Rocky Point public consultations off to a rocky start

Ryan Mannette provides commentary on the first public consultation for a hotel development by Superior Hotels TT Ltd at Rocky Point in Mt Irvine.

Mannette is a Tobagonian, a marine scientist, and a director of the NGO SpeSeas that advocates for marine conservation and awareness.

The public consultation was highly anticipated. Arrival an hour early was not unusual as there were several people already registered and in their seats at the Buccoo Multipurpose Facility. Closer to the start time, people continued to file in. The numbers were impressive, every seat was filled, then walls were lined, doors were blocked (people were relocated) and people were standing in the courtyard outside where a speaker was mounted.

There were close to 200 attending – more people than at the Toco port EIA consultations three years ago. People from the communities around Mt Irvine, including Pleasant Prospect, people from the surfing community wearing “Save Rocky Point” T-shirts, NGO representatives – Buccoo Reef Trust and SOS Tobago among others, with members of the Tobago House of Assembly looking on.

Certificate of environmental clearance

A development project of this scale and nature requires a Certificate of Environmental Clearance (CEC) from the EMA. The EMA has determined that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), guided by a Terms of Reference (TOR), is required to inform its decision. As part of the EIA process, the developer is required to conduct a series of stakeholder engagement exercises of which this public consultation was the first.

As the consultation began, it was clear that opposition was anticipated, with John Aboud (chairman of Superior Hotels) declaring that they are aware of the various concerns already raised by the public and recognise the importance of the site and they will not be touching the coastline, nor the marine space. However, none of the presentations that followed directly addressed any of the concerns and no clear plan was presented.

The Terms of Reference (TOR) is clear on the objectives of the first public consultation. Apart from introducing the project, the first round of public engagement should be conducted before the EIA studies are initiated and should include:

1. All project proposed designs and alternative actions;

2. Descriptions of the environmental impact assessment process;

3. Precise location of the project and components;

4. All logistics (timelines, resources, schedules) associated with the activities; and

5. Details on the studies to be undertaken

A table was provided showing some generic impacts resulting from the construction and operation of a hotel, and equally generic proposed management options. None of the plans proposed in the CEC application were shown, and no details of the studies planned to inform the EIA were presented. The project team repeatedly stated that the final layout and design were unknown as they are still in the preliminary stages of design. The designs submitted in the CEC application were dismissed as initial concepts that will change as the project progresses.

Most questions were answered with “we don’t know yet.” Comments from Dr George Sammy of Ecoengineering Consultants Ltd implied that the EIA studies are due to commence any day now and the next consultation will take place only after EIA studies were done. It is mind-boggling that even with these studies imminent they were unable to provide basic plans for what studies would be conducted and what methodologies would be employed. Concerned citizens who came to get information were met with no plans, no methods, and no answers. How can the audience even ask the necessary questions without the essential information?

Restriction of access

The concerns brought up by residents were many. Rocky Point has significant cultural and spiritual value. For the surfers, it represents a ritual path to the ocean to access the perfect wave. It is an area for waves internationally recognised and used to train national athletes. For residents, the Point belongs to them, it is iconic and the hotel development indicates that access and freedom to enjoy nature and wilderness in the ever-encroaching concrete coastline of southwest Tobago will be restricted.

Ecologically sensitive

For divers, the coral reefs that line the point are unique and precious, and already under considerable strain. Although Aboud declared that the marine space will not be touched, coastal development already impacts most reefs around Tobago through land-based sources of pollution, no touching required. The main culprits of pollution are grey water, sewage, and sedimentation.

Derek Chung of Undersea Tobago expressed his concern on the impact to his livelihood and others who depend on this reef, one of the last remaining remarkable reefs in southwest Tobago. The reef, Chung remarked, is already being consumed by red algal blooms from the existing pollution. And the development along with climate change impacts of coral bleaching will surely push the reef to a tipping point. Tobago is home to over ten critically-endangered coral species, all of which reside at Mt Irvine.

Back Bay also has some of the highest densities of turtle nesting in southwest Tobago, with the iconic leatherbacks, and hawksbills that nest higher up the beach under cover of sea grapes and manchineel trees. This was pointed out by Niamh Vaughan of SOS Tobago.

This location is ideal because the beach is one of the few remaining nesting beaches on the island still unimpacted by coastal development – intact native coastal vegetation providing shade, with no hard structures, artificial lights, beach chairs, umbrellas, etc. How will the hotel operate without disturbing the nesting, incubation and hatching of both species of sea turtles which can occur almost year-round? As Environmentally Sensitive Species, marine turtles and their habitats are protected under the laws of Trinidad and Tobago.

Water quality

Wastewater management is a known issue for Tobago and throughout the Caribbean with observable impacts to the marine environment. No clear answer was given regarding whether the development will provide their own wastewater treatment facility (as indicated in the information booklet shared) or whether they will rely on the existing WASA infrastructure.

No details were forthcoming about what the expected wastewater output would be or whether the existing infrastructure has the capacity to accommodate this increased load. Additional wastewater loads will put further strain on existing infrastructure with potential negative impacts to the marine environment. If they have their own facility, how will they maintain it?

Where will this effluent be discharged? What safeguards will be put in place to ensure that proper wastewater treatment will be guaranteed for the lifetime of this development? There are very few cases of hotels managing their wastewater treatment well on the island.

Attendees came in expecting, at the very least, a basic understanding of what the development would entail, but instead were left with more questions than before, no clear path and no answers to even the simplest of questions.

It begs the question, will there be another consultation prior to the start of the EIA to share the information as required by the TOR? An EIA requires knowledge of all project activities and the receiving environment to accurately predict the extent of impacts – how can an EIA be executed if there are no known details about the project?