Divided by Sugar
Category: Kenya, Sugar, Tana Delta, Wetlands, Wildlife | Date: May 28 2008 | By: thewaterhole
Our wetlands team consisting of EAWLS and the Kenya Wetlands Forum (KWF) members came in from the field the other day after attending NEMA’s public hearings on the Tana Integrated Sugar Project (TISP) between 6 and 8 May 2007, and a monitoring trip to the Lake Jipe Projects Cluster in Taita-Taveta District on 12 to 17 May 2008. I will tell you what happened at the Delta first since this is a hot topic. Forgive the bad pictures.
As I have mentioned before, NEMA held 3 public hearings on the TISP on 6, 7 and 8 May 2008. The hearings - I have since learnt - were held at Danisa and Golbanti villages in Tana River District and at Witu Trading Center in Lamu District.
Our team consisting of EAWLS Deputy Director, Hadley Becha, George Wamukoya and Jael Ludeki of CREEL, Willy sabila of the Kenya Lands Alliance (KLA), and Phylis Gichuhi, Mary Nyumu and Benson Vidambu of EAWLS was accompanied by Bardale Tapata (KWS Honorary Warden) and Ali Shekue, the chair of Coast Fisher Folk Association.
On Monday, 5 May the team converged at Malindi and strategized on their onslaught at the project proponent and the EIA lead agencies. They also met with community leaders to gauge their preparedness for the big days to come. Some 2 weeks earlier, the KLA had performed a pre-hearing community sensitisation and preparation at Danisa Village and the Monday meeting was thus used to tie up some loose ends.
NEMA Director for Compliance and Enforcement addressing the crowd
The next day was NEMA the first day of the hearing. The gods must have been mad at NEMA since that morning a heavy downpour bathed Danisa village - the first venue - with a vengeance causing a lengthy delay in the commencement of the hearings. Just when the rain had stopped and the meeting started, a large group of pro-sugar folk inundated the village grounds. They were carrying sugarcane stalks that they were planting all over the place while chanting pro-sugar songs. The commotion disrupted the meeting and angered the pastoralists who proceeded to stage a walk-out from the meeting.
Pro-sugar youth standing in floodwater after the downpour
NEMA was on the verge of calling off the meeting but carried on until, after two agonising hours, the pastoralists started trickling back into the village square. This time though - much to the chagrin of the pro-sugar folk - they came in the company of a large contingent of sheep, goats and cattle. A stifling blanket of tension descended upon an already overcast day.
Pastoralists bring in the livestock in retaliation
Hell-bent on fulfilling their legal obligation - pursuant to Regulation 22 of the EIA/EA Regulations of 2003 - NEMA doggedly carried on with the hearings amidst much heckling and shoving.
Both pro- and anti-sugar groups presented their perspectives, opinions and positions. Clearly - in the assessment of our team - those opposed to the project presented a strong case while the pro-sugar group monotonously went on about employment creation and infrastructure development.
The anti-sugar group clearly presented their concern over land tenure and ownership rights, loss of life supporting and livelihood systems (mostly for pastoralists and fisher folk), forceful relocation, loss of wildlife and other biodiversity and water resources, salt water intrusion, loss of pasture lands, pollution, potential for volatile conflict between resource users, and human wildlife conflict among other concerns.
The meeting at Danisa was the most explosive although the other two meetings were not without their fair share of theatrics. I will update you on what went on at Golbanti and Witu in the next post.
Shenanigans at the Delta
Category: Community, Kenya, Sugar, Tana Delta, Wetlands, Wildlife | Date: May 08 2008 | By: admin
Yesterday was the second day of the NEMA public hearings at the Tana Delta and as expected the villagers turned out in large numbers to voice their concerns. It is important, however, to note that not all villagers are against the Tana Integrated Sugar Project.
Take the events of yesterday for instance. Pastoralists came out with their goats and sheep to the meeting and carrying placards and uprooted sugarcane. They were not just going to use their voice to talk down the project. They were going to show the experts that their livestock is in danger. There was quite a fiasco when they started chanting protests and planting and uprooting sugarcane stalks (it looked quite comical on TV, i might say). Apparently, based on a report in the Daily Nation newspaper, they pulled the same stunts on the first day of the protest (Tuesday) much to the chagrin of the crop farmers.
The farmers, as I have said before, are largely supportive of the project. They are looking at the opportunity to supply sugarcane to the sugar factory as out-growers. About 10,000 acres of land has been promised to them under the out-grower scheme. The EAWLS and other conservationists are however gaining ground in their campaign to get the support of this crucial group. They have been providing factual information about the irreparable harm that this project could visit on the Delta.
The out-grower scheme and the said 20,000 jobs that the project has promised are being used as bait to lure the community to accept it. Project proponents know that it does not stand a chance in environmental terms and they are therefore employing cheap tactics - in the guise of socio-economic benefits - to lure the local people into their trap. It would be important to note that a sugar project in Ramisi (in Kwale District further south) also in the Kenya coast is not doing very well either. How dumb can people be? If Ramisi didn’t work, how do hey expect Tana to work?
Maybe an excerpt from an article published in the Sunday Standard a year ago will tell you how Ramisi fares these days:
Piles of concrete rubble spread for hundreds of metres, accentuated by large pillars sticking out as if in defiant mockery. Giant rats, baboons and monkeys fight for the wild berries growing in the compound, and a plantation of blooming cashew nut trees and coconut palms may be harvested by any passer-by.
Ramisi has been dead since 1987 (in the end, i think nature won). By the way, almost all state sugar plants have had to be bailed out by the government at one point or the other after digging themselves into a financial rut. Now they tell us the Tana Sugar will flourish.
The pastoralists are of course not amused. They are more than 20,000 hectares of their seasonal grazing land. They say that their animals will die when the dry season comes. From an environmental perspective, pastoralism is more eco-friendly and that would explain why we are sympathetic to the pastoralists cause. The Masai Mara is among the most spectacular wildlife areas because - on the large part - the Maasai are pastoralists. Somebody convince me that growing wheat (which is the ideal crop for the area) in the Mara - if it came to that - would make more economic sense than tourism and I will call him/her a blatant liar.
The environmentalists who are following the proceedings down at the Delta are using all opportunities to fight this monster both for the sake of the environment and for the sake of the community. Although crop farmers may see the immediate economic benefits, they need to be told that environmental damage arising from the project will in the long run affect the productivity of their land. Their yields of food-crops will definitely decline.
Today is the last day of the hearings and in two weeks NEMA will make a decision on whether the project is to be given a clean bill of environmental health or not
Lets wait and see.
Tana Sugar: It’s Illegal & Uneconomical, says new study
Category: Community, Kenya, Sugar, Tana Delta, Wetlands | Date: May 05 2008 | By: admin
As NEMA gears up for the three public hearings on the proposed Tana Integrated Sugar Project, a new report by Nature Kenya has revealed that not only will the project contravene some laws, but it also does not make economic sence.
According to Nature Kenya, Mumias Sugar Company (project proponent) says that they will be making KShs 151-million (US$ 2.5-million) each year for the next 20 years. This figure, however is incorrect since they have not factored in such costs as fees for water use, compensation for lost livelihoods, chemical pollution and loss of tourism and wildlife which would give the true cost of the project. The report says that if these costs were included, the project would make as little as US$ 790,000 per annum. This according to them is a total waste of a rich resource that already makes US$ 60-million from tourism, farming (livestock), fisheries and other incomes.
In light of this report, Nature Kenya strongly recommends that the project be abandoned altogether. We hope with such convincing evidence against the project, the TISP will not be allowed to go on. We hope that Nature Kenya will join our own Wetlands team right now headed for the Delta to try and convince NEMA that the project cant go on when the public hearings start tomorrow (May 6).
A summary of key issues discussed in the report can be found here
Tana Sugar: EIA License Not Issued Yet
Category: Kenya, Legislation, Policy, Tana Delta, Wetlands | Date: Apr 28 2008 | By: admin
In keeping with our battle to save the Tana Delta from impending anihillation by the Sugar Project we sought to get clarification on whether Mumias Sugar Company had been issued with an Environmantal Impact Assessment License (EIA License) which would then mean that they can proceed with the project. To do this our Executive Director, Ali Kaka, wrote to the Director General of the National Environmental Management Agency (DG-NEMA), Dr Muusya Mwinzi on 11 April 2008 seeking to hear directly from the DG-NEMA about the EIA.
Previously, there was inside information that the Technical Committee had recommended that the said license be granted. Our Director thus sought to get this - so to say - from the horses mouth.
NEMA has just responded (with a letter dated 23 April 2008) saying that the license has not been issued yet given that they have not held any of the mandatory public hearings for the contested EIA report. According to their letter, NEMA is currently organizing three public hearings in the Tana Delta, “the proceedings of which will provide further guidance to the Authority”. Their letter also tells us that the dates and venues of the hearings will be publicized at least one week prior to the meeting by a notice in a daily newspaper, and by at least two announcements in the local language of the community and the national language through radio with nationwide coverage. Kenya’s national Environmental Management and Conservation Act (EMCA) requires that the above hearings and announcements be done (vide Regulation 22 of the EIA/EA Regulations, 2003).
Read the letter here
EAWLS will definitely be represented in the public hearings when they are announced and will go down to the Delta before the dates of the meetings to mobilize the community to come out in large numbers and speak their mind. This mobilization is of course in the docket of the EAWLS Wetlands Programme.
The Wetlands Programme has been facing an uphill task of trying to convince the government and the public that wetlands are not wastelands that should be rehabilitated and converted for productive activities (such as large scale agriculture). Wetlands, we have been telling government, are among the most productive ecosystems that need to be preserved.
The programme is making progress even with their limited financial resources but with more support from you, we can can score greater victories for our wetlands. Our wetlands are not only important for us. They are also important for you. We therefore call upon you once again to support the work of this very important programme by making donations.
-
100% of your donation, minus a small bank fee, will go to your intended purpose.
Donations made here are safe.
-
Donations Received
- Feb 1st Theresa S. USD50.00
- Nov 11th Charles T. USD50.00