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
Steve Ovett, the famous British middle-distance athlete, won the 800-metres gold medal at the Moscow Olympics of 1980. Just a few days later, he was about to win a 5,000-metres race at London’s Crystal Palace. Known for his burst of acceleration on the home stretch, he had supreme confidence in his ability to out-sprint rivals. With the final 100 metres remaining,
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]Ovett waved to the crowd and raised a hand in triumph. But he had celebrated a bit too early. At the finishing line, Ireland’s John Treacy edged past Ovett. For those few moments, Ovett had lost his sense of reality and ignored the possibility of a negative event.
This analogy works well for the India story and our policy failures , including during the ongoing covid pandemic. While we have never been as well prepared or had significant successes in terms of growth stability as Ovett did in his illustrious running career, we tend to celebrate too early. Indeed, we have done so many times before.
It is as if we’re convinced that India is destined for greater heights, come what may, and so we never run through the finish line. Do we and our policymakers suffer from a collective optimism bias, which, as the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman once wrote, “may well be the most significant of the cognitive biases”? The optimism bias arises from mistaken beliefs which form expectations that are better than the reality. It makes us underestimate chances of a negative outcome and ignore warnings repeatedly.
The Indian economy had a dream run for five years from 2003-04 to 2007-08, with an average annual growth rate of around 9%. Many believed that India was on its way to clocking consistent double-digit growth and comparisons with China were rife. It was conveniently overlooked that this output expansion had come mainly came from a few sectors: automobiles, telecom and business services.
Indians were made to believe that we could sprint without high-quality education, healthcare, infrastructure or banking sectors, which form the backbone of any stable economy. The plan was to build them as we went along, but then in the euphoria of short-term success, it got lost.
India’s exports of goods grew from $20 billion in 1990-91 to over $310 billion in 2019-20. Looking at these absolute figures it would seem as if India has arrived on the world stage. However, India’s share of global trade has moved up only marginally. Even now, the country accounts for less than 2% of the world’s goods exports.
More importantly, hidden behind this performance was the role played by one sector that should have never made it to India’s list of exports—refined petroleum. The share of refined petroleum exports in India’s goods exports increased from 1.4% in 1996-97 to over 18% in 2011-12.
An import-intensive sector with low labour intensity, exports of refined petroleum zoomed because of the then policy regime of a retail price ceiling on petroleum products in the domestic market. While we have done well in the export of services, our share is still less than 4% of world exports.
India seemed to emerge from the 2008 global financial crisis relatively unscathed. But, a temporary demand push had played a role in the revival—the incomes of many households, both rural and urban, had shot up. Fiscal stimulus to the rural economy and implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission scales had led to the salaries of around 20% of organized-sector employees jumping up. We celebrated, but once again, neither did we resolve the crisis brewing elsewhere in India’s banking sector, nor did we improve our capacity for healthcare or quality education.
Employment saw little economy-wide growth in our boom years. Manufacturing jobs, if anything, shrank. But we continued to celebrate. Youth flocked to low-productivity service-sector jobs, such as those in hotels and restaurants, security and other services. The dependence on such jobs on one hand and high-skilled services on the other was bound to make Indian society more unequal.
And then, there is agriculture, an elephant in the room. If and when farm-sector reforms get implemented, celebrations would once again be premature. The vast majority of India’s farmers have small plots of land, and though these farms are at least as productive as larger ones, net absolute incomes from small plots can only be meagre.
A further rise in farm productivity and consequent increase in supply, if not matched by a demand rise, especially with access to export markets, would result in downward pressure on market prices for farm produce and a further decline in the net incomes of small farmers.
We should learn from what John Treacy did right. He didn’t give up, and pushed for the finish line like it was his only chance at winning. Treacy had years of long-distance practice. The same goes for our economy. A long grind is required to build up its base before we can win and celebrate. And Ovett did not blame anyone for his loss. We play the blame game. Everyone else, right from China and the US to ‘greedy corporates’, seems to be responsible for our failures.
We have lowered absolute poverty levels and had technology-based successes like Aadhaar and digital access to public services. But there are no short cuts to good quality and adequate healthcare and education services. We must remain optimistic but stay firmly away from the optimism bias.
In the end, it is not about how we start, but how we finish. The disastrous second wave of covid and our inability to manage it is a ghastly reminder of this fact.