Redefining conservation
Who and what is responsible for the heart-breaking landslides that hit Wayanad district and took so many lives? The question is important even as weeks have passed and our attention has shifted to other devastating disasters. I had earlier explained how climate change played a role in the disaster but not entirely. This already vulnerable region of the Western Ghats had been made more prone to disasters because of human activities. But then the other question, which frankly haunts me, is: Why do people who live in these fragile regions end up opposing conservation efforts? They know that they are cutting that proverbial tree branch that they are sitting on! So, what can be done? Let’s first understand the developmental activities in Wayanad. My colleagues Rohini Krishnamurthy and Pulaha Roy have investigated this and found that this disaster was waiting to happen. The landslide occurred near Mundakkai, a ward of Vellerimala village. I am pointing this out because this village was identified as an ecologically sensitive area in the 2013 report by the K Kasturirangan committee. I was a member of this committee, set up by the Union environment ministry to come up with an “all-round and holistic approach for sustainable and equitable development” for the Western Ghats. It recommended that all such villages where over 20 per cent of the area was ecologically sensitive should have strict controls on developmental activities that would make the area more vulnerable. This is why it recommended against allowing destructive activities, in particular mining and stone quarries, in these areas. In November 2013, the ministry accepted this report and issued a directive under Section 5 of the Environment Protection Act, demarcating a large area (60,000 sq. km) as ecologically sensitive and banning certain activities, including mining and stone quarrying. However, Kerala asked for an amendment, citing the finding of its own committee which had argued that an entire village could not be demarcated as ecologically sensitive as it had other activities that should not be stopped. Now look at the implications of this. Pulaha superimposed the satellite imagery of quarrying sites in Wayanad on the map of the 13 villages identified by the Kasturirangan report for protection as ecologically sensitive areas. He found 15 quarrying sites across these 13 villages. One village, Noolpuzha, has six quarrying sites, all in the area demarcated as forest. And it gets worse. Rohini found to her horror that in 2017, Kerala amended its minor mineral concession rules and permitted the use of explosives anywhere beyond 50 metres of a residential building or in forest land or hill slopes. This literally means blasting in one’s backyard and creating conditions to destablise the hills. Why are we then surprised that when extreme rain hits the region, it leaves behind this scale of devastation? Wayanad landslide is a humanmade disaster.
