Lower lake buffers in Bengaluru: Fix or folly?

Reducing the protected area around lakes can be problematic, especially in a crowded city like Bengaluru, irrespective of the lake's size, say activists.

The rules defining buffer zones for lakes and water bodies in Bengaluru have seen a roller-coaster of expansion, pushback, and rollback, shifting between ecological protection and development pressures. These evolving limits have significantly influenced urban planning, lake conservation, and legal disputes in the city.

The latest in line, which is showing all signs of stirring a hornet’s nest, is the recent decision of the government to limit buffer zones according to the areas of lakes across Karnataka. 

The draft bill proposed sets a buffer of 3 metres for all ponds and lakes measuring between 0.05 guntas to 1 acre, 6 metres of buffer for lakes measuring between 1 and 10 acres, 12 metres for lakes measuring 10 to 25 acres, 24 metres for lakes measuring between 25 and 100 acres, and a buffer of 30 metres for all lakes above 100 acres.

This move has been slammed by environmentalists who warn that it will legitimise encroachments, exacerbate flooding, and undermine ongoing conservation efforts. Bengaluru Town Hall, a citizens’ movement focusing on planned development and better municipal governance, is organising a public citizens’ consultation on Saturday (today) to discuss the implications of the amendment and the importance of buffer zones around lakes. 

This is because activists have been hearing about the amendment for some time, but the government did not approach any citizen groups or share the idea publicly for feedback.

Many changes in buffer zone

The existing limits set by the government were amended in March 2008, mandating a limit of 30 metres around all lakes.

However, CAG audits in 2015 revealed that many lake plans violated these norms, sometimes even within approved layouts. The survey involved 56 random lakes, including 13 lakes under the BBMP and 19 lakes under the BDA. No lake had demarcated buffer zones, while many of them were encroached on as well.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT), while hearing a case related to Bellandur lake, introduced stricter protection in May 2016, increasing buffer zones to 75 metres around lakes, 50 metres for primary drains, 35 metres for secondary drains, and 25 metres for tertiary drains. These zones were designated as “no-construction, green buffer zones”

After much confusion and legal battles between 2017 and 2019, over whether the rule was applicable retrospectively or not, the state urban development department attempted to clarify the retrospective impact of the 2016 NGT norms, leading to more confusion and legal pushback.

However, in March 2019, the Supreme Court overturned the NGT’s enhanced buffer rules, reinstating the earlier 30 metres per lake and 50–15 metres per drain standards. This brought much cheer to the real estate sector and citizens living in the periphery of lakes, having bought properties knowingly or unknowingly.

For areas like the Thippagondanahalli (T.G. Halli) reservoir and adjoining rivers, a 2003 notification classified buffer zones up to 1 km, but in 2019, the distance was halved, raising judicial questions again about whether this change was retrospective.

The recent development of the government deciding to amend the buffer zone rule yet again is likely to add to the confusion. A review of the draft of the proposed amendment text, reviewed by DH, shows that there is no clarity yet again on the retrospective applicability of the rule. 

The draft amendment allows the laying of public utility infrastructure in the lake buffer zone, in addition to reducing the buffer area, thereby also allowing private constructions closer to lakes, which will make the lake prone to sewage discharge and garbage dumping in the absence of underground sewage networks or illegal houses that have no public utility connection.

The explanation

A press note from the Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority (KTCDA) pitches the amendment as an effort “for the first time in the country” to “scientifically modify buffer zone regulations based on the size of waterbodies/tanks in the state.”

The note explains that the demand came from Kundapura and Udupi districts requesting modification of the buffer zone area around lakes and ponds as the 30-metre buffer specified by the government applies uniformly to smaller size lakes of one acre and below and bigger size lakes with 100 acres and more. 

The issue was discussed in meetings held in August 2024 and April 2025 involving the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister.

Following this, the committee was constituted under the chairmanship of the Chief Secretary with members from relevant departments. 

The note explains the rationale behind including public utility works such as drinking water pipelines, underground electric cables, roads and bridges connecting important routes, jackwell cum pump houses for lift irrigation projects, drinking water projects, sewage treatment plants, and other similar infrastructure within the lake buffer zone.

The note says the buffer distance was framed using a “scientific approach”, as in several instances, the existing buffer area is disproportionately larger than the tank size. It goes on to explain how other states have varying areas as buffer zones and none of them has 30 metres for smaller tanks, the press note says: “Karnataka is the only state to have framed incremental buffer guidelines scientifically linked to tank size.”

The debate 

A spokesperson from the Federation of Bengaluru Lakes (FBL) says the government’s decision merits some more discussion with the people who understand the matter, such as experts and scientists.

“Instead of fixing the current broken system, they come up with new rules. What’s the point?” he asks.

“The government should have discussed the amendment with the stakeholders before deciding to reduce it. There should be meaningful public consultation and dialogue to ensure the decision is democratic,” he says.

“Lake activists are depicted as anti-development. But that is not true. Many cities in India follow good buffer rules blended with development, so why can’t it happen in Bengaluru? We believe there need not be a trade-off between development and conservation,” he adds.

A source from the minor irrigation department said a committee constituted by the department, comprising all line departments, decided to revise the buffer zone. All departments, including Municipalities, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, BBMP, Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority, and every department concerned with lakes, have been a part of the committee, he added.

“Look at other states. Telangana has a mandated 9 metres buffer around lakes irrespective of the size. Tamil Nadu has just 3 metres. We are much more progressive; we retained 30 metres of buffer for large lakes while the rest have been modified according to size,” he explained.

Lake activists argue that a city like Bengaluru needs different treatment to buffer zones around lakes because the city is congested with people and pollution, and smaller lakes are likely to become victims with increased sewage, garbage dumping and reduced ecological activities; therefore, reducing the buffer to below 6 metres for lakes below 10 acres is unfair.

“It might sound counterintuitive, but reducing the activities around lakes needs increased buffer area, irrespective of the size of the lake,” the Federation of Bengaluru Lakes spokesperson said.

However, the source from the Minor Irrigation Department disagrees. “What is a buffer for? It is just to make sure there are no constructions around lakes and the ecology is in sync with the lake. It also makes sure water inflow to the lake is not obstructed. We have considered all these aspects.”

“A 30-metre buffer zone for a small lake of 1-2 acres is meaningless. Our amendment is progressive. We have discussed this in detail and have come up with the best possible buffer to protect our lakes,” he says.

A source from BBMP said the ground staff from the BBMP Lakes Department were not consulted before the amendment. “We are not involved. We are only the custodians of the lakes, and the lakes belong to the revenue department. The decision has entirely been theirs, we have no role,” the source clarified.

The draft amendment is yet to be tabled in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly and Council.