I will write the letters to those people. Hope you will be able to save this place.
All the very best with all your efforts. Kishen Das 2011/3/2 Kunte, Krushnamegh <[email protected]> > > > Peter, my best wishes in your fight against the destruction of Jones > Estate. Have you considered any judicial means of halting the bulldozers? > That may be effective considering that the planned construction is in > violation of several rules and regulations. > > BTW, the species has recently been reported from Thailand and Laos: > > http://yutaka.it-n.jp/lyc4/81565001.html > > So it cannot be considered endemic any more. But the fact that it is listed > under Schedule I remains on your side. > > Krushnamegh. > > ------------------------------ > *From: *Peter Smetacek <[email protected]> > *Reply-To: *butterflyindia <[email protected]> > *Date: *Wed, 2 Mar 2011 13:01:48 -0500 > *To: *butterflyindia <[email protected]>, Indianmoths < > [email protected]> > *Subject: *[ButterflyIndia] Lister's Hairstreak > > > > > > > > Dear all, > This is to seek your help in the following matter: the Jones Estate > watershed near Nainital is forested and private land. My family has lived > here for 60 years and protected the forest throughout this period. It is > believed that this micro-watershed is vital to the continued existence of > the Bhimtal (western) and Sat-tal (eastern) lake systems. It is a unique > geographical feature in the Himalaya. > I have petitioned the Chief Minister to re-notify Jones Estate as the Green > Belt of Bhimtal. It was de-notified in a shady set of moves the day before > Uttarakhand was created. It created a furore at the time when it was > discovered that a builder intended to establish a mini-city on 100 acres of > forest land here. The State Government was embarrassed and admitted in the > Vidhan Sabha that de-notifying Jones Estate was wrong and giving permission > to build the mini-city was also wrong. However, no move was subsequently > made to re-notify it. Now, 10 years later, hoping that it is out of the > public eye, permission is again being given to builders in contravention of > several rules of the Lake Development Authority. > Where members of Butterflyindia and Indianmoths come in is in the matter of > Lister's Hairstreak, Pamela dudgeoni. This is a very rare, endemic Indian > butterfly known from four Indian records: Sikkim (type locality); Mussoorie > (specimen in the Forest Research Institute, Dehra Dun); Riuni village near > Ranikhet, Kumaon (specimen in British Museum (Natural History), London and a > single specimen I collected in October 1974 here in Jones Estate. As Avtar > Kaur's recent article in the February 2011 issue of Journal of Threatened > Taxa clarifies, Mussoorie is under severe stress as a habitat for Lycaenids; > it is more than likely that Pamela dudgeoni does not occur there anymore. > Riuni village is also not a potential habitat anymore: the specimen from > there was recorded in 1909 when it was presumably not so degraded. The > Sikkim habitat is, I think, unknown, since most of the butterflies were > brought in by trained local collectors. Therefore, this leaves Jones Estate > as the only known and most recently confirmed habitat of this butterfly. If > Jones Estate is urbanized, the possibility of the last habitat of P. > dudgeoni being destroyed cannot be ruled out. > However, Government officials regard it as "only a butterfly" and not > enough to justify halting ongoing construction work on the watershed. > May I request each and everyone who reads this to please send two > postcards: one to Dr. Ramesh Pokhriyal Nishank, Hon'ble Chief Minister of > Uttarakhand, Dehra Dun, Uttarakhand and the second to the Secretary, > Nainital Lake Special Area Development Authority, Nainital, Uttarakhand PIN > 263 136 expressing your views on the subject? Perhaps stressing the > importance of the survival of Lister's Hairstreak and our responsibility > towards endemic butterflies? Incidentally, Lister's Hairstreak (Pamela > dudgeoni) is listed on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and > therefore theoretically enjoys the same degree of protection as the tiger, > elephant and rhinoceros. > I am posting the petition to Dr. Pokhriyal below. > In addition, our MLA, Mr. K. S. Bora, wrote to the Chief Minister on > 31.12.2010 (Ref. Kha 39187) urging him to stop construction activity in > Jones Estate to conserve future drinking water resources for the burgeoning > population; the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Uttarakhand, Dr. > R.B.S. Rawat (vide letter No. Kha- 1480/16-1(1) dated 07.01.2011) forwarded > the petition to Mr. Manoj Chandran I.F.S. for study and comments. Mr. Manoj > Chandran's comments are posted here below the petition. The Government of > Uttarakhand, in compliance with the Chief Minister's letter dated 29.12.2010 > (ref. GE/32732/XXXV-2/2010(1)) has asked the Secretary, Nainital Lake > Special Area Development Authority, Nainital, vide letter No. > VIP-08/V/10-98(A)/10 dated 19 January 2011) to take necessary action > according to rules in the context of this petition and inform the > Uttarakhand Government of action taken. > Thank you, > Sincerely, > Peter Smetacek > > To, > Sarvashri Dr. Ramesh Pokhriyal "Nishank" > Hon'ble Chief Minister > Uttarakhand Government > December 18, 2010 > Dehra Dun, > Uttarakhand. > > Subject: Petition to re-notify Jones Estate (=June Estate) as a Green Belt > of Bhimtal. > > Dear Sir, > I would like to draw your esteemed attention to the following matter: > > 1. That the Bhimtal and Sattal lake systems in Nainital district, > Uttarakhand, comprising 5 perennial lakes, 3 seasonal lakes and 1 dried up > lake constitute an invaluable source of fresh water for the burgeoning > population not only of Bhimtal town but also areas downstream. In the > future, these lakes could form a dependable perennial supply of drinking > quality water for the mega-city that Haldwani and surrounding areas will be > in the next 50 years. > > 2. These two lake systems are separated by a forested watershed, formerly > the Green Belt of Bhimtal, properly called Jones Estate after Colonel B.O. > Jones, who owned it prior to 1951, but entered as June Estate in Revenue > records. > > > 3. That the area known as Kua Tal near Bhimtal used to be a lake around > 1890; it was reduced to a marsh for most of the 20th century and has > completely dried up during the past 15 years, due to destruction of Oak > forest in its catchment area on Jones Estate. Surprisingly, the drying up of > this lake has elicited no interest whatsoever from any level of Government., > except when, during the heavy rains of July 2010 and 18 September 2010, Kua > Tal filled again for the first and second times in living memory and there > was commiseration with the people whose houses were flooded as a result. > However, no one questioned how building permits were given for construction > on a lake bed. Clearly, it was God's grace that no lives were lost, but this > cannot be depended upon in the future if construction in the area continues > and the watershed functions of Jones Estate are destroyed by construction > activity. > > 4. Soon before Uttarakhand, or as it was then known, Uttaranchal, was > created, the Green Belt of Bhimtal was de-notified to enable 100 acres of > land to be developed into a township. > > > 5. There was an outcry in the press and public, whereupon on January 17, > 1991,the then Minister for Environment and Forests, Mr. Kandari, stated in > the State Assembly, Dehra Dun that permission for construction in Bhimtal's > Green Belt was wrong (Annexure 1: Amar Ujala headlines and accompanying > article for January 18, 1991, Dehra Dun edition). > > 6. He further admitted (Annexure 1) that the Public Works Department, > Forest Department and Pollution Control Board, etc had reported that > construction in Jones Estate would be extremely detrimental to Bhimtal and > Sattal lakes. The storage capacity of Sattal lakes would be adversely > affected. > > 7. Presently, permission is being obtained by interested parties for > construction not only of residential houses but also larger commercial > properties in Jones Estate and construction is underway at least 10 > different sites. > > > 8. This is not only in flagrant disregard of the abovementioned statement > by the Hon'ble Minister for Environment and Forests, Uttarakhand, based on > competent technical reports by several Governmental departments, but also in > complete disregard of the letter and spirit of the Judgement of the Hon'ble > Supreme Court of India (Judgement Number 202/95; T.N. Godavarman > Thirumulkpad Vs. Union of India and others [1997 AIR 1228, 1996 (9) Suppl. > SCR 982, 1997 (2) SCC 267, 1996 (9) SCALE269, 1997(10)JT 377]) attached > herewith as Annexure 2, wherein it is stated "The term "forest land", > occurring in Section 2 (of the Forest Conservation Act 1980), will not only > include "forest" as understood in the dictionary sense, but also any area > recorded as forest in the Government record irrespective of the ownership." > Jones Estate was recorded as a Green Belt, which presupposes it being > forested. Even today it is relatively well forested, although the forest is > being cleared at a rapid rate by plot owners who hope to obtain permission > to build houses. > > 9. Further, houses are being constructed on slopes of over 45˚ whereas, > according to the byelaws of the Lakes Development Authority, no permission > is to be given to construct buildings on slopes over 35˚. > > 10. It is evident from the above that the Byelaws of the Lakes Development > Authority are being ignored; technical reports by concerned Governmental > Departments are being ignored; a clear statement that permission to > construct buildings in Jones Estate was a mistake by the concerned Minister > in the Vidhan Sabha is being negated and, perhaps most important, the > Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India is being flouted, to the > benefit of potential residents and businessmen and the detriment of all > those who depend on water of these lakes for survival. > > 11. We have before us, for all to see, the example of one lake, Kua Tal, > drying up due to forest degradation in its catchment area on Jones Estate > during the last 10 years, i.e. after Uttarakhand came into existence. The > possibility of Bhimtal and Sattal lakes becoming seasonal if their catchment > areas are tampered with cannot be ignored. Reports by the various Government > departments mentioned above imply this in stating that the urbanization of > Jones Estate watershed will have negative consequences for Bhimtal and > Sattal lakes. > > 12. In addition to the above, 49 species of wildlife protected under the > Schedules of the Wildlife Protection Act 1972 (16 on Schedule 1; the > remainder on Schedule 2) have been recorded in Jones Estate (Smetacek, in > press. Butterflies (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera Grypocera) and other protected > fauna of Jones Estate, a dying watershed in the Kumaon Himalaya, > Uttarakhand, India.). Urbanization of this watershed will undoubtedly result > in destruction of their habitat and, consequently, these species. Among > them, the rare butterfly, Lister's Hairstreak (Pamela dudgeoni: Schedule 1) > has only been recorded from Jones Estate in the post-Independence period. > Destruction of this habitat will very likely result in the global extinction > of this butterfly. > > 13. It is therefore in public interest; ecological interest; interest of > the rule of law and national interest that the remaining perennial lakes of > the Bhimtal and Sattal lake systems be safeguarded, not only for the use of > the present generation, but all the unborn generations that will depend more > and more on these stable sources of drinking water in the years and > centuries to come. > > 14. In order to safeguard these lakes, it is necessary to re-notify the > Jones Estate watershed as a Green Belt of Bhimtal and ban all construction > and development activities on the watershed, as had been done prior to 2000. > > 15. While this is being undertaken, it would be essential to halt all > ongoing development and construction activities on the Jones Estate > watershed with immediate effect, so that further damage is not done. > > 16. Therefore, I request you to urge the Lakes Development Authority to > suspend all permissions issued by it and review the basis on which the > permissions were issued, in light of their own bye-laws, technical reports > mentioned by Mr. Kandari, Hon'ble Minister of Environment and Forests in the > State Assembly on January 17, 1991 and the abovementioned Judgement of the > Supreme Court of India. > > Thanking you for your kind consideration on behalf of the present and > future residents of Bhimtal and surrounding areas, > Yours sincerely, > > > Peter Smetacek > Butterfly Research Centre > Jones Estate, Bhimtal > 263 136 > Uttarakhand > e-mail: [email protected] > Encl.: Annexure 1: 2 pp. Amar Ujala 18.Jan.2001 > Annexure 2: 17 pp. Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgement > Annexure 3: 2 pp. Forest (Conservation) Act 1980. > > cc.: > 1. Chairman, Lakes Development Authority, Nainital. > 2. Hon'ble Chief Justice, High Court of Uttarakhand, Nainital > 3. Mr. K.C. Singh Baba, Hon'ble MP, Nainital. > 4. Mr. K. S. Bora, Hon'ble MLA, Nainital. > 5. Dr. N.S. Jantwal, President, UKD. > 6. P.C.C.F., Dehra Dun. > 7. Chief Conservator of Forests (Environment), Dehra Dun. > 8. Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Nainital. > 9. D.F.O., Nainital. > 10. Chairman, Bhimtal Town Area Committee. > 11. Amar Ujala, Haldwani. > 12. Dainik Jagaran, Haldwani. > 13. Greenpeace, New Delhi. > 14. Various national and international e-forums and public forums via the > "Bhimtal Bachao" Andolan. > > > > > > Comments > on the > Petition to re-notify Jones' Estate as a Green Belt of Bhimtal > > This petition has been submitted to the Hon'ble Chief Minister of > Uttarakhand by Mr.Peter Smetacek, resident of Jones'Estate, Bhimtal to > re-notify the Jones'Estate area which forms a watershed between the lakes of > Bhimtal and Sattal and other lesser lakes in the surrounding and to ban and > suspend all construction activities in this area and to review the basis on > which the permissions for constructions were granted by the Lakes > Development Authority. > I visited the watershed several times and also went through many of the > available documents and records pertaining to this area and have come to the > following conclusions. > All the points put up by the petitioner on why this area has to continue to > be protected as a green belt of Bhimtal are valid and appreciated and are > also based on scientific studies conducted in the watershed by the > petitioner himself and also by other researchers in the area. The major part > of the watershed is the June estate Van Panchayat, constituted in 8222nalis > within khet no.321 of the Jones'Estate revenue village. This Van Panchayat > was constituted after so much of land was acquired by the govt. during the > land ceiling proceedings of one of the erstwhile partners of the > Jones'estate. A patch of forest area also within 321 has also come under the > land ceiling of another partner of the estate, but has not been constituted > into a Van Panchayat. The remaining area in the watershed belongs to > different landowners who acquired their lands from time to time. According > to the Bandobast land records, khet nos. 48, 67,183, > 280,290,321,324,326,338,360,361,363,375,390,392,395,404 and 415 have been > recorded as "forest". The total area recorded as forest is around 250ha > (including the VanPanchayat area). Apart from this, there is another portion > of land called the Sattal Estate on the north western side adjoning the > Jones'estate, which is a completely forest area with a church and some > residences inside. However, there is no land record available for most of > this piece of forest land. The area adjoining Jones'estate on the south > western portion is a Reserved Forest area. Several land holdings, other than > those mentioned as 'forest'above have also in the process of time have taken > the shape of forests dominated by oak trees. The whole area originally had > only 14 bunglows, however, several other residences were built from time to > time till date. The old lake of Kua tal also dried up due to siltation and > drying up of springs due to anthropogenic activities in the forest and > agricultural areas above. > A forest working plan was made for the Jones'estate forests from 1954-64, > by the then DFO, Nainital. The area is rich in a variety of flora and fauna > and is often reported as a heaven for birdwatchers and other naturalists. > However, due to anthropogenic pressures, most of the forest area is now > becoming degraded due to lopping, felling and is also being invaded by > Lantana and Ageratina. Huge oak trees in the residential areas have also > been cut lately for giving way for construction activities. > Any construction activity within 100m of the high waterlevel of Bhimtal is > also prohibited. > Considering all these factors, the watershed is predominantly a forest > area, with patches of buildup area, especially towards the lake and towards > Kua tal area. The build up area not only includes residences of inhabitants > living there for more than two generations, but also hotels and resorts > which has recently sprouted up. Allowing large scale constructions in the > narrow strip of land between the forests above and the lake below would be > detrimental both to the lake as well as the forests. Many of these > constructions also fall within 100m of the high water level of the lake. > A Public Interest Litigation 944 of 2001 has been filed in the Hon'ble High > Court of Uttarakhand, by Fredrick Smetacek (Jr.) S/o Late Fredrick Smetacek > (Sr.), Chief Co-ordinator, Society of Appeal for Vanishing Environments > (S.A.V.E.) Bhimtal Nainital versus Collector, Nainital and others for the > protection and conservation of the hills and lands adjoining to the lakes of > Bhimtal, Sat-tal and Naukuchiatal in the District of Nainital. This PIL also > contains details about the watershed in question and reasons why it should > be conserved. A copy of the PIL is also annexed herewith. > Since most of the watershed is either a recorded forest area or an area > which as per dictionary definitions is in the shape of a forest, all > construction activities whether illegal or permitted by the Lake development > Authority are clear cut violations of the Forest Conservation Act 1980 and > also violation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order dated 12/12/1996 in Writ > Petition 202/95 T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. Union of India., which the > petitioner also has annexed in his petition. > This watershed is highly vulnerable to the impacts of growing urbanization > and also associated climate change and any shortfall in conserving this > watershed can have severe impacts in the near future. > During my short tenure as DFO, Nainital, I had objected to all construction > activities in the watershed and also issued a letter to the Secretary, Lake > Development Authority and to the District Collector stating that no 'No > Objection Certificates' would be provided for any construction activity in > the Jones'estate as it is a disputed area. The whole of Bhimtal, in my > opinion has also exceeded its carrying capacity and no more constructions be > allowed in the area. However, people who have been living here for more than > two generations may be allowed to repair their existing houses or make minor > additions to their residences. > The whole of Sattal Estate area for which land records are not available > should be constituted into a Reserved Forest. All private forest areas > should be acquired and constituted and added to the June Estate Van > Panchayat. The rest of the residential areas should also be declared a green > belt where further construction activities may not be allowed. All major > construction activities in violation of the Forest Conservation Act, > Environment Protection Act and in violation of the bye-laws in force, should > be dismantled at the cost of the violators. A complaint may be lodged under > the FCAct against the Lake Development Authority in case they have given > permission for construction of buildings in the forest areas, either > recorded or as per dictionary meaning. > A road, called the Lingam road has also been constructed in the forest > area, which is also a violation of the FCAct. This road should be closed and > planted up with oak trees and fenced. > Considering all these facts, the whole watershed between the Bhimtal and > Sattal lakes and also the adjoining NalDamayanti tal area as per the > boundary given by the petitioner is a fit case to be declared as a green > belt of Bhimtal. > > Regards... > Manoj Chandran IFS > Deputy Conservator of Forests > Working Plan > Pithoragarh Forest Division. > Enclosures: > 1. Petition in original > 2. A copy of the PIL mentioned above > > > > < > http://sigads.rediff.com/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/www.rediffmail.com/signatureline.htm@Middle?> > > > > > > > -- Enjoy
