Sunday, September 15, 2013

Indian agriculture scientists watch helplessly while the government is waiting for the Supreme Court's last word on GM crop issues

Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Sep 13, 2013, 12.20AM IST 

NEW DELHI: Do you think only 'Monsanto' (or any multi-national seed company) has the capacity to develop transgenic crops? The answer is a clear 'no'. Indian scientists, working with public sector research institutions and universities, too have developed many genetically engineered varieties which, in fact, could not move beyond lab or 'restricted' trials.

The list accessed by the TOI shows that Indian scientists have over the years developed more than 200 genetically modified (GM) varieties of as many as 15 crops including cotton, brinjal, castor, groundnut, mustard, papaya, potato, rice, rubber, sugarcane, wheat and tomato.

These varieties, developed by scientists in different Indian universities and research institutions, have all the traits — resistance to insect, fungal, drought and virus — which may bring them in the league of Bt cotton by increasing productivity and export earnings.

Indigenous transgenic varieties include a high salt-tolerant rice which can grow in salty water near coast. This variety is developed using genes of mangrove. Similarly, Indian scientists have developed a tomato variety having shelf life of over 50 days. The farmers will, however, reap the benefit of these findings only when government allows the scientists to go for extensive field trials and eventually for commercial production.

Bt cotton is the only genetically modified crop whose commercial production is allowed in India. Fate of others is caught in a pending petition filed in Supreme Court by anti-GM crops activists who have sought a complete ban on genetically modified technology.

Activists say transgenic crops will not only affect human health but it will also have a negative impact on biodiversity in the long run.

Indian scientists, involved in developing genetically modified varieties of many crops, dismissed such apprehensions at a number of occasions, They, however, found themselves on the same page with at least a section within the anti-GM crop activists who believe that a green signal to commercial production of such crops will affect the Indian farmers due to monopolistic control of seed business by multi-national companies (MNCs).

"The solution to this problem is to encourage competition among the GM seed companies and even more importantly to have mission-mode programmes for the development of genetically modified seeds in the public sector", said N K Singh, professor at National Research Centre on Plant Biotechnology of the IARI, while referring to the list of varieties developed by Indian scientists.

He said, "The Seed Act and the Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices Act should be used effectively to ensure competition and control of seed prices in addition to the bio-safety".

It is true that the MNCs are far ahead in the development of GM crop varieties due to heavy investment and focused attempts by the companies. But, Indian research data show that the public sector transgenic crops can compete if allowed to grow.

Expressing his confidence over what the Indian scientists have developed over the years, Asis Datta, former vice-chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University, said, "GM crop is going to be an essential part of our life today or tomorrow. If we don't realize it now, it will only push the country back. It will be difficult to recover later due to intense global competition".

Datta, founder director of the National Institute of Plant Genome Research, rued that the hard work of Indian scientists has not paid any dividends to the country's farmers as their findings could not move beyond the field assessment stage.

"You won't know the exact impact of a particular variety of GM crop unless you are allowed scientific trials," he said............................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=Q0FQLzIwMTMvMDkvMTMjQXIwMTEwMQ==&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom 

Grow with Green: CAG findings will certainly act as a deterrence for those who ignore vital issue of afforestation; Corporate Houses too have responsibility to take care of the 'Green' issues

http://t.co/olIwd7a2X9

Environment ministry draws CAG fire for sops to Reliance Power
Vishwa Mohan & Pradeep Thakur,TNN | Sep 7, 2013, 03.43AM IST 

CAG pointed out that environment ministry did not exercise due diligence in ensuring compliance with conditions of the Forest Act while giving relief to Reliance Power
NEW DELHI: The CAG has pulled up the Union environment ministry for extending undue favour to Reliance Power-owned Sasan Power Limited (SPL) in Madhya Pradesh and pointed to a string of separate cases where there is evidence of a nexus between corporate houses and officials in other states, including Uttar Pradesh, Goa, Karnataka and Jharkhand.

In its report — tabled in Parliament on Friday — the CAG noted that the ministry of environment and forest (MoEF) had exempted Reliance Power Limited (RPL) in 2009 from providing non-forest land to the tune of 1,384.96 hectares.

RPL had to provide non-forest land to the government for compensatory afforestation in lieu of the forest land it was supposed to use for its Sasan Ultra Mega Power Project (UMPP) for setting up power plant and coal mining project.

Under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, whenever forest land is to be diverted for non-forestry purpose, user agencies have to provide equivalent non-forest land for carrying out compensatory afforestation.

CAG, however, pointed out that MoEF did not exercise due diligence in ensuring compliance with conditions of the Forest Act while giving relief to RPL.

SPL, a special purpose vehicle created for development of Sasan UMPP, was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Power Finance Corporation (PFC) but it was transferred to RPL in August, 2007 - much before the MoEF had given its nod.

RPL, however, denied the charge and termed the government auditor's findings as "misplaced and bereft of facts".

The company's spokesperson said, "Any increase in cost incurred on acquiring non-forest land for compensatory afforestation would have increased the cost of the project which in line with the bidding conditions has to be borne by the power procurers from various states. This would have led to higher tariff for the power generated from the Sasan UMPP, which would eventually be borne by the consumer.

"Therefore exempting Sasan from acquiring non-forest land has in no way benefited or extended any undue favour as alleged by CAG to SPL. Instead the benefit has accrued to the over 35 crore consumers across seven states who are the ultimate beneficiary of low-cost power from the Sasan UMPP."

The top federal auditor noted that the MP chief secretary had issued a certificate of non-availability of non-forest land in Sidhi district instead of a certificate of non-availability of non-forest land for the entire state.

"Based on this ineligible certificate issued by the chief secretary, the MoEF exempted Sasan Power Limited from providing non-forest land of 1384.96 hectare in case of Ultra Mega Power Project and for the coal mining project in violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980," CAG said.

It, however, noted that MoEF had subsequently insisted for compensatory afforestation over the non-forest land in latest project of the same company in nearby location in MP, which clearly illustrates that in earlier cases undue favour were extended to SPL.

CAG also pointed out that the UP government showed similar generosity when it handed over forest land to the JP Associates Limited for non-forest use like establishment of cement plant, mining and other allied activities.

The auditor claimed that the state government had in August 2007 changed the status of Reserve Forest land measuring 1,083.23 hectare in Sonbhadra district as revenue land without prior approval of MoEF in contravention of the conservation Act and handed over the land to the company.

Similarly, CAG said, MoEF and Goa government were both complicit in extending favours to Elray Minerals & Company. Despite an adverse inspection report from regional office, the ministry had in August, 2006, approved diversion of 17.84 hectare of forest land to the company with the condition of providing of non-forest land to the extent of 4.86 hectares along with other general conditions.

Later, the ministry modified its in-principle approval in August 2008 and exempted the firm from providing any non-forest land.................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JS00vMjAxMy8wOS8wNyNBcjAxMjAw&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Grow with Green: Afforestation goes for a six when government tries to push its development agenda ignoring key environmental concerns

http://t.co/mhvJCnJZQl

CAG slams govt on afforestation
Vishwa Mohan & Pradeep Thakur,TNN | Sep 7, 2013, 06.18AM IST 
NEW DELHI: Indicting government for its "dismal" record in raising green cover through compensatory afforestation in the country, comptroller and auditor general of India has come out with alarming statistics on the way project promoters in various states have been allowed to flout the norms of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.

In its report on the compensatory afforestation in India, the auditor on Friday brought to light that 114,877 hectares of forest land was diverted for non-forestry use against which 103,382 hectares of non-forest land was to be provided by user agencies between 2006 and 12. However, the project promoters were allowed to get away with providing only 28,086 hectare. To make matters worse, the compensatory afforestation fund (CAF) has remained unutilized at the expense of ramping up green cover.

Sharing utilization data of the CAF that is being managed by ad-hoc Compensatory Afforestation Funds Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA), CAG said that while the amount lying with the Authority has increased substantially, compensatory afforestation has been "dismal".

Out of an amount of Rs 2,926 crore of the CAF — released between 2009 and 2012 for compensatory afforestation activities — Rs 1,776 crore were utilized by states and Union Territories.

The percentage of under-utilization was significant in states like Meghalaya (100%), Arunachal Pradesh (91%), Bihar (77%), Tripura (68%), Chhattisgarh (67%), Andaman & Nicobar Islands (63%) and Delhi (63%).

The federal auditor also expressed its anguish over an "easy deterrence regime", pointing out the free run that corporate houses have had over forest lands in Goa, Jharkhand and other states over the years, underscoring whether one can stop their insatiable greed.

It was observed in the audit that the green ministry had invoked penal provision only in three cases between August 2009 and October 2012, and even this was limited to serving show-cause notices on errant firms..........................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JUFUvMjAxMy8wOS8wNyNBcjAxNDAy&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Onion crisis .... 1998 BJP defeat in Delhi Assembly polls reminds politicians of its potential in election year

http://t.co/pKrcHUl1gP

AND

http://t.co/6BRqYzXQuX

Reluctant private importers add to soaring onion price woes
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Sep 2, 2013, 10.04PM IST 

Only three private international traders had shown interest till the deadline of the first onion import tender expired on August 27.
NEW DELHI: Private traders' reluctance to import onion has spelt trouble for the government grappling with soaring price of the staple kitchen item. Cooperative major Nafed came out with a fresh tender on Monday since its earlier one on August 21 had failed to attract traders to import onion from Pakistan, Iran, China or Egypt.

Only three private international traders had shown interest till the deadline of the first import tender expired on August 27.

And, two importers wanted to deliver the vegetable at Panvel in Mumbai instead of Nafed's warehouse at Lawrence Road here as specified in the tender, making them ineligible to import from any of the four shortlisted countries.

Since the federation had to select at least three importers who can fulfill both cost and delivery norms, it is now forced to float another tender, where the last date of submission of application has been fixed on September 6. Nafed is hopeful that the extended deadline may help it get eligible importers who will deliver onion in Delhi from where the vegetable can be distributed to other centres.

If the government manages to find importers as per the fresh tender, the consignment will take a minimum seven-10 days to reach the Lawrence Road warehouse.

Supplies from import coupled with relatively easy flow of the produce from the domestic wholesale markets — mainly Maharashtra and Karnataka — are expected to bring down the retail price of onion by end-September and early-October. The timing holds the key since states like Delhi, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh go to assembly polls in November.

Onion prices will, however, remain under pressure till end-October, when the new crop is likely to hit the market,

Although the retail price cooled down a bit last week, it still hovers around Rs 60 per kg in the national Capital and most parts in northern and eastern India. Last month, the price spiraled to Rs 80 per kg at almost all these places.

The minimum export price, pegged at $650 per tonne, fixed by the government on August 14 had its impact in the domestic market. But it could not bail out the consumers from the crisis, forcing the poll-bound government to explore the import option.

Nafed has specified that the imported onions should be of good quality and free from fungus infestation and attack by insects and moulds.

The federation has sought phytosanitary and fumigation certificates issued by a competent authority of the exporting country, attesting that onions are fumigated with methyl bromide and are free from smut, dry rot and maggot..................................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=Q0FQLzIwMTMvMDkvMDMjQXIwMTEwMg==&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Top Indian scientists cry for logical stand on controversial GM crop issues ..... Don't ban science.... Banning science is banning progress

http://t.co/GijzOrJHsK

Indian scientists back Pawar's remarks on GM crops
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 31, 2013, 08.24PM IST 

Top scientists of the country support Sharad Pawar’s remarks on scientific field trials for transgenic crops.
NEW DELHI: Emboldened by agriculture minister Sharad Pawar's current pitch in favour of scientific field trials for transgenic crops, top agriculture scientists of the country on Saturday came together to make it forward more vigorously through their strongest ever remarks: "Ban Monsanto, but don't ban GM crops" and "don't ban science (research and trials). Banning science is banning progress".

Seeking to clear the air over the anti-GM activists' allegation that the scientific community has been pitching for genetically-engineered crops at the behest of multinational seed companies like Monsanto, the scientists from government institutions like IARI and ICAR and other research bodies argued that demand for scientific trials has nothing to do with benefiting a company A or company B, but it's for larger interest of people of the country.

Referring to instances where many states don't even allow trials of genetically-modified crops, noted genetics scientist Deepak Pental said, "It's quite an irony that the country tested pesticides, drugs and vaccines but it refrains from scientific field trials of GM crops which may turn out to be a boon for increasing agricultural productivity."

Dismissing the stand of anti-GM crop activists as a case of "fear" and "scientific ignorance", Pental - former vice-chancellor of Delhi University - said the Supreme Court-appointed Technical Expert Committee (TEC) too had taken an "ideological" stand which had nothing to do with science.

The TEC had in its report to the apex court recommended a ban on open field trials of genetically-engineered crops till a robust regulatory mechanism was put in place.

The scientists' remarks came barely four days after Pawar made his preferences for GM crops clear. Strongly articulating his ministry's stand in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday, he had cited examples of Bt Cotton saying its success showed how farmers themselves opted for this crop which last year alone earned Rs 21,000 crore from export.

"I honestly feel that the farmer of this country is wiser than me...It is not proper to say that Bt Cotton is not useful", said Pawar, adding the farmers preferred genetically-modified cotton as it gives higher yield, is more disease-resistant and provides more profit.

Pental and other scientists fully concurred with what the minister had said. Former vice-chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and founder-director of the National Institute of Plant Genome Research, Asis Datta, too emphasized that they would not have insisted for the GM crop options if there had been any scientific evidence of adverse impact of genetically-engineered crops on human health and environment,

The National Academy of Agriculture Sciences' (NAAS) president R B Singh, its secretary Anwar Alam and senior scientists of IARI - N K Singh, K V Prabhu and A K Singh - along with other scientists of this institution put forward their arguments on similar lines highlighting importance of genetic engineering to enhance India's ability to meet its comprehensive food and nutritional security through home grown foods.

Responding to activists' allegation that the scientists have, in fact, been pitching for GM crops at the behest of Monsanto, N K Singh said, "Ban Monsanto, but don't ban GM crops". His remarks came in a bid to drive home the point of fellow scientists that "any ban on research and testing of such technologies will push India at least 20 years behind and it will be difficult to recover due to intense global competition for the development on commercialization of the GM technologies".

They also said that Indian public sector institutions were capable enough to counter multinational companies, provided government allows the Indian scientists to go for field trials and strengthen infrastructure to compete with private companies.

Lending his support to the scientific community, the ICAR director general S Ayyappan assured his all out support for strengthening of the infrastructure for agronomic performance and bio-safety evaluation of GM crops including establishment of an "All India Coordinated Research Project on Transgenic Testing and Evaluation".

Former ICAR's director general R S Paroda - one of the six members of the technical expert committee on GM crops - suggested setting up such project in his separate report to the Supreme Court last month. Going against the other members of the TEC, Paroda pitched for scientific field trials of GM crops..........................................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JS00vMjAxMy8wOS8wMSNBcjAxMTAx&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Anti-GM crop groups ( Greenpeace India and Coalition For GM FreeIndia ) question Pawar's claim on Bt Cotton

http://t.co/uP6A4S7KPL


Pawar’s 'promotion' of GM crops draws activists’ flak
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 28, 2013, 08.24PM IST 

Sharad Pawar has made a strong pitch for field trials of genetically modified crops citing success story of Bt cotton.
NEW DELHI: A day after agriculture minister Sharad Pawar made a strong pitch for field trials of genetically modified (GM) crops citing the success story of Bt cotton, several anti-GM lobbyists dismissed his call for "sensible approach" to resolve food security crisis as his "mindless promotion" of GM crops.

Pawar, quoting increase in productivity of cotton and income of farmers after introduction of Bt Cotton in the country, had on Tuesday said, "I think the time has come that we have to take a sensible approach to resolve the problem of food security."

Responding to members' concern in the Lok Sabha over use of GM crops, he had emphasized that the farmers preferred genetically modified cotton for its higher yield, more disease-resistance and better profitability.

Strongly reacting to Pawar's claim, the Coalition for a GM Free India, however, said, "If that was true, what accounts for the thousands of farmers in the cotton belt committing suicides year after year in the same period."

Asking the minister "to stop his mindless promotion of GM crops", the Coalition urged MPs to question Pawar's inaccurate and biased opinions on the issue.

Sticking to its anti-GM crop stand, Greenpeace - the INGO that has been spearheading the worldwide opposition against genetically engineered crops - pointed out that farmers had to adopt Bt Cotton because of was non-availability of non-Bt cotton seeds which were deliberately made scarce, thanks to aggressive marketing strategies of multinational companies.

The anti-GM crop groups also referred to the reservations expressed by the Supreme Court-appointed technical expert committee (TEC), comprising scientists from various backgrounds, against genetically engineered crops to bolster their argument.

Greenpeace said the final report of the TEC strongly recommended that India must take a precautionary approach to GM crops. "This shows that science is divided on the issue of GM crops. But, Sharad Pawar chooses to blatantly ignore scientific evidence and deny the comprehensive and detailed report of the TEC," said the INGO.

Besides, the six-member committee has failed to make a unanimous recommendation, with one member, RS Paroda, submitting a separate report to the apex court.

While five members of the committee have recommended an indefinite ban on field trials of GM crops, Paroda — a former director general of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research — has joined issue with the majority view and pitched for field trials for collecting bio-safety data under close observation of experts appointed by the agriculture ministry.

Pawar, while pitching for field trials of GM crops, also emphasized on taking adequate precautions. He had said, "It is our considered view that Bt transgenic crop is definitely useful, but we have to take all precautions. Is there any bad effect on soil, water, environment, cattle, human beings or other crops?

"We are ready to take all precautions. After taking all these precautions, if a particular crop and particular research is useful for the nation and the farmers, I think we have to take a positive approach"............................................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=Q0FQLzIwMTMvMDgvMjkjQXIwMTMwNQ==&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Will Agriculture Ministry find support on GM crops in Health and Environment Ministries?

http://t.co/nwEwyEQiVc

Sharad Pawar bats for GM crops in House, holds up Bt cotton as success story
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 28, 2013, 05.06AM IST 

"I honestly feel that the farmer of this country is wiser than me… It is not proper to say that Bt cotton is not useful," Pawar said.
NEW DELHI: With all eyes set on the Supreme Court to resolve the controversial issue of GM food crops in India, agriculture minister Sharad Pawar on Tuesday appealed to all stakeholders, including activists and policy makers, to take a "sensible approach" so that it could solve the problem of food security in the country -- setting the stage for a renewed policy joust over ban on scientific trials of transgenic crops.

Strongly articulating his ministry's stand in the Lok Sabha over benefit of genetically engineered crops, Pawar cited the example of Bt cotton, saying its success showed how farmers themselves opted for this crop which last year earned Rs 21,000 crore from exports.

"I honestly feel that the farmer of this country is wiser than me... It is not proper to say that Bt cotton is not useful," Pawar said, adding that farmers preferred genetically modified cotton as it gave higher yield, was more disease resistant and provided more profit.

The agriculture minister shared data to substantiate his points during question hour. He pointed out that pesticide use had also dropped substantially.

Taking anti-GM crop groups head on, the minister said certain organizations based in the US were engaged in propaganda against genetically modified crops whereas their own country was growing such crops and even exporting them to India.

"They are using, they are producing and they are exporting to us. But when we think of using these varieties here, definitely there is opposition. I think the time has come that we have to take a sensible approach to resolve the problem of food security," the minister said while responding to members' concern over use of GM crops.

Pawar maintained that growing Bt cotton was "a very sensible decision", saying the income of farmers had gone up from Rs 7,000 per hectare in rain-fed areas to Rs 16,000 per hectare after introduction of Bt cotton.

"In the irrigated area, it has gone up to Rs 25,000 per hectare. Bt cotton has established all benefits and advantages to the farmers and to the nation. Farmers themselves have accepted Bt crop. That's why we have supported Bt cotton," he said.

Pawar, however, rued that many states were not allowing scientists to hold field trials for GM crops. "There are only a few states including Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and Karnataka which have allowed scientific trials. Other states are not even allowing any trial. Our scientists have developed many Bt varieties like brinjal, soyabean, corn and some other vegetables. But states have not yet taken a final view about the trials," he said.

Referring to reports of an expert panel which presented contradictory findings before the apex court, the minister said, "Supreme Court has unfortunately taken a different stand... one more report was presented to the Supreme Court... We are waiting for the decision of the apex court."

It is learnt that the SC-appointed six-member technical expert committee (TEC) on GM crops has failed to make a unanimous recommendation, with one member, R S Paroda, submitting a separate report.

While five members of the committee have recommended an indefinite ban on field trials of GM crops, Paroda -- a former director general of Indian Council of Agricultural Research -- has differed with the majority view and cited importance of field trials for collecting scientific data..........................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JUFUvMjAxMy8wOC8yOCNBcjAxMDAw&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Dividend to retired bureaucrats ... live longer and get more as pension

http://t.co/yBIm8F6rFI

Ex-babus' pension to double on turning 100
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 28, 2013, 04.28AM IST 

The change will benefit retired government officials who had been part of elite All India Services like Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS) and Indian Forest Service (IFoS).
NEW DELHI: Bringing cheer to retired bureaucrats, the government has amended post-retirement rules making them eligible to get "additional pension" once they turn 80. And, the monthly pension will double if they turn 100.

The change will benefit retired government officials who had been part of elite All India Services like Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS) and Indian Forest Service (IFoS).

Retired government servants of other 37 central services have been covered under similar pension facility for long.

Syncing pension rules for IAS, IPS and IFoS with that of retired babus of other central services, the ministry of personnel had last month brought amendments in the All Indian Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules.

The amended rules have provision of graded pensions. It has now put retired bureaucrats in distinct categories as per their ages. Under the new rules, they will get 20% more of their basis monthly pension if they turn 80.

The amount will further increase once they cross 85 years. They will get 30% additional pension between 85 and 90 years; 40% more from 90 to less than 95 years; 50% more from 95 to less than 100 years and 100% raise once they turn 100.

The amended rules say, "In case a member of the service retires in accordance with the provisions of these rules after completing qualifying service of not less than 10 years, the amount of pension shall be calculated at 50% of emoluments or average emoluments, whichever is more beneficial to him\her, subject to a minimum of Rs 3,500 per month and a maximum of Rs 45,000 per month."

Officials explained that the decision has been taken in view of recommendations of various pay commissions over the years, which had emphasized on the upgrade for additional monthly pension in view of longevity of Indians along with spurt in inflation.................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JS00vMjAxMy8wOC8yOCNBcjAxMjAw&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Shark finning draws attention of Indian Green ministry

http://t.co/liBMxxzj6r

Exotic shark fins soup industry comes under environment ministry's radar
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 23, 2013, 10.30PM IST 
NEW DELHI: Exotic shark fins soup industry will have to observe certain dos and don'ts in India under a new government policy. Union environment ministry has prohibited "the removal of shark fins on board a vessel in the sea" so that the law enforcers can monitor illegal hunting of banned species of sharks.

The policy prescribes that any possession of shark fins that are not naturally attached to the body of the shark would amount to "hunting" of a Schedule-I (protected category) species which attracts punishment under the Wild Life (Protection) Act.

"The policy calls for concerted action and implementation by the concerned state governments through appropriate legislative, enforcement and other measures", said the ministry in a statement issued on Friday.

It said, "With a view to stop the inhuman hunting of sharks and to enable the enforcement agencies to monitor the illegal hunting/poaching of the species listed in Schedule-I, the environment and forest minister Jayanthi Natarajan has approved a policy for prohibiting the removal of shark fins on board a vessel in the sea".

Sharks, Rays and Skates play an important the role in maintenance of the marine ecosystem like tigers and leopards in the forests. India is known to be home to about 40-60 species of sharks.

However, the population of some of these has declined over the years due to several reasons including over exploitation and unsustainable fishing practices. Therefore, 10 species of sharks have been listed in the Schedule- I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, in order to provide them the highest degree of protection.

"Due to high demand of shark fines in the shark fin-soup industry, it has been reported that the fins of the sharks captured in the mid sea are removed on the vessel and the de-finned sharks are thrown back in the sea to die a painful death.

"This has not only resulted in in-human killing of large number of sharks and in this process, but also has further decimated the population of listed species. This practice prevailing on board the shipping vessels has led to difficulties in enforcement of provisions of the law as it becomes difficult to identify the species of sharks from the fins alone, without the corresponding carcass, from which the fins have been detached", said the ministry.

Pro and anti-GM crop groups are testing the ground when government appears to be on poll mode

http://t.co/u6BeAnJrtX

Pro and anti-GM crop groups slug out the controversial issue in power corridors
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 23, 2013, 08.32PM IST 
NEW DELHI: Days after testing their strength on Delhi's streets, both anti and pro-GM crop groups sought to slug out the issue in the Capital's power corridors on Friday.

Though politicians gave both the groups a patient hearing, the fate of genetically engineered crops lies with the Supreme Court which is set to resume hearing on a public interest litigation on this controversial matter. The pro-GM crop group comprising representatives of the Consortium of Indian Farmers Association (CIFA) and other organizations from nine states met the agriculture minister Sharad Pawar and pitched for allowing use of biotechnology in farm sectors to increase food-grains productivity in the country.

They also resolved to meet the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh next month and mobilize support of as many parliamentarians as possible in favour of their demand so that farmers can reap the benefit of modern science in agriculture. The anti-GM crop groups including Coalition for GM Free India and Greenpeace, on the other hand, submitted signed petitions of over four lakh activists to T Subbarami Reddy - chairman of the parliamentary standing committee on science & technology and environment & forests - asking him to recommend the government to withdraw the controversial Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) Bill.

Both groups presented their views on pros and cons of use and non-use of genetically modified crops in India. The anti-GM crop groups believe that the BRAI Bill is meant to facilitate entry of genetically engineered food-grains in India through a single window clearance. They said the Bill was, in fact, an attempt to circumvent public opposition to GM crops in the country.

The supporters of GM crop, however, want this legislation to see light of the day at the earliest as they think it would provide them right to choose and freedom to farm, specifically when there is no scientific evidence of any adverse affect of such food on human health and environment.

After meeting the agriculture minister, the CIFA's secretary general P Chengal Reddy said the group having support of lakhs of farmers from across the country would like the government to put the biotechnology regulatory authority under the ministry of agriculture so that it can work for the farmers' interest in promoting sustainable farm practices.

Reddy said, "Farmers confronts with several farm productivity challenges like labour costs, insects, weeds, diseases and unpredictable weather. Biotechnology or GM crop can offer them several solutions. We need biotechnology and the right to choose. We have full faith that the Supreme Court will do what is right for farmers who need technologies to increase productivity".

The pro-GM groups were also very critical to the recommendations of a five-member Technical Expert Committee (TEC) which has called for a halt on genetically modified crop filed trials in the country till the regulatory issues are addressed. In fact, the environment ministry is also in favour of the Committee whose views saw a sharp division within the scientific community.

Terming the TEC's recommendations as prejudiced, Reddy said the committee had, in fact, considered information from only those sources that supported its point of view. "We will expose them before the Supreme Court", he said. A group of scientists, meanwhile, appealed to the apex court to reject the recommendations of the committee. They argued that the committee's suggestion was against the established mainstream science on GM crops' safety and utility.

"India needs science, which can be converted into technology that benefits the farmers and consumers. The recommendations of the TEC demoralize thousands of public sector scientists and students of agricultural biotechnology. If the TEC report is implemented, all research will be put into cold storage denying farmers and the nation the benefits of modern science and technology. Let science innovate. Let Indian scientists research freely. And let farmers choose," said Desh Pal Verma of the department of molecular genetics, Ohio State University.

Will green signal to GM Crops be an answer to food-grains requirement in the face of shrinking cultivable land in India?

http://t.co/0JrdzWfTs9

Cultivable land continues to shrink
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 16, 2013, 04.19AM IST 
NEW DELHI: Cultivable land in India continues to shrink. It may not pose an immediate problem for the nation's food security but its long-term effect could be disastrous with the country needing more and more foodgrains to support its growing population.

Latest data from the agriculture ministry shows that as many as 20 states reported decrease in cultivable land to the extent of 790,000 hectares in four years from 2007-08 to 2010-11.

The decrease is mainly attributed to diversion of cultivable land for non-agricultural purposes, including construction, industries and other development activities.

Since such diversion is inevitable, the government had in its National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy (NRRP), 2007 recommended several measures to keep a tab on ever-decreasing cultivable land in the country.

But the data, shared by the agriculture ministry in response to a question in Lok Sabha on Tuesday, shows that only five states have taken some steps to increase the areas under cultivation and three others (Assam, Goa and Sikkim) have adhered to the policy of not tinkering with land which can be used for farming.

Gujarat is the only big state which increased the area of cultivable land during four years from 2007-08 to 2010-11. Manipur, Mizoram, Jammu & Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh are the other states which reported increase during the period.

Haryana is among the twenty states which reported decline in area under cultivation. The small state, which has seen diversion of huge tracts of cultivable land due to boom in real estate, reported decrease of 65,000 hectares of agricultural land between 2007-08 and 2010-11.

Since land falls under the purview of states as per the seventh Schedule of the Constitution, it is for states to bring in suitable policy to prevent diversion of agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes. The Centre had under its 2007 policy advised states to allow development projects to come up on wastelands.

Under NRRP, states were advised that acquisition of agricultural land for non-agricultural use should be kept to the minimum, multi-cropped land should be avoided to the extent possible for such purposes and acquisition of irrigated land, if unavoidable, may be kept to the minimum.

But it seems most states have not followed the norms, leading to overall decrease of nearly 406,000 hectares of cultivable land in the country during the four-year period.

Though the shrinkage did not have adverse impact on foodgrain production as the country reported increase from 230.8 million tonnes in 2007-08 to 255.4 million tonnes in 2012-13, the ever declining trend of cultivable land may pose a serious challenge in the long run....................................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTS8yMDEzLzA4LzE2I0FyMDA3MDM=&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

Issues concerning GM crops continue to draw all-round attention both inside and outside Indian Parliament

http://t.co/DKFEoFKplK

Agriculture ministry sticks to its 'pro-GM crops' stand in Parliament
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 13, 2013, 11.06PM IST 
NEW DELHI: Dismissing concerns expressed by activists and civil society against use of genetically modified (GM) crops in the country, the Union agriculture ministry on Tuesday said that such objections have been "very speculative" and "without any reasonable assessment".

The ministry, known for its pro-GM crops stand, articulated its point in response to a Parliament question in Lok Sabha and assured the members that the government is "following a policy of case by case approval of GM crops" after extensive evaluation and regulatory process for commercial cultivation.

"This includes generation of relevant bio-safety information, its elaborate analysis to ensure food, feed and environmental safety. A final view on the commercialization of GM crop plants is taken only when there is a clear economic and technical justification besides suitability for environment and human consumption", said the ministry in its written response.

The ministry's reiteration to its well-known stand came merely five days after thousands of activists and anti-GM crops experts from across the country gathered here at Jantar Mantar for a day-long protest demanding that the Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and multinational seed companies must quit India.

The protestors had marched to Parliament, asking the government to withdraw the controversial Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) Bill, 2013 as they believe that it will only fast-track the entry of GM food crops in India. They had also demanded that the Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh must unfurl national flag, made of non-Bt cotton, on Independence Day.

Allaying concerns of activists over use of Bt Cotton, the agriculture ministry on Tuesday said, "Since inception of Bt. Cotton, there have been objections from some of the NGOs besides Civil Society on Agriculture... The objections have been very speculative, without any reasonable assessment of the technological strengths of Bt-cotton. In spite of the controversy regarding Bt cotton, the ground reality is that during the last decade, area under cotton cultivation (approx. 12 million hectares, of which 90% is under Bt cotton) and productivity of cotton has gone up significantly".

The ministry also stressed that the Indian economy has benefited as India is the second largest exporter of cotton. "There is no scientific evidence to show that Bt cotton has adversely impacted the biodiversity or human/cattle health. The main purpose of Bt cotton was to control bollworms to enhance yield and production of cotton in the country," it said.

Illegal beach sand mining draws Green Court's attention

http://t.co/ExMZonQKxp

Ban beach sand mining in Kerala, TN: Green Tribunal
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 14, 2013, 10.14PM IST 

National Green Tribunal extended the order to beach sand mining in Kerala and Tamil Nadu and asked both these coastal states along with others to tell it within two weeks as to why did they fail to adhere to the Supreme Court order.
NEW DELHI: Days after restraining sand mining in river beds without taking prior environmental clearance, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Wednesday extended the order to beach sand mining in Kerala and Tamil Nadu and asked both these coastal states along with others to tell it within two weeks as to why did they fail to adhere to the Supreme Court order.

The Tribunal's order came while hearing a petition which was filed by the NGT Bar Association in the backdrop of illegal sand mining in the Yamuna river bed in UP's Gautam Budh Nagar district.

Though UP was initially in denial over the illegal activities, its counsel on Wednesday admitted instances of "indiscriminate sand mining" without green clearance when encountered with evidence by the petitioners.

Subsequently, NGT directed deputy commissioner and superintendent of police of Gautam Budh Nagar district to explain by August 29 as to why they didn't take appropriate action to ensure that no illegal sand mining could be carried out in the area. They will also have to explain why action shouldn't be taken against them for their `failure' to prevent illegal sand mining.

The petitioner also pointed out that around 230,000 tonnes beach sand mineral has been quarried in TN's Vaippar village alone "without permission of any government authority".

Making a particular reference to TN and Kerala, the five-member bench of the Tribunal — headed by NGT chairperson Justice Swatanter Kumar — directed the chief secretaries of both these states to file their "personal affidavits before the next date of hearing" explaining about the action that may be taken by the states.

The Tribunal, while delivering the order, grant liberty to any advocate of the NGT or even public at large to duly bring to its notice "particulars of any person carrying on illegal mining activity and if the order of the tribunal is violated".

The bench had issued notices on August 5 to all the states seeking their replies on a petition contending that rampant illegal mining and transportation of lakhs of tonnes of sand are being carried out every year, causing loss of lakhs of crores to the state exchequer.

Barring UP, Haryana and MP, no other state, however, appeared before the Tribunal on Wednesday due to non-service of the notices. Besides the counsel for these three states, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) also sought time to file their replies.

Haryana government told the tribunal that sand mining is going on in Panipat and Sonipat as per green clearance granted to them whereas Madhya Pradesh government's representative said that 3,000 cases have been registered regarding illegal sand mining over the past five years.

The UP's counsel accepted that the state administration has not arrested anyone. Though 192 green clearances have been given by the state till August 5, no approval was obtained for Gautam Budh Nagar district.....................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JQ0gvMjAxMy8wOC8xNSNBcjAwMzA1&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom

m-Sand may be an answer to infrastructure sector ..... It'll get sand without creating ecological imbalance

http://t.co/JzBudTEqDQ

New norms in the works for use of alternative materials to sand
Vishwa Mohan,TNN | Aug 13, 2013, 09.37PM IST 

The national green tribunal's move to ban sand mining with environment clearance gave a new impetus to the ongoing debate on how to strike a balance between economic needs of the infrastructure sector and environmental concerns.
NEW DELHI: Seeking to strike a balance between growing needs of construction industry and environmental concerns to preserve river beds amid excessive sand mining, the government may opt for changing specifications of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) to ensure substitutes of sand can be used by builders across the country.

Now, the BIS stipulates that the concrete can be made only with naturally accessed materials, making it impossible for the realty sector to rely on alternatives to sand like m-Sand (manufactured sand), copper slag, powdered glass and recycled construction waste among others which are increasingly being used in many EU nations, Singapore and the US.

"I am soon going to write to the BIS," said the Union environment and forest minister Jayanthi Natarajan.

She told the TOI that there was a need to firm up views in this matter through consultations within government while keeping in mind growing environmental concerns.

It is learnt that her ministry will bat for promoting green construction norms that are being practiced in other parts of the globe.

Though the need to have a definite policy in this regard have long been expressed within and outside the government by proponents of sustainable growth, the recent episode of Gautam Budh Nagar district in Uttar Pradesh where the then local subdivisional magistrate (SDM) Durga Sakthi Nagpal had brought the instances of large scale illegal mining into focus by taking action against sand miners in July.

The national green tribunal (NGT) had subsequently restrained sand mining across the country without taking environmental clearance for mine lease area irrespective of its size.

The move gave a new impetus to the ongoing debate on how to strike a balance between economic needs of the infrastructure sector and environmental concerns. Such debate has again brought into light the demand for necessary changes in BIS regulations so that substitutes of sand can be used in construction.

The m-Sand is the widely accepted substitute to sand in many countries. It is produced by grinding stone gravel and boulders. Besides m-Sand, builders in Hong Kong use powdered glass as a substitute for sand. On the other hand, Singapore uses copper slag (a by-product of copper production) whereas US uses all these alternatives including furnace slag.

Environmentalists across the globe are in favour of such locally viable alternatives by pointing out how the sand depletion from river beds is bad for ecology and safety of settlements along the rivers......................................http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=Q0FQLzIwMTMvMDgvMTcjQXIwMjEwMA==&Mode=Gif&Locale=english-skin-custom