Date: 11.05.2010.

FOR FAVOUR OF PUBLICATION

Goenchea Raponkarancho Ekvott and Other Coastal People’s Organisation (GREOCPO) while appreciating the Minister for Environment and Forests for taking cognizance of the people’s demand and presenting a pre-draft notification on Coastal Regulation Zone 2010, which is a welcome precedent, observes that the pre-draft notification is full of loopholes and deliberate provisions aimed at exploiting the coastline rather than its protection and conservation and pays only lip service to the rights of the lives and livelihood of the 25 per cent of India’s population living along the 7,500 kms long coastline.

In the first place, a new concept “HAZARD LINE” is introduced in the pre-draft notification which is very suspicious and to which we object very strongly and demand its deletion totally. Fine reading of the Notification, specially with regards to CRZ III clearly reveals that the Hazard Line is introduced to dilute the No Development Zone.

The notification clearly states that “buildings will be permitted on the landward side of the Hazard Line” which will be used to permit development within the No Development Zone on grounds that the area falls on the landward side of the Hazard Line. It is our fear that the Hazard Line will be drawn arbitrarily to even include areas within 200 mts of Low Tide Line and arguing that there is no risk of developing the area, the beachfront will be thrown open for development.

This would not only result in changing the shoreline and throwing open our coastal land for commercial exploitation of the moneybags but at the same time displacing the local people who have been living not only on, but also off that land from time immemorial as has been seen in different parts of the country where resorts and hotels have come along the coastline.

It would be pertinent to point out that one of the reasons for rejecting the Coastal Zone Management Notification was the provision of “Set Back Line”, which apparently is re-named as Hazard Line in the present notification.

Besides, the pre-draft notification also has clauses indicating that forest land along the country’s coastline, which is currently protected under the Forest Protection Act, will be thrown open for development under the provisions of this Notification. This particular provision has to be deleted totally as it would result in changing the very nature and environment of area like in Pernem and Canacona, where certain powerful and influential people are reported to have purchased huge tracts of forest land.

If these forest areas are used for development, it would not only deplete our forest cover but also have an adverse impact on the environment. As it is, Goa is becoming warmer every year and if it becomes any more warm, then tourists themselves will stop coming to Goa thereby resulting in we killing the very goose that was laying the golden eggs.

The pre-draft notification has some subtle changes which are clearly aimed at opening the rural coastal areas for hotels, resorts and even mega housing projects. For example, while the 1991 notification had reference to projects in terms of their value, the 2010 notification specifies the area and the specified area is 20,000 square metres.

This means that only moneybags would be able to develop such huge areas and this development, in no way, would be in the interest of the local people as they would not be able to afford to purchase any unit developed therein, nor would they be able to spend time at the resorts and hotels that will be coming up there.

That the pre-draft notification is aimed at opening virgin rural beaches for resorts and hotels is evident from the fact that there is an entire Annexure (being Annexure III) which lists out dos and donts for setting up hotels and resorts in CRZ II and CRZ III. The department has come with an interesting usage of words as by stating “development of beach resorts/hotels for temporary occupation of tourists/visitors” it has paved way for permanent constructions to come up on these virgin beaches.

The pre-draft notification has very conveniently overlooked the fact that the staff and management of these beach resorts/hotels will be living there on permanent basis.

GREOCPO strongly demands that no permanent construction for commercial use be allowed in virgin beaches. Instead, we suggest that temporary structures for temporary occupation of tourists/visitors be permitted as is being done in Palolem in Goa for many years now. The Palolem model is not only eco-friendly as it allows nature to rule the roost during the off season, but is also people friendly as the wealth is distributed amongst the locals who are used to erect and demolish the temporary structures.

Going by the Goan experience, GREOCPO demands that the pre-draft notification specifically prohibits the government from acquiring coastal properties for development of hotels or resorts or any other commercial establishments by private parties including corporate houses.

As far as Goa is concerned, GREOCPO appreciates the ministry designating Goa as an area of special interest. However, it is apparent that the special needs of Goans have not been properly studied as they find no mention in the pre-draft notification.

For example, while there is a mention of protection of khazan lands, unique to Goa and though the pre-draft notification does mention that “no developmental activities shall be permitted in the khazan land”, prohibition of conversion of khazan land for agro related purposes like horticulture or pisciculture, which has been happening rampantly in Goa, is not banned. Protection of khazan land will become a farce if such conversions are not stopped.

And notwithstanding the tall promises made by the Minister for Environment and Forests and the Congress President to Goan coastal residents, the pre-draft notification has left a loophole that would prove to be very cumbersome and detrimental to Goans willing to construct their own residential houses in properties owned by them along the coastline.

The pre-draft notification permits reconstruction and repairs of existing structures, but is conveniently silent on constructions that can come up in plots which are currently vacant. GREOCPO’s demand is that if hotels and resorts could be allowed to be constructed on vacant land, individual Goan, wanting to construct his or her bungalow and even commercial structures, on coast side properties should also be allowed. Currently, they are not permitted.

Meanwhile, the Goa government has not taken any concrete steps to mitigate the problem of the coastal people who have been issued demolition notices. It has now become evident that due to the failure of the Goa government many people have lost their houses which were demolished due to the improper interpretation of the provisions of CRZ 1991.

Significantly, many houses are still facing demolition and the government is just sleeping over the matter even though the Union Minister for Environment and Forests had himself suggested ways and means to protect these houses. GREOCPO demands that the Goa Government immediately files an affidavit in the High Court so that the demolition notices may be revoked at the earliest.

On a general basis, the pre-draft notification provides for review of the Coastal Management Plan after five years. GREOCPO takes strong objection to this and demands that the review, if at all, should be after 10 years as currently the Regional Plans are also reviewed after 10 years. Besides, since the Coastal Management Plans will be prepared using scientific data like remote sensing and others, it can well be prepared by anticipating the requirements for 10 years.

The pre-draft notification provides for the authorities to provide certain facilities within a certain time frame. For example, two years period is provided for phasing out discharge of untreated sewage and waste in sea. However, it is silent on what action should be taken if the authorities fail to meet the deadline. Penal action for failure to meet the deadlines has to be incorporated as the authorities have not yet met the deadlines prescribed in the 1991 notification even though 19 years have passed since then.

Another area of concern is the provision for extension and development of ports. The Government of India proposes to add 353 new ports all along the Indian Coastline. This will be disastrous to the ecology. As it is, beaches in Canacona taluka in Goa are undergoing dramatic changes due to the Sea Bird project in neighbouring Karwar. If new ports and extension of ports is allowed, the entire coastline of India would well change. GREOCPO demands that such work should be taken up only after a through Environment Impact Assessment is done and not with any rapid EIA.

Interestingly most of the new ports are either private ports or on PPP concept which would result in displacing the local fishermen from the land of their ancestors and their work place, for the sake of the private parties. The conflict with Mormugao Port Trust over territorial jurisdiction in Goa, should be an eye opener for the people.

There are a lot of ambiguities in the pre-draft notification which would provide the loopholes for violations of the notification. For example, certain projects are to be permitted after due permission, but the word “certain” is not explained. Similarly, a department is supposed to issue a notification, but which department and within how much time, is not mentioned. GREOCPO demands that all such ambiguities be deleted.

In what appears to be a total parody, the pre-draft notification provides for demolition of buildings of archaeological and historical importance, heritage buildings and buildings under public use. This is truly ridiculous as these are the assets of the country and should not be demolished. GREOCPO demands that instead of demolition, these structures be relocated.

Ironically, even though the Government of India has withdrawn its SEZ policy, the pre-draft notification provides for setting up SEZ in CRZ. GREOCPO demands that no SEZ should be permitted within CRZ.

The pre-draft notification has failed to appreciate the 73^rd and 74^th amendments to the Constitution. GREOCPO therefore demands that the Coastal Management Plans be discussed at specially convened Gram Sabhas or meetings of the Municipal councils of affected areas before the same are finalized. Incidentally, though the 1991 notification stipulated preparation of the Coastal Management Plans, the same have not been prepared till date even though 19 years have passed. As a result permissions are being granted on case to case basis which is a convenient means to fill up the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats.

GREOCPO will raise up these issues at the National Fishworkers Forum meeting scheduled in Chennai later this month.

Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-

Matanhy Saldanha

Convenor

Agnelo Rodrigues

GRE President

Francisco Fernandes

Toddy Tapper