The Hindu Business Line : Another green battle ahead?

THE SITE OF the proposed Pathrakkadavu project near the Silent Valley. To the right of the V-shaped gorge is the Nilikkal plateau of the Silent Valley, an abode of several endangered species including the lion-tailed macaque and the Nilgiri tahr. To the left are the reserved forests of Mannarkkad, which is also a biodiversity hotspot. - K. K. Mustafah

Pathrakadavu is a biodiversity-rich slice of the Nilgiri Hills in the Western Ghats, located in Palakkad district of Kerala, approximately 500 metres from the southern border of the Silent Valley National Park, one of the last undisturbed tracts of montane rain forests fringed with some tropical moist evergreen forests in India. And now it is in the news for not the happiest of reasons.

The State Government is believed to have given the go-ahead for plans to revive the Pathrakadavu hydroelectric project across the Kunthi river to generate 70 MW of power. The cost of the project was estimated at approximately Rs 247.06 crore in 1999, which has now been revised to approximately Rs 420 crore.

According to the Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History (SACON), the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) done for the hydroelectric project by the Environmental Resources Research Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, concluded that there would be a loss of 22.16 ha of forests.

ROAD TO DOOM?

The EIA foresees a problem with the proposed road to the dam site - it would make access to the Silent Valley National Park easy, opening up the possibility for degradation of the forest. Currently, the major approach to the national park is only through Mukkali.

The new road for the project would therefore be disastrous for the protection of the park, the EIA concludes, and suggests a series of check posts at the dam site to counter the danger. The floristic and faunistic study of the EIA reveals the area as biologically rich, with high endemism.

Based on a visit to the project area in May 2004, the EIA team of SACON concluded that the Silent Valley and Pathrakkadavu areas are contiguous and come within a single ecological landscape and hence have to be protected as one unit for the long-term conservation of the biodiversity of the existing National Park.

This was also the recommendation of the four-year study of Dr Ramachandran, Wildlife Biologist at the Kerala Forest Research Institute, Peechi, who suggested that all adjacent areas of the Silent Valley National Park - which would include Pathrakadavu - should be declared as buffer zones.

SACON also raised some posers in the EIA, in which it has been claimed that the dam site is separated from the National Park by a cliff. "The rocks and cliffs are integral parts of an ecological landscape covering the Silent Valley National Park. So also is the vested forests adjoining it on the southern side i.e. the proposed project area. In other words, Pathrakadavu is an integral part of the Silent Valley ecosystem," states SACON.

CONFLICTING CLAIMS

Environmentalists and citizens' groups such as the Kerala Forest Protective Staff Association have latched on to these arguments to decry the decision of the Kerala Government to give administrative sanction to the Pathrakadavu hydroelectric project in the buffer zone of Silent Valley.

If implemented, the project would destroy 40 acres of the rain forests in the Silent Valley forest area, destroy the Kunthipuzha and also affect the supply of drinking water to the districts of Malappuram, Palakkad and Thrissur, they contend.

SUPPORTERS' CLAIM

On the other hand, there is support for the project too, especially from the Kerala State Electricity Board Officers' Association (KSEBOA), which argues that the area required for the project came to 22 hectares and was not within the Silent Valley National Park.

Further, the project did not envisage a reservoir across Kunthipuzha, says KSEBOA, and was basically a `run of the river' project and the structure to be built was only a `check dam' to regulate the flow of the river and divert it to the proposed powerhouse.

Even as the pros and cons of the project are being debated, there is one sore truth staring Kerala in the face: By 2007, the State will have to build up installed capacity for the generation of at least 450 MW to meet the demands of Kerala's customers, in addition to the power that might be additionally available from Central power stations.

Clearly, therefore, the sooner the Pathrakadavu issue is settled, the brighter will be Kerala's energy future.

The writer can be contacted at kgkumar@gmail.com

More Stories on : Environment | Power | Kerala | Random Walk

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Japanese cos in India upbeat on biz prospects for 2007: Survey

Another green battle ahead?

Indian IT cos increase focus on domestic outsourcing

GAIL may infuse more funds in Dabhol project

Sugar companies report lower profits, dip in sales

Congestion afar, `loads' of problems at home

Metals make gains on weaker dollar

Positive sentiment may continue

`Index movements are relatively insignificant'

`India needs to focus on labour law reform'

e-filing of returns mandatory for partnership firms

Public issues may raise Rs 2,500 cr by June

Airlines catch `em young