Vizhinjam: States choice ideal, feels panel

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The Expert Appraisal Committee of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has swallowed most of its earlier stipulations wholesale while clearing the terms of reference (ToR) for conducting Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Vizhinjam seaport project. At its latest meeting on June 23, when the ToR application was approved, the Committee accepted Kerala’s contention that the location it selected was the ideal one. This was after the committee had vehemently argued that the State should reconsider alternative sites at three earlier meetings. In a July 1 letter, the MoEF had informed the State that the ToR were cleared.  Kerala Government had informed the committee that the two alternative sites were ruled out as one was marshy and the other, thickly populated. ‘’As per the details (submitted by Kerala), the northern side of Vizhinjam has higherosion, hence the three sites were examined on the southern side. The weightage is given on various parameters, that is, location, depth, design requirements, shoreline change, environment impact, etc. Site ‘B’ has thick population, the site ‘C’ has low-lying marsh areas and more filling required and also a river meets the sea, hence it will lead to shifting of the river,’’ the committee cited Kerala’s reasons for favouring the present choice of port site. During his visit to Vizhinjam last month, Union Minister for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh reportedly expressed doubts about Kerala’s choice, but then had conceded the State’s demand and announced that the port would come up where Kerala wished it to. Not surprisingly, the committee too has toed the Minister’s line. However, it has reiterated that Kerala study the impact of the project on fisheries, particularly the implications of having a huge breakwater near the bustling fisheries harbour. In fact, the committee has suggested shifting the location of the breakwater further south. ‘’The gap between the fisheries harbour and the proposed breakwater is less and the wave movement may cause turbulence in the entrance of the fisheries harbour. The likely impacts and mitigation measures shall be examined and submitted. The mitigation may include the shifting of the breakwater further on the southern side,’’ the committee noted during the June 23 meeting. The Committee also repeated its call for a public hearing on the environmental issues.