continental shelf slows the front of the wave. Then the trailing waves pile onto the waves in front, like a rug crumpled against a wall. This makes the wave rise up to 30 feet before hitting the shore. Although greatly slowed, a tsunami still bursts onto land at high speeds, with enough momentum to flatten buildings and trees and to carry boats from the shore miles inland. Their onslaught on land comes without wind and rain. They strike with great stealth and surprise.
Fisherfolk are traumatized by the fact that the sea, in a rare display of fury, has deceived them and taken away their children, family members and property. The position that this was nature's fury, which no human agency could predict or prevent, is untenable. Coastal communities, scientists, the government and civil society are asking several important questions. Could thousands of lives have been saved if proper Coastal Regulation Zone plans had been implemented without pleading for numerous exemptions in the name of ‘development'? Could short and long terms measures have been taken to mitigate the extent of devastation inflicted on the coastal communities? If all fisherfolk had been given housing sites on the landward side of coastal roads would not the death toll have been lower? If natural green-belt barriers (such as mangroves, wind breaker trees) had been in place, would the damage to property and the death toll have been reduced? If the coastal communities had been given disaster management training could more lives have been saved? If the prime responsibility, as well as the finances and material resources, for safety and rescue were vested at the community level would the response time to the crisis have been more rapid and the damage greatly mitigated?
The answer to all these questions is a big YES! We now realize that the costs of neglecting several basic and simple precautionary measures have been so huge in terms of human lives and property. While the shock of this unprecedented disaster is still on own minds, it is the duty of those of us who have been spared the trauma, to commit ourselves to ensure that coastal communities – particular the fisherfolk among them who were the most affected – will have a safe and secure future. This disaster context should be turned into an opportunity -- not just to put in place emergency measures and early warning systems, but rather to work out a master rehabilitation plan for long term livelihood security for these communities.
Master Rehabilitation Plan
There is need to generate a larger consensus on this at the level of state and civil society. The plan should be the responsibility of the state, but it should be formulated and implemented in a participatory manner. The roles of civil society organizations and the affected community should be clearly spelt out. Such a master rehabilitation plan should consist of an agenda for action that covers the following realms.
Environmental protection of coastal land and sea
Protection of the coastal area ecosystem – composed of a sea and land interface – should receive top priority. Foresters should play a major role in this. They need to advise about location specific, appropriate green belt protection alternatives and also lobby for implementation of the Coastal Regulation Zone requirement of a 200 to 500 meter ‘no development' zone. Suggestions being made in certain influential quarters for building sea walls along the entire coastline need to be countered for their huge investment costs, scope for corruption, impact on natural coastal sand and water dynamics, adverse impact on coastal small-scale fishing and even on tourism potentials. The right approach is to have a menu of alternatives with the appropriate one chosen keeping the geo-physical and ecological characteristics of the coastal tract and its uses in mind.
Housing and related facilities
Good housing, appropriate sanitation and water facilities, lighting and spacious community facilities are a priority if the hitherto abysmal quality of life of fishing communities is to be radically improved. These f