Dhamra Consultative Technical Workshop. Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India February 2009

Transcription

1 Dhamra Consultative Technical Workshop Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India February 2009

2 Dhamra Consultative Technical Workshop Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India February 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Synopsis...3 Introduction...4 Inauguration: Lighting of the ceremonial lamp...4 Welcome speech by Aban Marker Kabraji, Regional Director, IUCN Asia...4 Speeches by Chief Guests...4 Sea turtles tale Roderic Mast, Co-Chair, IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group...5 Collation of studies on Olive Ridleys and gaps in research R. Suresh Kumar, Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India...6 Backgrounder on Dhamra Port Santosh Mohapatra, CEO, Dhamra Port Company Limited...8 Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary C. S. Kar, Senior Research Officer, Forest Department, Government of Orissa...9 IUCN s engagement with Dhamra Port Aban Marker Kabraji, Regional Director, IUCN Asia...11 Dredging impacts on sea turtles Eric Hawk, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USA...12 Artificial lighting and sea turtle conservation Erik Martin, Ecological Associates, USA...14 IUCN recommendations and work done so far Biren Bhuta, IUCN Project Manager Dhamra Port Project...16 Stakeholder views...17 Talk Roderic Mast, Co-Chair, IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group...19 IUCN engagement with the private sector: The Asian experience Shiranee Yasaratne, Head Regional Business and Biodiversity Programme, IUCN Asia...21 Where are we headed? Biren Bhuta, IUCN Project Manager Dhamra Port Project...22 Summing up...27 Vote of thanks...27 Annex 1: Agenda...29 Annex 2: List of Participants...31 Cover photo: Olive Ridley turtle hatchlings crawling towards the sea at Rushikulya in April 2009 IUCN 2

3 Synopsis The IUCN Dhamra Consultative Technical Workshop was held in Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India on February The workshop was followed by an overnight field trip to the Dhamra Port, including a boat trip to view the port development from the sea and a road trip to see the port from the land side. The objective of the workshop was to provide a forum for discussion among key stakeholders regarding the work that IUCN and DPCL are undertaking to mitigate port development activities on vulnerable Olive Ridley turtles, which nest along the Orissa coast to the south of the Port. The workshop addressed key issues regarding work done to date and provided an opportunity for open discussion on many questions and concerns that have been raised regarding the controversial topic of the Dhamra Port development, its impact on the Olive Ridley turtles, and IUCN s involvement in the project. The workshop provided an opportunity to present and discuss a range of scientific and technical information on mitigation efforts including turtle-friendly dredging, lighting strategies, as well as turtle and marine biology. The issue of conservation was discussed in the larger and more complex context of the economic development of Orissa, local livelihoods and natural and human induced ecosystem change. Importantly, participants worked to identify and recommend topics and activities where further work should be considered and undertaken. Areas for new research and studies, further mitigation measures, awareness raising activities, new policy initiatives and other actions to support conservation along the Orissa coastline were all discussed in detail. The results of the workshop will be used to make public IUCN s work at Dhamra Port to date, as well as provide recommendations to be included in the proposed comprehensive environmental management plan. The workshop was attended by 70 participants with representation from the IUCN Asia Secretariat, IUCN India Members, the Marine Turtle Specialist Group, local and international scientists, nongovernmental organizations, the academic community, the local fishing community, the private sector including Dhamra Port Company Ltd, Larsen and Toubro Ltd and Tata Steel, and the Ministry of the Environment and Forests, Government of India and Government of Orissa. A full list of participants is provided in the annexure. This workshop report was prepared from a recording of the workshop proceedings and has been lightly edited for readability. 3

4 Lots to smile about. (Left to right) Santosh Mohapatra, Meena Gupta, Aban Marker Kabraji, Upendra Nath Behera, B K Patnaik, Priya Nath Padhi, P R Sinha, Dr. Anmol Kumar Introduction Introductory comments by Aban Marker Kabraji, IUCN Asia Regional Director noted that this is a consultative and interactive workshop. The intention is to learn and better understand the issues and the science and work towards a practicable solution. Inauguration: Lighting of the ceremonial lamp 1 Welcome speech by Aban Marker Kabraji, Regional Director, IUCN Asia Aban Marker Kabraji: Once again, I extend a very warm welcome to all of you and we, at IUCN, appreciate the fact that all of you have taken time off from your schedules to come and participate in this technical consultative workshop and for contributing with your inputs and suggestions. Our chief guests represent the responsibility for and the stewardship of, the sea turtle population and the coastal development along this part of the Indian coast. They are now also responsible for many of the recommendations that this workshop brings forward to be embedded in Government policy and hence their support and presence here today is extremely important. Scientists lighting the lamp of wisdom. (Left to right) Dr. Sudhakar Kar, Dr. C.S.Kar, Professor B.C. Choudhury, Eric Hawk, Roderic Mast Set the ball rolling. (Left to right) Dr. Anmol Kumar, P.R. Sinha, Aban Marker Kabraji Speeches by Chief Guests B.K. Patnaik: The Gahirmatha beach is the largest turtle nesting area in the Asian sub-continent. However, there was no mass nesting last year and so far, this year as well. 2 We do not know the 1 2 To accommodate schedules of participants, the inauguration took place during the middle of the first session as is reflected in the Agenda in the Annex. It has been placed here in the documentation to provide a more logical sequence. Subsequently, three weeks after the workshop, an Arribada took place at Gahirmatha with more than 150,000 nesting adults 4

5 reasons for this. I had asked the port authorities to appoint NIO Goa (National Institute of Oceanography) to conduct a study to ascertain if there has been any change in the beach profile and any obstruction in the turtle migratory path due to dredging activities of the port. NIO Goa has already started the study and if any such effects are found in the turtle nesting or turtle migratory paths, we will have to look at mitigation measures and the port should willingly come forward to carry out any such mitigation measures. P.N. Padhi: Any development is bound to have impacts. We cannot stop development. The economic development of Orissa as a maritime state is vital and the economy of the state must improve. Commercial activity must take place. There is ample scope for economic development. At the same time, Orissa plays host to one of the world s most unique creatures the Olive Ridleys and also to one of the world s great natural phenomenon the Arribada or mass nesting. But we still do not know enough about the Olive Ridley and its full life cycle. The port authorities must accept scientific facts. We must join together to address the issues of development and conservation. A fine balance. Chief Guest U.N. Behera asks delegates to find a balance between environment and development U.N. Behera: Orissa is a poor state, but rich in natural resources. Today, many development proposals have come up, including proposals for steel and aluminium plants, power plants and also port development. All these are required for the economic development of the state. In addition, the Olive Ridley turtles have also chosen to nest in the Orissa coast. One disturbing fact is that there has been no mass-nesting at Gahirmatha since last year. There are too many factors; we need to study this, including the mangroves and other flora and fauna. We need to discuss these issues and solutions and find a delicate balance between environment and development Sea turtles tale Roderic Mast, Co-Chair, IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group Rod Mast began with a brief background about IUCN, the Species Survival Commission (SSC) and the Marine Turtle Specialist Group (MTSG). He provided an overview of the different species of marine turtles, turtle biology and life cycle. He then described some interesting natural history traits of sea turtles like pan-tropical distribution, vast migrations, variable annual nesting, long maturation and low survival rates, incubation temperatures, hatchling orientation and broad habitat requirements Rod Mast cautioned that to understand population trends, one needs to look at multiple year data sets because of fluctuations in nesting patterns. Also, due to long generation times and high mortalities, there is a lag effect; hence the impacts of our actions today may not be seen for several years to come. He listed the top 10 threatened sea turtle populations world-wide which included the Olive Ridleys of Orissa. Of all the hazards that threaten these populations, the impact from fishing is the most devastating, albeit unintentional. There are other threats like coastal development, direct takes, pollution and pathogens. Global warming remains to be a key issue. 5

6 On fisheries impact, Rod Mast emphasized the need for greater collaboration with fishing communities for more effective sea turtle conservation. All is not lost as there are encouraging signs for the future: population recoveries; more acceptance of bycatch mitigation measures; successful conservation projects all over the world; and changes in government awareness and policies. Rod set the tone for the next presentation by identifying a list of key unsolved mysteries like: 1. Where do sea turtles spend the first few years of their lives? 2. What is the ecological role of sea turtles? 3. What proportion of male turtles is necessary to maintain a healthy population? 4. How do sea turtles sense their environment? 5. How do sea turtles navigate? Demystifying turtles. Roderic Mast gives a primer on turtle biology and life-cycle 6. How will global warming affect sea turtles? Collation of studies on Olive Ridleys and gaps in research R. Suresh Kumar, Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India Suresh Kumar began by highlighting the growing concern for safeguarding the Olive Ridley turtles and their breeding habitats along the Orissa coast. Information is crucial while formulating conservation strategies. It was in this context that IUCN Asia requested the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) to carry out a study, the objectives of which were three-fold: 1. To prepare a bibliography of existing information on biology and behaviour of Olive Ridley turtles along the Orissa coast; 2. To summarise all past and present research on Olive Ridley turtles along the Orissa coast; and 3. To identify gap areas for research. The WII project team for this study included Professor B. C. Choudhury, Professor Anup Nayak, Dr. K. Sivakumar, R. Suresh Kumar and Dr. Basudev Tripathy. A total of 335 publications were gathered from various sources and a thematic analysis of this literature was made. The studies cover aspects including: ecology, conservation genetics, conservation and management of sea turtles and policy issues, sea turtles stranding and by catch reduction, pollution and its effects on sea turtles, physiology and biochemistry, sea turtle-human interactions and coastal geomorphology. Suresh Kumar went on to highlight the key research findings from the compiled literature: 1. Mortality of Olive Ridley turtles has increased from a few thousand in the early 1980s to more than 10,000 a year by the mid 1990s. 2. Reproductive patches are discrete areas, about sq km in size, extending to a distance of about 5-6 km offshore. 3. Arribada estimates could be much lower than the reported annual figures due to a review of the methodology for census of Olive Ridley turtles during mass nesting. 6

7 4. Tagged turtles were recovered from Andhra Pradesh, southern Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka, indicating that at least some of the Olive Ridleys that nest in Orissa migrate to these areas. Recent on-going study on satellite telemetry confirm the post nesting migration of Olive Ridley turtles to at least up to the northern Indian Ocean and eastern Sri Lanka. 5. There is no genetic difference between nesting populations in each of the mass nesting beaches. More significantly, these populations may even be ancestral to populations in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. 6. Satellite imagery studies suggest that failure of Arribada at Gahirmatha during 1997 and 1998 was due to natural causes such as erosion and reduction in nesting habitat due to impacts of successive cyclones. There are still gaps in our knowledge of the turtles and their habitats, both in the on-shore as well as the off-shore environments: On-shore environment 1. An in-depth study of the geo-morphological changes affecting the nesting beaches is required. 2. A clear understanding of nest site selection by turtles is required. 3. Revisiting the coast of Orissa to assess the status of sea turtle nesting along the entire coast of Orissa is required. 4. Are some prime nesting sites super abundant with predators and do they require active predator management? 5. The technique to estimate nesting turtles has been improvised over the years; however, it still requires further refinement and effective sampling. Off-shore environment 1. Why do turtles occur in such large congregations in front of the river mouth or in front of the mass nesting beaches? An in-depth study of feeding ecology and availability of prey for the turtles in the near-shore waters is required. 2. The movement pattern and behaviour of turtles while they are in the congregations in the near-shore waters is crucial to provide effective protection to the turtles. 3. There is no information on the impact of gill-net fishing on the incidental capture and mortality of turtles. A study on sea turtle-fisheries interface should look into the mono-filament or multifilament and any other gill-net fishing practices in Orissa, based on which, measures to reduce turtle by-catch in these fisheries can be devised. 4. A decrease in the size of nesting females over the years is thought to indicate the removal of the older population. This needs to be supported with data on the age of turtles to better understand the population dynamics. 5. A study to monitor the level of pollutants or to assess the overall health of the near-shore waters and its effects on turtles should be taken up. 6. A long term satellite tracking programme should be taken up for a clear understanding of the foraging grounds of the turtles. It will also throw light on whether the turtles arriving in the near-shore waters of Orissa undertake annual migration or not. At this juncture, P. R. Sinha clarified that the gap analysis is based on published literature. Professor Choudhury added that this exercise has brought out the full range of options for future research for topics such as impacts of climate change and developmental activities. Professor Choudhury finalized the discussions by pointing out that turtles have coped with a host of stochastic factors over 200 million years but asked whether they will be able to cope up with anthropogenic activities. This answer will come if we identify areas where research is required and also identify organisations with capabilities to conduct such research. 7

8 Backgrounder on Dhamra Port Santosh Mohapatra, CEO, Dhamra Port Company Limited Santosh Mohapatra started with a brief history of Dhamra port from pre-independence days. He clarified that the Dhamra port is not a private port but is being developed as a public-private partnership. The Government of Orissa decided to develop the port in the early 1990s in the northern part of the state, close to the mineral hinterland. IIT Chennai identified Dhamra as the best option. He then described the economic dimensions of the port. Dhamra port will essentially cater to the steel and aluminium industries and export of minerals like iron ore, all of which are known as dry-bulk products that are of high volume and low value. That means it is economical to carry them in large sized ships, which require greater drafts and hence, deeper ports. Two more criteria are important: 1. The distance of the port from the industries, since land transportation is extremely expensive, Exercise in sustainable development. Santosh Mohapatra explains DPCL s position 2. The distance of the port to the deep sea and the length of the channel required Haldia and Paradip are the only two ports close to the mineral areas. Haldia is becoming shallower by the day while Paradip has a draft of 12 metres, insufficient to accommodate ships of 150,000 DWT. Because of this, Dhamra is the logical choice between Haldia and Paradip. Santosh Mohapatra then elaborated on the process of obtaining an Environment Clearance, saying it was a two-year process. The clearance was initially challenged but subsequently upheld by the National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) on the grounds that the Ministry of Surface Transport (MoST), which had issued the clearance, was competent to do so and that the port location itself could never be a breeding ground for Olive Ridley turtles. Another concern was that the EIA was for a different location. That was, however, untrue as a supplementary EIA for the current final location was submitted to the Empowered Committee for Environmental Clearances. He used a map to mark the locations of the port, the channel, the Kanika Sands islands, the Dhamra river mouth, the Wheeler islands and the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary. He drew attention to a WII study which divides the coast of Orissa into eight sectors out of which turtles are shown to be visiting seven sectors along the coast, either sporadically or en-masse. The only sector which turtles do not visit either sporadically or en-masse for nesting is the northern most sector north of river Dhamra and that is where the port is located. Finally, he outlined the measures taken by the port. One set of measures are laid down as conditions in the Environment Clearance. The other measures include associations with: 1. IUCN 2. National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) for studying the beach profile and impacts of dredging 3. Regional Research Laboratory (RRL) for monitoring the impact of dredging on water and air quality 8

9 4. Orissa Forest Development Corporation (OFDC) for undertaking plantation along the railway corridor 5. The Water Technology Centre (WTCER) for studying drainage on account of embankments and reclamation 6. The State Forest Department for patrolling and demarcation of the marine sanctuary Santosh Mohapatra stated that the attempt is to make Dhamra an exemplary exercise in sustainable development. In the discussions that followed, Dr. Sudhakar Kar observed that there have been changes in beach profile and that the nesting sites had shifted from South to the North. He feared that the biodiversity of Bhitarkanika and Gahirmatha could have been impacted by Paradip and now, by the development of Dhamra port. There have been many studies on these issues but he wanted to know the results of these studies. In response, Santosh Mohapatra explained how the port development could alter a beach profile. More than dredging, it is the breakwaters that cause damage. The littoral drift in Orissa is from South to North and any attempt to break this, as seen at Paradip, results in high deposition rates in the south and higher accretion rates in the north. The designers of Dhamra port took this into consideration. The Kanika Sands islands act as natural breakwaters; hence it is a natural port area. Moreover, the port is being built with minimum effect, with jetties standing on pillars. The effect of this port on beach profile is therefore minimal. Dr. N.L.N.S. Prasad voiced concern that the original EIA and clearance could have lapsed or become redundant due to the intervening period and the changes. Santosh Mohapatra responded that this issue has already been sorted out with the Ministry of Environment. Dr. Prasad also suggested that any reports on dredging must clearly specify whether it has an impact or not. Santosh Mohapatra welcomed suggestions and comments from experts on any aspects of the RRL reports. Professor B.C. Choudhury asked why Paradip port was not considered for expansion and deepening and why a new port was needed. Santosh Mohapatra replied that Paradip could only deepen its two new berths at the mouth of the lagoon and not the entire port. Orissa s requirements are far greater than what those two berths could handle. Professor Choudhury commented on the fact that the reversible changes are being mitigated by the port but wondered if the port has a plan on how it will deal with irreversible changes. Santosh Mohapatra mentioned that DPCL and its promoters had agreed to stop development of the port if any effect was found to irreversible, but they believe that the effects can be mitigated and hence they are going ahead with port development. Dr. C.S. Kar presents the issues and plans for Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary C. S. Kar, Senior Research Officer, Forest Department, Government of Orissa Dr. C.S. Kar started by saying that Orissa is on the world map of sea turtles. Four species (Leatherback, Hawksbill, Green and Olive Ridley) of marine turtles are found in the coastal waters of Orissa. Only the Olive Ridley nests in Orissa. There are three mass nesting or Arribada sites: Gahirmatha, Devi and Rushikulya. More than 50 percent of the world s population of Olive Ridleys are found in Orissa. Why do turtles come to the Orissa coast? There could be several reasons: 9

10 1. Sea surface temperature. There is a temperature gradient from south to north. 2. Abundance of food resources both for adult turtles and hatchlings. 3. There are many river systems, hence salinity is low. 4. Abundance of mangroves, hence productivity is very high. 5. Suitability of nesting habitat. 6. Mass nesting beaches undergo erosion and accretion every year. Hence they get clear uncontaminated sand every year, due to which, hatching success is higher in Orissa than in Costa Rica. The Bhitarkanika Wildlife Sanctuary, Bhitarkanika National Park and Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary are together proposed to be declared as a World Heritage Site. The Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary has a total area of 1435 square kilometres. It borders the Bhitarkanika Wildlife Sanctuary which encompasses the Brahmani, Baitarni and Mahanadi deltaic region of Kendrapara district of Orissa. In 1993, 20 km offshore of Gahirmatha coastal waters was declared as a No Fishing Zone. The Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary was finally notified in Until , more than 10,000 turtles were found dead each year off the Orissa coast. In the last six to seven years, this number has come down to 3,000-5,000 turtles each year. Dr. Kar attributed this improvement to increased patrolling effort, though he also mentioned that this area is very difficult to patrol. He pointed out that the congregation period of the turtles coincides with the period favourable for fishing and that where there is mass congregation, turtle excluder devices (TEDs) do not work. In any case, TEDs have been designed to be fitted on trawl nets. They cannot be fitted on gill nets. Multifilament gill nets are death traps for the turtles. In mono-filament gill nets, turtles can tear the net and escape but that is possible only when there is one net. If there is a series of such nets the turtles may not be able to tear and escape multiple times in a row. Dr. Kar described some of the key threats facing turtles: 1. Construction of fishing jetties, fish landing centres, fishing harbours, minor and major ports near major river mouths. 2. Casuarina plantations along the coast, particularly on major nesting beaches. 3. Development activities along the coast such as Missile Test range, ports and fishing harbours and mega industries. 4. Increased illumination on nesting beaches and near breeding grounds. So far, there is no Act to prevent illumination, though there was an attempt in the form of: Coastal Zone Illumination (Prevention and Control) Act and Rules (Proposed) 5. Pollution of coastal waters. 6. Potential Fishing Zone forecasting through print and electronic media. 7. Changes in land use and sea use patterns of coastal areas. 8. Introduction of improved beach landing crafts and motorisation of country crafts. 9. Increase of vehicular traffic on navigational routes. 10. Large scale destruction of mangroves affecting food chain of turtles. 10

11 During , marine species and marine area conservation has come on the priority list of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) of the Government of India. A high-powered committee for protection and conservation of sea turtles has been formed under the Chairmanship of the Chief Minister of Orissa. During , a separate budget head was created by the State Government for protection and conservation of sea turtles. Among the future plans outlined by Dr. Kar, the key activities were: demarcation of the boundary of the marine sanctuary, checking infiltration of illegal fishing vessels through continued surveillance and minimising sea fishing related adult turtle mortality in near shore and offshore coastal waters. Finally, Dr. Kar highlighted some issues concerning Dhamra port: 1. Illumination caused due to port construction activities, anchoring ships, related industries and peripheral activities such as townships, roads, railways, etc. 2. Dredging of the channel which could have potential impacts such as changes in sea current circulation pattern, changes in sediment transportation, changes in distribution pattern of aquatic biodiversity influencing the food chain, creation of obstacles in the migration of species which are at the bottom of the ecological pyramid and changes in the sea bed and water column characteristics, ultimately influencing coastal equalisation. 3. Removal of huge amount of sand from the sea-bed for port construction and development activities. 4. Large scale fishery displacement. 5. Coastal and marine pollution. 6. Coastal erosion. 7. The port should demarcate the boundary of Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary and also provide sea worthy vessels for protection, monitoring and research. IUCN s engagement with Dhamra Port Aban Marker Kabraji, Regional Director, IUCN Asia Aban Kabraji gave a background of IUCN s engagement with the Dhamra Port Company Ltd (DPCL). She began with the Scoping Mission, which raised key concerns regarding the potential impacts of dredging and lighting and the impacts due to secondary development around the port. IUCN believes that it is not just the port, but all that comes up in the hinterland of the port, that needs to be taken into consideration to ensure the long term survival of the sea turtles. She acknowledged that many questions have been raised regarding IUCN s engagement with the port, such as transparency, consultation with IUCN member organisations and engagement of MTSG scientists in India. She noted that even before the agreement with DPCL was signed, IUCN started consulting with its members in India. Some members believed that it was a good idea and that IUCN should lead on the process. Others said that they did not agree and that IUCN should not get involved. So IUCN took the discussion to the Indian National Committee. The consensus of the members at that meeting was for IUCN to proceed. Some disagreed but the majority felt that IUCN should proceed with bringing the best science for advising mitigation measures for the port. Based on this mandate, IUCN entered into an agreement with DPCL. Informal discussions continued with MTSG members. Regular updates have been given to IUCN members in subsequent National Committee meetings. All trip reports and recommendations have been put up on the website. All member organisations were invited to this workshop as well. Aban then explained IUCN s position on the Dhamra issue. As long as the Government of India has given a mandate to the Government of Orissa to build the port, IUCN will give the best scientific 11

12 advice in terms of the management of the port and mitigation of impacts on sea turtles. It will bring the best science to inform the decision making process. IUCN s role is to be an independent scientific advisor. Dr. C.S. Kar asked Aban Kabraji for the entire agreement between IUCN and DPCL to be put up on the website. She replied that a summary of the agreement with all the relevant details was on the website but the agreement is a contract between IUCN and DPCL and it is a legal contract which it is not IUCN s practice to put into the public domain. To another query, she clarified that IUCN was not a regulatory authority and the agreement with DPCL could not have provisions to make the mitigation measures mandatory for DPCL. She however confirmed that up to this point, DPCL has implemented IUCN s advice, often at great cost. IUCN has on occasion, asked DPCL to stop work and DPCL has agreed to that. She clarified that IUCN s advice is in the public domain, but it should be made clear that IUCN is not a regulatory body. Dr. S.N. Patro of the Orissa Environmental Society suggested that IUCN enlarge its scope of work as more development activities are being planned at Dhamra, apart from the port. He pointed out that the entire coast of Orissa has development activities planned so why limit the scope to the port alone. Lastly, it is not just about turtles as there are other species to consider as well. Aban Kabraji replied that the Environment Management Plan which will be part of the next phase of engagement with the port would address several of these concerns. Although for IUCN to go further than this towards something like a State Environment Strategy should be a decision of the State Government. IUCN would welcome such a move as it would be an opportunity to influence other developments such as promoting adoption of lighting legislation by the State that would be applicable to all ports and all developments. This sort of thing could have state-wide impacts, and in the longer term these are the decisions for the state to take. Dredging impacts on sea turtles Eric Hawk, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USA Eric Hawk began with a film showing how a hopper trailing suction dredger works. He stated that over the years the ERDC (Engineer Research and Development Centre) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has improvised on the drag-head deflectors so that the drag-head does not entrain turtles. Another film was shown that highlighted different designs of deflectors and how the most efficacious design was arrived at. Eric then presented Dr. Dena Dickerson s presentation (Dr. Dickerson was unable to travel to India for the workshop) on Dredging Impacts on Sea Turtles in the South Eastern United States. Turtles get entrained by dredgers only when they are sitting on the sea bed and when they come in the path of the dredger. Turtles are killed not so much by suction as much as by being crushed under the weight of the drag-head. Since 1992, different tools have been used in the U.S. to minimise takes of turtles: 1. Environmental windows: dredging is restricted at times of the year when endangered species are present. 2. Minimise hopper use. 3. Deflectors on drag-heads are a mandatory requirement in the U.S. 4. An observer programme is required. Observers monitor the spoils as they come into the hopper. The material is fully screened as it flows through the inflow pipes and when the excess water flows out through the overflow pipes. 5. Do relocation trawling where a shrimp trawler actually captures live turtles (trawling for not more than 40 minutes at a time so as not to drown the turtles) and then releases them in 12

13 another area. This gives an idea of abundance of turtles in the channel and also sweeps the channel for any turtles and relocates them to a safe distance from the dredger. Typically, relocation trawlers operate in front of the dredger. Safety is a concern with relocation trawling. It can pose danger to the animal, to the crew and also to the vessel. Another issue presents itself in terms of getting permits to handle protected species. But overall, relocation trawling is good as it successfully moves turtles out of harm s way. Also turtles are rarely hurt by capture and relocation. Valuable scientific information is obtained and turtles that are captured are tagged prior to release. 6. There is another method called as non-capture trawling but this is still being tested for its efficacy. In the US, there are take limits set by NOAA for every species per year. Quotas for takes are allocated by species. For example, Kemp s Ridley is the most endangered in the US and therefore allocation of takes for that species is the lowest. This ensures that the loss, if it occurred, does not jeopardise the existence of the species. So it is a sustainable take. This is strictly followed in the U.S. and projects can even be shut down if they exceed their allotted number of takes. Eric Hawk proceeded with a NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service) presentation on the reduction of turtle takes through the use of Turtle Excluder Devices or TEDs. He then made a statement that trawl fisheries in Orissa ended up killing thousands of turtles each year. 100,000 documented takes in a decade only accounts for turtles that get washed ashore. This means that there are a lot more out there which didn t show up. If one compares it with dredging; in the US, the average documented takes by hopper dredgers per year is 33 turtles. Nonetheless, trawler and gill net fishermen cannot be put out of business. They need to ply their trade. The only way and the simplest way of not drowning turtles is by using TEDs. TEDs are very effective as turtles can escape within 10 minutes of being trapped. Eric said that he has been working with TEDs since 1989 and they have been improved significantly. Bar spacing of TEDs can be modified to fit the conditions of the country that is trawling. For example, Costa Rica has a six inch bar spacing; therefore there is no law that says it has to be 4 inches. There are TEDs which exclude even leatherbacks. There are many convincing arguments for TED use. Turtles and sharks, for example cause damage to the catch if trapped in the nets. In addition, unwanted by-catch results in pulling more weight, increasing fuel costs. Some large fish may also escape through the TED but then, they are the even more reproductive ones. In fact, larger bar spacing will further reduce loss in catch, so fishermen really do not have a convincing argument for not using TEDs. The Government should have the will to force TED use. It is quite clear that trawling has very detrimental effects on the sea turtles of Orissa. Gill nets are culpable as well. But, at least, there is a solution for trawl nets. Eric finally showed a film of TEDs at work under water: buckets, tyres, coconuts, and even sharks and turtles were seen escaping from the TED. In the question-answer session that followed, Meena Gupta remarked that in the earlier presentation by Dr. Kar, TEDs were seen to not work, but what was presented now, shows that they do work. Eric replied that the designs that Dr. Kar mentioned may have been older, with a smaller grid. The more recent designs with larger grids, and different bar spacing, allow even the leatherback turtles to escape within 10 minutes. Even if 10 turtles are trapped in 5 hours of trawling that still means 2 turtles per hour and they can easily escape from the TED within seconds. Eric said that he was 100% convinced that TEDs would be effective in Orissa. 13

14 Dr. Kar asked Eric if he could share some experiences from Mexico and Costa Rica. Eric said that in Mexico, they used TEDs with 10 cm spacing while in Costa Rica; they used TEDs with 15 cm spacing. In Mexico, trawling in waters off nesting beaches is prohibited. In Costa Rica, they do not let trawlers come up to a certain distance from the shore. In Venezuela, they have done away with trawl fishing. B.K. Patnaik, Chief Wildlife Warden of Orissa, commended DPCL for seeking IUCN s advice on dredging impacts. He said that while all the measures that Eric Hawk outlined would prevent turtle mortality due to dredging, there was an apprehension that dredging could have an impact on turtle congregation and nesting. An Arribada did not take place last year (2008) and some were of the opinion that dredging was the reason. He wanted Eric Hawk s opinion on this issue. Eric Hawk replied that in his opinion, channel dredging could not have impacted the Arribada. Olive Ridleys nest even when there is obstruction and in this case, the channel was quite removed from the nesting beaches. Expressing concerns. Chief Wildlife Warden B.K. Patnaik seeks an opinion about dredging impacts Professor Choudhury asked Eric Hawk whether an environmental window was recommended for Dhamra Port for its dredging operations. Eric Hawk replied that environmental windows can be applied only when there is information about abundance of turtles. In the case of Dhamra Port, it was not recommended as a mitigation measure. Professor Choudhury suggested that the channel at Dhamra and the channel at Paradip would have an impact with regards to littoral drift. He said we need to understand the impact of this on beach erosion and nesting of turtles. A modelling study is required to determine what the littoral drift is and what is contributing to the loss of beach. We can also determine dredging windows based on these studies. Assumptions should be accepted or rejected based on a study. Dr. N.L.N.S. Prasad said that dredging clearances in future would be given only for non-nesting periods of the year. He suggested that there should be studies to determine the productivity of the dredged channel as well as the productivity of the dumping area, as this could have an impact if these areas happen to be turtle movement zones. Artificial lighting and sea turtle conservation Erik Martin, Ecological Associates, USA Erik Martin has been studying sea turtles in Florida for 28 years and has spent much of his time studying the effects of lighting on sea turtles. The first part of the presentation dealt with the impacts of lights on sea turtles. Adult female turtles nest primarily during the night. There is a reduction in the number of adult nesting females in areas where there are extremely strong lights. Adult females get disoriented by lights. Turtle hatchlings emerge in the night when temperatures are cooler and artificial lighting disorients turtle hatchlings. The more time they spend on the beach after hatching, their chances of survival decrease. For turtles, light is information while artificial lighting is misinformation. Dr. Blair Witherington (who was unable to attend the workshop due to prior commitments) has established through experiments that: 14

15 1. Light provides overriding cues that lead hatchlings to the sea. Hatchlings move in the brightest direction. 2. Artificial lighting produces a more directional light field than natural celestial light sources do. 3. Hatchlings move towards open horizons and away from silhouettes. 4. Hatchlings are attracted more by short wavelength light than long wavelength light. Erik Martin outlined a few basic light management tactics: 1. Put the light only where it is needed. a. Shield the lights: Light should be recessed inside the fixture. b. Re-position the lights. c. Lower the lights. d. Re-align the lights. Alignment of lights is an important aspect. Even if the lights are properly shielded, a wrong alignment could still allow light to spill upwards. e. Plant vegetation buffers. f. Replace fixtures. 2. Use minimum amount of light necessary. a. Reduce number of fixtures. b. Reduce intensity of lamps. 3. Use light only when needed. a. Turn off lights when not needed. b. Install motion detectors. c. Install timers. 4. Consider less disruptive lights. But the ultimate objective is to keep the light off the nesting beach and minimise uplight to reduce sky glow. Erik Martin then gave examples of bad lights and good lights and how lights can be effectively shielded and properly aligned. P.R. Sinha asked Erik Martin about recommendations IUCN has given to DPCL. He replied that the lighting mission had advised DPCL to use only full cut-off fixtures. DPCL reverted with different options, of which, some were acceptable while others were not. Even high mast lights can be directed downwards, but we need to be sure that they are not visible from the nesting beach. So while the shields will cut the sky glow, a vegetative buffer would be required to hide the lights and the reflection from those lights. IUCN also advised using motion detectors for security purposes. Where possible, use long wavelength lights instead of short wavelength lights. Siddhanta Das, Conservator of Forests in the Orissa Government, asked if lights could be kept in the sea to attract hatchlings. Erik Martin replied that hatchlings would indeed crawl towards the lights in the sea and swim around the lighted areas. So would predatory fish which would prey on the young turtles. 15

16 Dr. Lakhmapurkar asked about the impacts of lighthouses on turtles. Erik Martin clarified that the periodicity of lights is another aspect of lighting impacts on turtles. Intermittent light is not very detrimental to turtles. Dr. S.N. Patro wanted to know which species can be used as an effective buffer. Erik Martin advised that native vegetation is most suitable. When asked about intensities of light, Erik Martin replied that guidelines are available for intensity of lux. The recommendation is to use minimum light required for each application. IUCN recommendations and work done so far Biren Bhuta, IUCN Project Manager Dhamra Port Project Biren Bhuta presented the work done so far in the first phase of engagement with DPCL. He listed the recommendations of the dredging mission which had visited Bhubaneswar and Dhamra in December 2007: 1. Install deflectors on drag-heads to push turtles out of the path of the dredger. 2. Relocation trawling to reduce the number of turtles in the vicinity of the dredger. 3. Install screens on inflow and overflow pipes to monitor number of entrainments. 4. Observer programme to detect any such entrainments. He reported that, except for relocation trawling, for which permits have not yet been received from the Government, all other recommendations have been fully adhered to. For the first time in India, deflectors have been installed on all drag-heads on every dredger that has operated in Dhamra Port. He reiterated the key recommendations of the lighting mission (which were earlier mentioned by Erik Martin) which had visited Bhubaneswar and Dhamra in March He informed the participants that DPCL and its lighting contractors (L&T and ABB) were still designing the lights. Inputs had been provided to them at a very early stage. Once the lights are designed, they will be approved by IUCN s lighting experts and only then, will the lights be purchased. This will make Dhamra the first port in the country to have turtle friendly lights. He raised the issue of secondary developments and how imperative it is to have some measure of control over such activities. One area where effective control could be brought about is through lighting legislation. IUCN has prepared draft lighting legislation and he asked the participants to recommend how this can be taken forward. It could be a pioneering initiative by the Government of Orissa. Another initiative in the first phase of engagement has been the literature review and identification of gaps in research. This was undertaken by the Wildlife Institute of India and presented earlier in the day at the workshop. This workshop itself has brought together several different stakeholders whose views and suggestions would guide IUCN in its next phase of engagement with the port. Extensive consultations with other parties goes on continuously. On the conservation front, IUCN along with DPCL, has been working with school students and fishermen to create more awareness about the need to conserve turtles. One interesting tool has been the use of jatra or opera. A specially commissioned opera on turtles uses the religious imagery of turtle as an incarnation of Lord Vishnu according to Hindu mythology. The presentation was concluded with the showing of a seven minute trailer of the turtle opera. 16

17 Dr. Archana Godbole asked about impacts other than dredging and lighting and about specific plans to address the issue of secondary development. Biren Bhuta replied that the first phase specifically addressed dredging and lighting. The next phase will include development of a comprehensive Environment Management Plan that will cover all aspects like oil spills, ballast, dust pollution, noise pollution, effluent disposal, coastal erosion, plantations, etc. It will also include setting up of a Turtle Trust that will provide a long term mechanism for undertaking research and conservation projects for sea turtles. Dr. N.L.N.S. Prasad asked about the impacts of the awareness campaigns on the fishermen community. Biren Bhuta responded by saying that these are attitudinal and behavioural changes and they require a lot of time. It is too early to have a direct correlation between the awareness campaigns and use of TEDs. However, what is important is that the thinking process has begun and he emphasised the importance of re-enforcing these messages over time. Nandini Oza suggested that the question of whether the port his having an impact on the nesting behaviour of the Olive Ridleys be studied. It was suggested that WII undertake these studies. P.R. Sinha mentioned that the nesting behaviour is a function of several variables. The gap analysis would identify what type of study is useful to be undertaken. Meena Gupta remarked that while the lighting legislations could take some time, a vegetation barrier to shield the lights from the beach could be started right away. The trees would grow up in the next couple of years by the time the port commenced operations. Professor B.C. Choudhury noted that Dhamra is just one port along the Orissa coast. DPCL should engage in dialogues with other ports and other developments, on how they can come up with farreaching, far greater impacts than just on turtles. Santosh Mohapatra mentioned that this was an excellent suggestion. He said that up until now, with all the controversy surrounding the port development, DPCL was always on the defensive. But DPCL is very interested to work with other developments. Stakeholder views Dr. T.P. Singh introduced the session by emphasizing that this workshop has participation from diverse stakeholders Orissa forest department, MoEF, IUCN member organisations, members of IUCN commissions, NGOs, academicians, fishermen associations, DPCL, Tata Steel and L&T. The objective of this session was to gather diverse views and be guided and be benefitted by those views. Dr. N.L.N.S. Prasad pointed out that the Environment Ministry is giving clearances for individual projects, but so far nobody has looked at the cumulative impacts of a series of projects. Dr. T.P. Singh agreed that this is a very valid point and there must be a common approach to conservation through a Strategic Environmental Assessment or a SEA. Collecting diverse views. Dr. T. P. Singh Dr. Anmol Kumar said that there must have been some miscommunication regarding permits for relocation trawling. He announced that the MoEF would grant permits if there was a request from the State Government. Aban Kabraji welcomed this statement, saying that it would be excellent if we 17

18 could add relocation trawling to our mitigation measures. This can be a new income source for trawler fishermen. We must plan for it. We will need scientists to do research on captured turtles. Dr. R.C. Panigrahy said that there were many studies on Olive Ridley turtles in the last forty years, but many questions remain unanswered. Integrated cohesive studies are required. Ashok Jena of the Maa Dhamarai Fishers Association noted that there has been fishing in the waters off Dhamra for the last fifty years. For the last ten years, fishing has been halted during November to March due to turtles. Now there are new rules and fishing is halted from April 15 to June 15. Also, when missiles are tested, fishing is stopped. So we have only a few months left for fishing. He asked whether it was only trawlers that killed turtles. What about propellers of large ships. He said that the fishermen were not opposed to the conservation of turtles. They want to avoid turtles coming into the nets, but we must see how we can co-exist together. The fishing community also supports the port and does not want to disturb it, but the development must also not disturb the fishing. Guidance and advice is required from all the Government departments for an amicable solution. We must find the way where Turtles? Sure! What about livelihoods? (Left to right) Manoj Mahapatra, B Prasad Pati (hidden), Prafulla Kumar Jena, Ashok Kumar Jena all will live peacefully. He wanted IUCN to conduct training seminars for the fishermen at least twice during the fishing season so that the message of turtle conservation is spread among the community. P. K. Jena, Secretary of the Maa Dhamarai Fishers Association, said that sincerity is lacking in turtle conservation. We need to be sincere. All must co-exist. Turtles have been around for many years, but since the last couple of years, some changes have been noticed. Maybe this is due to dredging impacts but we need to find out. Also, new mass nesting areas have emerged over the years. He also suggested that just as we have we have artificial crocodile hatching, similarly, can we not try with turtles? S. R. A. Mishra said that some were of the opinion that the turtle beaches are eroding due to dredging and now, the turtles do not come to nest there. This needs a scientific study. Suresh Kumar pointed out that based on data collected by the Wildlife Institute of India, the congregation patch is in front of the mainland south of the port during December and March. The turtles, however, move to the river mouth during nesting and during this time, we may come across large number of turtles in relocation trawling, if it is undertaken. Santosh Mohapatra said that DPCL would support relocation trawling to be done where there is dredging because that would establish the abundance of turtles or the lack thereof. Dr. Pranaya Parida of AFPRO cautioned that if we rely on American research on TEDs, it may not work in Orissa. In the U.S., only one species is targeted i.e. shrimp. While in the Indian context, nothing is by catch. CIFT (Central Institute of Fisheries Technology) has designed a CIFT-TED with an upper opening. There is a debate on the loss of catch. Also, Dr. Parida asked Eric Hawk if there was an incentive for fishermen in the United States to use TEDs. Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary poses a peculiar problem. The law states that fishing must take place outside the sanctuary, which is 20 km from the shore. But traditional fishermen cannot go that far in their small boats. Only the mechanised boats can go beyond 20 km. Rather than have a top-down conservation approach, we could have a community friendly conservation approach. The community knows the importance of turtles, that is, if there are no turtles 18

19 today, then there will be no fish tomorrow. A lot of traditional knowledge exists about turtle conservation. We have spent lots of money on turtle conservation but very little on livelihoods of fisher folk. Dr. Parida stated that there were different types of gill-nets based on different fishing practices. For instance, there would be one type of net for pomfret and another for rays. Are all these nets detrimental for turtles? Finally, Dr. Parida stated that Potential Fishing Zones (PFZ) data is available and that can be utilised by trawlers so that they can directly go to these locations for fishing. Dr. Kinsuk Mitra noted that there has been an overall feeling of optimism after the whole day s presentations and discussions. During the 1970s, the same problem was raised as a conservation issue. At that time, there was an overall pessimistic feeling amongst the Government and other stakeholders. The attitude was that this was of no concern to anybody. Over the years, there have been many developmental projects. But nothing much has happened in the name of conservation. Look at what happened to the Tiger Project, to the elephant corridors or to the vulture populations. He was quite pleased that we are now dealing with this in a positive way. Now there is a pragmatic approach. We always knew that good scientists do good research, but we have not seen them come where research needs to be applied. We are also seeing Government officers, DPCL, international and local experts all working together and making many contributions. If this sort of an effort cannot solve a problem, nothing can. This is a valiant attempt. We have never seen this before. If we sustain this, this is going to get solved, with some compromises by all. Talk Roderic Mast, Co-Chair, IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group Mr. Leatherback. (Left to right) Sukdeb Das, Mrunmay Manna (sitting), Roderic Mast in his turtle incarnation, Manas Sahoo. Rod Mast shared some examples of effective partnerships with industry through his work at Conservation International (CI). CI works in hotspots around the world. It has a Centre for Environmental Leadership in Business whose philosophy is Conservation is a social science with biological underpinnings and not the other way round. To work effectively with people, one needs to look at economics and hence the need to work with large corporations. It has to be a partnership-based approach; that is partnerships between business, environmental organisations, governments, academics and local communities. Rod Mast talked about CI s experience with Mobil Oil in Peru, using an offshore oil model inside a tropical forest. With Mobil, it developed a set of best practices guidelines of how oil exploration can be done in fragile areas and these have been used subsequently by Mobil to reach out to other industry partners. CI also works with Starbucks, Walmart and a host of large corporations. He then turned to reflect on some of the discussions of the previous day and recommended some long-term research efforts for Orissa s Olive Ridleys: 1. Pursue specific answers to key natural history questions e.g. why do turtles come to Orissa? Where do they go when they are not nesting here? 19

20 2. Understand all perceived hazards (fishing, habitat degradation, direct take, pollution, global warming). 3. Monitor all aspects of port development. 4. Make best use of existing global standards for Ridley turtle management and research. There is much to be learned from experiences in Mexico and Costa Rica. 5. Involve all pertinent local, regional, national and international partners. 6. Secure long-term funding commitment. He reiterated that we need to work with industry to develop and spread use of best practices. For instance, the work with Dhamra port could be a model for other companies involved in port development or other coastal developments. We need to strengthen and broaden research and monitoring. We need to engage with communities be it outreach, education, training, small business development and in that respect, he complimented the work done so far by IUCN and DPCL. In conclusion he stated that this is a unique and special area, a globally significant monument. There are very few places in the world where one can see sea turtles by the hundreds and thousands. It does not only concern turtles and Arribada but also horseshoe crabs, mangroves and many bird species. It needs the highest level of protection. It should be leveraged as a World Heritage Site to give it global recognition. Professor Choudhury drew Rod Mast s attention to the fact that only 4.7 percent of India is in a Protected Area Network. But oil majors insist that they must be allowed to explore within Protected Areas. This is a worrying trend. Rod Mast agreed that there should be no development within Protected Areas. There has to be a line drawn at some point. The UN Biosphere Reserve Model has a core area and multiple use areas around it. Professor Choudhury remarked that the concept of core areas works in terrestrial environment, but core areas and no-take areas do not work in marine environments. Rod Mast replied that there are great examples of indigenous communities that have marine sanctuaries built into their culture. In the Philippines, local people set aside a portion of their reef. They do not fish there because they know that the fish have to be born and be raised and have a nursery somewhere. Fishing in a core area in a marine environment is, indeed, a problem. You just can t simply put a fence around it. We can do our absolute best to protect turtles on nesting beaches, but if they get taken by fishermen right offshore, then all those efforts have been wasted. Dr. Suprava Patnaik pointed out that the Species Survival Commission has a Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA). Why can t scientists come and assess turtle populations? Rod Mast replied that the Captive Breeding Specialist Group (CBSG) does the PHVA model, but it works better with terrestrial species than it does with marine species. He also mentioned there are members of MTSG who are doing these types of analyses. Dr. Patnaik again asked about the impacts of sea surface temperatures and global warming on turtle migration. Rod Mast said he believed that there would be impacts. One is that the sex of baby turtles is determined by the temperature on the beach during incubation. As average beach temperatures rise, that could result in feminising populations. Extremely high beach temperatures could be lethal for turtle eggs. The sea level rise could lead to the disappearance of beaches and nesting habitats of sea turtles. He reminded the audience that sea turtles have been around for more than 100 million years. They have seen the planet hit by giant asteroids, they have seen the dinosaurs come and go, they have seen the continents shift. He said that he believes that sea turtles are probably going to be able to handle the kinds of impacts that arise from climate change. 20

21 IUCN engagement with the private sector: The Asian experience Shiranee Yasaratne, Head Regional Business and Biodiversity Programme, IUCN Asia Shiranee Yasaratne made a presentation on IUCN s engagement with the private sector. Increasingly, the private sector in Asia is looking at conservation issues as part of its initiative on sustainable development. IUCN Asia aims to encourage and support environmental responsibility in business and harness its potential for conservation. IUCN can help companies to reduce their environmental footprint, help build capacities to enable business to positively contribute to conservation and increase the level of trust and agreement between business and conservation communities. All this is possible only because of the fact that the World Conservation Congresses since 1996 have given IUCN Secretariat the mandate to work with the private sector. IUCN has developed Operational Guidelines for Private Sector Engagement, which it strictly adheres to and continuously revises. She outlined some key focus areas for IUCN s engagement: large footprint industries (mining, energy, construction), biodiversity dependent industries (agriculture, fisheries, forestry), green enterprises that can contribute to biodiversity contribution (organic farming, ecotourism, etc) and finance sector (banks, insurance companies, etc). IUCN s competencies are three-fold: developing policies and tools, raising awareness and making the science available. She gave a few regional and global examples of IUCN s private sector engagement. At the global level, IUCN has agreements with Shell, Holcim and Dilmah Tea Company and these have trickled down to partnerships with these companies in the Asia region as well. At the regional level, IUCN has worked with Chevron in Bangladesh, Dhamra Port in India and also, with the rubber sector in Laos PDR. She ended her presentation by saying that Conservation is everybody s business. Nandini Oza asked whether there were any clauses in contracts that allowed IUCN to back out of any project and whether IUCN has done that till date. Shiranee Yasaratne replied that IUCN s engagement with the private sector is governed by the private sector guidelines, which includes preparation of a due diligence report. IUCN rejects proposals that are seen as being involved with green-washing. All engagements have individual contracts that do allow IUCN to pull out if certain conditions are not met. So far, IUCN has had no reason to back out of any projects. B. Prasad Pati of Nature s Club wanted to know if IUCN could look at areas that are fragile from a biodiversity point of view and that could be impacted in future. Shiranee Yasaratne gave the example of Pakistan where IUCN has helped provincial governments to prepare environment strategies. There was also a suggestion earlier that IUCN could do a similar exercise for Orissa. IUCN has the expertise and the experience and it would surely consider if it came as a request from the Orissa State Government. To a question from Dr. N.L.N.S. Prasad whether IUCN made any profits from its work with the private sector, Shiranee Yasaratne stated that IUCN is a not-for-profit organisation and that most of its private sector engagements are partnerships, also co-financed by IUCN itself. Professor Choudhury speculated whether IUCN s work with the private sector was more curative than preventive. He also wanted to know if IUCN could make some kind of a statement on the possible impacts on biodiversity form the hundreds of ports coming up along the Indian coastline. Meena Gupta asked about the opposition that IUCN faced on its work with the private sector. Aban Kabraji replied that there was a hard-core group of members who were opposed to IUCN s agreement with Shell and similarly, with Dhamra Port. One needs, however, to realise that IUCN has a policy framework. It acts on the basis of the majority of the members opinions. As an example, at the World Conservation Congress in Barcelona in October 2008, there was a motion to stop IUCN s work with Shell. This went to a vote, where it was defeated. Members of IUCN voted that IUCN should continue to work with business and interestingly, the Indian delegation was very supportive of that 21

22 decision. However, these debates continue, which is fine. But the work also continues. Aban went on to say that working with any constituency, particularly with the private sector, is based on trust. Business is not in the business of charity. It ultimately has a responsibility to deliver profits to its shareholders and that must be understood. Responding to Professor Choudhury s query, Aban Kabraji said that while the work with Dhamra Port could possibly fall under the curative category, there have been two instances involving the Tata Group which have been preventive: 1. IUCN advised Tata Chemicals on the Lake Natron issue in Tanzania. IUCN had a strong advisory role through the Species Survival Commission and it was all done gratis. IUCN walked Tata Chemicals through a very complicated and difficult set of negotiations and discussions that took place. Eventually, Tata Chemicals took a decision to withdraw, a decision that was heavily influenced by the advice given by IUCN. 2. In another recent case, which was very significant, Tata Steel was planning major investments in a mining operation in Mount Nimba in West Africa. Mount Nimba is a World Heritage Site between three countries Ivory Coast, Guinea and Liberia. The Ivory Coast Government had invited Tata Steel to mine inside the World Heritage Site. IUCN approached Tata Steel at UNESCO s World Heritage Centre s request, and got a commitment that it would not mine in or near the World Heritage Site. We now have a letter from Tata Steel Group s Head of Mining, making that commitment. This too was advice given gratis. These are examples of preventive work and also of leverage due to IUCN s work at Dhamra. She clarified in response to an earlier query by Prasad Pati that IUCN was ready to work further in Orissa, at the invitation of the State Government and if IUCN members are willing to work with the IUCN Secretariat. Dr. S.N. Patro reiterated that the east coast of the country was less developed than the west coast and that significant development was being planned. Hence he believed that IUCN should expand its scope of work to ensure that some virgin areas of great biodiversity significance are protected. Finally, Santosh Mohapatra clarified the question raised earlier about whether IUCN s advice was binding on companies. He said that as far as DPCL was concerned, IUCN s advice was as binding as the conditions of the Environment Clearance. Where are we headed? Biren Bhuta, IUCN Project Manager Dhamra Port Project Biren Bhuta presented issues on the way forward, so that the group could deliberate upon them. Dredging mitigation efforts, which have been institutionalised, would be continued and we need to ensure that they run smoothly and are effectively monitored. Lighting mitigation measures need to be implemented. It s not enough to have the right fixtures and the right shields, but a light management plan and a lighting inspector are required to ensure a sustainable light monitoring mechanism. Biren again mentioned the need for an overall lighting legislation which would be applicable to all developments at and around Dhamra and indeed, along the entire Orissa coast. Biren requested the group to discuss the modalities and the best way in which such legislation could be brought into effect. The gaps in research have been identified through the study undertaken by the Wildlife Institute of India. Some of these research gaps could be funded and the research could be initiated. Biren outlined some future plans: 1. A comprehensive world class Environment Management Plan which would address most of the issues that the participants have raised oil spills, ballast, effluent treatment, noise 22

23 pollution, dust pollution, coastal erosion, etc. This could be monitored by an Environment Monitoring Committee which is already in place and which could be further strengthened. 2. Setting up of a Trust for turtles. The Orissa Government already has a Society for the same purpose and a new initiative could be aligned with the existing one. There are in-principle commitments for funding from Tata Steel and L&T. Finally, he raised the issue of demarcation of Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary, which the Orissa Forest Department expressed interest in. Whether it is a good idea and how it can be done, is something which experts could discuss. There is a related issue that of effective patrolling, as the turtles will nest only if they survive. Dr. Archana Godbole suggested that there needs to be capacity building of not just DPCL personnel, but other industries and port developers as well, towards understanding of environmental problems and conservation issues. Meena Gupta supplemented this by informing that there is something called as Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA). This looks at either a particular activity, in this case, port development across the state or even for the country or looks at a geographical area and does assessments for that. At present, the law requires that there is a project-wise environmental impact assessment. But it is more progressive to look at an area-wide or activity-wide assessment. Maybe one could take a step in that direction. Professor Choudhury remarked that IUCN certainly seems to have a generic plan in place for its activities at Dhamra though the activities may be evolving as well as adaptive. According to him, it would make sense to share this plan with a whole lot of people as the adaptive and evolving nature would only come through with a greater number of brains contributing to that. As far as studies are concerned, Professor Choudhury mentioned that it is extremely important to initiate a study to understand what is happening to the ocean floor. On the southern end, there is the Paradip channel while on the northern end, there is this new channel being developed for Dhamra. The littoral drift is from south to north and it is extremely important to understand what is happening to bottom sand movement. There is almost monthly data available for the last four years and in the last six months, there has been far greater erosion in the islands where turtles would nest. The deflector is great in the sense that turtles will not be killed, but how will the port contribute to geo-morphological changes in the area. We need to understand that. Professor Choudhury suggested that it would be prudent to form a core group to prepare an environment management plan. Dr. C.S. Kar and the Orissa Forest Department have been working in the area for the last 25 years and there are many other professional organisations who have been working there and their expertise could be pooled by forming a core group which can contribute to the management plan. That should be the top-most agenda at this point in time. Turtle specialist group. (Left to right) Professor B.C. Choudhury, Dr. C.S. Kar Dr. Mahalik opined that there should be an extensive mapping of the geomorphology of the present as well as what is possible in the future. 23

24 Dr. S.N. Patro reminded the group that it is not just about turtles. There are other species like the horse-shoe crabs which are equally important. Dr. Patro gave the example of Chilika. What is happening now does not match the predictions. We need to learn from that experience. When we talk of dredging, we need to discuss two aspects: what are the changes taking place inside the sea where dredging is taking place and also, where the dredged materials are dumped. Both need to be studied. The EIA and the EMP need to be discussed from time to time at different levels. Dhamra port must come up, but not in haste. One is concerned about irreversible changes, not so much about what can be reversed. Finally, Dr. Patro asked the Port authorities to also consider the impacts on the livelihoods of fishermen around Dhamra. Suresh Kumar talked about ship movements and ship docking. Not all ships would go directly to the port. They would be docked out at sea. Suresh wanted to know where they would be docked, what would be the depths and whether it would be close to the turtle congregation sites. Satyaranjan Behera s observation, from his work on sea turtles at Gahirmatha, is that in the last six months, the worst kind of erosion has taken place, especially on Nasi I and Nasi II islands. They have been regularly monitoring the beach profile. Last year, the average beach width was metres, while this year, it is only metres. He feels that dredging must have had some impacts. S.R.A. Mishra, the Range Officer at Gahirmatha, asked whether IUCN had done any research before giving advice to DPCL. There are three protected areas near DPCL: Bhitarkanika National Park, Bhitarkanika Sanctuary and Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary. They are home to Olive Ridley turtles, dolphins, salt water crocodiles, water monitor lizards, pythons, king cobras and white bellied sea eagles. He believes that IUCN should consider all this before giving any advice. His second suggestion was that DPCL should provide all the maps showing the actual location of the port vis-à-vis the protected areas. How far it is from turtle congregation zones and whether it will affect the turtle corridor or not. Dr. Kar expressed his concern about removal of sand due to dredging and whether sand was also being obtained from other areas for other developmental activities of the port and how it is affecting the sediment transportation and circulation patterns of the sea. The Kalibhanjdian Island, close to the port has been designated by the Ministry as a National Mangrove Genetic Resource and Conservation Centre, which is the only one of its kind in the country. Dr. Kar wondered what would be the impact on Kalibhanjdian. Dr. Kar explained that Dhamra is a transitional zone between the sandy coastline towards the south and the muddy one further north. Hence, species diversity is maximum and maybe it is also the reason why turtles come here. Also, the Bhadrak district mangroves are very different from the mangroves anywhere else in the country and they are rich in biodiversity. So impacts of dredging on all these on sand-heads, mangroves, species, etc need to be considered. Dr. Kar informed the group that the District Administration of Bhadrak had inherited four forest blocks. It had given a statement that no forest block existed within the Dhamra port limit. But the same District Administration filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court claiming forest blocks in the area. For a long time, there was a debate about how to demarcate the forest blocks. Fortunately, DPCL has agreed and now, the work is going on. That needs to be completed within a specified time-frame. That is the only mangrove area in the district and if that is lost, the area will be prone to natural calamities like cyclones, etc. Dr. R.C. Panigrahy said that construction and operation of the port will obviously have some adverse impacts. To what extent can these impacts be minimised, should be the core of the discussions. 24

25 He also stressed the need to know about turtle populations and their migratory routes. Finally, Dr. Panigrahy suggested that the oceanographic phenomena in the Bay of Bengal should be studied. Silt particles have a lot of adverse impacts, especially on mangroves. Proper advice should be sought from expert agencies in the country. Dr. Kinsuk Mitra flagged an important issue that of the side-effects of all the ancillary developments. There would be more roads, more vehicles, more people, more construction, more waste. There would be issues around water, health, education. Coastal populations would have to be prepared for disasters. What would be the impacts on agriculture and natural resources? There would be a lot of pollutants. The list is very long. Unless planned in advance, it would be difficult to manage these later. Someone needs to address these. Dr. Mitra also posed a question as to what is the plan of addressing threats to turtles due to fishing or when they are on the beach. This may not be DPCL s brief but then, someone will need to address these issues. Dr. Mitra suggested that Dhamra should be a learning experience and that, it should be applied to other ports and developments in a timely manner and not when it is too late. How many ports are in the pipeline? How many have already got clearances and if there are, are they involved in an elaborate environmental management and conservation plan as DPCL is doing now. If concerned people are going to intervene, they have to do so when the time is right and not at a later stage, when it is very difficult to make too many changes. Santosh Mohapatra then attempted to clarify a few queries that were raised. He began by showing on a map, the location of Dhamra Port vis-à-vis Bhitarkanika and Gahirmatha sanctuaries. Regarding dredging, he said that if DPCL was to dredge a channel in such a manner that it would disturb the entire morphology of the area, then the first victim would be DPCL itself. There was a study of the whole area done by a U.S. organisation over four seasons to determine what alignment of the channel would least disturb the surrounding area. The alignment is along the natural stream of the river which means that it will optimise removal of the silt and it will also take advantage of the natural flushing effects of the river after the monsoons. Before dredging started, fears were expressed by DRDO that it would affect Wheeler Islands which is already getting eroded and one would notice that they have armoured the beach. DPCL undertook another study to see if dredging will erode Wheeler Islands. The study was shared with DRDO scientists and they were satisfied with it. Between 2000 and 2003, there are photographs that show that Nasi islands have increased three times in one year and reduced by half the next year. This is a dynamic area and erosion takes place due to various reasons. Erosion has been taking place all along the Orissa coast. A very stable beach like Puri has been eroded, so has Gopalpur. Santosh Mohapatra requested participants not to propagate speculative stories without any scientific basis. To allay fears, DPCL has asked National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) to study the erosion at Gahirmatha and the impacts of dredging. He said that it is not in the interest of the port company or the dredging company to dredge a channel in such a manner that it disturbs the geo morphology of the surrounding area, as that would imperil the channel and the port which is the nearest to the area of the dredging. To address this a thorough study extending over four seasons is undertaken to decide the alignment of the channel. In case of Dhamra Port the study recommended aligning the channel along the existing water course through which part of the river is flushing itself. It is like deepening an existing stream which is least disturbing to the surroundings. DPCL has had a siltation study done which showed that there would be an annual siltation of 2 million cubic metres, which would be a combination of silt from the river and silt from the littoral drift. 25

26 Santosh Mohapatra said that, despite all of the above, DPCL has already engaged NIO to study the impacts of dredging and is open to suggestions for any additional studies. Regarding disposal of dredged material, he mentioned again that it is in DPCL s best interest to dispose in such a way that it does not affect the dredged channel. The material is being disposed off in an area where the sea is more than 20 metres deep in a direction where the littoral drift will push it further forward. As far as secondary development was concerned, DPCL has made a presentation to the Chief Minister of Orissa, who appreciated the point that the whole area should be designated as a Dhamra Development Area and a Development Authority should be established which can have its own set of rules and regulations, including one on lighting. On fishing rights, Santosh Mohapatra confirmed that fishermen are welcome to use the same channel but outside the demarcated area which is 250 m wide, out of the sea width of 2 km. So he requested the fishermen to leave the 250 m and use the remaining area. Regarding an Environment Management Plan (EMP), he said that there is already a statutory EMP as part of the EIA and the conditions mentioned in the Environment Clearance, additional conditions imposed by the Appellate Authority as well as the Orissa State Pollution Control Board. But, DPCL wants IUCN to help prepare a much more comprehensive EMP, incorporating several other issues, which will be for the operational phase and which will be binding on the port. Finally, Santosh Mohapatra clarified on the query raised on ship docking. Ships would anchor outside the channel at depths of more than 20 metres and will enter the channel and go back the same way. There is no way that ships would move through the turtle congregation zones. Aban Kabraji then talked of the Environment Management Plan, saying that the EMP was a recommendation of IUCN s Scoping Study. Apart from the many components that would go into the EMP, it should make a reference to this idea of a Dhamra Development Authority, should look at the issue of lighting legislation and should look at the issue of the Trust in perpetuity, so that there is a sustainable, long-term financing mechanism in place for the turtles. She reminded the group that DPCL is here only for a limited period of time. Ultimately, the port will be handed over to the State Government. IUCN is looking at institutional mechanisms which would work with the State and which would set up some kind of independent financial resources in order to ensure that it becomes a sustainable long-term effort. In the first year, IUCN identified the most immediate potential impacts on the turtles due to port construction i.e. dredging and lighting and how one can deal with those issues. Now, there are also issues of fishing and livelihoods. If we are to talk about introduction of turtle excluder devices (TEDs), we need to find out exactly why they have not worked so far, what we need to do with the fishing community so that they can be made to work. What incentives need to be brought in, in terms of overall economic development of those communities. So far, IUCN has been using the turtles as an indicator species for the ecosystem of the area. She clarified that IUCN is perfectly aware of the larger ecosystem. It is like protecting the tiger. You save the tiger, you save the ecosystem. You cannot save the tiger without saving the prey and the jungle. And you cannot save the jungle if you are not working with the people who live in it. So, in much the same way, we know that we cannot save the turtles without also looking at the overall ecology and people of the coastline. But that is part of a wider programme. Currently, IUCN is restricting its focus to areas directly affected by the port. If we want to go beyond, it is the Government that must invite us. Indeed, this is related but also a separate study and we must not confuse the two. IUCN has had discussions with DPCL and DPCL is keen on our continuation into the next phase. We will have to write up all the suggestions that all the participants have given and reflect it back to all. 26

27 Aban said that she agreed with Professor Choudhury that a core group must be set up as advisors who will help prepare the EMP. Someone has to do the writing and pulling in everything together. This would be an on-going exercise. It will be dynamic, consultative and participatory, but always taking the process forward. Summing Up Meena Gupta summarised the workshop proceedings by saying that some of the recommendations that have emerged have been Dhamra specific while others have a much broader relevance. The Dhamra specific suggestions would feed into a detailed and a more elaborate environment management plan and a mechanism to monitor its implementation. The Development Authority is essential to regulate other developments in the area, or else all the efforts would go waste. There was also talk of a turtle Trust. The broader suggestions include the Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) for the coastline. It would be the first for the country. It would largely depend on the State Government. IUCN or anyone else can do this. Lighting legislations, if applied for Dhamra, could Summing up. Meena Gupta then be extended to other developments and areas. Application of dredging practices i.e. deflectors, could be wider. And finally, there is the issue of impact of fishing on turtles. Work needs to be done on acceptance and use of TEDs. Meena Gupta acknowledged various stakeholders who could be part of this process the Central and State Governments, DPCL and IUCN, NGOs, academicians and IUCN member organisations. Aban Kabraji added that the most important stakeholders that have emerged are the fishermen. There needs to be a clear relationship of actual work and mutual benefit for the fishing community. Hence local development NGOs need to be involved. Many stakeholders would come and go. But there would always be a core group. Regular consultations need to be built in and an annual workshop like the current one, would be a good idea. Vote of thanks Meena Gupta then thanked everyone for their excellent participation and useful comments and suggestions, saying that it has been a very enriching one and a half days. Usha Srinivasan of Development Alternatives said that she had come to the workshop with a lot of concerns from people all over the country. But she now had some insights into what was happening at Dhamra and she said that she could go back more light-hearted than when she came. 27

28 It is all about balance. Traditional Gotipua dancers perform the balancing act during the cultural programme. Field trip to Dhamra Port on trawler. Left: Aban Marker Kabraji, IUCN Asia Regional Director and Santosh Mohapatra, CEO, Dhamra Port Company Ltd. Right: Construction workers on the pier at Dhamra. 28

29 Annex 1: Agenda DHAMRA CONSULTATIVE TECHNICAL WORKSHOP February 24, am to am REGISTRATION SESSION ONE: BACKDROP Chair: Aban Marker Kabraji, IUCN Asia Regional Director am to am: Sea Turtles Tale Rod Mast, Co-Chair, IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group am to am: Collation of studies on Olive Ridleys and gaps in research R. Suresh Kumar, Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India am to am: Backgrounder on Dhamra Port Santosh Kumar Mohapatra, CEO, Dhamra Port Company Limited am to am: Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary C. S. Kar, Senior Research Officer, Forest Department, Government of Orissa am to pm: Tea/Coffee Break pm to pm: INAUGURATION Lighting of the ceremonial lamp Welcome speech by Aban Marker Kabraji, IUCN Asia Regional Director Speech by B.K. Patnaik, PCCF and Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa Speech by Priya Nath Padhi, Special Secretary, Forest and Environment Department, Government of Orissa Speech by Upendra Nath Behera, Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Forest and Environment Department, Government of Orissa SESSION ONE: BACKDROP (CONTINUED) pm to 1.00 pm IUCN s engagement with Dhamra Port Aban Marker Kabraji, Regional Director, IUCN Asia 1.00 pm to 1.30 pm Q and A 1.30 pm to 2.30 pm: Lunch SESSION TWO: POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON TURTLES & MITIGATION MEASURES Chairs: P.R. Sinha, Director, Wildlife Institute of India and Anmol Kumar, DIG (Wildlife), MoEF, Government of India 2.30 pm to 3.15 pm Dredging impacts on sea turtles Eric Hawk, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USA 29

30 3.15 pm to 4.00 pm Artificial lighting and sea turtle conservation Erik Martin, Ecological Associates, USA 4.00 pm to 4.45 pm IUCN recommendations and work done so far Biren Bhuta, IUCN Project Manager Dhamra Port Project 4.45 pm to 5.00 pm Tea/Coffee Break SESSION THREE: CONSERVATION INITIATIVES Chair: T.P. Singh, Regional Group Head Ecosystems and Livelihoods, IUCN Asia 5.00 pm to 6.00 pm Stakeholder views 6.00 pm to 6.20 pm IUCN Engagement with the Private Sector: The Asian Experience Shiranee Yasaratne, Head Regional Business and Biodiversity Programme, IUCN Asia 7.30 pm: Reception with Cultural Programme followed by cocktails and dinner February 25, 2009 SESSION FOUR: WAY GOING FORWARD Chair: Meena Gupta, Ex-Secretary, MoEF, Government of India 9.00 am to 9.30 am Talk Rod Mast, Co-Chair, IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group 9.30 am to 9.45 am Where are we headed? Biren Bhuta, IUCN Project Manager Dhamra Port Project 9.45 am to am Discussion on environmental management and conservation plans am to am: Tea/Coffee Break am to pm: Discussion on collaboration amongst stake-holders pm to 1.00 pm Summing up 1.00 pm to 1.10 pm Vote of thanks 1.30 pm to 2.30 pm: Lunch 3.00 pm: Leave for Dhamra (Optional) February 26, am: Take a trawler out to sea to visit port site pm to 2.00 pm: Lunch 2.00 pm: Leave for Bhubaneswar 30

31 Annex 2: List of Participants 1. A K Kar, General Manager, Dhamra Port Company Ltd 2. Aban Marker Kabraji, Regional Director, IUCN Asia 3. Amlan Dutta, Environment Manager, Dhamra Port Company Ltd 4. Anmol Kumar, DIG (Wildlife), MoEF, Government of India 5. Archana Godbole, Deputy Director, AERF (IUCN India Member) 6. Ashim Datta, Dredging Observer 7. Ashok Kumar Jena, Member, Maa Dhamarai Fishers Association, Dhamra 8. B. Prasad Pati, Advisor, Nature s Club, Kendrapara 9. B.C. Choudhary, Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India and MTSG Member 10. B.K. Behera, Environmental Engineer, State Pollution Control Board, Orissa 11. B.K. Patnaik, PCCF and Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa 12. B.K. Swain, Advisor Environment, Dhamra Port Company Ltd 13. Biren Bhuta, IUCN Project Manager Dhamra Port Project 14. Biswajit Dey, Health Safety Environment Officer, Larsen and Toubro Ltd 15. Brajeswari Singh Samal, Research Scholar, Marine Sciences, Berhampur University 16. Chandra Sekhar Kar, Senior Research Officer, O/o Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa and MTSG Member 17. D.P. Rath, Regional Co-ordinator, Centre for Environment Education (IUCN India Member) 18. Eric Hawk, Biologist, NOAA, USA 19. Erik Martin, Scientific Director, Ecological Associates, USA and MTSG Member 20. Evelyn Daniel, President, Institute for Integrated Rural Development (IUCN India Member) 21. Himansu Sekhar Sahoo, Manager Corporate Communications and CSR, Dhamra Port Company Ltd 22. J. Ravikumar, Chief Financial Officer, Dhamra Port Company Ltd 23. J.S. Rawat, Forest Programme Office, IUCN India 24. Jagannath Bastia, President, Beach Protection Council of Orissa 25. Jayendra Lakhmapurkar, Associate Ecologist, Gujarat Ecology Society (IUCN India Member) 26. K. Murali, Unit Manager and Senior Hydrogeologist, AFPRO 27. K.K. Ghosh, Senior Manager, Larsen and Toubro Ltd 28. Kinsuk Mitra, President, Winrock International India (IUCN India Member) 29. L. Nayak, Professor, Department of Marine Sciences, Berhampur University 30. Manas Sahoo, Dredging Observer 31. Manoj Mahapatra, Deputy CF, State Medicinal Plant Board, Orissa 32. Meena Gupta, Ex-Secretary, MoEF, Government of India 33. Michael Dougherty, Regional Communications Coordinator, IUCN Asia 34. Mohit Das, Head Corporate Affairs, Tata Steel Ltd Bhubaneswar 35. Mrunmay Manna, Dredging Observer 36. N.K. Padhy, Executive Engineer (Civil), Fishery Engineering Division, Government of Orissa 37. N.L.N.S. Prasad, Director (S), MoEF Eastern Region, Government of India 38. N.U. Mahalik, Retd Professor, Geology, Utkal University 39. Nandini Oza, Joint Secretary, INSONA (IUCN India Member) 40. P. Krishna Mohan, CF, O/o Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa 41. P.K. Behera, DFO, Rajnagar 42. P.R. Sinha, Director, Wildlife Institute of India (IUCN India Member) 43. Partha Sengupta, Vice President, Tata Steel Ltd 44. Prabhakar Rout, Consultant, Tata Steel Ltd 45. Prafulla Kumar Jena, Secretary, Maa Dhamarai Fishers Association, Dhamra 46. Pranaya Parida, Fisheries Specialist, AFPRO 31

32 47. Priya Nath Padhi, Special Secretary, Forest and Environment Department, Government of Orissa 48. R.C. Panigrahy, Professor, Department of Marine Sciences, Berhampur University 49. R.K. Dey, CF, MoEF Eastern Region, Government of India 50. Rachna Panda, Research Scholar, Marine Sciences, Berhampur University 51. Ramapad Arabinda Mishra, Range Officer, Rajnagar 52. Roderic Mast, Co-Chair, IUCN SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group (MTSG) 53. Rupanita Mohapatra, Research Scholar, Marine Sciences, Berhampur University 54. S.K. Dutta, Professor, North Orissa University 55. S.K. Sundary, O/o Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa 56. S.S. Srivastava, CCF (Wildlife), Orissa 57. Santosh Kumar Mohapatra, CEO, Dhamra Port Company Ltd 58. Sareeta Pradhan, Environment Executive, Dhamra Port Company Ltd 59. Satyaranjan Behera, Research Fellow, Wildlife Institute of India 60. Sharad Goel, Joint General Manager, Larsen and Toubro Ltd 61. Shiranee Yasaratne, Regional Head Business and Biodiversity Programme, IUCN Asia 62. Siddhanta Das, CF, Bhubaneswar Circle 63. Sudhakar Kar, Senior Research Officer, O/o Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa and Member of IUCN SSC Crocodile Specialist Group (CSG) 64. Sukdeb Das, Dredging Observer 65. Sundara N. Patro, Working President, Orissa Environmental Society 66. Suprava Patnaik, Associate Professor, Indian Institute of Forest Management (IUCN India Member) 67. Suresh Kumar, Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India 68. T.P. Singh, Regional Group Head Ecosystems and Livelihoods, IUCN Asia 69. Upendra Nath Behera, Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Forest and Environment Department, Government of Orissa 70. Usha Srinivasan, Senior Advisor, Development Alternatives (IUCN India Member) 32

33 63 Sukhumvit Soi 39 Wattana, Bangkok Thailand Tel: Fax: iucn@iucnt.org Asia Regional Office International Union for Conservation of Nature