Province firm on Owls Head despite objections

Public will get a say but on the developer's terms

The government defended its handling of Owls Head on Thursday, despite continuing calls for the sale of public land to be stopped.

Minister of Lands and Forestry Iain Rankin said he is aware of the public’s interest, but has no plans to protect the area. He said the sale to a private developer is still in progress.

He said he’s committed to protecting 13 per cent of the province’s land, and this falls outside of that.

“At this time, and that has not changed, it has not been put forward as a priority for protection to get us to our 13 per cent, which is in my mandate letter,” Rankin told reporters after a cabinet meeting.

Owls Head is 267 hectares of coastal land located in the Eastern Shore. Its ecology has high conservation value, containing rare plant species and unique rock formations. It was managed as a provincial park reserve, though it was awaiting official designation as a provincial park.

In December, CBC reported that the government de-listed Owls Head from its parks and protected areas plan and revealed Lighthouse Links Development Company intended to purchase it.

News of the decision and the secret nature of the deal upset many people.

Over 2,000 letters have been sent to the Nova Scotia government through a website created by Chris Miller, executive director of the Nova Scotia chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society.

Over 2,500 members have joined a Facebook page supporting protection of the area.

Bob Bancroft and the Eastern Shore Forest Watch Association are seeking a judicial review of the government’s decision to de-list the land, and filled legal papers in Nova Scotia Supreme Court last week.

Supporters raised over $12,000 of the $15,000 required for legal fees in three days.

Premier Stephen McNeil said he has received many letters on the issue, but the process continues.

“That property was never protected, that property will go through the process that it is going through,” said McNeil.

Public input?

Rankin said people will get to have their say in the matter, but exactly how will be left up to the developer.

“In terms of the letter of offer that we’ve put together we have a clear condition to have a public engagement plan that we have to approve,” said Rankin.

The engagement plan will not give anyone the ability to block the development, though Rankin insists the developer wants public support before he moves forward.

“There’s no veto, but from my understanding the developer wants to have a good understanding of what the community wants,” he said.

NDP Leader Gary Burrill says public consultation is required.   Sam Gillett

Nova Scotia NDP Leader Gary Burrill wants the government to revisit the issue. He said no decision should be made before people can have their say.

“Owls Head ended up on the list of parks and protected pending areas out of an extensive public consultation. So if the area is to be removed from that list there needs to be a consultation of the same scope,” said Burrill.

The NDP plans to introduce legislation that would require public consultation before an area’s pending protected status can be removed.

Stefan Sinclair-Fortin

Stefan Sinclair-Fortin

Stefan is a journalist who lives in Halifax. When he isn’t staring at a screen, he can be found falling off of Nova Scotia’s granite cliffs or frigid waves.

Have a story idea? Let us know


  1. When’s the next provincial election. It can’t come too soon, these goofs are drunk with their power!

  2. What else would you expect from the Liberals? Their price is cheap. They do as they’re told by the Johns that contribute to their campaign coffers. It would be interesting to see what the “Developer” has contributed to the Liberal party in the last five years.

  3. Owl’s Head, Clam Harbour and Little Harbour were all parts of my childhood. The happy times we had there exploring, digging clams and going out fishing with the Stevens’ crew in Little Harbour…all good times…all wonderful memories. Our natural heritage of unspoiled land in Nova Scotia belongs to the people of Nova Scotia, not to a Government or Corporation. Save it for our children and their children so that they, too, can explore, dig clams and go fishing…all important memories of a natural world, unspoiled by commercial golf courses.

  4. Iain Rankin: “We’re committed to protecting 13% of the province’s land”
    But if it’s prime coastline or any other magnificent site for private homes, we’ll ignore all objections and sell YOUR land to private developers, because they can make far more profit building luxury homes for people like us, than affordable housing for young families. Oh…and it’s great investment opportunity for our friends and campaign donors.
    Of course, Iain Rankin won’t benefit at all. You all believe that, right?

  5. Can’t the wives of some of these —————- (whatever they are labeled) gently talk some sense into them? Are they too intoxicated to understand? If I were the wife of one of them I would be absolutely ashamed.

  6. Most of Canada is untouched wilderness, the population is growing and people have to live somewhere. There is plenty of nature available in this country without turning every square inch in to park land and nature preserves !!!

    1. This land is not being developed for housing. It is being developed for seasonal recreational use by those with cash to spare play golf. There are numerous golf courses in the province already that struggle to stay afloat. We do not need golf courses built in protected areas that draw tourism away from the existing golf courses. David is correct – we need affordable housing and critical infrastructure. Not playgrounds for the rich on public protected lands.

    2. David, there is clearly a much bigger profit for developers to make from building private homes on premium coastline. So it’s completely obvious that this land sale is primarily not about building homes for a growing population, it’s about providing investment opportunities for a very few people to profit from.
      If you think this is an honest way to make money, that benefits everyone, I have to say that I (and at least tens of thousands of others) don’t agree. It’s profiteering, at the public expense. This is PUBLIC land. Not the governments land, or the politician’s land. They work for us. And they’d better listen to us if they want to be re-elected. Unfortunately I think some politicians are only in politics for the personal gains to be made – which are considerable – above and beneath the table.

  7. Shame on this government. But, then again, it is consistent with its’ agenda. Hopefully, people will vote this lot out. Patronage abounds. DIsrespect for the electorate is the norm.

  8. OMG This has got to stop . The land is being raped .I know these people know this but it’s all about greed and egotistical power.Killing the planet for money, REALLY??????
    These eco systems are necessary for survival.

  9. The earlier post about this said the developer (s) will build 3 golf courses. Golf has had falling numbers for the last several years. In a state like Florida which receives tens of thousands of tourists every winter and has a population of 20million year round, has had any number of course that have shut down or are fighting to stay alive. What are the chances there will be apartment buildings instead?

  10. Government has lost it’s mission of representing the people that voted them in power and have become like most businesses, the more money they can get their hands on, the better.

    1. Agreed. But more accurately, Ivan – they’re using public money and public land to make private investment opportunities for the people who donated to their election campaigns. And this is going on all over the country. The scope for corruption is astronomical. Campaign funding should be overhauled – but it won’t be. That requires political will, not public disgust.

Comments are closed.