Mixed views on Sandals overwater suites plans

WESTERN BUREAU:

While environmental activists are seemingly not thrilled about Sandals International’s proposal to build overwater suites in proximity to its Sandals Montego Bay property, some residents of the nearby Flanker community have no issue with it.

In fact, several fishermen and community representatives, who attended a town hall meeting on Monday to discuss the matter, welcomed the proposed development, as well as plans to develop a new public beach facility for residents, seemingly going against the concerns of other residents and activists, who have been setting off an alarm bell about beach access and possible impacts on marine ecosystems.

The meeting formed part of the environmental review process being overseen by the National Environment and Planning Agency, which is assessing the proposal to construct 18 overwater suites offshore from the resort, before a final determination is made by the Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA).

Beulah Henry, a water sports operator who has lived and worked in the area for nearly 50 years, said the shoreline being debated is heavily silted and has not been used as a recreational beach for many years.

“That is not a beach that people use for swimming,” Henry said. “When you stand there your foot sinks into the silt.”

Henry, who said she has spent 37 years working in the marine tourism sector, also praised the economic opportunities created by Sandals in surrounding communities.

“My mother worked at Sandals and raised eight children, all of whom became professionals,” she said.

Representatives from three Whitehouse-based community groups, including members of the Whitehouse Fishers Co-operative, indicated they were generally supportive of the development but wanted assurances that marine ecosystems, boat channels and fishing grounds would be protected.

Tourism and fishing

Livingston Hall, secretary of the association, said tourism and fishing could coexist if proper environmental safeguards are implemented.

“Not everyone here will agree on everything, but we must make the things we agree on more important than the things we disagree on,” Hall said.

He noted that the fishing industry and tourism sector could work together, particularly in supplying fresh seafood to nearby hotels.

“When we land our fish, there should be a ready market for it right next door in the tourism sector,” he said.

Fishers from Providence raised concerns about maintaining safe access to the boat channel used to enter and exit the fishing grounds. Several fishermen stressed that the channel is essential for navigating their vessels through the shallow coastal waters.

Environmental Solutions Limited’s (ESL) consultants have indicated that adjustments to the channel alignment are being examined as part of the environmental assessment, to ensure that vessels can continue to safely access the area once the proposed overwater suites are constructed near Sandals Montego Bay.

According to the project presentation, the proposed navigational channel would remain wide enough to allow boats to pass safely. Additional hydrographic surveys are expected to be carried out to confirm that the channel remains navigable for fishermen.

Despite their support for the project, several fishermen expressed concern about the proposed relocation of seagrass beds and the possible impact on fishing grounds.

Troy Jumpp, president of the Whitehouse Fishers Co-operative, warned that relocating seagrass into sandy areas traditionally used for fishing could disrupt fishermen’s livelihoods.

“Those white areas you see on the map are where we place our fish pots,” Jumpp said. “If you plant seagrass there, fishermen will lose those areas.”

Jumpp also argued that natural seabed conditions should guide decisions on where seagrass can successfully grow.

“If you follow Mother Nature, you can’t go wrong,” he said.

Another fisherman from the Whitehouse community, Omar, who said he has fished the area for more than 25 years, disputed claims that the project site lies within a fish sanctuary.

“That area cannot be a sanctuary, because that is where we fish,” he said.

However, he warned that construction activities could affect water quality and marine life.

Community engagement

Environmental activist Monique Christie criticised the proposal, arguing that surrounding communities had not been sufficiently engaged during the earlier stages of the planning process.

Christie, who said she represents residents of the Flanker and Providence communities, acknowledged that she had participated in a consultation meeting with project representatives the previous Wednesday, but maintained that broader engagement should have taken place earlier.

She also questioned the proposal to allocate less than 100 metres of beachfront for public access, and criticised the location proposed for community use.

Christie argued that the beach has been used by nearby communities for decades, and raised concerns about the possible run-off from a drainage canal located near the proposed public access area.

ESL consultant Ann-Marie Barnett said the second consultation was intended to present additional studies requested by regulators, following the first public meeting held in May 2025.

According to Barnett, the addendum to the environmental impact assessment addressed several key concerns raised previously, including seagrass relocation, beach access, boat channel navigation, and an expanded socio-economic survey involving more than 400 residents and businesses.

The NRCA will review the environmental studies, public comments, and the developer’s responses before making a final decision on the application.

janet.silvera@gleanerjm.com