CEPI Steering Committee Meeting

CEPI Steering Committee Meeting

September 16, 2011

Crane Cove Seafoods Complex Boardroom

Eskasoni, NS

10:00 a.m.

Present: Shelley Porter (CEPI-UINR), Charlie Dennis (UINR), Annie Johnson (UINR), Lisa Young (UINR), Allison McIsaac (EFWC), Brian MacSween (NSNR), Hubert Nicholas (UINR), Shelley Denny (UINR), Teresa MacNeil (BLBRA), Eliot Frosst (RFSS), Waddie Long (NSCC), Albert Marshall (UINR-CEPI), Catherine Ann Fuller (NSEDT), Guy Rochon (EC), Sharon Munroe (NSoE)

Regrets: David Duggan (FOC), Kevin Squires (BBFG), Fred Baechler (ADI Ltd.), Cheryl Bartlett (CBU), Bruce Hatcher (CBU), Gerard MacMaster (Georgia-Pacific), Dan Christmas (Membertou-CEPI), Pat Bates (BSS), Andrea Doucette (NewPage Inc.); Lorne Penny (ENS-DFO)

Chair: Charlie Dennis

Minutes: Shelley Porter

1.Meeting Called to Order, Welcome, and Introductions: Charlie Dennis

2.Opening Prayer: Albert Marshall

3.Additions/Deletions to the Agenda: none

4.Review & Approval of the Minutes: Teresa MacNeil and Lisa Young wished to be added to the “Regrets” of the past minutes; on p. 5, “groundwater” should read “surface water”. Motion to approve the minutes of the last meeting, with corrections, made by Brian MacSween, second by Waddie Long.

5.Presentation on the NS Provincial Water Strategy – Cheryl Benjamin, NSoE

Charlie invited Cheryl to begin her presentation. At this point, Albert asked leave to relate some information about water quality issues he had learned about on a recent trip to Kelowna, BC. At this event, Albert heard a report of source water deliberately contaminated in an Ontario First Nation community. This sort of thing could happen anywhere. There are issues with water testing even when it’s an emergency. Testing can be delayed and there is no way to speed up the process. All agreed that this was an important point, and that we need to be aware of how vulnerable our clean water can be.

Cheryl then commenced her presentation. The province is working with municipalities on source water protection plans, including Eskasoni First Nation. Cheryl outlined the provincial Water Strategy, including the legislation involved, monitoring activities, and Groundwater Observation Well Network. The Vision for the strategy is “Water is essential for life and will be valued, kept safe, and shared”. Consultation between the Mi’kmaq and the province took place in 2010. This was a joint activity with NS Fisheries and Aquaculture, which was developing a Coastal Strategy at the same time. Issues raised included watershed protection, water conservation, and state of infrastructure. The relationship of the Mi’kmaq to water and their cultural traditions around water were built into the provincial Water Strategy. The strategy takes an integrated approach to water management, including human activities and their effects on watersheds and ecosystems.

• Question: Is there integration of federal and provincial regulations?

Cheryl referred to the federal Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act, Bill S11. The legislation establishes that federal regulations developed in this regard may incorporate, by reference, provincial regulations governing drinking water and waste water in First Nations communities. (see the Parliament of Canada website for more details). Levels of government need to work together.

Groundwater monitoring is being done by the provincial government; the map of sites and more information can be accessed at: gov.ns.ca/nse/groundwater

• Question: Is there lagtime between sampling and publication?

Cheryl replied that surface water results are reported in real time, but groundwater is not.

The Nova Scotia Water Strategy was launched in December 2010. This was after a process of development and public consultation, including a survey in which some of us participated. The strategy grew out of the Environmental Goals and Sustainable Prosperity Act (2007).

• Question: RE information for alternate water treatment systems: can the provincial department provide it for people who want a more objective comparison of systems than they would get from retailers?

Cheryl replied that the NSoE engineering staff do have expertise, if you have questions you can contact the department. You have to be sure the treatment system matches the needs of the client. The questioner would like to see standards established (i.e. all treatment systems must meet certain quality standards). Cheryl said to note that NSoE does not regulate/monitor private wells/roadside springs. It does public education on septic system, private source water quality safety and monitoring. They have an on-site system coordinator, Blake MacDonald (septic) based in Halifax. It should be noted that some things that work well theoretically do not function well in reality.

• Lots of questions about different types of septic systems. Cheryl offers staff from her department to do a focused presentation at a future meeting.

NS Fish and Aquaculture is concurrently developing a Coastal Strategy, and consultation with the Mi’kmaq on the Water Strategy is happening simultaneously. Mi’kmaq connections to and traditions around water are included. The strategy is also part of the KMK process. The strategy framework is based on Integrated Water Management. There is no Mi’kmaq rep yet, but one is being found by AFN. Fred Baechler is on that committee and Dr. Graham Daborn (facilitator for the 2006 CEPI/UINR salmon workshop) is also a member.

One of the tasks of the Water Strategy was the creation of an online “Water Portal”. The Water Portal “acts at the nexus of community, industry, academia, and government to manage our most valued resource - water. Water is essential to our health, communities, economies and environment.” (See New research is also being done (Dalhousie). The strategy identified the Bras d’Or as an area needing more study (combining GPS layers to create models that identify indicators of ecosystem health). Dr. Shannon Sterling is doing this work. (see also

• Ques re: “water security”; systems right now don’t have a large buffer. How do we know the back-up is safe? Is supply/quantity known and guaranteed?

Cheryl acknowledged that these are all good questions. They are hard to answer partly because not all is known, and also every supply is different. Communities and agencies are trying to do risk management at the least. The public is often ignorant of the facts about their water supply. There is a need for public education constantly. In this area, the department will continue to support the local water festival. Here there was a comment re the success of collaboration locally, and noted we should support and enhance it. It is not out of line to go beyond regulatory standards. In our region ACAP-CB, which does a lot of public education, has curriculum related to water. The Ecology Action Centre in Halifax has implemented a community groundwater monitoring project, i.e. the Groundswell Project (see SMU has an ‘equipment bank’ for community groups wanting to do their own water testing.

They are developing a water quality “tool kit” (equipment); this is part of a larger project on which Dr. Cathy Conrad is the lead.

• Questions: Are drinking water guidelines consistent across jurisdictions? (federal, provincial, etc.)

Cheryl indicated that Nova Scotia’s guidelines are the same as the federal guidelines. In fact, the province meets or exceeds the federal standards.

• Question: Are the standards hard to find?

Cheryl replied that the standards are widely available, including online at the Agriculture Canada site or the Health Canada site ( )

With respect to testing one’s own well water, it should be noted that it is costly to test and the results are difficult for a layperson to understand. There are standards for drinking water but not for groundwater.

Charlie: Thanks to Cheryl for an excellent presentation on a very important subject. The CEPI recognizes that this is a broad issue and very complex. It is very good to raise public awareness about all the things affecting our water supply.

It was offered by other members of the committee that tours of the CBRM water facility are available – very high level of testing. The water strategy has resulted in land owners getting together to create source water protection plans (ask Brian MacSween for details)

• Comment: dearth of observation well sites in Cape Breton, even around the Bras d’Or

Cheryl indicated that creating more sites in this are can be made a priority. It should be realized that the locations of many test wells were opportunistic. The Chair makes a suggestion to pursue getting more observation well sites in Cape Breton.

Update on CURA community water monitoring project – Guy Rochon (EC)

This project is part of the Community University Research Alliance [CURA]. The universities involved are St. Mary’s University and Dalhousie University. The project is not ready to start yet. It is known that community efforts at monitoring and regulators response often disconnected. Data collected by community volunteers is not considered valid or scientifically rigorous. This project falls under CURA for Water. The research group is starting from scratch; they will receive $1 million over 5 years. They need to develop the program, create the training get equipment for the project, and start monitoring. In this area, the program will be through CEPI but UINR is the lead. Training materials will be in English, French and Mi’lmaq. They will be forming an early warning system for water problems by community groups monitoring their own water supplies. The project intends to prove citizen scientists can collect good data. Many NS groups involved – NSGOs, schools, etc. The CEPI/UINR will be involved in training program development.

Guy is the contact for us, attends the organizational meetings in Halifax and reports back to us. The research group is translating information to make it culturally relevant. All of this is still in the preliminary stages. Things should roll out Spring 2012. The CIER watershed stewardship guidebooks, which draw heavily from the CEPI process, are also helpful

To summarize, funding is in place, surface water is the focus and this is a “proof of concept” project.

It is agreed that all are interested in the universal importance/value of water. The research Group will officially approach the CEPI to create a water monitoring program. Parameters observed will include pH, temperature, etc. Testing will be only for presence/absence of contaminants. The project is a possible fit with the NSCC technical program, and we could get BEAHR grads involved. UINR will nurture the possible connection and involvement of the Mi’kmaq fishery guardians. Each community will develop its own training program, including set standards. Any group within the CEPI can participate. Lisa has a meeting with the Guardians Sept. 19. Other groups could team up with the Guardians to create a unified program. NSCC also has trained people and some equipment, which they may be willing to offer for use. There was one comment re some bearing on our activities could be affected by outcome of salmon court case.

7. Review of Workplan Priorities:

Workplan Priority and Task Team Updates

Development Standards Project – Shelley Denny

[revised agenda because Shelley D. was unable to stay so moved the Development Standard report to first]

Shelley indicated that Band approval is still needed from some communities to release their plans. The community meetings, etc. were very successful at Malagawatch with Best Management Practices {BMPs] as the focus. It should be noted that the application and adoption of the BMPs is voluntary. Shelley’s tactic was to persuade, by showing the value of protecting fish habitat, individuals to adopt the BMPs on their personal properties and in their own daily lives and businesses.

The BMPs for Malgawatch have been approved by Grand Council, and the Unama’ki Chiefs. UINR research is still working with Eskasoni on source water protection guidelines (surface water). They have had several meetings, trying to bring everything together. They intend to incorporate the Spirit document’s guiding principles into the project and presentations. With respect to new constructionc, ontractors still need to be approached and agreement reached [subdivisions]. There are no BMPs for home owners, dependent on contractors to do things right. We know that poor construction, etc. practices are affecting eel habitat. For Eskasoni, UINR got HADD money to remediate ditch that had been silted up, etc. by work done upstream.

The UINR Research team is going to use the CIER guidebooks for watershed stewardship. Sililtation and surface water pollution are some of the issues that needed to be dealt with.

Comment that FN need to establish effective functional Public Works departments. There are still some outstanding problems, like who polices contractors. Doing the right thing has be cheap or free.

Right now Shelley has the Aboriginal Fishery Guardians ins each community checking. At present, there are no “environment departments’ in First Nations. We need people in the community to be eyes and ears. Shelley is trying to create a small guide for communities for the contracting/construction issues. BMPs can be widely applicable so other First Nations can use them. The key is planning construction well. Ultimately it is each Band’s responsibility.

Comment: need integration of awareness and knowledge into the education system

Contractors may need some training

Congratulations also to Shelley’s team for the community brochures: they are comprehensive, useful, and have wonderful graphics.

Alternative Funding Task Team – Annie Johnson

This Task Team has had one meeting so far. They also have sent out one proposal, to the New Horizons for Seniors program. The project involves Mi’kmaq Elders mentoring youth. Youth will likely be defined as university-aged people. There is very good expertise on this team, and the writers of the project proposal got very useful feedback when it was reviewed. UINR mailed out the proposal this morning. Most of the activity of this Task Team will be reviewing project proposals. The Management Committee will be setting the workplan priorities. Elaine Jeffries (EC) is a member of this Task Team, she has lots of experience and can give a good idea of funding opportunities. The main purpose of this team is to look for funding and review other task team’s project proposals with the goal of giving proposals the greatest chance of success.

Communications (Launch Team Subcommittee thereof) – Anthony Morris, Shelley Porter, Sharon Munroe

The new Communications plan was presented to Senior Council in 2010. The main focus of the team was the Launch of the Spirit document. The current membership of this team is: Shelley Porter, Anthony Morris, Sharon Munroe, Annie Johnson, Guy Rochon, Jessica Farrell, Jessica Kleinherenbrink, and Maria O’Hearn.

After the launch in July, the Management Committee asked the Communications Task Team to revise the communications plan for 2011-12 and follow up the launch with publicity to facilitate the implementation of the Spirit document. The hope is that in some form or other the Spirit Document will be in “every home in the watershed”.

The challenge last year was that there was no framework for a Communications Plan, and the last one had been created in 2007. Now we have a framework (from 2010). The Task Team met last week, and its next meeting is next week. They are working on a new Plan, and will update the Senior Council at the meeting in October.

Our other communications efforts, such as participation in the Cape Breton Farmers Exhibition, were considered successful. There is a lot of interest in the Bras d’Or and our appeal to people’s curiosity with a quiz and maps was effective. Next year and at other events, we’d like to try to have more maps and other “trivia game” type materials.

At present we have a need for more printed materials (e.g. hard copies of the Spirit document); these can be very expensive.We may need to do school presentations. Our public seems interested, diverse, and aware.

Comment: maybe we need to get good information out there, to make discourse more reasonable when conflicts arise over developments, etc. People just want to know the truth and if they need to be concerned.

Of course we have to remember that use of the Spirit approach is voluntary. The Communications Task Team has discussed using the website as a tool to help the public find good, credible information (links, etc.). We have the ability to get the public connected to the information they need to make informed decisions.

Comment: we have to educate the public about our approach and offer it as an option

Comment: There has been a meeting of the BLBRA program development committee at BPNT. There are materials available there at the Bras d’Or Interpretation Centre; could we integrate and cross-reference every group’s website?That way we can showcase the different foci and approaches of each group. The BLBRA program development group is also working on an Inventory of initiatives /groups around the watershed. It was offered that the Sustainable Communities Initiative might have reports including a list of groups around the Bras d’Or.