3 ms·

I have backpacked through one of the regions where some of the construction you are talking about is going on. In one of the Himalayan states, one of their ambi

I have backpacked through one of the regions where some of the construction you are talking about is going on. In one of the Himalayan states, one of their ambitious highway projects has caused destruction with little benefit to the local populace and far negative consequences to the terrain and environment. Pursuing development is good but it shouldn't come at the cost of destroying your ecology and environment, specially the fragile ones. So I would hold my judgement on the effectiveness and vision of the current establishment. I tried searching for the issues once I came back but I was surprised how less effort was given in the country's English media to cover this. With the amount of publications that seemingly are there, I would have assumed this to be covered extensively and researched. I would add that I am not against the improvement in connectivity, the Himalayas are beautiful. There are far better ways to improve connectivity which keeps the beauty of the areas preserved. It would have taken more time and money but the dividends would have been more. I will leave some blog posts I found on the issue for reference; hopefully someone acts on this horrific "development" going on. [1] https://indiaclimatedialogue.net/2018/09/24/highway-project-poses-grave-danger-to-garhwal-himalayas/ https://indiaclimatedialogue.net/2018/09/24/highway-project-... [2]https://sandrp.in/2020/02/24/uttarakhand-road-widening-work-in-almora-damages-traditional-water-sources/ https://sandrp.in/2020/02/24/uttarakhand-road-widening-work-... [3] https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/scorched-earth-uttarakhand-s-road-to-wildlife-destruction-117041800034_1.html https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/sc...

Retric 6y ago
If you happen to be standing near a highway sure it’s ugly, but they have minimal impact on low population density areas.
- actuator 6y ago
  I am not sure about that, few of the issues I saw was - inconsiderate cutting/blasting in landslide prone areas. - destruction of vegetation by throwing away the waste/debris from the cutting/blasting downhill which covers the slope. [1] - non disposal of the same waste impacting river flow paths and debris narrowing the river bed There are far more issues relating to local population and ecology which have been documented. [1] I have photos of my own but this also represents the conditions there quite well. https://images.firstpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/naalupani.jpeg https://images.firstpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/naal...
  - Retric 6y ago
    Again that’s from standing next to a highway, try and work out the percentage of land being covered by highways in that region. They are highlighted on maps and travelers tend to spend a lot of time on them, but they don’t actually cover that much surface area compared to local roads, houses, etc.
    - actuator 6y ago
      Sure, the area of highways is less but the impact is not localised. If you see the articles that I had quoted in my original comment, two of them mention impacts which bubble up to other areas as well. Also, it is not necessary that even area around highways has to be an eyesore/badly degraded. Mountainous roads are some of the most beautiful paths to travel on and there are plenty of examples where construction has happened keeping that in perspective.
shripadk 6y ago
I am not disputing that there might be some bad ecological impact of road construction projects. I bet such issues exist in every part of the World where development is taking place. Here is a list of all the Highway revolts that took place in United States alone for various environmental violations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_revolts_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_revolts_in_the_United_... The numbers are staggering in comparison to what violations happen in India. But still I am not justifying it by saying that it should continue to happen. I am just saying that these issues exist everywhere and there is no point singling out India for this. And those 20,000+ kms highways are not built in Himalayas alone but in the entire Country. But yes, I understand and share your concern that ecology must not be affected for any project whatsoever and will 100% support you on that point. I just wish that people take things holistically when it comes to any project that happens in India in the same way you would take projects that happen in your own countries. After all, India has to develop and for that to happen you have to clear out land, build roads, construct buildings, dams etc. It can't happen on virgin soil. Something has to be removed for the development to happen. Isn't it? If you have an alternate way of going about it please suggest.
- actuator 6y ago
  I apologize if it looked like I was singling it out, my intention was to just point out that not all construction might be something to feel happy about; some of it should definitely be questioned. Regarding the US example, since most of the freeway construction in US happened long time back. A lot of these oppositions are old, we are now much more aware about the human impact to ecology. Also, isn't it better to learn and not repeat the mistakes of even others.
haltingproblem 6y ago
These kinds of comments show the paradox of the modern urban professional. The ones who have reached the top 1-2% in terms of educational achievement and career prospects. They live in cities or remote locations with full amenities - car, electricity and internet, smartphones, laptops. They use apps powered by the global internet and consume from the global supply chain. And they hike in the Himalayas with their DSLR, patagonia/north face gear and post the snaps to instagram. They just want to freeze the state of development, fossil fuel usage, roads, etc. Because they see no benefit to themselves of any more of those things. Everything is swell for them. This denies the benefits of development to the hundreds of millions who still need access to education, health care and economic opportunities. There is NO country in the world that has reached first world status without going through development. I am sure you think there is a way but it is just one way to deny the poor of benefits. There is no widespread environmental destruction. Every measure forest cover, pollution, habitat has improved over the past decades. Just because things are great for you is not an excuse to unintentionally wage class warfare.
- actuator 6y ago
  Wow, that's a loaded comment that makes a lot of assumptions about me. I am not against connectivity or improving the life of people there, a lot of these areas are already connected by metalled road. What was happening when I was traveling there was widening of the roads indiscriminately, if you talk to people there or even read some of the articles I have linked, there isn't much benefit that local people are seeing because of this. There are far more important things that would have been beneficial to people living there like education, healthcare and some of them can be improved drastically with something as simple as improving LTE coverage. All I am saying is, I would have preferred to see the myriad of problems associated with the project addressed, I am not saying do not build, but build sustainably. About the metrics you think that haven't degraded, I don't have sources ready on all of them but I just looked up forest cover and one of the most green regions is now covered with plantations a lot. [1] Plantation cover != Forest cover. Lastly, just because I am wearing Patagonia/North Face because of their environmental commitments, doesn't mean I expect everyone else to do the same. There are other paths, which might not be perfect but will be better, it doesn't hurt to raise issues when you see them so you can explore those paths. The choice is not binary. [1] https://bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/d586f57c-6ef3-42e5-a68c-031b10d950b9_586x631.png https://bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.am...

Retric 6y ago

If you happen to be standing near a highway sure it’s ugly, but they have minimal impact on low population density areas.

actuator 6y ago
I am not sure about that, few of the issues I saw was - inconsiderate cutting/blasting in landslide prone areas. - destruction of vegetation by throwing away the waste/debris from the cutting/blasting downhill which covers the slope. [1] - non disposal of the same waste impacting river flow paths and debris narrowing the river bed There are far more issues relating to local population and ecology which have been documented. [1] I have photos of my own but this also represents the conditions there quite well. https://images.firstpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/naalupani.jpeg https://images.firstpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/naal...
- Retric 6y ago
  Again that’s from standing next to a highway, try and work out the percentage of land being covered by highways in that region. They are highlighted on maps and travelers tend to spend a lot of time on them, but they don’t actually cover that much surface area compared to local roads, houses, etc.
  - actuator 6y ago
    Sure, the area of highways is less but the impact is not localised. If you see the articles that I had quoted in my original comment, two of them mention impacts which bubble up to other areas as well. Also, it is not necessary that even area around highways has to be an eyesore/badly degraded. Mountainous roads are some of the most beautiful paths to travel on and there are plenty of examples where construction has happened keeping that in perspective.

shripadk 6y ago

I am not disputing that there might be some bad ecological impact of road construction projects. I bet such issues exist in every part of the World where development is taking place. Here is a list of all the Highway revolts that took place in United States alone for various environmental violations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_revolts_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_revolts_in_the_United_... The numbers are staggering in comparison to what violations happen in India. But still I am not justifying it by saying that it should continue to happen. I am just saying that these issues exist everywhere and there is no point singling out India for this. And those 20,000+ kms highways are not built in Himalayas alone but in the entire Country. But yes, I understand and share your concern that ecology must not be affected for any project whatsoever and will 100% support you on that point. I just wish that people take things holistically when it comes to any project that happens in India in the same way you would take projects that happen in your own countries. After all, India has to develop and for that to happen you have to clear out land, build roads, construct buildings, dams etc. It can't happen on virgin soil. Something has to be removed for the development to happen. Isn't it? If you have an alternate way of going about it please suggest.

actuator 6y ago
I apologize if it looked like I was singling it out, my intention was to just point out that not all construction might be something to feel happy about; some of it should definitely be questioned. Regarding the US example, since most of the freeway construction in US happened long time back. A lot of these oppositions are old, we are now much more aware about the human impact to ecology. Also, isn't it better to learn and not repeat the mistakes of even others.

haltingproblem 6y ago

These kinds of comments show the paradox of the modern urban professional. The ones who have reached the top 1-2% in terms of educational achievement and career prospects. They live in cities or remote locations with full amenities - car, electricity and internet, smartphones, laptops. They use apps powered by the global internet and consume from the global supply chain. And they hike in the Himalayas with their DSLR, patagonia/north face gear and post the snaps to instagram. They just want to freeze the state of development, fossil fuel usage, roads, etc. Because they see no benefit to themselves of any more of those things. Everything is swell for them. This denies the benefits of development to the hundreds of millions who still need access to education, health care and economic opportunities. There is NO country in the world that has reached first world status without going through development. I am sure you think there is a way but it is just one way to deny the poor of benefits. There is no widespread environmental destruction. Every measure forest cover, pollution, habitat has improved over the past decades. Just because things are great for you is not an excuse to unintentionally wage class warfare.

actuator 6y ago
Wow, that's a loaded comment that makes a lot of assumptions about me. I am not against connectivity or improving the life of people there, a lot of these areas are already connected by metalled road. What was happening when I was traveling there was widening of the roads indiscriminately, if you talk to people there or even read some of the articles I have linked, there isn't much benefit that local people are seeing because of this. There are far more important things that would have been beneficial to people living there like education, healthcare and some of them can be improved drastically with something as simple as improving LTE coverage. All I am saying is, I would have preferred to see the myriad of problems associated with the project addressed, I am not saying do not build, but build sustainably. About the metrics you think that haven't degraded, I don't have sources ready on all of them but I just looked up forest cover and one of the most green regions is now covered with plantations a lot. [1] Plantation cover != Forest cover. Lastly, just because I am wearing Patagonia/North Face because of their environmental commitments, doesn't mean I expect everyone else to do the same. There are other paths, which might not be perfect but will be better, it doesn't hurt to raise issues when you see them so you can explore those paths. The choice is not binary. [1] https://bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/d586f57c-6ef3-42e5-a68c-031b10d950b9_586x631.png https://bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.am...