Save the turtles

adobe audition 1.5 cracked Download Adobe Audition 3 download adobe premiere elements adobe audition v1.5 crack Download Adobe Premiere Elements 8 keygen abbyy finereader 7.0 adobe audition 7.1 Download ABBYY FineReader 10 Professional Editionadobe audition 2 tryout adobe audition totally free Software download 2.0 adobe cd elements key premiere adobe audition 3.0 crack Download Adobe Captivate 4 microsoft streets and trips mexico plugins for adobe premiere elements 3.0 Download Microsoft Streets and Trips 2010 adobe premiere elements 3.0 trial

TATA plea for injunction against Greenpeace listed for consideration on August 12

India — Delhi High Court today granted Greenpeace India 10 days time to file a written reply in the defamation and trademark infringement suit filed by TATA & Sons. The Court has listed the matter for August 12 to consider TATAs application for grant of an interim injunction against Greenpeace India’s ‘Turtle vs TATA’ pacman-inspired online game.
Citing the online game on Greenpeace India’s website, TATA & Sons have filed a suit in the Delhi High Court claiming defamation and trademark infringement and asking for Rs.10 crore (USD 2.1 million) in damages.

“The Dhamra project symptomatically represents all that threatens India’s coastline and the fact that state and central authorities continue to turn a blind eye to the irregularities in the project is shameful. Greenpeace continues to oppose the project. If the UPA government and Jairam Ramesh are serious about protecting India’s coasts they need to make sure that the mistakes of Dhamra are not repeated” said Ashish Fernandes, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace India. “We are asking that no new ports or expansion of existing ones be permitted within 25 km of eco-sensitive or CRZ I areas. This is critical as over 300 ports are proposed for the coast of mainland India” he further added.

The Dhamra port project has been opposed by conservationists, environmental groups, researchers and scientists ever since it was proposed in the 1990s, on account of its proximity to the Bhitarkanika National Park and Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary, and the habitats of endangered species including the saltwater crocodile and olive ridley sea turtle.
Vision, video, photos, report information

Ashish Fernandes, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace India, +91-99801 99380, ashish.fernandes@greenpeace,org
Hozefa Merchant, Media Officer, Greenpeace India, +91-98195 92410, hozefa.merchant@greenpeace.org


TATA tries to silence critics, takes Greenpeace to court

Delhi, India – Claiming defamation and trademark infringement, TATA Sons has filed a lawsuit against Greenpeace in the Delhi High Court, asking for Rs. 10 crore in damages. The case is listed for hearing on July 27. Greenpeace has been an outspoken critic of the Dhamra Port Project, being co-developed by TATA Steel, on account of the threat it poses to nearby protected areas and endangered species, including the olive ridley turtle.

The lawsuit filed by TATA is an act to silence its critics. “TATA’s threat of legal action is a desperate attempt to stifle the growing criticism over their port project, and divert attention from the real issue of the impact it will have on a biodiversity rich area. Public opinion is on the side of the turtles – over 150,000 Indians, leading scientists and turtle biologists(1), politicians and national NGOs(2) have come out against the port. By first ignoring and now trying to silence these voices, TATA is showing that it cares only about its bottom line, and not the environment,” said Ashish Fernandes, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace India.

The Dhamra port has been opposed by researchers and wildlife groups since it was first proposed in the 1990s, on account of its proximity to the Bhitarkanika and Gahirmatha protected areas. Bhitarkanika is India’s second largest mangrove forest and the last stronghold of the saltwater crocodile, while Gahirmatha is one of the world’s largest nesting grounds for the endangered olive ridley sea turtle. The port is less than 5 km from Bhitarkanika National Park and less than 15 km from the mass nesting beaches at Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary.

The Dhamra port is scheduled to be operational within a few weeks, despite unresolved legal issues. Government documents obtained under the Right to Information Act show that the port is in violation of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. Acting on these documents, prominent conservationists have challenged the project in the Supreme Court(3), where the case is currently pending. Earlier this year, over 20 national politicians (4) wrote to Union Minister for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh asking him to take action on this issue; the Minister has thus far refused to take a public stand.

“Greenpeace believes in non-violent creative confrontation and our ‘Turtle vs TATA’ game is a result of that belief. The game has become very popular in the online world since its launch, even generating media articles(5) about creative activism,” says Avijit Michael, Greenpeace Online Campaigner. “Over 150,000 people have supported the campaign against the Dhamra port – that figure should be respected and answered to,” he added.

Over 300 ports are planned for the coast of mainland India. To ensure that mistakes like Dhamra are not repeated, Greenpeace is asking Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh to strengthen the Coastal Regulation Zone notification to exclude new ports or expansion of old ones within 25 km. of ecologically sensitive (CRZI) areas.

Notes to Editor
1. http://greenpeace.in/turtle/wp-content/pdfs/scientist-statement.pdf
2. http://greenpeace.in/turtle/wp-content/pdfs/letter-to-ratan-tata-wpsi.pdf
3. http://greenpeace.in/turtle/docs/moef-dhamra-fca-violation-june-12-2009
4. Business Standard – http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/green-lobby-seeks-action-against-dhamra-port/395270/
5. Wall Street Journal – http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/06/29/campaign-20-turtle-vs-tata-the-game/

Vision, video, photos, report information

1. Ashish Fernandes, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace India +91 9980199380 ashish.fernandes@greenpeace.org 2. Hozefa Merchant, Media Officer, Greenpeace India +91 9819592410 hozefa.merchant@greenpeace.org


Environment Ministry’s Pre-draft CRZ Notification 2010 rejected by fishermen, environmentalists

Commitments broken, hopes betrayed

New Delhi, June 17, 2010: The National Coastal Protection Campaign (NCPC), a collective comprising of a broad range of fishworker groups including the National Fishworkers Forum (NFF), fishworker support organisations and environmental groups jointly rejected the Ministry of Environment’s ‘pre-draft’ CRZ 2010 notification for being anti-people, anti-environment and pro-industry (1). Most of the concerns and issues raised during the public consultation process undertaken by Minister Jairam Ramesh between August 2009 and March 2010 have been ignored in the ‘pre-draft’, despite assurances from the Minister that these would be taken on board.

“The ‘pre-draft’ is doubly disappointing as we had high hopes that Mr. Ramesh would ensure a much improved legal regime that would better regulate destructive development on the coast, and protect the livelihoods of traditional fishers”, said V.Vivekanandan, Convenor, NCPC. “The contents of this pre-draft are extremely disappointing as it is grossly inadequate to control the rampant industrialization on the Indian coastline. It also fails to address the dwelling and livelihood rights of the fishing community, providing only token concessions”

Notably, many of the recommendations contained in the “Final Frontier Report”, submitted by the MS Swaminathan committee in 2009, have been completely ignored (2). On the issue of port development, the Swaminathan committee had recommended a moratorium on new ports until their cumulative impacts were studied (3). However, the pre-draft makes no effort to control the growth of ports through a zoning system that keeps port developments at least 25 km. away from the most critical habitats (CRZ 1 areas), as suggested by many.

“The issue of the carrying capacity of the coastline with reference to developmental projects is completely missing. The proliferation of mega ports near CRZ1 and other ecologically sensitive areas has been a matter of controversy for some time now, from Dhamra on the eastern coast, to Mundra and Tadri on the west. Not only does the pre-draft ignore this burning issue, it is opening up coastal areas to further unsustainable development,” said Sanjiv Gopal, Oceans Campaign Manager, Greenpeace India.

There are currently over 300 ports proposed along the coast of mainland India, of which over 200 are notified (4). This would translate to roughly a port every 20-25 km! Besides its own impact, port development is invariably accompanied by other industries, power plants, railway lines, highways, hotels, SEZs, residential complexes, etc. that can have multiple detrimental impacts on the coast. The premise for port expansion on this scale also needs to be questioned given that all major ports are currently under-utilised and operating below capacity.

“There has been a consistent demand to recognise the rights of fishing communities in management and protection of the coasts. This requires a fundamental shift from providing concessions to recognising the rights of fishing communities” said Matanhy Saldanha, Chairperson, National Fishworkers Forum and former Minister for Tourism, Government of Goa. “We are calling on the Ministry to incorporate the specific inputs that have been provided to them by groups such as the NCPC and the National Fishworkers’ Forum, and come out with a notification that strengthens, not dilutes, the protection of India’s coasts and the communities that depend on them,” he concluded.

Notes to Editors:
(1)The NCPC is a platform of fishworker organizations, environmental and conservation groups who are concerned about coastal and marine issues. Its membership is broad based and includes the National Fishworkers Forum, South Indian Federation of Fishermen Societies, Tamilnadu – Pondicherry Fisherpeople’s Federation, International Collective in Support of Fishworkers, Kalpavriksh Environmental Action Group, Greenpeace India, World Wide Fund for Nature, Conservation Action Trust, Centre for Education and Communication, Pondy Citizen’s Action Network, Dakshin Foundation and TRINet, amongst others. Refer to http://greenpeace.in/turtle/docs/letters-to-moef-on-crz-proposals for Greenpeace and NCPC’s submission to the MoEF.

(2)In July 2008, the MoEF issued a draft notification under sub section (1) and clause (v) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986) inviting suggestions and objections from the public. In response, the MoEF received large number of suggestions and objections on this draft notification, which was examined by a committee under the Chairmanship of Prof. M. S.Swaminathan. This committee after examination of the comments received submitted the Report titled Final Frontier”. This Report recommended to let the draft Coastal Management Zone Notification, 2008 lapse and to strengthen the CRZ Notification, 1991. The MoEF accepted the recommendations of this Report and let the draft CMZ Notification, 2008 lapse and undertook public consultations with fishermen and coastal communities and other civil society representatives, across the eight coastal states, between August 2009 and March 2010. These consultations were organized by Centre of Environmental Education (CEE), who submitted the Report of the consultation process in 25th March, 2010

(3)Refer to http://envfor.nic.in/mef/cmz_report.pdf “page 20 – Introduce regulations to manage the proliferation of ports along the coasts, with possible impacts on the coastline, by considering cumulative impacts of these developments.”

(4)The Working Group Report on Shipping and Inland Water Transport for the Eleventh Five Year Plan – http://planningcommission.gov.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp11/wg11_ship.pdf

For more information, contact:
Sanjiv Gopal, Campaign Manager – Oceans, Greenpeace, sgopal@greenpeace.org, +91-98455 35416
Matanhy Saldanha, Chairperson, NFF, matanhysaldanha@gmail.com, +91-98221 60941
V.Vivekanandan, Convenor, NCPC and Advisor, SIFFS, vivek.siffs@gmail.com, +91 98470 84840


No end to means

Ritika

Ritika

Tata is a reputed name in India with respect to ethics and national concern for the people. Dhamra project is undoing whatever good they’ve done till now and putting their name to shame. From an organization like TATA we expect responsible actions and decisions and not just monetary gain. Being a corporate organization it is understandable that they have their monetary concern, but never before, have I heard of them putting commercial aspect ahead of a cause.

It is common knowledge now that the port being constructed at Dhamra is encroaching on the habitat of Olive Ridley turtles (where they migrate annually) and many other species. We are also aware of the fact that despite many pleas neither government nor the company is willing to put a hold to their project, despite the fact that alternatives are present.

Now, I’m not a business person, so I don’t know much about the business aspect, but I do know that a project which is almost built on the land in such an environmentally sensitive and important area is not a good idea at all. How can a (so-called) responsible company like theirs not do complete research and take a decision of the land where they intend to build a multi-million dollar project? How can the government allow them to flaunt all the laws? Is this project going to be another example for others that they can break the rule and get away with it? Unfortunately, it seems so to me and I’m sure to many more.

If this project gets accomplished we’d have a lot more to pay than what we’re right now. Today TATA’s and L&T are building this commercial project tomorrow other’s will, because all they’d have to do is start building their project before the approval from the government comes, and by the time the government is able to come up to any sort of conclusion the project is 90 per cent complete, and then, thank you very much, we can’t do anything.

Today we’re going to probably end up losing existence of one of the specie on our land because of this project, tomorrow many more. And all this is happening because our government is too slow and too weak to take any substantial action.

Greenpeace briefing states that “There is prima facie evidence that construction at the Dhamra port commenced in violation of the Forest Conservation Act, as detailed in letter dated 5-5-2000 from Eastern Regional Office, MoEF to the PCCF (WL), Orissa. These violations have never been investigated or penalized.”

What is it that the government is waiting for? More rules or more proof? In either case, there are enough of both and it’s just about taking the right decision. I think it’s high time that government let the corporate know that who has an upper hand and that they can’t just go around flouting the rules without paying a price – in literal sense – not bribe, but fines.

There have been various changes in the project details official permission was given, the parameters have changed and unfortunately, not for good, but for worse. The port site was supposed to be on Kanika Sands, whereas the current site is now on the mainland. Initial proposed capacity was 20 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) whereas the proposed capacity is now 83 mtpa. Original project plan was to handle bulk carriers up to 120,000 deadweight tons (dwt); the revised plan proposes handling ships up to 180,000 dwt. And lastly, the depth of the shipping channel was for a vessel draft of 14 m. but this has now been changed to cater to vessels of 18.5 m draft, hence substantially greater dredging is required to be done.

The question is that if we as individuals can notice these details, and consciously feel that what is happening is wrong, then why can’t the company, or ministers feel it? Even if the Dharma port has to be demolished, I’d say it should be. And it must be kept as an example for other organizations who may think of following the path TATAs have taken, and know there is no end to their (faulty) means.

-Ritika Verma


An ecosystem at stake

Rishabh

Rishabh

An estimated 1,40,000 species are becoming extinct every year, which is 383 species extinct everyday!! And 13 million hectares of forest being lost globally due to deforestation, which is 35616 hectares of forest lost every day!!!  Do we really want to add to these figures? At least I don’t.

But this is exactly what TATA, Larsen and Toubro, and the Indian government seem to be doing. Tata in collaboration with L&T is constructing a port in Dhamra, Orissa one of the largest in India. But the problem is its close proximity to the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary, which is the world’s largest remaining nesting ground for the Olive Ridley Sea turtle, a species classified as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

Between 200,000 and 500,000 female turtles nest here every year, and the port is less than five kilometers from the boundaries of the Bhitarkanika National Park, which itself contains an abundance of rare wildlife species and an amazingly lush and biodiverse mangrove forest ecosystem, all of which are threatened by this port development scheme.

The location of the port also runs contrary to a 2002 directive of the Ministry of Environment, based on the government of India’s National Wildlife Action Plan, that a radius of 10 kms from all existing parks and sanctuaries be declared ‘eco-sensitive areas’ and large-scale industrial development be kept away from these areas. Additionally, the central governments own guidelines for industries ask that they be located at least 25 kms away from national parks or sancturies.

So what exactly are these people doing? By looking at these facts, we can clearly see how these companies and the government are much more interested in making money than in India’s environment and bio diversity, and it is the same environment which keeps us alive and we are simply going to endanger or harm it just in the name of development. What is development and it certainly does not mean anything if that development is endangering species in that area which would consequently harm us.

On June 8, 2007, Greenpeace released a scientific report prepared by the North Orissa University that unequivocally established the ecological significance of the mud flat ecosystem of the port site. The study makes the case that there is need for abundant caution, besides highlighting the high likelihood of turtles in the waters near Dhamra, which was later justified by satellite tracking studies by Wildlife Institute of India.

TATAs have always maintained that they will reconsider the port, if the evidence of turtles in the area is established. In addition, there are other significant findings, such as that the mudflats (actual port site) are a mating and nesting ground for Horseshoe crabs and a rare species of frog. But the company has refused to re-examine its plans, while continuing to maintain that they will not harm the environment or endangered species, without responding to either the specific concerns that are being raised or new evidence presented.

So even with concrete evidence of the perils of the development of the port in Dharma, the company has ignored them and now is only looking in its self interest rather than the whole interest of the community being affected by the development of the port.

Another issue is the probable impact on livelihoods of thousands of fishermen in the region. The construction of the port and dredging in particular could result in the destruction and pollution of breeding and spawning grounds of fish, leading to a situation where the fisherfolk cannot fish in their own local areas which would severely affect these people but still the state government of Orissa and the central government at Delhi is supporting the development.

The time to act is now, before it’s too late because the last hope is us, the ordinary people who have to come together to achieve something extra ordinary and stop the development of the port which is clearly damaging the environment and the diversity around it, we are the last hope for the survival of the Olive Ridley turtles, horseshoe crabs, the forest, livelihoods of the fishing community in that region and finally our survival because if this port succeeds in its development then later many more like this will come up, which  would surely be frowned upon but  it would be too late and then we would look back at these days when we could have done something , but we chose not to.

-Rishabh Gupta


Coasts at stake!

As if Dharma was not enough, over 300 ports are coming up near biologically diverse coastal areas across the country.

Write to environment minister Jairam Ramesh and ask him to protect our coasts from permanent damage.



Facebook Fans

Last Users

Last users on Save the turtles!

Last Friends

Last friends on Save the turtles!
To see your friends on this site, you must be logged in with Facebook: