No law in St. Vincent and the Grenadines prevents landowners from cutting down trees, including mangroves, on private property Minister of Physical Planning Nigel “Nature” Stephenson said in Parliament on Thursday.
Responding to a question from opposition senator Carlos James about the removal of mangroves at Canash, Stephenson said that the New Democratic Party administration will pass laws to protect mangroves across the country.
James asked the minister whether the Physical Planning and Development Board had provided him with information about the removal of mangroves and associated development at Canash.
He also wanted to know whether, having regard to section 30 of the Town and Country Planning Act, the minister had considered making an order directing the board to take such steps as are necessary to mitigate or prevent any condition at the site that poses or is likely to pose a threat to the environment.
Stephenson said he was advised that Rybeck Properties Ltd., owned by Ryan Gonsalves, submitted an application in principle on Dec. 16, 2025, for a new commercial apartment.
The minister said the board decided on March 26, to refuse the application, and the secretary signed the refusal on April 27.
“The reasons for refusal related in part to concerns regarding the impact on the mangroves,” Stephenson said.
“In relation to the destruction of the mangrove trees in recent months, there was no application submitted to the planning board for these works to be conducted. The planning board is constrained in terms of its powers to stop the cutting down of trees on private property, and the trees cut on Canash were on private property,” he said.
Opposition Leader Ralph Gonsalves raised concerns about the destruction of the mangroves on Aug. 31, describing it as an “environmental massacre and marauding” within the South Coast Marine Conservation Area.
Stephenson said that the Physical Planning Board became aware of the destruction of the mangroves after it had taken place.
“The board was not aware of the intended cutting down of the mangrove until it had already taken place,” he said. “As such, it was not able to consider an order under Section 30 of the Act.”
The board, he added, was “constrained in terms of its powers to stop the cutting down of trees on private property,” and the trees at Canash were on private land.
Minister points to a lack of statutory protection
Stephenson said the Forest Reserve and Conservation Act’s schedule of declared forests did not legally protect the Canash mangroves.
He said the schedule listed Kings Hill Forest Reserve, Cumberland Forest Reserve and the Tobago Cays Marine Park, but not Canash.
He said the law, passed in 1992 — when the New Democratic Party was in office — provides a way to declare a forest or mangrove protected, but the regulations needed to support it “were never passed”.
The minister said that the Fisheries Act’s designation of nearby waters as a conservation area did not protect the coastal vegetation.
“It does not include coastal mangroves or beaches, and protects the water only, not the vegetation. This protection is extremely limited.”
He added that stakeholders had discussed and prepared the South Coast Marine Park, but it “was never declared.”
“There has been extensive discussion under the stewardship of the National Parks and Beaches Authority on preparing and declaring the South Coast Conservation Area as a marine park.
“This would have increased the level of protection. While much valuable work was done with stakeholders to prepare for the declaration, the South Coast Marine Park was never declared by the National Parks, Rivers and Beaches Authority, and we know who started that authority,” Stephenson said, referring to the Unity Labour Party administration.
The minister said a 2014 assessment by Dr. Kimberly Barlwyn, prepared in connection with the proposed South Coast Marine Park, had identified threats to the Canash mangroves and recommended protection.
“Regrettably, no such protection was afforded to the Canash mangrove.”
Stephenson said the cleared areas were on two privately owned parcels, while mangroves on a third parcel belonging to the Sailing Association remained intact.
He described the Canash species as buttonwood and said red, black and white mangroves were not present there.
The minister said a sign at Canash identifying red mangroves and suggesting the area is protected contains false information.
“A sign placed at Kanash by the national parks, funded by KFW, the German Development Bank, says there are red mangroves and suggests that it is a protected area.
“That information is false. You will note that the forestry logo is not on the sign. There are no red mangroves in Canash,” Stephenson said.
As an example of an existing protection arrangement, Stephenson cited land owned by Jerrol Thompson in Brighton, adding that Thompson had voluntarily entered an agreement with the Forestry Department to protect the mangrove there “in perpetuity”.
In the absence of legislation, Stephenson said, the country was “left at the mercy of the individual property owner” to decide whether to protect mangroves on private land.
Jetty is separate, minister says
Stephenson also addressed a jetty development at Canash, saying it was being undertaken by a separate landowner and was not related to the mangrove-clearing matter.
He said permission for the jetty was granted on Oct. 7, 2025, and that the Physical Planning Board was monitoring the work in consultation with the landowner to ensure it complied with the approved plan.
Stephenson said the episode demonstrated the need for stronger protections.
“What has happened to the mangrove of Canash reminds us of the need to be proactive in ensuring that we must have the relevant laws in place to protect our fragile ecosystems,” he said.
He pledged that the government would “move swiftly ahead to introduce regulations to the Forest Reserve Conservation Act”, protect the Ashton Lagoon mangroves on Union Island and make the South Coast Marine Park “an actual reality”.