Trees come between grand zoo plan

A biodiversity report on the Byculla Gardens has said that the zone has more plant species than estimated, making it imperative that the 47-acre green lung be preserved as it is. The study commissioned by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and municipal heritage committee said that the BMC’s plans for the Rs600-crore ‘international zoo’ at the site will destroy the park’s biodiversity apart from damaging animal and plant habitat created in it over the last 150 years.

The report by botanist Marselin Almeida said that the park, originally laid out in 1861 as a botanical garden, has 276 species of trees — 50 more than earlier estimated. The report, which used GPS indicators for the first time to establish the exact location of trees, also counted the park’s plant species for the first time and said there were 843 plant types, including tree species, from 149 botanical families.

Apart from the addition of animal enclosures and more plant species, little has changed at the park over the last 150 years. But in 2007, the BMC announced plans to redevelop the park by creating larger and more modern animal enclosures. Other new features planned for the zoo were restaurants overlooking the enclosures for carnivorous animals and a night safari. Alarmed that the project will destroy the park’s biodiversity and take away a substantial part of its green cover, citizens groups protested against the plan.

The project was stalled after the Central Zoo Authority (CZ), the statutory body whose permission is required for project, laid down tough conditions in 2008 for the redevelopment work.

Municipal officers continue to insist that it was not a botanical garden, but just a zoo.

Apart from the fear about the destruction of the park’s botanical wealth, there were doubts whether the new facilities could be built in such a small area. In May 2010, based on the opinion of two experts - Almeida and the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) director, zoologist Asad Rahmani — the heritage committee, whose nod is necessary because the zoo is a protected urban precinct, also rejected the plan. Considering that the earlier surveys had given conflicting statistics on the park’s biodiversity, Almeida was commissioned to do a new tree survey in September 2010.

Anil Anjarkar, the new director of the zoo, who was specially brought from Pune’s Katraj Zoological Park to oversee the redevelopment plan, said they will submit their report based on Almeida’s findings before the heritage committee in the next few weeks. “The zoo and the botanical park have co-existed since 1873. We will maintain the greenery; even a zoo needs vegetation,” said Anjarkar.

But Rahmani doubts whether BMC can build the new zoo without stripping away the park’s biodiversity. “I have serious trouble with their assurance that they will not cut trees. If they keep their promise, they will not be able to go ahead with their plans,” said Rahmani. Anjarkar said the new report will clear the municipal heritage committee’s doubts about the project. But Almeida’s concluding remarks in the report does not give much hope. It says: “Current detailed study shows many more tree species. We are even more convinced of our stand that the botanical garden needs to be preserved.”