Nongkhyllem Movement Response From The Government
The Meghalaya state government’s assurance on the eco-tourism project inside Nongkhyllem Wildlife Sanctuary has sparked intense debate. While officials claim it aligns with global conservation models, environmentalists warn of potential ecological disaster.
The state government’s latest assurances regarding the controversial Rs 23.60 crore eco-tourism infrastructure project inside the ecologically-sensitive Nongkhyllem Wildlife Sanctuary have done little to quell mounting concerns among conservationists. The proposed initiative, while dressed up as a feather in the cap of sustainable development, has sparked protests from environmental groups who fear it may open the floodgates to irreparable ecological damage.
Speaking on Wednesday, government sources maintained that the project would cause “no environmental harm” and had been in the pipeline for nearly three years, following what officials described as a “due diligence” process. However, given the sanctuary’s status as a vital ecological zone brimming with rare and endangered species, many remain unconvinced.
The Forest and Environment Department confirmed that the project is yet to receive forest and environment clearances and is currently in the pre-commencement stage. The firm selected for the job, ‘E Factor’, was chosen by the Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd (TCIL) after a tendering process. That said, the appointment has raised a few hackles, with critics questioning whether the company is adequately equipped to handle such a delicate venture.
In response, TCIL clarified that the venture is modelled on Japan’s forest therapy concept – a celebrated approach that emphasises deep ecological mindfulness over commercial tourism. They highlighted parallels with initiatives in Costa Rica, Peru, Ecuador, and Namibia, where conservation tourism is seen not as a bolt-on, but as a fundamental shift towards sustainability.
According to the clarification, the project is not your average tourist trap. Instead of thrill-seekers and adrenaline junkies, the sanctuary would attract “premium sustainable travellers”. Designed in consultation with ecologists and biodiversity specialists, the initiative features “non-invasive, quiet activities” and temporary sculptures using sustainable materials to promote awareness and appreciation of slow tourism. There will be no concrete monstrosities, no garish theme parks – only what the planners insist will be a subtle enhancement of the natural surroundings.
Indeed, TCIL stated that the project’s blueprint is a far cry from traditional development. “It should not be deemed as a development ecotourism project,” the statement read, “but a world-class case study in conservation – aimed at creating a bevy of natural connoisseurs and dissuading local communities from deforestation and extractive livelihoods.”
Nevertheless, the plan must still run the gauntlet of clearance from the National Wildlife Board before any ground is broken. Officials have stressed that the project is community-centric and not commercially motivated, designed to provide an eco-friendly experience and offer a more sustainable livelihood alternative to local residents.
But despite all this high-minded rhetoric, many environmentalists believe the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Earlier this week, members of the Green-Tech Foundation paid a visit to Nongkhyllem Wildlife Sanctuary to raise awareness about what they described as “potential threats” posed by the proposed project. They highlighted the sanctuary’s irreplaceable biodiversity, which includes over 50 species of mammals and 25 species of reptiles. Most notably, the sanctuary is home to nearly 30 of the 140 mammal species listed in Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 – a veritable Noah’s Ark of India’s natural heritage.
In a sharply worded statement, Green-Tech warned that the project, for all its lofty goals, could inadvertently pave the way for “devastative and irreparable damages” to the sanctuary’s delicate ecosystem. Once the balance tips, they argue, there may be no turning back.
And therein lies the rub. While the government may be keen to present the project as a trailblazing example of green innovation, conservationists fear that it may simply be old wine in a new bottle – a classic case of putting lipstick on a pig. The tightrope walk between development and preservation is notoriously difficult, and with Nongkhyllem hanging in the balance, one can only hope that this time, we don’t let the fox guard the henhouse.
In the end, the project’s fate may come down to one question: Can we truly afford to gamble with a sanctuary that is not only a treasure trove of biodiversity, but one of the last few remaining vestiges of undisturbed wilderness?
As they say in Britain, it’s all very well to talk the talk – but now, the state government must prove it can walk the walk.
To read last articles onNongkhyllem click here
To read previous previous article on Nongkhyllem click here
To read first articles on Nongkhyllem click here
What's Your Reaction?
