Weak Monitoring, Flawed Clearances Haunt Uttarakhand’s Development Projects.
Dehradun: Ground-level compliance of environmental clearances in Uttarakhand continues to remain weak. The monitoring mechanisms are virtually absent in several cases, reveal IMI.
STS Lepcha, IFS (Retd.), former Additional PCCF Uttarakhand and President of Uttarakhand Sustainable Development Forum (UKSDF), the state chapter of Integrated Mountain Initiative (IMI) said observations are part of IMI’s detailed response submitted after consultations with the Uttarakhand Government and the Auditor General’s office for a Government of India agency meeting held on April 28, 2026.
Quoting the submission, Lepcha said there is “hardly any mechanism to monitor compliance of environmental clearance conditions closely.”
He pointed out that institutional processes themselves are lagging, noting that the PARIVESH portal has not been updated since 2021 and meetings of the State Environmental Impact Appraisal Authority have not been held since October 2024.
The IMI response underlines that multiple small-scale mining and infrastructure projects are proceeding without any cumulative impact assessment, leading to ecological stress on rivers.
Lepcha referred to the damage to spawning grounds of Golden Mahseer in river tributaries as an example of the consequences on aquatic biodiversity.
At higher altitudes, particularly in fragile zones, road construction activities are being carried out with limited ecological safeguards.
Lepcha noted that contractors operating in such terrains often function without effective oversight, as monitoring mechanisms in remote areas remain inadequate.
The submission also points to indiscriminate dumping of muck and debris on steep slopes, which is contributing to siltation of rivers, choking of streams, and degradation of landscapes.
These activities, Lepcha said, are also impacting areas that hold cultural and religious significance for local communities.
On public participation, IMI state chapter has observed that public hearings have limited effectiveness, with local communities often influenced by short-term economic benefits linked to development projects.
Lepcha noted that environmental awareness remains low in remote regions, and concerns raised during hearings are not always meaningfully reflected in clearance conditions.
The issue of compensatory afforestation has also come under focus, with limited availability of land leading to pending cases and a growing backlog.
Lepcha stated that afforestation efforts in plains cannot offset biodiversity loss in ecologically distinct regions such as alpine meadows and high-altitude landscapes, stressing the need for a shift towards eco-restoration-based approaches.
Highlighting the ecological diversity of Uttarakhand, the IMI submission notes that current environmental assessments often focus narrowly on tree cover, overlooking ecosystems such as grasslands, alpine bugyals, and cold deserts, which support unique flora and fauna.
Lepcha added that such landscapes should not be treated as degraded forests or diverted for afforestation.
IMI says thev consultation process involving IMI, the state government, and the Auditor General’s office is expected to feed into broader policy discussions on environmental clearances and development planning in Himalayan states.
#HimalayanEcology #Uttarakhand #EnvironmentalClearance #IMI
