
|
Integrated Resource Management process and related issues. For a detailed discussion on Integrated Management Issues, also visit the Ecology Action Centre's IRM Website. |
| MEETING WITH MINISTERS | LETTER from MINISTER | PUBLIC RESPONSE |
|
Meeting Notes January 28, 2000 Digby, NS TWC meeting with Minister of Environment John Chatataway, Minister of Natural Resources Ernest Fage, Minister of Economic Development Gordon Balser, and Queens MLA, Kerry Morash: The meeting was short (about 30 to 40 minutes). TWC focused mainly on the proposed additions to the Tobeatic with comments overlapping on IRM . A short time was also spent on management issues re: both department's inability to effectively manage the Tobeatic at present. Minister Fage's responded with key buzz phrases: "Balanced approach"..."Committments"..."IRM ..." With regards to the Tobeatic additions, there was no sense of movement towards this issue. (TWC remembers the PC's 11th hour opposition to Bill 24 and their strong support of Industry at the Law Amendments Committee hearings). TWC pointed out that the IRM process is in fact not "balanced". Department of Environment, Parks Planning is outnunmbered and out gunned by the Department of Natural Resources on the IRM board. TWC suspects the single Parks representative may be there for appearances only. (This situation was quite evident when TWC participated in the public IRM road show in Annapolis County) The IRM process continues now behind closed doors, closed to the public. IRM decisions will be presented as a "fait accomplie", with no option except voicing our concerns over set decisions, after the fact The Ministers are aware of and receiving comments from concerned people on behalf of the following proposed wilderness areas in particular, and other areas as well: 1)
Tobeatic Additions (10000 ha scattered around the perimeter of the
Tobeatic)
|
|
Department of Natural Resources Office of the Minister January 31, 2000 Ms. Alice L. White, President
Dear Ms. White: I am writing in response to your letter dated January 20th and to further to my response to your letter of September24, 1999. Until the IRM process is completed we will not be placing moratoriums on any lands not already under some form of protection. However, as is our practice, no developments will be approved for Crown lands, unless recommended by our IRM teams, and then only if a development can be accommodated in accordance with good management practices which recognise the particular values of the parcel under consideration. Natural Resources staff are working to balance all points of view. Your comments will be added to all the other comments staff receives from their public consultation. I understand there will be a public review of their land classification this spring. I hope you will attend and give staff your comments on the results of this process. Yours sincerely,
|