Feedback needed

Times Contributor 

 

Resident feedback was listed as an integral component of drafting the Southern Saskatchewan Regional Plan (SSRP), presented at the open house on Nov. 7 at the Strathmore Civic Centre. Facilitators gathered some resident feedback at a workshop session held earlier in the day. 

“We are asking for input from Albertans on the draft plan. We know it is very important to get that, it is very critical,” said Neal Watson, public affairs officer with Environment and Sustainable Resource Development..

Watson said the initial draft, which was discussed at the workshop, was designed through advice from a Regional Advisory Council (RAC) comprised of a group of individuals (not from government sources) with different types of experience and expertise, in a number of areas. The provincial government asked them to consider terms of reference and provide advice to use for developing the subsequent draft. 

Public work sessions and open houses are being held throughout the province, to disseminate the information developed and allows the public to consider the draft and submit their input. Watson encouraged people to go to the website www.landuse.alberta.ca to see the draft and complete the workbook online, or mail it to the address listed, by the deadline of Jan. 15, 2014, so the final draft can go before the legislature in the spring of 2014. 

 “We very much want to hear from as many people as possible. This plan is in draft form and not final form. It is why we are out here finding out what people think about different aspects; what they like and don’t like. We build these plans with the input from Albertans and a lot of different stakeholders and groups, First Nations and municipalities,” said Watson.

Breakdowns for consideration fell under categories of economic development, agriculture, energy, renewable energy, forestry, transportation, tourism, human development, ecosystems and the environment, water and watersheds, air quality, environmental management, human development with proposed strategies for each area. 

Part of the draft provides non-binding guidelines and part contains binding regulations that will be put forward for legislative approval.

Previous SSRP information sessions showed 47.4 per cent of the respondents strongly agreed with their vision statement. There was less support for new development of resources in the coal based and oil industries, and more support for bioenergy and renewable resources. For environmental strategies, the respondents were split with some undecided or not sure or those leaning heavier on agreement. The majority also reserved agreement on social strategies, only agreeing somewhat with the plans. For water protection initiatives, respecting private land ownership, strong conservation measures and stewardship, accommodating  multiple purpose land use, integrated planning and streamlined efficiency for regulation processes, addressing First Nations issues and improved economic development, there was strong or somewhat strong support; however, approximately 25 percent of the respondents in most categories didn’t know or had no answer.  Many found the initiatives outlined in the plan too vague and wanted more concrete details.

A sampling of responses from attendees at the Strathmore workshop indicated a desire for:

• preservation of municipal decision making, with provincial alignment and better funding support 

• more specifics and less general references 

• better protection and support for agricultural interests and a split between more supports for rural interests, or more inclusive reference to all Albertans 

• Stronger protection for head water, ground water and better defined water quality standards, and combining water storage with recreational water areas 

• better and speedier land reclamation enforcement for resource development projects, with solutions found for the ground water and seismic use disagreements 

• Integrated and streamlined resource processes

• prohibition of deforestation in headwater areas and industrial lumber sales 

• pro’s and con’s to voluntary stewardship programs and more investigation needed 

• incentives or land swaps to protect grassland areas and better education programs, with no sales of public land to private interests 

• more wetland reclamation strategies 

• general support for greater recreational areas, but wanted existing areas maintained and improved, with concerns over increased off-road vehicle permissions and a split between user pay and provincial free campsite use 

• health services and communication for connected communities was missing 

• preservation of culture and heritage was supported and input from First Nations peoples should be included in all areas

Responses given at the Strathmore workshop will be combined with other public input, generated in other regions, mail-in responses and online submissions. They will be posted on the land use Alberta website for people to view.