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 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, spanning 29,180 hectares, the 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 Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve nurtures biodiversity crucial for sustaining our coastal communities and marine life. The designation of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve 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 became a reality on 6 May of this year (2024), following the decision by the Minister of Wildlife and Forest Resources Conservation, attorney-at-law Pavithradevi Wanniarachchi, to remove the protected status of certain undisclosed areas of the Reserve, as outlined in the Extraordinary Gazette Number 2383/05. 

The decision to remove the 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 the 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. This 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 Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve, 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 fulfill 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 or green bonds, etc.

The degazetting of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve 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, No. 2 of 1937 as amended, is to conduct an ecological assessment before releasing lands (“(a) The Minister may, by order, declare that the limits of any National Reserve or Sanctuary shall be altered or varied. (b) Any order made by the Minister under this Subsection shall have no effect unless it has been approved by the Parliament and the notification of such approval is published in the Gazette.”). 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 guides the government to protect, preserve, and develop the environment for the benefit of the people (“The State shall protect, preserve and improve the environment for the benefit of the community.”). De-gazetting a portion of the Vidattaltivu Nature Reserve 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 the actions being carried out, highlights a disconnect that warrants urgent scrutiny and investigation. The President's (Ranil Wickremesinghe) pledges for a low carbon future, and his proposed initiatives such as the international climate change university, are in direct contravention of the actions that 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 recognise 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/LEF is a not for profit serving the environment and working towards the empowerment of local communities)

––-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication