sanctuary and the Ranthambhore National Park.

3 File No. 6-92/2011 WL

4 Name of the State Rajasthan

5 Not indicated

6 Critical Tiger Habitat: 111.3364 Sq. Kms

Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve: 139.4478 Sq. Kms

7 Area proposed for diversion/denotification
1.99 ha 8 Water Resource Department

9 Already 598 trees out of 892 have been felled on the basis of the approval by Government of India
dated 24.09.2008 under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Work started on 19/04/2011. Felling of 598 trees out of 892 trees done and excavation done in length of 1.2 kms. Work has been stopped on 14/05/2011 under the directions of the CF & Field Director-Ranthambore.
10 Maps depicting the sanctuary and the diversion proposal included or not
Yes 11

The proposal has been approved by the Standing Committee of the State Board for Wildlife on 13.6.2011.

The proposal is for construction of a diversion channel from Kushalipura Nallah to Mansarovar Dam so as to provide irrigation facilities to farmers by improving water storage capacity in Mansarovar dam by diverting the water from Kushalipura Nallah to Mansarovar which is flowing to Chambal river, at present. As a result of this diversion channel, the

Mansarovar dam would receive 77 million cu.ft additional supply of water.

As per the Site Inspection Report of the Field Director, Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve, the proposal had received ‘in principle’ approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 on 14.11.2005, while the final approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 was received on 24.09.2008. The work had started in April 2011 and as per the final sanction, 598 trees out of 892 trees were felled and approx. 1.2 kms of channel has been dug by the Irrigation Department until it was stopped on 14.05.2011. The area falls within the Critical Tiger Habitat and is also a Reserved Forest. The existing Kushalipura Nallah flows through the Sawai Mansingh Sanctuary on the right side of the highway.

Tiger, Leopard, Hyena, Jackal, etc.

The Chief Wildlife Warden had recommended the proposal with the following conditions:-

i. Chainage 60 m to 210 m. All along this part of channel, there is a hill on one side and a road on the other. The user agency must construct a masonry retaining wall having a height of 6` along the length of the channel towards the road side.

ii. Chainage 210 m to 2220 m: the diversion channel will be constructed underground and covered by an arch cover. The channel should be covered by a layer of soil with a minimum depth of 60 cm so that the area looks natural. Moderate tapering slopes would be maintained on both side of the arch cover between 210 m to 870 m to facilitate movement of wild animals.

iii. Chainage 2220 m to 2700 m: the diversion channel will be an open channel with a side slope of 1:1. 15 Comments of NTCA The proposal has been already sanctioned by the Government of India and 899 trees in the proposed 1.99 ha have already been felled. The area falls under the core area of the Ranthambore Tiger Reserve. It has been proposed that between RD 210 to 2200 m., the diversion channel would be covered, hence would not cause any hindrance to the animal movement. Between RD 2200 to 2700 m. the channel would be open with 1:1 slope.

(8) 1 Diversion of 19.503 ha of forest land from Rajaji National Park for the use of Shri Raghavendra Sewashram Samiti for construction of a hospital. 2 Rajaji National Park 3 File No 6-1/2003 WL-I

4 Name of the state Uttarakhand

5 No. However, previously IA No. 20 was filed which directed that the matter be placed before the Standing Committee of NBWL for consideration (Details in comments of Ministry)

6 820.42 Sq. Km.

7 Area proposed for diversion/denotification
19.503 Ha.

8 Shri Raghvendra Sewashram Samiti, Haridwar.

9 Not mentioned in the proposal. 10 Maps depicting the sanctuary and the Not included 11

Not mentioned in the proposal.

Shri Raghvendra Sewashram Samiti had about 4 acres of land adjacent to the northern boundary of Rajaji National Park, on lease since 1976. The Samiti had sought extension of lease in 1985 and had also deposited the renewal fee in 2001 but no decision was forthcoming. Thereafter, it was informed that prior permission of MoEF would be required for extension of the lease. Accordingly, the Samiti had framed a proposal wherein it was proposed that an area of 19.5 ha of the thin strip of irregular width of land South East of the railway line (including 4 acres which had been with the Samiti since 1976 and which was now a Gaushala with about 500 cows) should be given to the Samiti in exchange for an equal area of private land contiguous to Rajaji National Park and which is considered fit for afforestation and for developing as a habitat for wildlife. In the letter of the Commissioner, Forests and Village Development, Government of Uttarakhand, it has been indicated that the diversion of the proposed land would be beneficial for wildlife due to the following reasons:

(i) The land that has been proposed to be handed over to the Forest Department in lieu of the 19.503 ha is very important from the wildlife conservation point of view.

(ii) The applicant has agreed for compensatory afforestation and other charges for wildlife conservation, for the 19.503 ha of land sought for.

(iii) The applicant has agreed to create a fence/barrier along the northern portion of the 4 Kms stretch of railway line passing from Haridwar to Motichur so that wildlife, especially elephants, would not cross over the railway lines.

(iv) The applicant has also agreed for creation of water holes in the sensitive areas over the railway line falling in the boundary of the Rajaji National Park.

(v) It has also been proposed by the applicant that, if the price of land is higher than that has been fixed by the Forest Department, then the difference in the rate would also be borne by them.

The Applicant has also indicated that the Standing Committee had not taken into consideration the EIA carried out by the Zoological Survey of India during 2006.

13 Elephant, Tiger, Leopard, etc.

14 The Chief Wildlife Warden had recommended the proposal earlier. 15 (i) An IA No. 20 had been filed by Shri Raghavendra Sewashram Samiti seeking diversion of 19.503 ha of forest land falling within Rajaji National Park. Hon’ble Supreme Court had referred the said IA for consideration of the Standing Committee of IBWL vide order dated 9th May 2002. The proposal was, accordingly, considered by the Standing Committee of IBWL in its meeting held on 12th July 2002, wherein it was rejected. (ii) The applicants had again approached the Hon’ble Court for re-consideration and, therefore, it was again referred to the Standing Committee of NBWL vide their order dated 7th November 2003. Accordingly, the proposal was re-considered by the Standing Committee of NBWL in its meeting held on 24th December 2003, wherein it was again rejected. (iii) Hon’ble Supreme Court while hearing the case on 12th March 2004, had directed that the relief claimed in the application cannot be granted and the I.A is accordingly dismissed. (iv) Thereafter, the applicants approached the Ministry with a request that they be heard by the Standing Committee. In view of this, the matter was once again considered by the Standing Committee in its meeting held on 6th April 2005 wherein the applicant had made a presentation. Thereafter, it was decided that a team comprising Shrimati Maya Singh, the then Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha) and Shri Ravi Singh, both members, Standing Committee of NBWL, would conduct site inspection and submit a report. (v) Both, Shrimati Maya Singh and Shri Ravi Singh had submitted two different reports. The reports were considered by the Standing Committee of NBWL in its meeting held on

20th January 2006. After discussion, since there was a difference of opinion among the members on the subject, Hon’ble Chairman decided to go by the majority view and therefore, the proposal was not recommended. (vi) The applicant had, thereafter, approached the Prime Minister’s Office seeking a relief in the decision of the Standing Committee of NBWL. The PMO had sought this Ministry’s comments on the proposal. In response, the Ministry vide U.O. note dated 25.7.2008 had indicated that since the proposal was rejected twice by the Standing Committee of NBWL and also by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it would not be prudent for the Ministry to recommend/reject the proposal. (vii) The Standing Committee had considered the proposal during its 21st meeting held on 25th April 2011 wherein the Chairman desired that the proposals which had earlier been rejected by the Standing Committee/Court should not be included in the agenda, unless any additional information or new facts had been provided by the State Government in respect of the proposal.

In the meanwhile, State Government (CM, Uttarakhand) has written for reconsideration of the proposal by the Standing Committee of NBWL as according to him the 19.503 ha of forest land proposed for diversion would be utilized for construction of a hospital which would provide medical facilities for local people. According to him, Raghavendra Sewashram Samiti has proposed for creating 4 km fence on north side of Rajaji National Park which would check the accidents of elephants in the area.

(9) 1

Diversion of 0.204 ha of forest land from Gantala Autranghat Wildlife Sanctuary for laying of water pipeline, Maharashtra. 2 Gantala Autranghat Wildlife Sanctuary 3 File No 6-95/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Maharashtra

5 Not indicated

260.61 sq kms 7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
0.204 ha 8 M/s Nirmal Seeds Pvt. Ltd, Jalgaon.

9 Total number of tree to be felled Nil 10 Yes

11 Yes recommended on 28th June 2011.

12 The proposal is for diversion of 0.204 ha of forest land from Gantala Autranghat Wildlife Sanctuary, Maharashtra for laying a water pipeline by digging a linear strip for 3400 mts length with a width of 0.60 mts. The main purpose of laying the water pipe is to implement water supply scheme for Kolsawadi village in Aurangabad District. The pipeline will be largely passing through those areas of the Gautala Autramghat Sanctuary along the district road 183 which forms a part of tourism zone of sanctuary. Since the work involves laying of pipeline underground and covering it completely with restoration of the surface, entire work will be completed within 7 to 15 days. There is likely to be only temporary disturbance of digging in the Wildlife sanctuary area. 13 The proposal indicates the presence of leopard, Hyena, Wolf, Jackal, Jungle Cat, Barking deer, Chinkara, Porcupine, Hares etc.

The project authorities should provide funds for vegetation restoration over restored ditch surface (to be decided by Chief Wildlife Warden);
The project implementing agency should construct 5 waterholes, as designed by wildlife

authorities; 3. The agency should also provide water for filling up these waterholes free of cost as per the schedule given by the Protected Area Manager ever year 15

The Standing Committee may like to take a view on the proposal

(10) 1

Renovation of 220 KV old electricity transmission line passing through Tungareshwar Sanctuary and Sanjay Gandhi National Park Borivali, Maharashtra. 2 Tungareshwar Sanctuary and Sanjay Gandhi National Park 3 File No 6-102/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Maharashtra

5 Not indicated

6 85.70 Sq. Km of Tungareshwar Sanctuary & 86.96 sq km of Sanjay Gandhi NP.

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
Nil 8 Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd.

9 Not mentioned in the proposal 10 Yes

11 Yes recommended on 28th June 2011.

12 The proposal is for renovation of existing 220 KV old electricity transmission line by replacing the old towers with new improved towers. The transmission line passes through Borivali and Tungareshwar sanctuary. The transmission lines exist since 1964, so no new diversion of land is proposed. The project is for construction/renovation of existing transmission line using same corridor. No tree cutting/felling is required. The existing tower area is 9mX9m on ground, whereas proposed new tower area would be 5.6mX5.6m, thereby reducing the ground area occupied.

13 The proposal indicates the presence of Indian Rock Python, Indian Marsh Crocodile, Leopard, Jungle Cat, Rusty Spotted Cat, Spotted Deer etc.

1.No blasting or excavation or taking away material from the site for erection of towers will be
permitted. 2. No construction activities shall be carried during night time.

Clearing and proper maintenance of fireline below transmission line.
All construction material to be used shall be brought from outside and no material from
National Park/Sanctuary area shall be used.
The excavated pit area shall be properly fenced so as to avoid injury/death of wild animals. 15 Comment of Ministry

(11)

1 Proposal for clearance of converting earthern shoulders into hard shoulders of existing Beawar (km 58.245) to Ghomti chauraha (km 177.00) section from km 58/245 to km 177/000 of NH-8 in Todgarh- Raoli Wildlife Sanctuary. 2 Todgarh-Raoli Wildlife Sanctuary 3 File No 6-20/2010 WL-I (pt) 4 Name of the state Rajasthan

5 Not indicated 6 495.27 Sq. kms

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
11.541 ha 8 Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MORT & H)/PWD Rajasthan.

9 If necessary clearing of only small bushes required at some places.

10 Yes 11 Recommendation of State Board for wildlife The State Board for Wildlife has recommended the proposal on 22.09.2010.

The proposal is for widening of NH-8 existing road which is already in use. The Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MORT & H), Government of India has decided to take up the improvement of Beawar (km 58.245) to Gomti Chauraha (km 177.00) section of NH-8 having length of 118 km where the intensity of traffic has increased significantly and there is requirement of augmentation of capacity for safe and efficient movement of traffic. Improvement of Beawar (km 58.245) to Gomti Chauraha (km 177.00) section includes conversion of earthen side shoulders into paved shoulders of existing two lane road within existing Right of Way of PWD. The project road stretch between Bheruguda village (km 148.0) and Bassi village (km 160.44) having length of 12.44 km is passing through Tadgarh-Raoli Wildlife Sanctuary in Rajsamand district. Between chainage 152.5 km and 152.650 km for a length of 150m at Chhapli village, protected forest exists on both sides of project road under Chhapli forest block. Hence, a minor forest area of 0.3450 ha is required for proposed project. The strip in the form of notified protected forest (P.F.) exists along the project road from km 148.0 km to 160.44 within sanctuary area, which is required for the widening. The area required for clearance under notified protected forest within sanctuary area is 11.196 ha. Therefore, proposal for forest clearance within sanctuary (11.541 ha) is submitted. Hence, total area for clearance within sanctuary is 11.541 ha.

13 Leopard, Sloth bear, Wolf, Hyena, etc.

The Chief Wildlife Warden while recommending the proposal has indicated that the NH-8 Section from Bheraguda village (148 Km) to Bassi village (160.44 km) falls in Todgarh Raoli Sanctuary and the upgradation and widening of NH-8 in this stretch requires forest area of 11.541 ha from the Sanctuary. The proposal has been recommended with the following conditions:

No night camping shall be allowed during the construction of road by labour and construction activity will be permitted only during day time only.
No construction material should be stored within Sanctuary boundary.
No construction material should be taken from sanctuary or forest area like sand, soil and stone etc.
User agency should pay 5% amount of the project cost for the better management of Sanctuary.
To check the speed of vehicles, speed breakers will be constructed at an interval of 500 mts in Sanctuary area by user agency
The underpasses should be constructed by User agency at an interval of 1 km.
The User agency will put and maintain signboard on both sides of the road mentioning that the road is passing through Sanctuary.
Plantations in three rows on both sides along the road should be maintained by User Agency.
On both sides of the road boundary, pucca wall of about 1.8 mts height should be constructed by the User agency in consultation with PA incharge (DCF).
No tree cutting will be allowed.
The User agency will not create barrow pit in Sanctuary area, for the construction of road.
User agency will clear all the debris left after construction is over.

15 Comment of Ministry The proposal was considered by the Standing Committee of NBWL in its 21st meeting held on 24th January 2011 wherein the Committee decided not to permit any widening of the road. The decision of the Standing Committee as per the minutes of the 21st Meeting for the same proposal is as follows: “The Committee decided not to permit any widening of the road. However, measures for improving the road safety could be undertaken including strengthening of the shoulders with gravel”.

(12)

1 The proposal is for rehabilitation and upgradation to lane configuration of Obaidullahganj to Betul Section of National Highway No. 69, at Ratapani Sanctuary, Madhya Pradesh
2 Name of the Protected Area involved Ratapani Sanctuary
3 File No.
6-47/2011 WL 4 Name of the State Madhya Pradesh 5 No. 6 Area of the Protected Area 823.84 sq. km. 7 Area proposed for diversion/denotification Total 43.35 ha is proposed for diversion. 15.15 ha is already in road usage for NH69 which passes through Ratapani Sanctuary. Total 58.50 ha area proposed for upgradation in PA. 8 Name of the applicant Agency National highway Authority of India
9 Total number of trees to be felled.
2555 10 Maps depicting the PA and diversion proposed included or not Yes 11 Recommendation of State Board for Wildlife Yes, recommended on 07.03.2011 12 Brief Justification of the proposal as given by the applicant agency -

The proposed project is to improve connectivity between Bhopal and Nagpur by catering to the needs of the heavy traffic. The highway also connects Bhopal to other parts of the State and helps in increase in the speed of the vehicle and reduces accidents. With increasing traffic, it is essential to upgrade and widen it. At present NH 69 is 2 lane which is proposed to be upgraded to 4 lane. 13 Critical and endangered species found in the area Tiger, Leopard, and prey base. 14 Opinion of the Chief Wildlife Warden The proposal is recommended by CWLW. Further, taking into consideration the safety of animals, the SWLB has prescribed underpasses and speed breakers according to international standards and practices. Following conditions are proposed by the CWLW: i. Construction of Flyover Bridge in 10% length of the total length passing through Ratapani Sanctuary, so as

to provide underpass to the wildlife. ii. Left out length of Flyover Bridge in Ratapani Sanctuary is to be fenced on both sides with chain link fencing along the NH69. iii. Sound absorbing systems to be installed near each flyover bridge in sanctuary. 15 Comments of the Ministry There are around 100 families in the area that are to be displaced which includes 14 SC families and 9 ST families. The proposal was also tabled in the last NBWL meeting, and was deferred for consideration of this Standing Committee meeting. The Committee may like to deliberate on the proposal.

ANNEXURE-V

PROPOSALS WITHIN 10 KMS FROM BOUNDARIES OF NATIONAL PARKS AND WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES

LIST OF PROPOSALS WITHIN 10 KMS OF THE BOUNDARIES OF NATIONAL PARKS AND SANCTUARIES TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE STANDING COMMITTEE OF NBWL

S. NO. STATE FILE NO. SUBJECT 1. Andhra Pradesh 6-15/2011 WL

Diversion of 477.03 ha of forest land in Kondapuram RF of Paloncha Division for Kondapuram UG Mine Project Manuguru in favour of SCCL-Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Andhra Pradesh falling within 4.25 kma from the boundary of Kinnersani Wildlife Sanctuary, Andhra Pradesh. 2. Arunachal Pradesh 6-79/2011 WL Construction of 1750 MW Demwe Lower HE project in Lohit District, Arunachal Pradesh located outside the boundaries of Kamlang Wildlife Sanctuary, Arunachal Pradesh. 3. Jammu & Kashmir 6-93/2011 WL

Proposal to exploit 1240000 TPA High Grade Magenesite Deposit at Chipprian Hills, and setting up 30000 TPA Dead Burnt Magnesia Plant at Panthal, near Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary at Katra District Reasi, J&K–proposal is 3 Km from boundary of Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary, J&K. 4. Maharashtra 6-111/2010 WL-I

The proposal is for construction of Baglinga M.I. project at Baglinga Tq.Chikhaldara Distt. Amravati, Maharashtra. 5. Maharashtra 6-96/2011 WL

Laying of 400 KV electric transmission line through Matheran Eco-sensitive zone, Maharashtra. 6.
Maharashtra 6-94/2011 WL

The proposal is for establishment of steel plant and electricity generation unit as an extension project of M/s Welspun Max Steel Company in the non- forest area within 10 km of Phansad Wildlife Sanctuary, Maharashtra. 7. Uttarakhand 6-88/2011 WL The proposal is for diversion of 26.86 ha of forest land from Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary (within 10 kms radius of the boundary of Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary) for mining activity by M/s Adi Gold Mining Pvt. Ltd., Uttarakhand.

(1) 1 The proposal is for diversion of 477.03 ha of forest land in Kondapuram RF of Paloncha Division for Kondapuram underground Mine Project Manuguru in favour of SCCL- Singareni Collieries Company Limited.

2 4.70 Kms from Kinnerasani Wildlife Sanctuary

3 File No.

6-15/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Andhra Pradesh

5 No

6 635.45 Sq. Kms

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
477.03 ha 8 Singareni Collieries Company Ltd (SCCL)

9 Not required. 10 Yes 11

The State Board for Wildlife has recommended the proposal.

The proposal is for diversion of 477.03 ha of forest land in Kondapuram RF of Paloncha Division for Kondapuram underground Mine Project Manuguru in favour of SCCL- Singareni Collieries Company Limited. The proposed mine site is 4.70 Kms from the boundary of the Kinnersani Wildlife Sanctuary. The Environmental Clearance for the project was accorded on 5th March 2010 with one of the specific condition being that mining shall not be undertaken until the approval of the Standing Committee of NBWL is obtained since the proposed mine is within 5 kms distance from Kinnersani Wildlife Sanctuary.

It has been indicated that 8.30 MT of coal is to be extracted from the proposed underground mine and coal would be evacuated from underground to surface bunker through series of belt conveyors and thereby to Konadupram by trucks. The proposal also indicates that as part of the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), the Singareni Collieries Company Ltd (SCCL) is intending to provide protection in buffer areas to the Kinnersani

Sanctuary by providing suitable assistance like engaging protection watchers and digging up water holes.

The proposal does not indicate the names of the rare and endangered species in the Sanctuary area. However, the website of the Kinnersani Wildlife Sanctuary of Andhra Pradesh Forest Department indicates that the Sanctuary is the home for Tigers, Panthers, Gaurs, Chinkaras, etc

The Chief Wildlife Warden has recommended the proposal with the following condition:

Wildlife habitat amelioration plan will be prepared by the user agency with the approval of Chief Wildlife Warden at a cost not less than Rs.10 per ton of coal removed by the user agency. This will be implemented by Wildlife Wing for the period of the mine.

(2) 1 The proposal is for construction of 1750 MW Demwe Lower HE project in Lohit District, Arunachal Pradesh located outside the boundaries of Kamlang Wildlife Sanctuary, Arunachal Pradesh.

2 Kamlang Wildlife Sanctuary 3 File No 6-79/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Arunachal Pradesh

5 No

6 783 Sq.km.

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
No diversion of land from Kamlang Wildlife Sanctuary. The project falls within 10 km radius from the boundary of Kamlang Wildlife Sanctuary (8.5 kms aerial distance)

8 M/s Athena Demwe Power Ltd.

9 The proposal indicates clearing of 43,000 trees in 1415.92 ha of forest land.

10 Yes 11

The State Board for Wildlife has recommended the proposal on 27.5.2011.

The 1750 MW Demwe Lower Hydroelectric Project is being executed in joint sector with the Government of Arunachal Pradesh. The Ministry of Power has scheduled the project for commissioning in the 12th Five Year Plan. The project would contribute green energy of about 6322 million units (MU) per annum. After 40 years, the project will be handed over to the State Government. This is a run-of-the-river project with diurnal pondage and is at an advanced stage of development as all major statutory clearances are in place. The detailed project report (DPR) was concurred in by the Central Electricity Authority in November 2009. The proposal has obtained Environmental Clearance in February 2010. The proposal for diversion of 1415.92 ha (surface 1408.3 ha +7.62 ha underground) of forest land for the

project was recommended by the Forest Advisory Committee in May 2010. The Full Reservoir Level (FRL) and Maximum Water Level (MWL) of the project have been kept at EL.424.8m to ensure no submergence in the Kamleng Wildlife Sanctuary. The total land involved for the construction of the said project is about 1589.97 ha, out of which 502.92 ha is River bed area, 174.05 ha is community agricultural land, 713.63 ha is community owned private land with Jhumming rights and 199.37 ha is Reserved Forest land. The proposed dam site around 8.5 kms aerial distance from the nearest boundary of Kamleng Wildlife Sanctuary on the Lang river.

The proposal indicates that the Kamleng Wildlife Sanctuary is home to the Hoolock gibbon, tiger, leopard, capped langur, red panda etc.

i. Various measures recommended by the Expert Appraisal Committee, MoEF as a part of Environmental clearance under Biodiversity Conservation & Wildlife Management Plan of the Project shall be implemented in consultation with State Forests & Wildlife management Department in line of guidelines of KWLS.

ii. KWLS shall be kept outside the submergence area and all possible measures should be adopted for compliance of the same.

iii. Mitigation measures and management plans suggested in the Environmental Management Plan Report and approved by MoEF as a part of Environmental Clearance of the project should be adopted and implemented during construction period.

iv. For effective implementation and monitoring of the Wildlife Management Plan of the Project, a Conservation Cell comprising of Chief Wildlife Warden, Officer in charge of the KWLS, DFOs of concerned Forest Division, Wildlife/Ecology Experts, Panchayats Representative of the area, Representatives from Demwe Lower HEP etc may be constituted.

v. Control blasting techniques should be adopted at dam site for minimal disturbance.

vi. Appropriate awareness schemes/programmes with adequate budget shall be prepared to reduce the Jhum Cultivation practices in the local area.

vii. As project falls in downhill area, every measure proposed in EMP for soil conservation shall be taken up.

15 The project involves felling of a large number of trees (43,000) but outside the Kamlang Wildlife Sanctuary. Forest and Environment clearances have been granted for the project.

(3)

1 Proposal to exploit 1240000 TPA High Grade Magnesite Deposit at Chipprian Hills, and setting up 30000 TPA Dead Burnt Magnesia Plant at Panthal, near Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary at Katra District Reasi, J&K.

2 Name of the protected area involved Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary 3 File No 6-93/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Jammu & Kashmir

5 No

6 27.75 sq.kms

7 Area proposed for diversion/denotification
Non-forest private land under ownership of Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board located 3 Km from boundary of Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary. As per information provided by NMDC in the project proposal, the mine lease area is 485.30 ha out of which only 17.92 ha of area is for mining of Magnesite. The Standing Committee of NBWL, in its 22nd meeting held on 25.04.2011 recommended denotification of the Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary with some conditions.

8 J&K Mineral Development Corporation Limited.

9 Nil 10 Maps depicting the sanctuary and the Yes 11

The State Board for Wildlife in its meeting held on 28.6.2011 has recommended the proposal.

12 Brief justification of the proposal as given by the applicant agency.

The proposal is to exploit 1240000 TPA High Grade Magnesite Deposit at Chipprian Hills, and setting up 30000 TPA Dead Burnt Magnesia Plant at Panthal, near Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary at Katra District Reasi, J&K. The magnesite mine pit is situated at Chipran hills near Panthal village and is at a distance of three kilometers from Trikuta Wildlife Sanctuary. The Dead Burnt Magnesite (DBM) plant is 4.5 km from the Sanctuary.

13 The proposal indicates presence of Leopard, Goral, Peafowl etc. in the Sanctuary.

(a) The general protection measures and the specific conserving measures prescribed in the Wildlife conservation Plan i.e., soil and moisture specific habitats, management of grassland and meadows, activation of anti poaching squad and awareness activities, eco development works shall be carried out through the State Wildlife Department in the buffer zone at a cost of Rs.25.00 lakhs per annum for a period of 5 years, i.e., Rs.125.00 lakhs over a period of 5 years.

(b) The progressive mine closure plan will be implemented by the user agency.

(c) The user agency while implementing the magnesite mining project will abide by the stipulations under Environment Protection Act, 1986 prescribed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests.

(4) 1 The proposal is for construction of Baglinga M.I. project at Baglinga Tq. Chikhaldara Distt. Amravati, Maharashtra. 2 8.5 km away from core area of Melghat Tiger Reserve 3 File No.

6-111/2010 WL-I

4 Name of the state Maharashtra

5 No

6 1677 sq.km

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
14.75 ha (11.88 ha is reserve forest & 2.87 ha from identified forest)

8 Water Resources Department

9 721 trees to be felled 10 Yes

Not mentioned in the proposal
12 The proposal is for construction of Baglinga M.I. project at Baglinga is situated in compartment no.26 of East Melghat Forest Division. The project area is 14.75 ha reserved forest having 709 trees which is within proposed buffer area of Melghat Tiger Reserve. The project area is close to the outer boundary area and is more than 8.5 km away from the core area of Melghat Tiger Reserve.

13 Leopard, Hyena, Blue Bull, Napped Hare and Barking Deer etc

14 For water storage works in catchments area, 2% of the project cost shall be provided by the Agency.

15 Comments of NTCA The minor irrigation project involves 14.75 ha forest land in the buffer area of Melghat Tiger Reserve, which is 1.5 km inside the boundary of the buffer and 8.5 km away from the core area. The project would also elicit public support in the wildlife conservation in the buffer area. Therefore, the proposal may be considered favourably.

(5) 1 Laying of 400 KV electric transmission line through Matheran Eco-sensitive zone, Maharashtra.

2 Matheram Eco-sensitive zone (Buffer zone of 200 mts from boundaries)

3 File No.

6-96/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Maharashtra

5 No

6 214.73 Sq. Kms

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
Nil, Matheran Eco-sensitive zone (Buffer zone of 200 mts from boundaries) 8 Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

9 Nil 10 Yes 11 The State Board for Wildlife has recommended the proposal on 28th June 2011.

12 Brief justification on the proposal as given by the applicant agency The proposal is for laying of 400 KV transmission line through Matheram Eco-sensitive zone. The proposed transmission line passes along one side of Sensitive Zone-North and North West side very close to Ambernath M.I.D.C. area. West side is very close to Taloja MIDC area. Both are fast developing M.I.D.C. in Maharashtra. The project site does not form part of any sanctuary or National Park. The project involves only overhead transmission line supported by intermittent structures. There will be minimum pressure on forest, that is also for short time and the elevated position of the line helps free movement of wildlife in the area without any hindrance or obstruction.

13 The proposal indicates the presence of Wild Boar, Barking Deer, Mongoose etc.

14 The Chief Wildlife Warden has recommended the proposal.

(6)

Establishment of steel plant and electricity generation unit as an extension project of M/s Welspun Max Steel Company in the non-forest area within 10 km of Phansad Wildlife Sanctuary, Maharashtra. 2 Phansad Wildlife Sanctuary
3 File No 6-94/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Maharashtra

5 No

6 52.73 Sq. Km.

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
The proposed project area is about 4.7 km away from the northern boundary of the Phansad Wildlife Sanctuary. 8 M/s Welspun Max Steel Company

9 Not mentioned in the proposal 10 Yes

11 Yes, recommended on 28.6.2011.

12 Brief justification of the proposal as given by the applicant agency. The proposal is for establishment of steel plant and electricity generation unit over 350 ha as an extension project of M/s Welspun Max Steel Company in the non-forest area within 10 km of Phansad Wildlife Sanctuary, as an extension to its existing sponge iron plant at village Salav in, Raigarh District. The said steel plant is situated along the sea coast adjoining Phansand Sanctuary and Revdanda, and is situated at about 4.7 km from Phansand sanctuary which is less than 10 Kms from the boundary of Sanctuary. The expansion of the existing steel plant will not have appreciable impact on Ambient Air Quality in the area and thus sanctuary area will not be under direct threat. However, mitigation actions are suggested as future conservation measures in the area to ensure least disturbance to the Wildlife Habitat of the sanctuary area by suggestions of the Monitoring Committee to be set up for this purpose.

13 The proposal indicates the presence of rare plant species like Achyranthus coynei, Cryptocoryne cognata and animals like Trimeresurus gramineus (venomous pit viper species found only in southern India), Genus Indirana (frogs), White-rumped Vulture (Gyps benghalensis), Indian Vulture (Gyps indicus), Great Knot (Caladris tenuirostris) and Nilgiri Woodpigeon (Columba elphinstonii), Sambar (Rusa Unicolor), Leopard (Panthera pardus) etc. The project site is also habitat for snake species like cat-eyed water snake (Gerarda prevostiana), Black-headed Ibis, Western

Black-tailed Godwit, Pacific Golden Plover etc

The project proponent shall abide by all the conditions; those would be stipulated in the final wildlife Conservation Plan and the suggested mitigation measures and shall also abide by the suggestions of the Monitoring Committee to be set up for this purpose.
The project does not envisage deletion of area from the sanctuary, hence there is no question of adding wildlife area to the sanctuary.

15 Proposed site is reportedly habitat for endangered species like White-rumped Vulture (Gyps benghalensis) and Indian Vulture (Gyps indicus). But the proposal under consideration is an expansion/extension project of the exisiting structure.

(7)

1 The proposal for diversion of 26.86 ha of forest land from Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary (within 10 kms radius of the boundary of Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary) for mining activity by M/s Adi Gold Mining Pvt. Ltd., Uttarkhand. 2 Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary
3 File No 6-88/2011 WL

4 Name of the state Uttarakhand

5 A court case regarding re-demarcation/ delimitation of the boundaries of the sanctuary is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court (IA No. 1791 of 2007)

6 600 Sq. Km.

7 Area proposal for diversion/Denotification
26.86 ha 8 M/s Adi Gold Mining Pvt. Ltd

9 134 trees will be cut from civil and van panchayat lands 10 Yes 11 Not mentioned in the proposal.

12 Brief justification of the proposal as given by the applicant agency. The proposal is for diversion of 26.86 ha of forest land from Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary (within 10 kms radius of the boundary of Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary). The proposed project is about 1 km from the boundary of the sanctuary and involves underground mining at 100 meters below the surface in Civil & Soyam land (21.9028 ha), Van Panchayat land (4.958 ha) and private land outside the boundary of Askot Musk Deer Wildlife Sanctuary. According to the project, 70% of the mining waste is to be filled back within the tunnel of excavation.

13 Snow Leopard, Musk Deer, Brown Bear, Bharal etc.

The Chief Wildlife Warden has recommended the proposal.

Positive impacts:

The project provides employment for the local people and developmental

opportunities by improving medical facility, education system and local ITI for better future of young generation 2. The project enhance national base metal production and revenue through tax for the country 3. Compensatory afforestation of 54 ha

Negative impact:

Temporary disturbance of the flora and fauna in the vicinity during the course of construction of proposed project
134 trees will be cut from civil and van panchayat lands
15

AGENDA ITEM NO.5

ANY OTHER ITEM WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CHAIR

Verbatim extracted text (OCR/PDF). Older scans and tables may show extraction artifacts — verify against the original for anything you act on.

Analysis

No analysis has been generated for this document yet.