7.3 To identify the
cause behind the problems
Determinants of LULC and hence LULC pattern (LUP) are
soil characteristics, climate and human interaction with land. Quality and quantity
of such interaction is dependent upon quality and quantity of users of land,
i.e. the population on and around a specific land, because the human activities
like agriculture, forestry, deforestation, industry, energy production, settlement,
recreation, water storage and its catchment alter the LUP of the area. The quality
and quantity of such activities depend largely upon educational and financial
level of the population in and around the land. Further, some such activities
which are concerned with gaining mineral resources from the land (i.e. mining)
depends upon availability of an economic and mineable mineral resource in the
land, which is again a geologic and hence natural factor.
Thus a huge number of factors appear as determinants of LUP in an area. How
these factors interact to produce different LUP in different environmental,
social, geological and historical context had not been interpreted firmly. However,
there were many theories (Spangale et al., 1976) about relative magnitude of
influence imposed by the different factors discussed above.
Hence to generate a set of LUPg guidelines for MAs it is required to identify
the determinants of LUP change, to quantify the capacities of each of these
determinants in influencing LUP change in MAs and hence to generate a strategic
guideline to counter-act their capacities so that the LUP of the area suffers
minimum change. This requires a statistical analysis of LUP change suffered
by the MAs in the country. Realising the fact that it will be a seriously time
taking job, an attempt has been made to conduct the study in a piece-meal manner,
and it was started with coal mining areas of India (CMAs).
7.4 Identifying determinants of LU change in CMAs
7.4.1 Damage to LUP by coal mining in India
India documents a very long history of coal mining. The
first attempt of coal mining in India dates back to 1774 (Gee, 1932) and the
first consignment of 92.9 tonnes of coal was brought to Calcutta (presently
Kolkata) from Raniganj in September, 1775. Indian coal was used in railways
in 1855, when the section between Howrah and Raniganj covering a distance of
about 260 km was opened. At that time Raniganj coalfield (RCF) was the only
producer of coal in India and the production rate was very low. In 1857 the
production was 50.5 tonnes. With the expansion of industries and railways, demand
for coal went on increasing, and exploitation started in the other coalfields
like Jharia, Ramgarh, Bokaro etc. and the coal production in India started increasing.
The production from RCF was 217 tones per year in 1858 and 6000 tones per year
in 1929-30 (Chakraborty & Singh, 1989).
The first mine fire and subsidence in Raniganj coalfield RCF was reported in
1864-65 (Prasad et al., 1984) gradually such incidences also started increasing.
In these days the mining activities were being conducted by the private business
houses and their method of working was completely unplanned. The idea of "environmental
protection" or "land protection" did not exist in those days. Ultimate goal
of these mine owners was to get coal, as much as possible, at minimum cost.
This started producing degraded lands in the forms of fire areas, subsided areas,
abandoned quarries, OB dumps and barren lands produced due to damage to water
resources and spreading of OB materials.
Such selfish mining continued upto nationalisation of coal mining industry in
India, in 1972-1973. Parallelly exists the official record of realisation of
need of environmental protection; the milestone being the first "World Environment
Day" celebration on 5th June 1972. But the need of land protection or land reclamation
was realised much later.
Damage to LUP in CMAs as is observed to-day is the cumulative effect of all
these since 18th century.
7.4.2 Case studies
Damage to LUP by mining has been detailed in chapter 3.
It initiates immediately after land acquisition, when starts shifting of pre-mining
LUs. This may require shifting of habitations to new sites, which may require
damage to greenery at the new sites. Further, to compensate a cultivation land
may require cutting some greeneries which were existing at the new site to be
used for the purpose. Regarding forest-lands to be disturbed by mining "compensatory
afforestation" is an oft-told activity but to view from the stand-point of ecology
"no forest can be compensated in a year or two", as "forest is the sum total
of ecological edaphic and biological parameters" (Dutta, 1989). What can be
done is, only "compensatory plantation". Saplings of selected forestry species
planted in the name of "compensatory afforestation" can only form, at best,
a dense population of plants. This will take a considerable number of years
to from a real forest, i.e. "a natural association of plants and animals" something
like which existed in the pre-mining forest-ecosystem, i.e. something almost
similar to that which was originally formed by the nature.
Over and above such direct damage to ecosystem after land acquisition, greeneries
and surface water bodies may get damaged by direct excavation (at the quarry
sites) and OB dumping (at the OB dumping sites) causing a direct damage to ecosystem.
Any excavation, be it at the mining site or at the site for rehabilitation of
the population to be shifted, opens a source of severe erosion and hence damage
to land and surface water bodies by siltation.
Excavation of OB materials needs forming OB dumps, which when get spread over
the surrounding land, damage greenery over it. Further, to facilitate excavation
below water table it needs pumping out of water which damages ground water resources
of the region. This results into chances of damage to greenery.