Conservation Law ‘ridiculous’ says premier

| 25/08/2017 | 77 Comments
Cayman News Service

Premier Alden McLaughlin in the LA, 24 August 2017

(CNS): Premier Alden McLaughlin has given a clear indication of just how much his new government will be backtracking on environmental protection when he referred to one section of the National Conservation Law as “ridiculous”. He made it clear Thursday that he would be repealing the section that requires Cabinet to consult the National Conservation Council before a government department embarks on development, especially roads, rolling back the provision that requires as much consideration of the environment as of social, economic and political factors in any development by government.

During parliamentary questions yesterday, Ezzard Miller (North Side) asked what was happening regarding the requests by farmers in his constituency for government to construct farm roads in North Side after the NCC had recommended Cabinet undertake an environmental impact assessment. Miller accused the council of objecting to farmers having farm roads on farm land.

The new planning minister, Joey Hew, said that under section 41 of the law consultation with the council was mandatory. But Miller said Cabinet was required to consult, not accept, the need for an EIA, at which point the premier intervened with a surprising comment about this part of the law, which is intrinsic to the historic legislation that was steered through parliament by the premier’s former Cabinet colleague and major PPM donor, Wayne Panton.

“The government thinks that this… provision, which requires this exercise with respect to EIAs by the NCC with respect to road construction, is quite frankly ridiculous,” he said, as members of the opposition banged the tables in support. “We are in the process of having a review of the conservation law, especially around this area and… my view is we need to swiftly make the necessary amendments to these sorts of impediments to continue the proper development of these islands.”

Miller was clearly delighted with the premier’s u-turn over environmental protection and offered his full support for the removal of this and other parts of the conservation law.

The NCC had recommended the government undertake EIAs regarding the proposed farm roads in North Side for many reasons: the proposed roads are both longer and wider than those originally gazetted, and the land in which the proposed roads go through is pristine habitat and in some cases home to many of Cayman’s endangered and vulnerable flora and fauna.

But in addition in its submissions to the NCC, the Department of Environment had made it clear that the roads proposal was being made in the absence of any plan, context or justification. They recommended an EIA so that government could examine all aspects of the benefits of constructing the roads versus the potential costs to the environment, as well as the public purse. The DoE explained that the EIA could also help find a less damaging alternative to the proposal via a different or shorter route.

However, the premier’s indication that this administration will abandon this legal requirement to ensure that pristine habitat is only destroyed for road construction when absolutely necessary will be a retrograde step for conservation, giving government a green light on roads without having to justify the need for more tarmac at the expense of the country’s natural resources.

But things got even worse for the environment as Thursday progressed, after lawmakers also accepted a part of Miller’s long-standing private member’s motion asking government to change the customs law to increase the amount of cigarettes and alcohol and the value of goods that Caymanians can bring home from an overseas trip.

Miller had added another request, asking government to change the law and pave the way for the importation of spearguns and parts for Caymanians, which government accepted. Although, the premier rejected a change to the duty-free personal allowances, he said government would make the changes to the law over spearguns.

Marine conservationists are likely to be dismayed by the decision, as speargun fishing remains one of the major threats to the marine habitat because of the quantity of fish poachers can take with that equipment.

During the exchanges between government and Miller over these issues relating to the conservation law, the minister who now has responsibility for the environment, Dwayne Seymour, remained silent, failing to go out to bat for conservation and making it clear that the absence of Panton is likely to see a complete roll-back on the commitment government had to making the hard decisions against populist sentiment in order to protect the natural habitat.

See: DoE takes aim at arbitrary road plans

Tags: , , , , ,

Category: Land Habitat, Laws, Politics, Science & Nature

Comments (77)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    This news saddens me greatly as a young Caymanian, that grew up loving the amazing natural habitats of these islands. Mr. Panton worked so hard to preserve those invaluable natural resources that sustain our islands, for generations to come. I was very upset when he lost his seat and the opportunity for him to continue contributing to these islands. Now because it doesn’t suit their agenda to build some roads ( that could potential harm some of the last untouched natural habitats of these islands) they want to tear down the progress made for some farm roads?!?!? Now please don’t misunderstand, local agriculture is important in its own right and local farmers deserve our support. My family buy from the farmers market by the cricket pitch weekly. But I just don’t think the potential loss of the environment vs the benefit to the farmers is worth it. It needs to be fully investigated in my opinion




    4



    1
  2. R. says:

    Dwayne keeping silent was not a “failure”, because he’s smart enough to not support the current protocol either.

    That section of the law needs to go because all the NCC does is nitpick and outright prevent progress.

    As if the members of the NCC didn’t have to clear “pristine habitat” to build their homes.




    6



    8
  3. Anonymous says:

    “I love Cayman. In fact, I don’t think I’ve been away from Cayman for any longer than two weeks at a time.”
    – Premier Alden McLaughlin

    (SMMFH: Yes, it definitely shows.)

    Education is nothing without exposure, context, and perspective.

    – Whodatis




    16



    6
  4. Rick Berns says:

    Everything about this ‘Premier’ makes me despise politicians. If this was so ridiculous, then why did we not hear about it in the recent elections? And there is no indication that he intends to consult the people before chopping up the country on a whim. The government is exactly the entity that needs brakes put on them re any development. He has no respect for the people of this country at all!




    14



    3
  5. Anonymous says:

    Just let Dart and Imperalto decides if it ridiculous! They are benefactors. You and MOE haven’t got a clue!




    9



    2
  6. Sharkey says:

    I have read all the comments on this subject , and see that there’s a lot of people who understands that we must have a healthy sustainable Environment and what Mr Premier wants NOW would destroy it immediately.

    I say instead of commenting , take your message to him in another form if you really mean what everyone is expressing in you comments .

    I say at this point that we the people have to save the Environment , because the Premier has made his decision publicly known what his intentions are .




    18



    5
  7. Anonymous says:

    A spineless politician that kneels before big money. How f*#%##* original.




    19



    3
  8. Anonymous says:

    Our Tourism numbers grow because they come here to see the environment, not the pretty buildings along seven mile beach. Can’t believe this dude, so ridiculous! It’s our most precious resource.




    28



    3
  9. Concrete jungle bunny. says:

    Hopefully the FCO will be notified and have some say in this matter which is a concern for MOST residents of this island.
    Failing that, I’m afraid that Alden and his band of merry men will lead us into the asphalt and concrete jungle that they so desire.
    CNS maybe you can get maps of these proposed “farm roads” which will show that they have nothing at all to do with farming and also make sure to show who owns the land where they are proposed to go and then people will get the TRUE picture.




    19



    3
    • Anonymous says:

      When the FCO speaks to the discrimination against locals in the workforce and generally in society as it concerns upward mobility – we may consider regarding them as a relevant or concerned entity.

      Or if it speaks to the destructive policies that import poverty as well as diminish the once vibrant Cayman middle class then we may bother to pay them some attention.

      However, for some strange reason they are eerily silent on the growing inequality in Cayman as they monitor and ensure “good governance” therein.
      One can only assume they support these societal changes.

      – Whodatis




      1



      2
  10. Anonymous says:

    This isn’t about Ezzards so called ‘farm roads’ it’s about Ezzards wish to build across the Central Mangrove and create his link road between NS and BT.
    Remember, the DOE are dead set against the idea, this is Ezzard and Aldens deal to prop up this lame government with a clear bribe and every right thinking person on this island should protest at the massive destruction to the wetlands that will follow and the loss of natural hurricane protection that the mangroves offer us. Don’t be fooled by the pathetic farm roads idea, after all it was apparently Ezzard who had the highly dangerous and unused channels cut into the reef on NS for his ‘fishermen’ in years past. If farmers want roads on private land let them apply and pay like everyone else instead of Ezzard constantly using public funds to buy his votes at church. I wonder how much of this land that Miller wants for roads is his or family?
    This new policy is unconstitutional at best and corrupt at its worst, perhaps less blinkered Caymanians should lobby the Governor and the UK to stop this foolishness and environmental vandalism.




    23



    3
    • Anonymous says:

      Anon 8:58. This is one of the dumbest posts I see on this subject. Your obvious hate for Ezzard is not shrouded by the nonsense you are spewing on tis subject.

      Your ignorance of how laws work is showing or maybe you just want to spew misinformation on CNS and walk away patting yourself on the back.

      The inland farm in North Side exists and is owned by North Siders who need access, this is an easily proven fact, there is no request to join Bodden Town and North Side on the table with Government.

      Nothing that Alden or Ezzard does with the conservation law will affect the requirements of the law now in existence with regards to these roads. Even is Alden changes the law or discards it, government still has to comply with the law that exists today including EIA, value for money and consideration of the environment by the new Conservation Board.

      Alden CANNOT make, change or discard laws retroactively so everything that Panton put in place in the existing law will have to be applied to these roads before they can be built.




      1



      10
  11. Anonymous says:

    Spearfishing is not only a threat to the reefs by the quantity of fish taken, but also the damage to the coral it’s self. Go on youtube and spend 10 mins watching spearfishing videos… The coral is damaged for almost every kill the spearfisherman makes in shallow water. The fish run into the reef attached to a cord and the cord snaps off all the coral in the process, then the spearfisherman grabs the reef with his hand to hold himself under while he attempts to retrieve the fish. This is why the reefs in the Florida Keys are a mound of rubble. 100 years of spearfishing has taken it’s toll!




    45



    9
    • Sharkey says:

      You and Youtube are making spearfishing out to be the biggest destroyers of the corals /environment . How come you and YouTube didn’t show video of a dredge and Politicians and Developers completely destroying the corals Environment ?

      I agree that spearfishing is destructive when did irresponsible to the marine conservation /resources , but Youtube is showing a video of an careless lobster poacher using a spear gun .




      4



      4
    • Anonymous says:

      Spearishing is the most selective and enviromental friendly fishing. You have no clue what you’re talking about, go wade in the pool and stop spreading garbage.




      9



      11
      • Anonymous says:

        It might be selective to the responsible spearfishermen but there aren’t too many responsible fishermen on this island. Take the annual snapper spawn for example. We all know Caymanians anchor down in the middle of the spawn and catch snapper by the thousands. Give these same people spearguns and forget about having healthy coral reefs.




        3



        3
    • Anonymous says:

      That’s if you even hit the fish you’re aiming at. It can sometimes take three or four attempts to get the fish on the spear if you are lining it up at or near your breath holding limit.




      4



      3
    • Anonymous says:

      Oh really 7:10 am? I would like you to explain how our marine habitat is benefiting from spearfishing lion fish and not the opposite?

      You know why? Spearfishing is selective and enviromental friendly. You and whoever voted for you are morons.




      5



      0
  12. Sharkey says:

    Mr. Premier , I don’t think that’s the Marine conservation Law is rediculous, I think that it’s the ones who are implementing the Law . I hope that everyone can see that it’s more important to have a good Environment than to have more development today .

    Why does these politicians thinks that it is more necessary to have the Island fully developed today , and not spread out over a 50 years plan . Is it because , see how I got the Island developed attitude . And I have to do and get while I can . One thing to remember that after you destroy the Environment it’s gone and you can’t get it back

    I would say what is needed to be done is to have the Marine conservation Laws implemented and enforced , not repealed to suit greedy destructive agendas.

    As I see the state of the Islands and what is going on the Island, I think that there’s more important issues that needs to be addressed than repealing Marine conservation Laws .

    Leave that in place and consider fixing the dump , and crime , and Healthcare for everyone, and Immigration , that would take care of the next 3 years .




    35



    1
    • Anonymous says:

      It is the National Conservation Law, not the Marine Conservation Law.




      8



      1
    • Sharkey says:

      Now Mr Seymour you have to show us who are the Minister of DOE , because they are showing in this article that you don’t even exist . Let’s hear why you are in favor or opposes the repealing of the Cayman Islands Marine conservation Laws .




      7



      1
  13. Anonymous says:

    Glass houses




    7



    0
  14. Isadorah says:

    I see why there no real punishment for the developer who ripped up the iron shore in north side. If our politicians continue to clear every tree on this island, I suspect we will all soon have to leave our coastal properties and head for higher grounds. We all see through this facade of smoke and mirrors to really go for the kill……this is all about the port. A dream of you build it and they will come. I can see the big sign at the entrance “The Honourable Royal Port of Alden McLaughlin”




    26



    1
    • Anonymous says:

      Who the heck put in the rope for wave runners at the fish market . They are not needed . This beach is designed to swim in without gasoline fumes and the danger of Ingrid run over . The port authority needs act. I doubt they have the beach owner’s permission.




      13



      0
      • Chris Johnson says:

        Do not know who Ingrid is but the operators do not have my permission nor that of the Port Authority just like Thompson next door who has no certificate of occupancy and no TCB licence. No one cares, particularly the CPA, and everyone operating there is above the law. No point in reporting it as the CIG do not want to know about it and certainly have no balls.




        12



        0
  15. Anonymous says:

    This is precisely why you cannot trust the PPM. They crave power, not the national interest. Alden has thrown his biggest supporter under the bus with this doozy. Imagine what he thinks about the rest of us. Alden is not fit to lead and is not worthy of the premiership. He is a national disgrace. He supported this law for his friend’s sake and now effectively kicks him in the teeth. What a guy.
    Methinks this amendment, cloaked as necessary for farm roads access, is to get buy in from the Opposition leader but the real intention is to pave the way for cruise berthing facilities which, without amendment to the law, would destroy countless acres of protected marine park. Treasonous. That’s a word Alden himself is familiar with.




    51



    10
  16. Anonymous says:

    sad times in our beloved isle




    44



    4
  17. Anonymous says:

    As sad as this is, it shouldn’t surprise anyone. This is what you get when Alden is called do-nothing for following the FFR/NCL/any other sensible law, Wayne (environmental champion) drops out, Mac (development champion) comes in, and Ezzard (nationalist champion) takes over the opposition. What all except Wayne appear to be misunderstanding, is that it is not anti-Caymanian or anti-prosperity to preserve the Caymanian birthright and primary driver of tourism: our environment.




    55



    5
  18. Woah is me says:

    The silence from our current minister of environment Mr. Jon Jon Seymour is deafening. Does he even have an opinion or is he just along for the ride.? What a mess we have for a government now. God help us all.!!!




    72



    7
  19. Anonymous says:

    Private roads on private land for private use and who should build and pay for them?




    33



    2
  20. nickcayman says:

    It is time for a study to be donelocally, researching the financial benefits of ecosystem services to the economy. The outcome may surprise many.

    Accounting for Nature’s Benefits: The Dollar Value of Ecosystem Services

    Healthy ecosystems provide us with fertile soil, clean water, timber, and food. They reduce the spread of diseases. They protect against flooding. Worldwide, they regulate atmospheric concentrations of oxygen and carbon dioxide. They moderate climate. Without these and other “ecosystem services,” we’d all perish.

    One hallmark of the history of civilization is an ever-increasing exploitation of ecosystem services coupled with substitution of technology for these services, particularly where ecosystems have been exploited beyond their ability to provide. Agriculture is a hybrid of exploitation and substitution that enabled people to live in greater, denser populations that drove further exploitation and substitution. Modern plumbing made close quarters far less noxious but led to exploitation of ecosystems’ ability to break down sewage, and to substitution with expensive sewage treatment technologies. Exploitation of fossil fuels led to a slew of modern conveniences, including fishing fleets that are so effective at catching their prey that they threaten fisheries globally. All this exploitation strained ecosystems,but in the past, when the population was a fraction of what it is now, these strains were local rather than global phenomena.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3339477/




    29



    1
  21. Anonymous says:

    CI Constitution:

    Protection of the environment

    18.—(1) Government shall, in all its decisions, have due regard to the need to foster and protect an environment that is not harmful to the health or well-being of present and future generations, while promoting justifiable economic and social development.

    (2) To this end government should adopt reasonable legislative and other measures to protect the heritage and wildlife and the land and sea biodiversity of the Cayman Islands that—

    (a) limit pollution and ecological degradation;
    (b) promote conservation and biodiversity; and
    (c) secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources.




    44



    1
  22. Anonymous says:

    Idiots!!!😣




    32



    1
  23. Anonymous says:

    Lookya now!! What a tangle web we weave when first we practice to deceive.




    20



    0
  24. Anonymous says:

    Backwards greedy people being backwards and greedy. Time for the Governor and London to step in is not far away.




    37



    4
  25. Anonymous says:

    Wayne Panton must be so happy with his Party – go PPm




    25



    3
  26. Anonymous says:

    Wait wait wait…. didn’t Alden and crew pass this law? And if they weren’t the govt in charge at the time did they disagree with this point then. BUT it is fact that Alden spearheaded the constitutional effort which included a right to environment in the bill of rights which is designed to force govt to consider environmental impact on the same level as economic and social impact! So the law is based on the constitution and as far as I am concerned the proposed change would be unconstitutional. But of course Alden forgets about key aspects of the constitution he championed when it suits him. Pure hypocrisy and this time putting the beauty and future sustainability of the country at risk.




    89



    6
    • Anonymous says:

      Bouy, the Premier and Wayne broke up on election night in May, now looks like the divorce is now final. Always heard that the Premier never thinks of anyone besides himself but really thought that Weenie was his golden boy. Guess I was wrong again.




      28



      2
  27. Anonymous says:

    caymankind???




    18



    13
  28. Anonymous says:

    The Environmental Charter between the UK and its overseas territories commits the Cayman Islands to conservation actions. The 2012 White Paper recognised that tourism is a major part of the economy of most Territories. “It is important to develop this industry but also to consider carefully the environmental impact of proposed development so that the coasts, seas and wildlife that attract tourists are not damaged”.

    If Alden and Cabinet cronies think that bypassing an accountable and transparent vetting of environmental priorities leads to more expedient results, then they should expect another beach landing demonstration at Governor’s, only this time, it will be a more weapons-hot scenario.

    http://www.ukotcf.org/pdf/charters/cayman.pdf

    I hope that the DOE and National Trust are informing the FCO of this dangerous shift in territorial policy, clearly to politically appease and silence the defacto leader of Opposition.




    64



    10
  29. Ex PPM supporter says:

    The Premier has just confirmed that he was never in support of the NCL which was passed by his previous govt under the stewardship of Minister Panton. He should be ashamed of himself and hang his head in shame. Seems like he will do anything to maintain power, including destroying the environment of our country. He really is now demonstrating the real looser that he is.!!




    90



    8
    • Anonymous says:

      Not a loser – just a sensible, practical statesman. How can the farmers in North Side or anywhere else farm on their land if they cannot get to it? The Govt. is encouraging increased farming so where will the farming actually take place if not on the farmers’ land? In the sky? Yeah! Sky farming for Cayman!




      16



      34
      • Ching ching says:

        How long will it be before they will be building homes on the farm land. No roads no homes




        17



        1
      • Anonymous says:

        Nobody has said they can’t build the roads, just that there needs to be an appropriate plan – i.e. if these roads are traversing the critical central mangrove wetland we’ve all read about, there needs to be some consideration for the life already situated there. It might mean a few culverts or a slightly different, and perhaps more expensive construction method than simply piling aggregate – as would be the norm. It’s also possible that piled aggregate won’t hold in wetland or may dissolve by liquifaction in an earthquake – and that taking the shortcut of planning badly will wind up costing more to the public purse, perhaps even in the short term. This stance is consistent with leader with a history of planning badly and I told you so’s. I hope that the National Trust will issue an injection against the lazy cancellation of environmental due process.




        4



        0
      • Anonymous says:

        Statesman? You are F…..ing kidding me! All the hallmarks of a double talking tyrant!




        5



        0
      • Anonymous says:

        They can have roads, if they pay for them. Private land, private business, private roads and private finance.




        3



        1
    • M McLaughlin says:

      To simple put it, they dont have no spines.




      2



      0
    • Sharkey says:

      1:08pm , you put it very politely.




      0



      0
  30. Anonymous says:

    Great news, thank you mr. premier




    19



    78
  31. Anonymous says:

    What a pathetically blinkered point of view.




    57



    6
  32. Gt Voter says:

    Couldn’t government easily hire and retain employees with expertise in undertaking EIAs?

    That way whenever one is deemed necessary, public funds need not be spent on external consultants.




    25



    7
    • Anonymous says:

      But they don’t even want to do that. This is basically saying that environmental (and social and economic, the other two legs of a good EIA) considerations are unnecessary for ‘proper’ development. – The question is then, how do you know its proper if you didn’t check before approving it?

      Or this is just Ezzard being played to help the Govt. get its Port without needing to actually consider how their going to pay for it, much less the environmental cost.




      36



      1
  33. Veritas says:

    I suppose the Premier’s logic is carry on as he says and soon we won’t have a problem as all our pristine natural woodland and other habitat will be under layers of hot mix. His head in the sand approach is rivalled only by the member for North Side. Maybe they should take a trip to some civlised countries to see what preservation has achieved, for soon we will have nothing left except for a few acres preserved through the efforts of the National Trust and their largely expatriate supporters.




    70



    5
  34. Anonymous says:

    Um, Alden…I am not sure we should import more spear guns as it appears you would be using one of them to continue shooting yourself in both feet.




    58



    2
    • Anonymous says:

      On this one I assume he means for those grandfathered in who already have a licence. The ability to import new, safe parts is integral. It is far easier to catch what you will eat by means of a speargun than line. So limit the catch.




      10



      3
  35. Anonymous says:

    “They paved paradise and put up a parking lot”




    54



    1
  36. Anonymous says:

    He’s an idiot! Plain and simple! Not fit to lead.




    51



    10
  37. Anonymous says:

    A bit bias article CNS. There won’t be a complete rollback of the Conservation Law. The Premier stated that there were specific areas which were ridiculous.

    While I understand that everyone is pushing their own agenda, please let’s not jump off the deep end with the ‘sky is falling ‘ hysterics.

    The NCL has many safeguards, which will still ensure that the entire island isn’t mowed down for development. The law needs to be amended!!! And it will be!!!




    17



    45
    • Anonymous says:

      Exactly! He was specific. In particular when it comes to building roads. Every “expert” on this site will be complaining about traffic next week, when school starts back.

      The only way that we are going to keep this environment pristine , is to limit the influx of people wanting to move here.

      What you newcomers got to say about that?! I bet you all aren’t willing to leave the land of milk and honey!!

      Allow the farmers go build their roads to their land. Not one person on this island don’t eat food!!!! Hypocrites.




      4



      8
      • Anonymous says:

        Good point, so take all the hire cars off the roads, limit tourism and stop foreign property ownership so that the disproportionate number of foreign owned rental properties are redundant. That in turn will see a decline in tourist numbers, a collapse in the property market and huge numbers of Caymanians out of work.
        What an economic genius you are.
        Why don’t you plan and implement a cohesive and credible public transport system with ferries, regulated taxis, larger public busses that have competent drivers and scheduled routes and times, why don’t you look further than your nose to realise that the problems come from the ineptitude, self interest and the greed of many Caymanians not the foreign investors, workers and tourists that keep this island financially afloat.




        3



        2
    • Anonymous says:

      Ridiculous? Them how come this provision was included in the law after more than a decade of debate, acceptance of numerous changes proposed by the.opposition, and finally voted for unanimously by Legislative Assembly. If it is indeed ridiculous then it is our legislators that deserve ridicule.




      11



      2
  38. Anonymous says:

    Thank God this premier has the common sense to not put in the eco wackjobs as the authority whether a infrastructure program is allowed to proceed or not.




    13



    54
  39. Anonymous says:

    So Wayne was the only one keeping him in check in regards to the environment. No wonder he’s happy with Dwayne and Capt. Eugene in charge of the subject. SMH.




    45



    6
  40. Anonymous says:

    You are ridiculous!!! Over development is a real threat in these islands. Get a grip Mr. Premier. Real quick.




    60



    5
  41. Anonymous says:

    This is horrifying… but no surprise really! The gov’t could give a rat’s behind about our environment- i.e. recycling; so why would they care about paving new roads and destroying our natural resources and endangering the wildlife!?? Shame shame shame!!!!

    Gov’t should be working on how to change laws which would require ALL restaurants, bars, hotels, schools & condos to provide proper recycling of all materials. This would then provide tons of new jobs for locals to process and pick up the recyclable items. It really is that simple, is it not? But noooo, instead they just say that environmental conservation is “ridiculous”— I think the Premier is RIDICULOUS!!!




    83



    17
    • Al Catraz says:

      What makes you believe that recycling in Cayman would be a net environmental gain?

      Let’s take bottles and cans… there are no facilities in Cayman to recycle these materials, nor is there any manufacturing facility in Cayman with use for these materials. The recycling process (i.e. to melt glass or metal) requires a significant energy input. That makes sense in places where there is significant hydro electricity, but electricity in Cayman is generated primarily by burning diesel. So, as far as recycling on-island, there is no reason to ship in and burn additional diesel in order to process materials for which there is no on-island use.

      The only thing that can be done with collected recyclables is to ship them off island to somewhere else. Most “somewhere elses” that can receive these materials are significant distances from Cayman, so you have the added fuel and transport losses for what amounts to a ridiculously small material stream for “somewhere else” to bother with it.

      Recycling makes sense in places with an industrial economy in the first place, but not so much sense for a non-industrial economy hundreds of miles from anywhere else, requiring ocean transport to move the raw material off island.




      2



      10
      • Anonymous says:

        they need to MAKE the facilities! There’s no excuse for not having proper ways to recycle HERE! This is 2017 for crying out loud! So you think we should all just say F it and toss everything into the land fill forever????? Foolishness! Negativity running rampant– I hope you don’t have children! If everyone thought like you, the Earth would be a disaster, with wildlife becoming extinct faster and more and more cancer cases in younger and younger people…. it’s ALL related- and it’s our job to be environmentally responsible however we can!

        When was the last time you walked the beach at Barkers, or anywhere really… didn’t find mountains of trash, most that can be recycled?




        0



        0
    • Anonymous says:

      hahah!! who thinks this comment is BAD? Seriously? Suggesting the gov’t hold hotels, bars, etc accountable for being environmentally conscious is a BAD thing? Wow- that’s SAD! Or was it the part about calling the Premier RIDICULOUS? ppssttt-




      7



      2

Please include your email address in the form below if you are using your real name. You can use a pseudonym, with or without leaving an email address, or just leave the form blank to be "Anonymous". All comments will be moderated before they are published. Please read the CNS Comment Policy at the top of this page.