Editorial | Lessons from Wakatipu basin for Dry Harbour Mountains

Dick and Jillian Jardine have no known connection to Jamaica. They are New Zealanders. Their story is, however, relevant. At least, it has resonance.

The Jardines are an intergenerational farming family in the Wakatipu area, in the Central Lakes basin, on New Zealand’s South Island. They are in the news this week for 900 hectares, or over 2,200 acres, of pristine land on the edge of Lake Wakatipu, which they transferred to the Crown, is to be managed by the Queen Elizabeth II National Trust for “the benefit and enjoyment of all New Zealanders”.

The land was in the family for 98 years. In recent times, the Jardines have turned down offers from developers in a district teeming with wealthy people. According to Jillian Jardine, they want to ensure that the biodiversity and the “iconic nature”of the property is protected in perpetuity.

“We thought about this idea and it just stuck, so it feels like the right thing to do,” she told the Guardian newspaper. “We want to keep it as it is forever; we don’t want buildings all over it or housing, there’s so much housing going in … . We want to be part of saving something.”

The idea of wanting to save something has relevance in Jamaica in the face of the controversies over the Government’s decision to allow Noranda Jamaica Partners to mine bauxite on the periphery of the protected Cockpit Country in the parish of Trelawny, and, more recently, Prime Minister Andrew Holness’ overturning of the National Environment and Planning Agency’s (NEPA) refusal to grant a licence to the firm, Jamaica World, to quarry limestone in the Dry Harbour Mountains, near Discovery Bay, St Ann.

SHORT-TERM GAINS

In neither case are the issues clear-cut. But with respect to the latter, the Government’s behaviour appears driven by expected short-term gains, without fully weighing the potential long-term consequences. The approach has also raised questions about the need for additional safeguards, and greater transparency, in the mechanisms intended to protect the environment, especially when ministerial action will have sway over the decision of scientists.

The hilly, karstic Cockpit region in the island’s north is well known for endemic species of plant and animal life. After several years of discussions over how it should be protected, and disputes about its delineation, the Holness administration, three years ago, announced the boundaries for the protected area. Although the boundaries did not satisfy everyone, the fact that the Government had acted won substantial praise for the administration, even from environmentalists.

The Government is quick to emphasise that the area for which the bauxite mining licence was granted was not only previously disturbed, but outside the protected Cockpit Country. Critics, however, insist that it is still important ecologically and that its biodiversity will be damaged by mining, for which the proposed mitigation will offer little cure. The opponents of quarrying in the Dry Harbour Mountains make similar arguments. Except that in this case, there is the element of the Government’s reversal of the decision of its key environmental watchdog, an action that, albeit, was within the law.

In the Dry Harbour Mountains matter, private owners control 570 acres of land, which is estimated to contain over 335 million tonnes of limestone. The owners, over 20 years, want to mine 123.5 acres of the land, extracting around 40 million tonnes. Although the region is not zoned for mining, Jamaica World says that there is precedent. Two million tonnes of limestone was extracted from the very property over a seven-year period, up to 2007, for use on the construction of the North Coast Highway.

NEPA, nonetheless, sided with residents of nearby communities not only on the disruption mining would cause to their lives, but the dangers it posed to the environment, with little chance of mitigation, despite the offerings of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) produced by Jamaica World’s consultants.

FUTURE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT

However, as is allowed by the NEPA Act, Jamaica World appealed and its complaint, ultimately, was upheld by Prime Minister Holness, but with a list of things to do to ameliorate the dangers to the environment.

Mr Holness has implied that part of his consideration in signing off on the appeal was the promise of future real estate development, although it is not clear if that would be on the mined-out lands after the limestone is extracted, or on other parts of the 570 acres. In the event, Jamaicans, unlike New Zealanders with respect to the land near Lake Wakatipu, cannot look forward to a future of the Dry Harbour Mountains in near-pristine condition and its biodiversity intact.

Recent events in Jamaica should encourage caution on how we proceed with these projects. During the hurricane season, the island was never in danger of direct hit. Yet, there were major floods and landslides from rains caused by passing storms. Home and infrastructure were severely damaged. That, in part, was the effect of our destruction of watersheds and failing to protect the natural environment.

As we have suggested before, when ministers hear appeals against decisions by NEPA, all stakeholders should have a say; the law should be amended to make that clear. Additionally, stakeholders, including potentially impacted parties, should perhaps have a say in framing the terms of reference for EIAs. Further, rather than applicants commissioning EIA, maybe the cost should be wrapped up in their application fees, and NEPA invites tenders for their production.