Puri Greenfield Airport Controversy

Q: What are the key concerns raised by the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) regarding the proposed greenfield airport in Puri?

The Wildlife Institute of India (WII) has raised significant ecological and safety concerns regarding the proposed Shree Jagannath International Airport near Puri. The primary issue is the proximity of the proposed site to Chilika Lake, a Ramsar-designated wetland of international importance. Chilika serves as a major habitat for migratory birds, which creates a high probability of bird strikes, posing serious threats to aviation safety.Additionally, the region is ecologically sensitive due to the presence of endangered species such as Olive Ridley turtles and Irrawaddy dolphins. The construction and operation of a large airport could disrupt nesting sites, breeding cycles, and migratory routes. The WII emphasized that such ecological disturbances could have long-term consequences on biodiversity conservation in the region.Importantly, WII also highlighted global precedents, such as incidents near Ramsar sites like Muan International Airport and Bahir Dar Airport, where bird strikes led to severe accidents. Thus, the concerns are not only environmental but also directly linked to human safety and sustainable planning, making the proposal highly contentious.

Q: Why is Chilika Lake considered ecologically significant, and how does this impact infrastructure development decisions?

Chilika Lake is one of Asia’s largest brackish water lagoons and is recognized as a Ramsar site, indicating its global ecological importance. It hosts a rich diversity of flora and fauna, including migratory birds from Central Asia and Siberia, as well as endangered species like the Irrawaddy dolphin. The lake plays a crucial role in maintaining ecological balance, fisheries, and local livelihoods.The presence of such biodiversity imposes strict constraints on nearby infrastructure development. Activities like airport construction can lead to habitat fragmentation, noise pollution, and disruption of migratory pathways. In particular, bird congregation near wetlands increases the risk of bird strikes, making such areas unsuitable for aviation infrastructure.From a policy perspective, international commitments under the Ramsar Convention obligate India to ensure the conservation and wise use of wetlands. Therefore, development decisions near Chilika must balance economic aspirations with ecological sustainability. Ignoring these factors can lead to environmental degradation, loss of biodiversity, and even international criticism.

Q: How do bird strikes pose a threat to aviation safety, and what lessons can be drawn from global examples?

Bird strikes occur when birds collide with aircraft, particularly during takeoff and landing phases. These incidents can damage engines, windshields, and critical flight systems, sometimes leading to catastrophic accidents. Airports located near wetlands or migratory routes face a higher risk due to dense bird populations.Global examples cited by the WII highlight the severity of this issue. At Muan International Airport in South Korea, a collision with migratory birds led to a deadly accident in 2024. Similarly, Bahir Dar Airport in Ethiopia, located near Lake Tana (a Ramsar site), has reported frequent bird strike incidents. These cases demonstrate how proximity to ecologically sensitive zones can compromise aviation safety.In the Indian context, the proposed Puri airport faces similar risks due to its closeness to Chilika Lake. This underscores the need for scientific site selection, environmental impact assessments, and risk mitigation strategies. Avoiding such locations altogether is often the most effective solution, as technological interventions alone may not fully eliminate the risks.

Q: Critically analyze the conflict between infrastructure development and environmental conservation in the context of the Puri airport project.

The Puri airport project highlights a classic conflict between development and environmental conservation. On one hand, the Odisha government argues that expanding aviation infrastructure is essential due to limitations at Bhubaneswar airport. Improved connectivity can boost tourism, economic growth, and regional development.On the other hand, the ecological costs are substantial. The project threatens a sensitive ecosystem near Chilika Lake and could endanger species like Olive Ridley turtles and migratory birds. Moreover, the WII’s rare outright rejection indicates the severity of the environmental and safety concerns. Ignoring such expert advice could lead to irreversible ecological damage and increased accident risks.A balanced perspective suggests that development should not come at the cost of sustainability. Alternatives such as upgrading existing airports or identifying less sensitive locations should be explored. The principle of ‘development without destruction’ must guide policymaking, ensuring that economic progress does not undermine environmental security and public safety.

Q: How can the Puri airport controversy serve as a case study for environmental governance and decision-making in India?

The Puri airport case serves as an important example of environmental governance in India, showcasing the role of scientific institutions, regulatory bodies, and public policy. The involvement of the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) and the Wildlife Institute of India reflects a structured decision-making process where expert opinions are sought before granting approvals.It also highlights the importance of evidence-based policymaking. The WII’s reliance on global case studies and ecological data strengthens the argument against the project. This demonstrates how environmental decisions should be guided by scientific research rather than purely economic considerations.However, the case also reveals challenges such as conflicting interests between development agencies and conservation bodies. Moving forward, India must strengthen mechanisms for inter-agency coordination, transparency, and public participation. If handled effectively, this case can set a precedent for balancing infrastructure development with ecological sustainability.

Q: What are the underlying reasons for the Odisha government's push for a new airport in Puri despite environmental concerns?

The Odisha government’s push for a new airport in Puri is primarily driven by capacity constraints at the existing Biju Patnaik International Airport in Bhubaneswar. With increasing passenger traffic and limited scope for runway expansion, there is a need for additional aviation infrastructure to support economic growth and tourism.Another key factor is the strategic importance of Puri as a major religious and tourist destination. The proposed Shree Jagannath International Airport aims to enhance connectivity for domestic and international pilgrims, boosting local businesses and employment opportunities. This aligns with broader goals of regional development and tourism promotion.However, these economic motivations must be weighed against environmental and safety risks. The challenge lies in finding a solution that meets developmental needs without compromising ecological integrity. This calls for innovative planning, alternative site selection, and sustainable infrastructure practices to achieve a balanced outcome.

When Aviation Safety Meets Ecological Sensitivity — The Chilika Dilemma

Gopi

•April 11, 2026•5 mins read

WII opposes Puri airport over risks to wildlife and flight safety

Introduction

India's civil aviation sector is among the world's fastest-growing, with domestic passenger traffic exceeding 150 million annually and the government targeting 220 airports under UDAN by 2026. However, rapid airport expansion is increasingly colliding with ecological red lines — protected wetlands, wildlife corridors, and migratory bird routes. The proposed Shree Jagannath International Airport at Puri, Odisha, has become a landmark case: the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) has issued a rare outright rejection of the project, citing both ecological harm and direct aviation safety risks near Chilika Lake, a Ramsar-designated wetland of international importance.

"Wetlands are the kidneys of the landscape — filtering water, storing carbon, and sustaining biodiversity." — Ramsar Convention Secretariat

Background

Parameter	Details
Proposed airport	Shree Jagannath International Airport, Puri
Location	Sipasurubali village, Brahmagiri tehsil, Puri district
Total land required	471.401 hectares
Non-forest land	443.514 hectares
Forest land (Wildlife Division)	27.887 hectares
Clearances already issued	Ministry of Civil Aviation — site clearance
Existing airport	Biju Patnaik International Airport, Bhubaneswar
WII recommendation	Against the project

Why the Airport Was Proposed

The Odisha government and Airports Authority of India (AAI) jointly pushed for the Puri airport on the ground that Biju Patnaik International Airport in Bhubaneswar lacks sufficient land for runway expansion to meet projected passenger growth. Puri's religious tourism significance — as the seat of the Jagannath Temple, one of India's most visited pilgrimage sites — further strengthened the demand case.

Why WII Rejected It — Two Distinct Grounds

1. Ecological concerns

Chilika Lake, located in close proximity to the proposed site, is India's largest coastal lagoon and a Ramsar site — a wetland of international importance under the Ramsar Convention (1971), to which India is a signatory
Chilika hosts over 10 lakh migratory birds from Central Asia, China, and Siberia every winter — including flamingos, herons, and rare species
The Puri coast is a critical habitat for Olive Ridley sea turtles (Schedule I, Wildlife Protection Act) and Irrawaddy dolphins — both threatened species
Airport construction would disrupt migration routes and nesting habitats irreversibly

2. Aviation safety concerns

Large concentrations of migratory birds near airports create severe bird-strike risks. WII cited two recent precedents:

Incident	Airport	Distance from Ramsar Site	Outcome
December 29, 2024	Muan International Airport, South Korea	9 km from Muan Tideland	179 human casualties — collision with migratory Baikal Teals
Recent	Bahir Dar International Airport, Ethiopia	4 km from Lake Tana	Bird-strike incident

This dual grounding — ecology and safety — makes WII's rejection unusually robust and difficult to override.

Regulatory and Legal Framework

Ramsar Convention (1971): India has 89 Ramsar sites; Chilika was among the first two designated in 1981. The convention requires signatory nations to avoid ecological degradation of listed wetlands.
Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: Olive Ridley turtles listed under Schedule I — highest protection.
Forest Conservation Act, 1980: Diversion of 27.887 hectares under Wildlife Division jurisdiction requires Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) approval — which triggered the WII referral.
Environment Protection Act, 1986: Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) norms apply to Puri's coastal location.
Aircraft Act, 1934 / DGCA Regulations: Bird hazard management is a mandatory safety consideration for airport site clearance.

Significance of WII's Recommendation

Environmental lawyer Shankar Pani has noted that an outright rejection by WII is rare — the institute typically flags concerns rather than opposing projects categorically. The dual basis (ecological + safety) gives the recommendation exceptional legal and scientific weight, making it difficult for the Ministry of Civil Aviation or state government to proceed without addressing both dimensions comprehensively.

Broader Policy Implications

Raises the question of whether aviation infrastructure planning in India adequately integrates ecological sensitivity mapping at the site-selection stage — before clearances are issued
The Ministry of Civil Aviation had already issued site clearance before ecological assessment was complete — a sequencing failure in the regulatory process
Highlights tension between UDAN scheme (regional connectivity ambition) and wetland conservation obligations under international treaties
Sets a precedent for how WII recommendations interact with sectoral ministry clearances — and which takes precedence

Way Forward

Explore expansion alternatives at Bhubaneswar airport through vertical or technological solutions (multi-level parking, terminal redesign) before greenfield development
Commission a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for all proposed airports within 20 km of Ramsar sites
Establish a mandatory ecological pre-screening stage before aviation ministry site clearances are issued
Consider Cuttack or inland Odisha locations as alternative sites with lower ecological sensitivity

Conclusion

The Puri airport controversy is not simply a conflict between development and environment — it is a failure of integrated planning. The fact that a site clearance was issued before ecological assessment was completed exposes a systemic gap in India's infrastructure approval architecture. Chilika Lake is not merely a local asset; it is an internationally recognised ecological commons. Protecting it is both a treaty obligation and a moral imperative. At the same time, Odisha's aviation infrastructure needs are real. The answer lies not in choosing between the two, but in designing smarter — finding solutions that do not demand ecological sacrifice as the price of connectivity.

Quick Q&A

Everything you need to know

The Wildlife Institute of India (WII) has raised significant ecological and safety concerns regarding the proposed Shree Jagannath International Airport near Puri. The primary issue is the proximity of the proposed site to Chilika Lake, a Ramsar-designated wetland of international importance. Chilika serves as a major habitat for migratory birds, which creates a high probability of bird strikes, posing serious threats to aviation safety.

Additionally, the region is ecologically sensitive due to the presence of endangered species such as Olive Ridley turtles and Irrawaddy dolphins. The construction and operation of a large airport could disrupt nesting sites, breeding cycles, and migratory routes. The WII emphasized that such ecological disturbances could have long-term consequences on biodiversity conservation in the region.

Importantly, WII also highlighted global precedents, such as incidents near Ramsar sites like Muan International Airport and Bahir Dar Airport, where bird strikes led to severe accidents. Thus, the concerns are not only environmental but also directly linked to human safety and sustainable planning, making the proposal highly contentious.

Chilika Lake is one of Asia’s largest brackish water lagoons and is recognized as a Ramsar site, indicating its global ecological importance. It hosts a rich diversity of flora and fauna, including migratory birds from Central Asia and Siberia, as well as endangered species like the Irrawaddy dolphin. The lake plays a crucial role in maintaining ecological balance, fisheries, and local livelihoods.

The presence of such biodiversity imposes strict constraints on nearby infrastructure development. Activities like airport construction can lead to habitat fragmentation, noise pollution, and disruption of migratory pathways. In particular, bird congregation near wetlands increases the risk of bird strikes, making such areas unsuitable for aviation infrastructure.

From a policy perspective, international commitments under the Ramsar Convention obligate India to ensure the conservation and wise use of wetlands. Therefore, development decisions near Chilika must balance economic aspirations with ecological sustainability. Ignoring these factors can lead to environmental degradation, loss of biodiversity, and even international criticism.

Bird strikes occur when birds collide with aircraft, particularly during takeoff and landing phases. These incidents can damage engines, windshields, and critical flight systems, sometimes leading to catastrophic accidents. Airports located near wetlands or migratory routes face a higher risk due to dense bird populations.

Global examples cited by the WII highlight the severity of this issue. At Muan International Airport in South Korea, a collision with migratory birds led to a deadly accident in 2024. Similarly, Bahir Dar Airport in Ethiopia, located near Lake Tana (a Ramsar site), has reported frequent bird strike incidents. These cases demonstrate how proximity to ecologically sensitive zones can compromise aviation safety.

In the Indian context, the proposed Puri airport faces similar risks due to its closeness to Chilika Lake. This underscores the need for scientific site selection, environmental impact assessments, and risk mitigation strategies. Avoiding such locations altogether is often the most effective solution, as technological interventions alone may not fully eliminate the risks.

The Puri airport project highlights a classic conflict between development and environmental conservation. On one hand, the Odisha government argues that expanding aviation infrastructure is essential due to limitations at Bhubaneswar airport. Improved connectivity can boost tourism, economic growth, and regional development.

On the other hand, the ecological costs are substantial. The project threatens a sensitive ecosystem near Chilika Lake and could endanger species like Olive Ridley turtles and migratory birds. Moreover, the WII’s rare outright rejection indicates the severity of the environmental and safety concerns. Ignoring such expert advice could lead to irreversible ecological damage and increased accident risks.

A balanced perspective suggests that development should not come at the cost of sustainability. Alternatives such as upgrading existing airports or identifying less sensitive locations should be explored. The principle of ‘development without destruction’ must guide policymaking, ensuring that economic progress does not undermine environmental security and public safety.

The Puri airport case serves as an important example of environmental governance in India, showcasing the role of scientific institutions, regulatory bodies, and public policy. The involvement of the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) and the Wildlife Institute of India reflects a structured decision-making process where expert opinions are sought before granting approvals.

It also highlights the importance of evidence-based policymaking. The WII’s reliance on global case studies and ecological data strengthens the argument against the project. This demonstrates how environmental decisions should be guided by scientific research rather than purely economic considerations.

However, the case also reveals challenges such as conflicting interests between development agencies and conservation bodies. Moving forward, India must strengthen mechanisms for inter-agency coordination, transparency, and public participation. If handled effectively, this case can set a precedent for balancing infrastructure development with ecological sustainability.

The Odisha government’s push for a new airport in Puri is primarily driven by capacity constraints at the existing Biju Patnaik International Airport in Bhubaneswar. With increasing passenger traffic and limited scope for runway expansion, there is a need for additional aviation infrastructure to support economic growth and tourism.

Another key factor is the strategic importance of Puri as a major religious and tourist destination. The proposed Shree Jagannath International Airport aims to enhance connectivity for domestic and international pilgrims, boosting local businesses and employment opportunities. This aligns with broader goals of regional development and tourism promotion.

However, these economic motivations must be weighed against environmental and safety risks. The challenge lies in finding a solution that meets developmental needs without compromising ecological integrity. This calls for innovative planning, alternative site selection, and sustainable infrastructure practices to achieve a balanced outcome.