index

LATIN AMERICA

Belize

Villagers defend their mangroves

Placencia Lagoon in southern Belize separates the Placencia Peninsula from the southern Belize mainland. Mangroves in the Lagoon are an essential component of the Placencia Peninsula estuary system, filtering inland water, protecting the coastline and serving as home to large numbers species of the tropical wildlife. However, a proposal in course to build a two-lane causeway and a bridge across the Lagoon to connect it with the village of Independence in the mainland practically ignores environmental issues and just considers that the works will not upset the water flow of the lagoon nor threaten mangrove life.

On the contrary, many Placencia Peninsula residents fear that the causeway would significantly and adversely affect the Lagoon and the coral reef nearby. The livelihood of Placencia residents highly depends on the continuing environment health of the area, both for the small commercial fishing industry that has supported the area for hundreds of years, as well as for ecotourism. Local residents think that the causeway will be approved without an adequate environmental assessment, and that, if approved, proper environmental standards will not be enforced during causeway design and construction. They have organized themselves and went to the media with an anti-causeway petition. They consider that a project to build a causeway almost two miles long, including a forty foot high bridge to let boats through, is not the kind of undertaking that can be considered useful for the community nor good for the environment. (WRM Bulletin Nº 23, May 1999).

Shrimp farming threatens Placencia Lagoon's mangroves

In 1999 local residents of Placencia Lagoon - a shallow water body fringed by mangroves and very rich in terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, located in southern Belize - organized themselves to resist a project to build a two-lane causeway and a bridge across the Lagoon. The works would have caused a severe environmental impact, damaging ecotourism, the main activity in the area, as well as small scale fishing. A new threat is now pending on this rich ecosystem: industrial shrimp farming.

The Placencia Lagoon is largely responsible for the area's pristine waters and abundance of fish in the proximity to the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef, which furnish the basis for most resident's livelihood, and is a major scenario for ecotourism. The area has lately attracted shrimp farmers and "developers." Currently five shrimp farms are located on the Lagoon. Two new shrimp farms have been proposed and are in the process of applying for operational permits. Additionally, two of the existing ones have plans to expand and are in the final phase of approval for their respective permits.

Taking into account the deleterious effects of shrimp farming in many other tropical countries and the specific conditions of Placencia Lagoon's environment - which because of its soil composition and geology is likely to have a low carrying capacity and high pollution susceptibility - it is expected that such expansion would lead to an environmental disaster. Already in 1997 a report prepared by UNDP for the Belize Coastal Zone Management Authority warned that the shrimp farming industry in the Placencia Lagoon area was rapidly approaching its limit for sustainable shrimp production.

Signs of what may occur in a near future have already been perceived. Local residents have witnessed a decline in the area's fish stock and fear that the new and expanded shrimp farm operations, plus increasing commercial and residential developments will continue to degrade the Lagoon environment and their livelihoods. However, the government appears to be more interested in the promotion of shrimp farming than in the protection of mangroves. Shrimp farmers enjoy a favourable tax policy as well as lack of regulations for pollution control and mitigation. To the official view, currency generated by industrial shrimp exports is more important than mangrove conservation. (WRM Bulletin Nº 38, September 2000).

  top

Colombia

Local communities affected by shrimp companies

From 1982 onwards, the shrimp industry has been settling in the Cispatá Bay, an ecosystem harbouring one of the most exuberant mangroves in the Colombian Caribbean. Presently there are four shrimp industries fully established in this site, covering an extension of approximately 700 hectares. The semi-intensive productive system these farms apply has a daily water recharge in its ponds, reaching an average of up to 15% of its volume, leading to a daily dumping into the estuary of large quantities of water saturated by organic waste.

After 14 long years of carrying out this practice uninterruptedly, in 1996 the Soledad marshes, one of the most important bodies of water associated to the estuary, started showing the first signs of unbalance: the appearance of filamentous blooms of algae and the subsequent death of fish and shell-fish. This phenomenon was to be expected if we consider that the estuary of Cispatá Bay, due to its hydrodynamic characteristics, has a low level of daily replenishment of its waters, particularly in the extreme south-west of the estuary. Evidently the shrimp industry located in the area was most affected, as its production dwindled, but the serious prejudice to local artisan fishers should not be forgotten.

The shrimp industry's response was quick to come. Far from generating a change of attitude regarding the considerable dumping of waste water into the estuary, it promoted and started to build, with the endorsement of the environmental authorities, an artificial channel that was to communicate the Soledad marsh directly to the Caribbean Sea, in order to increase its daily replenishment of water based on high and low tides. There is no doubt that the water quality conditions in this part of the estuary would improve, giving the shrimp industry peace of mind. However the greater inflow of salt water directly from the sea involves a disproportionate amount of salinity in the estuary and therefore the imminent penetration of a saline band (through the water table) towards neighbouring agricultural zones, sustaining almost 2,500 families that live in nine rural communities.

Such a blunder caused the local communities to complain about the situation to the local and regional authorities, without achieving any attention on their part. The power of the shrimp industries involved was such that the works not only had a permit from the environmental authority without any prior technical assessment but were also using public machinery. Once all the possible legal mechanisms had been exhausted, and in view of the imminence of the work, the communities resorted to force to stop the construction, achieving their purpose after various days of struggle, in which about 400 peasants took part. Faced by the public scandal caused by the peasant protests, the shrimp companies halted the project.

It is worthwhile stressing the misleading arguments used by the shrimp companies to convince the authorities and local leaders of the soundness of their project. They talked of "restoration of the drainage system" to improve the operation of the estuary as an ecosystem, and of the generation of hundreds of jobs that would benefit the poor local communities. None of this was true, given that the underlying interest of the project was to get rid of organic waste that was being dumped every day into the estuary.

On having to abandon the project for a channel to the sea, they were obliged to improve their internal systems for the management of organic waste, having to build an artificial wetland as a bio-filter. In spite of the considerable investments made and an aggressive advertising campaign leading to a national prize for ecology, the environmental situation of the Soledad marsh and the rest of the estuary grows worse every day.

Five years after the first attempt at increasing the flow and ebb of water in the estuary, the shrimp companies are insisting again with their project. What happened to the bio-filter that won the prize? The project is essentially the same "Restoration of the drainage system," with the same Good Samaritan purposes: generation of employment and improvement of ecosystem functions. The major difference now lies in the fact that the project managers are no longer the shrimp industry, but the environmental authority itself, in this case the Regional Autonomous Corporation of the Sinú and San Jorge Valleys (CVS) and the municipality of San Antero.

"We have about 800 million pesos (approximately 348,000 USdollars) to restore the drainage system in the estuary," explained a CVS official to the peasant and fisher communities, as part of the permanent invitation to participate in the project.

Should the project be implemented, its effects on the peasant agri-systems in the nine rural communities located in the municipalities of San Antero, San Bernardo del Viento and Lorica, will be devastating, as the regulation of the Sinú river channel by the URRA I hydroelectric plant has significantly decreased the flow of fresh water towards the estuary. Faced by this new regional scenario, the salinity of land used by the local communities for agricultural and animal husbandry activities will be hastened, inducing the displacement of thousands of families to the neighbouring urban zones.

Presently the interest of the shrimp industry is not only to increase the capacity for water flow and ebb in the estuary, but to expand towards agricultural zones that have become saline due to the effect of the URRÁ I hydroelectric project and the "drainage system restoration" promoted by the environmental authority.

For this reason, the peasant and fisher communities, members of ASPROCIG, who have ancestrally used the lands in the Sinú River delta, are calling all people, NGOs and grass-roots organisations throughout the world to join in their struggle and to state their rejection of the project to the Colombian authorities. (WRM Bulletin Nº 51, October 2001).

Actions against expansion of industrial shrimp farming

The semi-intensive production system used in shrimp farms located in the Department of Cordoba, in the Atlantic region of Colombia, has caused great disruption in the surrounding environment. Among other things, this system implies the constant dumping of large volumes of water saturated with organic waste into the estuary of the lower basin of the Sinu river.

The shrimp industry established in this estuary in 1982 already covers some 700 hectares and has been an important promoter of the Urra 1 hydroelectric dam. This dam which is already in operation, involved the flooding of over 7,000 hectares of forests, with a direct impact on the means of living and very existence of the Embera Katio indigenous peoples and the fishing communities in the area.

The company managers have everything under control: the hydroelectric plant regulates freshwater inflow, whereby they manage to increase salt water inflow, causing the salinisation of the lands adjacent to the estuary in the Cispata bay. It is estimated that 7,200 hectares of agricultural land are affected by salinisation. The local communities which historically occupied these lands with traditional subsistence crops have abandoned them. And this is precisely what the companies want: to occupy the agricultural lands adjacent to the mangrove ecosystems in order to install their artificial ponds for industrial shrimp breeding.

Attempts at expanding the shrimp industry along the Colombian Caribbean Coast, are being promoted with the complacency and support of the State, through the Ministry of Foreign Trade. Recently an agreement was signed between State bodies and private companies for the establishment of a further 9,000 hectares of shrimp ponds in the Department of la Guajira, to the extreme north of the country and another similar agreement is being prepared for the establishment of 8,000 hectares in the estuaries of the lower basin of the Sinu river.

The Association of Producers for Community Development of the Cienaga Grande del Bajo Sinu (ASPROCIG) are very concerned over this situation and are considering the preparation of various actions to face it. Contacts have already been established with FUNDECOL in Ecuador, who know only too well the disasters caused by the shrimp industry in the coastal zones of the country.

Depredation is orchestrated. It is sufficient to see how the different systems for the exploitation of resources repeat themselves, with the same noxious social, environmental and economic repercussions. For this reason, orchestration of efforts among those who are affected is essential. Along these lines, ASPROCIG has lodged this complaint with the international community and is making an urgent call for solidarity in the struggle to oppose the commercial interests that are attempting to sweep away their present and their future. (WRM Bulletin Nº 59, June 2002).

  top

Ecuador

Greenpeace action to protect remaining mangroves

In July 1998, Ecuador's Minister of Environment Flor María Valverde has promised Greenpeace that she will take steps to secure a permanent ban on mangrove clearcuts - the destruction of mangrove forests by shrimp farming interests has been illegal in Ecuador since 1994 under Decree #1907.94.b. - by the country's shrimp farming industry and investigate evidence of illegal mangrove destruction in a protected national reserve.

In a meeting with Greenpeace, Minister Valverde also agreed to confront the Ecuadorian Forestry Institute of Natural Areas and Wildlife (INEFAN) over evidence of 745 cases of mangrove destruction by shrimp farm operators that were lodged with it by local environmental organization Fundecol since 1989. Only four cases were investigated.

However, Greenpeace is calling on the incoming government of Ecuador to honour the agreements made prior to its recent coming into office by Minister Valverde.

"The international community is now waiting to see how the present and future governments of Ecuador will stop the many shrimp farming operators from destroying what's left of Ecuador's mangrove forests," said Greenpeace spokesperson Gina Sánchez.

Greenpeace and it's ship Rainbow Warrior were invited to Ecuador by Fundecol to highlight the widespread and illegal destruction of mangrove forests by the shrimp aquaculture industry.

The meeting with the minister followed an earlier protest by Greenpeace activists and Fundecol at an illegal shrimp farm recently built in one of the last remaining mangrove forests in the Muisne region near Esmereldas. In this area, 20,800 hectares of mangrove forests have been reduced to 650 hectares after clearcutting by the shrimp aquaculture industry in the last 10 years.

During the protest, the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior was ordered to remain in port. Ecuadorian authorities released the Rainbow Warrior after the Judge who ruled against Greenpeace was dismissed by the President of the Supreme Court. Similarly, the court order issuing arrest warrants for Fundecol directors and Rainbow Warrior crew members is now invalid.
(WRM Bulletin Nº 14, August 1998).

Government tries to hand over mangroves to the private sector

Ecuador is currently facing an extremely serious social situation as a result of a number of unpopular economic measures adopted by the government -in line with IMF and World Bank recommendations- which have resulted in workers' strikes, peasant and indigenous peoples' demonstrations, road blockades, violence in many parts of the country, rumours of a possible military coup and generalized caos within the country.

Among those measures, there is one which has received strong opposition from the environmental community and from the affected communities and which would further affect the country's mangrove ecosystems, many of which have already been destroyed by commercial shrim farming.

By that time - July 1998 - the environmental NGO Fundecol had registered 745 cases of mangrove destruction by shrimp farm operators.

On March 2nd President Jamil Mahuad announced on a national broadcast that he had sent to the National Congress a draft bill for the so called Rationalization of Public Finances, that - among other measures to face the budget deficit - establishes that shrimp farmers that use public lands would have to pay a fee for this use. In prior days, various newspapers warned that this measure was paving the way for shrimp company operators to purchase 60,000 hectares of land - apparently beaches and bays - along the Pacific coast. The operation would mean an income of US$ 60 million dollars to the State budget. At the same time, the government added that the idea of opening new concession areas for shrimp farms would not be discouraged. Traditionally, concessions to shrimp entrepreneurs were in most cases (95% according to Fundecol) not granted in "beaches and bays" but in mangroves as well as in agricultural areas. This was possible because of the existence of false reports and generalized corruption rampant in public administration, which allowed the companies to declare - once the pools were already built - that there were no mangroves or agricultural lands in the area.

Even though the text of the draft bill did not explicitly mention the possibility of coastal areas being sold to the shrimp entrepreneurs, the project caused justified alarm among environmental organizations in Ecuador and worldwide, since it was not difficult to realize that this was its final goal. In this regard, Sandra Cogliotore, President of the Chamber of Aquaculture publicly stated: "We will be the owners of the lands." In previous days, the Chamber of Aquaculture had strongly lobbied for the presidential draft bill to be passed on to the parliament. The industry even discussed the contents of the norm with the Minister of Trade, the Undersecretary of Fisheries, and the Merchant Navy (DIGMER).

Civil society quickly reacted to oppose this project, requesting international support to protest against this measure, that would worsen the already fragile situation of mangroves in Ecuador and would legalize the flagrant unlawfulness and depredatory practices with which the shrimp industry has always operated. Paradoxically, the economic crisis itself in which the country was plunged as a result of the announced economic measures halted, at least for the time being, the project. "It appears to us to be adequate that US$ 1,000 is paid per hectare, but the time period and the form or mechanism of payment need to be discussed. At this moment, no one has US$ 1,000 to pay ..." The serious political events and social unrest happening later diverted politicians' attention away from this issue. Nevertheless, the risk still persists.

Some reflections can be made in relation to these facts. The attitude of the Ecuadorian government needs to be highlighted. It has not hesitated in literally auctioning the natural resources of the country - in this case mangroves - to show its willingness to comply with the dictates of the international financing institutions, which demand a "balanced fiscal budget". In its view, the country's economy is completely divorced from the sustainable use of natural resources. Regarding the shrimp industry itself, it must be said that, after having obtained high profits through the depredation of coastal resources, it now tries to portray itself as cooperating with "development", since shrimp is one of the country's important export. The present situation is ideal for the industry, because it could result in it becoming the owner of a significant area of mangroves that would disappear to give place to shrimp farms. Coastal populations are not taken into account in decisions such as the one being put forward by the government. On the contrary, much of the shrimp industry's infrastructure has occupied and destroyed areas that are part of ancestral territories and until then occupied and managed sustainably by traditional communities that had found there food and shelter. Additionally, the intended boosting of shrimp farming - and consequent mangrove destruction - does not take into account that mangroves act as natural barriers against the rise of the Pacific Ocean's water. Floods occuring during 1997 and 1998 as a consequence of "El Niño" phenomenon, showed what is to be expected in coastal areas if mangroves continue to disappear due to the irresponsibility of the authorites and the greed of a few powerful and influential entrepreneurs.

Thanks to the opposition from environmental and community organisations, the article of the draft bill concerning the privatization of mangroves was voted down. The struggle was facilitated by the fact that shrimp farmers, who are facing problems with the white spot disease, found that the one-time price of $1,000 per hectare for a 25 year lease ($1,500 for illegal occupants) established in the draft bill was too hard to bear. It is interesting to note that a recent decree of the Environment Ministry, related to the establishment of penalties to illegal cutting of mangroves, establishes that for purposes of the fines, the mangrove is valued in approximately US$ 13,000 per hectare per year. This figure is considerably higher than the US$ 1,500 per hectare established by the polemic draft bill, which shows that the Ecuadorian government has two widely differing ways of valuing the mangroves. Why? (WRM Bulletin Nº 21, March-June 1999).

Mangrove replanting initiative

Ecuador's lush mangroves at the Pacific Ocean coast have been suffering for long the effects of commercial shrimp farming that, together with the government's shortsighted vision and irresponsible behaviour on the issue, is to be blamed for the destruction of this valuable ecosystem regarding biodiversity, local communities' livelihoods and coastal protection.

Ecuadorian and international environmental NGOs have repeatedly expressed their concern over such a destructive process. Now Mangrove Action Project (MAP) and the Ecuadorian NGO FUNDECOL are dealing with a project to restore the once magnificent mangrove forest of Muisne.

MAP is a worldwide network and pro-active coalition that is addressing the serious issues associated with global mangrove forest loss. This specific programme aims at drawing national attention to mangrove loss and local community needs, support local initiatives on mangrove sustainable use, draw media attention to the plight of the coastal zones, rehabilitate mangrove zones degraded by industrial shrimp farming, draw a spotlight on issues which will benefit by this kind of actions, and educate volunteers coming from all around the world, who will gain in both knowledge and experience.

The programme, which counts on a limited budget but is high in volunteer involvement, will start next September and will last around 10 to 12 days. Participants will be involved in important environmental restoration work, while meeting and working together with some local Ecuadorian community people who themselves are dedicated to restoring the mangrove forest. (WRM Bulletin Nº 36, July 2000).

Action to save mangroves in Guayas

Industrial shrimp farming is one of the direct causes of the deforestation of mangroves in the tropics. In Ecuador the level of destruction caused by the 1970s and mid 1980s shrimp production boom continues unabated, even though a law for the protection of mangroves was approved in 1995. Nowadays there are in Ecuador 207,000 hectares of ponds which have affected 70% of the country's mangrove area and practically all of its estuaries in the Pacific Ocean shore. Local economies have been disrupted. The successive Ecuadorian governments have been supporting this destructive activity - trumpetted as the "Blue Revolution" - by granting it land concessions, building infrastructure to favour the transport of the products, offering subsidies, etc. The "Trolley" Law passed in August 2000 establishes that present beneficiaries of concessions in mangroves and beaches where shrimp ponds are built can become owners of the land. This meant the complete loss of sovereignty of the Ecuadorian state over such a valuable resource. In December 2000 the Constitutional Court declared 22 articles inconstitutional, among them Nr. 164, which granted the property of beaches and bays to the shrimp industry.

A new case of destruction has been recently denounced by the members of a local crab-catchers association. This time it is at the Parroquia Naranjal in the western Province of Guayas. At a place called "Granja del Mar" near the River San Pablo, mangroves are being cut down for the construction of shrimp ponds.

The above is happening in spite of the fact that in July 2000 the Crab-catchers Association "6 de Julio" was granted by the Ministry of Environment a concession for the use of 1,666 hectares of mangroves. To their surprise, their legally-obtained concession area was invaded by outside agents - presumably linked to the shrimp industry - who have already destroyed 70 hectares of mangroves with the aim of setting up industrial shrimp farming infrastructure. Local dwellers have requested the intervention of the environmental authorities and of the Forest Agency of Guayas, but the situation still remains unchanged, and destruction continues.

The Ecuadorian National Coordination for the Defense of Mangroves - a coalition of environmental NGOs and local communities involved in mangrove management created to unite efforts to that aim - are asking for international solidarity to defend this precious ecosystem, which is also the source of livelihoods for a local community. (WRM Bulletin Nº 43, February 2001).

Mangroves and shrimp farming companies

Over 30 years ago, the destruction of mangroves was started in order to build ponds in beaches and bays. According to data from the former INEFAN (Forest, Natural Areas and Wild Life Ecuadorian Institute) and the National Aquaculture Chamber, in January 2000 there were 207,000 hectares or 170,000 hectares respectively of shrimp ponds, of which 50,454 hectares were operating legally. The rest are illegal. In the province of Esmeraldas, where the best conserved and tallest mangroves in the world are to be found, over 90% of the ponds installed there are illegal. Official information from CLIRSEN (Centro de Levantamientos Integrados de Recursos Naturales por Sensores Remotos) shows that in 1984, there were 89,368 hectares of shrimp ponds, indicating that the expansion of shrimp breeding over 16 years increased by 117,631 hectares.

The shrimp companies not only benefit from the Ecuadorian's natural heritage, but also from the weakness of their official policy. In June 1985, the government declared the conservation of mangroves to be of public interest. In September that same year, the Under-Secretariat for Fisheries suspended the granting of licences to carry out fish-farming in mangrove regions. In November 1986, the Government declared 362,742 hectares of mangroves and saline pampas to be protected forests. But legal regulations have no weight as in the period between 1984 and 1999 more mangroves were lost and more shrimp ponds were established than at any other time.

During this period of mangrove depredation, thousands of families that traditionally had depended on this ecosystem have been affected by the loss of their culture and of the environment that made their social and economic reproduction possible. For over 30 years now there has been impunity and violation of the laws in force in the country.

Over the past two years, the shrimp industry has complained about the problems affecting this activity, blaming all its economic ills on the White Spot virus for the reduction in shrimp production. What is not said and what is not recognised is the irresponsible way of acting to favour the shrimp companies getting richer, and provoking the destruction of mangroves.

Today the shrimp companies are getting ready to make another assault on nature with the installation of shrimp ponds on the high lands, which would cause salinity of agricultural lands and fresh water. If this undertaking is permitted, in a very short while Ecuador will be facing environmental disasters, such as the loss of agricultural lands due to soil salinity, the contamination of surface and groundwater, changes in the physical, chemical and microbiological structure of the soil, loss of terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity, in the name of salvaging the shrimp sector.

The national press, farmers, higher educational centres, local authorities, peasants and citizens from various sectors have voiced their protest and rejection of this activity which goes against the environment and have claimed the farmers' legitimate right to maintain their activities without the competition and prejudice caused by the shrimp companies.

Attention should also be drawn to the social impact that would be generated by competition between fish-farmers and agricultural farmers, together with problems in the use of water for human consumption and agriculture. Privileging economic issues, aimed at satisfying the demand of developed countries, over the production of food for the consumption of the Ecuadorian people, is equal to an attack on national food sovereignty.

The United States is the greatest consumer in the world. Shrimp consumption rose from 0,2 pounds per person to over 3 pounds in 1999 and has been constantly increasing since 1996, when the annual average was 2,50 pounds.

Regarding impacts on health, Greenpeace Austria, together with Greenpeace Germany sent the mass media a publication denouncing the effects of antibiotics applied to shrimps and particularly that of Chloramphenicol that, independently from its concentration, may cause strong effects, even causing death.

In showing up the various elements involved in aquaculture, an abominable picture of this activity appears:

- Destruction of mangroves to build ponds in beaches and bays
- Shrimp industry ponds operating illegally
- Thirty years of impunity and of violation of the laws in force in the country
- Installation of shrimp ponds in high lands
- At attack on the food sovereignty of the peoples
- Impacts on consumer health

In this context, the Ecuadorian environmental organisation, Acción Ecológica is promoting the non-consumption of shrimps produced in captivity in tropical countries as a way of protecting actively and in solidarity, mangroves and the peoples that depend on them. (By: Alfonso Román, WRM Bulletin Nº 51, October 2001).

  top

next page