To,
Mr. Suresh Prabhu
Union Minister for Environment and Forests,
Government of India
Paryavaran Bhavan
New Delhi -110 003

24 July, 1999

Reg.: Temporary extension of Mining Lease in favour of M/s. Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Ltd. in the Kudremukh National Park.

Dear Mr. Prabhu,

We are shocked to learn that your Ministry has approved the extension of the mining lease in favour of KIOCL within the Kudremukh National Park for another year. This has been done contrary to expert and public opinion and in contempt for the spirit and letter of the law.

We had in our letter of 20 July 1999, sought your indulgence to spare no efforts in saving one of the most sensitive regions of the Western Ghats from certain destruction. We had done this not only with the specific purpose of saving the Kudremukh National Park, but also in preventing several other such protected areas from being ravaged by other mining companies and industries, quoting this precedent favouring KIOCL. Such genuine concerns have obviously not found favour with your Ministry.

Shocking indeed is the fact that the decision has been taken completely ignoring, even suppressing, the objections of the Chief Wildlife Warden of Karnataka (CWW). In his unofficial note No. DM-WL.CR-74/98-99, dt. 17-3-99 to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests Karnataka, the CWW has concluded that "the continuance of mining activities will be injurious to the existence of wild life in the National Park" and has recommended to "bring to a halt all mining activities within the National Park on 27-7-99". He has further asserted that "no extension of mining lease be granted to KIOCL, in Kudremukh National Park, beyond 27-7-99, when the original mining lease expires". And, he has proposed that the request for permitting Nellibeedu area for mining should also be rejected on the "same consideration".

What are these considerations? He has for instance raised concerns over the "serious pollution" to the Bhadra River and its tributaries, and stated that "all problems of mining including blasting,^Emovement of vehicles,^E(and) the noise, air and water pollution associated with the mining activities^E..are contradictory to the interest of the Wild Life." He has further stated that KIOCL has been making misleading and false claims regarding the extent of forestland affected by mining, and clarified that upto 3,201.53 ha of forest land is within the KIOCL control as against the company's claim of just 1,416 ha.

As you are aware, the Chief Wildlife Warden is the only designate authority to approve of any activity within a National Park and any activity so approved can and only be in favour of conservation. In the instant case, he has completely abided by the provisions of law and provided very strong reasons for the same. However, this has been wholly rejected by the PCCF so "as to avoid hardship to M/s Kudremukh Iron Ore Company Ltd., which is a Government of India undertaking", vide his letter dated 3-7-99 to the Principal Secretary, Karnataka Dept. of Environment.

If indeed there was a strong case to extend mining, the same should have been done in full compliance of the law and transparently. Such has not been the case in the present instance. The Principal Secretary of the Karnataka Dept. of Environment when forwarding the KIOCL case for approval by your Ministry on 6 July 1999 has wholly suppressed all the objections of the CWW. This amounts not only to suppression of evidence on a matter of such crucial importance, but also is an attempt to subversively push the KIOCL case. Most distressingly, it seems to have found your Ministry's support.

The counsels to the State and Union Government had very categorically assured the Honourable High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No. 22402/1996 dated 30 March 1998 (B. Krishna Bhat vs. State of Karnataka and others), that any license favouring KIOCL, "shall be granted strictly in accordance with the provisions of law applicable in the case". And the Court had directed Union of India to "ensure the compliance of all provisions of law applicable in the case particularly the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and^Ekeep in mind the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in T. N. Godavarman's case". The Court further directed the State Government to "ensure that no forest land is misused or encroached upon by any person or authority". Every one of these assurances and directions has been flouted in the instant case. The Wild Life Act very clearly states that only those activities which are of benefit to wildlife can be allowed to continue inside a sanctuary or national park^Eby no stretch of imagination can mining be said to be beneficial to wildlife!

Further, the extension has been granted when:

  • The so-called "temporary" working permission/extension has no place in the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, legally.

  • Any application for extension has to be forwarded by the State Government to the Central Government at least 6 months before the lease is to expire; in this case, the letter has been forwarded less than a month before the expiry period. Further, the application is extremely sketchy in nature and includes no mining plan or Environment Management Plan as required under the Mines and Mineral Act or National Mineral Policy.

  • No Public Hearing has preceded this clearance as per your assurance to the public earlier in the year, which is in keeping with the spirit of the EIA Notification.

    In extending this clearance, the string of very serious violations by KIOCL of both the Forest and Wildlife Acts has been completely overlooked by both the State and Union Governments. These include, for instance, illegal forest felling, road building and drilling activities in preparation for mining over 310 hectares in the Nellibeedu area of the Kudremukh National Park, and the submergence of 340 hectares of shola forests by the illegal increase in height of the Lakya Tailings Dam. Their most recent violation of this nature includes building roads into the Kachigehole Valley, again within the Kudremukh National Park, to build another dam!

    It is not comprehensible to us how, despite such clear violations, despite the destruction of the Bhadra River (source of water for over 20 million people) by the mining, the MoEF continues to give a clean chit to KIOCL. Pl. note that the Bhadra river also passes through the Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary (a Project Tiger Reserve!). And how the Kudremukh National Park, one of the finest and probably the last vast stretch of shola forests in this part of the Western Ghats, would be plundered for extremely poor quality iron ore and it would still be considered to be in the national interest!

    We very strongly protest your decision to clear the extension of the mining lease and strongly urge that you immediately withdraw the same.

    We, however, support the need to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the environmental and ecological impacts of KIOCL's mining operations in the area, so that a clear understanding can be gained of how much has been lost to posterity and what chances we have of saving what is left. Not, as KIOCL and the State Government wish, to see how much more damage the forest can take.

    We hope you are as committed as we are to stop mining in India's protected areas, which are amongst the last bio-diversity rich areas the country is left with.

    Thanking you,

    Yours sincerely,