|
Chair
Thompson made introductory comments giving a brief background on the
reasoning for the report and how and why it has come to the Agriculture and
Rural Affairs Committee today.
Lee Ann
Snedden, Manager, Policy Development and Urban Design introduced Nick Stow, Senior
Planner, Land Use and Natural Systems who would be assisting her with the
presentation. A copy of their PowerPoint presentation is held on file with
the City Clerk’s office.
Following the presentation the Committee
members asked questions of staff to clarify some issues such as construction
protocol and education campaign.
The Committee then heard from the
following delegations:
1.
Donna DuBreuil, Ottawa Carleton Wildlife
Centre – Stated that her organization was unhappy with the strategy as
presented. She noted that the consultation process was flawed and all groups
not heard.
2.
*Liz White, Ontario Wildlife Coalition – She
said that there were 2 concerns with the strategy, process and content. Due
to the importance of the strategy it should go to multiple committees as was
originally directed by Council in 2010. Committee members did respond stating
that it will be debated at full Council and had input by all departments at
the City.
3.
*Iola Price, retired wildlife biologist –
Commented that she was not part of the consultation process or groups but
that she is favour of the strategy as presented. Strongly in favour of hiring
a Wildlife Resource Officer immediately.
4.
Debbie Lawes – There is a lack of transparency
and public input into the strategy. Feels that public meetings should be held
on the issue. Committee members noted that this was a public meeting for
input and the drafting of the report has been in process with consultation
since 2010.
5.
Leah Travis – The online consultation process
was not publicized enough. Committee should defer the strategy until the fall
after hearing from the public.
6.
Robert Farley – Is opposed to the strategy as
presented and questions why some organizations originally involved in the
advisory group resigned.
7.
Gerry Lee, retired Canadian Wildlife Service –
Is in favour of the report and is a good starting point but feels there are
areas where more work is needed such as diseases and now that the document is
done, who will do the work. Strongly recommends hiring a Wildlife Biologist.
8.
Anita Utas – Is concerned with the flow device
demonstration project for beavers. She feels that the device is not allowing
enough water for survival of the species.
9.
Paul Mussell – Is in favour of the report but
feels more groups should have been consulted such as trappers and farmers.
Urges hiring of a Wildlife Biologist.
10.
Alastaire Henderson – Feels it should have
gone to other Committees and should have a well publicized public
consultation.
[ * All individuals marked with an asterisk either provided
their comments in writing or by email; all such comments are held on file
with the City Clerk. ]
Following the delegations the Committee
members questioned staff on various items posed by the delegations on such
issues as: is ARAC the proper Committee and according to the Clerk’s office
it is under their Terms of Reference as a Committee, the consultation
process, education programs, beaver deceiver program, etc…
Staff noted that this was a living
document and will be tweaked over time but is a good starting point and
evolving process. Over the past three years staff and Councillors have
received lots of emails and discussion with residents and groups with many
opportunities for public input.
Chair Thompson thanked staff and the delegations
and the public for work on this important emotionally charged file. The
strategy is a positive step and starting point.
The report recommendations were then put to Committee and CARRIED
as presented.
|