| 1. | In Toward a Sustainable Environment we outline our approach to a provincial framework for environmental management (for details see pages 22-27). We are interested in your thoughts on the best ways to meet our objectives. Please organize your answers by the headings listed below. 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 on strengthening policy direction (p.22, top of 23). Please provide your comments on these commitments and any suggestions you may have about their implementation. |
|
 |
| Generally I support and appauld the commitments made by the Green Plan to strengthen policy direction are sensible commitments. Providnig of course they are indeed carried out. In the past we have so often not seen this. I want to see stronger environmental policy through reviewing of legislation and working with stakeholders to ensure that provincial environmental policy is relevant to current issues. It is absolutely critical that government always consult with the public by government departments, and strongly support coordinated reporting across government. I want government to continue to consultate and collaborate with federal departments, as previously mentioned like Environment Canada, Parks Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada, as well as with non-government organizations who have a strong interest in environmental issues. |
|
|
| There are some excellent existing resorces that government can call upon to make the job easier and the reults better. ** ** ** ** **. |
|
|
| First your policies will not strengthen any thing; it will only confuse and disrupt gov. ties with the people who use these crown areas and eventually when these people have had enough they will burn them. Take a hard look at what you do before you do it. We are all stewards of this land not just gov. |
|
|
| ** ** **
** **
** **
** **
** **
Find this report to be a good working paper
|
|
|
| We need one agency that we can contact re. environmental rules and problems so that groups ** ** (**) can get the answers it needs quickly and easily. We can also send our suggestions to this one agency or office.
Possibly give tax breaks to industry and organizations that do the most for the environment. |
|
|
| One thing has not been mentioned: The mining industry.
Check the figures - mining brings in more revenue and provides more employmenet in the past than even logging or fishing - or it did the last time I checked.
The public should be educated. Let the word "mine" or "quarry" be mentioned and all the ignorance and false information comes to the "fore". I have worked ** years in the mining industry and I know the environemental hurdles and over regulating is sometimes just plain stupid. Every mine I ever worked in, if you went back you wouldn't even know a mine was there. |
|
|
| To review some of the earlier recommendations,
1. Have a stand-alone group ** ** ** serve as the funding agency for the provinces environmental issues (this would provide secure funding for the groups and free up staff time for the now-separate government departments).
2. Have energy use alternatives and efficiency increases as key pillars in the planning for Nova Scotia’s provincial government, instead of afterthoughts.
3. Create a Vermont-style energy efficiency utility.
4. Promote energy industry and organization professional development.
In addition, and in response to the three bullets in this section, the government can strengthen public policy direction by including stakeholders, the public and vested interests in every stage of policy development, not just passively asking for responses to vague and wasteful policy documents that nobody plans to implement anyway.
|
|
|
| ** feels that the commitments made by the Green Plan to strengthen policy direction are sensible commitments, and we encourage the strengthening of environmental policy through reviewing of legislation and working with stakeholders to ensure that provincial environmental policy is relevant to current issues. We stress the importance of consultation with the public by government departments, and strongly support coordinated reporting across government. However, we would like to see continued and increased consultation and collaboration with federal departments, such as Environment Canada, Parks Canada, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada, as well as with non-government organizations who have a strong interest in environmental issues. |
|
|
| Much could be written on this topic. The province is void of many aspects of consensu building on decision making proeceses within environemental protection. Other areas which must be placed in effect is the provincial roundtable , which is not a t present active. The Environment Act review of 2000 still has not had the recommendations legislated and the time for another review is upon us. An ongoing porblem also appears to be the reluctance of the province to empower the staff of DEL and DNR towards environemental protection. Overuse of what is perceived to be "non-regulatroy compliance", section 2(i) Evnironment Act, abournds in our province. It would appear to be overused and misunderstood as a method to deal with environemental monioring to the point that the public views of protectino given and regulated by our province to be ineffective. |
|
|
| Definitely need to review and change legislation to meet current needs. |
|
|
| I think most importantly the government must involve citizens and listen to the voic of communities. I think both the municiapl and provincial governments are improving in this regard, and must continue to do so. |
|
|
| Effective policy needs clear objectives and targets. You have not set these out as already discussed in my letter (attached)
Integration of environmental issues at all levels of government is essential. There really should be no need for a Department of the Environment. Environmental considerations should permeate all other departments in such a fundamental way as to make a department dedicated to environmental issues redundant. These issues need to be addressed all levels of decision-making and in all government departments. Again, if we put the environment central in our decision making we don’t need a special department, just like at the moment we don’t have a Department of the Economy, economic decisions just permeate the rest.
|
|
|
| The document at hand, "Towards a Sustainable Environment," and its accompanying workbook is an excellent example of a way to involve the public in environmental initiatives. I only wish that I had obtained it sooner so that I would have had time to digest it more thoroughly. I also hope that many ordinary citizens take the time to participate; and that the responses are not skewed by vested interests in the business world. Participatory democracy should involve a lot of these guests for submissions from the public, especially if they are NOT limited to an online format. |
|
|
| Working with stakeholders is important as is leading by example as long as the stakeholders ARE consulted and their recommmendations are considered. Involving the public is high on my priority list. The day is here when Canadian citizens are becoming increasingly fed up with NO consultation as to what they want and grotesque over regulation in many aspects of our everyday life. We need more serious consultation that will actually be taken into consideration when drafting legislation. |
|
|
| Bullet #2 under Strengthening Policy Direction absolutely undermines any real government commitment to public input.
Encourage?
Guidance?
No requirement?
No ensuring?
If this stays as weak as it is, the whole document fails. |
|
|
| I shall remain skeptical of the intentions of the Nova Scotia Government until I see major changes underway. |
|
|
| All worthy commitments, but not worth the paper they are printed on if the resolve and backbone is not there to carry them out. So far that determination is not evident to an effective degree. |
|
|
| LEADING BY EXAMPLE - Good plan.
This plan will be too expensive to implement.
Fly over Nova Scotia before the leaves are on the trees and observe the timber!!
Promote industry! Encourage economic growth! |
|
|
| To continue my theme throughout this workbook!! We try to "manage" everything BUT the effects of increasing human populations!
Governments are unwilling to "OFFEND" groups such as tunnel vision religious groups, etc. etc. by broadcasting the TRUTH! That is, we must limit our global and yes Nova Scotian population
|
|
|
| - new and stronger legislation to protect the environment and for more efficient use of our resource is needed.
- education and following of rules and laws has to be emphasized.
- we need to shift from consumerism to efficiency: initiate a program for production efficiency similar to the Energy Efficiency Evaluation. |
|
|
| We need to put the money in place to actually enforce our existing legislation. |
|
|
| The government can strengthen public policy direction by including stakeholders, the public and vested interests in evry stage of policy development, not just passively asking for responses to vague public consultation documents. Stakeholder advisory groups should be foremd and seats at the decision making table should be created. Stakeholder representation for these should include cientists, academics, environmental NGO groups and First Nations representatives. |
|
|
| Once again these are empty words. Fine intentions but no real commitment. |
|
|
| I would like to see NS take a major leading role in environmental management. To do so we need to make the environment a top priority and work towards bringing in some tought environmental laws. It is easy to talkt the talk - we need action. |
|
|
| Policies and government commitment needs to be strengthened. it is disheartening that the government supposedly worked on the "Green Plan" for years and this is the final result. The consulation process is also disappointing. The so-called "commitments" are too general and the requested feedback is also too general. What exactly is the government thinking - what options for implementation are they considering? The Green Plan and the consultations do not provide any answers. |
|
|
| Start giving good publicity to businesses/industry/individuals that have achieved, or are making valuable strides in achieving better practices.
Put as much effort into promoting/recognising positive initiatives and efforts (even though they may sometimes be small) as you do into publicising news about polluters and disasters. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| These are great. I believe the province can very effectively lead the way through its actions. There are quite a number of jurisdictions that have made a serious commitment to the environment through their buying policies. New York City, for example, requires FSC certified wood in its contracts. It's even possible to buy FSC certified pencils for schools at essentially the same price as run-of-the-mill uncertified wood. The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program os the Green Building Society is another certification program the province should embrace. And whatever grenn, sustainable programs the Province uses, it should strive for the highest rating. |
|
|
| No comment |
|
|
| The province must completely re-vamp the regulatory process for oil and gas exploration and development. The current system is not working to the benefit of Nova Scotians, the environment, or even industry. Moreover, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board has demonstrated a tendency to mislead the people if this province regarding ecological impacts of oil and gas, a practice that is inconsistent with the Green Plan’s stated goals of community involvement in decision-making.
See response to question 2 for ideas on policy for invasvie species. |
|
|
| The government needs to provide strong direction to departments to always act with sound environmental principles in mind. In particular, the Department of Natural Resources seems to see its purpose as being to facilitate commercial exploitation of our land and resources, rather than to protect the land as a steward and monitor. This culture needs to change. The Integrated Resource Management process should be rethought and redirected to emphasize protection and the precautionary principle. |
|
|
| Critical to sustainable environment is an immediate action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection. We are in crisis mode as the province is being clear cut before our very eyes.
There needs to be a moritorium on harvesting and road, or other development, in all environmental hot spots in the province, such as the Ship Harbour Long Lake Wilderness, until environmental assessment and community planning is completed.
Designate Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas as has been proposed with borders as recommended.
Consider the Musquodoboit and St. Mary's Rivers for the Canadian Heritage River Program.
Woodlot owners should be rewarded through excellent tax incentives for practicing low impact or other green types of harvesting
Industry must pay the full costs of environmental remidiation as determined by third party evaluation.
The province must focus on creative ways for value added employment to be generated by all our natural resources. These should not be shipped raw from NS where employment could be generate here.
The province must focus on and protect the environment. You must see the urgency of this and the incredibly vunerable state we have put ourselves. Time is running out. Action, leadership and vision are needed as they have never been before. Look to the forests and the seas and you must know.
|
|
|
| Begin adopting GPI Atlantic measurements so that the public will finally have a realistic view of environmental costs and benefits.
Tie the costs and revenues together to expose gaps and areas that have to be redressed. |
|
|
| Yes, public participation needs to be greatly enhanced and expanded. We need mush broader discussion of several critical issues.
Think always in terms of ecologically sustainable development. |
|
|
| What is wrong with our policy now? Enforcing existing legislation would help. Working with stakeholders? If I like to fish, hunt,farm,prospecting or walk in the woods am I a stakeholder? I do not think a partnership or shared responsibility is a good idea because it could and would give powers to special interest groups which one could say controled the government. |
|
|
| Fully support.
|
|
|
| Strengthening policy direction:
There should be an interdepartmental approach to policy. The multi departmental model suggested by the Voluntary Planning interim report on OHVs should be considered.
Instead of encouraging public consultation, the government should be requiring
departments to involve the public in major environmental initiatives at the early
stages and in a meaningful way.
action planning needs to have time frames and accountability.
|
|
|
| hants County needs protected land immediately. The Stanley Wilderness Area Must be identified as protected as soon as possible.The South Maitland Proventicial Park Reserve must also be protected.Long Lake and Devils jaws as well as the Nine Mile proventicial park reserve must be protected. |
|
|
| The govenemnt is meant to regulate, police and enforce. All the mumbo jumbo about collaboration is political speak for allowing the abusers to continue their abuse, to negate the efforts of those seking long term solutions and provide methods to delay so that pollution continues. |
|
|
| Without a link to these paragraphs it is not possible for me to make comments on them. Sorry. Otherwise I would have. |
|
|
| Additionally, I think it's necessary to articulate which goals policy should support. |
|
|
| As a group, we object to more taxation to implement these objectives.
Also, we object to initiatives that prevent eviromentally responsible extraction of natural resources. |
|
|
| There should be a priority review of Crown Lands to determine those for new protection.
Thus, there must be a moratorium on NS Public Lands Coalition and NSEL hotspots while studies are being done.
The management planning process for the Tobeatic and all other protected areas should be strengthened and accelerated
|
|
|
| It is unclear what these commitments will mean in real terms. We encourage the government to consult with stakeholders on policy issues related to the environment. However, it is also the role of government to take a leadership role on difficult issues that will impact the environment of the province in the long term. The province must use the best information available and take a precautionary approach to environmental issues in order to protect the environment we all depend on. |
|
|
| Too vague! |
|
|
| THese are good, though I hope they allow for plenty of input from environmental advocacy groups and scientists. |
|
|
| Promised legislation sounds great but how about some ENFORCEMENT of existing legislation as a start. |
|
|
| I think it is vital that the government (in all it's departments) lead by example. We definitely need to encourage and push all parts of the goverment to move forward in this regard. |
|
|
| For seven years we have been providing the NS government with a key element of such a framework - in the GPI measures. Adopting these measures will provide you with the framework you need. |
|
|
| It is great that you have designated two more wilderness areas. Bravo! Make sure you protect the whole area |
|
|
| Last year the province made an important first step in looking at environmental issues in Cape Breton and the Bras d'Or Lakes by hiring a Bras d'Or Lakes coordinator. The coordinator was playing a strong leadership role in getting the major players together to help improve waste water management in the Bras d'Or. Unfortunately the position was removed through no fault of the coordinator or the NSDOEL area manager. Coordinating a diverse group of people such as First Nations, municipalities, NGO's etc is a difficult task. I recommend that the province consider reinstating this position in order to assist with these issues. |
|
|
| These commitments could be achieved by observing, and actually enforcing, existing legislation, although the costs may be prohibitive. The Atlantic Provinces deserve more of the Offshore Oil Revenues, it's ours.
|
|
|
| Fine. Do it. Action is necessary....not just promises.... |
|
|
| Strong collaborations between the education and government sectors in treating environmental issues must be encouraged and facilitated by government policy. |
|
|
| - the Green Plan is a great start, and it will take a gutsy government to get it fully implemented
- however, please increase the profile of this plan by giving it major attention on the Nova Scotia government website! do you know how long it took to find this? there should be a huge button the home page to direct people toward this survey...do it now, please! |
|
|
| Enough with the policy already! We want a commitment from government to protect all public lands from further development and destrcution. Do not develop policy. Pass legislation! |
|
|
| Integration within NS government yes but also integration within the broader Maritime region is also needed. Think beyond the provincial border. Work with the other Maritime provices. Develop one system where we have two or more now. Harmonize more. Save our money. Do a better job. Support informed decision making region wide.
Use the government's purchasing power to achieve critical mass in push the priviate sector toward green ways of doing things.
|
|
|
| These are NOT objectives! Objectives are specific; have expected outcomes which are measurable; are feasible and realistic.
Shame on you! |
|
|
| I especially like "leading by example". Government departments (especially NSDEL) should set a STRONG example.
As with everything some financial incentives would be nice. If direct financial incentives cannot be provided, information on long-term financial savings should be highlighted. |
|
|
| Observe and enforce current legislation !!!!
The maritimes should receive more of the offshore oil revenues. |
|
|
| Fanatics in everything is bad. No matter how good the intentions, do not take away the average person's rights to go into any area and work as long as they act in a responsible manner.
|
|
|
| Listen to scientists who are warning about environmental degradation and use this information as the basis for policy making - not back room deals that don't even consider the science. |
|
|
| These commitments could be achieved by observing, and actually enforcing, existing legislation, although the costs may be prohibitive. The Atlantic Provinces deserve more of the Offshore Oil Revenues, it's on our turf, just underwater. Please don't tax me anymore, welfare, and sitting on my ass is becoming a viable option. |
|
|
| Fair commitments. |
|
|
| We need to stop creating "paper" strategies for better managing our environment and actually begin to put these into practice. Government needs to immediately implement an internal sense of change which puts greater emphasis on mainting the ecological integrity of our environment and less emphasis on pleasing the economic hiers which are essentially harming our current society and societies to come. |
|
|
| Again, I must stress the importance of consulting the communities on environmental issues. Too often, things are happening without community consultation. I see this commitment is part of your plan. PLEASE STICK WITH THIS COMMITMENT!! Community meetings are essential before any developments or cleanups are allowed. |
|
|
| We need a policy to create a network of protected areas in Nova Scotia. We need to protect more wilderness areas and the coridors between them
We need a policy on coastal development that will identify and protect senstive habitats and regulate the kind of development that can occur on the floodplans and along the coast.
Also need a real commitment to public involvment in the policy process. NO more sneaking documents like this Green Plan in under the radar with minimal public input. |
|
|
| Get on with it the sooner the better. |
|
|
| Nova Scotia has set the direction in the past. Pollute, allow resources to be exported and money to go outside the province. Act local. We need to have policies that are sustainable for the environment not just for large outside interests who export their money made from our resources abroad. We life in the environment left behind. |
|
|
| This sounds wishy washy. Canada's environmental polcy is not that strong compared to many other nations - there is a lot further to go. |
|
|
| Leading by example is such a key component if you actually follow through. |
|
|
| I cannot stress enough... keep the environmental objectives in mind, consistently, for all government goals. They complement each other and will have a synergistic effect. |
|
|
| Looks good. Do it. |
|
|
| I support A broad and long range vision, coordinated, community based approach with an emphasis on conservation, science and protection of resources |
|
|
| The words are all right. |
|
|
| Change practices of other departments and municipalities before you go into high minded strategic planning on larger issues please. |
|
|
| You are missing the boat... no pun intended... by ignoring our water-based activities. It's tourism, no0t fish farms that will build our economy and tourists want clean, neat and pristine areas, not fishing tugs, and net cages in our coves. |
|
|
| This is all good. My one comment would be to make sure that all decisions are made with the bigger picture in mind. The last thing we want are many initiatives that are interesting, but do not contribute to the end goal. |
|
|
| All of these goals can be achieved by observing policies and legislation in place now. There is no need for new initiatives. |
|
|
| | |
| 2. | Please read our commitments on leading by example (p. 23). Please provide your comments on these commitments and any suggestions you may have about their implementation. |
|
|
| First bullet – remove “work towards ensuring” with “Legislate”. All buildings should meet the model national energy code for buildings. This also addresses the second bullet, because if all buildings, future and current, meet the model code, then they will be efficient buildings.
Third bullet – why is the government not purchasing green power now? At least 20% of all electricity that the government pays for should be from green sources. 50% is a much more appropriate number.
The other two points are fine, but should have been in place ten years ago. This whole document plans to implement strategies that should have been put in place a decade ago.
|
|
|
| One topic that is not not in the report is the environmental degredation of the night sky that is produced by light pollution. Light pollution is caused by poorly design light fixtures (sadly this includes most on the market) that put light where it is not needed . The results are light trespass (light that shines on other people's properlty), glare (light that shines directly into the eyes of people in the vicinity), energy waste (both in terms of money and greenhouse gas emissions to produce the energy), and a loss of a dark sky casued by light going upwards and illuminating particles in the atmosphere.
(A recent RV ad shows a father and daughter out in the wilderness under a dark sky and the child asks "Why can't we see the stars at home". The answer is light pollution.
The proevince should adopt a policy to install only lower wattage, fully shielded lights in the future, establish a program to begin retrofitting existing light, and encourage other users to do the same. The city of Calgary is relpacing all of its "cobra head" streetlights with shielded fixtures and expects to recoup the cost of the new fixtures in several years just from the energy savings.
One of the worst recent examples are the lights that were just put up in Dartmouth at the intersection of Victoria Road and the Circumferential Highway. Light from these fixtures shines onto the middle of the MacKay biridge and the TOP of Magazine Hill.
Light pollution is one of the few types of pollution that saves money by fixing the problem. Better lighting means, safer lighting (no glare), lower power bills, greenhouse gas reductions, and as an extra benefit brings back the wonder of the night sky.
** ** ** ** ** **. |
|
|
| It is government's repsonsibility to do so as the elected body. Let us not forget that. Leadership is about action. Real detailed commitments with targeted dates, partners, and actions. This is something the environmental/health/social community knows and puts into place every day with vigour and commitment, we would be lost as a society without the voluntary sector - I know this as a volunteer who spends ** ** hours a week doing what I can, for not economic benefit, but because it is the right thing to do and at times government has let me down. But I do have hope having met so many good people in government that also want change. My hope is that they are listened to by their leaders/managers. PLEASE keep the community groups, the outspoken community groups at the table and in the discision making process. |
|
|
| We applaud the work of this task force/committee and suggest the website you refer to will be widely publicized in the articles and TV programs we suggested in our comments re: p. 10 2nd bullet. |
|
|
| This is great, but as said earlier, give us details, timelines and commitment. |
|
|
| I stated earlier in this workbook that gov. record is not good at leading and I standby what I have said; the blind can't lead the sighted in daylight. Who ever wrote this document could have used 6 to 7 pages of paper with a lot less confusing language. ** ** ** can'tput my canoe and pack on my back and trek the 4 miles from where I will have to leave my truck to get to a camp ** ** ** **; but because of your new laws I can't drive to anymore even on my bicycle thanks to you. I grew up in canoes and small boats I now have to take a course at $65. for something i taught. I have a ** ** old ATV that will soon require insurance and a course. I had guns to register and pay for. How long will it be before I will need a permit to cross the street. Your government is heading this Country towards civil war. Its time for Big Brother to back off. We are still a free country and your getting under my skin.
Educating the public, encourageing community pride and ownership are greatly needed. We have the mediums to do this. |
|
|
| Agree with all of page 23.
Possibly give tax rebates to industry that uses green power and/or cuts down on wastage of any sort, including energy. This could also be extended to private citizens who demonstrate that they have been able to cut down on energy consumption and/or waste production. Make it substantial enough to make it worthwhile, both to industry and individuals.
Increase funds to commuter transportation initiatives that cut down on auto traffic and fuel consumption. Nova Scotia has a very crude public transport network that fits the necessities of the motoring public. |
|
|
| We support the government's commitment to leading by example, and encourage the adoption of environmental responsible standards in all areas of government operation. True leadership will require more detailed commitments with targeted dates, partners, and actions. |
|
|
| This "leading by example" in the provincial government is very good, and I think it should continue.
I was very impressed (as were many citizens) but the government's push to ban pesticides, establish a composting program, and ban smoking in public areas. If we continue to be progressive by cleaning up our harbour and the Sydney Tar Ponds, Tuft's Cove, and preventing urban sprawl (ie. the moratorium), Nova Acotia could really be doing some great things.
I am generally improessed with theh government's efforts, but there are improviements to make.
It is an exciting path to take! |
|
|
| And also:
- Ban smoking in all public places (to begin with)
- Put regulations in place re: scented products in public places.
- Educate about the health risks (of smoking and using scented products in homes, around children)
- Legislate to stop industrial clear-cutting.
- Require FSC certification for forestry on Crown land.
|
|
|
| One way to lead by example would be to keep consulting the citizens of Nova Scotia in the same manner as done with this "Towards a Sustainable Environment" request for submissions. This could be a regular occurrance every second month, or even once a month if such exercises were less involved than the present one. Again, let me endorse the concept of the "Voluntary Simplicity Income" which could be related to compulsory (?) participation on the part of the public, thus enhancing democracy without having to resort to knee-jerk referenda. The latter are vulnerable to manipulation by the mass media, and would be even less representative of public opinion if held "online" because of the maybe 50% of people who make up the so-called information have-nots. So I would conclude that your proposed "green web site" include a mail out equivalent for those of us who cannot afford the "luxury" of the internet. And yes, purchase green power! |
|
|
| I think it's great that we lead by example PROVIDED that we do so within reason and our financial means. The last thing we want to do is stifle our poor economy further, or force established companies and individuals out of business. This MUST be considered when changeing existing regulations or drafting new ones. As far as the government and their own operations, they need to view the financial pros and cons very seriously for any changes. Certainly using environmentally friendly procedures, supplies, and equipment in their daily operation is a good idea. |
|
|
| Fine. A website is fine, but mostly a waste of money. People assume that a website is all that is needed to porvide a public face. Many people don't bother with government websites. Who do you think will use it? Better have a clear audience in mind. |
|
|
| Businesses and offices and apartments and condos need to be urged to recycle. All government vehicles (trucks too) should be tested for emissions and maintained for fuel and efficiency.
Most government (and public buildings) are overheated and uncomfortable - power consumption needs to be reduced.
If all of these initiatives were acted upon with determination and strong commitment we would have a beautiful and healthy province (world). But I wonder how much watering down will happen. Hopefully none.
This sounds a little bit like a John Hamm campaign publication. Is it? |
|
|
| Page 21:
"Forestry Code of Practice". We want to see the report on the practices of the Pulp and Paper Mills. Will these rules be applied to them or is this for the small land owner. We want to know: how much timber is cutt off of crown land, who is cutting it, and why the laws of silviculture do not apply. Unfair practices!!
We do not have the money, nor the funds to implment all of these proposals. If these proposals are enforced, you will be putting a lot of people out of work.
How do you propose to police this plan? |
|
|
| Commendable commitment. The original cost will be high, but we will be leaving something for our children.
No biosphere or there will not even be a place for us to live out our days. |
|
|
| - Continue to require that all new buildings that government is responsible for exceed the targets for the Model National Energy Code for Buildings by 25%.
- Evaluate all government and government-agency owned buildings for energy efficiency and implement the recommended retrofits over a time frame as established by the Sustainability Officers.
- Establish a building material code that reflects the principles of sustainability, to be followed by contractors used by government.
- Require that caterers used in government buildings purchase organic and local food.
- Government purchases shall be based on the most efficient use of energy, water, and resources, and the lowest life cycle costs.
- Government departments and agencies shall make their purchases locally whenever possible. |
|
|
| First bullet - remove "work towards ensuring" with "Legislate". All buildings should meet the model national energy code for buildings. This also addresses the second bullet, because if all buildings , buture and current, meet the model code, then they will be efficient buildings.
Third bullet - why is the government not purchasing green power now? At least 20% of all electricity that the government pays for should be from green sources. 50% is a much more appropriate number.
Fourth bullet - as part of a responsible (green) procurement policy all government departments and agencies should be required to only purchase 100% post-consumer recycled paper and only FSC certified lumber.
Fifth bullet - yes.
As part of your dommitment to lead by example, invasive species awareness and mitigation should be integrated inot all levels of government which deal with natural resources, transportation, recreation, and the environment. For instance, roadside planting should use native species rather than non-native species. Provincial park staff and otehr provincial field workers should recieve training so they can monitor for invasive species, educate otehrs about the issue, and, in some cases, how to mitigate effects and/or carry our rapid response plans for invasives. |
|
|
| Sounds good except the website - instead of developing a website, give the money to environmental organizations. |
|
|
| This government needs to listen to the people and protect our resources for future generations. Enough selling out to oil and gas, forestry and fisheries companies that exploit and harvest unsustainably.
I would like some sort of status report.
This document is full of buzz words and dolled up jiberish.
We need action and legislation like the development moratorium. |
|
|
| The government of NS does not lead by example. It makes a pretense of being concerned; a pretense that fools no one, and in fact earns only contempt.
The the government:
1. Requires that forest industry cutting on crown lands meet fSC standards
2. Imposes serious air quality standards
3. Meets its obligations to protect 12% of the provincial land mass
4. Imposes serious environmetnal controls on mines and quarries
5. Requires environmental impact reviews on all projects.
Then I'll believe that the government of NS is leading by example |
|
|
| Although a “green” website is an excellent idea, internet connections are not yet universal. A traveling road show however, where citizens can access information on government programs, see displays of “green’ power sources (i.e. solar cells), and talk to government representatives would be a valuable supplement to the website. |
|
|
| Implement incentives and/or rewards, including publicity, for good practices/improvments.
Promote/recognise the positive, no matter how small instead of (or at least in addition to) endlessly overwhelming us with news about polluters, disasters etc. |
|
|
| The Province has a long way to go before it can make claims that it is "taking a leadership role by managing its own operations in an environmetally responsible manner", or that there is "efficient and effective environmental management within government". Yes, some units such as the Protected Areas Branch of NSEl are doing a very good job, with pathetically minimal resources. This seems, however, to be one of the exceptions. Nonetheless, by doing the things noted in this book (and on pg. 23), things will be forwarded along the right direction. Much more is needed, though. I would encourage you to take a bold leadership role toward environmental conservation, and to lead by example. |
|
|
| Critical to sustainable environment is an immediate action plan to select and designate more large blocks of public (crown) lands for protection. We are in crisis mode as the province is being clear cut before our very eyes.
There needs to be a moritorium on harvesting and road, or other development, in all environmental hot spots in the province, such as the Ship Harbour Long Lake Wilderness, until environmental assessment and community planning is completed.
Designate Gully Lake and Eigg Mountain/James River as Protected Wilderness Areas as has been proposed with borders as recommended.
Consider the Musquodoboit and St. Mary's Rivers for the Canadian Heritage River Program.
Woodlot owners should be rewarded through excellent tax incentives for practicing low impact or other green types of harvesting
Industry must pay the full costs of environmental remidiation as determined by third party evaluation. |
|
|
| As well as purchasing green power, the government should provide assistance to wind farms and other sources of green power, and require Nova Scotia Power to facilitate the integration of green power producers with the provincial power grid. |
|
|
| The 'Leading by example' is a good strategy, which needs much further implementation - to give just a small example: what paper was used to print this 'Green Plan' - if it was recycled paper (which I doubt), you should have mentioned it in the printed document.
There are good ideas under these bullets, however! |
|
|
| As part of your commitment to lead by example, invasive species awareness and mitigation should be integrated into all levels of government which deal with natural resources, transportation, recreation, and the environment. For instance, roadside planting should use native species rather than non-native species. Provincial park staff and other provincial field workers should receive training so they can monitor for invasive species, educate others about the issue, and, in some cases, how to mitigate effects and/or carry our rapid response plans for invasives. |
|
|
| Example is good, but enforcement of regulations and standards is better. Besides, there's some revenue in it before perfection is attained. |
|
|
| Leading by example is the best way to lead. The government is in the best position to provideleadership if we are going to turn present practices around. We have to make decisions which will lead to a future for life.
|
|
|
| Fully support.
Government must ensure that various partnership programs are fiscally responsible and have complete representation not only from interested stakeholders and individuals but also from all appropriate disciplines of the scientific community, as well as the appropriate government departments and agencies. |
|
|
| See above comments |
|
|
| Great...look forward to the continuing progress... |
|
|
| Certainly, leading by example is important. However, with limited resources, if more can be accomplished by providing funds outside of government, then this should be a priority. Having a very "green" government that does not reflect the reality in the province is hardly beneficial overall. |
|
|
| PLEASE DO NOT IMPLEMENT ANY BIOSPHERE RESERVES in Nova Scotia. The costs to the province will be enormous, from the United Nations legal requirements for administration and policing.
We would draw your attention to the 'Louisianna Decision' in the United States, where a Biosphere Reserve was rejected, for good reason.
Also, Saskatchewan allows Mineral Exploration and Mining in it's conservation areas.
Also, Ontario recently reversed a court decision preventing Mineral Exploration an Mining in their conservation areas, apparently realizing the error of that decision.
Last but not least, Mineral deposits are fixed in the ground, by geological structure, and cannot be moved. They have to be extracted from where they are.
Below is a section that was cut and pasted from the Integrated Resource Management web page, Dept of Nat. Res.
Goal 4. Use mineral and petroleum resources in keeping with sustainable development principles.
Objectives:
Maximize opportunities for exploration/development of minerals and petroleum.
Ensure access to land and stability of mineral and petroleum tenure.
|
|
|
| Too vague! |
|
|
| We believe the idea of leading by example is a good one. We suggest that the government can also lead by example by supporting car pooling and public transportation use among government employees. For example, employees that car pool could be given access to “prime” or preferred parking spots or pay a cheaper price for parking. In areas with transit, transit passes for government employees could be subsidized or perhaps the government could look into a “Gov-Pass” program, similar to the “U-Pass” (university students’ pass) available to Saint Mary’s University students. Free transit passes can be a cheaper alternative than the development of new parking lots, new road construction, road widening, and maintenance (several U.S. employers have offered free transit passes to employees). |
|
|
| I think these are all good, particularly the purchasing of "green" energy. |
|
|
| If this all were to happen it would be wonderful. Wouldn't it be nice if politicians thought beyond the next election; that has long been the problem nationally as well as provincially. |
|
|
| NS's solid waste diversion efforts are exemplary as is HRM's ban on lawn pesticides. However we are not leading by example in our forest management practices, in our reliance on coal for energy production, etc. |
|
|
| I think all the points outlined on p. 23 are excellent. |
|
|
| Leading by example is great, but if no one knows what you are doing than they will not follow suit. The best way of educating the public is catching them young and introducing environmental curriculum in the schools. MOst people don't pay attention to what the government does in its own practices anyway. Regulations may be the stick you need to protect the environment. |
|
|
| When you protect areas, don't chop it up! |
|
|
| A commendable vision - but at what cost?
PLEASE DO NOT IMPLEMENT ANY MORE BIOSPHERE
RESERVES in Nova Scotia. The costs to the province will be enormous, both from the legal requirements for administration and policing, and that it may be the 'last straw' for many rural taxpayers. When you take away all that they cherish, they have
nothing to lose.
|
|
|
| Fine. Do it. Action is necessary....not just promises.... |
|
|
| - the government can do a lot to raise the profile of environmentally responsible behaviour
- we have to make it 'cool' to be green again, just as we did in the early and mid 80's |
|
|
| All these bullets lack commitment. "work towards", "improve", "adopt ... standards", "develop a website". You may be fooling most people with this soft language but you don't fool me. Lead by example by passing legislation to protect all public land from any further development and destruction. Just do it. |
|
|
| leading by example. means you should listen to what the people want, not the politicans. |
|
|
| Leading by example is an altruistic viewpoint, you need standards of practice and they must be audited. |
|
|
| I challenge the government to certify government operations to ISO 14001, report on performance regularly and maintain the certification for a 10 year period.
Go beyond the Model National Energy Code and make new government meet LEED Silver and 10% on new buildings meet LEED Gold. |
|
|
| If this is leading my example then God help us! I realize that you want input but when countless public servants are being paid very well to identify problems, to develop appropriate standards/policies etc., to find answers/take initiative and achieve sustainable results - then that is what we expect and what makes your departments credible and the public perceiving that they are getting their monies worth. Instead, it looks as though - beyond a fair tongue for smooth words and Motherhood pronouncements, you are devoid of focus, of ideas, of results oriented initiative - and so must ask us for ideas!
By the time your expensive 'Resource People and Specialists' have finished reading all teh prose written by people as frustrated as I am over your lack of application and industry, who knows how much time will ahve passed, money wasted, further poolution gone unchecked; opportunity lost, forests gone and damage done!!
Leadership you say - or abrogatino of duty, misuse of public trust and further public cynicism affirmed!
As for action-response-focus? |
|
|
|
I completely support these commitments. |
|
|
| It is very important to purchase a certain level of Green Power - ie. 20%.
the buildings could also act as a demonstration site for successful technologies such as solar energy for water heating and for producting electricity.
One important thing to remember is that if you are going to lead by example, you must do A LOT. It will be somewhat embarassing if other groups greatly surpass NSDEL's own programs. Also, the more programs adopted by the departments, the more examples given to others.
Also note that different things can be tried in different buildings. For example, the root of NSDEL in Halifax would be a great site for solar hot water panels (produced locally), whereas other departmental offices may be suited better for other technologies/techniques. |
|
|
| It's very important that government lead by example...go above and beyond these commitments even! |
|
|
| PLEASE NO BIOSPHERE RESERVES !!! look at the costs towards implementing and administration - money could be best spent elsewhere - healthcare and education.
Stop listening the cries of special interest groups , many of who aren't even from here. My children deserve a future here. |
|
|
| At what cost? Both time and cost must be considered.
The reference document sticks to its topic but in doing so it creates a problem. It pretty much ignores economic realities. It stats NS will "purchase green power". In the short term this could be a costly alternative, although the goal is good. There must be a balance betwen cost and benefit, between the sustainable and the non-sustainable.
The pamphlet almost completely ignores unsustainable development although much of this is necessary (eg. oil, gas). The cost vs. benefit (both long and short term) should be considered here as well.
|
|
|
| Again, take the lead but do not take away the rights to be able to work and live in all areas. |
|
|
| Leading by example is a no-brainer. Everything the government does should be in alignment with sustainable practices. Start the process of overhauling the way the government operates day to day to ensure that it does so sustainably. |
|
|
| A commendable vision - but at what cost?
PLEASE DO NOT IMPLEMENT ANY BIOSPHERE RESERVES in Nova Scotia. The costs to the province will be enormous, both from the legal requirements for administration and policing, and from the very real possibility that it may be the 'last straw' for many rural folk. When you take away all that they cherish, they have nothing to lose.
I now have to visit the doctor as I think I have given myself an Ulcer from filling out this form. |
|
|
| Cut down on energy use. Only use recycled paper. Don't pollute. |
|
|
| Fair commitments. |
|
|
| "Leading by example" - why is it that whenever I'm at a government meeting, and they provide handouts, the handouts are printed single-sided? I see this as the government's way to support the forestry companies - waste more paper, buy more paper. There should be a mandatory policy on double-sided photocopying.
Lead by example - new vehicles should be hybrids. New buildings should have the best construction practices, be run on solar/wind power. This CAN be done. |
|
|
| Leading by example is the best way to do anything. Let Nova Scotia be a leader in environmental protection!
All of the commitments in this plan are EXCELLENT! Let's make sure we follow them -let us be an industry leader! Let us be proud of what we are achieving and hopefully we will inspire other provinces/countries to develop an environmental stewardship framework. |
|
|
| Get on with it the sooner the better. |
|
|
| For reasons I have already mentioned I do not believe you are taking a leadership role in this arena - and I certainly don't believe you are managing your own operations in as "environmentally responsible" a manner as you could be.
How about adding the following bullets to you list of commitments?
- Stop clearcutting on crown land. Time frame: Immediately.
- Close EA loop-hole on the 3.9 ha. quarry permits. Time frame: Immediately.
- Complete protected areas network. Time frame: Immediately.
- Ammend EA legislation to ensure proper and thorough assessments are done in undeveloped areas. Time frame: Immediately.
The ideas are great - but you really needed to show us your commitment by presenting them loudly and clearly, with concrete time commitments in a document you are proud of. I don't blame you for trying to slip this by - I'd be embarrassed too!
|
|
|
| So far your leading has been by saying lots and do nothing. Focus should be on committments to Nova Scotia not to outside mining and quarying interests. Leading by example would stop:
mining in Digby Neck
clear cutting
industrial fishing. |
|
|
| The commitments seem to be concentrated on land aquisition and industry, however I would have hoped for advancement in some basic government led sustainability projects. It seems to me that NS has alot of catch up to do on some basic things (eg. sewage disposal, fossil fuels, encouragement of the purchase of recycled products and water source clean up) before it can "lead by example". |
|
|
| This all sounds excellent. If you could demonstrate that these measures are cost effective too, that would be great. |
|
|
| Absolutley, I also suggest tv commercials. |
|
|
| Our leaders need to lead by example. Not cave in to special interest groups, like ATV's. |
|
|
| Looks good. Do it. |
|
|
| I think it is incredibly important for government to lead by example, be innovators, but at all times work by the precautionary principle. |
|
|
| I would urge the government to value the appropriation of land for protection rather than focus on development. Extend the protected land corridor, do not renew leases in protected areas, acquire more crown land for existing wilderness areas, protect areas of ecological significance, and employ people in these services. |
|
|
| Very good. We can also lead the way for other provinces, as Nova Scotia did in its Wilderness Act setting aside the protected areas. The weakness has been the lack of follow-up and consistency, which are the things that must be in place for the "example" to be a good one. |
|
|
| 1. COAL. Sysco was closed, now do the same for the mines. The employment issue needs to be dealth with but otherwise it is just politics. |
|
|
| Good, agree. |
|
|
| fabulous |
|
|
| Perhaps you should not only lead in an environmentally responsible way, but sustainably (economics, social, env.).
How much green power will you purchase? Perhaps a better idea would be to produce power on individual buildings where possible.
What about green roofs on as many buildings as possible to counter the urban island effect?
How about investing $ into ethical/social/Environmental funds? |
|
|
| Green power is expensive. As a taxpayer, I do not relish the idea of my tax dollars going to prop up financially irresponsible buisnesses that have the intention of developing green power at the taxpayers expense. |
|
|
|
|
|
* In keeping with the privacy provisions of the NS Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act, [S.20] personal information has been removed from these comments. |
