THE IMPOSITION OF THE HOPE/DOCH FOUR CANAL: CALLOUSNESS AND ARROGANCE OF THE JAGDEO/PPP REGIME

Apr 18, 2010 APNU Column, Features / Columnists

---

THE RESIDENTS’ PETITION

In a document, dated 19 April, 2009 and signed by two hundred and sixty two (262) residents of the East Coast Demerara villages of Dochfour, Two Friends, Hope/Lowlands and Ann’s Grove, the residents stated that they were only made aware of the Hope/Doch Four canal proposal on 7 February, 2009, “…at a street corner meeting to which residents were invited by the Minister of Agriculture along with the Head and Surveyor from the National Drainage and Irrigation Authority (NDIA).”

The residents further stated, “At no time were residents provided with anything in writing, either to justify the need for the new canal, or to show how the Government will calculate compensation for loss of homes, crops, livestock and farmlands.

“Nor has any explanation been provided to assure DochFour and all surrounding communities that the new canal will not threaten human lives and livelihoods.”

The document also stated that, “On 23 March, 2009, at the invitation of the Ministry of Agriculture, some forty residents from DochFour met with officials of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Privatisation Unit, the NDIA and the Lands and Surveys.

“The request was repeated for a written document explaining what the project was intended to accomplish and why it had to pass through Dochfour. The officials informed the residents that a feasibility study had not been undertaken. They also confirmed that the new structure would be a high level, rather than a low level canal…”

The problem, for which the National Drainage and Irrigation Authority (NDIA) is seeking an engineering solutions, is relief from the dangers of overtopping of the East Demerara Water Conservancy (EDWC) during periods when there is a high accumulation of water therein.

NO CONSIDERATION OF OTHER OPTIONS

The reality is that there are options other than the construction of the High Level Foreshore Discharge Option, commonly referred to as the Hope/Dochfour relief canal, which should be carefully evaluated.

It is, therefore, nothing short of arrogance, insensitivity and the complete disregard for accountability and transparency in the expenditure of state resources (the resources belonging to the People of Guyana) that, for a project of this complexity, as well as one which will create some very serious environmental risks, neither a Feasibility Study nor an Environmental Impact Study has been undertaken.

In his letter to the Editor of the Kaieteur News, dated 1 February, 2010, Mr. Charles Sohan, a very experienced and knowledgeable Guyanese Engineer, pointed out, “In any event, based on the preferred Canal location the designers have a number of complex and challenging engineering and financial problems to overcome before contract documents could be finalized.”

EXCESSIVE COST & ENVIRONMENTAL RISK

An initial estimate of the construction cost for the Hope/Dochfour relief canal, before the final design and evaluation steps have been completed, is $3.6Bn. However, if account is taken of: the cofferdam required for the eight-door sluice; the sea defence protection concrete walls at least 100 feet. both sides downstream of the outlet sluice; the length of the drainage channel and embankment over 10km long; the road diversion with a high level pre-stressed concrete bridge along the main roadway; the access road for construction; and the access bridges across the canal, the cost is likely to be in excess of $4.0Bn.

The major and most frightening environmental risk is the likely catastrophic consequence of a breach of the banks of this high-level canal, which, for eight of its 12 miles, would be about eight to nine feet higher than the surrounding terrain.

Such a breach, apart from the possibility of the loss of lives, could cause considerable loss or damage to existing housing and other built infrastructure, as well as disrupt the livelihoods and well-being of the inhabitants in the surrounding communities of Dochfour, Two Friends, Hope/Lowlands and Ann’s Grove.

Yet, amazingly, according to the report in the Kaieteur News of 13 April, 2010, “The technical phase of the Hope/Dochfour Relief Channel is over, excavation of the channel will begin shortly and the tender requests for construction of the necessary structures along the route of the relief channel will soon be advertised – this from the Minister of Agriculture, Robert Persaud.”

The report also informs, “According to the Minister, the actual excavation of the earthen channel will be undertaken by the government and will not be contracted out. The Ministry has purchased 10 excavators which are scheduled to arrive in the country shortly.”

CONSULTANTS’ CONCERNS

In his letter to the Editor, Mr. Charles Sohan pointed out that, “It was evident from the Consultants report the proposed Canal at Hope/Dochfour will not alleviate flood risks per se from the EDWC but it could provide some measure of flood relief if it operated in conjunction with the Lama and Maduni Sluices discharging into the Mahaica River.”

In fact, the Consultants appointed by the Government, stated, in their Report, that “the client instructed the Consultant to continue the design of the Relief Channel based upon the deep foreshore option and maintaining the width of the way-leave.

Concerns were however expressed on excavating an outfall channel 2.5 km in length and maintaining it at an invert if 14.00m GD”.

They further stated, “A much shorter relief channel route is possible between Flagstaff and the Mahaica River ” and “It is possible that drainage in the Mahaica could be improved in the lower return period events. The Mahaica option would also need maintenance, but that requirement may not be any greater than the maintenance required for the Hope/Dochfour options.

“The capital cost of the Flagstaff – Mahaica relief route would be significantly lower than that of the Hope/Dochfour relief.”

THE INESCAPABLE SOLUTION

From all the information and analyses accessed, it is clear that flood relief would only be effective, with or without the Hope/Dochfour canal, through the dredging of the Mahaica River as far upstream as beyond Belmonte, along with the removal of the sand bar from its mouth.

In addition, there is the urgent need to dredge the approaches and rehabilitate the Lama, Maduni, Cunha and Kofi sluices, along with the canal leading to the Land of Canaan Spill Weir to restore the entire system to the original design capacity.

As Mr. Sohan recommended, “It is hoped that in their collective wisdom to resolve the many seemingly intractable water resources problems facing Guyana, the MOA/NDIA will proceed urgently to conclude arrangements with the World Bank to get the Conservancy Adaptation Study started since its findings will provide a blueprint for comprehensive strategic development of drainage, irrigation and flood control not only for EDWC but the coastland as well.”

The information presented above and all the available analyses suggest that the relief canal should be built between Flagstaff and the Mahaica River. Therefore, the Hope/Dochfour relief canal is not necessary and should not be built!

---

---