DOWNLOAD - Economic Alternatives to the Cross River Super Highway

Is it sensible for a broke Cross River State state to try to build a new "super highway" when its existing roads are in shambles and rural roads are insufficient? If this new road is economically viable why are there no investors? For facts -  Download Economic Alternatives to the Cross River Super Highway HERE 

This is an ambitious and expensive project. There has been so much debate about the human and environmental cost of the super highway and very little debate on its viability for investors. How will the project be funded and recouped? Why are there no investors?

Download Economic Alternatives to the Cross River Super Highway HERE 
an in depth analysis from RRDC, Green Code and BudgIT

FULL List of Conditions in FG Provisional EIA Approval of Cross River Super Highway

There has been much rejoicing by the Cross River State Government over an "EIA approval" for its proposed superhighway. However what was obtained is a conditional approval with 23 pre-conditions. As usual people do not have the full text of the conditions and clearly the State Government is not releasing any details. Here is a list of all the pre-conditions many of which cannot be completed within a 2 week deadline or are vague at best. 

23 CONDITIONS FOR PROVISIONAL APPROVAL OF THE SUPERHIGHWAY PROJECT     

Some Highlights

        Plan to be revised and resubmitted within 2 weeks

• ·         Development and funding of biodiversity offset to be included
• ·         List of all affected 5 communities  must be made public by the Cross River State      Govt. 
• -         Communities already affected by earlier clearing before stop work order last year  must be compensated before work commences
• ·         Create and implement resettlement plan etc before starting work
• ·         CRSG to maintain corridor at 70m. Reversal of revocation of earlier hotly contested 
•           20.4km width with 10km either side offset must  be GAZETTED before work  commences. Affected land ownership revoked had included Bakassi, Akpabuyo, Calabar Municipality and Calabar South contrary to popular belief it was just a forest matter in Central and Northern LGs. 
• ·         All non-Nigerian and Cross River wild life references to be addressed.
• ·         Long-term indirect impact on CRNP due to hunting and habitat loss to be addressed
• ·         All NGOs, national and international, to be consulted throughout
• ·         CRSG to protect hydrology and wildlife corridors
• ·         Map to be made clearer, should not cut through Ekuri or CRNP
• ·         Erosion controls to be included
• ·         Safety standards      
• 
  

Approval for the project subject to the following conditions:

1. The EIA approval shall cover only the construction of a 275km long by 70m width Super Highway of 6 lanes including setbacks and other associated infrastructures such as eco-friendly bridges, culverts, drainages from Calabar to Katsina-Ala junction in Cross River State.
2. Cross River State Government (CRSG) shall ensure that the construction of the entire road project and associated infrastructures conform to standard engineering codes and International best practices.
3. CRSG shall ensure that the diverse management plans, which include Environmental Management Plan (EMP); Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP); Resettlement Action Plan (RAP); Livelihood Restoration Plan (LRP); Greenhouse Gas Management Plan (GHGMP); Public Consultation Plan (PCP); Waste Management Plan (WMP); Traffic Management Plan (TMP) as well as Labour and Human Resources Plan (LHRP) put in place for the road project are strictly adhered to as required throughout the project lifecycle.
4. CRSG shall engage a group of accredited Consultants to effectively manage the diverse management plans for the proposed road project.
5. CRSG shall ensure the realignment of the 275.344km road corridor from the boundary of the Cross River National Park is in line with the National Park Service (NPS) Act CAP LFN 2016.
6. CRSG shall ensure the re-routed road corridor is clearly depicted on a map in the updated EIA report taking cognizance of the boundary of Cross River National Park and Ekuri Community Forest as well as conform to international best practices on setbacks for highways in critical ecosystems such as the proposed corridor.
7. CRSG shall gazette the reversal of revocation order on the acquisition of 10km on either side to the 70km span of the road corridor as well as the gazetting of the boundary of Cross River National Park within two weeks (2) of receipt of this letter.
8. CRSG shall ensure that the initial land clearing of the road corridor that was carried out without due inventory of the third party properties/farmlands is revisited to adequately compensate the project affected persons (PAPS) in line with National and International standards of practice on resettlement and restoration plans. This shall be done prior to project commencement.
9. CRSG shall identify all proximate communities to the road corridor within the established area of influence as well as the project affected persons (PAPS) and ensure that every community/PAP is regularly consulted with throughout the project lifespan.
10. The environmental offsetting should be one of the guiding principles for the proposed road construction as the proposed project area of influence is noted for endemic, threatened and endangered flora and fauna. There shall be development and funding of Biodiversity offset by CRSG.
11. CRSG shall ensure that all relevant non-governmental organizations both local and international are consulted with regularly during the project lifespan to ensure among others biodiversity protection and project sustainability.
12. CSRG shall ensure that the highly technical eco-friendly bridges to be constructed at strategic points/biodiversity hotspots/critical ecosystem on the road corridor are intensively monitored by specialized accredited consultants.
13. CSRG shall ensure that the borrow pits proposed for the road project are provided with coordinates for ease of location, site identification number, reclaimed and converted to alternative environmental-friendly uses in line with regulatory standards as well as International best practices.
14. CRSG shall ensure that the proposed road setbacks from third party structures, farmlands, critical ecosystem and green areas confirm to Engineering code of practice/regulatory standards as well as International best practices.
15. CRSG shall ensure that cautionary signs are appropriately placed at strategic points along the road corridor during implementation and throughout the lifecycle especially for wildlife crossing.
16. CSRG shall ensure proper drainage termination for the flow route of run-off/storm water to protect the road corridor from erosion, ensure that the road embankment is constructed in a way that allows free-flow of surface water run-off, that any existing access road to neighbouring villages and settlements are not blocked, create appropriate buffer zones to prevent damage to unique ecosystems as well as enhance forest cover
17. CSRG shall put in place appropriate road furniture and safety standards in line with International best practices.
18. CRSG shall ensure that the proposed project protect the hydrology of wetlands, streams and channels through restoration of natural drainage pattern and reduce disruption of of ecological processes by providing wildlife corridor. 
19. CSRG shall provide adequate personal protective equipment for workers, ensure that every worker on the project is adequately trained on Health; Safety and Environment procedures for Highway and provide sanitary facilities and mobile clinic during project construction
20. CSRG shall ensure that the maintenance and management of the road corridor is in line with International best practices.    
21. There shall be Impact Mitigation Monitoring (IMM), Post Impact Assessment (PIA), Environmental Audits and Compliance Monitoring on the project by the Federal Ministry of Environment in collaboration with other relevant regulatory agencies.
22. CSRG shall put in place a robust contingency plan for the proposed road project.
23. CSRG shall update 4^th version of the EIA report to also include the following:-

a.      To exclude flora and fauna that are non-existent in the proposed project area of influence as per the attached;

b.      A comprehensive list of the actual affected communities along the proposed road corridor;

c.       List of borrow pits with coordinates and site identity for the proposed road project;

d.      Map clearly showing the preferred road corridor with coordinates as well as major crossings along the entire stretch;

e.      The EIA report should consider indirect long term impacts of hunting and habitat loss on Cross River National Park proximity to the Super Highway with improved access to the forest.     

f.        The updated 4^th version of the EIA report shall be submitted to the Ministry within two (2) weeks of the receipt of the letter.

ADD ON. In my opinion none of these requirements can be done in 2 weeks, there are still no funders and with the recent NDDC take over of the old Calabar - Oban - Ikom - Etung road the journey to Ikom will be 1hr without the super highway within the next 2 years well before the super highway 2022 proposed completion date.

Superhighway: Government seeks explanation on ‘strange’ wildlife EIA mentions - Environews

The roloway monkey is not found in Nigeria. Cross River State EIA claims it is. Photo credit: Sébastien Meys, La Palmyre Zoo

This article appears in Environews

In a move that appear to call the authenticity of the report to question, the Federal Ministry of Environment (FMEv) has categorically stated that such wildlife do not exist in Cross River State – some not even in Nigeria – and therefore wants state officials to address such queries in the updated report that is expected to be submitted in two weeks.

For instance government explained that the Bunbundi bat (Chalinolobus egeria) has not been recorded from Cross River and the pitch shrew (Crocidura picea) has only ever been recorded from Cameroon.

Additionally, noted the FMEv, while the long footed shrew (Crocidura crenata) has not been recorded from Nigeria, the Eisentraut’s mouse shrew (Myosorex eisentrauti) is only found on the island of Bioko.

Similarly, the forest chameleon (Chamaeleo camurunensis) – assumed to be Trioseros camerunensis is restricted to Cameroon, while the Cameroon worm lizard (Cynisca shaeferi) has not been recorded from Nigeria.

Furthermore, both the Schneider’s banana frog (Afrixalus Schneider) and the Dizangue reed frog (Hyperrolius bopeleti) have only ever been recorded from Cameroon.

Also mentioned were the Werner’s river frog (Phrynobatrachus werneri) which FMEv officials say has only been recorded in Nigeria from the Obudu Plateau, and the worm lizard (Cynisca gansi), which is said to have only ever been recorded from Okoloma village near PortHarcourt.

The FMEv wrote: “Many of the species listed in Table 6.1 such as the Indian Malimba, Sclater’s guenon and the Anambra waxbill are not present in Cross River State, though known from Nigeria.

“Appendix A2 is clearly not the work of PGM Nigeria Limited and has merely been copied from elsewhere. This is unacceptable. The list contains many species not known from Cross River such as the Niger Delta red colobus monkey (Procolobus epieni); others such as the roloway monkey (Cercopithecus roloway) are not found in Nigeria and some are not even known from Africa such as the American bullfrog (Lithobates catesbaeianus).

“There is no hedgehog (Erinaceus or Atelerix) (listed on Table 4.56) found in the rainforests of Cross River State; it likely confused with the brush-tailed porcupine.

“Table 4.60 lists threatened mammal species, but Cercopithecus erythrogaster is not found in Cross River and Cercopithecus roloway is not found in Nigeria.”

Designed to link Calabar, the state capital, to the neighboring Benue State, the $3.5 billion Superhighway will pass through biodiversity rich forests in the Ekuri community as well as the Cross River National Park (CRNP), a development observers feel will have far reaching implications for thousands of families and their livelihoods, as well as flora and fauna.

The anniversary of a land grab

NGO RRDC show shocked community members the true extent of displacement

On January 22nd 2016 the Governor Ayade administration of Cross River State in the Chronicle publication revoked rights of ownership of one quarter of the States land mass for a proposed “super highway”. A land mass 5 times the size of London seized for one road. Here is a map with SOME names of communities, towns, villages swallowed by the Cross River 400 m wide highway and its massive 20km offset.

After an outcry from environmentalists the Federal Ministry of Environment put a halt to the project pending an environmental impact assessment of a project which passes through much Nigeria’s last protected forests and over 180 communities. The Governor has been vocal about continuing with the project despite its controversy and the States heavy debt profile.
One year later the absurdity of the 20.4km width and the enormous loss of property and land stands unchanged. Many have no clue the road is gulping an additional 10 km on either side for a so-called “buffer zone” which aides have explained will be used to “build new cities” not reflected in any budgets.
Stories abound of unprecedented logging, documented destruction of farms and possible placement of “MOU” banana, sugar cane ethanol and other plantations owned by foreign investors on this seized land.
Here is a breakdown of the map starting from Bakkasi that shows in detail names of communities affected. This is clearly inconclusive but it serves as a guide. Note if your community name falls anywhere within the pink zone your land and property is no longer yours. If it is on the line then it falls within the 400 m for the actual road. You can neither sell, develop, take any loans or use it as equity for any business. It ceased to be yours 6 weeks after the land was revoked on 22nd January 2016.

Enjoy the silence and happy anniversary! Pamela Braide

Special thanks to NGOCE for providing the map. They have a huge one hanging in the office.

Section 1.

The map from which above excerpts were derived 

Map from NGO's with vegetation

Cross River Government notice. Jan 22nd 2016

Cross River Government notice Jan 22nd 2016

List of communities  affected  by cross river super highway extracted from map
by no means complete

List of communities  affected  by cross river super highway extracted from map
by no means complete

Videos

Amenism vs Doism we can do both

Online you see photos of BMW’s with instructions to type AMEN below it. I wish getting things done was that easy.

This is not an AMEN piece. It is a guide for Cross Riverians, and by that I mean residents and indigenes of the State at home and away who wonder if their land has been confiscated under the auspices of a super highway for which the Cross River State Government has revoked, on January 22nd 2016, one quarter of all the land in the state. Yes you read me right. One quarter. For a 12 lane “super highway” that ends in a rickety 2 lane road in Benue State. Width revoked 400m plus 10km on either side equals 20.4km. And this spans 260km so yes it IS a quarter of the land in Cross River State.

In 2015 Cross River State Governor Ben Ayade announced that he would focus on ambitious out of the box projects. A multi-lane super highway starting at a yet to be built deep sea port with internet access would be built at no cost to the state and end up in Benue State. People naturally rejoiced.

After bulldozers cleared (before their January 22 notice!) the highway was halted by the Fed Ministry of Environment to secure an EIA(environmental impact assessment).

Notes

1. A revocation notice is not “just a notice” as I have heard government aides explain. You will not lose your land, you have lost it. Read the notice.

2. Very few people along the path know they are have gone from landlord to landless.

3. This highway starts at something optimistically called a “deep sea port”. How? The ceding of Bakassi to Cameroon robbed us of our littoral status and that is the singular reason Akwa Ibom snatched our oil. First determine the feasibility of the “deep sea” port for a State that lost its access to the sea.

4. Usually when a high way is being built outliers enjoy business opportunities e.g. petrol stations, restaurants, guest houses, shops. Local market days move as close to the road as is safe and legal. 10km buffer zone says no.

5. People are ambivalent about the environment. But I’ll still drop these numbers. Nigeria has 4% of primary forest left. 70% of that is in Cross River. Much of that falls within the path of this road and its 20km “buffer zone”. Cross River villages do get buried by mudslides. That’s what rushed logging does. Make of it what you will.

Am I against development? Of course not. However the unprecedented quantity of land, the inexplicable path of this road from a deep sea port without a sea and the inability of Government to compensate even people whose crops were destroyed in the initial construction is deeply worrisome. As Odigha Odigha said Cross River State is 70% agrarian, and 90% of our bloody communal clashes are land related. ANY development of this nature requires DEEP consultation and minimal foot print to avoid more confusion and not a 20.4km width.

What can you do?

Typing AMEN will not return your ancestral land title. So here are some tips.

1. Download a copy of the revocation and map notice to confirm if you are affected. Show a surveyor

2. Ask your elected officials what they are doing about this situation. They ALL know what’s going on. Force them to take a stand for their constituents.

a. Local Govt. Chair, Councillor

b. State house of assembly members(communities tried to meet them in the house to no avail)

c. National Assembly legislators — Senators and Rep members

3. Visit or write to the MDA for Lands

4. Discuss this in your holiday meeting at home. Help your community members whose farms and property have been bulldozed without compensation speak to officials. They feel frustrated and abandoned.

Last points

One road evacuating a yet to be built deep sea port does nothing for 70% of our agrarian communities who watch crops rot for lack of feeder roads. Will the crops be airlifted to the highway? Does the highway go anywhere else than rickety 2 lane road in Benue? Our Government should do massive construction of feeder roads to rural areas where crops rot for lack of good roads. Or where sick people can die bumpy bike ride on a track enroute to treatment. Fix what you have and build to serve the unserved.

ENGAGE YOUR ELECTED AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS THIS SEASON. FIND OUT IF YOU ARE HOMELESS.

Next year tell me how it went. I wish you the best. I will post pictures of my meeting with whichever Cross River elected officer I see. Let us help ourselves. AMEN!

Listen to those affected speak here and here and here and here

Pamela Braide

An abridged version of this  article appeared in the 25th of December in Cross River Watch

http://crossriverwatch.com/2016/12/amenism-vs-doism-we-can-do-both-by-pamela-braide/