Dartmouth Cove Trail Access Clarity and DFO's Continued Review
- Friends of Dartmouth Cove
- 3 days ago
- 4 min read
Halifax Regional Council passed amendments to protect Dartmouth Cove from further infilling. Those amendments were approved by the Province with conditions attached that HRM has tried several times to satisfy.
Rather than allow the process to drag along indefinitely, the City has now taken the Province to court to seek clarity. The opinion of HRM, is that the bylaw should now be in effect, given that DMA did not follow their own rules. Delaying the bylaw is not an option when there is a real risk of irreversible harm to a public water body.
While everyone hopes this can be resolved without prolonged litigation, the City is asserting that Dartmouth Cove deserves certainty and there is urgency in ensuring it is protected sooner rather than later. The Province is also refusing to issue further comment on the bylaw while the matter is before the courts.
ARCP’s January 5th “access” claims
In December, Atlantic Road Construction & Paving (ARCP) sent a letter to the City stating their intention to begin work on January 5th. Since then, ARCP has suggested publicly that HRM unnecessarily sensationalized the situation and caused public concern.
The documents tell a different story.
A careful reading of the 2006 easement agreement makes one thing clear:
while ARCP may carry out trail or roadway work on their own parcel, the easement does not give them the right to cross HRM-owned land, nor does it override municipal or provincial property rights.
HRM’s response, which ARCP has now shared publicly, simply confirms this legal reality.
What ARCP has not acknowledged is equally important: they also do not have permission to cross adjacent lands owned by Build Nova Scotia, and they have not secured that access either. HRM and Build Nova Scotia are exercising the same rights any landowner would, consistently, lawfully, and within their authority.
Why DFO must reject ARCP’s infilling application
Beyond access and process concerns, there is a much more fundamental issue: the proposed infilling itself.
A more detailed review of ARCP’s application under DFO’s Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction (HADD) policy, raises serious questions about the primary argument of ARCP. That Dartmouth Cove can be used to safely dispose of and neutralize pyritic slate.
In plain terms:
Pyritic slate, a type of rock, contains iron sulfide (pyrite). Once excavated, it is exposed to oxygen and water and a chemical reaction occurs, transforming the pyrite into a mix of sulfuric acid and iron oxide. This process, harms waterways with acidity and heavy metals.
The initial solution to this problem was simply the idea of keeping the slate underground, covered, or underwater. The thinking was if the slate wasn’t exposed to air it would not become hazardous. However, the fact has been ignored that there is air in the water and in the soil and neither will mitigate pyritic slate exposures.
Marine disposal of pyritic slate in Halifax Harbour is a longstanding practice, without much evidence, data, or comparative study, to mitigate (not eliminate) acid generation. Dumping pyritic slate in the harbour and Dartmouth Cove is a convenient solution that’s fast, cheap, and easy. The “solution to pollution is dilution” rationale is that vast, saltwater bodies can dilute and neutralize the acidic leachate. While the immediate effects of pyritic slate disposal in seawater might seem mitigated by dilution, the potential for environmental harm, particularly with continuous or large-scale disposal in confined areas, is concerning. The need for careful consideration and management of such practices to protect marine ecosystems is not to be ignored out of convenience. The diluted acidic runoff can still alter the pH balance of marine environments; especially in the confined space of the harbour and, more so, the semi-enclosed bay of Dartmouth Cove, as both are estuaries. These shifts can cause a series of ecological disruptions, impacting marine flora and fauna. Estuaries do not have the same capacity to neutralize pyritic slate as the open ocean. This means the likelihood of negative effects from pyritic slate is much higher when disposing of in Dartmouth Cove.
ARCP’s proposal to “safely” dispose of pyritic slate makes assumptions about the water chemistry in Dartmouth Cove. However, their application contains no evidence to back up these assumptions, and; therefore, safe disposal cannot be guaranteed.
The promise of “offsetting” any negative impacts through the use of building “beaches” for rockweed and the placement of reefballs is also insufficient. Dartmouth Cove has made an impressive recovery from continuous dumping raw sewage in the harbour. Placing new rock to create productive habitats will undo any progress that’s been made over that time, and benefits will not be seen for several more years, or at all.
ARCP’s evidence to justify how their offsetting will work is not an apples to apples comparison. They use an unrelated project from Mahone Bay to show how intertidal restoration could work, but with no comparison of how Dartmouth Cove’s water chemistry, geology or habitat are similar to that situation. Field observations revealed that intertidal seaweed growth is sparse in Dartmouth Cove, influenced by environmental factors that ARCP did not consider. Intertidal surveys were not conducted by ARCP to substantiate their claims of improvement. Proposed reef balls placement will be beyond optimal growth range for the seaweed species they claim will develop. Physical water parameters in the cove were not evaluated to again substantiate claims of marine community development.
Under the Fisheries Act, when serious harm to fish or fish habitat cannot be confidently avoided or offset, authorization should be denied. This application fails that test.
What you can do?
DFO has the authority, and the responsibility, to reject applications that pose a credible risk of irreversible harm. We encourage community members to contact Fisheries and Oceans Canada and urge them to deny this proposal.
Contact the Department of Fisheries
DFO.Minister-Ministre.MPO@dfo-mpo.gc.ca - Honourable Joanne Thompson
Be sure to CC the Department of Environment and Climate Change.
julie.dabrusin@parl.gc.ca
ministre-minister@ec.gc.ca
Dartmouth Cove is not a dumping site. It is a shared public resource with ecological, cultural, and recreational value that deserves protection grounded in science, not assumptions.