The Department of Natural Resources and Renewables has placed an “indefinite hold on a proposed harvest plan, consisting of three areas of Crown land, near Minamkeak Lake, Lunenburg County.”
In an email to The Quaking Swamp Journal it stated:
“The department has determined the proposed harvest plan does not meet all requirements for operating on Crown lands. The primary concern is potential impact to the lakes, where the endangered Atlantic whitefish are located, due to road construction needed to access the proposed harvest area. The department has also confirmed the presence of rare lichens in one area of the proposed harvest plan after it was reported through the public comment process.
In our efforts to be fair and transparent, the department applies the same process to all proposed forest harvest plans. When licensed forest management companies submit proposed harvest plans, they are placed on the Harvest Plan Map Viewer for 40 days to seek public input as part of the departments review process. Public input is a valuable part of the process and can help identify site-specific information not already known to the department. This information is reviewed by the department’s resource professionals, which include foresters and biologists, to determine if a proposed harvest plan meets all requirements for operating on Crown lands.
The department remains committed to transparency and giving the public an opportunity to provide input on how public lands are used, managed and protected. Decisions will continue to be made based on science and evidence to ensure responsible forestry practices while protecting the province’s biodiversity.”
I’ll still report on the results of the ATIP that I filed with the DFO to find out more about the potential “stakeholder” pressures placed on the department in finalizing the Recovery Strategy.”
Thanks for reading The Quaking Swamp Journal! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
This is great news that the cutting will not go ahead, at least in the near future. I'm sure it's due to the hard work of the Minamkeak Lake conservation group and your wonderful investigative articles. Well done!
Thank you for this, Linda. The bioblitz team in and around the Minamkeak Lake sites has done a great job of locating SAR in the area, and noting the damage the required logging road into the site would cause. They deserve our thanks and gratitude.
I am curious about DNRR's comment that: "In our efforts to be fair and transparent, the department applies the same process to all proposed forest harvest plans." Does this mean that over the months (beginning around February, I believe) that their HPMV tool was inaccessible to the public, that DNRR will repost those cut blocks for public comment when the public was unable to access them? I certainly hope so (in the their "efforts to be fair and transparent" and all that...)
I appreciate all your time and efforts to hold this intransigent Department accountable.
Where is DFO??? This is a critically endangered fish listed under SARA. Moreover, DFO has essentially delegated responsibility for any recovery to Provincial Fisheries, which are negligible for a fish which arguably is the most endangered freshwater species in Canada. This is a case that ECELAW should pursue through the courts. Gross criminal negligence by all Governments.
One last point, Atlantic Whitefish are also a global endemic and were rated by IUCN in 1990's as 'Critically Endangered' recognizing the one remaining population in the world and small population in imminent threat by invasive chain pickerel and smallmouth bass. A search now, suggests that IUCN status has been downgraded recently to VU D2, meaning it is at low risk. The source of whoever was responsible for this change would be very telling, given that the risks to extinction are higher now than ever before and still meet criteria for 'Critically endangered.' Notably, the Canada Conservation Data Centre still ranks the fish as G1 (critically imperiled) arms length of Governments and based on scientifically rigorous criteria.
One last point. I organized the first recovery team with Bob Barnes and John Gilhen. SARA did not exist and so, under the NS Endangered Species Act we felt it prudent to bring people together for the first time. John and Bob Barnes (DFO) co-chaired the team as I remember. In the beginning, because the fish was still considered anadromous, DFO was quite insistent on keeping tight reins on the process unfolding. It was Bob Barnes, who walked up and down the watershed with donuts and coffee, going door to door who finally found an old man, who for the first time confirmed the only known spawning location known to still exist. Bob Barnes who is now deceased, deserved a great deal of credit for his energy galvanizing stewardship in those early years despite formidable opposition.
Thank you Linda for writing 'The' story that has helped to light a spark of hope and also, to the many people who selflessly work in our province to defend ecosystems, habitats and species that depend upon them. Your stories never fail to shine a light! :)
My mistake Linda. Original designations by IUCN back in 1986 and in 1996 had it listed as vulnerable. No change since then. A quick google search resulted in the VU D2.
Note the disclaimer..."In our efforts to be fair and transparent, the department applies the same process to all proposed forest harvest plans." Yup. The same process is this" 'If there is enough backlash, especially from people we consider part of our base (or potentially), and the Minister is getting heat, and the Chief is upset, we back off. "
Well done to all those fighting the forestry decimation and for the protection of species. It is breathing room to gain more momentum for the protection side.
This is great news that the cutting will not go ahead, at least in the near future. I'm sure it's due to the hard work of the Minamkeak Lake conservation group and your wonderful investigative articles. Well done!
Thank you for this, Linda. The bioblitz team in and around the Minamkeak Lake sites has done a great job of locating SAR in the area, and noting the damage the required logging road into the site would cause. They deserve our thanks and gratitude.
I am curious about DNRR's comment that: "In our efforts to be fair and transparent, the department applies the same process to all proposed forest harvest plans." Does this mean that over the months (beginning around February, I believe) that their HPMV tool was inaccessible to the public, that DNRR will repost those cut blocks for public comment when the public was unable to access them? I certainly hope so (in the their "efforts to be fair and transparent" and all that...)
I appreciate all your time and efforts to hold this intransigent Department accountable.
Yes, so much effort on so many fronts, Robert. However, this one really was a no-brainer.
Where is DFO??? This is a critically endangered fish listed under SARA. Moreover, DFO has essentially delegated responsibility for any recovery to Provincial Fisheries, which are negligible for a fish which arguably is the most endangered freshwater species in Canada. This is a case that ECELAW should pursue through the courts. Gross criminal negligence by all Governments.
One last point, Atlantic Whitefish are also a global endemic and were rated by IUCN in 1990's as 'Critically Endangered' recognizing the one remaining population in the world and small population in imminent threat by invasive chain pickerel and smallmouth bass. A search now, suggests that IUCN status has been downgraded recently to VU D2, meaning it is at low risk. The source of whoever was responsible for this change would be very telling, given that the risks to extinction are higher now than ever before and still meet criteria for 'Critically endangered.' Notably, the Canada Conservation Data Centre still ranks the fish as G1 (critically imperiled) arms length of Governments and based on scientifically rigorous criteria.
When I go to the IUCN site I see it listed as Critically Endangered: https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/5379/81422722#assessment-information
Assessed in 2017... is there a more recent assessment I'm not seeing?
One last point. I organized the first recovery team with Bob Barnes and John Gilhen. SARA did not exist and so, under the NS Endangered Species Act we felt it prudent to bring people together for the first time. John and Bob Barnes (DFO) co-chaired the team as I remember. In the beginning, because the fish was still considered anadromous, DFO was quite insistent on keeping tight reins on the process unfolding. It was Bob Barnes, who walked up and down the watershed with donuts and coffee, going door to door who finally found an old man, who for the first time confirmed the only known spawning location known to still exist. Bob Barnes who is now deceased, deserved a great deal of credit for his energy galvanizing stewardship in those early years despite formidable opposition.
Thank you for sharing this story and thank you for all the work you did to help protect this species, Mark.
Thank you Linda for writing 'The' story that has helped to light a spark of hope and also, to the many people who selflessly work in our province to defend ecosystems, habitats and species that depend upon them. Your stories never fail to shine a light! :)
My mistake Linda. Original designations by IUCN back in 1986 and in 1996 had it listed as vulnerable. No change since then. A quick google search resulted in the VU D2.
Has maintained Critically endangered consistently since then - to be clear.
In full agreement!
Note the disclaimer..."In our efforts to be fair and transparent, the department applies the same process to all proposed forest harvest plans." Yup. The same process is this" 'If there is enough backlash, especially from people we consider part of our base (or potentially), and the Minister is getting heat, and the Chief is upset, we back off. "
Wow!
Well done to all those fighting the forestry decimation and for the protection of species. It is breathing room to gain more momentum for the protection side.
That's excellent news BUT I'm glad that you intend to look further at how the Recovery Strategy was altered. Good work in any case!
Oh yes, this isn't over yet. A hold is not a cancellation.
Yes, any time DNRR backs up, it's always just a "deferred" or a "hold" and never an ironclad protection.