Protest over Flyover: Controversy Brews Over Elevated Highway Plan through Bannerghatta Park

The southern Indian state of Karnataka stares at an ecological powder keg as authorities mull constructing a major elevated highway bisecting Bannerghatta National Park near Bengaluru. The ambitious infrastructure project to ease traffic woes faces swelling opposition over expected environmental fallout within the delicate wilderness sanctuary.

Understanding the Sensitive Site

Sprawled across 250 square kilometers in the hilly outskirts of Bengaluru, the Bannerghatta forest zone holds special ecological significance as a rare natural expanse amidst burgeoning urbanization. Originally established in 1970 as a designated national park in 2002, this protected reserve occupies parts of the larger Cauvery river basin ecosystem.

Its varied habitats encompass dry and moist deciduous forests, scrublands, grasslands, and wetlands that sustain abundant wildlife. Four rural villages also reside within park boundaries. As the sole natural lung preserving Bengaluru's green cover and climate resilience, Bannerghatta requires zealous safeguarding.

Home to 100 endangered Asian elephants, nearly 80 leopards and numerous other vulnerable species, the park’s conservation priority remains extremely high. The forested patches and elephant passageways facilitate seasonal migratory movements and foraging needs vital for this megaherbivore population’s survival.

Key Details of the Controversial Infrastructure Project

The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), which oversees national road infrastructure projects, proposed developing an elevated 6-lane highway across Bannerghatta National Park. Forming part of the Bengaluru Satellite Toll Ring Road project, this section spanning 3.85 km aims to connect Bannerghatta Road with Jigani.

The planned flyover alignment cuts through 27.45 acres of the park’s protected core critical habitat and 14 acres of the buffer zone. Park boundaries narrow considerably in certain areas. Constructing concrete support pillars and associated access roads around them would require felling nearly 1300 trees within primary elephant and tiger terrain. Though the design is elevated, the broad highway would dominate landscapes.

As per records, the NHAI secured wildlife clearance in 2022 itself from the National Board for Wildlife, the apex body governing protected area projects. The ambitious expressway looks to relieve exponential traffic growth in Bengaluru's southern suburbs. If implemented on schedule, the project costing ₹8.5 billion could finish by December 2025.

Consequences for Bannerghatta's Wildlife

Conservation scientists and environmental activists have jointly opposed the highway plan as disastrous for biodiversity. They highlight two major downsides:

Habitat Destruction:

Construction activity and tree felling along 3.85 km strips would severely degrade wildlife habitat and obstruct animal navigation routes. The project footprint falls within a prime elephant corridor regularly traversed by herds, which cannot afford losing more space. Leopards, sloth bears, gaurs, and countless small fauna also stand imperiled by external habitat intrusion and fragmentation.

Disturbance Due to Traffic Impacts:

The constant traffic stream of 20,000+ vehicles and associated noise, air, and light pollution would disturb wildlife behavioral patterns and impede breeding. The likelihood of roadkill deaths and injuries also escalates, especially near walls. Stress combined with shrinking rangelands may even spark increased human-animal conflicts.

Alternative Options Ignored

Wildlife groups argue the NHAI overlooked alternative alignments for the highway that could have avoided the park, instead prioritizing land acquisition feasibility. They recommend elevated corridor options bordering (not inside) the park, besides expanding existing roads. Avoiding fragmentation of this Protected Area should get highest precedence they assert.

Ongoing Deliberations

Given intense public scrutiny over potential adverse impacts, the project’s fate remains under review by the Karnataka state government currently. The State Board for Wildlife and Forest Department aim to conduct additional impact studies before granting local construction permits. They also demand more detailed mitigation strategies from NHAI through public consultations.

The state forest minister has assured he will veto the alignment if research establishes irreparable harm. However, authorities also regard the expressway imperative to transform road infrastructure coping with soaring traffic in Bengaluru's southern vicinity. For now, the plan stays suspended until government entities thoroughly reassess ecological repercussions.

Broader Implications of the Controversy

The clashes over the Bannerghatta expressway carry far-reaching implications concerning sustainable development and public trust doctrine. This discord indicates two key issues:

Pressure on Shrinking Protected Areas:

As India’s cities balloon in size, megaproject demands increasingly eat into adjacent wilderness zones vital for climate and communities. The Bannerghatta case exemplifies a recurring pattern of biodiverse ecosystems losing ground. While NHAI contends it has the green light, protestors highlight total area loss matters more than percentage ratios distortedly downplaying damage. Saving invaluable carbon sinks like Bannerghatta warrants a broader habitat perspective.

Lack of Transparent Governance:

Earning public trust remains integral for governments backing disruptive interventions in sensitive habitats. Yet opaque decision-making, exclusion of ecological experts from panels, and overriding dissent has provoked activism alleging authoritarian procedures. Protestors demand truly participatory, informed assessments of bordering alignments to prevent the National Park’s arbitrary fragmentation post-facto. They dismiss mitigation promises as eyewash that cannot compensate habitat erosion in an interconnected ecosystem.

The Road Ahead

As both sides await final verdicts on the expressway’s alignment, the Bannerghatta land use conflict spotlights critical governance deficits. It underscores how pursuit of short-term infrastructure goals often sidestep ecological build-up and local voices integral to sustaining cities long-term.

India still loses natural forests nearly thrice the size of Central Park annually between roads, mining, dams and factories. As Bengaluru’s urban needs multiply, a more balanced reconciliation of conservation and welfare interests becomes paramount. Bannerghatta today represents just one symbolic battle amidst the bigger baggage of biodiversity tradeoffs facing burgeoning metros countrywide.

Getting policies right requires authorities tuning decisions to scientific evidence, not arbitrary targets. Due process adhering to environmental rule of law also bears utmost relevance when tampering with public commons. As showed by protestor persistence, people nation-wide now demand meaningful public trust protection for threatened habitats like Bannerghatta too.

Thus, while hopes persist for an alternative Bangalore flyover alignment, the real opportunity lies in evolving inclusive, sustainable planning frameworks benefiting both wildlife and urban populations. At stake is not just Bannerghatta’s survival, but also setting the tone across India on addressing the perils of undisciplined urbanization.