17Apr/109
GPPC Leaks Full Conservation Plan
The Gatineau Park Protection Committee has posted for download the full 178 page PDF of the Gatineau Park Ecosystem Conservation Plan announced by the National Capital Commission last month.
In so doing the GPPC has also issued a press release critical of the NCC and claiming that the Plan contains many errors.
This though is not inconsistent with the explanation of the non-posting of the document as described to GuideGatineau by the NCC earlier.
Though the NCC has not posted the full Plan to date, it has sent copies to interested parties and it is understood that this included GPPC.
April 17th, 2010 - 08:47
Well Charles, unlike the NCC, you are providing your audience key information.
The document is really bad. And when we say 504 mistakes, we were being very conservative–there are way more than that. We averaged 10 mistakes per Figure (illustrations), where the French is first and the English is italicized (I wonder what the Official Languages Commissioner would say). But counting all the mistakes would have taken more time than the GPPC wanted to give.
And remember: the plan is based on the precautionary principle and adaptive management–”ALTHOUGH WE DON’T HAVE ENOUGH HARD EVIDENCE, LET’S KEEP THE PEOPLE OUT OF THE PARK, JUST IN CASE, AND IMPLEMENT MEASURES THROUGH TRIAL AND ERROR.
“And although we DO have evidence of the DAMAGE done to the delicate Meech Lake habitats, let’s leave the squatters alone and target the public for exclusion.
The NCC: working hard to exclude Canadians from their own land, to maintain Gatineau Park’s status as a private club.
Triple shame on the NCC!
April 17th, 2010 - 10:27
Before we criticize the NCC, let’s understand that the ‘plan’ was prepared by Del Degan, of Quebec City. The ‘plan’ appears just as it was submitted to the NCC.
The NCC is really only sharing with us what our tax dollars funded in the first place. Love it or Shove it, your choice. The NCC could really only be blamed for a poor contractor choice here, not that I’m saying that’s the case, not yet anyways…
April 17th, 2010 - 10:50
Charles,
Here’s evidence, with some observations on only some of the mistakes (note: we had highlighted mistakes in yellow, but your system won’t recognize this. So we’ve placed mistakes in brackets. Anyhow we have provided the page and in most cases the offending mistake…)
Someone should be fired. Heads should role. This is a scandal…!!!
Conservation Plan Mistakes
(throughout the text, i.e., and e.g., should be followed by a comma (Chicago Manual of Style, 1982, p. 144; MLA ).
i.e., 8 mistakes counted.
e.g., 51 mistakes counted
Periods and commas should be placed inside quotation marks, save when single quotation marks are used to set of special terms—Chicago Manual of Style, ibid., p. 134.
“.: 7mistakes
“,: 56
Throughout the text, colons should not be preceded by space: 151 mistakes counted
1) Of all the proposals contained in the Master Plan, that relating to the preparation of “a” Ecosystem Conservation Plan was given highest priority, as a means of protecting the integrity of the Park’s components and significant natural environments. (p.1)
3) PART I” :”
CONTEXT OF ECOSYSTEM “THE” CONSERVATION PLAN (p.3)
2)Gatineau Park Master Plan (NCC, 2005c), which itself “follows on from” the Plan for Canada’s Capital (NCC, 1999a). In addition, the Gatineau Park Ecosystem Conservation Plan addresses conservation problems existing both within the “Parks” boundaries as well as in the area of influence in which the Park is located. (p.5)
3)To understand the ecosystemic impact of Gatineau Park and the surrounding areas, they must be examined at four different levels, namely the greater ecosystem in which the Park is situated (> 100,000 km2), the Park as an element of its region (5,000 “à” 15,000 km2), the Park itself, through its basic bio-physical components (50 “à” 1,000 km2) and the individual ecosystems and communities (< 20 km2). The Ecosystem Conservation Plan is therefore not limited to the
ecosystems within the Park’s boundaries, but "must also encompasses" the greater and regional ecosystems as well. (p.9).
4) P. 10, illustration, why is English italicized, while French is rom.? “Statut des aires naturelles protégées Status of protected natural areas”
And why French first in an English document? This problem occurs throughout (we have averaged 10 mistakes per figure at 20 figures = 300–though there are more than that..).
5) The NCC, in collaboration with the University of Waterloo, has studied the repercussions of climate change for recreational and tourist activities, as well as for the entire question of biological conservation of the Park’s ecosystem (Scott "et coll.," 2005). Basically, the study found that climate change will be the stressor with the greatest impact on the Park’s ecosystem in the coming decades. (p.16)
A sweeping statement with nothing to back it up or illustrate it… At least some information to illustrate the point would have been crucial.
6) Also to be considered is the still not perfectly understood impact of the large number of visitors using these areas. (Conservation areas) So much of the park will be off limits, even though we don’t understand the impact people have.
7) "Since" more than 40 years, over a thousand studies have been conducted, by the park’s professionals as well as by researchers "form" scientific and university institutions. (p. 31).
9) The greater ecosystem is affected by global phenomena such as climate change, and considers the Park "parting the contest" of a network of protected natural areas. (p.44). ?
10) They are "shows" in Figure 16: p. 47
11) La Pêche River itself joins Des Loups, À la Loutre and La Pêche lakes, and is only partially within Park boundaries (DDM, 2002; NCC, 2004b), p. 52.
12) Parks Canada uses more than thirty descriptive components to monitor biodiversity, ecological functions and pressure on aquatic and riparian environments in Canadian parks (Sargent et al., 2005; "Parcs Canada", 2006). P. 53.
13) Although the severe winter of 2007-2008 undoubtedly reduced the Park’s deer population, overpopulation will "reoccur" if winter conditions are normal in the next few years (Donald Jean, MRNF, personal letter). P. 56.
14) Like many of the other components of the Park environment, beavers receive special attention in terms of conservation, and a Beaver Management Plan (Dryade, 1984) and strategy (NCC, 2001c) have been drawn up, along with a monitoring program (inventory, site inspection, "develop", maintenance, population control) that are "revise" on an irregular basis (NCC, 2004b).p56
15) This is why a Plan to "Protection" Plant and Wildlife Species at Risk in Gatineau Park has been developed (NCC, 2006b). P. 57.
16) Their smaller "size individual" and components do not allow them to be described as valued ecosystems, but they nevertheless present a number of features conducive to the presence of different species, including species of interest. P. 64. (not consistent with French)
17) Restoration should therefore target revegetation of the most severely affected (eroded and "over-grazied") areas. p. 69
18) p. 73 The characteristics of the conservation action itself (e.g. cost "," effectiveness).
19) Identify two or three walls on which rock climbing could take place, based on their impact on the "Eardley" Escarpment ecosystem, their current level of damage and their popularity (also applies to “Eardlye" Escarpment). P. A4-12.
20) The indicators were selected and structured on the basis of the pressure/health"/ "response model. p. 85 (space)
20) A number of agreements, joint initiatives and partnerships were entered into with the "Town" of Chelsea and the City of Gatineau, to ensure a collaborative approach to planning. (p.79) Should be “Municipality.”
21) Other organizations, such as the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), the Gatineau Park Protection Committee, the Conseil regional de l’environnement et du développement durable de l’Outaouais (CREDDO) and the Nature Conservancy of Canada all scrutinize the Park’s conservation mission (NCC, 2002c).
(The NWPL was created in 2003, while the GPPC was created in 2008, so this reference is misleading and wrong).
22) New partnerships aimed at improving ecosystem conservation"," could be formed with nature protection associations, French- and English-language universities in Canada, scientific interest groups, research centres, other provincial and national parks, regional municipalities and Outaouais region tourism businesses.
23)Eardley Escarpment is a cliff lying along a south-south-west line. It is approximately 300 metres high, with an average height of more than 200 metres, and is the dominant topographical element in the Outaouais region. It begins in the City of Gatineau and runs "north-eastwards" (sure, I'll take the NCC's word for it) along the Ottawa River for several dozen kilometres, forming a characteristic rock slope alignment. (Appendix 2-1)
24) Gatineau Park is typical of the St. Lawrence Lowlands, and offers a number of rare and unique, but also fragile, attributes. p 95 (most of it is in the Canadian Shield)
25) The Conservation Vision defines the desired state of the Park in 2035. This vision "is" sets out principles and orientations to help achieve ecological integrity. P.95
26) Refers to the plant and animal species with special status at the federal (Species at "risk act") and provincial(Québec’s Act respecting threatened or vulnerable species (Loi sur les espèces menacées ou vulnérables)) levels.
It also includes the species on the COSEWIC list and the provincial list of species likely to be designated as threatened or vulnerable (period missing) p.97.
27) AARS, J. et R.A. IMS, 1999. The effect of habitat corridors on rates of transfer and interbreeding between vole demes, Ecological Society of America, 80 (5) ":" 1648-1655, p.99
28) AGENCE PARCS CANADA, 2007. Principes et lignes "directrice" pour la restauration "écologiques" dans les aires naturelles protégées du Canada, ébauche ministérielle, Direction de l’intégrité écologique, Gatineau, pour le Conseil canadien des parcs. p.99
29) ANDERSEN, R., 2006. Suivi de la restauration écologique des tourbières ombrotrophes : le point de vue microbiologique, article scientifique paru dans le Naturaliste Canadien, vol 130 nº1"." p.99
30) HARRIS, L.D. et J. SCHECK, 1991. From implications to applications : the dispersal corridor principle applied to the conservation of biological diversity, "in° :" Nature Conservation 2: The role of corridors, Saunders, D.A. & Hobbs, R.J. (eds), Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton, 189-220. P. 106
31) HASLETT, J.R. et E. TRAUGOTT, 2000. Ecological corridors for invertebrates: real or imagined ?, Atelier sur les corridors écologiques pour les invertébrés: stratégies de dispersion et de recolonisation dans le paysage agrosylvicole moderne, Rencontres et Environnement No. 45. P. 106
32) HOLZGANG, O., H.P. PFISTER, D. HEYNEN, M. BLANT, A. RIGHETTI, G. BERTHOUD, P. MARCHESI, T. MADDALENA, H. MURI, M. WENDELSPIESS, G. DANDLIKER, P. MOLLET et U. BORNHAUSERSIEBER, 2001. Les corridors faunistiques en Suisse, Cahier de l’Environnement n° 326, Office fédéral de
l’environnement, des forêts et du paysage (OFEFP), Société suisse de Biologie de la Faune (SSBF) et Station ornithologique suisse de Sempach, "Bern." P. 107
33) JOKELA, A. et R. KIPP, 2007. Monitoring native freshwater (Unionidae) in two Gatineau Park lakes : Meech "lake" and Ramsay "lake," Technical report for the National Capital Commission, Redpath Museum, McGill University. P. 107
34) MASSE, D., 1996. Ten years on monitoring of "Common" loon population in "La Mauricie National Park, Parcs Canada, Service de la conservation des ressources naturelles, parc national de la Mauricie" (reference should be in English since title is in English). P.109
35) WILD, M. et D. GAGNON, 2002. La situation de la woodsie à lobes arrondis sous-espèce à lobes arrondis (Woodsia obtusa ssp. Obtusa) au parc de la Gatineau, Université "de" Québec à Montréal, rapport produit pour la Direction du patrimoine écologique et du développement durable, ministère de l’Environnement du Québec" . "p.114 (space)
36) WILD, M. et D. GAGNON, 2004. Étude des caractéristiques du microhabitat et des limites à la dispersion et à l’établissement de la fougère Woodsia obtuse au parc de la Gatineau, Université "de" Québec à Montréal. P.114.
37) WILSON, A.M. et D.B. LINDENMAYER, 1995. The role of wildlife corridors in conservation of biodiversity: a review, "rapport préparé pour" “The National Corridors of Green Program”, Greening Australia., p. 114. (should be English)
38) WILSON, E.O. et E.O. WILLIS, 1975. Applied biogeography, in: Ecology and Evolution of Communities, M.L. Cody and J.M. Diamond (eds), Belknap Press, Cambridge, "Massachusset," 522-534., p. 114
39) BENNETT, A.F., 1999. Linkages in the landscape: the role of corridors and connectivity in wildlife conservation, IUCN – The "world conservation union," Gland, "Suisse." p. 116
40) MAC ARTHUR, R.H. "et" E.O. WILSON, 1967. The theory of island biogeography, Princeton, New-Jersey, Princeton University Press., p118
41) COAD, B., 2007. Fishes of Canada's National Capital Region. Salmonidae – Trouts and Salmons, "30 août 2007."
http://www.briancoad.com/NCR/Salmonidae.htm, p116.
42) ENVIRO LINKS DESIGN PTY LTD., G. BUTLER & ASSOCIATES et A.-M. WILSON, 1998. Wildlife corridors and landscape restoration" :" principles and strategies for urban nature conservation, "rapport préparé pour" Canberra Urban Parks and Places of the ACT Department of Urban Services.
http://www.parliament.act.gov.au/downloads/submissions/PE 12 AILA sub.pdf
http://www.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/FR-021.pdf, p.116.
43) Fragility: The criterion most directly linked to environmental tolerance, and, like rarity, a key element of this process. Fragility refers to the component’s vulnerability to use, its sensitivity, and "ots" use as a result of its attraction for visitors (DDM, 2004a). p. A1-1
44) Potential habitat of "Least Bittern," p. A1-2
45) Potential habitat of "Loggerhead Shrike," p. A1-2
46) More bird species ("60 %") on non-climbing sites (Krajick, 1999), p A2-4
47) CAMP, R.J. ET R.L. KNIGHT, 1998. Effects of rock climbing on cliff plant communities at Joshua Tree National Park, California, Conservation Biology, Volume 12 Issue 6 Page 1302 "Décember" 1998., p.A2-6
48) CENTRE D’INTERPRÉTATION DE LA GÉOLOGIE DE GRENVILLE, 2003. Sites et circuits du patrimoine naturel de la région de l’Outaouais, "p" 30-34. p.A2-6
49) DUPUIS V., 2001. Suivi environnemental de sentiers autorisés et non autorisés pour la pratique du vélo de montagne, "Préparé" pour la Commission de la Capitale Nationale, Parc de la Gatineau, Gestion des ressources naturelles et des terrains.
50) FARRIS, M.A., 1995. The effects of rock climbing on the cliff flora of three Minnesota State Parks, Conservation Biology Research Grants Program, Division of Ecological Services, Final "report" to the Minnesota department of natural resources. p.A2-7
51) FINDLAY, S., T. STANLEY ET A. WASIAK, 2005. Gatineau Park Conservation Management Plan – "Operational Issues and human impacts of hiking," (inconsistent caps/lc) Department of Biology, University of Ottawa.,p.A2-7
52) GAGNON, D., 1978. Ecological assessment of the Eardley "Escarpement," Université du Québec à Montréal. p.A2-7
53) GRAHAM, L. "ET" R.L. KNIGHT, 1999. Bird and plant communities associated with cliffs in Jefferson County, Colorado, Colorado State University, Department of fishery and wildlife biology, Fort Collins. p.A2-7
54) KNOLL, M., 2001. Soil compaction due to rock climbing and hiking activity at cliff margins on the Southern Cumberland Plateau, Tennessee, University of the South, Department of "forestry and geology," Sewanee. p.A2-7
55) LANDRY, -F. ET B. LANDRY, 1991. Mentions nouvelles ou intéressantes de "Lépidoptères" dans le sud du Québec en 1991, "Ministère Agriculture Canada." p.A2-8
56) LAPLANTE, S., 2001. Capture en Outaouais de quelques coléoptères rarement trouvés ou nouveaux pour la faune du Québec, "Ministère Agriculture Canada." p.A2-8
57) LARSON, D.W., U. MATTHES "ET" P. KELLY, 1999. "Cliff" as natural refuges, American Scientist, 411-417. p.A2-8
58) MORGAN, K., 2003. At a snail’s place: rock climbing cuts mollusc diversity, Science News Online, Vol. 163, No. 15, "april" 12, 2003. p.A2-8
59) RICHARDSON, H., 1999. Threats posed by rock climbers to birds nesting on cliffs in the South Okanagan, "In proceedings" of a Conference on the Biology and Management of Species and Habitats at "Risks," Kamloops, B.C., "1,490." p.A2-8
60) RUSTERHOLZ, H.P., S.W. MULLE ET B. BAUR, 2004. Effects of rock climbing on plant communities on exposed limestone cliffs in the Swiss Jura "mountains," Applied Vegetation Science, 7, "35-40." p.A2-8
61) SPEAR, P.W. ET M.J. SCHIFFMAN, 1979. Rock climbing and endangered plants : a case study, "In proceedings of the speciality conference," National conference on recreation planning and development," pp. 630-636. p.A2-8
47) Priority I, between 2010 and 2015: Projects with a rating that is ≥ "85 %" of the final score and/or that require continuous monitoring
Priority II, between 2015 and 2020: Projects with a rating of between "70 %" and 85 %, inclusively Priority III, between 2020 and 2025: Projects with a rating of < "70 %" of the final score
April 17th, 2010 - 11:02
Well Mr. Brown, if that’s your real name: the NCC, not Del Degan, “released” the plan. And it’s their technical services who are allegedly in charge of checking English and French versions.
And from a cursory reading, it seems the French is much cleaner than the English. So it seems the NCC has serious translation issues.
The capital of a bilingual country my posterior!
If I had the energy, I’d follow up by reading the English and French versions side by side–and boy, I’m sure I’d have a field day.
But for the purposes of illustrating NCC incompetence, and arguing Marie Lemay is multiplying manegerial fiascos, let’s just say the mistakes flagged above will suffice for now.
Anyhow, how dare you excuse such off-the-scale incompetence–it’s your tax dollars!
You should refrain from commenting on the thing til you’ve read it!
April 18th, 2010 - 07:28
Yes Pete Brown is an apologist of the highest order. Pete, it is fine that there is a plan, but it was not released by the NCC, only doled-out selectively and you claim these are from ‘tax dollars?’ The public has paid for this but they can’t see it? This is accountability? No, and our drawing attention to its many mistakes reveals they were not at all in a position to ‘announce’ something that was so badly crafted. Have some honesty and temerity, Pete, and call it for what it is.
April 18th, 2010 - 10:32
So, pedantry is the new park saviour??
Am I cheesed over more money spent? Sure I am, but not nearly as irate as the rest of Canadians who fund the NCC yet never get a chance to step into park bounderies.
Punctuation mistakes don’t take away from the real issue here; some areas of the park already show signs of degradation.
Love it or Shove it…
April 18th, 2010 - 10:50
Yes, pete, like the degradation around the Meech and Kingsmere shorelines, real evidence of real damage, but no proposed action plan.
Gatineau Park: home to professor Piscivore’s plants and private property…
So “Keep Out: Private Property” is the order of the day…
Pete, there is much confusion and illogic in what you write…
April 20th, 2010 - 10:39
I’m confused by the term ’squatters’ – is there some evidence of residents taking up illegal residence? My understanding is that some of the residents around Kingsmere and Meech have had family ownership that predates the existence of the Park. Perhaps I have been misled. If not please advise how I can squat in one of those lovely homes as it appears to be a delightful spot to live and all the better if I don’t need to pay for it.
April 20th, 2010 - 22:58
Well, other less well-connected families were asked to leave, in the 50s and 60s, creating a rank and fetid double standard distinguishing the swells and the great unwashed simple folk.
To answer your question: a squatter is a person who settles on someone else’s land without legal authority, the term most often applying to those who take hold of public land.
In Gatineau Park, the term squatter appliesy to some 300 private residents occupying what the federal government has identified as National Interest Land Mass (NILM), or lands that are supposed to be held by the federal government for public purposes (for list of all private holdings in the park, and name of owners: see: http://gatineauparc.ca/Documents/land_owners_at_park.pdf).
The NILM was created in 1988 to designate and acquire lands needed to support the federal Capital’s plans and objectives. And since not all NILM consists of public property, Treasury Board directed the NCC to acquire all NILM it did not own, including all private lands in Gatineau Park (see TB 809464, September 15, 1988, and http://www.canadascapital.gc.ca/data/2/rec_docs/5074_NCCLands_en_FINAL_SEP06.pdf).
Unfortunately, the NCC flouted the 1988 Treasury Board directive to acquire all Gatineau Park NILM lands – or the 300 odd properties listed above, and 119 new houses have been built in the park since 1992.
In its most debauched form, Gatineau Park squatting occurs where private houses are built below the high-water mark — in the fish habitat supposedly protected by the so-called Ecosystem Conservation Plan. The most egregious examples: 692 and 776 Meech Lake Road, where both houses were built on the lakebed – i.e., on property of the state. Such behaviour is a categorical “seizing of public land” (for photos of the offending houses, see http://gatineauparc.ca/gatineauPark_en.html).
According to section 919 of Quebec’s Civil Code, the “beds of [...] lakes and watercourses are property of the State up to the high-water line.” Although the “State” usually refers to the province, since subsurface rights are in general a provincial purview, the NCC obtained control and management of Gatineau Park lake bottoms by virtue of a 1973 land agreement with Quebec. That the NCC has not availed itself of its authority over lakebeds to prevent residential construction is an ongoing public scandal (see Clause A-2: “Agreement Regarding the Transfer of Control and Management of Certain Public Lands [...], August 1, 1973”: http://www.gatineauparc.ca/Documents/land_exchange_1973.pdf.)
Some have argued that squatting is the most ancient form of land tenure, that all of us are recipients of stolen land – “for to regard our planet as a commodity offends every conceivable principle of natural rights.”
But for Gatineau Park landowners to continue residing on National Interest Land Mass — in flagrant violation of all park master plans — boils down to theft of public land aided and abetted by the NCC.