Menu
Log in

Member login
For first-time access, enter your email and click "Forgot password"


Post authors appear as "Anonymous member" and replies cannot be added unless you log in.

All Vecinos members are pre-registered with logins. Vecinos non-members may request access by emailing admin@vecinosakumalnorte.org and login credentials will be provided.

Barrier Clausura Status

  • 26-Aug-2024 3:52 PM
    Message # 13397985

    I am sure that some of us are aware of the content of the recent email from David Zucker, but I want to make sure that everyone is aware of the following (see attached and below).  I am curious if there are any responses/insight/discussion on the following:


    "To concerned members of the North Akumal Community: 


    An anonymous source recently received and forwarded to me the attached letter dated July 24,  2024 from the DIRECTOR GENERAL, PROFEPA of Crimes, Commutations, Denunciations and  Complaints about the failed barrier across Half Moon Bay, in which the Director General categorically states "that the security measure imposed on December 7, 2023, consisting of the temporary total closure (clausura total) of all activities related to the installations (anchoring system), operation and removal of floating barriers for the redirection of the sargassum, remains in force."


    This directly contradicts what the barrier committee has been telling us. I am concerned that the work on the barrier this year was illegal and could incur serious fines or worse, which might apply to the members of the committee and their financial supporters.

    In the interest of transparency, I have attached the letter and translation and hope that the Barrier Committee will publish the notice from Profepa that they claim terminated the Clausurado before they installed and then removed the remnants of the barrier so that this communication failure can be rectified."

    2 files
    Split from Sargassum barrier discussion: 27-Aug-2024 2:14 PM
  • 02-Sep-2024 6:16 PM
    Reply # 13401723 on 13397985

    Here is the formal response to the Zucker email:

    Dear neighbors and friends!  
     

    We are writing in response to an email about the HMB Sargassum Barrier that you may have received from David Zucker with an unsigned attachment from PROFEPA addressed to an anonymous individual. The document from PROFEPA is accurate in stating that the injunction on barrier installation (ie “Clausura”) has not yet been lifted. However, the follow-up statements in Mr. Zucker’s email are misleading and require a response:

      

    1)      The HMB Sargassum Project never said the Clausura against the barrier had been lifted. We said the following, which is exactly true:


    The regional office of PROFEPA has come under new leadership and now intends to lift the temporary injunction (a.k.a. “Clausura”) that’s been preventing EcoProteccion Akumal (EPA) from deploying a sargassum barrier in Half Moon Bay.
     

    2)   A meeting was held at PROFEPA’s offices on May 3, 2024, between the local head of PROFEPA, our lawyer, Antonella Vazquez, and Project Manager, Ivan Penie.  In this meeting, EPA was given the go-ahead to install the barrier immediately under the State of Emergency rules and a list of procedural actions required for PROFEPA to officially remove the temporary Clausura (minutes copied below). 

     

    3) PROFEPA received copies of the notifications (avisos) of barrier activities sent to the government agencies as required by law on May 28, 2024, but took no action to “remove” the barrier when it was installed, which speaks for itself.

     

    4)      David’s statement that the barrier’s financial supporters could face legal liability is an untrue and an unneighborly scare tactic. 

     

    Sargassum is an existential environmental and economic threat to Akumal Norte and the rest of the Mexican Caribbean coast. There are dozens of sargassum barriers deployed in Quintana Roo andmore are being added every day. Offshore sargassum barriers are an essential part of the integrated sargassum management strategy recommended by the Mexican government.

     

    The HMB Sargassum Project is the largest community initiative ever attempted in Akumal Norte and has the potential to make a huge improvement in the quality of life on Half Moon Bay. But all the time and money that has been put into it by donors and volunteers will be for nothing without continued financial support from the community. We have yet to install the barrier before the seasonal arrival of sargassum. Next year will be the first opportunity to deploy early and to determine the effectiveness of a barrier on Half Moon Bay.

     

    The HMB sargassum group welcomes David Zucker or any other community member to contact any one of our team if you are not sure about what’s happening with the project, or have any questions.  We will happily share the information that we have with you.  We have members of the HMB sargassum group physically in Akumal most days and others available by phone or email.

     

    Please don’t be distracted or discouraged by misinformation and continued attempts to further divide our community. Let's keep working together towards managing the sargassum infestation on our beach.

     

    Thank you for your commitment to ongoing sargassum mitigation!

     

    Marieke Brown (La Tortuga)  +52 9841058475

    Liane Perry (La Bahia) +1 (603) 930-4135

    Lisa Wilson (Villa Fortuna) +1 (202) 905-6103

    Mike and Gayle Dunning (Luna Azul) +1 (303) 941-4539

    Michael Fulps (Nikte Condos) +1 (918) 805-7733

    Steve Hamilton (Playa Blanca) ‪+1 (303) 884‑5961‬

    Peter Swenson (Mi Casa Del Mar) +1 (918) 805-7733

     

     

     

    Minutes from meeting with Profepa on May 3, 2024

     

    Tuvimos reunión con la Ing. Nidelvia- ahora procuradora de Profepa.

    Nos recibió a los dos en su mini oficina que es una sauna, a pesar de la señora de la entrada que NO se podía y estos serían los pasos a seguir:


     

    1. Desistimiento del amparo. A pesar de que difiero, ella dice que si debemos desistirnos del amparo y una vez que presentemos el desistimiento al juez, 

    2. Presentar copia del desistimiento a PROFEPA en un escrito donde señalamos que nos hemos desistido del juicio de amparo ya que solicitamos se lleve el procedimiento ante la PROFEPA QROO únicamente conforme a la última acta de inspección donde reconocemos la totalidad de los hechos asentados en la misma, sobre todo en el sentido de que no se circunstancio daño ambiental alguno; también en ese escrito renunciamos a la etapa de pruebas y alegatos, en el entendido de que todo lo presentado y actuado por ECOPROTECCION akumal se mantiene y adjuntamos i) el escrito de la fiscalía, ii) la respuesta de transparencia de que no se requiere MIA y iii) los avisos presentados a Conanp y Semarnat (o vistos buenos). Este escrito TAMBIEN debe decir que ECOPROTECCION akumal es una AC sin animo de lucro, carece de recursos y que los pocos con los que cuenta se han dedicado a la barrera a fin de contener el sargazo. 

    3. Presentado lo anterior, debemos presentar las AUTORIZACIONES a SEMARNAT y CONANP para instalar la barrera, avisando del procedimiento que existe con la PROFEPA que impide poner la barrera, pero señalando que en virtud del 4to constitucional y que permitir la acumulación de sargazo en la costa será un daño a la salud y al medio ambiente por lo que se avisa de la urgencia de ingresar la barrera. Mismo escrito a CONANP y ambos COPIADOS a PROFEPA.

    4. Presentado todo esto, podemos meter la barrera- no obstante que el RESOLUTIVO final de PROFEPA tardará unos DOS MESES y nos pondrán un apercibimiento de que debemos SIEMPRE copiarles y dos tres cosas más que mencionó ella...


     


  • 09-Sep-2024 12:48 PM
    Reply # 13404268 on 13397985

    I apologize for the length of this Fact-Check to the recent clarifications by the Barrier Committee, but for too long I refrained from addressing their talking points to avoid stirring controversy.

    A:

    “We are writing in response to an email about the HMB Sargassum Barrier that you may have received from David Zucker with an unsigned attachment from PROFEPA addressed to an anonymous individual.”

    The signers of the above, several of whom speak Spanish, seem not to have noticed that there were two attachments to my email: the original Spanish letter from the PROFEPA Legal Sub-prosecutor's Office, General Directorate of Crimes, Commutations, Reports and Complaints was signed on each page by the Director General. Naturally, my translation was not signed. A copy is attached. As can be seen, it is hard to miss if you read the original.

    Speaking of signatures, we have yet to see an official signed permission that let the barrier be installed again rather than just a wink and a nod from the Cancun PROFEPA office.

    B:

    Sargassum is an existential environmental and economic threat to Akumal Norte and the rest of the Mexican Caribbean coast….”

    For years we have repeatedly been told that sargassum is an existential threat to not only the condos on the bay but to all of North Akumal because of the loss of renters. The following report in Riviera Maya News throws new light on this claim in this year sans barrier:

    Government reports Playa del Carmen and Akumal with highest hotel occupancy rates in country

    By Riviera Maya News on August 20, 2024 | Travel News

    Riviera Maya, Q.R. — Playa del Carmen and Akumal have been reported as the two busiest tourist centers in the country. The Secretary of Tourism of the Government of Mexico says hotel occupancy rates in those two areas topped the most-occupied list in the first half of 2024.”

    As to the environmental impact of the barrier, results are at best ambiguous, highlighted by the fact that the most recent opposition to the barrier has been stimulated by negative assessments by the turtle volunteers.

    C:

    “The HMB Sargassum Project is the largest community initiative ever attempted in Akumal Norte…”

    Not the largest community initiative, but the most expensive. All of the infrastructure projects combined that improved our community and increased the value of our properties didn’t equal the cost of the barrier.  These included two and a half kilometers of paved roads with topes, lights and drains, a larger project that cost half as much;  the Security Program encompassing installation of the automatic gate, cameras and an integrated computer system, the construction of an office casita and the two-story building housing the National Guard contingent, and the annual financial cost of the private guards and of maintaining the National Guard; also the fresh-water supply system that piped water to every property in North Akumal operated by the original Vecino Association before it was turned over to CAPA.

    D:

    I was pleased to see the publication, in response to the request for transparency, of the minutes of the meeting between the EPA and the new leadership of the local PROFEPA office in which the necessary steps to circumvent the Clausurado were laid out. I had wondered at the somewhat disingenuous reply from the Q.R. office of PROFEPA to the Director General in which they said only that the CLAUSURA was still in effect without adding that they had allowed EPA to proceed with the installation anyway. My attenuated copy of the minutes didn’t explain how far the authority of the local office extended or whether they needed approval from Mexico City. Luckily, the barrier collapsed under the impact of a mild storm and had to be removed, so the question has become moot.

     

     

     

     

     


    1 file
  • 10-Sep-2024 9:05 AM
    Reply # 13405022 on 13397985

    David, I know I speak for a multitude of people when I say THANK YOU for Fact-Checking that email!  Their statement that the official government letter was not signed, was preposterous, and only served to alienate even more homeowners. I personally have spoken to a large majority of homeowners (and the occasional renter) and the consensus is that all have realized that the barrier:

    1 Was and CONTINUES to be a money pit and….

    2. It is a total failure (I was HERE the day it came apart into small sections and despite what they told you conditions were not that bad at all!!)

    The truth is, they are all ready to move on and are excited to support Vecinos with the multitude of other projects that our community desperately needs to tackle. The Government project has been moving along nicely, if anyone hasn’t read The latest issue of La Voz I highly encourage you to do so…. It’s time to move on!

  • 10-Sep-2024 12:16 PM
    Reply # 13405123 on 13397985

    David, what’s your point here? That your neighbors on the barrier committee are liars and need to be “fact checked”? That sargassum is not a problem because hotel occupancy is high in Akumal and Playa (which spends millions on sargassum mitigation)? That a project with over a hundred donors that raised over half a million dollars isn’t significant?

    Yes, Monica - it’s time to move on. It’s time to move on from the ugly rancor about this project and accept some basic facts:

    1. Sargassum is obviously a major issue for our community and others like it
    2. Offshore barriers are part of the Mexican government’s recommended strategy for coping with it
    3. The HMB barrier has not yet been in place for a full sargassum season, so nobody yet knows for sure how effective it is or isn’t
    4. CEA nesting data prove neither that the barrier has an effect on turtles nor that it doesn’t
    5. PROFEPA is well aware of the barrier project and will take action against it if it sees fit
    6. The committee will proceed with barrier installation next season if it has the money to do so
    7. Any enforcement action against the barrier is between the committee and the government and has nothing to do with barrier donors or barrier opponents

    Like 70% of community members who responded to the survey Vecinos conducted last summer, I support the barrier if it blocks sargassum and doesn’t hurt the turtles or the reef and I oppose it otherwise.  But whether you are in favor of the barrier, opposed to it, or (like me and most of us) are waiting to see the results, let’s all stop questioning the honesty and good faith of neighbors we disagree with and move forward with civility. 

    We all love our community, the turtles, and the reef. Calling neighbors liars and making unsupported claims about barrier effectiveness, its impact on turtles and the reef, and its sturdiness (the storm hit during barrier deployment, the worst possible time, resulting in the damage) does not contribute to to a civil dialog. It further divides our community at a time when we should be coming together to address the issues discussed in La Voz and many others.


    Last modified: 10-Sep-2024 12:21 PM | Anonymous member
  • 13-Sep-2024 6:40 PM
    Reply # 13406598 on 13397985

    SUBJ:  PROFEPA temporary Clausura formally removed! 

    Dear friends and neighbors!  We have some great news to share with you today!  

    First, a little background info on how we got here.  In December of 2023 a small group of individuals (mentioned in our March 2024 newsletter) in North Akumal made civil and criminal complaints to the Mexican government against our Half Moon Bay sargassum barrier citing environmental damage and harm to turtles.  PROFEPA issued a temporary Clausura of the barrier project while they investigated the civil complaint and the Attorney General sent a team of marine specialist scientists to investigate the criminal allegations.  

    The team sent by the Attorney General’s office dove on each of the anchor points, inspecting each of the installations, and reported that they found no evidence to support the criminal accusations of reef damage and harm to the turtles and other marine life, and dismissed the criminal complaint.

    In response to the civil complaint, PROFEPA conducted a detailed investigation of our Half Moon Bay barrier project over the last 9 months, and this week issued a final document stating that they have found no evidence to support the allegations of harm to our Half Moon Bay reef nor the marine environment and its inhabitants including the turtles.  They confirmed that the 3 small screws in a rock on the southern headland (left over from our barrier’s initial configuration) were not causing environmental harm. Additionally, they have confirmed that EPA is operating the Half Moon Bay Barrier project in full compliance with all of the government regulations and requirements.  PROFEPA has now completed its investigations into the civil complaint and has formally removed the temporary Clausura from the operations of the Half Moon Bay Barrier. 

    We are absolutely delighted to share this news with you, and although the results of these investigations were far from unexpected, it was lengthy, and time and resource-consuming process that we are grateful to see reach its conclusion.  We are looking forward to now being able to dedicate 100% of our resources back to protecting Half Moon Bay and keeping the seaweed off our beach.   

    As always, we welcome anyone with questions about the Half Moon Bay Sargassum Project to talk to us and give us the opportunity to share our information with you. Let’s use our community resources to support each other and make North Akumal a better place.

    Here is the full document from PROFEPA informing us that the investigation process has been completed and the Clausura removed. 
     

    If you dont have time to read the entire 31 page document, here below is the original and translated text of the part that states that the Clausura has been lifted.   

    English

    IV. Now, regarding the security measure consisting of the TOTAL TEMPORARY CLOSURE, imposed during the inspection visit on December 7, 2023, which in environmental law is of a precautionary or preventive nature to protect natural resources from human impact in the face of a potentially illegal act until it is determined whether the impact was made based on authorizations issued by the regulatory authority or not; this being established in the final administrative resolution, temporarily or transiently affecting certain freedoms or powers until the procedure is concluded.

    Once the objective of imposing the security measure has been fulfilled, it is appropriate to order the lifting of the temporarily and precautionarily imposed security measure, and consequently, the indicated action for its lifting is rendered ineffective. Therefore, once this resolution becomes final, it should be communicated to the Subdelegation of Environmental Impact and Federal Maritime Terrestrial Zone, of this Office of Environmental Protection Representation, of the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection in the State of Quintana Roo, to proceed accordingly.

    For the reasons stated and founded, this Office of Environmental Protection Representation, of the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection in the State of Quintana Roo, proceeds to definitively resolve and:

    RESOLVES:

    FIRST. By virtue of the reasoning set forth in CONSIDERING III of this resolution, it is made known to the legal entity named ECOPROTECCIÓN AKUMAL, A.C., that in accordance with the provisions of Article 57, Section I, and 59 of the Federal Law of Administrative Procedure, the closure of this administrative procedure is decreed. Consequently, once this determination becomes final, the file is ordered to be archived as a concluded matter.

    SECOND. Notwithstanding the closure determination issued by this Authority, the legal entity named ECOPROTECCIÓN AKUMAL, A.C. is urged to continue complying with its environmental obligations in terms of environmental impact. Likewise, in the case of continuing with the authorized activities of containment, removal, and management of sargassum, OBSERVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OFFICE.

    “It is located for your consultation in the Office of Representation of Environmental Protection, from the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection in the State of Quintana Roo, located on Avenida Mayapán, Lot 1, Block 4, Superblock 21, PROFECO office building, Cancun, Municipality of Benito Juarez, State of Quintana Roo, C.P. 77500.”

    Spanish

    IV.- Ahora bien, en relación a la medida de seguridad consistente en LA CLAUSURA TOTAL TEMPORAL, impuesta durante la visita de inspección de fecha siete de diciembre de dos mil veintitrés, cuyo objeto en el derecho ambiental es del tipo precautorio o cautelar que protegen a los recursos naturales de su afectación por parte del hombre ante la aparición de un acto probablemente ilegal y hasta en tanto se determina si la afectación se ha hecho con base en autorizaciones emitidas por la autoridad normativa o no; siendo esto establecido en la resolución administrativa definitiva, afectándose de manera temporal o transitoria determinadas libertades o potestades, hasta en tanto el procedimiento se concluye.

    Una vez cumplido el objetivo de la imposición de la medida de seguridad, resulta procedente ordenar el levantamiento de la medida de seguridad impuesta de manera temporal y precautoria, y en consecuencia se deja sin efecto la acción indicada para su levantamiento, por ende una vez que cause ejecutoria la presente resolución hágase del conocimiento de la Subdelegación de Impacto Ambiental y Zona Federal Marítimo Terrestre, de esta Oficina de Representación de Protección Ambiental, de la Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente en el Estado de Quintana Roo, para que proceda conforme a derecho corresponda.

    Por lo antes expuesto y fundado esta Oficina de Representación de Protección Ambiental, de la Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente en el Estado de Quintana Roo, procede a resolver en definitiva y:

    RESUELVE:

    PRIMERO.- En virtud de los razonamientos señalados en el CONSIDERANDO III de la presente resolución, se hace del conocimiento de la persona moral denominada ECOPROTECCIÓN AKUMAL, A.C., que conforme a lo dispuesto en el artículo 57 fracción I, y 59 de la Ley Federal de Procedimiento Administrativo, se decreta, el cierre del presente procedimiento administrativo, en consecuencia una vez que cause ejecutoria la presente determinación se ordena archivar el expediente como asunto concluido.

    SEGUNDO.- No obstante, la determinación de cierre que emite esta Autoridad, se exhorta a la persona moral denominada ECOPROTECCIÓN AKUMAL, A.C., a seguir cumpliendo con sus obligaciones ambientales en materia de impacto ambiental, asimismo en el caso de continuar con las actividades autorizadas de la contención, retiro y manejo de sargazo; OBSERVE LOS LINEAMIENTOS TÉCNICOS Y DE GESTIÓN PARA LA ATENCIÓN DE LA CONTINGENCIA OCASIONADA POR SARGAZO EN EL CARIBE MEXICANO Y EL GOLFO DE MÉXICO, vigentes, tal como también se le indicó en el oficio número W0027/24 de fecha veinte de agosto de dos mil veinticuatro, emitido por la Dirección General de Impacto y Riesgo Ambiental, de la Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales.

     


Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software