National Park--Leatherback Sea Turtle Preserve; pristine beach; prime surfing; laid back locals, surfing; excellent cuisine; affordable; mucha carne; que mas necesistas, mae?

Verduras. No carne, por favor... vegetariano.
Prime surfing AND surfing. Is there any awesome surfing?

renablnrg,

When I say carne, I'm referring to flesh, as in the saying, "mucha carne, no dientes", which basically translates to: you can look, but you can't touch, or, literally, "lots of meat, no teeth."
Now,then. I'm all about the vegetarian thing, although I must admit to being a social carnivore.
Yeah, and when I said "surfing" the second time, what I meant to say was "yoga". Pardon the lapse.
Awesome surfing? Dude, some of the best breaks in that part of the world. Check it out.
I could go on and on and on, but try to opt for pithy. All right.

Thanks for the explanation pg. Do you have any recommendations as far as places to stay? I have surfed in the past but actually I'm a PADI Divemaster and I hear there are some nice spots in the area. Even just snorkeling works for me.

Trouble in Paradise...

Lines in the Sand
By Mike McDonald
Tico Times Staff | mmcdonald@ticotimes.net

PLAYA GRANDE – The four kilometer stretch of beach along the Pacific shore here is nearly empty most hours of the day. On a sunny Sunday afternoon, a few dozen beach-goers show up to jump in the quiet waves, soak in rays from a cloudless sky or climb a giant rock that marks Playa Grande's northern border.


No Man's Land? Turtle conservation organizations on one side, and residents and would-be developers on the other, are squaring off over the future of Las Baulas National Park. The conflict is over the limits of the park, and whether development should be banned outright or allowed under controlled conditions.

Just over 50 meters inland from where the tide meets the sand is a small embankment on top of which sits a thick line of bushes that slants gently toward the land and reaches a height of about 10 feet.

This hedge – or green wall, as most have come to call it – bands the entire crescent-shaped beach from north to south. Behind it is vacant land, with some exceptions, shaded by 20-foot-tall trees and covered with soil and weeds.

It is this undisturbed area, at the heels of the green buffer zone and inland, that has been the battleground of a raging debate among environmentalists, residents and developers for nearly 20 years. Most recently, this plot of land has forced the discussion in the Legislative Assembly of a proposed bill that would attempt to both clarify and expand the types of activities that should be permitted here.

Playa Grande is home to Costa Rica's Las Baulas National Marine Park, arguably the most important nesting beach for leatherback turtles in the eastern Pacific. National parks are strictly protected and, by law, no development – proposed or already built – can exist within their limits.

Along all of Costa Rica's coasts, the first 50-meters of land from where the average high tide breaks is considered public property and also is protected from development under the Maritime Zone Law.

No one questions the status of these 50 meters at Playa Grande.

What is in question, however, is the point at which the boundary of the Las Baulas National Marine Park ends.

The park was first created by presidential decree in 1991 and then established by law in 1995. One part of the law states that the park extends 75 meters inland from the 50-meter public zone, while another part of the same law states that it extends 75 meters out to sea, according to a 2004 report from the Office of the Attorney General.

The confusion arises from an error in the law, the report concludes, and it also states that the park was actually meant to extend 75 meters inland from the inland edge of the 50-meter public zone (TT April 22, 2005).

The problem is that landowners built small houses and hotels within these 75 meters before the park was created, and they disagree with the attorney general's interpretation.

“The law clearly states 75 meters aguas adentro (or, out to sea),”said Manfred Marshall, whose family has owned a 30-room hotel within 75 meters of the beach since before the dispute began. “We don't agree with the attorney general's interpretation of the law, and we don't believe that he has the power to make the interpretation.”

In order to comply with the attorney general's interpretation of the National Park Law, Marshall's hotel and any other development inside these 75 meters must go, and the land purchased by the state would be incorporated into the park.

The government has begun the process of expropriating more than 60 properties inside the park, according to local residents, but it hasn't completed the process because of what it claims to be a lack of funds.

Exact property values are difficult to pin down, but owners who are closest to the beach said that the Finance Ministry has appraised their land at prices that range from $600 to $1,200 per square meter. Government officials have estimated the total cost of expropriation of private lands in this area to be as much as $800 million.

To complicate matters for developers, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court (Sala IV) annulled all legally obtained environmental viability building permits on Dec. 16, 2008, for properties inside the park. The court also ordered the suspension of all permits for properties within 500 meters of the park's limits to create a buffer zone for Las Baulas National Park (TT Jan. 16).

“It's absolutely ridiculous,” said Tom Battaglia who bought property within the 500-meter buffer zone years ago. A small development on his property now sits only partially completed, and he said he can't touch it because of the Sala IV ruling.

“That buffer zone doesn't exist in any law,” Battaglia said. “The Sala IV created that buffer zone and that's something they can't do. They are legislating from the bench.”

Scientists and environmental groups insist that the interpretation issued by the Office of the Attorney General is binding and the park boundaries must stay as they are, including the 50 meters of public land and the additional 75 meters further inland. This would mean that expropriation must occur.

These groups insist that continuing development of the area would spell disaster for the future of the leatherback turtles, which they say have suffered population declines of up to 90 percent in the past two decades.

“You have to protect their environment against excessive human development,” said Andy Bystrom, a spokesman for the Marine Turtle Restoration Program. “There is no confusion about the attorney general's ruling. It's the law.”

Environmentalists and legislators have said that the land isn't worth as much as property owners claim, and Bystrom said he hopes an agreement can be reached about the values so non-profit groups can begin to raise money to help the government expropriate the lands.

Bystrom noted that international conservation groups raised $5 million to aid expropriations in 2005, but the money had to be returned to donors because the government did not use the funds.

Officials at the Ministry of the Environment, Energy and Telecommunications (MINAET) did not confirm or deny information about these donations by press time.

Residents, landowners and other government officials favor a new bill that would “correct the limits of the Las Baulas National Marine Park” and create a “Las Baulas National Wildlife Refuge,” a distinction that would allow developers to continue construction, within height and density limits, thus eliminating the need for expropriation.

The area actually received the national wildlife refuge status by decree in 1987 and by law in 1990 before it was declared a national park in 1991. The creation of least 18 lots, on which building is now blocked by the national park dispute, received approval in the late 1980's, according to Battaglia.

In terms of protecting the turtles against poachers, the bill would create 35 ranger stations to watch the park. There is currently one station, although the Leatherback Trust coordinates volunteer projects to patrol the beach during nesting season.

But until a resolution is reached, all parties involved will remain at a standstill, facing each other with furrowed brows, at least 75 meters apart.

Man, you've got it right. The Leather Back Turtle preserve group is a land grab engineered by, well, I won't go into it. Thanks for the post.

Except the Tico Times article didn't get it right. Rather it's a one sided catering to private interests who bought land illegally inside a NATIONAL PARK adn now whine about how their so confused over the law and where their rights begin and end. In reality, the Costa Rican supreme court has already ruled on this issue. It has said that private land holding inside Las Baulas Marine National Park must be expropriated. There is on debate here, the court has made it's ruling. Stop trying to protect your private get rich foreign interests at the expense of destroying Costa Rica's national park system. More information is available on the Costa Rican Conservation Network's blog: http://costaricanconservationnetwork.wordpress.com/

Awesome blog Andy. Added to my Favorites. What's up with Oscar? First he gives an excellent speech to the Climate Change Summit and then backs a bill that proposes to downgrade Leatherback Marine National Park to a national wildlife refuge? Loco.
Here's my Tweet from this morning... giantabalone The creation of a global network of marine reserves would create more than 1 million jobs. -Lester R. Brown, PLAN B 4.0
I have a bachelors degree in Biological Sciences and am now working on an AAS degree in Renewable Energy here in Eugene, Oregon. I'm also a PADI Divemaster.
Hope to get down to CR & get some sustainable, green, renewable projects accomplished.
Keep up the great work hermano. Gracias muy amable!

Unfortunately, that's pretty much to MO on Costa Rica's president--great "eco" PR the world over, but at home he's capitulating to private interests and dismantling the country's natural resources. But hey, look on the bright side, we're getting a big new national stadium financed by China, the new fleet of police cars have Chinese flags on them. All it cost was for Costa Rica to continue to fuel China's shark fin soup fixation by continuing the illegal slaughter of sharks---how convenient. How can a country with no army (no inflated military spending) need to rely on the Chinese for police cars!?!?!?

That's why the world needs grass-roots folks such as yourself to sound the alarm.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful commited citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. -Margaret Mead