Report of the Public Consultations on the Review of the Management Plan

marinepark.qc.ca Report of the public consultations on the Review of the Management Plan Report of the public consultations on the Rewiew of the Management Plan Saguenay St. Lawrence Marine Park September 2008 Legal deposit Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, 2008 ISBN 978-2-550-54022-9 (print version) 978-2-550-54023-6 (PDF) Saguenay St. Lawrence Marine Parc Table of Contents SUMMARY V INTRODUCTION 1 PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROGRAM 2 III OBJECTIVES 2 THE THREE PHASES IN THE PROGRAM 2 INFORMING THE PUBLIC 2 GATHERING THE COMMENTS 2 PRESENTING THE RESULTS OF THE CONSULTATIONS 3 1. A VISION FOR THE SAGUENAY-ST. LAWRENCE MARINE PARK 5 2. THE MARINE PARK, AN EXCEPTIONAL NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 7 3. THE MARINE PARK, “CROSSROADS OF PEOPLES, WELLSPRING OF RESOURCES” 9 4. THE MARINE PARK, A MODEL OF PARTICipaTORY MANAGEMENT 10 5. THE ECOSYSTEMS AND STATE OF HEALTH OF THE MARINE PARK 12 6. SUSTAINABLE USE OF RESOURCES 14 7. ZONING PLAN FOR THE MARINE PARK 18 8. LAND AND SEA DISCOVERY SITES AND EXPERIENCES 26 CONCLUSION AND INFORMATION 29 Saguenay St. Lawrence Marine Parc Summary As part of the review of the management plan of the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park, more than 500 copies of the public consultation document were distributed from mid-December 2007 to mid-March 2008. The document could also be consulted on the marine park’s website. Public meetings were held, where information was provided and the public could express their views, at La Malbaie, Rivière-du-Loup, Saguenay (La Baie district) and Les Escoumins. Approximately 230 persons attended these meetings, which were held in the afternoon and evening. Below is a summary of the briefs and comments received during the period of public consultations. It contains the main concerns and recommendations expressed by groups and citizens, either in person or in writing. In V all, 28 briefs and written comments were submitted on behalf of 30 groups, and 24 were submitted by indivi- duals, for a total of 52 documents. A Vision for the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park Although most of the groups and citizens share the future vision proposed for the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park, others maintain that the vision contains objectives that are too general in nature and that lack indications as to the means that will be used for reaching those objectives. Furthermore, the management plan should take into account the Report sur l’état du parc marin, a report on the state of the park that raises important management issues. Some of the interested parties deplore the fact that the proposed vision of the marine park in 15 years is not a promising outlook full of hope but an assessment of actions that have been carried out. Others say that they are very enthusiastic with regard to the clear indications given for the direction that the marine park will take over the coming years. Numerous comments and suggestions were also received regarding means that will be used to increase the vi- sibility of the marine park beyond its territorial limits. Some people believe that it is essential that community groups work together to accomplish this. Developing the reflex of welcoming and encouraging members of the community to visit the various sites by lowering fees for the local population, for example, is an excellent way of ensuring that the community takes ownership once again of the discovery sites and takes part in “putting the marine park on the map”. They maintain that “the people are the best ambassadors for the community”. The Marine Park, an Exceptional Natural Environment With regard to the boundaries of the marine park and its co-ordination zone, numerous briefs made refe- rence to the possibility of increasing the area covered by the marine park. It was suggested that as a marine conservation area the park should better represent the natural marine region of the St. Lawrence Estuary by extending its boundaries to the southern part of the estuary to cover both shores of the St. Lawrence. The new boundaries should also include the entire portion of the Saguenay River upstream from the present boundary, near the town of Sainte-Rose-du-Nord, as well as the Baie des Ha! Ha!, areas which are representative of the marine ecosystem of the Saguenay Fjord. In addition, it was suggested that the territory covered by the park be extended to the boundaries of the Charlevoix region, as far as Petite-Rivière-Saint-François. Everyone is in agreement that the area of the marine park must be increased for better protection of the unique ecosystem that the Saguenay and St. Lawrence rivers represent. Several comments were to the effect that the consultation document presented the features of the marine park too briefly, without focusing on the uniqueness of the ecosystem and impacts sustained by it: no mention is made of the negative consequences that certain activities have on the natural environment. Consequently, a more detailed and more scientific description of the marine environment and the stress factors, including an Report of the public consultations on the Review of the Management Plan inventory of the human activities that have an impact on the area, should be included in the management plan of the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park. A presentation of the impacts and present state of the park’s com- ponents would provide an accurate picture of what needs to be done in the future and would prevent mistakes made in the past from being repeated. The Marine Park, a Model of Participatory Management It was pointed out that the jurisdiction of two levels of government means that a large number of players are involved in managing activities that take place over the park’s territory (government departments, organi- zations, etc.). These bodies do not all act consistently in terms of the mandate and objectives of the marine conservation area. The management plan should ensure greater cohesion between the participants for a more VI effective administration of the park. Along the same lines, the desire for more sustained collaboration can be seen in comments on the system of participatory management. Although this type of management means that certain representatives of groups in the co-ordination zone are involved in directions taken in managing the marine park, it does not necessarily mean that citizens and park users have an active role. In that sense, users such as groups of fishermen and hun- ters, coastal residents, kayakers, tour boat operators, conservation groups and environmental groups should form one overall group that would become more involved in park management; that way, at least one community group would take part in implementing actions. All are in agreement that the marine park team needs to determine its strategy in close consultation with groups in the community. Several suggestions were made with regard to the action proposed “to develop and implement a strategy for generating revenue and creating business partnerships with players in the community”. One group proposed that a marine park cetacean research fund be set up, which would be financed by an increase in commercial fishing licence fees.T he research fund would be used to fund various projects and would come with application conditions, deadlines for the presentation of projects and a decision making committee made up of experts from the marine park and other institutions. On the other hand, it was mentioned that users should not have to pay fees to fund marine park activities since they are already asked to finance equipment or infrastructures (marinas, for example). It should be up to hi- gher authorities, particularly the provincial government, to invest in the long term to ensure adequate funding for the marine park, to cover both its day-to-day operations and implementation projects. The Ecosystems and State of Health of the Marine Park A number of groups and citizens brought up the fact that it is vital that we keep in mind that the marine park’s primary mandate is to protect ecosystems. This requires constant environmental monitoring to assess whether human activities such as commercial fishing, ice fishing and summer sport fishing are detrimental.H owever, it would appear that the scientific monitoring carried out in the park is relatively poor.C onsequently, a complete scientific program needs to be put into place to monitor the state of the ecosystems, with financial support from the fishermen and associations that operate within the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park. Adequately funded research programs that meet the park’s needs, especially programs focusing on the protection of marine mammals and the species that make up their primary food supply, such as krill, capelin, smelt, and herring, would enhance the marine park’s knowledge of its ecosystem, and it would be in a better position Saguenay St. Lawrence Marine Parc to protect it and develop an appropriate way of managing it. Scientific monitoring and a more active hand in protecting the marine area would increase the awareness of fisheries authorities and fishermen of the fragile nature of these resources and the importance of sound harvesting practices. Furthermore, several briefs point out that pleasure craft sewage stations are inaccessible. Sewage discharge regulations have been adopted, but much remains to be done to make the recovery system operational, especially since presently only the marinas at the far ends of the marine park are equipped with sewage stations. The briefs insist on the need to form a committee composed of the marinas and the various government departments involved to conduct a feasibility study and come up with an implementation timetable.

Load more