Fishers uneasy over Sandals overwater villas at Mammee Bay
Published:Wednesday | October 15, 2025 | 12:05 AMSteven Jackson/ - Senior Business Reporter
Sandals Resorts International’s US$230-million redevelopment of its Dunn’s River hotel property, particularly the addition of 18 overwater villas, has received mixed reactions from the community, according to a newly released environmental impact assessment report.
Sandals is seeking a beach licence for the villas.
The luxury expansion, positioned as a boost to Jamaica’s tourism offerings, was at odds with some fishers, business operators, and residents in Mammee Bay, St Ann. Many cited environmental risks, economic exclusion, and long-term threats to local livelihoods. Fishers worry that the area will be declared a no-fishing zone in order to accommodate the operation of the villas.
The cost of the villa project has not been disclosed, but it is included in the full US$230-million Sandals Dunn’s River redevelopment project, phase one of which was completed in May 2023.
The report indicated that construction of the overwater villas were to be completed in 18 months, starting from late 2023. That period has elapsed, but the status of that element of the project is unknown.
Sandals, a regional hotel chain with properties in Jamaica and various Caribbean countries, is yet to respond to requests for comment on this story.
The villas comprise phase two of the development, according to the environmental report, which was prepared by Technological and Environmental Management Network Limited on behalf of Sandals. They will become the fifth overwater villa installation in the Sandals chain, following similar developments in Montego Bay and Westmoreland in Jamaica, as well as St Lucia and St Vincent & the Grenadines, according it its website. Stay at these villas currently costs about US$2,000 a night, but can double that figure during peak periods.
Surveys conducted as part of the environmental report show that most community groups welcomed the potential opportunities but remained cautious about the risks. Beach visitors were the most receptive, with 69.2 per cent considering the project “very important”, while four-fifths of professionals surveyed believed the project would result in jobs and development.
Many of the 69 fishers interviewed, however, expressed concern about ecological disruption and restricted access to traditional fishing grounds.
“It is not a good idea because a lot of fishermen use that area, and the project will damage the reef and become a no-fishing zone,” one respondent warned. Another added: “Only Sandals will benefit, and poor fishermen suffer.”
The report documents a wide range of community feedback gathered during public consultations in late 2022, but the findings are only now being released. Three-quarters of the fishers viewed the project as having a negative impact on their livelihoods, citing reef damage, exclusion from tourism benefits, and loss of access. The few areas of perceived positive impact related to job creation, increased stopover tourism, and general development.
“I need the development, more tourist, and income,” one of the fishers said.
“The hotel won’t be a benefit to fishermen. Many will lose their livelihood,” said another.
Others offered conditional support, emphasising the need for environmental safeguards and community engagement.
“I am good with the development once the environment is protected,” one fisher said.