In the 20th meeting of the State Board for Wildlife (SBWL) on May 2, the project was approved without any discussion. The meeting was conducted by the Vice President of the Board and the Forest Minister. Sudhir Mungantiwar, Finished in five minutes. Speaker CM Eknath Shinde did not attend the meeting.
The Manganese mining project of the Raipur-based firm was given the go-ahead by PCCF (Wildlife) Maheep Gupta on the basis of a wildlife mitigation plan suggested by the Chandrapur Forest Academy, according to which the Crusaders have no authority to recommend such projects .
According to MS Reddy, director of the APCCF and Chandrapur Forest Academy, the mining proposal was “recommended up to the deputy conservator level”. “Even the Pench officials were not clear on rejecting the project while presenting their views,” he added.
Pench officials claimed that they never said “yes to the project”. “We have clearly mentioned the facts that there is presence of tigers and Schedule-I animals in the area. The mining block has a vast stock of orchids and medicinal plants which tells a lot about the quality of the forest. The area, though it lies outside the ESZ, is a functional tiger corridor,” he said.
Citing a government resolution issued on December 4, 2014, Reddy said the academy has been “empowered to provide advice and suggest mitigation measures for projects”. “We have done it before. I was asked by my superiors to submit a mitigation plan, which I did. We have suggested a compensatory afforestation plan,” he said.
Environmentalist Debi Goenka said the mitigation plan was not laid out during the SBWL board meeting and “hence it has not been approved”. “The GR does not mention that the Academy can prepare mitigation plans for such mining projects. It only says that the Academy can facilitate Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) studies. Preparing for mitigation for a mining firm and EIA are two different issues,” he said.
Goenka feels that the Chandrapur Academy “does not have the expertise and capability to prepare such plans and cannot match itself with the Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun.”
according to wildlife conservationists Prafulla BhamburkarSection 38-0 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 empowers the NTCA to “assess and evaluate sustainable ecological aspects and disallow any ecologically unsustainable land use such as mining in areas connecting one protected area to another”. Does
“The way the meeting was conducted, it is doubtful that NTCA was sought for its views. The project has also not received forest and environment clearance. Due to some reasons, the company canceled a public hearing on 14 February. Of the 105-hectare project area, 100 hectares is a dense forest in the corridor including a fresh water body,” said Anasuya Kale-Chhabrani, president of the Swachhta Association.
Shrikant DeshpandeThe Green Crusaders, however, feel the company has been given an easy ride. “Pench Tiger Foundation has been asked to deposit 4% of the project cost for conservation works. No shaman can restore this corridor once it is destroyed. We have raised our voice against the mine along with the MPCB.
A camera trap survey in 2020 revealed that the area is home to tigers, panthers, rattlesnakes, porcupines, wild dogs, wild cats, nilgai, deer, sambar, civet and wild boar. “It could also be a part of the proposed Mogarkasa Wildlife Sanctuary. No spot visit was done by the Academy officials while preparing the mitigation plan,” alleged Deshpande.