And a comment on ForestNS’s assertion that we are “increasing wildfire risk by protecting too much land”.
Nature Nova Scotia has posted a comprehensive update on where we stand today on Protected Areas in Nova Scotia, noting
The province stopped designating new protected areas in 2024, leaving many parcels in the 2013 Parks and Protected Areas Plan unprotected. As of summer 2025, Nova Scotia is sitting at just 13.5% protected lands, less than 4 years away from the 2030 deadline for protecting 20%.”
The post opens with a photo of Owls Head, describing the background to the secretive delisting [by the Liberal Gov of the day] of Owls Head Provincial Park in 2020 revealed by investigative reporting by CBC journalist Michael Gorman. Under a section on “Misinformation and Conflicting Interests”, NatureNS reminds us how that factored into election of the PCs in 2021.
An extract:
“Our nature network went to court over that very question in 2020, where Bob Bancroft and NatureNS member organization Eastern Shore Forest Watch argued that government had a duty to consult with the public before agreeing to sell the parcel, even though it was not technically designated yet and only a park in name alone. Justice Christa Brothers decided that such a “public trust doctrine” respecting public lands was not the kind of “incremental change to the common law that [the] court [was] permitted to make”, instead suggesting that if citizens had a problem with any politicians’ decisions they should voice as much at the polls. The Liberal government was shortly after replaced by the current Progressive Conservative government.”
The post has sections on
– Getting to 30% Protected Areas, re, the UN Convention on Biodiversity call for expanded global protected areas, and Canada’s commitment protecting 25% of land and ocean by 2025 and 30% by 2030.
– Protected Areas in Nova Scotia referencing the NS Gov ECC page on Protected Areas.
– How many times must concerned citizens fight the same fight? NatureNS asks readers to “sign onto our letter asking government to strengthen protections for these important natural and recreational spaces?”
– Misinformation and Conflicting Interests
NatureNS notes how it “can be difficult to get new protected areas designated in Nova Scotia”, e.g., because
There are several different kinds of conservation lands under the Nova Scotia protected areas system, each with varying degrees of protection and allowances for different activities. This may make public land protection vulnerable to misinformation.
– Where Do We Stand Today? As cited above, NatureNS notes the apparent slack in designating new protected areas beginning in 2024, and comments:
As we wait for the province to pick up the slack or, at minimum, provide a reason for the lack of action, we are increasingly concerned that the delay may be intentional. Most of the 2013 Parks and Protected Areas Plan parcels that are still unprotected are listed in the Plan as “delayed to 2020” due to “addressing mineral” and “petroleum rights,” or “wood supply.” We think the province is intentionally delaying formal protection for these public lands so that industry can take what they want, first.
– Citizens Step Up To Fill The Gaps NatureNS details how “Nova Scotians are stepping up to protect local wildernesses through citizen science, petition signing, and direct action.”
– Take Action Nature NS suggest 3 actions individual citizens and concerned groups can take to become more informed and to put pressure on the NS Gov and our federal Gov to move on Protected Areas.
It’s a clear, factual and comprehensive review on where we stand on Protected Areas and how to help move the goals of 20% Protected Areas in NS and 30% for Canada at large by 2030 forward.
Visit NatureNS: Make Room for Nature: Getting to 20% and 30% Protected Areas by 2030. or view a PDF of the NatureNS Post here
COMMENT (david p for NSFM)
It’s worth noting that Nova Scotia’s 2030 goal for 20% Protection is much lower than the 30% sought nationally and internationally. The reasoning behind that is basically that NS has a relatively low % of Crown lands compared to most other provinces (See Wikipedia: NS 29%; only PEI at 12% is lower; Ontario 87% ).
The 20% goal has been strongly supported by environmental groups as a realistic goal, while recognizing we ‘could do better’, and encouraging private land owners – even those with only a back yard – to support biodiversity conservation to help make up the difference.
For Big Forestry, however, even 20% protection is challenged, e.g., by claiming that access to all Crown lands – even the Protected Areas – is required to conduct thinnings to reduce wildfire hazard. Says ForestNS in a post on Nov 16, 2023:
We will see more fires because it is getting harder to manage our forests actively. Active management means properly managing and harvesting in the forest and thinning areas where harvesting isn’t allowed.
And a post on Nov 22, 2023:
“…In Nova Scotia, there are two big problems with the current model used to protect land. [It] Increases Wildfire Risk…[It] Hastens Climate Change…we could avoid worsening climate change and increasing wildfire risk by protecting too much land” [by counting towards the total protected area goal] “Large areas of private land cannot be forested for legislative or regulatory purposes.”
However, in contrast to ForestNS’s contentions, there is accumulating scientific evidence that commercially thinned forest stands, especially where management is geared towards pure softwood stands, are, in general, more susceptible to fire and/or burn more intensively than un-managed stands – see scientific papers cited on this website under Forest Management and Fire.
And there is anecdotal evidence that such was the case also in regard to the large wildfires in NS in 2023 and in 2025. Certainly we could benefit from comprehensive, objective, independent, and transparent analyses of the areas that burned and burned most intensively in NS in 2023 and 2025 in relation to landscape, vegetation and forest management variables.
The question: will that be forthcoming, e.g. by the Dalhousie-based group? And soon?
And can we in NS once again have serious, objective and inclusive dialogue on how to manage our forests for the benefit of all, “once again” referring to the Lahey review and the respect it afforded all Nova Scotians?