Pollution from Cruise Ships

- Nancy Birnbaum
- Charles, Taiwan
- Jean, Dominica
- Doug Hickman, Canada
- Atherton Martin, Dominica
- Henry Mutafya
- Edward Robinson, Jamaica
- Joan Seymour
- Quarantine Vila, Vanuatu
- Jeremy Wright, British Virgin Islands
- Writer, Dominica

Marine Pollution

- Bill Aalbersberg, Fiji
- Larry Andrew, St. Lucia
- Father Api, Fiji
- Brian Crawford, USA
- Leslie Farnel, Hawaii, USA
- Thomas Goreau, USA
- Patrick Hare, Mauritius
- Patu Hohepa, New Zealand
- Dean Jacobsen, Majuro, Marshall Islands
- Nico, Mauritius
- Stuart Pimm, USA
- Sofia Shah, Fiji
- Tetoaitit, Kiribati
- Colette Vesikula, Fiji
- Arthur Webb, Fiji
- Barbara Wilson, Canada
- Writer, Haida Gwaii
- Writer, New Zealand
- Raymond Zaharia, France

Access to Clean Drinking Water

- Aliti Vunisea, Fiji

Other Topics

- Rodrique Aristide, Guadeloupe
- Leah Belmar, Bequia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines
- Solomoni Biumaiono, Fiji
- Brad Brace
- Edna Chukwura, Nigeria
- Giuseppe Cirillo, Italy
- Khalfan Hassan, Zanzibar
- Dick Holmberg, USA
- Angela James, Dominica
- Leba Halofaki Mataitini, Fiji
- Gaualofa Matalavea, Samoa
- Steve Menzies, New Zealand
- Dulph Mitchell, San Andres Archipelago

 

From Nancy Birnbaum

I read with some dismay about the sewage problem in Tortola. I wondered if there is any grassroots organization working for change. I would be happy to publish something in the SSCA Bulletin to this effect. Our members are committed to leaving a clean wake and that usually transcends into helping causes such as this one. Let me know if you have any contacts for me in the BVI or on Tortola. I will contact them and see what we can come up with.

From Charles, Taiwan

Sometimes it is possible to consult those countries which have some experience in protecting their coastal lines, like Australia. It is said that you could ask the cruise ships to pack the things not originated in islands and bring them back home. For those cruise ships that sail from nearby countries, it is easy to handle those foods they procured. For the sewage, same request could be followed. Usually port authority charged the cruise ships for the handling the garbage, so the port authority already received the funds and they should help the people. If the funds are too small because of the promotion of the business, it is advisable to increase the charge and assign it to the public. A good image in environment and tourism will attract visitors. Some other ways are to seek help from the Commission in the UN for funds for enforcement helicopters to monitor those cruise ships that are disposing of sewage in the open oceans. Even could check up with the International Maritime Organization in the UN for their assistance and opinions how to meet the concerns. That is my viewpoints and may be premature.

From Jean, Dominica

With this sort of problem in Fiji and elsewhere, should we not request the WHO to do regular tests around the globe to test the water. Why are we not reducing the use of these boats when we know what is inevitable? I really wonder about the people on earth, how are we thinking or what are we thinking? People seem to love a crisis! I would like to see a pressure group world wide that would sincerely work daily on keeping the WHO, UN, UNESCO alert to everyday problems.

From Doug Hickman, Canada

Athie Martin argues strongly for sensible development in Dominica, but in doing so he incorrectly characterizes the issues that he addresses. I go into this in some detail because unless we remember and accurately record our history we are prone - if not condemned - to repeat it.

Regarding solid waste management he writes of the recent construction of new solid waste disposal facilities in several Caribbean islands to allow cruise ships to dispose of their garbage in these Islands. It is true that cruise ships dispose of their wastes in Caribbean islands - but they did so before the construction of the landfills that he refers to. Previously, the wastes were taken to local dumps and burned - or dumped at sea. The landfills are not the final solution to the problem - and certainly not in Dominica where landfill siting is very difficult - but they should provide a better solution than what went before and provide the islands some time to develop better solutions.

Mr. Martin also states that the Florida Caribbean Cruise Association helped arrange the loan for these new facilities from the World Bank. To my knowledge this is not the case. Consultations with the Association were certainly held, as they were with an extremely wide number of stakeholders. A key perspective of the Association at the time was that they rejected any idea that they should pay for waste management to a degree disproportionate to their contribution to the waste problem. But to suggest that the Association helped arrange the loan is overstating their role. It is the case however, that the environmental levy that is charged on tourists equally in the 6 countries that built the landfills was introduced as a mechanism to reduce the cost burden on the local population for waste management, and the negotiation of the rate of the levy included discussion with the Association. I suggest that a review of events at that time would lead an independent observer to conclude that the Association did all it could to resist the levy and to pit one country against another in a divide and conquer strategy designed to subvert the introduction and application of the levy. I believe this levy, when introduced some 10 years ago, was one of the first of its kind in the world and remains one of the key innovative global mechanisms for financing an environmental initiative. It is also worth mentioning in passing that as part of the new waste management arrangements, new institutions were created in each country. The budget of the institutions and the waste management activities they undertake were calculated to include, among other things, a continuing level of financial support from government equal to the waste management budget of the government before the institutions were created; the environmental levy was therefore an additional amount of money. However, several - and perhaps all - governments quickly reduced their waste management budgets on the basis that their contribution was now represented by the environmental levy. But the environmental levy was calculated on the basis of the agreement of governments to maintain their waste management budgets as a component of the cost recovery progamme, so it is not surprising that waste management budgets are very tight in some of the countries. After some 10 years at its original rate, perhaps it is time for countries to set a higher levy.

Mr. Martin makes the point that importation of cruise ship garbage is a component of our trade. Unfortunately, this is very true, as it is in many other countries. But it does not have to be this way. The technology exists to treat (not incinerate or burn) and manage waste on board cruise ships and to take cruise ship waste back to a home port or port of origin. Mr. Martin may wish to review cruise ship waste management where cruise ships travel to places where they do not stop at a port every day - for example, the Inside Passage from Seattle/Vancouver to Alaska, or to Antarctica. Clearly, the industry will resist any measures that involve cost to manage wastes or which require them to change their waste management practices. But I have no doubt that a coordinated political and technical response to this issue can achieve change - and that the industry can come to see such change as in its own best interest.

I cannot comment on the sewage outfall situation, except to note that similar approaches to the management of sewage are taken in major coastal Canadian communities, and that at least one such community does not even have this level of management. To my knowledge, the tertiary level of treatment that others have spoken of as necessary to protect coral has been applied in Canada on a demonstration basis only.

From Atherton Martin, Dominica

The issues raised in this discussion have been at the forefront of the Caribbean development dialogue for some years now. In some cases, the dialogue about the management of waste has led to initiatives in coastal zone management (Barbados), solid waste management (Grenada, St. Lucia, Dominica) and sewage management (Dominica). In many cases the response has been inadequate and inappropriate, leaving these small islands even more vulnerable to the impact of waste on our natural environment. And the prospects for development that is sensible and sustainable have been reduced.

In the case of coastal zone management, the power of the tourism industry coupled with the absence of proper planning, has intensified the effects of sea level rise and natural disasters on important coastal fisheries as well as coastal settlements.

Included here are effects of inadequate septic tank and soakaway facilities for businesses as well as households; the inappropriate disposal of used engine oils; the indiscriminate dumping of solid waste along the coastal cliffs; the continued use of agricultural chemicals and their runoff into streams and coastal waters; inappropriate arrangements for the anchoring of pleasure craft etc.

The recent construction of new solid waste disposal facilities in several Caribbean islands to allow cruise ships to dispose of their garbage in these islands is a new twist to the problem, as the number of visitors far exceeds the resident population. In the case of Dominica, the resident population is 70,000, while the annual number of cruise visitors is 300,000. Added to this is the fact that the Florida Caribbean Cruise Association helped arrange the loan for these new facilities from the World Bank, an institution that promotes sustainable development. Now the importation of cruise ship garbage is a component of our trade.

Less than five years ago, the Canadian Government and the Kuwaiti Fund financed the construction of a sewage treatment plant in Dominica, which is not a treatment plant at all. The plant, located at the mouth of a river in the centre of our capital, Roseau, simply removes paper and other solids from our sewage and lets the raw sewage out into the coastal waters 200 m offshore. Instead of having nine small outfalls, we now have all the sewage from the main population centre (almost half the population of the island) being released from one large outfall into the coastal waters where our people bathe and the visitors snorkel and scuba dive, and where whales live and breed.

The tragedy is that all attempts by local environmental organizations and other interested parties to get the Canadian government officials and the consultants to build a tertiary or higher level treatment plant failed. We were told that the waters offshore were sufficiently deep and the currents would disperse the sewage to the point where it was not a hazard. Does this sound familiar to the plight of the Haida nation in the Queen Charlotte Islands?

The pain for us is that Dominica has been promoting itself as the Nature Island of the Caribbean where land and marine ecosystems are in very good condition. The design and construction of such a facility by a government that prides itself on protecting the environment is a shame.

The other concern is that governments and the international financial agencies are now partners in ignoring the principles of sustainable development so well established in the international agreements that our countries have acceded to: Agenda 21, the Plan of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, the Framework Convention on Climate Change and others.

It seems very important that civil society and community based organizations take on the responsibility for protecting and managing our vital resources.

From Henry Mutafya

The issues that are raised in this article for the islands are sensitive, worrying and desperate for they boarder on a heightened environmental degradation that might affect today's and tomorrow's generation. I have already noted that most of the cruise ships that do a financial-merry-go-round with tourists mostly find ocean waters an obvious disposal choice for their human waste. The dumping of waste 200m from shore is raw sewage. If no one knows what raw sewage is, go to the library and research on raw sewage! Does this show that is the current practice in Canada? No. Is it possible to do it in a third world country? Yes. Why? They have no clout in their Voice. What gives clout to a Voice? Financial muscle. If it were possible, could we get aid on our terms at least this once in this sane world so that we can design our waste treatment and disposal plants suiting our delicate environments? Is it possible that nations with the much needed Financial Clout can allow environmental protection so that the people it really affects, who feel the hurts when it pains most, who carry the real passion for their environment, could have a say that registers on the environment? There is a saying in my language: How can I tell you how many rooms you have in your house when I don't live there? In other words give enough room to the house owner to tell you how many rooms they have in their house before you say anything on the subject.

From Edward Robinson, Jamaica

I fully agree that the island economies are dominated by the tourist industry, so it has the clout, and tends to ride rough shod over environmental concerns, regardless. But the figures about there being many more tourists, in some cases, than islanders, and that this will grossly exacerbate the garbage problem is somewhat misleading. Firstly, how do the islands count their tourists? By name? by day? Whichever way, one has to multiply numbers of tourist bodies by days stayed, then match this tourist-day value against the man-days value for islanders. There are 365 of these for each islander. For the example given, Dominica, the number of islander-days per year is 70,000 x 365 = 25.5 million. If each tourist stayed on average 10 days, then there would be 300,000 x 10 = 3 million, still substantial but perhaps less challenging. If many of the tourists are cruise ship tourists, then the figure of 3 million is probably overestimated (but one would need to include cruise ship crews in the statistics).

If the tourist garbage is becoming an important part of the trade, I sincerely hope that the local authorities are charging enough to cover the cost of running the disposal facilities (to tertiary standards) plus replacement cost after the end of their life span.

From Joan Seymour

I am amazed at the reports you published about the discharging of sewage by cruise ships off the BVI. Does the cruise line pay for this or is it done as a matter of course and the local governments have no recourse? I wonder if this is what happens everywhere that the cruise lines dock at ports and what are the most effective ways of addressing this problem. Soon there will be no marine life left in the waters and the people bathing in the seas will come out with terrible skin diseases.

From Quarantine Vila, Vanuatu

It's quite interesting, though I'd also like to know about our polluted waters in my own small island country Vanuatu.

From Jeremy Wright, British Virgin Islands

Gosh what a subject, extremely worth commenting on and sending to people in the local newspapers for a start and I shall right now...a concerned waterman.

From Writer, Dominica

I just want to note some points and respond to the Sustainable Development paradox. Carefully defining caps and ceilings for the extent of development for Dominica and islands in general should be the norm. In very finite systems such as our islands, sustainable development is a misnomer, often falsely leading government decision makers to adopt pro-development campaigns (to elevate standard of living) that irreversibly damage fragile ecosystems. The conundrum arises in part because government officials often like to identify with first-world (i.e., developed) ideology, and move away from notions that a small country may still be developing or may level-out at a modest GDP. By most standards, Dominica is not a developing country, because we enjoy a very high standard of living and wealth of natural resources. Small Island voice, for your information, I have long believed that effective resource management does not hinge on campaigning for sustainable development, but rather, ensuring responsible, sustainable resource use, limiting growth and impacts, responsive to nature's processes and aspiring to a modest resource consumption profile. For example, I see what is happening to our frogs...and the massive amount of visitors tramping on our soils with no surveillance and no mitigation to pest, disease, fungus and pathogen spread. Why mega Cruise ships? Why? Where did the fungus (Chrytridiomycosis) that is killing our frogs came from?

 

Marine Pollution

From Bill Aalbersberg, Fiji

The story from Fiji has motivated me to respond. I am from the University of the South Pacific with main campus in Fiji. Since 2002 we have been working with the Fiji integrated coastal management project which has documented that emerging threat of sewage to Fiji's reefs in tourism areas. Nutrient levels are several times what is thought to be safe for coral reefs and algae is becoming dominant in many places.

We hope it is not too late and communities and hotels are responding by upgrading sewage systems, building composting toilets and wetlands and managing pig waste. It is true that tourism seems to be a major factor in this change but in ways more complex than might be thought. The actual hotel sewage seems to contribute about 20% of the nutrients whereas village waste adds 40-45%. This has increased as people move from inland pit latrines to flush toilets that push the nutrients through the sandy substrate onto the reef. The big surprise in our study was that piggeries contribute the remaining 35%. Hotel workers get to take home leftover hotel food for their pigs, which often live over or near waterways. Hotels also contribute as a ready market for marine produce; overfishing is also part of the equation when there are less herbivores to eat the algae.

Many villages are choosing to set up protected areas in 10-20% of their reef areas, which leaves enough for community needs but allows fish to reach maturity and reproduce. If done while the reef area is still relatively healthy good fish stock recoveries have occurred.

From Larry Andrew, St. Lucia

This situation is not unique to your country although it may be in a different form in other countries such as ours. I think the problem we are facing is striking the balance between tourism gain and the effects to our environment. In St Lucia this is prevalent as our government keeps relinquishing the beachfront to investors for new hotels.

From Father Api, Fiji

Greetings from Labasa in the Fiji Islands. I thank you and am very moved about Haida and British Virgin Islands stories. Fiji is now putting a lot of its effort on tourism. We have been warned about this recently by the University of the South Pacific. I really believe the landowners who allow their seashore to build hotels and resorts must be aware of this danger. They must be advised to understand this and to act to protect their environments.

I come from a village opposite a hotel. One problem we are faced with is the sea that runs between the village and the hotel has stopped providing us with fresh sea food. Something has happened I believe its something to do with hotel. Fiji needs to be careful now or else it will be too late.

From Brian Crawford, USA

With respect to pollution of reefs......While hotels may be one source of pollution to adjacent coral reefs (and the nitrogen that promotes algal growth), we also need to consider other sources. In a study done in Fiji along the coral coast (Tanner, C.C., Gold, A., (2004), Review and Recommendations for Reduction of Nitrogen Export to the Coral Coast of Fiji , Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI USA, 54pp, (2876kb) - report can be downloaded from www.crc.uri.edu), most hotels actually had fairly decent treatment facilities. Nitrogen loading estimates showed that population growth of people and pigs, actually was a larger source of the problem of nitrogen loading to reefs compared to hotels - with less nitrogen removal from piggery and septic systems in coastal villages compared to most hotel treatment systems.... While hotels may directly discharge into the sea (many do not discharge at all and recycle all water in water limited areas), piggery waste enters directly through rivers and streams, and human loadings through groundwater seepage. So in addition to better nitrogen removal at hotel systems, better village based treatment systems and treatment for piggery waste, that not only address health risks, but also reduce nitrogen, are likely needed. Of course, hotel growth also likely promotes increased population growth in adjacent areas, but hotels and tourism may not be the main source of the problem in all cases.

From Leslie Farnel, Hawaii, USA

Thank you for posting this article. One only needs to study the reefs off the populated Hawaiian Islands for more fuel for this fire. What was once solid coral beds teeming with fish and colour when I first began diving the area in the late 1970s now is black and dead, a skeleton of its former self. This has been attributed to industrialization where more and more rubbish is dumped in the water. It's bad enough there is natural silting. Now we add waste from construction, sewage from over population which results in "accidental" sewage spills (coinciding with high season tourist populations), and toxins from agriculture. The reefs don't have a chance. Where streams used to flow naturally into the ocean channelling the fresh water run off, now the construction and agriculture has dammed up the natural flow of water so the run off comes from the top of the land and takes everything that sits there with it...pesticides used in sugar cane and pineapple, fertilizers unnatural to the ocean and red mud causing heavy silting and smothering the coral. This is not to mention the thousands of boaters each day sloughing off suntan lotion and urine in the shallow waters as they snorkel and swim. No self respecting tropical fish would live in that environment. I rarely go diving any more because it only brings tears to my eyes to see what it looks like now compared to what I remember it was before traffic jams, 100 passenger snorkel boats and tract housing. Yes, the tourists bring money to the islands but they bring other things as well. There are still places out there where unlike Hawaii it is not too late to say No. If you live in a place like that cherish what you have. It may not last forever.

From Thomas Goreau, USA

Since early childhood, I watched all the reefs of Jamaica killed by algae whose uncontrolled growth was caused by untreated sewage. Waves of algae spread outwards from all the sewage sources over a period of 40 years, as each part of the coast was developed, until all of our reefs were smothered. Foreign "experts" came afterwards, did superficial studies, and blamed the fishermen instead of sewage!

The result of their misdiagnosis based on faulty science and ignorance of local environmental history are policy prescriptions that cannot possibly work. They say make marine protected areas and stop people from fishing and the corals and fish will bloom. Yet these protected areas are full of dead and dying corals and the algae have not vanished! In fact, the only way to get rid of algae is to starve them by cutting off the fertilizer pouring into the sea. When this is done, the algae quickly die back: I got a bay in Jamaica cleaned up in only a few months this way. The only way to restore the fisheries is to restore the health of the coral reef habitat that maintains them, not to pretend that sick areas that are protected can support more fish.

At the UN Experts Meeting on Waste Management in Small Island Developing States, held to provide advice by island experts for our governments at the UN Summit of Small Island States last year, I wrote the review chapter on the effects of land-based sources of nutrients on coral reefs and fisheries, and how to solve the problem by using biological tertiary treatment to recycle all the nutrients on land, in order not only to prevent killing our corals and fish but also to increase the productivity of our land instead of throwing its fertility away and poisoning the sea. The entire group of UN Experts called for complete elimination of all human caused sources of nutrients to the coastal zone.

But this message was lost completely at the Summit, and has also been totally ignored in the Small Island State Position Paper for the forthcoming United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development meetings on energy and environment, along with all the other key recommendations made in a series of meetings of island experts held across the Caribbean, Indian Ocean, and Pacific. All the key points have been dropped, and more of the same is offered by people who do not seem to understand the issues. It seems that we do not want to learn from our experience. If so, we only have ourselves to blame.

From Patrick Hare, Mauritius

We have had to face same problem here: the solution is of course sewerage collection by performing networks and treatment to tertiary level (disinfection and filtration), with nitrate and phosphate removal to leakage factor, specially if treated water is to be used for landscape irrigation (it is necessary to find out how much of the nitrate and phosphate will be taken up by land vegetation and make sure that none are leached and carried to the sea). Large beach resorts have their own systems when public services operate none.

Also adequate set back between high water mark and resort buildings.

From Patu Hohepa, New Zealand

DON'T SWIM ON THE BEACHES OF THE BAY OF ISLANDS, NEW ZEALAND, DON'T EAT LOCAL SHELLFISH AVOID EATING FISH FROM INLETS AND RIVERS That problem of local and central government encouraging or allowing massive rapid housing development of New Zealand's coastal and hinterland areas without similarly making certain that the sewerage infrastructure is also upgraded or enlarged has resulted in many of our harbours and waterways being polluted by overflowing or bursting sewerage. There is also the continuation of allowing so called clarified or treated water from sewerage treatment plants into the waterways and ocean.

If I was cynical I would invite and charge all tourists to come and watch the beautiful changes of water colour from clear to green to yellow and froth over the famous Haruru Falls and down the Waitangi river to Waitangi where my people signed the Treaty of Waitangi, and into the Bay of Islands. This was once a place that was safe for swimming and collecting succulent shellfish. Warning signs are becoming more prevalent but placed so normal visitors do not see them. Another river, the Kawakawa, and the Waikare Inlet has oyster farms whose owners are now taking multimillion dollar court action against the local government for pollution that has closed down or minimized sales of oysters. From fear of hepatitis and faecal diseases and contamination many of us who live in this area no longer net flounders or mullet for consumption. The small voices of indigenous peoples need to be made louder because we are paying the cost of marine pollution.

From Dean Jacobsen, Majuro, Marshall Islands

Hello from a small island (Majuro). I have been photographing the coral and algae along a pollution gradient on Majuro, Marshall Islands for almost five years (nutrient sources are sewage outfall, big trash landfill, ships, overpopulated shoreline where native population and pigs use the shore for a privy). With a high population growth rate, lots of disposable diapers also find their way into the sea.

Obviously, the situation is already bad, without much tourism here. The result is not like Jamaica, where the over fishing of algae-eating fish and the die-off of Diadema urchins clearly had a huge effect (nasty events often have a combinations of causes: marine protected areas are an important tool, the science is not wrong). Instead of coral die-off, the problem is the reduction of coral recruitment (black, slimy rhodophyte algae over much of the substrate, replacing coralline algae). Also, pollution and Crown of Thorns resistant coral, Porites is spreading, forming mono-cultures. Finally, excess nutrients are apparently stimulating the turf algae, and the largest schools of surgeon fish are found near sewage plumes! So, depending on the state of the fishery and ecosystem, results can vary.

From Nico, Mauritius

Having read the article you sent me, I was once again saddened by a pattern that repeats itself, it seems around the world.

I also do not go diving anymore; it hurts too much to see the degradation down below. I have come to the conclusion that it does not go very far to explain to others the danger of what we are doing, and that we will have to suffer the consequences in a serious way before a halt is brought to our ever increasing greed. I am ashamed to think of what my children and further generations will inherit.

From Stuart Pimm, USA

I live a third of the year on a small island (Key Largo, Florida) where pollution from leaking septic tanks is considered to be one of the causes for why the coral cover on the reefs offshore has declined from 80% to 20% in a generation. (Just got back from snorkelling off those reefs, it's such a shame.)

From Sofia Shah, Fiji

The mail on "No more seafood" was really touching. Actually, I am a research student at the University of the South Pacific and am looking at the effects of pollutants such as heavy metals on corals. Heavy metals do affect the health of the corals and other marine organisms both in the long and short run. Heavy metals are pollutants which are mostly from land based sources.

From Tetoaitit, Kiribati

I note the recent question and concern regarding development and the issue on sewage brought about by construction of a hotel in Fiji.

The islands, if I may deviate a little, are not new to sewage. Sewage was there before but in trace amounts - after all as the scientists put it - they add nutrients to the ecosystem, either on land or in the reef marine environment.

However it is only when sewage is deposited in huge amounts that this causes concentration well beyond normal levels and sewage is problem. Dumping sewage on land causes the forest to grow perhaps faster but gatherers would not want that. Dumping huge amount of sewage in the reef will cause blooms associated with too many algae that will end up on the beach and when they decompose this is a problem. Where I live, an atoll, sewage is the cause of a seasonal accumulation of algae on the beach which when dry pollute the air with their decomposition and odour. For fishermen, the reef bivalves are hands-off and other marine life that lives in the reef feeding through filters. The reef fish may be good for eating but that depends of what comprises the sewage.

When developments are invited which will cause huge amounts of sewage disposal, I agree that the best way to approach the sewage problem is by carrying out research to see how much sewage can be allowed to the reef. The residual needs to be treated. Or a formula which says that this amount of sewage needs to dumped to allow and maintain a balance in the ecosystem would be one way to go. Let the developers come up with that sewage plan, let the stakeholders including the people living close to the developed area see that something is done and that they have a say. Let the developers pay - sewage is their making - an externality that they must handle no matter the cost.

From Colette Vesikula, Fiji

I would just like to comment on the sewerage issues that were raised through hotel development. The Fijian Hotel at Sigatoka has implemented an environmentally safe method and this could be used as an example for other hotel developments. Hotel development approval through the Fiji Trade and Investment Board, the Ministry of Tourism and Department of Environment should ensure that these issues are addressed thoroughly and constant monitoring to ensure that these developments are being carried out. Also all hotels should pay an environmental levy to the Department of Environment. The levy should be used to fund an environmental NGO or pressure group to ensure that sewerage environmental issues by these developments are monitored continually.

From Arthur Webb, Fiji

I agree pollution in your small atoll home of Tarawa has changed the lagoon greatly, particularly during the last 20 or so years that I have been associated with the island and it saddens me greatly. I'm interested to know who you believe the developers are in Tarawa and who should be responsible for this pollution? Certainly in my experience, Tarawa is a classic example of what Solomoni Biumaiono (Fiji) was saying about we the people are the problem. Just a few short years ago in the early 1990s I could swim and boat over the Inter-tidal flats of South Tarawa lagoon and see little but white carbonate sands full of infauna (burrowing animals) and in the shallow sub-tidal areas stretched large seagrass communities. In many areas this is now largely replaced with macro algae which I agree is directly linked to nutrient pollution from inadequate waste (sewage, etc.) disposal.

As for corresponding development which causes this problem - well all we have is a massive increase in people! There's certainly no significant increase in industry or tourism. So I would suggest that average, ordinary people are indeed responsible for what we see happening in South Tarawa. All the evidence would suggest that the lagoon pollution problems are directly related to the multitude of individual imputes, that is to say the people are responsible for degrading the marine environment. I know that on an individual basis this is not intentional, but it is misleading to talk of developers and assume they will somehow pick up the bill or change the pollution issue in Tarawa because the developers are people just like you and I. We might say our local Government council and the PUB department should provide these services but these institutions are grossly under-funded and understaffed and lack the capacity, tools and materials to intervene meaningfully on the Tarawa community's behalf.

Why don't we have adequate public services? Well simple, the Tarawa community does not pay a realistic price for such services so they don't exist. People in Tarawa are generally of the mind set that they can enjoy the freedom of village life (outer-island village life I mean) in what is now a densely populated urban environment (a city). It is a fact of life whether you live in Australia, Scandinavia or Kiribati that if you wish to live in a city which is capable of providing adequate services and infrastructure to its people (water supply, waste disposal, etc.) then you and I and all the other people must be prepared to pay for this. Many of us have spent time in larger cities in the region and will have noticed that everything you do costs money, from parking a car to turning on a tap. What you may not realise is that for residents of a city their individual property rates (which they must also pay) will also amount to many thousands of dollars every year. All of this money goes into providing those services needed to keep a city clean and functional.

You were correct in your statement that sewage has always been around on Tarawa, it's just that now because of huge population increases there is much too much of it for the environment to deal with. So here's the problem, we have an island with the population density and needs of a city but our Tarawa community contributes very little (in financial terms) to the up keep and maintenance of our city. What can we do about it? Well that's where you the I'Kiribati community must make some hard choices, i.e. if you want expensive services to cope with waste and needs of 40,000 people then you'll have to find the funding locally or elsewhere to build and run them. If you want to reduce the pressure (population) and thereby the need for such services then you will have to make some difficult decisions regarding urban drift and movement to Tarawa. If you won't do either of the above then the Tarawa community must accept that the land and marine environment will become irreparably changed and damaged and it will not be a pleasant or safe place for us or our children.

Lastly and most important of all, don't wait for the developers to pick up behind you because, you, I and everyone else in Tarawa are the developers and we need to either decide to pick up behind ourselves or be able to pay to have somebody do it for us. That's life in the big city.

From Barbara Wilson, Canada

As a member of the Haida nation, it saddens me to see the same level of disregard and disrespect shown to our oceans in the various parts of the world. We harvest a portion of our foods from the oceans, rocks and sands around Haida Gwaii. I have been aware of the disposal of human faecal matter into our waters for many years. In 1990 (approximately) I phoned our Band office, as well as the Provincial offices in Victoria and Federal Departments concerned with the state of our ocean, only to be told our area has a big enough flushing that our foods would not be affected.

So, now we are in the process of making yet a bigger system, and is it providing third level treatment, on checking the answer is no. A third level system would ensure the water going into the inter-tidal waters and the rest of the ocean would be clear water.

My father, who is 93 years old, for many years walked the sandy beaches between our village and Qay on low tides looking for cockles, only to note the cockles had left the area. How do we ensure our foods are safe to eat? The village of Queen Charlotte has pumped their effluent into the inlet for many years, the waste which comes from the visitors' travel homes are deposited into the Queen Charlotte sewage system, which goes into the inlet. The village of Port Clements has a sewage system and I think it would be safe to say that system does not have the third level treatment either. Massett and Old Massett are joining their systems together, will they use a third level system? Probably not.

How do we get responsible government in these small islands? Yahgudang (respect) is so important.

From Writer, Haida Gwaii

Thank you for your concern and information. This is a very general sketch of a complex situation...I hope it is of some use to you.

Haida Gwaii is a small island in the North Pacific which has provided for one of the largest populations of hunter gathers. The great rainforests and relatively mild though damp climate have provided in many ways idyllic conditions, not just for humans, but all of the life we share these lands with.

No doubt we share some of your troubles. Our issues however, aren't of large hotels - yet. Tourism is seasonal and our population is small. In the spring and summer we are inundated with sports fishers who come here to feed their masochism by killing fish. As this happens, thousands of wine bottles have been disposed of by breaking them into the ocean. At the same time thousands of fish are taken and as many killed by catch and release. Then they go home with their booty and bragging rights. Vast areas which had been the domain of local fishermen have been cordoned off for exclusive sports-fishing. The effect of this is social as much as ecological.

At the same time we have seen abusive commercial fishing, which is now mainly done by fishermen from the mainland. The Colonial Government in its wisdom has been mainly managed by the advice of the commercial fleet. Management has been determined by catch statistics and when a stock becomes too low to provide a viable fishery they move on to the next species, blaming natural events or ignoring the loss. This combined with logging taking out the salmon spawning habitat has decreased the fishing significantly.

Overall, our troubles are related to globalization, decisions made from afar by foreign companies pulling resources for foreign markets. The greater threats are coming from the interests in offshore drilling and their plans to ship oil off to the continent by way of super-tankers.

We have been successful so far in protecting our rights and about half of the land base while keeping from drilling or tanking thus far. We also expect that we will have a significant impact on fisheries through similar processes. We have accomplished this so far through court actions leading to the determination that the Crown is bound to uphold the diminished Honour of the Crown. The ruling of Court also determined that the Crown's Duty to Indigenous People is a Constitutional Duty which overrides legislation. Our people have never hesitated to take direct action where necessary.

Our people are very politically inclined with a strong love for and connection to the land and sea. Our culture is that relationship reflected in the very political arts and the identifiable and celebrated totem poles canoes and jewellery that make conflict with us kind of embarrassing and difficult as they are seen to be fighting a culture that is a showcase for them even showing up on their currency. Our continuous fight against these forces has practically become a lifestyle.

Not to be underestimated in this battle has been the alliance with our local Canadian neighbours and fellow islanders. This has been invaluable as the opposite situation would give the Crown more validity in making decisions that aren't in the best interests of the land.

We still rely on the sea, and eat well here. Though diminished from former days, we certainly retain the genetic stocks and species to maintain hope of recovery through the healing of habitat and reduction and even elimination of certain fishing efforts.

Everything is possible though we realize that either we decide our fate and that of our island, or someone else will decide it for us.

From Writer, New Zealand

How refreshing it is to read you accurate observations about marine degradation and that marine reserves do not help, and (bravo!) the superficial investigations by marine scientists. I have been working on this very issue since 1990, resulting in some major discoveries last year - discoveries that will shake the scientific community. You can read all about it on the Seafriends web site, which is dedicated to people like you. You can find all the information you need from http://www.seafriends.org.nz/ I like to use your letter as a shining example of people who care for the sea and who in doing so, have identified the true causes of their problems.

From Raymond Zaharia, France

Rather than only blaming ourselves... could we get this "review chapter written for the United Nations Experts Meeting on waste management in Small Island Developing States. We do know how critical messages can be totally ignored and how key points may be dropped, (in the UN family or elsewhere...)

We do know how very pro active and efficient Project Offices may be shot down by the appointment, (on political grounds), of an inexperienced or incompetent fellow. If we want to overcome this critical lack of common sense and goodwill, we need to use the Internet to spread best practices, and nice ideas. This may be essential for the most wanted capacity building, (and greater awareness), efforts.

 

Access to Clean Drinking Water

From Aliti Vunisea, Fiji

The issue of access to clean water is one which is closely tied to other issues such as the economy of the country, rural development emphasis of the country, development priorities and people's education in these issues. Sometimes we spend a lot of time talking about pollution on the more visible, known rubbish dumping, giving minimal attention to consistent pollution of waterways and drinking water sources by very little waste dumping actions which turn out harmful in the long run. Dumping of all sorts of waste along waterways, near drinking sources, is usually not visible when assessed individually but the collective action of many people in a certain area over a period of time does have a lot of impact.

In many areas of rural Fiji (as in the case of Labasa as quoted, which is on the second largest island in Fiji) piped water is a privilege to have access to and is not easily accessible, thus when there is widespread flooding usually nearly all sources of water are affected by flood waters. Drinking clean water is sometimes secondary to people's safety at these times and people are not in a position to take precautions as they resort to whatever is available in terms of food and drinks. There needs to be more rigorous education and awareness on pollution and access to clean water to help address these problems.

Pollution of seas and waterways resulting in coastal marine pollution is one that has been there for sometime and one that is not easily solved. The Suva Harbour is the main port of call at the capital city and oil, sewage, etc. continue to be a problem. It is one that cannot be easily addressed because it involves the usual case of the costs and benefits of development, and when small island states and developing countries sometimes put national economic growth ahead of environmental and societal problems. In the end there is a nearly complete cycle because the government then ends up paying for medication, nurses and doctors' times, etc when people are affected. The pollution of the waters within and around the Suva harbour area is well known but people continue to fish in the areas. Again the lack of employment and alternatives sometimes "push" people to fish, eat food and "drink" water that is not clean or which maybe contaminated. It is when seafood from the area is the only choice that people have to feed their families that they continue to fish in the area.

In the more urban areas, even though we have large rivers and numerous sources of water in Fiji, urban people who are dependent on tap water for supplies sometimes get no water, or get water that is suspected to be dirty or contaminated. In these cases, people are helpless to help themselves or take control as communities to try and solve the problem. It becomes a government problem and this depends then on the government's priority in terms of development, policies, committing money to better the system in use, etc.

The sad thing about all these is that the most vulnerable in our societies, and the people least equipped to deal with these problems or to voice their concerns on their access to basic things like water are usually the ones most affected. In some of these cases, education, awareness and assistance to communities to get access to clean water and safe food maybe the answer…On the other hand community based work has its limitations and the government needs to bring into effect policy or regulation changes that can help change the way things are. But it will take a slow path and one that needs a lot of commitment from the government and sacrifice from the people.

At the more public level it means the coming together of the water authorities, the environmental authorities, the health authorities, education authorities to effect some change. More common in our countries are incidences of sectors dealing specifically with issues that concern them, resulting in issues that concern everyone and are crosscutting left on the wayside and not properly addressed.

To get involved, contact :