(Dagbladet): – This is about an activity that can lead to fish species become extinct. It Environment Directorate itself said in its original warning. Directorate should have been on nature in this matter, says manager Lars Haltbrekken in Naturvernforbundet.
The environmental movement has seen red since the government on April 17, on the recommendation of the Environment Directorate, gave Nordic Mining permission to make seafill for mine waste in Førdesfjorden .
The recommendation from the Environment Agency was given the ministry in February 2015, just three months after the agency, out of pure environmental concerns, warned against the project.
See also: Environmental authorities fjord investigated
Changed conclusion
In a letter on 4 November 2014 Climate and Environment Ministry showed Environment Agency to significant negative consequences for cod, eel, dogfish and blue ling.
The Norwegian Berg Manufacturing and mining company Nordic Mining reacted sharply on Environment Directorate’s assessment and expressed this in a letter to the Climate and Environment Ministry, wrote Dagbladet yesterday.
13. November asked the Ministry Environment Directorate for an assessment of “the relationship that emerges of Nordic Mining’s letter.”
19. November only six days later, sent Environment Directorate its new ratings for Climate and Environment Ministry. In this letter, sent just two weeks after Environment Directorate original warning against seafill in Førdesfjorden, the Directorate conclusion is quite different.
Suddenly it “unlikely” that the management target § 5 of the draft Act unreachable for four fish species.
Environment Director Ellen Hambro rejects to Dagbladet that Environment Directorate has been politically driven, and she is not that they have come to a new and opposite conclusion within 14 days.
Naturvernforbundet react
– First we wrote that seafill “may cause the management objectives of the draft Act § 5 of these four species is not reached.” It is not an opposite conclusion by asserting that it is “unlikely” that the management targets are not met, says Hambro.
She explains the different conclusions that there behind letter to the Ministry on November 19 was a thorough work from Environment Directorate .
– We went deeper into the matter and made a thorough assessment of the likelihood that the landfill means that the targets of the draft Act, paragraph 5 is not reached, says Hambro.
Director Lars Haltbrekken in Naturvernforbundet not buy environmental director Ellen Hambro argument that the Directorate’s new and much kinder conclusion comes as a result of that they have made a new and thorough analysis.
– The Directorate was asked by the Ministry for reconsideration on 13 November 2014, the Directorate delivered on 19 November. So then you have this very thorough review as Hambro shows to have been done in six days, including Saturday and Sunday.
Haltbrekken further points out that the directorate has not had any new knowledge to deal with that could explain their new conclusion.
– Hambro claim that there is no contradiction between the warning about endangered fish species Environment Agency gave on 4 November and far more moderate “low probability” that the fish species are threatened as they came with fourteen days later . This must mean that it remains unchanged that the Agency believes seafill may lead to “the management objectives of the draft Act is not reached.” When I find it very strange that this is not even mentioned in the letter Environment Directorate sent Climate and Environment Ministry with its recommendation on the project in Førdesfjorden says Haltbrekken.
– Unable to do the job
– There are few cases that have been so thoroughly studied as this. Over a hundred pages are delivered to the Ministry, says environmental director Ellen Hambro.
She denies that the Directorate has not had time for a thorough assessment of the case during the short time they were wearing.
– We have managed to do the job on the days we had at our disposal, says Hambro.
No comments:
Post a Comment