On April 30, 2019, the Cole Harbour Parks and Trails Association's Board of Directors submitted a letter to the Minister of Lands and Forestry requesting that a review of permitted and restricted Shearwater Flyer Trail uses be performed. The letter and its attachments set out the reasons for the request, including:
CHPTA has made numerous efforts to involve the ATV community in their maintenance activities to foster partnered stewardship, with unsatisfactory results.
The lack of effective enforcement of existing regulations, such as the hours during which motorized trail use is permitted.
The disruption to non-motorized trail users, caused by motorized users, including noise, safety concerns, environmental destruction in the surrounding area, and overall interference with trail enjoyment.
The difficulty and increased cost to maintain the trail, as a result of activity by ATV users.
Here’s the disappointing (but short) verdict handed down 21 December 2022:
“The Department of Natural Resources and Renewables acknowledges CHPTAs decision to withdraw from the maintenance and care of the Shearwater Flyer trail effective December 31, 2022. “
Here’s a review of the decision (which took 3 years 8 months) from another perspective:
Things are Connected
In 2023 Nova Scotia there are competing priorities. Perhaps Climate Change is the most urgent topic, but Health, Immigration and Housing are right up there. The Shearwater Flyer question is a small matter, but it has dimensions that fall into areas of critical interest. It is both a test and an opportunity to make an integrated decision optimized for the times. Says the Premier in his Mandate Letter to The Minister of Natural Resources and Renewables:
As Minister you will:
Protect at least 20% of the total land and water mass of Nova Scotia for nature conservation by 2030.
And in particular, you will support:
The Minister of Environment and Climate as they develop and introduce the Enviro-Goals and Climate Change Reduction Act.
The Minister of Environment and Climate Change as they build climate change adaptive capacity and resilience across every government department.
The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing as they develop a full inventory of lands owned and identify areas that could be used for housing.
The Shearwater Flyer decision lies at the junction of several of these important goals:
Housing - a large part of the trail borders on the Miller Lake property which is one of six designated for quick approval and buildout. Assuming it goes ahead, we need to be careful that our enthusiasm for new housing doesn’t tempt us to make the wrong decision for health or the environment by ignoring transportation or pollutants.
Climate - We’re trying to reduce pollutants. We need to take this decision in the full knowledge of consequences. Climate covers a host of intimately connected concerns - not just buildings and power generation, but also species decline, forest management, pollution and development.
Health - Halifax’s Active Transportation program wants you to bicycle, walk and use other “human powered” ways to move across the municipality. The municipality plans to build new active transportation greenways, sidewalks and enhanced bicycle facilities. The future vision is a regional greenway and bicycle network that spans across the municipality.
A Bad Decision - Things are not connected after all
Here is an example of a decision made with too little attention paid to the broader context:
In September 2020, WSP Canada Inc. was retained by the Province of Nova Scotia to complete a public consultation reviewing support for permitted uses on the Shearwater Flyer Trail. Here’s how it unfolded. More than you wanted to know? Read the turquoise highlights/
Each page of the SHEARWATER FLYER COMMUNITY CONSULTATION ON PUBLIC USE by Consultant WSP has this footer in red - Intended for Public Use
Nevertheless, given government's addiction to secrecy, Cole Harbour Parks and Trails had to file a FOIPOP in order to see the report. It's the work of novices with a solid grasp of arithmetic, and the inescapable conclusion is this:
Conclusion: Although some data findings were inconclusive, based on qualitative and quantitative data collected, the majority of the community is in support of this option and would prefer for ATV use to be removed from the Trail. The need for increased enforcement would be the primary implication of this option.
The report covers three sources of information:
On site interviews (popups)
A brief from the ATV Association of Nova Scotia
A survey received 2691 responses. After discarding responses from:
anyone who indicated they "Rarely" or "Never" use the Trail
anyone who listed they lived outside of the Dartmouth, Cole Harbour, Eastern Passage and Cow Bay
Anyone who answered they lived within the Dartmouth, Cole Harbour, Eastern Passage and Cow Bay area, but did not have a representative postal code to reflect this
There were 1624 surveys used to make conclusions. This despite the Park being a world famous eco-destination – what do tourists think?.
Analysis focused on
Broad categories of use. Categories did not include
Birdwatching
Botanizing
Fishing
Commuting
Distance of property from trail - why is this important?
Support for continued ATV use
3 specific 'issues'
Users violating trail rules - includes users going too fast, dogs off leash, leaving Trail boundaries, etc,
Users not respecting the surrounding (natural) environment; and
Users traveling at different speeds.
Findings include
THE IMPACT OF ATV USERS
inconclusive
Overall, roughly half of survey respondents (52%) indicated they experienced issues while using the Trail and roughly half (48%) indicated they had not experienced issues. One quarter of overall respondents (25%) indicated that the issues experienced were negatively impacting their use of the Trail.
THE IMPACT OF ATV USERS ON ADJACENT LANDOWNERS AND THEIR ENJOYMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY
inconclusive
While the abutting property owners who lived next to the trail that were interviewed by the project team felt that ATV use negatively impacted their experience of living next to the Trail, over half of survey respondents (57%) of those who identified they were abutting property owners felt that ATV use had not negatively impacted their experience.
N.B. That 57% is 145 surveys - just 5% of all responses.
THE ALIGNMENT BETWEEN COMMUNITY OPINIONS AND CHPTA BOARD OPINIONS ON ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
somewhat conclusive
Survey results indicate 76% (or 1,242) respondents value connection with nature on the Trail, and that 24% (or 392) respondents reported that "Trail users not respecting the environment" was an issue they had experienced.
THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IMPACTED BY A DECISION TO REMOVE ATV USE FROM THE TRAIL
Results were conclusive.
More respondents would be positively impacted by removal of ATV use than negatively impacted.
SUPPORT FOR ATV USE AND VALUES AND EXPERIENCE ON THE TRAIL
Results were conclusive.
There appears to be a correlation between those who have experienced issues on the Trail and not supporting ATV use (71% of those who experienced issues do not support ATV use).
SUPPORT FOR ATV USE ON THE TRAIL BASED ON WHICH ENTRANCE POINT IS MOST FREQUENTLY USED (Huh?)
Users who access the Trail on Main Road and private land are more likely to support ATV's as a permitted use to remain on the Trail. Those who access the Trail on more public trailheads such as Corsair Drive and Bissett Road are least likely to support ATVs as a permitted use going forward.
And finally. options for consideration
OPTION 1: ATV USE REMAINS AS A PERMITTED USE
ATVs remain a permitted use and the status quo is maintained by the Province.
Conclusion: Although some data findings were inconclusive, based on qualitative and quantitative data collected, the majority of the community would not be in support of this option and there would still be significant issues left unmanaged.
OPTION 2: ATV USE REMAINS WITH PROVINCIAL REVIEW OF MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT OF TRAIL
In Option 2, ATVs remain a permitted use but the Province reviews management and enforcement issues on the Trail to make necessary changes which address issues identified by CHPTA and the public. In the review of management and enforcement, the Province may wish to work closely with CHPTA to help manage and coordinate management and enforcement issues experienced on the Trail.
Conclusion: While this option would likely be palatable to some survey respondents, especially those who have experienced issues but still support ATV use, this option would likely require investment of time and resources on the part of the Province and mediation between LOA holder and ATV users/groups.
OPTION 3: ATV USE IS REMOVED FROM PERMITTED USES
In Option 3, ATVs are removed as a permitted use and all other uses remain unaffected.
To reiterate:
Conclusion: Although some data findings were inconclusive, based on qualitative and quantitative data collected, the majority of the community is in support of this option and would prefer for ATV use to be removed from the Trail. The need for increased enforcement would be the primary implication of this option.
And there you have it. This is a very unscientific survey
No use of statistical measures to identify significant differences
No attempt to introduce facts on species, vulnerability or outstanding threats
No summary of the survey
It is astounding that the Minister could read the turquoise highlights and still permit ATV use. What's the point of spending money on a consultant and ignoring the evidence? Taxpayers should be outraged. Why does the Minister listen to ATVANS in the face of contradictory evidence?
Most importantly, the decision was made in a vacuum, not considering the breadth of the mandate.
Favouring Legacy Polluters
Among the many dimensions WSP failed to consider is the nasty effect of 2-cycle engines.
In the report there is precious little, if any, reference to Climate Change or pollutants, despite the high priority government assigns to the subjects.
Air quality is within the bailiwick of DNRR.
“We help people, businesses and industries reduce greenhouse gas emissions and provide sustainable management of Crown lands to reduce the impact of climate change. We also operate provincial parks throughout the province”
2 stroke ATVs seem to be legal in Nova Scotia. Two-stroke engines emit volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen, particles, carbon monoxide and a range of air toxins, such as benzene.
2-stroke ATVs emit about 25 times the pollutants per km as 4-strokes. That means operating a 2-stroke to get from Halifax to Truro is like driving a car to Thunder Bay.
2-strokes are a health hazard to operators and bystanders alike. Health effects include headaches, general weakness, increased susceptibility to allergens and bone marrow toxicity.
What’s the position of ATVANS on 2-strokes?
Are they discouraged?
Are members informed of health consequences?
What is the proportion of members driving 2-strokes?
Is there a statement of health effects?
Housing
Morris Lake Expansion Special Planning Area:
• Dartmouth East Holdings (Crestco)
• 3100 units
• Shovel ready 2024
We’ll never know the full impact of this development on the environment, but the occupants will be well situated to take advantage of the active transportation corridor running through the heart of their neighborhood. We don’t know the plans for this development, but they will surely affect ATV access to the trail. The developer probably has an opinion and should be a party to the decision.
Our Record
This shows our commitment to patrolling the park:
For 2022, we made 193 outings for 193 hours on the Flyer. We spend about 12% of our efforts here. It is well documented, but did not entitle us to a seat in discussions.
Note to Minister: You’re Welcome
No comments:
Post a Comment