[All] Fw: Addendum to Affidavit of Louisette Lanteigne

Thu Sep 15 16:44:30 EDT 2016

I think I found an economic motive as to why the Ontario Governement has not stepped up to reasonably protect Jefferson Salamanders.
I just submitted this as an addendum to my affidavit but I don't know if the NEB will accept this document or not because it is beyond the deadline of submission but I think the risk of not voicing this is far greater. 
I took the liberty to send a copy to the UN's Anti Corruption bureau as well as the UN Biodiversity Secetariat and elected officials. I want absolutely no plausible deniability. 
Lulu 

----- Forwarded Message -----
 From: "water.lulu at yahoo.ca" <water.lulu at yahoo.ca>
 To: Matt Groza <matt.groza at neb-one.gc.ca>; NRIC MNR (MNR) <mnr.nric.mnr at ontario.ca>; MIN Feedback (MNR) <minister.mnr at ontario.ca>; Premier of Ontario | Première ministre de l’Ontario <premier at ontario.ca>; Andrea Horwath <ahorwath-qp at ndp.on.ca>; James Carr P.C.M.P. <nrcan.minister-ministre.rncan at canada.ca>; "catherine.mckenna at parl.gc.ca" <catherine.mckenna at parl.gc.ca>; "justin.trudeau at parl.gc.ca" <justin.trudeau at parl.gc.ca>; Bardish Chagger <bardish.chagger at parl.gc.ca>; MPP Catherine Fife (Kitchener-Waterloo) <catherinefife at on.ndp.ca>; "secretariat at cbd.int" <secretariat at cbd.int>; "uncac.cop at unodc.org" <uncac.cop at unodc.org>; Carolinian Info <info at carolinian.org>; Ecojustice Info <info at ecojustice.ca>; Naturecanada Info <info at naturecanada.ca>; Environmentaldefence Info <info at environmentaldefence.ca>; Wildlandsleague Info <info at wildlandsleague.org>; "feedback at sixnations.ca" <feedback at sixnations.ca>; "pbellegarde at afn.ca" <pbellegarde at afn.ca>; "indigenous_un at un.org" <indigenous_un at un.org> 
 Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 3:59 PM
 Subject: Addendum to Affidavit of Louisette Lanteigne

RE: Enbridge Pipelines Inc. - Line 10 Westover Segment Replacement Project - Proposed Electrical Transmission Corridor Route (A79406)
Background:
This email regards an ongoing National Energy Board Process known as Line 10 Westover Segment Replacement which is basically the abandonment of an old pipeline with the installation of a new parallel oil pipeline to deliver fuels from Nanticoke Junction Facility in Hamilton to Enbridge's Westover Terminal. It is part of a 142 Km export pipeline that carries oil from Westover to West Seneca in Buffalo NY where it attaches to the Kiantone Pipeline in Warren Pennsylvania where it is refined. 
Previously I was a participant of both Enbridge Line 9 NEB processes where I secured new conditions to add more valves along Line 9's major waterways. When I applied for the Enbridge Line 10 hearing, the NEB denied me the right to participate at all.  I appealed by way of a written letter and the NEB then allowed me to be a commenter without any explanation as to why they specifically limited my participation. I have expertise specific to these properties because I previously initiated and Environmental Bill of Rights Review  which resulted in a full review on the state of the Waterloo and Paris Galt Moraine systems.  My work is currently archived at Wilfrid Laurier for the advocacy I have done over many years. I have successfully protect moraines and Jefferson Salamanders using various public processes.
I was given a firm deadline for my written submission. The NEB deadline was Friday August 19th. A screen shot of the informational power point along with the email from NEB Process Advisor Matt Groza Is included in the attachments for your reference.  My affidavit as submitted on August 15th 2015 focused on the lack of critical habitat delineation for the Endangered Jefferson salamander as well as significant geological/seismic risks and concerns with the use of brand names rather than legal corporate names when identifying the owner of this pipeline. I was concerned of potential fraud.  You can view my full affidavit which is NEB file A78981 online here:    https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=3025064&objAction=browse&viewType=1
On September 14, 2016 Enbridge filed new information showing they were relocating the area of the proposed new pipeline. See NEB File A79406 online here; 
https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-eng/llisapi.dll?func=ll&objId=3052327&objAction=browse

Within the new information is document A79406-8 titled: Updated ESA Reroute A5F0W7  Line 10 Westover SegmentReplacement Project Prepared for Enbridge by CH2M Hill and Dillion Consulting LImited (There is a PDF copy of this document in the attachments and I will refer to the page number of the PDF below for your reference)
Please review the following passages as taken from this report: 

3.1.2 Consultation with Other Stakeholders (Page 6 PDF)
3.1.2 Consultation with Other StakeholdersEnbridge has notified the Grand River Conservation Authority and the City of Hamilton of the routebeing considered via email in August 2016, and have requested their feedback.Additionally, Enbridge has spoken with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF)on August 19, 2016 regarding the ETCR and the potential effects on various species, including Jeffersonsalamander (Ambystoma jeffersonianum), common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) and Americanchestnut (Castanea dentate). MNRF indicated that the Project design, construction methodology andconstruction timing windows described are acceptable provided appropriate mitigation measures areimplemented. Specific survey requirements regarding Jefferson salamander discussed with MNRFinclude pond suitability studies to be completed in 2017 to determine potential habitat and presence ofJefferson salamander. Mitigation measures to be implemented in confirmed habitat will includeamphibian salvage or relocation, and the installation of exclusion fencing prior to construction. TheProject-specific preliminary Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) will be updated as warranted, includingthe wildlife Resource Specific Mitigation Table (RSMT) included as Table 3 in Appendix O [FilingID A5D8Y1]. In discussion with MNRF, it was determined that future turtle basking surveys along theETCR are not warranted given that habitat is considered to be significant turtle habitat (MNRF, 2000;MNRF, 2015) based on August 2016 field observations, and that mitigation measures remain the sameas what was included in the EPP [Filing ID A5D8Y1]. Mitigation measures specific to American chestnutwere not discussed at this time; however, Enbridge will consult with MNRF upon completion of fieldsurveys in order to determine any site or species-specific mitigation, if observed during field studies.Additional details and updates are provided in the Stakeholder Consultation Section of this filing.

Table 4-1. Summary of Environmental and Socio-Economic Setting and Considerations  (page 10 PDF)
Wildlife • Jefferson salamander (Ambystoma jeffersonianum) is known to occur in proximity to the ETCR.This habitat has been previously described in Section 5.0 of the ESA [Filing ID A4W2R0] and theSupplemental ESA [Filing ID A5E4Z2]. Potential effects to Jefferson salamander have beenpreviously assessed in Sections 6.2.11 and 7.10 of the ESA [Filing ID A4W2R0 and A4W2R6] andreviewed in consideration of the route revisions filed in the Supplemental ESA [FilingID A5E4Z2]. Considering the ETCR, updates to the Wildlife RSMT and the Project EAS will bewarranted following habitat suitability studies in spring and summer 2017. Surveys will becompleted in consultation with the MNRF.

5.1 Supplemental Studies (page 12 of PDF) 
• Amphibian breeding surveys are scheduled to occur between April and June 2017 in areas wherepotential habitat has been identified. Jefferson salamander pond suitability studies will occur inspring and summer 2017 in select areas along the ETCR.

The issues I have specific to the above mentioned comments are as follows: 

1. This timing for the Jefferson Salamander tests as noted by Enbridge conflicts with the common book used as the key guide for salamander surveys: Heyer, W.R., M.A. Donnelly, R.W. McDiarmid, L.C. Hayek, and M.S. Foster, (editors). 1994 Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Amphibians, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. 364 pp. 

Basicallly, Jefferson salamanders migrate to ponds during the first warm rains of spring when temperatures are 4 °C or higher. They are unique in this time range compared to other species giving them the advantage of less predation. They breed, lay eggs and migrate back into the forests well before other species arrive to the pond. 
2. A cursory review of the weather data for Hamilton for 2016 as seen in the attachments, indicates that the conditions during March were likely very suitable for the breeding migration of the Jefferson salamander because of the air temperatures on this date were frequently >10ºC.  Thus, the statement that the amphibian surveys are to be completed during April in regards to Line 10, indicates the primary breeding migration would not be observed and conflicts with standard methods used to inventory amphibians in general and salamanders in particular (Heyer et al. 1994). For example, the amphibian surveys completed for habitats in southern Ontario (Hecnar and M’Closkey 1996, 1998) that are being used currently to frame conservation plans for amphibians used early spring sampling to determine species inventories at sites.
3. Currently the Ontario MNR states Jefferson salamander (and hybrids) samples shall be limited to toe or tail clips (maximum 5mm) and/or egg mass collections (2-5 eggs per egg mass).however testing on eggs is the destruction of a specimen. It is important to note that The Wildlife Scientific Collector's Authorization process with the Province of Ontario allows for the capture of wildlife, keeping of wildlife and release of wildlife, not the destruction of actual specimens.  If testing takes place in April and June it will not likely focus on DNA tests conducted on mature salamanders but will involve the destruction of eggs and/or larvae of this endangered species.  
4. In the attachment is a letter from Ecojustice clarifying the specific policies that protect Jefferson salamanders in Ontario.. 
5. Because the Jefferson salamander has been observed to achieve the age of 30 years in undisturbed forests of southern Ontario (Dr. Nicholas Collins, University of Toronto, Erindale Campus Mississauga, Ont, Pers. Comm.), a relevant question to ask is: why might this salamander be identified as absent in an intact forest along Line 10 while other salamander species are still present and abundant at the site? There apparently are no issues of species scarcity with other variants of mole salamanders like spotted.salamanders in Ontario to warrant their inclusion on the endangered species list yet they often share the same pond as Jefferson Salamanders. Why is it that just this one species is missing?
6. In my sworn affidavit submitted for the Line 10 process, it included Attachment 4, a document produced by The Committee on the Status of Specie At Risk In Ontario (COSSARO) which speaks of the swift decline in Jefferson Salamander populations. It states the following:

6. Ontario DeclineThreatened. Of 87 sites from which salamanders of the Jeffersonianum complex have been recorded, only 33 have been confirmed to have A. jeffersonianum (JJ) or unisexuals (LJJ) over the past decade. Assuming all 33 locations have pure Jefferson Salamanders (JJ), then the decline over the past three generations (~33 years) is 60%. However, other samples from ponds known to have pure Jefferson Salamanders suggest the decline is higher (COSEWIC 2010 in press). Repeat surveys over a 15-year timeframe (1990-2005) revealed that most populations were declining and some were extirpated. For example, surveys of 18 historically known breeding sites along the Niagara Escarpment that were documented in 1990-91 revealed only 3 sites that were confirmed to still be supporting A. jeffersonianum populations in 2003-04 (COSEWIC 2010, in press), an apparent decline of 83%.
7. Ontario’s Conservation ResponsibilityNot in any category. Ontario has less than 10% of global range, albeit the most interesting 10%.

7. There is no reasonable explanation as to what the COSSARO report is referring to in section 7. Why does Ontario has an "Interesting" Jefferson Salamander population? 
8. Is there a link between Ontario's population decline of Jefferson salamanders and the way Environmental Impact Studies are testing for them? 
9. I have spent 16 years asking the ministry to simply secure proper test methods for this animal. It was the subject of two Part II order requests I made with the Ministry of Environment. I initiated an Ontario Municipal Board Process PL071044 where my expert secured concessions for this animal. We made all sides sign off on the fact testing was insufficient. The MNR representative from Guelph who witnessed this was Ken Cornelisse.  I also saw the same issue with the Mount Nemo Quarry Pit Expansion which was stopped at the Ontario Municipal Board. Now we have the same issue happening with Enbridge Line 10. Why is the government of Ontario not stepping up to mandate proper testing procedures to avoid loss of specimens and to avoid having to address the issue repetitively in costly hearing processes? 
10. I would like the NEB to find out how many eggs and larvae have been destroyed to facilitate Jefferson salamander testing in regards to the Line 10 pipeline to date. The data is recorded in the Wildlife Collectors Permit and I think both the Province, the Federal Government and the NEB really need to review those numbers. 
11. I want to know from the Province of Ontario: How many of these animals die annually simply by testing for eggs and larvae?  Can you provide me with a written answer please?   12. What is the cumulative impacts to date for the totality of not only Line 10 Jefferson salamanders  but for connecting line where oil is intended to flow from the one pipe to the other. If we facilitate the transfer of oil by way of this approval process we need to look at the total footprint this approval process is having on this particular species. Will approval of this line push this animal faster to extinction? 
13. The Scientific merits of the Jefferson Salamander is extremely high.  They are an excellent indicator species for high water quality and high groundwater recharge areas. They are one of the few animals that regrows all body tissues including bone, skin and mussel in the right sequence and studies are being done with salamanders to glean data on how to regrow human limbs. There are triploid varieties of Jefferson salamanders with three chromosomes not just two and they are found here in Ontario.  The knowledge to be gleaned from triploids can give us clues on how to cure genetic diseases like Downs syndrome. This animal is literally a scientific treasure. It would be a lost for all mankind to loose such an extraordinary species who's very DNA holds so much potential for the future of medicine.  
14. In light of the above concerns, I respectfully request that the NEB mandate proper spring thaw testing for Jefferson salamanders which includes the proper use of drop pit tests and that strictly prohibits the destruction of known specimens. I would like the NEB to apply this to ALL pipeline EA's where Jefferson salamanders are at risk. I would like the province to apply these standards as soon as possible.
15. In order to comply with Provincial, Federal and International Biodiversity laws as written, we need critical habitat delineation and a recovery strategy for these animals. We need to secure reasonable data and understand the full consequences of our actions before habitat destruction and loss of specimens takes place not afterwards and that includes tree clearance and ground disturbances at these locations. 

16. I would also like to appeal to the Board to add a measure of procedural fairness for commenters that have complied with the deadlines and were left out of the knowledge of the additional EA data and other documents which Enbridge Submitted on September 14, 2015.
17. As a Mi'kmaq Metis woman it is my duty by way of the Vatican Concordat of 1610 to be Catholic and to protect people.With today's policies, Endangered Species are the only tool we have to protect high water recharge zones located away from wellhead areas. The Source Water Act excludes protection for these natural recharge areas, but if we protect the salamanders, we protect our own water supplies for generations to come. Please protect our water. Protect the wetlands because they protects our rivers and lakes by filtering out the the nitrates and phosphates when kept salt free. The algae and salt issue plaguing wells and Lake Erie are a testimony to our destruction of the wetlands in Southern Ontario. These habitat areas are sacred spaces that are vital to protecting our remaining endangered species, traditional foods and medicines and water supplies. Saving the salamander, save all this. 
I pray in good faith that the NEB will accept this document as an addendum to the overall evidence I submit for this process since commentors like me were not privy to this new data provided by Enbridge prior to our  Aug. 19th deadline.  I pray procedural fairness will prevail to receive this document as an addendum to help protect the public good, the endangered Jefferson salamanders and our water supplies for the long term. 
I will electronically submit this for the record. 
Thank you kindly for your time.  Wela'lin/ Miigwetch. 

Louisette Lanteigne700 Star Flower Ave.Waterloo OntN2V 2L2 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20160915/9367e499/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: HamiltonWeather 2016.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 129794 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20160915/9367e499/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Attachment 4 JeffersonCOSSARO.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 41663 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20160915/9367e499/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Aug19deadline.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 206898 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20160915/9367e499/attachment.jpg>