TATA to turtles?
“We are absolutely delighted to see the turtles return to Gahirmatha in tune with their annual sojourn after giving the region a miss in 2007-2008 turtle season.” said Ashish Fernandes, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace India. “However, this episode of mass-nesting cannot be used as a smoke screen by port promoters in projecting that all is fine. It would be dangerous to assume so since this nesting does not mean that the turtles and the adjoining ecologically sensitive areas, including the Bitharkanika National Park are safe .Our concerns, shared by scientists, academics and other conservationists over ongoing dredging operations for construction of the Dhamra Port, and its impacts on the turtles and adjoining areas, remain (2). In the absence of any credible and comprehensive assessment of dredging and port construction activities on these areas, the significant
ecological threat persists” he added.
Earlier, on March 23rd, 2009, coinciding with the Indian launch of the TATA “Nano”, Greenpeace, in an open letter to Ratan Tata, in the Financial Times and the International Herald Tribune, reminded the TATAs of their environmental responsibilities, in line with the company’s professed environmental ethics, by raising the issue of “Placing the planet on par with profits, because there are some things that money just can’t buy back”. While the launch of the TATA Nano has generated significant excitement, this has coincided with disappointment among the public over TATAs’ reluctance to suspend dredging and commence an independent and comprehensive biological threat assessment. In the last few weeks alone over 10,000 people have faxed Mr. Tata, calling for a suspension of dredging at the port (3).
Heightened protests in 2008 forced the TATAs into a dialogue process with an alliance of environmental and conservation organisations. This hit a dead end in February 2009 after TATA refused to consider any suspension of construction or dredging work at the port (4). The negotiations involved the need to suspend construction, specifically dredging, pending an independent and comprehensive biological threat assessment of the Dhamra Port on the turtles and adjoining areas.
Commenting on the current impasse, Bittu Sahgal, Editor, Sanctuary Asia said “For Tata Steel to refuse to halt dredging operations, claiming they have scientific advice to the effect that this will not impact the turtles, amounts to embracing voluntary blindness. It not only defies common sense, but throws the tenets of the precautionary principle to the winds. JRD would strongly disapprove of the obstinate attitude of the Tata Steel management towards the fate of one of India’s most endangered species. Dredging must stop immediately and independent scientists must be asked to determine the extent to which the port will harm the turtles and other biodiversity.”
Over 100,000 people from across the world have already joined Greenpeace in reminding Mr. Ratan Tata of the need to put ecological and environmental imperatives on par with corporate profitability. In 2008, over 100,000 Greenpeace cyber-activists called on the TATAs to relocate the port. A Greenpeace snap-poll of nearly 5000 TATA customers, conducted in February this year, revealed that 98% believed that port construction should be stopped immediately (5).
The development of this port has been mired in controversy (6). Its location for years has been a matter of serious concern to conservationists, hundreds of scientists and academics, including turtle experts, who have opposed it (7).
Speaking on the TATA’s reluctance to suspend dredging and commence a study, Fernandes added “Scientists, conservationists and the general public are raising an outcry against this port. There is clear evidence of the ecological significance of the port site as well (8). What more does Mr. Ratan Tata need? If the TATAs want to maintain their professed reputation for being sensitive to social and environmental concerns – they have no choice but to suspend dredging and commence an independent and comprehensive assessment”.”
ecological threat persists” he added.
Earlier, on March 23rd, 2009, coinciding with the Indian launch of the TATA “Nano”, Greenpeace, in an open letter to Ratan Tata, in the Financial Times and the International Herald Tribune, reminded the TATAs of their environmental responsibilities, in line with the company’s professed environmental ethics, by raising the issue of “Placing the planet on par with profits, because there are some things that money just can’t buy back”. While the launch of the TATA Nano has generated significant excitement, this has coincided with disappointment among the public over TATAs’ reluctance to suspend dredging and commence an independent and comprehensive biological threat assessment. In the last few weeks alone over 10,000 people have faxed Mr. Tata, calling for a suspension of dredging at the port (3).
Heightened protests in 2008 forced the TATAs into a dialogue process with an alliance of environmental and conservation organisations. This hit a dead end in February 2009 after TATA refused to consider any suspension of construction or dredging work at the port (4). The negotiations involved the need to suspend construction, specifically dredging, pending an independent and comprehensive biological threat assessment of the Dhamra Port on the turtles and adjoining areas.
Commenting on the current impasse, Bittu Sahgal, Editor, Sanctuary Asia said “For Tata Steel to refuse to halt dredging operations, claiming they have scientific advice to the effect that this will not impact the turtles, amounts to embracing voluntary blindness. It not only defies common sense, but throws the tenets of the precautionary principle to the winds. JRD would strongly disapprove of the obstinate attitude of the Tata Steel management towards the fate of one of India’s most endangered species. Dredging must stop immediately and independent scientists must be asked to determine the extent to which the port will harm the turtles and other biodiversity.”
Over 100,000 people from across the world have already joined Greenpeace in reminding Mr. Ratan Tata of the need to put ecological and environmental imperatives on par with corporate profitability. In 2008, over 100,000 Greenpeace cyber-activists called on the TATAs to relocate the port. A Greenpeace snap-poll of nearly 5000 TATA customers, conducted in February this year, revealed that 98% believed that port construction should be stopped immediately (5).
The development of this port has been mired in controversy (6). Its location for years has been a matter of serious concern to conservationists, hundreds of scientists and academics, including turtle experts, who have opposed it (7).
Speaking on the TATA’s reluctance to suspend dredging and commence a study, Fernandes added “Scientists, conservationists and the general public are raising an outcry against this port. There is clear evidence of the ecological significance of the port site as well (8). What more does Mr. Ratan Tata need? If the TATAs want to maintain their professed reputation for being sensitive to social and environmental concerns – they have no choice but to suspend dredging and commence an independent and comprehensive assessment”.”
greenpeace.org
Advertisement
Posted by bebenajib on June 10, 2010 at 3:32 am
Love can sometimes be magic. But magic can sometimes… just be an illusion.
google