After the onslaught

We've had a few days to consider what has happened.  On Monday it became clear that no level of government wanted to get involved.  At the same time, nobody seemed prepared to say that the construction on the beach was acceptable in the eyes of their department. Later, a town official sent a message saying that since the Department of the Environment 'are fine from their perspective with the work that has taken place for the wharf', the town has no problem with it.  

I've visited the website of the provincial Department of Environment and Conservation.  The Environmental Guidelines for CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF WHARVES, BREAKWATERS, SLIPWAYS AND BOATHOUSES made for an interesting read, especially the following sections:

14.5.1 Equipment Operation

The use of heavy equipment in streams or bodies of water is not permitted. Heavy equipment must be kept outside the high-water mark of all drainage courses and bodies of water. The operation of all heavy equipment must be confined to dry, stable areas to reduce production of mud and silt laden water.

Suitable measures must be taken to prevent or reduce the generation of silted or muddied water from the operation of heavy equipment.

14.5.6 Bank Disturbance

At all times, every necessary precaution should be taken to prevent the disturbance of channel banks, bank vegetation and land within the high water mark, flood zone or 15m environmental buffer of any body of water. A minimum 15 meter wide vegetated buffer zone must be maintained along the edge of the water body in order to provide bank stability and maintain local aesthetics.

14.3.3 Site Restoration

Any areas adversely affected by this project must be restored to a state that resembles local natural conditions. Further remedial measures to mitigate environmental impacts on water resources can and will be specified, if considered necessary in the opinion of the Department of Environment and Conservation.

And yet, the department failed to see any contravention of the guidelines.  

The federal government also publishes an Operational Statement regarding Dock and Boathouse Construction.  It puts similar limitations on what can transpire in the ocean and within 15 metres of the high water mark.

Provincial: http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/waterres/regulations/appforms/Guidelines_for_Wharves.pdf
Federal: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/habitat/what-quoi/os-eo/nl/pdf/dock-eng.pdf  *

When this began we were upset that one individual had undertaken a wharf project that was executed in a way that showed disregard for the environment and for the public good.  The opportunity for many to enjoy a natural beach was subjucated by the desire of one man to build a honking great dock system.

Now it has become a quest to learn why the provincial and federal governments publish guidelines for environmental protection but do nothing to ensure those rules are adhered to.  In fact, when apparent violations are drawn to their attention, they do not respond.

Is it me or is it they who are misinterpreting the bans on heavy equipment in the water and the disturbance of vegetation within 15 m of the high water mark?  Can anyone show that the area has been restored to a state that resembles local natural conditions?

A large set of Healey's Cove pictures, with captions and dates, can be viewed at tinyurl.com/HealeysCove

* December 2013 update.  This link no longer works.  See instead http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/measures-mesures/index-eng.html  for a different version of the guidelines.