The Tribune

By FAY SIMMONS

TRIBUNE Business Reporter

jsimmons@tribunemedia.net

ENVIRONMENTAL advocates yesterday hailed SpaceX’s decision to end its Falcon 9 booster landing programme in The Bahamas, arguing that these should never have been approved and that it highlights the need for greater transparency in the permitting process.

Joseph Darville, of Save the Bays and Waterkeepers Bahamas, said he was “extremely happy” the programme had ended, arguing that The Bahamas’ limited land mass and globally important marine environment make projects carrying the potential for major environmental impacts too great a risk.

“It brought a tremendous joy to my heart to hear that they did cancel it. It was something that we should never, ever, have entertained,” said Mr Darville.

The initiative was initially promoted as an opportunity for space tourism and technology in The Bahamas, with up to 20 Falcon-9 booster landings planned in Bahamian waters. The first landing took place in Exuma Sound in February 2025, followed by a second in February 2026.

Speaking to Tribune Business, Mr Darville said The Bahamas has an abundance of ocean but relatively little land on which its population lives, meaning the country cannot afford to expose its communities or marine environment to unnecessary risks.

“With space exploration, you cannot be guaranteed 100 percent that it’s going to be safe,” he said. “We are a very small island state.” Mr Darville argued that climate change, sea level rise and increasing temperatures made it even more important for The Bahamas to protect its territory from activities that could create additional environmental risks.

“We don’t need another catastrophe in our territory to blast away some of our people, portions of our islands, and particularly our marine species,” he said.

Mr Darville said the Government should establish that similar booster landing operations would not be permitted in the future. “I think it should be recorded for infinity that this will never be allowed in our territory. Plain and simple, that must be established,” he said.

He also questioned the original argument that the programme would contribute meaningfully to the country’s tourism product.

“That space tourism, that’s absolutely ridiculous. How is that going to assist with tourism in The Bahamas? That was just a play game that I don’t think held any water to it at all,” said Mr Darville.

Dr Ancilleno Davis, owner and chief scientist at Science and Perspective, said he was also satisfied the programme had ended but argued that the bigger issue was whether The Bahamas’ environmental approval process is sufficiently transparent.

“I’m fine that they stopped it. I wish the whole process had been more transparent,” said Dr Davis. He added that communities often do not know about proposed projects or approvals until months after the process has begun, pointing specifically to the SpaceX application.

“The time delays for us to see what’s going on — some of these things are approved and no one knows about the approvals, or that they even have a proposal in front of them, for months. And in relation to SpaceX, it was 11 months. So that’s almost a year. That is not reasonable at all,” he said.

Dr Davis also criticised the notice given to residents and marine users ahead of the first SpaceX landing, noting residents were given less than two weeks to learn that they could not use their boats or enter a large area affected by the landing operation.

“That’s super unreasonable,” he said. Dr Davis added that The Bahamas also lacks a sufficiently-comprehensive environmental baseline against which the potential effects of major projects can be measured.

“We just don’t know the areas that are going to be impacted, and we don’t have a good environmental baseline,” said Dr Davis.

He called for the Department of Environmental Planning and Protection (DEPP) to work with local communities, researchers, educators and students to collect environmental data that could be used to assess future developments.

“DEPP needs to partner, I think, with local communities, researchers, educators and students to collect data on the environment, so that they could have something to compare to what these incoming developers or environmental impactors would have to say,” he said.

Dr Davis also challenged the accuracy of information he said was contained in the SpaceX environmental impact assessment (EIA) concerning marine research in The Bahamas.

“In the SpaceX EIA, for example, they said that there were no researchers doing marine mammal research in The Bahamas. That’s false. That’s categorically false,” he added.

Dr Davis said greater public access to environmental documents was also needed, arguing that Bahamians should be able to see the full record of environmental assessments and management plans for proposed developments.

“I think finally you need a complete record that’s accessible to the Bahamian public,” Dr Davis said. “The EIAs that are on the DEPP website, there are fewer EIAs, EMPs, etc. on the DEPP website than what I have on Science and Perspective, and that’s really sad. Bahamians should be able to see all of those.”