NASSAU, BAHAMAS — Environmental groups have expressed serious concerns about Disney’s efforts to “rush through” environmental approval for their proposed $400 million cruise ship port at Lighthouse Point, Eleuthera.
Waterkeeper Alliance, Friends of the Earth US and four Bahamian environmental groups — reEarth, Bahamas Reef Environmental Educational Foundation (BREEF), Save the Bays and Waterkeepers Bahamas — said they are dismayed by indications that the thousands of public comments submitted recently “that raised dozens, if not hundreds, of questions about the adequacy of Disney’s environmental impact assessment (EIA) will not get serious consideration”.
In a statement released yesterday, it was noted that on May 7, the organizations submitted detailed comments, including from multiple independent experts, which were highly critical of the adequacy of the EIA.
“Among its deficiencies, the EIA fails to disclose data about the economics of the project, making it impossible to verify Disney’s claims of benefits for local communities and The Bahamas,” it was noted.
“The EIA ignores climate risks, COVID and threats to endangered coral, groupers and sea turtles.
“It fails to consider the impacts of operating the port with up to one million visitors each year.”
Dinah Bear, former general counsel at the US President’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), stated: “This document suggests a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of EIA… As it stands, the document does not conform to international and US standards for EIA.”
More than 30,000 people joined Friends of the Earth US in submitting comments directly to the Bahamian government that pointed out these and other deficiencies. Nearly 450,000 people have supported the Stop Disney campaign’s Change.org petition calling upon Disney to rethink its plans for Lighthouse Point.
Under Bahamian regulations, Disney has 21 business days — or until June 7 — in which to compile all the public comments and prepare responses.
Yet, in replying to the submission of a comment, Disney Cruise Lines has seemed to make up its mind already: “As we have said from the beginning, we will only move forward with a project at Lighthouse Point if we are able to do so in a way that aligns with our company’s deep and longstanding commitment to the environment. The EIA has confirmed this will be possible — and that there will be no loss of marine or terrestrial biodiversity — with the appropriate environmental management plan in place.”
Executive Director of Waterkeeper Alliance Marc Yaggi said: “Disney’s claim of no loss of biodiversity is no more than ‘greenwashing’. Disney’s EIA does not include any management plans, so how can it be asserted that they are ‘appropriate’? The EIA did not find threats to species because it did not bother to look at them.”
Opponents have continued to propose Disney adopt alternative options for development of the area.
Among those expressing “disappointment” with Disney’s apparent decision to move forward with its current plans were James Lima, a New York real estate and economic development expert; Marcie Keever, Oceans and Vessels program director at Friends of the Earth US; and S Jacob Scherr, former international program director at the Natural Resources Defense Council and a senior advisor to the Last Chance campaign.
reEarth Executive Director Sam Duncombe stated: “We want Disney to live up to its environmental commitments, to deal with the new realities of climate change, pandemics and racial injustice, and to work with the local organizations on truly a transformative development at Lighthouse Point. Environmentalists are ready to cooperate with Disney to find another more suitable site for its port.”
