[GREN-Exec] FW: [All] Application for a Grand River Watershed Act.

Sun Dec 14 12:00:34 EST 2014

Hi GREN Exec,

I must admit my eyes glaze over at most of what Lulu sends out – it’s just too much. But this caused me to pause...I think she’s onto something here. She doesn’t mention that the Grand is a designated heritage river (and I don’t even know what that means, if anything)

I googled this and found that New Brunswick has a watershed protected area designation order: http://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/env/pdf/Water-Eau/WatershedProtectedAreaDesignationOrder.pdf

I’m not familiar enough with Ontario – do we have something similar? Is that the Clean Water Act? 

Susan K

From: All [mailto:all-bounces at gren.ca] On Behalf Of Louisette Lanteigne
Sent: December-14-14 2:17 AM
To: all at gren.ca
Subject: [All] Application for a Grand River Watershed Act.

If at first you don't succeed...try try again.

Folks we need to work on a fresh application for a Waterloo Moraine Act and it has to expand to watershed wide criteria.  It's not because we are in immediate risk but we are in an imminent risk with climate change, provincial growth mandates etc. When I used the EBR process in 2006, it took three years just to get the results so if we apply today we might not see preliminary results till 2017-2018 but that seed is worth planting today. The faster we can get protective provisions in place the faster we can mitigate risks. Source Water Act protects wells but not recharge zones outside of the delineated source water protection areas. Our Grand River Watershed still need protection. 

The Aggregate Act review presentation I gave reflects the base logic of why we need a Waterloo Moraine Act regarding Sprawl and Gravel concerns and Lake Erie issues. etc. http://www.gravelwatch.org/orig-gw/misc/ARA-review-2012/Submissions/L-Lanteigne-ARA-review-slides.pdf

Concerns exist downstream in areas like Brantford, Brant County too. See attachment. We've got system wide issues far greater than the scope of simply our Moraine and it's all connected. We share one river, discharging into the same Lake. Let's go from there. 

The Harper government used the Jobs and Growth 2012 act aka Omnibus Bill C-45 to remove protection of the Navigable Water Act from any reaches of the Grand going from the Brantford Dam North. This is evidence to show legislative protections are actually weaker now then at the time of the first application for the Waterloo Moraine Protection Act back in 2006. That info on page 8 of the attachments. 

Since that time we've seen projects like the mega dump in Tiny Township, Melancthon Mega Quarry, Mount Nemo, St. Mary's Quarry in Flamborough and Capital Paving in West Montrose successfully stopped and cancelled by OMB and by public pressure. We need to glean the key points that stopped these projects and push them forth. In a nutshell: they all reflected bad science with over reliance on Modflow models using outdated data, lack of proper test times and methods, lack of regard for impacts on adjacent properties or down stream communities and a total lack of regard for endangered species. They undermined the will of a determined and intelligent public willing to fight for what they want: Healthy water, protection of heritage areas,  farmlands and biodiversity. These are ideas we can frame our concerns on. 

 Waterloo Region's storm water fees is a successful way to pay for water infrastructure and it encourages natural infiltration vs. infrastructure solutions which improves the health of the Grand with long term benefits for taxpayers. Let's use the Act to implement that policy throughout the watershed. That additional tax base can help communities afford to repair water infrastructure and treatment costs to protect the Grand for the long term. It's do-able. 

Our Region tried to implement a country side line to protect farmland and primary recharge only to be told by the OMB to sprawl out. The province is joining the region in an appeal in Divisional Court to challenge this.  <http://smartgrowthwaterloo.ca/whats-going-on/> http://smartgrowthwaterloo.ca/whats-going-on/  We must mention the failures of the OMB system. How the OMB is non compliant. How their rulings have no reasonable enforcement protocols at all. Only recourse for contempt to an OMB ruling is for a concerned person to pay out of pocket to prove contempt. There is no intervenor funding to allow either municipalities or the public to defend ourselves from bad projects that risk harm to our water supplies. It's at our own expense as individuals and municipalities to defend provincial laws. 

Municipalities are threatened by developers using delay as an excuse to push go to the OMB and have the chair give first approval for a project while bypassing an actual municipal decision.  Because our Moraine is sensitive it happens to us often. Our city and region have seen bad approvals passed as a result of OMB threats and we can't afford to fight every single fight. We need the province to help us reduce our battles and municipal costs so when we mandate studies and it takes time, we won't loose our democratic rights to allow our representatives to vote on approvals. We have to take time to comply to the law. Don't deny our civil liberties because we are acting in compliance. Our area is unique. Our watershed contains the largest region in Canada dependent on groundwater. Paris and Galt Moraines are connected in this one watershed. We take the time because it's worth preventing risks. Municipal revenues are bound to potable water and we need to protect that for the long term. 

Let us also invite others to have input to share their ideas on protecting our watershed for the long term. Invite them to answer these questions and to provide any additional comments they wish. 

What would you recommend as part of a Grand River Watershed Act?

How do we best protect our food and water supplies for the long term?

How can we best protect our economy and environment?

These don't have to be the questions but it's an idea to be built upon. To give shape. I want GREN to shape it. 

Groups in our watershed that I know of with an interest on these issues include: GRCA, All Municipalities, NDACT, Guelph and Brant Council of Canadians, Concerned Citizens of Brant, Oxford People Against the Landfill, WREN, Gravelwatch, CREW, ROOF, RARE, BridgeKeepers, Wellington Water Watchers, TransitionKW, Food and Water First, Waterloo Food System Roundtable, Climate Action WR, Citizens Climate Lobby, Waterloo Institute for Sustainable Energy,  Greenbelt Alliance, Ontario Nature, KW Field Naturalists, Ecojustice. Environmental Defence, Toronto Zoo, Frogwatch, Ontario Turtle Tally, Turtle Haven, United Church, Ontario Beekeepers Association, Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, Canadian Physicians for the Environment, Unifor, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Wilfrid Laurier Sustainability, US Sustainability Project. Student unions, WPIRG, UW Environmental Stewardship and Sustainabililty, WEEAC, EEAC, Laurel Creek Citizens Working Group. Six Nation's, Canadian Water Quality Network etc. 

 There are so many more but it's worth getting the names of every single one to help give them a voice when the time comes to provide comments.

The MNR stated 90% of our natural wetlands in areas of Southwestern Ontario are gone. Our Region innovated a way to stopped rezoning of areas using Environmentally Sensitive Lands policy they created. It offers some protection but the MNR does not recognize these laws because they are not provincial. They have the legislative power to still use them as quarry pits someday, I found that out at the Aggregate Act review. A Grand River Act can protect these areas from pits to protect our water supply, our biodiversity and economic systems dependent on it, for the long term. We still need to protect Hidden Valley and Barrie's Lake. We need rules to simply prohibit development in Jefferson Salamander habitats. It's the only way to stop repeating these OMB hearings. Don't build on swamps. Is that so much to ask? Seems like common sense. 

We need the power to go back to old plans that have not been built and stop them when they post a direct risk to rare species and water supplies ie: 30 year old quarry applications or gas stations over top primary recharge. Our area is unique and so are the risks we face. If you can't grandfather Species At Risk Act, then for God's sake do NOT grandfather our Source Water Act or our Grand River Act. If something poses a risk we need to mitigate it. We need tools to work with to revisit those decisions. We need to be able to say no and we need the province to do so too when the need is there and proven. 

Technicaly the MOE, MNR and Environmental Commissioner are the ones we need to shape this request for. We must have issues within their respective jurisdictional powers but it never hurts to include economic benefits.

GREN's work can be embedded into this to showcase working solutions for all the communities to use. We can show fiscal benefits. We can show scientific benefits. We can prove our region lowered water use in spite of growth to the point we are doing more with less water to support more people. We can show through Sustainability Waterloo that companies who invest in conservation reap significant cost benefits. The good stuff we've got is outstanding!  Use the Grand River Act to make an economic case for spreading successful implementation strategies watershed wide.  Show others how to do it. We need to be the example and we've gotten pretty darn good at it. We can use this application and strut our stuff. 

It's time for this people. It's time. Election next year. Let's make this an issue. Let's craft this right. I need your help. I can't do this one. I can offer the snippets of info I've given but I'm asking GREN to handle this as a group. Who's interested. Anyone? Is this a GREN thing? Because it is to me. This is us. Our work, our efforts and collective experiences all wrapped up in a way we can help folks all across our watershed. We need to save the Grand. That is do-able to me. Showcase how, we can sell that to the world. They need our knowledge. They need this Act. They need the example. We can be that. We already are! 

So GREN, what do ya think. Nice project for the New Year? Anyone interested in a committee? I'll help. I don't want to run it or lead it. I'd love to support it though. I like supporting more than leading on this one. I want this done with greater care and better spelling that anything I can offer. I believe this can really be a policy that can shape a National Water Strategy, and legislation to come. Harper took away laws but our universe is not a vacuum. The good Lord opens doors in our minds allowing inspirations to build towards new policies. I see a Grand River Act using the Environmental Bill of Rights. If you want it, make it happen people.

Lulu :0)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/executive_gren.ca/attachments/20141214/4193c18e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: navigation-protection-act-lakes-and-rivers.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 499511 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/executive_gren.ca/attachments/20141214/4193c18e/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: brantwaterpresentation-121002114120-phpapp02.ppt
Type: application/vnd.ms-powerpoint
Size: 9980416 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/executive_gren.ca/attachments/20141214/4193c18e/attachment.ppt>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00013.txt
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/executive_gren.ca/attachments/20141214/4193c18e/attachment.txt>