Unwise to dilute lake protection law

The Karnataka government’s decision to reduce buffer zones around lakes is a shocking policy reversal that could devastate Bengaluru’s already crippled water bodies. By proposing to amend the Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority Act, the state has not only undermined Supreme Court and National Green Tribunal (NGT) orders but also given in to the very forces that have historically plundered the city’s water bodies. The buffer zone, a vital protective barrier around water bodies, has been reduced on the basis of lake size: 30 metres for lakes above 100 acres, 24 metres for those between 25 and 100 acres, and an abysmal 3 metres for lakes under one acre. This dilutes the earlier provision that mandated a uniform 30-metre buffer zone around all lakes to protect them from encroachment and degradation. 

If anyone stands to benefit from this regressive amendment, it is the land grabbers and developers who have long eyed buffer zones as lucrative plots for their ever-expanding  construction projects. The irony, and indeed the tragedy, is that the government not only failed to act on previous encroachments, many of which still stand despite court directives, but is also legitimising the violations under the guise of reform. Bengaluru once had over 1,000 lakes, a hydrological network that served as the city’s natural sponge, helping recharge groundwater and prevent flooding. Today, fewer than 200 remain, many choked by debris and sewage. Each year, the city faces devastating floods, not because of excess rainfall alone, but also because the natural drainage system has been destroyed by haphazard construction. Rather than learning from these disasters, the government seems intent on compounding the problem. Allowing commercial, industrial, and recreational activity dangerously close to water bodies will only exacerbate flooding and water contamination. 

The Federation of Lakes (FBL), comprising 47 citizen groups, has rightly called the amendment a betrayal of public trust. Their warning that the bill ignored environmental safeguards must be heeded. This is not the time to legalise past neglect, but to restore ecological balance through transparent, science-based policymaking, guided by the principles of sustainability and public welfare. Opposition leader R Ashoka has called the amendment a “death warrant” for Bengaluru, accusing Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar of prioritising real estate interests over the city’s future. The charge may be political, but the implications are real and irreversible.  The amendment must be scrapped. Bengaluru’s future depends not on  construction near lakes, but on conservation of every inch of its ecological infrastructure.