CONCRETE VS. JUNGLE

                                   Uttarakhand : For richer, but poorer

   

                       Swarg Uttarakhand bhoomi,

                             Deva Uttarakhand bhoomi,

                             Himalaya phool jaiso phoolyo, brahmikamal,

                             Himalaya Ghana devadaro, brahmikamal.

In the 1970s, Chipko activists in Tehri Garhwal used to sing this song, praising their hills as paradise, the place of gods, where mountains bloom with rare plants and dense cedars.

Chipko began as a movement to save the indigenous forests of oak and rhododendron from being felled by the forest department. It soon became a wider assertion of local rights to the environment, protesting against inappropriate policies imposed on the hills by a distant plains-based state government. That sense of alienation and exploitation grew into a broad-based campaign for regional autonomy. The state of Uttarakhand was formed in 2000 and many hoped that the region would finally chart a path of development that was in harmony with its unique ecology and culture. Uttarakhand would become Swarg- paradise-once more. Those dreams have ebbed away over the past 13 years of statehood. Successive governments in Dehradun followed the pattern of ruthlessly exploiting the region’s natural resources.

And on the face of it, Uttarakhand did indeed grow richer. Better roads brought more tourists, especially pilgrims, most of whom would never have attempted the once-arduous Choti Chaar Dhaam Yatra without the convenience of motor vehicles, the comfort of hotels, restaurants and other urban amenities along a trail that once required austerity and unflinching devotion.  

Economic liberalization increased tourism in the state resulting in the boom of business in Uttarakhand. As the spiritual value of the Himalayas to Hindus-the home of the gods, source of sacred rivers-became a money spinning resource, the material value of Himalayan Rivers as hydro-power came to be recognized as ripe for exploitation. Dams and so-called ‘run-of-the-river’ projects in Uttarakhand promised to bring more wealth to the region as they supply the rest of the country with much needed electricity. This brought prosperity to the region by cashing in on the state’s natural endowments. Uttarakhand thus united India through grids of power and pilgrimage.

But the catastrophic rain, landslides and floods, and the consequent human tragedy should make us look more critically at Uttarakhand’s development. The story that is told-the state can produce wealth and welfare by using natural resources to the fullest-grossly misunderstands the nature of Himalayan ecology. The Himalayas are known to be geologically active. Earthquakes and glacial lake outbursts are natural hazards that accompany these processes. But the destructive powers of these events have been eclipsed by human-made hazards that exponentially increase the instability of the Himalayan landscape. Poorly designed and cheaply built roads trigger landslides. Blasting tunnels through the mountains for run-of-the-river projects destabilizes an already fragile geology. The pressure of water in dam reservoirs induces tectonic shifts, multiplying the risk of earthquakes.

Like mountains, Himalayan Rivers too are dynamic entities. Blocking and diverting their path with dams and tunnels, dumping lakhs of truck-loads of debris from construction sites and from landslides, and building close to river channel, has disastrous consequences. The cloudburst that precipitated the recent disaster was a natural event, but the toll taken by the floods and landslides was made much worse by Uttarakhand’s development strategy.

Our understanding of nature is poor, our ability to control and manipulate is poorer still. We choose to forge ahead with building more concrete infrastructure because in short term, that is where money lies! Development aims at bringing greater security of livelihoods and life-chances. Yet development has only increased ecological and economic vulnerability because of one fundamental error: the belief that we can proceed as if nature is stable, predictable and controllable.

Development has to incorporate precautionary principle, anticipating potential harm and acting prudently to prevent it. This means a conservative approach to construction in the hills, including a moratorium on the most risky projects. Research by the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP) and other environmental organizations identifies these projects and their alternatives. There is also considerable expertise, some of it locally available, on how to make roads and buildings safer. The chief issue is to enforce building standards and regulations about no-development zones on river banks and steep hillsides.

Rapid, ill-conceived development has only increased vulnerability and the risk of disaster. And for the future of Uttarakhand, it’s now time for the nation to consider a ‘no-development cess’, paying the Himalayan states to protect mountains, rivers and forests instead of exploiting them, so that India can be ecologically secure. The integrity of the Himalayan landscape is essential to the well-being of the entire subcontinent.