RISK & OPPORTUNITY FOR

RIVERBANK STABILITY FROM

NATURAL DISASTERS

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RIVERBANK STABILIZATION IN

GOVERNMENT?

FORESTRY DEPARTMENT

What was the future risk for riverbanks?Frequent, heavy rainfall causing flash floods

and soil erosionDeforestation especially by farmers along

the rivers

HURRICANE TOMAS 2010Damages to Forest sector:1. < 80 landslides majority of

which were on private lands

2. 80% of riverbanks were significantly eroded and left unstable

3. Water intakes compromised

4. Government changed hands and removed Forestry from Agriculture to Ministry of Sustainable Development

5. New management

Copyright www.wunderground.com

Copyright Forestry Dept.

WHAT FORESTRY DID AFTER TOMAS Sourced outside funds for landslide and riverbank rehabilitation - got

some from foreign organizations

Worked alongside players in the water sector to mitigate the impacts on the water resources of the country

Focused on implementing existing management plans including emergency management plans for forestry throughout the country

Needed and tried to source a consultancy for a new management plan

Conducted clearing of debris from rivers and began riverbank and landslide rehabilitation through project funding not by government funds

Engaged the schools, NGO’s, community groups, farmers and others in riverbank planting, and planting within landslides that occurred near communities, public road etc.

DID THE RIVERBANKS RECOVER IN TIME FOR THE NEXT SHOCK?

Copyright Forestry Department

Copyright Forestry Department

NO!!!

CHRISTMAS EVE TROUGH 2013!!!

All pictures are Copyright Forestry Department

POST TROUGH STATUS Water was a main cause in the second shock Riverbank and soils were still recovering from the

first shock therefore suffered serious degradation Rivers were not de-silted enough and silt from

hurricane was deposited on either side of riverbank which compromised its stability

Not enough time to recover between shocks Reactive management continued to take place Government funds to Forestry was reduced Networking between certain sectors such as

Planning, Infrastructure, farmers not strengthened

PRESENT STATUS OF FORESTRY SECTOR Forestry not visible enough on the ground Management about to change hands

again Received funding to clear only 2 rivers Budget cuts within government Plenty of projects coming on stream but

with little or no capacity building within the organization

Not enough resources to devote to all the projects and to riverbank stabilization

LESSONS LEARNT Risk Management, before, during and after a shock is key in

reducing forest related vulnerabilities especially on riverbanks.

Riverbanks still not stabilized, due to private land ownership conflicts, not enough funds to clear all affected rivers of debris

Recommendations from consultancies need to be revised, implemented, monitored, evaluated and reported on in order to reduce vulnerability especially in the forest sector

Legal instruments need to reviewed, improved upon and enacted

Inter-sector networks needed strengthening, farmers needed to be educated

Need to build capacity within Forestry and the communities

OPPORTUNITIES FOR RIVERBANK STABILITY AND FORESTRY After every shock comes opportunity in the form of project funding,

training and capacity building of staff, educating farmers, etc.

Funds for stabilizing riverbanks by outside sources

Funds available for a consultancy towards a new management plan

Opportunity to carry out research on species vulnerability – to test what species on a riverbank can better withstand effects of hurricane, flood, etc. especially as climate change is now a main focal point in government

Opportunity to implement, assess and evaluate the effectiveness of the new management plan when completed.

New project opportunity to assist with sustainable livelihoods by researching slope vulnerability and rehabilitation in the worst hit farming areas, and by helping farmers select less vulnerable crops for these areas.