- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
KAFILA - COLLECTIVE EXPLORATIONS SINCE 2006 
Just out of curiosity, why is the Government of Orissa or Larsen & Toubro not the target of the protestors? According to the Dhamra Port website (http://www.dhamraport.com), the port is a joint venture between Tata Steel and L & T based on a concession from the Government of Orissa. If at all anyone ought to be held responsible, it’s the Government of Orissa which awarded the concession in the first place. Surely, it’s primarily the duty of the government to take environmental concerns into consideration when awarding concessions?
Let me expand on this. Any industrial activity will disturb the environment in some way. That’s simply a consequence of the relevant physical laws. With regard to ports, one of the problems that we have in India is an “unbroken” coastline which means that there are very few locations for good ports. [Contrast, for instance, the “broken” coastline of the UK with the “smooth” and unbroken Indian coastline.] I am not arguing either for or against Dhamra port but the location probably stems from that fact. In deciding whether or not to go ahead with the Dhamra project, of course, society has to weigh the benefits from the port against the costs (which includes environmental damage). But this decision is a political one, not a commercial one. Hence, in going after Ratan Tata, the protesters have chosen the wrong target. The correct ones are the Government of Orissa and the Government of India.
And lastly, I particularly enjoyed the irony of the guy sitting in a car pontificating about environmental damage. Brilliant.
LikeLike
I am happy these activists raised this issue. I am less delighted that they have chosen to become part of Greenpeace. What is the attraction of signing up with these international umbrella organizations like Greenpeace, Beauty Without Cruelty etc. ?
LikeLike
Suresh – “And lastly, I particularly enjoyed the irony of the guy sitting in a car pontificating about environmental damage.”
Here’s how to ensure perennial enjoyment of this particular irony – Ensure a world in which normal everyday existence becomes unbearably difficult without private cars – e.g. cities designed in such a way that homes and workplaces are hours of commute away, with (and this is crucial) no govt responsibility for efficient public transport.
That way you will always have the opportunity to laugh at the irony of people unhappy with this way of life, who are forced to express their unhappiness from within the constraints they are placed under.
I hold no brief for that man in the car, but if I were caught in a war zone and forced to pick up a gun for my survival, I might not laugh at the irony of pleading my pacifism while toting that thing.
LikeLike
Re above: actually Bombay does have an efficient public transport system which usually gets you from one place to another in roughly the same amount of time it takes by private car or taxi. And the trains are a much faster way compared to road transport.
Pleading necessity for using a car in Bombay is not at all convincing. The analogy of a gun is just weird.
LikeLike
Dear Suresh,
Commenting on an issue while enjoying from the side-line is an criminal offence. The ground realities are different. Do you know that the formation of DPCL is just an eye-wash? Do you know that L&T is just the construction consultant of the very port? Do you know that the TATA s are planning to go big with this port for their very own purpose only? and do you know, who is paying the ultimate price? These turtles, my dear!! So instead of laughing at a man sitting in a car, and showing off your proficiency in english language, visit wikipedia instead and get to know how much of an enigma these turtles have been since ages. TATAs cannot place profits above the planet. They simply push these turtles to the brink of extinction!! And last but not the least, do you know what is really going towards extinction?? Good human beings….. that is why this war against the TATAs is still on…!! Some other country, some other time, TATAs would have backed out of the port by now. EXample:– TATAs were coming up with a soda-ash project in Lake Natron, Africa which is a breeding zone for the lesser flamingoes, another endangered specie. They faced protest over there and now they have backed out of the project….so why not in India may I know?? The answer is very simple…. ignorant people like you, who like to sit by the sideline and watch instead of being on the ground really is what makes the difference between a certain Lake Natron and Dhamra. Think about it!! Hafeez Khuda!!
LikeLike
The Ridley turtles are another one of nature’s most wonderful and fascinating creatures. The awe-inspiring manner in which each of those little guys make their way back to the ocean, knowing which direction to go in without being taught, instinctively following the right path, is a definite indicator to me about who is the superior being between animals and homo sapiens. It is a tragedy that any harm should befall such creatures on the pretext of development.
This is a nice video as well
LikeLike
Have a look at http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=41645784174&topic=305078
Its says:
“It may be noted that IUCN and the MTSG (Marine Turtle Scientific Group) scientists working with the group have clearly stated that dredging operations for Dhamra does not and will not affect the Olive Ridley Turtles in Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary and its periphery area. For more details log on to – http://scienceoremotion.blogspot.com“
LikeLike
Interesting. Both the links in the comment above lead to the same blog, which basically has 11 posts in all, posted in April 2009, all of them reproducing charges made against Greenpeace by various sources.
1. A letter from MP’s protesting against “foreign organizations” blocking “development” in India (a matter of opinion, and which does not address environmental concerns)
2. A statement by a former Greenpeace leader Patrick Moore (who claims he is a co-founder, but this claim is disputed) who says here that he left Greenpeace in 1986 because it had moved away from science and “into politically motivated agendas”. In the document here, he refers to Greenpeace campaigns against chlorinated water and phthalates, which he says are ill-informed.
However, this site suggests that Moore may be a simple case of a person making more money from corporations than he did from being a Greenpeace activist.
Greenpeace says: “Clients for his consulting services are a veritable Who’s Who of companies that Greenpeace has exposed for environmental misdeeds, including Monsanto, Weyerhaeuser, and BHP Minerals.”
We dont know the truth of the matter, but at the very least, Patrick Moore cannot be cited as unproblematic evidence here. His credibility remains debatable.
3 and 4. Letters from an MP and a fishworkers union “apprehending that in the name of turtle protection the group is trying to extract huge money from the private company” (Rumours)
5. Letter of support from the same union for Dhamra Port (the letter heads are totally different, but let that pass).
6. North Orissa University claims in a letter that Greenpeace has misrepresented and doctored a report they prepared on Bio-diversity assessment in Dhamra Estuary
7. Hindustan Times report on this letter.
NOTE: Greenpeace has countered this allegation, saying: “If the contents of the final report published by Greenpeace India were not acceptable to NOU, how did the University permit the Principal Investigator as a senior representative of the University to not only attend the press conference but also address the media. Why has the University suddenly backtracked more than three weeks after the report was published? Is it because the powers that be, political and commercial, have suddenly realized the implications of these findings?”
For a link to the pdf file of the full response, click here.
8. Allegation that Greenpeace “misused” local union.
9. Allegation in an Oriya daily that Greenpeace volunteers are actually terrorists, who are moving in the area to carry out another attack like the one in Mumbai, but who know that they will be dismissed as another harmless environmental campaign, thus managing to carry on their nefarious activities without coming under the scanner of our ever vigilant security agencies.
10. Letter from MLA’s of Orissa claiming Greenpeace is against development.
11. A general query by an unnamed person/s as to whether Greenpeace is backed by science or emotion. This entry ends with the quotation in the comment above (“it may be noted that IUTN and MTSG scientists have stated that….dredging operations will not affect Olive Ridley turtles”). There is no link to any report, no further details are given. So it is just another statement with nothing to back it.
It may also be noted that there is NO information on who runs the blog. Nothing at all.
I hold no brief for Greenpeace, and I do believe that long-term campaigns must be built in co-operation with local people, so if Greenpeace has failed to do this, that’s not good for any campaign.
But NOTHING in the blog the last comment leads us to, gives us any information on the issue. It is simply a set of allegations, some of them nonsensical, some refuted entirely by Greenpeace.
LikeLike
Just checked out IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) and MTSG (Marine Turtle Specialist Group).
The comment from Jessica Jhons claims that “IUCN and MTSG scientists working with the group have clearly stated that dredging operations for Dhamra does not and will not affect the Olive Ridley Turtles…”
This information turns out to be outright FALSE. Basically IUCN has recommended “mitigation” measures to reduce the destructive impact on the turtle population, and several measures to protect bio-diversity in the area were discussed at a workshop held in February 2009 (three months ago, when the project began in 2007, and is expected to be operational from March 2010! )
in which government representatives and the private port developing company met with IUCN.
If environmental concerns are now being addressed at all – too late, probably, and only in terms of “mitigation” – it is a result of the campaign by environmentalists in India and globally. No thanks to the corporations and the Indian state, equally unconcerned as they are with either “environment” or “people’s livelihoods”, each ritually invoked against the other when it suits them.
MTSG in the meanwhile, seems to be caught in a controversial decision when it got involved at the point it did.
So who IS Jessica Jhons? Come on, tell us!
LikeLike
It may also be noted that there is NO information on who runs the blog. Nothing at all.
Not only is there no information on who runs the blog, it is remarkable that there is not even *one* dissenting voice on such a controversial subject. All of the commentators are strongly in favour of the project: wow! Furthermore, I’ve not found even one commentator who has chosen to make his/her profiles available publicly – clicking on any name gives you the same page which says that the blogger has chosen not to make their profiles public. (I’ve not clicked on all the names but enough – more than 20, a surprising number female! – to satisfy myself.)
The list of MPs seems genuine [I refer to the latest post of 20 April, 2009]. However, remarkably, there is no date on the document. This is, to say the least, astounding and bizarre.
“Jessica” (which I am sure is not your real name), if you are going to set up a fake blog, then at least make it believable. Damn, now I’ve put ideas into your head.
For the record, you moron [I use the word deliberately], the only implication of what you’ve done is to undercut your own case. Kafila has done well to allow you to cut your own throat.
LikeLike
“It is sad that we first decide a villain and then find the proof to crucify them, when our concern could be about the turtles and people of Orissa and finding out ways so that both prosper.” – Cyber activist blogger’s viewpoint on Greenpeace and the turtles
LikeLike
Dhamra Port Project is not only concern about the Orissa’s economy or the society’s betterment but they are also concern about the environmental protection. A very nice video which you will definitely like to share with others
LikeLike
The “nice video” above is a straightforward propaganda promo made by Dhamra Port Company Limited (DPCL), a joint venture of Tatas and L&T. In part it makes the false claims already refuted above in my two comments, especially regarding the participation of IUCN.
The 2 new claims here are
a)that WWF gave up on doing a study despite DPCL being ready for this, committed as DPCL is to preserving the environment while making their mega bucks. WWF gave “no convincing reason” for doing so (or words to that effect, I don’t feel like listening to corporate propaganda all over again).
Here is the link to the reason why WWF gave up, (yes, it’s the Greenpeace site):
“The dialogue between an alliance of environmental organisations and Tata Steel and other promoters of the Dhamra Port hit a dead end on 20 February 2009, after Tata refused to consider any suspension of dredging work at the port. Tata had earlier committed ‘in principle’ to an independent and comprehensive threat assessment. However, the promoters were unwilling to suspend critical elements of the construction, particularly dredging, which conservationists fear could be causing irreversible harm to the ecology. Suspension of dredging would be fundamental for any scientifically credible and meaningful study to be conducted.”
Greenpeace is of course a foreign entity whose sole raison d’etre is the thwarting of India becoming an industrial giant on the global stage.
But there is a fifth column inside India, it appears: “The Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) has returned the money given to it by Tata Steel for conducting a study on the presence of Olive Ridley sea turtles near Dhamra port and the likely impact of the port on the marine creatures…The BNHS was asked to assess the presence of turtles and how the port could affect them by March this year….But apparently, Tata Steel did not keep its word and continued with dredging work while the EIA report was pending. Besides, the society has also raised objections to the March deadline, arguing that the breeding season continued till May. Experts at the BNHS felt that a two-season study (2006 and 2007) was required before arriving at any conclusions as the turtles may not nest in a particular year…The money was returned in November last year. Before the BNHS, the World Wildlife Fund also refused to undertake a similar study commissioned by the Tatas.”
b) Second claim in the film, made again and again with diagrams and helpful arrows: the port is north of the northernmost point where turtles come to nest, and so does not affect their nesting.
But according to indianjungles.com in the link given above: “Contrary to what the DPCL official contended, a study conducted by the Dehradun-based Wildlife Institute of India via satellite in 2001 had found that turtles were in the habit of moving towards the north of Dhamra.
Then, in April 2004, the central empowered committee of the apex court had suggested a site change for the port.”
Which was not acceptable of course. As the DPCL official says in the film, “There is no question of moving further north, as that is a military area.”
What we are intrigued by is all this propaganda material we are being deluged with, making blatantly false claims, sent in girls’ names such as Jessica, Megha, Tina…
LikeLike
Light and lighting are crucial for any industrial project, both during construction and the operational phase. IUCN lighting experts and DPCL are also taking care of implementing lighting safeguards, which would also be turtle safe lighting and would be low pressure sodium vapor lights which have been proven by research to be the least disorienting to turtle hatchlings.
Source: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=296928&id=168851070709
LikeLike
More propaganda. The Facebook page takes you to Eco Dhamra, founded by DPCL to project itself as concerned about the environment.
Fair warning – in future, no such comments will be passed, since we already have put up the link to all possible future propaganda for DPCL. So Aakash, Tina, Mina, Deeka, dont waste your time and ours.
LikeLike