4.3 Threats

The health of Koroua Island is under threat from several sources, the cumulative impacts of which jeopardise iTaukei lives and livelihoods (Table 2). While these threats have been here described in isolation, many are interlinked and contribute to additional impacts. Each of these threats’ places pressure on the continued ability of Koroua Island to support reliant communities. It is also evident that they will not only diminish food and livelihood security but also social and cultural dimensions of the community. Mining

Twenty-six participants (90%) discussed their concerns surrounding mining activity on Koroua Island. For some participants the mine was considered to be the greatest threat to Koroua Island. Impacts on farmland were one of the main concerns associated with the mine. Participants described damage to their land and fences as a result of drilling and accompanying equipment. Dome constructed a bridge at Vunavutu and roads to transport their equipment throughout the island which resulted in a loss of farmland for some. Participants also claimed that the roads caused drainage issues that killed their crops. According to one participant compensation was paid to those whose farmland was damaged as a result of mining activities, but it should be noted that this was only a one-off payment in the case of the participant interviewed.

Table 2 Summary of identified threats and their impacts

Threats Impacts

Mining • Damage to farmland. • Vegetation clearing.Increased rates of erosion. • Restricted movement through the Koroua Channel. • Improved access to the island.

Climate Change • Drier conditions. • Increase in flooding events. • Erosion.

Flooding • Damage to crops and farmland. • Nutrient replenishment.

Dredging • Changes in fish assemblage. • Changes in how people use Sigatoka River. • Erosion. • Degradation of soil and vegetation on Koroua Island • Decrease in flooding.

Pollution • Decrease in the size and abundance of fish in the Koroua Channel

Societal Change • Decline in adoption of traditional practices amongst younger generations ‘… that mining company. They build the roads. It’s like leaving the rest of the land there down and the level of the road is on top. So, the when the rain comes… there is no access for the water to go out. So, it stays inside and spoils the farm’.

As participants explained, there were both benefits and drawbacks to the construction of the roads and Vunavutu bridge. While they made it easier to transport crops and materials to and from the island, they also provided outsiders with greater access which was a major point of concern for participants. The bridge coupled with Koroua Channel becoming narrower and shallower in recent years also helped pest species such as pigs come onto the island and destroy crops. Additionally, participants were frustrated that the bridge was not constructed with boats in mind as they now cannot travel past that point, impacting fishing and movement throughout Koroua Channel.

Participants held Dome responsible for damage done to mangroves and coconut palms on the island. Clearing of vegetation as well as the dumping of soil, killing subsistence creatures such as crabs, caused significant distress to some participants. Mangrove loss was also connected to increased erosion by participants who wanted to see replacement mangroves planted to address this.

Participants shared their fears regarding how the mine could potentially affect the wellbeing of future generations. As discussed, the welfare and health of the community is closely tied to Koroua Island with participants stating that the island must be protected to ensure future food and livelihood security. This was connected to a desire for future generations to continue living in the way of their ancestors.

There were conflicting accounts of the degree to which Dome engaged the community with some claiming that there had been no consultation. This translated into uncertainty amongst participants regarding the nature of Dome ’s interest in Koroua Island and the surrounding area. To address this, participants wanted greater levels of consultation from Dome so that the community could have a better understanding of the project and its purpose.

Figure 13 Bridge built by Dome across Koroua Channel outside of Vunavutu.

‘… we don’t know what Magma is doing and what Magma’s future going to be. Maybe might take all our cream and leave nothing with us…They just said this and that. They’re hiding the reality’.

Figure 14 Drone image of vegetation on Koroua Island.

Climate change

Climate change was identified as a threat of concern by several participants (34%). Impacts of climate change included drier conditions, increased flooding events and erosion.

Both within and outside of interviews, the effects of climate change were linked to diminished crop condition on Koroua Island. Participants discussed the detrimental effect drier conditions are having on their crops. Conditions on the island were considered by some to be less favourable for farming than they once had been with drier conditions resulting in harder soil that required greater effort to till. For those who grazed cattle on Koroua Island, drier conditions resulted in the disappearance of pasture in places where it had been present in previous years.

Participants also reported reduced crop yield and quality with plants such as cassava failing to grow to the size of previous harvests. One participant attributed this to a climate-driven increase in flooding, saying that it damaged the crops and the land itself. Increased flooding was linked to greater rates of erosion along sections of the island resulting in crop loss for some. One participant described their yams falling into the Sigatoka River as it ate at their land. This was also the case for another participant whose family had lost cassava to the river.

‘Crops, cassava, before [were] bigger… Getting smaller… Something happened to the land’.

Flooding

Flooding was not always attributed to climate change with some viewing it simply as a natural process. Although, there were conflicting responses amongst participants as to whether there has been a change in the frequency of flooding events.

For those who grew crops on Koroua Island, flooding was a major concern. It was repeatedly explained that flooding events destroy crops, particularly root vegetables such as cassava which quickly rot. The loss of a crop that requires so much time to grow can equate to a substantial loss in both earnings and food. yet it is interesting to note that two participants did identify benefits of flooding stating that floods ‘clean[ed]’ the island through the removal of deadwood and deposited rich soil from the valley upriver.

‘…there are a few breeds of cassava. One is one year and one is six months or four months and it take time. To redo the soil again and replant and wait for another six months and wait for a year and then you can start to harvest’.

Dredging

The Sigatoka River was dredged in 2016, allegedly to address the numerous impacts of flooding. However, according to participants (48%), dredging has resulted in problems of its own. Participants reported changes in how they used the Sigatoka River following dredging. Several participants voiced their concerns regarding changes in fish species as a result of deepening the river. An increase in the prevalence of sharks and big fish and the disappearance of smaller fish was noted by some who felt that sections of the river were now too dangerous to fish with nets. In the past, people would walk across the river to neighbouring villages and harvest fish and prawns in shallower sections. However, these areas have purportedly deepened since dredging occurred. Deepening the river also affected where people

Figure 15 Sigatoka River towards Sigatoka bridge.

took their children swimming with one participant explaining that sites where they had swum as a child were now no longer safe. Another participant expressed concern over how dredging will affect prawns in the future.

Koroua Island itself has also been affected by dredging activities. Increased rates of erosion were linked to the recent dredging with one participant stating that the deepened river was ‘eating up the land’. Participants also discussed instances of sand taken from the river being dumped on farmland and mangroves, ruining the soil and killing creatures important to villagers such as mud crabs. Traditional methods of flood mitigation were described by one participant. In the past, the mouth of Sigatoka River would be ‘opened’ in times of flood to release water into the sea. This was done by clearing sand from the mouth by hand. They argued that, unlike dredging, this method did not disrupt nature. They believed that dredging was not suitable or necessary, stating that they already had a working solution. However, some participants felt that there were positives to dredging, attributing it to a reduction in flood events.

‘I do not believe that the dredging is the solution ... Nature will work on that… We don’t bring dredging and all that because it will damage everything’.

Pollution

Five participants (17%) discussed the impacts of pollution and its sources. A nearby carwash, Sigatoka hospital and pigpens adjacent to Koroua Channel in addition to the increased use of pesticides on Koroua Island were identified by participants as sources of pollution. Pollution from other villages upriver was also discussed by one participant who believed that an increase in the occurrence of floods was transporting more contaminants downstream. A rise in pollutants was linked to a reduction in the size and prevalence of fish and shellfish, particularly in Koroua Channel where women often gather fish from the creek for subsistence purposes.

Figure 16 Koroua Channel mouth blocked by debris.