Poaching of Waterbirds Prevented by CNHS Member

 

Cochin Natural History Society member Sri. Anoop C R responded to a team trying to shoot down birds at

Expert warns of Uttarakhand-like disaster in Western Ghats

Link to the article Expert warns of Uttarakhand-like disaster in Western Ghats The extremely fragile Western Ghats region is highly prone to natural calamities and chances of an Uttarakhand-like tragedy in the region cannot be ruled out if scientific conservation initiatives are not being implemented at the earliest, says a leading environmentalist. Significantly, the foreboding has come at a time when the State is in a dilemma over implementing the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel report drawn up by noted ecologist Madhav Gadgil. While business interests having stakes in granite quarrying, real estate, timber and tourism, who thrive in the biodiversity hotspot for decades, are opposing the report, the UDF government is under pressure to implement its salient recommendations. According to Prof V.S. Vijayan, former chairman of the State Biodiversity Board, also a member of Gadgil committee, commercial interests with the support of political parties are trying to create tension among people and making false propaganda against the report. “The Ghats region is highly prone to natural calamities like that happened in Uttarakhand recently. Indiscriminate plundering of natural resources and illegal and unscientific constructions have made it geologically fragile. Those who are agitating against the Gadgil report should try to understand the facts first before making a hue and cry,” Mr. Vijayan told PTI. “The natural forest cover in the region has dwindled to seven per cent. Most of the rivers have dried up and waters are contaminated in the rest of them. Hills are also slowly disappearing due to quarrying,” he said. Dismissing the argument that the Gadgil report is “anti-development” and “anti-farmer”, he said it is a pro-development report to the core but it wanted development initiatives in the region to be carried out in a sustainable manner. “Development process has to go on. Livelihood of people should be met. But, these all should be achieved in a sustainable manner, without causing any more harm to the biodiversity and environment there,” he said. Gadgil committee report has evoked sharp criticism from various quarters including the mainstream political parties in all the six States concerned — Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa —through which the Western Ghats is spread over. In Kerala, political parties and church establishments, irrespective of their differences, are against implementation of the report. They fear that the implementation would result in large-scale displacement of small and marginal farmers settled on the slopes of the hill ranges. Even the Kasturirangan report, which studied the recommendations of Madhav Gadgil report, has also not received total support. The State government formed an experts’ panel last week under the Biodiversity Board Chairman V. Ommen to create consensus among political parties and environmental activists on its implementation. Disputing the contention of the sceptics, Mr. Vijayan said the Gadgil committee has not opposed all human activity in the demarcated regions. “We have recommended the ban on polythene carry bags in the region. But, some churches told the faithful that they could not use even plastic buckets if the report was implemented.” “Another propaganda is that the report is against the construction of new houses in Western Ghats. But what we objected to was the conversion of agricultural and forest land for other purposes. But exception could be given to families who live there for generations. The recommendation was actually to curb real estate lobby,” he said. A recommendation to make all new constructions in the region eco-friendly, was twisted by vested groups and propagated that Gadgil committee wanted all new houses to be built with grass and bamboo, he said. He also denounced the allegation that the report was “anti-farmer”, saying that the report recommendations actually would provide more monetary gains to the farming community. “There are recommendations in the report to provide ’conservation charges’ for those farmers who use indigenous seeds for cultivation. The benefit is also recommended for farmers who rear indigenous fish species. Even those who grow native tree species in their homeyard are also recommended to get monetary benefit,” he said. Holding that the Gadgil committee has used a “totally unbiased system” to study the Western Ghats, Mr. Vijayan said they first took Western Ghats as a huge “water tower” as it is the water repository for all the six states. The entire Western Ghats was divided into three zones based on as many as 14 characters like geological and biodiversity factors, presence of rare species and so on. The entire region was demarcated as grids and grades were given to each grid based on these factors, he said. “The most sensitive areas have been included in zone one. Areas like Silent Valley and Athriappally fell under the zone naturally. We have not included any place purposefully in it.” The report, prepared thoroughly through a democratic process, envisaged to secure ‘grama sabhas’ and panchayats the ultimate power which the mafia groups in the region did not want to happen, he said. “The Kasturirangan panel, formed to examine Gadgil report, also had references about the presence of these mafias. As many as 52 per cent of objections which the Kasturi panel received against Gadgil report were from mining lobbies.” He criticised Kasturirangan report for discarding the zonal wise demarcation proposed by Gadgil panel and dividing the Ghats region just into ‘cultural and natural areas’ stating that it would open up the region for mafias. The expert also urged the authorities to distribute a Malayalam version of the Gadgil report among local residents and hold public debates on the matter with the support of grama sabhas. Meanwhile, V. Ommen, who has been made the chairman of the expert committee on the Kasturirangan report, said his main responsibility would be to hold grassroot level discussions on the report and create awareness among people that it would not harm their life. “I will be clear about my responsibilities only when I receive the terms and references. When we receive a copy of Kasturirangan report, we will bring out a Malayalam version of it, giving focus on Kerala side.Later we will visit all 123 villages, said to be affected with its implementation, and try to create consensus among various sections of people with the support of panchayat authorities and political parties,” he said.

Weedicides affecting Biodiversity

Weedicides will affect local biodiversity

Seventh Kerala Bird Race -10 November 2013

Dear Friends,

 

The seventh Kerala Bird Race will be held on  the Sunday, 10th November 2013 in Thiruvananthapuram, Kochi and Kozhikode. Kerala Birder along with The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (HSBC) and Yuhina Eco-Media  is organizing the HSBC Bird Race in Kerala, a signature event of the Bank, on 10th November 2013. Kerala Bird Race is a dawn to dusk event where teams of bird-watchers will spend the entire day birding in and  around  each city. There are no pre-determined routes - you can watch birds in multiple locations all within 100 km radius of each of the site to see as many  species as you can. The participants will try to record as many species of birds as possible; learn about the finer points of bird-watching from the experts & the experienced, and then later in the evening, all teams will meet at a suitable venue over dinner and an interactive tête-à-tête. Each Team gets an opportunity to interact with the others and recount their day's experiences. All in all, it is a great end to a day well spent with and for the feather-folk, and for nature.

For the first time, HSBC Bird Race shall be NON-COMPETITIVE. There are no prizes for winners and the idea is to see how many birds can be seen in a day by all the teams put together. There are no strict rules and its is only about the fun element in this exercise, which will hopefully help stimulate enormous interest in bird-watching as a highly popular hobby. The event will give us a good idea of the nature of this region's birdlife and shall help build up support for environment and nature conservation.  

 

Last year, we had more than 350 bird-watchers on the field on a single day, many of them fresh into the hobby. Birdwatchers from other states are encouraged to take it as a chance to do some great birding in Kerala. We sometimes have participants from Kanyakumari district joining us at Thiruvananthapuram.

The Grand Plan

Play the race hard - try to see as many species as you can from dawn to dusk before assembling to your chosen site for the evening dinner. Play the race to enjoy and share – each of you can treat it as an opportunity to make one another person interested in birds and share the joy.

Birdwatchers across Kerala (& outside) shall participate in this event - choose a convenient city where you can assemble for the evening of Nov 10th and contact the right coordinator.

Sites could be outside the district or even state.

You are free to make your own team. Each team can be 3 or 4 members; but there should be one good birdwatcher with every team who can identify most of the species around the city. You should name your team with a bird's name - we had several interesting names last time like "Falcons", "Cuckoos", "Flycatchers" etc. Also, make sure you drop in your phone numbers with the coordinators.

If you are a beginner bird-watcher and is not able to find a team, you still can contact the coordinators and they will help you out for finding you a team with a good bird-watcher in it.

The Thiruvananthapuram leg shall be lead by WWF-Kerala while Cochin Natural History Society (CNHS) will lead the Kochi site. Malabar Natural History Society (MNHS) shall be coordinating the race in Kozhikode.

Whom to Contact

Whom to Contact (Site Coordinators):

Thiruvananthapuram:

A K Sivakumar (WWF-India)

Phone: 94473 86978

Email wwfklso AT gmail.com 

Kochi:

Vishnupriyan Kartha (CNHS)

Phone: 94464 37410

Email: vpk_cusat AT yahoo.com

Kozhikode:

Sathyan Meppayur (MNHS)

Phone: 94472 04182

Email: satyanmpr AT gmail.com

Whom to Contact (General)

P.O.Nameer

Phone: +91 94465 73106

Email: nameerpo AT gmail.com

Praveen J

Phone: +91 94480 39906

Email: paintedstork AT gmail.com

Only Humans Can Halt the Worst Wave of Extinction Since the Dinosaurs Died

by E.O. Wilson (Edward O. Wilson, a leading advocate of global conservation, is Pellegrino University Professor at Harvard. His book The Diversity of Life will soon be available in 14 languages around the world.) The Baiji is a graceful, freshwater dolphin that once abounded along a thousand miles of the Yangtze River. It may now be the world's most endangered large animal. Caught in a vise of rising pollution and indiscriminate fishing during the past century, its population fell to only 400 by 1980, to 150 in 1993, and is now below 100. Zoologists doubt the species will survive in the wild for another decade. The baiji's closest rivals for early extinction include the Sumatran rhinoceros (probably fewer than 500 individuals survive) and the giant panda of China (fewer than 1,000). The media can be counted on to take note when the last member of each of these species dies, or, like the California condor, is removed from the wild to be placed in a captive breeding program. But for every animal celebrity that vanishes, biologists can point to thousands of species of plants and smaller animals either recently extinct or on the brink. The rarest bird in the world is Spix's macaw, down to one or possibly two individuals in the palm and river-edge forests of central Brazil. The rarest plant is Cooke's koki'o of Hawaii, a small tree with profuse orange-red flowers that once graced the dry volcanic slopes of Molokai. Today it exists only as a few half plants--branches implanted onto the stocks of other related species. Cooke's koki'o may spend its last days in this biological limbo; despite the best efforts of horticulturists to assist the plant, no branches planted in soil have sprouted roots. Around the world, biodiversity, defined as the full variety of life from genes to species to ecosystems, is in trouble. Responding to the problem, conservation experts have in the past two decades shifted their focus from individual species to entire threatened habitats, whose destruction would cause the extinction of many species. Such "hot spots" in the U.S., for example, include the coastal sage of Southern California, the sandy uplands of Florida, and the dammed and polluted river systems of Alabama and other Southern states. Arguably the countries with the most hot spots in the world are Ecuador, Madagascar and the Philippines. Each has lost two-thirds or more of its biologically rich rain forest, and the remainder is under widespread assault. The logic of the experts is simple: by concentrating conservation efforts on such areas, the largest amount of biodiversity can be saved at the lowest economic cost. And if the effort is part of the political process during regional planning, the rescue of biodiversity can gain the widest possible public support. In hot spots around the globe, mass extinctions of local populations have been commonplace. Among them: More than half the 266 species of exclusively freshwater fishes in peninsular Malaysia. Fifteen of the 18 unique fishes of Lake Lanao in the Philippines, and half the 14 birds of the Philippine Island of Cebu. All of the 11 native tree-snail species of Moorea in the Society Islands. Those on nearby Tahiti, as well as in the Hawaiian Islands, are rapidly disappearing. More than 90 plant species growing on a single mountain ridge in Ecuador, through clear-cutting of forest between 1978 and 1986. These well-documented cases notwithstanding, it is notoriously difficult to estimate the overall rate of extinction. Some groups, like the larger birds and mammals, are more susceptible to extinction than most. The same is true of fishes limited to one or two freshwater streams. Most kinds of insects and small organisms are so difficult to monitor as to make exact numbers unattainable. Nevertheless, biologists using several indirect methods of analysis generally agree that on the land at least and on a worldwide basis, species are vanishing 100 times faster than before the arrival of Homo sapiens. Tropical rain forests are the site of most of the known damage. Although they cover only 6% of the land surface, they contain more than half the species of plants and animals of the entire world. The rate of clearing and burning of rain forests averaged about 1% each year in the 1980s, an amount about equal to the entire country of Ireland, and the pace of destruction may now be increasing. That magnitude of habitat loss spells trouble for the planet's reservoir of biodiversity. It means that each year 0.25% or more of the forest species are being doomed to immediate or early extinction. How much is that in absolute numbers, as opposed to rate? If there are 10 million species in the still mostly unexplored forests, which some scientists think possible, the annual loss is in the tens of thousands. Even if there are a "mere" 1 million species, the loss is still in the thousands. These projections are based on the known relationships between the area of a given natural habitat and the number of species able to live within it. The projections may be on the low side. The outright elimination of habitat is the leading cause of extinction. But the introduction of aggressive exotic species and the diseases they carry follow close behind in destructiveness, along with overhunting or overharvesting of plants and animals. All these factors work together in a complex manner. When asked which ones caused the extinction of any particular species, biologists are likely to give the Murder on the Orient Express answer: they all did it. A common sequence in tropical countries starts with the building of roads into wilderness, such as those cut across Brazil's Amazonian state of Rondonia during the 1970s and '80s. Land-seeking settlers pour in, clear the rain forest on both sides of the road, pollute the streams, introduce alien plants and animals and hunt wildlife for extra food. Many native species become rare, and some disappear entirely. The world's fauna and flora are paying the price of humanity's population growth. The levy may be acceptable to those who put immediate human concerns above all else. But it should be borne in mind that we are destroying part of the Creation, thereby depriving all future generations of what we ourselves were bequeathed. The ongoing loss in biodiversity is the greatest since the end of the Mesozoic era 65 million years ago. At that time, by current scientific consensus, the impact of one or more giant meteorites darkened the atmosphere, altered much of earth's climate and extinguished the dinosaurs. Thus began the next stage of evolution, the Cenozoic era or Age of Mammals. The extinction spasm we are now inflicting can be moderated if we choose. If not, the next century will see the closing of the Cenozoic era and the start of a new one characterized by biological impoverishment. It might appropriately be called the Eremozoic era, the Age of Loneliness. People commonly respond to the evidence of species extinction by entering three successive stages of denial. The first is, simply, Why worry? Extinction is natural. Species have been dying out through more than 3 billion years of history without permanent harm to the biosphere. Evolution has always replaced extinct species with new ones. All these statements are true, but with a terrible twist. After the Mesozoic spasm, and after each of the four greatest previous spasms spaced over 400 million years, evolution required about 10 million years to restore the predisaster levels of diversity. Faced with a waiting time that long, and aware that we inflicted so much damage in a single lifetime, our descendants are going to be--how best to say it?--peeved with us. Worse, evolution cannot perform as in previous ages if natural environments have been crowded out by artificial ones. Entering the second stage of denial, people ask, Why do we need so many species anyway? Why care, especially since the vast majority are bugs, weeds and fungi? It is easy to dismiss the creepy crawlies of the world, forgetting that less than a century ago, before the rise of the modern conservation movement, native birds and mammals around the world were treated with the same callous indifference. Now the value of the little things in the natural world has become compellingly clear. Recent experimental studies on whole ecosystems support what ecologists have long suspected: the more species living in an ecosystem, the higher its productivity and the greater its ability to withstand drought and other kinds of environmental stress. Since we depend on functioning ecosystems to cleanse our water, enrich our soil and create the very air we breathe, biodiversity is clearly not something to discard carelessly. In addition to creating a habitable environment, wild species are the source of products that help sustain our lives. Not the least of these amenities are pharmaceuticals. More than 40% of all prescriptions dispensed by pharmacies in the U.S. are substances originally extracted from plants, animals, fungi and microorganisms. Aspirin, for example, the most widely used medicine in the world, was derived from salicylic acid, which in turn was discovered in a species of meadowsweet. Only a minute fraction of the species or organisms--probably less than 1%--have been examined for natural products that might serve as medicines. There is a critical need to press the search in the case of antibiotics and antimalarial agents. The substances most commonly used today are growing less effective as the disease organisms acquire genetic resistance to the drugs. The bacterium staphylococcus, for example, has recently re-emerged as a potentially lethal pathogen, and the microorganism that causes pneumonia is growing steadily more dangerous. The age of antibiotics, it has been said, is over. Not quite, but medical researchers are nevertheless locked in an arms race with the rapidly evolving pathogens that is certain to grow more serious. They are obliged to turn to a broader array of wild species to discover the new weapons of 21st century medicine. Each species is a masterpiece of evolution, offering a vast source of useful scientific knowledge because it is so thoroughly adapted to the environment in which it lives. Species alive today are thousands to millions of years old. Their genes, having been tested by adversity over so many generations, engineer a staggeringly complex array of biochemical devices to aid the survival and reproduction of the organisms carrying them. Even when that much is granted, the third stage of denial usually emerges: Why rush to save all the species right now? We have more important things to do. Why not keep live specimens in zoos and botanical gardens--on ice, so to speak--and return them to the wild later? The grim truth is that all the zoos in the world today can sustain a maximum of only 2,000 species of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, out of about 24,000 known to exist. The world's botanical gardens would be even more overwhelmed by the quarter-million plant species. These refuges are invaluable in helping to save a few endangered species. So is freezing embryos in liquid nitrogen. But such measures cannot come close to solving the problem as a whole. To add to the difficulty, no one has devised a plan to save the legion of insects, fungi and other ecologically vital small organisms. And once scientists are ready to return species to independence, the ecosystems in which many lived will no longer exist. Tigers and rhinos, to make the point clear, cannot survive in paddies. The conclusion of scientists and conservationists is therefore virtually unanimous: the only way to save wild species is to maintain them in their original habitats. Considering how rapidly such habitats are shrinking, even that straightforward solution will be a daunting task. Many ecosystems have already been lost, and others seem doomed. In spite of all these difficulties, there is reason for some optimism. With appropriate measures and the will to use them, the hemorrhaging can be slowed, perhaps eventually halted, and most of the surviving species saved. Some of the most important immediate steps that can be taken are outlined in the Convention on Biological Diversity, signed by 156 nations and the European Union at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro (with its Senate hesitating to ratify, the U.S. is one of the few nations not yet a formal party to the agreement). The convention was the turning point in the awareness of biodiversity as a world issue. It served as a catalyst in accelerating conservation efforts and has been especially important in awakening tropical countries, where biodiversity is both the richest and most threatened. One of the first moves under way is the closer surveying of biodiversity, country by country, to pinpoint the extinction hot spots. Such information, when used to sequester parks and reserves, can lead to the rescue of large numbers of endangered ecosystems and species. A review of bird distribution by the International Council for Bird Preservation, using the best data available for any group of organisms, revealed that 20% of the world's species occur within 2% of the land area. Protecting natural environments in these localities alone would help greatly to slow the rate of bird extinction. It would also shield larger numbers of other animals and plants limited to the same habitat. Saving the last remnants of the natural environment requires more than just scientific information. There are also formidable economic and political problems to be overcome. Growing populations need new land and increased food production. The priorities of the desperately poor do not include saving the fauna and flora of their country. Funds must be raised to purchase much of the land from private owners, and then to pay for the protection and management of the reserves. To gain the support of local peoples, educational programs are needed to convey the importance of wild lands to sustaining their own environment in a healthy state. The poor need to be helped to a better life on the land they already occupy. Out of this welter of conflicting interests has arisen a new kind of environmentalism. It values the world's fauna and flora not just aesthetically as the natural heritage of humanity but also as a source of wealth and economic stability. An infant biodiversity industry is now taking shape along several fronts. More than 20 pharmaceutical companies have contracted with private and national research organizations to push "chemical prospecting" for new medicines in rain forests and other habitats. Ecotourism, opening the most spectacular wild lands to paying visitors, has become a major source of income in many developing countries. Reserves and the surrounding land are being reorganized to create an outer buffer zone where local peoples are helped to develop sustainable agriculture, enveloping an inviolate core zone for the maximum protection of endangered species. Some forest tracts previously scheduled for clear-cutting are now selectively logged or cut along concentric swaths, then allowed to regenerate. Because the practices yield higher long-term profits, they are expected to be widely adopted. The new approach to biodiversity, uniting conservation and economic development, is obviously far from perfect, and it is not yet fully practiced in any country. But it is a promising start. Some of the pilot projects have succeeded dramatically. They offer a way out of what will otherwise be a biologically impoverished future. With the world population at 5.7 billion and sure to keep on growing rapidly until well into the next century, humanity has entered a dangerous environmental bottleneck. We hope--surely we must believe--that our species will come out the other side in better condition than when we entered. We should make it a goal to take as much of the rest of life with us as is humanly possible.

Call for serious debate on Western Ghats Reports

Achuthanandan calls for serious debate on Western Ghats reports

Birding at SSUS campus

The Cochin Natural History Society, in association with the Sukrithi Nature Club of the Sree Sankaracharya University, Kalady has conducted a Pre-Migration Season  Bird Watching for the School students of Kalady environs.

American Bison makes a come back.

Watch this video

http://www.defendersblog.org/2013/08/yellowstone-bison-arrive-at-fort-belknap/

Birds in my backyard - The Hindu

Birds in my backyard - The Hindu

Insect World

The Fascinating World of Insects: I had an opportunity to take part in a short course on taxonomy of insects conducted at the University of Agricultural Sciences,GKVK Bangalore last month.We could learn many intersting and fascinating tit bits about insects and their world with the masters in Entomolgy.Here are some pictures from the event.

HOMAGE....

                             Antappan Ambiyayam

Be warned! It's climate weirding - Article in The Hindu

Be warned! It's climate weirding - The Hindu

Coastal Zone Management Rules

Coastal Regulation Zone Act

Click here to view CRZ Notification 2011

As populations in coastal areas increase and the economic activity diversifies, all the impacts on coastal environment are bound to worsen threatening survival several species, productivity of the biota, and render fishing an unsustainable proposition. It is, therefore, clear that unless governments and resource users take appropriate action, the degradation of the coastal and marine environment will become uncontrollable and there will be no possibilities for sustainable use of resources from these waters.

These concerns are expressed in the linkage between development in Chapter 17 of UNCED Agenda 21: "Protection of the oceans, all kinds of seas including enclosed and semi-closed seas, coastal areas and the protection, rational use and development of their living resources'. It includes a commitment of nations to sustainable development of coastal areas and the marine environment under their jurisdiction. It also enjoins states to 'identify marine ecosystems exhibiting high levels of biodiversity and productivity and other critical habitat areas' and 'provide necessary limitations on use in these areas, through inter alia, designation of protected areas.' In particular, it states that the priority should be accorded, as appropriate, to:

a) Coral reef ecosystems

b) Estuaries

c) Temperate and tropical wetlands, including mangroves

d) Seagrass beds and

e) Other spawning and nursery areas.

The CRZ Act notified by the Ministry of Environment and Forests in 1991 needs to be seen against this background. It declares coastal stretches as CRZ and regulates certain activities within the zone. The provisions of the act are to be implemented by the coastal states and Union Territories. It also envisages the creation of an appropriate authority at the state/UT level to be responsible for enforcement and enactment of these provisions.

The act defines the coastal stretches as seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and backwaters which are influenced by tidal action, in the landward side, upto 500m from the high tide line (HTL) and the land between the Low Tide Line (LTL) and HTL or the intertidal zone, as the CRZ. It classifies the CRZ into four categories for regulating the development activities. A short description of these categories is given below.

The notification specifies activities that are prohibited or regulated in these categories, with the most stringent regulations applying to CRZ-I. The norms for regulation of activities in different categories of the CRZ are given in Appendix. Certain activities are totally prohibited in it, such as theestablishment and expansion of existing industries, manufacture/ handling/disposal of hazardous substances, dumping of wastes, land reclamation and embankment building, dumping of industrial wastes, mining of rocks, sands and substrata. Harvesting of ground water within 200m is also disallowed. Between 200m and 500m, only manual withdrawal of ground water for purposes of drinking, horticulture, agriculture and fisheries is permitted. It is to be noted that, tourist sector, however, has been allowed to tap ground water in the zone with the concurrence of the Central/Sate Ground Water Boards.

The notification permits a large set of activities subject to environmental clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests. Water front and foreshore activities, development work relating needs of expanding defence facilities, etc., are possible. The notification is an attempt to prevent uncontrolled and environmentally unsound development on the coast. It is an attempt to provide a legal framework for the protection of the coastal environment, in the background of the concerns expressed in the convention on biodiversity.

CRZ-I

a. Ecologically sensitive areas (national/ marine parks, sanctuaries, reserve forests, wildlife habitats, mangroves, coral reefs, areas close to breeding and spawning grounds of fish and other marine life, areas of outstanding natural beauty/historical/heritage, areas rich in genetic diversity.

b. Those falling between HTL and LTL.

c. Those areas likely to be inundated due to sea level rise due to global warming and such other areas as may be declared by the concerned authority (Central/State/UT).

CRZ-II

Areas that are already developed up to and close to the shoreline. For this purpose, "developed area" is that which falls within the municipal limits or in other legally designated urban areas which is already substantially built up and which have been provided with drainage and approach roads and other infrastructure.

CRZ-III

Relatively undisturbed areas that do not belong to either I or II. This will include coastal zone in rural areas (developed and undeveloped) and also areas within municipal limits or in other legally designated urban areas which are not substantially built up.

CRZ-IV

Coastal stretches in Andaman & Nicobar, Lakshadweep and small islands, except those designated as CRZ-I, II, or III.

Note:

The CRZ Act is with effect from 19/2/91. Therefore all the prohibitions and regulations apply from that date. Any change in land use after 19/2/91 within the CRZ must be in accordance with the provisions of the act. For example, an area is considered to be “developed” or “substantially built up” or the status of the existence of a road or other infrastructure must be based on the status as on 19/2/91.

It is quite evident that the notification is only a preliminary step in this direction and not a comprehensive legislation. Its aims are rather limited, confined to regulating certain acts in a narrow, geographically defined, strip of the coast. In particular, it does not recognize the intimate links between aquatic and landward sides of the shoreline.

Its most glaring drawback is the complete absence of a seaward component in the definition of the CRZ. A major drawback of the CRZ Notification is that while its provisions are supposed to apply to 'coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and backwaters which are influenced by tidal action' and several other ecologically sensitive areas along the coast, the actual protection zone defined by it covers only an extremely narrow strip of the shoreline.

As evident from several discussions on the issue, the regulatory authority proposed to be set up does not make any provision for representation of the stakeholder and the public. There are no provisions for either public hearings or information disclosures. It is thus a continuation of the existing environmental protection acts and does not contain any new progressive elements. This is despite the Panchayati Raj Act and the concept of joint ecological management that is replacing the approach of managing from above.

A careful reading of the act shows that the communities traditionally dependent on the coast for their livelihood, who in most cases have lived in harmony with the coastal environment have little to lose by the stringent implementation of the act. In fact, they stand to gain a lot. The development pressures which threaten their livelihood would be inhibited by the act. The act will help to rejuvenate the coastal ecology in several ways. It can lead to substantial improvement in the quality of coastal habitats.

Further, if the state and local authorities are committed to the protection of environment and are not misled by the environmentally and socially irresponsible noises made primarily from the industry (in its broadest sense), there are possibilities of embarking on new forms of development with community participation. Restoration of coastal ecology, such as restoring mangrove vegetation, safeguarding habitats for migratory birds and other animals, could form part of such initiatives. The state governments (Kerala is no exception), unfortunately, have tended to neglect the responsibility to safeguard environment and have been far too much in favour of the arguments against enforcing environmental protection acts.

The CRZ and CZM is not just a matter of zoning and regulating development on the shore, but are

one part of a strategy for coastal biodiversity conservation and ecologically balanced sustainable

development of the coastal areas. The threats to ecology of coastal waters, affecting not merely the marine biota, but also that of sustaining an important food source for human communities is at the heart of CRZ and CZM.

Photos Munambam Pelagic Survey 28Apr 2013

Munambam Pelagic Survey Photos 28 Apr 2013

Pelagic Bird Survey, Munambam 28th Apr 2013

Dear All,

Cochin Natural History Society, under the leadership of Dr.Dileep K G, conducted a Pelagic Bird Survey on Sunday 28^th April from the Munambam Harbour (western coast- north of Kochi, near Cherai, Kerala).We started at 7am from Munambam. The sea was calm and breezy. It was sunny and hot mostly with occasional rain clouds. We travelled approx. 55 kms.  towards west and crossed the point where sea floor drops to 200m depth. We returned by 4.30pm.

The birds we saw were:

1.Flesh footed Shearwater- 25+

2.Arctic Skua.

3.Brown Noddy.

4.Swinhoe`s Storm Petrel.

5.Wilson`s Storm Petrel.

6.Bridled Tern.

7.Greater Crested Tern.

8.Lesser Crested Tern.

9.Common Tern.

10.Whiskered Tern.

The members of the team:Dr.Dileep K G,Praveen J, Dipu.K, E S Praveen, Vishnupriyan, Prasanth Narayanan,Sandeep Das ,Tomz Augustine,Vishnu Sivadas, Dr.Jinesh,Rafy Kallettunkara, ,Venkat Raj,Ajesh,Anwin,Dileep Kumar,Mathews B A,Madhavan Kutty,Sobha Menon,Neetha Geoprge,Tedy N Alias,,Jamsheed,Jayakumar Chellappan,Pradeep Aymanam,Abhilash Chandran and Gopinathan Nair.
We are thankful to Sri.Vasanth who did all to materialize this pelagic trip  and enthusiasticcaly accompanied us in the trip as well as our previous pelagic trip from Munambam.

Click Here for the Google Earth Trip File

Photographs will follow......

Dr.Dileep K G

Vishnupriyan

CNHS

Second Pelagic Birding Trip from the Munanmbam Coast



Pelagic Survey Invitation

 Dear friends,
CNHS is organising one more Pelagic Bird Survey on 28th April from Munambam coast, north of Kochi.
Will be back with report tomorrow,
Vishnu

CNHS Member bags Photography Award

Our member Sri.Vishnu Sivadas has bagged Second Prize in Birds category and Consolation Prize in Mammals category in the All India Photography competition organized by Environment Conservation Group of Cimbatore.The competition was judjed by legendary nature photographer T N A Perumal and M Balan, Bittu Sehgal etc.
Congratulations to him.


Vishnu