Diana McCaulay has sent out this advisory clarification on JET's concerns about the Goat Islands development proposal:

I’m sure you have all been seeing the press coverage with regard to the proposed building of a port facility in the Portland Bight Protected Area in the vicinity of the Goat Islands. I thought it might be worthwhile setting out JET’s position on this matter AGAIN – this has already been said in our various press statements, but somehow much is being lost in some of the overheated rhetoric. See our statement below... -D.McC

Gleaner Link:
http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20130917/cleisure/cleisure4.html


Regarding whether the process of Environmental Impact Assessments(EIA) can be ignored or "weighted" to the preferences of developers, the government (or environmentalists), depending on "suspect"/incomplete data inputs from engineers/geologists/environmental science/economists etc, read Peter Espeut's comments:

Remember that there are always three possible recommendations emerging from an EIA:
• yes, go ahead as planned;
• yes, go ahead but with these modifications to the plan,
• or no, the project is environmentally unsustainable and may not go ahead (i.e., the negative project impacts cannot be adequately mitigated).

Approving the project before the EIA has been conducted is really to declare that "no matter what the EIA says, we are going ahead with the project," which is irresponsible!

Remember also that the EIA cannot begin until CHEC has said definitively what it wants to do. You cannot do an EIA on 'puss inna a bag'. So the terms of reference for the EIA cannot be developed until after April 2014, and since such a study takes about a year to be completed, we won't have the results until around June 2015. Then, and only then, should a decision be taken to proceed or not.

But as I have written before, often in Jamaica, an EIA is just a formality, going through the motions, the decision to go ahead has already been made!

That would seem to be the case here. The Chinese 'puss inna bag' logistics hub is a done deal, no matter what the April 2014 proposal contains, and no matter what the EIA finds. We are that desperate!

There is a big heresy out there, that any and every environmental impact can be mitigated.
Therefore, no project - no matter how damaging - need ever be turned down. But the destruction of natural forests by bauxite mining cannot be mitigated by planting grass on 'restored' mined-out lands.

Replanting mangroves and seagrass in new areas to mitigate the destruction of healthy mangroves and seagrass usually does not work, because if mangroves and seagrass could have grown in those new areas, they would have already been there - naturally. The replants usually die! Artificial reefs are no mitigation for healthy coral reefs; there usually is no coral!

For years, dishonest EIA consultants in this country have recommended that destructive and unsustainable projects be approved "with these additional mitigation measures".
I expect no less in this case.

Jamaicans are more environmentally aware today than ever before. I don't think we are going to buy this 'puss inna bag'.

Gleaner: Puss inna Bag
http://jamaica-gleaner.mobi/gleaner/20130913/cleisure/cleisure2.php

it is really a joke,that the government does not know what happens on Jamaica land,ok you can give approval to look at it,but you must know what they are doing!on the other hand,the goat island is under protection,why did the government not say,hello you can look at it how nice it is,but you can never built something on this island,so,look somewhere else,or let us find together a place,unbelievable

Y'know, it's like selling a kidney to feed our conspicuous consumption frenzy. Disguised as modern development that will elevate poor people, who could object and not be termed backward.

I object!

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/latest/article.php?id=48168