Karnataka HC Notice to State on Mullayyanagiri Hills Conservation Reserve Plea

08 Aug Karnataka HC Notice to State on Mullayyanagiri Hills Conservation Reserve Plea

✎ Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 empowers state governments to declare areas as 'conservation reserves' to protect wildlife habitats, but such declarations remain discretionary and often face delays due to…

Subject Relevance — Where This Topic Fits

• GS Paper III — Environment and Biodiversity (Conservation, Legal Framework, and Governance)  |  GS Paper II — Constitutional and Statutory Provisions (Judicial Activism and PILs)
• Prelims: Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Section 36A of WLPA, Conservation Reserve, Mullayyanagiri Hills, Chikkamagaluru district, Geological Survey of India (GSI), Public Interest Litigation (PIL), Landslide-prone zones, Draft notification vs. final notification
• Essay: Ecological degradation and judicial intervention: Balancing development with environmental conservation, The role of judicial activism in environmental governance: A case study of Mullayyanagiri Hills

Quick Revision: Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 empowers state governments to declare areas as ‘conservation reserves’ to protect wildlife habitats, but such declarations remain discretionary and often face delays due to administrative and developmental pressures.

Why is this in the news?

The Karnataka High Court has issued a notice to the state government on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the declaration of Mullayyanagiri Hills in Chikkamagaluru district as a ‘conservation reserve’ under Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The petition highlights the state’s inaction despite a draft proposal (2018) and a prior court directive (2019), raising concerns over unregulated construction, tourism-induced ecological damage, and heightened landslide risks in the ecologically fragile region.

Background

• The Mullayyanagiri Hills, part of the Western Ghats in Karnataka, are recognized as an ecologically fragile zone due to their rich biodiversity and geological vulnerability.
• A draft proposal to declare approximately 14,183 acres of the hills as a ‘conservation reserve’ was submitted by the state government in 2018, but no final notification has been issued to date.
• In July 2019, the Karnataka High Court had directed the state to expedite the process of declaring the area a conservation reserve while a PIL was pending, citing concerns over road-widening projects in the region.
• The Geological Survey of India (GSI) has recently classified the Mullayyanagiri and Chandradrona ranges as ‘danger zones’ due to frequent landslides, exacerbated by deforestation and unregulated construction.
• The petitioners, including the Bhadra Wildlife Conservation Trust and Wildlife Conservation Action Team, argue that the delay in notification has permitted construction activities that threaten the region’s ecological integrity.
• The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, empowers state governments to declare areas as ‘conservation reserves’ to protect wildlife and their habitats under Section 36A, though such declarations are not mandatory.

What is a Conservation Reserve under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972?

• A ‘conservation reserve’ is a legally designated area declared by state governments under Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, to protect wildlife and their habitats while allowing for limited human activities.
• Such reserves are established in areas that are ecologically fragile but not classified as ‘sanctuaries’ or ‘national parks’, making them a middle-tier conservation tool.
• The declaration process involves: (i) identification of the area by the state government, (ii) preparation of a draft notification, (iii) public consultation, and (iv) final notification.
• Conservation reserves aim to balance conservation with sustainable use, including eco-tourism, research, and non-destructive resource extraction, subject to strict regulatory oversight.
• Conservation reserves play a critical role in the conservation of biodiversity hotspots, particularly in regions like the Western Ghats, which are under significant anthropogenic pressure.

Key Features

Feature	Significance
Section 36A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972	Provides legal framework for declaring ‘conservation reserves’ to protect ecologically fragile areas while allowing limited human activities.
Mullayyanagiri Hills	Part of the Western Ghats, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, known for high biodiversity, endemic species, and critical watershed functions.
Draft Proposal (2018)	Initial step toward declaring the area a conservation reserve, indicating administrative recognition of ecological fragility.
High Court Directions (July 2019)	Judicial intervention to expedite the declaration process, highlighting administrative delays in environmental governance.
Geological Survey of India Report	Identifies the region as a ‘danger zone’ due to landslide risks, linking ecological degradation to human activities.

Why it Matters

Ecological

• Mullayyanagiri Hills are a biodiversity hotspot within the Western Ghats, harbouring endemic flora and fauna, including several threatened species.
• The region serves as a critical watershed for the Bhadra and Tunga rivers, supporting downstream ecosystems and human settlements.
• Deforestation and unregulated construction exacerbate landslide risks, as highlighted by the Geological Survey of India.
• Declaration as a conservation reserve would legally safeguard the area from further degradation while permitting sustainable tourism.

Legal-Administrative

• The petition invokes Section 36A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, which empowers state governments to declare conservation reserves.
• The High Court’s notice underscores the judiciary’s role in ensuring compliance with environmental laws and judicial directives.
• Administrative inaction despite draft proposals and judicial directions reflects systemic gaps in environmental governance.

Economic

• Unregulated tourism and construction activities pose long-term economic risks by degrading natural capital and increasing disaster vulnerability.
• Sustainable ecotourism, if managed within a conservation reserve framework, could generate revenue while preserving ecological integrity.

Geological

• The Mullayyanagiri and Chandradrona ranges are identified as high-risk zones for landslides due to deforestation and slope instability.
• Geological fragility necessitates urgent conservation measures to mitigate risks to human settlements and infrastructure.

Challenges

1. Administrative Delay

• Failure to finalize the conservation reserve declaration despite a draft proposal in 2018 and judicial directions in 2019.
• Permitting construction activities without awaiting the reserve’s legal status, compounding ecological damage.
• Lack of inter-departmental coordination between forest, revenue, and tourism authorities.

UPSC Link: Environmental Governance (GS-III)

2. Ecological Degradation

• Deforestation and unregulated construction have increased landslide risks, as confirmed by the Geological Survey of India.
• Loss of habitat for endemic and threatened species due to anthropogenic pressures.
• Deterioration of watershed functions, threatening water security for downstream regions.

UPSC Link: Conservation Efforts (GS-III)

3. Judicial-Executive Interface

• Repeated judicial directions without compliance highlight systemic inefficiencies in environmental governance.
• Balancing judicial activism with executive autonomy in environmental policymaking remains a persistent challenge.

UPSC Link: Judicial Review (GS-II)

4. Tourism vs. Conservation Trade-off

• Pressure to develop tourism infrastructure conflicts with conservation objectives.
• Lack of clear guidelines for sustainable tourism within ecologically fragile zones.

UPSC Link: Sustainable Development (GS-III)

5. Legal Ambiguity in Section 36A

• Ambiguities in the implementation of Section 36A may lead to delays or misuse of the conservation reserve framework.
• Need for clarity on permissible activities within conservation reserves to balance conservation and livelihoods.

UPSC Link: Wildlife Protection Act (GS-III)

Challenges — UPSC Perspective

Issue	Concern
Delay in Notification	Erosion of ecological integrity due to prolonged administrative inaction.
Landslide Risks	Increased vulnerability of human settlements and infrastructure due to deforestation.
Habitat Loss	Threat to endemic species and biodiversity hotspots.
Tourism Pressure	Unregulated construction and tourism activities degrading natural resources.
Judicial-Executive Tension	Repeated court directions without compliance undermining governance.
Inter-Departmental Coordination	Lack of synergy between forest, revenue, and tourism departments.

Way Forward

• Issue the final notification declaring Mullayyanagiri Hills as a conservation reserve under Section 36A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, without further delay.
• Conduct a comprehensive ecological assessment to identify critical habitats and permissible activities within the reserve.
• Implement strict zoning regulations to demarcate core conservation areas, buffer zones, and sustainable tourism zones.
• Enforce a moratorium on new construction activities until the conservation reserve is legally notified and zoning plans are finalized.
• Develop a multi-stakeholder governance model involving local communities, forest departments, and civil society for participatory management.
• Integrate landslide risk mitigation measures, including afforestation and slope stabilization, in collaboration with the Geological Survey of India.
• Formulate a sustainable tourism policy that aligns economic development with conservation objectives, including carrying capacity limits.
• Establish a monitoring mechanism with periodic audits to ensure compliance with conservation reserve regulations.

UPSC Value Addition

Prelims Practice Questions

Q1. Consider the following statements regarding the declaration of an area as a ‘Conservation Reserve’ under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972:
1. The State Government can declare any area owned by it as a Conservation Reserve.
2. The Act mandates that the entire extent of an ecologically fragile region must be declared as a Conservation Reserve if proposed.
3. The declaration is made under Section 36A of the Act.
4. The process requires prior approval of the Central Government before notification.

How many of the above statements are correct?

1. Only one
2. Only two
3. Only three
4. All

Answer: Only three — Statements 1 and 3 are correct. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Act does not mandate the declaration of the entire extent; it is discretionary. Statement 4 is incorrect as prior approval of the Central Government is not required for declaration under Section 36A.

Q2. Assertion (A): The Mullayyanagiri Hills in Karnataka have been declared a ‘danger zone’ by the Geological Survey of India due to frequent landslides.
Reason (R): Deforestation and unregulated construction in the region have exacerbated ecological fragility.

Options:
A. Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.
B. Both A and R are true, but R is not the correct explanation of A.
C. A is true, but R is false.
D. A is false, but R is true.

Answer: ? — Both the Assertion (A) and Reason (R) are true, and R correctly explains A. The Geological Survey of India’s declaration of the Mullayyanagiri Hills as a danger zone is directly linked to deforestation and unregulated construction, which increase landslide risks.

Q3. Match the following pairs related to wildlife conservation in India:

Column I (Legal Provision/Institution)
1. Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
2. National Board for Wildlife
3. Project Tiger
4. Wildlife Crime Control Bureau

Column II (Purpose/Function)
A. Advisory body for wildlife conservation
B. Declaration of Conservation Reserves
C. Monitoring and control of wildlife crimes
D. Centrally sponsored scheme for tiger conservation

Options:
A. 1-B, 2-A, 3-D, 4-C
B. 1-A, 2-B, 3-C, 4-D
C. 1-C, 2-D, 3-A, 4-B
D. 1-D, 2-C, 3-B, 4-A

1. A
2. B
3. C
4. D

Answer: A — The correct match is: 1-B (Section 36A allows declaration of Conservation Reserves), 2-A (National Board for Wildlife is an advisory body), 3-D (Project Tiger is a centrally sponsored scheme), 4-C (Wildlife Crime Control Bureau monitors wildlife crimes).

Mains Practice Question

✍ The declaration of ecologically fragile regions as ‘Conservation Reserves’ under Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, is a critical instrument for biodiversity conservation. In light of the recent judicial intervention by the Karnataka High Court in the case of Mullayyanagiri Hills, critically examine the efficacy of this legal framework in addressing ecological degradation and unregulated anthropogenic pressures. Also, suggest measures to strengthen the implementation of conservation policies in India. (15 Marks)

Approach: MODEL-ANSWER SKELETON:

1. Introduction (2 marks):
– Define ‘Conservation Reserve’ under Section 36A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
– Context: Mullayyanagiri Hills case and judicial intervention by Karnataka High Court.

2. Legal and Institutional Framework (3 marks):
– Role of State Governments in declaring Conservation Reserves.
– Powers and limitations under Section 36A.
– Role of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) and State Boards.
– Overlap with other conservation mechanisms (e.g., Protected Areas, Tiger Reserves).

3. Efficacy and Challenges (5 marks):
– Strengths: Legal recognition of ecologically fragile areas, potential for habitat restoration.
– Weaknesses: Delayed notifications (e.g., Mullayyanagiri Hills draft proposal from 2018), lack of strict enforcement, anthropogenic pressures (tourism, construction).
– Judicial activism as a catalyst for conservation (reference to Karnataka High Court’s intervention).
– Role of Geological Survey of India in identifying risk zones (landslide vulnerability).

4. Measures for Strengthening Implementation (3 marks):
– Time-bound notification processes for draft proposals.
– Strengthening monitoring mechanisms (e.g., satellite-based surveillance, community participation).
– Integrating climate resilience and disaster risk reduction in conservation plans.
– Public-private partnerships for sustainable tourism and eco-restoration.

5. Conclusion (2 marks):
– Balancing conservation with developmental needs.
– Need for a multi-stakeholder approach involving local communities, judiciary, and policymakers.

Source: The Hindu

---

Generated by AanyaAi for educational purpose.