Text :
28.02.02: NGOs Welcome European
Parliament's Clear "No" To Water Transfers
Environmental NGOs WWF, BirdLife International and
the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) welcome the clear position
taken by the European Parliament against unsustainable water management
schemes across Europe. European Parliamentarians meeting in Brussels
today adopted a tough Resolution on the "European Union's Sustainable
Development Strategy", which will be sent to Heads of State and
Government at the Barcelona Summit (15-16 March). The Resolution contains
a clear expression of concern about "the precedent set by proposals
for the development of unsustainable water management schemes across
Europe" such as water transfers, and calls on the Commission
to "not provide any EU funding for such water transfer projects."
MEPs stopped short of issuing an outright condemnation of the Spanish
Hydrological Plan law of 20 June 2001 by removing a specific reference
to it that had been voted at last weeks' Parliamentary Committee on
the Environment, despite its clear EU dimension and NGOs concerns
over it. Nonetheless, NGOs hope that the Parliament's Resolution will
send a clear signal to decision-makers in Madrid and in the rest of
the EU that this type of water management scheme is viewed as unsustainable
by many across Europe.
The Spanish Hydrological Plan is a "water transfer" law,
including as many as 863 water infrastructure works and other developments
including dams and reservoirs - on top of the piping for the transfers.
NGOs believe that the plan could lead to the destruction of many areas
requiring protection under EU nature conservation, such as the Ebro
Delta. They estimate that as many as 86 Special Protection Areas and
82 Sites of Community Interest, as designated under the Wild Birds
and Habitats Directives are under threat from the infrastructure development
required by the plan. Moreover, they state that the plan will contravene
the principles of sustainable water management by substantially increasing
water demand in Spain and clearly violating the legal provisions of
the EU Water Framework Directive. Worse still, say NGOs, the plans
are likely to be part-financed by the European taxpayer. It is understood
that the Spanish authorities are looking for a seven billion Euro
cash injection for the scheme from the EU's cohesion and structural
funds.
Eva Royo Gelabert from WWF commented: "Although the European
Parliament's Resolution does not make a specific reference to the
Spanish Hydrological Plan, MEPs have today taken a very clear and
responsible stance against unsustainable water management schemes
in Europe. We hope that other EU Institutions will now follow suit.
The services of the European Commission, by comparison, have had several
multi-stakeholder complaints against the Spanish Hydrological Plan
for months on their table, but we still don't know what is the European
Commission official reaction to it". Miguel Naveso, BirdLife
International, said: "MEPs have recognised the contradictory
nature of the current situation in Spain: the EU is seeking to protect
precious natural heritage on one hand, yet plans are being made to
use EU funds to finance environmentally-damaging infrastructure on
the other. The Commission should respond to the European Parliament's
demand and refuse to fund unsustainable water projects with European
Union taxpayers' money".
"After this clear statement from the European Parliament against
EU support for unsustainable water transfer projects, like the Spanish
Hydrological Plan, it is now up to the Commission to take a position
on this issue before the Johannesburg Summit.", says Stefan Scheuer
of the EEB. "The EU's credibility on sustainable development
must not be jeopardised and environmental protection laws must not
be undermined by financing the wrong projects".
Further information from:
· · Eva Royo Gelabert, WWF, +32 2 743 8814 ·
Victoria Phillips, BirdLife Internat. +44 1767 680551 · ·
Stefan Scheuer, EEB, +32 2 289 1304
Editor's notes:
1. The final text of the amendment adopted by the European Parliament
on 28.02.02 in the context of the Resolution on the "European
Union's Sustainable Development Strategy for Barcelona": "The
European Parliament is deeply worried about the precedent set by proposals
for development of unsustainable water management schemes across Europe
and calls on the Commission not to provide any EU funding for these
water transfer projects." This was adopted by 493 votes to 24
with 5 abstentions. 2. The SNHP law entered into force last August,
with the aim of regulating water resources in the Spanish territory
by transfers from river basins that have (so-called) water "in
excess" to river basins with a (so-called) "water deficit",
mostly in order to increase water-intensive agriculture and tourism.
The implementation of this law will require the development of 863
new water infrastructure and other works (e.g. dams, reservoirs) for
the whole of the Spanish territory, which are already listed in Annex
II (the "investment plan").
2. The main bulk of the SNHP entails the development of a new water
transfer of 1,050 cubic hectometres per year from the Ebro river to
another four basins in the east of the country. This is the part of
the SNHP for "immediate execution" requiring, on top of
the piping, approximately 381 new water infrastructure and other works
affecting all five river basins. The most negative of these are several
new dams in the Pyrenees mountains. Negative impacts on the Ebro river
basin include the disappearance of the Ebro Delta (area for Natura
2000 designation, already a Ramsar site, the 2nd most important wetland
in Spain, and of high European significance), as show by a recent
report by the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (full report - summary).
3. 3. NGO concerns about the SNHP, shared by many Spanish academics
and scientists, are summarised as follows:
4. · The SNHP has been analysed as being unsustainable from
an economic, social and environmental point of view, and thus it goes
against the EU's Sustainable Development Strategy and the Treaty itself.
· Spanish government is anticipating the EU will fund at least
30% (?7,683 million) of the investments required. Structural and Cohesion
funds have already been given for building dams and reservoirs that
could now be used to make the overall implementation of the SNHP possible.
· The development of the infrastructures listed in the SNHP's
"investment plan" will have significant impacts on EU protected
or proposed protected areas forming the Natura 2000 Network, leading
to infringements of the Birds and Habitats Directives. The recent
complaint submitted to the Commission by SEO/BirdLife shows at least
126 IBAs and 86 SPAs being affected along with at least 14 habitat
types, 18 species and 82 proposed Sites of Community Interest. We
believe the plan will also contravene other parts of existing EU environmental
legislation, various Articles of the EU Treaty, and overall EC/EU
commitments under International Conventions. · Of prime consideration
is the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), the
new EU water law since 22 December 2000, which offers an immediate
opportunity for the European Commission to respond to such an unsustainable
water development scheme.
19.02.02: Nepal's New National
Park Protects Kathmandu Water Supply
By Deepak Gajurel
KATHMANDU, Nepal, February 19, 2002 (ENS) - The drinking water supply
for Kathmandu Valley's one million inhabitants has been secured by
the designation of a new national park near Nepal's capital city of
Kathmandu. The Shivapuri National Park, 13 kilometers (eight miles)
north of Kathmandu, protects the Shivapuri watershed from which more
than a quarter of the valley's water demand is supplied.
For full text and graphics visit: http://ens-news.com/ens/feb2002/2002L-02-19-01.html
19.02.02: Belize dam approval
challenged in court
BELIZE CITY, Belize, February 19, 2002 (ENS) - Belizean
environmental and business groups have filed a lawsuit to block the
controversial, Canadian backed Chalillo Dam project. The suit challenges
the Belizean government's conditional approval for the Canadian backed
hydroelectric dam, charging that the government failed to hold public
hearings or consider comments from scientists, as required by Belizean
law.
For full text and graphics visit: http://ens-news.com/ens/feb2002/2002L-02-19-06.html
18.02.02:
New demonstrations against the NHP.
AMDPress 18/02/02. -
Between 20,000 and 35,000 people (respectively according to the Local
Police and the organizers) demonstrated yesterday in the streets of
Deltebre to protest against the National Hydrological Plan (NHP).
Actions took place not only in the streets but also in the offices.
(Thousands of companies have started an initiative against the controversial
Plan. )
Representatives of Ecologist in Action met today with the Commissioner
of Environment, Margot Wallström, to ask the European Commission
not to finance the NHP.
Called by the Platform For The Defense Of The River Ebro, the thousand
persons gathered yesterday in Deltebre showed their opposition to
the water transfer from the Ebro.
Placards reads "dead River, lost Delta …" and the demonstrators
centered their critics against the PP and CiU, political forces that
supported the approval of the PHN in Cortes.
Many groups were present: political parties ICV, PSC and ERC; unions
UGT, CCOO, Unió of Pagesos and USOC; and the "anti-transfert"
platforms of the Ebro, Manlleu, Vic, Girona, Barcelona and Aragón
areas.
Another demonstration will take place in Barcelona on March 10th to
try and turn the NHP into one of the central subjects of the political
debate before the European summit that will take place in the Condal
City 15 and 16 of the next month.
18.02.02: Colloque international
sur le Saumon.
Un colloque regroupant les différentes organisations
internationales du saumon, de l'Atlantique nord, du Pacifique nord
et de la Mer Baltique se tiendra à Vancouver les 14 et 15 mars
prochains. Les thèmes sont les mortalités en mer et
la recherche d'une collaboration entre les chercheurs, les organisations,
les états. www.npafc.org/events
Source: SeaRiver 43
08.02.02: Outcry as largest
Europe dam opens
February 8, 2002 Posted: 1339 GMT
LISBON, Portugal (CNN) -- Environmental activists have been protesting
at the opening of a giant dam project in Portugal that will create
Europe's largest artificial lake.
The ceremony on Friday marking the closing of the 96-metre-high floodgates
to the hyrdoelectric dam was presided over by Portugal's outgoing
Prime Minister Antonio Guterres near the town of Alqueva, 150 kilometres
(90 miles) southeast of Lisbon. The ?1.96 billion project will provide
enough electricity for 180,000 people.
Over the next four years, the 250 square-kilometre lake will submerge
160 rocks covered with Stone Age drawings and the village of Luz,
whose 400 inhabitants are being relocated to a new village nearby.
Cemeteries are also being moved.
Portuguese journalist Joana Latino told CNN that there was much opposition
from archaeologists and environmentalists, who she said planned to
follow the prime minister around at the opening ceremony and throw
wreaths into the Guadiana river.
More than one million trees were chopped down because decaying underwater
flora could pollute the reservoir, and the ruins of a Roman fortress
from the first century BC will be lost under the water along with
other sites from the Neolithic period.
The environmentalists say the lake, which will be about 80 kilometres
long at its furthest points, will destroy the habitats of floral species
and animals including eagles, kites some of the few remaining Iberian
lynxes. They also say it is a waste of money.
Many residents of Luz are also unhappy about their new homes in a
replica village on the banks of the new lake, Latino said. Francina
Goudino, 69, told London-based Guardian newspaper: "I will cry
when I have to leave. I love this place. My husband, my parents and
my grandparents all lived and died here. Why should I want to go?
"The new house is okay inside. It is the same size as this one
but the yard is only three square metres. What can I do with that?
They started talking about this dam when I was a girl. I never took
them seriously until now."
06.02.02: New Report Examines
Privatization's Dangers, Calls For Stricter Standards
The Pacific Institute released a new report on water
privatization today that aims to ensure water privatization deals
are fair, protect the public health, and don't harm the environment.
"The New Economy of Water: The Risks and Benefits of Globalization
and Privatization of Fresh Water" is the most comprehensive examination
of the issue of water privatization to date. The report looks at the
dangers and benefits of water privatization, offers case
studies from around the world, and sets forth principles designed
to help guide privatization deals.
The report is available on our Website at: http://pacinst.org/reports/new_economy.htm
Print copies are available for $20 from the Pacific Institute. To
order, please send check or money order to:
Pacific Institute -- New Economy, 654 13th Street,
Preservation Park, Oakland, CA 94612, USA.
05.02.02: Cree
Approve New Agreement with Quebec
NEMASKA, Quebec, Canada, February 5, 2002 (ENS) - In secret ballot
referendums held among the Cree which ended Sunday, close to 70 percent
voted to approve an Agreement in Principle establishing a new relationship
between the government of Québec and the James Bay Crees.
The Agreement in Principle, reached last October 23, will allow hydropower
and forestry development that has been blocked by disputes between
the indigenous people and the provincial government.
"This is an historic moment for the Crees," said Grand Chief
Ted Moses. "We will build our communities, find and create employment
opportunities for the Crees in the development of the territory and
we will build our Nation."
"This is an agreement to implement Québec's obligations
under section 28 of the [1975] James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement
while at the same time it preserves and increases the Cree rights
in the agreement. It is an agreement that vindicates the long Cree
campaign since 1975 to have our rights respected," Chief Moses
said.
The agreement includes cash payments to the Cree of C$24 million in
2002, C$46 million the following year, then C$70 million a year for
48 years. The Cree also get more control over their community and
economy, more power over logging and more Hydro-Quebec jobs.
"We will receive from Quebec payments in order for us to properly
carry out these responsibilities in accordance with priorities and
means which we, the Cree, deem appropriate for our own development."
said Chief Moses when the Agreement in Principle was signed last October.
In return, the Cree have promised to drop C$3.6 billion in environmental
lawsuits against the government.
The Cree also agreed to accept hydropower installations along the
Eastman River and Rupert River, subject to environmental approval.
The agreement will allow Hydro-Québec to build its planned
C$3.8-billion Eastmain and Rupert hydroelectric projects, part of
the controversial James Bay power development plan. The projects will
generate 1,200 megawatts of electricity when they are completed in
10 years.
The Cree position concerning hydropower has changed since the 1990s
when a Cree campaign managed to keep the province of Quebec from building
the Great Whale River hydro-electric project as the second phase of
its plan, first announced in 1971, to dam and divert almost every
major river running into James and Hudson Bays.
That effort by the Cree included an eight million dollar lawsuit and
an information campaign aimed at power customers in the New England.
The traditional terrority of the James Bay Cree Nation is in boreal,
subarctic Canada. It has been adversely affected by hydroelectric
mega-projects involving river diversions and river basin re-engineering
since the 1970s, according to the Cree submission to the World Commission
on Dams in November 2000.
"We have been dispossessed, displaced and environmentally, culturally,
economically and socially devastated by large hydro-development projects,
initiated and built in our traditional lands by the state owned electricity
corporations Hydro-Quebec and Manitoba Hydro respectively, against
our wishes and without our consent," the Cree said.
The governments of Canada, Quebec and Manitoba "have benefited
from over 20 years of multi-billion dollar revenues at our expense,"
the Cree said, and they have not "adequately mitigated, remediated
or compensated us as peoples for the profound and ongoing injuries
and losses we have suffered."
"Deprived of adequate lands and resources, we now endure mass
poverty and unemployment, ill health including epidemics of infectious
disease and suicide, and crises of hopelessness and despair,"
they said.
This new agreement offers hope for a new relationship between the
province of Quebec and the Cree Nation, said Chief Moses.
The agreement settles forestry disputes between Quebec and the Cree.
The Quebec forestry regime will apply in Northern Quebec, but major
adaptations will be made to this regime to ensure the protection of
the Cree traditional way of life.
A joint Cree-Quebec Forestry Board will review forestry regulations
and forestry plans for Cree territory and provide recommendations
to conciliate forestry activities with the Cree traditional uses of
the territory and the protection of the natural environment. "We
will also be closely involved in all aspects of forestry planning
and management through meaningful and results oriented consultation
processes at the community level," Chief Moses said.
No other agreement entered into between the Crees and any government
has been subjected to referendum processes involving the Cree Nation
as a whole. The whole process involved two tours of the communities
by the Cree leaders during which the people debated the issues more
than at any time in recent Cree history. At the end of this, the Cree
leadership listened to the demands of the Cree people and sought political
confirmation through referendum processes of the decision to proceed
or not with this new agreement.
"A substantial portion of the Cree People have obviously supported
and endorsed the position taken by the majority of their leaders in
favor of the new agreement," Chief Moses said Sunday.
Chief Moses and Quebec Premier Bernard Landry are to meet Thursday
for a formal signing.
Implementation of the 1975 James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement
by the government of Canada is still subject to court proceedings.
31.01.02: New Danube
Shipping Routes Ecologically and Economically Dangerous says WWF
31 January 2002 Vienna, Austria
Vienna, Austria - New shipping plans for the Danube
River are ecologically dangerous, economically unsound and must be
halted immediately according to a new report issued today by WWF,
the conservation organization. The WWF report, “Waterway Transport
on Europe’s Lifeline, the Danube”, shows that the various plans that
are being proposed for shipping and navigation along the Danube will
damage vital wetland ecosystems all along the river. Some significant
threats include even greater pressure on species such as sturgeon
and beavers, a decrease in the availability of drinking water, and
increased levels of chemicals in the river. At the same time, the
WWF report underlines that the plans take no account of current economic
trends related to transport within Europe and hence do not make economic
sense either. “The new projects are clearly the largest threat to
the last few remaining natural areas in this part of Europe," said
Philip Weller, Director of WWF's Danube Carpathian Programme. “WWF
is not against shipping, but we are against those projects which make
neither economic nor ecological sense." Ecological damage could be
averted if the plans, developed by bodies including the European Commission,
national governments bordering the Danube, and the Budapest-based
inter-governmental Danube Commission, had taken account of current
economic and technical trends. The WWF report shows that the plans
are based on outdated technical arguments and that ecologically compatible
river navigation is possible on Europe's major rivers, without the
need for massive building, dredging, or river straightening works.
At the same time, new ship-building technologies and information and
communication systems can increase the productivity of inland navigation
and ensure that it is competitive with the road transport industry.
The plans for the Danube are not only against common sense, but they
also conflict with national, international and EU nature protection
regulations, and directly contradict recent commitments in the region.
Regional commitment to protect the Danube peaked in April 2001 with
the WWF-organized Summit on Environment and Sustainable Development
in the Carpathian and Danube Region in Bucharest, Romania. There,
the UK’s Prince Philip and Presidents from nine countries in the region
adopted a joint Declaration expressing their support for rehabilitating
the Danube. “Experiences with Europe’s Rhine River prove that an intelligent
shift is possible,” says Helmut Hiess, a key contributor to the report.
“In addition, the Rhine, with far heavier water transport than the
Danube, has a minimum depth of 2.1 metres; the proposed depth for
the Danube is 3.2 metres. The numbers do not add up; in fact they
reflect the lack of logic behind these plans.
-
Download Study, Summary, Background, Maps...
(Website "ZINKE ENVIRONMENT CONSULTING for Central and Eastern
Europe, Vienna
-
more on WaterwaysProjects in Europe ( ERNs Website for living
Rivers)
-
CNN News (Warning of Danube shipping threat - January 31, 2002
Posted: 6:17 AM EST (1117 GMT)
Call on the European Commission:
The Danube shipping plans also conflict with national, international
and EU nature protection regulations, and directly contradict recent
commitments in the region. WWF therefore calls on the European Commission
to:
1. Promote further open and transparent discussion
on the content of these projects to ensure that they do take into
account current economic and technical trends, which has not been
the case so far. These should allow for the development of ecologically
compatible navigation in the Danube.
2. Re-assess the projects and take measures (including consideration
of all possible alternatives) to ensure that they do not contravene
EU environmental standards, in particular those of the Habitats and
Birds Directives and the Water Framework Directive.
3. Uphold the rules governing EU funding, in particular under the
ISPA instrument (Instrument for Structural Polices for pre-Accession,
Council Regulation EC/1267/1999). This states that "projects must
comply with EU norms and standards, be coherent with the sector policies
of the EU and environmentally sound development as defined by Articles
2 and 174" of the EU Treaty.
4. Note that the ISPA instrument can be used to fund preparatory studies
and technical assistance, which in this case could fund the technical
work required to develop ecologically compatible navigation in the
Danube. The EC should encourage the Danube Accession countries to
make use of this possibility.
" For more information: Paul Csagoly, Communications
Manager, WWF Danube Carpathian Programme Office, tel: +36 30 250 5869,
email: pc@wwf.at Lisa Hadeed: Communications Manager WWF Living Waters
Programme, tel: +41 22 364 9030, email: lhadeed@wwfint.org
31.01.02: World Wetlands
Day 2002 (2 February): "Wetlands: Water, Life, and Culture"
The suggested theme for World Wetlands Day 2002 is "Wetlands:
Water, Life, and Culture". Wetlands are a storehouse of cultural
heritage which takes many forms, from human-made physical structures
and artefacts, palaeontological records in sediments and peat, and
traditional water and land-use management practices, to places of
religious and mythological significance and the intangible 'sense
of place' felt by many for these wild and often mysterious sites and
their wildlife. Throughout its history, the work of the Ramsar Convention
on Wetlands has emphasized the importance of people in conservation
efforts: their livelihoods, their welfare, their traditions and beliefs,
their leisure as well as their work - not only their economic and
social well-being, but their "cultural heritage" as well.
Increasingly, the Parties have observed that there is much common
ground in the biodiversity and heritage management of wetlands.
Background: 2 February each year is World Wetlands Day. It marks the
date of the signing of the Convention on Wetlands on 2 February 1971,
in the Iranian city of Ramsar on the shores of the Caspian Sea. WWD
was celebrated for the first time in 1997 and made an encouraging
beginning. Subsequent World Wetlands Days have been organized around
such suggested themes as the importance of water to life and of wetlands
to the supply of water and, in 1999, on "People and Wetlands:
the Vital Link". Each year, government agencies, non-governmental
organizations, and groups of citizens at all levels of the community
have taken advantage of the opportunity to undertake actions aimed
at raising public awareness of wetland values and benefits in general
and the Ramsar Convention in particular. From 1997 to 2001, the Convention's
Web site has posted reports from more than 60 countries of WWD activities
of all sizes and shapes, from lectures and seminars, nature walks,
children's art contests, sampan races, and community clean-up days,
to radio and television interviews and letters to newspapers, to the
launch of new wetland policies, new Ramsar sites, and new programmes
at the national level.
http://www.ramsar.org/wwd2002_index.htm
31.01.02: Conference announcement:
UK : Public Participation under the EC Water Framework Directive
The recently introduced Water Framework Directive
contains provision for a far greater role for public participation
in the management of water resources at catchment scale. Article 14
of the directive calls for member states to 'encourage the active
involvement of all interested parties in the implementation of this
Directive, in particular in the production, review and updating of
the River Basin Management Plans.'
The School of Water Sciences at Cranfield University is hosting a
one-day conference on April 4th 2002 to discuss and debate a number
of issues arising from this initiative, questions to be addressed
include; What are the aims / objectives of public participation in
the context of the WFD? What form(s) should / could consultation take
? What tools and techniques are available to facilitate / manage the
process ? What experiences are there from the UK / Europe / elsewhere
which can be learned from ? The program includes speakers from the
European Commission, the Environment Agency, the World Wildlife Fund,
and the Cabinet Office. This event is organised in conjunction with
CIWEM and the IWA.
Programme
09.30 Registration and Coffee
10.00 Dr Paul Jeffrey, Cranfield University, UK
Chairman's morning introduction
10.10 Adam Harrison, World Wildlife Fund, UK
Models of participation
10.40 Richard Harris, Environmental Council, UK
Stakeholder dialogue as an alternative to consultation
11.10 Coffee
11.30 Dr. Eliot Taylor, University of East Anglia, UK
Managing public participation exercises: A community planning
Example from the Broads
12.00 Yvette de Garis, Thames Water, UK
Participation experiences in water resource development and
planning
12.30 Lunch and exhibition
13.30 Paula Orr, Environment Agency, UK
Current consultation models used by the Environment Agency and
their relevance to the Water Framework Directive
14.00 Jacqui Cuff, European Environment Bureau
Public participation in the EU wise use of floodplains project
14.30 Drennan Watson, Landwise Scotland
Comparative assessment of stakeholder engagement methods
15.00 Paul Greening, Cabinet Office, UK
Examples of innovation and good practice in public participation
15.30 Ludwig Kraemer, European Commission (Environment Directorate)
The envisaged role of public participation in the Water Framework
Directive
16.00 Afternoon Tea and Close of Meeting
Further details can be found at
http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/sims/water/stakeholders.htm Members
of the UK Rivers Network are being offered a discount of ?15 on registration
and you can book your place for this event by contacting;
Short Course Office: Cranfield University Cranfield MK43 0AL Tel:
+44 (0)1234 754176 Fax: +44 (0)1234 751206 E-mail: shortcourse@cranfield.ac.uk
30.01.02: Impact of Belize
dam in dispute
What is the point of gauging the environmental impact
of a dam before it is built? Not a lot, if a row over a proposed hydroelectric
scheme in Belize is anything to go by.
Location of proposed dam and potential flood area
A group of leading biologists reckon the Chalillo dam would destroy
an area of rainforest containing rare and threatened species. But
the companies that commissioned the biologists' report are not following
its recommendation that the dam should not be built, one of the report's
authors told New Scientist.
The dispute has highlighted growing concerns over the value placed
on "environmental impact assessments". Last year, a report
by the World Commission on Dams warned that recommendations about
whether a dam should go ahead are no longer welcomed - contrary to
the intention when EIAs were introduced in the 1970s.
Instead, EIAs have evolved into devices "to render dams acceptable
when the decision to proceed has already been taken" by recommending
ways to lessen their impact, says the commission.
"Ignored or rubbished"
Scientists from the Natural History Museum in London conducted an
EIA of the proposed dam project, which is scheduled to start construction
in January in the former British colony of Belize in Central America.
In their official report, the researchers say that the Chalillo dam
would do irreparable harm to one of the most biologically rich and
diverse regions left in Central America, and they "highly recommend"
that the scheme be dropped.
"What is the point of scientists undertaking environmental assessments
if they are ignored or rubbished rather than being taken into proper
consideration?" asks Alastair Rogers, a co-author of the report.
The proposed 35-metre dam is to be built on a remote stretch of Belize's
Macal River and produce electricity for the surrounding provinces.
It would flood 11 square kilometres of the river's pristine forested
flood plain in remote mountains near the border with Guatemala.
The area contains rare species such as jaguar, Baird's tapir, Morelet's
crocodile, ocelot, howler monkey and a population of 60 to 100 scarlet
macaws--a subspecies of parrot of which fewer than a thousand remain
worldwide. The report says the dam would "cause a rapid reduction
and probable eventual extirpation" of the birds.
Draft report
The Canadian arm of the British engineering firm AMEC, a consultant
on the construction of the $30 million project, commissioned the Natural
History Museum to analyse the impact of the dam on wildlife as part
of a wider EIA. The company has shunted its 105-page report into an
appendix to the five-volume assessment, prefaced with a warning saying
that it is "a draft report, and readers should formulate their
conclusions accordingly".
But Rogers told New Scientist: "There are many scientists who
are deeply concerned about this project and believe the facts speak
for themselves." Rogers, a colonel in the British Royal Marine
Reserve, has led five scientific expeditions to the dam region.
AMEC denies trying to bury the report. Fortis, the Canadian company
that runs Belize's electricity industry and will own the dam, says
that the report contains significant inaccuracies, including false
claims that several species are endangered. The scientists deny this.
Fortis chief executive Stanley Marshall also recently claimed on Canadian
radio that "from the time this report went to Britain it has
been continuously leaked to environment groups and influenced by them".
But Rogers denies that activists have influenced the report. In a
letter to the Belize government in September he said: "It is
absolutely clear that constructing a dam at Chalillo would cause major,
irreversible negative environmental impacts and destroy many important
archaeological sites."
New Scientist 19:00 19 December 01 Fred Pearce
30.01.02: March 10 : Important
demonstration for a new water culture and against the Spanish National
Hydrological Plan in Barcelona
A big number of spanish, NGOs, academics, political
parties and unions (supportetd by ERN and others) are calling for
to demonstrate for a new waterculture and against the Spanish National
Hydrological Plan in Barcelona (Sunday, 10 march).
Some national Events and conferences will be helt on March 7,8,9 !
ERN will informe you weekly on that importante event and will organize
and coordinate transports to Bacelona.
Informations on the Spanish National
Hydrological Plan on ERNs server:
24.01.02:
Spanish Presidency's contradictory environmental plans !
Pressrelease by The Greens/European Free Alliance
in the European Parliament
Brussels, 22 January, 2002
Reaction to the Spanish Environment Minister's address to the European
Parliament this afternoon : Spanish Presidency's contradictory environmental
plans ! Following a meeting of the European Parliament's Environment
Committee with the Council President in Office this afternoon, Jaume
Matas i Palou (The Spanish Environment Minister), where various questions
on the Spanish National Hydrological Plan were posed by Euro-MPs,
Alex de Roo MEP (Green Netherlands) Vice-President of the Environment
Committee said:
"While I welcome Mr. Matas' suggestion that the EU should set
higher standards for the Natura 2000 Directive in terms of implementation
and financing to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the adoption of
the Habitat Directive, I find it astonishing that the Spanish Government
representative can at the same time ask for EU money for financing
the ecologically insane National Hydrological Plan.
"He clearly does not see the contradiction of asking for more
EU money to be invested in the very Natura 2000 areas that he and
his government wish to destroy. There are more than two hundred proposed
Natura 2000 sites in Spain, of which many would be affected should
the construction of heavy infrastructures for the huge transfers of
water be permitted."
"It is also hypocritical that he claims that the Hydrological
Plan is an internal matter for Spain only when his government is asking
for a third of its financing to come from the EU. When confronted
by difficult questions, being in possession of two different hats
seems to suit the Spanish presidency." "I sincerely hope
that Mr Matas is right when he said that the environment was a priority
for the Spanish Presidency. If that is the case, it is rather bizarre
that President Aznar forgot to mention that priority during his presentation
of the presidency's priorities in the European Parliament last week."
"Finally, Mr Matas stated that the presidency is committed to
add new indicators, such as health and biodiversity, as criteria for
assessing the success of the EU's sustainable development strategy.
But saying alone is not enough. They must also act and make these
indicators compulsory instruments to be used during the policy making
process."
Eluned Haf Press Office Green/ EFA group in the European Parliament
ehaf@europarl.eu.int Tel: Brussels: +32 2 284 1665 Strasbourg: +33
388 17 2936 Fax: Brussels: +32 2 284 4944 Strasbourg: +33 388 24 1196
,GSM: 0497 480 255
Gianluca Solera, Adviser on Urban and Regional Affairs and Transport
The Green/EFA Group, European Parliament Rue Wiertz, 1047 Brussels
+32.2.284 22 02 ph +32.2.230 78 37 fx gsolera@europarl.eu.int
More information on the Spanish
Hydrological Plan
24.01.02: Spain's environment
ministry published an environmental assessment of the country's controversial
national hydrological plan
(Environment Daily 1142, 23/01/02)
Spain's environment ministry today published an environmental assessment
of the country's controversial national hydrological plan (NHP) in
a bid to defuse strong national and international criticism.
The ministry described the assessment as a "demonstration of
willingness to guarantee the coherence and environmental friendliness
of the NHP". The assessment confirmed the plan's compatibility
with EU directives on natural habitats, wild birds and water management,
it claimed.
The assessment's main conclusion is that "the shortage of water
on Spain's Mediterranean coast, with the severe environmental and
socio-economic impact which that entails, can only be met by the transfer
of water resources from other parts of Spain". Planned water
transfer projects have been at the heart of environmental dispute
over the NHP.
It was prepared in line with the EU's new strategic environmental
assessment (SEA) directive, which entered into force last year, but
which member states are not obliged to implement until 2004 .
The law is aimed at programmes and plans rather than individual projects,
for which environmental impact assessment rules already exist.
The review is unlikely to satisfy environmentalists, who have been
calling for a detailed assessment under article six of the 1992 habitats
directive, in particular to evaluate likely impacts on the approximately
130 sites nominated to join the EU's Natura 2000 protected areas network.
NGO Ecologists in Action described it as a "propaganda document,"
produced by the government to evade its responsibilities.
Senior EU figures have also been urging Spain to assess the NHP under
the habitats directive. However, a source in the European Commission
told Environment Daily today that he "could not rule out the
possibility that this kind of assessment would be acceptable to satisfy
the requirements of the habitats directive".
Follow-up: Spanish environment ministry
http://www.mma.es/, tel: +34 91 597 6000; Ecologists in Action
http://www.ecologistasenaccion.org/,
tel: +34 91 531 2739.
More information on the Spanish Hydrological
Plan
24.01.02: Spain
notifies EU of controversial water plan
BRUSSELS - Spain has presented details of a controversial
plan to redirect water from its humid north to arid south to the European
Commission, Environment Minister Jaume Matas said this week.
The $21 billion project to channel water from the
river Ebro to irrigate arid regions in the southeast has outraged
environmentalists, who say it will destabilise the ecology and break
European water management and nature laws.
Matas said he was confident the project complied with EU rules. Spain
had volunteered to give the European Commission detailed plans but
did not expect any interference from Brussels as the issue was purely
a matter for Spain, he added.
"We are talking about a matter which is well
within the competence of member states and we don't really see why
it would need to be regulated by the Commission," Matas told
a news briefing at the European Parliament.
Environmentalist are campaigning to ensure the plan
gets no funding from EU coffers.
Reuters News Service
More information on the Spanish
Hydrological Plan
Back to the Homepage
These pages and their content are © Copyright
of European Rivers Network.
For more information, remarks or propositions, send
us a message !.