Belizean macaws and tapirs threatened by dam project

Elizabeth Mistry
Sunday 06 April 2003 00:00 BST
Comments

The future of some of the world's rarest mammals and birds is in doubt after a court in Belize ruled that a giant Canadian power company, Fortis, could build a dam on the upper Macal river in the tiny Central American state.

This week the Belize Alliance of Conservation Non-Governmental Organisations (Bacongo) will begin preparing an appeal to the Privy Council in London, the final court of appeal for Belize, which gained full independence from Britain in 1981.

Fortis – backed by the Belizean government, which has made millions of pounds from privatising its electricity industry – wants to construct a huge concrete dam across the upper Macal river, designated a "biogem" because of the range of habitats found in the area near the Maya mountains in the south-west of the country.

If the project, known as the Chalillo Dam, goes ahead, more than 1,000 hectares of rain forest will be flooded, destroying the foraging area for jaguars from the nearby reserve, as well as the unique riverbank feeding grounds for the Baird's tapir, Belize's national animal, listed as endangered by the International Conservation Union.

The greatest fear of Belizean and international environmental organisations – which have enlisted the support of Hollywood stars Harrison Ford and Cameron Diaz – is the loss of the Belizean scarlet macaw, of which there are no more than 150 left in the wild.

There are also many unexcavated Mesoamerican ruins in the surrounding jungle which will be flooded if Fortis starts work in the next few weeks before the rainy season begins.

Fortis already operates another dam in Belize, the Mollejon. When it opened 10 years ago the company claimed it would supply more than enough electricity to meet the growing demands of the 250,000-strong Belizean population without the need for any further construction.

While most people agree that the country's electricity needs must be met, those opposed to the new dam say it will operate for just 50 years. They want the government to support the use of alternative, sustainable energy, such as the use of bagasse, a byproduct of the sugar manufacturing process which was once a major industry in Belize, or to buy in power from neighbouring countries, which could cost less over the long term.

Fortis commissioned an environmental impact study from Amec, the British construction group, which used scientists from the Natural History Museum in London to carry out part of the assessment. But when the scientists concluded that much more work was needed in the region before the dam could proceed, their recommendations were buried in an annexe of the final 1,500-page report.

Colonel Alastair Rogers, a former Royal Marine and co-author of the assessment, now says the dam could be a disaster for the area. "Fortis claims that the bedrock of the area is granite. We believe that the presence of a large amount of porous rock such as limestone could render the dam useless. The forest would be flooded, but the water would drain away. You'd be left with all the negatives and none of the positives."

It has since emerged that Fortis's subsidiary, Becol, was never granted a government licence to generate electricity from the Mollejon dam, let alone Chalillo, even though logging has already started in the jungle to construct roads to the proposed site of the new dam. According to Lois Young, the Belizean lawyer for Bacongo, this means that the company was breaking the law and breaking the terms of the original sale contract, with the knowledge of the Belize government. Fortis was not available for comment.

Sharon Matola, director of the Belize Zoo and a leading campaigner against the dam, has more than 10 years' experience surveying the Macal river watershed. She told The Independent on Sunday: "It would be an environmental crime if this dam were built in one of the most pristine areas of the planet. We could have electricity and preserve our wildlife, which would attract visitors, which would bring in revenue. Why can't they see that if we say yes to this dam, then we lose our national treasure for ever?"

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in