| 1. | What are the most important environmental issues facing Nova Scotians? |
|
 |
| Forseeable legislation that would 'sterilize' the countryside, effectively eliminating individuals, groups or companies from developing natural resources in enviromentally responsible ways. |
|
|
| The most important issues facing Nova Scotians are the effects of climate change, air pollution, and water quality. Climate change will impact the way we manage our forests and impact growth and yield predictions amde on our 'growing' forest.
Air pollution will continue to affct our freshwater systems. Unfortunately we can only control local pollution sources.
Drinking water and its protection are important issues because it is the foundation for any healthy environment, community, etc. |
|
|
| The decline in forest cover. I have flown Halifax-Sydney and seen the incredible amount of deforestation in recent years. The effect of high levels of clearcutting on groundwater and other elements of the ecosystem are only partly known. Plus, it goes against the Provinces' assertion of "pristine environment" we are supposedly selling to tourists. |
|
|
| Clean air, water, land and food. Pollution and use of chemicals in the environment threaten the health and well being of our citizens.
The sustainable growth of our towns and cities, in particular, the healthy growth of our Province's largest city and economic and cultureal hub - Halifax Regional Municipality. How HRM develops will greatly affect our use and impact on environmental assets in the Province.
The practices of clearcutting and chemical spraying associated with industrial forestry is also a major concern in rural ares. Similarly, the use of toxic chemicals in agriculture is a major concern both to rural health and consumers of food products. Invasive species also represent a significant threat to our environment and economy. Many foreign invaders have alread had a profound impact (examples: spruce longhorn beettle affecting trees, chain pickerel and smallmouth bass devastating native trout and salmon populations.) |
|
|
| - Conservation has taken a back seat to development. Clearly conservation must be the priority, which implies that policy must always err on the side of conservation over development.
- Increased protection of wetlands, protected areas, and sites of ecological significance including proposed wilderness areas additions.
- Crown Land conservation.
- Increased protection of the province's largest and most intact wilderness area - the Tobeatic Wilderness Area.
- Watershed and river quality and health. |
|
|
| ** ** **
PLEASE NOTE: IN LIGHT OF THE FRUSTRATING TENDENCY FOR THIS WEBFORM TO CRASH - AND THE APPARENT LACK OF CAPACITY TO SAVE WHAT'S WRITTEN - I AM GOING TO SEND THIS IN CHUNKS AND HOPE I AM NOT WASTING MY TIME. I HAVE ALREADY LOST TWO BITS AND AM NOW KEEPING IT AS A SEPARATE FILE AND PASTING BACK AND FORTH.
Answer to the question about "most important environmental issues":
Declining native biological diversity. This is the most fundamental global environmental issue, and all parts of the world are part of it. All other environmental problems impact on this one. Among these subsidiary issues are:
(a) Acid rain. This has had a huge impact on Nova Scotia and the problem has not gone away. Instead it has been forgotten. This is partly because progress has been made in the Great Lakes region and so it has been assumed that the same applies in N.S. It doesn't.
(b) Global climate change. This is a global issue of which we are all part. We have to adapt now ... it's too late now to stop it, the issue is how to minimize its impact.
(c) Invasions of alien species. We are currently facing waves of invasions in the North Atlantic Ocean and these are having major ecological effects. The N.S. government appears unaware of this.
(d) Runaway economies. We have not rationalized the continuity among environment, economy, and society. Instead we have allowed an out-dated "classical" economic model to govern decision-making. This has led to urban sprawl, pollution, over-fishing, unsustainable forestry, inappropriate coastal development, destructive recreaton, and many other enviro-social ills.
(e) Failure to apply laws and policies. Nova Scotia has some good environmental laws, and also some good proposals for revisions to these laws. We have the capacity to produce good policies. Unfortunately, we have mostly acted like someone waking up on January 1st full of good resolutions, only to abandon them on January 2nd. |
|
|
| There are several key environmental issues that facing Nova Scotians that the government has yet failed to address. Here are two of the most basic problems that Nova Scotia, as a member of the developed world must come to address:
1. Sewage disposal: I was shocked to hear that even Halifax, the capital of Nova Scotia does not have a proper sewage treatment plant. Even Pattaya, a small coastal city ** ** in Thailand ** ** had sewage treatment and it was in a third world country!! Given the new innovations in converting human waste into fuel and Nova Scotia's use of fossil fuels for energy, it looks to me like there is a great opportunity for Nova Scotia to develop its own energy through the processing of its sewage.
2. Recycled products. The government should endorse the use of recycled products, especially the use of recycled paper. Currently consumers of paper in Nova Scotia continue to use 100% non-recycled paper products due to the large increase in price for recycled products. The main reason for this price difference is simply consumer demand. It is the duty of the government to subsidize the recycled-paper industry and therefore ease Canadian consumers away from fully non-recycled paper products. |
|
|
| 1. Protection of our water resources - ground, coastal, drinking, and natural water basin (lakes, rivers, etc.).
2. Protection of wilderness land - including coastal property, forested areas, wildlife-preferred areas, and ocean areas frequented by marine mammals.
3. Protection of agricultural land from commercial/residential encroachment; soil pollution and erosion.
4. Need to expand recycling programs ** ** **.
5. Need to develop/monitor/safeguard and value natural water sources - by policies which prevent discharge of waste material (raw sewage, industrial waste, pesticides, chemical fertilizer and other polluting materials) into our rivers, lakes, ponds and ocean. Need to enforce the policies - including for municipalities, boat operators, companies, farmers) with STRICT penalties.
6. Education - begin with teaching children and their families how to honour, value, protect and learn to live/enjoy the environment.
7. Clean up known contaminated sites.
8. Curb the clear cutting. |
|
|
| Clean air to breathe and water to drink.
The loss of our wild lands and wildlife waterways and fish. |
|
|
| A Plan for Coastal Development and Conservation - Threats to our coasts include unbridled development, pollution, sewage, invasive species, and unsustainable aquaculture. Our coastlines will also be altered as sea levels rise due to climate change. The Green Plan boasts that Nova Scotia is has 7400 km of coastline, yet there is no concrete coastal preservation plan to ensure that this coastline is protected and developed in a rational and sustainable way. The province should make full use of its jurisdiction to 12 nautical miles offshore (as instated in the “Special Places Protection Act” to protect key coastal areas as part – but only part – of this coastal plan. As well as ensuring adequate protection of habitat and unique geological formations, a sustainable coastal development plan would also zone areas which are appropriates for different types and levels of development. Of course, this plan must be formulated through open consultation with stakeholders and concerned citizens.
Invasive Species - The Green Plan makes reference to the importance of maintaining biodiversity, yet the Nova Scotian government has not addressed the second greatest threat to biodiversity on this planet: biological invasions. Bioinvasions also represent a threat to the economy and health of Nova Scotians. In the case of the introduction of the oyster-killing parasite MSX, a sustainable, rural-based industry in the Bras d'Or Lakes was wiped out by an invasive parasite that killed off the highly-prized Bras d’Or Lakes oyster. Invasive plants and pests that are allowed to enter Nova Scotia may also create a barrier to trade in agricultural and forestry products. This point was brought home when the brown spruce longhorn beetle invaded Point Pleasant Park, and the forestry industry was threatened both by the beetle itself and by possible trade barriers with the United States. The West Nile Virus is an example of how the spread of a non-native virus can have human health consequences. Studies on ballast water in the United States have shown that 14 out of 15 ships entering the Chesapeake Estuary contained cholera virus, and outbreaks of cholera have been linked to ballast water introductions.
The Green Plan also refers to government initiatives to protect wilderness areas and rivers in this province. However, if these areas are not protected form the damage incurred by invasive species, efforts to protect them will be in vain. For instance, smallmouth bass were deliberately introduced to Lake Ainslie last summer, representing a threat to the Margaree Heritage River System. Currently, awareness programmes are not in place and provincial staff does not have the capacity to properly inform the public of invasive species or to prevent such introductions through enforcement and monitoring.
The Nova Scotia government must formulate comprehensive strategy to prevent the introduction of non-native species, monitor for invasive species, and be able to respond quickly when an invasive species is detected. Such initiatives are occurring nationally and on a state-wise basis in the United States, and other Canadian provinces are also moving ahead to respond to invasive species. Nova Scotia, as a participant in the Gulf of Maine Council and other regional initiatives, should do its part to keep on par with these strategies. As part of its fulfilment of these obligations and in order to improve its record on dealing with invasive species, the Nova Scotia government must make a formal commitment to participate fully in the ** ** **. This well-informed and active group is moving foreword to address invasive species issues on a regional basis, despite an embarrassing lack of participation from our province.
The Nova Scotian government’s involvement in establishing effective ballast water regulations for this region has been a great asset to the process, and for this your representative on the Atlantic Sub-committee for the Treatment of Ballast Water should be congratulated. However, the provincial government must focus more resources on efforts to work with federal bodies who regulate invasive species such as Environment Canada, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Transport Canada, and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, in order to ensure that the special concerns of Nova Scotia (such as the need to protect the Bras d’Or Lakes) are addressed and to hasten the adoption of policies that deal with invasive species. The Nova Scotia government should also lobby the federal government to enforce or alter legislation pertaining to invasive species such as laws against illegal stocking of fish – a law which has never been successfully prosecuted in this country – so that these laws are effective instruments, rather than exercises in “window dressing.”
Stop Coastal Oil and Gas Development. The province must formally acknowledge the threat that coastal oil and gas development represents to coastal industries and communities and declare a moratorium on development off Cape Breton. The province must completely overhaul the environmental assessment process for oil and gas exploration and development. The province must also move to create a rational taxation and royalties system than acknowledges the environmental cost oil and gas incurs. |
|
|
| highly degraded forests and ongoing unsustainable forest management, which only values fiber sustainability, which only serves industry, and negates other values, such as wildlife, tourism, and averything else that depends on natural Acadian forest ecosystems. We believe that tree farms should not be replacing Acadian forests.2
|
|
|
| We feel that the lack of political will to deal with environmental issues as a priority is the most important environmental issue in Nova Scotia. The Sustainable Environment document reveals this in its lack of specifics, its pervasive use of the
word “promote” in a meaningless way, its omission of meaningful reference to
the resource based industries such as mining, agriculture, offshore resource
extraction, and forestry
At the very least, we need monitoring and enforcement of current policies which protect the environment.
Nova Scotian citizens need to be considered stakeholders in discussions of policy. Government must provide access to good data on resources.
We need to receive economic rent from Nova Scotia’s resources: benefit through
adequate compensation, good business development and concern for the
environment that citizens share with industry.
We need to ensure that unprocessed resources do not leave the province before undergoing process which would add value to those resources.
Government needs to ensure that renewable resource extraction does not ruin the
resource itself.
|
|
|
| -loss of natural resources from over harvesting (aggressive forestry, fishing, mining activities)
-air & water pollution (acid rain-eutrophic water sources, Sydney tar ponds, pesticides in the Annapolis Valley affecting air quality)
-Halifax harbour, sewage treatment problems |
|
|
| Development encroaching on limited Crown Lands remaining for natural habitat and outdoor recreation
Need for more protected areas |
|
|
| WE must put a halt on the destruction of our forests. Clear-cutting is out of control, selective cutting should be mandatory.
Also, we must protect fragile, wilderness areas, such as the Tobeatic - ATV's should be banned from these areas immediately. |
|
|
| Clean the Sydney tar ponds and coke ovens. How? I don't know.
Nova Scotia is one of the dirtiest provinces in Canada. Why? Because we rely on coal and fuel for our energy. Cheaper in the short run but a real burden on our health care system. We are the leaders in cancer rates, asthma, pneumonia, bronchitis, emphysema...
We need to produce more wind, solar, thermal and other forms of non polluting, renewable energy. |
|
|
| There are many: Reducing carbon emissions by exploring alternative sources of energy, smart city planning, support of active transportation, and more. Conserving the marine environment by banning the use of draggers and seismic exploration. Conserving the terrestrial environment by severely restricting the use of All Terrain Vehicles. |
|
|
| The need to protect: our fisheries and what's left of it; our forests, by stopping the clearcutting so that they don't go the way of the fisheries; Our farmland, from development, topsoil removal, lack of crop rotation, pollution from overuse of chemicals, and spread of septic waste; our water quality and quantity, from increasing development, farming practices, industry and aggregate operations; our air quality, from pestiside sprays, exhaust fumes. We need to protect environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, and designate more Nature Reserves, particularly on crown lands.
Regarding farmland, we should be working toward organic practices which are healthier for humans and soil and more sustainable for all in the long term. Land trusts need to be set up to preserve farmland. Note Clinton County Planning Department in New York State that purchases easements on farmlands from landowners wishing to sell development rights (** **). The State of Vermont encourages protection by giving tax breaks for those who place easements on their farms.
The forests are heading toward softwood plantations with the present policy. Clearcutting should be strictly limited and regulated with a focus on healthier biodiverse and uneven aged forests, getting back to the original Acadian forest. |
|
|
| Protecting wilderness areas, coastal areas and rivers. |
|
|
| Sydney Tar Ponds - clean it up now.
Halifax Harbour - clean it up now.
Wilderness protection - protect it now before it disappears |
|
|
| 1. Pollution from things such as the smoke stacks at Tufts Cove. I think it is ridiculous that NS Power is selling the gas that they have available to the US, and burning the coal and oil here making our pollution worse.
2. Gereral pollution from human beings that is not thought about very much, such as using cars when buses or car pooling would cut emissions, making a mess by using off road vehicles in sensitive areas, building our cities in ways that require one to have a car, when planned communities could ensure that people work close to where they live, etc. |
|
|
| I think that air, water and soil quality are important issues in Ns, not just from an environmental perspective, but from a health one as well.
In addition the protection of biodiversity - the preservation of wildnerness areas and the species and habitats they contain - is an important issue to face as well.
|
|
|
| See comments made during an online submission on or about March 8, 2004 |
|
|
| Forseeable legislation that would 'sterilize' the countryside, effectively eliminating individuals, groups or companies from developing natural resources in enviromentally responsible ways. |
|
|
| What I would call the "root cause" of all environmental problems in Nova Scotia is the sorry fact that nature in general seems to have been trumped by a warship of economic growth as the be-all and end-all. Even something as readily apparent to any thinking person as climate changes brough about by excessive GHG's is dismissed as fearmongering by Big Oil and subsequently a necessary lowering of our standard of living via a carbon tax being legislated to reduce automobile usage is stopped in its tracks because we have been indoctrinated since youth by such banal mantras as: "A man without a car is only half a man". We need to start thinking outside the box, i.e. encouraging "voluntary simplicity." Look it up; it's LONG overdue! |
|
|
| 1. Lack of timeline for reducing GHG emissions with specific targets by specific dates. (through reduced energy use, increased renewable source).
2. Failure to look at mitigation for changes which will (and are) occur as a result of climate change (extreme weather events, coastal erosion - changing ecosystems affect agriculture, forestry and the fisheries.
3. Failure to develop comprehensive land use planning which ensures people live in commercial/residential mixes in urban centres with sustainable means of transportation - either walking or biking trails vs. continued urban sprawl. The strip-road developments as they are occuring from Halifax to Wolfville/Halifax to Truro/Halifax to Chester are examples of increasingly resource intensive and unsustainable development - this affects air quality, habitat loss, water quality, etc.
4. Failure to re-think the oil and gas exploration - the rate at which areas are opened; the failure to collect a royalty on the millions of dollars being spent; the need for an environemental assessment which comprehensively determines what areas should or should not be opened to seismic testing.
5. Failure of sound environmental education coupled with regulation. Most members of the public don't understand their roled - Do they need an SUV? Wht not build an R2000 home? |
|
|
| I see the loss of access to indivduals,companies and groups to renewable and non renewable resuorces because of fear and ignorance of the enviroment. |
|
|
| Sustainble forestry - reducing clearcutting, a morortorium on clearcutting. developing more FSC certified wood lots.
Completing a protected area circuit in the province.
Develop an action plan to identify and designate more large blocks of public lands for protection. Do it now. Time is running out for wilderness.
Get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Do it now, large borders and don’t shrink the areas down.
Select and designate more new Nature Reserves.
Conservation of the Atlantic Ocean, the Acadian Forest, and the ecological integrity of existing protected areas.
Adhear to (at mininum) the recommendations laid out in the Voluntary Planning taskforce on ORV/ATV use.
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***.
|
|
|
| 1. Destruction of forests; sprating poinsing which goes into the water talbe, thus affecting wildlife and fish habitats.
2. Swampland being destroyed by large machinery.
3. Raw swage (mostly detergents) running off into waterways.
4. Sydney tar ponds
5. Sewage in Halifax Harbour
6. Acid rain coming from central Canada nad the Eastern seaboard.
7. Rock quarries on the north mountain (Annapolis County and Digby Neck) |
|
|
| Marine habitat protection! By far the number 1. Protect some marine areas and let people fish outside these MPAs. At least try it and see what results you get instead of just ignoring it.
Increasing terresterial protected areas is also very important.
New building codes and land classifications are integral to making sure that human activites are env friendly in the future.
|
|
|
| 1. Water quality and quantity.
2. Sewage management
3. Solid waste management
4. Natural resource depletion
5. Quality of fruits and vegetables
6. Manure handling, storage
7. Factory farming with regards to maunur, odour control
8. Air quality
9. Energy production
10. Loss of green spaces for ocmmunities. Also, protected areas.
11. OHV use
12. Road salt overuse |
|
|
| I would say the following environemtnal issues are currently important to Nova Scotians:
- Pesticide by-law and building moratorium: particularly in HRM, these two issues are drawing out a lot of debate;
- Helath and the environment: access to safe drinking water, clean air, and soil, and not having one's health destroyed by industry. Sydney Tar Ponds, for example.
- The fishery and forestry industries: how to keep these two sectors sustainable and viable. (Agriculture too!!)
- Balancing industrial development and environmental protection: offshore oil and gas, mining, clearcutting. The need to find a balance.
- the portection and presenttion of public lands acrosss the province. ATV regulation and control is also a hot topic. |
|
|
| Air pollutants – SO2, N0X and C02 from burning coal, vehicle emissions;
Depletion of natural resources – depletion of fish sticks – forest management treading the same precarious line;
Wildlife protection – not enough protected areas;
Climate change – extreme weather events affecting our region – lack of commitment to Kyoto targets;
Water quality – e.g. Municipal sewage dumped in Halifax Harbour;
Toxic waste – e.g. Sydney Tar Ponds;
Increased urbanisation in a few centres because of reduction of rural services, and the implications of this population pressure;
Lack of political will to address the above.
|
|
|
| The mission ** ** is to prevent biodiversity decline. ** ** ** concerned with three areas of conservation: the Atlantic Ocean, the Acadian Forest, and the ecological integrity of existing protected areas.
Major environmental issues addressed ** ** ** include the creation of systems of National Marine Conservation Areas and Marine Protected Areas, reduction of ocean noise and other forms of ocean pollution, co-operation with other organizations in the promotion of a healthy ocean environment and the identification and conservation of special habitats, including structurally complex and biologically important sites.
Major environmental issues addressed ** ** ** ** include the protection of old forests, the creation of a network of protected areas that are representative of natural heritage in Nova Scotia and the Acadian Forest region, the conservation of species at risk, and the reduction of clearcutting forestry practices.
Major environmental issues addressed ** ** ** include the responsible use of off-highway vehicles (OHVs), the prohibition of OHVs in all protected areas and sensitive habitats, appropriate management (i.e. no industrial developments, road building, or inappropriate use) of National Parks, provincial parks, wilderness areas, and other protected areas in the Maritimes.
|
|
|
| - Power generation from coal, dirty coal.
- Pulp mill effluent
- Quarry, sand and gravel practices
- Road construction
- Building codes and zoning regulations - encouraging wasteful land use. |
|
|
| · Terrestrial habitat loss and fragmentation – our natural areas are being lost or significantly altered at an alarming rate, primarily due to rampant clearcutting, highway construction, development of utility corridors, residential and industrial development (big box malls, industrial parks, quarries, etc).
· Industrial forest practices – in addition to loss of habitat, clearcutting results in a range of additional negative environmental effects such as siltation and decreased water quality in lakes and watercourses, increased soil erosion, massive ground disturbance, loss or degradation of almost all non-tree vegetation in the affected areas, and a wide range of potential edge effects on adjacent forest remnants.
· Urban sprawl – particularly in HRM the accelerating and unregulated development of sprawling suburbs, and the associated road and utility infrastructure, is leading to rapid deterioration in habitat quality within the affected area.
· Air pollution – the continued use of low grade fossil fuels by NS Power at the Tufts Cove plant, the wasteful burning of gas at the ** refinery in Dartmouth, and the increasing amount of truck and car traffic, are leading to deteriorating air quality within the HRM urban area. The long-range transport of air pollutants from central Canada and the northeastern United States adds to this problem in the metro area, and in the province generally.
· Marine habitat loss and destruction – the well-documented destruction by mobile dragger fleets of the unique deep, cold-water coral communities of the Scotian Shelf demonstrates the negative impact inappropriate fishing technology has on the marine environment. Aquaculture has the potential to cause similar loss of natural marine areas in the coastal zone.
· Global Climate Change – as a coastal province, we have a lot to lose if climate change predictions prove accurate. Rising sea levels will cause greatly increased erosion and flooding of low-lying areas, including some heavily populated areas. Increased severe weather could result in more storm damage like that experienced during Hurricane Juan. Climatic shifts could dramatically affect the agriculture, forestry, tourism, and fishing sectors of our economy. With so much to lose, the Nova Scotia government has demonstrated a startling lack of leadership on this issue.
· Transportation – the province continues to pursue a policy of building more and bigger highways, which simply encourages more of the most inefficient forms of transportation (cars and trucks). This adds to our air pollution problems, greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change, and to increasing loss and fragmentation of habitat.
|
|
|
| As I see it, there are two inter-related issues:
1. Wilderness preservation
2. Wilderness/environmental protection
The government needs to set aside more of our rapidly shrinking crown wilderness land now being ruined by urban sprawl and resource management (forestry and mineral extraction). ** ** ** 18 Crown wilderness areas (** **) that warrant protection because of their unique and irreplaceable qualities in the Nova Scotia landscape. The government should place an immediate moratorium on these areas to rpeven any new development. Then as soon as possible, officially designate all these areas as Protected Wilderness Areas.
The government needs to fully implement the recommendations of the Voluntary Planning OHV Task Force to protect our environment from the ravages of OHVs. |
|
|
| - completion of the protected areas network
- protection of our water resources
- ammendments to the EA process that will close loop-holes like the 3.9-4.0 ha trigger for EA, and protect communities from unwanted development (residential, commercial, industrial)
|
|
|
| Significant disregard of the environment (air, water, flora, fauna, and soil) both by corporate and private citizens, through lack of knowledge, green, and irresponsibility. This includes locals (ie. NOva Scotians), and groups from other parts of North America. In the search for money and/or expediency, we are allowing ourselves to be poisoned, either through the air we breathe, soil wer use, or water we ingest. There will be nothing left for our children except disease and pollution. If we do not curb our present practices quickly, there will be irreversible damage done in the next four years. I include also the overpopulation of Nova Scotia will leave no land or sutainable resources for the next generation. |
|
|
| The development of a long view, which balances the need to support economic development with protection of the environment.
Open, transparent public consultation on environmental issues.
Enforcement of existing statutes and regulations in a timely and even manner. |
|
|
| 1. Clearcutting of our forests - non-sustainable fore forestry at theis rate, loss of most old-growth forests, losing the capacity for our trees (lungs) to purify the air, government money (our money) is being used to supplement the cost of spraying with glyphosat on both public and private woodlot - adding to pollutants in our air, water and soil. Destruction of our natural water filtering ststem, loss of tourism attractions and revenue, loss of protection for our streams, loss of habitat and fish, etc.
2. Concern about air quality - NS is responsible for 25% of all Canada's sulphur oxide emissions, ozone levels above the acceptable Canadian level.
3. Water quality - how many Nova Scotians depend on bottled water? Our grandparents would have luaghed at us for paying for water! What have we done to the environment in the last century?
4. Safe, nutritious food - we are always trying to cut costs and make a profit! Polluting the feed of cattle, and continuing industrial farm pracices wehre antibiotics are routing (poultry) have resulted in a crisis wehre people have little confidence in our food supply. So many of our pre-packaged foods are laced with salt, sugar, transfat and chemicals, and then we wonder why so amny peoplare sick and our health costs are so high.
5. Old problems - Halifax Harbour and Sydney Tar Ponds |
|
|
| To decide whether to allwo indsutrial expansion or to shut out industrial expansion.
I believe that people have to work to live. If an industrial expansion of any type is possible it should be done. Hoever, all impacts on the environment should be studied (not a process to take 10 or more years). rules should be imposed on all industrial projects (and not rules that are impossible to follow economically). Once implmented,these rules hould be policed by the government departments. A pristine wonderful parklike Nova Scotia is a dream of utopia of Shangrala. If it ever should happen every Nova Scotian would be standing beside the road with a tin cup in the hope that a tourist will be generous. My experience is that the tourist love to look at the forests, but very few go into them. Hope, they will just drive by. That way they don't get bit by the mosquitos or ticks. This the new world of high city populations that really don't like uncomfortable adventures. |
|
|
| The most important issues in Nova Scotia all relate to how we interact with, extract from, and pollute the world around us. Our children have entrusted us with the stewardship of this province, and we are not fulfilling our responsibility to protect, manage, and sustain the Nova Scotia environment.
The single major impact on our environment that causes the most damage and from which all other damages flow from is how we use energy. The types of energy we have chosen to use, the amount of waste energy we produce, and the efforts we have put into developing non-renewable sources instead of renewable sources of usable energy, have all been contributing factors in the accelerated degradation of our natural environment, the direct and indirect deaths or thousands of Nova Scotians, and the alarming rise in illnesses suffered by our children,
There needs to be an immediate reversal in the way we approach energy resources in this province. Our governments needs to accept the fact that we are not Alberta, Quebec, or British Columbia, and we do not have vast amounts of oil, hydroelectric potential or geothermal energy to sell to the United States. Our size, population distribution, and coastal situation set us apart from the larger western provinces, and we should look to other parts of the world that more closely mirror Nova Scotia in scale, resource potential and geography when developing our energy policies.
We will always remain a poor have-not province if we continue to try to play in the big leagues with the resource-rich provinces of the west. By looking to places like Denmark, Germany, and the UK, we can see the benefits of renewable energy policy implementation – benefits that help both the economy and the environment.
|
|
|
| I would say that cleaning up some of the most serious mess that has been mad ein the past would rank high on my list. A close second would be dealing with all the awful stuff coming up to our province via the jet stream from the US. I really feel that Nova Scotia isn't doing too bad environmentally compared to a lot of other areas in Canada. Most of our environmental problems are a direct result of either our rbanized areas or fallout from the US. i feel we need no more than a rewrite of the legislation that is currently on the books and enforcement of the same. I do not believe that there are currently many environmental culprits in this province. |
|
|
| The single most important issue facing Nova Scotians is the total failure of their goverment, under the Department of Environment and Labour, to uphold its mandate and responsibilities under the Environment Act. |
|
|
| 1. Not enough old-growth forests being preserved.
2. The reliance on fossil fuels for energy when we should be investing in renwable energy eg. solar, wind, geothermal.
3. We need to ban poisons being sprayed on our agricultural land. |
|
|
| - Pollution of all water sources - salt, fresh, groundwater, wells.
- Air pollution from vehicle emissions and industry. Many sources are beyond our control from the US or western Canada.
- Loss of habitat and green space. |
|
|
| - Clearcutting of our forests.
- The raping of our forests
- Fresh air
- Good water - clean and safe
- Seals - eating and infection of our fish
- "The Dumping" into our lakes and oceans, by ships, boats, yachts, etc. |
|
|
| - air, water and soil pollution
- bad forestry practices
- destruction of private and crown land by "public"
- habitat loss for rare species
- wetland loss
- coastal protecton
- non-enforcement of environmental laws |
|
|
| Natural habitat destruction by overuse by farming, forestry, housing "development", and "recreational" activities using ATVs and snowmobiles. |
|
|
| Maintaining a healthy and sustainable environment for present and future generations:
1. education starting from an early age that promotes thinking about where the products that we use daily come from and what happens to the waste.
2. having good jobs that provide a good income.
3. being able to use the land (not abuse) as a way of supporting items 1 and 2. |
|
|
| I believe the issues of water pollution, air pollution and forestry mismanagement are the most crucial issues needing to be addressed. A continued commitment to recycling programs is essential (Not to further worsen the situation).
Awareness and practice of safe, non-toxic contaminants such as pesticides for weed and forestry management needs to be enforced as policy!
Aerial spraying no only poisons trees, but lakes and water supplies and the air! Stop poisoning our beautifl province and all of its residents! |
|
|
| The failure of the NS government to appreciate the extent of the problems that we face, or to demonstrate leadership and commitment ni correcting those problems. |
|
|
| 1. Habitat destruction/loss (aquatic and terrestrial)
2. Species declines
3. Draggers along the ocean fllor
4. Deforestation (clearcutting, erosion, increased absorption of heat)
5. Urban sprawl/accelerated development
6. Transportation/infrastructure (focused on single occupant and reliant on fossil fuels)
7. Air quality
8. Seismic exploration |
|
|
| - Sustainable development and green communities.
- Sustainable transportation.
- Water and air quality
- Impacts of climate change (and thus how to reduce our GHG emissions)
- It all comes down to reducing consumption, being responsible, and haveing a holistic view. |
|
|
| - Clear-cutting of our forests
- pollution of waterways
- air quality
- Sydney tar ponds
- Halifax Harbour
- dumping of waste and oil by large ships off our coast
- food safety - using genetically modified foods and not requiring them to be labeled.
- concern about foods for childeren containing aspartame without sufficient testing. |
|
|
| clean water; eg. uncoordinated, uncontrolled rural housing development.
tar ponds and province-wide inadequate or non-existent sewage treatment.
Relentless loss and/or degradation of wilderness habitat and species. |
|
|
| A healthy environment requires the interaction of a large number of factors, so a quick response would be that all environmental issues are most important, especially since we do not know how damage to one factor may affect others in the future. If specific answers are necessary, the most important issues include water quality, air quality (including factors affecting climate change), and the protection of public land for sustainable uses now and forever. Without public lands, the diversity and sustainability of our plant and animal species cannot be guaranteed. |
|
|
| Damage to streams / waterways / wetlands by ATV’s. Impact to flora and fauna.
Fuel spills from domestic heating systems due to inadequate upgrading / inspection/ regulation.
Inadequate treatment or slow progress towards treatment of municipal sewage sludge for communities in Nova Scotia.
Lack of promotion by the province with regard to energy consumption / energy efficiency. The province needs to provide funding for upgrading of insulation, heating, and lighting.
Increasing electrical demand which NSPI will have difficulty in supplying. The province needs to actively promote alternative sources, possible tax incentives for companies who consume or generate alternative power.
|
|
|
| Loss of critical habitat for species at risk.
Lack of watershed strategies to protect watersheds from development pressures that impact on them through siltation, depletion of groundwater, infilling of critical streams and brooks, and depriving senstive areas of former water resources through redirection and/or infilling of waterways and streams.
Public access to former natural areas that are being bought and developed by foreign and local investors who subsequently gate or post signs in these communities to prevent public access. |
|
|
| I will focus on the coastal and marine environments, because this is where my main activities, interests and expertise lie:
- Oil & gas exploration
- Aquaculture development
- invasive species (not mentioned at all in the 'Green Plan') |
|
|
| air quality is huge.
habitat destruction, especially related to forestry (clearcutting).
in the Halifax area, sprawl. |
|
|
| Clean water; eg.uncoordinated, uncontrolled rural housing developments all with septic systems.
Sydney tar ponds
Absent or inadequate Sewage treatment for all NS cities and towns
Weak enforcment of existing environmental laws - powerful, big companies getting away with inexcusable environmental practices
Relentless loss of green spaces and wilderness habitat |
|
|
| Industrial exploitation of our natural resources particularly through clear cutting of the forests, dragger fishing, mining.
linking the what the built environment is doing to impact climate change and resource depletion |
|
|
| 1. Loss, conversion, degradation and fragmentation of wildlife habitat, leading to isoloted populations that are not viable and to consequent extirpation and extinction of species and losses to biodiversity. This is our life support system, and these species have their own inherent worth.
2. Invasive and introduced species and the rsultant threat to native species and ecosystems.
3. Forest conversion, degradation, homogenization, simplification, and shifts to younger age classes through excessive and inappropriate logging practices and other land uses.
4. Water pollution from land based activities, and over-drawing of water from watercourses and ground sources for industrial, agricultural and domestic purposes.
5. Sea-level rise and risks to coastal ecosystems.
6. Threats to biodiversity and natural ecosystems from climate change.
7. Increasing road and trail density throughout the entire province.
8. General loss of natural land cover to below threshold levels for healthy ecosystem functions.
9. Regional-scale air-borne pollution deposition (from the Eastern seaboard and central US and Canada). |
|
|
| Destructive forestry practices
Air pollution (GHG, acid, auto, sulphur)
Destructive fishing practices
Insufficient protection of natural theme regions and habitat
|
|
|
| This is difficult to say, as it would depend to a great deal on location. Air quality would be a greater concern to people in urban areas or near large sources of air pollution. Chemical contamination would be a high priority for anyone near a toxic site. Water contamination would be more or a rural issue. Loss of wild places and their protection from ATVs, urban sprawl, clearcutting would also tend to be both widespread, but could be quite localised. Climate change would affect everyone. |
|
|
| 1) Wilderness preservation - Protect more crown land and do it now, before what little is left is even further degraded. I suggest the following places for protection as Wilderness Areas: Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River. I suggest the following places for protection as Nature Reserves: Herring Cove Barrens and Backlands, Ship Harbour Long Lake, Humes River Cape Breton, Kelly Mountain Cape Breton, Liscombe Game Sanctuary. I nominate St. Mary's River, Nictaux River and Tusket River to be added to the Canadian Heritage River Programme.
2) Forest Practices should be better controlled. The current Wildlife and Watercourse Regulations are inadequate and do not go far enough to protect our forests for wildlife. Tighter regulations should be put in place that require wider riparian zones to be left uncut along all waterways, and more trees left in much larger areas around places that show wildlife habitat. We should be retoring our Acadian forest to have more old growth features in future, starting by changing forestry practices now.
3) Air pollution from power generation - Stop using coal and/or improve scrubbers in generating stations, and use renewable enrgy sources such as solar and wind power.
4) Protect more ocean environments - create more Marine Protected Areas.
5) Improve septic systems in rural locales - many older homes have no septic systems.
6) Control Off-Highway Vehicle use - ban them from Wilderness Areas; ban them from wetlands, dunes, streams, lakeshores and other ecologically sensitive areas; require licensing of OHV drivers; require registration of all OHV's; restrict their use to only designated trails and require written permission from landowners.
7) Improve water quality around pulp mills - tighten up and enforce regulations regarding effluent. |
|
|
| One of the most important environmental issues facing Nova Scotians includes the degradation of our natural habitats and their biodiversity. This includes both aquatic (wetlands, rivers, streams, estuaries and oceans) and terrestrial habitats (forests, barrens, bogs).
Our natural habitats are being degraded in various ways. Some examples include the flow of sewage into watershed streams and estuaries and eventually the ocean, indiscriminant logging of areas that may be rich in biodiversity, or unique for certain organisms it supports, the degradation of natural areas by ATV use (whether it be the destruction of an amphibian breeding pool along a forest trail, or the destruction of nesting areas on beaches along the coast). |
|
|
| Number 1 is the permanent loss of the valuable resources were already possess. For example, we have a few relatively unspoiled wilderness areas left, but these are facing tremendous pressure for development of various kinds. Unfortunately, once exploited, the cost in time (decades) and money to restore these to their former state is prohibitive. Yet there are plenty of analyses that indicate these areas give us, as a Province and a People, more of a return in their unexploited state (i.e., through wildlife, water conservation/quality, tourism, and other values) than they would through development; that is, we benefit more from living off the interest of these areas than we would by cashing in on their capital.
Second, in those areas of the province where lands are exploited more directly (farming, mining, logging, etc.), we need to enact provisions to insure that our lands and water maintain or even improve in their 'health.' We need to insure that farming does not pollute our streams and rivers with silt and chemicals, that logging does not reduce the quality of our forests over time (trading saw logs for wood chips, for example), and that mines have the smallest ecological footprint and when played out, see their footprints erased by reclamation and restoration. Thus we need tougher regulations that are enforced, so that the polluter, and not the public, pays for environmental damage. |
|
|
| Better protection of more wilderness areas.
1/ Acquiring and designating more PWAs
2/ Implementing and enforcing stronger legislation to protect wilderness areas and habitat for species at risk (land, and fresh and salt water habitats). |
|
|
| Again the writer is showing his expertise,
(masters in enviornmental studies?)and writing directly to the 2-3% who seem to think they have a clear mandate to speak for all! Again I quote your statement
"managing the enviornment is a shared responsibility involving all citizens of Nova Scotia". It should be the mandate of Enviornment Nova Scotia to educate 100% of
the citizens of Nova Scotia they want to involve in enviornment management. |
|
|
| The most important issues facing Nova Scotians include:
- inappropriate developments, particularly in coastal areas, due to the absence of adequate regulatory controls and environmental assessment requirements.
- inadequate system of nature reserves that protect the natural and cultural values of Nova Scotia
- Poor air quality due to pollution
- global warming
- contaminated sites such as the tar ponds
- lack of protection for threatened species
- the impact of off-road vehicles
- the impact of inappropriate and unsustainable logging practices
- Acid rain
- lack of protection for our waterways and groundwater systems against non-point source pollution |
|
|
| nOVA Scotia need to have more identifed and protected wilderness spaces. It is up to the government to make tis happen as soon as possible. The clear cutting of crown land must stop and the companies harvesting the forests must be made to follow practices that promote substainablity and protect the waterways and habitats of the areas. |
|
|
| -destruction of environment caused by clearcutting rather than using sustainable forestry practices
-loss of plant, animal, bird habitat due to OHV use, forestry practices
-growing list of endangered species
- need more designated wilderness areas, that means no motorized access
-air pollution, climate change, loss of ozone layer due to burning of fossil fuels |
|
|
| 1. Water cleanliness
2. Wilderness protection
3. Clear cutting and loss of habitat
4. OHV management |
|
|
| Certainly one of the most important environmental issues is Nova Scotia's shrinking natural wilderness areas to the unsustainable use of our forested lands. Nearly three-quarters of our natural landscapes remain unprotected and we have only one-half of one percent less of old growth forest. It is very short sighted of the Province not to be pro-active in increasing the area of protected wilderness and reducing the level of clear cutting of the forests. Nova Scotia needs to protect wetlands and wildlife habitat by specific legislation directed to these problems.
Another major issue is pollution. Reducing local source emissions should be a priority but it is not. Only a few of Nova Scotia's polluters have reduced emissions by much. Nova Scotia Power is a major contributor of pollution. The Province apparently lacks the political will to take the necessary steps to address the problem of pollution and climate change. |
|
|
| 1. Protection of Public (Crown) Lands still available
2. Off Road Vehicle usage in the environmentally sensitive areas
3. Off Shore Development and Seismic Testing - Materials being flushed into the Ocean from Marine Vessels and Platforms
4. Emissions from Power Generating Stations |
|
|
| - Burning coal to generate electricity and having no incentives in place to encourage energy conservation and efficiency is our province's greatest problem, from my perspective. Second is dumping sewage into the ocean, and the volume of sewage created by water-wasting infrastructure in the average home. Others include housing developments with little environmental planning and overfishing.
|
|
|
| general habitat degradation - loss of farmland, natural habitat for wildlife, forests, fish stocks, increasing pollution of land, sea and air.... |
|
|
| I think the important environmental issues facing Nova Scotians are no different from those facing others from around the country or around the world. Everyone has land-use responsibilities, waste disposal responsibilities, air quality responsibilities, etc. However I think Nova Scotians have to strongly consider the responsibility we have to keep ocean waters clean. We are a province almost entirely surrounded by water. Many Nova Scotians depend on the ocean for their livelihood, and in the past many have abused the water by overfishing. Still now, trolling the ocean floor might be having a negative impact. In addition, we need to continuously study local marine life to determine how our relationship with the ocean affects it. (I also think Nova Scotia's recycling programs aren't nearly as efficient as they could be. Nova Scotians should look at the steps taken in other countries to recycle, as well as the harsh penalties facing those who disregard the environmental laws in those places.) |
|
|
| _ make clear cutting illegal. Companies should replenish twice what they harvest
Develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection. Do it now. Time is running out for wilderness.
Get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Do it now and don’t shrink the areas down.
Select and designate more new Nature Reserves
- Old growth forests must be protected
|
|
|
| Water degradation, deforestation, uncontrolled development of private land and lack of adequate protection of our crown land. |
|
|
| The aim of our organization is to promote and advance the development of public transportation and transportation policy that takes into account the environment, energy conservation, accessibility, safety, and social equity. Nova Scotia is facing many important environmental issues. One of the critical issues it faces is climate change and subsequent effects – such as the increased incidence of extreme weather events. It is essential that Nova Scotia develops a responsible transportation policy, one that includes financial and other support for public transportation around the province.
The continued provincial promotion of highways, cars and trucks to the exclusion of more environmentally efficient rail and public passenger transport in general (transit, interurban buses, and trains) is a problem. This imbalance is under the control of the province and can be addressed directly. In the longer term, our dependence on high consumption of fossil fuel energy needs attention. For example, there has been a lack of attention to the flexibility and benefits of electrified rail in light of looming fossil fuel shortages and environmental costs of fossil fuel use.
While we agree that other issues are important to Nova Scotians, such as the protection of natural areas and wildlife, we have chosen to respond only to the questions that are immediately relevant to our area of expertise. |
|
|
| . water resources management and protection
|
|
|
| Protected wilderness areas.
ATV usage.
Aquaculture.
Acid rain and endangered salmon stocks.
River restoration and stablization programs
Forestry practices.
Acid Rain |
|
|
| Protection of water resources, both ground and surface, and the protection of coastal marine and estuarine habitats. |
|
|
| I believe the most important environmental issue facing Nova Scotians today is air quality. Air pollution contributes to water and land pollution (and impacts our tourism and agri/aquaculture, and fishing industries) and directly affects our health and quality of life. Many health problems that are particularly rampant in Eastern Canada are directly correlated to Air pollution. As well, our quality of life is (or at least perceived to be) severely affected by air quality alerts that ask us to limit our time spent outdoors in the summertime. This also is very detrimental to our tourism industry. |
|
|
| Excess clearcutting of forests; excess greenhouse gas emissions; over-reliance on coal as an energy source; excess automobile usage; need to designate more protected areas; an ecological footprint that is too high; measures of progress that rely on the economic growth statistics and fail to account for environmental benefits and costs. |
|
|
| General lack of knowledge (ignorance) in individuals to realise that we are destroying the systems we rely on for healthy living.
Protection and sustainable use of wilderness areas, for example the Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James
River areas.
Controlling development and urban sprawl especially in the HRM. Regulation of personal transportation and promotion of public and alternative transportation. |
|
|
| Any future legislation or 'malicious environmental agendas' that would "sterilize" crown lands to effectively eliminate individuals or certain recreational groups from using and enjoying the recreational benefits of the land and traditional "environmentally sound" resource extraction (Mineral exploration - Geo-tourism opportunities). |
|
|
| 1. Air quality -getting worse
2. Lack of protected wildnerness areas
3. Extent of clearcut has implications for climate, air quality, biodiversity
4. Water quality-getting worse as a result of unregulated development
5. Climate change. Hurricane Juan was no fluke.
6. Loss of biodiversity eg, moose, wildflowers (eg. ladyslipper, dragon's mouth orchid)
|
|
|
| (1) Negative impacts of concentrated urban development e.g., the HRM. |
|
|
| health consequences
air, water, soil quality
ecotourism and wilderness protection |
|
|
| keep it clean,but do not take our rights from us. |
|
|
| The protection of all public lands from further use of any kind. There is so little public land in NS and government has done a very poor job in protecting it to date. |
|
|
| 1/ Enforcement of the Environmental Protection Laws.
2/ Clean Air.
3/ Clean Water.
4/ More walking and biking paths for commuting, especially in the bigger cities. - this would improve air quality, noise pollution levels, and it would improve the users' general health. |
|
|
| - deforestation and the lack of a commitment to allow deforested areas to develop over time into old growth forests
- use of senseless motorised vehicles (ORVs and snowmobiles) in wilderness areas
- alteration of watersheds by clearcut logging or damming
- water pollution from agriculture and pesticides, especially in the Annapolis and Cornwallis Valleys
- overfishing, especially with regard to bottom-trawling
|
|
|
| 1. AIR POLLUTION FROM ENERGY PRODUCTION AND USE - Poor air quality has adverse impacts on teh quality of air, water and soil. Air pollution also contributes to climated change. NOVA SCOTIA POWER is the biggest contributor, producing 89.98% of the air pollution in the province (Pollution Probe, 2003). Yes, much air pollution in NS comes from the Northeast states and Central Canada, but NS Power has the top four producers of air pollution. If NS can't get off the use of coal, we will have a very weak argument for attacking transboundary air pollution. We must practice what we preach by having a general phase-out of coal use, using scrubbers where possible, and adopting RENEWABLE ENERGIES. Any effective plan must have exact targets.
2. Sydney Tar Ponds - This environmental disgrace must be cleaned.
3. Water Quality - sewage, pesticide runoff.
4. Oceans - fisheries, oil and gas (reduce), coastal policy (we still don't have one).
5. Forestry - clear cutting.
6. Protected Areas - Continue with the great work and make some areas that totally exclude human activity (ie. hunting, four-wheeling).
7. Pesticide use |
|
|
|
The use of our resources, in a way that conserves them for future generations.
Having a long range vision about the environment, and where Nova Scotia is headed.
Clearcutting, quarries, and other short term uses of resources that have long term effects, need to be rethought, and more planning needs to go into them. As well, the means of enforcing regulations.
The use of ATV's in wilderness areas, and the use of wilderness by the public, needs thought as well. |
|
|
| 1)Acid Rain
2)Wetlands, put back under watercource definition NSDOE&L
3)bUFFERS Mandortory legistation of at least 100 metrs.
4) Remove "By Right" development, replace with Development Agreement so as to allow for public input.
5)Take the forest away from Natural Resources Depatment and give it to NSDOE&L as NR is in a "Conflict of Intrest Postion" How can you protect the forest when you in charge of cutting it down and digging it up, replace with NSDOE&L.
6)Support and fund the Adopt-A-Stream Program.
7) Start liming our rivers like they do in Sweden and Norway, whick spend over 20 million US a year liming theirs.
8) Support NSSA in liming East River Sheet Harbour NOW!!
9)Coplete the PRotected Areas Program now.
10) Do away with the IRM Process as its not a good process and replace it with the Martain Willison Program where all property lines are removed and whats really needs saving e.g old growth, wetlands, crown lands, islands, rivers etc. and with both governemnt and public process it becomes OUR system.
11) Take the restriction of only 10 hectartes quarries need an full EIA and roads(E.G TWINNINGS) by the province and replace with all quarries of any size and ALL roads must undergo a full EIA.
12)Protect at least two of each land form in th province from development and destrction.
13)Save to the NSDOE&L the last 60 acres at 2nd Lake Provincal Park.
14)Increase the Heritage Rivers from 2 to many.
15)Start measuring and protecting by MUncipal zoneing all FLOODPLAINS!! |
|
|
| Legislation that would sterilize the countryside preventing economic growth that
benefits all persons in the province.
Special interst groups don't think about the impact they have on the citizens of the province.
Stop illegal dumping !!! I spend a lot of time in the woods and there's too much garbage - have citizens patrols and make it easier for people to be punished!!!!!
|
|
|
| - loss of marine habitat
- loss of forest habitat
- urban sprawl
- risks associated with increasingly industrial agricultural practices
- climate change |
|
|
| Property access to potential ground that may or may not have mining potential |
|
|
| Nova Scotians must continue to have access to wilderness areas. The recent trend is to put in place increased resterictions. The basic concept of an integrated approach is good, but access to Crown Lands by the public for non-disturbance activities should not be restricted.
Other problems include:
- clear cutting
- inadequate reforestation programs
- pollution - acid rain - global warming
- declining fish stocks
"A successful approach to development must balance both it costs and benefits." |
|
|
| Access to undeveloped areas is improtant to our members. |
|
|
| There are many issues that I think are of importance.One issue that concerns me is the idea that crown lands/public lands have been given over through governmental contracts,to businesses for developement.I am aware that this happen a few good years ago but I think that with all of the new thinking on the topic of land conservation for sustaining eco-systems,we should look at what can be done about putting this land back into the hands of the public.Crown lands were lands owned by the soveriegn for the purpose of the common use of the citizens.How the Government of Nova Scotia got away with making deals with business for the use of this land indifinately must be one of the greatest injustices of our history.I do not remember at any time in my life where the citizens of Nova Scotia ceceded their rights to crown land.Now we are in an increasing situation where business is clearcutting forests,and inhibiting the conservation of more wilderness areas. I think all crown land should in fact be designated as wilderness area.If a business wants to use any of this land to develope or use for it's resources,than the government should make them come up with some good reason for allowing that type of activity on crown land.In other words ,it is protected and is not to be used for the sake of making big bucks fall into the pockets of one or two guys.
Another issue is Nova Scotia power.With all of the new building in just the Dartmouth area over the last few years ,not to mention all the other areas, it has put a strain on N.S.power.It is only a matter of time before some disaster befalls us.On the N.S.Power web site ,they encourage people to send extra money to buy wind generated power to add to the grids.Well,why doesn't the government get behind this idea.I think wind generated power is a good way to go .While the windmills themselves are expense the number of homes it can supply is great.We are still a small province in size and this could be a good alternative to coal use.How great it would be to have cleaner air again. |
|
|
| Develop an action plan to designate more large blocks of public land for protection.
DO IT NOW. Time is running out for the wilderness |
|
|
| Government needs to fight polution on two fronts. It must do something about ongoing problems. Ie. Smoke stacks, car exhausts, water polluters etc. At the same time work must begin on things like the Halifax harbour and tar ponds, to name just two. The environment must be priortized as a major focus of government. Fifty years ago the law enforcement community and the criminal justice system might be forgiven for focusing on traditional crime and lawbreakers. However today, we see exactly the same approaches being taken, the same focus and the same results. Some of the real major crimes are being committed today are by corporations polluting the environment and by individuals going about their day to day lives as the drive to work in mechanically unfit automobiles or by disposing of toxic household waste. At the same time we listen to the new commander of the RCMP in Nova Scotia speak of his priorities. Speeding on highway 101. His announcement is no surprise. The dog's tail gets its message from the dog's head. If the environment becomes a priority of government then it will become a priority of government bureauracy. |
|
|
| ACID RAIN/POLLUTION
We need GREEN power, we need incentives for citizens who are willing to use less electricity. We need a better cleaner public transportation system that serves all communities, including access to safe bike lanes also in all areas. We need to make those who drive SUV's and other high gas consumptive vehicles pay for the pollution they produce.
PROTECTED AREAS
a total lack of protection will cause Nova Scotian's and the species we share this province with to pay a high ecological price in the future. Our watersheds should NOT be up for any type of industrial tender. This includes industrial forestry and mining.
ENDANGERED SPECIES
Species like the Piping Plover need real protection from ATV's and other users of nesting beach areas. The mainland moose should be given the highest priority in the Department of Natural Resources. A road/trail building moratorium should go into affect in areas where the mainland Moose still exists.
ORV/ATV USE
All recreational use of ORV'S/ATV's should be banned in wilderness areas/intact forests in Nova Scotia. They are wrecking havoc in the bogs,fens,lakes shores,stream beds and woods of Nova Scotia. This rapidly growing 'sport' should be reigned in asap.
HERBICIDE/PESTICIDE USE
All herbicide/pesticide chemical use in the forests of Nova Scotia should end. This would also include a total ban on the commercial application of these chemicals on lawns/gardens and a ban on the use of them on Christmas tree growing operations. Organic growing of crops should be given the highest priority also.
CLEAR CUTTING
Implement a forest code that will phase in a total ban on clear cutting over a period of time. Commerical Forests in Nova Scotia should be managed in a way that the forest canopy is always in existence with native mixed tree species. Natural Acadian forests should not be allowed to be managed to become single species plantations.
|
|
|
| Suburban sprawl is gobbling up too much land. This development pattern is expensive to maintain for a province in such debt and economic hardship
Resource industries, while necessary to the province's economic well-being, are exploiting our natural areas. They should develop slower, maintianing the forests, fisheries, etc, for future generations.
Chemicals from lawn biocides and farm waste needs to be controlled better.
Illegal dumping sites |
|
|
| Unrestrained growth. NS is still a rural province, and there must be limits placed on growth. There must be concious planning at the city level. More land must be protected in provincial parks, keep NS green |
|
|
| Loss of coastal habitats due to increasing coastal development and unsustainable land-use practices.
|
|
|
| Pollution and health |
|
|
| Too much deforestation.
Too many ATVs (these should be banned).
Lack of public education regarding our natural biota. |
|
|
| Transportation and wilderness conservation. The evidence that transportation is an important issue is shown through the incredibly low level of physical activity of Nova Scotians, the high levels of respiratory disease and asthma, particularly in urban areas. The provincial government must expand its transportation mandate to include sustainable and alternative transportation. Public transit needs to be supported at the provincial level. Multi-use lanes need to be incorporated into road widening. Encourage people to cycle, walk and take the bus. Stop putting so much money into road building. Given that we have public health care and the health care system us gradually crumbling under the weight of an overweight and inactive population. Help make it easier for people to walk and cycle places. Encourage car pooling and transit to reduce air pollution.
While the province has come a long way towards protecting wilderness areas, there is still much to be done. Protect areas like Ship Harbour -Long Lake wilderness area, protect Eigg Mountain and Gully Lake, protect Humes River. Legislate sustainable forestry practices. Think long term and where Nova Scotia's economic future lies. |
|
|
| Off-highway vehicle damage to watercourses, wetlands, protected areas and watersheds for municipal water supplies. This ties directly to urban expansion and unregulated access to green spaces. |
|
|
| Uncontrolled Development (urban sprawl)
Unsustainable Logging and Mineral exploitation,
Pollution from industry and farming
Lack of a solid protected areas system appropriate to preserve natural ecosystems and their functions. |
|
|
| There are several important environmental issues facing Nova Scotia.
First - air quality. Not only are we inheriting air pollution from Ontario - we are creating our own through detrimental burning practices of Nova Scotia power and the use of unregulated wood burning appliances.
Second - our ocean is in trouble because of pollution, use of draggers and overfishing.
Third - clearcutting. These practices are destroying our forests.
Fourth - overdevelopment. Wildlife areas are disappearing. |
|
|
| The lack of a coastal policy to identify and protect sensitive coastal habitats is a huge issue for Nova Scotia. This is causing a number of problems including coastal sprawl, lack of public access and habitat loss and fragmentation.
Nova Scotia's lack of commitment to implementing Kyoto protocol agreements and refusal to offer any programs to home owners seeking to reduce greenhouse gas emisions and conserve energy is also a problem
We also need planned and smart development in our urban and coastal areas
We also need more efforts to protect our water supply and encourage water conservation
|
|
|
| * Food security - preserving local organic food production system.
* Urban sprawl - associated consumption of natural and agricultural land and other environmental resources.
* Personal commuter transportation - landuse patterns in growing urban areas that perpetuate dependence on the private motor vehicle for access and mobility - has grave negative consequences in terms of health impacts of air pollution (especially respiratory illnesses), consumption of natural habitat, maintenance of road infrastructure. |
|
|
| The cutting down of our forests.
the damaging and destroying of our other wilderness areas through lack of and/or poor control of development, ATV's, etc.
|
|
|
| Lack of parkland |
|
|
| WATER POLLUTION from many activities, sewage
storm runoff from urban areas , highways and farms. WATER depletion/ overuse in urban areas due to "CHEAP WATER" we sell water too cheap we need to have water rates that reflect the true cost to deliver that water and to treat it when it becomes waste water.
I think provincial and federal dollars spent on water and waste water infrastructure hurt the environment more than they help. We then end up with water and sewer utilities on welfare. Utilities need to get "ALL of their revenue from rates" This gives the utility the need to set rates at an approriate level to look after the infrastructure and the money comes in even monthly payments as opposed to big lump sum payments from the feds and prov. Also water and sewer utilities may not do the required maintance / or rebuilds when they needed because they are waiting for the next big infrastructure program. |
|
|
| 1. Set aside more green spaces and network or connect them. This is urgent.
2. Reduce air pollution and dependency on vehicles by better planning development and establishing legislation to control recreational vehicles (ATVs, seadoos, snowmobiles) and small-engine machines (mowers, leaf blowers etc.).
3. Arrest the damage to our natural environment inflicted by ATVs and snowmobiles. |
|
|
| Decline of the fin fishery.
Lack of diversity, both age and species, of our forests.
High levels of pollutants in our air.
|
|
|
| We live in Canadas ocean playground. Yet we continue to see rain runoff from denuded forests, acid rain from NSPower plants damage our fragile environment. We continue to brutalise the forests and minimize protected areas. Healthy communities depend on a healthy eco system. We must develop larger and cohesive natural areas that can rejuvinate fish stocks,increase native plant and species abilities to survive beyond just mere pockets of threatened existance |
|
|
| Endangered species management and protection as well as air, water and soil pollution. |
|
|
| Loss of biodiversity. We need to complete a comprehensive system of protected areas in Nova Scotia that represents a full spectrum of natural landscapes, ecological hotspots, and sites containing rare species. Otherwise, species will continue to become extirpated from this province, as has happened in the past with many species, such as the woodland caribou, for instance. Strong, proactive leadership from government is required, starting with Crown lands, but also encompassing private lands as well. |
|
|
| Climate change
|
|
|
| POLLUTION - air and water. Sites such as the halifax harbour and sydney tar ponds are an absolute disgrace, and have a lot of negative health impacts for people and wildlife.
RESOURCE EXTRACTION - we need to invest in cleaner sources of energy - solar, and possibly wind, instead of relying so heavily on our forests and fossil fuels to provide heat and electrical needs |
|
|
| The "environmental issues" are obvious in the conflict between the need to preserve natural and undisturbed spaces against the human need for recreation and economic return.
What has happened in the past 200 years is that we have ignored the needs of the "natural" world almost exclusively and now only see this world as something which is ours to use or gain from or control.
Provincially and locally, I believe the issues of wilderness and habitat protection, unsustainable forestry practices, urban sprawl, agricultural pollution but air and water, intense recreational use, over-fishing and damaging fishing practices, environmentally damaging oil and gas operations, as priorities for Nova Scotians.
On a global agenda, the issues of climate change, imported air pollution (though a recent study identified a significant percentage of our air pollution as "home-grown") and pressure to develop our natural resources for the use of foreign countriesl, eg. oil and gas, water and lumber, as well as mined products.
|
|
|
| 1. Improve the air quality (i.e. do something to reduce emmissions from our coal fired power plants).
2. Develop a mass transit strategy now before the HRM gets too big and it's too late.
3. Protected lands. |
|
|
| Keeping the wilderness areas and others, free of motorized and exploitive intervention. We need to remember that Nova Scotia is a tourist attraction, big dollars, for its beauty. It's a crime to fly in and look at all the clear cuts. Then to have them right alongside our highways. We need buffer zones and stronger legislation about wilderness uses.
Noise and habitat pollution from off road vehicles is atrocious. Their exhaust is incredibly more damaging than that of cars.
As well, the drivers seem to have no regard for government or private wilderness areas. They're tearing them apart. AND terrorizing landowners in the process. |
|
|
|
-lack of protected wilderness areas (most land in province is opne to exploitation from mining, forestry and other industry)
-pollution i.e., Sydney Tar ponds, Halifax harbour, pesticide use
|
|
|
| Clean air, clean water and loss of wilderness and wildlife. |
|
|
| The most important enviromental issue facing Nova Scotians is the total lack of control of the use of Salt on our roadways. Enviroment Canada has stated that Salt is a dangerous substance, and yet, the Government of NS has the BALLS to talk about a "Green Plan" at the same time that the shoulders of the Nova Scotia highways turn brown with dead evergreen vegetation due to the "GROSS" use of salt during winter months. Water well are destroyed, trees are killed,waterways are polluted and moch more so please have a good long look at my concern |
|
|
| -while Nova Scotia does have considerable tracts of protected lands, it is important that these lands are actively managed and that there is work done to establish a system of protected areas
-how to make unsustainable industries that our province relies on environmentally sustainable or find alternatives (eg. make the fishery more sustainable, decrease reliance on oil and gas industry for economic health of the province)
-cleaning up our environment for our own health as well as the health of the environment |
|
|
| The attitude prevails that the earth and its resources are for the taking-somehow humans believe they are entitled to use, abuse and or ignore problems related to our very existence. That is the biggest issue. On a more practical level, the biggest issues facing Nova Scotians is a long range view of how to protect that which we do have and are losing, and how to undo some of the harm we are causing with Off Road Vehicles raging out of control, forests being clear cut, mining that leaves huge polluting gouges in our soil and our need to come up with means of legitimate employment that protects our resources rather them rampantly wasting them. |
|
|
| As they are in a relatively densely populated province, our wild places are under great pressure from developers and others. Unless we protect wild places now, they will be lost, and with them we will lose our opportunites for outdoor recreation, associated valuable eco-tourism, our air and water quality and wildlife habitat. Wild places must be interconnected so that corridors can continue to exist for natural animal movements. |
|
|
| Clean air
Clean water
Too much development
Pesticide spraying on farms
Wildlife is disappearing (eg, moose) |
|
|
| food quality, access to local, afforadable organic food. There are too many superstores and sobeys. I would like to see a local, afforadable health food store. |
|
|
| - reducing the use of fossil fuels
- finding a way to manage farming, forestry and fishing sustainably
- protecting sensitive areas of the environment |
|
|
| 1. Unlimited ATV use on crown land. It's not sustainable. There are 40,000 ATV's in use in Nova Scotia and only 1200 of these in clubs or associations. Thay are accessing deep wilderness without regard to the damage they are doing... the noise, the weight of the machines, the sheer number of machins. Historically, these areas were only accessable by wilderness savy people on foot or paddling canoes. These ATV onwers are not uncaring, just naive and ignorant posing a danger to themselves and to the environment and large animals present there. There are no police available to enforce use or safety of the trails we have already created.
2. 100 year leases of huge tracts of crown land to the pulp and paper industry. They now have equipment to mow down hundreds of acres of trees per day, many ofd those trees are less than 6 inches trunk diameter. They may be replanting, but cannot duplicate the natural environment and are only replanting tree they judge to be harvestable lumber trees and are not reproducing the biodiversity of a natrual forest thus threatening the existence of the birds, plants and animals who must live there.
3. Unlimited destruction of private wild lands at the hands of developers and out-of-province tree harvestors for the same reasons as above except most of those lands never get replanted.
4. Lack of public access to shore lines and islands off our coast as these properties are bought up and developed or fenced off, killing traditional trail heads and swimming beaches. |
|
|
|
environmental effects of transportation
decreasing biodiversity
urban encroachment on natural spaces
air pollution
|
|
|
| Attempts to place restrictions on individuals, groups, or companies that wish to develop natuaral resources in environmentally responsible ways. |
|
|
| | |
| 2. | Towards a Sustainable Environment identifies a number of commitments that support sustainable communities (for details see pages 9-11). We are interested in your thoughts on the best ways to implement these commitments. The headings below will help you organize your comments. You can respond to as many, or as few of these headings as you choose. If you need more space, please use a plain sheet of paper.
Please read our commitments to protected areas (p. 9, all bullets; p. 19, bullets 8 - 10; p. 20, bullet 1). Please provide your comments on these commitments and any suggestions you may have about their implementation. |
|
|
| - Page 9: Agree with all bullets.
- Page 19, Bullets 8-10: Generally agree, but would add Indian Fields Provincial Park Reserve and a number of others of equal or greater value for protection in SW Nova Scotia. Spinney's Heath is badly damaged from ATV use, and is still being ruined. Greater protection is needed for the Tobeatic Wilderness Area.
- Page 20, Bullet 1: Agree, but must do more to add to protecting the biological integrity of those already designated, especially the Tobeatic Wilderness Area, and in particular the following:
- Retire leases at the end of terms.
- Absorb by any means all inholdings.
- Prohibit hunting and trapping.
- Add adjacent significant lands (see ** ** ** **).
- Prohibit use of OHV's.
- Form and provide resources for a dedicated enforcement staff from within Protected Areas (not DNR. |
|
|
| I would encourage more financial support for the Forest Safety Society of NS to implement Best Management Practices training to landownders, forest contractors, woodworkers, and truckers.
More wisely used land will help acheive environmental and economic benefits. |
|
|
| Nova Scotia's failure to follow through on its commitments is well illustrated by the painfully slow progress on protected areas.
(a) The South West Nova Biosphere Reserve as a good example to start with [it is misnamed in the document]. It was a "no-brainer" for Nova Scotia to support this, but instead the local community had to take it to UNESCO without official provincial support. Now the commitment is to "endorse" it. I understand that this has already been done, but endorsement is not really the issue. Active support is needed. What could possibly be more appropriate than a community-led initiative to find ways to develop conditions that will lead to environmental sustainability, social health, and a robust economy? The SW Nova BR is the largest biosphere reserve in Canada! The government should be leaping up and down with praise for the work of the local people - but instead there has been reluctance even to "endorse" it.
(b) Wilderness Areas and Nature Reserves. It's hard to keep track of all the agreements that Nova Scotia has signed to say that an adequate protected areas system will be put in place (Statement of Commitment to Complete Canada's Network of Protected Areas; Canadian Biodiversity Strategy; National Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk, and so on). Nevertheless, despite clear scientific evidence that we are nowhere near having an adequate system of protected areas in this province, very little progress is being made. The 2 new wilderness areas should not be proposals - they should have been enacted already. The proposed nature reserves are long overdue (indeed the lack of action has been simply disgraceful), and so on. Nova Scotia did not need this Green Plan to take action on any of the protected area proposals in the plan. Governments in Nova Scotia have already FORMALLY COMMITTED to do these things through national and international agreements.
(c) Heritage Rivers. This is a nice program, though with very few teeth. Given the unfortunate state of Nova Scotia's rivers due to acid rain and poor logging practices in the past, it is surely only right to try to acknowledge the value of rivers. At the very least, the St. Mary's River and the La Have River should be designated as soon as possible. Again, I don't see the need for this to be in the Green Plan - community consultations should have begun years ago.
(d) With respect to protected areas, the NS government should be actively promoting the implementation of both provincial and federal programs within the territorial sea (i.e. out to 12 miles offshore). While jurisdiction is shared with the federal government in this region, this is not reason to leave the responsibility for conserving marine heritage solely to the federal government. For example, the Special Places Protection Act applies to the ocean environment as well as to land. Not only can Nova Scotia take action directly, it can also be an active advocate with the federal government with respect to programs like marine protected areas (DFO) and National Marine Conservation Areas (Parks Canada). The absence of any mention of the ocean in the Green Plan shows that it is not a visionary document, it is simply a re-statement of existing commitments. |
|
|
| - provide tax incentives for landowners to encourage private land conservation.
- provide financial grants for the ** ** to acquire more private land for conservation - especially the ** who are the only provincial groups of this kind and should be better supported by our provincial government.
- Stakeholer input has already been well integrated into managemetn planning for existing Protected Areas on Crown land. This should continue and more resources should be made available to this effor in order to accelerate the process. Stakeholder input for the rest of publicly-owned Crown land management planning is poor to non-existent. Public and NGO seats should be created on such bodies as the ** ** ** ** ** under DNR and a new consultation body with similar representation from the public and NGO community should be created at DEL to advise the Minister on how to move forward with Nova Scotia's Protected Areas program.
- Yes, endors and support in every way possible the designation of the South West Biosphere Reserve. This is an excellent international program and Nova Scotia should be participating. This is long overdue.
- As previously stated, government should expand the IRM Management decision making body to include greater respresentation than just DNR bureaucrats. Create at least two seats from the public (qualified conservation scientists, academics, etc.), two seats from the NGO community (** ** **) and a sear for the tourism industry (**) as well as at least on seat for each government department that has a legitimate program interest in crown land management (Tourism, Environment, inland fisheries, etc.)
- Yes, designate the five new Nature Reserves named, select at least 20 more from the long list of reserve areas and update the long-delayed Nature Reserves legislation.
- Nova Scotia should nominate the St. Mary's River for inclusion in the Canadian Heritage River Program.
- VERY IMPORTANT - Yes, Nova Scotia MUST continue to work towards a comprehensive system of pretected areas in order to preserve our native biodiversity and to meet our national and international committments in this regard. As such, the governmetn must create an action plan that includes specific goals and target and lays our a selection and public consultation process in order to reach those goals. And this will require the designation of MORE CROWN LAND. Relying on private sector land donations and purchases alon will not work. This approach takes too long and is too costly. Publicly owned Crown land can go a lot further towards meeting our commitments and do so much more quickly. Government should direct DEL staff to do a protected areas system gap analysis and then a comprehensive review of available Crown Lands that are of significant natural value and would fill in gaps in the system. These areas should then be put forward in a new list of target areas for protection. This is long overdue and should be done immediately. We must act quickly to save the best of what's left now, before it is gone forever. We owe this to ourselves and to future generations.
- Yes, designate Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain-James Rivers ASAP. And DO NOT shrink the boundaries! If anything these areas should be expanded through land acquisitions or otherwise to make them larger in order to better meet their core function as biodiversity reserves. In the context of a heavily fragmented landscape, the preservation of large, intact wilderness econsystems is critically important to conserving our native biodiversity. |
|
|
| We need more protected areas. We have so little crown land to start with, and how much of that is licensed to industry to mine or clearcut? ** ** **, the Ship Harbour Long Lake Wilderness area needs to be officially designated before it is lost. The government of Nova Scotia has provided no word on this unique area's preservation. |
|
|
| The document Towards a Sustainable Environment states that the government wishes to take what it calls “an integrated approach” to the environment. If the government truly wishes to follow an integrated approach, it will recognize that the state of health of our forests is connected with just about every other issue mentioned in the document. The quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink are related to the health of our forests. A healthy tourism industry and a viable forestry sector are dependant on healthy forests.
One of ** ** major concerns is the amount of clearcutting that is taking place in this province, both on private and public lands. The current level of clearcutting is not only unsustainable from the resource perspective, it is also destroying wildlife habitat, threatening water quality, harming tourism and undermining the quality of life of our citizens.
We propose two main courses of action to deal with the current situation. First, there needs to be regulations limiting the size and number of clearcuts on private lands. The Nova Scotia Wildlife Habitat and Watercourses Protection Regulations that became law on January 14, 2002, are no more than a token gesture. There is an urgent need to put in place a process of consultation involving industry, environmental groups, scientists and others interested in the health of our forests with a view to framing an effective set of controls on harvesting methods. The government must go beyond the establishment of a voluntary “Code of Forest Practices” as mentioned in the “Green Plan” and draw up a set of mandatory controls for both private and public lands.
A second course of action to save our threatened forests is to protect the relatively small amount of public land in Nova Scotia by creating more protected wilderness areas and parks. Although some small areas have been added to Nova Scotia’s protected areas network since the original 31 sites in 1998, very little progress on the ground has been made since then. It is time for the government to move forward on the commitments already made. The document Towards a Sustainable Environment promises that the government will indeed move forward but only two new areas are mentioned specifically as “candidate Wilderness Areas.”
Since the late 1990s the ** ** ** ** has been working to secure protected status for the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area. This is one of the few remaining areas in HRM that are still relatively pristine and roadless; it contains remnants of old growth forest, dozens of interconnected lakes and is home to many different species of wildlife, some of them rare or endangered.
This area, most of it public land, is now under threat from industrial logging. Apart from its ecological value, the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area has enormous potential for tourism, especially when one considers its close proximity to metro Halifax.
The protection of the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area will make an important contribution towards building the promised network of protected areas. The importance of the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area is recognized not just by environmental groups, but by many individual citizens, including some Halifax Municipal councilors and members of the Provincial Legislative who have, at various times over the past few years, called upon the government to move forward on this issue.
Yet the government continues to procrastinate in the matter of a wilderness study of Ship Harbour-Long Lake, even while promising in its own “Green Plan” to “continue to work towards a comprehensive system of protected areas.” (Towards a Sustainable Environment, Govt. of Nova Scotia, June 2003, page 19).
There is so much more to be gained by protecting our natural assets--for tourism, for the environment, for the health of our citizens--than by allowing them to be depleted by indiscriminate clearcutting. Please move forward with real actions and not just fine- sounding phrases.
|
|
|
| p.9 Bullet 1+2+3
I have personally experienced the effects of agreeing to comments like this, ** ** ** **. ** ** was one of the first communities approached when the idea of 'protected areas' were first presented. It generated keen interest from the community, and the Fire Hall was packed to the rafters. In this presentation, the community was asked "Do you want to protect the area from DEVELOPMENT(the capitals are mine), so you and your children, and childrens children may enjoy it as you have always done?". This proposal was wholeheartedly endorsed by the community as a good thing, as a large percentage of the community use the area for hunting, fishing and ATV riding. Everyone left the meeting with a 'feel good' attitude. Fast forward a couple of years, and we get to find out that the Terence Bay Wilderness Area is now a "PROTECTED AREA", with no vehicular access for ATV's, outboard motors, or even bicycles. This has left a very unpleasant taste in the mouths of residents, who consider they have been duped by government. You can expect retaliation.
I did a little research and found out that any roads or trails that existed prior to the designation cannot be closed.
To "increase your understanding of community needs, and improve program delivery" you had better listen to the communities involved. The most recent number I heard was 44,000 ATV's in Nova Scotia. That's a lot of votes. EDUCATION, NOT STERILIZATION.
p.9 Bullet 4
This statement caused my jaw to drop. It was made very clear about five years ago by land owners in the Southwest Nova Area that the SW Biosphere was NOT ENDORSED OR SUPPORTED. Inclusion of Bullet 4 just reinforces my feelings about what happened in Terence Bay. Is this just goverment incompetence that allowed this statement, or is it denial of the peoples wishes (the ones that live, work and raise their children there, not the people who live in the city).
p.19 Bullet 7
"conserve special values" Statements like this are far to broad and ambiguous, and by agreeing to them, they can be used to stop ANY kind of activity.
p.19 Bullet 8-10
To me, ** ** ** **, every river is outstanding, but I still want to be able to use it.
"comprehensive system of protected areas" will be a mistake if they turn out to be thin ribbons that you cannot cross.
p.20 Bullet 1
Are not proposed protected areas supposed to go through the Integrated Resource Management (IRM) process? If these guidlines were being followed at all, you would know that some of these areas are currently under exploration/evaluation for economic mineral deposits.
|
|
|
| 1) provide a financial incentive to priviate landowners managing their lands for for forest harvesting to certify their forest management practices through a recognized sustainable forest certification that is auditable and audited. The benefits should cease if and when the certification is lost.
2) Nova Scotia government should make a meaningful contribution to the ongoing operation of the SW Biosphere Reserve
3) if the federal government is interested work to add the Tobiatic and associated provincial wilderness areas in the SW to the Kejimkujik National Park. They already have a good, effective management, management planning and visitor facilities in place. They market the province tourism internationally and with a really large protected block consolidated under one land manager it should be possible to achieve World Heritage Status for that park. This would have significant tourism benefits and possible transfer operational costs to the federal government.
4) By all means establish new nature reserves, wilderness reserves, Canadian Heritage Rivers and otherwise work toward the completion of a comprehensive system of protected areas.
5) The protected areas system should incude coastal waterways. Work with Parks Canada and DFO to establish a marine protected areas particularly in coastal waters. We need a NS system of protected coastal marine areas.
|
|
|
| Complete the protected areas network now - while we still have areas left to protect! At least provide people with some targets!
Your discussion on this is way too vague! This document should have provided some time lines - true commitments - to this very important program!!
Nova Scotians have demonstrated that this is a top priority (** ** **). This government's commitment to this program is pathetic.
|
|
|
| Read as is, it sounds all encompassing and very grand. However it would be helpful to know how many paid staff (including management) are in the deapartment to oversee/initiate/undertake/monitor and evaluate all and each of the projects referred to; or are your staff essentially depending on community volunteers to initiate and good will to see these many projects through. Would it be better to focus and do versus dream and dabble.
|
|
|
| 1-Designate more lands for protection.
2-Stop talking about Gully Lake and Eigg mountain\James River and get on with it!!
3-The St. Mary's River should be designated as a Canadian heritage river
|
|
|
| p.9 Bullet 1+2+3
Unfortunately, by agreeing to statements like this, the door is opened to land sterilization, so we cannot support these in their present form.
p.9 Bullet 4
It was made very clear about five years ago by land owners in the Southwest Nova Area that the SW Biosphere was NOT ENDORSED OR SUPPORTED. This statement is a blatant disregard of the landowners wishes.
p.19 Bullet 7
"conserve special values" Statements like this are far to broad and ambiguous, and by agreeing to them, they can be used to stop ANY kind of activity.
p.19 Bullet 8-10
As we are people who spend a lot of time in the bush, every river is outstanding, but we still want to be able to use it.
"comprehensive system of protected areas" will be a mistake if they turn out to be thin ribbons that you cannot cross.
p.20 Bullet 1
Are not proposed protected areas supposed to go through the Integrated Resource Management (IRM) process? If these guidlines were being followed at all, you would know that some of these areas are currently under exploration/evaluation for economic mineral deposits.
|
|
|
| -Develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection. Do it now. Time is running out for wilderness. Especially the Tobeatic Wildreness area, expand the boundaries-mining activities are already taking place at the boundaries!!
- Get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Do it now and don’t shrink the areas down.
- Select and designate more new Nature Reserves. Especially coastal areas, ** ** on the South Shore, land is being consumed by huam development.
-Nominate the St.Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program.
|
|
|
| The land belongs to the public not goverment and blanket policy should not be made to cover small towns and rural areas. City people don't give a hoot about forest land, and if they go camping its at a camp site NOT WILDERNESS. What are you protecting these areas from?? |
|
|
| We need more protected areas, before it is all destroyed. Please designate Gully Lake & the Eigg Mts/James River. |
|
|
| Good objectives, but please do not only "review" but act by enacting legislation. Create tax incentives to encourage private landowners to donate land for protection. ** ** ** ** **: many people would not donate land to the province since they do not trust the government to protect their land. Many for instance see the Dept. of Natural Resources as a lobby group for big business (forestry, mining) within government. The Department of the Environment has far greater credibility. |
|
|
| Select and designate more large blocks of public lands for protection.
Designate Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Do not reduce the size of the areas.
Designate more new Nature Reserves.
Nominate St. Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program. |
|
|
| I agree with your plan. In the future, clean air, pure water and sustainable forests will be worth more than gold. |
|
|
| I think that partnerships are great. As I drive around NS, I see private land where the first thing a person going to build a hoome does is take out all the trees near their new home area. We do not seem to recognize that trees provide shade and great air conditioning in the summer. Then I see the great lawns being planted, and then the chemicals arrive to keep the lawn perfect. What is wrong with the meadow look, where we do not have to have noisy lawnmowers out wasting energy so grass does not grow too long on the great lawn. I think we need a lot of basic education for folks on how to be protecting the environment and not using energy for things that give us little value such as mowing lawns.
I think that we need to instill in Nova Scotians a sense of pride in their province, so that folks would not be throwing ** ** cups out their car windows, or doing things that harm our precious environment.
Even the way I see folks wasting water is amazing. People hop in for a 10 minute shower, when one of half that length or less will do just as well. We have a generation of citizens who think that there is no limit to the clean water and other resources that we use on a daily basis. We really do need a lot of education about the very basics of life, and the many things we take for granted.
We should be actively teaching people how to have backyard gardens to grow some of their own foods that would not be sprayed with poisons.
Nature Reserves: we should designate as many of these as possible, and get local folks involved to protect these areas as a community resource.
Renewal energy: terrific idea.
Basically I find all the suggestions you give to be great. The big issue is to get the message out to folks who often do not think about conserving our great province for future generations. |
|
|
| The document Towards a Sustainable Environment states that the government wishes to take what it calls “an integrated approach” to the environment. If the government truly wishes to follow an integrated approach, it will recognize that the state of health of our forests is connected with just about every other issue mentioned in the document. The quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink are related to the health of our forests. A healthy tourism industry and a viable forestry sector are dependant on healthy forests.
One of ** ** major concerns is the amount of clearcutting that is taking place in this province, both on private and public lands. The current level of clearcutting is not only unsustainable from the resource perspective, it is also destroying wildlife habitat, threatening water quality, harming tourism and undermining the quality of life of our citizens.
We propose two main courses of action to deal with the current situation. First, there needs to be regulations limiting the size and number of clearcuts on private lands. The Nova Scotia Wildlife Habitat and Watercourses Protection Regulations that became law on January 14, 2002, are no more than a token gesture. There is an urgent need to put in place a process of consultation involving industry, environmental groups, scientists and others interested in the health of our forests with a view to framing an effective set of controls on harvesting methods. The government must go beyond the establishment of a voluntary “Code of Forest Practices” as mentioned in the “Green Plan” and draw up a set of mandatory controls for both private and public lands.
A second course of action to save our threatened forests is to protect the relatively small amount of public land in Nova Scotia by creating more protected wilderness areas and parks. Although some small areas have been added to Nova Scotia’s protected areas network since the original 31 sites in 1998, very little progress on the ground has been made since then. It is time for the government to move forward on the commitments already made. The document Towards a Sustainable Environment promises that the government will indeed move forward but only two new areas are mentioned specifically as “candidate Wilderness Areas.”
Since the late 1990s ** ** ** **has been working to secure protected status for the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area. This is one of the few remaining areas in HRM that are still relatively pristine and roadless; it contains remnants of old growth forest, dozens of interconnected lakes and is home to many different species of wildlife, some of them rare or endangered.
This area, most of it public land, is now under threat from industrial logging. Apart from its ecological value, the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area has enormous potential for tourism, especially when one considers its close proximity to metro Halifax.
The protection of the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area will make an important contribution towards building the promised network of protected areas. The importance of the Ship Harbour-Long Lake area is recognized not just by environmental groups, but by many individual citizens, including some Halifax Municipal councilors and members of the Provincial Legislative who have, at various times over the past few years, called upon the government to move forward on this issue.
Yet the government continues to procrastinate in the matter of a wilderness study of Ship Harbour-Long Lake, even while promising in its own “Green Plan” to “continue to work towards a comprehensive system of protected areas.” (Towards a Sustainable Environment, Govt. of Nova Scotia, June 2003, page 19).
There is so much more to be gained by protecting our natural assets--for tourism, for the environment, for the health of our citizens--than by allowing them to be depleted by indiscriminate clearcutting. Please move forward with real actions and not just fine- sounding phrases.
|
|
|
| Two protected areas are not enough. Past governments promised adequate represention of all of NS's 77 natural landscapes. Currently, there is only 1/3rd of these landscapes adequatrely represented in protected areas. |
|
|
| As stated above, unless the province deals with the issue of invasive species, protected areas continue to be under threat.
Protecting coastal areas should be part - but only part - of a comprehensive coastal conservation and preservation plan. |
|
|
| THere are some good suggestions and commitments. I am concerned, however, about the plans to manage crown land for multiple use. I do not want to see crown land used for clear-cutting or off highway vehicle recreation. I think these lands should be conserved and the only use that should be allowed is low-impact recreation such as hiking, swimming and cycling. |
|
|
| · I support the commitments to reduce barriers to private land conservation, however there is no timetable given. I am aware that the government has been looking into this issue for years. It is time to translate words into action and improve participation of willing private land owners in the province’s protected areas network.
· Given the importance of private land conservation in Nova Scotia (approximately 70% of land is private), the province should also commit to providing some base level of funding ** ** **. The government seldom has difficulty in finding money to invest as venture business capital through NS Business Inc., even though there is a litany of these ventures going bankrupt before any benefits accrue to the tax payers. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***.
· Establishment of 5 new nature reserves has been a commitment since 1997. These should be established forthwith. The province should also set a timetable for designating additional nature reserves from the growing list of candidate sites. A target of 5 new nature reserves per year should not be unreasonable.
· The Canadian Heritage Rivers System provides a good opportunity for community-government collaboration in conservation and heritage protection. The province should pursue additional designations. The Shubenacadie, Roseway, and La Have rivers should be considered as potential candidates.
· The statement suggesting to continue working towards a comprehensive system of protected areas is meaningless without providing any details. The province recently completed a long, expensive Integrated Resource Management planning exercise that was ostensibly meant to examine the important values of all Crown lands, and designate which areas were best suited to what types of use. This process did not result in a single, new legally protected area. No new provincial parks, no new nature reserves, no new wilderness areas. Not a single one! This despite more than a dozen community-based proposals for new wilderness areas on Crown land, and the recognition that several of the province’s unrepresented natural landscapes can only be represented by the designation of Crown lands. If the government wishes to work towards a comprehensive system of protected areas it must show leadership and recognise that provincial Crown lands must continue to be designated where these lands can make a significant contribution to addressing the gaps in the system. It must show a real commitment to advancing the protected areas agenda by rejuvenating the nature reserves program that has been dormant for many years, and by increasing the profile of, and level of resources committed to the protected areas program.
· The Crown land parcels in the Eigg Mountain-James River and Gully Lake areas should be fully protected under the Wilderness Areas Protection Act as soon as possible. The government should commit to a timetable, and also should reveal to the public just exactly where the proposed boundaries of these two candidate areas are. The boundaries should be designed to take in as much contiguous Crown land in these blocks as possible, even if some of it has already been degraded by clearcutting or road building. This is necessary in order to ensure that meaningful core protected areas can be established, taking into account the principles of conservation biology and protected areas design. Any deforested areas included in the boundaries should be allowed to regenerate naturally.
|
|
|
| expand partnerships ** ** ** ** **:
These groups are doing important work and should have ongoing support from government
work with private land owners to incorporate conservation values into the working landscape:
an excellent goal. Why not extend the work to forest companies? The contrast between
** ** woodlot winning DNR awards last fall, and ** ** cutting practices
just up the road at ** ** could hardly have been greater.
incorporate stakeholder input into management planning for protected areas:
this means, for instance, that environmental groups should be reinstated in ** ** ** Advisory Group ** ** ** ** and that no further decisions be taken until this is accomplished
there should be stronger provisions in the legislation regarding wilderness areas and
nature reserves, so that mining and clearcutting cannot occur in buffer zones
separate management planning groups should be set up for each wilderness area, because
each has distinctive attributes
ministerial discretion in Bill 73 should be limited so that if a mining company gets to a minister, a Nature Reserve can’t be thrown out the window.
Endorse the designation of the South West Biosphere Reserve and participate in making it work: Yes.
Manage Crown land to allow for multiple uses, to conserve special values, and to provide for sustainable management of renewable and non-renewable resources:
the public input under the IRM management review process promoting conservation and
sustainability was ignored. The excuse of forest leases needing to be honored was used
to maintain business as usual. More and more roads are opening up Crown land to be
harvested in an unsustainable way. We support measures you are going to introduce to turn this situation around.
Designate new Nature Reserves:
take immediate action. Several of these have already been damaged by ORVs. Go
beyond these to designate other reserves as well which are already on the waiting list.
Designate additional outstanding Nova Scotia rivers to the Canadian Heritage River Program:
All our rivers were once heritage rivers. We need to do what we can quickly to save and improve what is left. Yes.
Work towards a comprehensive systems of protected areas:
Yes. The plan for the comprehensive system should include desperately needed habitat
for wildlife such as moose and their need for corridors to travel to find sufficient food since their habitat has been broken up and shrunk.
Designate two candidate Wilderness Areas:
We need these and others on the waiting list to be designated immediately. |
|
|
| I support the means described on p.9 to encourage private land owners to donate land and incorporate conservation values - particularly through the NCC and THe NSNT.
On p. 19, I support the designation of new Nature Reserves, in particular the area of Duncan's Cove. This should be done as soon as possible.
I support disignating additional outstanding NS River to the CHRP - I nominate the St Mary's River.
The Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River should be disignated as Wilderness Areas as soon as possible, protecting as much of the areas as possible. |
|
|
| You missed the Bay of Fundy.
Also protecting small fragmented habitat is great if the main goal is to attract tourists but usless for animals that need large habiats or migratory animals.
What about some wilderness corridors?
Once again no mention of marine protected areas.
|
|
|
| For each of the statements "the government wil..." What is the specific time frame? Polling shows Nova Scotians strongly support living in a sustainable society. For example, they don't favour clear cuts, and would pay more for less polluting energy. What is the government prepared to do to deliver these and by when? We need more habitat that is less fragmented - larger tracts to sustain biodiversity. This should require much sotronger regulations for private lands and how they are managed. Current requirements for regulation of trees left standing in clearcuts is a joke. |
|
|
| My response to all bullets on all above pages is NO! there is no reason for protected land or biospheres.Improve and enforce laws. |
|
|
| More money needed for key holdings.
Better laws to guarantee pulic access on private lands such as coastlines. |
|
|
| *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***.
|
|
|
| The Annapolis River and Fundy Shore Watersheds:
** by the shore ** in Port Royal for ** **, the most extensive set back for the river is when the causeway was put in (1959 or 1960). ** ** ** fishing, clam digging, lobster fishing, and hand lining, ** **seen the gradual decline in these fisheries. Due to the current change, clams to do not seed like they used to. Salmon cannot get up the river to spawn in streams as in the past. Silt slime and mussel beds have taken over a lot of the shoreline, especially Goat Island. there are not more shcools of hering coming up into the river; this is mainly due to large herring seiners scoopeing them up before they et here.
** ** ** the river was aboudnig with smelts, salmon, gaspereau, glounders, shad, mackeral, herring, striped bass, halibut, cod, sole and other numerous species. Seagulls and blue herons are starving. Even loons are seldom seen in the river now. The tide used to flow up to Bridgetown and when the tide ebbed, it flushed the river. Now it is practically dead. Talk to the elder people ** ** and they can expalin a lot more. Aquaculutre seems to be the way of the gure, which I somewhat agree wtih, but this will not bring this river back to its once pristine self. my solution is to replace the causeway with a bridge like it should have been. Even doing this, it will still take decades to bring the river back. |
|
|
| While protected areas designation is to be commended there is an ever increasing desire with the public for the Province to further this goal. Any allowance for development within these areas is also a major concern. There is also a great need to review all grandfathering causes with regard to areas which have in the past have endured environmental damages. Protected areas should not be for pristing areas alone. Areas which are of value for heritage, science, and cultural activities should all be considered for protection.
The province should consider protecting areas such as Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain as protected areas. A sytem of protected areas should be conducted by communities. Each community given an opportunity to submit an area they feel is appropriate for protection.
|
|
|
| I support these commitments. I believe the more private land owners (ie. point 3,page 9) and citizens that live near these protected areas are involve, the more rewarding and meaningful land protection will be. The trick is to get people involved and to realize protected land is an improtant asset. That people can benefit from (ie. ecotourism, landscape beauty, posterity, healthy water air, etc.) |
|
|
| We need more protected areas – specific sites have been identified and these need to be implemented ASAP. These areas include Eigg Mountain/James River and Gully Lake.
Select and designate more Nature Reserves
|
|
|
| The protected areas system plan is long overdue (promised in 1992 with the goal of a system plan by the year 2000) and needs to be implemented immediately. We would like to see networks of protected areas in the Atlantic Ocean and Acadian Forest. By 2007, we would like to see 12% of each of Nova Scotia’s 80 natural landscapes protected by provincial and federal legislation. We would like to see all of Nova Scotia’s existing and potential old forests on public land protected by legislation by 2009, and a moratorium on their harvest in the meantime.
We would like to see greater consideration and support by the provincial government of protected areas in the ocean and nearshore environments. Though the creation of Marine Protected Areas and National Marine Conservation Areas is not under provincial jurisdiction, we feel that the Provincial government could do more to work with both government and non-government organizations to promote the establishment of these areas. ** ** ** ** is currently studying the St. Margaret's Bay and Mahone Bay region of Nova Scotia to assess the feasibility for the establishment of a National Marine Conservation Area in this area. It is our belief that this area represents an important component of the province's ecological heritage and as such is deserving of protected status. ** ** ** ** ** call on the provincial government to petition Parks Canada for the establishment of a National Marine Conservation Area in Nova Scotia.
The entire crown land blocks of Eigg Mountain – James River and Gully Lake need to be part of the Wilderness Areas for adequate protection.
We are pleased to see five nature reserves named in your report, and would like to see a detailed long-term plan for the establishment of other nature reserves on the Nova Scotia Department of Environment and Labour’s (NSDEL) candidate list. We would like to see the Nature Reserves Act reintroduced to the House, debated, and passed to provide legislated protection of Nature Reserves. We would also like to see a detailed plan for the management and enforcement of legislation for these areas. Without sufficient resources to enforce the legislation, our protected areas are essentially only protected in name.
We call on the government to promote the designation of the LaHave River as a heritage river. This designation would fit well with our call for St.Mary’s and Mahone Bays to be designated a National Marine Conservation Area. In addition, we support the ** ** ** call to have St. Mary’s River designated a Heritage River.
We support the addition of nine parcels of provincially owned land to six existing Wilderness Areas, for protection under the Wilderness Areas Protection Act. We think the additions will be critical to the integrity of the Wilderness Areas as a whole. NSDEL is to be congratulated for these initiatives. We encourage the ongoing acquisition of in-holdings and the designation of new wilderness areas as an urgent priority, while undeveloped spaces are still available.
We are pleased that the Province acquired Cape Split for protection. We look forward to reviewing the government’s management plan for Cape Split, their intentions to work with the local private landowners, as well as the recreational users of the area. Cape Split is a popular recreation and tourism entity, the management plan should, in detail, outline the governments plans to manage such use.
We commend the specific actions detailed in your report to work with the Nature Conservancy of Canada, the Nova Scotia Nature Trust, and the Southwest Nova Biosphere Reserve Association. The Southwest Nova Biosphere Reserve does not currently take into account protection of the marine environment, that is, Nova Scotia’s territorial sea. We would like to see nomination of southwestern Nova Scotia’s territorial sea for Biosphere Reserve designation.
Because so much of Nova Scotia’s land base is held privately, it is imperative that financial incentives in the form of tax breaks be provided for private land conservation with the Nature Conservancy of Canada and the Nova Scotia Nature Trust. Government should also create a database of critical adjacent lands, which could become future acquisitions and additions to the current protected areas; these areas should be made open for public comment.
The government must legislate land as protected and enforce the legislation. Resources must be allocated to the open and transparent development of management plans for protected areas. There should be some provincial guide and vision for management plans that have a regional perspective in addition to local plans tailored to local needs. ** would like public provincial and regional-scale visions for management plans in which ** can participate.
|
|
|
| These all sound like excellent ideas. Encouraging and facilitating the proper management of land by private landowners, including industry, is really key here,. There must be substantial amounts of land with movement corridors for animals in order for them to be really effective. I wonder if there is a way that when the province conciders buying products and services, they can give preference to companies and individuals that have made real efforts to protect wilderness areas. This could also be applied to companies that reduce emmisions or other environmental projects. |
|
|
| Reduce property tax on land set aside for conservation
Set aside Five Bridge Lake area on the Chebucto Peninsula as a protected area ** ** ** **.
|
|
|
| Please designate James River/Eigg Mountain and Gully Lake as two new Protected Wilderness Areas, as was promised, leaving the orgingial boundaries intact. Do not shrink these boundaries. The public has been waiting years for movement by the government to protect these places. Please desgnate their protection now. |
|
|
| We strongly urge the fulfillment of the commitments made to conserve and protect our natural resources and special places for the future.
We advocate the timely development and release of an action plan to select and designate significant areas of public (Crown) lands for protection. This is a high priority for the Government and the people of Nova Scotia. 69% of people in a public survey ** ** ** ** ** ** expressed an opinion that there should be more protected wilderness areas on publicly owned Crown land in Nova Scotia. The question was prefaced by a description of alternate uses of publicly owned Crown land and had survey respondents wigh up economic uses versus conservation of tracts of land. For 69% of Nova Scotians, the creation of more Wilderness Protected Areas is a priority and the Trousim Industry Association of Nova Scotia agrees.
We agree that Gully ALake and Eigg Mountain/James River are priority areas for protection as Wilderness Protected Areas and welcome the designation of these areas, as well as new Nature Reserves and Spinneys Heath, Great Barren and Quinan Lakes, and Quinns Meadow in Yarmouth County; Duncans Cove in Halifax Ciounty; and MacFarlane Woods in Inverness County. ** recommend the designation of St. Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program. We urge the Goverment to consider additional areas for protection.
We also welcome the commitment to review barriers to private land conservation and to expand partnerships with the Nature Conservancy of Canada and the NS Nature Trust to encourage stewardship and acquisition of additional critical lands for protection.
We encourage the Government to work with private land owners to incorporate conservation values and with stakeholders to generate input into the management planning process for protected areas and Crown Lands. It is particularly important that the local community in the vicinity of current and proposed Wilderness Protected Areas and Crown Land are effectively consulted and involved int he management planning for public lands in their area. This encourages a sense of stewardship of the public lands in their communities.
We commend your endorsement of the designation of the South West Nova Biosphere Reserve and encourage active participation by the Government of Nova Scotia in respect to the conservatino and sustainable use of resources in this area.
We advocate a moratorium on resource extraction and development in tracts of publicly owned Crown land which are proposed Wilderness Protected Areas. |
|
|
| Page 9: Agree with all bullets *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***.
Page 19: Agree with all bullets and ask that you help ** accomplish the bullets.
** ** ** ** ** ** set aside the south end of the Black River Lake. |
|
|
| In my view protected areas really must be protected from certain forms of human recreation and especially from economic exploitation. The former would include OHV usage unless absolutely necessary and the latter would include forestry which has devastated a huge swath of the province. |
|
|
| Bill 73 diminishes the requirement for public consultation.
Emphasize the public as a stakeholder in management planning. |
|
|
| We definitely need more protected areas. Yes, Gully Lake and Eigg Moutnain/James River should be designated Wilderness Areas. We need protected lands in Hants County. The Stanley Block areas should be studied to identify an area within it to protect that is large enough to be representative of most of the natural landscapes (especially Walton Cay Plain natural landscape). |
|
|
| To protect should not meant to sterilize. Just because an area is protected should not mean that people cannot condust activities or prohibit industries - just that parameters and guidelines should be implemented. |
|
|
| I have no problem with keeping the Tobeatic and Kejimikujik park area protected, but I draw the line at the proposed SW Biosphere. There is considerable economic potential outside these boundaries that wehn operated within current enviroenmental guidelines could generate major revenue and jobs for this region. Regulations as they are (if enforced) will ensure environmentally sound business operation. |
|
|
| The protected areas must be protected first and foremost fore their future integrity. Begin with the banning of all OHVs in all protected areas. NO EXCEPTIONS.
|
|
|
| Sounds good but it seems that the resolve is soon watered down in the interest of threats from those whose interest is monetary gain. |
|
|
| Why is it necessary for silviculture on lands not belonging to the crown, but not necessary on crown lands? How many acres of timber are left on crown land? Who is cutting it? How much is cut each year? |
|
|
| - timetable for the planned protected areas to be fully protected (no further shrinking of areas).
- select, designate and protect furhter protected areas to achieve 10% by 2010. (international agreement by 123 nations in Kuala Lumpur, February 2004).
- legislation and enforcement of it for the protected areas. Implement the recommendations made by the task force on off-road vehicles according to its timeline.
- tax changes in the 2005 budget - tax incentives to donate land for protection and tax incentives to enable private land to be protected.
- Set up a trust fund for further research in NS ecosystems, sensitive habitats, their protection and the education of the general public of the importance of these systems.
- Workable process to involve stakeholders in management planning for the Protected Areas, keeping the focus on protection. |
|
|
| The Nature Conservacy of Canada, the NS Trust, and in particular the Biosphere Reserves are not understood by most Nova Scotians, and so there is much distrust. Much education is necessary. |
|
|
| Bullets 1-3: There is not need to acquire more land just to protect it. Good enforceable legislation is adequate (that works for government and private property).
Bullet 2: NO Southwest Biosphere (where every living thing is protected). We need to use the land in a responsible manner (be it a mine or tourist attraction).
Page 19
Bullet 7: Special values have to be spelled out.
Bullet 8-10: Protected areas are fine, but they are individual and no one system will work (commitment to protection is fine.
Page 20
Bullet 1: All areas are supposed to go the resource management process. You already have a commercial project being evaluated that would provide good jobs and yet you have skipped the process.
|
|
|
| These commitments sound great if they can be implemented. But when you use words like review, explore opportunities, work with and continue to work twoards, it down't sound like there is any time line for inporvoement to what has been going on. |
|
|
| Most of page 9 lacks actual commitments as it all sounds developmental withough time frames - a lot of words for little commitment. P. 19 - Managing crown land for multiple uses such as? Does this include clear-cutting and pesticide spraying? I would hope all of our forests are sustainable. How will new candidate Wilderness Areas be selected (or worse) and developing climate change impacts and adaptations be implemented? (Public input should be mandatory). |
|
|
| We need more protected areas (private and public).
Areas need to be off limits to any resource extraction.
Need minimum of one area to represent all natural landscapes within Nova Scotia. Create tax incentives to encourage people to protect land.
Need more wilderness areas. |
|
|
| 1. Complete all protected area designations
2. Implement a reliable forest inventory. |
|
|
| Provide details on how you would do it, get feedback from affected communities/groups, make specific commitments (not general statements that have no measurable results) and then do it. |
|
|
| Make a serious attempt to protect tracts of public land and coastline still in existence. (Nova Scotians are losing access to THEIR coastline in many areas).
Ensure action plans include local input and consider including such places as The Chebucto Peninsula and St Margarets Bay. |
|
|
| Need more protecterd areas -- still far short of the Endangered Spaces goal.
Enhanced support for NS Nature Trust; develop sufficient tax incentives to make donations of land more attractive. |
|
|
| Good progress. More protected areas are needed, and the mamangement of existing areas must be maintained or improved to prevent deterioration of these areas. Working with NGOs is highly commendable. The Nature Conservancy is one of the top charities that I support. Education of the benefits of the preservation of protected wild places is key to getting more public support. |
|
|
| Duncan's Cove Coastal Barrens have long been 'pre-designated' as a Nature Reserve - why does the process take so long? Implementation and re-inforcement is absolutely pressing and necessary. The same applies for the Herring Cove 'Backlands' Area, which has been proposed for a Wilderness Area. Yet, we are still waiting for an assessment (study) of the region. It does not appear like the government is giving priority to the designation of wilderness areas / nature reserves. |
|
|
| pg 9 - The province needs to encourage the municipalities to constrain uncoordinated development to control sprawl outside the urban core of our communities, to minimize the cost of servicing the community and to minimize our footprint on the local environment.
pg 9 – The province, in concert with the municipalities, should examine the development of residential lots which view forests as an impediment to development. Many building lots are clear cut, followed by the introduction of non native trees and grasses to replace mature vegetation.
pg 19 – 8th -10th bullet – The Mira River would be a prime candidate for Canadian Heritage River status.
pg20 - 1st bullet - No comment. |
|
|
| Bullet 1. Don't just review; instead, REDUCE barriers and tell us how you are going to do it. Do it and don't just say how you will. Make bold, financial incentives to reduce the barriers.
Bullet 2. Good - do it now.
Bullet 3. It depends on who the stakeholders are. All stakeholders must have an equal say and influence on which lands are critical and which ones need to be protected. What is your definition of stakeholder? To consult the general pubic you need strategic organizational methods and a plan on how you will provide information. A small advertisement in a newspaper or on the web will only reach a small portion of the population. You need a broader range of pubic input mechanisms such as workshops, flyers, perhaps TV advertisements sponsored by public television such as as those provided for election campaigns. This topic may be viewed as more important than an election and should warrant "free" advertisement from our public radio and television stations.
Bullet 4. This doesn't take into account the marine environment. The marine environment needs better protection and conservation and more sustainable uses of its resources as well. Nominate marine environment areas for Bioshere Reserve designation.
Page 19:
Bullet 8. No argument here.
Bullet 9. Nominate specific rivers such as the Lahave River.
Bullet 10. Long overdue.
Page 20:
Bullet 1. Designate these areas quickly. Also designate the entire Crown Land blocks adjacent to these areas.
|
|
|
| My community includes wildlife; ensure adequate representation and consideration of these "stakeholders" needs.
Stakeholder input must be also sought for extractive/conversion management activities, not just for conservation/protection.
Stakeholders include members of the general public, not just those with an immediate or economic stake.
Yes, barriers to conservation on private lands must be removed immediately, and incentives should be provided.
Improved communication and collaboration among government levels and departments is also important.
Partnerships with engos are critical and additional support for their conservation efforts should be provided.
Endorse the designation of the SW Biosphere Reserve.
Yes, designate rivers and these new Nature Reserves and Wildrness Areas and select and designate many, amany, many more and larger ones.
Yes, most definitely and most importantly, make much quicker and more extensive progress on designating a comprehensive system of protected aeas, including sufficient areas to adequately reprsent every natural landscape type and to provide connective areas or linkages among these for migration and dispersal of wildlife, and to maintain and enhance the connectivity of populations, so they can respond to climate and other environmental changes and remain viable over time. There is no time to hesitate on this initiative, because options are bieng foreclosed as human activities degrade, convert and fragment remaining natural areas at an alarming rate. Place an immediate moratorium on areas of natural cover remaining in patches larger than 10 000 hectares, areas of older/mature forests with climax species, and areas that currently have no roads. This is by far the most positive and healthy thing that our generation can do for future generations of all Nova Scotians, human and non-human.
While it is important to take an immediate opportunistic approach to secure the best remaining patches of natural landscapes, it is equally important to also immediately initiate a scientifically-based systemmatic approach using principles of landscape ecology and conservation biology, and to engage all intersted parties, including engos and scientists. |
|
|
| from pg 9:
- expand partnerships with the Nature Conservancy of Canada and the Nova Scotia Nature Trust to encourage stewardship and acquisition of additional critical lands
for protection
This could be a very useful step. |
|
|
| the HRM moritorium must be allowed, and should be extended until a management plan is in place.
the province needs more protected wilderness areas. the Ship Harbour Long Lake area should have a development and harvesting moritorium instituted immediately and a wilderness study completed with input from the community.
|
|
|
| I support this commitment, but urge the government to move more quickly to protect more public land, and to complete a network of protected areas that will provide adequate habitat and movement corridors for wildlife. We have little public land in Nova Scotia, and we need to protect as much as possible as soon as possible. |
|
|
| Although I'm not familiar with the details of each proposal, I feel that fundamentally all of these commitments are valuable and should be implimented. |
|
|
| Strongly support all initiatives.
Through the SCI the government must take a leadership role to coordinate all stakeholders. |
|
|
| Designate the Herring Cove Backlands as a wilderness area and set a deadline for this within the next two years.
Designate the Duncan's Cove Barrens as a nature reserve and do this in 2004.
Set out a clear plan for the protection of more public land in the province as wilderness areas and nature reserves with a five year deadline. |
|
|
| All the commitments to protected areas are laudable. My basic comment is that they should be implemented as quickly and as fully as possible. And by fully, I mean that the areas designated for protection should not be whittled away for varous short-term, special-interest concerns, but rather should encompass as much area as possible. Biodiversity and nature reserve research indicates that the health of an ecosystem is firstly a product of its size. The more we pick away at wilderness areas, the less sustainable they will be over the long term. And in this context, we should be thinking about the very long term. Predictions from the climate change modelers indicate that even if we completely reversed our production of green-house gases tomorrow, it would likely still take a century for the current rise in temperatures to ruin its course. Already reports from England indicate that more than half of bird species, and nearly 3/4th of butterfly species, both groups very visible in the landscape have either gone extinct or been greatly reduced in number. Since we don't really know how serious environmental change will be over the next century, we need to be prudent and cautious in our estimates of how many and how large are protected areas need to be. After all, what is a wilderness missing a significant proportion of its native flora and fauna? For that reason, we should never sit back, even if we have all of the currently suggested protected areas actually designated as such. We need to periodically revisit this issue, so that areas of value that may have been initially overlooked can be considered. |
|
|
| The proposed Stanley Widerness Area should be placed on the protected list immediately. |
|
|
| Simply complete the actions you have already promised to safeguard wilderness areas. Add the Ship Harbour Long Lake area to the protected list.
Stop further depredation of public lands |
|
|
| We need new protected areas, means to prevent damage to the protected areas we now have by OHVs, buffer zones around these protected areas (the Tobeatic area), and carefully designed wilderness trails to encourage responsible recreation. |
|
|
| I support acquistion of all these areas and urge the government to also commit to protecting coastal islands, such as those in Mahone Bay and the La Have Islands |
|
|
| Action Plan - Designate more large blocks of public lands for protection. This needs immediate action as time is running out in our Province...
Designate Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas - get on with this one as it has been pending for some time! Do not shrink the areas down for the sake of more revenue - Just Do It!
Nature Reserves - we need more designated reserves - there are people with more knowledge than I on this one so I am unable to suggest where we need them...we need them to protect habitats and foster growth.
Nominate the St.Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program
|
|
|
| We agree that conservation is necessary to protect the beauty of Nova Scotia. However, Enviornment Nova Scotia must realize that crown lands are public lands owned by the taxpayer and protected areas should be accessable for recreation use. |
|
|
| - While the commitment to protect certain areas in noteworthy and something to be encouraged, this approach largely ignores the need to effectively integrate natural areas in development plans, and to ensure that protected, natural areas are connected in a sufficient manner to support biodiversity. Having small chunks of "nature" separated by kilometres of development is undesireable. A network of physically-linked protected areas should be established in the province. Additionally, development should support natural areas as well, since we're ultimately developing everywhere in the province.
|
|
|
| Without a link to these paragraphs it is too difficult for me to make considered comments on them. Sorry. Otherwise I would have. |
|
|
| We need more protected areas. All crown land should be a protected area. We have far too little for any other use. |
|
|
| . assess all aspects of potential reserves first (including mineral reosurces), before designating them - make sure we are not blocking out large tracts of land with sustainable resources on them
. ONce protected there is no money available for undertaking research on various aspects of the environement (i.e. streams, groundwater, biology, forests etc). Establish a research fund to begin to learn from these areas - not just to protect them and leave them |
|
|
| The protected areas should be protected as a whole and not as a smaller bargining chip. It is the whole area that works are a living organism and to lose any of these little remaining areas will be an unreplaceable loss. By looking after a whole entact wilderness area we will have protected watersheds (ie James River is the town of Antigonish's water supply), rivers, endangered species (Atlantic Salmon, moose), areas for the enjoyment of all people of Nova Scotia. We can also foster Eco-Tourism, and low impact enviromental industries (ie Folk art). |
|
|
| Please develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public lands for protection. Please designate Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Select and designate more new Nature Reserves.
Nominate St. Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program. |
|
|
| I think that government commitment to land conservation is terrific and I agree wholeheartedly with it. However, I do think that working together with private landowners towards the purpose of conservation and sustainable forestry will be difficult and time/resource consuming. It will also be less 'glorious' as a network of private conservation areas will likely take a lot of time before an easily identifiable network can be created. It will also be less appealing compared to larger tracts of land set aside as protected areas. I support the iniative to inolve private landowners more, but I would place more of a priority on government setting aside more and larger areas of crown land as protected areas. |
|
|
| Involve people early in the process rather than just gathering "stakeholder" input after decisions are already made. Develop an action plant to designate more and larger areas for government protection including offshore and marine habitats. Also designate more crown land for protection. Select and designate more new Nature Reserves.Promote public awareness of these initiatives, the importance of wild areas and diversity of animals and habitats. |
|
|
| Government needs to develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public lands for protection. Protect these areas for us and future generations.
Protect Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. You promised. What's the delay?!
I also nominate St. Mary's River for the Canadian Heritage River Program.
|
|
|
| More large interconnecting blocks of public land need to be designated as protected areas, to allow wildlife connecting corridors of access. This really needs to be done now. Do NOT just designate small pieces of Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River..LARGE INTERCONNECTING areas need to be designated Protected Wilderness Areas now. We do not have time to dither around any longer. I would also like to suggest designating the area around Suzies Lake behind the Bayers Lake Industrial Area as Protected Wilderness or a designated Nature Reserve. It is really beautiful and offers easy access to residents of Halifax. I would also like to suggest adding St Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program. |
|
|
| Pg. bullets
1. Critical. Also consider making it illegal to purchase oceanfront property for private ownership. Or if this is not possible, make the property taxes of those owners very high and use those funds to purchase lands for public parks or just for preservation of biodiversity
2. Critical.
3. Critical
Actually all of these need to be done as soon as possible.
|
|
|
| P9,B1-3 -I support all these initiatives, CONDITIONALLY such that the private landowners of NS are not dictated-to or forced to comply with unreasonable demands that they should manage their own private lands the way they want to, to a reasonable extent, by any level of government or any
radical environmental group/s for the purpose of land sterilization!
P9,B4- No more Biosphere reserves - too costly to administer and to maintain for the tax base of NS.I do not like the radical views of the UNESCO organization who's sole purpose is to make the land "sterile" from all people, everywhere!
P9,B9 - Don't sterilize rivers, MANAGE their use! All recreational stakeholders must continue to have access to the rivers
for responsible use.
P9,B10 - Don't make Nova Scotia into a big park that will have future restrictions on its use. I want to be able to still hike,fish,swim,pan for gold like i have always done and will always do, regardless of how many more protected areas there are! |
|
|
| - all of these are worthy initiatives; my suggestion is to implement these as soon as possible
- it is imperative to increase the amount of protected area in Nova Scotia to a figure far above 8% (a good start, but time is running out)
- ensure that protected areas contain complete watersheds
- designate important rivers (e.g. St. Mary's) to the Canadian Heritage River Program |
|
|
| Develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection.
I'm wondering if the headlands around Prospect and the Herring Cove paths along the water--both of which are used extensively by the public-- are protected.
All Crown lands should be protected--not clear cut. Protect coastal and lake front lands from being sold to private (and often foreign) parties.
Select and designate more new Nature Reserves. |
|
|
| Expand the number of designated areas and continue to work towards a comprehensive system of protected areas. Enough talk and discussion, Just do it before it is too late. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| It looks very good, but most bullets are vague and do not give any specific numbers or targets. In fact, only two bullets are specific: endorsing South West Biosphere Reserve and "designating two new candidate...p. 20, bullet #1.
Put NS Youth Conservation Corps into the budget. They provide an essential service (most of NSDEL's "Good News" stories), and it's silly that they have to spend so much time fundraising.
|
|
|
| Bullet 1 and 2 - Land trusts and protected areas limit the ability to develop natural
resources and this should be avoided.
Bullet 3 - remove the statement , it is not clear
Bullet 4 - Ridiculous !! there should be no U.N. designated biosphere reserves - this policy ignores the views of a majority of Nova Scotians > don't sterizile our land |
|
|
| Land trusts and protected areas should be avoided because they limit land availability to Nova Scotians to develop natural resources. Bullet 3 lacks standard working definitions. It is open to misinterpretation and confusion. It should be removed or greatly reworded. The SW Biosphere Reserve should not be endorsed. Reason: Unnecessary international obligations as well as regional ojections. A Biosphere Project implies control over a local are that may not be necessary in any case. If it is not necessary don't use it because unnecessary interference may result. Biosphere development stresses sustainability. Mining, by nature, does not fit this definition. However, where a large scale open pit mine may be unacceptable, a small underground development could be okay. All potential devleopment projects should not be painted with the same brush.
Non-sustainable projects shouls not be totally rejected, simply because sustainable projects are necessary. One should not exclude the other. |
|
|
| What is wrong with the present environmental protection act? Too much sometimes is a bad thing. |
|
|
| Farm land takes up half the country, pumping pesticides and other chemicals into the environment. We are a throwaway environment where big companies make things that only last 2-5 years. Everything is about money. Work on this and not taking away the people's rights to explore the wilderness and be part of nature, which we are all a part of. Culling out trees and exploring the wilderness is a right for everyone. |
|
|
| Get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg mountain, James River as protected wilderness areas |
|
|
| Nova Scotia has not met its commitments regarding protected areas. It is a disgrace that the current Government has basically ignored this area of the environment. The placing of the Black Bull mine near the boundary of the Tobeatic should also not have been allowed. Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain should be top priority for protection. From there departments should work to fully implement and complete the protected areas network that will protect at least 40-50% of Nova Scotia's land base.
|
|
|
| Commitments to protect additional wilderness areas are commendable. Partnerships with local and national land conservation groups and aquisitions of private inholdings will go a long way towards protecting the environment and increasing Nova Scotia's "natural capital".
Dont stop there...forestry practices need to be addressed. Why does the province allow clearcutting so near the highways? This is bad for tourism. No one wants to see this, local citizens included. Selective harvesting and value added manufacturing need to be encouraged. Natural regeration of multispecies forests rather than single species plantations will result in more resilient and healtier forests for the future.
|
|
|
| Protected area designations are a great approach. The only downside is that even though these areas are so-called protected, there is minimal enforcement capability by DEL or DNR. Along with designations there should be a committment to increase enforcement, otherwise they are only protected in name only. |
|
|
| It is important to attach some sort of timeline to these commitments. Without a goal for aquiring at least x amount of hectares of protected areas by a specific date, what will ultimately guide DEL's actions in the next 5, 10, 20 years? |
|
|
| This is good but NS needs to be more proactive in protecting land for nature. The government should find and protect more large tracts of crown land right away. |
|
|
| Well done as a beginning. But far more needs to be done. Protected land is crucial for the future of Nova Scotia, especially getting more private land owned and protected by the government. |
|
|
| These are great initiatives. Howeverm they protect too little land. Public water sheds should be added to these areas |
|
|
| In principle these are all significant needs for the province. However, no action plan has been identified. NS protected areas are fighting for the last precious scraps. government needs to make it much easier for protected areas to be established, and once established resources for thier management need to be significatly increased i.e. enforcement. the Hot Spots map produce by the NSPLC identifies many candidate areas, these need to become protected NOW. Mvoe forward with the designation of Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as official protected areas, and ensure that these areas are not decreased in size, if anything they should be expanded in order to meet the Widerness Areas Protection Act requirements.
Government needs to designate all inholdings and critical adjacent lands as protected, working the the nature conservancy is an ideal avenue to do this, the committment of more financial resources will make this task easier. In addition, fostering solid partnerships with private landowners in areas of significant wild land would be a good strategy to help develop wildlife and natural corridors of connectivity between PA's, government needs to identify incentives to encourage private landowners to be conservation minded.
In order to secure quality watershed management NS should also increase the number of Heritage Rivers being designated, focus on their headwaters is ideal. A good starting point would be the designatio of the St Mary's River. |
|
|
| I think that purchasing various areas and designating them as "protected areas" is an excellent idea! Overdevelopment is one of the problems in this province - too many natural habitats are disappearing!
Educating private landowners is also an excellent idea. They need to know how to best manage their lands to promote environmental stewardship. |
|
|
| The suggestions need to be more specific, they need to have strict timelines for implementation, and they need to be enforceable - turned into policy and tied with particular Acts. |
|
|
| The government keeps talking about what it is going to do, but very little is being done. Time is running out for our wilderness. Let's do it now and develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection.
Eg. Let's get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Don’t shrink the areas down and do it now!
Select and designate more new Nature Reserves before we have none left to select.
Add the Saint Mary's river to the Canadian Heritage River Program.
|
|
|
| Complete the designation opf Gully Lake and AJmes River/Eigg Mountain as a protected area.
Please protect more areas of public land, especially thoise areas around salmon rivers. |
|
|
| This is the most important part of the plan. Since development of all sorts is continually encroaching on the remaining wild places, we must act urgently to complete the network of wilderness areas. This can only be done once.
By all means legislate the two specific new areas identified, without reduction in their scope.
Propose the St. Mary's River as a heritage river. |
|
|
| Though 24% of land is owned by crown, only a small percentage of that land supports sustainable harvestable forest. I can see no reason to allow logging on any crown land. Let the forests owned by the crown preserve the strong seeds needed to sow the barren landscapes of private woodlot owners. |
|
|
| Designate more protected areas as soon as possible to protect endangered species. Some areas that deserve protection are Cape Split, Tusket River watershed and Kingston Sand Barrens. |
|
|
| Large protected areas need to form a corridor. Such corridors such meet the needs of animal species not humans needs for highway corridors. Vehicular access should be prohibited in all wilderness areas. |
|
|
| A comprehensive system of protected areas is needed in this province, encompassing a full spectrum of natural landscapes. Completing this system will provide a crucial foundation for other conservation inititatives, such as species-specific management plans. Currently, large gaps exist within the Nova Scotian system of protected areas. The green plan should encourage the identification, designation, and implementation of new protected wilderness areas in under-represented parts of the province. In this regard, I am supportive of designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as wilderness areas. These places contain important ecological values and occur in areas currently without wilderness parks. For this reason, these two new protected areas should be made as large as possible, incorporating all Crown lands within these blocks. The designation of these two areas must be a first step toward a much broader initiative to incorporate new protected areas into the protected area system. A landscape-level, science based approach should be used to identify new candidate protected sites. As for the nature reserves, I am supportive of getting on with protecting these long overdue sites. Five new protected nature reserves, as proposed by the Green Plan, is not enough. There are over 100 sites of ecological significance within the province, which include examples of old-growth forest and rare species habitats. In many cases, these sites of ecological significance have been well researched, mapped, and inventoried. Thus, there is no justification to only protect five of these sites. All of them should be protected as quickly as possible, before interim degredation ruins their ecological significance.
|
|
|
| 1. Develop a transparent action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public lands for protection.
2. Take immediate action on designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas.
3. Select and designate more new Nature Reserves.
4. Nominate Musquodoboit River and St. Mary’s River to the Canadian Heritage River Program.
|
|
|
| Develop an action plan to select and
designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection. Do it
now. Time is running out for wilderness.
Get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg
Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Do it now, large
borders (don’t shrink the areas down), etc.
Select and designate more new Nature
Reserves. (areas near large population centres so that people can develop interest and understanding in protected areas)
Nominate Mersey River to the
Canadian Heritage River Program. |
|
|
| We need an action plan that would designate more areas of crown land for protection. There aren't many left!!
There are several areas in Nova Scotia that should be named as Protected Wilderness Areas. Examples: Gully Lake, Eigg Mountain, coastal areas around the Tusket River. We need to make the borders as large as possible for these areas. |
|
|
| Large blocks of land put into"protected
areas"is a mistake that will take years to
correct.
Good common sense laws should protect all
areas without drawing lines on maps.
|
|
|
| I support a dedicated, agressive commitment to enlarging and enforcing the protection of existing wilderness areas. However, I do not believe that enough of our Crown Lands are designated for wilderness areas. "Multiple Use" means everyone else first, and wildlife after that. I think it is deplorable that the Dept. of Natural Resources has a mandate to control what happens on our Crown Lands, and so little of it is set aside for wilderness and natural habitat.
I would like to see more attention in the report to a commitment to enforcing of the legislation. It is often the only way to send the message that knowingly damaging the environment is not going to be tolerated in Nova Scotia.
I was pleased to see that agricultural operations will be monitored more closely. The air and water pollution emmissions from large farm operations is a huge health concern in the Annapolis Valley. The Province of Quebec has placed a moritorium on "pig farm factories" until further studies have been done to control the emmissions and deal with the disposal of manures. Nova Scotia should follow in this as well.
In general, I believe that this initiative is commendable, however, feel that it does not go far enough in the protection of wildlife habitat, wetlands, mature and old growth forests and the other issues I listed above. I would have liked to have seen a stronger position on these issues, and rather than place the onus on "communities" to cooperate, see the government take a stronger position of protection and enforcement. |
|
|
| The designation of new provincially protected areas is a step in the right direction. I also agree with the coordination with the nature conservatory and other such groups. Otherwise, the points sounded nice but time will only tell if they are ever moved on. |
|
|
| -Develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection
-Get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Do it now, large borders (don’t shrink the areas down), etc.
-Select and designate more new Nature Reserves especially focusing on remaining old growth forests
-Nominate St. Mary’s River to the Canadian Heritage River Program |
|
|
| - Develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection.
We must do it now! Time is running out for wilderness, and the govt. has been slow to act on commitments; designate Ship Harbour Long Lake Wilderness Area.
- Get on with designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas. Do it now and don’t reduce the areas committed.
- Select and designate more new Nature Reserves.
- Nominate The St. Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program. |
|
|
| Create a plan to select and designate more public (crown) lands for protection.
Get on with the process of designating Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as protected areas. Same for new Nature Reserves.
Designate St. Mary's River to the Canadian Heritage River Program. |
|
|
| I think the key commitement is that of establishing a system of protected areas. In addition some protected areas lack adequate management. It is not enough to simply protect the land, but it must be managed so that activities that are damaging to the land are minimized. As well, identifying the educational opportunity of protected areas is important, but any activities must be undertaken with a minimal impact.
The areas identified for protection are very important, and this should be done immediately. |
|
|
| Enlarge protected areas where crown land is availabe, extend wilderness areas and develop a corridor across Nova Scotia to protect migrating species and habitats.
Increase protection of wetlands (including those in cities and towns where developers want to fill them in).
Continue Crown Land Conservation.
Promote watershed and river conservation and better monitor all uses and abuses.
Reduce property taxes for people who put their land into conservation easements and aim to provide free government service for this plan.
Don't allow off road vehicles into wilderness areas and protected spaces except for official rescue of people in serious danger. |
|
|
| Protected areas are the key, and the government deserves credit for progress to date. We must add more protected areas urgently- the last bullet on p.19 is the most important of all.
Working with the nature Conservancy and Nature Trust are excellent methods.
As to private landowners like me being reluctant to contribute land toward the protected spaces, a major deterrent is the recent proliferation of All-Terrain Vehicles (ATV), whose riders are out of control. No one feels like giving up private land only to see it used as a playing field for these noisy polluters. The governemnt must act boldly on the upcoming recommendations of the Voluntary Planning task force on Off-Road Vehicles. |
|
|
| Bullet 1 and 2: Land trusts and proteced areas limit the availability of the people of Nova Scotia to develop their natural resources in these areas and should be avoided, not endorsed.
Bullet 3: This statement is vague and should be removed. How can anyone endorse a statement such as, "incorporate conservation values into the working landscape", when "conservation values", could mean any level of undefined development sterilization, and, "working landscape", is not defined?
Bullet 4: This statement is outrageous and should definitely be removed. No U.N. designated (or otherwise designated) biosphere reserves should be endorsed by this government in any way in Nova Scotia. The South West biosphere reserve proposal was dead in the water 5 years ago. Why is this issue being raised as a Phoenix now? Landowners in the proposed reserve area, as well as those in the proposed Fundy reserve, have made it VERY clear to the proposal proponents, that they do not endorse or support this proposal, or any similar issue. The fact that this bullet has been shoehorned into this document after the people have made ther feelings clear to the Depts of the Environment and Natural Resources, indicates an agenda on the part of government that the wants and needs the people of Nova Scotia have indicated to these departments are being ignored. |
|
|
| | |
| 3. | Please read our commitment to pollution prevention in communities (p. 10, 1st bullet). Please provide your comments on this commitment and any suggestions you may have about its implementation. |
|
|
| Agree |
|
|
| This statement sounds good, unless it is used to 'sterilize' an area. |
|
|
| Create a multi-stakeholder advisory board to the Premier and/or appropriate Ministers on pollution prevention and control, including representatives of the science, academic, and NGO communities. |
|
|
| I have no comments on this section. While this is an important matter, others can make wiser comments than I can (and my energy is running low). |
|
|
| We need a better education system for forest contractors on how to properly dispose of:
- used oil filters
- used oil
- oil containers
Support should be shown to encourage more forest workers to use vegetable based oils. ** ** is involved, but costs are high. More pilot projects could be funded by the provincial government. |
|
|
| Motherhood statement - what specifically is your focus - with whom and for what outcome?
What are your priorities - and where? What monies and resources can you put to this grandiose all encompassing statement. |
|
|
| Until U.S. signs the Kyoto Accord, we in N.S. can't clean our land, air and water as we would like. It has to be all of North America.
|
|
|
| climate change initiatives are tightly linked with pollution prevention. Come into step with federal funding initiatives to address climate change educational programs. |
|
|
| I totally agree with trying to prevent pollution. When I look at things such as protecting wetlands, I think of what happened in ** a couple of years ago. ** ** ** there was a gorgeous wet area that drained the surrounding area before the water flowed into the local lake. But ** ** ** crew saw the undeveloped land as an area for houses, so they filled in the beautiful wetland when they "developed" a new subdivision, and now the drainage area that protected the lake is gone. How shortsighted our people are!! We need strict controls to protect wetlands such as this one that we lost. |
|
|
| 1) Pollution prevention needs more than vague statements about promotion. It requires a clear set of actions.
2) Extend the province's environmental assessemnt regulations to a broader range of projects and require the assessment identify not only measures to minimize negative effects but measures to maximize benefits to the environment
3) Find a way to make thoes developing capital programs/project see a benefit if the operation of the facility operate with less inputs but with slightly higher capital cost - some form of mandatory life cycle costing is needed.
4)Remove tax benefits from new non-renewable resource extraction and provide equivalent amounts to recycling, reprocessing industries. Get with a program of materials re-use as if it means something. More than lip service with vague words like "promote". We need real programs and government needs to let nova scotians know when these new approaches are being used here. |
|
|
| Many regulations are already 'on the books' but rarely if ever enforced. What is needed most urgently is enforcement. All the talk and good intentions are useless without putting teeth in laws! |
|
|
| This is very vaque. I would like to see incentives for industry to develop and invest in sustainable energy resources, and penalties for those who don't. I would like to see incentives for individual homeowners and small businesses to power their homes with solar. wind and other forms of sustainable energy. I would like to see the support of safe biking and bike trails in communities. |
|
|
| This statement sounds acceptable, unless it is used to 'sterilize' an area. |
|
|
| Transportation, I think, is probably the biggest thing that needs to be addressed here. In cities and towns, good public transport is important - improve bus services, and make taking cars less attractive - by making parking more expensive, say.
People should be encouraged to use cars that reflect their needs - make SUVs for driving casually go away! I often think higher gas taxes might be a good thing, especially if the profits went to help poor families with heating oil expences.
What about a program for cheap energy efficient lightbulbs, or solar waterheaters, like the program HRM ran for backyard composters a number of years ago. And why is getting "Green" energy from NS power more expensive than the regular kind? Make coal power more expensive to use. |
|
|
| Pollution prevention in communities:
The government has to show that this is an important priority:
shut down electricity generation from coal by setting higher standards for emission
controls and promoting renewable energy
promote public transportation
tighten up environmental regulations for mines and quarries of all sizes
promote organic agriculture
promote sustainable forestry with no cutting within 100 metres of watercourses
eliminate pollution from raw public and industrial waste
|
|
|
| Make polluters clean up their mess. When it starts costing them to clean up they will soon turn to preventing their mess. |
|
|
| We need more education to fishermen to stop throwing their garbage into the ocean.
Also it should be easier to punish people who dump their garbage onto private or crown land.
Businesses such as ** ** should have to be responsible for all the garbage that they create. |
|
|
| Although your plan clearly states that it will promote “pollution prevention approaches with all stakeholders” the Nova Scotia government has not adopted this approach when dealing with the issue of ocean noise pollution created by seismic exploration for oil and gas. The government of Nova Scotia must formally embrace the precautionary principle when it comes to ocean noise, and declare that, while its impacts are unknown, it will not allow further blasting in ecologically sensitive areas such as off the coast of Cape Breton and in exploration licenses adjacent to the Sable Island Gully. Once the results of an ongoing national review of the impacts of seismic exploration are released, the province and the federal governments should designate an independent panel to review these findings and come up with concrete recommendations and a zoning system for seismic blasting off of Nova Scotia.
Again, if invasive species are to be considered a form of biological pollution, the Nova Scotian government has much to do to address this threat. |
|
|
| Which pollutants are you specifically targeting - who are the stakeholders. Does it include GHG emissions from MSPI, industry, or vehicle users? What are the gargets for reduction? What are the timelines? And what are the penalties for failure to comply? Is this voluntary? Is the government planning on introducting incentives for energy conservation? Does this include small businesess such as body shops? |
|
|
| Identify which pollutants are a concern and set targets for reducing these over time. There should be minimal levels of compliance established which must be adhered to by all. Working with stakeholders to find an acceptable approach. Why not introduce some kind of pollutant trading scheme on a community level (like sulfur trading but on a small scale). |
|
|
| We would like to see specific targets for pollution prevention in marine and terrestrial environments. Ocean noise from oil and gas exploration is a great threat to whales, we would like the province to ensure, as part of its duties through the Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board, that there is no harm to noise-sensitive marine species such as whales.
|
|
|
| It is excellent that pollution prevention (p2) be promoted because it is best to prevent the pollution from occurring right from the the start (then worry about the 3 Rs of reducing, reusing and recycling). So, great to see p2 in this plan!
I would say public education and behavioural change campaigns would be smart to do, as well as incentives offered to citizens and companies who take p2 intiatives. Supporting orgainziations ** ** ** ** ** also helps!! |
|
|
| The Farming industry should be rewarded for best management practices. Composting of all manure must be mandatory. The use of pesticides and sprays should be curtailed and greater emphasis placed on organic farming. The concept of community farm markets for sellers of this product shold be promoted. This should be hjighlighted to our food industry. Retailers should have to sell a compulsory amount of local produce and organic sellers should be included in the mix. farmers have to be given a greater assistance with regard to water management. Grey water usage requires a review. Issues such as water economizing with snow melt must be practiced and promoted. |
|
|
| That is so vauge it's useless. How about some actual substance to your plan instead of vauge allusions to things you'd like to do |
|
|
| The province should not buy any electricity produced with soft coal. |
|
|
| yes. |
|
|
| Who are the stakeholders? "Promoting" isn't much of a commitment. |
|
|
| Agree with all bullets.
Clear cutting is not allwoing rain water to be absorbed and kept in the soil for long periods of time. We witness flash flooding each spring and to a lesser extent with each heavy rain fall. this leasches soil, mercury and other pollutants into our alkes and streams.
Increase public education so that the individual can learn that thier little practices collectively have a large impact on the environment. |
|
|
| I am unsure of the definition of stakeholders, but I do know that private property rights - while undeniably integral to our Wester "way-of-life" - should not imply an unfettered licence to rape and pillage one's land just because it's there. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***. |
|
|
| Lofty goals. We will reduce sulphur dioxide release in the atmosphere by 50% by the year 2010, mercury 20% by the year 2009, nitrogen oxide 30% by the year 2005...
If we plan to do this by voluntary action on the part of highly polluting companies, we are kidding ourselves. Twenty years from now, we will have attained none of our aims. Only compulsory adherence to this program accompanied by severe fines for non-compliance will work. |
|
|
| What are your approaches?
Is this bullet your commitment??? |
|
|
| I would like to see specific targets for pollution prevention in marine and terrestrial environments. Ocean noise from oil and gas exploration is a great threat to whales, we would like to see advisory groups with ENGO and health liason and new legislation created to address these problems immeidately |
|
|
| I would like more detial on this bullet (are you just referring to the poilot in Lunenburg?)
More needs to be done to educate all stakeholders about ways to preven pollution. Programs through community health centres are an excellent way to get the info out to the general public. I beleive the governement should lead by example. it's good to have moreregualtions about smoiking in publ;ic, but I would have preferred a complete ban. There are health risks associated with exposure to second hand smoke. We all pay for the health costs that result.
Many schools and institutions have a "no scent" policy. The government should be taking a leadership role in establishing regulations so that the pbulic doens' have to be exposed to unnecessary scents (chemical) that for amny result in asthma (or other physical reactions) and more health costs. |
|
|
| Sounds great as long as this does not mean sterilize. This could mean fine for recreation but not any chance for employable activities. |
|
|
| This sounds good, although it is a very broad statement. Any development currently has to pass environmental studies. I don't see what needs to be changed in this regard. Maybe individuals wanting to do certain things should also face some sort of application process to help safeguard the environment as well. |
|
|
| This is a very large commitment since there has been very little concern for pollution prevention to this date. Goverment must commit to addressing the problem of ground water pollution in many areas of the province, ie. Annapolis Valley communities. |
|
|
| Who wouldn't agree? All stakeholders need to be expected to do their part. |
|
|
| Ecucate people of the dangers! |
|
|
| - Very specific legislation with timelines is essential for clean air, water and soil.
- the polluter pays:
a) tax polluting substances - no exceptions!
b) require the producer of polluting substances to take them back after use.
c) legislate the environmentally safest disposal process, even if it is not the cheapest.
d) the more it pollutes, the more it is taxed - tax rebates for the least polluting purchases (eg. cars)
- extract methane from landfills and use it
|
|
|
| This is a good general statement as long as there is not sterilizaton of land and laws are enforced equally. |
|
|
| To promote approaches is great, but what kind of time is given to get something in place and what if nothing is done? |
|
|
| This statement is too general. What does it mean? See above comments. |
|
|
| Government must do more than "promote". Must regulate and enforce regulation. |
|
|
| This bullet doesn't address how these approaches will be addressed to communities. In my aread, public interest is great and I thing further awareness should be a priority. Newspaper and radio advertised information sessions could greatly assist the public in pollution awareness. Setting realistic goals to appreciate the advantages of pollution reduction. Small changes can have an accumulative impact. |
|
|
| Some commitment you have
Water Pollution - Fined and funds received used for clean up.
Air Pollution - promote commuting (cheaper parking, special traffic lanes)
Litter - fines, community service. |
|
|
| Promote cleaner business and industry practices eg. facilitate introduction of solar and wind power.
Promote organic farming practices.
Make environment protection/pollution prevention issues a mandatory school requirement |
|
|
| pg 10 -1st bullet –How is the province to promote pollution prevention? Will it increase fines for contaminant spills? Does the province require ISO 14000 certification for companies with which it deals?
|
|
|
| See above: Financial support and commitment is necessary.
Also: I suggest that the issue of marine invasive species be given the attention it deserves; alien invasive species represent 'biological pollutants' with potentially devastating and irreversible effects on ecosystems. After habitat loss, this issue is the second largest cause of biodiversity loss globally - including in Canada and Nova Scotia! |
|
|
| Yes, by all means, use all avenues to prevent pollution! I can't believe we even need to discuss this; it is obvioiusly imperative!
|
|
|
| Begin auto emission testing to coincide with registration renewal. Could be fee-based like current MVI requirements.
Encourage energy efficient lighting, heating, ... with tax incentives. |
|
|
| public and active transportation need to be developed as viable alternatives to cars.
Bio and veggie diesel options for vehicles needs to be made available.
alternative energy solutions like wind, active solar, geothermal etc. need to be made affordable and those that use them need to be rewarded through tax and other incentives.
Low impact natural building alternatives like straw bale construction need to be encouraged.
Government and civil service should be modeling all the above.
|
|
|
| In the halifax area, buses to outlying communities are nonexistent, or don't go back to the communities after 6. since many people work later than this, or pursue activites after work, better busing to outlying areas would be great. |
|
|
| Promotion of pollution prevention through encouragement or education won't be enough. We need laws with teeth, that specify penalties and provide an enforcement mechanism, and that do not provide discretion in decisions about whether to act. The precautionary principle should be followed, so that activities which may lead to pollution are prohibited unless they can be shown to be safe, rather than being permitted unless they are shown to be harmful. |
|
|
| All important commitments.
The government must take a leading role in education and enforcement of pollution prevention. |
|
|
| I believe that this commitment should be accompanied by extensive education initiatives. The average person will not stop polluting if they can not understand the extent of harm which is caused by their actions. Hence, if the average person is not aware of the influence of pollution on our natural systems, they will not care about preventing pollution caused by individuals or caused by the industry on which their lifestyle relies. |
|
|
| See above comments |
|
|
| The use of pesticides to control forest growth must be stopped in all area to ensure a safe water supply for our future generations. |
|
|
| See my comments above. |
|
|
| Great thought - is there an Action PLan to support this? Promote Approaches - where are the approaches we are promoting to all stakeholders?
|
|
|
| This commitment is incredibly vague. I liken it to saying "We'll do some stuff". Instead it would be more valuable to indicate the specific areas NS will be focussing. Sewage reduction and treatment across the province, eliminating packaging in consumables before they enter the province, a vehicle scrappage program for old cars to eliminate a specific number of older vehicles over a certain period of time. These are all worthwhile pollution prevention commitments. NS needs to decide where it will focus and how it plans to take action. |
|
|
| We agree. |
|
|
| The commitment is too general and does not show that the province of Nova Scotia has a clear and definite commitment to reducing its part of the national goal of 240 megatonnes. |
|
|
| Too vague! |
|
|
| We strongly agree that the province should promote pollution prevention measures among all stakeholders. We urge that the province implement these measures among the transportation sector. This could be supported by:
• increased financial support for public transportation
• support for rail use for cargo transportation, such as by encouraging the federal government to support infrastructure programs for rail.
Transport truck use is subsidized by taxpayer support for highway and road-building and repair projects. The same degree of support is not given to rail projects, while the use of rail for cargo transport is more efficient and less polluting. It will also lead to safer highways. The provincial government bears much of the financial burden, through increased maintenance costs on roads and new road construction, when transport truck traffic increases and rail traffic decreases. Thus, in the long term, encouraging federal funds to support rail will assist both in pollution prevention and reduce the money needed to maintain roads. |
|
|
| Also, help communities secure funding for organizations that deal with pollution prevention. Also, work with FIRST NATIONS
not just municipalities in areas concerning water and water pollution prevention. Many First Nations share common water supplies with "municipalities" but decisions made concerning these supplies are rarely made in joint with First Nations. |
|
|
| In order to achieve air pollutant emission targets: Reduce over-reliance on coal for electricity generation and increase commitment to renewable energy sources. Make commitment to sustainable transportation options and integrated land use-transportation planning. See detailed recommendations in the GPI Air Quality report available at www.gpiatlantic.org |
|
|
| The report doesn't provide much of a framework as to how pollution prevention in communities will be supported. From my point of view, I believe education/communication is a good starting point for this, as well as more regulation from the authorities. People generally don't seem to respect the laws concerning pollution (ie. littering). Consequences need to be applied to individuals who choose to ignore the laws regarding pollution. |
|
|
| All Good ideas. |
|
|
| This is essential; it goes without saying.
The need for a seriously improved public transportation system is paramount.
Can there be some sort of tax break for people who buy hybrid cars.
Stimulate the use of biodiesel and biofuel
(Wilson's is doing this now)
Support development of alternative energy sources.
Provide some kind of incentive for homeowners to install solar panels or wind-driven generators
BAN SUVs
Make proper bicycle paths throughout HRM
|
|
|
| - this one has to be enforced by the use of heavy fines for those industries that pollute the environment |
|
|
| All of the commitments on page 10 are vital. |
|
|
| You could start with the heaviest polluter: Tuff's Cove. |
|
|
| This bullet is very vague. It must stat more specifics - NSDEL could simply say somewhere on their website that "we promote pollution prevention approaches..." OR NSDEL could (and should) ahve a more comprehensive plan.
Ways to do this: education and financial incentives (if possible). |
|
|
| This statement sounds good . |
|
|
| "Promote pollution prevention approaches with all stakeholders" is a good idea, but this commitment seems a bit vague. Education about the long term effects - on both the environment and industries - of pollution is key. Also, stronger policies are in order. Finally, industry needs practical advice as to how they can creatively reduce pollution. Industrial ecology, an exciting new discipline, provides many creative and practical solutions. |
|
|
| What does the document mean by the use of the word "promote"? Promote may mean a simple education function. However, it could have heavy handed implications that could close down firms that have operated for generations. |
|
|
| Air conditioning should be one of our main concerns espectially in buildings where most people spend most of their time in present life. It is not environmentally friendly and also cancerous? |
|
|
| Will this sterilize the land so that no one will be able to do anything? Give people knowledge to use things and chemicals the right way. |
|
|
| Impiment the Kyoto accord in its entirety including giving refund of PST where applicable to persons or companies that comply. ie a person buying a hybrid (green) vehicle should be eligible for some rebate either provincial, federal or both |
|
|
| Unfortunately in todays society the only stakeholders that may comply to pollution prevention are government agencies, municipalities and reputable private business. The average homeowner or private business will continue their non-eco ways. Awareness programs may change peoples actions. |
|
|
| As there are many sources of pollution, there are many sollutions and controls that can be implemented. The province should develop specific goals and objectives with regards to sources and specific types of pollution. Ie, air pollution (not just climate change), water pollution, soil pollution.
For example, within the agricultural sector, Nova Scotia could be doing more to promote organic and low impact agriculture. There is a growing market for organic food and increasing interest in buying locally. Especially with the existence of Mad Cow disease and the avian flu, marketing towards Nova Scotians should be to consume Nova Scotian Products. This ensures that money stays in the province, reduces transportation costs of food, and encourages local consumption and local economies as well as limits exposure to disease.
Encouragement of organic agriculture or reduced pesticide use will protect water resources and ultimately human health. The province should regulate pesticides uses on golf courses, particularly those used in rural communities as well water contamination can occur. This will also go along way towards pollution prevention and toxin accumulation in the longterm.
Air pollution - why not establish anti-idling bylaws in the province? Many many cars are left to idle, especially in the winter months. This is completely unncessary. Muncipalities in Ontario, including Toronto and Mississauga have adopted anti idling legislation. Start a province wide "turn it off" campaign to raise awareness. This is both an environmental issue and a public health issue.
Develop strong urban planning policies so that wells and septic tanks are limited in suburban areas. Plan for the future! |
|
|
| one line to prevent pollution? pollution prevention is a very serious issue. Stronger environmental regulation is needed, buisness must adapt to a more sustainable climate. |
|
|
| Pollution is affecting human health in many ways and needs to be reduced or eliminated at the source. |
|
|
| My community consists of several households which rely on wood-burning as their primary heat source. According to research I've conducted, several households in this province use this practice. This burning is unregulated. Most households do not burn properly - they emit a grey-coloured foul smelling smoke containing carcinogens, among other unhealthy components. B.C. has laws which govern this practice, but Nova Scotia does not. We need some kind of procedures in place to govern this detrimental practice.
Halifax has an air quality problem created from the several vehicles entering and exiting the city every day. There need to be some procedures created to combat this problem, such as bike paths, ferries or trains to and from Bedford.
Unnecessary vehicle idling is also a problem. There need to be some laws created to end this practice.
Nova Scotia Power needs to be "forced" to start burning cleaner fuels - such as natural gas! |
|
|
| Why is there some much emphasis on preventing community pollution and so little on regulating what industry and government itself does? We need to better seperate the regulatory and enforcement functions of agencies such as provincial department of natural resources, and fisheries and aquaculture.
There should be real penalties for polluters and mechanims to actually bring them to justice. |
|
|
| Commitment is great, now let's take some action! |
|
|
| This is far too vague to be useful. Government will need to show leadership. |
|
|
| Koyoto should be exceeded.
Inspections of pollution producing industries should bve done on a regular babsis. Polluters include:
Large scale forestry
Agricultural spraying of animal waste, herbicides/pesticides
Oil and gas plants
Nova Scotia Power |
|
|
| Force industries to cut emissions and improve public transportation to encourage people to bus to work rather than drive. (Make public transportation more affordable, especially in less urbanized areas such as the Annapolis Valley). |
|
|
| Stop burning coal that is not cleaned
and filtered in the exhaust to provide power.
Stop dumping waste in the sea. |
|
|
| That's great but unless you introduce legislation (even if it's legislation that starts small but continues every couple of years to get tougher and tougher --- i.e. ease the economic burden) then nothing will get done. The problem with busines (as I mentioned above) is that unless everybody is on board than nobody is going to do it. |
|
|
| -focus first on industry and require them to pay ALL the costs of their operation
-provide reliable information to communities and provide incentives for significant decreases in pollution |
|
|
| Poluter pays in all cases. |
|
|
| Instead of promoting pollution prevention strategies, it may be more effective to mandate pollution prevention strategies |
|
|
| Pollution PREVENTION
Promote and Develop the use of materials which are recylcled, are not hazardous, combine hazardous material with some other detoxifying ingredient so that it can be reused, apply polluters pay regulation more broadly to off road vehicles by way of example.
Regulate, support with incentives and set up group insurance policies that set standards of use for Off Road Vehicles including Seadoos,Argos, 3 wheelers or ATVs which are referred to euphemistically as bikes.
Agree on other points.
Regulate, support with incentives and set up group insurance policies that set standards of use for Off Road Vehicles including Seadoos,Argos, 3 wheelers or ATVs which are referred to euphemistically as bikes. |
|
|
| Pollution prevention is important but is partly just a measure or symptom of more basic actions. For example, setting aside protected ateas, with interconnection corridors for wildlife movement, will of itself protect water supplies and air quality. Similarly, controlling the use of ATVs will reduce several types of pollution automatically. |
|
|
| See my general answer above. |
|
|
| | |
| 4. | Please read our commitment on protecting wetlands and wildlife (p. 10, 2nd bullet). Please provide your comments on this commitment and any suggestions you may have about its implementation. |
|
|
| The statement "promote stewardship approaches ..." is far too broad for it to be meaningful. I am pleased at least that the word "wetland" appears in the document, but "wildlife habitat" is a useless phrase. I have never come across a place that is not "wildlife habitat". Even parking lots have the occasional wildlife! We need the following:
(a) A Wetland Policy. Many provinces have a wetland policy - as does the federal government. Nova Scotia only has a "wetland directive". While this is usefully placed in regulations under the Environment Act, it is absolutely ineffective as a policy tool. Furthermore, most people don't know it exists, and so it is only effective when a regulator wants it to be effective. A wetlands policy would set directions that not only protect wetlands but also help to address issues related to water supplies and water pollution.
(b) "Wildlife habitat". Despite the inclusiveness of this term, there are certain habitats that clearly deserve more attention. Of special concern are the rare and vulnerable habitats. For example, we have a Beaches Act for this rare and vulnerable habitat, but we don't have Coastal Barrens Act. I recommend that the Beaches Act be amended to become the Beaches and Coastal Habitats Act (or something similar to this). We would then be able to get a handle on conservation issues in: beaches, saltmarshes, coastal barrens, special intertidal areas, and other rare coastal habitat types. |
|
|
| On the surface this appears to be a 'Good Thing", but could be used to 'sterilize' land, depending on the interpretation. A lot of Nova Scotia is swampy/wetland (I know from personal experience). As an example, a lot of the old Gold Districts of Nova Scotia have swampy areas. Would this Bullet preclude development of a gold mine?, or access to the average Nova Scotian? To an enviromentalist ,it would. To me there are several million hectares that are just the same mosquito/blackfly infested swamp. REASONABLE consideration has to be given to mineral exploration ventures and public access. |
|
|
| There needs to be more work done on wetland protection. We seem to always focus on non-forested wetlands, but forested wetlands are sometimes not mapped or given proper recognition. Forested bogs should be digitized on the GIS system, and guidelines should be identified for their use. Forested Wetlands contribute to the protection of rare flora and water quality. |
|
|
| Set up a programme where local volunteers can be trained to monitor environmental conditions over time. This would include water quality, animal counts/migrations, etc. |
|
|
| Critical need of protection of wetlands and wildlife on private and Crown lands. |
|
|
| Provide adequate project funding and technical support to groups and organizations involved in wetland and wildlife conservation (eg. river groups, conservation groups, community groups, fish and wildlife groups, etc.) |
|
|
| Again, "promote" is not much of a commitment. How about "ensure" consensus work on management plans doesn't work when there are large divisions. ** ** ** ** ** **. Don't use that excuse as a model. |
|
|
| Stewardship is a concept which could be put into action more effectively if it was not limited to "feel good" summer jopbs for students. It is a year round task which requires a more serious approach, perhaps achieved by older people who are committed to the environment, but have been marginalized by innate disgust with the way things are. I.e. One individual's ecological footprint mulitplied by the rate race equals unsustainability! |
|
|
| Wetland Protection Legislation is needed immediately in Nova Scotia. We are one of four provinces without legislation to protect wetlands. The legislation should be formed with a committe made up of private citizens, environmental group representatives, ** **, scientific community, and land owners. The wetland directive is outdated. All wetlands should require a careful review regardless to their size. There should be no infilling of wetlands. Practices such as utilizing manmade wetlands for manure, and human and industrial sludge should be promoted.
Green space availability is a value for all communities. This should be achieved with full community involvement and be recongnized by the province. Green space has to be considered as nature wilderness areas as well as parks which have been developed. Recreational activities such as walking, hiking, snowshoeing, rock climbing should be promoted towards the better |
|
|
| ** **, recently made the comment that the WHWCP regulations were never intended to protect wildlife. As such there are no measures in place to protect wildlife in NS. ** ** has collected evidence that 100m reparian zones could likely adequately protect most wildlife in NS. NSDNR needs to make the hard call on whether they want a Forest Strategy NS can be proud of, or whether they are only serving the wishes of the forest industry. |
|
|
| Agree with bullet 2 on page 10, but must go farther to stop private individuals, corporations, and farmers from destroying welands and other wildlife habitat. |
|
|
| Nova Scotia's "wetlands directive" is inadequate for the protection of these ecologically and economically valuable natural assets. The government of Nova Scotia should quickly create a comprehensive wetlands policy by referring to and improving on similar policies in other North American jurisdictions.
We encourage the promotion of stewardship approaches for the protection of wetlands and other wildlife habitats and hope to see this approach extended to marine and coastal areas. Although ** encourages the government to promote a stewardship approach to protect wetlands and other wildlife habitats, we are concerned that stewardship alone will not be adequate. Therefore we encourage the government to also protect wetlands and other habitat through a wetlands policy and through protected area designations as described above.
In finalizing recent amendments to the Environmental Assessment Regulations, the province should show a strong commitment to wetland protection. Environmental assessments should be mandatory for all enterprises, activities, projects or structures disrupting any wetland, regardless of its area in hectares.
** encourages the provincial government to implement the recommendations of the Voluntary Task Force on Off-highway Vehicles, and prohibit the use of OHVs in protected areas and sensitive habitats, including bogs, marshes, beaches, dunes, barrens, brooks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, and estuaries, by January 2005. These landscapes provide important habitat for Nova Scotia’s flora and fauna and must be protected against unnecessary destruction and fragmentation. Accordingly, the impacts of off-highway vehicles on such landscapes must be decreased and precluded. The following points outline some of the impacts of OHVs on wildlife:
· Ruts and quagmires created by irresponsible riding can disorient and trap small animals (e.g., reptile, rodents, amphibians), break up home ranges and cut off food supplies;
· Tires can crush the eggs and young of ground-nesting birds on beaches, lakeshores, barrens and in the woods, causing additional losses in population recruitment;
· Fording waterways disturbs the streambed, pulverizing small fish, aquatic invertebrates and aquatic plants – leading to impacts throughout the food web; and
· Tires remove natural vegetation, often importing invasive species that establish more readily in disturbed habitats and out-compete natural vegetation.
Numerous sensitive species, such as the endangered piping plover (Charadrius melodius), the threatened eastern ribbon snake (Thamnophis sauritis) and the endangered pink coreopsis (Coreopsis rosea), inhabit sensitive habitats, which must remain natural and undisturbed to ensure their survival and eventual recovery. Off-highway vehicle use is not consistent with the protection or recovery of these species or their habitats. This reality must be reflected in provincial policies relating to endangered species, protected areas and OHV operation.
|
|
|
| Protecting wetlands and wildlife is very improtant, something I didn't fully realize until doing a ** project on the ** ** Salt Marsh and field work with the EAC. Wetlands need to be better understood by people, and better protected from human damage (ie. ATVs, infilling, etc.)
Once again, public education and invovlvement are needed as are genuine intentions by the government to preserve their areas and/or harmonize development with the protection of these areas. |
|
|
| Just walking in the woods and seeing wehere huge machinery has mass destruted the swamps and timberland is mind boggleing. Ruts, 1-2 meters deep, some black iwht engine oil leakage and hydraulic leaks. Now wonder the frogs, toads and snakes are disappearing. How to stop it? It can't be stopped becaus this is progress! Maybe stricter policing can slow this destruction down. |
|
|
| I want to see the promotion of stewardship approaches for the protection of wetlands and other wildlife habitats and hope to see this approach extended to marine and coastal areas. Although ENGOs encourages the government to promote a stewardship approach to protect wetlands and other wildlife habitats,I am concerned that stewardship alone will not be adequate. Therefore we encourage the government to also protect wetlands and other habitat through protected area designation as described above.
I want to see the provincial government to implement the recommendations of the Voluntary Task Force on Off-highway Vehicles, and prohibit the use of OHVs in sensitive habitats including bogs, marshes, beaches, barrens, brooks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes, and estuaries by January 2005.
|
|
|
| NO to stewardship. How do I know ** ** some ** interest group wont be given stewardship. |
|
|
| There needs to be a specific plan with a time line to designate more areas of crown lands. That is, significanty sized blocks for wilderness protection. Because a large portion of the province is privately held - crown land is the best opeion for conservation. I really question spending $14 million on land owned by Mac Tara when it is not evident that it is an environmental priority vs. an economic one. Also - why weren't there 2 independent appraisals done prior to the purchase of Cape Split? Are we getting good value for our money?
Please support Voluntary Planning ATV report recommendations. |
|
|
| Establish more protected areas or restricted use areas – no motorised vehicles including ski-doos and ATVs; no commercial activity
Develop an action plan to select and designate more large tracks of public (crown) lands for protection. Include various ecozones in this area including wetlands and wilderness areas.
|
|
|
| Protect habitats and you will protect wildlife. Create more protected areas and nature reserves. |
|
|
| Please see “A Plan for Coastal Development and Conservation” above. Unless the province commits to a rational and conservation-based plan of coastal development, these vital habitats will continue to be eroded.
|
|
|
| that's good. Now ensure restoration of important salt wetlands - not just freshwater ones ** *** *** - and you might be getting somewhere |
|
|
| Set aside Five Bridge Lake area on the Chebucto Peninsula as a protected area ** ** ** **. |
|
|
| Now is the time to act. In Europe, they have dead forests, sterile rivers and polluted lakes. We must save our wildlife while we can. |
|
|
| What are your approaches? More detail! |
|
|
| - Work with ** **.
- Buy up wetlands.
- Stop municipalities from issuing building permits on wetlands. |
|
|
| If we could stop acid rain our wetlands would look after themselves. The PH of lakes in my area is 4.3 to 4.5, small fish can't survive long or they become deformed. Lime has been tried, it works but is short term. |
|
|
| Protection of wetlands and wildlife:
keep OHVs out of wetlands
institute a planned network of protected areas to allow enough wildlife habitat and
corridors for animals such as moose to get from one patch of habitat to another
minimize development and permit only low impact forestry in areas adjacent to protected areas
protect wetlands from development
the riparian zone around watercourses should be left untouched for 100 metres on each
side
staff levels should be increased so that there are enough people to identify wetlands at risk, monitor them and enforce regulations protecting them
education in schools regarding our responsibilities to wetlands and wildlife should be promoted
|
|
|
| I agree with promoting the stewardship to protect wetlands and wildlife, but especially in the HRM area, we had better act quickly or the wetlands and wildlife will be all gone. We need to have large tracts of land that are left untouched as natural green areas. Redirect the developers to restricted areas, and leave the natural areas designated as such. |
|
|
| Ditto. I would rather hear the specifics from your department since you are our 'experts' who are being paid to do the job. |
|
|
| 1) We need more than vague statements about promotion.
2) Stewardship takes time and people working with people. It takes transfer of understanding about what is rare and important from specialists to the community. Resourcing for this type of work is needed.
3)In essence stewardship approaches try to take knowledge gained through science and turn it into traditional community knowledge - to give social value to something that has been thought to have no value. Such efforts must be underpinned by sound science, solid information management strategies, and sharing of informaiton beyond provincial boundaries ** ** ** . NS is a founding partner in this group but it contributes only 3% to its operating budget. There are opportunities for better use of this regional treasure.
|
|
|
| Again, this is very vague.
I would like to see the support of programs such as the ** ** ** Salt Marsh Restoration program, as well as other organizations working to conserve wetlands and wildlife. More work, study, funding and negotiations with industry should be put into protecting endangered species and their habitats. |
|
|
| ATV's should be banned in wetlands.
HUNTING IS OUT OF CONTROL - we own ** acres and it is posted all aroung the perimeter, but we have had at least a dozen instances of trespassing by people hunting, fishing, trapping and driving over our wetland on ATV's, in the past ** years. |
|
|
|
** ** ** ** **. A lot of Nova Scotia is swampy/wetland. As an example, a lot of the old Gold Districts of Nova Scotia have small swampy areas. Would this Bullet preclude development of a gold mine?, or access to the average Nova Scotian?
There are several million hectares that are just the same mosquito/blackfly infested swamp. REASONABLE consideration has to be given to mineral exploration ventures and public access.
|
|
|
| More protection for habitat.
Larger no cut zones around our rivers streams and lakes.
Work more closely with local eco groups ** ** ** **. |
|
|
| These are steps in the right direction. Protection of wetlands and wildlife shouldn't be dependent upon getting grants. I'd like the goverment to be more proactive and protect these areas across the province, and not just a few areas that "qualify" for funds! |
|
|
| Another very broad statement that sounds good at first. I am a bit concerned that this could lead to more land being sterilized in the future. |
|
|
| The government of Nova Scotia must demonstrate clearly that it has the will and intentino to protect wetlands and wildlife. Otherwise it is more empty, meaningless, rhetoric. |
|
|
| Refuse to allow development and clearcutting or infilling of sensitive areas.
Legislate it. |
|
|
| We do not have enough fish in our lakes an streams to feed the thousands of ducks, loons, gees, seagulls, etc. |
|
|
| The importance of wetlands has been acknowleged by the province of NS, immediate action is necessary:
- wetlands have to be protected with legislation and strict enforcement.
- enforcement education for DEL staff
- abolish clearcutting, then wildlife corridors will not be needed. |
|
|
| Ban use of ATVs and snowmobile machines in these areas. |
|
|
| Wetlands (swamps) - we have a lot in NS - can be protected and yet developed together. Swamps probably hide a lot of NS's economic minerals. We cannot afford to put them off-limites. If a mine is developed today it has a small footprint and safety and protection are built in by government legislation. |
|
|
| See above comments. |
|
|
| Stewardship only goes so far. Unfortunately legislation may be required.
Most of the wetlands along the Bay of Fundy and through NS have been dredged/filled/dyked. Agriculture and development arfe taking precedence, creating a need for increased infrastructure (treatment facilities, pumping stations, reservoirs).
These areas need to be protected for water quality and quantity. |
|
|
| Government must be proactive. Promotion is not enough. Must have strong regs that are vigorously enforced. |
|
|
| Is this commitment to further employ "stewards" in the sector? How many steps and at what cost - as the wetlands and wildlife habitats would have to be assessed and designated as areas to promote stewardship protection. This commitment needs to specify if, in fact, all wetlands and wildlife habitats would be protected, or only those already deemed "protected".
|
|
|
| This sounds good, but I do not think it is strong enough. Additionally to Stewardship approaches and education, there needs to be 'hard legislation in place to prevent damage and pollution to all - terrestrial and aquatic - habitats! |
|
|
| forget about wildlife if habitat continues to be destroyed at the rate it is.
the importance of out wetlands is only just starting to be appreciated, more research is needed here. clear cutting is destroying these too. |
|
|
| Yes, promote stewardship approaches to protect wetlands and other wildlife habitat.
Also, create regulations, incentives, enforecement for private lands, and take a leadership role in demonstrating best wetland and wildlife and habitat protection on Crown lands; there is not a good record to date in this respect. This should be a first priority for departments such as NSDNR and NSEL, and with the Dept. of Transportation and in the Municipal Act, as well. |
|
|
| Protect all wetlands -- get rid of the current (2-3 ha?) minimum. Start regenerating two ha of wetland for every one destroyed by development.
Establish realistic buffers on watercourses (at least 100 m). Maintain realistically wide wildlife corridors wherever forestry and development occur. |
|
|
| Again, promotion, while admirable, is unlikely to be adequate. We need to back up these efforts with enforceable regulations. Once a wetland is drained or paved, or a species is extinct, it's too late to strengthen our efforts. We must be proactive and effective. |
|
|
| pg 10 - 2nd bullet –What existing / planned programs are there to encourage stewardship of wetlands?
|
|
|
| We ca't do anything about salmon while they are at sea, but we can at least do what we can to insure they have the best possible chance when they come upstream to spawn and specd their first several years. Thus we really need to come to grips with destructive activities in the upper reaches of watershed, where logging, farming, road building and mining are all significant threats to stream water quality. For other wildlife, we need to insure that they have habitat that provides diversity and coonnectivity. Implementing forestry practices that will steadily improve, rather then degrade, forest health are critical in this regard. The use of clear-cutting is turning too much of the province into an even-aged, low-diversity, low-value and after several cut, low-productivity woodland that is more and more susceptible to drought, fire and insects. We need to more away from that management model to one designed to add value and diversity while at the same time reducing need for fire and insect control. |
|
|
| Very important.
Stronger legislation and enforcement to stop encroachment and abuses. |
|
|
| Wetlands must be protected. Stewardship programs are invaluable, since those individuals will have a vested interest in the protection of their particular wetland. Communities are educated and become involved with the protection of their natural systems. |
|
|
| Stewardship is good but it needs to be backed up with legislation that will allow it to work effectively, for example against the wanton destruction of wetlands and wildlife habitat by OHVs. |
|
|
| Whilst this commitment sounds good, without sufficient financial support and the appropriate allocation of human resources it can not be achieved. |
|
|
| Introduce swingeing penalties for wetland destruction and support with inspection services. |
|
|
| Again this "commitment" is too vague to be of any use, other than to note that wetlands and wildlife are at least recognized as important issues by the province. I'd rather see a wetland conservation and protection regulation created for all types of development. Otherwise, wetlands will continue to be equated with wastelands. Something has to be developed to make developers want to avoid filling in wetlands. |
|
|
| We are not sure what the intent of this statement was, stewardship by who??? We must start with education! (very few people know the value of such areas). Perhaps a series of articles & TV programs explaining the value and necessity to protect these areas. Add this to the school studies to suit the geographical area. Rome was not built in a day and the enviornment has been abused for centuries, so lets take the time and get it right. |
|
|
| How are you going to promote Stewardship? This is a poor reaction to an obvious problem...wetlands and other wildlife habitat should be protected without question...! |
|
|
| Wet land and wildlife must be protected. This plan should include shorelines and the mud flats. The Minas Basin and the Bay of Fundy are unique in the world. We must not allow draggers to tear up the basin bed and destroy the fish habitat.Marine worm harvesting must be evaluated - is the income potentiel of this resource woth the potectiel damage that is being done to the habitat of themud shrimp that is part of the food chain for migratory birds and the othe ocean creatures. |
|
|
| Too Vague! |
|
|
| This is a very vague promise. You need to identify a concrete aciton plan with the endorsement of those who are stakeholders, but not just them. First Nations need to be consulted from day one, and seen as an equal partner rather than as a "stakeholder". |
|
|
| I think one of the easiest and most effective ways to promote stewardship and enviromental responsibility as a whole is to get more and younger children and youths involved. There are limitless educational opportunities in this regard, with plenty of experienced and knowledgeable people who would be willing to volunteer their services/knowledge/skills to such projects. In addition, the children are our future, and even more importantly they can be an effective tool in educating and influencing their parent's behaviour. Starting with the kids is a good way to get whole families involved, which promotes healthier, more active and responsible communities. |
|
|
| See the GPI Water Quality Accounts for wetland indicators. See GPI Forest Accounts for information on forest practices that can help protect wildlife. |
|
|
| ATV useage has to be controlled in these environmental areas of extreme sensitivities. |
|
|
| develop an action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for the protection. Designate Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as protected wilderness areas. Select and designate more new Nature Reserves. Nominate the St Mary's River as a Canadian Heritage R.iver |
|
|
| The Protected Areas Network needs to be completed now. There is simply no excuse not to do this. It is shameful that it has not yet been completed. Absolutely shameful.
|
|
|
| Good as long as the land is not sterilized from all recreational users. |
|
|
| - again, entire watersheds must be protected for this to be of any use |
|
|
| i am for protecting our wet lands and wildlife, but it is only a few who are destroying this. don't punish everyone. we do not need a bigger extension on the TOBEATIC. |
|
|
| "Promoting stewardship" sounds nice but it also sounds like government is not willing to set the example on public lands. Protect all public land from from development right now. Enough talk! we want legislation! |
|
|
| See last comments. Again this is too vague and must include targets. |
|
|
| Public Education!!! I cannot stress the importance of education enough. These issues need to be exposed! Again the commitments made here are extremely vague. |
|
|
| This statement is O.K. provided it doesn't make resources and parts of the province
inaccessible to the people of Nova Scotia. |
|
|
| The present environmental programs that apply are fine. No need for hand tying. Policing is already being done. |
|
|
| Stewardship is good if people are still able to hunt, fish, cut wood and explore these areas as they can't now. |
|
|
| The working definition fo the term stewardship should be included. Will access be restricted? |
|
|
| Select and designate more active reserves.
Make St Mary's River for example a Canadian Heritage River Program |
|
|
| ORV/ATV use are destroying many fragile habitats. See above comments on this. |
|
|
| There are several ways through which protection of wetlands and wildlife can occur.
1) restrict development of roads in wetland areas
2) restrict ATV use in wilderness areas unless there already exists a road in the area
3) restrict ATV use in ALL wetlands, including streams, rivers, marshes and bogs. These vehicles have long lasting effects and are not necessary to enjoy many of these landscapes.
4)restrict building on saltmarsh areas
5) promote cluster housing development so that growing areas can have accesss to wilderness and limited damage to wetlands will occur. |
|
|
| Protecting wildlife and wetlands starts by protecting land and habitat. |
|
|
| Wetlands are of vital importance, not enough can be said about this. We must not only protect all remaining wetlands, but begin to restore damaged wetlands, that do not function because of overdevelopment. |
|
|
| The main target should be urban developers and off-highway vehicle owners. Forest companies and other resource extraction companies are regulated to protect such features. Urban developers and planners, and user of OHV's can greatly change the landscape. |
|
|
| Good, but I think NS should purchase the best pieces outright. |
|
|
| The best way to implement this practice is for the government to buy up these areas and forbit any kind of development in the area!! Great idea! |
|
|
| We need much better and clearer definitions of wetlands and a real recognition that we have alredy destroyed many of them. We need wetlands and other coastal habitats to be protected by a comprehensive policy and enforced through appropriate municipal and provincial legislation. All activities that impact wetlands should require a permit, notwithstanding the size of the wetland or the portion of the wetland impacted by the activity. Need to remove "mixed messages' about wetlands from the books. i.e fundnig available to convert them to farmland from agriculture and attempts to protect them through fisheries and environment. Should also encourage and faciliate restoration activities and make it mandatory as mitigation for destructive activities such as highway protection.
Wildlife protection should begin with prioritizing habitat protection, restoration, and ensuring connectivity of important habitats. Also need more research into status and threats of key wildlife species. |
|
|
| This is commendable but let's aim to be #1.
Our strongest resource is our tourist potential as a result of the pristine nature of our province. The greater the difference between us and New York, Los Angles, and Europe, the greater our potential for sustainable economic growth. |
|
|
| Again, we need meat on the bones. Of course we must protect wetlands and wildlife! |
|
|
| Nova Scotia needs to adopt a significant change in attitude. Urban development around Halifax is encroaching on significant areas. Increase down town population reduces urban sprawl into sensitive zones.
All protected areas should be larger than proposed thecreation of species corridors should be carried out. |
|
|
| Wetlands are vital to a healthy ecosystem and both the protection of wildlife and wetlands should be considered when making any changes to an area. More wetlands in NS should be protected as they are rapidly disappearing across Canada. |
|
|
| Wetlands provide a disproportionately large benefit for the environment given their relatively small size. It is imperative that all wetlands be protected, including bogs, fens, swamps, marshes, ands shallow water areas (as grouped by the Canadian Wetlands Classification System). Strong legislation is needed that will prevent wetland loss, wetland conversion, wetland degradation, and wetland contaminiation. It is not enough to rely upon responsible, voluntary management and stewardship. |
|
|
| See above, promotion is great but regulations are needed. |
|
|
| -provide incentives to landowners who protect wetlands/wildlife and establish community programs (with community leaders)to promote stewardship activities
-some incentives should be monetary others can be based on community pride, recognition of outstanding activiites, support should be given for stewardship activities |
|
|
| Protect more habitat. Bigger buffers around streams, wetlands, lakes and watercourses.
Work with local stakholder groups. Listen to what they tell you. |
|
|
| Promoting stewardship is important, but is not the only answer. There also needs to be a commitment from government to support these approaches, especially financially. |
|
|
| Comments above on wetlands important in all areas. Bogs are not just for filling in. Bogs are not for ATVs to romp around on. Bogs are really important to sustain our water, our wildlife, fire prevention, ecosystem balance and yet they are the first areas to be damaged. |
|
|
| Protecting wetlands is very important. These areas are fragile and are also vital in filtering groundwater and providing wildlife habitat. They need special care, and working with committed interest groups is a sensible approach. |
|
|
| This statements is tolerable as long as the committment DOES NOT make parts of the province, and resources of the same, inaccessible to the people of Nova Scotia. |
|
|
| | |
| 5. | Please read our commitment on nature recreation (p. 10, 3rd bullet). Please provide your comments on this commitment and any suggestions you may have about its implementation. |
|
|
| No comments |
|
|
| Support hiking and cycling by increasing these trails. Off-highway vehicles like ATV's have too high an impact on the environment to be promoted by our government. |
|
|
| On the surface this appears to be a 'Good Thing", but could be used to 'sterilize' land, depending on the interpretation. It should not be used to make parts of the province and it's resources inaccesssible to Nova Scotians.
|
|
|
| More actively promote non-invasive, sustainable, non-motorized cultural tourism and eco-tourism, and recreation. |
|
|
| In order to promote nature recreation and active, healthy living, government should designate significant amounts of wilderness areas including all park and protected areas as motorized vehicle free zones (ie. no ATVs, Jet skiis, et.) and encourage low impact, self propelled activities (hiking, canoeing, rock climbing, etc.). Governmetn should also provide funds to develop eco-tourism operations and infrastructure such as hiking trails, picnic and camping areas, etc. |
|
|
| Send your tourists to places like Keji. or camping or trailer sites even maybe a salt water beach site. They sure as the devil don't want to go into the Tobeatic area. |
|
|
| The sky is the limit - what ideas do you people have? |
|
|
| I think nature recreation is important to make people see the importance of natural areas, and invest in their care. However, encouraging people to use natural areas without any background about then seems to cause problems (habitat destroyed, people lost.) Supporting programs ** ** ** might be one way to overcome this - making this type of program more accesble to everyone would be worthwhile.
As well, I think it is very important to maintain wilderness areas that are not developed or really open to casual recreational use. |
|
|
| once again almost too vauge to be useful. Is this greenspace out in the woods or in downtown Halifax? Reform building codes and city plans to include more green spaces for city use and keep people out of protected animal habitat. ATV use in the woods is not protecting the flora and fauna of the area. |
|
|
| 1) See my comment above about extending the network of protected areas to include marine coastal waterways aimed at non-motorized water sport, sailing, kayak, coastal canoe. These areas can accomodate recreation and and resource protection/conservation. |
|
|
| Great as long as this access and increased use of 'green space' is not by means of off road vehicles. Hiking, skiing, snowshoeing, canoeing etc should be promoted. This not only helps protect our environment but leads to a healthier population with fewer demands on the medical system. |
|
|
| Take provincial sales tax off recreational equipment. |
|
|
| The Government must approve more nature reserves - an ideal one (that is currently for sale right now) is Port Mouton Island.
Also Brier Island should be protected. |
|
|
| I strongly support this commitment. Nature recreation is a very inexpensive way for Nova Scotians to maintain a healthy lifestyle. Increasing Green Space availability within core urban areas such as in HRM is a good step. Increasing the number of walking/nature trails in all communities is another. |
|
|
| I think this is good, however, I would like to see the prevention of All Terrain Vehicles in public areas, as these vehicles ruin the experience for all other recreationists. |
|
|
| Promote nature recreation and active living:
protect wilderness from motorized vehicles. Wilderness expeditions without motorized
vehicles provide the most exercise and mental health
ORV trails should be sensitively laid out for minimal disturbance to habitat or non-
motorized recreation.
Promote options for people to be active in each community, such as walking programs
eco-tourism should be promoted, but regulated. Eco-tourism businesses should have to register, and demonstrate responsible practices. ORV tourism should be monitored for pollution levels and damage caused. There should be a structure in
place to limit ORV use. This could give other people a voice if areas such as
valleys become so noisy and with gas fumes hanging so heavy in the air, that no
one else can use them and wildlife are driven out.
|
|
|
| Areas MUST be protected from OHV use. There is no other option for portecting wilderness in Nova Scotia. OHV use MUSt be regulated through a user-pay regualtory system.
Again invasive species and coastal oil and gas development reduce / threaten nature recreation opportunities. |
|
|
| On the surface this appears to be a 'Good Thing", but could be used to 'sterilize' land, depending on the interpretation. It should not be used to make parts of the province and it's resources inaccesssible to Nova Scotians.
|
|
|
| Nature recreation should only be done when it is not blatantly destructive of nature. OHV's are destructive and should be strictly regulated to protect wildlife and sensitive areas. |
|
|
| Are the programs designed to increase availability and use of green space already designed and in place? Is there a tender for when this will be implemented? Is there a targeted amount of "green" space to be made available? What are the specifics? For example x km. of bike trails by 200x. Will there be more nature interpretive parks/trails? Is this going to support more community naturalist groups? |
|
|
| fine as long as other groups are not denied access to these areas. |
|
|
| I support nature recreation and the promotion of active living. However, with respect to increasing the use of green space, this needs careful consideration and efforts to promote low impact activities and to encourage users to respect the environment.
Though I support nature recreation and active living, I believe that encouraging the use of "green" space areas, and marine and coastal areas popular for recreational activities, such as boating, requires consideration to ensure that these activities are carried out in a responsible manner. I encourage continued work with community groups which promote sustainable recreational use of the marine environment and engage in activities which educate the public on recreation which is respectful of the environment.
There is a value of getting people to enjoy nature but also we must find a balance if protected areas are to maintain Ecological Intigrity - park management plans and ongong evaluation and monitoring is critical.
|
|
|
| Yes, I think this is a wonderful idea, and one I highly support. Programs like the NS Outdoor Leadership programs are wonderful. Nature recreation is not only a way to encourage people to be healthy and active, but it also gets them in close contact with anture, which will more often than not instill a land ethic within them. As long as nature recreation is done sustainably, it is an excellent way to inspire people to protect the environment.
The government could develope their own nature recreation programs as well as support local groups that encourage outdoor recreation. Getting in touch with students of all ages is also important! |
|
|
| Good idea to promote nature recreation – a good place to start is in the schools. Instill respect for nature in students and this will carry on into adulthood. Every student in Nova Scotia should have the opportunity to go camping and on wilderness hikes with their school.
More nature interpretation trails and centres
More support for the Nova Scotia ** ** ** ** – funds to establish interpretation centres.
|
|
|
| ** ** ** ** support nature recreation and the promotion of active living. However, with respect to increasing the use of green space, this needs careful consideration and efforts to promote low impact activities and to encourage users to respect the environment.
Though we support nature recreation and active living, we believe that encouraging the use of "green" space areas, and marine and coastal areas popular for recreational activities, such as boating, rock climbing, and mountain biking requires consideration to ensure that these activities are carried out in a responsible manner. We are concerned about areas such as Peggy’s Cove Preservation Area where recreational activities may impact sensitive lichens. We encourage continued work with community groups that promote sustainable recreational use of the environment and engage in activities that educate the public on recreation that is respectful of the environment.
Government must take account of the management dichotomy between natural ecosystem preservation and wilderness recreation. Wilderness recreation, if engaged in carelessly or ignorantly, can significantly degrade the lands on which such activities occur. Thus, government must provide resources for management plans and adopt and promote a low-impact recreation ethic for all protected areas. Our comments about management plans area described above. A low-impact recreation ethic should include the promotion and active development of Leave No Trace. NSEL has produced the Keep it Wild brochure, this is a first step in the right direction; the NSEL should now follow up this initiative in a more proactively.
|
|
|
| · Access to high-quality natural areas is a critical component of good quality of life. The government should work towards this goal by establishing new wilderness areas or provincial parks in proximity to communities and urban areas. Many of the citizen-generated proposals for new wilderness areas, such as Ship Harbour Long Lake, Birch Cove Lakes – Blue Mountain Area, and Big Five Bridge Lake provide many excellent opportunities for nature recreastion.
The government should also work towards increasing nature recreation opportunities by moving quickly to adopt and implement the recommendations of the Voluntary Planning OHV Task Force Interim Report. Unregulated and irresponsible use of OHVs is quickly diminishing the quality of our natural environment, and destroying many nature-based recreational opportunities by eroding trails, damaging sensitive habitats, and discouraging use by hikers, bikers, and skiiers.
|
|
|
| We welcome the commitment of the Government to supprot Community Partners through the programs listed. ** support shte "Adopt-a-Highway" program by doing cleanups along the highway 2.5 km to the east and west of the entrance to Peggy's Cove on route 333. Providing support for such a program makes good business sense. Tourism is a billion dollar industry yearly for the Province, and clean roadsides not only say to visitors that we care for our environment, they also creaste civic pride in our communitities. We encourage the Gvoernement to continue to support the listed programs but not to limit itself to those programs.
There are a number of other programs ** ** ** ** ** ** **, whose mandate is to foster civic pride, environmental responsibility and beautification through community participation and the challenge of a friendly competition. communities are evaluated on a number of criteriea; floral displays, tidiness, environmental effort, community involvement, urban forestry, heritage, landscaped areas and turf and open spaces. We encourage the Government to support this program. in return, communities across Nova Scotia will enjoy an increased availability and use of "green" space. ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **. |
|
|
| One way to prmote active living and the utilization of green space would be to limit "users" of the Trans Canada Trail to physical recreation only. By allowing ATV clubs to fill the vacuum ack in the late 1990s when the Rails-to-Trails inititative was just getting off the ground, we have inadvertently created a monster. Now the CATVDC is lobbying its puppet "clubs" to lobby the provincial governemnt against any and all ergulation. Sadly, I think environmentalists are out-numbered and less well funded so we need all the help we can get! |
|
|
| Nature recreation is great. We could even promote this to tourists. But let us look at recreation that will not harm the environment, such as kayak tours. |
|
|
| In doing so, please follow the Voluntary Planning's Interim Task Force Report on the OHV use recommendations. Allow the use of revenue from OHV registration to go toward a managed trail system. Keep wilderness Protected Areas protectd. Keep ecotourism balanced by regulating certain kinds of activities by tour operators (again Wilderness Protected Areas). |
|
|
| Describe some of your programs? How can I comment on them if I don't know what they are? |
|
|
| Now that we are in the process of solving the air, water and land pollution problems in Nova Scotia, how about cleaning up the criminal environment?
Murder, death threats, atmosphere of fear and intimidation, heavily armed criminals (** ** ** **), drug pushing (** ** ** **), money laundering, drug smuggling...
Where? Halifax?
No! Chéticamp, a small fishing community of 3,000 souls. |
|
|
| Set aside Five Bridge Lake area on the Chebucto Peninsula as a protected area for traditional outdoor recreatioanl activity ** ** ** **. |
|
|
| Agree with Bullet 3, page 10, but feel that very strict guidlines must be followed so that "green spaces" are not overused or abused by the public. Someitmes green spaces must be kept solely as green spaces to allow flora and fauna places to grow and prosper. |
|
|
| Steps in the right direction! These "green events" should be made available to the public on Crown Land more frequently and local communities should have input.
More "active living" needs to begin with the youth. Daily physical activity should be mandatory in shcools, even throughout high school. As tax-paters we all pick up the tab for the results of inactivity. |
|
|
| Same comments as above basically. I am also queationaing where all the funds will come from to promote anything and provide proper enforcement. Considering the dire econmic straits this province is in, I just don't know where the money will come from. |
|
|
| What does "active living" mean? What does "increase availability" mean? Are these buzz words for more degredation of the environment? |
|
|
| The need for physical activity is becoming more and more apparent and more people look to the outdoors for their exercise. It can also have economic benefit with the development of eco/adventure tourism. At the same time, motorized activity pollutes air, water, and a quiet environment. |
|
|
| Stock our lakes, rivers and streams with fish. |
|
|
| - trails: grants and logistical help for development, maintenance, and patrolling of trials, some for ATVs, som for non-motorized, some for walking only, some for waterways.
- timeline for Rails-to-Trails
- Education: include in the school curriculum "outdoor, hands on, environmental education". Ensure that possible insurance issues are resolved.
- resolve insurance problems for kayak and canoe enterprises
- designate some lakes as motor-free
- protect available public access to bodies of water. |
|
|
| Sounds good, however should be applied to crown land - DON'T GO LOOKING FOR MORE.
When a subdivision is being planned, green space must be incorporated. |
|
|
| This commitment is very vague. I agree that people need to be involved with nature reacreation and active living, but by increasing availability and use of "green" space sounds as though metro areas are considered. There are excessive "green" areas in rural NS, but overuse has to be cautious otherwise litter and pollution won't keep it a "green" area. How is an area designated "green" and what financial commmitment has been allocated? Who is appointed to verify the "green" areas is "green" by what standards (ie. could the Halifax Harbour ever be "green"?) |
|
|
| Need to fund outdoor programs. Bring back outdoor education in public schools. Subsidize outdoor programs in the private sector. |
|
|
| Commitment is too vague. Does it mean opening up the Tobeatic to ATVs? Should have outdoor recreation programts that stress human (not machine) physical activity and responsible use of nature. |
|
|
| See above comments |
|
|
| Public educotion on health benefits of this type of recreation (with the potential of savings to the health care system) from improved health of citizens should not be overlooked. |
|
|
| What exactly does this mean - again, it sounds good, but lacks concrete suggestions and commitments to preserving and re-creating green space in the face of economic conflicts. |
|
|
| reduce and limit use of ATVs - this is a destructive form of "nature recreation" |
|
|
| pg 10 - 3rd bullet – As above, what programs will be used? Are these programs currently operational or simply in the planning process? |
|
|
| This is a good idea, especially if nature recreation leads to increased knowledge and interest in protecting the environment. That protection must be the higher priority, however. Local community and environmental groups should be an integral part of this process of promotion. |
|
|
| While non-motorized and non-consumptive, nature-compatible forms of nature recreation are valueable for fostering support for natural areas, limits should be placed on visitor capacity. Other uses such as OHVs should be severally limited/restricted; implement the voluntary planning recommendations, re: OHVs. In both cases, significantly large areas of natural cover should be restricted from human use, access altogether, as a nursery or benchmark. There should be several places where humans hardly ever go; places for sensitive wildlife species such as the endangered American marten. Access trails, whether for foot or OHVs opoen up access for invasive, agressive species, with serious threats to native species and ecosystems, such as to the endangered Canada lynx and to American moose. |
|
|
| Keep ATVs away from people who are out to enjoy nature. |
|
|
| Very important to promote recreational uses of "green" spaces in well-managed, designated areas.
But Protected Wilderness Areas should be vigorously protected from many nonconducive forms of recreation and development. |
|
|
| There are two communities of nature recreators that unfortunately do not have compatible views about nature: those that prefer an unobtrusive experience (hikers, birdwatchers, photographers, ecotourists of many kinds, and the majority of tourists that visit the province) and those whose style is much more intrusive (off-road vehicle enthusiats, some mountain bikers, etc.). The interactions between these two groups are unfortunately often very one-sided: the former group finds the activity of the latter group quite disruptive, while the latter group is largely unaware of the former. Thus the province needs, first of all, to provide each of these groups with space where they can fully enjoy their separate activities. The activities of the first group are also compatible with the values and purposes of wilderness areas, where the health of the land and its flora and fauna are paramount. Those of the latter group are less compatible and sometimes anathema to the notion of protected areas. Thus nature recreationneeds to look well beyond the system of protected areas to provide space where the latter group can enjoy its style of recreation without negatively impacts the activities of other nature users or nature itself. |
|
|
| Its great. Municipal programs should support this commitment and Env. and Labour should run interpretive programs in the school holidays. It is essential that these programs and all other initiatives support passive recreation with minimal environmental impact. There should be areas within all reserves that are not promoted for human use, and are set aside as wilderness. ATV and other vehicle usage of protected areas should be severely limited and those areas patrolled, with fines for those who act illegally. |
|
|
| Again, too vague. |
|
|
| Where is the commitment to protect Nature for these activities? Is there legislation and policy in place with DNR, Tourism and Environment stating how this will be done?
Will Off Highway Vehicles continue running through these areas? |
|
|
| A huge problem here is the lack of coordination between the Departments of Natural Resources, Environment and Labour, and Tourism. Recreation is critical to health but we need trail systems that encourage hiking rather than motorized travel. Some progress is being made in this direction but the priority is low, progres slow, and the lack of coordination among departments a major obstacle. In health and economic terms the benefits of making timely progress here a priority can be significant. |
|
|
| All public land is held in trust for the public, now and for the future. This doeas not mean allowing logging or OHVs accessing these lands. |
|
|
| It is vital that stewardship programs be implemented to educate those people who use shores, rivers and wilderness area for recreational use. |
|
|
| I think this statement is the best I read in the booklet. Somebody finally realized that these lands are taxpayer properties, but again the statement is vague. The only way we would find this acceptable is if the type of nature recreation was spelled out. |
|
|
| Too Vague! |
|
|
| Again a very vague promise. What are these programs and how are they being promoted? I've never heard of them. |
|
|
| I think urban wilderness areas are great. They make communities more attractive, and provide opportunities for outdoor recreation. The only downside is safety. In metro there are some urban wilderness parks that aren't perceived as safe anymore because of some social misfits. We need to secure these areas so they can be enjoyed again. Getting people out more is a good step to making places safer too. One challenge would be how to motivate members of the community to participate in such programs. Once again targeting the children first would be an effective tool. |
|
|
| Wilderness areas should be protected and enjoyed with low impact enviromental activities. They should be open to hiking, fishing, canoeing/boating, exploring, etc.
Mining, forestry, ATV usage avoided only in special circumstances.
Eco Tourism should be fostered. |
|
|
| See GPI Forest Accounts for forest practices that can help enhance nature recreation. |
|
|
| Good ideas as long as equal rights are given to all recreational groups for each of their respective activities. I want as
much right as a prospector to use the lands and watercourses responsibly, with no environmental degredation as a fisherman does to go angling or a hunter does to harvest wildlife. Management and education, NOT sterilization and prejudice. |
|
|
| Yes, fine; especially to educate children and young people about their environment and the need to protect it.
However, RESTRICT ATV and OHV use. The destruction caused by these machines is severe. I see it everyday myself and it is heartbreaking.
|
|
|
| Create the green space by banning all industrial use and ATV's on public land in NS and you will see that tourists will flock to NS to marvel at our foresight. |
|
|
| - protection is important so that generations of Nova Scotians and tourists may enjoy the wilderness with low to medium impact activities (e.g. hiking, canoeing, cross-country skiing, and, where appropriate, rock climbing and mountain biking)
- use of green space should absolutely NOT be available to motorised vehicles or boats |
|
|
| just leave things as is and no more roads or trails be made. go from point A to point B your camp. |
|
|
| I agree that this is important. However we do have many "nature recreation" programs in our province and as long as we don't cut any funding to these; I think any $ would be better invested in acquiring land to be permanently protected (green space). |
|
|
| It should not be used to makes parts of the province and its resources inaccessible, |
|
|
| How restricted is the increased availability? |
|
|
| Green space is good, but how will it be acquired? Will it be a substitute for access to forested areas? (ie. if urban green space is provided therefore people stay out of the woods!). This could be a good and harmless suggestion, or it could be the beginning of Orwell's "1984". Access to forest land should not be reduced. |
|
|
| The present programs have sufficient authority to control the recreation areas. The problem is not enough and money and people to police. |
|
|
| Nature recreation should be encouraged, but certainly NOT to the point where it becomes a burden on natural systems. Education is a big part of respecting the natural world.We see very little in the schools that pays any attention to this. There is much work to be done in this area. The kids (the human future of Nova Scotia) need to know, understand and appreciate the incredible diversity around us and also understand they are a part of it. This will create ethics for the future that will help Nova Scotia's environment in the generations of humans and other species to come. |
|
|
| More hiking trails and natural areas where ATVs and jet skis are banned. |
|
|
| It all begins in the city. With a properly designed city, it would be easy to enjoy green space within the city, as well as have a form of public transportation to get to larger green areas around the city. Ban atv's and snowmobiles, they are only trouble, and disuade other users |
|
|
| This is a key activity. Education of existing "green spaces" and public access would go a long way in building community appreciation of nature recreation. Create requirements or incentives for municipalities and developers in requiring public green spaces. This is especially key in coastal areas! 95% of our coast is privately owned. This needs to change, otherwise we're going to end up like the State of Maine, which is spending millions and millions of dollars obtaining coastal green spaces and access points. |
|
|
| Fair commitment. |
|
|
| Change to, "Promote non-motorized, non-consumptive nature recreation..."
But...we don't want too many people recreating in our best places. Leave some natural! |
|
|
| Nature recreation can be promoted and encouraged through any or all of the following ways:
1) include bike lanes/multiuse pathways on new road building widening. This will encourage an already economically valuable industry of bicycle touring.
2) encourage trail builing and specifically trails that connect suburban and urban areas
3) encourage sharing the road with cyclists
4) encourage such recreational pastimes as cross country skiing, kayaking - those that are low impact.
Nova Scotia is BEAUTIFUL, and people should have access to that beauty, but should also be encouraged to take care of it.
|
|
|
| Nature recreation is a right of Nova Scotia citizens that should not be taken lightly. It must come with real responsibilties on all our part. First of all, we should keep it accessible by keeping park fees low, making sure public transit is available, and making sure children have access to environmental education programs through the school board and nature education centre. Provincial parks should be able to stay open longer and offer interpertation programs.
However, we should be encouraging outdoor recreation that does not damage the environment. We should promote camping, cannoing, kayaking, cycling, and not ATV, off road activities, jet skis or other fossil fuel, high consumption, noisy, distrubing activities.
We need to keep people on designated trails. Certain sensitive habitats shoudl be kept people free, as beaches are during piping plover nesting season. |
|
|
| The best way to do this is to advertise the areas where this is possible (i.e. advertise hiking trails, parks) Again, if the government purchased more land, and turned it into protected areas - these areas could be made available for "green tourism". |
|
|
| Nature recreaiton is certainly a beneficial way to increase stewardship and expose people to the preciousness of our wilderness. However, we need to develop a low-impact recreaiton education program in order to ensure our nature recreation isnt degrading the very wilderness we want to protect. Leave No Trace is being developed nationally across Canada, the NS government needs to adopt this philosophy and help LNT reduce nature recreations impacts. |
|
|
| Nature recreation should not support activities that severely damage the environment, such as ATV's. |
|
|
| Congratulations on acquiring these prime recreation areas. With increased usage, there will need to be management plans in place. This cannot be achieved fully by depending on volunteer community groups. Conflicting usage issues that arise between various groups may have to be resolved by an outside body whose mandate is to do what is best for the province as a whole. |
|
|
| The big factor here is the uncontrolled recreational use of ATVs (and snowmobiles to a lesser extent). The enjoyment of a few is ruining the outdoors for the majority and doing great damage to the natural environment. The recommendations of the Voluntary Planning ORV task force must be acted on with thoroughness and commitment. This is very important. |
|
|
| This is an area where promotion is a great idea. |
|
|
| -focus on low-impact nature recreation, i.e. hiking, cross-country skiing, bird watching, fishing |
|
|
| Work with toursim industry and outdoor recreation groups to develop ecotourism infrastructure and opportunites. |
|
|
| Green space is incredibly important. It is important to distinguish between land that is conserved for protection and that which is set aside for recreation, often these dual purposes can not be met by the same area. In both cases, the land must be appropriately managed. In terms of green spaces, it is important that these are located in and near cities to give all people an opportunity to experience nature. The types of activities allowed should be carefully monitored to minimize impacts. |
|
|
| Promote healthy use of our resources that encourage people to hike, paddle, sail, biking as in bicyle, swimming,cross country skiing, toboganning etc. These activities are more likely to promote better health, exercise, improve eating habits, and general sense of well being. They don't cost much, they don't pollute and they can be regulated |
|
|
| Recreation is fine, but some forms are much more damaging than others, and also serve to reduce the enjoyment of the outdoors by others. In particular, ATVs must be reined in, and contained to only the most hardened trails where they will not be a threat to other users. The approach must be to ban ATVs from areas where they do not have specific approval, i.e. a reversal of the current Wild-West situation. |
|
|
| This statements is tolerable as long as the commitment DOES NOT make parts of the province, and resources of the same, inaccessible to the people of Nova Scotia. |
|
|
| | |
| 6. | Please read our commitment on best management practices in water supply areas (p. 10, 4th bullet). Please provide your comments on this commitment and any suggestions you may have about its implementation. |
|
|
| No comments |
|
|
| On the surface this appears to be a 'Good Thing", but could be used to 'sterilize' land, depending on the interpretation. It should not be used to make parts of the province and it's resources inaccesssible to Nova Scotians. |
|
|
| Good |
|
|
| Since water goes downhill and most people live near the coast, it makes sense to preserve the integrity of inland waters. Put a moratorium on development of all crown lands to ensure the preservation of a natural buffer/filter for our water supply. |
|
|
| I would like to see all landowners abide to watercourse protection guidelines. The forest industry must leave buffers and landowners should as well. A landowner who owns a home along a large river, ie. LaHave, could clear up to the waters edge, whereas a forest activity, ie. harvesting, must leave a buffer (buffers are a good thing!)?
|
|
|
| Restrict forestry and other industrial activities in municipal water supply areas. Also restrict ATVs and other forms of OHVs from municipal water supply areas.
The province appears to be ready to allow the spreading of stabilized sewage sludge on farms and soil reclamation pojects. Without careful moniroting and oversight of Municipal source control plans and long term investment in separating storm drains from the sewage systems there is very real possiblity of contaminiation of water tables in Nova Scotia. Rural areas and farmers will be greatly affected by this issue and will likely be a serious political and health issue in rural areas of Nova Scotia. The EPA class "A" standards that HRM is using to assess its stabilized sewage sludge have resulted in a storm of controversy and litigation in the US.
Provincial government funding for sewage treatment is inadequate in HRM. The province has not lived up to its tradtional role of providing 1/3 funding for large municipal infrastructure projects in partnership with the federal and municipal governments.
We would like to see some emphasis put on protecting and remediating environmental damage to watersheds and wetlands. The provincial strategies should recognize watersheds as a distinct geographical system and plan strategies around protecting those watersheds. |
|
|
| Restrictions should be made province wide to prevent sprawling communities. These kinds of communities have been shown to reduce water quality in certain areas through old and improperly maintained septic systems. |
|
|
| Protecting our water supply areas is great. Again we need to get community buy in by education of the people about the impt of protecting their water supplies. |
|
|
| Again, invasive species have irreversibly altered the water quality of the Great Lakes, and increased incidences of botulism and blue-green algae have been shown to be linked to the invasive zebra mussel. Toxic algae introduced via ballast water can threaten aquaculture operations and cause sickness and even death in humans who eat toxic shellfish. Disease-causing bacteria and viruses carried in ballast also represent a threat to water quality. Unless the province works to remedy its response to invasive species issues, this province is vulnerable to the damage which invasive species can incur on healthy watersheds and human health. |
|
|
| You are on track. |
|
|
| Promote best management practices in water supply areas:
DNR and municipalities are starting a process of looking at watersheds and building a dialogue around habitat protection, for instance the protection of Atlantic whitefish in the Bridgewater area. This is a very positive step.
More work needs to be done to prevent contamination of ground water through
agricultural practices mining and quarrying
in high risk areas there should be a cycle of free water testing: for instance, in areas of arsenic contamination, people should have access to free water tests every 10 years
there should be requirements for disclosure in real estate sales of any known challenges
to the water supply in the surrounding area
|
|
|
| On the surface this appears to be a 'Good Thing", but could be used to 'sterilize' land, depending on the interpretation. It should not be used to make parts of the province and it's resources inaccesssible to Nova Scotians.
|
|
|
| - I am glad to see the new more stringent regulations in place.
- What specifically are you doing to: monitor progress among towns etc., assist in the training and certification, anyliaze the results, financially assist municipalities, towns, etc., and be a resource as needed? |
|
|
| · All OHVs should be prohibited from protected water supply areas. This issue was not discusssed in the Voluntary Planning OHV Task Force Interim Report.
· There should be no large scale manure spreading, factory farm waste spreading, or sewage sludge spreading permitted within any water supply area.
|
|
|
| Recognize the conservation function of such watershed areas and link them into the network of protected areas. |
|
|
| Reforestation of water supply areas provides the best protection: natural filtration, water retention. |
|
|
| All Towns & Cities should have proper sewage treatment - it is a disgrace that Halifax sewage goes into the harbour. |
|
|
| There is not enough protection given to private home owners on their own water. The NB Water Act is much better than NS has brought forward. |
|
|
| This is a good beginning, as long as municipal and provincial regulations are enforced. Ensure that there is adequate staffing at all levels. |
|
|
| I strongly agree with this commitment. Maintaining a strong supply of good quality water is very important.
Municipal land use controls which will limit the amount of development to unserviced rural areas is a good step towards protecting water quality.
In addition, methods to encourage industry/municipalities to use their supply in a more sustainably manner should be developped. For example, developing a pay system whereby citizens pay a flat rate for a basic allotment of water, but are charged a higher rate for any amount used over that basic amount would help curb wasteful water usage. |
|
|
| Does the protection of water supply areas intend on taking a longer term view? For example within the previous 10-12 years, both the town of New Glasgow and the twon of Truro have had extensive clearcutting in the watershed area. In New Glasgow this was up to the perimeter of Forbes Lake.
Does the province intend to regulate the bottled water industry? Why not introduc a tax on bottled water which can be used for an education fund to promote understanding about good water management practices. In a province with so much water availabel why are we producting waste (plastic bottles) and waste energy (transportation/pollution) to buy something ** ** **, which should be available in a tap? |
|
|
| I see the call for research. Great. Where's the call for action? Typical. |
|
|
| I cannot agree with this because it would affect areas of Halifax regional municipality that are outside targeted areas. |
|
|
| And sue them if they offend. |
|
|
| There are already laws governing water supply areas, and they are posted, I don't want to be sassy, [ Leading by example] but your track record {Goverment of N.S.} speak for themselves. They have screwed up Fishing Industry, Forestry, Agriculture, and everything else you had your fingers in. |
|
|
| I believe once again that public education and behavioural change campaigns are essential when it comes to issues of water protection. Development around lakes and streams must also be checked and septic systems must be maintained. Once again, government incentives for citizends to protect water supply areas could be implemented. |
|
|
| Great idea - tell me more! How about some time-lines? |
|
|
| Agree wholeheartedly with bullet 4, page 10. but must not let the hope of a few added tax dollars decrease your resolve to protect water supplies. I ahve seen polluters who will offer jobs, be allowed to bed and break laws solely for the almighty buck in municipal coffers. |
|
|
| I have to wonder about the wisdom of expanding the Kaiser Meadow landfill site in order to take yet more garbage from other municipalities. It is a catch-22 in that their money pays for our expansion but would we need the expansion if we buried only garbage from Chester Municipality? After all, water flows downhill to the coast. |
|
|
| Ban logging mining and other industry from local watershed areas. |
|
|
| Please ensure (with legislation updated) that industry ** ** ** or any other multinational cannot clearcut near watershed's and riperian zones. Let's overhaul the Forest Practice Code to ensure this happens, or address other forest policy that impacts this issue. It is already happening and our water supplies are in danger as we don't have any science on what happens to the soil run off of clear cuts near water supplies - we MUST address this.
|
|
|
| Words like "continue to work with" and "develop" sound like nothing definite is really in place.
Something as important as water quality and supply require best managment practices to protect water supply areas. I was shocked this past year to learn that watershed areas in our coutny are not protected from herbicide spraying (by regulation) unless they have a special designation in Boston, where water comes from a watershed area that maintians forests that are FSC certified. |
|
|
| To implement this strategy, the government should, at the least, support the development moratorium put in place by the planning department of HRM, and any subsequent moratoria that HRM or any other municipality requests government support for.
The development lobby is strong, but their cause is purely economic. The line must be drawn, and there needs to be a thoughtful set of restrictions put in place to curb the unplanned, cancerous growth that has suburbanized HRM in the past 20 years.
|
|
|
| One thing that the government could do to help maintain water supply quality is to encourage more, small diversified farms rather than LARGE operations which overload the land with waste and gerilizer near water suplly areas. Right now, it seems that the small farmers are being choked with regulations forcing them to quit while the larger operations are having to grow even bigger just to survive. |
|
|
| Declare certain areas around lakes and watershed areas off limits to cottage development.
|
|
|
| Let us see a whole lot more concern on the part of the government in working with municipalities. To date, there has been no evidence of a response to the resolution from the UNSM regarding regualtions on pits and quarries. This cooperation should extend over resources in the province. |
|
|
| Land use controls are necessary even if it means not allowing a subdivision in sensitive areas for example. |
|
|
| Good! |
|
|
| Good statement but interpretation is key. Accessability and development should be allowed within guidelines, not sterilization. |
|
|
| Keep information flowing to the general public. |
|
|
| - legislation to strictly protect bodies of water that are used for drinking water, including restriction of activities on surrounding lands.
- no bulk export of water
- monitoring of water table and private wells by government departments where there are bottling plants and other high-water use businesses.
- stop clear cutting! Forests retain water (cooler climate, snow and ice), release it slowly - continuous re-supply in lower lands. |
|
|
| Need strong regulation - suitable enforced - re: water quality and protection from pollution. |
|
|
| See above comments. |
|
|
| Best managment practices need to be implemented in all sectors. Agriculture, forestry, development, transportation, fisheries, recreation, etc. |
|
|
| No logging, dumping, or vehicular access. |
|
|
| pg 10 - 4th bullet – no comment |
|
|
| See above - not strong enough; 'recommendations' and 'best management practices' do not replace hard legislation. |
|
|
| Once again, nondiscretionary regulation and effective enforcement will be necessary to achieve the goal of protecting our water supply. |
|
|
| I have grave concerns over current plans to spread treated sewage from Halifax on rural fields. The "sewage" in Halifax also contains chemicals from many surces, from the latex paint from people washing out paint brushes, to the runoff from salt and "black snow" that is found on the streets in winter. |
|
|
| Yes, work on better land use controls, etc, and any other means of improving the ability of local/municipal governemnts to better manage and protect all waterways and aquatic systems regardless of whether they are currently being used to supply domestic, industiral and other forms of water use to humans(not just water supply areas). This also requires that financial and other resources must be transfered to Municipal levels, so they can take on this added task and responsibility. |
|
|
| stop clear cutting |
|
|
| Should also include more monitoring and support to rural areas which are not covered by incorporated communities or activities. |
|
|
| Again, start protect watershed areas by restricting logging and OHV destruction |
|
|
| This commitment should include not the undertaking to work with industry and municipality, but also with environment groups, landholders and the general cummunity. Management of water supply areas needs a wholistic approach with the protection and where necessary, the restoration of the water source as first priority. It is essential that the water sources are maintained in perpetuity and commitment is given to monitoring and research of these areas, so we know what the fundamental ecological needs of the system are. Extraction and human use of water should be of secondary importance. It is essential that as much attention be given to groundwater as to surface water and that management plans are development for each water source. These should be guided by an overarching province-wide Management Plan. |
|
|
| Please see my comments above (in portion already submitted). |
|
|
| Where is the commitment to protect the water sheds of our communities? You are going to continue doing the same thing as you are now and do what...?
Priority should be on agricultural run off into our streams, lakes, oceans...raw sewage...
There should be a zero emissions policy in place where appropriate - Let me come back to Off Highway Vehicles - they do not belong in the environment for recreational purposes! |
|
|
| What would the research and development ultimately lead to? What are you researching? What questions are you trying to answer? It all sounds great, but I have no idea what is being considered, or what the goals ultimately are. |
|
|
| We agree, with consideration to activities already in place. |
|
|
| Our water is our future and the forests are the protectors of our water suppleies. We must manage these resources better and prevent clearcutting and the mis manaagement of the wilderness ares that are left. |
|
|
| Too Vague! |
|
|
| Better urban planning, including the control of sprawl in urban areas, will help preserve the quality of our water supply by maintaining natural areas around water supply sources. This requires phased development and the support for public infrastructure to reduce or alleviate sprawl and reduce road-building (e.g., public buses, commuter rail, high-density residential areas). |
|
|
| .NSDEL does not apparently see itself as the overall manager of the wtaer resources of the province. If they did they would continue the regional water resource evalautions of the 1970's and 190's to determine how much water we have to use and threfore how best to protect it. Re-establish the regional resource evaluations. |
|
|
| River restoration and rehabilitation programs can be extremely successful (ie Sacville River, West River (Antigonish). Charles MacInnis of DFO in Antigonish is a pioneer in this area. No money has been avaiable but government/public should see what good before and after axamples can look like. |
|
|
| See GPI Water Quality Accounts for detailed information on this question. |
|
|
| In this case I think that economic incentives and consequences are key to delivering results. Industry needs economic results to determine policy changes. |
|
|
| Don't forget that transportation controls may be an important part of this process where an important water supply area is adjacent to a highway. |
|
|
| Very important. Just do it.
|
|
|
| Mostly good ideas - just don't sterilize land by making huge buffer zones around these water supply areas. Proper management and monitoring will go a long way. Educate the general public and INCLUDE them in future plans of land uses in these areas. |
|
|
| - money will be needed for research into best how to achieve this commitment |
|
|
| let the camp owners look after their area. |
|
|
| Start by designating community watersheds throughout the province, and develop standards of forest practices, especially roadbuilding and harvesting. |
|
|
| You should have the word "committed" in this bullet.
Again, specified targets/goals would be nice. |
|
|
| sewage treatment! |
|
|
| Same answer as previous. |
|
|
| To protect water supply areas is a good thing. As long as activities that do not pollute the area are still allowed to continue. |
|
|
| Most water management is done by federal laws and control. |
|
|
| No industrial encroachment on watersheds, period. This includes industrial forestry, mining etc. Water is the life blood of everything, it should be treated as so. |
|
|
| . |
|
|
| Keep them natural. No loging or roads, etc. |
|
|
| This commitment should be number one. The media has already labelled water and the "Oil of the 21st century". We must protect our water supplies, by promoting BMP's, encourage proper landuse, restricting activities, etc. |
|
|
| It is essential that the provincial government monitor water practices of municipalities. Water is crucial to human beings, and a safe water supply is absolutely necessary. Regular inspections of water sheds and water supply sources must be conducted by experts in the field. |
|
|
| We need mandatory buffer zones around watershded including all streams, and lakes where no development and foresty activities are allowed.
Mandatory water reduction commitments at municipal and provincial level
Subsidies for purchasing and installing water efficient toilets and showers
Charge user fees to golf courses, and corporations who insist on using more than certain amounts of water during drought
More water testing facilities in rural areas
|
|
|
| Good in principle but lacking specifics. For example many rural supplies are threatened by forest clearcutting and insufficient green belts along waterways. |
|
|
| Sounds great if actually accomplished. |
|
|
| -focus on development in existing serviced areas---there is space in downtown Halifax for more development
-conduct extensive, long-term assessments taking into account all environmental factors before any development takes place in new areas |
|
|
| Ban logging and other forms of industry from municipal watershed areas. |
|
|
| AGREE on protecting water supply. Encourage groups such as HRM's Five Bridges group that involves industry and residential concerns with protection and recreational concerns. |
|
|
| The above comments on ATVs apply again here. |
|
|
| This statements is tolerable as long as the commitment DOES NOT make parts of the province, and resources of the same, inaccessible to the people of Nova Scotia. |
|
|
| | |
| 7. | Please read our commitment on supporting communities (p. 10, 5th bullet). Please provide your comments on this commitment and any suggestions you may have about its implementation. |
|
|
| Other community partners that should receive provincial support are:
- various endangered species at risk recovery teams.
- nature conservancy |
|
|
| I do not agree with government sponsorship of special interest groups whose only intent is to sterilize land. |
|
|
| There is a need for mroe public educatin and outreach on environment and health issues all across Nova Scotia. Community and conservation groups currently conduct much of this valuable work, which contributes greatly to protecting and preserving our environment. More support from the province is needed to allow such organizations to continue and expand their work.
Other than the Nova Scotia Youth Conservation Corps (which is a limited form of funding), DEL has no significant broad-based community funding program. New Brunwick has an Environmental Trust Fund available to community groups, municipalities, non-profit groups, and institutions. Its goal is to provide funding to a variety of "green" community projects. A similar trust fund is needed in Nova Scotia.
The money for the NB Environmental Trust Fund, which doles out $4-4.5 million per year, comes from green fees on recyclable beverage containers. In the past it also came from video lottery profits. However, here in Nova Scotia the RRFB collects money frmo deposits on recyclable beverage containers. This money is only allotted to further waste reduction education efforts, some of which are spearheaded by community groups. A portion of this money should be redirected into a Nova Scotia Environmental Trust Fund and made available to community and conservation groups for more general environmental projects.
Government should also restore funding to the Adopt A Stream program. It is ironic that the Green Plan would highlight this worthy program in the very year that IT WAS CANCELLED due to lack of funding. |
|
|
| It would be good to see an objective accounting of the effectiveness of these programs. I agree with the concept of community partnering, but I think this should also involve community-based evaluation of the programs, and a community-based process for improving them. It is critical that these programs develop by building on strengths and avoiding weaknesses. This cannot be achieved without a feed-back mechanism, including opportunities for communities to directly affect the forms of the programs (i.e. communities need to welcomed into the creative process). |
|
|
| Good |
|
|
