Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Salient Ecological Sensitive Regions of Central Western Ghats, India

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Earth Systems and Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ecologically sensitive regions (ESRs) are the ‘ecological units’ with the exceptional biotic and abiotic elements. Identification of ESRs considering spatially both ecological and social dimensions of environmental variables helps in ecological and conservation planning as per Biodiversity Act, 2002, Government of India. The current research attempts to integrate ecological and environmental considerations into administration, and prioritizes regions at Panchayat levels (local administrative unit) in Uttara Kannada district, Central Western Ghats, Karnataka state considering attributes (biological, Geo-climatic, Social, etc.) as ESR (1–4) through weightage score metrics. The region has the distinction of having highest forest area (80.48%) in Karnataka State, India and has been undergoing severe anthropogenic pressures impacting biogeochemistry, hydrology, food security, climate and socio-economic systems. Prioritisation of ESRs helps in the implementation of the sustainable developmental framework with the appropriate conservation strategies through the involvement of local stakeholders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beinat E (1997) Value functions for environmental management. Kluwer Academic, Boston, p 241

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Berkres F, Davidson-Hunt IJ (2006) Biodiversity, traditional management systems, and cultural landscapes: examples from the boreal forest of Canada. Int Soc Sci J 58:35–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blicharska M, Orlikowska EH, Roberge JM, Grodzinska-Jurczak M (2016) Contribution of social science to large scale biodiversity conservation: a review of research about the natura 2000 network. Biol Cons 199:110–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourne A, Holness S, Holden P, Scorgie S, Donatti CI, Midgley G (2016) A Socio-Ecological Approach for Identifying and Contextualising Spatial Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Priorities at the Sub-National Level. PLoS ONE 11(5):e0155235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd C, Brooks TM, Butchart SH, Edgar GJ, Da Fonseca GA, Hawkins F, Hoffmann M, Sechrest W, Stuart SN, Van Dijk PP (2008) Spatial scale and the conservation of threatened species. Conserv Lett 1(1):37–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brose U, Martinez ND, Williams RJ (2003) Estimating species richness: sensitivity to sample coverage and insensitivity to spatial patterns. Ecology 84:2364–2377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown S (1997) Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: a primer, FAO Forestry Paper, 134

  • Burrough PA, McDonell RA (1998) Principles of Geographical Information Systems. Oxford University Press, New York, p 190

    Google Scholar 

  • Calder IR (2012) Forests and hydrological services: reconciling public and science perceptions. Land Use Water Resour Res 2(2):21–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Boominathan M, Ravikumar G, Chandran, MDS, Ramachandra TV (2012) The impact of dams on the edible bivalves–a comparative study of Kali and Aghanashini Estuaries of Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka, India. In: Ramanathan AL, Sreekesh S, Sundararajan M (eds) The proceedings of national conference on mangrove wetlands and near shore marine ecosystems from sustainability issues to management and restoration. pp 45–46

  • Conradin K, Hammer T (2016) Making the most of world natural heritage—linking conservation and sustainable regional development? Sustainability 8(4):323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels RJR, Vencatesan J (2008) Western Ghats: biodiversity, people conservation. Rupa & Co, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • de Lima RF, Dallimer M, Atkinson PW, Barlow J (2013) Biodiversity and land-use change: understanding the complex responses of an endemic-rich bird assemblage. Divers Distrib 19(4):411–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadgil M, Daniels RJR, Ganeshaiah KN, Prasad SN, Murthy MSR, Jha CS, Ramesh BR, Subramaniam KA (2011) Mapping ecologically sensitive, significant and salient areas of Western Ghats: proposed protocol and methodology. Curr Sci 100(2):175–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Kibert CJ, Thiele L, Peterson A, Monroe M (2011) The ethics of sustainability. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Kivinen S, Kumpula T (2013) Detecting land cover disturbances in the Lappi reindeer herding district using multi-source remote sensing and GIS data. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geo Inf 27:13–19 (ISSN 0303-2434)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight AT, Cowling RM, Campbell BM (2006) An operational model for implementing conservation action. Conserv Biol 20:408–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin N, Watson JE, Joseph LN, Grantham HS, Hadar L, Apel N, Perevolotsky A, DeMalach N, Possingham HP, Kark S (2013) A framework for systematic conservation planning and management of Mediterranean landscapes. Biol Cons 158:371–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li A, Wang A, Liang S, Zhou W (2006) Eco-environmental vulnerability evaluation in mountainous region using remote sensing and GIS-a case study in the upper reaches of Minjiang River, China. Ecol Model 192:175–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lou J (2006) Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113(2):363–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margules C, Pressey R (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marignani M, Blasi C (2012) Looking for important plant areas: selection based on criteria, complementarity, or both? Biodivers Conserv 21:1853–1864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesta PN, Setturu B, Chandran MDS, Rajan KS, Ramachandra TV (2014) Inventorying, mapping and monitoring of mangroves towards sustainable management of West Coast, India. J Geophys Remote Sens 3:130. https://doi.org/10.4172/2169-0049.1000130

    Google Scholar 

  • Moen J, Keskitalo EC (2010) Interlocking panarchies in multi-use boreal forests in Sweden. Ecol Soc 15(3):17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Da Fonseca GA, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403(6772):853–858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagasaka A, Futoshi N (1999) The influences of land-use changes on hydrology and riparian environment in a northern Japanese landscape. Landscape Ecol 14:543–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P, Steingröver E, Van Rooij S (2006) Ecological networks: a spatial concept for multi-actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 75(3):322–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paloniemi R, Tikka PM (2008) Ecological and social aspects of biodiversity conservation on private lands. Environ Sci Policy 11(4):336–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson AT, Egbert SL, Cordero VS, Price KP (2000) Geographic analysis of conservation priority: endemic birds and mammals in Veracruz, Mexico. Biol Cons 93(1):85–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressey RL, Cabeza M, Watts ME, Cowling RM, Wilson KA (2007) Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends Ecol Evol 22(11):583–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV (2014) Hydrological responses at regional scale to landscape dynamics. J Biodivers 5(1-2):11–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV, Joshi NV, Subramanian DK (2000) Present and prospective role of bio-energy in regional energy system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 4:375–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV, Chandran MDS, Gururaja KV, Sreekantha (2007) Cumulative environmental impact assessment. Nova Science Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV, Hegde G, Das GK (2014a) Scope of solar energy in Uttara Kannada, Karnataka State, India: roof top PV for domestic electricity and standalone systems for irrigation. Productivity 55(1):100

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV, Hegde G, Krishnadas G (2014b) Potential assessment and decentralized applications of wind energy in Uttara Kannada, Karnataka. Int J Renew Energy Res 4(1):1

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV, Hegde G, Setturu B, Krishnadas G (2014c) Bioenergy: a sustainable energy option for rural India. Adv For Lett (AFL) 3(1):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV, Chandran MDS, Rao GR, Mukri Vishnu, Joshi NV (2015) Floristic diversity in Uttara Kannada district, Karnataka. In: Pullaiah T, Sandhya R (eds) Biodiversity in India, vol 8. Regency Publications, New Delhi, pp 1–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandra TV, Setturu B, Chandran S (2016) Geospatial analysis of forest fragmentation in Uttara Kannada District, India. For Ecosyst 3(1):10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riitters KH, Wickham JD, Coulston JW (2004) A preliminary assessment of Montréal process indicators of forest fragmentation for the United States. Environ Monit Assess 91:257–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouget M, Cowling RM, Lombard AT, Knight AT, Kerley GI (2006) Designing large-scale conservation corridors for pattern and process. Conserv Biol 20(2):54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen P (2000) Report of The Committee on Identifying Parameters for Designating Ecologically Sensitive Areas in India. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Termorshuizen JW, Opdam P (2009) Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development. Landscape Ecol 24(8):1037–1052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toth S, Haight RG, Rogers L (2011) Dynamic reserve selection, optimal land retention with land price feedbacks. Oper Res 59(5):1059–1078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigl LE, Schirpke U, Tasser E, Tappeiner U (2016) Linking long-term landscape dynamics to the multiple interactions among ecosystem services in the European Alps. Landscape Ecol 31:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vinay S, Bharath S, Bharath HA, Ramachandra TV (2013) Hydrologic model with landscape dynamics for drought monitoring. In: Proceeding of joint international workshop of ISPRS WG VIII/1 and WG IV/4 on geospatial data for disaster and risk reduction, Hyderabad, November 2013, pp. 21–22

  • Wang X, Zhong X, Gao P (2010) A GIS-based decision support system for regional eco-security assessment and its application on the Tibetan Plateau. J Environ Manage 91:1981–1990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasige JE, Thomas AG, Smaling E, Victor J (2013) Monitoring basin-scale land cover changes in Kagera Basin of Lake Victoria using ancillary data and remote sensing. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 21:32–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson JEM, Grantham H, Wilson KA, Possingham HP (2011a) Systematic conservation planning: past, present and future. In: Whittaker R, Ladle R (eds) Conservation Biogeograph. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp 136–160

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Watson JEM, Cross M, Rowland E, Joseph LN, Rao M, Seimon A (2011b) Planning for species conservation in a time of climate change Climate change, research and technology for climate change adaptation and mitigation, vol 3. InTech Publishers, London, pp 379–402 (ISBN: 979-953-307-278-3)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wondie M, Schneider W, Melesse AM, Teketay D (2011) Spatial and temporal land cover changes in the Simen Mountains National Park, a world heritage site in northwestern Ethiopia. Remote Sens 3(4):752–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wondie M, Teketay D, Melesse AM, Schneider W (2012) Relationship between topographic variables and land cover in the Simen Mountains National Park, a world heritage site in northern Ethiopia. Int J Remote Sens Appl 2(2):3

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Shuzhen S (2001) The mangrove wetland resources and their conservation in China. J Nat Resour 16(1):28–36

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We are grateful to (i) ENVIS Division, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Government of India, (ii) NRDMS Division, the Ministry of Science and Technology (DST), Government of India, (iii) Karnataka Biodiversity Board, Western Ghats Task Force, Government of Karnataka and (iv) Indian Institute of Science for the financial and infrastructure support. We acknowledge the support of Karnataka Forest Department for giving necessary permissions to undertake ecological research in Central Western Ghats. We thank Vishnu Mukri and Srikanth Naik for the assistance during field data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Energy Wetland Research Group, CES TE 15, Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, New Bioscience Building, Third Floor, E-Wing, [Near D-Gate], Bangalore, 560012, India

    T. V. Ramachandra, Setturu Bharath, M. D. Subash Chandran & N. V. Joshi

  2. Centre for Sustainable Technologies (astra), Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560012, India

    T. V. Ramachandra

  3. Centre for Infrastructure, Sustainable Transportation and Urban Planning [CiSTUP], Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, Karnataka, 560 012, India

    T. V. Ramachandra

Authors
  1. T. V. Ramachandra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Setturu Bharath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. D. Subash Chandran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. V. Joshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. V. Ramachandra.

Annexure I: Activities that can be Allowed in ESR -1, 2 3 and 4

Annexure I: Activities that can be Allowed in ESR -1, 2 3 and 4

1.1 Remarks

  • ESR_1 represents a zone of highest ecological sensitiveness, no further degradation be allowed. ESR-2 has the potentiality to become ESR-1 provided strict implementation norms and regulations for improvement of degraded patches of forests. Further erosion of ESR-2 will have more adverse effects in ESR-1.

  • Forest Rights Act to be implemented in its true spirit.

  • Monoculture plantations are not allowed, existing exotics should be replaced by planting location specific native species.

  • Promote the use of renewable energy sources such as (solar, wind power) through incentive-based decentralized electricity generation.

  • Mining is to be banned in ESR 1, ESR 2 and ESR 3.

  • No new licenses to be given for quarry and sand mining in ESR 1 and 2.@@

  • Local agro-based industry to be promoted with strict regulations and social audit.

  • Adapt development projects (discussed in the next section) which will have least environmental impact by involving local community members in decision making and environmental monitoring.

  • No new major roads, widening of highways.

  • Proposed Talaguppa—Honnavar rail link to be shelved (affects LTM habitat, and ESR1).

  • Ecotourism (comparable to Goa and Kerala model and based on MoEF regulations) after taking into account social and environmental costs.

  • The laterite formations are aesthetically pleasing, and particularly with the massive flowering of rainy season herbs. The terrain is ideal for tourism and scientific studies.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramachandra, T.V., Bharath, S., Subash Chandran, M.D. et al. Salient Ecological Sensitive Regions of Central Western Ghats, India. Earth Syst Environ 2, 15–34 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-018-0040-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-018-0040-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation