Editor:
Further to Brian Carson’s letter (“Enough water in Chapman,” Sept. 24) and Geoff Craig’s response (“Revisiting Chapman,” Oct. 1), Hansard, June 26, 1995 (Volume 21, Number 14) states the following:
Gordon Wilson, MLA: “… there’s a real concern that if a Class A park classification is put in place, regional district interests with respect to water – and in particular the construction of water management projects – will be greatly inhibited because of what may be deemed to be unacceptable activity within a park. What we’re doing is creating in this area the concept that those lakes are protected in their natural state as part of a protected-areas strategy for recreational users to use, whereas the vast majority of the population is saying that that’s not what they expect to do. They say they are setting aside those lakes because they are the primary source of water for everybody who lives on the Sunshine Coast …”
Hon. Elizabeth Cull [Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks]: “… I want to assure the member again that when we do the master plan for the parks, the requirements of water for the community – the watershed issues – will be one of the priority issues to be addressed. It was made very clear to all when we made the announcement that the protection of water quality was one of the most important issues in this particular protected area that all decisions made with respect to the plan for the park in the future had to support the provision of water to the local communities.
“The Ministry of Environment will be involved … to ensure that whatever planning is done to the park respects first and foremost the need in future to provide high-quality water sources for the communities in the area.”
Clearly the ministry must uphold its commitment to water security from Chapman Lake.
Brett McGillivray, Roberts Creek
