Mangroves perish under fill

| 17/10/2012

photo (6) (247x300).jpg(CNS): Although an appeal has been filed with the Central Planning Authority regarding the on-going dispute over a proposed costal development in South Sound, it appears to be too late for the mangroves in the area. A mangrove replenishment project that was partially funded by an overseas grant to the Cayman government began disappearing this week under a pile of fill, which the developer is tipping into to the sea to reclaim his 2003 land boundary as a result of what activists say is a legally erroneous decision by the CPA. RC Estates was given permission to begin the work under which the replenished mangrove buffer is now vanishing.

Although Protect South Sound, a group of local residents and local activists trying to preserve the coastal area, is waiting to have their appeal over the CPA decision heard, attempts at an injunction to stop the work by the government’s own Department of Environment appear to have failed.

The activists and the DoE believe that the CPA has made a decision which is not, as it claimed, based in law and that no costal boundary can be fixed, which means RC Estates' efforts to reclaim a 2003 land boundary which has since been lost to the ocean is wrong. However, while the legal arguments continue, the failure of the Attorney General’s Chambers to respond to the application for an injunction means the fill is continuing to be poured into the ocean and on top of mangroves replanted in 2006.

“Protect South Sound contacted government ministers on Monday to stress the urgency of the injunction application which has been before the AG for weeks,” said a spokesperson for group. “While we wait for a decision truck loads of fill are being dumped into and bulldozed out into the sea and over young mangrove trees. The CPA's 15th August 2012 decision, which erroneously approved the developer to extend his lots 50 feet out into the water and build a 9-foot high seawall only 2 feet in from the 2003 boundary, has been appealed and the developer was served with the notice and grounds of appeal last week on 10th October.”

photo (9) (300x276).jpgDespite the notice of appeal, with permission from the CPA in hand, RC Estates is proceeding lawfully at present with the development regardless. It will require an injunction to stop the coastal works, since the developer has avoided the need for a Cabinet granted coastal works licence because of what is seen as a misguided decision by the CPA. Having accepted the claim that the 2003 boundary is still valid, despite the fact that the sea took it, the CPA had indicated that work is not really coastal works but work on land which the developer is reclaiming.

The 50 feet of recovering mangrove buffer that runs for 2,000 feet along the existing coastal lots of the proposed development in the South Sound was funded in part by a grant from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Migratory Bird Conservation and Reef Ball Foundation. The Cayman government via the DoE received around $30,000 towards the project, which has proved to be a success. While replenishing mangrove buffer is notoriously slow and difficult, the project, which began in 2006, was beginning to make significant progress.

In what is becoming a problem for conservation in Cayman, the DoE had managed to raise much needed funding for a conservation projects while another arm of government has completely undermined its efforts. Not only has government persistently failed to demonstrate any real commitment to environmental protection, in this case one agency of government has given permission to a developer to entirely destroy a project undertaken by government’s own environment agency.

During the recent hearing the DoE presented extensive evidence to the CPA of the recovery of the mangroves and a catalogue of environmental issues relating to the removal of the recovering buffer, as well as the importance of continuing to replenish the area and not remove more. As the marl continues to be dumped into the ocean in South Sound this week, local marine life there is also under threat. The DoE also pointed to the sensitivity and significance of the area as a Marine Replenishment Zone and as a protected Scenic Coastline Zone. 

In addition the planning department had also advised the CPA against the removal of the mangrove, pointing out that the preservation of mangrove buffer at the high-water mark was best planning practice. “From department’s perspective, the 50’ buffer should be retained,” the planning department said in its recommendations.

The Development Plan (1997) designates this area as being a ‘Scenic Coastline Zone’ and Section 20 of the Development and Planning  Regulations (2006 Revision) requires the CPA to ensure that the open character of scenic coastline land is preserved and to safeguard the public’s right to use the beaches and to gain access to them through public rights of way. In addition, the plan states that “the panoramic views and vistas provided by these coastlines are natural assets which are to be safeguarded for present and future generations.”

Hislop SS 002 (483x500).jpgDespite the recommendations from the two government departments, the CPA said it was swayed by the presentation given by the applicant’s lawyer that the owners had a legal right to develop the land. The attorney argued that his client’s land had a fixed boundary, which the sea had eroded, but it was still his client’s boundary.

However, it is understood that the law does state that coastal boundaries cannot be fixed — an issue that the CPA did not acknowledge when granting the developer planning permission and paved the way for him to begin tipping fill into the ocean.


Related articles on CNS:

South Sound Mangrove Threat

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Science and Nature

About the Author ()

Comments (80)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    Bs He is taking more than he lost.What nature takes away should be left as is.We all know what can happen when we buy land in these areas."

    This is no way to pick at Peter just trying to make a point. A few years ago (after Ivan)  land owners along the South Sound Road from the launch ramp up to where is currently being filled received letters/certificates thanking them for participating inthe mangrove replanting project. I'm not sure of anyone else but as a land owner in the area I received no such notice that this was being done nor gave the ok for the mangroves to be replanted on my property. So nature took them away…Why has my beach not been left as is??

    I know Peter and others have the best intentions for Cayman but why are we fighting down another Caymanian and his family.

    So what are land owners to do spend their money buying land and not use it. Or maybe just allow people to squat, camp and run their businesses on it.

    Everyone needs to relax…and get loud about the real problems at hand like locals being unemployed, no proper cruise docking facilities, crime, a Government school system that is consistently failing our youth and fractured leadership in our country and the list goes on.



  2. Anonymous says:

    To 14:00: you’re on the right track. To answer your question directly, yes the common law position, which is based on things such as riparian rights (rights of access to water) is indeed displaced by Cayman statute, namely our Registered Land Law, specifically Section 18. That section provides that where a precise survey has been done and an application has been made to the Registrar to register the same as a fixed boundary, the Registrar shall register the same and shall record the fixed boundary and thereafter the boundary “shall be fixed”. There is no carve out or exception for coastal boundaries and so whenever an application is made to register a fixed coastal boundary, the registrar, upon being satisfied that the survey has been done properly, MUST fix the boundary. It appears that is what has happened here, so RC is saying that since their seaward boundary is fixed in accordance with the applicable law, then the area they are filling(reclaiming) is their land and will always remain their land in perpetuity. It sounds like an impossible argument to counter to me.

    • Anonymous says:

      Please see my earlier post which I have copied below

      I assume that the Fixed Boundary Survey that is being referred to is 51/052, which was Authenticated by the Chief Surveyor on 22.9.2003.
      There is a note on the face of that plan that states that the edge of the magroves have been taken from General Boundary Survey GB5360, and was not in fact re-surveyed in 51/052. Therefore the sea boundary is not "Fixed" but "General Boundary".

      If this is indeed the survey RC Estates is using, then their HWM is not "Fixed".


    • Anonymous says:

      it sound to me like people who do not know the law are trying to interpret the law


      this is not what a fixed survey means! its not fixed permanently….

  3. Red Flag says:

    Hey 07:29, I hope like hell these guys start dumping their seaside property on the market and leaving town.  I sure would like to buy some of it and improve it environmentally.  And when they go, how about you go with them.  DOE has nothing but the best for ALL Caymanians in their heart and are constantly fighting the likes of you to keep this place from becoming a tile topped concrete slab.  It isn't the hypocrisy so much that disgusts me, as the GREED and STUPIDITY, but now that you have brought it up, don't you think it might be a little hypocritical to destroy the very things that make this place unique and then stand up and blow your own horn about what a nice parking lot you just built. On your bike.

  4. Anonymous says:

    I understand the common law rule that the seaside property line moves in and out with the high water line as land is added or lost naturally. But in Cayman there is a land register and the property lines are defined by the "cadastral" surveys.. The government is supposed to guarantee title under this arrangement. Does that apply to the boundaries? Is my boundary what is shown in the land registery or not? Does Cayman follow the common law rule or does the land register law create fixed boundaries? Anyone know? The CPA seems to say the common law rule is not in effect in Cayman.

    • Anonymous says:

      Ask a Licenced Land Surveyor

      • Anonymous says:

        Neither of these responses seem responsive. Boundaries are fixed all the time, including boundaries that lie in the water such as lakes and rivers, and when parties don't agree then the courts give the answer. Land surveyors just do measurements, they don't decide what the law is. English statutory law doesn't seem relevant. So does Cayman law provide a statutorily fixed sea boundary or a common law "floating" one?

        Frankly, it's hard to believe this is an open issue but that's Cayman, i guess. I won't even mention the CPA's claim that the public has a "prescriptive" right to use the "beach" above the high water line.

    • Anonymous says:

      Boundaries can be fixed if they follow the correct procedure under the Law and regulations, but not if the are boundaries bounded by the sea. The UK also has a similarly worded land registry regime, and cannot fix such boundaries. In fact it is very difficult to even fix land boundaries, as all parties must agree. Of the millions of registered land plots in the UK only a tiny percentage have had land boundaries fixed. Seriously think about it, how do you think it would be if mud and sand had been deposited, and the government came along and dug that out to restore the now covered land back to sea bed? Also if you have land bounded by the sea, and build a sea wall, that can protect your boundary, but no after the fact…. Ie you can’t fill in what has been taken, and then build…. The law allows you to rebuild a seawall damaged by storm, but there has to have been one there in the first place…..If you still owned land eroded by the sea, there would be people in the East of England who owned land now two or three miles out from the coast……

  5. Anonymous says:

    You need to get your facts straight before you make stupid comments!  I used to live in South Sound in 2005 after Ivan and can personally vouch that there were still pleanty of Mangroves left aftter Ivan – although many did persish during the storm.  I used to catch (and release) many fish including Tarpon, Snook and Snappers from a Kayak in that very same spot that they are filling at the moment.  Guess those fish will have to find somewhere else to live if they haven't already been killed.

  6. Anonymous says:

    hmmm, it's an interesting dilemna given that boundaries all over the world will have similar issues to face with rising sea level and frequency of storms that change the landscape.

    it would be interesting to see where the law of the sea convention is concerned in this, as it could be argued that they are artificially extending their boundaries.  it's what they call the shifting baseline issue. 


    not to be on any particular side, but if the boundary into the sea is still up for debate, why didn't the DOE plant/replenish the mangroves in an area that was not a disputed area?  seems that would have solved some of this problem.

  7. SSM345 says:

    Clearly a spokesperon for RC Estates judging by the response, and its a carbon copy of every other, no matter what the subject…..look at them, they did it / are doing it, so why can't I?

    Take a look around at the moment and you would have noticed the amount of property on the market, so I dont quite understand your justification for more while you mess up a natural habitat which I will point out is a Replenishment Zone.

    Or perhaps I am mistaken and there is a huge waiting list for investors wanting to scoop up property in Cayman while the world is in a recession?

  8. Anonymous says:

    Disgusting. Worse that he is Caymanian but has no regard for the environment only the Holy dollar!

  9. Anonymous says:

    Mature mangrove is being bulldozed and destroyed between Snug Harbour and Canal Point by this developer. 

    Plenty of mangrove to attempt to transplant but its easier to bulldoze and pave over.

    Cannot wait till the proposed canal construction for this development starts and further pollutes North Sound.



    • Anonymous says:

      there will be no canal.  given all of the opposition the first time around, the developer amended plans and is proceeding to develop his land.  it will be low-cost development, that sounds a lot better than a nice rich development.

      • Anonymous says:

        Did he not submit a separate application for the canal which was approved?

      • Like It Is says:

        Oh god, I did not know that.  Why would they introduce low cost housing into a nice part of town like South Sound?  That is ridiculous.  I did not oppose the original plans because it seemed a good development, but what I hate the thought of is trouble being shipped into the neighbourhood.

  10. Savannah Resident says:

    Okay all members of the CPA should feel ashamed for allowing this project to move forward. This particular board needs to be removed and the ToR for the board require amending.  How a board can blatantly ignore a request by the DoE and Planning Department is completely unacceptable.  

    God be with the members of this board as Karma always prevails.  

    • Anonymous says:

      It would make sense to address a comment to the CPA, but they do not read these posts.  They only read the instructions coming from on HIGH!

      We know the culprit members of the CPA:

      In accordance with Sections 3(2) and 3(5) of the Development and Planning Law (2008 Revision), the Governor-in-Cabinet has re-appointed the following persons to the Central Planning Authority, to serve for a period of two years from 17 June 2010:

    • Kadafe says:

      I hope who donated the money for these plants finds out about this and never donates another dollar to the cayman islands again. What a set of greedy animals.

    • bobo says:

      south sound is dead…its no longer blue and green….it smells thanks to that drain pipe…took my son fishing on the dock the other day you cant see to the bottom in water that is 6 feet deep.


    • Knot S Smart says:

      Why cant we all just get along?

      We should either pay Rene for his waterfront land that was lost to Ivan, or just let him reclaim it and STF up…

      In the end its his land and he has a right to reclaim it…

      • peter milburn says:

        Bs He is taking more than he lost.What nature takes away should be left as is.We all know what can happen when we buy land in these areas.

    • Anonymous says:

      There wasn’t a single mangrove damaged in this venture. All of the mangroves that used to be there were destroyed by Ivan and subsequent storms. The only mangroves that were out there recently were the ones that the developer installed in pots (at great expense to the developer), which were moved away from the filled area prior to the fill being brought in. All of this was discussed and recorded at the CPA hearing. But, then again, why would “the activists” let the facts get in the way of a good story? This is all typical DOE propaganda designed to promote their agenda which is driven by a blind desire to have the absolute power to stop any development, by pushing Government to pass their draconian National Conservation legislation which would turn the entire island into a giant nature reserve, thereby effectively prohibiting development. And I’m certain this coastal boundary “issue” which has always been a matter of settled law (except for a few confused souls) is going to be used to try to push the Government towards “fixing” the law so that coastal boundaries are ambulatory. For all of you blinkered so-called activists that think that would be a wonderful thing, Ican tell you that if that ever happens, there are going to be more suits against the government than you can count by landowners who bought land under a Government-guaranteed title system (i.e. our Torrens registered land legislation) based on land values that are dictated or heavily influenced by zoning created by parliament under another law. To put it in perspective- we are talking about seaside property here, some of the most valuable property in the world, which has been bought under the assurance of guaranteed title and the ability to fix the boundaries if the same weren’t already fixed. If you tell these folks that the government is going to change the law so that their entire property can be reclaimed by the Government by the simple process of erosion and that they have no right to build any means of protecting themselves from that erosion, just because the DOE says so, then coastal properties will no longer be a very attractive investment at all. This includes properties that the condos and houses of some of these hypocritical “conscientious activists” are living in right now. I know some of you are thinking, great, we’ve already built and we don’t care about any new development, so let’s get rid of all of these nasty development investors, because we don’t need them! But I would invite you to think about how good life will be like in Cayman when every investor (except maybe Dart, who will have a field day buying it all up for a song) in real estate in Cayman dumps their property on the market and leaves town. Think that cant happen? Really? Well you tell a guy that his investment is about to be diminished by new legislation, especially in the current economic climate, and see what happens.
      By the way, could we do any enquiry to see who the appellants (the people behind “Protect South Sound” ) in this planning appeal really are, and how many of them have seaside property with mangroves on it? And, while you’re at it, find out which ones are either living on similar developments to this one and, better yet, which one had planning enforcement action brought against them recently for illegal development at the waters edge on their own property. The hypocrisy here really is disgusting.

      • Anonymous says:

        DOE propaganda??? DRACONIAN National Conservation law?? Blogger whoever you are you are a very ignorant person…..the island needs protection from developers who are willing to singlehandedly destroy t in order to fill their pockets….wake up bobo and smell the roses……..

    • YoungCaymanianFormerPoliticker says:

      Cayman has broken my heart and spirit. I used to be so proud of our islands. I used to believe the people here were more sensible, friendlier, smarter (nothing beats good old fashioned sense), but it’s been a long time since I’ve felt any of those things about my beloved country. I tried to get involved in politics when I saw the destruction of environment and values that was happening, but the old boys club reigns still….no room for anything new in their minds. “Contruction is industry” they said…how that could be a logical thought I didn’t know…we are a very finite land. My country. Is being destroyed before my very eyes and I don’t think that I can make a difference any longer…and it breaks my heart. So like the many people of Jamaica and India who left their homelands amid destruction, I will likely be leaving my homeland too. Human instinct is to survive. I no longer see how I can survive the daily heartbreak that my country deals me.

    • my oh my! says:

      May I suggest that when the decision by the CPA is reversed, remove every square in of fill that has been placed in the water, and bill RC Development for the cost of removing it.  

    • Red Flag says:

      You know, I remember pre Ivan South Sound and the beautiful drive by the sea and the large Casurinas that lined the road and really miss that.   Well, Ivan took all that and a little bit more.  I really think that a person that lost land to the sea would want to reclaim it if possible as that is a piece of his holdings that was unfairly taken away.  I know everyone who lost something in Ivan would like a chance to get back what they lost and some lost a lot more than a little bit of land.  There are a lot of things wrong with this situation, not the least being that none of the local neighbors want the area they have come accustomed to living in to change so radically as proposed by the developer and no one can blame them for that.  It seems to me the problem with this  reclaimation project is that it took so long for the developer to do it.  If he had started filling shortly after Ivan, while the reef and surrounding seabed was still in a state of shock, no one would have said much about it.  In fact people may have been grateful that he was fixing something Ivan had destroyed….but he didn't do that.  He has waited until a lot of work has been done to repair the coast and make it safe for the residents.  People have overcome Ivan's destruction and settled back into their everyday lives and are happy with their community.  The developer has waited until the real window for this project has closed and appears now to be using his connections in the development community to shove this through, no matter what anyone else thinks.  This is wrong and needs to be stopped.  XXXXX  Good luck with stopping this and get behind DOE.  They need all the community help they can get…..the rest of government sure won't.

    • Anonymous says:

      Yet another sensational diatribe about nasty evil development. With all the usual suspects involved.
      Could somebody please find out who and what exactly this “Protect South Sound” group is, and who died and willed to them the awesome power that they purport to wield in respect of all property located in South Sound?
      And what do you mean “it is understood that the law states that a coastal boundary cannot be fixed”? WHICH LAW IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS STATES THAT???! Please quote the provision forus please? You mean section 28 of the Land Survey Regulations? That simply provides howa coastal boundary should be surveyed by reference to the High Water Mark. A survey is simply the means by which a boundary is established at any given point in time. BUT Section 18 of the Registered Land Law provides a procedure for fixing ANY (including coastal) boundary that is precisely surveyed and, once it is fixed and registered as such IT IS FIXED. The fact that the DOE conveniently refuses to accept this unassailable legal position does not give you the right to report their opinion as fact or Law.
      The fact of the matter is that these points were fully ventilated before the CPA, and should be reflected in the minutes of the hearing.
      And while your at it, consider this: THERE IS NO MANGROVE BUFFER ANYWHERE IN SOUTH SOUND!!!
      Mangrove Buffer is a Zone which is shown clearly on the Development Plan for the Island of Grand Cayman, which Development Plan is passed into Law by the Legislative Assembly of the Cayman Islands. There is and has never been any MBZ in South sound. And, red mangroves are NOT, by virtue of their species, precious or protected plants under any law in Cayman.
      I would strongly suggest that you check your facts and take some proper legal advice from someone with relevant experience before publishing such a sensationally inaccurate story, carefully tailored to incite hatred for development and developer alike. At least try to give the impression that you are objective.
      And BTW, while you’re researching the legal position on all of this, please try to find and publish the provisions of Cayman Islands Law that creates the DOE, yet alone gives them the wide ranging remit that they purport to have with regards to boundaries etc. I’ll bet you a years worth of honest reporting that what you don’t find will truly surprise you.

      • Oh my! says:

        THERE'S AN OLD SAYING, that goes "it's not for the want of a tongue" why a JACK ASS doesn't talk.

      • Anonymous says:

        There is such a thing as the common law which must also be considered and the common law is quite clear a boundary cannot be fixed if it is a coastal boundary. Ifyou buy land bounded by they sea you risk losing it if there is erosion, conversely you also may gain land if material is naturally deposited, as happened to some in East End.

      • Anonymous says:

        The seaside boundary of any parcel has always been treated as “ambulatory”, subject to natural erosion and deposition. Look at Point of Sand in Little Cayman, this is constantly changing shape with the seasons and storms. To assume a particular time fixes this forever is nonsense.

        Watch the attached video:

        In this case once lost it is gone for ever, at least in Cayman storms can bring the sand back.

      • Anonymous says:

        I am all for protecting south sound, but I must ask where the group has been in the following;

        1.) Stopping massive over development of south sound coastline with gigantic homes that is completely ghastly.  The 3, 4 and even 5 (next to the dock) story monstrosities must be stopped.

        2.) Filling in by other developers closer to prospect (I saw that with my own two eyes, but no one would listen to me)

        3.) Blatant misuse of the South Sound public dock by dive operations and the use of the sound for commercial operations and mooring.  They even take very large compressed air tanks there which are explosive.

        4.) Blatant misuse of the South Sound public dock by fisher men leaving the dead carcasses of fish there to rot (and the smell wafts over).

        5.) Blatant misuse of the entire Sound by commercial kayak operations who have presumably killed some of the biggest coral heads in the sound due to cruise tourits not understanding the "don't touch" rule.

        6.) Worst of all, the sewage that is spewed from the South Sound swamp and Randyke day in and day out.  This needs to be stopped, it has completely marred the coastline.

        • Anonymous says:

          Well you could not have tried to tell too many people as NO ONE heard about it.  we would have objected to that also had we known

          2.) Filling in by other developers closer to prospect (I saw that with my own two eyes, but no one would listen to me)

    • Anonymous says:

      How that 2003 boundary was fixed will always be a secret kept between Mr Hislop and his associates. If ever you wanted a crystal clear example of how the real decision makers ofthis island can act with impugnity and the manner in which they operate this is it. Government does nothing. Developer gets what he wants. Natural environment gets destroyed. It's the same old story, it's not a Cayman specific problem but our environment is probably a little more crucial to our economy than other places. What we need is leadership from our elected officials but guess what? surprise surprise not a peep from either Party……. 

      • Anonymous says:

        I assume that the Fixed Boundary Survey that is being referred to is 51/052, which was Authenticated by the Chief Surveyor on 22.9.2003.

        There is a note on the face of that plan that states that the edge of the magroves have been taken from General Boundary Survey GB5360, and was not in fact re-surveyed in 51/052. Therefore the sea boundary is not "Fixed" but "General Boundary".



    • Anonymous says:

      for the anti-planning, anti-development crowd…..ask yourself….

      before ur house/condo was built…what was there?

      ask the same thing about the roads you drive on…. and shops you shop in……

      the hypocrisy of the 'cave' people is astounding….

      • Anonymous says:

        Before ur house/condo was built….what was there? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING but Nature in her beautiful state and "Natives" loved, enjoyed and missed it.  South Sound was a true beauty then with just about 10 – 15 homes and huge "Christmas Trees" as we called them then.  Not even the 'cave' people would want to change that if they could forsee the future.

    • Anonymous says:

      Guys, I am 16:46. I knew perfectly well that RC Estates is a Caymanian entity. I was being IRONIC to highlight the fact that far too many people in Cayman, including posters to this site, hammer the expats for "ruining the island" when, in truth, there is and always has been for the last 40 years plenty Caymanians (as well as expats) prepared to do it. And one even has a statue of himself in town, even though he personally drove the bulldozer that knocked down Fort George, our only truly historical building.

    • village idiot of Absurdistan says:

      This is a disappointing story. I believe mangroves have incredible value for coastal protection and a nursery for many of the reef fish. They are also an impressive filter. 

      But what really disturbs me, is the reclamation is taking place despite there being no apparent need or demand for more property to be developed. The island has a large amount of inventory available for sale or rent, yet development continues, and degradation of the environment continues. 

      Poor decision making on a number of levels including RC Estates. 

    • Anonymous says:

      They call it Paradise,I don't know why.

    • Anonymous says:

      Its a shame the little mangrove shoots couldn't have been transplanted somewhere else. Before the bulldozer ran' em down.

      D.O.E …… ?  Mangrove transplant ? Yes… No ???? D.O.E……are you there ?

      • Anonymous says:

        The DOE does not have any power what so ever over anyone destroying any marine or land plants.  The government of the day and likely future adminsitrations will likely be releuctant to pass any law that will slow or stop development.  It will be compeltely up to the good hearts of the land owner and activist to save these plants.

      • Anonymous says:

        Obviously you missed the part where (a) it took overseas money to plant them the first time and (b) government is broke, so no, Government doesn't have the money to send the DoE out to transplant mangroves that the Government has deemed it acceptable to bulldoze. That would ust be a waste of Government resources, wouldn't it? Considering it would have been free to leave them alone. Bandaid solutions, like transplainging a few saplings, are not the solution. Proper development controlls are.

    • peter milburn says:

      I hope he is satisfied with what he is doing as he mobviously has no regard for the enviroment in that area.Time longer than rope so we shall see what happens to that area during another  ivan.Nature has a way of coming back to bite these types of people in the ASS.Like another poster has said we will soon lose all that makes the tourists come here and then what will happen to our next few generations including his own kids and their kids.

      • Anonymous says:

        How can you disagree with that??

      • Anonymous says:

        Where was the out cry and protests when private developers (ie. Ritz Carlton) destroyed that large "protected" area of mangroves on the West Bay road and when the government dumped up the sea in GT at what we knew as Alice Bay (next to the lighthouse in front of CNB)?  I don't condone what the developer is doing in South Sound but would just dare to add what is good for the goose should apply to the ganderl.   If foreigners and government can do it, why not some other Caymanian?  This is exactlty what will happen when we bend the rules and look the other way for some people or entity.  Sorry to say Caymanians have lost it all a long time ago.

        • Anonymous says:

          Where were YOU?!


          There was massive outcry when the Ritz was destroying the mangroves on 7MB. In fact Rene's now (or former but recent) spokesperson Mr Conolly took the Ritz to the Grand Court (along with the National Trust) to try to prevent the mangrove destruction by the Ritz. 

      • Anonymous says:

        nice cliched soundbites…

    • Anonymous says:

      Wouldn't you want to reclaim land that Ivan took from you?  People would do exactly what RC is doing in a heart beat.  It's always wrong, until you have the same opportunity.

      • Anonymous says:

        Do you not understand, coast line property have no fixed boundry !

      • Anonymous says:

        It was a mangrove buffer that he had to protect and not touch! It is now the ocean – and not his land.  These are the laws of nature  –  with which man should not interfer. And all part and parcel of owning and buying water front property. Coastline boundaries change naturally – and so too does your coastal property boundary. 

        • Life's a Beach says:

          'Coastline boundaries change naturally’???

          No, they are set and fixed on the day of the survey.

          Coastal property boudaries don't change, legally.

          Though, one day it can be at the high water mark and the next day it's under water.

          That is the risk that developers (and offshore investors) have to accept when buying oceanfront land.

          Trying to reclaim what is part of a natural cycle, in my opinion, is most likely an ‘illegal’ action.

          And, as far as I’m concerned, so do all other shoreline disruptions.

          Mess with Mother Nature and eventually she’ll bite you in the ass….as others have said, that’s Karma for you.

      • Life's a Beach says:

        I live on the ocean.

        Except for storms or hurricanes, the trees and vegetation have never been touched except for weather damage and cleanup afterwards.

        Over the years the beach front has changed 20 feet in either direction.

        That's Nature……live with it.

      • Anonymous says:

        My family didn't get to reclaim our land after Gilbert.  Matter of fact, I wanted to rebuild on the same location and they said, "sorry it's too close to the sea."  Even though there was a cement base floor, they wouldn't let me build a small room on it.

    • Anonymous says:

      Be careful! Karma is a b*tch!

    • Anonymous says:

      Why not save the mangroves and at least use them elsewhere? Government is incompetent through and through …

      • Anonymous says:

        Where would you suggest they replant them to (leaving aside the cost of moving the plants) thats not at risk of being 'reclaimed' in the future now that this rulling by the CPA has set this horrible precedent? – Stop missing the forrest for the trees.

    • Guardian Watch Tower says:


      The problem is that the CPA as a board (and I believe this board and its appointed members of Govt makes this decision) along with sitting Govt to give the green light to bulldozer over the mangrove that buffers the land which is now vanishing. You see they have to push this tru fast due to time line of May 2013 – The 7-month fast food conveyer belt get it done and fill ASAP!!! 

      Will, May 2013 can’t come too soon!!! 

      For all the concerns Caymanians and the future generation have your note pad ready to ask the simple but HARD CORE like 

      #1 – Where do you stand on this development that RC Estates (or any other developer) in saving our mangroves. Case in point Mr. XXX future candidate, the South Sound Road project or another soon to be gone mangrove system.

      #2 – Will you support or appoint incompetent developers or home owners businessmen on these boards? 

      Ask every single one there position on what happened to the mangrove replenishment project that was partially funded by an overseas grant to the Cayman government?

      Make sure to put a list of hard asked questions (and you want answers at the same time) for the future of our children.  

      The Guardian Watch Tower


    • Anonymous says:

      If only it was a foreign developer then at least such destruction and total disregard for our beautiful island would be more forgiving. Sadly this is a local developer Mr Renee Hislop. Mr Hislop you should be ashamed of yourself!

    • Anonymous says:

      Once again its who you know and whos making the dollas. Nothing to do with what is right and just. Dispicable. There are two sets of rules on this island. Some people cant have electricity because a plug is not situated in the correct place in their house and others are allowed to do this. Im sorry for the people who live on Bel Air drive. You going to get it even worse on the next one.

    • Anonymous says:

      What I dont understand is why Rene is so greedy.  Just stop and maybe give someting back for a change.  You and your family have enough.  You fed off the old families here and developed their land. They gave back ten-fold and you built a bigger house for yourself…shame. Many would say you did not give them a fair deal, but that is the past.  Today you want for nothing so only greed can be fueling this development.

      • Anonymous says:

        What a bitter person…if this makes him greedy, what does dart’s developments make him?

      • Anonymous says:

        Based on your logic there are a lot of caymanian families that should shut down their companies because they have “enough”

    • Anonymous says:


    • Anonymous says:

      Speachless! Does anything positive happens on these islands?

    • Anonymous says:

      Amnesia is a gift for many. Clearly they don’t remember how Ivan ripped through South Sound!

    • Anonymous says:

      RC Estates? Judging by this company's total disregard for Cayman's environment, it must be a foreign developer.

      • Anonymous says:

        Sorry, you are wrong, the developer is Caymanian Rene Hislop.

      • Anonymous says:

        You must be a foreign blogger! (LOL). You surely know the people who spoil Cayman the most are Caymanian, & who let this happen. Developers have their mates on the Boards & in Government; it's not the foreigners doing all this (well, ok, there's Ryan, but Mac let him do it, which is partly my point. Also Dart, & Mac let's him do it too, although he's Caymanian now I believe).

      • Anonymous says:


      • Anonymous says:

        It is owned by a Caymanian and that is common knowledge.

    • Anonymous says:

      "Pave paradise. Put up a parking lot." — Joni Mitchell


      Parking lots here are profitable………for a lot of people.

    • Anonymous says:

      Imagine….in 50 years time this island will be a big stinking, smoking ball of sh!t. But boy it will have some nice houses on it.

      • Rorschach says:

        50 years??  Take a look's happening right now…

      • Anonymous says:

        In 50 years the sea level will be 20 to 50 cm higher.


        Cayman should be  building dykes today to get ready or a lot of beach front property will be under water.


        Mount Trashmore is looking more like an attractive building lot every day.

    • SSM345 says:

      Why don't they just scrap the whole zoning of that area i.e. the replenishment zone, and just let Renee dredge /  destroy the whole lot?

      Then do the same for all the other parks for anyone else who wants to develop.

      And we can all sit back and watch the ocean cave in on itself and all the tourists disappear  because we have completely destroyed our main attraction, the sea.

      And then it will be someone else' fault just like everything else on this piece of 2×4.

      • Anonymous says:

        That is exactly what he want to do with the Red Bay Cruise Port proposal. Dredge, pave, destroy, and replace nature with a cutesy fake little town.

    • October 2012
      M T W T F S S