Public Presentation Regarding the Vizcaino Desert Biosphere Reserve
by Mark Spalding/NRDC

Home | Mexico | Mexico Travel | Mexico News | Mexico Books | Mexico Parks | Mexican Ecotourism Network | Baja California | Vizcaino Desert Biosphere Reserve
Other Mexico States and Regions:

The following statement was made on Feb 29, 1996 in La Paz, BCS at a public hearing sponsored by INE (under order from Carabias) to take public comment on what the science panel, convened to prepare terms of reference for an EIA for the project, should consider.

Introduction

Since 1970, NRDC has worked to ensure the complete recovery of North America's grey whale population. The grey whale is one of North America's truly shared resources in that it migrates through Mexican, U.S., and Canadian waters.

NRDC has maintained a strong interest in environmental laws throughout North America for many years. During the past five years, as part of NRDC's work related to the NAFTA and NRDC's support for the NAFTA supplemental agreements which created the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission, and the North American Development Bank, it has focused significant attention on the inter-relationship between U.S. and Mexican environmental laws.

Lack of Transparency and Public Access

Transparency and public access is clearly one of the most important elements of sustainable development policy, especially here where this scientific panel should play a large role due to the conflict of interest inherent in the Mexican Government's environmental agency approving a project in which it has a majority financial interest.

In our view, there was a lack of proper notice for this meeting. A lack of sufficient notice makes it difficult for us and others to attend. At the least, because we are a non-profit organization, airfares on less than 21 or 30 days notice can make attendance costs prohibitive. I am aware that the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund and the League for Coastal Protection and others would like to be here today to provide their advice to this panel but could not make it due to the short notice for the meeting. In addition, sufficient notice allows for the most useful comments to be prepared for a meeting such as this.

We request that in the future, at least 30 days notice for public meetings be provided, and that SEMARNAP and INE establish a regular and clear processes for such notice. We also request that INE assure that public participation/consultation occurs throughout this process; and that INE establish a transparent process so that the public input is taken into account.

Lack of Enforcement of Law

Our Suggestions

• Noise, both from construction and from operation of the facility.
• Potential oil/diesel spills (especially given the history of the company)
• Location of the loading pier in migration paths.
• Changes in water temperature and salinity from pumping.
• Disposal of waste water after washing crystallized salt.
• Size of the buffer area (the EIA should discuss/test for various sizes).
• Potential for increased access to the lagoon.
• Potential for increased population in the area of the lagoon.
• The effect of the creation of salt ponds on watershed drainage.
• The handling of human sewage and garbage during and after construction.
• Potential impact of alternative transport systems in the event of a pier failure.

• Area Residents
• Area Fishing
• Culture
• Education and Technology Transfer
• Tourism
• Service Providers
• as well as others dependent on the migration of the North American Grey Whale, including the Russian Federation, Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.

• Grey Whales
• The endangered peninsular pronghorn antelope
• Sea Turtles
• Green Turtles
• Mangroves
• Eel Grass
• Katarina Scallops
• Peregrine Falcons
• Golden Eagles
• Osprey
• Northern Pintail
• Blue winged teals
• American Widgeon
• Lesser Scaups
• White Pelicans
• as well as other marine mammals, fish and shell fish, birds and lagoon and terrestrial plants

Our specific suggestions for research and contacts are as follows:

• Contact Canadian, U.S. and Mexican Universities for copies of relevant research (e.g. the Scripps Institute of Oceanography).

• Determine the respective roles of the ESSA's joint venture partners, the Mexican Federal Government and Mitsubishi.

• Carefully examine the environmental record of the Mitsubishi Corporation in Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Chile, Brazil and Malaysia.

• Carefully examine the already affected lagoons where ESSA already has operations. Particularly - what is the cumulative impact of operations in all the lagoons?

• Obtain and examine the information developed on grey whales in the Mexican National Marine Mammal Program over the last 15 years.
• Look for examples of similar EIAs to determine the depth and completeness of your terms of reference (e.g., the San Francisco Bay salt evaporation facilities' EIA).

• Carefully examine the economic context for this project to determine whether the salt market can absorb this new facility.

• Carefully examine alternative development options for this reserve.

• Carefully examine alternative designs for this facility.

• Consider the appropriate time frame for the EIA. In our view, it should extend over 24 months to compare at least two whale calving seasons and two rainy seasons.

Mark J. Spalding, J.D., M.P.I.A.
140 Twelfth Street
Del Mar, CA 92014-2315 USA
Email: mspalding@ucsd.edu

Natural Resources Defense Council
1350 New York Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20005 USA

Home | About | Advertise! | Books | Central America | Ecotourism | Headlines
Learn Spanish | Mexico | Media | Site Map | South America | World Travel | Updates