|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. OVERVIEW |
|
|
Since the time of donation the Morton Centre has had limited use as a field station for the Environmental Science program at Acadia. Recently, interest in developing the property has been escalating, though specific projects have not been determined. |
|
|
Nova Scotia has legislation requiring project based environmental impact assessments. These assessments are triggered after a project has been planned and a location suggested. If sustainable development is to be achieved, environmental concerns must be addressed earlier in the planning stages. Strategic Environmental Assessments have the potential of meeting this objective. |
|
|
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS (SEA) |
|
|
Since inception, the utility of project environmental impact assessments has been recognized. It has also been recognized, however, that project EIAs may occur too late in the planning stage and environmental concerns would be better addressed if taken into account earlier leading to the concept of strategic environmental assessments. |
|
|
Strategic Environmental Assessments are described as the "process of evaluating the environmental impacts of policies, plans and programmes" (Glasson et al., 1994). As such, the SEA helps establish a top-down approach to reaching sustainable development. |
|
|
PROJECT OBJECTIVE |
|
|
To develop and use a strategic environmental assessment methodology in evaluating the Morton Centre. More specifically, given... 1. the desire to have a field station for Environmental Science 2. the desire maintain a sustainability policy at Acadia University 3. the desire to develop the Morton Centre to its fullest potential ...what are the key key indicators (ecological, physical, social) to monitor to detect impact as well as areas of environmental sensitivity. |
|
|
SCOPING: KEY INDICATORS |
|
|
In order to efficiently assess the property, key indicators had to be identified and prioritized. These indicators then directed the methodology specific for this project. |
|
|
Components from a project EIA were identified. These components were then further broken down into categories. The categories were then evaluated in terms of whether the category was capable of identifying areas of environmental sensitivity on the property. If the answer was no, that category was eliminated from the process. |
|
|
If the category could identify areas of sensitivity, then the type of data the category represented was identified (qualitative vs. quantitative). Preference was given to categories that could be quantified, though qualitative data did not exclude the category from consideration. |
|
|
Once the type of data was identified, the category was than scrutinized in order to determine whether it could be used to detect short-term and long-term change on the property. If the answer to this question was yes, then the component and nested categories were used as a key indicator for the property. The scoping exercise is summarized in the following decision tree: |
|
|
Figure 1.1: Decision tree illustrating scoping exercise |
|
|
Relevant components included flora and fauna, geology, water and air. It should be noted that although Air Quality was determined to be a key indicator, due to equipment and funding constraints, this component could not be measured during this project. |
|
|
BASE-MAP |
|
|
In order to achieve a systematic sampling regime and maintain some consistency over time, the property was divided into 50 m by 50 m sections. The grid was based on NAD83 Universal Transverse Media (UTM) data. |
|
|
Figure 1.2: Baseline map of property showing 50 m by 50 m grid sections |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
