Translation of Council of Ministers decision regarding the Management Plan for the Akamas Peninsula

Akamas

A translation of the 2000 Council of Ministers Decision with remarks by Terra Cypria

Translation of Council of Ministers decision regarding the
Management Plan for the Akamas Peninsula , as published by the Press Information Office 1/3/2000
Remarks by Terra Cypria, the Cyprus Conservation Foundation

Regarding the Decision of the Council no. 43.740, dated 7.2.1996, and after examining the recommendations of the Akamas Peninsula Management Plan, the positions of the Ministers participating in the Ministerial Committee established under Decision no. 43.740, the positions of the affected communities, the recommendations of the Environment Service, and the position adopted by Parliament, the Council of Ministers has decided the following:

a) To continue the operation of the Ministerial Committee established on 7.2.1996 by Council Decision no. 43.750 until final decisions are taken regarding the Management Plan of the Akamas Peninsula.

The initial appointment of the Ministerial Committee for the Akamas Peninsula dates four years ago. Since then, no concrete decision or important means of communication between the ‘partners’ or capacity building for communities and interested parties was put in place in order to help reach a consensus on the basis of the World Bank/METAP/EU Management Plan. Meanwhile illegal operations have been taking place for some years now.

ai) In the light of all available facts, to start a continuous dialogue with interested parties (Union of local communities, the village presidents of Drousia, Inia, Kathikas, Pano Arodes and Neo Chorio, the Mayor of Peyia, the Scientific and Technical Chamber of Cyprus, the Federation of Environmental and Ecological Organisations, the land owners, and relevant government departments) with the aim of reaching, if possible, a consensus decision regarding the Management Plan of the Akamas Peninsula and to submit a report to the Ministerial Committee within three months.

Starting a dialogue with interested groups is a good point, but late. The World Bank/METAP/EU report regarding Akamas was published in Sept. 1995. Since then the Government downgraded the matter by referring it to the local district officer, whereas protection of this area is of national concern calling for high-level decisions. Worst of all, the decision allows three months to reach a consensus, while it is known to be almost impossible for the locals to understand and accept such a report within these time limits.

Translation of Council of Ministers decision regarding the Management Plan for the Akamas Peninsula, as published by the Press Information Office, 1/3/2000
Remarks by Terra Cypria, the Cyprus Conservation Foundation

aii) All tourist development in the areas of Lara and Toxeftra is to be prohibited. The problem of coastal private land in these areas may be solved with either the exchange of land, or the transfer of development rights or with compensation. Even though, this allows protection of the coastal strips of these two ecologically important areas, it does not specify the precise areas of protection since the statement is vague. These are two of the most important turtle breeding sites in the Mediterranean and protection of the specific sites alone without extending the protection according to the recommendations of the World Bank Report is not sufficient. The decision alone does not clarify the protective boundaries and leaves room for negotiation and outside pressures.

aiii) The problem of private ownership at the ‘Fontana Amoroza’ (coastal) area to be settled by expanding the near-by tourist zone and re-establishing the boundaries of this holding by partial exchange of some land towards the west with government land located between the present tourist zone and the land owned by this company.

This is one of the biggest drawbacks of the decision. It makes a selective special arrangement for one private land owner within the forest boundary in an area identified by the World Bank/EU Report as having special ecological interest. While this property has no development rights at present, the decision extends the present tourist zone on the coastal strip to reach the private land. The existence of such a development in the park and the disturbance it will create on land and to the marine life, negates the concept of a reserve area.

aiv) Mild and sustainable development with sensitivity and respect towards the environment to be allowed in the rest of the Akamas peninsula area lying outside the national forest boundary (i.e. Translator’s note: between the forest boundary and the upper elevations reaching the Laona Plateau). This was one of the worst fears of what might happen, that is, to limit protection only within the forest boundary and allow development outside. The World Bank/METAP/EU Report, clearly states that the land outside the forest boundary and up to the villages should be protected in the sense that it would be available for agriculture and grazing, but not for holiday homes with all the negative impacts that will create. This vague statement allowing ‘mild’ development is very dangerous when mild development is undefined and has rarely, if ever, been implemented. Even ‘mild development’ requires infrastructure support facilities like roads, sewage, water pipelines, electricity etc.

b) The Licensing Authority to be advised of the need to declare a moratorium on granting new licences for ‘Safari type’ excursions in the Akamas area; all existing licences to be reviewed with the objective of prohibiting the usage of forested roads and cancelling licences of those who do not comply with the conditions imposed.

This is a good point in general. However, the number of ‘Safari type’ licences presently operating is already too high and it is virtually impossible to withdraw licences. Monitoring of compliance is almost impossible with existing government procedures.

Translation of Council of Ministers decision regarding the Management Plan for the Akamas Peninsula , as published by the Press Information Office 1/3/2000

Remarks by Terra Cypria, the Cyprus Conservation Foundation

c) To remove all signs and posts which were illegally placed in the area.

This is again a positive point, but should be accompanied by cessation of illegalities.

d) To prosecute all individuals carrying out any illegal activities. This is something which should have been happening anyway without the necessity for a Council decision. It proves that many illegal activities are currently taking place in the absence of a comprehensive management plan.

e) To allocate CY£ 50.000 for cleaning up the area. This is a good point, but it again shows the drawbacks of how not having a comprehensive management plan for the area leads to numerous problems.

f) To control overgrazing by a combination of incentives and penalties. Overgrazing is a major issue in the area. This is a step in the correct direction, but it directly affects local livelihoods and will need to be administered carefully.

g) To prepare a reforestation and rehabilitation plan for the area formerly used by the British military for exercises. This is a good initiative and this plan is absolutely necessary. Cessation of British military exercises in the Akamas area was the result of pressure exercised by Cypriot environmental groups with a view to conserving the area, not opening it up for development!!

h) The Ministerial Committee shall review the Report of the Special Committee and submit its recommendations to the Council of Ministers together with an implementation programme, which will include estimates of public funds to achieve the above.

CONCLUSION (drawn by Terra Cypria, the Cyprus Conservation Foundation):

Piecemeal initiatives will not give solutions. Fragmented problems are likely to occur in the future, unless a holistic approach is undertaken with a view to protecting Akamas as a prime coastal/inland habitat. The Government decision is not holistic, allowing no room for implementation of the World Bank/METAP/EU Report, since development has been allowed in or near sites specially ear-marked for protection by the Report. It is evident from this decision that the Government supports development rather than conservation initiatives, and is not prepared to create a buffer zone for the proposed park which is now seriously limited. In addition to tourist and other development the Government has allowed the continuation of hunting within the Akamas, since no provision is included to prohibit or limit this activity. Despite its positive points this decision offers very little protection for an important part of Cypriot and European heritage. It encourages disastrous long-term impacts with little concern for the interests of future generations.

Top of Page

Translation of Council of Ministers decision regarding the Management Plan for the Akamas Peninsula , as published by the Press Information Office 1/3/2000	Remarks by Terra Cypria, the Cyprus Conservation Foundation
Regarding the Decision of the Council no. 43.740, dated 7.2.1996, and after examining the recommendations of the Akamas Peninsula Management Plan, the positions of the Ministers participating in the Ministerial Committee established under Decision no. 43.740, the positions of the affected communities, the recommendations of the Environment Service, and the position adopted by Parliament, the Council of Ministers has decided the following:
a) To continue the operation of the Ministerial Committee established on 7.2.1996 by Council Decision no. 43.750 until final decisions are taken regarding the Management Plan of the Akamas Peninsula.	The initial appointment of the Ministerial Committee for the Akamas Peninsula dates four years ago. Since then, no concrete decision or important means of communication between the ‘partners’ or capacity building for communities and interested parties was put in place in order to help reach a consensus on the basis of the World Bank/METAP/EU Management Plan. Meanwhile illegal operations have been taking place for some years now.
ai) In the light of all available facts, to start a continuous dialogue with interested parties (Union of local communities, the village presidents of Drousia, Inia, Kathikas, Pano Arodes and Neo Chorio, the Mayor of Peyia, the Scientific and Technical Chamber of Cyprus, the Federation of Environmental and Ecological Organisations, the land owners, and relevant government departments) with the aim of reaching, if possible, a consensus decision regarding the Management Plan of the Akamas Peninsula and to submit a report to the Ministerial Committee within three months.	Starting a dialogue with interested groups is a good point, but late. The World Bank/METAP/EU report regarding Akamas was published in Sept. 1995. Since then the Government downgraded the matter by referring it to the local district officer, whereas protection of this area is of national concern calling for high-level decisions. Worst of all, the decision allows three months to reach a consensus, while it is known to be almost impossible for the locals to understand and accept such a report within these time limits.
Translation of Council of Ministers decision regarding the Management Plan for the Akamas Peninsula, as published by the Press Information Office, 1/3/2000	Remarks by Terra Cypria, the Cyprus Conservation Foundation
aii) All tourist development in the areas of Lara and Toxeftra is to be prohibited. The problem of coastal private land in these areas may be solved with either the exchange of land, or the transfer of development rights or with compensation.	Even though, this allows protection of the coastal strips of these two ecologically important areas, it does not specify the precise areas of protection since the statement is vague. These are two of the most important turtle breeding sites in the Mediterranean and protection of the specific sites alone without extending the protection according to the recommendations of the World Bank Report is not sufficient. The decision alone does not clarify the protective boundaries and leaves room for negotiation and outside pressures.
aiii) The problem of private ownership at the ‘Fontana Amoroza’ (coastal) area to be settled by expanding the near-by tourist zone and re-establishing the boundaries of this holding by partial exchange of some land towards the west with government land located between the present tourist zone and the land owned by this company.	This is one of the biggest drawbacks of the decision. It makes a selective special arrangement for one private land owner within the forest boundary in an area identified by the World Bank/EU Report as having special ecological interest. While this property has no development rights at present, the decision extends the present tourist zone on the coastal strip to reach the private land. The existence of such a development in the park and the disturbance it will create on land and to the marine life, negates the concept of a reserve area.
aiv) Mild and sustainable development with sensitivity and respect towards the environment to be allowed in the rest of the Akamas peninsula area lying outside the national forest boundary (i.e. Translator’s note: between the forest boundary and the upper elevations reaching the Laona Plateau).	This was one of the worst fears of what might happen, that is, to limit protection only within the forest boundary and allow development outside. The World Bank/METAP/EU Report, clearly states that the land outside the forest boundary and up to the villages should be protected in the sense that it would be available for agriculture and grazing, but not for holiday homes with all the negative impacts that will create. This vague statement allowing ‘mild’ development is very dangerous when mild development is undefined and has rarely, if ever, been implemented. Even ‘mild development’ requires infrastructure support facilities like roads, sewage, water pipelines, electricity etc.
b) The Licensing Authority to be advised of the need to declare a moratorium on granting new licences for ‘Safari type’ excursions in the Akamas area; all existing licences to be reviewed with the objective of prohibiting the usage of forested roads and cancelling licences of those who do not comply with the conditions imposed.	This is a good point in general. However, the number of ‘Safari type’ licences presently operating is already too high and it is virtually impossible to withdraw licences. Monitoring of compliance is almost impossible with existing government procedures.
Translation of Council of Ministers decision regarding the Management Plan for the Akamas Peninsula , as published by the Press Information Office 1/3/2000	Remarks by Terra Cypria, the Cyprus Conservation Foundation
c) To remove all signs and posts which were illegally placed in the area.	This is again a positive point, but should be accompanied by cessation of illegalities.
d) To prosecute all individuals carrying out any illegal activities.	This is something which should have been happening anyway without the necessity for a Council decision. It proves that many illegal activities are currently taking place in the absence of a comprehensive management plan.
e) To allocate CY£ 50.000 for cleaning up the area.	This is a good point, but it again shows the drawbacks of how not having a comprehensive management plan for the area leads to numerous problems.
f) To control overgrazing by a combination of incentives and penalties.	Overgrazing is a major issue in the area. This is a step in the correct direction, but it directly affects local livelihoods and will need to be administered carefully.
g) To prepare a reforestation and rehabilitation plan for the area formerly used by the British military for exercises.	This is a good initiative and this plan is absolutely necessary. Cessation of British military exercises in the Akamas area was the result of pressure exercised by Cypriot environmental groups with a view to conserving the area, not opening it up for development!!
h) The Ministerial Committee shall review the Report of the Special Committee and submit its recommendations to the Council of Ministers together with an implementation programme, which will include estimates of public funds to achieve the above.