Dredging and CCM Spin

By James Milnes Gaskell

However John Yearwood and I learned that Island Dredging Ltd., then in St. Kitts had been contracted by Four Seasons to dredge from the sand bar that lies 2-300 yards off the Northern part of Pinneys. Reducing the size of this natural barrier against the sea would, we thought, increase the chance of erosion on the beaches along that coast.  We were advised to take out a private prosecution against the dredging company. Our objective was to show that dredging from the sandbar, because it was a natural barrier against the sea, was unlawful. It was not to prevent dredging, per se, and what is called renourishing the beach, but it was to demonstrate that dredging, to be lawful, must not destroy or diminish the effectiveness of a natural barrier against the sea. I shall go into a little more detail shortly.  But first I must comment on the CCM propaganda machine’s version of these events. Their spin is that two political mischief makers, Gaskell and Yearwood, tried to stop the re-opening of the Four Seasons Hotel during the time CCM was in power, and furthermore these spinners of the facts ask why is it that these two persons are not now trying during the current NRP Government’s time in office to stop the latest dredging? This CCM story bears no relation to the facts or to the motives of Gaskell and Yearwood and is invented in order to try to discredit the two of us in the eyes of fellow Nevisians. It is defamatory. It is known in this year of 2010 that Gaskell writes from time to time in the newspapers and that some of these articles have not reflected credit upon the previous (CCM) Administration, and that Alastair Yearwood is involved in the current NRP Administration.

Until 2002, when I wrote about The Privy Council, I had had only one article published, which was about Environmental Impact Assessments, and had ended ‘I want to be able to support our leaders, whoever they, are in their environmental judgements…’. In 2000 I was a hotel owner and in no way a political activist for any party. No one could have known if I had any political sympathies or what they might have been. Alastair Yearwood may have his NRP connections in 2010, but the Yearwood who joined with me in the dredging case in 2000 was not Alastair but John, the hotelier, not the NRP activist.  The CCM spin is to claim that two NRP sympathisers were acting in bad faith against four Seasons, the CCM Administration and the best interests of the Nevis people. Rubbish.

When John told me in about July 2000 of the plan to dredge the sandbar, I looked at the relevant law, and found that in ‘The National Conservation and Environment Protection Act” is stated at S.26
‘No person shall:
(a) remove or assist in the removing of any natural barrier against the sea…
And at  S.32
‘Any person who:
(a) removes any natural barrier against the sea…. is guilty of an offence’.

We then proceeded to try by persuasion to have the dredging site changed.  We wrote to the Four Seasons’ Directors in Canada, their Manager in Nevis, the Premier Mr. Amory, Dr. Asim Martin, the Federal Minister with responsibility for the environment, The Labour Spokesman, The Democrat, the Observer.  We contacted experts and read books and articles on coastal defences.   Our attempts at persuasion were ineffective.  In a letter to me, in August 2002, Dr. Martin said:
‘…May I remind you that if you are satisfied that an offence has been committed by the Four Seasons or its contractors under the National Conservation and Environment Act 1987 Section 32, then may I advise that it is open to you to bring a private prosecution against the offending parties’.

We were not alone in our attempts to persuade or oblige the Four Seasons to act like a responsible corporate citizen, the Chairman of the Public and Private Sector Committee had written to the Secretary to the Cabinet – Nevis:
‘… It is our considered opinion that this protective sandbar should not be removed or tampered with in any way…’
The late Calvin Howell of the Caribbean Conservation Association wrote in the Observer:
‘In the context of the current plan to dredge an existing sandbank which provides protection to the beach against the force of the waves, the wisdom of such action is not only questionable but is rendered illegal according to S.26…’

One of my letters to the Press in August 2000 ended ‘…We all want Four Seasons back in business yesterday, but we are distressed that a satisfactory scheme, environmentally sound, has not been put before the public…’

I did my own enquiries about the availability of inland sand from Barbuda.  Four Seasons was not interested.  I commented in a letter to the Press in September 2000 that Dr. Gillian Cambers of the University of Puerto Rico in her book ‘Coping with Beach Erosion’ wrote ‘…several factors should be considered in determining the feasibility and design of a beach nourishment operation.  These include…
Sand Source.  Sand in shallow waters close to the beach … should not be disturbed.  Sand found at depths of 49 – 131 feet is generally the best source since it lies beyond the natural beach sand replacement system and is relatively easy to dredge.’

The dredging for the Resort, I wrote, is taking place close to the shore and at a depth of 10-12 feet.

Persuasion having failed, we launched a private prosecution of Island Dredging Ltd.  We got to Court in October 2000 (Hearing adjourned).  At that time John wrote in the Observer
‘…Now that the dredging seems to have been completed why are we continuing with the case?  The answer is that the dredging is not over.  The famous Cap Julucca hotel in Anguilla has had to dredge back its beach three times already in this decade.  The next hurricane to hit Nevis will remove more sand from the Four Seasons beach despite their rock barrier and they will want to dredge again…That is why we must establish through the Court system, once and for all, that the sandbar that lies off the Northern section of Pinneys Beach is in fact ‘a natural barrier against the sea’ and that any attempt to remove it is a criminal act.’ Remember that the CCM spin is that Gaskell & Yearwood went to court to prevent Four Seasons from reopening, but the fact is that by the time of the first intended hearing date the dredging was over.

Our case was heard before the Magistrate on December 7th, 2000.  Our expert witness Dr. Robert Young stated that the portion of the sandbar that he had dived upon and inspected had had sand removed and was now a less effective natural barrier against the sea, which increased the risk to the properties behind it.  The Magistrate, in deciding against us said that she thought there was a loophole in the law, as on the strict construction of the Act the offence would not be committed unless the entire sandbar or a substantial part of it was removed.

We appealed to the Court of Appeal.

The three judges unanimously upheld our Appeal and declared that ‘…any removal of material from any natural barrier against the sea which impairs its integrity as a whole and diminishes its effectiveness as a defence or protection to the beach contravenes the aforesaid provision of the Act.

The Appeal is allowed, the matter remitted for further hearing, and the order of the Magistrate set aside.  Costs to the appellant in any event to be assessed by the Magistrate at the conclusion of the case.’

We attempted to continue the case.  We do not know why it was not relisted, but then the Magistrate left Nevis, possibly for about two years for, we gather medical reasons.  On her return we found that Island Dredging Ltd. had left the State, so any further attempt to pursue the case became futile.

There is another CCM spin, that of Ted Hobson who says ‘They went to Court and they lost’.  Well Mr. Ted, in a football match let us say that your team, the blue team is up one goal to none at half time.  By full time their opponents, the green team, have scored 3 goals and the final score is Green 3, Blue 1.  Why do you say Blue has won?

I write to set the record straight, because the tendency is for spin uncontradicted to become the acknowledged account of what actually happened.  This case continues to have relevance, as it has demonstrated the proper interpretation of the law should anyone consider again dredging from a natural barrier against the sea.  It has made it clear to the authorities what is lawful and what may not be where dredging is concerned.

It is up to those authorities, now an NRP Administration, to ensure that the law is not contravened, and up to Four Seasons to act as a responsible corporate citizen.  John Yearwood and I have taken the matter as far as we can in obtaining the Appeal Court ruling. If there is a current plan to dredge from the same natural barrier against the sea, what is the position of the CCM opposition? Are they for it or against it? The law is now clear.

The spin masters should retract their spin, which is a discredit to them, as it shows they have no interest in the truth and no interest in the protection of the beaches of Nevis, which, should they form a government, would be one of their responsibilities.