• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Preface
 Introduction
 Conference participants
 Part I - Citizen action in...
 Symposium
 Part II - Government planning for...
 Part III - National resources...
 Part IV - Economic factors...
 Part V - Site selection and...
 Part VI - Historic landmarks
 Part VII - Summation and resol...
 Map of the Eastern Caribbean...














Group Title: Conservation in the eastern Caribbean : proceedings
Title: Conservation in the eastern Caribbean
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00078502/00001
 Material Information
Title: Conservation in the eastern Caribbean proceedings
Physical Description: xx, 252 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: College of the Virgin Islands
Virgin Islands of the United States
American Conservation Association
Conference: Eastern Caribbean Conservation Conference, 1965
Publisher: Caribbean Research Institute, College of the Virgin Islands
Place of Publication: St. Thomas
Publication Date: 1965?]
 Subjects
Subject: Conservation of natural resources -- Congresses -- Antilles, Lesser   ( lcsh )
Conservation of natural resources -- Congresses   ( lcsh )
Genre: non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: Sponsored by the College of the Virgin Islands, Government of the Virgin Islands of the U.S.A., and the American Conservation Association.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00078502
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000134004
oclc - 27738661
notis - AAQ0048

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page i
        Page i-a
    Title Page
        Page ii
        Page iii
    Table of Contents
        Page iv
    Preface
        Page v
        Page vi
        Page vii
        Page viii
        Page ix
        Page x
    Introduction
        Page xi
        Page xii
        Page xiii
        Page xiv
    Conference participants
        Page xv
        Page xvi
        Page xvii
        Page xviii
        Page xix
        Page xx
    Part I - Citizen action in conservation
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Symposium
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
    Part II - Government planning for conservation
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Government policies in conservation - Dr. Francis X. Mark
            Page 37
            Page 38
            Page 39
            Page 40
            Page 41
            Page 42
        Protecting national resource values with zoning and related legal measures - Dr. Erling D. Solberg
            Page 43
            Page 44
            Page 45
            Page 46
            Page 47
            Page 48
            Page 49
            Page 50
        Discussion
            Page 51
            Page 52
            Page 53
            Page 54
            Page 55
            Page 56
            Page 57
            Page 58
            Page 59
            Page 60
            Page 61
            Page 62
            Page 63
            Page 64
            Page 65
            Page 66
            Page 67
            Page 68
            Page 69
            Page 70
            Page 71
            Page 72
            Page 73
            Page 74
            Page 75
            Page 76
            Page 77
            Page 78
            Page 79
            Page 80
            Page 81
            Page 82
            Page 83
            Page 84
            Page 85
            Page 86
            Page 87
            Page 88
    Part III - National resources management
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Some problems associated with the management of national resources - Dr. Arthur E. Dammann
            Page 91
            Page 92
            Page 93
            Page 94
            Page 95
            Page 96
            Page 97
            Page 98
        Discussion
            Page 99
            Page 100
            Page 101
            Page 102
            Page 103
            Page 104
            Page 105
            Page 106
            Page 107
            Page 108
            Page 109
            Page 110
            Page 111
            Page 112
            Page 113
            Page 114
            Page 115
            Page 116
            Page 117
            Page 118
            Page 119
            Page 120
            Page 121
            Page 122
    Part IV - Economic factors in conservation
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Economics and conservation - Fred M. Gottheil
            Page 125
            Page 126
            Page 127
            Page 128
            Page 129
            Page 130
            Page 131
            Page 132
        Discussion
            Page 133
            Page 134
            Page 135
            Page 136
            Page 137
            Page 138
            Page 139
            Page 140
            Page 141
            Page 142
            Page 143
            Page 144
            Page 145
            Page 146
            Page 147
            Page 148
            Page 149
            Page 150
            Page 151
            Page 152
            Page 153
            Page 154
            Page 155
            Page 156
            Page 157
            Page 158
            Page 159
            Page 160
            Page 161
            Page 162
            Page 163
            Page 164
            Page 165
            Page 166
            Page 167
            Page 168
            Page 169
            Page 170
            Page 171
            Page 172
            Page 173
            Page 174
            Page 175
            Page 176
            Page 177
            Page 178
            Page 179
            Page 180
            Page 181
            Page 182
    Part V - Site selection and conservation
        Page 183
        Page 184
        An approach to site selection for national parks, national reserves and other national areas - Dr. Carl A. Carlozzi
            Page 185
            Page 186
            Page 187
            Page 188
            Page 189
            Page 190
            Page 191
            Page 192
            Page 193
            Page 194
            Page 195
            Page 196
            Page 197
            Page 198
            Page 199
            Page 200
    Part VI - Historic landmarks
        Page 201
        Page 202
        Discussion
            Page 203
            Page 204
            Page 205
            Page 206
            Page 207
            Page 208
            Page 209
            Page 210
            Page 211
            Page 212
            Page 213
            Page 214
            Page 215
            Page 216
            Page 217
            Page 218
            Page 219
            Page 220
            Page 221
            Page 222
            Page 223
            Page 224
            Page 225
            Page 226
            Page 227
            Page 228
            Page 229
            Page 230
    Part VII - Summation and resolutions
        Page 231
        Page 232
        Page 233
        Page 234
        Page 235
        Page 236
        Page 237
        Page 238
        Page 239
        Page 240
        Page 241
        Page 242
        Page 243
        Page 244
        Page 245
        Page 246
        Page 247
        Page 248
        Page 249
        Page 250
        Page 251
        Page 252
    Map of the Eastern Caribbean Islands
        Page 253
Full Text








:1,


-P.-..


5'I1'I


p ,


1333. 7j2o7ia

1965
c.2,

























UNIVERSITY

OF FLORIDA

LIBRARIES







THIS VOLUME HAS BEEN
REVIEWED
FOR PRESERVATION.

Date:


-'I


I








EASTERN CARIBBEAN


CONSERVATION


CONFERENCE


SPONSORED BY


COLLEGE OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
Dr. Lawrence C. Wanlass, President


GOVERNMENT OF THE
VIRGIN ISLANDS OF THE U.S.A.
Hon. Ralph M. Paiewonsky, Governor


AMERICAN CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION
Laurence S. Rockefeller, President




ORGANIZING COMMITTEE


James Blaut
Alistair McIntyre


Henry L. Diamond
Louis Shulterbrandt


Thomas R. Herrick
Coordinator











October 1 4, 1965


CANEEL BAY PLANTATION


U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS


Published by Caribbean Research Institute
College of the Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands








333.

(psr
57.1














CONTENTS


Page

TITLE PAGE ... .............. .. .... **........ .. I

PREFACE ........................ ................. V

INTRODUCTION ... .......... ........................ XI

CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS ......................... XV

PART I CITIZEN ACTION IN CONSERVATION ........ 1

Symposium .................................. 3

PART II GOVERNMENT PLANNING FOR CONSERVATION ... 35

Government Policies in Conservation -
Dr. Francis X. Mark ........................ 37

Protecting National Resource Values with
Zoning and Related Legal Measures Dr.Erling
D. Solberg ................................. 43

Discussion ................................. 51

PART III NATIONAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ........ 89

Some Problems Associated with the Management
of National Resources Dr. Arthur E. Dammann 91

Discussion .............. ...... ..........*** 99

PART IV ECONOMIC FACTORS IN CONSERVATION ...... 123

Economics and Conservation Fred M. Gottheil 125

Discussion ....... ................ ... ..... 133

PART V SITE ELECTION AND CONSERVATION ......... 183

An Approach to Site Selection for National
Parks, National Reserves and Other National
Areas Dr. Carl A. Carlozzi ............... 185

PART VI HISTORIC LANDMARKS .................... 201

Discussion .............. ................. 203

PART VII SUMMATION AND RESOLUTIONS ........... 231












PREFACE
by
Mr. Laurence Rockefeller

(Consisting of the remarks delivered at
Governor Paiewonsky's Reception for Con-
ference Participants.)

I am pleased to have this opportunity to thank, on behalf of

the American Conservation Association, our two distinguished co-

sponsors of the Eastern Caribbean Conservation Conference, Governor

Paiewonsky and his associates of the Virgin Islands Government, and

Dr. Wanlass and his associates, Dr. Blaut and Mr. Herrick of the

Caribbean Research Institute. We are also indebted to Mr. Givens

and his National Park Service team for what they have done to make

this possible, and to Bill Faber and the Caneel Bay staff in doing

a superb job of handling this for us. My two associates who have

been spearheading our participation were Henry Diamond and Mildred

Layne.

The inspiration for this conference really goes back to Carl

Carlozzi, who is here with us this afternoon, and who spoke at the

Conference. His original Ph.D. study not only suggested the Con-

ference, but gave it much of its direction. It was his concept

that the preservation of the resources of this area was the concern

of all of the people and that therefore this was the one denomin-

ator that transcends international frontiers to draw these people

together for the common good.

I believe we have made a splendid start, and I hope that Dr.








Wanlass and the college might somehow be a coordinating group to

continue our efforts. I would be pleased if in three or five years

from now we would want to have another conference. We could capi-

talize on everything that we have accomplished and review our pro-

gress. I was amazed at the background of experience and knowledge

represented at the Conference. It was a little overwhelming to some

of us at the lay level. I have been trying to put together in some

layman's language some of the basic aspects that we were discussing

in the simplest possible terms.

To me the broadest common denominator that we have is the qual-

ity of the environment we live in, whether urban or in the country-

side. This is one aspect. Another is preservation in various aspects;

another emphasizes outdoor recreation. The President of the United

States has given a new dimension to this whole field in the emphasiz-

ing of natural beauty. His concept is a dramatic breakthrough of a

society reaching beyond its material goals of security and well-

being.

These four different concepts I have just mentioned are all re-

lated to the common raw materials of our renewable resources. They

are air, water, forest, soil, fish and animals, including humans.

These elements together make up our natural environment. None of

them can we take for granted. It seems to me that any action that

breaks this chain of life impairs our well being. In these islands

we have a classic example of the price we pay for a lack of concern

for these basics. When the rain forest land was cut over, soil

erosion followed and the watersheds were destroyed or seriously im-








paired. This was a very costly short-term expedient. So it is for

each one of these qualities of environment each one must survive if

the whole is to survive and be preserved.

There are many facets of action that relate to this chain of

life. There are obvious things that we can be doing directly, per-

sonally, through our local government, through our civic organiza-

tions or elected representatives. As you know, in the United States

Mrs. Johnson has emphasized primarily what we can do as individuals:

clean up our immediate back yards, paint where paint will do some

good, plant and concern ourselves by brightening up and making it

a more enjoyable community in which to live. She and others who

have seen it done have been astounded by how people have identified

themselves and have a little of their youth problems solved. Once

the community feels a part of the effort and is uplifted by it,

exciting differences have come about.

In New York, citizen groups are putting pools, sandboxes and

small play areas in the spaces between buildings and creating places

where people can meet. Much can be done in a park where people can

feel a part of it.

On a national and state basis, government is seeking to control

billboards. In Hawaii, the state has outlawed billboards largely

through citizen boycotts. Where billboards can still be used, there

is a tendency for citizens to boycott.

Then there is the question of junkyards. There is another

thing that the federal government has taken first steps to settle.

We, of course, are moving ahead on landscaping, scenic highways, and


VII








trying to get a little more judgement and taste in building instead

of simply going from A to B.

The federal government has started matching grant programs to

study air and water pollution. We in New York are very excited

about the chance to vote in the next election for a billion-dollar

bond issue to clean up the Hudson River and our other waterways.

If we get a big majority in favor of this, it will have great impact

on other states that have big urban populations, such as California,

and it may trigger a wave of action against pollution.

Our list of problems is not short. In certain areas on the north

shore of Puerto Rico we have serious problems of beach erosion. An-

other focal point of concern: The transmission and distribution lines

of electric power. To preserve the beauty and quality of the environ-

ment, some of these must be put underground. It was very encouraging

to see the progress that is being made there and what was necessary

to get it done. The hardest thing of this is the transmission lines.

The cost of putting these great lines underground is enormous. It

is being done in limited areas. The President recently indicated

that they are going to press that these be done and that the govern-

ment will sponsor research on all of these problems.

Generally not included, because it is not a physical state, is

the problem of noise. But in its impact on the quality of the envir-

onment, noise is an important factor and cannot be ignored.

We conservationists used to think that we were a voice in the

wilderness, but now almost everyone in government is sympathetic.

Not long ago activities such as fire, police and health were given


VIII








full consideration first, and if anything was left over, people would

talk about parks, recreation and natural beauty. Conservation would

get the leavings, and it was crumbs on the floor that generally were

available.

We hope that since the Outdoor Recreation Commission, which

reflects the leadership of the government and the will of the people,

that we have gotten up off the floor and onto the table. We hope

that whatever is a reasonable share will be allocated for the pur-

poses that we are discussing here. If the whole budget is going to

be cut, we hope that it will be cut proportionately and beauty alone

will not suffer. In this way the balance will be preserved and each

one will give proper consideration.

We are not trying to come from behind and then get way out ahead

and then take money from other people. We want to restore a balance

that hasn't existed to give a proper share of interest and funds to

conservation. This conference is so good, and we discussed in detail

so much, that I am only trying to give you a lay point of view as a

voter, taxpayer, and a worker in the vineyard of conservation, guide-

lines for action. However, to sum it up, when one link breaks in the

chain of life, sooner or later all links forming the whole of nature

will begin to deteriorate. We must act to prevent it. This is the

sum of thought that I would like to leave with you.













INTRODUCTION

by

CARL A. CARLOZZI


The first nature sanctuary in the Caribbean area was estab-

lished 171 years ago at King's Hill Forest on St. Vincent. If

the effect of that particular action to protect nature in the

Islands could be called a precedent, then it took the better

part of a century and a half for the idea to catch on. Today

there are other nature sanctuaries in the Caribbean -- not many,

of course, and most of them products of the mid-twentieth cen-

tury.

The destruction of the natural communities of the Eastern

Caribbean Islands with the consequental loss of numerous

endemic species of plants and animals began when the first col-

onial settlements were established. Now, as we enter the last

third of the twentieth century, people on the Islands are tak-

ing a more active look at what has happened to their resources

during the proceeding four and a half centuries.

In general, the physical remains of human activity in the

Islands have fared only a little better than nature. Like most

of the efforts to preserve the more unusual natural features of

the Islands, efforts to protect and develop sites of outstanding

historical importance have also been products of recent decades.

The Eastern Caribbean Conservation Conference held in








October, 1965 at Caneel Bay Plantation, St. John, Virgin Islands

was in many respects an historical event in the Caribbean. Over

the years representatives from the Islands and countries of the

Caribbean have assembled to discuss the many problems of mutual

concern and interest. This was the first time that a concerted

approach had been taken to problems of the conservation of nat-

ural, scenic, and historic resources of the Islands.

Another unusual feature of this conference, as Dr. James

Blaut so aptly pointed out in his summation paper, was the wide

variety of people participating. One would expect to find bio-

logists and historians at a conference such as this, but, one

also found geographers, economists, socialogists, anthropolo-

gists, planners, businessmen, civil servants, and politicians.

This mixture gave the conference much of its strength, despite

statements and disclaimers by some of the participants that

they thought perhaps they were out of place, or that they were

not really conservationists and perhaps should not be there.

I can't believe that the conference would have produced the solid

and apparently long lasting effects for conservation in the Carib-

bean had the professed'hon-conservationists" not been there.

The influence which these people had upon the proceedings

was to guarantee that any discussion of natural and historic

areas and sites would not be limited to a "preservationist" point

of view. Interests were too varied and professional competen-

cies too deep to allow such a narrow point of view to be estab-

lished. The up-shot of bringing this multi-interest group to-

gether to discuss conservation was that it got discussed in a


XII








context which was meaningful, broad in scope, and realistic.

Professors Mark and Gottheil perhaps did more to establish

the discussions in the broader context of national planning and

decision making than anyone else. Once having set this tone it

became possible for others concerned with the preservation of

nature and history in the Islands to accept the often conflicting

values which surround their goals, and the fact that action and

decision making for conservation in the Caribbean as elsewhere

can never be isolated from the task of choosing between alterna-

tives.

Certainly from the point of view of national development one

of those alternatives should be the preservation of natural and

historic features. The Conference was not lacking in its share

of people who could and did eloquently articulate the facts and

the philosophies supporting the cause of preservation. Dr.

Dammann's pleas on behalf of nature in the Islands is one that

I wish had been sounded and listened to a long time ago. The

panel of speakers who considered the question of historic monu-

ments were equally persuading and one wishes that someone had

followed their advice long ago, also.

The issues of this Conference were not concerned over the lack

of past action, but rather to assess what resources the islands

have and how the people and their governments can take action now

and in the future to conserve them. It was gratifying to note

Dr. John Watts' comments on the practical political-economic

basis for conservation on the Caribbean Islands. Dr. Erling

Solberg's careful presentation of some model legal-institutional


XIII








methods for achieving conservation goals provided the Conference

with a logical framework for action.

This Conference did take action. Their resolution to create

a region-wide organization may change the face of the Islands'

landscapes far into the future. The Caribbean Conservation Associa-

tion is getting underway. Its constitution has been drafted and

first annual meeting is planned for spring of 1967. By the time

that meeting is held there will be two new quasi-governmental

island organizations formed to guide conservation efforts on St.

Lucia and Grenada.

It is hard to know what to expect from conferences. Like

most conferences, the Eastern Caribbean Conservation Conference

produced some well conceived papers. It provided a reason for

people to get together around an important problem. It also gave

the participants an opportunity to see what could be done to con-

serve nature and history by observing the work to date in Virgin

Islands National Park. What is unexpected is that one year after

the Conference people throughout the Islands are still discussing

the conference issues and are enthusiastically preparing to make

their regional association a viable tool for conservation in the

Caribbean.


XIV














LIST OF PARTICIPANTS


Alegria, Ricardo (G Mrs.)
Pres., Institute P.R. Culture

Augier, Roy
Director, Dept. of History
Univ. of the West Indies

Baa, Enid
Dir. Museums & Libraries


Blake, Thomas
Dir., Planning Board of the Virgin Islands

Blaut, James (& Mrs.)
Dir., Caribbean Research Institute
College of the Virgin Islands

Bond, Richard
Dir., USDA Experimental Station

Boschulte, Bertha
Senator, Virgin Islands Legislature

Bough, James
Rep., Virgin Islands Museum

Boyer, Allston
Pres., Caneel Bay Plantation

Bryan, The Hon. Gerald (& Mrs.)
Administrator

Capestany, Salvator
Puerto Rico Planning Board

Carlozzi, Carl (& Mrs.)
University of Massachusetts

Chorley, Kenneth
Former Pres. Colonial Williamsburg
Trustee, Jackson Hole Preserve, Inc.

Clark, Cross
Dept. of Geography
University of Florida


Puerto Rico


Jamaica


St. Thomas


St. Thomas


St. Thomas



St. Croix


St. Thomas


St. Thomas


St. John


St. Lucia


Puerto Rico


Mass., U.S.A.


New York



Fla., U.S.A.








Cotte, Ricardo
U.S. Sport Fish & Wild Life Service

Dammann, Arthur
Dir., Marine & Insular Research Station
Caribbean Research Institute
College of the Virgin Islands

Dammann, Ruth
Admin. Ass't.
Caribbean Research Institute
College of the Virgin Islands

Dawson, The Hon. Ivan
Member of Legislative Council, B.V.I.

Dawson, George
Adm. Sec'y. Trade & Prod.

Diamond, Henry L.
Vice Pres., Amer. Conservation Ass'n.

Donnelly, Thomas
Dept. of Geology
State University of New York
Binghamton, New York


Puerto Rico


St. Thomas




St. Thomas




British Virgin
Islands

British Virgin
Islands


New York.


Texas, U.S.A.


Michigan, U.S.A.


Field, Arthur J.
Dept. Anthropology & Soc.
Wayne State University

Givens, Frank
Superintendent
V. I. National Park

Glynn, Peter
Inst. of Marine Biology
University of Puerto Rico

Gorman, Francis
Montserrat Real Estate Co.

Gottheil, Fred
Dept. of Economics
University of Illinois

Haag, William
Dept. of Geog. & Anthropology
Louisiana State University


St. Thomas


Puerto Rico


Montserrat


Illinois, U.S.A.


Louisana, U.S.A.


XVI








Herrick, Thomas
Sr. Research Associate
Caribbean Research Institute
College of the Virgin Islands

Hilder, Hubert
St. Croix Landmark Society

Hogg, Donald
Dept. of Anthropology & Soc.
University of Puerto Rico

Hoke, Robert
Vice Pres. & Dir. Pub. Relations
Caneel Bay Plantation, Inc.

Layne, Mildred
Officer, Jackson Hole Preserve, Inc.

Lowenthal, David
Amer. Geographical Society

McKee, Ian
Town & Country Planning Advisor

McLean, Vera
Dept. Commerce Trade & Industry


Mallet, The Hon. George
Minister of Trade & Industry


Manners, Robert
Dept. If Anthropology
Brandeis University


Mark, Francis X.
Chairman, Social Science Dept.
College of the Virgin Islands

Marty, Oscar
Urban Designer


Matheson, D. Lloyd
Soc. for the Restoration of Brimstone Hill


Millette, James
Dept. of History
University of the West Indies


St. Thomas


St. Croix


Puerto Rico


St. John


New York


New York


Montserrat


St. Thomas


St. Lucia


Mass. U.S.A.


St. Thomas


St. Thomas


St. Kitts


Trinidad


O'Bryan, James
Dept. of Commerce


St. Thomas


XVII









O'Neal, The Hon. J. R.
Chairman, Nat'l. Parks Trust
Member, Legislative Council

Paiewonsky, Isidor (& Mrs.)
Rep., Virgin Islands Planning Board

Paiewonsky, The Hon. Ralph (& Mrs.)
Governor

Passalacqua, Luis (& Mrs.)
Esec. Dir., CODECA


British Virgin
Islands


St. Thomas


St. Thomas


Puerto Rico


Petitjean-Roget, Jacques Martinque
President, Historical Society


St. Thomas


Petrie, Robert
Dir., Hotel Program
College of the Virgin Islands


Prendergast, A.
Dept. of Commerce


Reichard, Robert
Agricultural Research Serv.
Dept. of Agriculture
U.S. Government

Rivero, Juan
Dean Faculty, Arts & Sciences
University of Puerto Rico

Rodriguez-Pinan, Julio
Administration of Parks & Rec.

Rockefeller, Laurance (& Mrs.)
President, Amer. Conservation Ass'n.


St. Thomas


Puerto Rico


Puerto Rico


Puerto Rico


New York


Conn., U.S.A.


Rouse, Irving
Dept. of Anthropology
Yale University


Rubin, Vera
Dir., Inst. for the Study of Man

Ruopp, Phillips (& Mrs.)
Dean, College of the Virgin Islands


New York


St. Thomas


Schraub, Malford C. St. Thomas
Dept. of Const. & Tech.
College of the Virgin Islands


XVIII








St. Thomas


Shaubah, Patricia
Dept. of Social Science
College of the Virgin Islands

Simmons, Beryl
Dept. of Social Sciences
College of the Virgin Islands


St. Thomas


Wash., U.S.A.


Solberg, Erling
Econ. Res. Service
Dept. of Agriculture
U.S. Government


Stanton, Hazel DuBois
Caribbean Research Institute
College of the Virgin Islands

Stanton, Howard
Caribbean Research Institute
College of the Virgin Islands

Thomas, D. L.
Industrial Development Advisor

Thomas, G.C.H.
Perm. Sec'y. for Trade & Industry

Thorne, Alfred
Dept. of Economics
University of Puerto Rico

Wadsworth, Frank
Dir. Inst. of Tropical Forestry
U.S. Forest Service

Walker, Stephen
Dept. of Agriculture

Wanlass, Lawrence
Pres., College of the Virgin Islands

Watts, John
Chairman, Tourist Board
Member of the Legislature

Weaver, John
Dept. of Geography
Univ. of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez

Weddle, Owen
Dir. Public Information
College of the Virgin Islands


St. Thomas


St. Thomas


Antigua


Montserrat


Puerto Rico


Puerto Rico


Montserrat


St. Thomas


Grenada


Puerto Rico



St. Thomas


XIX








Wiles, Donald
Member, Nat'l. Trust

Winter, J.L.M.
Supt. of Agriculture


Barbados


British Virgin
Islands
























PART I


CITIZEN ACTION IN CONSERVATION



A

SYMPOSIUM


CHAIRMAN:


JAMES A. O'BRYAN, COORDINATOR
VIRGIN ISLANDS BEAUTIFICATION COUNCIL











CHAIRMAN:

Ladies and gentlemen, this portion of the Conference is called

to order. As is customary in these conferences, the Chairman has to

say what he is doing so everyone will know.

My name, as you can see here, is James A. O'Bryan. I am the

coordinator of the Virgin Islands Beautification Council. This Beau-

tification Council was created a few months ago by proclamation from

Governor Paiewonsky. It is patterned after similar councils created

in the United States of America by our illustrious President Johnson.

The object of this Beautification Council is not only to conserve but

to create beauty wherever possible, in order to sustain the economic

advantages which we have and which we hope to develop in the next few

years. In the Virgin Islands, about 50% of the revenues are derived

from the Tourist Trade. We know that tourists are very particular

people and like beautiful things and beautiful places. One of the

objects of this Virgin Islands Council is to preserve the natural

beauty, to maintain the highest standards of sanitation throughout

the Islands, to make of this a livable place for the tourist, and in

so doing, to retain a sort of viable economy for the United States

Virgin Islands.

With that in mind, I call on Mr. O'Neal, who is the Chairman of

the Natural Park Trust of the British Virgin Islands.


MR. O'NEAL:

Mr. Chairman, I belong, maybe, to the smallest territory attend-

ing this session here this evening, but I hope that when I am through








I will have satisfied the body that we also in the British Virgin

Islands, whom I represent, are doing our bit by way of conserva-

tion.

In 1961, we enacted the National Parks Bill. And I am glad

to have here tonight listening to me Captain O'Bryan, our former

Administrator under whose tenure of office in the Virgin Islands

the bill was passed.

A few years before that, at least a year before that, also

during Captain O'Bryan's tenure, he was asked to help and with the

generosity and philanthropy of Mr. Rockefeller we got funds to ac-

quire 15 acres of land in Virgin Gorda and 2 parcels on Tortola,

one called Spring Bay, maybe some of you have been to it--a beau-

tiful spot--and another one called Devil's Bay. We bought 75 acres

of Cane Mountain with an altitude of 1,780 feet. Since the acquisi-

tion of land, we have planted over 50 thousand seedlings of mahog-

any and cedars, mostly obtained from St. Croix. And here again

we must thank Dr. Bond for his assistance in helping set up the

National Park in the Virgin Islands.

The aim in our group in the Virgin Islands is twofold, both

aesthetic and economical.

We have long been a people who live by the sea, and ship build-

ing is one of the trades that our people used to follow long ago.

Timbers are getting scarce, so scarce that we can hardly build boats,

so one of the objects of the National Park is to reforest the land

in the Virgin Islands in order that in the future we will have tim-

ber for building boats and also maybe for the furniture industry.








On the aesthetic side, we want to beautify our roads, our

beaches and parks and to this end we have funds from the local

government and have recently made a start in this direction.

In a nut shell, that is what we are trying to accomplish in

the British Virgin Islands.


CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much, Mr. O'Neal. I now call upon Mr. Carlozzi,

an Associate Professor of Conservation from the University of Mass-

achusetts.


DR. CARLOZZI:

I won't be speaking at this symposium on the basis of practical

experience in the Caribbean. This will come, I think, from the rest

of the panelists.

My purpose here is simply to discuss how I view the whole ques-

tion of citizen action in conservation, and I hope perhaps I can

throw out some thoughts for people from all of the islands as to

how they might look at the potentials for citizen action.

As I see it, there are generally two levels on which that

action takes place. And in this case, I am going to separate citi-

zens as being individuals or groups apart from established govern-

ment bureaucracies--not that the people in their bureaucracies are

not citizens, but this is action taking place apart from government.

The primary need here is for some sort of organization--in this

sense, a selected group of citizens who get together because of a

common interest to develop common purposes and goals relating to








these interests. Now their interest may be extremely broad. That

is, they may have in mind the protection of every form of area that

this Conference will cover. That is, everything from National Parks,

Nature Reserves, Historical Monuments and Public Recreational Areas.

They may encompass the full range or they may have a very specific

interest. In the Caribbean there is an outstanding example of a

group with specific interests--the friends of English Harbor with

their extremely focused interest in the restoration of Nelson's

Dock Yard. And without commenting further I might say that they are

successful in this venture. But it is necessary that there be some

form of organization. It is also necessary that there be some form

of financing. The financing may come from government in part or in

total. It may come from outside sources, in the sense that the organ-

ization itself represents a body which can solicit for financial help

from other places, including their own government.

I think this organization needs some sort of legal framework

within which to work. That is, they ought to be empowered as a quasi-

public body, as a quasi-governmental body, perhaps, but at least be

empowered to the extent that they can hold funds, hold lands, accept

gifts, deeds for property and so forth, thus can be responsible for

the disposition of the financial or real aid that they may obtain.

Their primary duty as an organization should be to carry out some

program which has a continuing influence on their country, their

island, or in whatever segment of their nation they work. In this

sense, it shouldn't be a one-shot proposition. I think they can be

most effective if they become established, remain established, and








work continuously.

The other thing that they can do is to exert leadership within

the community that they are serving. This leadership should take

very specific forms, I think. I think they ought to serve as a kind

of public forum, a sounding board for all of the ideas pertaining

to their concern. In other words, this is the group to whom the gov-

ernment and individuals turn when there are questions of programs or

management or problems with regard to the preservation or the pro-

tection or the development of the sites in question.

I think in addition to this, they should exert leadership through

educational institutions. I would include school systems, universi-

ties, and all general public education. Now this might be what some

people call public relations, but I conceive of it as being carried

out on a high enough plane to be called general public education.

In this case, the organized group whatever, has an opportunity

through the newspapers, through radio and other forms of mass media

to reach out to the people they serve with their program.

This brings us to a secondary level of citizen action. In its

broadest form it is public approval by the majority of the people

for the programs that are being carried out in their behalf by the

organized group. They should come to see the benefits, the values,

and support this program. Perhaps they will support it eventually

to the point where they can exert significant influence on the fin-

ancing. That is, they would be happy to see more government funds

put into the efforts of the organization. You can also, I think,

get some more direct involvement as this goes on, involvement by








the people in doing things themselves. Perhaps on a smaller scale,

perhaps under guidance of the main organization. Perhaps it is

simply an awareness that they own on their own land, a significant

site, whether it be natural, historical or archaeological that they

feel somehow involved with and see the need for preserving it, or

protecting it. This level of citizen action, if it is going on in

a wide-spread way, represents, I suppose, the highest kind of sophis-

tication for a population. But it is at least what I would call a

suitable goal to work for. Obviously, all of these things build on

each other. The central organization--it might be a committee, a

trust, or any of the recognized official names for such an organi-

zation. It. can build from a handful of citizen leaders who have

combined their strength operating within a legal framework, able

to obtain financial backing, able to obtain sites, if this is nec-

essary. It can carry on a continuing program which can exert leader-

ship through educational institutions and thus build upon this as a

means of bringing more citizens in at the basic level of involve-

ment, which is approval and sympathy and public pressure, or bring

them in at the individual involvement of seeing themselves in some

aspect as custodians of their own sites.

I think that this has been really too general, but these

are my views on how I would conceive of a citizen action, at least in

part. Thank you.

CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much, Professor. I now call upon Mr. Hubert

Hilder, President of the St. Croix Landmark Society.








MR. HILDER:

I am not the president of the St. Croix Landmark Society. I

was some years ago. I have a great deal of interest in it and I

am so pleased to be called upon after Dr. Carlozzi, because with

no modesty whatsoever I am really pleased to say that the St. Croix

Landmark Society which is a fairly young group, practically filled

up all the classifications that he suggested would be the right

kind of citizen group to have.

We have done a lot of work on creating a landmark for the island

of St. Croix in the form of the reconstruction of a great house, form-

erly called Estate Whim. And we expect to go on with it in the next

two years, provided the money if forthcoming. We are getting along

well with it and creating, or rather, recreating the windmill which

was there and is now ruined, but which will be rebuilt so that

we will not only have a great house but we will also have the wind-

mill which will be able to do work. It will not be used for grinding

sugar as it formerly was supposed to do, but it will be working in-

sofar as the windmill sails will turn. In fact these have been

ordered from Holland and will be made to order and come over to us

so that the sails will be turning and the grinders will be turning

and it will be a facsimile of a former mill.

This was done strictly by citizens, by people who are sufficiently

interested to give a great deal of time and effort and some money to

rebuilding this old great house and now making a museum out of it.

We have moved the museum from the town of Christiansted out to this

countrypplace. It was a very big job, and according to Dr. Carlozzi,








the way we did it was in line with many of the things that he sug-

gested.

If there are any questions about it, I have a little folder

that I have brought with me which just came in from the printers

in New York. They were just mailed. I received only two copies

this week and I brought one with me, if anybody is interested in

the Whim Great House, they can read about it in this folder.

Thank you very much.


CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much, Mr. Hilder. I now call upon Mr. Gorman

of the Montserrat Company for his opening remarks.


MR. GORMAN:

Thank you. I am from the small island of Montserrat. I have

been there for the last three years. We have a land development

company. We have 1350 lots that we have developed and we are put-

ting in all utilities and we have put in a nine-hole golf course.

Over the past three years we have created a large amount of traffic

for a very small island that hasn't followed a seasonal tourist pat-

tern. I am giving this to you only in the way of identification,

because I have an example of "citizen action" in conservation in

the archaeological field that you might find of interest.

When we started construction on our golf course, we had to do

considerable bulldozing. We were working on the number one fairway

one Friday afternoon and turned up some pottery jars and bones and

things. We stopped working in that area and decided that we should








hold off until we could get someone properly qualified to come

and look at it. On Saturday morning, a man was down from the hotel

who was from Canada, a publisher. He said, "You can't touch that

land. It's sacred, it belongs to the government and it should be

preserved and you can't put any golf course in here." And I said,

"Let's not make any hasty decision on it." And he said, "I'm

going to take some action, whether you are or not."

Well, he left on Sunday to go back to Toronto and Tuesday morn-

ing a very strange looking character walked into my office, complete

with beard and all. He looked like Santa Claus, and he said, "I

am the archaeologist." And I said, "Fine, I am the Queen of May."

And he said, "I am, really." I said, "I don't believe you, where

did you come from?" He said, "Canada. I just got in." He said,

"Go ahead and pull on the beard. It's real." I said, "All right,

do you have any identification?" And he said, "Yes, I am from the

Royal Ontario Museum." Now this man from Canada had really created

some action. He had this archaeologist on the plane before he knew

what had hit him.

Work on the site was stopped and we roped off a rather large

area and dug for about two weeks. He took back about five hundred

pounds of pottery jars and broken bones and things like that and

did a very thorough job on it. We still haven't received his report,

but it was a very interesting experience for me. And it pointed up,

I think, how intensely interested some people are--as many people

are--in these things we are talking about and are going to talk

about here. And I think that out of this series of meetings (I








hope) will come more intensified feeling on the part of governments

and individuals to be prepared for a situation like this one I've

mentioned so that proper action can be taken, either by a landmarks

committee, something of your type, Mr. Hilder, or properly qual-

ified people to take over any situation like this.

It was sheer luck that we got this archaeologist down there.

Eventually we would have had to go ahead and build our golf course

and we might have destroyed something of terrific value.

Thank you very much. Tha- is all I have to contribute at

this time.


CHARIMAN:

Thank you very much, I now call on the gentleman from Barbados,

Mr. Wiles.


MR. WILES:

I am now the Secretary of the Barbados National Trust, and per-

haps if I might be allowed to mention a few of the stages by which

we got underway, some people might be interested in them.

About five years ago, a group of us came to notice that the

mason's hammer and the carpenter's saw were destroying many of our

rather fine houses and buildings, some of which dated from the

seventeenth century. Fortunately, we had with us a town planner,

who was -also a skilled architect and who had had some experience

with the National Trust in Great Britain. We got together and

formed what we called the Barbados National Trust. We drew up a

constitution, based on that which is used in Great Britain, and we








were able to persuade the government to enact legislation incor-

porating the National Trust. This means in Barbados that the Trust

has the right to hold property. It can sue and be sued as a body

corporate. It also means that we can encourage anyone who wishes

to deed their property to the Trust, to do so.

It may seem strange, but one of the first monuments--because

we interpret the word "monument" in a very broad sense--the first

monument we thought worthwhile preserving was a gully known as

Welchman's Hall Gully. In this gully there were several exotic

plants that grew nowhere else on the island. We were rather hap-

pily surprised when we were able to raise, by public subscription,

half the money to buy the gully and the government put up the other

half. This gully is now becoming almost a money-spinner.

We naturally make a charge for people who wish to go there.

We've found too that it seems in our circumstances that it is bet-

ter to have such a Trust formed of private citizens, that is, non-

governmental people. The Government has been interested, and indeed

has given us quite a considerable amount of support, including fin-

ancial support. The Government prefers to leave the details to the

National Trust.

We are interested as well, in bringing to the notice of the

public, buildings which we consider to have architectural or his-

toric interest. To ensure this, we have put on the front of these

buildings--of course with the permission of their owners--a plaque

which marks the particular building as having either historic or

architectural value.








Here I would mention that the main shop in our capital city,

Bridgetown, belonging to DeCosta and Company had a particularly

fine facade, and the firm was about to entirely demolish the build-

ing, and put up something of chrome-plate and glass. The National

Trust pointed out to the directors of the Company the value of

leaving this lovely facade. And, it was a great pleasure (just a

week ago) that we not only persuaded the firm to leave it, but to

be able to mount on the plinth of the facade a plaque stating that

this was a building of historic and architectural interest. In other

words, we hope it is preserved for all time.

Naturally, like yourselves in the United States Virgin Islands,

Sir, we are interested in the tourist trade. We would like to share

it a bit more with you. And we know that the visitors are parti-

cularly interested in things historic. But we felt too that an

equally important factor in forming the Barbados National Trust was

the need to preserve the island heritage.

As you know, several of these islands--and we in Barbados parti-

cularly--will feel a bit of a wrench when we become independent. We

have been British for three hundred odd years, only British, and we

feel that we would wish to preserve the symbols of our history. This,

I suggest, is very important for a people who have to face, shall I

say, the hazards of independence. We obviously hope that our tour-

ists will be interested in our historic monuments.

I might say that we interpret the term historic monuments in

a very, very broad sense. It may be a bit of land, it may be an

actual building, it may even be a cannon or a fort or something of








this nature. We have been able to persuade--I would not say too

much persuasion was necessary--several private owners of places of

historic interest to maintain their buildings authentically. I

might mention one you are all familiar with--the actress, Ingrid

Bergman who has acquired a property known as Maycock's Bay on which

there is a particularly fine fort. She has agreed to consult the

Trust, at least she has done so, and officials of the Trust have

advised her how to preserve its antiquity and historic character.

We have had no fight with private individuals on this. It

may be perhaps that we are entirely divorced from government.

When I use this word "divorced", I might say it is a very happy

arrangement, because government has given us substantial grants

from time to time for a specific purpose.

I might mention just one last thing, Sir, that we have recently

built along the east coast of Barbados--a road which we are pres-

ently calling the East Coast Road. We are very anxious to have

Her Majesty the Queen declare the road open when she visits Barbados

on the fourteenth and fifteenth of February next year. And we feel

complimented that the Barbados National Trust has been asked to

landscape the area. We have received a grant from the Government

for this specific purpose, and the work has been put in hand.

Our experience in Barbados augurs that much can be achieved

even by a small group who dedicate themselves to the preservation

of the heritage of the community.

Thank you, Sir.








CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much, Mr. Wiles, for your statement.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, you have all heard open statements

from people of many countries about citizen action in various com-

munities. I now declare this panel open for questions from the

floor. As you stand to ask a question, or as you raise your hands,

as the case may be, please state your name and your country.


MR. WADSWORTH:

I might report briefly on activity in Puerto Rico in this gen-

eral field. We have, let us say, the beginning of a private group

with this same objective. It is known as the Natural History Society,

a group of people who had one thing in common, that is, they enjoyed

one weekend each month going to some point of interest, to a beach,

to a mountain, to see a forest, a waterfall, or something of that

nature. Among the group we had archaeologists, we had foresters,

we had botanists, we had people interested in shells, and it became

apparent to the whole group that some places we were going to visit

were the last places. Sometimes there were shards or places where

you could find shells or the last pieces of forestry and this led

us into the development of a conservation committee. The conserva-

tion committee did not have this good background that we have been

hearing about now as to how to go ahead, but its first approach was

to be sure that the Natural History Society did not make a fuss

about the destruction of some plentiful resources, but that we saved

our ammunition for the best. So we made an inventory, which is

not yet complete, of this broad group as Professor Carlozzi has








mentioned; waterfalls, beaches, cliffs, mountains, a variety of

natural features and architecture as well. We took the topographic

maps and we located three or four areas and we went out on weekends

looking for one thing or the other and we devised a one-page form

in which we described these exact locations, how much land was in-

volved and how good it was.

We now have an inventory of Puerto Rico of three hundred such

locations. Many of them are not the best. We have many duplicates

but we are now at least in a position to point out to the govern-

ment when the bulldozers approach that this is the best or this is

the last. We have had financial support. We are not incorporated,

but we have been called upon by two or three governmental agencies

for counsel, when they were on the verge of expropriating an area

of natural beauty, for comments as to whether we felt that it was

one of the best and how much land we thought they should acquire.

This, of course, is encouraging. Furthermore, we have estab-

lished contact with all of the agencies of the government which are

concerned with this type of thing. The University appointed a

liason officer to work with us. First to tell us of areas we don't

know about, and to assist his own agencies to recognize the import-

ance of the society.

One sour note is that at the present moment the committee is

inactive because we have reached the point where it takes more time

than any of us can give to it. So the inventory sits there. We

anticipate reactivating. If one single government agency would pro-

vide us the support, as I understand they have in other places, I








think we could move ahead. As you realize, Puerto Rico, like

Barbados, is an area densely populated, where movement is going

on 24 hours a day. We must either move fast or not even try.

Thank you very much.


CHAIRMAN:

Have you tried incorporating as a non-profit organization

soliciting funds from the general public which could be non-taxable

or selling memberships in any way?


MR. WADSWORTH:

We have had some misgivings as to how much support we could get.

This is not a good reply, but having heard what was said here, I be-

lieve this is one of the things we ought to consider.

We have a group of 80 people which includes bankers, lawyers,

and so forth. They are laymen as far as science is considered, but

they are influential in community affairs and there seems to be no

reason why we couldn't go in this direction. It might be the next

step to take.


CHAIRMAN:

Are there any other comments from the floor?


MR. THOMAS:

Dr. Carlozzi mentioned the two levels of action, one by the gen-

eral public, and he also envisaged, though he did not outline it,

action on the part of government institutions.

Now, the situation in Montserrat, I think Mr. Wiles will remem-








ber is a rather difficult one. When Mr. Wiles was the Administrator

of Montserrat not so long ago, he tried very hard--after a visit or

two by Dr. Carlozzi--to get the people interested in organizing

themselves into a National Trust in Montserrat, as he has managed

to do in Barbados. But that couldn't be done. For some reason or

other he couldn't get the thing under way. The appeal which the

government sent out received very little response.

Now what I want to ask, Doctor, is what should be done in a

case like that? It would appear that the government should take

the initiative. It would appear that if the historical sites and

the monuments and the heritage of the people and its history and

tradition ought to be maintained, somebody has to take the initia-

tive. And if you can't get the people coming together in a trust

or in any organization that would take effective action in this

regard, what action do you suggest that the government take?


DR. CARLOZZI:

I think that even though I outlined a rather nice sounding

order of events that ought to take place, it is reasonable to expect

that there are going to be variations from one place to another.

The case of Montserrat and Barbados is a good example. But I

would like to mention at this moment there isn't any incorporated

organization, a Trust or a foundation. Yet this group, the Natural

History Society which grew informally, came to express a certain

interest, recognized certain values in landscape, and exerted a

very strong moral force. To the point that even though unofficial








and unincorporated it nevertheless was drawn upon by the government

at a critical moment, not like we think ought to be drawn upon but

at least consulted. They represent a force, and influence decision

making.

Now perhaps this is a logical beginning for other places, even

though the Puerto Rican group is not officially designated as a corp-

oration. It is not backed by the legislature nor does it have any

of the powers that the Barbados National Trust has. This does not

preclude its opportunity to be a public forum, to be a sounding board

for ideas and for itself to become a squeaky wheel that governments

spend an awful lot of time oiling. They don't like to hear squeaks,

I guess, but anyway it's worthwhile to consider it on this basis.

Now perhaps once you get this kind of recognition--in other

words, once government turns to your group, however informal it may

be, for advice, for help in decision making, for help in policy

making, this may be the logical way to arrive at the point to move

towards incorporation, towards becoming an established corporate

group. This may be the answer. I don't know this for sure. I am

suggesting that this is certainly a possibility. But in the mean-

time, even should this day not arrive I would not discount the in-

fluence of even an informal group upon the policy decisions of

government, if they are at least organized within themselves to pro-

vide leadership, and this is clearly a personal matter.

I don't think it takes a body of three hundred well organized

people necessarily to do this. A body of three well organized

people may be able to exert enormous amounts of pressure, especially








if they explore the avenues to making their squeaks sound loud at

the right time.

Now this could be a well placed group, also it could be a gen-

eral education program that they carry out and so forth. It does

not take enormous funds. It does take time and it does take personal

effort.

This is about the only way I can respond to Mr. Thomas.


MR. THOMAS:

Thank you very much Dr. Carlozzi.


CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Thomas, We must never discredit the general public educa-

tion of the masses on any problem with which we are confronted. In

the Virgin Islands we have used to great advantage the town meeting

hall where we discuss certain questions concerning the democratic

process. Maybe your cultural groups, your middle class groups could

devise a system towards educating them and telling them exactly the

benefits and so on that could be derived from such a thing, and what

the immediate and ultimate aims would be and what it would contri-

bute to the culture along this line.

Are there any other comments from the floor?


MR. CROSS:

I have a question that arises out of ignorance. Has there been

any attempt to educate the taxi drivers as to the historic sites or

the points of interest so that they might be able to point out to the

tourists the places of historical interest? I addressed that question








to no particular member of the board.


MR. BRYAN:

There is an Archaeological Society. This is purely a volun-

tary and private society, but in conjunction with an equally active

Tourist Development Board. The regular courses of instruction are

arranged for taxi drivers in regard to the history of the island,

so that they are well informed, both before and during the normal

tourist season.


CHAIRMAN:

Here, in the Virgin Islands, the Department of Commerce, under

Dr. Prendergast, has prepared items of general historical importance

of the island, and the taxicab people from time to time are briefed

about it and are able to tell the tourists about them on regularly

conducted tours.

Are there any other comments from the floor?


MR. BOND:

I am happy to be fairly familiar with Montserrat, and I wasn't

going to offer anything, but I think this may be of some value to

other areas.

Montserrat is a very small island. It was never a very rich

island. It doesn't have great, magnificent houses and such things

as the other British islands have, and the French islands have,

like Martinique and St. Lucia. It does have some remarkable old

buildings in town that are very fine architecturally, and it seems

to me that one possible way for the government to create interest








in preserving the better architecture there, would be to borrow an

architect who wasn't locally concerned, and wasn't trying to please

any particular people, to get him to pick out half a dozen build-

ings and to get the government to offer a permanent tax cut of 5%

or something like that. Therefore, if the people would not change

the appearance of those buildings, and as long as they maintain the

original appearance, they would get a little subsistence that way

from the government. That would be one possibility.

Another thing in Montserrat that is of great interest geologi-

cally is the old volcano. It is my understanding that there is a

good deal of crown land, isn't there?


MR. THOMAS:

Yes, Sir.


MR. BOND:

Yes, but at least that is an area that I think could be devel-

oped slowly and not too expensively which would be of great interest

to the tourists, and in many cases you wouldn't have to put out any

special money or raise very much private capital for it. I expect

that if the group is interested in preserving the best things in

Montserrat, they could call on such persona as the Osborns and the

Hollands and several other people that could be called in for a

consultation. Maybe you could get started off by having the govern-

ment ask them first for their advice.

MR. THOMAS:

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Dr. Bond very much for








his remarks, and I think I can say in answering the first part of

his remarks that the government has indeed borrowed an architect

and he is sitting on my right, here. He is Mr. McKee, who is a

well known and well qualified architect. We have just borrowed

him from the United Kingdom at a tremendous--I started to say salary.

(Laughter)

Well, he has the responsibility of advising the government and of

doing the unpopular work of trying to convince people that their

ideas on these matters are not always right. But here he is, and

he is an architect and a planner. The Administrator thought that

he should attend this conference. No doubt, he will have a few

remarks to make later on.


CHAIRMAN:

Oh, I would be glad to hear from him. In fact, I went to

school with a fellow in Montserrat by the name of Markhum. I did

not hear Markhum's name mentioned from Dr. Bond's lips.

(Laughter)

And also, one of the ablest teachers from Montserrat, Emanuel

Benjamin Oliver, so there must be something left in Montserrat

that we can do something about, Mr. Thomas, at least we hope so.


MR. McKEE:

I would like to comment on what Mr. Bond has said. It appears

to me, I would like to hear the opinions from the residents who have

lived here longer in the West Indies than myself, as to what the sit-

uation is in other islands, other than Montserrat.








It seems to me that while Mr. Bond's remarks about selecting

a few buildings is of value, isn't the fact that the form of the

town basically is of more importance than its character? The fact

is that you have two-story buildings and they have this very West

Indian quality to the buildings, little colonnades hanging on the

balconies, and the problem is going to be that commerce proposes

to put in something more along the lines of American supermarkets,

lots of glass and lots of air conditioning. I was very encouraged

on my first visit to St. Thomas upon seeing a very large number of

shops that have retained outwardly the West Indian quality. If it

is possible to cut down on some of your traffic, I think this is a

very successful idea. I'd like to hear just whether any towns in

any other islands in the Eastern Caribbean have already succumbed

to the glass-fronted jungles?


MR. CROSS:

The town of St. Augustine, Florida, has a plan that demands

that any new construction conforms to a certain time period. I

have forgotten whether it was the late Spanish or the early British,

but the whole downtown center is conformed to a particular pattern.

Any new construction must be approved in preserving all of the old.


CHAIRMAN:

Are there any other comments from the floor?


MR. BRYAN:

Perhaps I ought to make one further comment, that is, that the

fire hazard that St. Lucia has suffered--three very serious fires--








the last one in 1948, burned out a very large section of the old

town and I suppose it now represents more the image that is being

suggested by Mr. McKee from Montserrat', of a very modern recent

architectural construction in the main business section of the town,

and then just on the periphery are the old buildings which did not

succumb to the fire, and in that area it is quite an interesting

example of an Eastern Caribbean town.


MR. DAWSON:

Sir, I do take pleasure in representing the British Virgin

Islands at this Conference. And as Mr. O'Neal has said, we are the

smallest of the group and we don't have much to offer, but we are

here at least to look on, to listen and to learn. And I am quite

sure from what I have heard already from the members who have already

spoken, that when this Conference is over, this delegation from the

British Virgin Islands will have something at least to help us with

a little development that we have done. Mr. O'Neal has outlined a

proposal of our intention and I am quite sure that as we are now on

the threshold of tourism, that we have many historical areas that

we need to beautify and also to retain for our future tourist develop

ment. I am quite sure that if we depend only on government to take

care of this situation, we will not in fact get the fullest benefit

from it. I am quite sure that I, as a representative, will do my

part to try to persuade government to add some money to the pro-

ject in order to make this a success.

Mr. O'Neal at present is a nominated member of the Legisla-








tive Council and he has shown me that he would not be interested

in being nominated at another general election as a nominated

member, but would rather take more interest in dealing with the

National Park and continuing with the type of development that

he is now doing, as the chairman of this National Park Trust.

Nevertheless, I am quite sure as I listen to the former discus-

sion, that if we can form such types of committees, that is,

working, using the public individuals instead of just waiting

on the government, that we are certain to build up a very import-

ant industry that will mean very much to our future development.

As I said before, and I am saying again, that I am quite sure

that we have very much to learn from this Conference.


CHAIRMAN:

Thank you, Mr. Dawson. Are there any other comments from the

floor?


MR. RUOPP:

I would like to hear Dr. Carlozzi's comments on comprehensive

planning action as distinguished from piecemeal protective action.


MR. CARLOZZI:

One of the major problems, I think, in dealing with the pre-

servation, the protection, or even the actual development and

management of sites of all kinds, is that very often action does

take place out of the context of the socioeconomic changes that

are appearing on an island. These may be haphazard changes in

the sense that they are evolving without very much direction, or








they may be changes relating very specifically to policy, land

development policy, of the government. Without question the ulti-

mate aim should be not only to include these as--I mean not only

to accomplish the preservation and the protection of these sites--

but to do it in such a way that this preservation and this pro-

tection becomes part of government policy and government planning,

If you do this outside of that context, you are constantly fight-

ing the battle of someone having planned the use of the landscape

before you get there. And while you cannot always win these bat-

tles, you can win a few of them, but that perhaps isn't enough.

I think what it takes is a long look at what you want from the

landscape and what part the development of parks, reserves, his-

torical sites, or recreational areas can have in that overall

scheme.

In a sense, much of the preservation that has gone on is all

to the good, but it has been really a brush fire effort. It has

been individuals or groups of individuals striking to achieve a

very specific goal, to save this, to develop that. I for one

would not like in any way to diminish the accomplishments that

they have made. I would suggest that over the long run, this is

a matter for inclusion in the overall look at the landscape, at

the environment and in what direction your society and economy

are evolving.

Certainly, the concept being employed in Montserrat now;

having a professional architect on hand to look at the town, who








thinks of it in terms of the form of the town and the function

that the town has to play in relation to the form, is considered

to be desirable in the light of its historical importance, in the

light of the economic importance, and so on. This is a step in

the right direction.

And I don't want to miss the chance here in saying that I

think we might take a look at what goes on in Puerto Rico, with

the Institute of Culture in the historic zone in the old city of

San Juan. This is a very clear cut attempt to somehow combine

those qualities of the town that have historical importance with

the functional purpose of the town, to serve its commercial needs,

its waterfront needs, its entertainment and recreational needs.

These can be put together, but you won't put them together if it's

a committee to save this building and this building alone. You

will perhaps save that building, but growing up around it may be

the very kind of thing that we speak about, the concrete and the

glass, the chrome and the glass building that throws the whole

aspect of the town out of context, and certainly brings in all

sorts of conflicting values within the area itself.

So I think clearly that this is a major goal to work for,

that this is the approval we want. It's a look at our environ-

ment, our landscape and how these things would fit into it. Here,

of course, is where you need the widespread citizen approval of

what goes on. Here is where the educational and the leadership

role of the organized group of citizens can play its most signi-

ficant part.








It is very difficult for government to persist in policies

where the mass of people either show great disapproval or total

apathy. And I would say the challenge is very strong here, if

we want to think about the development in the context of national

plans or regional plans or urban plans.

Thank you.


CHAIRMAN:

Thank you very much professor. Are there any further questions

or comments from the floor?


MR. DONNELLY:

Let's pay a little homage here to the piecemeal effort. Let's

not bury it completely for several reasons. In the first place,

we must be pragmatic. We are trying to do something and trying to

do something fast. Let's remember we can "committee" things to

death. We can convince people to pass on master plans, but it may

take 10 years to do it and lose their interest while doing it.

Remember, we are dealing with human beings in our effort to save

something, whether it be a village in Barbados or a beach in St.

Thomas. This small effort, whatever you name it, will crystallize

feelings and actual attitudes in such a way as to make an overall

plan a little easier. Remember, a great many of the conservation

efforts around the world are really begun as specific piecemeal

efforts.


MR. CARLOZZI:
I wouldn't want Mr. Donnelly to think that I disagree with his








point of view. I have much good to think about the successful

efforts that have been made, not only in the Caribbean, but else-

where. What I am saying is that this basis can do the things,

he said it can. It can crystallize interest and it can make an

accomplishment. You can save these particular things that you

are interested in. I would like to think, however, that as we

look at the overall problem, for the islands especially, and in

many cases other countries, that here we know development is going

to occur. Many of the islands already think in terms of national

palns, and I have had personal experience with this in Trinidad.

There a national plan was worked on with help from a United Nations

planning team. And I was happy to participate, at least to the

extent of helping to select sites for a park and recreational

system for the country within the context of a national plan. Now

when that national plan is going to come about, I don't know. Do

I think it is wise to wait until the national plan was a reality

in order to make some very strong frontal attacks on the preserva-

tion of certain really important natural and historical sites?

No. I would not like to think we would wait for the national plan

to come along. But in thinking in terms of the national plan, what

you do has established this interest as a valid interest--as valid

as the preservation of soil for agriculture, as valid as areas for

housing or roadways, the protection of watersheds, anything you

want to think of as major land use allocations. This becomes one

of the important appropriate needs and you get it included. And

I think that this is a pretty important thing. Now obviously you








will be foolish to wait and never take action, because you always

were waiting for the national plan. I think this would not be so,

but certainly I would like to think that we could think in this

context. If we really believe in what we say about these things,

they are valid inclusions. I would not delay action. But, I

would certainly wish to see action carried out, perhaps on two

fronts, one piecemeal, as we have an opportunity to grab off and

preserve and protect or develop a site that we know is import-

ant, and the other, a long time continuing effort to see things

as a part of the national policy and national planning. Thank you.


MR. DONNELLY:

Yes, but remember the goal of the piecemeal effort is not so

much to save whatever the object is as it is to instill an atti-

tude.


MR. CARLOZZI:

I like to think that this was so, but I don't know. I mean,

there is nothing in my experience that makes me believe that peo-

ple who are motivated primarily to preservation could create an

attitude.

I think of a group of "Friends" that were more interested in

developing and restoring Nelson's Dock Yard in Antigua than creating

an attitude. I think the attitude grows out of the restoration,

that you can utilize the restoration as a means to creating it and

that these things come along as a result of this. I don't think

that the primary motivation is to be found here in creating an








attitude or else you'd go about it in an entirely different way.

But the end result is, I think, that they do create an attitude

and they serve very handsomely in doing this.


MR. McKEE:

Well, Dr. Carlozzi has largely said what I was going to say.

I would just like to add that while I approve strongly of piece-

meal development, if there is no plan to work to, I think the

danger of devoting your attention solely to this is the fact that

the very qualities that you are trying to preserve in the indivi-

dual unit can be destroyed by the development around it.

I have worked for some years in Edinborough, and I think as

a city it has probably got more preservation societies per square

inch than any other city in the world, but there was one drawback.

I can think of very many instances, but there is one a? ,ut a castle,

a small castle that sits in the middle of Edinborough, that should

be preserved despite the fact that there was a new technical col-

lege being planned for the area. The result was that the preserva-

tion society won. The small castle was maintained, and the techni-

cal college was built right around the castle, and the castle

was left in the court yard. The result was that the scale of the

original building was completely destroyed. The new development

completely dwarfed the original site, and you ended up with the

ridiculous situation that what you tried to preserve in one way

you destroyed in another way. I think this is a danger of con-

concentrating on a new interest or too small a unit.


CHAIRMAN:








Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. I have an

instruction here that someone is calling us. This has been a

most interesting discussion. I am sure that we will have time

during the rest of the conference to iron out any of the differ-

ences that exist among our miscellaneous philosophies. I am

sure that as Mr. Dawson said, that each of us will be able to

return with some benefit, or some means by which we can better

do the things which we have been doing in the past at home,

whether by piecemeal or economic comprehensive planning. When

in doubt, use both, as I have been instructed. Thank you very

much for your patience, and I want to tell you that dinner is

ready.



























PART


GOVERNMENT PLANNING FOR CONSERVATION






























CHAIRMAN: MR. JOHN WATTS, CHAIRMAN

THE GRENADA TOURIST BOARD








GOVERNMENT POLICIES FOR CONSERVATION


by

Dr. Francis X. Mark

College of the Virgin Islands


The approach of this paper is not that of the conservation-

ist but of the political scientist who sees conservation as only

one of the many conflicting demands faced by policy-makers. The

discussion of Government planning for conservation is not meant

to be descriptive; rather, it is my purpose to raise some general

questions about conservation in the context of the islands of the

Eastern Caribbean, in the hope that possibly this session may, as

a result of panel contributions and discussion from participants,

provide the outlines of a possible framework to guide the various

governments in formulating policy.

It seems appropriate to discuss this topic under three heads,

which can be phrased in question form:

1. How important a role ought conservation to play in govern-

ment policy in the Eastern Caribbean area?

2. What are the criteria which ought to be established in

order to assist Governments to formulate policies about conserva-

tion?

3. What kind of organizational and institutional structure

should Governments set up for proposing, advising on, and executing

conservation policy?








In raising these questions, I make no claim to having answers

to any or all of them. It is my hope that our session this morning

will provide these.

A certain amount of conservation is already practiced in the

area, as evidenced by the existence of laws establishing closed

seasons for hunting or prohibiting the hunting of certain species,

the establishment of some National Trust type institutions, and

the creation of parks, recreation areas, forest reserves, etc.

in various territories. There is some doubt, however, about how

much of this is the result of conscious overall policy planning.

How important is conservation--as distinct from the question

how influential are conservationists of one kind or another--as

a legitimate demand among the many conflicting social and economic

demand goals which make not only policies, but proper planning,

in the Eastern Caribbean an exercise in all the arts of compromise?

How much attention ought Governments to pay to those who demand

conservation, and at what cost?

It appears that this question must be considered in two con-

texts: 1) the context of the resources of the area; and 2) the

context of modernization and change which may be desirable. Before

we consider the resources of the area, or of any part of it, the

question of what it is we want to conserve, and why we want to con-

serve it has to be faced. The first is to some extent a technical

question for our scientists, or an aesthetic question for our land-








scape lovers, or the business of our historians, archaeologists,

and other curators of our culture; it is not, fortunately, my pro-

blem as a political scientist. The second implies, in fact, that

we have begun to answer the second general question which was posed

at the beginning, because it concerns criteria. Must we preserve

for the sake of uniqueness, or of representativeness, or for what

reasons?

To return to the main topic, the resources of the area as a

whole are limited, of individual parts of it pitifully small. The

desire for maximum and most efficient use of these resources is an

argument both for and against the conservationists' position, as

measured against the satisfaction values of the population. This

is the strength of the oft-heard argument that in this part of the

world landscape is a valuable resource, and that green hills, white-

sand beaches and the other attributes of a tropical paradise are

potentially the most valuable economic asset of the region; the

argument would see tourism as the major pillar of economic develop-

ment.

There are considerations which make this view open to serious

question: 1) The continuously declining position of the area's

staple agricultural products are an economic argument for industrial-

ization; 2) new staples, or market-gardening (which is largely a

peasant occupation), are unlikely to provide a long-term solution

to the agricultural problem; 3) social, economic and political

considerations may make various desirable conservation policies

unworkable, pointless or farcical; and 4) the demands of tourism








itself, as a viable industry, result in the destruction of some of

those very features of the area which are regarded as a resource

in this connection.

It must be accepted, too, that modernization is inevitable

in the area, with its concomitant of physical change. The dominant

socio-economic attitudes of the population demand admission to the

20th Century, with all that it connotes. Emphasis on minimum stan-

dards of living, for example, results in the need for housing devel-

opment; industrialization means urbanization. The acceptance (con-

scious or unconscious) of patterns of physical and social develop-

ment of the more successful, i.e., the more industrialized countries

is also a consequence of this attitude.

There is clearly a need for compromise in planning, given the

continuance of existing forms of political system in the area. But

what kind of compromise? This depends upon the criteria to be adopted

about what to conserve. Here, the usual general formulae such as

"whatever leads ultimately to the greatest good of the community"

and "conservation where possible" are of little value except in

specific situations where all the information is available--as it

seldom is in this area. We may phrase these in more practical terms,

perhaps; "Green rather than grey", "Better grass than concrete", or

"Rural jungle is preferable to urban jungle".

In the examination of organizational and institutional structure

we may be less vague. The existence of Planning Boards is generally

accepted as desirable in the Eastern Caribbean, and land use surveys

zoning regulations and other media are being employed in many terri-








stories. The problem here is one of availability of technical skills

rather than unwillingness to make use of them.

In this connection, three specific measures suggest themselves

for discussion as possible immediate contributions towards assisting

Governments to plan conservation policies:

1) The establishment of some regional body for conservation

activity would seem to be an urgent need. The composition of such

a body, its functions, and its relations with governments and with

local associations must be a matter for discussion. But. such a

body could fill much of the demand for technical advice and assist-

ance, for educating decision-makers and public, and for stressing

the claims of conservation which appears necessary.

2) The improved administration and execution of such laws

affecting conservation as are in existence in the territories.

3) For this purpose, it would appear that some form of sup-

port for historical, archaeological and naturalist societies which

exist locally in many of the territories ought to be considered.

This support, some of which may need to be financial, may have to

come from governments and/or from the regional body. But it is

necessary to provide encouragement for and to raise the prestige

of many of these local societies, some of which are regarded as

groups of cranks in their local communities, but which are reposi-

tories of a great deal of knowledge, interest and concern about the

area; they are too often compelled to be merely small pressure

groups, vocal and informed but not very effective.








These, and other measures which may suggest themselves to this

conference, should be invaluable to governments in the area in plan-

ning for conservation.













PROTECTING NATURAL RESOURCE VALUES
WITH ZONING AND RELATED LEGAL MEASURES

by
Dr. Erling D. Solberg
Agricultural Economist

I would like to spend a few minutes discussing some of the

legal measures that have been used, and are being used, or that are

proposed in the United States for reserving land for open spaces,

or for other conservation uses. I will start by discussing some

of the measures that have been used for reserving fertile soils for

farming.

Urbanization is not taking place around every town or city.

It is mostly centered around what we call standard metropolitan

statistical areas, that is, areas with a core city having 50,000

people or more. Urbanization of fertile farm lands has been most

rampant in California. Consequently, I will center my remarks

around some of the techniques that have been developed in Calif-

ornia in attempting to protect their fertile land for farming.

About a decade ago the farmers in California developed what

they called an exclusive agricultural zoning district. In such a

district only farming and a few related uses that facilitate the

use of the land for farming are permitted. All other uses, includ-

ing non-farming residences are prohibited. In addition, minimum

lot sizes are established that range from five acres to as much as

one hundred and sixty acres, depending on the district.








These types of exclusive agricultural zoning districts have

been established in more than a score of counties in California,

and they have been established by half a dozen cities. In recent

years, exclusive agricultural zoning districts have been estab-

lished in a dozen other states by counties, by towns, and by other

local units of government. This has occurred in Iowa, Indiana,

Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and in a few more states.

As I have indicated, zoning in California is at the county

level. In the northeastern part of the United States, where there

also are a few exclusive agricultural zoning districts, zoning is

at the town or township level. In the Lake states, zoning is at

the county and at the township level.

There have been terrific pressures on exclusive agricultural

zoning districts. There have been pressures of rising land values,

pressures of taxes, and political pressures of one type or another.

As a result, these exclusive zoning districts have not worked as

well as it was anticipated. I will say some more later about some

of the new techniques that were developed to make them more effect-

ive.

Now let me touch on a new approach that has been used in Hawaii.

In 1961, the legislature in Hawaii created a State Land Use Commis-

sion. This commission was authorized and directed to place all land

in the islands in one or another of four types of zoning districts.

The most fertile and productive land agriculturally was placed in

agricultural zoning districts. The second zone was a conservation








district. In conservation districts, they placed water reserve,

forest, recreation, grazing, and historic lands, and a number of

other categories. The third type was rural districts. In these

districts, they placed lands in small farms and lands that are

in non-farm homes on tracts that contain one acre or more. Also,

in these districts the normal urban services are not provided, The

fourth type of district is for the urban lands which are now in

urban uses and lands that may be needed for urban purposes in the

foreseeable future. These four types of districts were established

by the state agency, the State Land Use Commission.

Counties may also zone in Hawaii within the legal framework

applied by the State Land Use Commission. The counties may pass

restrictions that apply within the zoning districts, but the regu-

lations may not conflict with the regulations passed by the State

Land Use Commission.

But there is one exception to this county authority. It con-

cerns the conservation districts. The counties may not pass zoning

regulations there. These regulations are passed by another agency,

the Department of Land and Natural Resources.

The Hawaiian Law has another feature of interest. Lands that

are placed in conservation districts or in agricultural districts

may be "dedicated" by the owner for renewable ten year periods.

And when he does that, the land will be assessed based on its value

for farming in an agricultural district, or for conservation in a

conservation district, and not for its value for sub-division, or

for shopping centers, or for industry.









That brings me back to some problems in California. They have

tax problems. In some instances, the annual taxes on agricultural

lands have totaled more than the gross profits from that land. Conse-

quently, under such pressures, the farmers just can't hold the land

for agricultural purposes.

About three or four years ago the legislature submitted to the

people of California a referendum which would have authorized pre-

ferential assessments of agricultural lands--lands that are in an

exclusive agricultural zone and that are used for farming only. The

people turned it down. In the previous year, the same people passed

a preferential assessment law which authorized lands that are in golf

courses to be assessed based on their value for golf courses only,

and not for subdivision or shopping centers, industrial areas, etc.

As a result of the action of the people in California in turning

down the proposed constitutional amendment, the California legis-

lature passed the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. This

act authorizes any city or county by contract with the land owners

to limit the use of prime agricultural land to agriculture and com-

patible uses. Prime agricultural lands are lands in soil conserva-

tion land use capability classes one and two, or lands that yield

annual returns from agricultural production, that is unprocessed pro-

duction, of $200 an acre or more. This contract is for ten years

and is renewable.

Under this arrangement, the county agrees to pay to the land

owner a sum annually that totals five percent or five dollars for

every hundred dollars assessed valuation of the land. The State








agrees to pay annually to the county one dollar an acre for each

acre of land under contract, to help cover costs of payments that

the counties are making to the land owners.

This is an effort you see to ease the tax burden on agricul-

tural land so that landowners can keep these lands in agricultural

reserves.

Provisions are made for cancellation of the land contracts.

A violation of the contract by the owners, of course, will result

in the county cancelling the contract and terminating the ten year

period. If the farmer doesn't want to renew his contract, it is

terminated, of course.

Also, there is this provision in the law: At such time as the

land owner doesn't renew, or has his contract cancelled, he shall

pay to the county 50% of the increased assessed valuations of the

land which occurred between the time that he entered into the con-

tract and the time of the termination of the contract. In other

words, under this law, the county is taking a portion of the capital

gains. This law was passed in 1965, and I don't know how it is going

to work. There just hasn't been time to see how effectively it is

going to work out.

In 1965 the Pennsylvania legislature considered House Bill No.

1634. Well, you might say this bill is a compromise. It doesn't go

nearly as far as the law in California that I have just described.

It provides that the counties may covenant with the owners of farms

forests, water supply or open space lands, that their lands shall








remain as open space for five-year renewable terms, and the county

contracts that the tax assessment on these lands during that time

shall remain at current values. The bill ran into a little diffi-

culty. I don't know how it is faring.

In a number of states, laws have been passed authorizing local

units of government to acquire what we call development rights in

the land. Again, in Pennsylvania in 1965, a second bill, House Bill

No. 1633, was considered which contained such provisions. (Neither

bill became law.) It is more or less representative of some of the

laws that have been passed in other states and some of the laws that

are proposed. So I will just briefly touch on the provision of this

bill and then I will stop. This bill would authorize the common-

wealth through the Department of Forests and Waters and the Depart-

ment of Agriculture to acquire open space property interests. The

property interests may be acquired by purchase, by gift, by condem-

nation, by devise or otherwise. The open-space property interests

may include the fee simple title, a license, a life estate, or an

easement, which are restrictions or covenants of a sort.

The Department of Forests and Waters would be authorized to

acquire open space interest for future public acquisition in fee

simple to preserve water supply, for forest uses, to protect existing

or future public parks, to conserve scenic resources, to preserve

historic areas, to preserve open spaces between cities, or for re-

sale subject to restrictive covenants.

The Department of Agriculture in Pennsylvania, under the proposed








law, could acquire open spaces to preserve land for farm uses, to

conserve land for water supply uses, or for resale subject to res-

trictions, so as to keep the land in farming or in water supply uses.

This proposed law also provides that all property that is acquired

in fee simple shall be resold within two years to private interests,

subject to restrictive covenants. The idea is to keep as much of

the land value as is desirable in private ownership. The Common-

wealth's interest in land that is acquired would be exempt from taxa-

tion. If land is resold for farming, subject to restrictive coven-

ants which prohibit development for non-farming uses or for resi-

dential uses, the farmer's tax assessment would be based only on the

values that the Commonwealth granted when reselling the land to him.

And that's about it. Thank you very much.













DISCUSSION

on

GOVERNMENT PLANNING FOR CONSERVATION


CHAIRMAN:

Ladies and gentlemen, you have heard Dr. Francis Mark, who has

expressed his comments on this background paper, Government Plan-

ning for Conservation. Dr. Mark is the Chairman of the Division of

Social Sciences at the College of the Virgin Islands. Thank you

very much, Dr. Mark.

Just before we let loose these panelists upon you, I think we

should take the opportunity to introduce them all to you individu-

ally, so you will know who is talking, and about what. Starting on

my right, you have Dr. Francis Mark, whom I have introduced before

and whom you have looked at for a long time. Then you humble ser-

vant, of course, John Watts, who is the Chairman of the Tourist

Board on the little British Island of Grenada, the Windward Island

further south. Immediately on my left we have Mr. Thomas Blake

who is Director of the Planning Board of the United States Virgin

Islands. Then comes Mr. G.E.V. Dawson, Secretary of Trade and Pro-

duction Commission of Labor of the British Virgin Islands. And then

we have with us Mr. Gerald Bryan, The Honorable Gerald Bryan, who

is the Administrator of the British Island of St. Lucia, also in the

Windward Islands. Then you have our good friend, Mr. Herrick, Thomas








Herrick of the Caribbean Research Institute at the College of the

Virgin Islands, and may I say the driving force behind this Confer-

ence. Next to Mr. Herrick we have Mr. Alfred Thorne, Professor of

Economics at the University of Puerto Rico. And lastly, and by no

means, least, we have Mr. Irving Solberg, of the Natural Resource

Economic Division of the Department of Agriculture with the United

States Federal Government.

And there you have it, Ladies and Gentlemen, a fine collection

of gentlemen who will now thrust themselves upon you intellectually

and otherwise. Now we will hear from Thomas Herrick.


MR. HERRICK:

Well, unfortunately, I have very little to say with regard to

this particular panel, although I am a political scientist. I acted

as a political scientist in a planning project in Venezuela which

was recently completed.

We were planning the Orinoco River Basin down there, and I did

participate in the administrative aspects of that particular plan-

ning project. We were at that time doing a comprehensive planning

of the entire Orinoco River Basin in Venezuela, planning from soup

to nuts--housing, regional political relationships with the state

governments, urban planning, industrial planning, and feasibility

studies for particular plants. In fact, everything.

When I was there, I was struck by the fact that you have down

there a planning operation consisting of two distinct organizations.

One, the regional authority, or in this case, the "Corporacion








Venezolana de Guayana", which had absolute authority over this parti-

cular area and all the planning, all the development, and virtually

life and death control over the development of the Orinoco River

Basin. On the other hand, you also had the National Planning Office,

in this case, Cordiplan Venezuela. The National Planning Office was

busily engaged in five-year plans, one-year plans, two-year plans,

and concern from a national viewpoint.

Now, in relating this back to the paper here, and in my own

experience in Venezuela, I can see a possibility of a planning board

or a planning organization, which might be national in scope, which

might be attempting to develop particular programs, and be in almost

a vital life-or-death conflict with another organization, also

government-backed, which would be devoted to a particular region of

particular entity, possibly a particular province.

I expect the same thing is happening here in conservation. We

spoke, for example, of the local ad hoc committee to preserve a

particular historical site. These ad hoc committees are very power-

ful committees. Included on their staffs are very important people

within their specific governments working sometimes against the

National Planning Board, and there really isn't too much they can

do about it, except to try to effect a compromise. Perhaps it is

the function of the political scientist to try to work out these

particular compromises. This is a point which Francis Mark left

hanging here. How are you going to work your compromises? How

does a politician within a government work a compromise between two

government-backed organizations, one perhaps national in scope,








and the other devoted to a particular landscape site, to a parti-

cular historical site, or to any particular question of conser-

vation? Well, I wish I had an answer to that. If I were to make

a choice or to offer a solution, I think that the power should go

to your National Planning Board, and your ad hoc committee or your

historical landscape committees, whatever they may be, could pro-

vide more of a showcase role, a very important showcase role of

course, one which might provide funds, certainly publicity.

But I am struck by the fact that your overall planning and

your overall planning boards do not seem to have the power, do not

seem to have the prestige to fully carry through a comprehensive

planning program. And in the area of conservation, this seems to

be of vital importance. And again I can go back to my Venezuela

experience, where I noticed a definite conflict between the reg-

ional planning group in Guayana and in the Orinoco River Basin and

the National Planning Board of the Government of Venezuela. Thank

you.


CHAIRMAN:

Well, that was Tom Herrick. We have heard from a couple of

Political Scientists. How about letting us hear from an Economist?

I now call upon Professor Alfred Thorne, Professor of Economics at

the University of Puerto Rico. Let's hear his contribution.


MR. THORNE:

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, I have first of all to

confess that I have never done any work whatever in the field of

54








conservation, but I am very happy to be here because I have always

had an interest in the area.

When I accepted, or when I was asked this morning at breakfast-

time to make a few comments, I almost declined, through fear of not

being able to make an adequate contribution in view of lack of

experience in the area, but I felt that whatever little I had to say,

I should say it rather than just pop out of it. Now it seems to me

we are in a very difficult area of choice. An Economist is of course,

as you all know a man who is involved in a dismal science, a very

dismal science to most of those who are outside of it, but some of

us enjoy it. We have a very difficult problem here, of choice. This

problem of choice is all the more important in the Eastern Carib-

bean where we have a very dense population and where the density is

becoming greater rather than smaller. We have got, first of all, a

choice as to whether we are going to have conservation or preserva-

tion. I do have a recollection that somewhere in the past I heard

somebody in this field say that there was a difference between pre-

servation and conservation: that there is the alternative of pre-

serving nature as it is and preserving ruins, more or less as they

are, perhaps restoring them to make them resemble more clearly what

they are presumed to have been; and there is the other alternative

of conserving, of improving consciously upon nature -- not distorting

nature by some aesthetic standards, but not leaving it untouched.

I think that one gets the sense of this difference when one

looks at the approaches in England and compares them with the

approaches in the United States of America. In America, if I am








correct--I hope I am, if I am not, I would like to be put right--

I have the feeling that in the United States the emphasis has been

on conservation, upon improving upon nature, creating parks, beaches,

etc., more beautiful and usable than they would be if left untouched

by the hands of man. In the case of England, I have the impression

that the emphasis has been on trying to preserve what nature has

produced without interfering with it.

This is one area of choice, but I don't think it is by any

means the most difficult area of choice. I think we really get

into the difficulties when we are trying to decide whether we ought

to conserve at all, or ought to preserve at all, and what would be

the alternatives if we did not.

Now from the point of view of economics, if we say that our

objective is economic in some cases, then we have got some criteria

which could be simple, I think. For example, we could consider that

we have here a problem of choice between income effects and employment

effects. Very often, if you take one step and increase income, you

do not at the same time create more net total employment. We have

seen this, time and again, and I think the Puerto Rican case is a

good example of it. It is not unique. It is going to be found

right through the Caribbean. You create more employment in the

modern sector but a number of people who are employed in the old,

low income sectors decide--(I am talking now quite distinctly from

technological unemployment)--that they will no longer accept the low

income wage in the traditional old peasant and similar sectors.

They hopefully go to the urban area where the new employment is








usually created. They don't find the employment in the urban area;

but they remain there and become unemployed persons rather than low

wage, underemployed persons in the rural area. So we have got these

among our criteria: Are we going to create parks and improve beaches,

without considering what alternatives we could make of the area being

conserved, in terms of creating employment and creating income?

We have to consider not just income effects in the next year

or two, but over varying periods of years. We may create more income

for the next five years by conserving, or we may lose income for the

next five years. But, on the other hand, what we gain or lose in

that five-year period immediately ahead may be more than offset by

what we lose or gain, if we take a 10-year span of the time within

which to make the calculation. And so we have got another problem

of choice here.

The question also arises as to the effects on the distribution

of income. If you develop an area in a certain way, you may raise

income among the very poorest members of society for a short time,

or a longer time. In using the resources in a different way, you

may increase the incomes of the middle classes and upper classes

of people. The lower class, income-wise, may also get some trick-

ling benefits. So this, I suggest, is another matter for serious

thought.

There is also the question of conservation of land to stimu-

late tourism versus use of land for market gardening or some other

farming. Some think that these are always alternatives. Actually

they may not be, in some cases, because if we increase tourism,








then we often increase the demand for market gardening and for

other "non-staple" farm products. People who have a low level of

income seldom eat tomatoes and lettuce, and do not eat eggs and

butter and cheese very much. So that conservation of some areas

for the improvement of the tourist industry, may have undoubtedly

some repercussions that we might not like, but may also bring net

gains to farmers and others--it all depends on how the industry

develops and the conservation effort relative to all available

land resources and other productive resources.

But there is the question of population which makes this

choice so difficult in the Eastern Caribbean. Is there a popula-

tion policy? Should there be a population policy? The projections

that one would make with regard to income effects of a given use

of resource or employment effects, obviously would be influenced

by what one expects the total population to become. If we have

a stationary population, they we have a much reduced problem. If

the population is growing, then what we consider today as land

available for parks may impinge upon needed agricultural land in

ten years' time.

So I would suggest that the planning boards in these islands

should consider the population projections at the outset, and

recommend a national population policy.

Another point that would arise, I think for early decision

is whether the conserved or preserved park should be publicly

owned or privately owned. I think that an examination of the

British, Swedish, and American experiences could be useful. In








the case of the British experience, we note that many of the parks

are privately owned. The government introduced legislation which

prevents and restricts private owners of land from using the land

in certain ways. I am not suggesting that the procedures set up

in England are the most logical; but I think there is some rele-

vance, especially in our islands where we are faced with very

limited government resources.

In the case of the United States, we have got the government

owning the parks, but the United States government is supported

by a very rich country, so it can afford to buy, or not sell, land

when it decides that it wants this land for a park. Moreover, the

United States is a huge area, and so the problem of choice is not

so severe a one. But when we come to small islands where there

is a tremendous demand for practically all of the land for some

basic use or other, and prices are relatively high, the British

approach is something we ought to think about. It means that

government money that otherwise would be spent to purchase land

for the purpose of conserving or preserving it would not be spent

for that purpose, and would be available for other public purposes.

And finally -- there is the question of who makes the decisions.

We may have a planning board and all of that, but the question

still is: should the decisions be made by a group of experts with-

out any reference to the House, or Congress or Parliament, or

whatever it is, or should the proposals come through in very great

detail to the legislative body for the latter's decision?








We can get into a very serious problem here because usually

interest in conservation is greatest among a few people educated

in a certain way, and so forth, with certain levels of choice and

all of that. The greatest majority of people, as far as I have

understood the American History of it, have not been very interested

in pressing for conservation. The movement has come through a few

educated people, often hydraulic engineers and the like. If we

were to attempt to apply fully our democratic principles we might

find that we were left no land for conservation, because the great

majority of farmers would say, "No, let's use it for agriculture."

I have only posed these problems. I haven't solved them, I

realize this; but we economists are accustomed to putting more

problems up for consideration than we solve.

Thank you. (Applause)


CHAIRMAN:

Thank you, Professor Thorne. Now we have heard from, shall

we say, some of the "technical boys". We have with us a representa-

tive from the island of St. Lucia. I know they have a very -- in

fact, they have the best historical society in the Windward Islands.

We in Grenada are very envious of them, and so may I take this

opportunity to introduce the very Honorable Mr. Bryan of St. Lucia

to make a speech on this question of natural resources.


MR. BRYAN:

Thank you very much, Dr. Watts. I have been introduced very

neatly as being the peron who really knows nothing at all about

the subject. In fact, I can only speak to you from the point of

60








view of an administrator with a small "a". I have, however, been

an Administrator with a capital "A" of the British Virgin Islands

in St. Lucia. I, therefore, speak with experience concerning

this island. And I would like to take this point of view when i

speak, that this British Virgin Island, to give you the scale, is

approximately 60 square miles in length. I think that it was larger

when I went there, but the experts took off two square miles during

my term of office. St. Lucia is 238 square miles and has approxi-

mately 100,000 people. Now these are very small islands and quite

obviously they cannot have a very elaborate organization set up

to deal with individual problems such as conservation. Further-

more, these islands--I am sure I speak on behalf of the people of

the islands--feel that there has been far too much conservation

and preservation in the past and that there has been far too

little emphasis on the type of development which tends to con-

flict with conservation and preservation. And it is only just

now in these islands that we are getting this type of develop-

ment and that the problem is becoming more acute. So that insofar

as St. Lucia is concerned, this problem is now arising and we

attend this conference in the hope that we will learn how to

tackle it from the experience of those countries which have been

living with the problem for some time.

It seems to me, listening to the main address this morning,

that I must compliment the speaker, Dr. Francis Mark, on his very

stimulating address. I hope that we will be able to receive copies

of this address after the conference so that we can study it in








greater detail, but the main point has been the conflicting claims

between conservation on the one hand and economic and other develop-

ments on the other. Now, as far as I am concerned, the main thing

would seem to be to try to set up some form of organization which

would insure that the claims of conservation will receive due and

proper consideration against the competing claims of other sorts of

developments.

It might, I think, be helpful if I just gave a bit of the back-

ground of what actually happened in one of these smaller islands in

St. Lucia. There is no overall conservation policy and there is

no special central planning authority. But you must remember the

size concerned, that there are few people available for these special-

ized agencies and it is quite possible for the government to keep

an eye on most of the things that are going on.

The policy of the government is to concentrate on agriculture

first and the development of tourism second from the point of view

of the economy. But we have found that tourism can conflict with

the development of agriculture. For example, the development of

land for tourism can push up land prices to the point at which

they far exceed the agricultural value of the land. In St. Lucia,

conservation has been on a piecemeal basis as opposed to an overall

planned policy. And it is easy to see how these areas of conser-

vation have arisen. One of the earliest was the conservation of

the forest reserves. The whole of the central area of St. Lucia is

mountainous and it is covered with forest. And there is specific

legislation preserving those forest areas for a very good reason.








They are the catchment areas for water supply, and by preserving

the forest we conserve our water supply.

As far as fauna is concerned, there is legislation protecting

the birds. St. Lucia has a species of parrot which is unique in

the world, and it has been recognized that there should be specific

legislative protection for that parrot and other birds, but we do

not have any national society, such as there is in Puerto Rico, to

insure that this legislation is effective.

And finally, on the preservation side, more recently we have

introduced legislation to protect the beaches. There are now two

societies in St. Lucia, the Archaelogical and the Historical Society,

which has been mentioned, and more recently, a Horticultural Society,

both concerned with conservation on the island. They are private

voluntary societies, and they do operate in close association with

the government, but they have got at the moment no legislation to

back them.

As I mentioned earlier, until recently there has been no real

conflict with the claims of conservation and the claims of other

developments. But quite recently, to meet the pressing demands

for additional residential land, the government has acquired a

sizeable area of land from the British War Department. This land

is situated on a hill known as Fortuni Hill. This hill has been

fought over on numerous occasions by the British and the French,

and it can be considered as a historical monument. Now the govern-

ment, to cope with the development, has set up a special Develop-








ment Board, and the planning of the development was handed over

to that board and the board brought in architects for special

advice, and finally the plan was subject to approval by the govern-

ment. In the plan I am happy to say, that the whole of the top

of this mountain with the old fortifications and military build-

ings has been taken from the main development, and the only sites

which are being made available for houses are on the periphery

of the area. The appointment of members to the board is a matter

for the government, and quite recently a representative of the

Archaeological and Historical Society has been appointed to the

board, and I understand from the minister, Mr. Mallard, who is

at the Conference, that he proposes now to appoint a member of

the Horticultural Society to this board so that in this manner

the agency will be directly concerned with conservation being

brought directly into the field of planning.

I think also it is true to say that there is much greater

awareness of the problem now that the need to find solutions is

arising. This has cropped up in a sphere of conservation which

isn't perhaps directly related to the meeting here, but that is

archives, and we have now set up a formal archives committee.

The government gives an annual grant to the committee, and there

has quite recently been a meeting of archaeologists under the wing

of the University of the West Indies in Jamaica. I only quote

that to show that there is the growing awareness of the problem

of conservation. The Archaeological and Historical Society have








carried out an inventory of historical sites and they are now on

record.

Now, from our point of view, as I mentioned at the beginning,

our question is, "Where do we go from here?" What action ought we

properly to take in St. Lucia in the light of experience else-

where? Before we came here, we were considering specific legis-

lation to protect archaeological and historical sites in exactly

the same way as legislation has been passed to conserve fauna,

beaches and forestry land. This seems to be one practical plan

of insuring conservation of these buildings. We are also consider-

ing setting up a national trust on the lines of the National Trust

in Barbados, which was explained to us yesterday by Mr. Wiles.

Another major problem in relation to conservation has been under-

lined, and that is that where the resources, the natural resources,

the resources of technical knowledge, and finance are so very

limited, we have got to get solutions which will make the maximum

use of these resources. In that connection, we are particularly

interested in the suggestion that there should be some regional

cooperation here, because these smaller islands would, I think,

find this particularly useful, in that they might get their own

resources. And perhaps there might be some possibility of chan-

nelling financial assistance to the smaller and less economically

developed islands.

With these few ideas, I thank you for listening to me.

(Applause)








CHAIRMAN:

Ladies and Gentlemen, you have had Mr. Bryan who has

told you what efforts have been made in the small island of St.

Lucia, from which, I guess, some of us can benefit.

And now, Tom, you are sitting very close to me. How about

your telling us somehting? Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. Thomas

Blake from the United States Virgin Islands, Director of the

Planning Board.


MR. BLAKE:

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and Gentlemen of

this Conference, so far you have heard from political scientists,

economists, and a government administrator. Now you will hear

from a Planner who is in the executive branch of the American

system of government. I should hope somewhere on this panel we

have a sociologist or archaeologist, because all of these fields

and all of these endeavors are wrapped up in what we call a planner.

To begin with, in addition to being aware of all of these

special areas, the planner is really a generalist. In the American

system the planner is always faced with presenting these alterna-

tive choices to the decision-maker in the legislative branch of

the government. But in order to do this, he must be able to

think like the politician, and since he is usually appointed and

not elected, he becomes a "soft" politician.

Now Dr. Mark posed three headings under these conflicting

demands that might be imposed on the whole conservation effort.








Since the topic of this particular seminar, this panel discussion,

concerns influence on government planning for conservation, I think

we should talk more about what government can do in order to sort

out the problems which face conservation today.

I don't think there are any real serious conflicts in the

minds of any of us as to whether or not we should talk more about

what government can do in order to sort out the problems which

face conservation today.

I don't think there are any real serious conflicts in the

minds of any of us as to whether or not we should have conservation

or whether or not conservation should be part of government policy.

I think in all the efforts to improve a society's economic gains

against social gains and the others, that conservation can play

an important role. The question however, is to first determine what

are these goals, what are the objectives we are trying to achieve,

and then to see how much conservation efforts can contribute to

the achievement of them. Dr. Mark raised some very important

points, and again Mr. Bryan has mentioned the one that I like to

consider, the role of some sort of regional planning group for

the entire Eastern Caribbean.

My experience so far is rather limited in the planning field.

I have only been involved in it for the last three or four years.

However, in looking at the entire Caribbean you can address your-

selves to certain subregions. But we have all had some horrible

experiences, I think, with regional bodies, regional groups in

the Caribbean, and I think most of you here are familiar with those








bodies: the efforts of the federation which is in a way a

regional body; the efforts of the West Indies conference and

later on the Caribbean Commission. These were all thrown back

into the political arena, because of the difference in the

governments of these particular islands. Regardless of the

past failures, regional bodies are probably the most sensible

approach to discussing at least the conservation efforts of the

entire area. We in the United States Virgin Islands tried to

determine in our long-range planning what areas in our sub-

region were most meaningful to us, and to which island or islands

we should allocate our conservation efforts and resources. For

example, we realized that we have a very valuable asset here

in St. John at the National Park. The park isn't just here to

preserve open space, though that may have been the original

intention. There are economic benefits and social benefits that

grew out of the park. Because we have the park within the small

subregion we were then able to work with other areas and develop

them for other uses. But here is a source of conflict. As Mr.

Thorne has said, to what end are you conserving this particular

piece of land in St. John? What if your people's demands and

problems are such that the majority of them are not really making

full use of the area which you are conserving. By this I mean

if steps are not taken to move the other sections of an overall

area forward economically, then people in St. Croix, for example,

or in the British Virgin Islands, or in the other islands close








to us, cannot really appreciate this park here in St. John,

because they have not the economic means to really utilize it.

I say then that before we leave here today or before this con-

ference is closed, though I don't think the intent of this con-

ference was to have a workshop, but we should leave with some

things in mind when we get back to our little areas to begin to

work on our particular problems. The results of this conference

should have been to give us enough food for thought and to get

together again after having thought about these things. And I

say to you, don't only think of conservation in terms of natural

areas, or conservation for the protection of water sheds, but

also of the one resource which none of us has addressed ourselves

to seriously, and I think is the most important resource, is the

human resource. Whether you think in terms of conservation or

preservation, holding on to what you have, or what you think in

terms of conservation as developing and making something more

productive, you should consider the human resources as something

that ought to be conserved and developed. I will agree that in

the past we have all thought about natural areas and historical

buildings. My point is that it is useless to think of these

things merely in the effort of conserving them. You must determine,

predetermine, your goals and objectives and then formulate your

policies. I don't think that in this short session any one of

us will come up with policies that make sense. And again, I say

our role as technicians usually will be merely to pose the several

policies and the consequences of them and leave them up to the








decision-makers, which puts it back in Dr. Mark's lap as a

political scientist. I think my training has always been that

the elected representatives of the people must finally make the

decisions.

The other point I would like to address myself to is one

raised by Tom Herrick, in reference to his experience in Guayana,

where the effort was primarily an industrialization, and indus-

trialization leading to urbanization. I get the impression that

Tom feels that once you make this decision then things will run

away, they just go galloping ahead, and you will not be able to

control them. In fact, some of the efforts of the Caribbean

Research Institute lately has been towards this proliferation

of urbanization in the island of St. Croix, in the United States

Virgin Islands. This is somewhat my concern too, because again

decisions have not been made yet as to whether or not agricul-

ture is meaningful in the economy of the island of St. Croix,

and if in choosing to industrialize we should concentrate on

higher density in certain select areas or to allow things to

just spread all over the land. I say then the task of the tech-

nician is to recognize that these things will be, that there will

be industrialization which leads to urbanization, but the techni-

cian's role is to allocate land for each of these endeavors and

to present recommendations to the decision makers and to let

them finally make the decision. Our role cannot be to decide

but to advise and guide. Thank you.

(Applause)








CHAIRMAN:

That was Thomas Blake of the United States Virgin Islands.

We are still in the Virgins, Ladies and Gentlemen, so we will

hear from the British Virgin Islands. We will now hear from Mr.

Dawson, Commissioner of Labor in the British Virgin Islands.


MR. DAWSON:

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, I told Mr. Herrick that

I hadn't hoped to be on the panel or anything of the sort. I had

hoped to sit and listen and learn. There is hardly anything that

I could add to what the previous speakers have said, Mr. Bryan

covered the British Virgin Islands very well except for one or

two little points which I shall try to make here.

We have in the British Virgin Islands an ordinance which

set up a National Park Trust Committee of which Mr. O'Neal spoke

last night. Then we have an ordinance to protect beaches. This

ordinance prohibits or restricts the removal of sand and gravel

from the beaches which have been protected under the ordinance,

and even the owner of the beach must obtain permission prior to

removal of his sand or gravel.

We have just had a town planner from London. He is a town

and country planner, I should say. Mr. Dix is his name. I don't

know whether the town planner we have here from Montserrat is

acquainted with him. We are still awaiting a report, and until

that is received there is hardly much we can do as far as plan-
ning is concerned. However, we are trying to preserve certain








places of historic interest such as old sugar mill towers. We

have two such towers which I think can be preserved, and we are

working to that end with the hope that in the not too distant

future we shall have those properly preserved. We are hoping

to capture some of the tourist trade, and in this aspect we are

trying to beautify the colony as much as we can.

I don't think there is much more I can say on this, but

I do hope that after this conference we shall be able to take

back something to present to our government whereby we can start

the ball rolling in the proper direction. And to this end I

intend to listen attentively to the speakers and to see what

suggestions I can get to take back. Thank you.


CHAIRMAN:

Ladies and Gentlemen, I intentionally left the next speaker

for the last. We have among us here Dr. Erling Solberg of the

National Resource Economic Division of the Department of Agri-

culture of the United States government. I can think of no more

suitable person to give us some guidance into the practical

experiences on conservation.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Dr. Solberg.


DR. SOLBERG:

Thank you Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen. I am going

to make some remarks on the details of the planning process, on

the details of what it actually involves and I will try to stress








the aspects of the planning process that deal with natural
resources. But first I will have to give you a little back-

ground information on planning itself. I suppose that both in

the United States and in the islands the population explosion

continues. The technical revolution continues, which means

that we will have change. The automobile brought great change

to the nation and I am sure to your islands here.

Our need is to plan for that change, not let it grow hap-

hazardly and wastefully. This involves what the planner calls

"comprehensive planning for our community", and I am using the

term "community" to mean a little township or a city. It may

mean a county or several counties, or a region, or it may mean

several states. I am using it in a very, very general sense.

The planner starts with collecting data about the community,

about what the community has now, and about its problems. With

that information in hand, he then proceeds to devise plans that

are comprehensive plans for the community as a whole. Now again

I am using the word "community" in a very broad sense.

First, let me give you some general information on the type

of basic data or information that goes into the planning process.

Some of the preliminary remarks will just touch on it. For the

present I will not deal in great detail with the problem of

natural resources. I will deal with that later on.

Facts need to be collected about people and about their

creations, about existing public and private employment, trans-








portation facilities, public service facilities and government

building facilities. The climate of an area must be considered.

Then data needs to be collected about the present economic base

of a community: about its people, their educational level, their

skills; about population growth and trends in education; also,

reports on location of schools--elementary and high schools and

colleges, parks, playgrounds. Then also data is needed on the

location of dwelling areas; one-family, two-family, multiple

dwellings; on government and finance. And then, finally, data

needs to be collected on present land uses.

The planner begins designing a zoning ordinance, which is

one of the ways of carrying out the comprehensive plan, with an

inventory of present land uses. How is land used today? Where

are the industrial areas, the business areas, the residential

areas, the farming areas, forest areas, recreational areas, etc.?

And he also finds out the ownership of all land in the community:

federal government, state, county, city or township, other local

government units and private. Finally, he collects data on nat-

ural resources and on problems in the past. Planning has often

neglected certain aspects of the natural resource problems.

Here is a fast rundown of the type of resource information

that a planner needs, to design a good comprehensive plan. First,

he needs soil resource data. Now, planners in planning for rural

areas made use of land use capability ratings for some time; but,

in recent years, they are also starting to make use of soil

survey interpretation maps indicating the suitability of the soil








for purposes such as highways, parks, golf courses, athletic

fields, sewage disposal areas, sand and gravel quarries, for

industrial areas, and for woodland and agricultural areas. I

am just touching on some of the items that go into the planning

process.Another area where it is necessary to consider resource

data is in urban and suburban conservation. In building our

suburbs, there is very often a great deal of needless soil

erosion taking place. With some preplanning, much of this could

be prevented. Under current building practices soil is allowed

to wash into and fill lakes and streams and it is washed onto

the beaches. I heard some of you talk about that last night.

It gets into our streams and valleys, and fills the stream beds.

It kills the fish and harms the area for recreational uses. Then

when floods come, stream beds are quickly flooded and the flood

hazard increases.

Agricultural resource data that should be considered when

planning for a community includes information on the number,

value, and improvements on farms. This is important in the plan-

ning process. Very frequently, land in farms or in forests has

been considered undeveloped land by planners. But if you are

going to develop a comprehensive plan, data about such "undevel-

oped land" should be considered. Farm lands and forest lands

can be used to provide the open spaces that make the urban com-

munity more livable. We need information on acreage of woodlands

and other land uses, information on the size and type of farms








(commercial, part-time, etc.), on the extent of pasture and

woodlands, on water and wind erosion, and on irrigation and

drainage facilities in the area.

If an urban subdivision moves into a community in which

there are irrigation and drainage facilities, when they could

go into an area without such facilities, there is a considerable

loss of "sunk" investment. The irrigation facilities will not

be useful for the urban community.

The type and value of agricultural production should be

taken into consideration. The employment that provides the pay-

rolls of the community is also important. If the agricultural

base goes, the agricultural industries, the processing plants,

and the firms that are serving agriculture and the farmer will

also go.

Then planners need water resource data. They need to collect

information showing the location of streams, lakes, ponds, and

other bodies of water. The quantity and quality of ground and

surface water are important in the planning process. The loca-

tion of flood plains, swamps and wet land areas of high water

capabilities is also of importance. There should be accurate

maps showing the location of ponds, farm wells, water mains and

other water improvements. Recreational data should go into the

planning process--maps showing the location of present parks

and playgrounds, maps indicating public and private beaches and

swimming pools and other recreational facilities. I'm skipping








down through this list very fast. There are also natural loca-

tions of scenic beauty, historic buildings and sites, including

historic homes.

There is also forest resource data. Consideration should

be given to the forest potentials in an area; forest acreage,

total volume of annual growth, investments in forest industries

and processing industries, also to supply and service firms and

to studies of forest trends in the area. All of these pieces of

information go into the planning process.

Having all of this information at hand, then the planner is

in a better position to begin his comprehensive plan. I am going

to touch on just a few of the types of plans that might be

included in a comprehensive plan:

First, plans for improving transportation and utilities

as the community grows.

Maps showing the location of proposed sewage treatment

plants, water mains, and so on.

Then if you are going to have a larger population in the

community, an economic base has to be provided. Jobs have to

be provided and plans have to be drawn up that concern people;

plans of new schools of all kinds; elementary, junior and senior

high schools, colleges, vocational and training schools; also

plans relating to one-family, two-family, and multiple-family

residential areas; also areas to be set aside for future

industry, for business, for homes, for forest, for farming,

for recreational areas, and for other uses.









Having collected the facts and looked at the community as

a whole, the planner is then in a much better position to suggest

a realistic comprehensive plan for the future development of a

community. He will have to develop plans for reserving land

having transportation advantages for new industries, land for

shopping centers, for schools, parks, playgrounds,and other public

facilities. He will need plans for reserving and developing open

spaces: the steepest slopes, natural drainage areas, floodways,

and other unusual land forms. Zoning plans should indicate the

proposed zoning district for agricultural areas, for residential,

commercial, industrial, forestry and recreational uses. Natural

resource-oriented and agricultural-oriented plans and maps should

be included in the comprehensive plan. And it should include

programs for reserving the water supply for irrigation, for

livestock and domestic purposes; and plan for flood control,

for recreational areas; also resource plans and maps indicating

proposed parks, playgrounds, community and regional parks; and

plans for creating parklands having unique public values, such

as beaches, and dunes, forestry areas, cliffs, and historic

areas, natural environment areas, and plans for an enlargement

and development of forest areas.

A word should be said here about fish and wildlife resources.

Data and facts should be collected relating to fish and wildlife.

Plans for developing wildlife resources and game reserves might

be included, maps showing marshes, swamps and adjacent water areas,








etc. After the planners have prepared the comprehensive plan,

the next step in the planning process is to design ways of

carrying the plan out.

Zoning is one of the ways this is done. Projecting improve-

ments ahead for a number of years is another way. Preparing

official highway maps showing proposed roads, is another way.

The appropriations that the community makes for future public

developments are one of the best ways of directing future growth.

If the community is interested in reserving the fertile land for

farming, for example, but puts a high-speed highway through the

best farming areas, or if it puts sewers and water mains there,

the pressure on the farming area will be terrific, and it will

be extremely difficult to reserve the area for agriculture.

And the same rule would apply to forest areas and to other areas

that the community wants to reserve. There are many factors

that go into the planning process.

At this point, I think I have talked too long already. I

have been rather halting, because I have been taking individual

data from a long outline. I had very few minutes to prepare

this presentation. Thank you very much.


CHAIRMAN:

Ladies and Gentlemen, that was Dr. Solberg. Now we have

ten minutes before we close and I see that we have a coffee break

coming up. And before we close, I would like to give the opportunity

to members of the floor to pose a question or two to these fine




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs