MINISTRY OF HEALTH WELLNESS AND THE ENVIRONMENT ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

2013

Land Degradation in

Georgetown. Final Report

G E F / I W E C O P R O J E C T

Lennie D. Adams

2

MINISTRY OF HEALTH WELLNESS AND THE ENVIRONMENT ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES

Land Degradation in

Georgetown

FINAL REPORT 2013 L E N N I E D . A D A M S

GEF-Integrating Water, Land and Ecosystems Management in the Caribbean Small

Island Developing States-(IWEco) Project

3

Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................................... 5

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................... 5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................................................ 7

ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................................................. 8

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... 9

METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 13

BACKGROUND INFORMATION................................................................................................................. 16

1.0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................. 16

1.1 Location and Size ............................................................................................................................. 16

1.2 Geology and Soils............................................................................................................................. 18

1.3 Topography and Drainage .............................................................................................................. 19

1.4 Land Use and Distribution .............................................................................................................. 20

1.5 Temperature and Rainfall ............................................................................................................... 21

1.6 Coastal Area ..................................................................................................................................... 24

2.0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................................. 26

2.1 Fauna ................................................................................................................................................. 26

2.2 Flora ................................................................................................................................................. 29

2.3 Freshwater fauna ............................................................................................................................ 32

2.4 Marine Resources of Georgetown .................................................................................................. 33

3.0 SOCIO-CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................... 36

3.1 Population Distribution .................................................................................................................. 36

3.2 Human Settlements ......................................................................................................................... 37

3.3 Education ......................................................................................................................................... 38

3.4 Health and Wellness ........................................................................................................................ 39

3.5 Source of Livelihood .......................................................................................................................... 40

4

3.6 Ethnicity and Religion ..................................................................................................................... 41

3.7 Water distribution and Garbage disposal ..................................................................................... 42

3.8 The Service Sector and Industry .................................................................................................... 45

4.0 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................. 46

4.1 Stages in Stakeholders Analysis: .................................................................................................... 46

4.2 Identifying key stakeholders and their interests: ......................................................................... 46

4.3 Assessing the influence and importance of each stakeholders as well as the potential impact

of the project upon each stakeholder............................................................................................. 47

4.4 Identifying How Best to Engage Stake holders ............................................................................. 49

5.0 CRITICAL LAND DEGRADATION ISSUES ........................................................................................... 53

5.1 Increasing pressure on land due to need for housing and industries ......................................... 53

5.2 Improper use and disposal of waste and pollutants .................................................................... 53

5.3 Coastal erosion due to the action of winds and waves ................................................................. 53

5.4 Inappropriate – removal of forest and riparian zones ................................................................. 53

5.5 The mining of the beach sand and aggregate ................................................................................ 54

5.6 The burning of tyres, marijuana and other drugs: ....................................................................... 54

5.7 Land degradation law/regulation: ................................................................................................. 54

6.0 ASSETS & THREATS TO THESE ASSETS ............................................................................................ 56

7.0 NEGATIVE OUTCOMES/IMPACT ....................................................................................................... 57

7.1 Plant Pests and Diseases ................................................................................................................. 57

7.2 Poor Feeder Roads .......................................................................................................................... 58

7.3 Lack of Irrigation Service ................................................................................................................ 58

8.0 ROOT PROBLEMS AND CAUSES: ........................................................................................................ 59

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................................... 60

9.1 Recommendations developed from the assessment .................................................................... 60

9.2 List of Recommendations for the project implementation .......................................................... 63

5

10.0 Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................... 65

APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................................. 67

APPENDIX 1: MINUTES OF STAKEHOLDERS MEETING ................................................................... 68

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF PERSONS CONSULTED ................................................................................... 72

APPENDIX 3: HOT SPOTS & MITIGATION FOR LAND DEGRADATION IN GEORGETOWN

WATERSHED .................................................................................................................................... 73

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Assessment of degradation based on indicators visual assessment of Participatory Rural

Appraisal ..................................................................................................................................................... 13

Figure 2: An Aerial photograph of the Georgetown Watershed ................................................................ 17

Figure 3: Soils Map of Georgetown Watershed .......................................................................................... 18

Figure 4: Topography and Drainage Map of Georgetown Watershed ....................................................... 19

Figure 5: Map of Georgetown Watershed Land-use and Distribution ....................................................... 20

Figure 6: Georgetown Shoreline ................................................................................................................. 25

Figure 7: Stakeholders’ Importance and Influence on project ................................................................... 47

Figure 8: Stakeholders Map ........................................................................................................................ 48

Figure 9: Stakeholders’ Analysis Matrix ...................................................................................................... 52

Figure 10: Map of Perseverance Watershed Sites ...................................................................................... 73

Figure 11: Map of all Georgetown Watershed and Data ............................................................................ 75

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Rainfall Data at Perseverance (measured in mm) ......................................................................... 21

Table 2: Rainfall Data at Perseverance ....................................................................................................... 22

Table 3: Hourly rainfall from April 10th - 12th 2011 at the named stations .............................................. 23

Table 4: Rainfall recorded at stations on 11th April 2011 and their coordinates....................................... 24

6

Table 5: Fauna of the watershed ................................................................................................................ 26

Table 6: Flora of the watershed .................................................................................................................. 30

Table 7: Marine resources of Georgetown ................................................................................................. 33

Table 8: Population Distribution ................................................................................................................. 36

Table 9: Characteristic by type of Dwelling ................................................................................................ 37

Table 10: Distribution of schools by type and sex ...................................................................................... 38

Table 11: Chronic illnesses in Georgetown ................................................................................................. 40

Table 12: Distribution of water from Perseverance (2009- 2012) .............................................................. 42

Table 13: The volume of garbage collected in Georgetown area between (2009 – 2012) [measured in

cubic meters] .............................................................................................................................. 44

Table 14: Environmental assets and their threats ...................................................................................... 56

Table 15: Table illustrating environmental issues and their root causes ................................................... 59

Table 16: A summary of development challenges and development opportunities in the Georgetown

Watershed .................................................................................................................................. 60

Table 17: Watershed Assessment of Perseverance: (P.V) .......................................................................... 74

Table 18: Watershed Assessment of Jennings: (J.W).................................................................................. 76

Table 19: Watershed Assessment at Congo Valley: (C.V) ........................................................................... 77

Table 20: Watershed Assessment at Mt. Pleasant (M.P) ........................................................................... 78

7

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to convey my gratitude to the following persons, organizations and groups

for the assistances rendered in the initial activities and drafting this report.

I wish to thank the staff of the Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Transformation,

Forestry and Fisheries especially the district staff of the Forestry Department and

the Superintendent of the National Parks, Rivers and Beaches, for their support

and assistance in supplying the necessary information and for offering their

guidance throughout the project area.

I am also indebted to the citizens, business enterprises and Community Based

Organizations (CBO’s) of Georgetown for their willingness to share information

during the discussions and for their valuable time.

I am also grateful to the Government and non-governmental organizations

(NGO’s) for making documents available for use in the compilation of this report.

To those persons who have voluntarily participated in the consultation and

discussions on the environmental issues rose during the interpersonal contacts, I

say thanks very much.

I will like to say my personal thanks to GEF/IWEco for providing the funds for this

project.

I am indeed grateful to the Ministry of Health Wellness and the Environment for

rendering their help in many ways so as to make the implementation of the

project a reality.

8

AI •Agricultural Instructor

AO •Agricultural Officer

BAM •Banana Accompanying Measures

BRAGSA •Roads, Building and General Services Authority

CBO •Community Based Organization

CWSA •Central Water and Sewage Authority

ECLAC •Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

FO •Forest Officer

GEF •Global Environment Fund

IWEco •Integrating Water Land and Ecosystems Managements in Caribbean Island Developing States

MARFF •Ministry of Agriculture Rural Transformation, Forestry & Fisheries

NEMO •National Emergency Management Office

NIA •National Irrigation Authority

NPRBA •National Parks Rivers and Beaches Authority

SAO •Senior Agricultural Officer

SFO •Senior Forest Officer

WINFA •Windward Islands Farmers Association

ACRONYMS

9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Global Environment Fund through its project, Integrating, Water, Land and

Ecosystems (GEF/IWEco) Management in the Caribbean Small Island Developing

States focuses on implementing innovative solutions to effect the various policies,

plans and strategies developed by the former project.

In St Vincent and the Grenadines the focal point for the GEF/IWEco project is the

Ministry of Health Wellness and the Environment. The sub-project focuses on

land degradation in the Georgetown/Caratal Watershed.

This sub-project has provided the Government of St Vincent and the Grenadines

the opportunity to do an assessment of capacity needs for Georgetown

Watershed and to strengthen the capability of the Ministry of Health Wellness

and the Environment, communities and persons to implement national activities

to meet the national support for United Nations Convention to combat

Desertification.

The main objectives of the project are twofold:

(a) To implement an integrated approach to water, land and ecosystems

services and management, supported by policy institutional and legislative

reforms.

(b) To implement effective appropriate technologies to accelerate contribution

to global targets on access to safe and reliable water supplies and improved

sanitation and contribute to improved ecosystems functioning in the

Caribbean.

It is hoped that this report will portray a true picture of what is needed to develop

the capacity of the community of Georgetown and St Vincent and the Grenadines

to efficiently perform activities for the control of land degradation.

10

Information on Georgetown Watershed

The area is 22.2 sq. miles and it is located on the North Eastern coast between

Byrea River and Langley Park River. The coastal area is flat, about 3 meters to 5

meters above sea level and rises westwards to 900 meters in the central range of

mountains. The coastline is eroded by the wave action and is flood prone.

The rainfall averages 2752.6 mm per annum. There are two distinct seasons (dry

and wet). It enjoys an average temperature of about 23 degrees Celsius. The

population was estimated 6914 in 2001. There were 3532 males and 3382

females.

Flora and Fauna

The fauna includes birds (whistling warblers, parrots, black hawks swift and

wren), reptiles (black snakes, lizards and Congo snakes). Others like pigs, cattle,

small ruminants, fowls are domesticated and iguanas, tattoo and crustaceans and

mullets are hunted and harvested for food.

Most plants include coconuts breadfruit, bananas and aroids for food, forest

species provide homes for birds and other wildlife; others provide stabilization to

the land, are used for traditional medicines, fuel, ornamentals, craft and

construction purposes.

Human Settlements

The 1926 households the data shows 1271 of these are privately owned. There

were 172 squatters. There are others who conduct illegal activity in the protected

areas of the watershed.

Education

There are three (3) primary schools, one (1) Secondary School, one (1) Technical

Vocational School, The School for children with Special needs, and (5) Daycare

and Preschools. There are 2306 children of school age. 943 males and 933

females attend school.

11

Health and Wellness

The Georgetown Hospital is staffed and caters for clients as far North as Fancy

Owia and Sandy Bay. Data shows that among the chronic illness 421 persons are

suffering from Diabetic and Hypertension in this area; 361 are suffering with

Arthritis. The citizens believe that there is an increase of respiratory diseases.

Some 288 people suffer with asthma.

Sources of Livelihoods

Farming is the principal occupation in this community. Bananas and coconuts are

among the major crops. Cocoa was recently introduced and is grown in the Congo

valley and Perseverance valley. Most farmers also keep animals such as small

ruminants, cattle and pigs. Some people are also involved in bamboo and straw

craft. The government employees (teachers & police officers) are among the

number of persons with regular employment

Ethnicity and Religion

62% of the populations are of African descent, 24% are mixed, 12% are of

indigenous stock and 2% are of Indian Stock. Most people are Christians and

follow the Baptists, Catholic, Methodist and Anglican denominations.

Water and Garbage

Surface water is the source of portable water, irrigation water and industrial

supplies. The watershed supplies 5% of the national demand. Jennings and

Perseverance are harnessed by CWSA. Perseverance River has a minimum

capacity of 856,000 gallons of water per day. Irrigation supplies from the National

Irrigation Authority have been affected by an institutional problem and by

damages from 2011 floods.

There has been a continuous increase in the volume of garbage collected by the

Solid Waste Department of the CWSA. More households have been responding to

the weekly collection. Some 929.5 cubic meters in 2009 to the 1568.5 improper

disposal of waste still plagues the watershed.

12

Service Sector

Georgetown once known as ‘Sugar town’ suffered throughout the late 1980’s

throughout the 1990’s when the sugar industry declined. In 2001 the change of

government was welcomed by its citizens. Many have returned to Georgetown

and rebuild, renovated their properties while others have constructed new

businesses and homes. The citizens have invested in tourism, restaurants, salons,

boutiques and recreation. Water bottling, agro processing and rum distillery are

among the industries.

Methodology

The process consists essentially of:

Determining environmental issues from research

Interpersonal discussion/interviews

Technical group-meeting

Community consultations

Major Environmental Issues

The following environmental concerns are presented as follows:

Increasing pressure on land due to need for housing and industries

Improper disposal of waste and pollutants

Coastal erosion due to the action of winds and waves

Inappropriate removal of forest and riparian zones

Mining of the beach sand and aggregate

The burning of tyres, marijuana and other drugs at Rabacca

The need for stronger land degradation laws

13

METHODOLOGY

Overview

The process of this consultancy consists mainly of determining all major

environmental issues obtained from research of existing literature, information

obtained from personal interviews and conversations; technical group meetings;

and Community consultation. Issues that have been addressed by the Central

Government and the local community were also considered. Figure 1 illustrates

the issues of degradation.

Figure 1: Assessment of degradation based on indicators visual assessment of Participatory Rural Appraisal

Physical Degradation

Criteria: At least one or a

combination of the

following:

Soil compaction

Presence of gullies

Sheet erosion from

either or a combination

of the above

Depth of tree mounds

Depth of root exposure

Pedestal height

Biological Degradation

Criteria: Decline of organic Matter

Content and recession of

vegetation cover as shown by:

Reduction in plant cover

or productivity due to

poor land management

practices

Thinning of top soil

Scarcity of top soil litter

and debris.

(Photo Evidence)

Chemical Degradation

Criteria: At least one of the

following as shown by

presence of plant indicators or

field tests.

Nutrient Depletion –

(e.g reduced growth,

leaf loss, leaf

Chlorosis)

Salinity and or

Alkalinity

Toxic Compounds

Land is degraded and / or is likely to be degraded

Conduct Visual Assessment of Land

Condition

14

A participatory bottom up approach was used to mainly engage the residents,

staff of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries and Rural Development,

CBO, school teachers and other Government employees who work in the

community and other key stakeholders. This process incorporates the local

knowledge and experiences of individuals who are affected and look forward to

changes.

Method:

This consisted of the following

Groups randomly selected and held discussions on the issues affecting land

degradation.

Specialist: These are individuals who represent a particular view or

individuals with specialist knowledge in the field of sustainable land

management.

Individuals interviews: community members

Community consultation: Citizens from the varying villages were invited to

share their knowledge and experiences on the subject. Issues for

discussion were raised by the participants and they were supported by

the technical specialist.

The Process:

Consultation/Stakeholders meeting

This meeting raised the issues of land degradation in Georgetown. A structured

guide was used to guide the process. The meeting raised and clarified the things

that are needed to be done to correct issues. The participants requested to be

actively involved in the process of implementing this project.

15

Site visits: observation

The technical staff from the Government ministries was involved in this process.

The watershed was visited from the coast to the water catchment and forest

reserve areas on all the river basins. Critical areas were assessed and noted for

remedial work.

One to one contacts:

Farmers, home owners, key businesses, CBO, specialists and government

departments with interest in watershed were consulted. They all provided critical

information for the assessment process.

Literature review

The consultant reviewed various studies, project documents from St Vincent and

the Grenadines, and other regional and international researchers on the subject

studied.

16

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The GEF/IWEco sub-project has provided the Government of St Vincent and the

Grenadines the opportunity to do an assessment of capacity needs for

Georgetown Watershed and to strengthen the capability of the Ministry of Health

Wellness and the Environment, communities and persons to implement national

activities to meet the national support for United Nations Convention to combat

Desertification (UNCCD). The following is information on the Georgetown

Watershed.

1.0 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

1.1 Location and Size

Georgetown extends 22.2 sq. miles on the high energy eastern coast of St.

Vincent and the Grenadines, North of Byrea River and South of the Langley Park

River and from the coast to the central range of mountains.

It includes the following villages in the population and census district of

Georgetown:

O’Brien’s Valley Spring Village Basin Hole Dickson Mt Bentick Chapman’s Village Perseverance Chester Cottage Georgetown Byrea Grand Sable Langley Park Chili Overland/ Waterloo/ Orange Hill Touroma

17

Figure 2: An Aerial photograph of the Georgetown Watershed

18

1.2 Geology and Soils

Pyroclastic rocks are most abundant volcanic products in this watershed. It

includes particles of varying sizes from clay to small boulders. They include

volcanic ash and mixed pyroclastic and alluvium. Marine sediments and beach

sand are found along the coast. The soils are predominantly of volcanic origin

with good internal drainage classified mainly as:

Yellow Earth

Alluvial Deposit

Pyroclastic deposits of volcanic ash

Pyroclastic of Pre Soufriere volcanic ash

Figure 3: Soils Map of Georgetown Watershed

19

Most soils in Chapman’s, O’Brien’s, Caratal, Grand Sable and Langley Park are

classified as Georgetown gravely –sandy loam and loamy sand, with some pockets

being Georgetown sandy loam and sandy clay loam.

The interior and higher elevations are of pre Soufriere deposits. These soils have

no potential for cultivation due to their shallowness, infertility and highly leached

and acidic condition. These soils are prone to sheet erosion.

1.3 Topography and Drainage

The watershed rises from sea level on the coast westwards to the interior to

heights of over 900 meters. The central mountains run in a north to south

direction with spurs running eastwards with numerous steep gorges which are

drained by several tributaries which form (4) four main rivers, (a) Byrea river, (b)

Congo Valley river and Jennings river merge midway to form Grand Sable river

that flows to the coast, (c) Caratal river and Perseverance river and (d) the Langley

Park river. The rivers all flow eastwards from the central range.

The coastal plains rise from the sea coast to 450 meters. Most of these flat lands

are prone to flooding and sea surges.

Figure 4: Topography and Drainage Map of Georgetown Watershed

20

1.4 Land Use and Distribution

Figure 5: Map of Georgetown Watershed Land-use and Distribution

The lands in this watershed are fairly flat and are predominantly used for

agriculture. Whereas Figure 5: Map of Georgetown Watershed Land-use and Distribution shows

that most land in the watershed are agricultural lands, currently a significant

portion of these lie fallow due to the fall out with banana cultivation and the

unavailability of reliable workforce. In the valleys along the Grand Sable River,

banana was the dominant crop up until 2011. Moko disease and Black Sigatoka

21

leaf spot have wiped the crop out. Cocoa and root crops have been cultivated

dominantly on these lands.

Those lands which were identified as lands under coconut and banana mixed are

now either fallow or with livestock root crops and vegetables.

The residential area is located on the coast area and along the Caratal,

Perseverance and Langley Park rivers. The southern coastal area of Grand Sable

was under settlement farm. Houses are built along the main road.

1.5 Temperature and Rainfall

The watershed like the rest of St Vincent and the Grenadines enjoys the pleasant

conditions throughout the year. The temperature ranges between 18 – 28 ,

with an average of 23 .

The area experiences 2 distinct seasons – a dry season from January to May and

wet season from June to December. On an average the wettest months have

been June to December.

Table 1: Rainfall Data at Perseverance (measured in mm)

2009 2010 2011

January 286.9 138.4 123.0

February 166.2 10.7 128.3

March 62.9 76.6 333.0

April 178.4 284.6 523.5

May 290.4 226.4 126.0

June 208.6 284.8 242.6

July 260.7 277.6 336.1

August 217.6 227.0 278.3

September 269.1 209.9 127.5

October 117.0 566.8 264.1

November 196.0 360.8 346.0

December 73.3 285.4 161.2

TOTAL 2327.1 2949 2989.6

22

Rainfall distribution averages 2752.6 mm per annum over the past three years

(2009 – 2011) with 2989.6 mm of rainfall in 2011. During the month of April 2011

– (mid dry season) the community experienced 532.5 mm of rainfall at the

Perseverance Rainfall station. The April Flood still haunts the members of the

community.

Table 2: Rainfall Data at Perseverance

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

Mea

sure

men

t o

f R

aii

nfa

ll/

mm

Monthly Distribution

RAINFALL DATA AT PERSEVERANCE

2009

2010

2011

23

Table 3: Hourly rainfall from April 10th - 12th 2011 at the named stations

The floods of April 2011 created problems and damages in this watershed which

are not dealt with and may be irreparable in the short term. Table 3: Hourly rainfall

from April 10th - 12th 2011 at the named stations shows the accumulated rainfall for the

three stations from 9.00 am on the 11th April 2011. The highest hourly rainfall

total occurred at about 11.00 pm at all the stations at which time 30% fell at

Rabacca, 39% fell at Perseverance and 31% fell at Jennings.

A good overview of the floods can be viewed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYnFDdBEz_4 .

24

Table 4: Rainfall recorded at stations on 11th April 2011 and their coordinates

Rainfall Stations Location * 24 Hours Accumulated

Rainfall

Perseverance utm1467538m N

&

493832m E

275.6 mm

Jennings Utm1466049m N

&

491416m E

253.3 mm

Rabacca Utm1471023m N

&

491766m E

219.2 mm

*N.B Station coordinates provided by local authorities based on St Vincent 1945 British West Indies

Grid.

1.6 Coastal Area

The main road and the part of the town seawards of the main road lie on

relatively flatland about 10’-15’ above sea level. The shoreline as seen in Figure 4:

Topography and Drainage Map of Georgetown Watershed, consists of a narrow rocky beach.

This area is vulnerable to flooding, sea surges, hurricanes and storms.

Georgetown lies very close to the Soufriere volcano.

25

Figure 6: Georgetown Shoreline

26

2.0 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

The watershed is characterized by an undulating landscape supporting a rich

diversity of flora and fauna and scenic mountains and valleys.

2.1 Fauna

The Fauna includes the following:

Table 5: Fauna of the watershed

Animals Common Names Scientific Names Status

Birds Whistling Warbler

St. Vincent Parrots

Common Black Hawk

Short tailed Swift

House Wren

Little Blue Heron

Cattle Egret

Green Heron

Yellow-crowned Night-Heron

Common Black-Hawk

Broad-winged Hawk

American Kestrel

Peregrine Falcon

Spotted Sandpiper

Scaly-naped Pigeon

Eared Dove

Zenaida Dove

Catharopeza bishop

Amazona guildingi

Buteogellous anthracinus

Chaetura brachyuran

Troglodytes aedon musicus

Egretta caerulea

Bubulcus ibis

Butorides virescens

Nyctanassa violacea

Buteogallus anthracinus

Buteo platypterus

Falco sparverius

Falco peregrinus

Actitis macularia

Patagioenas squamosa

Zenaida auriculata

Zenaida aurita

Endangered

Vulnerable

Threatened

endemic

27

Common Ground-Dove

Ruddy Quail-Dove

Mangrove Cuckoo

Smooth-billed Ani

Barn Owl

Black Swift

Lesser Antillean Swift

Short-tailed Swift

Purple-throated Carib

Green-throated Carib

Antillean Crested

Hummingbird

Belted Kingfisher

Caribbean Elaenia

Yellow-bellied Elaenia

Lesser Antillean Pewee

Grenada Flycatcher

Lesser Antillean Flycatcher

Gray Kingbird

Caribbean Martin

House Wren

Cocoa Thrush

Bare-eyed Thrush

Rufous-throated Solitaire

Tropical Mockingbird

Scaly-breasted Thrasher

Columbina passerina

Geotrygon montana

Coccyzus minor

Crotophaga ani

Tyto alba

Cypseloides niger

Chaetura martinica

Chaetura brachyura

Eulampis jugularis

Eulampis holosericeus

Orthorhyncus cristatus

Ceryle alcyon

Elaenia martinica

Elaenia flavogaster

Contopus latirostris

Myiarchus nugator

Myiarchus oberi

Tyrannus dominicensis

Progne dominicensis

Troglodytes aedon

Turdus fumigatus

Turdus nudigenis

Myadestes genibarbis

Mimus gilvus

Margarops fuscus

28

Brown Trembler

Pearly-eyed Thrasher

Black-whiskered Vireo

Yellow Warbler

Carib Grackle

Shiny Cowbird

Cinclocerthia ruficauda

Margarops fuscatus

Vireo altiloquus

Dendroica petechia

Quiscalus lugubris

Molothrus bonariensis

Reptiles Black Snakes

Saint Vincent Boa

Chironius vincenti

Corallus cookii

Critical

endangered

St Vincent tree anole

St Vincent bush anole

Cuban Brown anole

Anolis griseus

Anolis trinitatus

Anolis sagrei

Endemic

Endemic

Uncommon

Amphibians

Mammals

Congo snakes

Iguana

Saint Vincent Frog

Lesser Antillean Frog

Marine Toad

Agouti

Nine Banded Armadillo

Mongoose

Opossum (Manicou)

Antillean Fruit-eating Bat

St. Vincent pygmy rice rat

Greater Bulldog Bat

(Fisherman Bat )

Mastigodryas bruesi

Iguana iguana

Pristimantis shrevei

E. johnstonei

Bufo marinus

Dasyprocta antillensis

Herpestes officinarum

Didelphis marsupialis

Brachyphylla cavernarum

Oligoryzomys victus

Noctilio leporinus

Endemic

Uncommon

Endemic

Common

Common

Common

Introduced

Common

common

rare

common

common

29

Parnell's Mustached Bat

Insular Single Leaf Bat

Tree Bat

Pteronotus parnellii

Monophyllus plethodon

Ardops nichollsi

uncommon

Sources: List of mammals of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_in_Saint_Vincent_and_the_Grenadines

Birds of the West Indies, H. Raffaele et. al (1998) Fitzroy Springer, Forestry Department, St. Vincent

2.2 Flora

The Third National Biodiversity Report (GoSVG, 2006) indicates that the

biodiversity listings are generally fragmented and incomplete. According to the

National Report of St Vincent and the Grenadines to the UNCCD (2002), the main

vegetation classes of St Vincent and the Grenadines can be classified as follows:

• Rain Forest: Located in areas of the upper Colonarie, Cumberland and

Buccament Valleys between 305 and 488 metres.

• Lower Mountain Forest: Before the 1940’s this type was not in existence.

These were cultivated by the plantations of the colonial era. Within this boundary

old sugar mills remnants of other structures can still be found.

• Secondary Rain Forest: This type refers to the forests which were disturbed

by volcanic eruptions, hurricanes and human activity. The largest areas lie in and

around the Soufriere Mountains. The vegetation ranges from almost bare soil on

the upper slopes of the volcano to significant stands of new forest at lower

elevations.

• Palm Brake: This refers to a sub-climax type apparently arising after such

disturbances as landslides. The land is covered initially by mosses, then by small

tree ferns and heliconias and by Mountain Cabbage Palms in the mountainous

regions above 500 metres.

30

• Elfin Woodland: Found on exposed summits above 500 metres on both

sides of the central mountains. They consist of pure stands of dwarfed trees

about ten feet in height covered with epiphytes. This vegetation type is

sometimes associated with Palm Brake.

The study area of the Georgetown watershed extends from the coastal zone with

cactus scrub, through the farming zone to 300 meters, from where it rises to

include the various forest types through the central mountain range. Expert

opinions suggest that there are some 1150 species of flowering plants on the

island which may be common in most watersheds. Table 7: Marine resources of

Georgetown lists the plants which are in the watershed and also indicates the status.

Table 6: Flora of the watershed

Plants Common Names Scientific Names Status

Epiphytes Begonia

rotundifolia

Peperomia

cuneata

P. vincentiana

endemic

Orchid Forest orchid Epidendrum

vincentinum

Fern

Tree fern

Bois Riviere

Laurier Cannelle

Locusts

Heliconia

Cyathea spp.

Chimarrhis cymosa

Phoebe elongata

Hymenaea coubaril

Heliconia spp.

common

common

uncommon

abundant

31

Ficus spp

Blue Mahoe

Caribbean Pine

Bamboo

Mango

Orange

Breadfruit

Bois Canoe

Bois Blanc

Man Jack

Ficus

Monkey Goblet

Chataigner

Galba

Blue Mahoe

Caribbean Pine

Bamboo

Mango

Orange

Breadfruit

Fiddlewood

Balata

Ashwood

Gwi-gwi

Gomier

Cercropia peltata

Simarouba amara

Cordia sulcata

Ficus spp

Clusia rosea

Sloanea caribaea

Calophyllum

antillanum

Hibiscus elatus

Pinus Caribaea

Bambusa vulgaris

Mangifera indica

Citrus spp.

Artocarpus altilis

Citharexylum fruticosum

Manilkara bidentata

Miconia spp.

Aiphanes luciana

Dacryodes excelsa

uncommon

rare

uncommon

uncommon

rare

Source: Excerpts re biodiversity from a CEHI report on a hydropower feasibility study on behalf of VINLEC, - areas of focus were

Colonaire and Richmond watersheds, St Vincent and the Grenadines -2009.

32

2.3 Freshwater fauna

The Third National Biodiversity Report of (GoSVG, 2006) states that 25 fresh and

brackish water species are found in St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Based on best

local knowledge (Renton, pers. comm., 2009*) there are 14 fish and 11 crustacean

species that inhabit the rivers in St. Vincent. A few of these species are regarded

as commercially and/or socially important and they constitute a food source in

local communities.

*(CEHI report on hydro power feasibility study for VINLEC, 2009)

Table: 7 Freshwater fauna of the watershed

Species Local Names Scientific Names Status

FISH River Goby

Nile Tilapia

Tri-Tri

American Eel

Awasous banana

Oreochromis

niloticus niloticus

Sicydium plumieri

Anguilla rostrata

common

rare

abundant

common

CRUSTACEANS

Palaemonid shrimp

Pseudothelphusid

land crab

Crayfish

Crayfish

Crayfish

Land crab

Xyphocaris spp.

Atya spp.

Macrobrachium

carcinus

Guinotia dentata

common

abundant

uncommon

common

INVERTEBRATES Fresh water snails Neritina punctulata common

Sources: List of Freshwater Fishes for Saint Vincent & the Grenadines http://fish.mongabay.com/data/Saint_Vincent_&_the_Grenadines.htm John Renton, researcher, St. Vincent

33

2.4 Marine Resources of Georgetown

The Georgetown area is in Zone 5 of the Fisheries National Zonal Landing sites of

St Vincent and the Grenadines. This area is on the Eastern Coast and is described

as the most dangerous conditions in the State for catching and landing fish*.

Source*(Fisheries Data Information Document of St Vincent and the Grenadines, Ministry of Agriculture and

Fisheries, by Jardine and Straker- 2003).

The rough Atlantic allows fishers to fish only for off shore species. The best

knowledge of the seas tells that there is no coastal reef in the area off

Georgetown. Line fishing is only practiced in the areas North of Georgetown from

Sandy Bay to Fancy and South from Colonarie to Biabou.

The species landed in Zone 5 at sites in Sandy Bay, Owia, Fancy and Biabou are

included in Table 7: Marine resources of Georgetown:

Table 7: Marine resources of Georgetown

Species Local Names Scientific Names Status

Dermasal Blue Parrot

Blue tube

Groupers

Grunt

Red hind

Snappers

Scarus vetula

Clepticus parrae

Epinephelus spp.

Haemulon spp.

Epinephelus guttatus

Lutjanus spp

Common

Abundant

abundant

Sharks Sand bar sharks

Silky sharks

Spinner shark

Carcharhinus spp

“

“

common

34

Tiger shark Galeogerdo cuvier

Inshore pelagic Jacks

Anchovy

Robin

Spratt

Dodger

Selar crumenophthalamus

Anchoa lyolopis

Decapterus macarellus

Harengula pensacolae

Decapterus punctutus

Abundant

Common

Abundant

Common

common

Shell fish

Whelks

Lobsters

Conch

Cittarium pica

Panulirus argus

Strumbus gigas

Common

rare

rare

Turtles Green back

Hawks bill

Chelonia mudas

Eretmochelys imbricata

migratory

Whales and Porpoises Pilot Whale

Porpoise

Globicephala macroryncus

Tursiops truncatus

Migratory

common

Offshore Pelagic Bonito

Barracuda

Dolphin

Blare eye cavali

Black jack cavali

Horse eye cavali

Green back cavali

Thunnus atlanticus

Sphyraena barracuda

Coryphaena hippurus

Priacanthus arenatus

Caranx lugubris

Caranx latus

Caranx crysos

Common

Rare

Seasonal

Common

Common

Common

Common

35

King fish

Little tuna

Mackerel

Ocean gar

Skip jack

Big eye tuna

Yellow fin tuna

Albacore tuna

White marlin

Blue marlin

Acanthocybium solandri

Euthynnus alleteratus

Scomberaomorus regalis

Istiophorous albicans

Katsuwonus pelamis

Thannus abesus

Thannus albacares

Thannus alalunga

Tetrapturus albidus

Makaira nigricans

Seasonal

Common

Common

Rare

Common

Common

Common

Rare

Rare

rare

Others Flying Fish

Gar

Balahoo

Eel

Rayfish

Porcupine fish

Exocoetidae

Tylosursus acus

Hemiramphus balao

Conger oceanicus

Dasyatidae

Diodontidae

Abundant

Abundant

Abundant

Common

Rare

common

Source*(Fisheries Data Information Document of St Vincent and the Grenadines, Ministry of Agriculture and

Fisheries, by Jardine and Straker- 2003).

36

3.0 SOCIO-CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

3.1 Population Distribution

The population of Georgetown at 2001 population census was 6964. These were

distributed among 1926 households and included 3570 males and 3394 females

who all live in 18 named villages. The census data also indicated that 44.24% of

the population was under the age of 19 years. The active work force of people

below the age of 60 year was 45.40% and over 60 years was 10.45%.

Table 8: Population Distribution

Males Females Total

Children (0-19 years )

1175 1131 2306

Adults (20-59)

2117 1943 3060

Elders (60+)

240 308 548

Total 3532 3382 6914

Source: Processed by Redatam and SP

ECLAC/CELADE 2010 -2013

37

3.2 Human Settlements

Table 9: Characteristic by type of Dwelling

H10-Type of Dwelling

H17-Land Occupancy

Owned/freehold Leasehold Rented Permission to work land

Squatted Other Don't know/not stated

Total

Undivided private

1182 14 72 9 157 34 6 1474

Part of private

67 - 2 2 15 2 - 88

Combined business & dwelling

21 - - - - - - 21

Other 1 1 - - - - - 2

Total 1271 15 74 11 172 36 6 1585

Not App : 318

*Source: Population Census 2001

Table 8: Population Distribution shows that 1271 of the 1926 households own their

properties. There are 172 squatters. They create problems in the forest by cutting

trees without supervision and permission. Most homes are made of concrete

blocks and wood and covered with galvanized zinc sheets.

The earlier settlements of the 1980’s show that most of Georgetown coastal and

flat lands were estates owned by a few and cultivated under sugar cane,

arrowroot and coconut. There are a few families who still own estates of over

50 -100 acres of lands.

In early 1990’s the government acquired the estates at Orange Hill, Langley Park,

Mt. Bentick and Grand Sable among other and distributed these among the

citizens for housing and farming settlements.

There are various shops supermarkets bakeries, barbers and beauty salon,

computer café, shipping broker, tourism and recreational services. Other

businesses include the water bottling plant at Congo Valley, Rum Distilleries in

38

Georgetown and Agro Processing Plant at Grand Sable owned by the Windward

Island Farmers Association (WINFA).

3.3 Education

Table 10: Distribution of schools by type and sex

Schools Males Females Totals*

Day Care 15 13 28

Pre- School 116 106 222

Special

Education

6 1 7

Primary 729 688 1417

Secondary 77 125 202

Total 943 933 1876

Generated by Redatam Webserver ECLAC/CELADE 2010-2013 *NB 430 Not app.

These show of the 1175 males of school age, 943 of them are in a school in

Georgetown and of 1131 female children, 933 are in a school in Georgetown.

In addition to those in the named schools, there is a Technical Vocational School

which is in operation. Evening classes are run in Georgetown and Langley Park for

those who require furthering their knowledge academically by Community Based

Organizations (CBO’s) and, the Ministry of Education supports the Adult Education

Programme for those who need literary skills and technical support.

39

3.4 Health and Wellness

There is a hospital with full staff in Georgetown that provides primary and

secondary health care to its citizens and those North to Sandy Bay, Owia and

Fancy. There is a Diagnostic Centre currently under construction.

The following table gives a picture of the chronic ailments which affect the

members of the community. Some 421 persons are suffering from Diabetes and

Hypertension and about 274 of these are women. 361 are suffering with arthritis

and 235 women are in this category. The citizens argued that asthma and other

respiratory infections are on the increase. The records show that 288 people

suffer from asthma.

40

Table 11: Chronic illnesses in Georgetown

Diseases Males Females Total

Sickle cell 14 24 38

Arthritis 126 235 361

Asthma 142 146 288

Diabetes 71 118 189

Hypertension 76 156 232

Heart disease 8 10 18

Stroke 5 3 8

Kidney Disease 7 8 15

Cancer 1 4 5

Lupus _ 1 1

None 2990 2579 5569

Other 90 96 186

Not stated 2 2 4

*Source: Processed by Redatam and SP

ECLAC/CELADE 2010 -2013

3.5 Source of Livelihood

It is noted that farming and the government are the primary source of

employment in Georgetown. School teachers and police officers are among the

greater number of persons employed by the government.

Farming has been seriously affected by the down turn in the banana industry.

Although there is an improved market for arrowroot and an abundance of flat

tractor- able lands here, there is no sign for reintroduction of that crop in that

41

area. Farmers have expressed very bad experiences with farming and look upon it

as a dying occupation.

Some major problems that affect the farmers are poor access roads, praedial

larceny, cost of inputs and unreliable work force. Praedial larceny has been

recorded as the worst problem. The government has recently introduced

legislations and Rural Constables in several areas to deal with this issue but

farmers believe this measure is ineffective.

Another important source of employment is craft. The Forestry Department and

National Craft Centre have worked with males and females of this area to

produce craft from straw and bamboo.

The Georgetown Craft-makers, a group of (10) ten males were trained to produce

craft, in 2012, under the Forestry Sustainable Livelihood Project, funded by FAO.

The group has since dwindled to one person. Bamboo is readily available from

within the watershed but the small and irregular market has limited the income of

the participants and most of them have sought employment elsewhere.

The females are a group of (10) ten mothers. They are regular at work and make

baskets, table mats, fans, coasters and waste paper baskets among others. There

is a ready market for their products. They have a paid supervisor from the

National Craft Centre.

Other forms of employment are in the private sector. Recently, property owners

have been renovating the buildings in the commercial centre of Georgetown and

several types of small businesses have started.

3.6 Ethnicity and Religion

The population is made up of 62% of African origin, 24% are of mixed race, 12% of

indigenous peoples and 2% of Indian origin.

Christianity is the dominant religion. The Anglican, Catholic and Methodist

Churches are of the traditional denominations. Other denominations of the

42

American origin are in the increase to include Adventists, Baptists and Jehovah

Witnesses.

3.7 Water distribution and Garbage disposal

Surface water is the major source for portable water, irrigation and industrial

supplies. The annual average rainfall is sufficient and meets the requirement.

Seasonal shortages rarely occur and only when there is an extended dry season.

The watershed provides 5 % of the national demands.

Jennings and Perseverance rivers are harnessed by the Central Water and

Sewerage Authority (CWSA) to supply portable water. A spring in Congo Valley

provides adequate water supply for the water bottling plant. Perseverance River

has a minimum capacity of 856,000 gallons of water per day. The following table

shows the volume of water distributed from the Perseverance River annually.

Table 12: Distribution of water from Perseverance (2009- 2012)

Year Volume of water

Distributed

Measurement

(Million Gallons)

2009 130.038 Million Gallons/Year

2010 121.230 “

2011 85.126 “

2012 83.918 “

Source CWSA* 2013

The table indicates a significant reduction from this supply by about 34% in 2011

to as much as close to 36%. This catchment was severely damaged by the storms

of 2010 and floods of 2011. Wastage reduction by consumers may be responsible

for the reduction in distribution for there has not been a reported shortage of

supply by the consumers.

43

Most homes have portable supply of domestic water. Payments for domestic

water are made to the CWSA based on the monthly volume used. However there

were only two cases where it was indicated that the families use the rivers

exclusively for all domestic purposes. In the O’Brien’s Valley, Mt Young and

Caratal areas, many families use the water from the river for washing and

bathing.

Water for irrigation purposes is supplied to some farms from the Perseverance

and Mt Young rivers by the National Irrigation Authority (NIA). The system was

severely damaged by the floods of 2011 and has not been restored. The NIA

appears to be going through some internal problems and both situations have

impacted on the irrigation supply and farming.

While the CWSA focuses on improving water quality, poor land use practices

continue to affect the quality of water. During the rainy season particulate matter

and sediments find their way into water due to lack of equipment for coagulation,

sedimentation and filtration. It is also possible that agricultural chemicals can

contaminate the water.

There has been a regular weekly collection of garbage in all communities

throughout St. Vincent and the Grenadines during the past five years. The CWSA,

through the Solid Waste Department, is responsible to collect and dispose of all

garbage. All households are required to put out their garbage on the named

collection day in each district. The trucks pick up garbage and transport to the

landfill sites run by the Solid Waste Department.

Garbage is not sorted but clients are required to take their white goods to the

land fill or call the Department for assistance at an extra cost. The CWSA /Solid

Waste Department periodically send an extra truck throughout the communities

to collect white goods freely. All clients pay a fee which is attached to their

monthly water bills to the Solid Waste Department, for the collection and disposal

of the garbage.

44

The table which follows shows the volume of garbage collected in the

Georgetown area from 2009 to 2012.

Table 13: The volume of garbage collected in Georgetown area between (2009 – 2012) [measured in cubic

meters]

MONTHS 2009 2010 2011 2012

Jan 146 71 121 187

Feb 88 96 78 139**

March 86.5 86 132 167

April 56 106 41 86

May 62 44.3 127 100

June 49 60 60 121

July 76 71 82 71

Aug 86 88 121 126.5

Sept 70 99 173** 198**

Oct 45 97 62 150**

Nov 99 43 96 170

Dec 66 146 58 113

Total 929.5 1007.3 1151 1568.5

*NB Source CWSA/ Solid Waste Department 2013

** White goods were collected, coast clean up Oct, garbage was also collected from Sandy Bay in Feb.

There is a continuous increase in the volume of garbage collected over the years.

More householders have been responding to the collection. There is the problem

of the improper disposal of waste and the citizens have expressed their concerns.

CBO’s are frequently mobilized and conduct clean up campaigns along the

riverbanks and along the shoreline.

45

3.8 The Service Sector and Industry

Georgetown was known for the famous sugar industry and a thriving arrowroot

industry. During the mid-1980’s, the sugar industry was closed. Arrowroot also

suffered and the banana industry took over the farms and valleys and thrived

until its demise in the last five years.

Guest Houses: There are about six known apartments available for rent with a

total of 20 beds. Some of these are not advertised, however, they serve to

accommodate guests who choose to stay over for short or extended vacation.

In the Jennings valley, two family facilities with five rooms once used by the

families are now offered for rent to nature lovers and vacationers. These are

located close to the CWSA water catchment facility and near to the Parrot

conservation zone.

Grocery shops and restaurants: There are five known restaurants and numerous

grocery shops and bars in Georgetown.

Salons/ Boutiques: The salons and boutiques are found along the main street.

They sell clothes mainly for children and women. These businesses are

patronized by residents.

Tourism and Recreation: The Black Point recreational facility is supervised by the

National Parks Rivers and Beaches Authority and run daily by a CBO. This facility

accommodates visitors from other communities and tourists from other

countries. This facility is very active in the tourist season, weekends and public

holidays. Some discussions to develop tours from the site through the Jennings

and Congo valleys are on the way.

Agro processing and Industry: With the closure of the sugar and arrowroot

businesses in Georgetown, the rum distillery was retained. It is now mainly

owned by the private sector and continues to make four brands of rum from

imported molasses. The effluent from this plant is discharged into the mouth of

the Perseverance River and is environmental concern. Local fruits are processed

by WINFA. Their facility is in need of repairs.

46

4.0 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS

A stakeholder analysis was necessary to identify all the primary and secondary

stakeholders who have vested interest in the issues which affect land degradation

with in the Georgetown watershed. The main interest was to select stakeholders

with whom the project can work to achieve the goals and reduce the threats to

the targets set. The Stakeholder Analysis Matrix is in 4.4 Identifying How Best to Engage

Stake holders

4.1 Stages in Stakeholders Analysis:

a. To identify key stake holders and their interests, whether negative or positive,

in the project.

b. Assess the influence and importance of each stake holder as well as the

potential impact of the project on each stake holder.

c. Identify how best to engage stake holders.

4.2 Identifying key stakeholders and their interests:

The key stakeholders were identified by brainstorming and examining the human

environment of the community. Discussions were held with some other persons

to further identify more stakeholders.

After listing the stakeholders and their mandate which include livelihoods, profits,

lifestyle and values, the status of that stake or interest was also establish. The

status may be their rights, ownership, legal status, intellectual; rights or social

obligations.

It also established whether there were groups or individuals who were

marginalized or disenfranchised. Bowen Golden, 2005 argued that marginalized

stakeholders lack recognition of the capacity to participate in collaboration on an

equal basis. He suggested that particular efforts should be made to ensure their

participation.

Figure 8: Stakeholders Map below explains the lists of stakeholders identified in the

projected area of Georgetown.

47

4.3 Assessing the influence and importance of each stakeholders as well

as the potential impact of the project upon each stakeholder

At this stage it was important to think through how the different types of

stakeholders should be engaged.

PROTECT GOOD RELATION

This group will require special initiative to protect their interest

A close and good working relation must be established with this group.

LOW PRIORITY MONITOR

May have some involvement, but relatively in lower priority

This group may be a source of risks, will require careful monitoring and management

Figure 7: Stakeholders’ Importance and Influence on project

The figure above shows the organization of stakeholders according to their

possible influence over decisions to be made and the likely impact that the

project may have upon them.

HIGH

HIGH LOW

IMP

OR

TAN

CE

INFLUENCE

STAKEHOLDER

PROFESSIONAL INTEREST

NEIGHBOURS

ECONOMIC

INTEREST

USERS

Public Agencies

Health Centre

Police Town Board

Teachers

Civil Society

Fair Trade

CBO

Youth Churches

Freindly Society

Farmers Organization

Land Owners

Utility Companies

Local Authority

Private Developers

Local Community

Immediate Neighbour

Resident Association

Land Uses

Forest users

Farmers

Hunters

Craftmen

Recreation Sites

Other Business

Shop

Guest Houses

CWSA

Mt. Top Spring Waters

Rum Distillery

Potential Users

Special Schools

Ethnic Group

Disabled

Regular Users

Man/ Woman

Clubs

Visitors

Aged Other Users

Squatters

Illegal Users

Figure 8: Stakeholders Map

4.4 Identifying How Best to Engage Stake holders

It was important here to determine how to involve the different stakeholders.

Figure 9: shows the different ways in which they may be involved in the various

stages of the project, from gathering and sharing information, to consultation,

dialogue, working together and partnership. In this process the needs and wants

are determined.

Consideration must then be given on how and when that involvement can be

achieved in a collaborative manner. Stakeholders’ views must be understood

before a decision can be made.

The use of an inclusive and transparent approach for the project development

and implementation helps to build ownership and commitment by all.

50

SECTOR Stakeholders Interests Source of

Power

Potential

Areas of

Conflict

Capacity to

Participate in

Management

Pri

va

te

Se

cto

r

Farmers and

Livestock

Tenders

-Access to

suitable land

- Need

affordable

water for

irrigation

and crop

production.

-Economic

-Food

Security

-Cultural

tradition

-Good

agricultural

practices (GAP)

-Impact of

animal waste

in water.

-Poor Garbage

disposal

-Low

- Poorly

organized.

-Too dependent

on government.

Land Owners,

Developers etc.

-Access to land

- Access to

rivers

-Conveyance

of

structures.

-Land

ownership

-Economic

-Price

-Access rights

-Lease

Agreements with

government

-High

-Agro Processors,

-Mountain Top

Springs

-St Vincent

Distillers

-Using

portable

water.

-Rechargeable

functions of

the

watershed

-Economic -Cost of rights to

extract water

-Potential

depletion of

water source.

-High

- Value for

money

-Water quality

and availability

Go

ve

rnm

en

t

MARTFF -Manage

forested

land to

maintain

ecological

integrity and

best soil

conservation

-Policy

-Legislative

-Control

-Enforcement

-Squatting

-Extraction of

forest

products.

-Improper use of

land

-High

51

practices

MHWE -Monitor

health and

wellness

-Inspection of

foods

-Legislative

-Enforcement

-Policy

-Negative impact

of waste

disposal

-High (results

may determine

future funding)

Other

Government

Ministries and

Statutory

Organizations

-Infrastructure

and services

-Policy

-Control

-Legislative

-Improving

the quality

of life

-Impact of

animal waste on

water quality.

-Consumers

dependence on

resources

-Taxes, fines.

-High

-Significant

influence on

implementation

CWSA -Manage,

-Collection,

-Distribution,

-Mitigate

-Impacts of

human

activity

-Legislative

-Control

-Policy

-Private land

ownership and

access rights.

-Improper

disposal of

waste

-Water price to

consumers

-High

- Regulations

and

maintenance

Civ

il S

oci

ety

-Cooperatives

-Fair Trade

-Consumers

-Need

affordable

supplies

-Economic

-Votes

-Quality

-Supplies

-Costs

-Moderate-

(lobbying)

Media

Outreach Campaign Low

52

Figure 9: Stakeholders’ Analysis Matrix

Popular

Politicians

Votes Campaign High

Location Land value,

Accessibility

Low

Environment pollution Clean.

Future

generations

Low

Planners

Evaluation,

quality

professionalism

Low

History Preservation,

Reuse and

revival

Moderate

53

5.0 CRITICAL LAND DEGRADATION ISSUES

5.1 Increasing pressure on land due to need for housing and industries:

As a result of increase demand for housing as the population improves their social

and economic status, and the need to provide improved infrastructure, the

government is sometimes forced to acquire prime agricultural lands for building.

Other lesser fortunate seek to establish their homes and sometimes build

structures in inappropriate areas, unsuitable for housing.

5.2 Improper use and disposal of waste and pollutants:

Industrialization and access to more processed food and the increase in imported

packaged items are all serious threats to the environment. The uncontrolled

littering throughout the areas along with the indiscriminate dumping of solid

waste and the improper control of pollutants present health hazards for the

citizens.

The abusive use of agricultural pesticides in high elevations with rain fall over 80-

100 inches per annum was noted. Gramoxone and Touch Down were observed as

the common herbicides used for weed control. Though there has been no record

of water quality tests in streams in the lower courses, these substances are used

at rates that warrant urgent control measures.

5.3 Coastal erosion due to the action of winds and waves:

The rising of the sea level has been observed by the people of Georgetown as

they have seen the sea encroaching on the coastline of some communities. This

has resulted in a loss of homes, plants and recreational facilities. Studies are

currently conducted to develop plans to combat the effect of coastal erosion.

5.4 Inappropriate – removal of forest and riparian zones

The cultivation of bananas has taken a turn for the worst. Agriculture in the area

has suffered significantly and some farm workers sought to move to the forest to

cultivate crops. The MAFF was not able to quantify the area affected but

continued to voice their concerns.

54

Despite the demand for food, farmers cannot be allowed to continue with

deforestation activities. Modern farming techniques which include organic

farming, shade house production of crops, mulching, and drip irrigation when

properly managed will aid in combating land degradation.

5.5 The mining of the beach sand and aggregate

In the north eastern area of Georgetown there is an abundance of stones and

gravel. The construction of blocks and block houses seem to encourage some

vendors to gain employment by harvesting sand and gravel from the beach. This

has contributed to the erosion of the shore line in those areas.

The Rabacca River bed provides adequate supplies of sand and gravel. This supply

is replenished whenever there is rain and the river water level rises. Sea sand is

salt and unsuitable for construction. The Georgetown Town Board can step up

enforcement to ensure that the coastline in not disturbed.

5.6 The burning of tyres, marijuana and other drugs:

The citizens have made a strong appeal to call on the authorities to stop burning

of tyres, marijuana and other drugs at Rabacca. Within recent times, the Law

Enforcement Agency has been burning drugs confiscated from dealers at Rabacca.

Used tyres are brought from all over the island and disposed of at Rabacca then

burned. . The residue from the tyres and the wires are left on the river banks.

Concerns are raised of these materials entering the river and sea.

The citizens believe that the fumes from the substances have caused an increase

in respiratory problems among elderly and children. The soot also blow onto their

homes and dirty their laundry.

5.7 Land degradation law/regulation:

There is inadequate law/regulation specific to land degradation. Although there

are several pieces of legislation which address various land and environment

issues, there is no single document which expresses comprehensively land

degradation issues.

55

According to Isaacs, 2013, the implementation of land and environmental

legislation and policies are constrained by a number factor, some of which are as

follows:

Limited regulations to accompany major land legislation

Overlapping legislation which leads to duplication of roles and inaction by

the various agencies with implementing and enforcement powers.

Limited land and environmental standards are in place for the enforcement

of key legislation.

56

6.0 ASSETS & THREATS TO THESE ASSETS

Table 14: Environmental assets and their threats

ASSETS THREATS SPECIFIC PROBLEMS

LAND Soil erosion Surface wash and land slides

Soil degradation Loss of Soil nutrients

Acidification

Nutrient imbalances

Adverse pesticide effects

Soil surface exposure

Land use and Suitability Removal of riparian zone

Pressure on land for housing etc

Land use and land capability do not fit

Tenure & inheritance

Feeder Roads Degraded roads and poor drainage

systems

Lack bridges

Biological Fauna Rare and endangered species of birds,

fresh water invertebrates, Marine

fish, terrestrial wildlife soil fauna

Invasive species in the forest and

farms

Noise Temporary & Permanent Noise

Coastal & Marine

Resources

Micro Climate Changes Decreasing wind protection

Increased temperature

57

Decreased length of dry season

Increased convectional rain

Coast line erosion

Atmosphere Dust & Odor Burning of tyres at Rabacca

Animal fumes

Increase respiratory problem

Water Drainage

River

Surface run off

Sediment load

River bank erosion

Flooding & solid debris load

River water Quality Nutrient and pesticide load

Siltation/pesticide effects

7.0 NEGATIVE OUTCOMES/IMPACT

7.1 Plant Pests and Diseases:

In recent years there have been the presence of pests and diseases in crops that

have affected their effective cultivation.

i. Moko disease has ripped havoc in the banana industry.

ii. Pink mealy bugs have affected nearly every crop thus reducing yields or

killing the entire plant.

iii. Black Sigatoka has wiped out the banana industry which is now struggling

to recover.

iv. Citrus thrips have now shown its presence and are affecting the Citrus crop.

58

v. Vegetable pests: The presence of several pests/disease has also been

mentioned by the local farmers.

The Ministry of Agriculture Rural Transformation, Forestry and Fisheries (MARFF)

has the opportunity to address these issues through the BAM project (Banana

Adjustment Measures)

7.2 Poor Feeder Roads:

The Hurricane Tomas (2010) and the rains of 11th April, 2011 have damaged and

in some cases destroyed major feeder needs in this community.

Agricultural feeder roads to Jennings, Congo Valley, Perseverance and Bower are

in urgent need for rebuilding. Some bridges are badly eroded. There is a call from

the farming community to assist in this area. The farmers have lost due to

inability to effectively move out their farms. It is known that entire areas were

badly eroded by the floods.

7.3 Lack of Irrigation Service:

The destruction of the head works/dams in several areas by the flood waters of

April, 2011. Due to these issues the Irrigation Authority has not been able to

provide the service to the farmers. This has affected many farmers. The Ministry

of Agriculture, Rural Transformation, Forestry and Fisheries has plans to

reconsider the management and operations of the Irrigation Authority. Work at

the Authority is currently at a standstill.

59

8.0 ROOT PROBLEMS AND CAUSES:

Table 15: Table illustrating environmental issues and their root causes

ISSUES ROOT CAUSES CAPACITY NEEDED

1. Increasing

pressure on land

due to need for

housing industries

Inadequate

legislation/policy on

town/country planning

Formulation &

strengthening of

legislation and urban

development policy and

strategy

2. Improper disposal

of waste and

pollutants

Inappropriate/weak

legislation on

waste/pollutant disposal

Pollution control in this

area

3. Coastal erosion

due to the action of

wind/waves

Lack of climate change

adaptation measures.

Uncontrolled mining of

the beach aggregates

Draft and implement

climate change adaptation

process

4. Inappropriate

removal of forest

tress & the

riparian zones

Inadequate

laws/regulation.

Inadequate enforcement

of existing

laws/regulation

Sustainable & effective

land management system

5. Beach sand mining Inadequate enforcement

of laws

Control measures by

enforcement agency

6. Burning tyres and

drugs

Improper knowledge on

the disposal of solid waste

Knowledge on the correct

disposal of solid waste

60

9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

9.1 Recommendations developed from the assessment

Table 16: A summary of development challenges and development opportunities in the Georgetown Watershed

DIMENSIONS CHALLENGES OPPORTUNITIES

Environment

1. The lack of a physical plan and zoning has resulted in agriculture, housing and tourism enterprises being located in areas which are not suitable for such activities This is a result of such activities as disposal of waste into the river; rearing of pigs and other animals, along the river banks; poor agricultural practices.

2. Citizens, investors and governmental officials in the watershed are not sensitized to the importance of maintaining the ecological balance of the watershed in order to ensure the integrity of all the enterprises that the watershed supports. 3. Industrial discharge and other toxic substances have adverse effect on the costal and marine ecosystems through oxygen deficiency in localized areas and turbidity in other areas with reefs 4. Developers should be sensitized to mitigating environmental impacts as a medium safeguard to investments and to protect the integrity of the watershed so that they can benefit from their investments.

1. The Physical Planning Act prohibits the construction of farm pens near water courses. The Environmental Services Act #15 of 1991 should be enforced and these structures be relocated. There is opportunity to put regulations in place to assist with the enforcement of this Act The Ministry of Agriculture should develop guidelines and standards for livestock farming including, the use of fiscal instruments to discourage farmers from establishing their farm pens along watercourses. 2. Funding is available from a number of the Multilateral Environmental Agreement for the conduct of public awareness campaigns and sensitization on a number of environmental issues. These funds can be used for the awareness programmes. There is the need to implement legislation to control the treatment and disposal of waste into rivers and waterways. A study of the effect of the disposal of industrial waste and domestic waste on coastal and marine ecosystems should be undertaken. There is need for personnel to enforce control over industrial processing and waste treatment and disposal. There is an opportunity to establish a coordinating body of all stakeholder agencies, which will monitor land degradation issues in all watershed and report to the Authority. The various investors who presently benefit from the natural assets of the watershed should be encouraged to pay for the services and assets provided by the watershed

1. The watershed degradation is being caused by poor agricultural practices on steep areas and poor

Effective land treatments measures in the upper reaches of the river valleys can arrest the rate

61

Physical

management of the environment. The degradation has impacted on the coastal resources and will impact on eco-tourism sites in the watershed, if not controlled now. 2. The valleys are subject to flooding because of run off during heavy rains; the soils have lost their percolation capacity due to the removal of forest cover and non-cultivation of cover crops. 3, The destruction of the riparian zone, along the river banks, make the valleys prone to flooding and destroy the natural habitat for the aquatic life.

and velocity of flooding downstream. The MAFF through its Soil and water conservation Unit must implement a program to assist farmers who produce on steep slopes, with soil conservation measures and provide incentives to the farmers for the maintenance of these measures The Agricultural Laws prevent farmers from cutting trees or cultivating lands on the river banks. These laws should be enforced. Incentives should be offered to farmers to re-establish and manage the riparian zone properly.

Socio-cultural

1. Comparative high levels of poverty. Concerns have been expressed that there is a growing underground illegal economy. Some of the communities in the watershed are socially and economically vulnerable Waste disposal, including liquid waste disposal is a problem in many homes in the Watershed.

1. The Ministries of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries, with the Department of Rural Transformation and the Department of Lands can put a programme in place to assist the young adults to establish suitable enterprises on Government rented/leased lands to improve their livelihoods. 2.The BAM project in the MARFF can address some of these concerns The Waste Management Act #31 of 2000, and the Solid Waste Regulations of 2006, need to be enforced. The Solid Waste Management Authority should encourage sorting of garbage and composting in order to reduce the volume of organic waste that is disposed. The organic waste can be sold to vegetable producers. – There is an increasing demand for organically grown vegetables by the health conscious persons in and around the watershed. There is opportunity for the CWSA to collaborate with the Department of Rural Transformation, to teach communities in the watershed about waste reduction and collective efforts at waste disposal. The CWSA can work in partnership with business and tourism enterprises in the watershed to provide more receptacles for solid waste disposal Georgetown.

62

The private sector and civil society organizations are not directly involved in land degradation issues and forest management. The farmers have not shown great appreciation for the use and maintenance of the Irrigation of the crops and for the Irrigation Authority.

1. A national land management policy would help to guide inter-sectorial participation in land management by indicating the roles and management objectives for various stakeholders. 2. There is a need to develop and nurture a more sophisticated culture of participation within the Department of Environment, and to develop the capacity to work more closely with non-governmental partners; The possibilities are there for the management and workers of the irrigation services be further trained in organizational and resource management.

Economic

1.The decline in arrowroot and banana cultivation and overall contraction of the agricultural sector has displaced many of the farm labourers 2. Most persons in the watershed do not have the necessary skill set to benefit from the livelihood opportunities which may occur by the expanded tourism sector in the watershed.

. There is an opportunity to build on existing business initiatives (craft production, water bottling, agro-processing and eco-tourism in particular) to develop voluntary standards and guidelines to enhance socio-economic benefits while ensuring environmental sustainability of these business activities. The Centre for Enterprise Development, The Cooperative Division I the Ministry of National Mobilization can help to promote this cause. The craft workers need to work together to enhance the management of their operations. There is an opportunity for them to brand their product and improve on the market potential of their commodities. An expansion of the agricultural sector in the watershed will provide more opportunities for livelihoods. There is opportunity for the MARFF, the Credit Unions and other financial institutions to provide financial assistance and guided extension support to farmers to further invests in agriculture. Persons should be provided training so that they enter the job market with some level of competency. There is a technical school in the watershed which can be used in the evenings to provide such TVET training. The MARFF can also provide technical and farm management training to farmers and agricultural workers at the training centers at Rabacca and Dumbarton.

63

9.2 List of Recommendations for the project implementation

The following are the main requests from the community for the future plans and

for environmental improvement of the Georgetown watershed.

That the report be reviewed by the stakeholders after it was presented to

the Ministry of Health Wellness and the Environment.

The report is the subject of District consultation before it is implemented by

the Ministry of Health, Wellness and the Environment.

All policies and strategies must meet their needs and be instituted using

stakeholders participation or the participatory approach.

That legislative enforcement is highly considered and where necessary laws

for the control of land degradation are incorporated into the environmental

act and regulations.

Adequate education and demonstration plans be developed and executed

by suitably trained personnel continuously to meet the demand.

Economic (cont’d)

3. Praedial larceny is a major hindrance to increased agricultural production throughout the agricultural areas. 4. The rising price of food and energy could force more persons into unsuitable lands for subsistence agriculture and into the forest to seek other livelihoods.

The programme to curb praedial larceny has been put in place. Rural Constables (Special Police to monitor the distribution of agricultural produce) have been put in place. Hopefully, there shall be some reduction of the incidence. and a programme to stimulate farmers to increase their productivity be put in place. The Rural Constable programme however needs to be evaluated in order to establish efficacy before farmers are encouraged to increase production levels. . The Forestry Act prevents persons from cultivating lands in the forest reserve. The Forest Department must enforce those laws. The MARTFF should review its strategy for agricultural diversification and seek the support of other private sector or state agencies to provide the much needed support to small farmers.

64

That the scheduled control and corrective measures be put in place as soon

as possible.

65

10.0 Bibliography

CEMI Report on hydropower feasibility study for VINLEC, 2009

Culzac- Wilson, Lystra (2009) Important Bird Areas. St Vincent and

the Grenadines. Bird Life International

Government of St Vincent and the Grenadines: Disaster

Vulnerability Reduction Project Environmental Assessment Report -

December 2010

Government of St Vincent and the Grenadines Hurricane Tomas

Emergency Recovery Project Environmental Assessment. June 2011.

Integrated Water Resources Management Planning Approach for

Small Island Developing States. UNEP, February 2012.

Isaacs, Philmore (July 2013): Issue Papers, Sustainable Land

Management, St. Vincent and the Grenadines.

Jardine, Chery and Leslie Straker (2003): Fisheries Data Information

Document Ministries of Agriculture and Fisheries

Kiribati, Neri Tiaeke (2007): The National Capacity Self-Assessment

Project: Ministry of Environment, Lands and Agriculture

Development.

Land Degradation – Guidelines for Field Assessment. Retrieved from

the internet . http //: unu.ed

National Action Programme to Combat Land Degradation –

(BHUTAN) Final draft, October 2009.

Niles, Edward (2011): Environmental and Social Management

Framework- Regional Communication Infrastructure (RCIP) Phase 1.

Grenada, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines. (CARCIP)

66

Roxo, M.J. (2001) A report on the stakeholders perception on Land

Degradation/ Desertification in the Mediterranean. Desert Links

Target Areas

St Vincent and the Grenadines Population Census 2011.

Sub regional Action Programme to combat Land Degradation in the

Caribbean, June 2011. CNIRD And PISLM.

SVG National Parks and Protected Areas Systems Plan, 2010 -2014.

The Republic of Trinidad and Tobago: The third National Report on

the United Nations Convention to combat desertification

Implementation Process. Interim National Coordinating Committee

– December, 2007

Woodfine, Annie (Ed) (2011): Manual for local level assessment of

Land Degradation and Sustainable Land Management Part 2. FAO,

UNEP. GEF.

67

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: MINUTES OF STAKEHOLDERS MEETING

The Minutes of the Stakeholders Meeting held on 20th June 2013

Venue: Anglican Parish Hall, Georgetown

Chairperson: Leroy Jackson (Supervisor) Agricultural Officer, Region III

AGENDA:

o Call to order

o Prayer (AI), Lynch

o Introduction to District (AO), Jackson

o The Project Background – Yasa Belmar (MHWE)

o The Georgetown Watershed and Land Degradation Issues – Lennie Adams

o Wrap up

o Closure

1. Call to order: The meeting was called to order at 4:32 pm by the chairman (AO) Jackson, Supervisor

for Agriculture Region III which includes the Georgetown area.

2. Prayers: Prayers were offered by (AI) Lynch, Agricultural Extension Officer of the area.

3. Introduction to Region III: The chairperson (AO) Jackson welcomed the participants to the

meeting. He highlighted the purpose of the meeting and stressed the importance for those present

to examine the human and biophysical factors that affected land and the environment by far in that

District.

He reminded the participants of the past events of hurricanes, the floods of 2011 and Coastal

degradation by the action of the waves of the ocean.

He expressed his regrets that Miss Yasa Belmar of the (MHWE) Ministry of Health, Wellness and the

Environment was not present and was unavailable at the meeting and then called on Mr. Lennie

Adams – in country Consultant, to explain the purpose of the project.

4. Land Degradation in Georgetown: Mr. Adams greeted the stakeholders present and welcomed

them to the discussions of the subject – Land Degradation in Georgetown.

69

He explained the reason given for the absence of Ms. Yasa Belmar and the non-representation of

the MHWE the national focal point at the discourse, and indicated that whatever was discussed and

decisions taken will to be taken to the MHWE.

He explained the function of the MHWE in the process and Global Environment Facility (GEF) as the

source of financing, and identified the Integrating Water, Land and Ecosystems Management in

Caribbean Small Island Developing States (IWEco) as the coordinating agency.

He introduced himself as the in country Coordinator, Consultant to the project who had a ten weeks

assignment.

After Mr. Adams’ introductory remarks the participants were given a definition of the term land

degradation and were asked to add their interpretation to the same.

Mr. Adams later in the discussion explained that over the past six weeks, he met with some of those

present and the technical staff of Government Agencies, private sector agencies and some farmers

and householders of the district and discussed the issues of land degradation. However, before he

shared those issues, he asked that those present share their views as what they wanted to come out

of the meeting.

The participants agreed and willingly and orderly expressed themselves. Some of the issues they

expressed were as follows:

o Removal of obstacles at Georgetown Bridge.

o The erosion of the river banks at Spring Village and Mt. Young.

o Farmers should be part of the project and when a final document is presented the

community be part of the implementation.

o Stakeholders wanted to know how they will be compensated for loss of properties and

homes.

o Remedial work for property damages from flood and the passage of a hurricane.

o The removal of the riparian zone and vegetation and the erecting of “liming” sheds.

o Large stones in river beds that divert water to banks.

o Compensation for injured persons by storms/ floods.

o Logs still pile in the river basins.

o Compensation for farmers’ loss of crops, livestock and land.

At that point Mr. Adams asked that the information they presented be reviewed. On the issue of

compensation, the meeting was advised with the help of Forestry Supervisor McLeod that damages

70

occurred due to the act of nature, and that householders and farmers are advised to insure their

property and other investments. They were also told that the government could not compensate

for property losses or damages but can provide some level of assistance to citizens who were

affected.

The discussion which followed identified the major areas that stakeholders wanted to be addressed.

These include

Money to be made available to resurface feeder roads damaged by machinery used to clear

areas after the floods of 2011.

Stop the burning of tyres, marijuana and other drugs at Rabacca.

Use of organic manures to crops.

The enforcement of laws against persons who litter streams and the sea shore.

The enforcement of laws against farmers who cut trees and weed crops and block drains,

and against those who remove river defenses and grow crops near waterways.

Noise pollution.

Air pollution: the stench from animal pens and the smoking of Ganga cigarettes.

Poor drainage at Dickson School.

Stabilization of river banks.

Water pollution: dumping of garbage in waterways and pig farming on the banks of the

rivers.

Mr. Adams introduced a handout and asked the stakeholders to turn to the section Environmental

Issues. This information was compiled from previous discussions held with other stakeholders,

interest groups, technical specialist and farmers. The meeting was asked to compare both sets of

information and rank the issues according to the level of priority to be addressed by the project. The

majority of issues was ranked as being very important and need to be addressed in a quick time by

the project.

Other Concerns

The increasing number of citizens who were affected by respiratory diseases as a result of

the smoke inhalation from burning carried out in Rabacca.

Deplorable condition of the feeder road which contribute to only a limited amount of their

crop produce to get to the market.

71

Narrowing of the river in some areas due to construction on its banks thus limiting the free

flow of water.

Rural constables were ineffective; a review of Praedial larceny in the area is required.

The increase of invasive species of pests and diseases in crops has significantly affected the

cost of production.

Wrap up and Closure:

Mr. Jackson urged the participants to adopt a behavioral change that will allow for an improvement in

the environment and for the preservation of the same for future generations.

Mr. Adams and other members at the head table thanked participants for their keen interest and

participation in the meeting and informed them that their concerns were well noted. The meeting

ended at 7.12 p.m. There were 45 participants and six others in attendance. They were all refreshed

before being transported to their homes.

72

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF PERSONS CONSULTED NAMES POSITION

Leroy Jackson Regional Agricultural Supervisor

Adrian Bailey Forest Officer 111

Anthony Simon Forest Officer 111

Glen Grant Forest Officer 111

Felicia Baptiste Forest Officer 1

Barry Williams Forest Officer 1

Rohali Da Silva Engineer Mountain Top Springs

Cornelius Richards Senior Forestry Supervisor

FitzGerald Providence Chief Forestry Officer

Ashley Caine Deputy Chief Agricultural Officer

John Browne Bamboo Craft Group Leader

Mrs. Minelva Lavia Craft Centre Coordinator

Leslie Grant Chief Agricultural Officer

Amos Glasgow Senior Forestry Officer

Andrew Lockhart Superintendent- NPRBA

DeAnna Ralph Social Analyst - Central Planning Division

Joan Ryan Public Relations Officer CWSA

Andrea Latchman Agricultural Instructor - Georgetown

Conrad Simon National Irrigation Authority

Colville King Agricultural Officer 1

St Clair Yearwood Ministry of National Mobilization – Community Development Division

Michelle Forbes NEMO

Gertheryn Bascombe Agricultural Instructor – Research and Development

Ann Marie Greaves Staff Nurse Georgetown Health Centre

Susan Samuel BRAGSA

Kenyatta Alleyne BRAGSA

Ms Sampson Georgetown Town Board

73

APPENDIX 3: HOT SPOTS & MITIGATION FOR LAND DEGRADATION IN

GEORGETOWN WATERSHED

The study on the causes of land degradation in Georgetown June-August 2013 indicated that land

degradation took different forms at different sites.

The (Hot Spots) or sites identified in the map of Georgetown Watershed Sites Fig:10 & Fig:11 are in the

Congo Valley, The Jennings River Valley, Mt Pleasant valley and the Perseverance river valley. They are

described in the Tables # 16, 17, 18 and 19 which identify the locations, issues and the mitigation

strategies.

Figure 10: Map of Perseverance Watershed Sites

74

Table 17: Watershed Assessment of Perseverance: (P.V)

CODE Hot Spots Mitigation Strategy COMMENTS Work Break

down COSTS

(EC)$ (US)$

P.V.1 & 2

Damages done to wildlife habitat during hurricane. (2010) River bank erosion

Reforestation to the denuded hills. Agroforestry, Fruit tree cultivation Forest liberation and soil conservation (approx. 2 acres)

Right bank of river is open pasture. Lower bank is cultivated with plantains.

Transportation of work force and planting materials. Plants Labour Equipment

$ 2,300.

$ 861.42

P.V.3

Erosion right bank of river close to main road

Realignment of stream Plant adaptable species of Gliricidia

Transportation of work force and planting materials. Plants Labour Equipment

$2,000 $749.06

P.V.4

River bank erosion

Fruit tree cultivation Replanting riparian zones

Farmer Selected Fruits

Transportation of work force and planting materials. Plants Labour Equipment

$ 1,200 $449.44

P.V.5

Blocking of main stream.

Changed water course due to blockage

Realignment of water course Replanting riparian zones

Plant adaptable species of Gliricidia

Realignment, Labour Removal of logs

$61,000 $22,846.44

P.V. 6;7;8

Erosion of river bank

River bank stabilization Establishment of demonstration plot. Removal of wood debris and boulder from river

Plant adaptable species of Gliricidia

Transportation of work force and planting materials. Plants Labour Equipment

$16,450 $6,161.05

P.V.9

Land erosion

Farmer required carrying out soil and water conservation measures. Practice of contour farming.

Farmer recommended to grow 1 acre of fruit trees

Planting materials. Plants transport, Labour Equipment

$5,400 $2,022.47

75

P.V.10

Indiscriminate dumping of molasses waste into the mouth of river

Enforcement of Waste Management Act #31 of 2000 and Environmental Health Services Act #14 of 1991.

The possibility exists to collaborate with the investors to establish a more modern method of treatment and disposal of waste.

Storage tanks Labour Pipes Pumps

$50,000 $18,726.59

Figure 11: Map of all Georgetown Watershed and Data

76

Table 18: Watershed Assessment of Jennings: (J.W)

CODE Hot Spots Mitigation Strategy COMMENTS Work Break

down COSTS

(EC)$ (US)$

J.W. 1

Piggery disposes waste directly into stream at high areas of water catchment.

Relocation of piggery. Enforcement of Environmental Health Services Act #14 of 1991

Education programme by MAFF on Environmental conservation and Good Agricultural Practices

Education and Training

$1,200 $449.44

J.W. (General Area)

Deposits of logs and boulders throughout the water course

Removal of logs throughout the upper course of the river

Labour Transportation Tools

$4,000 $1,498.13

J.W. (General)

Section of the valley eroded during the flood

River bank stabilization. Thinning of Blue Mahoe plantation.

600ft of riverbank stabilization with gliricidia. 3.5 acres of Blue Mahoe for thinning.

Materials Planting materials Labour Transportation

$6.750. $2,528.09

77

Table 19: Watershed Assessment at Congo Valley: (C.V)

CODE Hot Spots Mitigation Strategy COMMENTS Work Break

down COSTS

(EC)$ (US)$

C.V.1

- Farm eroded from heavy rainfall. - Tree cover

removed on sloped in excess of 65 - 80. Cultivation of root crops results in land slippage and siltation of stream.

- There is the heavy use of weedicide in this upper watershed which will cause the pollution of stream water

Reforestation and agroforestry in the area. Soil and water conservation measures are recommended Appropriate use of fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture

The production of Cocoa and the use of Gliricidia are encouraged. Education programme by MAFF on Environmental Conservation and Good Agricultural Practices

Transportation Planting materials, Labour collecting and preparation of materials, Labour for planting Training.

$10,740 $4,022.47

C.V.2

Pig farm located too close to upper river course. Waste from pigsty flows directly into stream water thus polluting the river.

Enforcement of Waste Management Act #31 of 2000, and the Environmental laws. Relocation of pig sty

Education and training needed

$1,200. $449.44

C.V.3

Erosion of farm lands after the blockage of stream caused river to change course and erode top soil.

River bank stabilization Soil and water conservation measures are recommended

Establish 200 ft on the river bank using coconuts. (Farm owned by Carlton Hackshaw

Transportation of plants, collecting plant, preparing plants, labour

$ 5,100.

$ 1,910.11

78

Table 20: Watershed Assessment at Mt. Pleasant (M.P)

CODE Hot Spots Mitigation Strategy COMMENTS Work Break

down COSTS

(EC)$ (US) $

M.P.1

Heavy flow of water caused damages to irrigation system and creating scars on the river bank

Removal of

sediments and logs

to allow water to

flow freely to

provide irrigation

water to farmers

This is a very

costly exercise

and may require

reconstruction of

the catchment

and water

storage for the

irrigation supply.

Building

materials.

Labour,

Transportation,

$12,000 $4,494.38

M.P.2

Bridge was blocked by large logs which caused water to flow on to or near farm lands thus washing away all top soils.

Removal of

sediments and logs

to allow water to

flow freely.

Soil improvement

through natural

inputs of green

manure compost etc.

Water resource

management.

Some

restorative work

was done already

by CWSA.

The replanting of

the riparian zone

is also

recommended.

Selecting

appropriate

plant species,

Transportation,

Labour,

Equipment,

$5,400 $2,022.47

M.P.3.

The blocked bridge caused water to flow on to properties destroying buildings and businesses.

Removal of

sediments and logs

to allow water to

flow freely.

Establishment of

protective measures

Some remedial work was done at this site. Gabion baskets were put in place by the Ministry of Works.

Transportation,

Labour,

Equipment

$3,400 $1,273.41

79

SUMMARY COSTS OF MITIGATION INTERVENTIONS

1.

PERSEVERANCE WATERSHED:-

$51,816.47 (US)

JENNINGS WATERSHED

$4,475.66 (US)

CONJO VALLEY WATERSHED

$6,382.02 (US)

MT PLEASANT WATERSHED

$7,790.26 (US)

Total $70,464.81 (US)