According to a recent report to Council by the Environmental Stewardship Ad-hoc Committee (ESAC), Professor McLeman of Wilfred Laurier University joined the group to present the preliminary results of the recent environmental survey.
Apparently the survey with open-ended questions has not yet been analyzed and, once completed, the committee has to determine what can be done with the data collected.
ESAC said that students at the University are always looking for projects and that they can be tasked with specific questions that the committee would like them to investigate.
The electronic survey pointed out that the majority (3/4) of survey users had their primary residence in Saugeen Shores, 1/4 had a secondary home in Saugeen Shores, and a small number had no residence in Saugeen Shores. Business owners also participated.
One result from the survey regarding quality of life determined that the majority in Saugeen Shores are satisfied.
On the flip side, the majority of respondents were not aware of any environmental initiatives. People seem to be generally concerned about almost all options that were presented to them, but most are worried about beaches and shoreline.
Under one survey question, it was suggested that users found Saugeen Shore environmental initiatives not adequate but opinions were equally divided as to whether or not a modest tax hike would be appropriate to address initiatives.
The survey preliminary results also indicated that people find it difficult to find environmental information but, according to the Committee, the town website and world-of-mouth were the top choices of informing.
When it came to priorities of environmental assets, participants chose Lake Huron as the top choice followed by forests, trees and trails and that people would like to see the town focus on the tree canopy, parks, trails and beaches.
The Trees Working Group of Odette Bartnicki, Diane Huber and Nancy Noble met earlier this month and said that a Tree Protection and Enhancement By-law creation is a priority to protect existing trees and also to determine what is OK and not OK in terms of removing trees. When it comes to tree policies, developer relationships and cooperation is important and encouraging an annual tree planting program (and budget) would be beneficial.
In the past year, 185 trees were planted in the community but the group feels that a better goal would be 500 and, perhaps, private activity and support for any tax increases or incentives would be necessary. Tree Trust activities to focus on big legacy trees is also a goal. Trees on private property however, are difficult legally to deal with and there are limits to what municipal by-laws can govern on private property.
Kincardine has developed an in-depth draft Tree Policy that is being considered. The policy is ” to effectively preserve, enhance, conserve, and manage the urban and rural tree canopy, thus providing a better quality of life for municipal residents. Planning, management, and continued inspection of the tree canopy is essential to ensure a healthy, aesthetic, safe and green environment.”
Education and outreach on the survey was surprisingly low on the list, as was electric vehicle charging. Active transportation was mostly reflected positively in the survey, with half saying that they can get to most places they need to get using active transportation.
The committee asked questions that included: What would the group like the students to do for them in terms of analyzing? Could there be possibly partnerships with the high school as well to bring those students in? How can this group fill in the gaps identified in the survey?
