Barbados Citizens Ramp Up Resistance To Ill-Placed Caribbean Splash Waterpark

Hardly a day goes by that we don’t get some sort of letter, article or reference from Bajans who are determined to ensure that the waterpark issue stays front and center.

Ok folks, we get your message… Don’t let the subject drop!

Here is today’s letter…

Dear Sir,

In response to Carson Cadogan’s obviously-slanted letter throwing support behind placement of a proposed Water Park in Graeme Hall area, despite protests by ALL surrounding neighbourhoods, I need to counter his thoughts by saying that there is plenty of doubt in everyone’s mind about the proposed water park that will not be sited in Graeme Hall. It will not take place. It must not take place!

I agree that Barbados may indeed need something shiny,tacky and new to replace ageing tourism infrastructure, but let’s group all the shiny,new,aquatically-oriented entertainment out at Balls Pltn., where there is already an aquarium, to both projects’ mutual benefit. Wouldn’t that make sense, for them both??

Clearly, Mr. Cadogan was not at the Town Hall Meetings held at Christ Church Community Center, where I’ve never in my life seen Bajans so heated and vehemently opposed to anything!

Believe me, Sir, we are agitated on this one!

The proposed site is unsuitable for a noisy,chlorine-emanating water park, especially since it would be right over my back wall – and near to the Bird Sanctuary and sensitive wetlands!

This proposed site must and will be changed: the alternative is a change in the seats of several Parliamentary Representatives in the districts surrounding Graeme Hall Agricultural Station, and I know several hundred people ready to change Representatives, should this ill-placed project go through!

Democratic Bajans will no longer be trampled, in the interests of Mr. BigBux Inc., who threatens to take his business elsewhere. Residents surrounding this area will not be compromised by The Yankee Dollar.

Furthermore, should the water park be placed there (or anywhere for that matter!) it’ll be a roaring success while the novelty holds for the first six months, then it’ll taper off when Daddy discovers, after three visits, that this Water Park thing is costing him One Hundred Dollars per Sunday to take the wife and kids there, versus fifteen dollars in gasoline, to go FREE to Worthing Beach, which God provided.

After a year, the revenue will taper off, and in two and a half years, the business will fold (but Mr.BigBux will by then be a resident and/or citizen, complete with Bajan Passport!) and Barbados will be left with a big White Elephant of plant-and-equipment, lying idle and of little resale value!

Mr.Big Bux does not yet know what awaits him, as he tries to run a fickle entertainment business in this our blessed Barbados of ever-spiralling running costs.

Wait til he gets his monthly electricity bill!

Wait til the Bajan workers, and the Unions start to seriously dig into him. Like he cares! he’ll take more of his Yankee Dollars and move on to St.Lucia or Dominica,instead, to repeat the whole thing over again.

Graeme Hall will NEVER, read our collective lips, Cadogan, NEVER tolerate a disruptive Water Park at the Graeme Hall Agricultural Station site.

Parliamentary representatives had better take this as a big ‘HEADS UP’ alert to the fragility of their Parliamentary seats.
You have been warned, gentlemen.

Thank you for your attention to this ongoing debate. The fire continues, unabated.

Yours very very sincerely, I assure you!

David Hunte.
Taxpayer and active voter!
43, Rendezvous Ridge,
Christ Church.



Filed under Barbados, Environment, Island Life, Politics & Corruption

20 responses to “Barbados Citizens Ramp Up Resistance To Ill-Placed Caribbean Splash Waterpark

  1. William Duguid

    Hi David,

    I took the liberty of responding to your letter from the Barbados Free Press site which carried your email address.

    As I have been saying all along that I think this is absolutely the wrong location and I have suggested that the developer look at Balls. This now I have been told was not selected because they need access to Brackish water for desalination and the only places that this water was available was Bath , Spring Garden or Graeme Hall.

    In that case then we do not have a suitable location as to my mind none of these locations are suitable for that type of development.

    Enjoyed your letter. Keep up the good fight.

    William Duguid MP

    Christ Church West

  2. Trueblue

    Do you plan to ask the PM to add Water Park to the short list of “no-noes” he announced while opening a new development which will block access to non-private beaches?

    What a bunch of hypocrites!

  3. Trueblue

    Big Willie: Do you plan to ask the PM to add Water Park to the short list of “no-noes” – casinos, private beaches etc. – he announced while opening a new development which will block access to non-private beaches?

    What a bunch of hypocrites!

  4. John


    Bath, Spring Garden and Graeme Hall I count as three possible locations.

    Was it the Developer who claimed there were 21 possible sites?

    My memory is not so good but something seems amiss here.

  5. All the problems, real or imagine, which you people keep dredging up can all be easily sorted out.

    Greame Hall is the ideal location! You are misguided. I part company with you as I see the waterpark as complimenting the Greame Hall Sanctuary not damaging it.

    Also, all the veiled threats really do not become you. Disagree without becoming disagreeable.

    Look at the big picture Barbados needs this project. We are a tourist dependent country with little to offer our Guests other than the tired same old, same old. Your quality of life will suffer if we do not start offering our Guests something new, different and more exciting. Take the emotion out of it since it is doing no one any good. This hallabaloo reminds me of the debate regarding golf courses in Barbados, another worthwhile project, there was so much heat generated and in the end what? Fire and brimstone did not come down and consume Barbados. This project will be the same.

    In the not too distant future we will wonder how we ever got along without it. Some Barbadians are simply like that, they feel it is their God-given duty to oppose everything that is to be introduced. I am sure that you can think of a few. Remember the ABC highway and how it was criticized? I can think of many more and so can you!

    Please, the sky is not going to fall in just because a Water park will be put in Greame Hall. For heavens sake think outside of the box for a change it might do all of a little good. We must stop being so petrfied every time something differnet is to be done we are living in a modern age and we must bring our minds out of the stone ages.

    Best regards.

    Carson C. Cadogan

  6. John


    Firstly, who you calling “you people”?

    Secondly, think of Barbados as a box. It is an island with limited resources and can be thought of as such.

    Carl recently wrote he figured the way to go was to make the island bigger. He is thinking outside of the box, way, way outside.

    The real issues relate to balance and using what we have sustainably.

    That is the box.

    We figured that out generations ago but seem to have lost the understanding of our land our forefathers acquired.

    Before you go thinking outside of the box, make sure you know what the box really is, and more importantly, what is in it.

    Try looking at Google Earth.

    If you have, put into words what you see on the south coast of Barbados and I will try and take you through what my thoughts are.

    Maybe you can help me to change, but I am hoping I will help you to do so.

    Perhaps we will end up agreeing to disagree.

    And by the way, Nature changes very slowly and what existed in the stone age here probably exists here still, …. and will for many ages to come, unless Nature decides differently.

  7. Jane

    We are not talking about one or two people opposing this ridiculous project and furthermore Barbadians have not heard the real facts yet.

    When the facts become available if they ever do perhaps we will see how serious our situation has become.

    We still want to know who sent the developers to that location, what the US$2 million was spent on, why Barbadians are being treated with such contempt and disrespect, why the people who caused the problem were not present at the town hall meetings to answer the questions and take the responsibility for their actions which would have spared the foreigners from having to hear and feel how so many Barbadians feel about this project.

  8. John


    Guess Jane answered my first question to you.

    “You people” are the citizens of Barbados, and they sound mad. I was at the Town Hall meeting and I saw some of them so I kind of knew what the answer would be.

    I think you need to start off from here with an apology to “you people”, and then we can get going with our discussion.

    Or, maybe you can come up with another explanation of what you meant by “you people”.

  9. William Duguid

    These were the final short listed locations as the other 19 were totally unsuitable mainly because they were not large enough I was told.

  10. John


    If they need brackish water they have to choose a location close to the coast.

    Balls is too far inland and the the fresh water lens and the brackish water beneath it does not extend inland that far.

    Along the West Coast there aren’t many locations, and certainly none that would be going cheap. Perhaps Trents playing field or the location of the Church under a tent down Speights Town. Public outcry would result.

    I suspect the 21 locations touted is a load of bull.

    Think for one moment of the 3 locations given, Graeme Hall, Bath and Spring Garden.

    We know where Graeme Hall is and we can perhaps imagine Spring Garden to be where the Cony (or is it Coney) Island sets up when it comes.

    There is no brackish water at Bath. There is either water from the sea or water from the springs which express themselves in the Waterfall down at the bottom.

    Bath is pretty big but I would hate to imagine that anybody could have even looked at the possibility of putting a Water Park down in Bath proper on the flat land behind the seaside houses. That to me would be sacrilege and I suspect that Barbadians from all over would have protested as they did at Bathsheba.

    If brackish water is needed, there are only two locations in Christ Churh which could provide 17 acres of land as well. One is Graeme Hall and the other is Gibbons Bogs. At a push, there is another site, the rifle range up at Paragon but then what would we do with the defense force.

    Much of the area in St. Philip over the fresh water lens is built up. Maybe up Oldbury. St. Lucy looks possible.

    But still, the Water Park seems as about objectionable as I could imagine, like a blemish on the country. We just don’t need it.

    But that is my opinion.

    Don’t take what you are told too seriously. Go and look, read, talk and think for yourself. Have a look at Google Earth.

    There is a limit to development and Tourism needs to be capped off and more sustainable sources of economic activity found. There are tough days ahead.

    As to whether the damage caused the island by what has gone on in the past 15 or so years is irreversible, that’s for another forum.

    For the moment just keep thinking ” Its a lovely day, tomorrow” …. and maybe it will be.

    But we need to fight through today.

  11. John

    William, Carson

    What is happening is that we are running out of options to sell off our land for a mess of potage.

    There is just so much in the box.

    We need to buckle down and earn our way in the world.

    Forget about thinking outside the box.

    The time for that type of BS talk has long gone.

    It doesn’t suit intelligent people.

    The question is, will this little rock rebel at the abuse it has taken?

    And more importantly, how bad do we love her?

  12. Hants

    The Waterpark is not going to be built in Graeme Hall unless the principles wait till 1 year after the next election to try and get it approved.

  13. ross

    The proposed waterpark joins a long list of “keep us in the dark and feed us on sh..” scenarios like the republic, the physical development plan, Greenland, Nelson statue, Gems, Bathsheba development etc. etc.

    You never know when one of these, or a new one, will pop up.

  14. Pat

    Why does Barbados need a water park? It is surrounded by water with navigable, sandy beaches. Does anyone for a minute think that it will cost less than $70 to use the facilities per person? The object is to make a profit. Even is the land is a penny an acre, there are salaries and electricity, first aid staff, security, etc. All of that adds up. Bajans will go once or twice to say they went, then what?

    I think Carson Cadogan is forgetting that tourists do not come to Barbados to frolick in a water park. They come to frolick on the beach, in the sea and get a taste of black bamboo, or passion fruit.

    Cuba, Mexico and the Dominion Republic do very well where the tourists are concerned. Why? They are cheap destinations where a dollar goes very far. In fact a dollar in Barbados goes as far as 2 pesos in these countries. Jamaica is doing a booming business with British middle aged women up in Negril. It is estimated 800,000 of them will be leaving their husbands in Blighty this year and enjoying two and three weeks with the rastitutes.

    It is time Barbados puts its natives first and the tourists second. Just my Canadian opinion.

  15. John


    I love the word rastitutes.

    Next time Owen feels the need to make up a word he needs to speak with you first for guidance.

  16. Concerned resident

    Carson – you say “Greame Hall is the ideal location! You are misguided. I part company with you as I see the waterpark as complimenting the Greame Hall Sanctuary not damaging it.”

    Do you know that the Graeme Hall Sanctuary takes the opposite view to you and are absolutely opposed to the proposed water park location? They have invested over 23 million Barbados dollars at the Sanctuary. Will the Government now come along and allow another “investor” to destroy this?

    Why do you say it is ideal?
    Because they can lease land cheaply from the Government? Imagine, that by the developers own admission the project will not be economically feasible if they have to buy private land so they had to find government land thay they could lease. In other words get a free ride on the backs of Barbadian taxpayers.

    Do you know that in their proposal they will build a desalination plant and every day pump 97,000 gallons of salt water, of which 47,000 gallons will be pumped back into wells in the watershed area as brine. By the way that works out at 17 million gallons per year of brine. Also by the way, brine is toxic. All of this wil happen “upstream” of the Sanctuary.

    Since you like the box analogy let us think about the Graeme Hall Swamp as if it is a box. All toxic subastnces that go into the box have no way of escapinga as there is no longer any “flushing” action by the sea. So even if only a small percentage of the annual 17 million gallons of brine contaminates the swamp you will have death and destruction to the flora, fauna and environment.

    And this is only one of many concerns that were not addressed in the developer’s EIA. In fact one government agnecy siad that it was so deficient that it really could not be called an EIA.

  17. william duguid

    I have heard of rent-a-dreads but this is the first time I am hearing of rastitutes.

  18. Concerned resident

    A lot has been said about the pros and cons of the proposed water park at Graeme Hall by residents of the area and other commentators. What is very interesting is what the Governments regulatory agencies had to say in their comments on the EIA done by the developer.

    These comments were published as an addendum to the EIA and I have recently been able to get hold of a copy. Here are some excerpts from the addendum.

    Comments by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) on Page 16:

    “Generally the report was found to be unacceptable because little actual information was provided about the nature, magnitude and scope of the development’s potential impacts. In cases where impacts were assessed as significant or not significant, insufficient information was presented to provide a clear rationale for this assessment. The document provides information at the level of a scoping study, in that it identifies some of the issues and impacts that are likely to be important, but the level of information provided about these issues and impacts is not adequate for this to be considered to be a satisfactory EIA”.

    Comments by Ministry of Agriculture on page 2:

    “The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development has not supported the application made by Caribbean Splash Inc……”
    “The Ministry objects to the proposal”

    Comments by the Government Environmental Unit on page 6:

    “The ministry doers not support the conversion of agricultural land for this type of development. The Environmental Unit is of the view that a development such as this is not in keeping with the sustainable use and conservation of natural resources”.

    On page 10: “Graeme Hall is a watershed area that is not fully understood from a hydrological standpoint. There is an assessment project that is currently being undertaken by the Coastal Zone Management Unit (CZMU) of the Ministry of Housing Lands and the Environment in collaboration with other relevant stakeholders on the hydrology of the swamp. The results of such a study will assist decision makers to better understand the dynamics occurring within this watershed so that they may better be able to coordinate developmental projects within the watershed area. The Ministry does not recommend placing a facility of this nature within the watershed area”.

    These are just some of the comments made in the EIA addendum by Government agencies, agencies whose job it is to protect our environment and country. In the face of these comments will our leaders and relevant authorities still give the go ahead for this project in the proposed location?

  19. Hants

    All they need to do is ask the PM to move Heaven and Earth to find a location other than Graeme Hall.

    Since we have CSME one of the other islands may be interested.

    What has come out of all of this is that some Barbadians have no clear understanding of environmental issues.

  20. Pingback: Barbados Free Press » Blog Archive » Caribbean Splash Waterpark - Excerpts From “Secret” Barbados Government Report