Peppara sanctuary: Expert panel seeks clarification

Thiruvananthapuram: The state expert appraisal committee (SEAC) has decided to recommend to the state environment impact assessment authority (SEIAA) to seek a clarification from the principal chief conservator of forests and chief wildlife warden regarding the distance to which the eco sensitive zone (ESZ) of Peppara wild life sanctuary is applicable. The need for clarification arose while considering an application for revalidation of environmental clearance (EC) for a stone quarry project in Uzhamalakkal village at Nedumangad taluk. As per the minutes of the latest meeting of the SEAC, the EC was issued to the project by the DEIAA (district environment impact assessment authority) in April 2017 for a period of five years.
The SEAC had earlier discussed the field inspection report conducted in response to the application for revalidation of the EC and decided to recommend to the SEIAA that the project was eligible for revalidation of the EC with project life of eight years from the date of the original clearance. However, a condition of wildlife clearance from the national board of wildlife (NBWL) was mandated since the project area is within a distance of only 6.70 km Peppara wildlife sanctuary.
However, the proponent did not submit the proof of the application for wildlife clearance. The SEIAA later observed that the proponent was continuing the quarrying process with the EC received in 2017 and without getting the mandatory wildlife clearance from the NBWL. So the SEIAA also decided to seek an urgent clarification from the SEAC for recommending revalidation of EC.
In response to it, the SEAC clarified that the EC to the project was issued by the DEIAA, Thiruvananthapuram, and the SEAC considered the revalidation project as per the direction of the High Court.
Following the clarification from the SEAC, the SEIAA examined the proposal and noticed that the quarry started functioning without obtaining mandatory clearance from the NBWL and violated the guidelines of the ministry of environment, forest and climate change. It issued a stop memo in September 2022 and directed the department of mining & geology and forest & wildlife department to take actions for violations.
The project proponent moved the High Court, but the petition was disposed directing the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice within a period of two weeks in October 2022. The court also ordered that the stop memo issued by the SEIAA shall stand deferred till a decision was taken in this regard. In the reply, the proponent said that NBWL clearance was not sought since the mining area was outside the eco sensitive zone in the draft notification dated March 25, 2022. The proponent submitted that the eco-sensitive zone of the Peppara wildlife sanctuary is applicable to a maximum distance of 2.72 km only and the project under consideration is 6.7 km away.
However, the SEAC noted that eco-sensitive zone has not been finally notified and as per the notification for proposals involving developmental activity/project located within 10 km of national park/wildlife sanctuary wherein final ESZ notification is not notified (or) ESZ notification is in draft stage, prior clearance from standing committee of the national board for wildlife is mandatory. SEAC has found the argument of the project proponent unacceptable and decided to get a clarification on the applicable extent of ESZ of Peppara sanctuary.