JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Saturday, April 5, 2025

Sando fishermen in limbo as new facility incomplete

by

KEVON FELMINE
77 days ago
20250118

Se­nior Re­porter

kevon.felmine@guardian.co.tt

Dis­ap­point­ment and frus­tra­tion filled the air at King’s Wharf, San Fer­nan­do, on Thurs­day, as fish­er­men and boat own­ers ar­rived at the long-await­ed fish­ing fa­cil­i­ty—on­ly to find it still un­der con­struc­tion.

For months, they have been un­able to work, their ves­sels strand­ed since Ju­ly 15, 2024, af­ter the Ur­ban De­vel­op­ment Com­pa­ny of Trinidad and To­ba­go (Ude­cott) filled in the beach­front where they were once moored. The Min­istry of Agri­cul­ture, Land and Fish­eries (MALF) had as­sured them of a par­tial fa­cil­i­ty open­ing, rais­ing hopes that they could fi­nal­ly re­turn to sea. But when they ar­rived Thurs­day, their op­ti­mism quick­ly turned to anger. Con­struc­tion work­ers were still on-site, with plumb­ing and elec­tri­cal in­stal­la­tions un­fin­ished.

San Fer­nan­do Fish­ing Co­op­er­a­tive So­ci­ety pres­i­dent Bob­by Sook­lals­ingh said he re­ceived word at 2.30 pm on Wednes­day that the min­istry would hand over the fa­cil­i­ty to them, al­low­ing par­tial oc­cu­pa­tion. But when the fish­er­men turned up, they were met with a stark re­al­i­ty—their des­ig­nat­ed area was not ready.

Adding to their frus­tra­tion, site of­fi­cials barred them from en­ter­ing, cit­ing Oc­cu­pa­tion­al Safe­ty and Health Au­thor­i­ty (OS­HA) reg­u­la­tions. With­out per­son­al pro­tec­tive equip­ment, they were not al­lowed past the gates. Of­fi­cers from the Prae­di­al Lar­ce­ny Squad stood by, ob­serv­ing the tense stand­off.

“As you see for your­self, the jet­ty is in­com­plete. That is where we are sup­posed to an­chor. In the en­gine re­pair room, we do not have any ex­trac­tors there. If you are sand­ing a boat, there are no lights. The jet­ty has no poles, as you can see for your­self, and peo­ple are still work­ing,” Sook­lals­ingh said.

While Ude­cott com­pen­sat­ed the 64 fish­er­men and boat own­ers for their down­time, Sook­lals­ingh said the agree­ment promised fur­ther com­pen­sa­tion if the project ex­tend­ed be­yond Jan­u­ary 15. How­ev­er, he said there has been no com­mu­ni­ca­tion from the au­thor­i­ties on this mat­ter.

Vet­er­an fish­er­man Er­rol Ranghill ex­pressed sus­pi­cion that Ude­cott was rush­ing the work to avoid ad­di­tion­al pay­outs. But de­spite the hur­ried ef­forts, he said there were glar­ing de­fi­cien­cies—most no­tably, a crane in­stalled too low to safe­ly hoist boats out of the wa­ter. The fa­cil­i­ty al­so lacked ba­sic ameni­ties, in­clud­ing toi­let fa­cil­i­ties.

Adding to their con­cerns, Ranghill re­vealed that fish­er­men were hand­ed a li­a­bil­i­ty waiv­er, ab­solv­ing the au­thor­i­ties of re­spon­si­bil­i­ty for lost or dam­aged items.

“They are go­ing to ‘kill our genes from the wharf,’” Ranghill lament­ed, ex­plain­ing that the waiv­er on­ly asked for the name of a next of kin—some­one to clear out their lock­er and boat if any­thing hap­pened to them.

Fur­ther­more, he point­ed out a crit­i­cal flaw in the de­sign. Orig­i­nal­ly, the plan in­clud­ed a wave break­er to pro­tect boats, but with­out it, ves­sels are left vul­ner­a­ble to rough sea con­di­tions. The jet­ty it­self, he claimed, was built too high, seem­ing­ly de­signed for jet skis and yachts rather than fish­ing boats.

Ranghill, who has spent a life­time on the wa­ter, said the new fa­cil­i­ty feels like a move for the worse.

“Nor­mal­ly, where we were, you could have slept by your lock­er when you came in at night. Where they brought us, you can­not do that. They tell you they do not want any­body stay­ing on the com­pound, but if some­body breaks in and steals, you have to pay for the dam­aged door. If you lose your en­gine, they are not com­pen­sat­ing you. So, this is what we are faced with this morn­ing.”

More than just a place to dock their boats, the wharf rep­re­sents a way of life—a lega­cy passed down through gen­er­a­tions. But with the cur­rent con­di­tions, Ranghill fears this tra­di­tion will die out.

“If a fish­er­man can­not put his son to con­tin­ue his lega­cy, it is the killing of a gen­er­a­tion. It is noth­ing for us; every­thing is for them. It is as if we gave up where we were born and raised to come here and rent,” Ranghill said.

Among the fish­er­men, there is grow­ing un­ease that their stay at the fa­cil­i­ty will be tem­po­rary and that au­thor­i­ties may even­tu­al­ly force them out al­to­geth­er.

Con­tact­ed for a re­sponse on the is­sue, Ude­cott said in a state­ment that the jet­ty was avail­able for use from Thurs­day, while the en­tire project will be hand­ed over to the MALF in Feb­ru­ary.

It said MALF, as client, was aware of all mat­ters re­lat­ed to the progress of the project and its readi­ness for oc­cu­pa­tion and use by the fish­er­men.

“The work to be com­plet­ed will not be ham­pered by the fish­er­men’s use of the jet­ty,” Ude­cott said.

It said the old fish­ing fa­cil­i­ty had to be de­cant­ed but there was a de­lay in the fish­er­men re­mov­ing their boats from the premis­es to al­low the con­struc­tion to start, which de­layed the project by three months.

Re­gard­ing the com­plaints about the suit­abil­i­ty of the fa­cil­i­ty, Ude­cott said there were nu­mer­ous con­sul­ta­tions with the fish­er­men, who signed off on the de­sign of the fa­cil­i­ty.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored