Climate Resilience Requires Collaboration

The government’s recent announcement of Route B3 as the “environmentally optimal” choice for the East-West Arterial (EWA) project has raised significant concerns. While we recognize the complexity of these decisions, the claim that Route B3 is the best environmental option feels incomplete and prompts critical questions about the decision-making process.

Unanswered Questions and Concerns

Incomplete Assessments: The government’s assertion lacks essential hydrology and peat depth assessments, making it difficult to accept Route B3 as “environmentally optimal. While the government claims that Route B3 offers favorable construction conditions, this assertion is unsubstantiated without complete design and hydrology analyses. We ask that these assessments be completed and shared with the public to ensure that the decision is grounded in comprehensive scientific evidence.

Ecological Impact: The central mangrove wetlands are more than just land; they are a vital part of our island’s ecological system, providing flood protection, carbon sequestration, and a habitat for diverse species. The decision to route through these sensitive areas, even if skirting direct impact on National Trust land, raises serious concerns about our commitment to environmental stewardship. It is crucial that we carefully consider the long-term consequences of fragmenting this habitat, ensuring that our choices today do not irreversibly harm the environment that sustains us.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The claim that Route B3 will result in lower long-term greenhouse gas emissions compared to Route B2 must be supported by a more comprehensive analysis. While traffic emissions may be reduced, the environmental cost of peat removal and potential industrial activity along the route must also be factored in together with the construction. We urge the government to provide a complete picture, including all relevant data, so that the public can fully understand the trade-offs involved.

A Call for Collaboration

This issue is not just about a road - it’s about the future of our islands. The best decisions are made through collaboration between the government and the community. The EWA project, the proposed cargo and cruise ports, and related developments should be part of a broader vision that benefits all Caymanians.

Protecting Our Communities

We are concerned that Route B3 may prioritize space for future industrial development, including a potential cargo port, over the needs of existing communities and the Terms of Reference for the project. Decisions must be driven by what’s best for Caymanians, not external or commercial interests. The chosen route should enhance community connectivity, support sustainable transportation, and improve residents’ quality of life, not isolate communities or worsen traffic issues.

Preserving Our Natural Heritage

The proposed deforestation of wetland habitat for Route B3 poses a serious risk to our environment. The black mangrove wetlands, which are home to numerous species, including our national parrot, play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological balance of our islands. Fragmenting this area between a road and a cargo port or industrial park is environmentally damaging and such an approach demonstrates a profound lack of understanding of the ecological importance of these habitats and the species that rely on them. We must carefully weigh the environmental costs against the perceived benefits of development, ensuring that our actions today do not jeopardize the natural heritage we all hold dear.

Climate Negligence

Labeling Route B3 as environmentally optimal is misleading and irresponsible, particularly amid a global climate emergency. This choice, which fails several indicators of the common IFC Performance Standard 6, prioritizes short-term infrastructure goals over long-term environmental sustainability, as highlighted in the RSPB Route Corridor Optioneering Report. It risks irreversible damage to our island’s natural resources and undermines our resilience to climate change.

Call for a Referendum

The decision to develop land along Route B3 appears politically motivated, potentially disregarding Caymanians’ needs. With immigration growth projections upwards of 250,000, there is a real danger of Caymanians becoming an even smaller minority in their own country, risking erosion of their cultural identity. Planning large-scale infrastructure, such as the EWA and proposed ports, should be holistic, considering impacts on the environment, economy, and social fabric.

Given the lasting impact of the EWA project, this decision should not proceed without direct public input. We call for a referendum question to be added to the ballot, allowing the people to choose the most sustainable option between Routes B2 and B3, based on the expert Shortlist Evaluation Report. This ensures the decision reflects the will of the people and considers the Caymanian community’s genuine needs, not just political or private interests.

A Call for Reconsideration

We are at a critical juncture. The decisions made now will shape the Cayman Islands for generations. We urge the government to reconsider Route B3, conduct comprehensive assessments, and prioritize long-term environmental and community interests. This is about more than infrastructure - it’s about the future we want to build together.

This moment calls for collaboration, partnership, and a commitment to true democracy. We ask the government to engage with the public, value transparency, and choose a path that ensures the well-being of our islands, communities, and future.

We must work together to make decisions that reflect our shared values and create a sustainable future for all Caymanians.