File
The Hope River in eastern St. Andrew in spate, endangering dwellings. Flooding after heavy rainfall is often caused by overexploitation of the natural environment.

During 2008, The Gleaner will highlight the adverse effects of poor environmental practices in Jamaica and the world. Our focus will include the phenomenon of global warming and climate change. The Gleaner will explore how this affects us individually and as a country, and identify ways in which each of us can preserve the planet for future generations.

Gareth Manning, Sunday Gleaner Reporter

Many of the laws intended to protect the island's environment are proving to be too old and too weak to withstand the forces of degradation, environmentalists have argued.

Many of the laws that relate to environmental protection and the development process were birthed from as far back as 1945, and have not been amended since.

"Each law emerged in a different era, for a different purpose. As a result, many of them conflict and are contradictory, and this has to be the major difficulty. Even the very names of the laws are intended to confuse," states environmentalist, Peter Espeut.

Critics say the country's main environmental law - the Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA) Act - is no longer sufficient. The act was passed in 1991 to give regulatory powers to the NRCA. But when the NRCA merged with the Town and Country Planning Department and the Land Development and Utilisation Commission in 2001 to form the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA), the act was not repealed to give NEPA the powers to function as the country's prime environmental watchdog.

While they have merged, the NRCA and NEPA remain governed by separate boards that sometimes do not collaborate on certain critical decisions. A bill was drafted - the NEPA Act - to bring the agencies and their functions under a single piece of legislation; but four years later, it is yet to be passed into law.

Ridiculous penalties

Then there are laws, like the Watersheds Protection Act of 1963, that carry penalties "that just seem ridiculous", environmentalists argue. This is despite studies by NEPA that show freshwater sources under strain because of overexploitation and pollution. A consequence of this is the shortage of water in some sections of the island, and flooding in other areas, following heavy rainfall.

"Fines are very low. For example, there is a maximum of $200 for assaulting or obstructing an agent of the authority (the NRCA); a maximum of $400 for wilfully destroying, damaging or obstructing any improvements works," environmental lawyer Danielle Andrade explains.

gareth.manning@gleanerjm.com