The light is returning

At four seconds a day, at the beginning, now, I can feel the morning light is gaining strength. The river has done it's ice ballet pirouette dance, on time again, it's icy jagged blanket on so warm and cosy. So much dangerous beauty in the winter, unless you're dressed right. The scalding cold wind on my face today as I recklously walk along the rivers edge admiring the master painters work etched in transparent black ice.

So by the new year in January, I'll be leaving this beautiful yet cruel cold world, no, I'm not planning to off myself (I made it fine through Christmas), I'll be heading off to Guatemala with a good friend. At this point in my sputtering, meandering career, I feel it's time to give something back and recharge my short circuited batteries at the same time. We'll be helping poor Mayan families in Xela to build low cost cook stoves through the amazing NGO called Guatemala Stove Project. If I don't have their link on this blog, I'll try to add it soon.

I'll be leaving on a high note for my involvement with SOS I hope. I have made plans with Paul Symes of Wakefield's Black Sheep to stage a show in February, with local bands and Maude Barlow speaking for the Council of Canadians, on our behalf to protect our spring and our local environment. Who needs an excuse for a party eh?

Stay tuned, the light is returning...

Final EA for phase II highway 5

This is my take with the spring in mind. A few things worry me:


1) It is some consultant's opinion that there is no hydraulic link between the Wakefield spring and Carmen/Brown's lake watershed - and that it does not reach the 105. (I have trouble believing this, especially since there is no reference to how this was determined). The EA report goes on to say that the aquifer supply is located on a slope located a bit more that 100 m north of Brown's Lake road (this is vague to say the least!). Then further on in the EA, there is a stmt that says "according to NRCan experts, that the upper watershed area (Brown's lake?) moves through the gravel pit (I assume they mean the one that is being filled in at the end of Rockhurst?). Again, I think it is likely that much, if not all, the spring water supply, moves through the valley behind Giant Tiger and it would be responsible to limit development that is currently filling in this valley (especially from the newly built house at the end of Rockhurst) with dirty fill. We should be on top of this as it's in our neighborhood!

2) LaPeche has launched research to determine the cause for the increase in total coliforms over the past 3 years. I find it strange that Council provided me with only 6 mths of water quality studies (there seems to be a problem giving us older data?). Also not clear how Health Canada is involved here, as there is no study referenced, their explanation is bizarre: "many users are filling large containers with a hose to their car trunk" (not a bad idea actually since all that lifting, especially in winter is difficult and unsafe for some people). I've never seen this practice and have doubts that this hose could contaminate the spring valve (unless they were using this same hose to pump septic waste?). Something sounds smelly to me here.

3) The section on monitoring is not just to verify if mitigation measures have been implemented, - but to ensure they address concerns noted. The report says that the env. follow-up will be coordinated by MTQ to verify the accuracy of the EA and effectiveness of mitigation measures (sounds like the same activity?). They say that the spring will be monitored for 2 yrs - even if it falls in the "no problems anticipated" category (MTQ - 2010) - what is the methodology for this I wonder?

The report goes on to say that if the water quality/quantity falls below "accepted levels" - and deterioration is deemed project related (by who and how?), environmental follow-up will continue for at least one year (this does not reassure me!).

If this is the case with the spring, will the MTQ be able to supply potable water to people who currently use the spring? (I sincerely doubt it!).

4) Section on adaptive mgt leaves the door open for further studies and actions if required? The assumed caveat here is presumably related to residual impacts. IF results reveal a need, actions will be taken to correct the situation and ensure a supply of potable water to residents (therefore, the residual impact is not fully addressed right?). Reality is, once our spring is contaminated, it will probably be too late to correct the problem!

Happy holidays!

This sign says it all!

I found a sign the other day
It was near the place
Pierre,Kevin and I
found another for sale lot sign
That said "I B 1"
Maybe it was a synchronistic?
Of a time to come?
But that sign was no more than 100 ft
To the entrance to Brown’s lake
That I noticed immediately
Just laying on the ground
Maybe one of our ancestors had pity
To prop it up on a small tree
So it wouldn't be lost forever?
Like all the trees surrounding it
That will be erased by a highway
Steamrolling it's way up north?
Even more synchronistic
I must have walked over this sign
At least a dozen times
In my many excursions
In and around Brown’s lake
Down to this exact route
Into the beautiful Valle Verde
For over 25 years and counting..
What a revelation this was!
At first I thought this sign should stay
Exactly where it was found
But Ian Huggett from Eco Watch
Who has been a local hero to me over the years,
Thought it was best to rescue it

At he end of the media photo shoot
I asked Ian if it would be OK
To donate this recued sign to the SOS cause?
He graciously agreed, it's not like he owned it?

This sign resonates for me
like when I was a boy scout leader
And "Be prepared" was our motto of the day
Though I was never fully indonctrinated
Into the Military or PS equivalent
I carry on the simplistic and frugal life
That is a testamount to my brothers teachings
And my university and life's experience
Wherever we camped or inadvertantly tread
That we should leave it cleaner before we arrived
Than after we left - big to smaller footprints
Some signs and simplistic mottos never change

Senator D Head

My neighbor, the "esteemed" Senator Raymond Lavigne is a real D Head. Not only does he get away with building an ugly big house on designated flood plain land, get his aid to cut down the neighbors trees, sick the cops and lawyers on me and my neighbors, but we have to look at his God damn flood lights (5 at last count) that pollute the sanctity of a magnificent flowing river reflecting only stars and the moon. How dare he? Why would he? I mean these big light serve no purpose whatsoever, except maybe to further piss off the neighbors.

Granted, my neighbors and I have been spoiled over the decades we've lived here, but no other home on the river anywhere, is there more light pollution being sprayed out into the country night sky, than from Senator D Head's ugly house. Did I say his house is really ugly? With it's beige vinyl siding and ravaged shorelines turned into tacky docks and lots of tents and motor boats. Of course, the lush forest that used to be there is now completly gone. Full exposure.

I mean if the Senator and his wife want light and noise so bad,why don't they stay in the city? It's always been a mystery to me why he picked the spot he did. Is there gold, maybe rare earth elements over there? The amount of cash he must have spent just on adding fill and landscaping, not to mention the bucket loads of cash he spent to have the municipality surveyed, so he could make a deal with Council and retroactively, get his prize lot on the river. He only spent something like $20 K on the 2 acre lot, what a deal!

This obvious sense of entitlement enjoyed by Senator D Head has obviously spoiled something for me, and probably my neighbors. I realize now, I have to leave. I can't stay here anymore. So if anyone wants to buy this place for a song, let me know. I'm outta here, Mexico, here I come!

Nature walkers beware!

Taking a walk out in the country can be hazardous to your health! I was following a transmission corridor north of Wakefield the other week on a walk, when I came upon a hunter with a weapon what looked liked an M16. I wasn't wearing any bright colors as I thought I was on a well used trail, I yelled out to him that I was human, but he was not amused. At least he didn't shoot me for scaring away his potential prize. I decided to get back to my car pronto, but on the way back, I met what must have been his very camouflaged wife sitting on the ground, didn't see her until I was only a few feet away. She was locked and loaded and sitting on the ground absolutely invisible and ready to blow away any animal that wandered her way. She scolded me for being out there during hunting season. There were no private property signage indicating this was a hunting spot. I didn't dare tell her that I'm vegetarian, she looked like a female equivalent of Rambo, I thanked her for not shooting me. I don't dislike hunters but I detest their attitude that wild lands and wildlife seem to belong to them. We're lucky to have the Gatineau Park to wander, but I've always enjoyed takern the path not taken in my journeys in my backyard paradise. Maybe I need to rethink my vision of nature's freedom?

STOP!

Many of us around the village of Wakefield were sad and shocked to hear that the Wakefield steam train people were allowed to spray herbicides along the tracks to control weeds. Why? Because LaPeche doesn't have by-laws like Chelsea that prohibit the use of herbicides, pesticides etc. in their municipality. As if this wasn't enough of an insult to families and kids, dogs etc. who walk along the tracks in the village, but there were no warnings that the railway corridor had been herbicied. No doubt that these herbicide chemicals would find their way into the Gatineau river considering the tracks are within a few feet of the river.

As if this wasn't enough insult to nature, a month or so ago, the same train people came through with a huge lawn mower to cut down trees (flowers) bordering the tracks, this buzz cut removed most vegetation along the river banks which of course is crucial to holding the banks against erosion. Yes, the village now has an unobstructed view of the river, but at what cost?

An old and unused closet of corroded batteries was cut down by this buzz cutter, and the batteries are now laying on the ground leaking their chemicals into the water and river. Where is the outrage? Where is the logic? STOP the madness!

What is going down?

I've been away for a while

OK, let's face it, nobody reads these useless blogs, but none the less, the optimist I am, I try to continue to say something, not just anything, but something positive. I spent the past month away from my little oasis on the Gatineau. I decided to respond to the clarion call to go out west. I made my way with one of my best friends, Phil Cohen, who just happens to be our local village poet. The best weather we could imagine greeted us at every train stop along the way in Jasper and Prince Rupert. The Rockies were magnificent! Phil was scintillating. Playing guitar, talking and partying in the dome car across the Prairies was sweet. We narrowly managed to avert a natural disaster in Bella Coola, and spent some very musical times in Williams and Pontzi Lake with my sister and family. The whole concept revolved around the fact that Phil Cohen was the Father of "The" Leonard Cohen, and I was his handler. We were on a mission to put the "e" on Clark road.

Be Well!

Whew! I'm letting out the steam and letting the dust settle on this hot day under the collar debate. As you may know, our local water engineer (and other good volunteers) has completed his analysis for input into the EA process. From what I see, we have made cool solid progress on many fronts, despite the tight, middle of summer deadline that has descended like a shadow on our tiny village. Kudos!

As far as the EA report, there should be more information available to the community per the scientific and consultative methodology. Although the EA report may likely be authored by an individual (or farmed out to some poor consultant shmuck), I understand that the standard practice is that no name is attached to the document (institutional blessing).

I agree it would be polite and nice to know what they did, how they did it, what they learned and what it all means to the local ecosystem and us - and our amazing spring water that we and so many others rely on?

I agree that the optics of this EA screening report appear flawed, skimped or maybe a little rushed? This is not unexpected considering this mega project was granted a lowly EA screening from the get go. Maybe we should get a second opinion?

Some SOS members make good points about sticking to the facts and creating a credible and professional conduct and relationship concerning the obvious noise impact on sensitive wetland wildlife (Brown/Carmen/Meech creek) in the park.

This is only the beginning...

I'm not sure about the official SOS media headline, "Not Worth the Paper It's Written On" - besides, a real environmentalist hippie would read the report on line. My own 3 picks:

EA Sham Alive But Not Well?
EA Process Serves Quebec Mega Highway Builder First - While Sleepy Village of Wakefield is Threatened with Thirst?
Bakefield Gets Left High and Dry!

Take good care and be well!

Aquifer - I prefer

As I see it now,we are moving along towards a "fait accomli".
Eco Echo land is still in the balance, I heard Pierrot's drumming tonight and saw the containment structure today around their modest yet proud fruit orchard. Maybe this is the quiet before the storm?

The expropriation axe is being wielded like a threat, maybe a punishment? - how dare you get in our way, I'll flatten you with my steam roller! Too American for me. Mr. Bully Bussiere has heavy baggage. At least we have Louis Rompré on our side right?

Selina always said it's important to choose your battles. As a "fuzzy" member of the Wakefield SOS steering committee, I have chosen to support the work of my neighbor and friend, Louis Molgat who is a water engineer, and has been competently and quietly conducting an objective and strategic baseline water use survey. This has been enhanced by the sharing of water quality testing that has recently been carried out by our Council. Thanks to Louis Rompré for this (we're still waiting for more historical data).

We have generated hard and credible data that will be expanded with more surveys planned, thanks to people like Phil Cohen, Neil Faulkner, maybe even Louis Rompré or Mr. Mayor himself? Bilingual volunteers are most welcome!

Louis and his son Sebastien, along with myself and others, have filled out detailed surveys for about 150 people who regularly or occasionally, use the Wakefield spring for their home or local cottage. We are doing a preliminary analysis of our results to date; and a final report will soon be compiled by Louis and myself that will highlight key information that is designed to complement and help focus the EIA screening work that is currently underway for this highway 5 spaghetti junction extension project.

I and many others I suspect, don't want to kill this extension project, I only hope to influence and maybe in due course, delay the overall construction process. A time out, a deep breath for letting the fog of indecision and unknowns to become clear. If there is a delay, it should be focused by a need to cover off certain key issues such as the potential impact to the Valle Verde Browns/Carmen lake aquifer, and the reduction or impact of water quality or quantity standards that our Spring currently supplies to the local and widespread community. Wildlife corridors are another important issue.

Rigorous and effective mitigation measures should be appropriately considered and put in place to ensure potential significant impacts to the aquifer and the spring amongst other environmental impacts, will be alleviated or minimized during and after the construction process. This is precisely what our survey is trying to inform and influence.

Cooperation is obviously the key. I just wish the good volunteer inspired people of Wakefield and SOS members, could see the merit of conducting an objective and credible survey of the people who actually use the spring on a not so casual basis. Kudos to SOS for their own generating of numbers, that carry serious weight and influence, and is a complement to the survey we are conducting. Strength in numbers carries weight. Whatever our collective goal is, there's no doubt our diversity in approach to influence the current planning process, will make a difference. Hopefully it's still possible to pro-actively influence the EIA screening process.

Bottom line, it may buy us some time, and whittle down "their" resolve to do it as they over-planned, but it's not too late to do it right for the directly affected residents and potential negative community impacts down stream, such as the spring. This for me, has always been a central pragmatic focus and symbol of what is important or valued by us, the people of Wakefield. We demand to be heard and to be part of the planning process that affects our daily lives.

Interesting facts emerging from our survey thus far:

- 43% of the Wakefield spring collect water on a weekly basis
- A majority of users rely on the spring for their daily drinking water needs year around
- 36% of water users fill up 11 to 20 litres per visit
- 38% of people collect water for two people
- The geographic distribution of water users is (at least in the summer) evenly distributed between locals and cottagers (many are from Masham or surrounding area)
- 26% of people surveyed have been equally using the for 1 to 5 years, and 11 to 20 years
- For our final question, we have a poetic plethora of descriptions on the importance and value of the Wakefield spring survey to users - I think even our village poet would be inspired.

I think the SOS petition will certainly add a lot to the intrinsic value that our spring represents. It's a lot like habitat that needs to be protected for this UN year for biodiversity. A trusted source for potable water is almost like a right to free air. It must be dedicated and protected. A surprising number of people interviewed for our survey, have been using the spring for over 50 years! The stories are akin to folklore on the tradition and trust that is bestowed to generations of people who rely and enjoy the legendary water quality of the Wakefield spring. It's almost like a fountain of youth and good health!

I would personally hate to see the symbol of our discomfort and hatred of the "our" next phase of the highway, be exploited in a way that breeds and feeds on public fear and creates uncomfortable political pressure on a resource that may soon be seen as a liability... Some of us remember our previous Mayor, "Typhoid Marie". We need to be focused and objective in our approach to affect positive change. We need to be patient and resolved. We also need to remember Churchill's wisdom:
"together we stand, divided we fall".

As I see it now.

UN Declares That Clean Drinking Water is a Human Right

On July 28,2010 the United Nations General Assembly voted to declare that access to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation is a basic human right.

Originally proposed by Bolivia and co-sponsored by 35 states, the resolution passes with 122 states voting in favor of it and 41 abstaining.

An estimated 884 million people do not have access to clean water and over 2.6 billion do not have access to basic sanitation. Consequently, 1.5 million children under the age of five die each year and 443 million school days are lost because of diseases related to water or sanitation.

Mikhail Gorbachev, who founded the environmental NGO Green Cross International in 1993, recently wrote an op-ed further explaining why the right to clean water is so significant. "As population growth and climate change increase the pressure for adequate water and food, water will increasingly become a security issue. As global temperatures rise, 'water refugees' will increase."

Gorbachev also contends that investing in clean water benefits those in need as well as the global economy. "A $20 million investment in low-cost water technologies could help 100 million farming families escape extreme poverty. Dedicating $15 billion a year to the water and sanitation millennium goals could bring $38 billion a year in global economic benefits. That’s a pretty good rate of return in today’s financial climate."

The UN's resolution will not result in sudden changes for those currently without clean water and sanitation, but it will place more pressure on governments to ensure the well-being of their citizens. In addition Catarina de Albuquerque, the UN Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, is expected to deliver an annual report to the General Assembly showing the steps being taken to ensure this basic right as well as tracking its progress.

Maybe this will "up" the profile of the Wakefield Spring.

Be well.

Septage: A forgotten waste - By Meredith Brown - Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Communities face increased environmental and health risks from failing septic systems and improper waste management.

I’ve recently written about the new Federal Wastewater Regulations that have been proposed by Environment Canada. Environment Minister Prentice has failed to tell us that these new regulations are not going to be enough to solve the full suite of sewage problems we find in our communities today. The federal strategy to manage sewage does not address septic systems (in Canada about 40 per cent of the population is serviced by septic systems) and it does not address sewage sludge (the solid portion of our sewage). Our rural communities are currently faced with environmental and health risks from failing septic systems and from the application of untreated sewage onto our land.

Many municipalities throughout the Ottawa River Watershed are faced with tough decisions about what to do with the sewage that they are generating. Believe it or not, in Ontario it is still perfectly legal to spread untreated sewage that is pumped from septic systems directly onto farmer’s fields. Sewage sludge is considered a threat to drinking water sources according to Ontario’s source water protection guidelines. Unfortunately there are still no legal tools to stop septage haulers from spreading our untreated sewage over our land, even land that will grow food crops.

I can often be heard describing today’s wastewater as a “toxic cocktail”; a disturbing mix of chemicals, pharmaceuticals and just about everything else we flush or wash down the drain. When it comes to managing sewage (and dealing with so many chemicals of emerging concern), the choices municipalities make can have impacts that last generations. Many substances of emerging concern cause cancer, the feminization of fish and frogs, and conditions that render our lakes and rivers unsuitable for swimming and fishing. Finding effective and affordable solutions is challenging. Decisions must take into consideration the future needs of our communities and incorporate a long-term strategy for protecting our environment and our health.

The municipalities within the MRC des Collines-de-l’Outaouais (map) are in the midst of making an important decision regarding the management of septic tank sludge in the region. The majority of the population in the region is serviced by private septic systems that must be pumped out every several years, depending on use. Currently the majority of the septage that is pumped out is hauled in trucks to be treated at the Gatineau sewage treatment facility (for a fee). Unfortunately, the Gatineau facility is at capacity and can no longer accept septage from surrounding communities.

In December, the MRC retained an engineering firm to investigate the best options for going forward with treating septic waste in the region. On May 26, the engineers presented their final report to council, which can be retrieved here (French only). The presentation to council was followed by a period of public consultation. Ottawa Riverkeeper and the Friends of the Gatineau River provided a joint response to the MRC, outlining some of our concerns with the engineering report (and recommended solution). We also provided several recommendations that aim to help decision-makers get the information needed to make a responsible and informed choice.

Of particular concern to us is that the final report from the engineers does not provide enough information and detail for the municipalities in the MRC des Collines-de-l’Outaouais to make a responsible decision regarding the future of septage waste in the MRC. The consultants have not provided an extensive overview of all the possibilities available to us, nor have they given justifiable and defendable reasons for eliminating some alternatives.

Of further concern is the effect that shifting wastewater regulation at the Federal level could have on the future legality of the project. Currently, provincial regulators have the authority to regulate sewage treatment in the Province of Quebec. All municipalities must monitor the impacts of the facilities (primarily impacts to surface water) and report to the province. However, that is about to change. Environment Canada has proposed the enactment of a Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulation to address the ongoing and serious problems caused by sewage pollution in Canadian waters. If passed, the new regulation would be enforced by Environment Canada. The proposed regulation sets new, more stringent national standards that must be met by wastewater treatment facilities as well as septage treatment facilities.

Ottawa Riverkeeper and Friends of the Gatineau River have identified 12 questions or criteria that should be used to compare alternatives that would give our elected officials the necessary information to make a responsible decision regarding what is the best solution to treat our regional septage. Clearly there are still many questions to answer and costs to determine. It is obvious that more time is required to find a feasible solution that protects our precious water resources.
The technology that is recommended by the consulted engineers (sludge dewatering followed by a conventional treatment lagoon) will not solve all of our problems, yet it will pollute our river at unacceptable (and likely illegal) levels and will likely cause odour problems for nearby residents.
Ottawa Riverkeeper and Friends of the Gatineau River have made the following recommendations the MRC des Collines-de-l’Outaouais:


Recommendation #1
The MRC set up a regional septic collection and monitoring program as the first step towards a better solution to managing septage in each municipality within the
MRC.

Recommendation #2
While the regional collection and monitoring system is being developed and implemented and alternative technologies are being researched and evaluated, septage haulers should continue to use the established wastewater treatment facilities in Gatineau and Ottawa to treat septage from our region.

Recommendation #3
The contracted engineers should provide detailed information, including costs for the alternative solutions identified. All alternatives should be systematically ranked by scoring each alternative based on several criteria (costs, land required, impact on the river, etc.) that are given weights according to their importance. Technologies other than conventional lagoons should be explored.

Recommendation #4
Consider a phased approach to finding a solution that our region will be proud of that will meet future needs and regulatory demands. Land requirements are important to consider for each alternative. Given the current information and analysis deficit that we have identified in the Phase 1 report, it would be irresponsible to move ahead with site identification at this time. Site selection should be based on objective criteria that are determined by the technology that is ultimately selected.

Recommendation #5
Any engineering firm hired by the MRC should have strict conditions to design a system that will meet new national effluent standards at all times, including the winter months.

Ottawa Riverkeeper and the Friends of the Gatineau River are concerned about the impacts a septage treatment plant would have on the Gatineau River. Every year thousands of people swim, paddle and fish in the river. It is the lifeblood of the communities that are built along the great river’s shores. It is imperative that decision makers at the MRC des Collines-de-l’Outaouais get all the facts before making a decision. We need to step up our actions and make decreasing water pollution a true priority.

Wakefield spring survey

I got our very own Village Poet, Phil Cohen to come out today and help out with the spring survey under the hot sun. At least we had the best, coldest water close by. Wakefield's Louis Molgat (a water engineer) has initiated this survey which is being conducted to form a baseline of spring usage and hydrology. People ask us why we're doing this survey and some expect the worse. We say that this survey will help focus attention on the valuable drinking water this spring plays for the municipality and beyond. If there is any impact to the aquifer that provides this beautiful water from planned construction activities (mainly associated with the Highway 5 extension to Wakefield), then we will know and expect mitigation measures to be taken that will ensure the long-term viability of this drinking water resource. Thanks for your help today Phil and Lorne Shouldice for caring so many years ago!

I will be looking for other volunteers to help out with a shift or two in the near future. If anyone reads this and wants to help out for an hour or two, please call or email me.

gatineauman@gmail.com
459-3591

Office of the Prime Minister

Office of the Prime Minister 2010-06-04
80 Wellington St.
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2


Mr. Prime Minister,

I’m sure you have bigger fish to fry at this or anytime for that matter, but I felt compelled to write you today about a very perplexing issue that has divided our community of Wakefield, Quebec. The issue I speak of is the proposed Phase II of the Highway 5 extension to Wakefield, Quebec. This has been presented to us by MTQ, Transport Canada and the NCC as a “fait accompli” without any real public consultation. While we are grateful to see real funding to make our transportation needs safer and promises kept by the government some 30 years ago, I ask you to please consider our concerns.

As an environmental impact assessment specialist for over 25 years, I was shocked and bewildered to hear that this massive project is only being environmentally assessed at a screening level. Given recent concerns that the construction of this project has a strong likelihood of impacting our primary potable water source (a spring that is used by a majority of Wakefield residents and cottagers etc.), and what is commonly referred to as “overkill” with the spaghetti junction planned at the gateway of Wakefield, I believe that this project should be environmentally assessed at a higher level (i.e., comprehensive study) which will mandate the inclusion of public consultation and appropriate studies to determine the potential impact to our Wakefield spring. As portrayed in our local newspaper, the Wakefield spring is the closest thing the region has to holy water – people revere it, cherish it, it’s natural, clean, cold, delicious and free. It’s a valued necessity to residents, cottagers and visitors. To ruin it would be an unforgivable act.

Along with the proposed highway 5 extension which is planned to begin construction for early 2011, Wakefield is also faced with unprecedented changes that include a proposed septic waste treatment facility and a proposed industrial park. While these issues represent different village concerns and require dialogue with different levels of government, a common thread evident is that citizens of Wakefield and beyond have passionate ideas about the future vision for Wakefield and the surrounding area, and a sense of frustration that large-scale decisions are being made for us, without a thorough public consultation process. In short, we are overwhelmed. As a growing community we need a long-term vision that reflects the concerns of all of us who live in the Wakefield area. And our voices need to be heard, before the changes are made for us.

Given our community’s overwhelming task to organize ourselves and promote consultation on the highway 5 and other projects mentioned above, I propose that a one-year moratorium be imposed on any highway development until a proper public consultation process has occurred, and until an exhaustive hydrological study is done to ensure our spring is not impacted.

ANDRE J LALONDE
Wakefield, PQ
J0X 3G0

Together we stand divided we fall

I think Lee Adrian and Sarah Beaudet hit the nail on the head today in the WN when they reflect on the sad state of whining and bickering that litters our wonderful WN. I was at the Eco LaPeche meeting last night at the Black Sheep and witnessed polite and constructive discussion on the highway extension and other “urban sprawl” type issues that threaten to drastically change our little village. Perhaps the real issue is our sleepy town has become overwhelmed with outside imposed change and we have become divided in our frantic response. Perhaps this is no accident? I think it’s great that people are concerned and impassioned to add their voice to the democratic debate, but why do so many outspoken people feel that the WN is the only forum to do this and not the face to face forums or blogs that many have worked hard to organize and attend? Storm Russell and I helped to start the Wakefield Newsletter under a different name many years ago and it was meant to be one of levity. When we had enough, we passed this rag-tag Newsletter on to our neighbors, Phil and Glennis who took it to a level that was meant to unite us. Now Nikki has done the same but it would be a shame to see the WN degrade into a forum for whining. It would be sad to see it become censored. Maybe we should take our cue from the sign above the door at the Black Sheep that says, Be Nice or Leave.

Andre Lalonde, Wakefield  

MTQ information session on highway 5 "spaghetti junction" extension

Last night was awesome, thank you all for coming out, asking questions and making noise. The following is a report of the meeting from Rita Komendant and myself.

 

Several people stepped up to remind the officials that the consultations and studies were done too long ago- the Population had changed and awareness of the fragility of the Environmnet has grown. We are going to have to give Louis the CONFIDENCE and ammunition to take this on.

EVERYONE is on the same page now
 water,
 animals,
 culture
 history
 where and when was the public consultation

It's important to know that if the EA study shows residual or unknown significant environmental impacts that are deemed unacceptable (to the community), that the project could be delayed or even cancelled. We need a ground swell with all the right reasons/rationale/arguments. It is evident that much work and patience will be required down the highway....

 

- Meeting Synopsis -

- Hall Packed.(~150 people?) (the parking lot was also packed which made me wonder why did so many people from Wakefield have to drive to Masham for a meeting that was mainly about Wakefield? The meeting clearly should have been in Wakefield, maybe Vorlage?)
- Ricard was Chairman  (he inserted several times that they are just the messengers and by law consultations were done and they can't hinder or change the process, people should pressure the MNA and Deputy (Cannon and Vallé) as well as NCC and Transport Canada)
- Bussiere and Rompre were there but did not say anything
- Long Drawings not on boards, flat on tables (hard to see how the proposed "spaghetti junction" was supposed to actually work)

Details of CIMA plan (Jean Francois Roy - Engineer):

2010-05-19 - seance d'info

2010-04-22 - final concept

2010-01-15 - before project (preliminaire)

2009-10-27 - date d'emission du plan)
- 1 rep from NCC (defered everything with: "I am not an expert")
- 2 Consultants to MTQ (the real Engineers - from Tecsult?)
- 2 MTQ guys (they were both real quiet - one guy did not say a word all night)

- Power point show (cleverly . . .or not, had the 2 sections seperated = long drawings) so IMPACT of mountain removal NOT obvious (to untrained eyes)
- Presentation sequence: (all en francais) (death by PowerPoint, nothing new, somewhat pedantic)
a) History (nothing about culture and 'real' history) (Environmental assessment under provinical BAPE process on-going since 1980's (early 1990's process initiated in La Peche and bumped up to Federal level due to involvement of NCC and Transport Canada)
b) Location (a reveiw about land gathering for the project Chelsea, the bypass etc etc other sections) (MTQ land allowance corridor was made many years ago to avoid expropriation issue - but were abandoned along 105 which forces the current stand alone highway monstrocity)
c) stressed numerous times that this phase II project is at the preliminary stage - no construction can begin until all studies are completed and recommendations for mitigation measures acted on. The design thus far is just 'Global' meaning - its a concept they arrived on based on certain criteria for the concept- motherhood statements like:
 1. need a safe(r) road (proposed extension is 3.7 km)
 2. the numbers warrant it 11,000 a day 15,000 on weeeknds
 and a bunch of other unnecessary info i jetisonned from my brain*
 3. accident statistics

 4. need to comply with topography and scenery (I don't think they were talking about natural scenery here...)

 5. need for geomorphology up-front work to focus on "risk areas (such as Valley Drive spring and local wells to ensure that when consturction is complete, there will be sufficient water volume and quality for users)

 6. Harper is handing out some money

>ding<
 Questiontime:

This was no doubt the best and most informative part of the evening and there was no shortage of people lining up to ask questions and voice their concerns. Here are a few: 

 

- Stan Carlson: asked about measures for wildlife movement under bridges (like 3 culverts used in Chelsea). Response was env. studies underway to comply with EA laws and recommendations will be integrated into plans to protect wildlife movement.

 

- Peter Andree got up and did a great job at summing up the key concerns from our meeting at Helene Anne's place last week. (what will be consultation process over next 6 mths - year? Will there be a Brown's lake access and are studies being done to ensure no damage to aquifer?.

  
- A woman from Masham was concerned with the accessibility to the hospital (now compromised by this design). This was touched by another woman who felt that the proposed round-abouts could slow response time for ambulance and fire trucks.

 

- Question about # 52 Trail and how will it work. There is a second multipurpose trail to be built between the 2 traffic circles (no other trails planned).While it is good that bicycles and walkers can access the park, riding a bike through the spaghetti junction will not be pleasant (Ken Bouchard said cycling path will be under all highways)

 

- Mike White made an empassioned plea as did Peter Everitt for protecting the aquifer and probably link to Valley Drive spring (will blasting of mountain damage aquifer? What about noise impact on wildlife at Brown's lake?  (response was the team is well aware of the community concern for Valley Drive spring)

 

- Neil Faulkner reiterated that the spring is essential (high quality water source) to the community and beyond. Environmental studies underway must ensure the spring will not be impacted and will completed studies be shared with residents?. Ricard said he would make these available via website etc). Consultants admitted some studies have not been done for sensitive issues - ie. Hydrology, animal movements etc.

- Rita asked:  "Where am I . . .L.A.? (waving at the power point show on the screen). Guys- when you were drawing this- didn't you think we are trying to do too much? Solve ALL the access points. She had never seen so much overkill in design.  Loop-de-loops. laneways, split approaches. Masham's needs are now our problem to disperse because of the elevation constraints and bad soils (e.g., 366 access was devised due to technical engineering problems with soft soils, leda clay etc.). TOO many variables, must be simplified (too many things in the interchange area). Rita mentioned the Animals- its easy for them to cross one sheet of pavement, WHAT are they going to do when they encounter this spaghetti tangle.  Is it going to be like Banff- with 30 foot high corridor of fences and overpasses for animal crossings???

 

- Some people saw the overkill as a make-work project (e.g., is the round-about for the 366 link necessary? Engineers said yes because of topography (grade is too low and too much fill would be required to raise highway) and the soils around La Peche river are not adequate (too soft?)

 

- Jay said that 25 year old data is being used to base decisions on (is this still relevant?) and that EA is at low "screening" level. Is it possible to "bump up" the EA process to more in-depth study with public consultation? Response was maybe, but this depends on NCC and Transport Canada and if environmental studies show serious impacts or significant unknown impacts (Ricard will get a contact person from TC involved in EA studies and share with residents)

 

- Lawrence brought up some good points (protection of aquifer, access to Brown's lake). Response was that any access tunnel to Brown's lake is not MTQ issue and must be directed to NCC (they are obviously not in favour of this)

- Sean Butler asked why the 105 can't be widened? (response was that allowances are not adequate and shoulders are soft and too many expropriations would be required)

 

- A good question asked was when will environmental and hydrogeology studies be completed and will they be shared with public and more important, be able to influence the overall EA study? (response was that no dates for completion are available but information will be forwarded to Ricard - no construction can be authorized until studies are completed and recommendations are integrated into the specification plans)

 

- Leane Benoit asked what happens if a link is established with the spring? (response was that solutions will have to be found - when asked if this could include moving the highway to a new location, the engineer said it could go that far and that it could delay the project)

 

- Chris Halloway asked if we can get assurance that construction on highway will not happen until consultations and studies are completed? (Ricard responded by saying that a legal injunction may be possible)

 

P.S. someone asked if any studies had been done to quantify the use of the Valley Drive spring? Ricard said he didn't know of any and would check into it. It was proposed that Council could hire a student to count the # of users/water jugs being filled at the spring, Ricard said yes, he'd look  into it. This is something that our group may want to consider doing or assisting. It can raise our profile and make an important argument for the safeguarding of this precious resource.

P.S.S - There were no questions about what kind of lighting was planned for the interchange, but it's clear there will be significant light pollution resulting from this. Also, will it be possible to erect barriers like Queensway to limit noise pollution to Brown's lake?)

 

Phase II Highway 5 extension to Wakefield

Perhaps two of the things I love most about living in Wakefield is our backyard access to Browns Lake and the Spring on Valley Drive. As a freshwater ecologist, I think it's most probable (but never proven?) that the Valle Verde aquifer (above) is fed by the Brown/Carmen Lake watershed and this is the source of Wakefield's spring on Valley drive. I would think that protecting this critical resource is a trump issue above even our local access to Brown's lake since many if not most of Wakefield residents rely on this spring for their potable water needs.  While I applaud the efforts that many have made, it may be too late for anyone to do anything to save this aquifer and the Valley Drive spring that Lorne Shouldice secured for us so many years ago. It seems to me that any credible environmental impact assessment should have included public consultation that no doubt would have payed special attention to the protection of wetlands and aquifer as a critical resource that local residents and community depend on. The price of so called progress keeps going up and up.

Lavigne in his sandbox

After many years of fighting neighbors, Council and Senate subcommittees, my esteemed neighbor and Senator, Raymond Lavigne, is finally beginning the construction of his big-ass house. As I look out at the verdant new summer green, I wonder what will happen now that the Senator has managed to undo the flood plain laws that protect the shoreline of the Gatineau river??? My neighbors and I are concerned that such development may continue to creep south along the river. Unless such development is initiated by the Senator himself, I can't imagine anyone wanting to live anywhere near this guy and his wife. Unless you're a rare breed like Neil and Carol Faulkner who are not easily intimidated. If development stops with the construction of this home by the Senator, I think many of us will be relieved that the wetlands further south, will be saved. A silver lining perhaps in this long strange story. For this, we owe Neil and Carol our thanks and our condolences during this noisy time of construction.

Well our beloved steam train is back for another season and repairs are being made to the track infrastructure along the way. Apart from the debate about the financial benefits that the train brings to Wakefield, I for one have noticed the Digger doing its thing along the tracks. Apart from doing some damage to the already damaged Riverside Drive, I find it surprising the free rein the workers have to cut large swaths through wetlands in order to improve drainage around the tracks. Maybe this is business as usual, but it seems like overkill to me? (I'll miss those peeper frogs...)

Reminder: Upcoming Wakefield meetings

I look forward to seeing the new and safer highway 5 extension to Wakefield. I also look forward to seeing less traffic on Riverside Drive (where I happen to live). However, I would like to see more public consultation with the current environmental impact assessment process so Wakefield concerns for things like access to Brown's Lake and protection of the Valle Verde aquifer and the Valley Drive spring are considered by project proponents. I think this is reasonable...

Upcoming Wakefield meetings: 

 

- Jessie Pratt of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency will be in Wakefield on May 13th at 7.00 pm to speak about how environmental assessments are supposed to work at the Federal and provincial levels. (organized by Peter Andree). Contact Helene-Anne Fortin in Wakefield for details.

 

- On May 19th at 6.30 pm - plan to attend the Transport Quebec Public Hearing being held at the Arena in Masham. This is an important opportunity for Wakefield residents to make some noise and provide some public input into phase 2 of the highway 5 extension to Wakefield. 

What is EcoVision?

I see this blog as a vehicle to explore and profile environmental issues of interest to myself and my community. Over the 30 odd years living in the Wakefield area, I've played an "environmental ombudsman" role as Ernie Mahoney used to call it. I've tried to focus on water issues but the truth is, I've always been outspoken about Mother Earth issues. The recent realization that the planned highway 5 extension to Wakefield will result in the loss of our local access to Brown's Lake, along with the likely impact of the Valle Verde aquifer that is probably the source of the Valley Drive spring, is one of those issues I just had to wade into. I felt the time was right for the creation of a blog for all things environmental. I look forward to hearing your comments and suggestions. I can't promise that I'll publish everything I hear, but I'll do my best to be fair, balanced and pragmatic.