By Pushpa Balgobin
Residents of Yarrowkabra yesterday protested the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission’s (GGMC) decision to give BK International licensing rights to a sand pit on land above the community’s largest potable water well.
Residents are upset that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) deemed an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) unnecessary.
The EPA said on Thursday that it was still to make a final pronouncement on whether project goes ahead and BK International must still satisfy a raft of environmental safeguards and requirements even though the Environmental Assessment Bureau (EAB) has upheld the EPA’s initial decision that an EIA was not necessary.
Bulkan Timber Works and Superior Shingles and Wood Products said it will be appealing this decision.
Speaking on behalf of Executive Director of the EPA Dr Indarjit Ramdass, Senior Officer Sharifah Razack said BK International is still going through an authorisation process to determine whether the project is approved or not.
Meanwhile, led by members of the Yarrowkabra Coal Burning Association, protestors walked outside the GGMC Headquarters on Brickdam yesterday, shouting slogans, such as: “BK have it all and we don’t have it at all,” and “no BK no sand pit”.
Stabroek News was unable to contact BK International for a comment.
Shane D’Andrade, a resident of the area said the EPA went to the area but did not know there was a well under there. D’Andrade stated that the well, which provides the community with drinking and cooking water, was a mere 60 feet below the proposed sand mine. He said the community was very worried that the GGMC had dismissed its concerns.
Michael Carrington, a local entrepreneur and resident of the area, said the EPA previously met residents but many of the issues were not discussed. He said it was after this that the EAB sent a letter to the EPA agreeing that no assessment was necessary and on Monday BK Inter-national got the go ahead to operate a sand pit in the area. “When we had that meeting with the EPA the whole village said no, that we don’t want a sand pit in that area. We don’t need it,” Carrington said.
He said the Linden Highway has space for other factories and pits and it made little sense that the GGMC would take the three acres being used by single mothers to burn coal and “hand it over” to a large company like BK International. Carrington said the small scale operation had little environmental impact and did not pose a threat to the well water below.
“There are no factories on the highway. A sand pit doesn’t create jobs for people; just some bulldozers and something fetching sand. We need factories in the area,” Carrington stated. He said the GGMC was touting the licence as a job-creation mechanism but noted that the YCBA had already created jobs for the 30 active coal burning members and their removal was actually job loss.
Carrington said the environmental concerns were troublesome and the small scale of the YCBA was minimal in comparison to what a large company like BK International was capable of. He said the YCBA “does not go around and cut trees around the place and destroy the environment to have wood… so they are able to benefit and a lot of money coming from burning coal in the area.” He emphasized that it was the small cottage industries that were reviving the area.
President of the YCBA Ricardo Seecharran told Stabroek News that the association is hoping the GGMC will suspend BK International’s licence until all sides have been heard. He said that in 2009, the Friendly Societies Act denoted that the land in question could be used by the association. However, “they [GGMC] acting like this isn’t what’s happening. We have been registered since 2009 and then we just got this letter to remove ourselves from the area just like that.
“They say we are squatting on this land and that isn’t true,” he added. He said the area is dotted with small sections for burning coal and residents have been able to earn a wage and build homes so the squatting charge was an outright lie. Seecharran said the EPA visited and saw the area for itself so he was shocked that this what the EPA was citing.
Seecharran said the association is small scale and that the current treatment of the residents of Yarrowkabra was telling of the government’s allegiances.
“We are using timber that Bulkan is done with and make the coal,” he said, adding that the association was not cutting trees, but instead reusing waste material from Bulkan’s Timber Works.
Many of the women who are currently involved in the YCBA are worried that because of their socioeconomic statuses, the GGMC would continue to ignore them. Shondell King told Stabroek News that for many women this was the opportunity they needed and were given. She said that Bulkan Timber Works has been allowing the women to reuse what was discarded by the factory. “This is a mutual thing that we are involved in. The EPA’s decision is very worrying,” she said.
Alethea Peters said that for 15 years she has been involved in the cottage industry and the small-scale operation was already benefiting the community. She said that prior to Bulkan Timber Works the area was economically depressed and the decision to have the YCBA removed from the land directly jeopardised her livelihood along with the other 30 members of the association.
Howard Bulkan the proprietor of Bulkan Timber Works told Stabroek News that he knew many of the single mothers who are members of the association and many have been burning coal since 1996 when he began renting the abandoned glass factory building from the government.
“I am not saying don’t give him [BK International] a licence, [but] there are lots of places along the Linden Highway. I am outraged that these women are being moved and my business will be affected,” Bulkan said.
He said the GGMC has proposed that the sand pit will be approximately 20 feet, “but that is never the case… We have rebuilt this complex and provided jobs and created more jobs like the coal burning and if the GGMC lets them [BK International] create a sand pit that is 50, 60 feet my building could cave in.
“These women in this association are poor,” he added, “this community needs job stimulation.” He said stifling the current means of employment was not beneficial.
Bulkan’s Timber Works had appealed to the EPA to withhold permission for the sand mine to go ahead on the grounds of health risks, the risk to ground water contamination from heavy machinery, and dangers to nearby structures which could collapse because of the sand mine’s operation.
However, the EAB said that while these were real concerns, they were not sufficiently evidenced to warrant the requirement of an EIA.
over issuance of sand mine licence
According to the EAB, it took into consideration statements made at the Public Hearing by the representatives from BK International Inc, representatives from Bulkan Timber Works and Superior Shingles and Wood Products Inc, representatives from EPA, Chairperson of the Yarrowkabra Community Development Council, Regional Chairman for Region 4 and members of the public. It also took fuller statements by the two businesses into consideration as well as written statements by all stakeholders, the Environmental Protection Act No 11(1996), the Code of Practice for Sand and Saprolite (Loam) Mining on the Soesdyke Linden Highway; and the Strategic Environmental Assessment of Mining in Guyana for Policy and Human Resource Development Grant.
The EAB said the area where the sand mine will be located has been zoned for such activities and noted that such mining already takes place in the area.
The EAB said too that there is sufficient distance between Bulkan’s factory and the proposed sand mine to allow the establishment of a buffer that would prevent airborne sand, noise and vibration.
