Protests have erupted across Pulwama and Shopian as farmers and orchardists resist the proposed Kakapora–Shopian railway line that threatens to cut through fertile apple orchards the backbone of south Kashmir’s economy and culture.

In the apple-rich districts of Pulwama and Shopian in south Kashmir, residents are rallying in what they have dubbed “Chipko Movement 2.0,” embracing apple trees and blocking survey teams to prevent their orchards from being felled for the proposed Kakapora–Shopian rail link.

Videos circulating online show men, women, and older residents standing guard over farmlands, tears in their eyes, as railway authorities install survey poles marking the route for the 27.6-kilometre line.

Farmers say the orchards are not merely economic assets but a way of life passed down through generations. “These trees are our lifeline they feed our families, create jobs and sustain our culture,” said Nazir Ahmad, a Shopian orchardist, speaking from a field lined with mature apple trees.

Critics of the project argue that the loss of orchards cannot be made good by one-time payouts because mature apple trees take decades to grow and begin yielding commercially.

Protesters also question the need for a rail line between two towns already connected by road. Local growers point out that the distance by road is barely 19–20 kilometres, making the proposed line appear both costly and unnecessary if it incurs such a heavy social and economic toll.

Economic and Ecological Stakes: Orchards at Risk

Apple cultivation is central to the valley’s economy. South Kashmir’s orchards produce a substantial portion of India’s apples, with entire families and allied sectors transport, cold storage, seasonal labour dependent on the success of each harvest.

Mature apple trees can yield produce worth significant sums annually, with orchard income often reaching lakhs of rupees per acre under favourable conditions.

Locals estimate that up to 200–250 acres of orchard land in Pulwama alone could be affected if the present alignment proceeds.

In several villages including Babhara, Keegam, Chak Niltrisal and Kunsoo, hundreds of thousands of apple and allied trees possibly between 6–7 lakh saplings and mature trees could face removal, fruit growers warn.

Environmental concerns run deep. Orchardists and climate activists highlight the role of apple trees in carbon sequestration, soil conservation and biodiversity support, including pollinators like bees and butterflies.

They argue that converting fertile agricultural land to railway tracks will have long-term ecological consequences for soil, water resources and the valley’s fragile environment.

The farmers’ frustration is compounded by their experiences with other infrastructure challenges: in recent years, closures of the Srinagar–Jammu highway due to landslides and weather events led to thousands of tonnes of apples rotting on stalled trucks, causing losses worth hundreds of crores and fuelling broader anxieties about inadequate planning for horticulture-dependent regions.

Lack of Consultation and Rising Local Discontent

A central grievance among orchard owners is the absence of meaningful consultation before the railway project was finalised. Residents say that survey and demarcation teams began work with minimal public notice and without comprehensive local dialogue, fuelling mistrust and anger.

Protests first began in earnest in December 2025 during fresh land demarcation efforts, with elderly farmers and women joining crowds calling for suspension of survey work.

Viral recordings show tearful orchardists standing beside newly installed iron poles, lamenting that their only source of sustenance is being threatened.

Local political leaders have backed the orchardists’ demands. Rajapora MLA Ghulam Mohiuddin Mir described the proposal as “useless” and warned it could weaken the local economy, while Shopian legislator Shabir Ahmad Kullay called it a “disaster for Kashmir,” urging resources be channelled into education, healthcare and road infrastructure instead of a rail line that slices through agricultural land.

The Awami National Party’s vice-president, Muzaffar Shah, echoed this rejection, stating bluntly that “a railway at the cost of the fruit industry is unacceptable.”

Local committees and youth activists have formed joint action groups to monitor survey work and have submitted memoranda to administrators demanding a review of the alignment and genuine local consultations before any project advances.

Authorities’ Response and Wider Debate

Railway authorities and state representatives have maintained that compensation packages for land and trees will be provided under existing regulations, and that such measures would enable affected farmers to start anew elsewhere.

In past public statements, officials have pointed to compensation for each tree and land per kanal as part of the acquisition process.

However, many residents say monetary compensation alone cannot replace decades of horticultural labour and cultural inheritance embodied in mature orchards.

They also call for exploring alternative alignments that avoid prime agricultural land, elevated tracks, or use of non-orchard government land for railway development. Civil society groups have echoed such calls, urging authorities to adopt solutions that preserve livelihood without halting connectivity improvements.

The controversy arrives in the context of broader infrastructure expansion in Jammu and Kashmir, where multiple new railway lines are being planned or surveyed from the Banihal–Baramulla stretch to routes across Kupwara, Uri and Pahalgam.

Residents argue that while connectivity is important, it should not come at the expense of food security and economic stability in an already fragile region.

The Logical Indian’s Perspective

The unfolding protests in Pulwama and Shopian reveal a deep fault line between top-down infrastructure planning and grassroots interests rooted in ecological and economic survival.

Apple cultivation in south Kashmir is not simply an industry it is the economic mainstay for thousands, the cultural core of rural life, and a symbol of resilience in a region often buffeted by climatic and political challenges.

While infrastructure development can bring wider opportunities, it must be undertaken with respect for local voices, transparent impact assessment and alternatives that safeguard both livelihoods and nature.

As authorities and communities navigate this fraught debate, finding a path that unites progress with preservation is essential.