However we have moved closer home! You may now find our Enviro Blog by Dan Earle at http://YarmouthCounty.com/enviroblog

We invite you to visit us there, and we thank you in advance for your continuing support.

However, don’t hold off on changing from incandescents to CFLs with the thinking that LEDs will soon be available. The fact is, it will be five to ten years before prices come down to mass market levels and technical kinks for home lighting are worked out. The only issues with CFLs at this time are mercury and disposal, both issues that are easily worked out with a little governmental leadership. Coal powered plants are a hugh contributor of mercury to the environment and much of this power goes to feed incandescents. That is, incandescents are not mercury neutral.

What sold me on CFLs was the display in Home Hardware that had a power use meter between an incandescent and a CFL bulb of the same brightness. A switch could be use to go from one to the other while the meter registered electricity use. The difference in watts used was significant. Every store should have one of those meters on display. Seeing is believing.

There are also ways not to do it.

As reported in the Chronicle-Herald on May 11, 2007, the Nova Scotia government is spending $204,000 dollars at Home Depot so the store can give away energy saving fluorescent bulbs. While this is intended to promote better energy use, which I support, it appears to me that our government is providing Home Depot with a very nice publicly funded loss-leader item with which to attract customers for other purchases. Our local, home based, building materials suppliers are left out. The program is also only available in Halifax, Dartmouth and Sydney which is not very convenient for the rest of us in the province.

To me, this is a poorly thought out action and I object to having my tax contributions going to support Home Depot’s marketing and the lucky bulb recipients who happen to live in the metro area. If the government has that much money to spend on energy efficiency perhaps they could have purchased bulbs through the bid process to be distributed to publicly owned buildings throughout the province.

While on the subject of fluorescents, the government could also lead by working out a system for return of expired bulbs for safe disposal and recycling of toxic materials in the bulbs. They could do the same for the used batteries from consumer electronic devices.

In Barrington we have Evelyn Richardson Memorial Elementary School, Forest Ridge Academy, Cape Sable Island Elementary and Barrington Memorial High School partnering with the Barrington River Committee, a community group on the adopt-a-stream project for the Barrington River.

In Yarmouth we have Centennial Elementary and Yarmouth Junior High School in partnership with the Tusket River Environmental Protection Association on the adopt-a-stream project on Broad Brook. Trout Unlimited is involved with both of these studies.

Islands Consolidated on Digby Neck is adopting the Northeast Cove watershed. They are working closely with the Nova Scotia Community College’s Center of Geographic Sciences.

The teams of students working on these projects get to take their learning experience out into the field for real hands-on experience. They are learning about mapping, different types of habitats, identifying flora and fauna, and taking measurements of water quality. They also engage in environmental clean-up projects. The YJHS team has started a blog (http://yjhsea.blogspot.com/) to share information with the public. Please visit and comment. They would love to hear from you.

A number of these teams will be participating in a Gulf of Maine Institute mini-conference at Acadia University at the end of May to learn more about Applied Community Mapping. Some will also be joining in the Institute’s summer workhop in New Hampshire in July. They will meet other student teams from around the Gulf to gain environmental science and leadership skills. See (gulfofmaineinstitute.org) for more information.

In all of these experiences the students are working with and getting support from community organizations, doing field work on real community issues, working in adult/student teams, finding out about career choices in the environmental sciences, and gaining understanding of their town and region in the greater Gulf of Maine bioregion.

Reading the newspaper daily, one gets the impression that Nova Scotia is an economically depressed, and, some claim, “have not” province, over balanced with old folks like me, a burdened health system, an educated youth that departs as soon as possible, dying industries, and polluted by outside air movement and its own power company. In any case, we are not where we want to be and certainly not a prime player in Friedman’s flat world, in spite of our few call centers. All of this will be solved, of course, when our off-shore oil starts to flow. Do we have time to wait…?

Back to basics. We had better solve the problem without the oil. The first thing we could do is develop our infrastructure so that people, goods and information can move more freely. Just-in-time delivery does not work with an absence of regional airports and good roads. High tech manufacturing and commerce require just-in-time delivery, that is, parts or goods arrive as needed so there is little inventory. High speed Internet access allows small businesses to operate around the world from the smallest communities. Nova Scotia is badly served by its infrastructure support.

We seem to be rich in quality educational institutions, especially at the university level. At the primary and secondary levels we seem to be lacking in science, engineering and the arts and we are not reaching the broad base of talent that is available to us. The top kids do very well, the rest seem to struggle on. But, if those with the highest talents leave they contribute to the flat world economies of other provinces.

While not in a position to evaluate government policy and its effect on joining the flat world platform I will say that I agree with the principles of the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act such as “the health of the economy, the health of the environment and the health of the people of the Province are interconnected” and “innovative solutions are necessary to mutually reinforce the environment and the economy.”

Many of the challenges that would excite youth are in the potential green industries that could be a big part of Nova Scotia’s future. Could we design a scrubber that would take the pollutants out of NSP’s smoke stacks and produce a useable by-product? We could certainly sell that system to China who has worse problems of pollution than we do. Can we expand our clean energy production by use of wind and tidal power? We certainly have the tides to do it. Could we develop a system to allow all homeowners and businesses to easily feed power back into the NSP system, reducing their own costs and maybe making it possible to export power to New England? Could we develop an agricultural network that brings Nova Scotia goods to the floors of the super markets thus helping our meat, fruit and vegetable producers? Could we better assist small businesses in their start-up years with easy to get and finance loans and easing in of tax assessments? We can’t keep waiting for the innovative outsiders to discover us. We need the innovators who are here to expand their potential. I am sure there are thousands of ideas worthy of exploration and many of those worth implementation. You are welcome to add your proposals!

Where are those innovative solutions called for in EGSP act going to come from? They are not going to come from doing what we have been doing in the same old way. They are going to come from all of us making an effort to our own abilities to live green and support green initiatives in our purchases. They are going to come more from innovative entrepreneurs and businesses that “get” the flat world concept. They are going to come to the extent that the government can resolve the infrastructure problems and direct its policies toward getting Nova Scotia connected to the rest of the world.

*The flat world economy is the stage of globalization where all jobs move to the place where they can be done best at the lowest cost. Thus, building standard rail cars, a craft mastered years ago, moves to Mexico; WalMart does well because it has mastered the art of the supply chain from factory to consumer; innovative companies that connect to and collaborate with others in any country do well. Read the book for the whole picture.

Of particular interest to this article are the sections related to water resources and wetlands. That is, in sections 2(k) a comprehensive water-resource management strategy will by developed by the year 2010 and 2(n) a policy for preventing net loss of wetlands will be established by the year 2009.

At the present time, both the Town and Municipality of Yarmouth are engaged in review of their respective Municipal Planning Strategy documents.

The town has done a very good job of completing protection of Broad Brook and its wetlands below Starrs Road with its recent environmentally sensitive zoning classification addition. The proposed extension of this zone above the SuperStore/WalMart development along Broad Brook is consistent with its protection of the lower Broad Brook and fully supportive of the goals of the proposed act. It recognizes that the quality and quantity of water in the upper portion of the watershed need to be considered in its own right and for the protection of the brook and wetlands in the lower part of the watershed.

The municipality is considering specific protection of the DNR ‘bog’ classification in the lower part of the Broad Brook watershed. The protection would disallow drainage, filling and development of these areas. In regard to this proposal, I was asked “just what are the values of these wetlands you want to protect.” Given past attitudes viewing “wetlands as wastelands’ this is a pertinent question.

The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, to which Canada is a subscriber, in its Wise Use of Wetlands document, mentions the following: sediment and erosion control; flood control; maintenance of water quality and abatement of pollution; maintenance of surface and underground water supply; support for fisheries, grazing and agriculture; outdoor recreation and education for people; provision of wildlife and fish habitat; and contribution to climatic stability. Elaboration on these values in available in many documents and and web sites.

Perhaps we have reached an environmental “tipping point” with it now being officially stated that “environmentally sustainable economic growth that recognizes the economic value of the Province’s environmental assets is essential to the long-term prosperity of the Province.” By incorporating environmental protection into our municipal planning strategies we support our provincial goals with meaningful local action.

If you still think that climate change is a theory and not a reality, or if you think climate change is a reality and want to know more about it, here are some recent references. They come to me by way of The Walrus, November 2006, a Canadian produced magazine, in the book review section, The Bad Future by Christian Parenti, pages 91-94. The one regret I have about being an elder person is that I may not be around to see how this all plays out — but, I hope to be around to see what happens over the next 20-30 years. For you younger people, climate change will have a significant impact on your lives so it is a good idea to get a perspective on what is predicted for your future.

Field Notes from a Catastophe: Man, Nature and Climate Change
Elizabeth Kolbert
Bloomsbury, UK, 2006
224 pp., $30

The Weather Makers: How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth
Tim Flannery
Harper Collins Canada, 2006
357 pp., $21

The Winds of Change: Climate, Weather and the Destruction of Civilizations
Eugene Linden
Simon and Schuster, 2006
320 pp., $24

An Inconvenient Truth
Al Gore
Rodale, 2006
328 pp., $29

Heat; How to Stop the Planet from Burning
George Monbiot
Doubleday Canada, 2006
302 pp., $30

Finally, after many years and much discussion the Tobeatic Wilderness Area Management Plan is a reality.

A key element to establishing the area as a true wilderness, vehicular access, was resolved. Nova Scotia Environment and Labour will not permit vehicle use in the wilderness area, with very few and highly regulated exceptions. As stated in the plan: “Unautorized vehicle use in Tobeatic Wilerness Area is wide-spread. This causes significant adverse environmental effects, diminishes unique and broadly valued wilderness hertiage values, creates considerable public safety and liability concerns, and presents significant challenges for management and enforcement. All unauthorized vehicle trails and routes will be retired. Without such action the area would have been wilderness in name only. Over the next 100 years, with the absense of logging and vehicular access the region will have an unprecedented opportunity to recover and evolve to a wilderness state.

Sportfishing, hunting, and trapping will be allowed but specifically managed as required for protection of wildlife poplulations and maintenance of ecological integrity. Baiting of animals for hunting will not be permitted. Except for a six-day primitive hunt no other hunting or trapping will be allowed in the Tobeatic Wildlife Management Area lands.

Campsite leases will be retired either by voluntary reassignment of land outside of the wilderness area or renewal with strict conditions and requirements valid only for the lifetime of current lease holders. There will be no land vehicle access to these sites. So, at some point in the future all lease sites will be eventually retired.

There are many other aspects of this plan that deal with less controversial aspects of wilderness area management and use. For a full review, go to: http://www.gov.ns.ca/enla/protectedareas/docs/TobeaticManagementPlan.pdf

Thanks to all on the Tobeatic Advisory Group, the public who took time to review and comment on draft plan, the DEL staff who finally got it all together, and the Minister who finally got around to signing it.

In the Saturday, October 21, 2006, Ralph Sureette, or Yarmouth based environmental columnist wrote about a real solution to our energy demands and ever rising costs. The basic approach – decentralize energy production and order the utility company to buy power from all sources available. This has just been done in Ontario. Starting in November 2006, Ontario utilities must pay homeowners or businesses for any electricy they generate from small solar, wind, water or other renewable sources. We could do that here in Nova Scotia.

Like most of the population, I am on the grid. It is convenient and reliable. However, where I live it is pretty windy much of the year. Given the opportunity, I would invest in a wind drive power generator to feed energy back into the system. In effect, when I am using energy I pay NSP; when I am not, and the wind is blowing, the meter runs in reverse. NSP gets power back; I get a lower utility bill.

With thousands of businesses and individuals on such a system NSP could reduce their reliance on coal, thereby producing cleaner air and still having a reliable supply of engery. In addition, people in the province would be producing their own supply reducing our dependence on out of province sources. Jobs would be created in the renewable energy resource sector.

What stands in the way of such a good idea? As usual, NSP is a private monopoly, our energy minister Bill Dooks is part of the system that has difficulty dealing with new ideas and innovation. He basically supports NSP’s monopoly on energy generation and shareholder over public interest.

With Ontario taking the lead, Nova Soctia will eventually follow. You will have the opportunting to become an energy producer and get paid for what you contribute to a diversified generation system. A letter to the Minister and your MLA might move this along. Voting for a party that supports the program in the next election would be even better.

During the week I have been trying to understand the Town’s thinking on the cutting down of the beautiful row of trees on Prescott Street. I support the home owners’ in this issue as those trees were important to energy conservation in their houses by providing a foil to the southern exposure and adding value to their property just by their being there.

Today I had the chance to give the situation a closer look and became even more baffled. At this location we have a unique situation with Beacon Street on one side of a park and Prescott Street on the other. Both are two way streets. It seems that the Town has decided to widen Prescott Street to provide a parking lane. So, the trees were cut to provide a parking space in front of the residences. Who needs it? When the residents have guests they can park in their ample yards and drives. Does the park need parking? Fine, cut a few into the park edge. Put parking where there are no trees. It was really an easy solution.

Is this portion of our town really gaining by cutting of trees for these “engineering improvements”? I think not. See http://www.friendsoftrees.org/tree_resources/facts.php to get a perspective on what we have lost so that the town can provide a few on-street parking spaces, the least efficient form of parking.

The Town has a Communities in Bloom initiative and committee with mandates including urban forestry. It struck out on this issue by not supporting the residents of Prescott Street.