by Malik Fernando
President, Wildlife and Nature Protection Society in SL
The Protected Areas Management and Wildlife Conservation Project (PAMWCP) seems to be proceeding serenely steered on a non-veering course by the ADB. There has been a spate of news reports following a recent press conference given by Mr. John Cooney, the resident representative of the ADB, Mr. Peter Kuperus of the Netherlands embassy, the Project Director Mr. Jayantha Jayewardene and the DWLC Director Mr. Dayananda Kariyawasam. In addition, there has also been a television programme on this project as part of a business programme, where one of the principle participants was Mr. John Cooney, Country Representative for the ADB.

Mr. Cooney is quoted as stating that ‘wildlife is a valuable source of income’, and that ‘Sri Lanka’s natural resources can be exploited’. Surely, resources have other values as well! Much emphasis has been placed on eco-tourism. In addition, criticisms were made of the DWLC, the Department they are allegedly in partnership with, and the vast pool of expertise and knowledge on conservation available in Sri Lanka contemptuously dismissed.

It is unfortunate that these remarks are being made by the donors. Taken together with the fact that the initiative for this propaganda campaign is theirs, it appears to confirm that this project is indeed an ADB one, an idea downplayed by its representatives in the past, rather than an ADB-funded government project. Our own Minister in charge of the subject continues to maintain a deafening silence on the subject, despite much concern being expressed by NGOs and individuals regarding certain aspects of the project. The DWLC appears to be just tagging along, an obvious encumbrance in the great scheme of ADB things.

The President, when she became the Minister in charge of the subject, appointed a Presidential Task Force to report on the proposals.

We understand that the group dealing with wildlife development submitted their report expressing reservations regarding certain aspects of the project and recommending review and re-negotiation of the whole project. The Wildlife and Nature Protection Society of Sri Lanka made its own observations on the PAMWCP in a report to the President dated June 20, 2001. The WNPS, while voicing concern over some matters made the following statement: ‘ The WNPS urges the Government of Sri Lanka to re-negotiate these proposals with the donor agencies, this time with a proper, transparent process of consultation controlled by government and not by the donor agencies.’

We are very disappointed at the attitude of the authorities, as there does not appear to have been any attempt to address any of the issues raised in those reports. Or if they have been considered, we have been kept in the dark, once again. Is it so difficult to dialogue with concerned NGOs who are only trying to see that what is best for the country is obtained? Why, for instance, has the Fauna and Flora Protection Advisory Committee not been convened for a very long time? This would be an ideal vehicle for discussing the government’s and the department’s plans with concerned citizens.

We would like to ask a few questions:

Has Cabinet approved the PAMWCP and if so, when?

Has an environmental impact assessment been performed and if so, by whom?

What is the position of the DWLC and where does it fit into this picture? Especially as the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance is administered by the DWLC.

It is our opinion that the DWLC should be leading this programme and not the donor agencies; and that the emphasis should be on wildlife conservation, not exploitation. Finally, can we please have a response from the Ministry (or Deputy Ministry?) under which the DWLC functions to the questions posed above?