Outskirts + Buses = No Tapovan Trees Need to Die for Kumbh
Nashik is preparing for the next Kumbh Mela and the first instinct of the administration is not planning, not logistics, not efficiency. It is to pull out the chainsaw. Nearly 1,800 trees in Tapovan have been marked for destruction on the justification that a “Sadhu Gram” must be built there. The state government, led by Girish Mahajan with the backing of Devendra Fadnavis, has decided that forests are an inconvenience. Cutting them is apparently easier than thinking.
There is a much simpler solution staring everyone in the face. Set up camps on the outskirts of Nashik and run NMC buses to the ghats. This method has been used for decades at Prayagraj, Haridwar and Ujjain. Nobody there decided that thousands of trees had to die for sadhus to have accommodation. Tents, bamboo structures, prefab cabins, sanitation blocks and water tanks work perfectly for the duration of the festival. When Kumbh ends, everything is removed and the land returns to its original state. Nobody ends up with a cleared forest ready for future “development.”
The government keeps repeating that Kumbh is a religious obligation. That is true. But no religion has asked for Tapovan’s destruction. Not one sadhu or akhada has demanded permanent buildings in a forest. There is no religious scripture that says faith cannot survive without concrete structures and bulldozers. The demand is entirely administrative and entirely avoidable. Faith does not require felling trees. Contractors do.
Every other Kumbh city has used temporary tented accommodation. Modern systems exist for rapid deployment of weatherproof shelters, portable toilets, water supply and power. These are used globally in disaster relief, military camps and large festivals. The technology is simple, efficient and proven. Nashik could use the same. It is cheaper, faster, cleaner and far less controversial. But it does not generate tenders for roads, drains, leveled plots and concrete works. That is the difference.
Nashik has sports grounds, maidans for political rallies, college playgrounds and large open land on the outskirts. On any given day, these grounds can accommodate thousands of people for speeches, events and gatherings. Nobody ever claimed a forest was required for rallies. Yet when it comes to sadhus, the government insists only Tapovan will do. The logic is not religious. It is commercial. A cleared forest becomes a land bank. What comes after Kumbh is predictable: exhibitions, events, permanent structures and slow conversion to real estate. Once the trees fall, Tapovan is lost forever.
The environmental cost is not abstract. Mature trees cool the city, absorb water, prevent flooding, hold the soil and provide oxygen. Planting saplings does not replace the ecological value of a 30-year-old tree. Transplantation on a mass scale almost always fails. Promises of compensatory plantation are made every time trees are cut, and almost never tracked two years later. Forests are lost because somebody found an easier path to a contract.
Running buses from the outskirts is a sensible alternative. The city already owns buses. Fuel and staffing cost less than excavation and concrete. Dedicated routes can be created. Crowd movement becomes easier to control. Traffic inside the city reduces. The ghats become safer. There is no downside to this approach except that it requires planning rather than bulldozing. The government is choosing the wrong tool for the job because the correct tool does not produce a tender file.
Citizens are asking a simple question: if grounds can host twenty thousand people for rallies, why can they not host sadhus? There is no good answer. The issue is not that Tapovan is required. The issue is that Tapovan is convenient. It is municipal land that can be cleared and converted. A forest can be cut only once. That is why the insistence is so strong.
Kumbh can be organised perfectly well without killing trees. Outskirts and shuttle buses are the correct solution. They cost less, cause zero ecological damage and respect both faith and the environment. The government should not treat forests as wasteland that must be punished for existing. Nashik needs those trees. Tapovan is the city’s green lung. Destroying it for a temporary event is not religious planning. It is lazy planning.
Saving Tapovan is not anti-Kumbh. It is pro-common sense. The Mahajan–Fadnavis government still has time to choose wisely. The right solution is available. It simply requires the courage to say no to bulldozers.
