Chardham Highway Project and the Environmental Destruction of the Himalayas

Surabhi Agarwal, Lubna Sarwath and Sandeep Pandey

The ecologically sensitive citizens had barely recovered from the excruciating death of Professor G.D. Agrawal aka Swami Gyan Swaroop Sanand, who gave up his life after a 112 days of fasting on 11 October, 2018, in Rishikesh demanding an end to devastating activities going on in Himalayas in the form of construction of a series of dams on various streams which join to become Ganga, mining in its bed and deforestation in its valley, that they are now witness to another tragedy unfolding.

The Himalayas are of tremendous ecological, cultural and religious significance for the people of India. Yet, for the past several decades the region’s abundant natural resources are being exploited and its ecosystems destroyed in the name of development. Now, the ambitious 900-kilometre Chardham Highways project, work on which began in 2018, seems set to propel the Himalayas towards unprecedented environmental disaster.

The goal of the project is to widen the roads leading up to the four Hindu pilgrimage sites of Gangotri, Yamunotri, Kedarnath and Badrinath. According to the government, this is intended to improve “connectivity to the Chardham pilgrimage centres in the Himalayas, making the journey to these centres safer, faster and more convenient.” It is ironic then, that the project was pushed through by the authorities with complete disregard for the environmental protection laws of the country.

Such a large-scale project should have required a comprehensive and rigorous environmental impact assessment (EIA), including public consultations and hearings, before being given the green light, as it is mandatory for road projects which span more than a 100 km. However, the government surreptitiously side-stepped this requirement by dividing the 900 kilometre stretch of road into 53 segments, each of less than a 100 km, and labelling the work to be done on each segment as a separate project.

Not going through the assessment process has not only put the environment and people of the region at great risk, but, by extension, even threatens the safety of the travellers for whose convenience these roads are being constructed.

The whole Himalayan region is geologically unstable and disaster-prone. The Himalayas are young mountains which are still in the process of formation. They grow in height by about 6 cm every year. They lie in seismic zones 4 and 5 because of which they experience frequent earth tremors and other seismic phenomena. They also experience exceptionally heavy rainfall. Large-scale deforestation and indiscriminate construction activity, mining and quarrying further contribute to the geological instability of the region.

The Chardham sites are located in areas which are particularly susceptible to landslides and land subsidence. They are amongst the sites which experience the most topsoil-loss in the country. According to a report prepared by the Geological Survey of India in the wake of the Kedarnath disaster of 2103, road construction in the area has disturbed the natural slope of the mountains over the years which has led to their destabilisation and to the activation of landslides. Yet, this already precarious nature of the environment has been completely disregarded in the formulation of this project.

The minimum width of the highway roads has been set at 10m, which many environmentalists have criticised as being far too wide considering the extent of slope cutting and soil displacement it would require. It has been reported that due to the mountains being cut at the dangerous angle of 90 degrees in many places, several landslides have already occurred at different points along the route. There have been several reports of fatalities among the construction workers as well as travellers and residents of the area. Damage to property and agricultural land has also been reported. The muck generated from the cutting of the slopes is being dumped directly into the rivers, causing extensive damage to their water quality and aquatic life.

Environmental groups such as Ganga Aavaahan and the South Asian Network on Dams, Rivers and People have voiced concern over the project. The late Professor G.D. Agrawal had also strongly criticised the project before his unfortunate death.

As the extent of the destruction due to the project started to become apparent, some concerned citizens filed a petition in court. Eventually, the matter reached the Supreme Court, which formulated a High Powered Committee to look into the matter, naming the eminent environmentalist Ravi Chopra as its chairman. The court directed the committee to ensure that the Chardham project conforms with the requirements of safe and sustainable construction in the steep valley terrain of the region.

Ravi Chopra and a few of his committee members have, after a systematic and extensive investigation of the situation, suggested an intermediate road width design of 5.5 metres, as opposed to the 10-metre double-lane paved shoulder design. Through a circular issued in 2018 Ministry of Road Transport and Highways itself originally recommended 5.5-metre width for roads being constructed in the Himalayas.

However, a group comprising 22 of the 26 members of the committee, who are mainly government officials and employees, have opposed Dr Chopra’s recommendations. They have submitted a separate final report to the Union environment ministry which supports the double-lane paved shoulder design. Ravi Chopra and the other three members of the minority group, who are all independent experts and scientists, have stood firmly by their recommendations, which they believe are the only viable option for protecting the Himalayas. They have requested that all construction activity on the project be halted until the final decision on the road width, which is now left to the Supreme Court, is made.

One of the reasons being proferred in support of wider road is facilitation of faster movement of troops given the imminent Chinese threat at the border. However, landslides, as they become frequent accompanying the ecological disturbance created due to the project, which cause traffic jams for hours and days at a stretch may prove to be a spoiler. The manner in which members of the High Powered Committee who have their own vested interests are misusing their power to further an agenda which is completely contrary to the public interest is condemnable and undermines the authority of the Supreme Court. The Court must take cognizance of the compromised nature of the parallel report submitted by them and order the adoption of the chairman’s recommendations so that the damage being done to the Himalayan ecology by the Chardham project can be mitigated.

Looking at the broader context, with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic as well as the climate change crisis – both of which will likely have a profound impact on tourism in the coming years – the prioritisation of the interests of tourists and pilgrims over local environments and communities appears irresponsible and unwise. Development in the Himalayas is necessary to improve the living standards and mobility of its people, but for this, the government should take a collaborative approach which also takes into consideration the indigenous knowledge and methodologies and technologies of the people of the region. For example, the development and up-gradation of existing modes of transport and conveyance through local innovation could be considered to improve access to various remote parts of the Himalayas. This could help invigorate local economies by encouraging and supporting localised entrepreneurial activity while also facilitating the conservation of the environment.

[The writers belong to Socialist Party (India).]

❈ ❈ ❈

Environment Experts Slam Bhagirathi Zonal Master Plan

Seema Sharma

The contentious Zonal Master Plan (ZMP) of the Bhagirathi Eco-Sensitive Zone (BESZ) was approved by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) last month. However, members of two expert committees – one appointed by NGT or another by Supreme Court – have said the document neither has their consent, not could they scrutinise it.

On July 17, Union Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar announced the ZMP’s approval, saying it would help expedite the Char Dham road project in Uttarakhand. Of the total 889 kilometres, a large part of the 160-km road stretch where work is yet to be undertaken lies in the BESZ and was pending due to the ZMP.

Members of two expert panels – the first committee constituted by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and a scrutiny committee formed by the Supreme Court – wrote a joint letter to the MoEFCC and the (MoWR) that the approved ZMP did not have their consent nor approval. They added that they had not scrutinised it either. They expressed deep regret, saying that the current ZMP is a flawed document which is not in consonance with the ESZ notification.

“The present version of ZMP packages project reports prepared by various departments and emphasises on modifying the Eco Sensitive Zone (ESZ) Notification rather than realizing the spirit of the same,” Vinod Tare, a Professor at IIT Kanpur and a member of both committees, said in the letter.

The approved ZMP has been uploaded to the MoEFCC’s website.

On December 18, 2012, the Centre had notified a watershed area of near the river Bhagirathi, from Gaumukh to Uttarkashi covering an area of about 4179.59 square kilometres. It spanned 88 villages and was declared an Eco-Sensitive Zone; thereby prohibiting, regulating or permitting certain categories of activities in the said zone.

The ministry (Environment Ministry) had asked the state government to prepare a ZMP for the sustainable development and protection of this fragile zone based on its notification by 2014.

The ZMP was aimed at the conservation of existing water bodies, forests, for watershed management, soil and moisture conservation and the requirements of the local community through sustainable development strategies.

The notification clarified that there will not be any changes in land-use, hydro-power projects above 2 MW and prohibition on river-bed mining for commercial purposes in the region.

A state monitoring committee comprising state government officials and four NGO activists was also formed to ensure the compliance of guidelines under the notification, till such time as the ZMP comes into force. “The committee, which was entrusted with such an important task, was rendered toothless by the state government. It was to meet at least once every quarter, which was not followed,” said Mallika Bhanot, a member of the monitoring committee.

The ZMP, submitted by the state government in 2016, after a delay of two years, was rejected by the MoEFCC as well as the water ministry for not following the notification guidelines for the conservation of the region. For instance, the ZMP had hydro-power projects upto 25 MW, while as per the notification, only projects up to 2 MW were permitted.

In 2017, after a petition was filed by Uttarkashi-based activist Keshar Singh Panwar against the ZMP submitted, the NGT constituted a nine-member committee. The committee was made up of geologists, hydrologists, and environmental experts – they were given the mandate to prepare a fresh ZMP.

Since the head of the committee was government representative – an additional secretary – the other members moved the NGT, appealing for an independent person. However, their appeal was rebuffed by the NGT.

A new appeal was filed in the SC to replace the head of the committee. In July 2018, the SC issued orders for an investigation in the matter. Meanwhile, the head of the NGT committee prepared the ZMP, without the consent of the remaining eight members.

The apex court then asked the MoWR to scrutinise this ZMP via 11 members suggested by it in July 2018. However, before the MoWR could form a committee with those members, the state government submitted the same ZMP – without scrutiny – to the MoEFCC. Members of the scrutiny committee called it a violation of the SC order and of misleading MoEFCC.

The scrutiny committee, which was constituted in October 2018, also included members of the NGT committee, like environmentalists Ravi Chopra and Chandi Prasad Bhatt, Academician Vinod Tare and Wildlife Institute of India scientist S. Sathya Kumar. However, the MoWR did not call for a single meeting of this scrutiny committee.

“No meetings of both the expert panels – NGT committee and Scrutiny committee – were held by the state government or MoWR after July 2018. We were asked to mail our comments on the ZMP recently, and after a few days we got to know of the submission of the final draft of the ZMP,” Tare told News Click.

Comments of the members have been highlighted in the annexures to the ZMP published on the environment ministry’s website. The scrutiny group members also wrote to the MoWR, saying that it was the old draft ZMP – essentially a compilation of departmental proposals mainly based on current schemes – and therefore cannot be accepted. This should be a people’s plan not a departmental one, they said, alleging that no public consultation, especially with women (which the notification stipulated) was held to prepare the ZMP.

“The draft ZMP still remains largely faithful to the rejected ZMP of October 2016. It lacks an integrated approach, as desired by the Union Ministries. Based on the foregoing it is not possible to accept the present ZMP draft,” Ravi Chopra submitted in his letter.

Hemant Dhyani, another member, also pointed out in the letter that the NGT committee members have received representations from the 16 village panchayats of Uttarkashi, that their villages have been merged with Nagar Palika without any public consultation. This is also in violation of the BESZ notification.

“The state government did not have the authority to submit the draft. The NGT had mandated a nine-member committee to prepare a fresh ZMP to be submitted to MoEFCC, a copy of which was to be given to the NGT,” a committee member told NewsClick.

Budging before the objections of three chief ministers and the local politicians of Uttarkashi, for being anti-development, the notification was amended on April 16, 2018.

It approved land use change to meet local needs and infrastructure development in view of larger public interest and national security, with the condition of seeking prior approval of the state government after due study of environmental impact.

Slope cutting for construction purposes was also permitted, but after a proper study for the benefit of the community.

NGT committee members had opposed slope cutting saying it leads to landslides, soil erosion and that it generates debris. They said that projects like road widening would result in the loss of forest cover and precious Deodar trees.

(The writer is a freelance journalist who writes on the environment. Article courtesy: Newsclick.)