Why in News: Odisha has begun the process to declare the Rushikulya rookery in Ganjam district as a Biodiversity Heritage Site, recognising its global importance as a major nesting ground for Olive Ridley sea turtles and a lifeline for local communities.
Rushikulya rookery: a unique coastal ecosystem
The Rushikulya rookery stretches for about 10 km from New Podampeta to Agasti Nuagaon along the river mouth and adjoining sea beach in Ganjam district. It is recognised as one of the world’s major mass nesting, or Arribada, sites where thousands of Olive Ridley sea turtles come ashore to lay eggs every year. This fragile coastal belt also supports migratory and resident birds, diverse plant species and a rich estuarine environment.
The surrounding Prayagi reserve forest, spread over nearly 415 hectares near the sea mouth, further enhances the ecological value of the landscape. This forest harbouring many native and medicinal plants links the marine and terrestrial habitats, creating a mosaic of biodiversity that is rare along India’s eastern coast.
Why biodiversity heritage status matters
The Odisha government, through the Odisha Biodiversity Board, has initiated the process to confer Biodiversity Heritage Site status on around 747 hectares in and around the rookery under Section 37 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. Scientists and researchers have already conducted a preliminary survey along the river mouth and sea beach after the Berhampur forest division submitted a formal proposal. This move signals a policy-level commitment to long-term protection of the rookery’s ecology and its associated cultural landscape.
Confluence of nature, culture and faith
Rushikulya is not only an ecological asset but also a cultural and spiritual space. The river is closely associated with local rituals, festivals and traditional practices that have evolved around its seasonal rhythms and natural cycles. Near the river mouth stands the Bateswar Temple, which embodies a convergence of sacred ecology and cultural heritage amid a biodiverse landscape.
What are Biodiversity Heritage Sites ?
Biodiversity Heritage Sites (BHS) are unique, ecologically fragile, and biodiversity-rich areas—terrestrial, coastal, or inland waters—designated under Section 37 of India’s Biological Diversity Act, 2002. They harbor rare, threatened species and high endemism, emphasizing conservation without restricting local community usage
Key Features of Biodiversity Heritage Sites:
- Designation: Declared by State Governments in consultation with local bodies (Panchayats/BMCs).
- Significance: These sites often contain high species richness, wild ancestors of cultivated plants, and significant cultural/aesthetic values.
- Purpose: To enhance the quality of life of local communities and preserve unique ecosystems.
- Notable Examples in India:
- Nallur Tamarind Grove (Karnataka): India’s first BHS (2007), known for ancient tamarind trees.
- Majuli Island (Assam): Largest river island with unique aquatic/terrestrial biodiversity.
- Aravalli Biodiversity Park (Haryana): Urban green space.
- Chilika Lake (Odisha): Major habitat for migratory birds.
- Gupteswar Forest (Odisha): Rich in biodiversity and sacred groves.
- Ambaragudda (Karnataka): Features rare Shola vegetation.
Biodiversity Heritage Sites of India:
Q1. Consider the following statements regarding the Rushikulya Rookery:
-
It is located in the Ganjam district of Odisha and is globally recognized as an Arribada site for Olive Ridley sea turtles.
-
The rookery is situated at the mouth of the Mahanadi River, supporting a rich estuarine environment.
-
The ecosystem’s ecological value is further enhanced by the adjoining Prayagi reserve forest, which connects marine and terrestrial habitats.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1 and 3 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3
Q2. With reference to ‘Biodiversity Heritage Sites (BHS)’ in India, consider the following statements:
-
They are notified by the Central Government under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
-
The designation of a BHS restricts all traditional resource usage by local communities to ensure absolute conservation of threatened species.
-
India’s first Biodiversity Heritage Site was declared in Karnataka.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) None
Q3. Consider the following pairs of Biodiversity Heritage Sites and their key features/locations:
-
Ambaragudda : Rare Shola vegetation
-
Majuli Island : Largest river island located in West Bengal
-
Nallur Tamarind Grove : Ancient trees and India’s first BHS
How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?
(a) Only one pair
(b) Only two pairs
(c) All three pairs
(d) None of the pairs
Q4. Consider the following statements:
-
Statement-I: State Governments have the authority to unilaterally declare any ecologically fragile area as a Biodiversity Heritage Site (BHS) for immediate conservation.
-
Statement-II: The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 mandates consultation with local bodies, such as Panchayats or Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs), before designating a BHS.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
(a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I.
(b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct but Statement-II is not the correct explanation for Statement-I.
(c) Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect.
(d) Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct.
Answer Key and Explanations
Ans 1. (b) 1 and 3 only
-
Statement 1 is correct: The passage states the Rushikulya rookery is in the Ganjam district and is a major mass nesting (Arribada) site for Olive Ridley turtles.
-
Statement 2 is incorrect: It is located along the Rushikulya river mouth, not the Mahanadi river.
-
Statement 3 is correct: The text mentions the surrounding Prayagi reserve forest links the marine and terrestrial habitats.
Ans 2. (b) 3 only
-
Statement 1 is incorrect: BHS are designated under Section 37 of India’s Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (not the EPA, 1986) by State Governments (not the Central Government).
-
Statement 2 is incorrect: The passage explicitly notes that BHS designation emphasizes conservation without restricting local community usage.
-
Statement 3 is correct: Nallur Tamarind Grove in Karnataka was India’s first BHS, declared in 2007.
Ans 3. (b) Only two pairs
-
Pair 1 is correctly matched: Ambaragudda (Karnataka) features rare Shola vegetation.
-
Pair 2 is incorrectly matched: Majuli Island is the largest river island, but it is located in Assam, not West Bengal.
-
Pair 3 is correctly matched: Nallur Tamarind Grove is known for its ancient tamarind trees and was the first BHS.
Ans 4. (d) Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct.
-
Statement-I is incorrect: State Governments cannot declare these sites “unilaterally.” They must do so in consultation with local bodies.
-
Statement-II is correct: Section 37 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 requires the State Government to consult with local bodies like Panchayats/BMCs before making the declaration.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
- Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest Finance (LEAF) Coalition, a collective of the United States, United Kingdom and Norway governments, came up with a $1 billion fund.
- LEAF is supported by transnational corporations (TNCs) like Unilever plc, Amazon.com, Inc, Nestle, Airbnb, Inc as well as Emergent, a US-based non-profit.
- The world lost more than 10 million hectares of primary tropical forest cover last year, an area roughly the size of Switzerland.
- Ending tropical and subtropical forest loss by 2030 is a crucial part of meeting global climate, biodiversity and sustainable development goals. Protecting tropical forests offers one of the biggest opportunities for climate action in the coming decade.
- Tropical forests are massive carbon sinks and by investing in their protection, public and private players are likely to stock up on their carbon credits.
- The LEAF coalition initiative is a step towards concretising the aims and objectives of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) mechanism.
- REDD+ was created by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It monetised the value of carbon locked up in the tropical forests of most developing countries, thereby propelling these countries to help mitigate climate change.
- It is a unique initiative as it seeks to help developing countries in battling the double-edged sword of development versus ecological commitment.
- The initiative comes at a crucial time. The tropics have lost close to 12.2 million hectares (mha) of tree cover last year according to global estimates released by Global Forest Watch.
- Of this, a loss of 4.2 mha occurred within humid tropical primary forests alone. It should come as no surprise that most of these lost forests were located in the developing countries of Latin America, Africa and South Asia.
- Brazil has fared dismally on the parameter of ‘annual primary forest loss’ among all countries. It has lost 1.7 mha of primary forests that are rich storehouse of carbon. India’s estimated loss in 2020 stands at 20.8 kilo hectares.
- Between 2002-2020, Brazil’s total area of humid primary forest reduced by 7.7 per cent while India’s reduced by 3.4 per cent.
- Although the loss in India is not as drastic as in Brazil, its position is nevertheless precarious. For India, this loss is equivalent to 951 metric tonnes worth carbon dioxide emissions released in the atmosphere.
- It is important to draw comparisons between Brazil and India as both countries have adopted a rather lackadaisical attitude towards deforestation-induced climate change. The Brazilian government hardly did anything to control the massive fires that gutted the Amazon rainforest in 2019.
- It is mostly around May that forest fires peak in India. However, this year India, witnessed massive forest fires in early March in states like Odisha, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh and Mizoram among others.
- The European Union’s Copernicus Atmospheric Monitoring Service claimed that 0.2 metric tonnes of carbon was emitted in the Uttarakhand forest fires.
- Implementation of the LEAF Coalition plan will help pump in fresh rigour among developing countries like India, that are reluctant to recognise the contributions of their forest dwelling populations in mitigating climate change.
- With the deadline for proposal submission fast approaching, India needs to act swiftly on a revised strategy.
- Although India has pledged to carry out its REDD+ commitments, it is impossible to do so without seeking knowledge from its forest dwelling population.
Context:-
At the recently concluded Leaders’ Summit on Climate in April 2021, Lowering Emissions by Accelerating Forest Finance (LEAF) Coalition, a collective of the United States, United Kingdom and Norway governments, came up with a $1 billion fund plan that shall be offered to countries committed to arrest the decline of their tropical forests by 2030.
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]What is LEAF Coalition?
Why LEAF Coalition?
Brazil & India
According to the UN-REDD programme, after the energy sector, deforestation accounts for massive carbon emissions — close to 11 per cent — in the atmosphere. Rapid urbanisation and commercialisation of forest produce are the main causes behind rampant deforestation across tropical forests.
Tribes, Forests and Government
Disregarding climate change as a valid excuse for the fires, Indian government officials were quick to lay the blame for deforestation on activities of forest dwellers and even labelled them “mischievous elements” and “unwanted elements”.
Policy makers around the world have emphasised the role of indigenous tribes and local communities in checking deforestation. These communities depend on forests for their survival as well as livelihood. Hence, they understand the need to protect forests. However, by posing legitimate environmental concerns as obstacles to real development, governments of developing countries swiftly avoid protection of forests and rights of forest dwellers.
For instance, the Government of India has not been forthcoming in recognising the socio-economic, civil, political or even cultural rights of forest dwellers. According to data from the Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs in December, 2020 over 55 per cent of this population has still not been granted either individual or community ownership of their lands.
To make matters worse, the government has undertaken systematic and sustained measures to render the landmark Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 ineffective in its implementation. The Act had sought to legitimise claims of forest dwellers on occupied forest land.
Various government decisions have seriously undermined the position of indigenous people within India. These include proposing amendments to the obsolete Indian Forest Act, 1927 that give forest officials the power to take away forest dwellers’ rights and to even use firearms with impunity.
There is also the Supreme Court’s order of February, 2019 directing state governments to evict illegal encroachers of forest land or millions of forest dwellers inhabiting forests since generations as a measure to conserve wildlife. Finally, there is the lack of data on novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) deaths among the forest dwelling population;
Tardy administration, insufficient supervision, apathetic attitude and a lack of political intent defeat the cause of forest dwelling populations in India, thereby directly affecting efforts at arresting deforestation.
Way Forward
Tuntiak Katan, a global indigenous leader from Ecuador and general coordinator of the Global Alliance of Territorial Communities, aptly indicated the next steps at the Climate Summit:
“The first step is recognition of land rights. The second step is the recognition of the contributions of local communities and indigenous communities, meaning the contributions of indigenous peoples.We also need recognition of traditional knowledge practices in order to fight climate change”
Perhaps India can begin by taking the first step.