Panna national park, home to 24 tigers, will be destroyed if the proposed linking of the rivers Ken and Betwa goes ahead, fear wildlife activists. Work was scheduled to start in December 2015. But the project isn’t likely to receive environmental clearances by then.



Linking the rivers Ken and Betwa is the first in a mammoth engineering scheme. The Ministry of Water Resources plans to link about 37 rivers across the country in the coming decades. Diverting waters from one river to the other is being promoted as a solution to poverty and increasing agricultural productivity.

The chief ministers of the states of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, and the central water resources minister signed a memorandum of understanding to connect the two rivers on 25 August 2005. Since then the project hung fire in the face of protests by environmentalists and social activists. Within two months of coming to power, the new cabinet approved the project on 24 July 2014.

About 660 million cubic metres of water will be siphoned off river Ken in Madhya Pradesh and channelled to river Betwa in Uttar Pradesh through a 220-km long canal. A 77-metre high dam will be built on the Ken that will submerge about 4,000 ha or 7% of Panna’s forests. Besides, an additional 2,000 ha of forest land and 3,000 ha of farmland will be submerged.

The goal of the plan, estimated to cost rupees 9,393 crores (£1bn) in 2008, is to provide water to 600,000 ha in five districts in Madhya Pradesh and three districts in Uttar Pradesh. An additional 60,000 ha along the canal banks will also get water. Around 1,600 to 1,800 households in 10 villages will be displaced.

The rationale for linking rivers is to utilise the full potential of the country’s water resources. Some parts of India receive more rain and consequently their rivers carry the excess water into the sea. Ecologists and activists challenge the notion that this water runs waste. They say the promoters of river linking don’t understand river ecology. Freshwater enriches the coastal waters, maintains salinity levels of mangrove areas in the deltas, and are vital for the survival of aquatic fauna such as river dolphins, gharial, and fish.

The critically endangered gharial is one of the creatures likely to be affected when river Ken is diverted. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

Around Christmas 2014, public consultations were held in two villages in Madhya Pradesh, but not in Uttar Pradesh even though many from that state will also be affected.



South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers, and People faulted the Ministry of Environment and Forests for not following rules. It alleged the EIA was available online only on the day of the second public consultation, documents were in English that villagers couldn’t read, and mandatory advance notices of the meetings weren’t issued to the village administrations. Few people attending the meetings knew what the project entailed. At one meeting, political activists of the ruling party shouted down anyone who raised an issue.

Faulty EIA

Brij Gopal, a professor of environmental sciences, faulted the EIA for not taking into account environmental flows, water balance, and said the volume of “surplus” water that could be diverted to the Betwa was miscalculated.

The wildlife section of the EIA is ludicrous. Species affected include sangai, a deer found only in far away Manipur; slow loris from the northeast; slender loris from south India; Philippine pangolin, found only in the Philippines; and brown palm civet, endemic to the wet forests of south India.

While the EIA estimates that the dam would submerge 7% of the park, forest officials estimated 28% to 30% would go under. A sizeable section of the report promotes sport fishing, prohibited in protected areas. Do the authors of the EIA know the relevant laws and policies?

The document also touts the project’s many “advantages.” The reservoir would apparently benefit the park by preventing encroachments and entry of livestock. Although it acknowledges the reservoir would drown forests of territorial animals like tigers, it says would solve the drinking water problem faced by wild animals. Connecting the two rivers offers fish an alternate route to migrate upriver, while the reservoir would get rid of pollutants by sedimentation.

Activists challenge the National Water Development Agency’s claim that the Ken has surplus water. The document provides similar rainfall data for both rivers, but doesn’t explain what makes one a surplus river. In fact the area is prone to drought, and impoverished tribal communities living downstream of the dam would suffer even more if the rivers were linked and water diverted.

In the meantime, before any clearances were given, on 15 September 2014, the Ministry of Environment and Forests approved pre-construction activities. Himanshu Thakkar of South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers, and People pointed out this is illegal. Any work in national parks and sanctuaries requires clearance from the supreme court.



From a conservation failure, Panna turned a corner to make a remarkable comeback.

Panna has just recovered from one crisis, after poachers cleaned the park of its tigers in 2008. By introducing tigers from other parks and upgrading their protection, the population has slowly increased over the past six years. This could be all for naught.

Wildlife activist Kishor Rithe wrote in Sanctuary Asia that the project “would involve massive construction of two tunnels, two power houses, and an entire irrigation colony all inside the core of the Panna tiger reserve, where a herculean effort had just seen the return of tigers.”

Core areas of tiger reserves are technically sacrosanct, where no human activity, besides tourism, is condoned. It is state policy to relocate any residents living in those areas. For years the forest department prevented residents from gathering forest produce and grazing their livestock. Now the very forest that was off limits to local people is going to be destroyed.

The National Tiger Conservation Authority, which largely funded this reintroduction of tigers, may now have to look for a new home to move these 24 tigers and their cubs.

Joanna van Guisen, a wildlife expert who has worked in Panna for many years, says river-linking would be “a death knell for Panna. Allowing such a project to come up in one of India’s precious tiger reserves undermines the whole concept of national park. Local villagers understandably wonder why this should be allowed when many other projects have been prevented. If it can be used by the irrigation department and flooded for this project of questionable benefit, ‘why should we not be able to use it too.’”

The project is yet to get environmental clearance, forest clearance, approval by the Standing Committee for the National Board for Wildlife, and the supreme court. Although this process will take time, there’s no place for complacency. Uma Bharati, the minister for water resources, who is from Madhya Pradesh, is keen on seeing it through. Besides, this is the test case for the grandiose national river-linking project.

In the latest development, the National Water Development Agency submitted a revised final EIA on 22 July.

When Panna lost its tigers a few years ago, there was an outcry. News media around the world carried stories, and there were vociferous debates in television studios. Now the forest itself will be destroyed, and strangely, there is no major campaign to stave off this disaster.

If Panna, one of the most high profile tiger reserves in the country, could go so easily, no other park is safe.