GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO RP679 vol. 1
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
Public Disclosure Authorized
NARIVA SWAMP RESTORATION INITIATIVE (NSRI) Public Disclosure Authorized DEVELOPMENT OF A REFORESTATION SCHEME AND ASSESSMENT OF ITS SOCIAL IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES OF THE NARIVA SWAMP.
SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Final Report
Public Disclosure Authorized
Submitted by:
THE TROPICAL RE-LEAF FOUNDATION
Public Disclosure Authorized P.O. BOX 4424, St. Ann’s Port of Spain Trinidad and Tobago
March 2008
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Several persons and organisations that provided valuable assistance and advice in the preparation of this Reforestation Scheme are hereby acknowledged:
From the Environmental Management Authority: Dr. John Agard (Chairman), Ms. Robyn Cross and Mr. Kishan Kumarsingh (Technical Coordinators) and Mr. Gerard Alleng (Consultant Project Coordinator)
From the Forestry Division: Mr. Anthony Ramnarine (Conservator of Forests), Ms. Nadra Gyan (Director Wildlife Division), Mr. David Boodoo (Senior Game Warden), Mr. Pretam Khemraj (Game Warden), Mr. Roopnarine Singh (Forester I – Private and Community Forestry), Ms. Barbara Scobie (Draughtsman)
Mr. Gerald McVorran, (Chair, National Wetlands Committee) and other members of the National Wetlands Committee.
From the Ministry of Agriculture: Mr. Ian Fletcher (Ag. Officer II, Department of Land Administration), Mr. Timothy Sutchit (Ag. Assistant II, El Reposo Demonstration Centre), Mr. Mohan Lookhoor (Ag Assistant II, Rio Claro Agricultural Extension Office), Ms. Anne Marie Medina, (Deputy Director, Land and Water Development Division), Mr. Frankie Balkissoon, (Agricultural Engineer, Land and Water Development Division), Mr. Ronald Bryce (Hydrologist, Land and Water Development Division), Ms. Mala Powdher (Agricultural Engineer, Land and Water Development Division).
From Fisheries Division: Ms. Sherry Pierre (Aquaculture Officer)
From the Central Statistical Office: Ms. Carol Salim (Senior Statistician)
From the Manatee Conservation Trust: Mr. Guptee Lutchmedial
Various local community organisations: Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group, Kernahan Improvement Committee, Kernaham Farmers Association, Biche United Sports and Cultural Club, Plum Mitan Village Council, Nariva Environmental Trust (NET), Villagers Organised in Conservation of the Environment (VOICE), and Southeast Ecotours.
Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...... 7
2. Project Description ...... 7
3. Legal and Institutional Framework for Management of Nariva Swamp...... 8
3.1. International Agreements...... 8 3.1.1. Ramsar Convention...... 8 3.1.2. CITES ...... 9 3.1.3. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ...... 9 3.1.4. Framework Convention on Climate Change...... 10 3.1.5. The SPAW Protocol...... 11 3.1.6. The IUCN Red List...... 12
3.2. National Legislation...... 12 3.2.1. State Lands Act, Chapter 57:01 ...... 12 3.2.2. The Forests Act, Chapter 66:01 ...... 13 3.2.3. The Conservation of Wildlife Act, Chapter 67:01...... 13 3.2.4. Environmental Management Act of 2000 (EM Act) ...... 13
3.3. Relevant Institutions ...... 14
4. Socio-economic Baseline Conditions ...... 15
4.1. Study Area...... 16
4.2. Settlements...... 16
4.3. Population and Demographics ...... 19
4.4. Economic Activities and Employment ...... 21 4.4.1. National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme ...... 23
4.5. Agricultural Activities...... 24
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
4.6. Land Use/Tenancy...... 29
4.7. Infrastructure...... 31 4.7.1. Social and Community Services ...... 31 4.7.2. Utilities...... 34 4.7.3. Protective Services...... 34 4.7.4. Accessibility and Transport ...... 35
4.8. Culture/Heritage...... 37
4.9. Community Organisations...... 37 4.9.1. Customs/Attitudes...... 39 4.9.2. Concerns and Expectations...... 40
5. Impacts...... 41
5.1. Positive...... 41 5.1.1. Creation of Employment Opportunities...... 41 5.1.2. Restoration of Wildlife Habitats...... 42 5.1.3. Reduction in Bush Fires...... 43 5.1.4. More Disciplined Land Management ...... 43 5.1.5. Carbon Sequestration...... 44
5.2. Negative ...... 44 5.2.1. Compulsory Removal of Agricultural Squatters...... 44
5.3. Potential Loss of Livelihood (income) ...... 46
5.4. Impacts Summary...... 46
6. Mitigation Measures ...... 47
6.1. Relocation/Redistribution of Land...... 47
6.2. Creation of Employment Opportunities...... 49 6.2.1. Planting, Tending and Fire Protection ...... 49 6.2.2. Nursery Operations...... 50 6.2.3. Public Awareness...... 50
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
6.2.4. Drainage Maintenance Operations...... 50 6.2.5. Nariva-Specific Game Warden Programme ...... 51 6.2.6. Fire Guardians...... 51 6.2.7. Research and Monitoring...... 51
6.3. Alternative Livelihood Options ...... 52 6.3.1. Community-based Ecotourism Activities...... 52 6.3.2. Aquaculture...... 53
6.4. Co-Management of Natural Resources...... 53
6.5. Mitigation Management Plan...... 54
7. Monitoring Plan ...... 55
8. Stakeholder Involvement ...... 55
Bibliography
Appendix I: Stakeholder Consultations Appendix II: Report on Public Consultation Appendix III: Tables of Socio-Economic Data
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
List of Tables
Table 1: Population of Study Area………………………………………………………….18 Table 2: Income Levels in Study Area……………………………………………………...20 Table 3: Type of Worker……………………………………………………………………21 Table 4: Residential Land Tenancy…………………………………………………………30 Table 5: Educational Levels……………………………………………………………...…31 Table 6: Exam Pass Levels………………………………………………………………….31 Table 7: Summary of Impacts………………………………………………………………45 Table 8: Summary of Mitigation Measures…………………………………………………56 Table 9: Monitoring Plan …..…………...………………………………………………….57
List of Figures
Figure 1: Community Districts……………………………………………………………..17 Figure 2: Settlements………………………………………………………………………..19 Figure 3: Block A Food Crop Project Survey and Development Plans……………………..24 Figure 4: Kernahan Food Crop Project Survey and Development Plans…………………...25 Figure 5: Preliminary Land Use……………………………………………………………..29 Figure 6: Infrastructure……………………………………………………………………...35
List of Photos
Photos 1 & 2: Examples of housing in Kerhahan…………………………………………...16 Photo 3: Agricultural lands south of Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary……………………….27 Photo 4: Kernahan Community Shelter……………………………………………………..32 Photo 5: “Bento” lands in the distance………………………………………………………46 Photo 6: Meeting with farmers in Kernahan ………………………………………………..55 Photo 7: Community Consultation with Plum Mitan and Biche residents………………….55 Photo 8: Public Consultation at Manatee Conservation Trust, Manzanilla…………………55
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
1. Introduction
In 1999 the Government of Trinidad and Tobago launched the Nariva Swamp Restoration Initiative (NSRI) under which a work plan was developed with a view to implementing some of the recommendations of the Nariva Swamp Management Plan and the Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by the Institute of Marine Affairs (IMA) for the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources. The work plan focused on the restoration of hydrology, aquatic vegetation and forests; and on the implementation of a fire-fighting program for the Nariva Swamp. The activities of the NSRI along with the recent establishment of the Nariva Swamp as an Environmentally Sensitive Area are expected to limit access to the Swamp’s natural resources and subsequently have the potential to affect the livelihoods and incomes of communities living around the Swamp.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation (TRF) was contracted by the Environmental Management Authority (EMA) to prepare a Nariva Reforestation Scheme. The primary purpose of the Scheme is to support the restoration of damaged areas within the Nariva Swamp in order to recreate vegetation conditions similar to those of the late 1960s. Recognising that the Reforestation Scheme is likely to impact on individuals whose livelihoods depend on the Swamp’s resources, the EMA requested that the TRF include an assessment of social impacts as a component of the Reforestation Scheme. The following social impact assessment looks at the current socio-economic baseline conditions of the communities of the Nariva Swamp, identifies possible social impacts of the Nariva Reforestation Scheme and makes recommendations for the mitigation of negative impacts. These measures are anticipated to potentially expand possible benefits of the Scheme for the communities involved and ensure that the project is more sustainable and socially acceptable.
2. Project Description
The overall objective of the Reforestation Scheme is to restore as far as possible the original vegetative cover of the Nariva Swamp while improving the capacity of this cover for carbon sequestration and wildlife habitat. Restoration of 1,339 ha of altered forest cover will be achieved through the artificial regeneration of ecologically compatible species. Reforestation activity is broken down as follows:
Artificial regeneration of Swamp Forest in Plum Mitan (Sector B1) 1,132 ha Artificial regeneration of Swamp Forest in The Bowl (Sector B2) 32 ha Artificial regeneration of Evergreen Seasonal Forest in Plum Mitan (Sector A1) 48 ha Artificial regeneration of Evergreen Seasonal Forest in Kernahan (Sector C1) 127 ha Total: 1,339 ha
All these Sectors fall within the boundaries of the ESA, except Sector C1. This Sector which was originally forty (40) ha was extended beyond the southern boundary of the ESA to take in an additional eighty-seven (87) ha of land presently occupied by agricultural squatters. A
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 7 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
small part of this additional area might encroach upon land legitimately reserved for agriculture under the Ministry of Agriculture Kernahan Food Crop Project, where some residential squatting is reported. This would need to be verified and excised from the Reforestation Scheme if necessary. This is expected to entail a loss of no more than thirty- five (35) ha of Reforestation Scheme land.
Artificial regeneration will be labour intensive and will involve ground preparation, tree planting, tree maintenance and the protection of the crop from fire and other threats. Planting stock will be raised in a nursery to be established in the Plum Mitan area. Portions of each the areas targeted for artificial regeneration are currently illegally occupied by farmers who would have to be relocated. Although it is desirable that all farmers be relocated prior to any planting, reforestation sectors B1 and B2 have more than enough unoccupied land area for planting to begin in 2008 while the issue of farmer relocation is resolved. It is advised that all relocation be completed prior to the 2010 planting season.
It is envisaged that the nursery will employ seven (7) persons and the reforestation operations will employ one hundred twenty (120) persons over a five year period. Planting operations are expected to commence in June 2008 with plantings from an outside nursery. Establishment of the nursery will also commence in June 2008 with a target to be operational by January 2009 in order to supply plants for 2009 – 2012 planting activities.
3. Legal and Institutional Framework for Management of Nariva Swamp
3.1. International Agreements
The following International Agreements, to which the Government of Trinidad and Tobago is a party, have relevance to the management of the Nariva swamp.
3.1.1. Ramsar Convention
The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) is the only global environmental treaty dealing with a particular ecosystem. The Convention’s mission is "the conservation and wise use of wetlands by national action and international cooperation as a means to achieving sustainable development throughout the world". Trinidad and Tobago joined this treaty on the 21st December 1992, and Nariva Swamp was designated as this country’s first Ramsar site.
In June 1993, Trinidad and Tobago further requested that the Swamp be added to the Montreux Record, a list of endangered wetlands, because of the destruction being caused by the illegal rice farming within the Swamp. With an end to the large-scale rice farming, the Nariva Swamp was later removed from the record.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 8 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
As a contracting party, Trinidad and Tobago is committed to ensuring the maintenance of the ecological character of each site recorded on the list of Wetlands of International Importance (the Ramsar list), including wetland conservation within their national land-use planning, and establishing nature reserves on wetlands.
3.1.2. CITES
Trinidad and Tobago is a signatory to the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and it entered into force in this country in 1984. Its primary goal is to provide protection for plant and animal species that may become threatened due to the activities of international trade by controlling the international trade of specimens of certain species of wildlife. The species listed under the CITES Convention require a licence for export, import, re-export and introduction into a new area. The species of CITES are listed in three Appendices:
• Appendix I is inclusive of all species that that are threatened with extinction, and trade is completely restricted and allowable only in exceptional circumstances;
• Appendix II are those species that are vulnerable or rare and as such their trade is incompatible with their survival;
• Appendix III covers the species that are protected in at least one country, the CITES Parties are asked to help control their trade.
The signatories to CITES are mandated to set up Management Agencies that administer the licences needed for species trade, and Scientific Authorities to act as advisors on the effects of trade on the status of certain species. Under this treaty, funding was provided for conservation projects. The Forestry Division is the Management Agency for CITES. However, the designation of protected species often requires the coordination of more than one governmental department. Many of the species that warrant protection under CITES are yet to be safeguarded nationally. The Nariva Swamp ESA is the habitat for species that fall under the CITES listing of threatened and endangered species, including the West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus) and the Red Howler Monkey (Alouatta seniculus).
3.1.3. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
Trinidad and Tobago became signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) at the historic Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The CBD was the first convention that specifically addressed the issues of conservation and sustainable usage of the Earth’s
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 9 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008 biological diversity. It was formed out of a need for the provision of a broad approach to sustainable development. Sustainable development is the process whereby the needs of humans are met without sacrificing environmental integrity. The most important aspects of the Convention were the protection and conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of the resources of the environment and the equitable division of the gains earned from the use of the earth’s genetic resource.
As a signatory Government, Trinidad and Tobago formulated the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) in 2001, in keeping with Article 6 of the convention. The NBSAP was adopted by the country’s Cabinet and is freely available from the EMA. The NBSAP is a framework for enhancing the management of natural resources of the country and serves to effectively highlight the key issues involved in achieving this.
Article 8 of the Convention requires each party country to establish protected areas and prevent species eradication. Public participation and education and awareness are encouraged with regards to planning for and managing biological resources and diversity.
3.1.4. Framework Convention on Climate Change
Trinidad and Tobago acceded to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in May 1994. The UNFCC recognises that the climate system is a shared resource whose stability is affected by emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. It sets an overall framework for intergovernmental efforts to tackle the challenge posed by climate change. Its main features are:
• Legally binding targets for emissions of six major greenhouse gases in industrialized countries during first commitment period
• New international market-based mechanisms, creating a new commodity: carbon
• Facilitation of sustainable development and additional support to developing countries on adaptation
The last two features figure in the Kyoto Protocol of the UNFCC. The Kyoto Protocol is essentially an elaboration and refinement of the UNFCCC. Among other things, it sets binding quantitative emissions reduction targets for developed country Parties which must be achieved during the first “commitment period” 2008 – 2012, using 1990 as the base year. No targets have been set for developing country Parties. At a recent Conference of the Parties in Bali, Indonesia discussions were initiated on arrangements for the second commitment period. These arrangements have not yet been finalized.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 10 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
To assist developed country Parties to achieve their targets, the Protocol includes a range of “flexibility mechanisms”, the most important of which, from the perspective of Trinidad and Tobago, is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).
Under the CDM, developed country Parties are allowed to undertake sustainable development (emission reduction) projects in developing country Parties to partially fulfill their “quantified emissions limitation and reduction commitments” under the Convention/Protocol. The CDM is relevant to the Nariva Reforestation Scheme in that the latter is being developed with a view to having it qualify for carbon credits under the CDM. The Nariva Project is applying the methodology coded as AR-AMS0003 entitled Simplifying Baseline and Monitoring Methodology for Small Scale CDM Afforestation and Reforestation.
3.1.5. The SPAW Protocol
The Protocol concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife to the Cartegena Convention (the SPAW Protocol) was formulated to provide protection to particular habitats and threatened species. It entered into force in Trinidad and Tobago in August 1999. It is a regional agreement that includes countries located in the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea and the adjacent Atlantic Ocean. This Protocol specifies the protection of threatened and endangered wildlife species, the establishment and management of protected areas, and species conservation through national, co-operative processes.
As a contracting party to the SPAW Protocol, the Government is obligated to protect areas of the country under its jurisdiction as specified by Article 4, and to enact national legislation to do so. There is also a mandate to prevent the trade in species that are included in its listing of threatened or endangered species, complementing the CITES agreement.
Under Article 11 of the Protocol, there were three species Annexes and the contracting parties are to adopt all necessary measures to protect and recover species listed in Annexes I, II and III. The Annexes are:
• Annex I: includes floral species as identified by SPAW as requiring total protection and recovery;
• Annex II: includes faunal species as identified by SPAW as requiring total protection and recovery;
• Annex III: includes faunal and floral species whose usage must be regulated.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 11 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
3.1.6. The IUCN Red List
The World Conservation Union (IUCN) has voluntary academic and technical contributions from a host of brilliant scientists and experts from more 180 countries. It has contributed to environmental conventions, global standards and disseminated a wealth of scientific of scientific knowledge.
The IUCN formulated the renowned Red List to draw attention to the importance and vulnerability of the world’s biodiversity. The Red List is deemed by the IUCN as being the most exhaustive catalogue of the current status of plants and animals in the world. Criteria are generated for the evaluation of the status of a particular species with regard to its risk of extinction. It can be used to determine how threatened a particular species is, and identify the priority species that need to be elevated for dedicated conservation efforts and further protection. It is also used to provide information to the policymakers of the CBD and CITES.
3.2. National Legislation
The following pieces of national legislation have relevance to the management of the Nariva Swamp.
3.2.1. State Lands Act, Chapter 57:01
The State Lands Act, by virtue of Section 6, empowers the Commissioner of State Lands to manage all State Lands. Section 6 also gives the Commissioner the authority to prevent squatting and encroachment upon State Lands and the spoil and injury to the woods and forest of such lands. The Commissioner also has a mandate to superintend lots in districts under his control, to superintend the allotment of State Lands, and to superintend the laying of village lots in such districts.
Further to this, the State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) Act of 1998 provides protection to squatters from being evicted from State lands. The schedules of the Act require the addition of areas of Trinidad and Tobago where regularisation of tenure will not be granted by state authorities. These areas are to be those that have been designated as ESAs; those that are important for the provision and protection of water resources; and green belt areas, like forestry conservation areas.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 12 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
3.2.2. The Forests Act, Chapter 66:01
The Forests Act provides for the establishment of Forest Reserves and is primarily concerned with the removal of timber and other forest products from these Reserves. The Act gives forest officers the authority to arrest and bring charges against those who commit offences on these Reserves. The authority does not extend to State Lands in general but forest officers do administer the State Land Forest Produce Rules.
The Forests Act makes provision for the declaration of prohibited areas, defined as specified areas being parts of a Forest reserve or State Land declared by the President by proclamation to be prohibited areas. Section 8(b) makes it an offence to enter a prohibited area. Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary was declared a Prohibited Area by virtue of Legal Notice No. 155 of 27 September 1989. The Ramsar site covering the lower half of the Nariva Swamp was designated as a Prohibited Area by Legal Notice No. 78 of 21 May 1993. Under this designation, prohibitions are placed on the entry and use of these areas. However, this only provides limited protection to ecosystems and their species.
3.2.3. The Conservation of Wildlife Act, Chapter 67:01
Wildlife conservation in Trinidad and Tobago is attained primarily through the Conservation of Wildlife Act. Its basis lies in the regulation of game species using a permit system, gaming seasons and wildlife refuges.
Section 3 of the Conservation of Wildlife Act provides for the establishment of Game Sanctuaries in which it is illegal to hunt. Bush Bush was declared a Wildlife Sanctuary on 16 July 1968. Section 3 also provides for the regulation of hunting. As a further measure to protect wildlife, Section 7 of the Act prohibits hunting during the closed season which runs from April 1 to September 30. The Act, in addition, makes provision for the appointment of Game Wardens and Honorary Game Wardens, who are given inter alia the powers of search and seizure. They are also given the power to arrest without a warrant.
3.2.4. Environmental Management Act of 2000 (EM Act)
The Environmental Management Act sought to provide a more comprehensive framework for addressing the issue of biodiversity loss and protection, by the formulation of guidelines on the designation and protection of “environmentally sensitive species” and “environmentally sensitive areas”. The primary goal of designating an area an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) under the Rules, 2001, is the protection and conservation of areas representative of the different ecosystems of the country and their species diversity.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 13 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
The ESA Rules limit and/or provide conditions for a number of uses and activities within the Nariva Swamp. The most important ones are:
• any action that will alter or upset the integrity of the natural functioning of the ecosystems of the ESA or cause undue distress to the plant or animal communities of the ESA; • hunting, trading, taking or killing of animals; • cutting or extraction of plants, trees, soil or any other material from land surface; • the willful introduction of any alien, non-native or illegal plant or animal species; • the use of pesticides, fungicides, insecticides and any other chemicals; • the removal, damage or exportation of animals, plants, soil or any material from land surface; • the extraction, quarrying or mining of any materials from the land surface of the ESA; • prospecting and surveying for the purposes of mineral extraction; • dredging, filling or excavating; • removing or destroying the natural physical features of the ESA; • the possession or use of explosives; • the removal, destruction, damaging or defacing of any object, which is of scientific, historical, archaeological, cultural or palaeontological interest; • the lighting, usage or maintenance of fire; • fishing or the possession of any equipment for the purposes of fishing; • dumping, littering or polluting, including the discharging or depositing of any refuse, oily liquids, waste acids, deleterious chemicals or any other toxic or polluting substances of any kind injurious to plants, animals or their habitats; • the unauthorized use of any motor-powered boat, vessel or conveyance.
3.3. Relevant Institutions
The Nariva Swamp has traditionally been managed by a number of State Institutions. The Commissioner of State Lands has overall responsibility for all the lands in the swamp but has vested some of these lands in other State agencies.
The Forestry Division is a key agency. Part of the Ortoire Nariva Windbelt Reserve falls within the Nariva Swamp ESA. It is vested in the Forestry Division and this Reserve is one of the Reserves in the South East Conservancy which is overseen by an Assistant
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 14 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Conservator of Forests. The Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary is part Forest Reserve and part State Land, but the Wildlife Section of the Forestry Division enforces the provisions of the Conservation of Wildlife Act here. The Ramsar Site, which encompasses the Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary, is largely State Land but is the responsibility of the Forestry Division since it was proclaimed a Prohibited Area under the provision of the Forests Act.
Lands in the Plum Mitan and Kernahan areas have also been vested in the Ministry of Agriculture for agricultural projects. The Departments of Land Administration, Extension and Land and Water Development are key agencies in this Ministry.
In terms of policy making for the Nariva Swamp, a cabinet-appointed Committee, the National Wetlands Committee, performs an advisory function. It is comprised of representatives from Forestry Division; Environmental Management Authority; Tobago House of Assembly; Institute of Marine Affairs; Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources; Department of Life Sciences, University of the West Indies; Pointe-a-Pierre Wildfowl Trust; and the Zoological Society of Trinidad and Tobago. The Committee is currently preparing a Revised National Wetlands Policy.
With the designation of the Nariva Swamp as an ESA, the entire area will now fall under the aegis of a Nariva Swamp ESA Management Committee, which is yet to be installed and become operational. Typically ESA management committees have been headed by a representative of the EMA or the Forestry Division, however, the structure of the committee is open to modification dependent on the needs of the ESA’s stakeholders.
For the implementation of the Nariva Reforestation Scheme, the Forestry Division has been named as the Executing Agency, but all the activities of the agencies operating in the ESA will be co-ordinated by the EMA under the provisions of the EMA Act.
4. Socio-economic Baseline Conditions
The socio-economic baseline was generated following a comprehensive review of existing literature, analysis of additional secondary socio-economic data and the conduct of a series of stakeholder consultations, which included meetings with representatives from the Nariva Swamp communities. In addition to generating valuable baseline data and information on stakeholder attitudes and concerns, the community consultations provided stakeholder input into the development of possible mitigation measures. See Appendix I for a complete consultation listing. A summary of the draft Reforestation Scheme was presented to stakeholders at a public consultation held at the Manatee Conservation Trust in Manzanilla. A report on the public consultation is found in Appendix II.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 15 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
4.1. Study Area
The Nariva Swamp is located midway along the eastern coast of Trinidad. It falls within the regional jurisdictions of the Sangre Grande and Mayaro/Rio Claro Regional Corporations and is split between the electoral districts of Cumuto/Manzanilla and Mayaro. For the purposes of the socio-economic baseline conditions, a wider study area and an immediate study area were defined. The wider study area encompasses the community districts which fall within an approximate 5 km radius of the boundary of the Nariva Swamp Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) and encompasses nineteen (19) community districts as defined by the Central Statistical Office (CSO) 2000 Housing and Population Census Community Register. (Figure 1) Looking at the wider study area helps to establish the socio- economic context in which the swamp is located. The immediate Study Area concerns those settlements found in close proximity to the ESA boundary (less than 2 km) and for whom access to the swamp has important livelihood considerations. The immediate study area will be the primary focus of this social impact assessment.
4.2. Settlements
The settlements of the study area are small, rural, primarily residential settlements with historical and current links to agriculture. Plum Mitan and Kernahan/Cascadoux have their histories in rice cultivation whereas the agricultural estates which helped to found the Biche community had holdings in cocoa, coffee, and fruit crops. Early settlers were drawn to the area by the flora and fauna and the conditions which were favourable to agriculture. At the time the settlements were developing, rice and to a lesser extent watermelon were the preferred agricultural crops. The general trend for the early settlers was for temporary settlement, but over the years, as more people began to settle in the area, the houses and infrastructure began to take on a more permanent nature. Agriculture slowly moved from primarily subsistence to more commercial in nature.
Rio Claro is the largest settlement of the study and the administrative centre for southeast Trinidad. Apart from Rio Claro and environs, populations are concentrated in the next largest settlements of Biche, Mayaro and Manzanilla. Settlements in the study area are typically characterised by ribbon development, with the exception of Kernahan and Cascadoux whose houses are spread out amongst the agricultural plots which constitute the community. These settlements are essentially agricultural squatter communities which began some forty (40) years ago with the relocation of rice farmers from the Penal, Debe, and Oropouche areas. The community has slowly established itself as residents created more permanent housing in place of the temporary camps initially built to support their agricultural activities.
The majority of houses in the wider study area are constructed of wood/concrete with basic amenities available, albeit at rates lower than both the regional and national averages. The communities of the study area are not viewed as priority areas for development either at the regional or national levels and as such receive little state support for infrastructural or
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 16 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008 economic development. Despite recent improvements in the availability of some basic amenities, lack of regularised land tenure and limited employment and economic alternatives continue to characterise the communities of the Nariva swamp.
Photos 1 & 2: Examples of housing within Kernaham settlement.
The community districts which constitute the immediate study area are Cocal/Estate/Mayaro (Kernahan and Cascadoux are within this community district), Plum Mitan, Biche, and to a lesser extent Manzanilla. The settlements of Plum Mitan, Manzanilla and Biche are located to the north and west of the Nariva Swamp with Kernahan and Cascadoux located to the south (Figure 2).
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 17 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Source: Base Map from CSO Population Distribution of Communities by Municipal Districts Map
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 18 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
4.3. Population and Demographics
According to CSO 2000 data the wider study has a population of approximately 24,000. The immediate study area is estimated to have just under 7,000 residents constituting 1,400 households. (Table 1) Population levels appear to have remained fairly consistent during the period 1970 - 1990, however, the latest census figures indicate that the populations of Plum Mitan and Kernahan/Cascadoux may have declined slightly. There are no significant age or gender characteristics which put the study area population at significant variance with either regional or national figures, however, the Cocal Estate/Mayaro community district has a slightly higher percentage of residents below the age of twenty (20). (Appendix III - Table 1)
TABLE 1: SETTLEMENT AND POPULATION STATISTICS FOR STUDY AREA # of # of Community District Male Female Total Households Businesses
CHARUMA VILLAGE 110 116 226 55 3 FOUR ROADS/TAMANA 160 133 293 199 10 ST. JOSEPH VILLAGE 160 139 299 80 5 MORA SETTLEMENT 173 165 338 88 3 CANQUE 183 171 354 92 15 DEEP RAVINE/CLEAR WATER 200 189 389 97 2 COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 225 177 402 106 7 AGOSTINI VILLAGE 229 227 456 106 13 ORTOIRE 258 293 551 134 9 MAFEKING 699 691 1,390 376 29 CUSHE/NAVET 785 679 1,464 380 28 PLUM MITAN 791 687 1,478 197 22 UNION VILLAGE 799 742 1,541 386 30 ECCLESVILLE 1,051 897 1,948 475 27 NAVET VILLAGE 1,064 900 1,964 531 44 MANZANILLA 1,081 931 2,012 402 52 MAYARO 1,141 1,211 2,352 621 99 BICHE 1,542 1,345 2,887 690 71 RIO CLARO 1,657 1,648 3,305 861 237 WIDER STUDY AREA 12,198 11,225 23,423 5,821 703 Regional Corporation 15,667 14,631 30,298 9,950 Trinidad 556,110 558,662 1,114,772 303, 871 Source: CSO data calculated from the 2000 Housing and Population Census
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 19 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 20 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Ethnically, the people of the study area are predominantly of East Indian descent. A wide range of religious traditions are practiced with Hinduism having the largest single following, however, residents are divided fairly evenly between Christian and Hindu religious traditions (Appendix III - Tables 2 & 3).
4.4. Economic Activities and Employment
The region and the study area, due in part to their rural nature, are characterised by low levels of economic opportunity and relatively high unemployment levels. Although the most recent unemployment figures (2004 Labour Force Report) are not available broken down to the community district level, the Nariva/Mayaro region has an unemployment rating of 11% versus the national figure of 8% for 2004. Both figures represent a significant drop from 2000 figures which were 17% and 12% respectively. Although residents state that unemployment remains a large problem for the area, they recognise that government programmes such as CEPEP and the National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme have been able to provide employment to some residents.
A critical element for assessing an area’s economic condition, in addition to unemployment levels, is statistics on income levels. Both the study area and the region record as high as 60% of the population earning less than $1,000/month (Table 2). The recently released 2005 Trinidad and Tobago Survey of Living Conditions indicates the poverty levels have dropped nationally yet the Mayaro/Rio Claro region remains one of the poorest regions with 27% of the area’s population (versus 17% nationally) living below the derived poverty line ($7,980 annually or $665/monthly). This figure is an estimate of what would be necessary for an adult to attain the minimum level of nutrition deemed adequate to maintain good bodily health at the prices available in the market during the time of the survey (mid year 2005) plus an accommodation for items other than food that individuals and households would need.
TABLE 2: INCOME LEVELS
< 500- 1,000- 2,000- 3,000- 4,000- 5,000- > ` Community District 500 999 1,999 2,999 3,999 4,999 9,999 10,000
BICHE 46% 18% 15% 5% 1% 1% 0% 0% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 33% 21% 12% 8% 1% 1% 1% 1% PLUM MITAN 47% 16% 13% 5% 2% 1% 1% 0% WIDER STUDY AREA 45% 15% 14% 8% 2% 2% 1% 1% Regional Corporation 45% 14% 13% 9% 3% 2% 2% 1% Trinidad 37% 12% 15% 9% 3% 4% 3% 1% Source: CSO data calculated from the 2000 Housing and Population Census
Full time farmers are considered “own account” workers (a person who operates his or her own economic enterprise or engages independently in a profession or trade), a category which represents approximately forty percent (40%) of the study area population. The
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 21 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
majority of own account workers employ no labour, however farmers indicate they may employ labour on a seasonable basis. Just over twenty percent (20%) of the population is employed in both government and in private sector jobs. Table 3 below highlights an interesting trend in the Cocal Estate/Mayaro community district in that as much as 26% of the working population falls under the unpaid worker category. This category generally refers to family members who support the family business without pay. Family members often provide the additional agricultural labour that may be required.
Agriculture is by far the dominant industry in the area employing over 50% of the study area population; the construction industry is estimated to employ approximately 11% (Appendix III – Table 4). In addition to agriculture, area residents cite reforestation as a source of employment. The recently inaugurated (2004) National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme engages three local community groups each offering employment to thirty-five (35) individuals. Fishing and hunting provide seasonal livelihood opportunities for a small number of area residents, but declining stocks have made these activities primarily a subsistence activity rather than commercial. Residents also cite having employment opportunities as labourers for a variety of state agencies including the Ministry of Agriculture. A few individuals get employment with a CEPEP contractor who operates out of Sangre Chiquito.
TABLE 3: TYPE OF WORKER Own Own Paid Worker Unpaid Account Account Community District Private Worker w/No Paid With Paid Government Enterprise help Help BICHE 24% 26% 0% 37% 4% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 15% 12% 26% 46% 0% PLUM MITAN 23% 28% 4% 34% 1% WIDER STUDY AREA 23% 35% 2% 29% 2% Regional Corporation 23% 39% 2% 25% 2% Trinidad 16% 51% 0% 15% 3% Source: CSO data calculated from the 2000 Housing and Population Census
In general, education levels are low so the only jobs available are those at the elementary levels. As much of 40% of the population is employed in low level jobs (elementary, craft, sales and service) either in state or private enterprise; many residents report having to engage in a number of economic activities in order to support their families. Agriculture, fishing and hunting, therefore, supplement other types of employment.
The Forestry Division employs labour from the community to assist in its ecotourism (mostly school group visits to the Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary), fire protection, trail maintenance and game warden programmes. Of the approximately twenty (20) people employed with Forestry Division, only four are employed on a regular daily basis. The other work available from Forestry tends to be seasonal or provides only a small monthly stipend.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 22 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Fishing (harvesting of cascadoux, conch and crab) provides a livelihood to a limited number of residents, but more people practice fishing as a subsistence activity than for commercial purposes. Additionally, fishing only takes place during the dry season. Permits are required to fish within the Prohibited Area and are generally restricted to residents of the wider study area. The procedure to obtain permits has been greatly eased since the establishment of the Forestry Division Field Station in Kernahan where permits are now issued. Previously permit seekers had to travel to St. Joseph to obtain a permit to access the prohibited area. Residents in both the Plum Mitan and Kernahan areas have reported that fish stocks have dwindled in recent years. Forestry Division officers say that perpetual bush fires, agricultural practices involving chemicals and illegal fishing methods have all contributed to a lower quality and quantity of fish stock.
Hunting is not allowed in the prohibited area of the Nariva Swamp; however, Forestry Division notes that illegal hunting and poaching remain a problem. Residents of the immediate study area state indicate that individuals from the wider study area and beyond partake in these illegal activities, and blame illegal hunters for much of the ongoing destruction in the swamp.
The presence of illegal crops, once a problem in the area, has been greatly reduced in recent years due to increased activities in the area by the Ministry of National Security as well as a regular presence of the Forestry Division since the Field Station was built in 2002.
4.4.1. National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme (NRWRP)
The National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme (NRWRP) is a Government-funded national reforestation initiative established by the Ministry of Public Utilities and the Environment in 2004. The purpose of the programme is to engage community groups in reforestation activities. Community groups are employed as contractors who are required to source and manage labour gangs of 35 people. Contractors earn 20% of the overall wage bill as a management fee. Provision of equipment, uniforms and workers salaries is handled by the NRWRP administration. It is reported that a labourer on a NRWRP project now earns $85/day less NIS.
Three community groups from the area (Kernahan Improvement Committee, Nariva Environmental Trust, and the Biche Sports and Cultural Group) have had NRWRP contracts to conduct reforestation exercises for the past three years. Of the three groups, only the Kernahan Improvement Committee has conducted reforestation activities within the boundaries of the Nariva ESA. The Committee executed reforestation projects in Sandhill and in Kernahan.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 23 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Reforestation sites are selected after a review of recommendations from the local contractor (community group) and from the Forestry Division. A NRWRP Site Supervisor will visit the site with the local contractor to verify its suitability after which a final approval is sought by the Forestry Division. Local forestry officers say that they are not sure exactly where the reforestation sites are and that approval for these sites takes place at a higher level.
4.5. Agricultural Activities
When small scale farmers first came to the area, rice was the main agricultural crop cultivated on lands in and around the Nariva Swamp. In the last 15 – 20 years the dominant crop has shifted from rice to watermelon. Other crops currently cultivated include bodi, okro, pimento, lettuce, patchoi, tomatoes, and cucumber. Watermelon is a preferred crop given its short cultivation period (3 months). Active farmers say they can usually put down two to three crops per year whereas other crops generally take six to nine months before they can be harvested. Watermelon yields are approximately 25,000 – 35,000 lbs/ha. Produce is generally sold wholesale ex-farm or at one of the wholesale markets (Port of Spain or Macoya). Depending on the price of watermelon which can range from $1.00 - $2.50/lb retail, farmers can net between $37,000 - $45,000/ha per crop. Generally, agriculture within the study area has been and continues to be characterised by lack of tenure, lack of mechanisation, poor drainage and inadequate irrigation structures. Other issues which farmers say plague their livelihoods are pests and fungi.
Figures from the CSO 2004 Agricultural Census estimate the number of legitimate farmers in the area to be approximately 517 (Appendix III - Table 5), however these figures are not likely to include those farmers who do not have official leases and therefore not considered bona fide farmers. The figures will also exclude those who practice agriculture in addition to having another job or those who work as agricultural labour on other people’s plots and estates. Agricultural labour typically earns $75 – 100/day.
A handful of farmers engage in animal husbandry, raising primarily sheep and cattle. A few years ago the Rio Claro Agricultural Extension Office obtained funding to launch a duck project with the Kernahan farmers. The Ministry provided training, one drake and four hens and feed for the start up period of the project and assistance in setting up cages. The project seemed to do well until farmers were expected to provide their own feed and then lost interest. Farmers say the funding was spread too thin for any one farmer to be able make a livelihood. Theft was also a problem.
Currently there are two Ministry of Agriculture sanctioned agricultural schemes within the study area – the Plum Mitan Food Crop Project in Block A and the Cocal Kernahan Food Crop Project on the southern boundary of the Nariva Swamp ESA. These developments accommodate small-scale agricultural activity for which leases must be obtained from the Lands and Surveys Division of the Ministry of Agriculture. Farmers are expected to pay rent on the leased lots but few, if any, rents are collected.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 24 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Figure 3: Block A Food Crop Project Survey and Development Plans
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 25 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Figure 4: Kernahan Food Crop Project Survey and Development Plans
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 26 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Figures 3 & 4 illustrate the current survey plans for these two agricultural areas. The figures also indicate the level of infrastructural development (roads, canals, bridges, sluice gates, pumps, ponds, etc.) currently being undertaken by the Land and Water Development Division (LWDD) of the Ministry of Agriculture. These development initiatives are designed to address the perennial problems of flooding in the rainy season and lack adequate water for irrigation in the dry season. Work has been underway since 2006 and to date has included the cleaning of drains and channels, installation of pumps and sluice gates, and an upgrading of the existing road infrastructure which is currently inadequate, particularly in the Kernahan area. Most works are expected to be completed by the end of the current fiscal year (September 2008).
Larger works such as the widening a portion of the Jagroma River in Plum Mitan and the establishment of retention ponds in the Kernahan are proposed but will require EMA approval before work can commence. After receiving the necessary approvals (applications are currently being prepared), these works are likely to require an additional two to three years. Once the full range of proposed infrastructural developments have been completed, it is anticipated that all agricultural parcels within these two schemes will be suitable for year round agricultural activity. It is also hoped that agricultural leases will be issued to all farmers operating within these two areas, thus providing farmers with official agricultural land tenure.
Plum Mitan
The 480 ha Block A Food Crop Programme began as the Government-initiated Plum Mitan Rice Scheme in the 1950s. The Scheme intended to provide agricultural leases of 2 – 5 ha parcels to family farms and began what might be described as “legal” farming within the swamp. Agricultural leases tend to be for 25 – 30 years, with a Probationary Tenancy Agreement (PTA) being given for a period of 1 – 3 years. According to sources at the El Reposo Agricultural Demonstration Centre, fifty-six (56) leases have been issued to farmers within the Block A Food Crop Programme; an additional ninety-four (94) farmers are cultivating within Block A without leases. An estimated one hundred twenty (120) additional leases are ready to be distributed; however, numerous factors seem to have stalled this process.
Firstly, as the survey plan is approximately ten years old it is currently difficult to know on the ground exactly where parcel boundaries lie. Further, the surveys were conducted after the lands had already been under cultivation. In many cases the boundaries for the surveyed plots do not coincide with the actuality of individual farmer cultivation on the ground. Other issues evolve from the fact that the paper plots may be bigger or smaller than what is actually desired by the farmer. Most farmers are not interested in cultivating more than 1 - 2 ha due to the inability to get labour, lack of mechanisation and the high cost of chemicals. The current Block A survey plan reflects a Town and County Planning Division policy to not allow parcellation of less than four (4) ha thus creating agricultural plots which are in most cases double the size desired by most farmers. Finally, the Ministry of Agriculture has a policy of a seventy-five percent (75%) cultivation rate and will only issue leases to farmers who meet
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 27 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
the required minimum cultivation rate on the plot of land they wish to lease. For the reasons stated above, few farmers achieve seventy percent (70%) cultivation on any of the officially demarcated agricultural plots.
In addition to the agricultural activity taking place year round within Block A, El Reposo estimates that twenty to twenty-five (20 – 25) farmers (some of who also cultivate plots in Block A but most of whom are not full time farmers) plant watermelon during the dry season within a portion of what was known as Block B (the northern section of the area utilised by the large-scale rice farmers in the 1980s). They estimate that agricultural activity is also taking place to the north and west of Block A (approximately twenty to twenty-five farmers). The Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group confirmed that farmers do try to put down a crop during the dry season (Feb – May) in Block B, a practice established prior to the arrival of the large scale rice farmers. Farmers were only just preparing (due to the extended rainy season this year) to do their planting this year in Block B at the time of writing so it was not possible to verify exactly on the ground where this planting is taking place.
Kernahan
The Rio Claro Demonstration Office estimates that as many as one hundred forty (140) farmers cultivate in the Kernahan/Cascadoux area, an estimate based on the number of damage relief claims submitted after recent flood events. A very small percentage of these farmers, however, are in possession of an agricultural lease and the majority are considered squatters. Although the survey plan for the Kernahan Food Crop project has been approved for almost ten years, leases have only been issued for twenty-eight plots in Block E. Unfortunately, Block E is in a low lying area (know as the Lagoon) and under water for nine months of the year.
As mentioned earlier, farmers in this area used to cultivate rice which could accommodate the swampy conditions of the Kernahan area. The switch to watermelon within the last twenty years, however, has required that farmers cultivate higher lands with better drainage. As such, most of the Kernahan farmers have moved their agricultural activity to higher ground; many cultivating on the “hills” - state lands found on the perimeter and inside the ESA’s southern boundary (Reforestation Sector C1). Local residents estimate that as many as forty (40) farmers utilise approximately 40 ha of land to the north of the officially sanctioned agricultural area; a dozen of those farmers are thought to be cultivating within the ESA boundary. (See Photo 3) Photo 3: Agricultural Lands to the south of Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary. GPS coordinates – E: 715360 N: 1147469
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 28 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Other Agriculture
There are two private estates within the study area, the 200 ha Huggins Estate now managed by the Manatee Conservation Trust and the 250 ha Cocal Estate managed by the Cocal Retreat Limited Consortium. The Huggins Estate is a working agricultural estate which produces coconut and melons and employs between 40 – 80 labourers depending on the season. The Cocal Estate (formerly the Bovell Estate) is a former coconut estate with current plans for some level of tourism development. Under previous ownership the estate cultivated 55 - 60 ha of melon. Current ownership prefers to lease a small portion of land to small scale farmers from the area who cultivate watermelon.
Historically farmers from outside the immediate study area would illegally cultivate lands along the roadside between the Mitan River and the Manzanilla Road. These farmers engaged in activities harmful to the swamp, namely the use of fire for clearing land (which often resulted in fires getting into the swamp) and the use of chemical pesticides and fertilisers. The numbers of these farmers has been reduced, and their practices modified, thanks in part to the efforts of The Manatee Conservation Trust who occupy a portion of these roadside lands.
4.6. Land Use/Tenancy
Land use in the study area is a mix of forest reserve, agricultural, and residential. The State is the primary landowner in the area, however, numerous that land management responsibility is spread out amongst a number of state agencies. The Ministry of Agriculture administers the lands within the two agricultural projects. The Wildlife Section of the Forestry Division manages lands within designated forest reserves and protected wildlife sanctuaries. Since the designation of the ESA in December 2006, the Forestry Division has taken a stronger role in monitoring lands within the ESA boundaries although technically all lands outside of the portfolios of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Division fall under the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of State Lands. Private lands can be found around the western periphery of the ESA, along the coast and at the southern end of the study area. Additionally, there is a portion of land to the southwest of the Kernahan settlement under oilfield leases. Figure 5 shows general land use patterns in the immediate study area.
In terms of residential land tenancy, CSO statistics approximate that one third of households rent land from private landowners, one third are squatting, and one quarter own their residential plots. The high incidence of squatting in the Cocal Estate/Mayaro community district is due to the fact that most of the residential development in the settlements of this community district (Kernahan and Cascadoux) are located on agricultural lands where residents have no leases and considered agricultural squatters. Plum Mitan and Biche have more regularised residential land tenure arrangements due to separation of agricultural and residential lands.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 29 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 30 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
TABLE 4: RESIDENTIAL LAND TENANCY Rented Rented Leased Leased Rent Community District Owned Private Gov't Private Gov't Free Squatted BICHE 36% 42% 2% 1% 7% 6% 3% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 1% 3% 0% 0% 2% 0% 93% PLUM MITAN 31% 54% 5% 6% 1% 2% 1% IMMEDIATE STUDY AREA 23% 33% 2% 2% 3% 3% 32% WIDER STUDY AREA 39% 34% 2% 2% 6% 7% 5% Regional Corporation 44% 32% 2% 2% 6% 7% 6% Trinidad 53% 18% 3% 3% 8% 5% 8% Source: CSO data calculated from the 2000 Housing and Population Census
The main concern from all communities with respect to land tenure, therefore, is insecurity of tenure on agricultural lands, where the majority of farmers have been operating for years and in some cases generations without leases. By allowing several decades without land leasing assignments, the practice of squatting has perpetuated and is a seemingly accepted part of the culture of the area. The people in Kernahan, for example, have been planting in the upland area along the ESA boundary and within the prohibited area for at least twenty years. According to the Land Settlement Agency, farmers cultivating on lands vested in the Forestry Division have no rights or protection, however those on State Lands may be able to make a case for protection. Insecure land tenure has been identified as one of the primary hindrances to agricultural development and subsequent financial stability in the area. It has been further suggested that this economic and tenure insecurity in turn influences the way in which residents use and interact with the swamp. The widespread use of slash and burn agriculture may be linked to farmers limited access to credit which would increase their access to less damaging technologies, such as the use of machinery for land clearing.
4.7. Infrastructure
4.7.1. Social and Community Services
i. Education and Training
Low educational attainment is linked to literacy, income and employment. Seventy-five percent (75%) of the study area population reported having a primary education or less; only twenty-four percent (24%) have completed schooling up to the secondary level. According to the results of the 1994 ALTA (Adult Literacy Tutors Association) National Literacy Survey, the rural areas in south Trinidad have functional literacy rates of about 75% (albeit there are varying degrees of literacy and ability to cope with everyday functions within that category), with 15% being functionally illiterate (able to read only the simplest of words) and 10% considered completely illiterate. The only ATLA classes offered in the study area are in
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 31 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Mayaro. Attempts to hold classes in the more rural agriculturally based areas have been unsuccessful.
TABLE 5: EDUCATION LEVELS
Nursery/ Highest Level of Education None Kindergarten Primary Secondary University Other BICHE 4% 2% 65% 28% 0% 1% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 8% 1% 76% 15% 0% 0% PLUM MITAN 3% 2% 64% 30% 0% 1% TOTAL STUDY AREA 5% 2% 68% 24% 0% 1% REGIONAL CORPORATION 4% 3% 56% 36% 1% 1% Trinidad 2% 2% 43% 46% 4% 2% Source: CSO data calculated from the 2000 Housing and Population Census
Also noteworthy is the high percentage of study area residents with no exam passes, an average of 84% versus 75% regionally and 65% nationally. Part of the challenge with education for area residents is limited educational opportunities. In Kernahan there is no preschool or primary school; children must travel to Ortoire. Cocal Retreat Limited has donated 10,000 sq. ft to the Bridge of Hope community to build a nursery school in Kernahan. Limited financial resources, however, have not allowed the building of the school to commence as yet. School children in Plum Mitan and Biche are able to attend primary school in their communities, however, for secondary level education students must travel to Mayaro, Manzanilla, or Sangre Grande.
TABLE 6: EXAM PASS LEVELS School CXC O A Highest Exam Passed None Leaving Basic levels levels BICHE 82% 6% 0% 11% 1% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 88% 4% 0% 8% 0% PLUM MITAN 85% 3% 2% 9% 1% TOTAL STUDY AREA 84% 4% 1% 10% 1% REGIONAL CORPORATION 75% 5% 1% 17% 1% Trinidad 65% 5% 2% 21% 2% Source: CSO data calculated from the 2000 Housing and Population Census
Vocational training is available from a variety of agencies such as YTEPP, Ministry of Agriculture YAPA programme, NESC and the regional Community Development offices. Like most educational offerings, however, many of these opportunities are available at regional office located in either Sangre Grande or Rio Claro. Occasionally Community Development will bring skills training courses direct to the community, but there is little support for residents in applying newly acquired skills to economically meaningful activity. One community group, Villagers Organised in Conserving the Environment (VOICE) has
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 32 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
been working with Community Development to bring training programmes to the community. Several area residents attested to just having completed a tourism training programme which was coordinated by VOICE.
ii. Health
Health care facilities within in the study area are limited to Health Centres in Biche and Rio Claro, a District Health Facility in Mayaro and the Sangre Grande Hospital. The Biche and Rio Claro Health Centres offer basic medical services on an outpatient basis Monday through Friday. The Mayaro facility offers traditional health care services plus a 24-hour accident and emergency service and other specialised out patient services. Anyone needing in-patient care is required to go to the hospital in Sangre Grande or San Fernando.
iii. Community and Recreational Facilities
Communities at the northern end of the study area are better equipped with community and recreational facilities than those at the southern end. Both Biche and Plum Mitan benefit from having a community centre and sports grounds available for use by residents of the community. Residents say these recreational facilities are in need of upgrading and would benefit from the addition of lights.
A few years ago a development initiative sponsored and administered by the Caribbean Natural Institute for Research and Development (CNIRD) provided funding for the building of a community shelter in Kernahan. In addition to providing the community with a much needed meeting space, it was envisioned that this shelter would serve as a welcome facility for the emerging community ecotourism programme. The first phase of the building was constructed, but the ecotourism project never really got off the ground. Subsequently the building was not maintained and all that remains are a few posts and a roof. The structure does service as a meeting area if and when the village council holds a meeting (See Photo 4). Other spaces available in Kernahan include the Forestry Division Field station which was designed with space to accommodate community meetings, and the evangelical church run by a pastor out of Rio Claro which sits just opposite the Photo 4: Kernaham Community Shelter community “shed”.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 33 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
4.7.2. Utilities
i. Water/Sewerage
Water service to this part of the country is poor. The vast majority of residents (88% in Plum Mitan, 60% in Biche and 44% in Cocal/Mayaro) rely on rain water collection to supply their potable water needs. Other water sources include public standpipes, spring/river water or a truck borne supply (See Appendix III – Table 6). Kernahan relies heavily on truck borne water which residents access primarily through several community tanks placed throughout the village. A number of residents have recently installed private tanks which the Kernahan Improvement Committee has helped to secure. Pit latrines are predominant within the study area found in 75% of the households, versus 50% for the region and 27% nationally.
ii. Electricity
While the level of electrical connectivity has improved over the last ten years, it is still considerably below regional and national levels. Kernahan in particular experienced a surge in the number of houses with electrification when the then Village Council brought electricity to the community in 1997 through a self-help project.
iii. Telecommunications
Although land line telephone connectivity improved over the last decade within communities of the study area, service levels are still far behind those of the regional and national levels. This connectivity level has become less important, however, since the advent of the pre-paid digital cell phone which can be found in abundance within the local communities. Although statistics are not available to know exactly what percentage of residents possess cell phones, most of the individuals from the area who were contacted during the course of this study were able to provide cell phone numbers as part of their contact information.
4.7.3. Protective Services
Like most of the state sponsored social services, protective services are available from the larger urban areas of the wider study area, Sangre Grande and Rio Claro. In addition to the police stations in these two areas, additional posts are found in Biche, Manzanilla and Mayaro. Fire Services also have stations in Sangre Grande and Rio Claro.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 34 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
4.7.4. Accessibility and Transport
The main roads within the study area are the Plum Mitan Road, a relatively short stretch of secondary road which connects to the Eastern Main Road just north of Manzanilla and the Cunupo Southern Road in the vicinity of the Biche settlement; the Cunapo Southern Road which runs along the western boundary of the wider study area connecting Biche to Rio Claro; the Manzanilla-Mayaro Road which runs the length of the Nariva Swamp along the coast through what is know as the Cocal; and the Naparima-Mayaro Road which runs to the south of the Nariva Swamp, connecting the eastern coast of Trinidad with Rio Claro. Combined these secondary roads create a triangle which surrounds the Nariva Swamp.
The region is expected to have greater links with the rest of the country when several proposed highways are constructed. The Ministry of Works and Transport is in the process of designing two separate four lane dual carriage highways one of which will connect San Fernando to Manzanilla via Princes Town and Rio Claro. The other proposed highway will connect the existing Churchill Roosevelt Highway to Manzanilla via Sangre Grande.
The Manzanilla-Mayaro and Naparima-Mayaro Roads are fairly well maintained whereas the roads found to the “back” of swamp are in need of maintenance and repair work. The settlements of Plum Mitan and Biche are located along the main roads and have a fairly reliable system of public transportation. Although census figures indicate that taxis and maxi- taxis are the primary mode of transportation, the recent additional of buses to the PTSC fleet has improved the availability of bus transport for these communities. Residents report a fairly reliable service which runs between Sangre Grande and Rio Claro. Fares to either destination run about $3.00.
Kernahan and Cascadoux are located off the Manzanilla – Mayaro Road and accessed by two all-weather roads. Given that the area is primarily agricultural, the Ministry of Agriculture is the primary agency responsible for the development and maintenance of roads within these settlements. Kernahan Trace was cut and paved with oil sand and pitch by the Ministry of Agriculture in 1974. The remaining road which forms a loop through the community was paved in 1995. All roads within the settlement are in need of maintenance and are expected to be addressed by the Ministry of Agriculture Land and Water Development Division’s infrastructural development plan for the Kernahan Food Crop Project. This plan, in addition to improving existing access roads and drainage channels in the area proposes a number of additional access roads as well.
Car ownership in the study area is estimated at 27% with regional and national levels at 30% and 41% respectively. These figures are taken from CSO 2000 Census data.
Figure 6 shows the road infrastructure of the study area, as well as the location of schools, community facilities, hospitals and police posts.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 35 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 36 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
4.8. Culture/Heritage
Six archaeological sites have been identified within the immediate study area, most falling just outside of the ESA boundary. One site is within the Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary, and several others are in close proximity to Kernahan and Cascadoux. None have been thus far identified within the boundaries of the proposed reforestation sectors, however, the Archaeological Committee admits that it only has knowledge of those sites which have been discovered and reported. As the Committee relies heavily on individuals and organisations to assist in reporting potential archaeological sites, it has requested that the executors of the Nariva Reforestation Scheme be vigilant as they go about planting and report any signs of historical artefacts. Such signs could include large areas (10m x 10m) of small shells which could indicate the remains of an historical settlement, the residents of which would have relied heavily on shellfish as a source of protein. The Committee sadly reported that certain archaeological sites south and east of Kernahan have already been destroyed by agricultural activity.
4.9. Community Organisations
Over the many years that the Nariva situation has been studied, there have been numerous community organisations formed and dissolved. The literature review reveals over a dozen community groups active within the study area, however consultations within the communities during the conduct of the SIA revealed only a handful of active organisations. Residents cite a number of reasons for the lack of sustainability, including personality conflicts, migration from area of group leaders, and lack of funding to name a few.
The emergence of the National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme has helped to sustain three area groups, namely the Nariva Environmental Trust, the Biche United Sport and Cultural Group and the Kernahan Improvement Committee all of whom have NRWRP contracts.
Nariva Environmental Trust (NET) was founded approximately eight years ago to develop and promote environmental awareness and assist in the preservation of the flora and fauna of the Nariva Swamp. Membership is open to citizens who reside in and around the Nariva Swamp. According to its constitution, the organisation has an executive consisting of a President, Vice President, Secretary, Assistance Secretary, Treasurer, Public Relations Officer, two trustees, two committee members and a project coordinator and that the group holds meetings on the last Sunday of each month. In addition to its involvement with the NRWRP, NET members are involved with Blue and Gold Macaw captive breeding and release project and the honorary game wardens programme. NET also works closely with the Forestry Division during the dry season to conduct fire patrols and assist with other fire prevention activities. NET has indicated that it currently has about 50 members
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 37 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
encompassing five communities – Plum Road, Biche, Plum Mitan, Kerhan, Cocal/Manzanilla.
Biche United Sport and Cultural Group was founded primarily to promote sporting activity in the community and the region. The group has been working with NRWRP for the past three years doing reforestation as well as community enhancement projects. The organisation has approximately 100 members, with 35 currently active in reforestation activity.
The Kernahan Improvement Committee was founded in 2004 with the purpose of developing programmes to help with community upliftment. Since its formation it has undertaken a number of projects for the community including the sourcing a water tanks for residents and organising social programmes for the children of the community. The group has approximately 40 members at present.
Apart from the above mentioned groups, community consultations have revealed two other organisations active in the immediate study area, namely the Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group and Villagers Organized in Conserving the Environment (VOICE).
The Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group was founded in early 2007 to seek the advancement of agriculture and the livelihood of the farming community in the Plum Mitan/Biche environs with respect to the following:
• Access roads • Irrigation and drainage • Land tenure • Employment opportunities for community members on projects within group’s jurisdiction • Consultation on developmental projects within the group’s jurisdiction • Education of members • Involvement of youth in agriculture • Provision of services for members (equipment, etc.)
The Group has a twelve person executive (President, Vice President, Secretary, Asst. Secretary, Treasurer, PRO, two trustees and four committee members) and approximately 100 members at present.
Villagers Organised in Conserving the Environment (VOICE) was founded in 2004 for the purpose developing and promoting environmental awareness and assisting in the conservation of the environment. In the past few years, VOICE has spent a lot of time in educating its members and the wider community about environmental issues; they have also put a lot of effort into bringing skills training programmes and other development opportunities to the community. The organisation has developed proposals to bring infrastructural improvements to the Plum Mitan community and its environs, one such proposal being a plan for drainage works in the Block A Food Crop Project.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 38 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
The regional Community Development Offices provided listings with a number of other community organisations recorded as active, namely village councils in Brigand Hill, Plum Mitan, Manzanilla, Kernahan/Cascadoux and Ortoire, and a number of women’s groups. There is also a Kernahan Farmer’s Association, but to date it has not been a very active group; it is possible, however, that the Association with gain strength and mobilise itself around the issues created by the Reforestation Scheme.
South East Eco Tours is a community based organisation based in Mayaro which conducts guided tours into the swamp and around the Ortoire River. It also conducts educational talks in area schools. The group began with a group of twenty graduates of Mayaro Composite who participated in a series of training programmes in tour guiding, business operations, etc. A number of the original members have moved away, but there are still three or four active members. The organisation is cited here for its potential in assisting with the development of community-based tourism in the area.
4.9.1. Customs/Attitudes
The 1995 Ramsar study estimates that approximately 5,000 residents of the Nariva communities depend on the swamp to varying degrees, engaging in such activities as fishing, hunting, and agricultural cultivation (watermelon, bodi, cucumber). Residents of the nearby villages of Rio Claro, Ortoire and Mayaro also use the swamp for hunting and fishing, though to a lesser extent than those of the previously mentioned settlements. Eco-tourism is a growing economic opportunity provided by the resources of the Nariva Swamp, however, area residents say that the tourism industry is controlled by “outsiders” and provides very little opportunity for locals.
Residents and other users of the swamp recognise their dependency of the swamp’s natural resources and in theory agree that these resources need to be managed and protected. Awareness of the fragility and interconnected nature of the swamp ecosystems has grown in recent years thanks in large part to the agencies and organisations who have highlighted the destructive nature of a number of illegal activities taking place in the swamp. Residents agree that restoration and rehabilitation of degraded areas of the swamp is a good thing so that current and future generations will continue to benefit from and enjoy the stamp, yet they tend to want to support such initiatives only to the point where it will not impact on their livelihoods, even if their livelihoods are at odds with the management objectives of the area. Residents welcome anything that will provide new or supplemental employment opportunities, but do not feel that these opportunities could adequately replace the income which could be lost if their current livelihoods are altered.
Individuals from the Nariva communities engaging in various extraction-type activities (fishing, hunting and farming) generally do not always apply “wise use” or “best practice” methodologies to their own actions, but are quick to impose those restrictions on other who
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 39 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
might not be from the surrounding area. The continued practice of agriculture within protected areas of the swamp, the ongoing practice of slash and burn agricultural clearing methods, illegal hunting and fishing methods which cause fire and otherwise negatively impact fish and animal stock are all examples of practices that continue despite the fact the individuals know these practices are not in keeping with the sustainable use of swamp resources.
4.9.2. Concerns and Expectations
Concerns and expectations varied across the range of stakeholders consulted in the conduct of the SIA. A summary of these views generated via feedback from interviews, group and community meetings and a public consultation is found in Appendix I. The main themes which emerged, however, centered on the issues of hydrology, management of the reforestation project and overall management of the Nariva ESA, and land tenure.
All stakeholders from the community level to the state agency expressed concern about the hydrology. There was agreement that all hydrological alterations which occurred as a result of previous illegal activities should be a priority for any restoration initiative. If left uncorrected the ecological nature of the swamp is likely change dramatically over the course of time. Many were concerned that the hydrological studies did not take place prior to any other restoration component as any changes to existing hydrological conditions will have implications for all other activities, including the reforestation.
Fires are a perennial problem in Nariva and stakeholders were concerned about the ability of the Project to prevent and manage these forest fires. There was concern about what systems would be put in place to ensure that trees planted as part of the Nariva Reforestation Scheme would not perish from fire in subsequent years.
Recognizing that numerous agencies have responsibility for different components of the swamp, the question was raised as to what entity would be capable of managing the Project and liaising with the various entities which will need to provide input into project management and execution. For years, stakeholders have been watching Nariva (and other ESAs) suffer from illegal activities (agriculture, hunting, fishing, etc.) with little to no effective intervention on the part of the relevant authorities. Many questions were raised. What is going to change? What role can be taken by the local and national conservation NGOs? What role will the NRWRP have in the Nariva Reforestation Scheme?
It should also be noted that a certain level of mistrust exists between community groups and members of the Forestry Division. It is suggested that this mistrust stems from the fact that neither group (community or FD) has a good appreciation of the other’s view on the use and management of the resources of the swamp. As such, interactions between the two have at times been reported to be contentious. While the establishment of the Forestry Division Field Office in Kernahan was in part an attempt by the Forestry Division to establish better
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 40 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
relations with the community, it is recommended that better, more regular communication channels which allow for discussion of expectations and concerns of all parties be established between the Forestry Division and the community.
Lack of appropriate land tenure for farmers cultivating state lands has been an issue since farmers began practicing agriculture in the region. Apart from the psychological and heritage benefits of having legal rights to land, official agricultural leases give resident legitimate status as farmers, which in turn allow them to secure loans from bank and properly invest in mechanisms to assist their agricultural production. Such mechanisms could include the purchase of machinery or the development of irrigation and other necessary infrastructure on individual plots. Additionally, agricultural leases may encourage farmers to look at combining longer term crops with the current short term crops to diversify their agricultural production.
5. Impacts
Overall, the impacts identified through the stakeholder consultation process were positive. Stakeholders were generally able to recognise the short, medium and long term impacts of the reforestation activity and as such supported the initiative. The only negative impact identified arose from a land use conflict in certain portions of the proposed reforestation sectors. All impacts are discussed in more detail in the following section
5.1. Positive
5.1.1. Creation of Employment Opportunities
Residents of the Nariva communities identify lack of employment opportunities as a significant social issue. While a high percent of the population engages in some level of agriculture, the risk involved with this occupation, particularly for those cultivating in more flood prone areas, leads residents to search for supplemental, reliable revenue streams. The region currently provides few opportunities.
The Nariva Reforestation Scheme is scheduled to run for five (6) years and will provide a certain number of employment opportunities for interested residents of the area. The main opportunities identified are labour for the various elements of the implementation plan. The first component requiring labour is the project’s seedling nursery located in Plum Mitan whose establishment will commence in June 2008. A small amount of construction labour will be required to build the nursery, which will then require a seven (7) person staff to handle all the nursery operations (estimated to commence January 2009). The nursery will support the Reforestation Scheme for the majority of the planting operations as well as the tending and supplying activities. The nursery will operate under the direction of the Forestry
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 41 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Division and it is possible that once established could continue to operate beyond the life cycle of the Nariva Restoration Scheme in order to service other Forestry Division activities.
Site preparation, tree planting and tending activities are estimated to require approximately one hundred and ten (110) persons for nine months of the year for five years.
The Nariva Reforestation Scheme recommends the establishment of a Monitoring and Research Committee to monitor project progress as well as to engage in empirical forest research in areas to be determined. It is possible that a small number of employment opportunities could be made available to interested and qualified area residents to assist in data collection and monitoring.
In addition to activities resulting directly from the reforestation programme, supplemental activities are recommended to further enhance the project’s potential success. Such activities include the implementation of a public awareness campaign for the complete Nariva Restoration Initiative, fire protection and an ongoing drainage maintenance programme.
5.1.2. Restoration of Wildlife Habitats
The objective of the Reforestation Scheme is the re-establishment of pre-existing ecological conditions of portions of the swamp through the restoration of specified types of land cover. The Nariva swamp was once home to a large number of animal species, however, continual destruction of portions of the swamp over years has reduced these populations as well as forcing wildlife into the few areas of protected habitat. The species of trees recommended for the reforestation plan were assessed for their ability to attract wildlife, recognizing that restoration of wildlife habitats was an important objective of the initiative.
In addition to the basic ecological benefits of improved wildlife habitats, there are a number of important social benefits as well. Fishing used to provide a livelihood for many residents of the area; however, stocks have dwindled in recent years in part due to the many alterations to the swamp’s ecological and hydrological characteristics. Illegal fishing practices and over- fishing have also contributed to reduced fisheries. The Nariva Swamp Restoration Initiative has the potential to contribute significantly to improved fisheries habitats, thus aiding the resumption of fishing as a livelihood.
Improved habitats and the return of fauna to restored sections of the swamp have implications for the ecotourism potential of the swamp and the ability of swamp communities to develop the livelihood potential arising from ecotourism. The potential social benefits to be derived from restored wildlife habitats, however, are only likely to be achieved if measures are put in place to effectively monitor and prevent illegal hunting and fishing from taking place in the swamp. As hunting is not permitted within the new ESA boundaries, game wardens will need to be equipped with the resources necessary to effectively patrol and prohibit this kind of activity.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 42 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Fishing will be allowed through a permit system throughout the ESA; currently permits are only required to fish within the prohibited area. Permits for fishing will be issued to local fisherman at no charge for subsistence. Consideration should be given to having “outsiders” and recreational “fisher persons” pay for permits. Even so, issue of permits should be carefully monitored and regulated to prevent over harvesting and other unsustainable practices, such as the use of fish traps.
5.1.3. Reduction in Bush Fires
The Nariva Swamp battles annually with the problem of bush fires. Fire sources include farmers using fire to clear and prepare land, hunters and fishermen who set fires to run wildlife, and malicious individuals who want to test the capacity of the fire patrol. Forestry Division employs labour to cut and maintain fire traces in the months of January – February. From March – May fire patrols are employed seven days a week to monitor and out fires, however, resources are not sufficient as each year fires burn large tracts of the swamp. In 2007, approximately 415 ha were affected by fire. The reforestation scheme includes provision for fire tracing as well as fire watch and patrols within the identified reforestation sectors to supplement the current resources of the Forestry Division operating in different areas of the Nariva ESA. Community involvement in these activities is considered essential as experience has shown that the more communities are engaged in activities within the forest, the greater their interest and ability in protecting those areas. The TRF’s experience with community reforestation in other parts of the country supports this finding. Similarly, farmers from Plum Mitan who currently cultivate in Block B state that their presence in this area during the dry season has been instrumental in keeping out fire.
In addition to greater vigilance for activities within the ESA which encourage bush fires, consideration should be given to assisting area farmers in changing their agricultural practices so that slash and burn methods are eliminated. Assisting farmers in accessing mechanisation, possibly through an effective farmers co-operative, could discourage burning practices. Training from agricultural extension officers with respect to alternative land preparation practices could further support the move away from slash and burn methods.
5.1.4. More Disciplined Land Management
Illegal occupation is a long time characteristic of lands in and around the Nariva Swamp. Removing land use activities incompatible with the objectives of the Nariva ESA and restricting those activities (e.g. agriculture) to within clearly defined and demarcated boundaries will establish a more effective system of land use management within the ESA. Similarly, management of the lands within these defined boundaries for agriculture must also be put under a better land management system whereby proper tenure is established for each
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 43 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
individual desirous of occupying lands. Essential for the success of appropriate land management, however, is the establishment of clear boundaries, for the ESA as well as for agricultural plots within approved agricultural developments. With respect to the ESA boundaries, public awareness initiatives to educate members of local and regional communities about the ESA boundaries and any corresponding access restrictions should be included as part of management activities.
5.1.5. Carbon Sequestration
It is widely recognised global warming is caused by human activity, and that CO2 emissions if not reduced or otherwise mitigated will cause irreparable damage to the planet. Trinidad’s energy-based industrialisation has resulted in the country having one of the highest per capita
CO2 emissions ratings in the world. Local interest in establishing projects to counter this highly negative rating is on the rise. Through its carbon sinking feature, reforestation is recognised as an important activity in addressing the whole issue of global warming. Moreover, recent research has shown that tropical forests sequester carbon more efficiently than temperate forests. The NSRI has in place a work plan for measuring the carbon that will be sequestered by the Nariva Reforestation Scheme.
5.2. Negative
5.2.1. Compulsory Removal of Agricultural Squatters
A portion of Reforestation Sector A1, the northern portion of Sector B1 and the majority of Sector C1 of the Nariva Reforestation Scheme contain lands cultivated by illegal agricultural (not residential) squatters. Many of those practising agriculture in these areas cultivate small holdings, typically 1 – 2 ha. Some farmers in the Kernahan area report cultivating larger holdings, but Agricultural Extension Officers for the area have questioned the level of cultivation on these holdings.
Table 7: Location of Farmers Estimated Area Season of Reforestation Sector # of (ha) Use Farmers* A1 – West of Block A in Plum Mitan 48 20 – 25 Year round B1 – Former Block B extending south to Bush Bush 1,132 20 – 25 Dry season B2 – The Bowl 32 - - C1 – North of Kernahan 127 30 – 40 Year round Total 1,339 70 - 90 * estimates based information gathered from Min. of Ag. and area farmers.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 44 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
In vicinity of Sector A1 it is reported that an estimated twenty to twenty-five (20-25) farmers cultivate lands during both the dry and rainy season. On the ground verification is required to determine which farmers cultivating in this area are along the perimeter of Block A are within the proposed boundaries of Sector A1.
In Sector B1, it is estimated that as many as twenty-five (25) farmers may try to cultivate 1 – 2 ha parcels during a portion of the dry season (February – April), depending on weather conditions. Local residents have been setting crops (primarily watermelon) on these lands since before the arrival of the large scale rice farmers into what was known as Block B (Bois Neuf). Those who cultivate in Block B tend to be part time farmers who have other sources of income and who view the Block B crop as an extra, albeit an important supplement, income. Farmers are drawn to Block due to the reportedly very fertile nature of the soil and its ability to produce high yield quality crops. It is purported that yields in Block B can be three times that of identical acreage in Block A. Attempts have been made to identify those farmers engaging in agricultural activity in Block B, however, it is reported that these farmers are reluctant to identify themselves out of fear of retaliation from the Forestry Division.
In general, farmers in Plum Mitan and Biche feel that the land currently available under the Food Crop Programme is an inadequate to meet demand. They agree that part of the problem with Block A is that the plots demarcated by the last Ministry of Agriculture survey created plots that generally inappropriate in size. Plots ranged in size from 2 – 5 ha whereas most farmers were accustomed to cultivating between 1 – 1.5 ha. Most farmers operate without mechanisation and without additional labour and are therefore unable to cultivate the larger parcels. Further, the eastern half of Block A is often flooded during the rainy season, forcing farmers with plots on that side to search for higher grounds to cultivate. Many of these issues are proposed to be dealt with under the current LWDD development programmes (See Section 4.5 Agricultural Activities), thus providing additional appropriate agricultural lands for interested farmers and removing a portion of the draw to cultivate outside of the Block A Agricultural Project. The challenge, however, is that these developments are ongoing and currently not expected to be completed for another two to three years.
When farmers initially came to the Kernahan area, their main crop was rice which grew well in the area’s swampy conditions. When rice was no longer profitable, farmers switched to watermelon which required drier conditions, thus farmers moved to the higher grounds. The search for high, dry agricultural land is the reason farmers from the Kernahan area moved into Reforestation Sector C1. Farmers occupy much of the land between the existing boundary of the Kernahan Food Crop Project and the boundary of the ESA, up to the boundary of the Bush Bush Wildlife Sanctuary. It was reported that previously agriculture had moved into the Sanctuary; however, Forestry Division officers have successfully removed farmers to outside of the buffer zone. Approximately forty (40) farmers have been cultivating lands north of the Kernahan Food Crop Project for the past twenty (20) years. It is estimated that perhaps twelve (12) of those farmers are within the boundaries of the ESA.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 45 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Similar to those in the Block A Food Crop Project, agricultural lands within the Kernahan Food Crop Project are currently not ready for year round occupation. LWDD is in the process of completing the infrastructural works to address the flooding and irrigation problems in Kernahan, but these works are estimated to required an additional one - two years.
Given the limited employment opportunities of the region, the low educational attainment and literacy rates, and the dependence of the local community on income from agriculture, the removal of farmers from these illegally occupied lands has serious livelihood implications. It should be noted that the proposed compulsory removal only involves agricultural crops and does not require any residential resettlement. No housing is located on the lands of the proposed reforestation sectors.
5.3. Potential Loss of Livelihood (income)
Farmers who will be removed from agricultural lands they are currently cultivating, albeit cultivating without authority to occupy these lands, are only likely to be able to continue practicing agriculture if suitable nearby lands are made available to them. Most of those potentially affected have been residents of the area upwards of forty (40) years and have indicated that although they are willing to move to new agricultural plots, they are not willing to move house to be close to these new agricultural lands. Although residents of the area typically engage in a number of economic activities, agriculture provides the largest portion of household income. Without providing comparable agricultural lands, affected residents are likely to suffer a significant loss of household income.
5.4. Impacts Summary
Table 8 summarises the impacts discussed above. The table shows an evaluation of each impact in terms of its time frame (short, medium or long term), magnitude of impact (high, medium or low) and type of impact (positive, negative, or no impact). Impacts # 4 and 5 were considered to be “medium” in magnitude due to the long term nature of the impact and the wider receiving area (national and global, respectively). All other impacts were considered to have a magnitude ranking of “high” due to the very localised nature of the impact.
Table 8: Impacts Summary Magnitude Type of Impact Time Frame of Impact Impact 1. Creation of Employment Opportunities Short – medium High Positive 2. Restoration of Wildlife Habitats Medium – long High Positive 3. Reduction in Bush Fires Medium – long High Positive 4. Improved Land Management Medium - long Medium Positive 5. Carbon Sequestration Long Medium Positive 6. Compulsory Removal of Agricultural Squatters Short High Negative 7. Potential Loss of Livelihood (Income) Short - Medium High Negative
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 46 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
6. Mitigation Measures
Of all the impacts identified, two are considered to have a negative impact and in need of mitigation prescriptions. The compulsory removal of agricultural squatters and corresponding livelihood implications are considered to be significant impacts and require a number of mitigation activities to adequately address the potential impact. Whatever measures or combination of measures are employed, however, the mitigation programme must have appropriate community buy-in from the onset. History has shown that many past initiatives aimed at diversifying economic opportunities for area residents have failed because the beneficiaries weren’t properly involved in the development process. Community involvement in development of proposed mitigation measures has already begun through the stakeholder consultation process. Further recommendations for beneficiary involvement will be outlined in the Process Framework and Action Plan. The remainder of this section describes the measures proposed to mitigate the impact of the removal of agricultural squatters from within non-agricultural designated areas of the ESA. In addition to relocation efforts which seek to continue current livelihoods, the mitigation measures discussed below provide a range of new employment opportunities which can be made available to affected individuals and other interested residents.
6.1. Relocation/Redistribution of Land
The estimated 70+ farmers who will be removed from lands identified for reforestation will need to be relocated to comparable agricultural lands. Although it is recommended that this relocation activity be completed prior to the commencement of any tree planting exercises within the Reforestation Scheme, it is possible that planting can commence at an earlier date in areas where relocation is not required (Reforestation Sector B2 and the southern half of Sector B1). Relocation of farmers, however, must be a priority for successful execution of the reforestation project and should be completed no later than June 2010. Relocation only involves the resettlement of farmers onto comparable agricultural lands; no housing is affected by the proposed Reforestation Scheme.
Farmers in Kernahan have suggested they be relocated to lands southwest of the existing Food Crop Project to an area known as the Bento lands. Most of the already cleared land in this area, however, is already under some level of cultivation. Where crops do not currently exist, the land is under some form of forest cover (Photo 5). Any move to lands outside of the already surveyed and approved Ministry of
Photo 5: “Bento” lands in the distance
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 47 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Agriculture plots – whether requiring clearing or not, however, will require a lengthy process of assessment, approval and land preparation before the lands will be eligible for distribution via agricultural leases. It is not recommended that forest be cleared to create new agricultural lands for these farmers nor is it recommended that farmers be relocated on lands for which they can not obtain appropriate lease documents. Rather, it is recommended that existing plots within the Kernahan Food Crop Project be made available and Probationary Tenancy Agreements (PTAs) be issued initially for all affected farmers. After an appropriate evaluation period (2 years), full agricultural tenancies can be issued to those who meet Ministry of Agriculture requirements.
One of the hindrances to the issuance of leases in the Kernahan area has been the fact that many existing agricultural plots do not meet the 75% cultivation rate criteria set by the Ministry of Agriculture. The Ministry must, therefore, be involved in an assessment of existing rates of cultivation on all plots within the Food Crop Project to ensure that all who are currently occupying lands are appropriately utilising them. First preference for the issuance of temporary or long term leases (up to 30 years) should be given to long term residents of the area.
Low cultivation rates in the Kernahan project are in part due to the flooding and irrigation problems which plague a significant number of the agricultural plots and force farmers to search for higher grounds on which to plant. As mentioned in Section 2.5, the Land and Water Development Division (LWDD) of the Ministry of Agriculture has embarked upon a development initiative designed to address the flooding and irrigation issues in the Kernahan and Block A agricultural developments. The project, expected to be completed in two – three years, should be fast tracked in order to be completed in time for farmers to experience a wet and dry season with the new infrastructure in place prior to their complete removal from lands within the reforestation sectors by 2010.
In tandem with the Resources LWDD development, resources need to be given to the Drainage Division – East so that they can adequately maintain all large and small drainage canals within the entirety of the Swamp.
While the issues of the Plum Mitan Farmers and Block A Food Crop Project are similar to Kernahan in terms of the need to fast track the LWDD initiative, Block A farmers have the additional requirement of needing the area to be re-surveyed so that 1 – 1.5 ha parcels can be recreated out of the existing larger parcels. The final approved survey plan for Block A and Kernahan should then be demarcated on the ground so the plot boundaries are clearly marked.
In the event that drainage, irrigation and survey activities discussed above may are not completed in time to issue temporary or permanent tenancy agreements to displaced farmers prior to the proposed 2010 relocation deadline, consideration might be given to temporarily relaxing the stipulation of no agricultural activity within the ESA to allow farmers to practice some form of agroforestry. This relaxation of the agricultural restriction would provide farmers a transitional period whereby they would continue to plant crops for a specified
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 48 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
period of time amongst the trees planted and tended as part of the reforestation initiative. A transitional period would help to ensure that there are no abrupt disruptions in income streams for displaced farmers, providing the additional time necessary to get new agricultural holdings established and/or new livelihood options adequately developed.
In addition to ensuring that all farmers in the approved agricultural areas, not just those displaced from the reforestation sectors, receive proper land tenure arrangements, it is recommended that the Ministry of Agriculture through its extension offices work closely with the farmers to ensure that they get maximum annual yields from their plots. This assistance could include helping farmer organisations obtain shared mechanisation, helping farmers cultivate new/additional crops suitable for different seasonal conditions, introducing soil enhancement techniques, integrated pest management, etc.
6.2. Creation of Employment Opportunities
The Forestry Division is identified as the implementing agency for the Reforestation Scheme. It is envisioned, however, that many components of the Scheme will be executed via contracts with external organisations, and individuals as required. Community organisations and area residents are recommended to be given first consideration for the contracts to execute the activities listed hereunder. A number of community organisations have been identified (See Section 2.9) for their potential involvement in these activities. A comprehensive assessment of the capability of interested organisations and individuals will need to be conducted prior to the awarding of any contracts.
6.2.1. Planting, Tending and Fire Protection
In most cases the income that can be earned as daily paid labour in the reforestation scheme is not sufficient to fully compensate for the loss of crop earnings caused by agricultural displacement. Watermelon is estimated to net $37,000 – $40,000/ha per crop whereas daily paid workers typically earn between $100 - $125. As such, the primary mitigation measure recommended for farmer displacement is relocation. Employment opportunities to supplement the agricultural activity of seasoned farmers, as well as for young people within the community, remain an important mitigation measure. All employment opportunities generated by the reforestation scheme should be offered first preference to area residents who are willing to work at reforestation. Further preference should be given to farmers whose livelihoods have been affected and who are also willing to do reforestation work as daily paid labour. As such, those groups existing or potential who best represent the interests of the potentially displaced are recommended for receiving contracts to execute the reforestation scheme (tree planting, tending and fire protection).
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 49 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
6.2.2. Nursery Operations
The Nariva Reforestation Scheme recommends the establishment of a nursery off Caltoo Trace in Plum Mitan. Although initially established to support reforestation in Nariva, this nursery could continue after planting in Nariva is completed as a Forestry Division nursery. Forestry Division currently has three nurseries (St. Joseph, Cumuto and Cap de Ville) which at present are stretched to meet the demands of current reforestation efforts. The tasks of managing nursery operations and the provision of nursery labour can be contracted to appropriate community groups existing or potential with the capability to undertake such activities.
6.2.3. Public Awareness
It was mentioned in the impacts section that a number of subsidiary activities are recommended in order to ensure the sustainability and success of the Reforestation Scheme, and more broadly the Nariva Swamp Restoration Initiative (NSRI). The Reforestation Scheme addresses the need for community outreach in connection with the fire prevention component, however, a greater public awareness programme is needed to educate the local and national communities about the overall Restoration Initiative, its components, the benefits and impacts of the various components, mitigation recommendations, and implementation plans to name a few areas to be addressed. Additionally, it was revealed that there is a lot of misinformation about the Nariva Swamp ESA, where are the boundaries, what activities are allowed, how it is managed and the implications of the ESA designation for Nariva communities. The local community in particular needs to understand the goals and objectives of the NSRI and how they potentially stand to benefit in order to afford it their full support. Community groups with experience in public awareness initiatives should work with the Forestry Division and other appropriate agencies to develop and execute the public awareness programme.
6.2.4. Drainage Maintenance Operations
Although the hydrological studies have yet to be completed, it is recommended, based on discussions with the Ministry of Works Drainage Division - East and local residents, that an ongoing drainage maintenance programme be part of the reforestation scheme. The current labour resources of the Drainage Division – East are insufficient to adequately maintain the primary and subsidiary canals that run through the agricultural schemes as well as the rest of the swamp. The success of the proposed relocation of farmers to plots within the existing agricultural developments will only succeed if farmers are able to cultivate plots with minimal risk of flooding. The ongoing LWDD infrastructural developments in addition to a Nariva specific drainage maintenance programme would contribute greatly to ensuring that
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 50 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
plots within the official agricultural areas remain suitable to cultivation year round. Community groups who demonstrate an understanding of existing drainage issues should be given consideration for involvement in drainage maintenance works.
6.2.5. Nariva-Specific Game Warden Programme
The Forestry Division officers assigned to the Kernahan Field station are charged with monitoring access to the restricted areas of the Nariva ESA and controlling illegal hunting and fishing throughout the Nariva Swamp. Forestry Division patrols which are conducted regularly during normal business hours are supplemented by the monitoring and patrolling functions provided by participants in the Division’s Game Warden programme. Game Wardens are expected to conduct patrols at night and on weekends when Forestry Division officers are not available. The challenge is that these are precisely the times when much of the illegal activities are taking place. Game Wardens are assigned to the entire Southeast Conservancy, not just Nariva, and are unable to adequately control all the activity taking place within their jurisdiction. Further, Game Wardens and Forestry Officers are not equipped with the tools and resources needed to arrest illegal activity when it is discovered. Illegal hunters and fishermen are often armed whereas Forestry Officers and Game Wardens are not.
It is recommended that a Nariva-Specific Game Warden programme be developed so that a team of Game Wardens assigned only to the Nariva ESA are trained and equipped to adequately support the Forestry Division’s monitoring functions.
6.2.6. Fire Guardians
The Nariva Reforestation Scheme stipulates that fire exclusion is necessary during the first five to ten years of the project to assure the success of reforestation efforts. The Scheme’s preliminary Fire Management Work Plan highlights the need for additional trained fire personnel beyond what is currently available. Community members can be involved in all aspects of Fire Management from cutting fire traces and conducting patrols to community outreach and environmental education activities.
6.2.7. Research and Monitoring
The Reforestation Scheme recommends the establishment of a Monitoring and Research Committee to monitor progress, develop a programme of empirical forest research activities, and work in close conjunction with the implementers of the NSRI Monitoring Work Plan and
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 51 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
the UWI carbon sequestration monitoring team. A monitoring programme to evaluate the success of proposed mitigation measures and proposed livelihood options should be incorporated into the NSRI Monitoring Work Plan. Additionally, the Monitoring Work Plan can include an assessment of the impacts of these various livelihood options (agriculture, tourism, aquaculture) on swamp ecosystems. Effort should be made to identify appropriate roles for local area residents in all of the monitoring programmes developed by each of the research teams.
6.3. Alternative Livelihood Options
Identifying alternative livelihood options for the Nariva community residents has been and will continue to be a difficult endeavour. Agriculture has been the way of life for several generations, and the main crop for the last generation has been watermelon. Residents know little about other crops let alone other livelihoods; they have difficulty visualising alternatives. Further, daily life is such that little time or energy is available to gain the skills necessary to make a switch. Stakeholder consultations revealed little interest in considering options for alternative livelihoods, however, when suggestions for alternative livelihoods were presented for consideration, some residents admitted to seeing their potential. The alternative livelihoods listed hereunder enjoyed the greatest level of interest throughout the course of community consultations, however, significant community buy-in is required before either option should be considered for further development. It should be noted that developing alternative livelihoods is a long term proposition and is not likely to see significant economic returns in the short term, however, long term economic success is possible.
6.3.1. Community-based Ecotourism Activities
The Nariva Swamp already supports a healthy eco-tourism industry; the problem according to area residents is that little to none of the revenue generated from this trade trickles down to the Nariva communities. “Outside” tour operators regularly guide tours through the swamp with very little interaction with the local community. The two private estates on the periphery of the swamp, the Huggins Estate currently managed by the Manatee Conservation Trust and the former Bovell Estate now managed by Cocal Retreat Limited, have separate plans to develop low impact tourist facilities to capitalise on the existing ecotourism market. .
Both Plum Mitan and Kernahan are ideally suited to benefit from the ecotourism and culture tourism markets. Further, the community-based nature of the Nariva Reforestation Initiative and its carbon sequestering potential create a unique opportunity to develop a new tourism product for the visitor concerned about tourism’s carbon footprint. Plum Mitan residents expressed interest in establishing facilities to assist in developing a tourism package which will capitalise on the wildlife of the area. The region’s well established agricultural traditions
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 52 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008 provide the foundations needed to develop an agro-tourism package. The challenge in making the most of these resources is getting sufficient community support. The community, with some external assistance, must organise itself, much like has been done in the communities of Grande Riviere and Matura, to actively participate in and derive financial benefit from the region’s tourism activities.
6.3.2. Aquaculture
A limited amount of aquaculture currently takes place in the Plum Mitan area. While there are issues connected to the supply of fingerlings and other inputs, persons with knowledge of the aquaculture industry are of the view that the region is ideally suited for the development of this industry; markets are also developing which can receive the fish produced on aquaculture farms. The 1999 Nariva Management Plan cites aquaculture as one of the activities compatible with proposed management objectives and recommends it for development as an industry. The missing link to date has been interest and initiative on the part of the community. History has shown that a project that is not self-generated is not likely to succeed. Development of an aquaculture industry is, therefore, recommended cautiously. After presenting aquaculture as an alternative livelihood for possible exploration at several community consultations, one or two residents of Kernahan indicated an interest. Additional discussions will be required to ascertain the full extent of that interest. Training and start up assistance would also be required to launch and sustain such an industry.
6.4. Co-Management of Natural Resources
The Nariva Reforestation Scheme recommends that the Private and Community Forestry Section of the Forestry Division be responsible for the implementation of the Reforestation Plan, including the establishment and operation of the Nursery. Given the high level of community involvement in all levels of execution, Nariva Reforestation Scheme presents an opportunity for the Forestry Division to re-examine its approach to involving local communities in structured co-management of natural resources. Co-management is an institutionalized process by which decision-making is shared among resource users and the State and it is seen as a means of effectively managing natural resources while dealing with economical restraints and user conflicts.
International developments in collaborative management of natural resources have had little impact in Trinidad & Tobago. This is because communities adjacent to forests were not seen as critically dependent on forest resources to the extent that collaborative management was an imperative. There has been no pressure for the State to relinquish control of forest resources to clamouring communities. The State, through the Forestry Division, still exercises monopoly control over the management and exploitation of forest resources.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 53 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Communities adjoining the forests have no structured say in the management and have the same degree of claim to the benefits of exploitation as those far removed from the resources.
But the resources of the Nariva Swamp go far beyond wood products. The swamp offers such non-wood utilization opportunities as in fishing and eco-tourism and there has been a tradition of community usage and interest in these areas. This is fertile ground for co- management. Community representation on the Nariva Swamp ESA Management Committee is a start towards the development of modalities for co-management but the time is ripe for exploring what more could be done in prescribing rights, responsibilities and operational functioning of the local communities.
6.5. Mitigation Management Plan
Successful execution of the mitigation measures proposed in the previous section will require the participation of a range of stakeholder organisations, not the least of which are community groups. It will also require the establishment of an entity to coordinate this multi- stakeholder involvement. The establishment of a proper management structure is critical to the success of the Reforestation Scheme and must be place at the start of the project.
All ESAs are required to have a management committee. This committee is to be established by the competent authority with responsibility for the ESA. Given the complexity of land jurisdiction within the Nariva ESA of it is recommended that this committee be chaired by the EMA but have representation from all stakeholder groups with input into the successful execution of policies, programmes and activities relevant to the Nariva ESA. Nariva Swamp ESA Management Committee will be charged with overseeing all activity in the Swamp including reforestation and ensuring that requirements for successful implementation of proposed programmes are put in place. It is proposed that the Nariva ESA Management Committee be designated as the entity to manage the mitigation plan. A summary of the plan is found in Table 9.
Membership of the Nariva ESA Management Committee should include but is not limited to:
• Environmental Management Authority • Forestry Division • Ministry of Agriculture Extension Offices (El Reposo and Rio Claro) • Ministry of Agriculture Lands Division • Ministry of Agriculture Land and Water Development Division • Ministry of Works Drainage Division • National Wetlands Committee • Local Community Groups
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 54 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
7. Monitoring Plan
The successful implementation of the proposed mitigation measures is essential precursor to the execution of the Reforestation Scheme and larger Restoration Initiative. Monitoring the progress of each mitigation measure is included as part of the Mitigation Management Plan and will be the responsibility of the Research and Monitoring Committee, possibly through a sub-committee established to monitor the success of mitigation measures. If required, training in data collection techniques and data collection tool development should be organised. Table 10 describes in detail what is to be monitored and proposes a monitoring frequency.
8. Stakeholder Involvement
The involvement of stakeholders was essential to the successful conduct of the SIA. Community liaisons were established at the outset of the project and were instrumental in guiding the research team through various field visits, providing local, historical knowledge of the ecological and hydrological conditions and uses of the swamp, and ensuring that attendees at the various community consultations represented the range of community needs and concerns. Agency stakeholder representatives were invaluable in providing data on institutional responsibilities, capabilities and limitations with respect to the implementation of the reforestation scheme and overall management of the Nariva ESA. Stakeholders were generally supportive of the project. A summary of the consultation process is found in Appendices I and III. Photos 6, 7, and 7 represent a range of the consultations which took place.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 55 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Photo 6: Meeting with Farmers in Kernaham
Photo 7: Community consultation with Plum Mitan and Biche residents.
Photo 8: Public Consultation at Manatee Conservation Trust, Manzanilla.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 56 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
TABLE 9: Summary of Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure Actions involved Required Agency Involvement Fast tracked completion of infrastructural works within Land and Water Development Agency, Min of Ag. existing agricultural developments Re-survey of Block A plots Lands and Surveys Division On the ground demarcation of agricultural plots Lands and Surveys Division Identification of affected farmers Farmers organisations, El Reposo and Rio Claro Extension Relocation/Redistribution Officers of Land Farmer consultation on suitable alternative plots Farmers organisations, El Reposo and Rio Claro Extension Officers Issuance of land tenancy agreements El Reposo and Rio Claro Extension Officers, Lands and Surveys Division Monitoring of farmer agricultural resettlement Monitoring and Research Committee Assessment of potential contractor organisations and Forestry Division and Nariva ESA Management Committee labour pool. Consultations with interested parties regarding Forestry Division, Nariva ESA Management Committee, and proposed involvement potential contractor organisations and labour pool. Creation of Employment Awarding of employment contracts Forestry Division and potential contractor organisations and Opportunities labour pool. Training Programmes as required Forestry Division and potential contractor organisations and labour pool. Monitoring of contract execution Monitoring and Research Committee Assessment of community and individual interest in ESA Management Committee and community representatives alternative livelihoods Assessment of existing community and individual ESA Management Committee, community representatives, resource base and the resource needs of alternative industry-specific technical resource persons, and Community livelihood Development Identification of appropriate training programmes industry-specific technical resource persons Alternative Livelihood Identification of sources of other resources required for industry-specific technical resource persons and community Options livelihood option representatives Development of business plan industry-specific technical resource persons and community representatives Execution of business plan Community representatives with assistance from technical resource persons Monitoring of new livelihoods Monitoring and Research Committee Co-Management of the Development of Co-management modalities ESA Management Committee Nariva ESA
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 57 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
TABLE 9: Monitoring Plan Parameter Indicator Frequency # of adequately maintained drainage canals Bi-weekly during rainy season, quarterly during dry season # of functioning pumps for removal of excess water Bi-weekly during rainy season, quarterly during dry season Suitability of agricultural when required plots for farmer # of functioning sluice gates Quarterly relocation # of sources of water for irrigation, when required Weekly during dry season
# of surveyed and clearly demarcated .5 – 1 ha plots Annually from start of project.
#of farmers in possession of official agricultural Annually from start of project tenancy documents
Transition of farmers to % of tenanted lands under cultivation Annually after one year of project operation new plots Crop yields Following each crop cycle
Income levels of relocated farmers Annually after one year of project operation # of employment contracts available for community Annually from start of project organisations
# of individual employment opportunities available Annually from start of project from community organisations Ability of Nariva Community and regional employment/unemployment community residents to Annually from start of project benefit from levels Reforestation Scheme Community and regional income levels Annually from start of project
# of new livelihoods created Annually from start of project Employment levels within new livelihood areas Annually from start of project Income levels within new livelihoods areas Annually from start of project
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 58 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abarca-Diaza, Marco and Wendy Singh. Donna Ramsammy, ed. Meshing Global Policies to a Community Perspective” bp Trinidad and Tobago Corporate Social Responsibility. Paria Publishing Company Limited, Trinidad and Tobago. 2003.
Ali Deonananan & Associates Ltd. Report on the Compilation of Boundaries for the Proposed Nariva Swamp Environmentally Sensitive Area. 2005.
Basdeo, Rishi. A Project of the University of the West Indies Centre for Gender and Development Studies (CGDS). Community Level Governance in Kernahan and Cascadoux: A Gender Analysis. 2001
Brown, Nicole A. Canari Technical Report No. 268. Environmental Advocacy in the Caribbean: The Case of the Nariva Swamp, Trinidad. 2000
Caribbean Forest Conservation Association. Nariva Swamp Seminar Proceedings. 1996.
Caribbean Forest Conservation Association. Report on National Parks and Protected Areas Design. 1996
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance. Monitoring Procedure Nariva Swamp, Trinidad and Tobago. 1995
Cross, Nicola and Gabrielle Hosein. A Project of the University of the West Indies Centre for Gender and Development Studies (CGDS). Socio-Economic, Cultural and Gender Analysis of Kernahan and Cascadoux. 2001
Ducks Unlimited. Nariva Swamp Restoration Initiative – Historical Change Detection Analysis, Restoration Scenario and Work Plans. 2005
Durbal, Sharda. A Project of the University of the West Indies Centre for Gender and Development Studies (CGDS). Gender and natural Resource Use in Kerhaham and Cascadoux. UWI CGDS 2000
Environmental Management Authority. The Administrative Record for the Environmentally Sensitive Area: Nariva Swamp Managed Resource Protected. 2006.
Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. Conflict and Natural Resource Management. 2000.
HALCROW in association with ADeB Associates Draft National Conceptual Development Plan. May 1999.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 59 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Ingles, Andrew W., Arne Musch and Helle Qwist-Hoffman for the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. The Participatory Process for Supporting Collaborative Management of Natural Resources: An Overview. 1999.
Institute of Marine Affairs. Final Report for Environmental Impact Assessment of the Nariva Swamp, (Biche Bois Neuf Area) 1998.
Institute of Marine Affairs. Draft Technical Report for the Nariva Management Plan – Legislative Control. 1999.
Institute of Marine Affairs. Draft Technical Report for the Nariva Management Plan – Economic Aspects. 1990
Institute of Marine Affairs. Draft Technical Report for the Nariva Management Plan – Machinery and Roads. 1999.
Institute of Marine Affairs. Draft Technical Report for the Nariva Management Plan – Socio- Economic Assessment. 1999.
Institute of Marine Affairs. Final Report – Formulation of the Nariva Swamp Management Plan. 1999.
Kacal, Sylvia. Nariva Swamp Management Resource Area: Social Assessment, 1999.
Lans, Cheryl. A Project of the University of the West Indies Centre for Gender and Development Studies (CGDS). State Policy and Governance in the Nariva Swamp: A Historical and Gender Analysis. 2000.
Mahy, Maryse. Feasibility of Co-Managing a Wetland of International Importance: The Case of the Nariva Swamp (Thesis Research) Preliminary Summary of Research Conducted. 1996
Ministry of Social Development, European Union Sponsored Poverty Reduction Programme, Trinidad and Tobago Survey of Living Conditions 2005 – Final Report. 2007.
Ministry of Social Development. Directory of Non-Governmental Organisations, Community-Based Organisations, Faith-Based Organisations and other Civil Society Organisations of Trinidad and Tobago, 2007.
Ministry of Planning and Development, Central Statistical Office in collaboration with The Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources, 2004 Agricultural Census Report.
Ministry of Planning and Development, Central Statistical Office. 2000 Population and Housing Census: Community Register.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 60 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Ministry of Planning and Development, Central Statistical Office. Continuous Sample Survey of Population. Labour Force Report. 2004.
National Wetland Committee. Draft National Policy on Wetland Conservation in Trinidad and Tobago. 1996.
Pemberton, Carlisle A, and Marsha L. Fridie. “Fishing versus Farming in a Fresh Water Swamp in Trinidad in the Caribbean.” 2000.
Pritchard, D. Implementation of the Ramsar Convention in Trinidad and Tobago. 1997.
Ramnarine, Anthony. Forest Policy in Trinidad and Tobago. FAO. 1997
Thelen, K.D. and S. Faizool. Plan for a System of National Parks and other Protected Areas in Trinidad and Tobago. Forestry Division .1980
University of the West Indies Centre for Gender and Development Studies. The Nariva Swamp: A Gendered Case Study – Composite Report. 2001.
University of the West Indies Centre for Gender and Development Studies. Community Level Governance in Kernaham and Cascadoux: A Gender Analysis. 2001.
Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC for Talisman (Trinidad) Petroleum, Ltd. Environmental Impact Assessment 3-D Seismic Survey for the Easter Block. 2003.
World Bank Africa Safeguards Policy Enhancement Tea. Process Framework for the Mitigation of Social Impacts of the Lake Chad Basin Commission (LCBC) Project. March 2002.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 61 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
APPENDIX I Stakeholder Consultations
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 62 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Organisation Contact Person Date of Key Issues Contact Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources Dept of Land Administration Ian Fletcher 31/10 Wants to see process for issuing of leases sped up. Stressed the need Ag. Officer II to consult with farmers in anything that affects their livelihoods Regional Administration (North) Mr. Timothy Sutchit, 17/10 It is important to recognise that gardening is a way of life in Plum Ag. Assistant II Mitan. Farmers have been doing their agriculture in certain areas for many years and it may be difficult to change that. Regional Administration (South) Mr. Mohan Lookhoor 24/10 Interested in trying to get land tenure issues sorted out on Kernahan. Ag. Assistant II Would like to see farmers branch out in to other crops to ensure that lands are fully cultivated Mr. Frankie Balkissoon, 10/10 Currently undertaking infrastructural development works to improve Ag. Engineer and the conditions of agricultural lands in Bock A and in Kernahan. Ms. Anne Marie Medina, 17/10 Looking also at current agricultural practices and how they might Deputy Director impact on water quality in the surrounding environments, possibly Land & Water Development Division Mr. Ronald Bryce, establishing a monitoring system. Recognise that is it important to Hydrologist get all players on board, including the many levels within the Min. of Ms. Mala Powdher, Ag. when trying to bring about a change in practice and behaviour. Ag Engineer Fisheries Division Ms. Sherry Pierre, 1/11 Very supportive of any initiative to further develop aquaculture in Acquaculture Officer the area. Feels that timing is right to establish such an industry, also the conditions in the Plum Mitan and Kernahan areas are conducive. Will need to bring Food processors into the plans to ensure all the fish cultivated have a market. Institute of Marine Affairs Mr. Paul Gabbadon 30/10 IMA is willing to assist in developing the aquaculture industry, already have a number of training manuals for the production of cascadura. Feels there is good potential to develop the industry Ministry of Works and Transport Drainage Division - East Mr. Hillary Ifill Drainage 22/10 Drainage works in the swamp need to be an ongoing activity, both Superintendent large and small channels, however, the resources afforded to the Drainage Division only provide for the large channels. With proper drainage maintenance flooding problems could be reduced. Very keen on seeing the Nariva Swamp rehabilitated and used sustainably. Public education will be critical.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 63 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Organisation Contact Person Date of Key Issues Contact Ministry of Public Utilities and the Environment Question was raised about how marsh areas figure into carbon sequestration equation. Wonder why the hydrology wasn't tackled Mr. Gerald McVorren, National Wetlands Committee 15/11 first as it is critical to nearly everything in the swamp. Concerned Chair about how the project is going to be managed. Request that training components be included in the plan. Forestry Division Wildlife Section Mr. David Boodhoo, 15/10 FD supports co-management approach to natural resources Senior Game Warden management, tries to involve community in a number of activities. Lots of monitoring of the swamp is required as illegal activities continue. Problem with farmers in prohibited area. This year boundaries should get demarcated on the and will be able to take steps to more those inside the ESA. Community Forestry Mr. Roopnarine Singh, 3/10 Main problems in the swamp are illegal hunting and fires. F.D. Forester I works closely with the community, tries to provide employment opportunities as possible. Field station can serve as community meeting space as needed. Tour Operators Asa Wright Dr. Howard Nelson, 15/11 Supports the restoration initiative Conservation Mgr Rooks Tours Mr. Courtenay Rooks 21/11 Very keen to support the development of community-based ecotourism activities in Nariva. Sees great potential in incorporating the restoration activities into the tourism package. Willing to assist with training and organising. Southeast Ecotours Mr. Phelix Kirk 1/1 Currently conducting guided tours into the swamp and in areas around the Ortoire River. Supports the concept of the reforestation activity but cautions that issues of the farmers relocation and tenure will need to be sorted out before anything can begin.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 64 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Organisation Contact Person Date of Key Issues Contact Community Organisations Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group Mr. Hansraj Ramlal, 17/10 and Farmers do not want to move from Block B. Only cultivate a few Secretary 28/11 months of the year, were doing so long before Large rice farmers came in. Block B is cultivated by about 40 farmers. Soils very fertile, give up to three times the yield of same acreage in Block A. Would like to plant watermelon and trees at the same time. Community interested in developing its ecotourism potential Kernahan Improvement Committee Mr. Roger Lobin, 24/10 Farmers know they need to move, want to move to the Bento President area. Willing to move if relocated to comparable land. Kernahan Farmers Association Mr. Rajam Harripersad, 3/10 Concerned that farmers will lose their livelihoods, most know President nothing else and have little education. Assistance will be needed to move/transition farmers to other activities. Nariva Environmental Trust (NET) Mr. Pretam Maharaj, 27/9 Very involved in environmental awareness and education. Fixing Secretary hydrology is very important, has implications for agriculture, reforestation, fishing, etc. Concerned about the illegal practices taking place in the swamp, mainly fishing and hunting. VOICE Mr. Kallian Deonanan, 17/10 Working on educating and training community members. Have President organized to bring in a number of training courses for interested members. Also concerned about hydrology. Drew up a drainage plan which was presented to Min of Ag.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 65 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Organisation Contact Person Date of Key Issues Contact Other Organisations Archaeological Society of T & T Mr. Peter Harris, 4/12 Confirmed that all known archeological sites are outside of the Member proposed reforestation sectors. Interested in obtaining support from interested community members in the monitoring and protection of existing sites Caribbean Network for Integrated Rural Ms. Zakiya Uzoma 8/10 Described CNIRD involvement with the Kernahan community. Development (CNIRD) Wadada, Coordinator Disappointed that the effort to establish a community-based ecotourism project proved to be unsustainable. Recommended that any initiative to develop alternative livelihoods also have the support of the Community Development Regional office Manatee Conservation Trust Gupte Lutchmedial 9/10 Supports the development of low impact ecotourism in the area, however, recommends that proper impact studies be implemented prior to the development of any new ecotourism initiatives. Monitoring of activity within the ESA is critical to the sustainability of the swamp. Any rehabilitation and/or.restoration plans must have the full support of the Ministry with responsibility for the environment. Call for the establishment of a formal system of protected areas in T&T. COPE Ms. Sharon Laurent 15/11 Concerned about the status of the hydrological studies and the importance of addressing that component of the restoration initiative. Concerned about the management of the reforestation project as well as other plans for the Nariva Swamp ESA. Recommend that an NGO lead the Nariva Swamp ESA Management Committee with support from EMA. Private Land Owners (around periphery) Huggins Estate Manatee Conservation 9/10 Trust ( see Manatee Conservation Trust) Cocal Retreat Limited Roger Butcher Concerned about the implications of ESA rules and restrictions for private lands which may fall within the ESA boundaries.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 66 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
APPENDIX II Report on Public Consultation
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 67 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Nariva Reforestation Scheme PUBLIC CONSULTATION Thursday, November 22, 2007 Manatee Conservation Trust Headquarters, Manzanilla
MEETING SUMMARY
A public consultation to present the Interim Reforestation Plan was held on November 22, 2007 at the Manatee Conservation Trust in Manzanilla. Selected stakeholders (Attachment 1) were informed of the meeting via an invitation letter (See Attachment 2). The meeting was also advertised via newspaper display ads and fliers (Attachment 3).
Organisations represented at the consultation included:
Kernahan Improvement Committee VOICE (Villagers Organised in Conservation of the Environment) Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group Plum Mitan Village Council Kernahan Farmers Association South East Ecotours Manatee Conservation Trust Cocal Retreat Limited, Ministry of Agriculture Department of Land Administration Ministry of Agriculture Lands Unit – El Reposo Demonstration Centre Ministry of Agriculture Lands Unit – Rio Claro Demonstration Centre Ministry of Works and Transport Drainage Division East National Reforestation and Watershed Rehabilitation Programme (NRWRP)
An attendance list is attached in Attachment 4.
After a brief welcome and introduction by Mary Schorse, Rural Sociologist for the project, Eden Shand, Project Manager, presented the key points of the proposed Reforestation Plan. A summary of these points is as follows:
• Three main reforestation sectors: B1, B2 and C1a for a total of 455 ha • Sectors A2, C1b, C1c and C1d which have already been reforested by the NRWRP will be put under forest management • A policy decision has been taken to not allow agriculture within the ESA with the exception of the Block A Plum Mitan Food Crop Project. • A maximum of two nurseries are being contemplated for the supply of seedlings to the project – one in Plum Mitan and one in Kernahan. • Community groups under the direction of the Forestry Division will provide the labour for the planting, tending and fire protection components of the project.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 68 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Approximately 110 persons will be employed for 5 years. Groups identified to participate in the Scheme were those already involved in reforestation via the National Reforestation Project – Kernahan Improvement Committee, Nariva Environmental Trust, and Biche United Sport and Cultural Group. These groups would be encouraged to form their labour pool from displaced farmers who were interested in working on the project. • Community labour will also be sourced to staff the two nurseries. This is estimated to be approximately 10 persons. • The project is estimated to begin in October/November 2008 with the establishment of the nurseries. Planting will begin in June 2009.
Impacts were identified as:
• Compulsory removal of agricultural squatters from the Nariva ESA • Employment opportunities for community members. Given that it was decided to discontinue agriculture in the Nariva Swamp (except of Block A), this would be the main impact to the local communities. • Restoration of wildlife habitats • Improved fisheries habitat • Carbon sequestration
Following the presentation, stakeholders were invited to ask questions and comment on what was being proposed. The following discussion took place.
Phelix Kirk of South East Ecotours wanted to know: 1) if the salaries provided to labour in the Reforestation Plan would be sufficient to compensate for the loss of agricultural land, assuming the farmers would want to make up the labour force for the project, 2) Will any of the carbon credits earned transfer to the communities, and 3) what type of trees will be planted.
Response: It was noted that the main recommendation for assisting displaced farmers is for the Ministry of Agriculture to relocate the farmers to alternative, suitable lands so that farmers’ livelihoods would not suffer in the long term. For those interested in working on the project, it was being recommended that labour be compensated at a rate of $125/day.
Carbon credits are being looked at to fund in part the Reforestation Plan. Any credit transfer to the community would be by way of funding employment opportunities within the project.
The plants that are being recommended are those that would restore the swamp to its original state. This entails recreating several types of forest – marsh, swamp forest and upland forest. The types of trees recommended therefore, are those types found in those formations, such as Swamp Immortelle, Water Locust, Bloodwood, Crappo, Wild Cashima, Guatecare, etc.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 69 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Rajam Harripersad of the Kernahan Farmers Association spoke about how he and many other residents/farmers in Kernahan have been living and working in Kernahan for almost 40 years. They’ve made a life and a living despite the harsh conditions and lack of infrastructure in the area. Their whole lives have been farming, many have no education and at this stage in their lives would have a difficult time moving physically and/or shifting occupations. Working for $85 – 100/day would not be sufficient to those who have families to support. There is concern that Kernahan residents are going to be uprooted. Farmers have no problem with relocation as long as they are able to continue the same level of agriculture that they currently practice.
Response: It was noted that only those farmers cultivating north of the ESA boundary will need to be relocated. The consultants are working with the Ministry of Agriculture to identify suitable parcels of land to which farmers can be relocated and given proper title to the land, recognizing that all of Kernahan is essentially a squatter settlement. How would regularised tenure assist the farmers?
Harripersad. Tenure would be good. It would provide security, allow farmers to leave something for their children, help in getting loans – although older farmers may not be interested in taking loans. Don’t like the term “displaced” for the farmers, more comfortable with “relocated”. It is important that something be done so that the farmers are properly relocated or they may get hostile when the project tries to get underway. Residents recognise that reforestation is a good thing and that we all need to protect the environment for our children and future generations, that this protection will ensure that future generations know about all the wildlife that lives naturally in the swamp, but they get concerned when it affects their livelihoods.
Residents have an interest in getting involved in the tourism which comes to the swamp, but currently it’s all the “big men” who get the contracts. The little man is shut out. Residents need training and support to make any kind of transition to new livelihoods. It is very difficult to make any change because people are so busy just trying to survive that they have time to study for and/or learn a new trade.
George Butcher, Cocal Retreat Limited. How are the farmers hurting the environment? Contributing to Global Warming?
Response: The determination as to whether or not agriculture is harmful to the swamp is not what the driver of the policy decision to remove agriculture from the ESA. Rather, the custodian of the land which comprises the swamp has decided that it wants to restore the swamp to an earlier state and will only allow certain types of activities.
Butcher. Wants to clarify a misconception about the Ramsar agreement. Hi knowledge of the agreement is that it only covers a small area of wetland (estimated at 10 acres) primarily for the purpose of protecting the habitat of water birds and swamp birds. He is very much against policies and regulations which would limit and/or prohibit how citizens can enjoy the swamp. Further, having protested again the inclusion of private lands within the ESA boundaries, he
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 70 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
is still waiting to see how those private landowners whose land falls within the ESA boundaries will be affected.
Raynaldo Phillips, (NRWRP). One of the problems in Nariva is that the boundaries are not visible on the ground.
Phelix Kirk, South East Ecotours. What is the time frame for the project?
Response. It is proposed that establishment of the nurseries begin in November 2008, with the first planting to take place in June 2009. Planting will be executed over five years, with an additional five years of tending and maintenance.
Alan Sankar, Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Association. Block B is cultivated by approximately 40 farmers for about 3 to 4 months each year – during the dry season. Many of these individuals may not be full time farmers, but only plant the one crop a year (having other jobs for the rest of the time) in Block B, in large part because the soil is so fertile. Yields out of Block B can be three times as much as what comes out of Block A for the same acreage. The profits from this annual crop over the years have helped residents finance the building of their houses, sending children to university, etc. Farmers have LONG been engaged in this practice, cultivating quietly amongst the trees on Block B prior to the arrival of the largescale rice farmers who caused the most damage in Block B. Now the small scale farmers will not be allowed to cultivate in Block B – basically being punished because of what was done by the large scale farmers. Block A is essentially filled, but no one has tenure, despite the fact that they have been trying to get if for years.
Recognizing that ours is a society which tends to favour “pardners”, won’t the Biche group favour Biche residents to select for its reforestation contract rather than residents of Plum Mitan even though it is Plum Mitan residents who will be impacted? Can consideration be given to the Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group which represents over 100 farmers in Plum Mitan and Biche as one of the groups to be involved in the reforestation scheme?
Kallian Deonanan, VOICE. Wonders where are the representatives of the EMA and the Forestry Division. For every consultation that is held in Nariva, they seem to be conspicuously absent. Not willing to share personal theories on why that is the case.
Does it make sense to have two nurseries when the project in Kernahan (Sector C1a is 40 ha) is considerably smaller than the project in Plum Mitan (Sector B1 is 465 ha and B2 is 32 ha). Wouldn’t it be more cost effective just to transport the required seedling down to Kernahan?
Will those groups who are being proposed for involvement in the Nariva Reforestation Plan be relieved of their contracts with the National Reforestation Project before the Nariva project begins?
Raynaldo Phillips, National Reforestation Project. Groups operating under the NRWRP are generally given about 50 acres to plant annually. Technically, five years after the initial
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 71 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
planting, these lands are earmarked to be returned to the Forestry Division for ongoing maintenance, however, the details of that arrangement have yet to be worked out. Given that Forestry Division is already understaffed, it is possible that some sort of arrangement will be made with the NRWRP to continue maintaining the lands it has planted. As such, those groups involved in the NRWRP are likely to continue to have contracts to do either planting or tending for the foreseeable future.
Kallian Deonanan. Groups with existing and ongoing contracts should be excluded from the Nariva scheme on several grounds. First, some of these groups have not proven to be effective managers and are running their projects very badly. Without a proven effective management track record, they should not be given preference for work on the Nariva Project. Secondly, all employment opportunities should not be given to just a handful of groups, while other groups working in the community are continually overlooked. Similarly, you will find that some of the groups with contracts already have numerous other projects (game warden programme, Blue & Gold Macaw project, etc.) which are providing economic opportunities for their members. These opportunities need to be spread around a bit more equitably than are being done at the moment.
Raynaldo Phillips. In responding to the comments about contractor management capabilities, the NRWRP operates in a very dynamic scenario and has found that is has to deal with a range of social issues, in addition to the basic technical issues of reforestation. Admits that different groups are at different levels of maturity, but they are trying to let the groups “grow”, assisting in their development as necessary. Firmly believes that the contractors have the expertise necessary to execute their projects and feels that cooperation and networking should take place between the existing NRWRP groups and any new reforestation groups that come on stream. A question was raised about the ability of the Forestry Division to enter into contracts with local community groups for the purpose of reforestation. His experience is the Forestry Division is only now becoming more responsive to greater community involvement in the functions of the Forestry Division but feels that the Division may not have the legal framework to allow them to contract community groups for reforestation. If group contacts are not available, another option would be to employ local residents as daily paid labour in the project.
Toussaint Roberts, Retired Forester III. In his experience in the Forestry Division there were no problems in entering into contracts for such activities as thinning of plantations and supply of road building materials.
Timothy Sutchit, Lands Division, El Reposo Demonstration Centre, Ministry of Agriculture. There are state lands near to the Block A Food Crop Project which could be made available for farmer relocation. The challenge with these lands is that they would need to be surveyed and have appropriate infrastructure put in place. Discussions will need to take place with the Ministry of Agriculture to discuss the options.
Discussions with hunters in the area would be very helpful to learn about how the area was (topography, flora, fauna, hydrology, etc.) before the large scale rice farmers came in. A
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 72 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
number of alterations to the hydrology which have not properly been fixed are still causing problems with drainage.
Roger Lobin, Kernahan Improvement Committee. Wants to know where the farmers are going to be relocated to. Farmers have actually been asking for relocation for years, but nothing has happened as yet. The lower lands of the Kernahan project are not suitable during the rainy season and only one crop of melon can get planted during the dry season – if you are lucky. In recent years rains have affected these dry season crops as well. Farmers have identified an area where they think they could move to, the Bento area. Wants to hear what Mr. Lookhoor, Lands Unit at Rio Claro has to say about that.
Mr. Lookhoor, Lands Unit, Rio Claro Demonstration, Ministry of Agriculture. In the execution of this project, it is very important to look at the time frame and the plans for what will be done to assist the farmers. It should be recognized that the Land and Water Development Division (LWDD) of the Ministry of Agriculture is currently undertaking a series of development works to improve the conditions of the land in the low lying areas of the Kernahan Food Crop Project, making more lands suitable for agriculture year round and giving farmers options outside of the ESA. Given the proposed time frame for the Nariva Project and the need to move farmers relatively soon, the LWDD projects will need to be fast tracked. As for lands available on the forest periphery (the Bento area), they need to be assessed in terms of the feasibility of shifting these lands to agriculture and if so, then putting in the necessary infrastructure to support the agriculture. There is some concern about the land use change, particularly if it would require the removal of any trees.
Roger Lobin. LWDD plans won’t work to remove all the water. Farmers need to go to Bento.
Ian Fletcher, Department of Land Administration, Ministry of Agriculture. Before any change of land use will be approved by the Town and Country Planning Division (TCPC), a series of studies will need to take place – topographic survey, soil survey, etc. In order to approve the request for land use change, as well as the request for subdivision, the TCPD will need to have all the details on what the land is like, what are the soil limitations, what crops will grow there, what is the condition of soil nutrients, etc. Once TCPD receives all that information, it can then make a determination about the proposed agricultural use for the land, but it may also place conditions and restrictions on such approvals. The process to arrive at having these lands in state whereby leases can be issued can be lengthy.
Fortunately, a committee has recently been formed which is trying to short circuit this process and speed up the process for issuing leases. A key component of the entire process, however, is consultation with farmers.
Alan Sankar, Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Association. With the latest survey plan for Block A, plots went from 3 aces to 10 acres. Very few farmers have the resources required to cultivate as much as 10 acres, and on such plots they are currently having to divide up the lands and share the plots, however, an agricultural lease will only be issued for one farmer, thus only one farmer benefits from the security of tenure provided by the lease. Farmers
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 73 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
would like all of Block A to revert to 3 acre parcels which would solve most of the problems with relocation as there would then be adequate space for all who needed.
Phelix Kirk, Southeast Ecotours. No reforestation should take place until the farmers are properly relocated.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 74 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
ATTACHMENT 1
Stakeholders Invited to Nariva Public Consultation, November 22, 2000
Last Name First Name Organisation Ali-Khan, Nazra Newlands/Biche Women's Group Balkissoon, Frankie Land & Water Development Division MALMR Beckles Denise UWI Faculty of Science and Agriculture Bharat Capildo Fish Farmers Association/Nariva Aquafarms Bidaissee Alvin Biche United Sport and Cultural Club Boodhoo, David Wildlife Section Forestry Division Broadbridge Stephen Caribbean Discovery Tours Butcher George Cocal Estate Celestine, Jennifer Manzanilla Village Council Charles Kim Kernahan/Cascadoux Village Council Cockburn, Brian UWI Faculty of Science and Agriculture Deonanan, Kallian VOICE Elder Stephanie State Lands Division Fletcher Ian Dept of Land Administration MALMR Gabbadon Paul Institute of Marine Affairs Harripersad, Rajam Kernahan Farmers Association Harris Peter Archaeological Society of T & T Hosein Ferdouse Kernahan/Cascadoux Village Council Hosein Gabriella UWI Centre for Gender Studies Ifill Hillary Drainage Divisoin – East Min of Works & Transport Kallicharan, Henry Plum Mitan Village Council Kallicharan, Sanbassie Plum Mitan Women's Group Llaurence Keith Archaeological Society of T & T Khan Mr. El Reposo Demonstration Centre MALMR Khan, Karen Biche United Sport and Cultural Club Kirk Phelix Southeast Ecotours Koping, Karissa Tourism Development Company Laurent Sharon COPE Lobin, Roger Kernahan Improvement Committee Lochan Barath Sangre Grande Regional Corporation Lokur Rio Claro Agriculture Ext Office MALMR Mohan Lutchmedial Gupte Manatee Conservation Trust Maharaj, Pretam Nariva Environmental Trust (NET)
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 75 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
Last Name First Name Organisation Last Name McVorren, Gerald National Wetlands Committee Medina Anne Marie Land & Water Development Division MALMR Nancoo Lelamattee Brigand Hill Village Council Neckles Roger Avifauna Tours Nelson, Howard Asa Wright
Osuji Pasqual NRWRP Ottley Fitzroy Rio Claro/Mayaro Regional Corporation Phillips, Raynaldo NRWRP - Pierre, Sherry Fisheries Division Rajbansee, Rose Plum Road Village Council Ram Glen Rio Claro/Mayaro Regional Corporation Ramlal, Hansraj Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group Rooks Courtenay Rooks Tours Seecharan, Sylvia Plum Road Women's Group Singh, Roopnarine Community Forestry, Kernahan Field Station Forestry Division Sooklal Taran Nariva Agricultural Group Sutchit, Timothy El Reposo Demonstration Centre MALMR Suzano Alda Ortoire Village Council Uzoma Zakiya CNIRD Whitwell Andrew Pathmaster Williams Rachel UTT
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 76 ATTACHMENT 2
THE TROPICAL RE-LEAF FOUNDATION
November 12, 2007
«AddressBlock»
Dear:
RE: Invitation to attend a Public Consultation on the Proposed Nariva Swamp Reforestation Scheme
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation (TRF), with support from the Environmental Management Authority (EMA) and the Forestry Division, is hosting a public consultation to discuss the proposed Nariva Swamp Reforestation Scheme. The consultation will take place Thursday, November 22, 2007 at the Manatee Conservation Trust Headquarters, 72 km mark, Cocal Estate, Manzanilla. 4:00 pm.
The purpose of the consultation is to present to the public and to key stakeholders plans for a Reforestation Scheme within the Nariva Swamp Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA). In addition to presenting the current Scheme, the consultation will provide an opportunity for stakeholders to ask questions and share their views on the proposed plan.
As an important stakeholder in the Nariva Swamp ESA, we invite you and/or representatives of your organization to attend. If you have any questions or need any additional information, free to contact me at 625-6033 or 759-9682 ([email protected]).
With kind regards,
Mary Schorse Secretary
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 77 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
ATTACHMENT 3
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 78 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
ATTACHMENT 4
Attendees at Nariva Public Consultation, November 22, 2000
Last Name First Name Position Organisation Butcher George Director Cocal Estate Deonanan, Kallian President VOICE Ramlal Hansraj Treasurer VOICE Fletcher Ian Agr. Officer Dept of Land Administration Harripersad, Rajam President Kernahan Farmers Association Kirk Phelix Director Southeast Ecotours Lobin, Roger Danraj President Kernahan Improvement Committee
Lokur Mohan Agr. Officer III Rio Claro Agriculture Ext Office Phillips, Raynaldo Forest Officer NRWRP Mclean Derrick Driver NRWRP Kallicharan Henry President Plum Mitan Village Council Rogoonath Rajendra Member Plum Mitan Village Council Sutchit, Timothy A.A. II El Reposo Demonstration Centre Rampersad Steve Member Kernahan Improvement Committee Sookdeo Kishore Member Kernahan Farmers Association Sookdeo Latchman Member Kernahan Farerms Association Kunjan Dhanraj Member Kernahan Farmers Association Kuuyan Lilowtee Member Kernahan Farmers Association Mahabir Frankie Member Karnaham Farmers Association Jonas Chandra Member Kernahan Farmers Association Neckles Kude Supevisor Kernahan Improvement Committee Sankar Alan President Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group Ramtahal Kumar Treasurer Plum Mitan/Biche Farmers Group Gomes Michael Manager Manatee Conservtion Trust Grant Lennard W.S. II Drainage Division East Edwards Carlisle Driver Drainage Division East Dookran Indira Worker Cocal Estate Beharry Calvin Worker Cocal Estate Roberts Toussaint Retired Forester III
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 79 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
APPENDIX II Tables of Socio-Economic Data
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 80 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
TABLE 1: AGE BREAKDOWN OF STUDY AREA POPULATION Community District Under 20 21 - 50 50 - 70 70+ BICHE 39% 43% 13% 5% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 45% 44% 10% 1% PLUM MITAN 36% 47% 13% 4% WIDER STUDY AREA 40% 44% 12% 4% Rio Claro Mayaro Region 40% 44% 12% 4% Trinidad 37% 45% 14% 5%
TABLE 2: ETHNIC BREAKDOWN OF STUDY AREA POPULATION Community District African Indian Mixed BICHE 15% 67% 17% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 9% 86% 5% PLUM MITAN 13% 80% 6% WIDER STUDY AREA 24% 56% 20% Regional Corporation 26% 53% 20% Trinidad 38% 40% 20%
TABLE 3: BREAKDOWN OF RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS OF STUDY AREA POPULATION Islam Other Roman Baptist Catholic Jehovah Anglican Hinduism Pentecostal Seventh Day Community District Presbyterian BICHE 1% 5% 38% 14% 5% 20% 4% 4% 1% 9% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 0% 2% 37% 3% 36% 9% 6% 0% 2% 4% PLUM MITAN 4% 5% 55% 4% 1% 8% 7% 1% 0% 12% WIDER STUDY AREA 3% 8% 31% 7% 5% 23% 5% 4% 3% 10% Regional Corporation 3% 9% 29% 7% 6% 23% 4% 4% 2% 10% Trinidad 8% 7% 23% 6% 7% 26% 3% 4% 2% 10%
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 81 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
TABLE 4: TYPE OF INDUSTRY
Industry Recoded Agriculture Petroleum and Gas Food and Beverages' Other Manufacturing Construction Wholesale and Retail Trade Transport Storage and Communication Finance Insurance Real Estate & Business Svc Public Administration Sanitary and Similar Social and Related Personal and Household
BICHE 36% 0% 1% 0% 20% 9% 4% 3% 8% 2% 5% 5% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 74% 1% 0% 0% 1% 8% 1% 1% 0% 7% 1% 1% PLUM MITAN 44% 0% 0% 1% 12% 9% 3% 4% 6% 3% 4% 5% WIDER STUDY AREA 25% 4% 1% 2% 19% 12% 5% 4% 7% 2% 6% 7% Regional Corporation 19% 8% 0% 2% 21% 13% 5% 4% 7% 2% 7% 7% Trinidad 7% 3% 3% 6% 12% 18% 7% 8% 8% 1% 10% 9%
TABLE 5: PRIVATE AGRICULTURAL HOLDERS
Area Private cultivated Crop Livestock Mixed Private Agricultural Holders Holders (ha) BICHE 1515 257 243 3 44 COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 472 115 79 2 34
PLUM MITAN 257 145 34 11 14
WIDER STUDY AREA 6338 1772 356 16 92
TABLE 6: SOURCE OF RESIDENTIAL WATER
Public Private Piped Public Public Piped Private Truck Spring / Water Supply Dwelling Yard Standpipe Dwelling Catchment Borne River BICHE 6% 0% 8% 3% 60% 2% 1% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 4% 0% 0% 0% 44% 52% 0% PLUM MITAN 0% 0% 0% 7% 88% 0% 2% Total Study Area 3% 9% 3% 3% 64% 18% 1% Regional Corporations 25% 10% 8% 6% 38% 5% 0% Trinidad 61% 9% 10% 4% 8% 2% 1%
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 82 Nariva Reforestation Scheme Social Impact Assessment March 2008
TABLE 7: TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL LIGHTING
Type of Lighting Electricity Kerosene Other BICHE 79% 21% 0% COCAL ESTATE/MAYARO 37% 63% 0% PLUM MITAN 72% 26% 2% TOTAL STUDY AREA 63% 37% 1% REGIONAL CORPORATION 82% 17% 0% TRINIDAD 91% 7% 1%
All tables created from CSO data calculated from the 2000 Housing and Population Census.
The Tropical Re-Leaf Foundation 83