|
the Tobeatic Wilderness Committee and various groups, agencies, and politicians. Correspondence is listed chronologically by DATE. January 31, 2000: ERNEST FAGE, Minister, Natural Resources to TWC January 31, 2000: TWC to JOHN CHATAWAY, Environment Minister January 31, 2000: ERNEST FAGE, Minister, Natural Resources to Queens County Fish & Game February 1, 2000: TWC to Premier JOHN HAMM February 22, 2000: TWC to Ernest Fage, Minister, Natural Resources (IRM) February 29, 2000: ERNEST FAGE, Minister, Natural Resources to TWC (IRM) March 13, 2000: TWC to Ernest Fage, Minister, Natural Resources (Kaolin exploration) March 23, 2000: ERNEST FAGE, Minister of Natural Resources to TWC (Kaolin exploration) January 20, 2000
The Honourable Ernest Fage
Dear Mr. Fage, With the recent approval from the previous Minister of the Environment to assess Eigg Mountain/James River and Gully Lake it was expected the IRM process proceed. This of course, has not happened. Instead the IRM process has been delayed once again. For this reason, the Tobeatic Wilderness Committee requests the Department of Natural Resources put in place a moratorium on development in the Gully Lake area located near Earltown and all the crown land areas of Eigg Mountain located in Antigonish County near McArras Brook. These areas are examples of the Northern Mainland forests and there are no other protected areas from Amherst to Cape Breton North of the Trans Canada Highway. Such immediate action would demonstrate the government's commitment to the protection of Nova Scotia's natural heritage as repeatedly requested by so many Nova Scotians through Public Processes as well as private communication with the government. We look forward to your reply on this important matter. Sincerely,
cc. The Honourable John Hamm
January 31, 2000 ERNEST FAGE, Minister, Natural Resources to TWC 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 September 24, 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,
cc Honourable John Hamm
January 31, 2000 TWC to JOHN CHATAWAY, Environment Minister The Honourable John Chataway
Dear Mr. Chataway, The Tobeatic Wilderness Committee thanks you for taking the time to meet with us last Friday, the 28th, in Digby. We felt it was a good introductory meeting, and as mentioned, we hope to continue to be in conversation with you in the future. We regret we were not able to speak on the management process during the limited time of our meeting. We do have concerns regarding the management process. The management process was to follow the passage of Bill 24, but has not happened which is to the detriment of the legislated protected areas. Our past experience at the IRM meeting held in Annapolis Royal gave us another concern, which is the lack of representation from other than the Department of Natural Resources. There was only one representative from outside the Department of Natural Resources. We found that overwhelming and unbalanced. We feel the Department of Environment must be adequately represented when interpretations of consumption and preservation are being considered. A wilderness ceases to be when shared with consumption. We are looking forward to discussing these and other matters with you in the very near future. Sincerely,
January 31, 2000 ERNEST FAGE, Minister, Natural Resources to QUEENS COUNTY Fish & Game Queens County Fish and Game
Dear Mr. Dagley RE: Lands at Roseway Lake, Shelburne County Thank you for your letter of December 23, 1999. There are several situations where the Crown has been able to acquire inholdings or parcels of land on the perimeter of Wilderness Areas. The parcel you reference is one instance. In due course and in co-operation with the Protected Areas Division of the Department of Environment, this parcel as well as others will be transferred to that Department for the inclusion in the appropriate Wilderness Area. Thank you for your continuing interest. Yours sincerely,
February 1, 2000 TWC to Premier JOHN HAMM Dear Mr. Hamm, The threat to the piece of unique crown land near Mabou, Cape Breton is of concern to the Tobeatic Wilderness Committee. We know these precious pieces Nova Scotia's natural history must be protected for it's own right as well as for all Nova Scotians to experience and enjoy for years to come. Nova Scotia is very much lacking in protected beaches, dunes and wetlands, all of which are found in this area. Now is the time and opportunity for the government to demonstrate it's determination and commitment to the protection of Nova Scotia's unique and fragile areas. It is hard to believe the benefit of education, recreation, culture and history be denied the people of Nova Scotia, as well as so many tourists from elsewhere, by allowing the construction of a private golf course which also has limited seasonal use. We ask the proposed golf course for this piece of Crown land be denied. Sincerely,
cc. The Honourable Rodney MacDonald
February 22, 2000 TWC to Ernest Fage, Minister, Department of Natural Resources The Honourable Ernest Fage
Dear Mr. Fage, Since our meeting with you on January 28th was brief, the Tobeatic Wilderness Committee (TWC) was unable to cover all our concerns. We have already expressed our concern (see Jan. 31st letter) with the unbalanced representation on the IRM. This matter is a continuing concern. We also have remaining questions and would like your answers to the following: 1. Will your Department be sending TWC the Phase 1 IRM public consultation report for our region? When? 2. Will your Department summarize the main points from the Phase ! public consultations for our region and send them to us preceding the Phase 2 public consultations? 3. Will your Department be sending TWC a copy of IRM plans, with reasons for same, well in advance of the open house for our area? 4. How will the comments of the Phase 2 Public consultations be accurately recorded? Inaccurate reporting was a fault of Phase 1. 5. Will your Department hold a third public consultation before the final plan is approved? We await your reply. Sincerely,
February 29, 2000 Ernest fage, Minister, natural resources to TWC Department of
February 29, 2000 Ms. Alice White
Dear Ms. white: Thank you for your e-mail of February 21, 2000 regarding the IRM process underway for Crown lands in Nova Scotia. As you must be aware, the Province is working to address its fiscal challenges by conducting an intensive review of all programs and services provided by the various Departments and agencies. All programs of the Department of Natural Resources, including the integrated resource management project, are subject to this review and an evaluation of the options for future program delivery. We are therefore not in a position to address any questions regarding our future process, at this time. Our plans for this and all other programs will be determined once we know the availability of resources ( staff and budgets ). We will certainly take your comments into consideration at that time. My staff will ensure that stakeholders such as you are informed of our next steps related to the IRM process, later in the Spring. Yours sincerely,
March 13, 2000 TWC to Ernest Fage, Minister of Natural Resources The Honourable Ernest Fage
March 13, 2000 Dear Mr. Fage: The Tobeatic Wilderness Committee has received inquiries concerning the present exploration and future mining in the Shelburne Barrens area. We come to you for explanation and questions. First, we know:
We have been told an environmental assessment of the Shelburne Barrens determined kaolinite exploration could proceed without compromising the ecological health or natural values of the site. We are aware of the broad environmental implications of allowing kaolinite mining in this area and ask these questions. 1. Why were the boundaries of the park redrawn without Public review?This is a pressing matter for the Tobeatic Wilderness Committee as well as many others, and we await your response. Sincerely,
cc Kermit deGooyer, EAC
March 23, 2000 Ernest Fage, Minister of Natural Resources to TWC Department of Natural Resources
Our File Number:
Dear Ms. White: This is in response to your letter of March 13, 2000, concerning kaolin exploration in the Shelburne Barrens area. Your are correct that the Shelburne Barrens was nominated as a site of ecological significance in 1974 under the International Biological Program (IBP). At the time, this was the largest IBP site in Nova Scotia. As you noted in your letter, this site was never designated and so it cannot correctly be termed a "park". However, that part of the IBP site lying north and east of Highway 203 was included in the Tobeatic Wilderness Area and is now protected under the Wilderness Areas Protection Act. In 1997, Government received a request to permit mineral exploration on a kaolin prospect that lay partially inside the northwestern margin of the IBP site. Because of the existence of the IBP site in this area, a full Integrated Resource Management review of this site and the mineral exploration proposal was undertaken in 1998 jointly by staff of the Protected Areas Division of the Department of the Environment, and Department of Natural Resources (DNR) staff. The review determined that the ecological values identified for the Shelburne Barrens IBP site, as a whole, are well represented within the Tobeatic Protected Area and in the parts of the Shelburne Barrens outside the kaolin exploration area. Accordingly, staff of the Protected Areas Division recommended that the mapped boundary of the Shelburne Barrens site be moved so as to exclude the mineral claims in question. DNR accepted this recommendation and allowed kaolin exploration to proceed in this area. I am requesting my colleague, the Minister of the Environment, by copy of this letter to forward to you a copy of the report prepared by staff of the Protected Areas Division, Department of the Environment. With regard to the exploration that is ongoing in this area, it is very
premature to speculate on where or whether there might eventually be a
mine. The exploration is presently still in a very preliminary stage. The
company has put down a number of
Details of exploration are confidential at this time. However, I enclose for your information a map showing the location of the company's mineral claims, the original Flintstone Rock showing, the trace of the geological feature that contains the kaolin resource (heavy dashed line), and the location of other possible deposits along the trend of this mineralized feature to the SW of the Flintstone Rock deposit. As you noted and as this map shows, kaolin has been seen to be present at various locations along about 6 km of strike length. However, detailed exploration has not confirmed whether the mineralization is continuous or of economic quantity and quality over this distance. There is not yet sufficient information to ascertain whether a mineral resource is present, how large it might be, or specifically where it might be located. DNR's geological staff believe that the kaolin-bearing geological structure does extend to the northeast of the present mineral claims into the Tobeatic Wilderness Area, as you noted, but under the terms of the Wilderness Areas Protection Act no exploration is permitted in this area. You are correct that mining of kaolin in Cornwall is carried out by hydraulic means using high pressure hoses to wash the kaolin out of the deposit. The Cornwall mining district is some 200 years old and one of the few areas of the world where wet methods are employed for kaolin mining. DNR staff have visited the Cornish operations but we do not have any scientific studies of mining in this area to share with you. However, for further information on the environmental effects and remediation of lands disturbed by mining in this area, I would refer you to the website of ECC International, one of the largest kaolin producers in Britain. You can find it at: http://www.ecci.co.uk/. In North America, kaolin mining typically employs dry mining techniques. DNR staff have looked in some detail at the kaolin mining experience in Georgia, which is North America's leading kaolin producing area. Kaolin mines in Georgia are typically surface pits of relatively small size and depth. Because of this, they are readily reclaimed and when mining has been completed, the land can subsequently be used for other purposes. The mining consists of removing the overburden and overlying rock from the deposit, removing the kaolin, and then putting the previously-removed overburden back in the pit and reclaiming it. Because kaolin and associated minerals are environmentally benign, no deleterious waste product is produced. 1 enclose an information sheet on kaolin mining in Georgia. DNR staff, who have visited some of these operations, would be pleased to describe them to you in more detail if you wish. Before the exploration project in the Flintstone Rock area could proceed to mining, it would have to be registered for environmental assessment. The review that would accompany this registration would address in detail the matters you raise such as possible effect of the operation on water resources, and on wildlife habitat and movement. No mine can be developed in Nova Scotia today without a full discussion of the potential benefits and liabilities of the development, and especially without a closure plan that describes how the land will be reclaimed following mining. Thank you for your concern in this matter. I share your concern for the preservation of our Province's ecologically significant sites and my Department is working hard to ensure that the needs of all users of Crown Land are considered and balanced as decisions are made about how to use this land. I believe that the case of the Shelburne Barrens is a good example of how an appropriate balance can be achieved and the use of Crown Lands optimized for all users. If you would like further information about kaolin or kaolin mining, I suggest you contact DNR's Mineral Promotions Geologist, Mr. Michael MacDonald, in the Halifax office at 424-2523. Yours sincerely,
cc Hon. Michael Baker, A/Minister of the Environment Mike MacDonald, Department of Natural Resources |