Controversy over proposed reduction in Kaziranga's Eco-Sensitive Zone buffer width
2-minute summary
The Assam government plans to request the Central government to reduce the Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) buffer around Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve from the default 10 km to a minimum of 1 km. The state argues that a wider buffer zone restricts urban and civic development in adjacent towns like Bokakhat and Kaliabor. However, this proposal has triggered a debate over ecological conservation versus development. ESZs, declared under the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986, act as 'shock absorbers' to minimize human impact on protected areas. They categorize activities into prohibited, regulated, and permitted. While the default ESZ width is 10 km, states can propose site-specific variations. Environmentalists warn that shrinking the buffer around a highly sensitive, rhino-centric ecosystem like Kaziranga could exacerbate human-animal conflict and threaten critical wildlife corridors.
Why it's in the news
The Assam government's proposal to reduce the Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) around Kaziranga National Park to a 1-km minimum buffer has sparked controversy, raising critical questions about balancing infrastructure development with biodiversity conservation.
Background and context
The concept of Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs), or Ecologically Fragile Areas, was initiated under the National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016). In 2002, the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) resolved to designate buffer zones around protected areas under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. In 2011, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) issued guidelines directing states to submit site-specific ESZ proposals, establishing a default buffer limit of up to 10 km. This limit can be extended to include critical wildlife corridors. However, several states have consistently pushed to reduce these buffers to prevent restrictions on local livelihoods, infrastructure projects, and urban expansion. This tension has led to significant legal scrutiny, including Supreme Court interventions aimed at defining baseline buffer widths while considering local geographical realities.
Constitutional provisions
- Article 48A — Directive Principles of State Policy directing the State to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forests and wildlife.
- Article 51A(g) — Fundamental Duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife.
Committees and reports
- National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) Resolution — Adopted the resolution to declare ecologically fragile territory around national parks and sanctuaries as buffer zones.
Government schemes
- Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats (IDWH) — A centrally sponsored scheme providing technical and financial assistance to states for the conservation of wildlife sanctuaries, national parks, and their surrounding buffer zones.
International organisations
- UNESCO World Heritage Convention — Kaziranga National Park is designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, requiring strict adherence to international conservation standards.
- Ramsar Convention on Wetlands — Deepor Beel, mentioned in the context of ESZ variations, is a designated Ramsar Site facing severe biotic pressure.
Mains practice: Discuss the concept of Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs) as 'shock absorbers' for protected areas. Evaluate the challenges in balancing ecological conservation with local developmental aspirations in India.
Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs) are transition areas surrounding National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries, notified under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Envisaged as 'shock absorbers', they aim to minimize the impact of human activities on fragile ecosystems by regulating developmental pressures.
Role of ESZs as Shock Absorbers:
• Transition Buffer: They act as a buffer between high-protection core areas and low-protection developmental zones.
• Regulation of Activities: Activities are categorized into Prohibited (e.g., commercial mining, polluting industries), Regulated (e.g., felling of trees, hotel construction), and Permitted (e.g., organic farming, rainwater harvesting).
• Conflict Mitigation: They help reduce human-animal conflict by securing wildlife corridors and maintaining habitat continuity.
Challenges in Balancing Conservation and Development:
• Civic and Urban Growth: As seen in Kaziranga, states argue that a wide 10-km default buffer halts infrastructure, road widening, and urban expansion in nearby towns like Bokakhat.
• Livelihood and Rights: Local communities often fear loss of land rights, restrictions on agriculture, and displacement, leading to public protests.
• Biotic Pressure: High population density near protected areas like Deepor Beel creates intense pressure, making strict enforcement difficult.
• Arbitrary Demarcation: Demands to shrink buffers to 1 km may compromise ecological corridors, increasing animal straying and habitat fragmentation.
Conclusion:
A one-size-fits-all approach is unsustainable. Site-specific scientific assessments, active community participation, and the adoption of green technologies are essential to harmonize ecological integrity with sustainable local development.
Prelims practice questions
Q1. With reference to Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs) in India, consider the following statements: 1. They are statutory zones declared under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. 2. The default width of an ESZ is 10 kilometers from the boundary of a protected area, which can be modified based on site-specific proposals. 3. Commercial mining and the establishment of major polluting industries are prohibited activities within an ESZ. Which of the statements given above are correct?
- 1 and 2 only
- 2 and 3 only
- 1 and 3 only
- 1, 2 and 3
Answer: B. Statement 1 is incorrect because ESZs are declared under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, not the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. Statements 2 and 3 are correct as the default buffer is 10 km (subject to site-specific modifications) and commercial mining is strictly prohibited.
Q2. Which of the following activities are classified as 'permitted' within a notified Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ)?
- Felling of trees and widening of roads
- Commercial mining and setting up of sawmills
- Commercial use of natural water and establishment of hotels
- Ongoing eco-friendly agricultural practices and rainwater harvesting
Answer: D. According to ESZ guidelines, ongoing eco-friendly agricultural or horticultural practices, rainwater harvesting, and renewable energy use are permitted. Tree felling and hotel establishment are regulated, while commercial mining and sawmills are prohibited.
Q3. Consider the following pairs of protected areas and their associated states/features: 1. Kaziranga National Park - Assam 2. Deepor Beel - Ramsar Site in Meghalaya 3. Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary - Kerala Which of the pairs given above are correctly matched?
- 1 and 2 only
- 1 and 3 only
- 2 and 3 only
- 1, 2 and 3
Answer: B. Pair 1 is correctly matched (Kaziranga is in Assam). Pair 2 is incorrectly matched because Deepor Beel is a Ramsar Site located in Assam (near Guwahati), not Meghalaya. Pair 3 is correctly matched (Wayanad is in Kerala).
Revision flashcards
- Under which legislation are Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs) declared in India? ESZs are declared under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
- What is the default statutory width of an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) around a protected area? The default width is up to 10 kilometers, but it can be extended or reduced based on site-specific ecological sensitivity.
- Name three activities that are completely prohibited inside an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ). Commercial mining, sawmills, and industries causing air, water, soil, or noise pollution.
- What is Deepor Beel, and why was it referenced in the Kaziranga ESZ debate? Deepor Beel is a Ramsar wetland and bird sanctuary in Assam. It was cited to show how site-specific ESZ notifications can vary (ranging from 25 meters to 5 km) due to high biotic pressure.
- What is the primary ecological purpose of designating an Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ)? To act as a 'shock absorber' or transition zone, minimizing human impact on protected areas and reducing human-animal conflict.