Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
stock readily and immediately available to revegetate the pipeline following
construction. This had the multiple benefits of including the local people as
active and cooperative partners, training, economic support, and mitigating
erosion in the rainforest ecosystem following clearing for the pipeline.
In spite of these efforts, there were observed cases of significant erosion
impacts resulting from no revegetation following pipeline construction. In one
case, the pipeline route was observed as a 10-meter eroded channel through the
rainforest because the route was not revegetated after construction. The eroded
soils were deposited in the downgradient stream, where they silted in the sub-
strate and destroyed the aquatic invertebrate habitat. These invertebrates were
the primary food source for the fish populations in the stream, which in turn
were an important source of protein to the inhabitants in the neighboring vil-
lage. Without an acceptable aquatic invertebrate habitat, the fish stock collapsed
and along with it an important food source for the indigenous people. When
this was reported to the government, they were genuinely surprised that the
villagers' abutting the route had not taken full advantage of the nursery and
replanting initiative. They even went outside their planned web-based public
outreach program and visited several villages to investigate the problem.
The villagers were excited to be visited by the government and anxious
to hear what they had to say. They even fired up their generator, which
normally was only operated a few hours a week because of the scarcity of
fuel, so the government and project proponents could make their computer
presentation. After the presentation, in response to one of the villager's ques-
tions as to how they were supposed to know of the opportunities for nurser-
ies and revegetation, the government presenter showed a slide of the project
website and went into great detail describing all the information on the site.
The more astute members of the government/proponent public outreach
team looked at the old extension cord stretched from the barely operating
generator to the traditional open air pavilion where the meeting was held
and realized Internet-based communication alone was not sufficient as pub-
lic outreach for the project.
Even in highly technologically advanced settings, such as the United States,
social media and web based public outreach tools alone may not be sufficient.
If there are affected publics who are not technologically oriented because of
age, economic status, or interest there must be other tools and communica-
tion avenues made available. Some other tools that have proven successful to
inform the public and generate constructive/cooperative interaction include:
r Organized site visits led by the project proponent and environ-
mental analysis team. These visits can be to alternative sites for a
proposed action or a site where a facility or activity similar to that
proposed is already in operation.
r Informational workshops. An expert or knowledgeable person not
associated with the project, plan, or policy can be engaged to present
Search WWH ::
Custom Search