N.S. man purposely violates ban on entering woods, gets handed $28K fine
In an effort to prevent wildfires in the midst of a drought, the Nova Scotia government has imposed a ban on anyone entering the woods — including hiking, fishing and camping — until Oct. 15 or until conditions improve. There is also a ban of open fires.
The fine for violating the proclamation under the Forests Act is $25,000. A victim surcharge and HST also apply to the fine, bringing the total to $28,872.50.
Last Friday, Jeff Evely of Coxheath, N.S., arrived at the Department of Natural Resources office just outside Sydney and declared he would be walking into the woods nearby. He recorded audio and video of his encounter and posted it on his Facebook page.
"I want to challenge this order in court, and the only way for me to do that is to get the fine. I'm not trying to make trouble for your guys," he told the official.
"I'm ordering you to not," the worker replied.
"Does somebody want to follow me out there?" asked Evely.
He is later seen walking into dense woods before heading back into the office. Evely is then handed a summary offence ticket.
Evely, a retired veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces who ran as a candidate for the People's Party of Canada in the April federal election, argues the ban is too restrictive and an example of government overreach.
"There is no logical connection to the goal of preventing wildfires to barring my sneakers from the woods," said Evely in an interview at Petersfield Provincial Park, where he regularly walks his dog.
"It goes too far."
This isn't the first time Evely has legally challenged a ban on entering the woods. In fact, it was the outcome of that case that led him to purposely violate the restriction this time around.
A similar ban was put in place in May 2023 as two major wildfires burned in Halifax and Shelburne counties, destroying hundreds of homes and forcing the evacuation of thousands of people.
WATCH | Nova Scotia isn't the only province telling the public to stay out of the woods:
About two weeks after the ban was lifted, Evely filed an application for judicial review of the natural resources minister's proclamation, arguing his rights were infringed since the two wildfires did not impact his Cape Breton community. He also argued the provincewide ban was put in place arbitrarily.
In a decision dated Jan. 22, 2024, Nova Scotia Supreme Court Justice Jamie Campbell ruled Evely did not have standing, meaning he did not have a legal basis to bring the case to court, given there were no charges or fines against him.
Campbell noted Evely was seeking a declaration saying that the minister's decision was unreasonable and beyond the authority granted under the Forests Act.
"But the proclamation issued by the minister has been revoked. The court cannot declare something invalid that is no longer in force," Campbell wrote.
He ruled the application therefore could not proceed.
Evely said he believes the court has no choice this time around but to examine the legality of the restrictions and whether they are constitutional.
Toronto lawyer Marty Moore will help represent Evely. Moore leads a team of lawyers at Charter Advocates Canada, which is funded by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.
Moore said there are a few avenues they may take, including an application for a judicial review. The team is reviewing the case and will decide how to proceed in the coming days and weeks.
"It's an arbitrary restriction. It's not rationally connected to stopping forest fires, by preventing people from doing activities that have nothing to do with the creation of forest fires," said Moore.
"You can't cause a forest fire simply by walking through the forest. And in fact, you might be in a position to prevent a forest fire by reporting an early combustion or even reporting someone who's intentionally going out into the woods to set a forest fire."
Moore said he believes Evely does have standing for a judicial review in this case, given he was issued a summary offence ticket and fined.
'Widespread support' for ban: Natural Resources
Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston has said the ban was put in place following recommendations from experts.
"So the experts gave the advice. I agreed with it. I'm happy to make sure that we're doing everything we can to protect people, to protect property and try to just get through this fire season," Houston told reporters last week.
In a statement Tuesday, the Department of Natural Resources said the decision was not made lightly. It said the current conditions are extremely dangerous.
"We're asking all Nova Scotians to take seriously the precautionary measures we've put in place.… Our teams and experts analyze data on a daily basis to make the best decisions for the protection of Nova Scotians and their homes and communities," the statement said.
"We have seen widespread support from across multiple business sectors and from Nova Scotians who want to do the right thing."
Bans also in place in N.B., N.L.
Ken McMullen, president of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs, said such bans are imposed for a reason and it's better to err on the side of caution.
"I know that this might appear inconvenient. I understand that it might seem over the top. The reality is desperate times may call for desperate measures," said McMullen, who is fire chief for the City of Red Deer in Alberta.
Scott Tingley, manager of forest protection with Nova Scotia's Department of Natural Resources, has repeatedly noted that the vast majority of the province's forest fires — 97 per cent — are caused by humans.
Newfoundland and Labrador, where multiple wildfires are burning, has vowed to impose lofty fines on people who violate its fire ban. Fines now range from $50,000 to $150,000, as well as up to a year in prison.
New Brunswickers are being asked to stay out of the woods, and the province has banned all access to Crown land as crews battle 10 active wildfires, including two major ones. But it has not imposed a hefty fine.
MORE TOP STORIES
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
From hotels, to wine and candy: Canada spent $170K to bring back women who joined Islamic State
The federal government spent more than $170,000 to bring Canadian women and their children back to the country after they went overseas to join the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, documents show. As first reported by Global News, the documents, which were released under access to information legislation, contain details of the costs incurred when eight women, along with their children, were brought home from Syria. They include costs for business class air travel and hotel bills in Montreal that include wine, candy and chocolates. A number of the women have since been charged with terrorism offences. On Friday, the Conservatives called for an investigation into the expenditures in a letter addressed to Jean-Yves Duclos, the chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, Global News reported. 'With Canadians lining up in food banks in record numbers and struggling with housing costs, the Liberal government must answer for why they spent $170,000 on lavish costs to repatriate reported ISIS criminals,' the letter reportedly says. The Conservative party did not respond by press time to National Post's request for comment. The first round of repatriations, completed in October 2022, cost $10,863, according to the documents from Global Affairs Canada. Canadians Kimberly Polman and Oumaima Chouay were returned to the country in that operation. Polman is facing terrorism charges and Chouay pleaded guilty last month to one charge of participating in the activities of a terrorist group. The second operation, which occurred in April 2023, cost $132,746 in expenses for government staff and those returned to Canada. Not all the expenses are detailed in the documents, but the total cost includes $20,331 for 23 hotel rooms at the Marriott hotel at the Montreal Airport, including room-service bills and a catering tab of nearly $3,000. At the time, four Canadian women — three of whom were arrested upon arrival — and their 10 children were returned to Canada, The Canadian Press reported. Among that group was Edmontonian Aimee Lucia Vasconez, who was married to two different ISIS fighters, according to an affidavit filed in court by an RCMP officer. Another, Ammara Amjad, was also arrested and faces a terrorism charge. Individual bills show that one room cost nearly $1,100, driven up from the original room cost of $638 by purchases of $95 worth of wine, a $105 room-service meal and $87 worth of items from the hotel gift store, including chocolate, chips and drugs such as Benadryl and Reactine. That same room tipped $7 on an $8 coffee. Another room ordered $15 worth of children's ice cream, and a third ordered white, red and sparkling wine at $25 apiece. One room's food bill included two $24 smoked meat dishes. The third repatriation operation, done in early July 2023, cost more than $27,500 and saw a government of Canada employee purchase snacks, including goldfish and granola bars, from Costco, and Timbits from Tim Hortons, for the operation. Hotel rooms in Montreal cost a bit more than $2,300. Two Edmonton women, Dina Kalouti and Helena Carson, were among that group. Both have been sentenced to six-month peace bonds and they are required to continue counselling with the Edmonton-based Organization for the Prevention of Violence (OPV), which provides programming for people seeking to leave extremist groups. The documents redact a number of details, and 50 pages were not released, as they are under consultation. The documents do not appear to account for the costs of actually flying to Syria to get the women from detention camps; they include only the costs of transferring them within Canada. Global Affairs Canada did not respond to National Post's requests for comment by press time. A number of Canadian women travelled to the Middle East when the Islamic State seized territory in Iraq and Syria more than a decade ago. However, the terrorist group lost much of its territory, and Canadians who had been living and fighting with the Islamic State were held in detention camps. This led to a major push, particularly from the United States, to have nations repatriate their citizens who were held in Syria. In 2023 alone, the U.S. state department reported under then U.S. president Joe Biden, 14 countries — Canada among them — repatriated 3,500 citizens from where they were detained. Overall, the administration reported that nearly 7,000 family members of foreign fighters had been repatriated by 30 countries. The U.S. bureau of counterterrorism warned in December 2023 that more than half of those held in camps were under the age of 12 and if they remained, they would become vulnerable to ISIS recruitment, perhaps fuelling a resurgence of the terrorist group. — With addition reporting by the Edmonton Journal and The Canadian Press Quebec woman pleads guilty to joining ISIL, sentenced to one day in custody Ruling ordering Ottawa to bring Canadian ISIL suspects home sparks security debate Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
4 years and 3 court cases later, City of Prince George wins case to shut down homeless camp
The City of Prince George has won its latest bid to close a downtown homeless encampment that has been a political football ever since it was first established in 2021. The ruling was handed down this week by B.C. Supreme Court Justice Bruce Elwood and distributed to the media by the city. It found that the city has significantly increased the number of available shelter spaces and affordable housing units in the north-central B.C. city, which serves a population of approximately 90,000. It agreed that the city had demonstrated plans were in place to further increase the available housing units in order to accommodate the remaining residents in the camp, who, it was agreed in court, number approximately 20. However, Elwood also ruled that the city must be prepared to allow for overnight sheltering for residents who are unable to find available supports elsewhere. "Today's decision doesn't solve homelessness," said Eric Depenau, the city's manager of administrative services, at a Friday afternoon news conference at city hall. "We have done good work... but we know that more needs to be done." The city said that moving forward, those who were living in the camp as of July will be allowed to remain until they receive an offer of housing, at which point they will have seven days to vacate. Any newcomers seeking outdoor shelter will be allowed to stay at 498 Ottawa Street, a smaller lot in the current encampment, between 7 p.m. and 9 a.m. The city says it will now be using a "phased approach" to close and remediate the encampment site. The ruling marks what may be the final chapter in an issue that has highlighted the growing visibility of homelessness in communities outside of Canada's major metro areas over the past decade. Previous shutdown attempts failed The encampment on Lower Patricia Boulevard, known as Moccasin Flats, was first established in the spring of 2021 on city-owned land, on an empty dirt lot between an industrial yard and a steep hill leading to a residential neighbourhood. Over the years, its population has fluctuated from fewer than a dozen to close to 100. Though homelessness had previously been an issue in the city, it was the first time in recent memory that a permanent encampment housing such a large population had been seen in Prince George, which bills itself as B.C.'s northern capital, and has sparked a multi-year debate about how best to handle its presence. WATCH | City back in court over homeless camp: While expressing sympathy for the plight of those who lived there, many nearby residents raised concerns about public safety and disorder stemming from the presence of the camp, which have included shootings and multiple fires consistent with arson attempts. At the same time, camp residents and outreach groups pointed out the greatest danger was to those who had nowhere else to go, and argued the camp was necessary as long as there weren't enough viable options for indoor sleeping available. It was also pointed out by groups, including the B.C. Assembly of First Nations, that a majority of encampment residents were Indigenous, many with direct family ties to residential schools, and could not be treated as a simple public safety issue. WATCH | BCAFN Chief Terry Teegee protests homeless camp eviction in Prince George: That argument first made its way to the B.C. Supreme Court in August 2021, when the city applied for an injunction to shut the camp down. But in October, Chief Justice Christopher E. Hinkson ruled the city had failed to prove there were viable alternatives to the camp, and ordered it to be allowed to stand. The ruling was upheld in a 2022 decision, after the city partially demolished a portion of the camp, which a separate justice said was in violation of the Hinkson ruling. The city later apologized. During this time, the encampment caught the attention of then-B.C. housing minister David Eby, who said he didn't believe permanent homeless camps were a safe or viable option and offered to collaborate with the city on finding a more permanent solution. After becoming premier, Eby announced Prince George as one of the first cities to pilot his new HEART and HEARTH programs, which were billed as a way to "rapidly respond to encampments to better support people sheltering outdoors to move inside." New units built during this time include the new transitional housing facility in Atco trailers on Third Avenue near the encampment and complex care spaces available a few blocks away. Phased shutdown In his ruling released Friday, Justice Elwood noted the change in the city's approach to homelessness over the past four years. "Much has changed since the city failed to persuade [the courts] that there was sufficient available housing in 2021," he wrote. "The HEART & HEARTH initiative, the memorandum of understanding between the province and the city and the construction of the Third Avenue Site all reflect tangible progress and concerted efforts by government to address the needs of the occupants of the encampment." However, he noted he was still unable to be certain that the new shelter spaces would be accessible to everyone currently living in the encampment. For one, he found that the units currently available are fewer than the number of people — between 10 and 20 — living in the encampment. Lawyer Claire Kanigan and co-counsel Casey St. Germain, representing residents of Moccasin Flats, said they found there to be at least 18 residents remaining at the encampment and said there are only three rooms currently ready to be occupied at the Thrd Avenue site. Kanigan said there's no timeline as to when more beds will be made available and that the city should be able to prove they have enough beds before they're permitted to close the site. "The basic calculation of number of beds to number of people is foundational," she said. "It is not an overly onerous burden to meet." But Elwood found the proposed solution from the city and B.C. Housing was reasonable — in which the camp would be allowed to stay open until its residents had been offered housing — and was enough to move forward. Outdoor sheltering must still be allowed: judge Another issue raised in the ruling, though, was city bylaws that have been passed barring overnight outdoor sheltering elsewhere in the city, as well as limiting daytime camping. With the closure of Moccasin Flats, Elwood wrote, the impact would be that "there will be nowhere in Prince George where a homeless person can lawfully erect shelter from the elements, store their possessions or even rest during the day," he wrote. "The potential lack of basic shelter during the day is an important consideration year-round. Extreme daytime heat during the summer is also dangerous for people experiencing homelessness. Those who have no other accessible option must be allowed to rest and shelter themselves." As a result, he said, the terms of his ruling "cannot be absolute" and exceptions must be made, however rare, for residents who cannot access other shelter. Mayor Simon Yu, who was elected in 2022 in part on a promise to build housing for people living in the encampment, said he remains committed to the goal of resolving homelessness in the city for good. "It has been a long road and there is much more work to be done to address homelessness in our community," he said in a written statement.
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Wants a Piece of Intel -- And Wall Street Is All Ears
The Trump administration could be gearing up for a bold move: a direct equity stake in Intel (NASDAQ:INTC). According to people familiar with the talks, the potential deal is aimed at reviving Intel's long-delayed factory project in Ohio, once promised to be the largest chipmaking hub in the world. Shares jumped 7.4% to $23.86 on the day of the news and gained as much as another 4% after hours, as the market reacted to the possibility of federal backing. The discussions come just days after President Donald Trump met with Intel's new CEO Lip-Bu Tan, whom he recently criticized for alleged ties to China. While the deal's details are still in fluxand could fall apartany move would signal Tan's job is likely safe for now. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 10 Warning Signs with INTC. This wouldn't be the first time the Trump administration takes a hands-on approach with corporate America. It recently took a 15% cut of certain semiconductor sales to China and secured a golden share in U.S. Steel to help clear a foreign acquisition. Even more surprising? The Pentagon just became the biggest shareholder in MP Materials (NYSE:MP) with a $400 million preferred equity deal. If Intel follows the same playbook, investors could see a blend of equity, guaranteed purchases, and government-led financingsomething the White House sees as a way to crowd in private capital while reassuring markets that the U.S. government has skin in the game. Intel's Ohio site was expected to benefit heavily from the 2022 CHIPS Act, but with funding momentum now uncertain, a direct government stake could change the equation. The factory buildout has already been pushed into the 2030s, and Tan has shifted focus toward stabilizing the company's finances. Earlier this year, one idea floated was to have TSMC (NYSE:TSM) operate Intel's factories under a joint venturebut that plan never advanced. What's unfolding now could become a new chapter in U.S. industrial policy: one where Washington doesn't just regulate or subsidizebut invests, owns, and influences. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Sign in to access your portfolio
