Page 1 •  page 2 •  page 3  •  page 4 •  •  •  Appendices  •  A  •  B  •  C  •  D  •  E

FROM THE EDITOR …
It has now been three years since the Society Incorporated. During those years, we have been actively opposing a mega-quarry for Digby Neck. It all started with Tony Kelly’s, ‘Concerned Citizens Group’ in April 2002. As an appendix to this newsletter, you will see a picture he sent to households on Digby Neck & Islands. At that time, ‘success’ was defined as stopping the mega-quarry – we thought we couldn’t stop the operation of the small quarry, as they already had a permit (which has since been rescinded.)

Now, four years later, we await the second round of the Prov./Federal Panel Review Process. (The highest, most stringent environmental review process in the Country) BUT, there is a flaw or weakness in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Process. Regardless of the findings and recommendations of any Panel, the Minister(s) of the Environment can decide to accept or reject the Review and decide whether a permit WILL OR WILL NOT be issued for a mega-quarry.

This has us greatly concerned, and we turn to you, our membership, for your assistance and support. We need your voice to join with us to let the politicians know we have a problem with this part of the process, given the Government’s historical support for resource extraction through development and industrialization.

So much of what we have done is ‘trail blazing’. We need to keep on doing just that! 
Please join us in writing a letter, similar to the one in appendix “E”.
Thank you.

WHO IS OUR OPPOSITION?
In 2002, we were convinced it was a New Jersey Company who was leasing land for a quarry operation to extract basalt to send to the USA.

Today, we realize that if it wasn’t this New Jersey Company; it would be someone else, who would be looking at our land, rich in resources. They would be doing so with the approval and assistance of our Government, who facilitates the permit application process (according to their own web site information.)

This is what Maude Barlow, Chair of the Council of Canadians, was trying to tell us in May of 2002, when she visited Digby Neck. The Great Canadian Giveaway, she called it. 

Now we understand what she meant. She told us to ‘take a stand” or our area would change beyond recognition. Now we know a “stand” would mean that it was time to ‘change the process’! The first step in any change is exposing why and where change is required! 

We feel this is what we should be doing while we wait for the Environment Impact Statement. 

WITH YOUR HELP, WE CAN BE HEARD!! 

Page 2

PANEL REVIEW PARTICIPANT FUNDING

Many people have heard there is $81,000 available to participate in the Panel Review. They believe that groups like ours can each receive up to $81,000. The reality is that the TOTAL allocation is 81 thousand. We have been allotted $15,500 to assemble expertise to identify concerns about the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that will be issued by the Proponent. (We had requested $45,000)

As you are probably aware, we do have Environmental Consultants working for the Society. They have guided the Society from the early days and we believe it was partly through their expertise and input that our issue attained Panel Review status!

They will continue to work on our behalf, and they are currently employed in building a “Team” to critique the EIS during the 90-day review period. Several meetings of ‘experts’ will be held during this period. 

As you can appreciate, $15,000 does not begin to cover an undertaking of this magnitude. This is where your donations and our fundraising efforts are channeled.

SUMMER OF 2005

Four important events took place this summer.

On July 15th, the Society ‘hosted’ a lobster chowder supper for Canadian & American delegates of the Sierra Club and three of their Foundation Groups.

Two busloads arrived with delegates who were attending the week-long conference on the South Shore of N.S. They spent the day whale watching and were cooked and served an ‘old fashioned supper’ by the Society Members. Our Blue Tartans received a standing ovation when they introduced the song they wrote, based on the Sierra Club concept: “THE SACRIFICE ZONE”. (Which, of course, we did not intend as the future of Digby Neck!) Elizabeth May, National Chair of the Canadian Sierra Club was one of the guest speakers and offered support and encouragement to keep up the ‘battle’ to maintain this beautiful area.

On July 30th, a lobster chowder supper was held as a public event with all welcome and approx. 175 attended. The Annual Meeting was held and then the crowd enjoyed the supper, followed by a ‘pie-auction fundraiser’, all resulting in $7,000 being raised for the evening.

(As reported in “Passages” –July issue.) VISIT BY SCOTTISH ‘HUMAN ECOLOGIST’

“Members of the Digby Neck Community were honoured to have the opportunity to welcome Alastair McIntosh, author of Soil and Soul: People versus Corporate Power, published by Aurum Press in 2002, when he gave a passionate presentation to about 75 people at the Digby Neck Consolidated School on June 6th. Alastair was one of the major figures in a fight to stop a super quarry in the Outer Hebrides in Scotland that took 13 years to win. He noted that, while the proposed quarry on the Isle of Harris was larger than the proposed Whites Point quarry, the proposed quarry is ten times larger than the average large quarry in the UK. He drew a number of parallels between that battle and the one being waged locally, including the fact that all the aggregate was to be exported, the number of jobs to be created was exaggerated, and personal lawsuits were filed. 

His message that “approval of the quarry will result in the death of the community” resonated with the thoughts of many members of the audience. 
He said he saw many similarities between those he met from the area and the Scottish people, particularly our politeness toward others and encouraged those opposed to the quarry to become more outspoken. 

The evening ended with the opportunity for audience members to chat informally with Alastair and have him autograph a copy of his book, made available by the Digby Neck Community Development Association (DNCDA) which had hosted the meeting.”

The quarry battle on the Isle of Harris has been a ‘model’ for us since we began – there are many similarities – remote communities with families going back multiple generations, and lack of job opportunities 

Initially, jobs were deemed to be the most important factor . They wished to try and keep the young people from having to leave the Islands. In the end, they chose not to industrialize and have since found ways to bolster their economy, very effectively. 

Page 3

ARTICLE WRITTEN FOR “PASSAGES “. NOV. 05
QUARRY SITE KEEPS GROWING

By Don Mullin 

Readers may remember that the initial application for a quarry permit in Whites Cove was for a 3.9 Hectare (approximately 10 acres) site. The developers (proponent) had obtained a lease from the owners (the Johnsons and Linebergers) to operate a quarry on part of a 380 acres site. The proponent later indicated they intended to quarry 150 acres on the site. Subsequent transactions surrounding the original site include the purchase of lots of land from four different owners. Bilcon of Delaware purchased 121.47 acres (formerly the Kieschnick property), and 15 acres (formerly the Carty property), and Bilcon of Nova Scotia purchased 150 acres (formerly the Mashuda property) and a combined 22.72 acres (from the Towles).

At present, the combined acreage owned by or leased to the proponent (Bilcon of Nova Scotia) or a related corporate entity (Bilcon of Delaware) is 689.19 acres, almost twice the size of the original property. The location and size of purchased lots makes one wonder what the proponent's plans are for expansion of the quarry beyond 150 acres.

Current regulations prevent blasting less than 800 metres from the foundation of a structure. Does the proponent really need to acquire almost 700 acres to find 150 acres in which blasting would be permitted? It's unfortunate for the proponent that some people actually own homes in the area and intend to remain there. But, perhaps they won't want to when they are surrounded by quarry property. Wouldn't this be a good break for the proponent?

Perhaps those who say the entire North Mountain is at risk aren’t exaggerating. It will be interesting to read what the proponent reports in the Environmental Impact Statement promised for release on December 15th. 

(Properties referred to above are: PID#’s 30161160, 30161244, 303269,87, 30161145, 30161194, 30161202, 30161236, and 30161343. Details are available through the Land Registry Office in Weymouth.) 

(This article was accompanied by the Map, which is shown in appendix B.) 

AMEC INFO. SESSION - SANDY COVE FIRE HALL - TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 01, 2005
(THE FOLLOWING REPORT IS A ‘COMPOSITE’ FROM THE SOCIETY MEMBERS WHO ATTENDED.)

Note: Society Members were present in the parking lot during the entire session and presented a ‘disclaimer’ (appendix D) to all attending, for the purpose of advising attendees that the Society was not sponsoring or presenting the session – this was the Proponent’s Information Session.

AMEC Consultants (Newfoundland Office) appears to have been retained to address Quality of Life, community cohesion and related issues. 

• Visitors were asked to sign in and complete a questionnaire on the Public Information Session and their opinions of the project. 
• Poster boards were placed around the room for public viewing. A number of posters contained general information on the project, the proponent and EIA process. Some posters appeared to have been drawn from the EIS, specifically on location of groundwater and monitoring wells and site layout. Given their general nature though, detailed examination of the underlying methods and data was not possible. 
• Graphics on these posters was prepared by David Pease of Bear River.
• In addition to Paul Buxton, a number of consultants retained by the proponent were present and available to answer questions. There were 10 people representing Bilcon. 7 were technical consultants and 3 were communications consultants. We met or gathered information only on the following: 

Page 4

Paul Buxton and David Kern, biologist, are the coordinators of the EIS. 

John Wall remains the project manager. In conversation with him, it was understood that, instead of hiring a company like Jacques Whitford to prepare the EIS, the coordinators decided to prepare the EIS based on the studies done by the experts in the specific areas of interest – also that the estimated cost of the EIS and the Panel Review is 3 million dollars. 

John B. Lizak of Lizak Geoscience & Engineering, Inc. Northampton, PA, for geology and hydrogeology. He has done the ground water and hydrogeology studies. 

Michael Brylinsky, Professor at Acadia and a marine biologist. He has done a survey of sediments and organisms at the bottom of White’s Cove. 

Gordon B. Fader, Marine geologist and recently retired from BIO. His company is Atlantic Marine Geological Consulting Ltd. It was understood that he has prepared a 200-page report on sediment transport and multi-beam bathymetry. 

Susan Sherk, senior associate at AMEC, will be writing her report with Jacinthe David on community health issues and ‘human environment’. It was understood that Gardner Pinfold is doing the ‘hard economic’ report and that she is dealing with the ‘soft issues’. 

There appeared to be somewhere in the vicinity of 60 to 75 people working/attending. It was difficult to assess due to people repeatedly going in and out of the building. The majority of the people attending appeared to be opposed to the proposed quarry and some reported that they had refused to ‘sign in’. Some had attended thinking the Society was holding the public meeting. A school bus load of 25 or 30 high school students from The Islands attended – it was understood that they were present to take advantage of the opportunity to meet the marine biologist, geologist, hydro geologist, etc. The experts were reportedly (understood in conversation with Kristy Heron, Bilcon of N.S.), asked to prepare presentations for the students that had nothing to do with the proposed quarry.

(The entire session, both inside and outside the Fire Hall was amicable and cooperative.)

MEMBERS ARE ASKED:

Please write us and let us know if there are items we have not addressed in this newsletter. If things go according to plan, we hope to issue several of these newsletters between now and the completion of ‘the process’ .

If you are willing to pledge a donation to help the Society work through the rebuttal of the EIS Statement, we would appreciate hearing from you, so that we can assess what we will be able to plan for our defense strategy. As we told you earlier, we requested $45 thousand and received $15 thousand. 

Website addresses of Note: 

www.savedigbyneck.org - this is the web site of the Society. (We do our best to keep this current.) 

www.ceaa.acee.gc.ca - site of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. 

APPENDICES

A - “Choices” -- published by DNCDA (Digby Neck Community Development Association) in one of the early flyers sent to households. Its message is stronger today than ever, especially when one looks at appendix B.

B - Land purchased or owned by Bilcon – the last purchase was a couple of months ago. Does anyone believe the future plans will have this remain a 350 acre or 120 hectare quarry? 

C - AMEC – the company holding the public information session. This is a subsidiary of the UK AMEC. It is involved world-wide in projects of magnitude. It is a ‘Giant’. Bilcon has hired them to deal with this tiny community. We suggest you spend some time researching the world-record of this group. 

D - Disclaimer by Society regarding Nov. 01.05 Information Session. 

E - Sample letter to Ministers of the Environment, outlining our concerns. Second page gives addresses for the Ministers and those we believe should/could receive copies, due to all the politicians involved by the Federal/Provincial process. 

Appendix A

Quarry Updates - June 6, 2002 
A Publication of the Concerned Citizen Committee

Appendix B

Appendix C

Copy of the notice of proponent's information session of November 1, 2005:

Appendix D

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2005
TO ALL RESIDENTS OF DIGBY NECK & SURROUNDING AREA: 

DISCLAIMER: The Partnership For Sustainable Development Of Digby Neck & Islands Society IS NOT a part of today’s information session. 

Much confusion has arisen about today’s event: the advertisements appear to imply that the government is hosting the information session. Many people think that this is a Society’s presentation – please be advised it is not connected with the Society in any way. 

When contacted with a request for further information, AMEC advised they were hired by Bilcon and that they were an independent environmental company, conducting the community health study and assisting bilcon with public consultation and disclosure. 

When questioned, they also advised that AMEC has no vested interest in this project and no corporate interest in this project moving forward. 

Our research shows that AMEC is a worldwide enterprise and according to their main website, involved in projects such as gas & oil and mining, from the early stages of community relations, through to remediation at the end of a project. 

******
FOR CLARIFICATION:

The next step of the process is for the proponent to submit the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement), Which Bilcon says is proposed to be delivered by December 15, 2005. 

After the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) has been issued, the public has 90 days to comment to the Panel Review. CEAA (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency) 

******
(Note: this is the flyer that was handed out at the Fire Hall in Sandy Cove, by members of the Society, when people attended the Information Session. Several people actually thought they were attending one of our Public Meetings.)

Appendix E

SAMPLE LETTER TO POLITICIANS