What is the Panel? • Established in 2001, to "advise" Council on matters affecting the
quality of lake waters in our municipality • Completed it ’s 3rd term • Membership: 7 Citizens with special interest in Lake Water Quality M b hi Citi ith i l i t t i L k W t Q lit appointed by Council Experts: – Ministry of Environment y – Ministry of Natural Resources – Sudbury District Health Unit – Nickel District Conservation Authority y – Fresh Water Ecology Cooperative – City of Greater Sudbury Environmental Staff
2002 Mi i 2002 Mission To serve as a watchdog on behalf of all citizens in the community and actively promote and protect ecological health of lakes within the City of Greater Sudbury through: Scientific and Social Scientific Research, public education, policy advocacy, community partnerships and strategic community initiatives. i i i i i
2002 Vi i 2002 Vision That within one generation, the watersheds and water bodies of Greater Sudbury will achieve and sustain a level of health and quality much better than today making of health and quality much better than today, making Greater Sudbury a world class model for living with lakes.
A i ii Activities GSLIP Panel meets approximately 10 times a year y Interacts with City Staff on issues, y Supports the work of Stewardship Groups by reviewing S h k f S d hi G b i i
proposals and assigning funds to projects to improve water q quality, y, y Monitors community concerns and offers advice to council when possible and appropriate y Communicates with the Public h h bl
A hi Achievements 1. Policy Development Input 2. Public Education by Media 3. Support for Community Volunteer InitiativesǦ Stewardship Groups Policy: Lake and Water Quality input to the City ’s new Official Plan. Background report stage for the Natural Heritage and Storm water Management Background Studies Policy development to plan draft Ǧ Comments and 22 recommendations with many incorporated into Official Plan for City of Greater Sudbury adopted by City Council on June 14, 2006, approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs on March 7, 2007 Ǧ i.e. watershed focus, storm water retention, waterfront lot sizes i in unserviced areas. i d Provided significant advice to staff and Council with respect to water quality issues
• Input to Lake Water Quality report card and icons (lake trout and
loons) to communicate health status of each major City lake.
• Organizing / CoǦorganizing an annual Lake Water Quality Forum at g g/ g g Q y
Science North Ǧ S i N h Venue for area residents to learn about water issues V f id l b i for area residents; Gets new citizen interest in lake stewardship issues and projects; Showcases the Lake Water Quality Program and partner program successes.
• Assists the City in education and communication on water quality
issues. Panel members have written newspaper articles on water quality topics.
• Provided input to staff ’s lake sampling program about which lakes to
sample and advice concerning the significance of the results obtained.
Stewardship Groups y
23 Lake Stewardship Groups developed and now networked, offering mutual educational and moral support, harnessing huge amounts of volunteer energy and working with City Staff.
y Grant Program with criteria to engage and assist individual lake
stewardship committees to spread the workload and speed penetration of stewardship ideas down to the grass roots of stewardship ideas down to the grass roots. Stewardship Assistance Program grants awarded since 2001 and authorized from part of the budget allocated to the Lake Water Quality Program to organisations to assist in the imitative of lake stewardship g g p groups in achieving their goals of healthy waterfront living. . Know how to become incorporated as independent organisations.
C ti i S t i P bl Continuing Systemic Problems City Planning • Over capacity development • Lack of understanding of Watersheds Ǧ drainage areas into the lakes from huge areas of land within which our 300 lakes exist Development decisions • Lake shore development without buffer zones • Despite the Official Plan, stewardship groups and individuals are fighting rearǦguard actions to try to get input to decisions and / or to get decisions reversed. Very inefficient and unnecessarily adversarial. • Lake of guidance about lakeshore living for lakeshore residents. Lake of guidance about lakeshore living for lakeshore residents ǦPesticide and Fertilizer use on Lake Front and Watershed properties ǦSeptic system maintenance ǦShoreline degradation and wild life destruction by boaters Ci M i City Maintenance • Infrastructure repair with inadequate runoff protection • Waste Management regulations • Road Salt and Sand application and removal Road Sa t a d Sa d app cat o a d e ova
S i S l i Systemic Solutions Full cost budgeting of Planned Development including Lake ll b d f l d l l d k Water / Watershed protection • Stick with the official plan working cooperatively with developers • ByǦlaw enforcement • Fund educational materials for all residents • Define lake capacity
So? We need to review and revise the panels mandate in cooperation with the stakeholders cooperation with the stakeholders. Political will needed to give more priority to maintaining g p y g and improving Greater Sudbury’’s greatest resources nj for quality of life, tourism, business and for our image as a community
Themes ǦCommunication Proactive not Reactive ǦSystemic not Ad Hoc ǦKnowledge alone will not produce positive –action Knowledge alone will not produce positive action ǦIgnorance can allow negative action
Recommendations 1. 2.
3.
Mission statement for the panel should be updated in the light of progress and changes over the years with input from the full range of stakeholders. Th t t th t t f h That at the start of each mandate, Council through the Policy d t C il th h th P li Committee, the Planning Committee, Committee of Adjustment and other key decisionÇŚmaking groups be given basic information about Watersheds, Lake Capacities, and , p , major issues of Lake Water Quality that should inform their discussions. A systemic approach be taken to ensure that all City Staff Departments responsible for advice on decision making about Departments responsible for advice on decisionÇŚmaking about projects with Direct impact Lake Water Quality and impact on lakes and water via Watersheds are well informed about p potential impacts. p
R d ti Recommendations 4.
5. 6. 77. 8.
That the City work with the Living Lakes Centre on projects and communication about Lake Water and Watershed health. communication about Lake Water and Watershed health 4a. That the GSLIAP present to the Budget Process advice on seed funding required to enable all Lake Stewardship Groups to fulfill their mandate to protect and enhance Lake Water Quality 4b That GSLIAP and City Staff support coordination of Stewardship 4b. That GSLIAP and City Staff support coordination of Stewardship Group efforts to reduce costs of materials and eliminate unnecessary efforts That Greater Sudbury Council consider moving in advance of the Province to protect non municipal drinking water sources 15% of Province to protect nonÇŚmunicipal drinking water sources ÇŚ Sudbury residents off services. Transition signs on main streets indicating locations of watersheds. City staff from waste management, planning, conservation authority, y g ,p g, y, environmental services, roads and engineering departments work cooperatively with the Lake Water Quality Program. That Greater Sudbury brand itself as The City of Lakes in its promotional materials.