Sagarmala project: Do we really need more ports?

Standing waist-deep in the waters of the Arabian Sea, Parvathi Tandel (46) offers milk to the Sea God. Parvathi and others from the fishing community of Kasarkod Tonka in Honnavar taluk of Uttara Kannada district have gathered on World Ocean Day to pray for their safety and seek a good harvest of fish.

However, she is well aware that the imminent threat to her village is not from the sea, but from 'development' projects. People of her community have been receiving police summonses, and worse, are being caned for protesting against a port coming up in the region. The port, initially proposed under the Union government’s Sagarmala project, is now being developed under private ownership. However, rail connectivity to the private port will be provided by the government under the Sagarmala project.

Experts fear that several projects proposed under the Sagarmala project would prove detrimental to locals and the environment.

Also Read: Sagarmala project well underway in Gujarat

Mooted first by the Union government in 2003, the project was launched in 2015. In 2018, the Union government planned to take up 1,537 projects by investing Rs 6.5 lakh crore across 7,500 km of the country’s coastline. But later, the numbers were revised to 802 projects worth Rs 5.53 lakh crore.

Consequently, the Karnataka government, under its Minor Ports Development Policy of 2014, sent a proposal to the Union government, stating that the 300-km-long coastline of the state had the potential to house 12 minor ports.

The Union government identified 12 locations---Karwar, Belekeri, Tadadi, Pavinakurve, Honnavar, Manki, Bhatkal (Uttara Kannada district), Kundapur, Hangarkatta, Malpe (Udupi district), Padubidri and Old Mangalore port (in Dakshina Kannada district)---either to set up new minor ports or renovate existing ports under government ownership, private-public partnership, or private ownership.

A total of 81 projects, including those relating to port development and modernisation, inland water transport, and tourism and fisheries were proposed for Karnataka under the Sagarmala project at an estimated cost of Rs 7,799 crore.

The ambitious project, however, was not well-received. A majority of these projects have faced opposition from residents who fear a loss of livelihood. Complications have arisen with regard to land acquisition and legal and environmental clearance.

According to V N Nayak, retired professor of marine biology, there is no logic behind the setting up of 12 ports, with each port being just 40 km from the next.

“Why do we need so many ports in such ecologically sensitive areas, given the current exports and imports and future estimations? There is no point in developing more ports when the current port at Karwar itself is underutilised,” reasons Nayak.

He asserts that the ports at Karwar and Mangaluru if maintained properly, can cater to our import and export needs for the next 100 years.

A look into the data on cargo handling at Karwar port shows its underutilisation over the years.

Officials at the Directorate of Ports and Inland Water Transport, Karwar, say that since 1985, the Karwar port which currently has a capacity to handle 3 million tonnes of cargo annually, has seldom reached 50 per cent of its handling capacity.

“Coal, liquid fuel and iron ore form the bulk of import and export goods from these ports and their stocks are limited. India is also a signatory to the Paris Accord that makes us duty-bound to reduce import and use of coal for power generation,” says Dr Nayak. He was part of an independent group that studied the ecological feasibility of projects under the Sagarmala Programme.

Ecological concerns

The carbon footprints that the ports leave behind are huge. Roads, railway lines and structures created to connect the ports to the hinterlands will ultimately take a toll on the Western Ghats.

“Eroding beaches like Karwar, Honnavar and other such locations are not fit for the construction of ports,” says Vikas Tandel, whose public interest litigation at the Supreme Court and case at the National Green Tribunal have resulted in a stay on the expansion of the Karwar port.

A 2019 report by the National Centre for Coastal Research says the Karwar beach is a Critically Vulnerable Coastal Area (CVCA). Another report by the Coastal Regulatory Zone categorically classifies the Karwar and Honnavar beaches as ecologically sensitive areas where ‘red category’ works like ports and harbours should not be taken up.

People here have seen how ports result in coastal ecology degradation. Sunil Ramachandra Kudalkar, a fisher at Belekeri, recounts how, when iron ore was being transported from the Belekeri port, red soil mixed with sea water and destroyed the breeding sites of blue bivalves.

When mining was at its peak, the Belekeri port would receive 3,000 tippers a day, dumping iron ore in the area. But after illegalities in mining came to the fore, huge piles of seized iron ore remain here.

Nowhere to go

According to the fishing community, more than 4.5 lakh people are dependent on fisheries in the five coastal taluks of Uttara Kannada. If these ports come up, fishers will lose their livelihood as the fishing areas will become restricted. This might eventually lead to their displacement.

“We will resist it if the government goes ahead with the Tadadi port project, just as we protested against the thermal power plant project,” says Vital Kantri Bethalkar, a fisher from Tadadi. He adds that the administration is being opaque about the projects being implemented under the Sagarmala project, causing anxiety among the locals.

Raju Tandel, chairman of Uttara Kannada Fishermen Federation, says the fishing community of Uttara Kannada has learnt a lesson after giving away nearly 11,500 acres of their beaches and fishing grounds to Sea Bird, a Naval base near Karwar.

“Even today, 80 per cent of the land acquired by the Navy remains unutilised. Stating security concerns, Navy officials do not allow local fishers to even fish in non-restricted zones. We may take pride in our contribution to our nation. But at the end of the day, we are left with no fishing grounds,” he says.

At the time of acquisition, the administration had assured jobs for locals at Sea Bird. However, not even 1 per cent of those displaced were given jobs at the naval base, he says.

“We fear that the same will happen at the proposed port sites too,” he told DH.

Similar fears were expressed by fishers at Belekeri, Kasarkod Tonka and Tadadi.

Engine of growth

Captain C Swamy, in-charge director of Karnataka Ports and Inland Water Transport Department, questions the logic behind environmentalists opposing only minor commercial ports and not fishing harbours.

“These harbours too have unscientifically constructed breakwaters in ecologically sensitive beaches. Then why oppose only ports and miss out on private investments that these
ports can attract?” he asks.

According to Swamy, currently, the department is planning to develop Keni port near Belekeri and Pavinakurve Port near Honnavar.

When asked about the ecological impact, he asked which port in India is not located in an ecologically sensitive area.

“Gujarat has 50 such minor ports in ecologically sensitive areas. But they are helping the state grow. Minor ports in Karnataka can similarly help in the establishment of industries and steer economic growth,” he says.

The department would follow all guidelines laid down by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board while handling cargo and ensure minimum damage to the environment, he says.

Defending the need for more ports, Manjunath G Namadhari, junior executive engineer at the Port Sub-division in Karwar, says they would help India trade wheat, rice, food grains, minerals, palm oil and potassium sulphate.

Implementing court orders

While Uttara Kannada Deputy Commissioner Mullai Muhilan agreed that there was opposition to some projects under the Sagarmala programme, he refused to comment on the Karwar port expansion plan, saying the matter was sub judice.

Muhilan says efforts to convince local people about the importance of ports are underway. The port being developed at Honnavar is not directly linked to Sagarmala and the district administration is only implementing court orders related to the port, he told DH.

Railway lines connecting the private port will be taken up with funds allocated for the Sagarmala project.

Soon after the prayers, Parvathi joins her fellow members who are protesting against the port project.

“It is not just for us humans, but also for the survival of flora and fauna in the region. We can’t allow the destruction of the breeding sites of critically endangered olive ridley sea turtles,” she says.