Mapping of two Western Ghats districts shows much of proposed ESA overlaps with Notified Forests, Protected Areas, or existing ESZs

The Western Ghats is a global biodiversity hotspot and a critical water tower for peninsular India. The central environmental governance mechanism for its protection relies on declaring it an Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The recent mapping by the Paani Earth Foundation demonstrates that 70-82% of the proposed ESA in the studied districts already falls under existing protection frameworks, such as Notified Forests or Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs) around protected areas. The core environmental debate centers on the recommendations of the Gadgil Committee (which proposed widespread protection) versus the subsequent Kasturirangan Committee (which reduced the proposed ESA to approximately 37% of the Ghats to balance development). For UPSC, understanding the specific prohibitions within an ESA is crucial: the current draft notification strictly bans Red-category industries (highly polluting), mining, quarrying, and large-scale development projects (over 20,000 sq m or 50 hectares), aiming to prevent ecological degradation while maintaining the existing landscape.

The geographical significance of the Western Ghats as a major watershed cannot be overstated. The mapping report highlights that the proposed ESA districts (like Kodagu and Udupi) function as crucial headwater landscapes. In Kodagu, streams feed both east-flowing river systems like the Cauvery River and west-flowing systems like the Kumaradhara and Payaswini towards the Arabian Sea. Similarly, Udupi's ESA villages support headwater streams for west-flowing rivers such as the Sita, Chakra, and Varahi. For UPSC Geography (GS1), this reinforces the concept of the Western Ghats as a major water divide in Peninsular India. Protecting these headwater regions through ESA notification is essential for maintaining the hydrological cycle, ensuring water security for downstream towns and villages, and preventing catchment degradation, which can lead to floods and water scarcity.

The controversy surrounding the ESA notification highlights the complex interplay between environmental regulation, state politics, and local apprehensions. The Karnataka legislature recently passed a resolution rejecting the Kasturirangan Committee report, arguing that ESA designation should exclude agricultural and residential areas to protect livelihoods. However, the governance analysis clarifies that ESA notification does not alter land tenure or displace communities. Instead, it acts as a regulatory overlay. The notification explicitly protects existing agriculture, plantation activities, and property ownership, allowing for repair of residential houses and continuation of healthcare facilities. This situation illustrates the challenge of environmental federalism, where the Centre's mandate for conservation under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 clashes with the State's economic and political interests. For UPSC, this emphasizes the need for effective communication, stakeholder engagement, and perhaps the implementation of the Kasturirangan report's unadopted recommendations—such as strengthening Gram Sabhas and providing financial incentives for conservation—to achieve sustainable governance.