CATEGORY:COMMENTARY ------------------------ INSIDE GRENADA Tuesday April 24,2007 by Sandra C Ferguson 1. Rationale for National Parks and Protected Areas: In 1986 the Government of Grenada placed the establishment of a national park and protected areas as a priority in the 1986 development plan and requested the required technical assistance from the Organization of American States, Department of Regional Development. Assistance was provided o Grenada through the Integrated Development Project. The government of the day recognized: • The occurrence of environmental degradation as a result of ever increasing pressures on the natural resource base. Examples of this degradation were- soil erosion, sedimentation of river systems, decreases in agricultural and fisheries productivity, imbalance in the water regime resulting flooding and drought, continued deterioration of historic and archeological sites. • The increasing demand for recreational opportunities and educational programmes for Grenada’s population • A major need for a much greater variety of developed natural and cultural areas for both nationals and tourists. 2. OAS-Integrated Development Project: The OAS-Integrated Development Project undertook studies in land policy and zoning, national parks, resource conversation and tourism development. As a result, the project: • Developed a Draft Plan and Policy for a System of National Parks and Protected Areas for Grenada (1988) • Developed land policy and infrastructural guidelines • Generated a zoning map to identify productive agricultural and grazing lands, especially in the south-east Grenada where development pressures were most intense The goal of all of these project outputs - policy, guidelines and zoning map – was to PROTECT and DEVELOP the natural resource of Grenada. 3. National Parks and Protected Areas: The National Parks and Protected Areas System Plan was based on specific criteria such as ecological or geological importance, cultural significance,tourism potential or recreational values. This was a first, important step in viewing the LIMITED LAND RESOURCE in a multiple use context and in the development of a LAND USE POLICY. The National Parks and Protected Areas programme: (i) identified and made recommendations for a course of action to be undertaken for the protection and use of the country’s outstanding natural and cultural heritage (ii) sought to encourage public understanding, appreciation and use of that heritage in ways which would leave it unimpaired for the enjoyment by and use of future generations (iv) was intended to promote and guarantee a continual flow of social and economic benefits to the Grenadian people- e.g protecting water supply and quality; control soil erosion and sedimentation; The Policy and Plan recommended the management of natural and cultural resources in five management categories: • National Parks • Natural landmarks • Cultural landmarks • Protected seascapes • Multiple use management areas 3.1 National Parks: The purpose of declaring national parks was: • The protection of OUTSTANDING NATURAL AND SCENIC AREAS OF NATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE to facilitate recreational, scientific and educational activities. National parks are relatively large land or water areas, containing a complex of ecosystems. They should include the most outstanding natural areas of the country, BE UNDER STRICT GOVERNMENT CONTROL and conform to international standards. e.g. Grand Etang, Levera Pond and Archipelago and High North National Park(Carriacou) 3.2 Natural Landmarks: The purpose of declaring natural landmarks was: • to protect NATURAL FEATURES OF A UNIQUE CHARACTER such as outstanding waterfalls, cave systems, geological features and distinctive landmarks and to ensure that these features do not lose their unique characteristics. e.g. Lake Antoine, Marquis Island, Hog Island, Quarantine Point and Fossil Beds at Grand Bay (Carriacou) 3.3 Cultural Landmarks: The purpose of declaring cultural landmarks was: • to protect cultural features of a unique character such as old sugar and rum mills, military forts, great estate houses and their surrounding houses, churches and Amerindian sites. 3.4 Protected Seascapes: The purpose of declaring protected seascapes was: • to protect outstanding littoral mangrove and island habitats, beaches and coral reefs which possess SPECIAL AESTHETIC AND ECOLOGICAL QUALITIES while continuing to co-exist with lifestyles which have traditionally utilized marine and terrestrial resources. The boundaries of these areas were to be set to include land adjacent to the shorelines and coral reef systems. E.g. Calivigny Harbour, the North Eastern Coastline (extending from Telescope Rock to the south to the Bathway beach in the north) and White/Saline Islands 3.5 Multiple Use Management Area: The purpose of declaring multiple management areas was: • to manage natural resources and ecological processes to contribute significantly to the economic needs of the nation – the lands and waters to provide sustained yields of natural products and conserve genetic diversity. Private lands which needed to be included in the National Parks system could be acquired under the Land Acquisition Ordinance allowing for the acquisition of private lands for public purposes. E.g. Annadale and Concord Watershed 4. National Parks and Protected Areas, Cap 206: Although the Draft Plan and Policy for a System of National Parks and Protected Areas was never officially approved by Cabinet, the National Parks and Protected Areas, Cap 206 was enacted in 1990: • to provide for the designation and maintenance of national parks and protected areas, and for connected purposes. • To provide guidance for the management of a system of protected areas in Grenada. The Act provides for: 1. Section 3(3): The setting up of a National Advisory Parks Council which has responsibility for the proper, maintenance of the land comprising the national park system and for ensuring that all such land ENDURES UNIMPAIRED for the enjoyment of the present and future generations. 2. Declaration of areas as national parks and protected areas: Section 5: The Minister may, by order, declare Government land to be a protected area for the purpose of:- (a) preserving the natural beauty of the area including the flora and fauna thereof; (b) creating a recreational area (c) commemorating an historic event of national importance or (d) preserving a historic landmark or a place or object of historic, prehistoric, archaeological, cultural or scientific importance. 3. Restrictions on lands in national parks: Section 6(1) provides as follows: “Except as provided by this Act, no Government land within the national parks system shall be granted, sold or otherwise disposed of and no person shall settle, use or occupy such land. Section 6(2) No right or title to or interest in any land within the national parks system may be acquired by prescription. 4.1 National Parks and Protected Areas (Amendment) Bill 2007: On Thursday, April 19th, 2007, the National Parks and Protected Areas (Amendment) Bill 2007 was passed in the Upper House. This bill amends Section 6(1) by adding the following new sub-section (1A): “The Governor General may by Proclamation make an EXEMPTION to declare FOR THE PURPOSES OF CONVEYANCE, POSSESSION, USE OR ACCESS OR BOTH, an area declared to be a National Park or a protected area, exempt from the provisions of subsection (1), subject to such terms and conditions as he or she may deem necessary after consultation with the National Parks Advisory Council.” This amendment is in CONFLICT with the intent and spirit of the principal Act and puts at risk all areas now designated national parks and protected areas. 5. Regional and International Commitments: Since the passage of National Parks and Protected Areas Cap 206, Grenada has also signed on to a number of regional and multilateral environmental agreements. Among these are: • The OECS St. George’s Declaration of Principles of Environmental Sustainability which outlines a set of principles that places environmental management as a CORNERSTONE of sustainable development • The Convention on Biological Diversity (signed December 3rd, 1993 and ratified August 11th, 1994). It is under this convention that Grenada committed to protecting the Grenada Dove which is endemic to Grenada (i.e. it is found ONLY in Grenada) and is a critically endangered species. It is sometime around that period that the dove was declared our national bird, • The World Heritage Convention for the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage (acceded to August 13th, 1998). St. George’s has also been submitted as a colonial town to be considered as a World Heritage Site 6. Implementation – the “state of play” in Grenada: 6.1 OPAAL Review Legislative and Institutional Framework: A review of the legislative and institutional framework in Grenada, undertaken in 2006, under the auspices of the OECS Protected Areas and Livelihoods (OPAAL) Project, has found that: 1. That there is no indication that the recommendations in the Draft Policy and Protected Areas System have ever been followed. 2. While the National Parks and Protected Areas Act provides substantial guidance for the management of protected areas in Grenada, it has never been implemented. 3. The Review noted that the Government of Grenada had not implemented the two most important recommendations made by the 1997 Tourism Master Plan re institutional arrangements for improvement of protected area management: • Establishment of the National Parks Authority • Facilitating the updating and approval of the plan for a system of National Parks and Protected Areas (or a similar management framework) to ensure that all critical natural and cultural resources receive adequate protection in an integrated fashion. 4. There is inadequate treatment of external environmental obligations. According to the review, the two GLARING examples are: (i) the obligations under World Heritage Convention for the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage – while St. George’s has been submitted as a colonial town to be considered as a World Heritage Site, there is no policy process in place to bring the site within a system of protected areas. (ii) Grenada is a signatory to the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD). At the 7th meeting, parties of the CBD adopted a programme of work on Protected Areas – i.e. direct actions for planning, selecting, establishing, strengthening and managing protected area systems and sites. Grenada has not yet developed a programme of action to address requirements. 6.2. Review by “we, the people”: A cursory review of the management and use of our national parks and protected areas reveal the following: 6.2.1 National Parks and Protected Areas: • Mt Hartman National Park and Grenada Dove Sanctuary is earmarked for a high end resort development including golf course and million dollar condominiums. The Government of Grenada has recently passed an AMENDMENT to the National Parks and Protected Areas Act. We the people believe that this amendment is to facilitate the conveyance of land including the dove sanctuary to a private foreign developer. The Grenada Government also has a judgment against it by a Belgian bank for a loan that it guaranteed for a would-be investor and this is now part of the NATIONAL DEBT to be borne by we the people. • Woburn/Clarke’s Court Bay - a marina is being developed in the area. Fishing and other traditional uses have been affected. • Perseverance Estate National Park- is the solid waste disposal site in Grenada, more popularly referred to by we the people as the NATIONAL DUMP!! • High North Forest Reserve Carriacou – we the people understand that this forest reserve has been violated • Levera National Park – was turned over to the use and control of private developers who have since gone BUST but not before doing considerable damage to the delicate ecosystem, including the destruction of mangroves and the silting up of the Levera Lake, as well as denying locals access to Bathway beach and affecting the traditional users such as fishermen. We the people have also been left carrying another substantial DEBT BURDEN since our Government also guaranteed a loan of several million dollars for the would be investors. 6.2.2. National Landmarks: What has happened to some of our most treasured land marks? • Lake Antoine, a crater lake – used for irrigation in the River Antoine Banana Project which went BUST. The project was funded by a loan from NIS ($4million, I think). The surrounding land cleared, the watershed almost destroyed and inflow to lake affected and that loan is again part our NATIONAL DEBT BURDEN. In addition, we the people also have grave concerns about our FUTURE NIS benefits. • Hog Island, a geomorphological feature, a volcanic representation of an undisturbed island ecosystem and of aesthetic and recreational value – SOLD TO A PRIVATE DEVELOPER who is excavating the island, clearing it of vegetation including its beautiful coconut palms. It is part of the Mt. Hartman development. Locals have been denied access to the island’s beaches, • Quarantine Point – significant for its aesthetic and recreational quality. It has been LEASED ( a long lease), to the Rotary Club of Grenada . 6.2.3. Protected Seascapes: • North-east seascape extending from Telescope Rock in the south to the Bathway beach in the north – INTENSE BEACH DESTRUCTION in Telescope, Pearls, Conference, La Poterie area destruction as a result of SAND MINING resulting in loss of recreational space for those communities. The near shore is at risk from the sea as the beaches are destroyed. • Southern seascape, lands surrounding Westerhall Bay, Chemin Bay, Egmont Harbour, Calivigny Island, eastern coastline of Mt. Hartman, Canoe and Devil’s Bay; includes the southernmost points and associated reefs of Point Egmont, Fort Jeudy Point and Mt. Hartman Point – marina, exclusive resort development and high end residential development: PRIVATIZED, traditional users denied access to areas they once enjoyed. • La Sagesse, at the estuary of the La Sagesse River within the La Sagesse Bay – Marina development and destruction of mangroves. Traditional use including fishing has been affected. • Tyrell Bay, Carriacou – marina development; fishing and traditional use have been affected. 6.3. St. George’s, Proposed World Heritage Site: We have noted THE UNREGULATED PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT in the town and the DISAPPEARANCE OF THE GREEN SPACES: bus terminus, fish market complex, Zublin development on Melville Street (and they still WANT MORE), building fiasco on Church Street next to the Anglican Church, another monstrosity on the corner of St. John’s and Melville Street, destruction of the Botanic Gardens and the Queen’s Park Recreational area , the destruction of the old hospital ( it was just BLASTED out of existence without a thought or question soon after it had undergone a $0.5 million renovation!) And just what look at what is happening with the skyline of Fort George as the new hospital buildings are being constructed!! Isn’t it ironic that the Minister of Health is also the Minister for the Environment? And even more ironic is the fact that the Physical Planning Unit is the National Focal Point for the World Heritage Convention. This must be “nearer to the church, further from God!!” 6.4 Convention on Biodiversity Before Grenada could develop a programme of action to address requirements coming out of the 7th meeting of parties of the CBD, it was back at the 8th meeting of the Conference of Parties (Brazil, March 2006), where Minister for the Environment, Senator Antoine made the 25/25 pledge - that Grenada will put 25 percent of its near shore marine natural resources and 25 percent of its terrestrial natural resources under effective conversation. Probably it was a case of “mouth open, word jump out!" Within a year of that pledge, Senator Antoine introduced and supported an amendment to the National Parks and Protected Areas Act which will deliver Natural Parks and Protected Areas including the Grenada dove sanctuary into the hands of PRIVATE FOREIGN INVESTORS. As my dear mother would say, “Dat beat all cock fight!!” It is a SORRY state of affairs. It is clear that the current administration has NO COMMITTMENT to National Parks and Protected Areas. The above cursory review reveals an assault on almost all of national parks and protected areas – areas that are dear to us because of their beauty, recreational value and the LIVELIHOODS they facilitate. A very disturbing trend is the PRIVATIZATION of and the EXCLUSION from areas whose use and benefits we the people have enjoyed from time immemorial – the kind of development that is now being proposed by the Port Louis Project. The amendment to the National Parks and Protected Areas Act SIGNALS DANGER and is a call to action by we the people. The current administration cannot be trusted to look after our best interests. Its members will look after interests. The question is WHOSE interests? Are we prepared to become “like aliens in we own land” in the name of tourism development - .so ably expressed by the 1994 St. Lucian Calypso King, Mighty Pep: “Like an alien in we own land, I feel like a stranger and I sensing danger We can’t sell out the whole country to please foreign lobby What’s the point of progress Is it really success If we gain ten billion But lose the land we live on. THE TIME IS NOW!! STAND UP FOR GRENADA!!