menu
With The Lanka Environment Fund
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
The Lanka Environment Fund is an environmental Conservation Organization and non-profit set up in 2019 to aid in protecting and restoring Sri Lanka's ecosystem by offering grants and support for local conservation groups.
With The Lanka Environment Fund
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
The Lanka Environment Fund is an environmental Conservation Organization and non-profit set up in 2019 to aid in protecting and restoring Sri Lanka's ecosystem by offering grants and support for local conservation groups.
With The Lanka Environment Fund
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
The Lanka Environment Fund is an environmental Conservation Organization and non-profit set up in 2019 to aid in protecting and restoring Sri Lanka's ecosystem by offering grants and support for local conservation groups.
With The Lanka Environment Fund
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
One of the ecosystems under the most pressure are mangroves. These trees thrive along the border between land and sea and are a first line of defence for many coastlines, reducing erosion from storm surges, currents, waves and tides. Their intricate root system makes them attractive to fish and other organisms seeking nurseries, food and shelter. Mangroves support more than 1,500 species, some 15 per cent of which are endangered.
The ecosystem’s protective function was dramatically highlighted by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, which killed more than 30,000 people in Sri Lanka. Parts of the coastline were vulnerable to the tsunami because about one-third of Sri Lanka’s mangroves had been cleared, mainly to make way for shrimp ponds and salt pans.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
Protecting mangrove ecosystems are a critical facet of marine coastal conservation. In the late 1990’s, over 50% of Sri Lanka’s Mangrove habitat was destroyed to establish prawn aquaculture projects. This severely affected the functioning of coastal ecosystems. Sri Lanka’s current mangrove cover is estimated to be 15-000 – 19,000 Hectares – only 0.3% of the total landmass, this is critically low and puts the island at risk from the impact of climate change and other natural disasters such as storm surges and tsunamis.
The largest threat to the future of the Anawilundawa Sanctuary even to date is that of further destruction of the area within the sanctuary for Prawn Farming. The destruction of these ecosystems is compounded by the fact that it also cripples livelihoods of communities living around the area.
As both a developing nation and a biodiversity hotspot, Sri Lanka has to tread a delicate balance between conservation and development. The recent decision to degazette portions of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve (VNR) has caused grave concern, further damaging this delicate equilibrium, serving neither our economy nor our environment.
Established as Sri Lanka's third-largest Marine Protected Area (MPA), spanning 29,180 hectares, Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve is not merely a strip of land but a vital ecosystem and lifeline for numerous species and communities alike. From the critically endangered Dugong, to a diversity of fish and species of shellfish, the VNR nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the VNR as a national reserve in 2016 was a testament to its ecological significance, and viewed as evidence of Sri Lanka’s serious commitment to protecting its environment.
However, there have been constant proposals for aquaculture development within the boundaries of the reserve, casting serious doubt on its very future. Now these threats have become a reality and on May 6 2024, following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, Pavithra Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the reserve, as outlined in Extraordinary Gazette 2383/05.
The decision to remove protected status, likely for aquaculture development, raises serious red flags, particularly in light of Sri Lanka's past experiences. From the Puttalam Lagoon to the Anawilundawa Sanctuary, unchecked aquaculture ventures have led to environmental degradation, pollution, and depletion of marine resources. Such actions extend far beyond ecological concerns. They infringe on the livelihoods of communities reliant on these vital ecosystems, disrupt traditional fishing practices, and jeopardise the long-term sustainability of our marine resources. The Lanka Environment Fund (LEF), a not-for-profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities, highlights the increasingly urgent need for holistic approaches that prioritise conservation, while supporting the socio-economic well-being of local communities.
There are both ecological and economic imperatives to immediately protect the VNR, never more prescient as the global community shifts towards a focus on sustainable blue economies. Its diverse habitats, including salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests, play a crucial role in sequestering carbon, presenting significant economic opportunities, whilst being vital in the fight against climate change. By conserving these ecosystems, Sri Lanka can not only fulfil its environmental obligations, but also harness new revenue streams for sustainable development through nature-based solutions, such as conservation financing;debt for nature swaps, carbon trading, blue/green bonds etc.
The de-gazetting of the VNR raises additional concerns about a lack of compliance with legal procedures and constitutional obligations. A legal requirement under Section 2 (5) of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (FFPO), is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands. The failure to adhere to these regulations prompts the urgent question: do the legal protections afforded to these areas actually have any practical value, and more disturbing still, could this decision set a precedent for the further exploitation of other Protected Areas? Article 27(14) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people. De-gazetting a portion of the VNR is a direct contradiction of this constitutional promise.
Furthermore, the disparity between the high-level commitments to climate action being given, and the actual on-the-ground decisions being made, and actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation.The President's pledges for a low-carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the International Climate Change University, are in direct contravention of the actions his government is taking. This inconsistency begs the question as to whether there is actually a genuine commitment to driving climate change mitigation and adaptation, or is it merely lip service being paid to appease critics and to give the appearance of honouring international commitments.
In light of these concerns, it is crucial for the government to reassess its decision regarding the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve urgently. While we recognize the need for Sri Lanka's ongoing emergence from the recent economic crisis, our worst since independence, and therefore the pressing need to explore new economic opportunities, there are alternative avenues available, such as conservation financing, that offer feasible solutions to balance conservation and development interests. Upholding legal requirements, constitutional mandates, and global climate commitments is not only a moral imperative but also essential for safeguarding Sri Lanka's natural wealth for future generations.
The Lanka Environment Fund is an environmental Conservation Organization and non-profit set up in 2019 to aid in protecting and restoring Sri Lanka's ecosystem by offering grants and support for local conservation groups.