Summary
NHPC Ltd has sought the Union Environment Ministry's approval to divert 3,278 hectares of high-conservation-value forest in Arunachal Pradesh's Kra Daadi, Kurung Kumey and Kamle districts for the 1,720 MW Kamala hydroelectric project on a tributary of the Subansiri.
The diversion involves felling 23,40,213 trees. Compensatory afforestation is proposed over 7,018 hectares in Madhya Pradesh, which forest rules allow because Arunachal has very high forest cover. The ministry's Forest Advisory Committee is scheduled, according to its agenda, to take up the proposal on October 23, 2026.
WHY IT MATTERS FOR UPSC & STATE PCS
The expert appraisal committee recommended environmental clearance at its 47th meeting in January 2026, on condition that in-principle forest clearance comes first. A ministry site inspection found the project outside protected areas, but warned that it will affect wildlife habitats and that the wider reservoir will hinder animal movement between the banks.
The project's social impact assessment lists 126 affected villages.
Standard News
Equal Area Is Not Equal Forest
The commitment is written into India's forest law: when forest is diverted for a project, new forest must compensate for it. The Kamala hydroelectric project tests what that word means. The target is measured in hectares; the loss is measured in ecosystems. On paper, the arithmetic balances. On the ground, it cannot.
What the
rules promise Under Rule 10 of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Niyam, 2023, a State with more than 75% forest cover may meet its compensatory afforestation obligation on land in States with less than 20% cover. Arunachal Pradesh qualifies, with roughly 79% of its area under forest.
So for 3,278 hectares of forest diverted in the lower Himalayas, NHPC proposes planting across 7,018 hectares in Madhya Pradesh - more than twice the area. That sounds generous. It is the right number for the wrong problem.
Where the
equivalence breaks The forest to be cleared is classed as high-conservation-value forest, in a valley the project documents describe as almost wholly hilly and densely forested. It includes about 439 hectares of very dense and 1,119 hectares of moderately dense forest.
The ministry's own Shillong regional office reported that the project will affect wildlife habitats and that the wider reservoir will make it harder for animals to cross from one bank to the other. A plantation in central India restores neither the habitat nor the crossing.
Three specific links in the compensation chain fail:
- Ecological equivalence. Eastern Himalayan forest belongs to a global biodiversity hotspot. A plantation more than a thousand kilometres away in a different biome cannot rebuild its species assemblage, its canopy or its corridors.
- Social equivalence. Much of the forest is Unclassed State Forest, over which communities hold customary rights. The Social Impact Assessment counts 5,440 families in 126 villages. Their commons cannot be replanted in another State.
- Delivery. CAG audits of compensatory afforestation funds have repeatedly found poor sapling survival, monoculture plantations and plantations that existed only on paper. The promise is only as good as the monitoring behind it.
What is
working The process is not empty. The expert committee made final environmental clearance conditional on forest clearance and directed NHPC to prepare an ecosystem restoration plan. The site inspection did its job by flagging habitat and movement impacts and asking for a wildlife mitigation plan.
The strategic case is also real: building on Brahmaputra tributaries helps India establish water-use rights while China builds upstream. But none of that resolves the core issue. A border-strategy argument can justify a dam; it cannot make a Madhya Pradesh plantation into Arunachal forest. If the project goes ahead, mitigation must happen where the loss happens: within the Subansiri basin, through protected corridors and community-managed restoration, with Madhya Pradesh plantations treated as an addition, not as the compensation itself.
For the exam, the useful insight is that compensatory afforestation measures area, while ecology measures function and Rule 10 widens the gap between the two.
Quick Facts
Key numbers & takeaways — revise these first
-
Project: Kamala Hydroelectric Project, 1,720 MW, developed by NHPC Ltd. River: Kamala, a right-bank tributary of the Subansiri, itself a tributary of the Brahmaputra. Forest land to be diverted: about 3,278 hectares in Kra Daadi, Kurung Kumey and Kamle districts. Trees to be felled: 23,40,213
-
15.08 lakh in Hapoli forest division and 8.31 lakh in Kra Daadi division. Compensatory afforestation proposed: 7,018 hectares across several districts of Madhya Pradesh. Estimated cost: Rs 23,764.01 crore, per the expert appraisal committee minutes. Design: storage project with flood moderation, with a 216-metre concrete gravity dam. Reservoir and dam-top area: about 2,960.49 hectares of forest. Affected: 5,440 families in 126 villages, according to the social impact assessment. Rule 10 of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Niyam, 2023 lets States with over 75% forest cover carry out compensatory afforestation in States with less than 20% forest cover.
Connect the dots for your UPSC preparation.
Standard news covers the event. Log in to read our comprehensive analysis and uncover the hidden constitutional, structural, and ethical dimensions of this topic:
The three specific links where compensatory afforestation fails: ecological equivalence, community rights and monitored delivery.
What the 439 hectares of very dense forest and the reservoir's barrier to wildlife movement mean on the ground.
The Etalin case study and why the Forest Advisory Committee deferred that clearance for detailed wildlife studies.
A way forward that keeps mitigation inside the Subansiri basin instead of shifting it to another State.
Included in this analysis
Join thousands of aspirants analyzing the news deeply.
Unlock Premium — Rs.699 AnnuallyDon't have an account? Sign up for free