|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 | ||
 |
|
 |
The Problems with IRM:No new protected area and distinct lack of public and interdepartmental representation in IRM
From the outset, the Integrated Resource Management (IRM) structure has been fundamentally flawed because it deliberately shut out public and interdepartmental input at the decision making level. Ernie Fage, the former Minister of Natural Resources, stated in an August 25, 2000 press release that "IRM is a planning process that considers all potential users and uses of Crown land. It is important to balance the diverse and sometimes competing interests to ensure that these lands are available for a variety of purposes."[1] It is important indeed to balance competing interests, unfortunately, only one interest (that of resource extraction industries) was given any real weight on the balance scale. Former Deputy Minister of the Environment George Fox stated in a memo to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) that "regional IRM plans ... do not demonstrate balance in regard to protected areas, parks, outdoor recreation and nature tourism interests and values". Indeed, if it had it would have produced some new protected areas in order to honour existing commitments. Even by DNR's own measure of balance: "If we've upset everyone then we've likely done it right"[2], IRM failed to achieve real balance. The reaction from non-resource industry stakeholders can be characterized as overwhelming disappointment (See Public Reaction to IRM), while the reaction from the resource industry has been glowing. Compare the reaction of environmentalist Mark Dittrick "...it's an exercise in obfuscation. It's a sham of a plan: it has no teeth, and it has had no public input."[3], with the reaction of Terry Daniels, Executive Director of NS Chamber of Mineral Resources: "... the Department of Natural Resources is to be commended for the fair, well-informed and objective manner in which they approached the land-use planning process..."[4]. IRM is not a balanced plan for the use of our Public Lands, it is a plan biased towards the resource extraction industries. Departments shut out of IRMThe severe bias towards pleasing the resource industry resulted from a flawed structure, which left decision making solely in the hands of DNR bureaucrats. Only one Environment Department representative sat on each regional planning team (these teams prepared draft plans for each of the three planning regions), all others were from DNR. The regional IRM planning teams took direction from a committee of senior DNR bureaucrats in Halifax, called the "IRM Land Use Committee". At this higher level Environment had no representation. Other government departments that have a stake in Public lands management were also absent, as were all environmental, outdoor and community groups. After Natural Resources finished and announced the plan they invited representatives from other government departments to sit on an "intradepartmental IRM advisory committee". This group can bring concerns to DNR's attention but, again, have no decision making authority. Approximately 80% of provincially owned Public Land is unprotected, and all of this unprotected land is managed exclusively by the DNR. DNR's control of the vast majority of our Public Land is an historical artefact, dating back to a time when wilderness was only seen to have value if it was carved up and sold as lumber, minerals and property. A 2000 public opinion survey clearly shows that Nova Scotian's no longer hold this outdated value system, and currently value the forest for the important life functions it performs, as well as for its tourism, recreation and aesthetic values. A more recent survey in 2003 found that the majority of Nova Scotias favoured wilderness conservcation over resource extraction. Unfortunately, the Government of Nova Scotia has not accepted this societal shift, and has failed to spread the management of Public Land more equitably among the Departments which represent the diversity of interests and values in the province. Department of Environment and LabourThe group currently responsible for planning and managing protected areas on Public Land is the Protected Areas Branch of the Department of Environment and Labour (DEL). On their web site they state: "Recognizing the challenge and importance of protecting biodiversity across Nova Scotia, the protected areas program is built around a framework of 80 Natural Landscapes, which represent the diversity of the province's natural landforms and ecology." Ecologists and Public Lands activists agree that this is a wise framework to use when planning for more protected areas in Nova Scotia. If the government actually believes that "it is our responsibility to preserve and protect our environment for future generations", then it should entrust DEL with the power to use ecologically based decision making to designate more protected areas, and complete our Protected Areas Network. Resource exploitation is not the inherent function of our Public land, but until DEL is empowered to override DNR's longstanding stranglehold on our land, resource exploitation will continue to win out over environmental protection. Department of Tourism and CultureThe tourism industry generates about as much revenue as the forestry industry, and far more money than the mining industry in Nova Scotia. Tourism is an important part of our economy and our culture and it does not destroy the landscape it promotes in a consumptive fashion. Tourism depends on beautiful landscapes and rich recreational opportunities to be competitive in today's global travel environment. Who wants to travel to a province scarred with clearcuts and open pit mines? At one of the public meetings regarding IRM, Stephanie Robertson of the Nova Scotia Field Naturalists commented "Why are we catering to forest interests out there when it's been proven that recreation and tourism make much more money? They keep our environment clean, our air and water, free. We don't have to pay for it. I don't think you took any of this into account in your plan." Gary Westoll, a DNR Resource Manager for the Central Region replied to these comments by saying: "We don't have an economist on staff in the region, and there wasn't an economist around the planning table. We did not do a cost-benefit analysis - dollars did not factor in heavily, if at all [in IRM planning]. What we really based our decisions on was what are the resource values and what sort of things are compatible and what sort of things aren't." Finding compatibility between resource extraction, tourism, recreation and protection must occur to successfully manage Public Land. The problem is that a true balance will never be struck when only resource focused bureaucrats from one department are in decision making positions. The Department of Tourism and Culture has a vested interest in Public Lands, and they deserve a strong voice at the decision making table. Department of Agriculture and FisheriesThe Inland Fisheries Division of the Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Fisheries is responsible for the maintenance of a healthy inland fishery. Healthy lakes and streams are severely compromised by clearcutting, mining and development, all of which have been known to introduce silt into watercourses, clouding them up and ruining spawning beds and aquatic habitat for fish. This is just one more department that has a vested interest in seeing more Public Land protected from excessive resource extraction. Like DEL and DTC they were not asked to the decision making table. The PublicPerhaps the most frustrating omission of meaningful input into IRM, was the input of the rightful owners of Public Land: the citizens of Nova Scotia. The public was invited to "information sessions" during the IRM process, and even invited to ask questions at these meetings, however, there was never any formal commitment on DNR's part to document, or seriously consider the opinions of Nova Scotian citizens. "According to a 1999 memo, public comments in favour of protecting areas in the central region of the province were removed from reports that Natural Resources staff sent up the bureaucratic ladder." [5] This is just one example of the executive decision making exercised by DNR officials throughout the IRM process to include or ignore public comment at their whim. As Ralph Surette insightfully pointed out in his September 16 Chronicle-Herald column, the "rounds of public meetings [were] meant only as window dressing....the residue of the old politics of influence and secrecy is still alive in Nova Scotia, evident in this [IRM] process that simply can't be open and forthright." Rather late in the process, a very subjective and incomplete process to document some of the public comments was enacted (see below for a link to those comments that were recorded). But considering that the majority of the comments advocated for more protection, and very little protection was granted under the final IRM scheme, it is clear that the comments were essentially ignored. For any future Public Land use plan to have any real credibility in Nova Scotia, it must formally include public representation in decision making and harmonize the province's protected areas commitment by delivering new protected areas. For more detail on the ignored public comments regarding IRM visit DNR's web site and view some of the public's input in the following papers:
[1] Progressive Conservative "Blue Book" party platform, 1999 election campaign
Public Lands |
Endangered Spaces |
News |
Issues
© Nova Scotia Public Lands Coalition, Ecology Action Centre, 2006 |
 |
 |
|
 |
