The Tribune

By LARRY SMITH

A major environmental controversy is playing out on the other side of the globe that, in many ways, mirrors our own experience here.

The big issue is the dredging of waters near Australia’s Great Barrier Reef to facilitate massive coal exports to China and India. This port expansion will result in a huge increase in shipping in the area, not to mention significant additional carbon emissions that are warming the planet.

The Great Barrier Reef stretches over 1,800 miles and is the only living thing on earth that is visible from space. It was discovered by Captain James Cook in 1770 when his ship, Endeavour, ran aground during a scientific voyage.

From the top of a nearby island’s hill, Cook surveyed the scene and wrote in his log: “I discover’d a Reef of Rocks extending in a line North-West and South-East, farther than I could see.”

Today we know that this huge reef complex contains the world’s largest collection of corals, as well as a great diversity of other marine life. This combination attracts over two million visitors a year who generate billions of dollars for the Australian economy. But coal mining and shipping are also big revenue earners.

Most of the reef ecosystem was designated a World Heritage site in 1981. But in a few weeks, members of UNESCO’s world heritage committee will meet to determine whether the Great Barrier Reef should now be listed as being “in danger”.

According to a recent editorial in The Guardian, a British newspaper, “Rising sea temperatures, increasing ocean acidification, swelling numbers of cyclones, pollution problems triggered by fertiliser and sewage run-offs from farms and cities, and damage caused by the development of ports on the east coast of Australia have had a combined and devastating effect on the Great Barrier Reef.”

Marshalling the scientific evidence, the editorial noted that over the past 30 years, the Great Barrier Reef has lost half its coral. “Had the Taj Mahal, another World Heritage site, lost half its structure, there would be no doubt that it would be deemed to be in danger,” The Guardian said.

Closer to home, recent deep dredging off Miami has also led to the destruction of corals in the area. This is not due to the dumping of dredge spoil, just the dredging – and it has occurred in spite of assurances by proponents that protective measures would work.

The Port of Miami is spending over $200m to expand a shipping channel to make room for a new generation of supersize cargo ships that will soon be transiting the Panama Canal. And Fort Lauderdale’s Port Everglades is next. The results are predictable.

According to National Geographic, “Outside Miami’s Biscayne Bay, coral reefs that were once a vivid rainbow have been turned a barren grey, choked in sediment, by a dredging operation run by the US Army Corps of Engineers.”

Reefs around the world have experienced drastic declines as a result of pollution, acidification and overfishing. Higher ocean temperatures, which can bleach coral and kill corals, have also damaged reefs. And recent research has pointed to the impact of overfishing on the planet’s already beleaguered coral reefs, which are some of Earth’s most important nurseries for marine life.

Researchers examined more than 800 reefs in 64 locations around the world and found that 83 per cent had lost more than half of their fish, with most of these losses having occurred since the 1970s. Even when protective measures to control and limit fishing are imposed, it can take up to 60 years for a reef to recover.

“The recent reports from, Australia coupled with the report of reef damage from the Port of Miami dredging, remind us that even with large marine protected areas and regulations, we still are not doing enough to protect the oceans,” University of Miami marine biologist Dr Kathleen Sullivan Sealey told me.

“In The Bahamas, marine protected areas are small, there is no management of coastal pollution and the Department of Marine Resources is under-staffed. Although the Bahamas has spectacular marine waters, it has failed to submit even one World Heritage site to UNESCO that would show we care for and value our marine heritage.”

She said The Bahamas was failing badly in marine conservation: “declining fisheries, marine debris and pollution, along with the loss of coastal wetlands and mangroves show that we have to completely re-think how we approach marine conservation. And every Bahamian needs to think hard about what fish and conch mean to them culturally and economically, as well as ecologically. People make jokes about the oil spills off Clifton like the oil won’t impact their lives or livelihoods, but the oil is a daily poison in the oceans.”

Casuarina McKinney at Bahamas Reef Environmental Educational Foundation agreed. “The Bahamas and Australia have a lot in common regarding coral reefs – importance, threats and conservation efforts. Reefs in both countries provide significant value from ecosystem services such as tourism, fisheries and shoreline protection. And our reefs are facing localised threats from damaging coastal development, habitat destruction, overfishing and land-based pollution, along with impacts from global climate change.”

Two big local examples will suffice to make the point.

At Bimini, the government has given Malaysian conglomerate, Genting, carte blanche to convert the island from a fishing village into a throbbing Miami suburb, bringing hundreds of thousands of gamblers in by cruise ship. To do that, they have built a mini port by dredging through some of the most ecologically valuable reefs in the area – which serve as major tourist attractions and provide important habitat for fish.

There is also talk of destroying what remains of Bimini’s mangrove-lined lagoon to make way for a golf course. The scale and insensitivity of Genting’s Bimini Bay development is astounding, and it is difficult to see how such massive investment in such a small place can be either financially or ecologically sustainable.

Meanwhile, the south coast of New Providence, with its important reefs and dive sites, has faced years of abuse from oil spills, shipping accidents and dredging. The government-operated power plant at Clifton Pier is a major source of pollution for the entire area and a major dredging operation is currently underway at the Coral Harbour Defence Force base that is completely unregulated, with plumes of sediment enveloping the southwest reef.

Coral reefs around the world are now being destroyed at a staggering rate. Some estimates suggest around 600 square miles are lost every year, a rate double that of rainforest destruction.

According to television environmentalist Sir David Attenborough, “reefs provide homes for around a quarter of all marine species. If you want beauty and wildlife, you want a coral reef. Put on a mask and stick your head under the water. The sight is mind-blowing.

“The truth is the natural world is changing. And we are totally dependent on that world. It provides our food, water and air. It is the most precious thing we have and we need to defend it.”

• What do you think? Send comments to lsmith@tribunemedia.net or visit www.bahamapundit.com.

The auditor-general and the politicians

The post of Auditor-General is independent and constitutionally mandated. The Auditor-General is required to audit government departments annually in the interest of safeguarding public funds.

More specifically, the Auditor-General must ensure ...

that all reasonable precautions have been taken to protect the collection of public monies, and that the law relating thereto has been observed;

that all payments are made with proper authority, and are supported by sufficient proof of payment; that all public funds spent are applied to the purposes for which the House of Assembly intended.

Audit reports are submitted to the Speaker of the House of Assembly, who effectively publishes them. And usually, there is a significant time lag between the date of the actual review and the publication of the report.

This makes the information stale news, which suits the government of the day perfectly. The reports are given perfunctory lip service by politicians of all stripes, not to mention the civil servants who are named in them. And there is no follow-up that the public is ever made aware of. Life simply goes on.

In the current circumstance, a special audit report for July 2012 to September 2014 found its way into the public domain relatively early (although the political directorate received it first). This meant that the contents were more relevant to current issues and personalities.

So what was the result?

Well, the two retired politicians who are in charge of a government agency that disburses public funds elected to construe criticism of their programme as a personal affront. They even arrogantly refused to appear before Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee, which wants to examine the Auditor-General’s conclusions.

Are these the actions of responsible government leaders in an accountable administration?

The bottom line is this: our emperors totally reject the idea that the public has a right to information. It is really as simple as that. And it cuts across the board – politicians, civil servants, etc.

Somehow we have to convince them otherwise.

• What do you think? Send comments to lsmith@tribunemedia.net or visit www.bahamapundit.com