Voluntary Planning

November 14, 2008

Comments on the Working Paper on The Future of Nova Scotia’s Natural Resources

Most of us have appreciated the opportunity to participate in this process. We can understand the committee’s attempt to include a full and diverse range of opinions; however, there seems to be a reluctance to highlight public opinion on key issues. After participating in the process, and reading the submissions that were posted, I was extremely disappointed by the few conclusions that were drawn and the lack of direction this document provides to government.

The themes:

While it may have been convenient to group the information around the 5 themes that were included, they generally weren’t ones I’d have chosen. Instead I would have selected:

Change – Given the interest and level of participation in our area (Hants) and obviously throughout the province, there should have been mention of the public outcry for change in the management of our natural resources. The public is very concerned about the clearcut/ spray/ replant model of forestry that shows little regard for the biodiversity, and the numerous ecological benefits that communities need.

Environmental Stewardship/ Community Involvement – This theme was very evident throughout the submissions, and especially those on mining and forestry. The public has become aware that the environment must be protected so that future generations can depend on clean air and water, and uncontaminated soil. We, as citizens, must do our part to ensure that we have not only the responsibility, but also the right to protect our natural resources in our communities.

Precautionary Principle – Herbicides are registered for use; they are not proven nor recognized as being safe. Vision (and similar defoliants) can affect mucous areas in individuals, and can trigger asthma attacks, and other adverse effects. Current research indicates that very minute amounts of chemicals can have devastating effects on unborn children. When Medical Officer, Dr. Robert Strang, is advising avoidance of repeat exposure to minute amounts of such chemicals, we should be erring on the side of caution. At the very least, public announcement (radio/ TV) need to be a requirement prior to the spraying so that people are aware that these herbicides are being used and can try to avoid these areas. We especially have a problem with those sites that are on public roads in close proximity to homes in the community. Several submissions referred to a need to end forestry practices that rely on the use of herbicides. This same principle should be applied to all stages of all mining operations.

Problems with the selected ‘themes’:

Sustainability and diversity- these were not adequately defined, and mean different things to different people or groups. These ‘themes’ are also easily confused with actual values.

Collaboration and transparency – There is definitely a need for both of these in the management of our natural resources, but again this would signal a change from current practices. It negates any perception of openness or transparency when N.S. has the highest rates for information under Freedom of Information regulations. Also, on many occasions we have engaged in ‘collaborative’ discussions with representatives from DNR only to eventually realize that our voices weren’t heard.

Balance- this is the theme that I (along with many others who attended the Oct. 24th workshop) most object to. For decades our forests have been subjected to monoculture management that used the clearcut method of harvesting over 94% of the time. Now is the time to rectify the mismanagement and make a serious effort to reintroduce more hardwoods and the biodiversity of the Acadian forest.

Additional Points:

Your inclusion of the reference to farmers using spray on their crops without public outcry (p.14) appears to try to legitimize the use of herbicides in forest operations. One of the major differences between the two should be included as well. Farmers are spraying around their own families, who are going to know when it will occur, and can take appropriate precautions. A lot of the forestry spraying that takes place in our area is done by contract on sites owned by individuals who don’t live in the community.

The section identifying the need to involve other departments was a welcome addition. Protection of our water and coastal communities cannot be overstated. I would have also included the Department of Health. Too often current practices such as lack of notification re herbicide spraying and dumping of effluent into rivers and lakes are undermining efforts to promote healthy living.

Minster David Morse had requested public input on the issue of uranium mining through the Voluntary Planning process, and he received it. As stated in your report, the public “overwhelmingly indicated a desire to see the moratorium on uranium exploration and mining maintained and legislated”. I fail to see the need for the time and expense of “a separate, dedicated process to resolve” this issue. Again it appears that our voices weren’t heard!

Respectfully submitted,
Barbara Gallagher