LACK OF FAITH IN POLITICS AND POLITICIANS

Good for the Woolwich Observer. To be specific good for Steve Kannon in his Editor's Notes column yesterday. The title of his article is "Will changing our voting system be enough to restore faith in politics?". I have long been a big fan of Steve's opinions and writing. He starts by advising that Canadians generalize two kinds of politicians: "those on the take, and those who haven't yet been caught.". Wow! He also states that citizens are neither getting full value from our governments much less true representation from them. He specifically indicates that this is at all levels of government including regional and local governments.

Steve also refers to "...blatantly crooked election financing methods...". I suspect he is referring more to provincial or federal elections than to municipal ones although it is unclear to me. Steve suggests that direct democracy could work at the local level and even compares Athens 60,000 eligible participants to the much smaller Townships as evidence that it could work here. Steve also believes that selection of leaders by lottery as was done in Greece, removes money, class and popularity when picking leaders. He does mention the possible downside of not getting the best and the brightest by this method but then counters that with "Who, however, would argue that's currently the case?" Good point.

"A loss of faith in politics and politicians can be tied to the way business is done in Ottawa, in the provincial legislatures and, to a lesser extent, in municipal governments, where power and decisions are typically ceded to unaccountable bureaucrats, developers and union lobbyists...".

Steve makes an excellent point about politicians exempting themselves from rules that apply to others. He's referring to laws that demand truthful representations from taxpayers, welfare applicants, immigrants and most professionals when they fill out government forms. There are no such laws demanding politicians be truthful in their public statements. There is one law that demands truthfulness from our local politicians and that is the Municipal Elections Act (MEA). Despite that I would suggest that there is a ton of room for artful stickhandling as has been practiced by some of our Woolwich politicians.

I agree with everything Steve is saying about the moral fibre or lack thereof in Canadian politics. Citizens are disengaged from politics because of the behaviour and conduct we see from our politicians.

Is there a small disconnect between this harsh, yet in my opinion, accurate outlook on our politicians from Steve Kannon versus the Observer's recent support for a Councillor who a) couldn't be bothered to even learn that ALL election expenses means ALL expenses or b) was assured that nobody was watching and he could literally spend five minutes and fudge the forms all he wanted ?

HAS THE WOOLWICH OBSERVER KNOWINGLY PUBLISHED INACCURATE INFORMATION?

Today's Woolwich Observer carrys a brief story in regards to last Monday's court actions involving Councillor Scott Hahn. Mr. Hahn is facing four charges under the Municipal Elections Act laid by a private citizen namely myself. The charges are Sections 89(h), 89(m), 92(5)(a) and 94. Essentially these charges allege that Mr. Hahn furnished false or misleading information, filed documents (Financial Statements) that were incorrect and that he contravened multiple provisions of the Municipal Elections Act namely Sections 69(1)(d), (e), (f), (g), (l), (m). These "apparent contraventions" are all spelled out clearly and in detail on pages six and twelve in the August 11,2015 "Compliance Audit Report For the Township of Woolwich Re: Scott Hahn". This report was prepared by Froese Forensic partners and the $12,000 cost paid for by Woolwich Township.

Today's Woolwich Observer has published a story titled "Adjournment until Nov. 14 in latest legal challenge for Hahn". In it the following sentence caught my attention: "A review and forensic audit found that while the councillor's initial paperwork was inadequate, the problems weren't significant enough to pass the file over to the provincial court for legal action.". Really?

This sentence is simply inaccurate and false on a number of points. Stating that the "initial" paperwork was inadequate implies that his followup paperwork was adequate. If that was the case then why does the forensic audit on page six have a Paragraph (2.8) titled "Apparent Contraventions-Initial Financial Statement and then on page twelve a Paragraph (3.36) is titled "Apparent Contraventions- Amended Financial Statement? While both these Paragraphs have four separate apparent contraventions listed the second one in regards to Mr. Hahn's Amended Financial Statement, filed months later, has new ones including suggesting that companies owned by Mr. Hahn's family members may have also contravened the Municipal Elections Act.

The Observer's sentence above in my second paragraph also states that "...the problems weren't significant enough...". I'll get to that inaccuracy in a moment. Another problem is the start of that sentence namely "A review and forensic audit...". Wow that is lumping the conclusions of the review namely MECAC (Compliance Audit Committee) along with the conclusions of the independent forensic auditor Froese. MECAC had a plethora of excuses, reasons and inappropriate criteria which they used to refuse to send the Audit and Mr. Hahn along to the courts. They included his alleged lack of bad intention, his age and inexperience as well as even attempting to pre-judge what any decision of the courts might be. The Forensic Audit absolutely made no such statement regarding sending or not sending Mr. Hahn on to the courts. They simply laid out the apparent multiple contraventions.

To my knowledge and I attended the MECAC hearings MECAC did not say that Mr. Hahn's contraventions "weren't significant enough to send over to the provincial court for legal action." They did give a litany of reasons for not doing it some of which I've stated above and I and other citizens attending generally found them to be excuses versus appropriate and proper reasons.

Now the final point. If the Woolwich Observer published this article without doing their due diligence in regards to its' accuracy then I could only say "To err is human". However that is not the case. I read this sentence (my second paragraph above) two days ago when it was on-line at the Observer's website. After I called the reporter Liz Bevan I was advised of two things. Firstly the on-line version could quite quickly be amended and secondly that she was taping our conversation. During our conversation I as carefully as I could pointed out the errors in that particular sentence. I then asked Liz if she had any questions or any difficulties with what I had just advised her. She said no. Hence you the readers can see why I have asked the question in the title to today's posting and included the word "knowingly".


P.S. I saved the above posting rather than publishing it until I had gone out to Lazer Video to pick up today's copy of the Observer. Lo and behold they have made one tiny but significant change on their printed version. They have removed the word "initial". This I had advised Liz Bevan (Observer) as per my third paragraph above. Good. That's a start. Now I believe you also need to correct your other errors in your article.

LUISA D'AMATO'S TAKE ON NESTLE

O.K. right off the bat I'm a little biased in favour of Luisa's writings and opinions. I don't agree with her 100% of the time but well into the 90s for sure. Something like how much I respect and enjoy Steve Kannon's writings at the Woolwich Observer. Today's K-W Record carrys the following Opinion article by Luisa titled "Direct your anger at Wynne, not Nestle". Luisa feels that while Nestle's actions are definitely not in the public interest they are in the interests of Nestle and their shareholders. Then she advises that this is exactly what we can expect from corporations. They aren't in the business of looking out for anybody's good but their own. They behave generally speaking within the rules, guidelines and laws that society has fashioned presumably for the public good.

Therefore Luisa feels that a boycott against Nestle is somewhat misplaced. She feels that consumers already should have figured out that their water products at least are neither necessary nor in the public interest. Therefore simply use alternative water and the most obvious is tap water. I'm certainly not promoting tap water because I've studied it and there are enough loopholes in the testing and especially paperwork to drive a truck full of contaminated water through. That said criticisms have often been directed at bottled water and its' alleged lack of full testing.

Luuisa feels that citizens anger should be aimed at the Liberal (Wynne) government. I agree as they are the ones making the sweetheart deals in the first place essentially giving our shared water resources away for free. Democratic governments are supposed to be governing in the best interests of all the citizens not just the powerful and influential ones. Unfortunately that's not the reality. The reality is and has been for a very long time that 99% of us are the sheep simply here to be consumers and to be sheared at every opportunity for the financial benefit of the 1%. This is true whatever form our governments take. In democracys at least we are constantly told otherwise. In other forms of government the ruling elite simply do as they please and violently if necessary suppress dissenting opinion.

CHEMTURA'S MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT FOR AUGUST 2016

Well first of all their on and off-site pumping was poor. However quoting their Alice in Wonderland wordsmanship "All wells operated at pumping rates greater than the Target Average pumping rates with the exception of PW5, W3, W4, W5A and W5B.". What this exactly means is that they achieved their pumping rates for PW4 on-site and E7 off-site. That's it.

According to page 5 Chemtura have submitted the Draft East Side Off-Site Investigation Work Plan to the MOECC on August 12, 2016. Also they have submitted a work-plan outline and anticipated schedule for sediment and soil investigation in the Canagagigue Creek to the MOECC on August 25, 2016. Neither of these submissions are on the Woolwich Township website nor have they been handed out to the only members of the public who attend every single TAG and RAC meeting, namely CPAC. This thank you Sandy and Mark is but one more reason to have removed CPAC members from the process in order to deny them (and the public) full access to the documentation. This is once again suppression of important documents hence denying true public consultation. Is it any surprise that I have zero respect for Chemtura and the M.O.E.. If they aren't outright lying to us then they are hiding documents regarding their pretend cleanups.

Chemtura's MISA (Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement) discharges to the creek contain low levels of all the usual solvents and pesticides. No change from forever as their site continues to leak one way or the other into the natural environment.

Similarily their concentrations of various solvents in their on-site shallow aquifer wells are as high as always. In the real world rather than their Alice in Wonderland world that would indicate both free phase LNAPLS and DNAPLS still remaining on their site.

There is one change in their surface water testing in the creek that runs through their site (the "Gig"). Besides BEHP being statistically higher upstream than downstream and Toluene being the other way around now we can add Xylene to the mix as it is slightly higher downstream than up.

Table D.1 is labelled as Off-Site Routine Groundwater Monitoring Program when in fact there are more on-site wells sampled than off-site. Perhaps GHD are picking up some of CRA's bad habits.

JUDICIAL SYSTEM GAMESMANSHIP?

O.K. so I've actually been home from court for over an hour but I got involved with some hydrogeological advice to a citizen involved in a local environmental issue (not Chemtura). The decision in court this morning was to adjourn until November 14/16 9 am. back in Provincial Offences Court (77 Queen St.), Courtroom #101. Now a month ago we adjourned because the Crown had not received anything more than the name and alleged offence by Councillor Hahn. Today the Judge (Anderson?) was advised by the Crown Alexander Andres that a Regional Crown was going to be brought into the case allegedly to obtain more insight, a broader perspective etc. etc.. Actually I didn't really find the explanation all that clear.

Once again the Crown (Mr. Andres) made a point of advising the Judge that the "Informant" to the private charges was present in court. I was asked if the proposed Adjournment date was O.K. with me to which I said it was. What is not alright with me is the gross lack of communication with the Crown. He has my phone number, e-mail and home address yet when I send him all of two e-mails in a month asking either a question or for confirmation that he's received data I've sent him, I get nothing back. To date there has been no sit down discussion, interview or questions asked. This is not acceptable. Similarily if the Regional Crown shows up for the November 14/16 Court date without having spoken to me, asked questions or even advised me of my options as the Complainant ie. citizen who laid the charges, I will not be impressed.

I was able to ask Mr. Andres one question after court in regards to whether or not I can proceed with my own prosecution if the Regional Crown for whatever reason chooses not to proceed. Mr. Andres stated that if the Regional Crown decides not to prosecute (he used a term I do not currently recall) then I can proceed with a private prosecuter. Hmm. This is far too much like pulling teeth getting any information at all. One or two brief, stilted conversations in a crowded hallway or even in an office every month or two does not give me much confidence in what is going on. Also the indecent delay, slowness and attitude of court staff at Superior Court (Intake Court) combined with some incompetence when they can't get the file to the Crown prior to the last court date only adds to the bad impression. Then we have interminable adjournments (six?) with Sandy Shantz and now we're heading to the third court date for Scott Hahn and I simply have to shake my head. This whole system and process is miles beyond nuts.

I was interviewed by Liz Bevan of the Woolwich Observer after court and answered her questions as straight forwardly as I could. I advised her of my disgust with the out of town Crown Fraser Kelly in regards to Sandy Shantz's MEA charges. Mr. Kelly brought me to a meeting at Regional Police headquarters allegedly to discuss the Sandy Shantz case three days prior to the next court appearance. In fact he had a detective present and I believe his only purpose was either to charge me for providing the Crown with a taperecording of a public MECAC (Compliance Audit Committee) hearing or to intimidate me into dropping the charges laid against Ms. Shantz. What an asshat! This is how our judicial system enforces provincial legislation apparently when a currently sitting local politician is involved. Are we getting more of the same with Mr. Hahn? The more hoops and loops, roadblocks, delays and refusals of officials to do their duty; the more obvious that something is seriously wrong with our judicial system it becomes.

OFF TO WONDERLAND THIS MORNING

My experience with the whole judicial process regarding the Municipal Elections Act (MEA) has been disappointing to date. I have seen a deference to the municipally appointed Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) and their biased decisions which I view as bizarre. Perhaps today we will see how much weight if any the Crown places upon an independent forensic auditor's report. That report by Froese and Partners is highly damaging to Councillor Hahn in a number of different ways. I will likely give a brief followup report here after I return from Provincial Offences Court.

DRAFT TAG MINUTES ARE OUT AND ON THE WOOLWICH TOWNSHIP WEBSITE

RAC/TAG - "cringeworthy" This is quoting a truthful Woolwich Councillor who still wishes he hadn't said that.

- "Really Awful Chemtura Truth Avoidance Group" This was my initial take on the names Sandy and Mark gave to the two groups replacing CPAC. A year later after having attended all public RAC and TAG meetings what do I think?

TAG have an incredible Chairman, Dr. Richard (Dick) Jackson who has resigned effective December 31/16. Their membership are a mixed bag including total newbies with little or zero background environmentally or with Uniroyal/Chemtura. David Hofbauer does seem technically oriented and very competent. Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach has nearly five years experience both as a past CPAC member as well as being their vice-chair. Overall less two gross conflict of interest queens, TAG are sincere and trying.

RAC to date have met only five times. They haven't been publicly or blatantly in bed with Chemtura and the M.O.E. except for their reluctance to proceed with a media strategy to poke and prod them into doing the right thing. Their do nothing history and dependance upon talk and communication with entrenched, dogmatic, professional liars while all the time according them respect and courtesy that they respond to with more lies, deceptions and manipulations does not inspire confidence. More of the same is the best we can expect from them. They are all getting paid for their time and are simply going through the motions. All hail the status quo!

Two interesting quotes from the Draft Minutes are as follows:
"The regulators picked a 30 year deadline that was not likely based on scientific analysis."
"Some at the technical experts meeting agree that it will take 50 years or more for the back diffusion to occur before the aquitards can be cleaned up because the NDMA had 50 years during which to infiltrate into the aquitard.".

O.K. the first quote I interpret as the "regulaters" (M.O.E.) being incompetent and or liars. Nothing new here folks.

The second quote was first suggested by Dr. Richard Jackson. He believes that it will be closer to 2048, fifty years after the 1998 start of off-site pumping, before the Elmira Aquifers are fully restored to drinking water standards. Keep in mind folks that this is all moot the day after (O.K. the year after) pumping on the Chemtura site stops and they recontaminate the off-site, Elmira Aquifers.

A NEW WRINKLE IN THE NESTLE LEGALIZED THEFT OF OUR GROUNDWATER

Pigs at the trough comes to mind. So do the words raping and pillaging our mutual natural resources. Trees and logging have long been battlegrounds in Canada but now water resources are up for sale. Sale is too strong a word. Basically our water is being given away by our governments for profit to private corporations. The irony is that while wood has been a product for use in construction and homebuilding literally for thousands of years, bottled water isn't really needed. While I disagree with Maud Barlow's contention in today's Waterloo Region Record article titled "Nestle outbids small Ontario municipality to buy well for bottled water", namely that tap water is perfectly safe; nevertheless she is correct in that somewhat tested and treated tap water is readily available. I carry a plastic bottle of water with me when I am on my bicycle. That said the plastic bottle will last me a season and I simply refill it indirectly from my tap after running it through a Brita filter. That and a single case of bottled emergency water in the basement is how little I support the bottled water industry.

The new wrinlke in the well being purchased by Nestle outside Elora is that the municipality of Centre Wellington submitted an offer to purchase the well. They wisely decided that it was in their constiuents' interests to have that well and water availble for their local use rather than availble for Nestle to pump and bottle and sell wherever. The original owner the Middlebrook Water Company are named after the road the building and well sit beside namely Midlebrook Rd. which runs from Highway #86 at West Montrose north to Elora. It is necessary for municipalities to pump groundwater for residential use. Bottled water is a somewhat trumped up demand based upon citizens appropriate skepticism of the claims of municipalities that their tap water is just dandy. Chlorine isn't just dandy and the taste of it can sometimes mask other odours and tastes in the water. Sometimes it's just the taste of chlorine necessary to kill bacteria (think E.Coli & Coliforms) but nevertheless it's not pleasant or healthy over a lifetime of ingestion.

Municipalities built up their wellfields decades to nearly a century ago long before industrialization sprinkled our groundwater with industrial solvents and more. Since then industry grew up around these wellfields and government inaction and corruption allowed companies to discharge their liquid wastes into the same ground that we pump our drinking water from. I dare anybody to show me groundwater in any southern Ontario city that isn't polluted with industrial chemicals. That is the sad reality. Hence bottled water companies allegedly and probably drawing their water from rural areas hopefully still unpolluted have sprung forth. Keep in mind that many rural areas themselves have issues with excess nitrogen (nitrates & nitrites) as well as phosphorous from agricultural use on fields and crops. Also let's not forget the rampant use of pesticides in agricultural practices. Add to this manure mismanagement including our city sewage treatment plants disposing of "bio-solids" on farmers' fields and you can see the potential for problems. Maybe Maud has a good point. Should we trust private corporations more than our own governments? Hell they both lie like dogs. Pick your poison.

PLAGUE OF HUMANS CONTINUES TO DESTROY OTHER SPECIES

On September 15/16 the Waterloo Region Record carried the following story titled "Survey finds bird numbers down by 1.5 billion since 1970". The major causes albeit among many are climate change and habitat destruction. Agriculture to feed the plague of humans disturbs habitat of grassland birds and also introduces pesticides into the landscape. More and more pesticides. Logging fragments forests that birds and other species rely upon both for food and shelter. Even free roaming domestic cats kill birds in astonishing numbers. Unmentioned in the article are bird deaths both by wind turbines and by birds flying into glass windows on high rise buildings.

The loss of birds results in less pollination of plants somewhat similar to recent losses of bee populations. Birds also are huge consumers of insects including mosquitoes. More mosquitoes and less birds is a bad combination with ever rising mosquito borne diseases such as West Nile. The statistics regarding particular bird species loss of numbers are in the article. This folks is the future of the earth as long as self important, self-serving homo sapiens rule. The earth can and has sustained life but it's capacity is not infinite. More humans means less of other species and eventually it will be the end of all of us.

THE MEDIA CONTINUE TO DISAPPOINT REGARDING CHEMTURA/M.O.E.

Basically with the exception of the Elmira Independent until their closing last year the media have been Absent Without Leave (AWOL) regarding Chemtura Canada in Elmira and the Ontario Ministry of Environment. The last three years have seen incredible news in relation to the public attempting to hold them accountable. Without either the K-W Record or Woolwich Observer attending public RAC or TAG meetings it has been very difficult to get the message out. While CPAC got the ball rolling in a huge way, Dr. Dick Jackson has really hammered the credibility of Chemtura and the M.O.E.. He has presented tutorials at TAG meetings essentially indicting Uniroyal/Chemtura and their consultants for their technical failures over the last decades. Failures to have a Conceptual Site Model, ignorance of the basal gravel unit, lack of sediment transport testing, failure to properly implement ISCO and the lack of understanding of the back diffusion issues have all clearly indicated that Conestoga Rovers sole reliance on pump and treat was misplaced. If only the media had picked up on this in a big way.

Then we get to the Canagagigue Creek. Dr. Jackson has been appalled with Chemtura and the M.O.E.'s failures to remediate the sediments and flood plain soils. They are filled with Dioxins/Furans and DDT. Just recently are we discovering that indeed as long suspected P.C.B.s in the creek are also from Chemtura. While CPAC were hammering Chemtura about this during 2012-14 Dr. Jackson has also lended his decades of professional experience to the cause. And where have the media been? AWOL. For the last year has any media attended so much as a single TAG or RAC meeting? Sure as hell the Woolwich Observer haven't. They will mention Chemtura/RAC/TAG/M.O.E. if they come up at Council meetings. Otherwise Nada.

The Record have a feeble excuse in that they are covering all of Waterloo Region. The Observer have no legitimate excuse whatsoever. I can think of two possibilities regarding their lack of coverage. Neither is particularily flattering to the Observer. There may well be other possibilities for the Observer's failure to publish citizens and professionals facts and criticisms regarding Chemtura and the Ontario Ministry of Environment. I simply can't imagine what they would be.

This lack of coverage around CPAC's successes in holding Chemtura's feet to the fire was pathetic and a gross disservice to the public. The lack of coverage by both the Record and Observer regarding Dr. Jackson's public, face to face confrontations with the Ontario M.O.E. has been grotesque. Dr. Jackson has publicly exposed the lies and misrepresentations of the M.O.E. and only the CPAC attendees, RAC and TAG especially have witnessed it. This is but one of the reasons I have been reticent to deny some connection between the Woolwich Council Election Financing Scandal and their behaviour regarding CPAC, Chemtura and the M.O.E.. The media have been covering the Shantz, Bauman, Hahn tribulations and some have attempted to link them with Council's contemptible behaviour towards CPAC all the while Council have been kissing Chemtura and the M.O.E.s butts. This purported linkage at least keeps Chemtura/M.O.E.'s corrupt behaviour a little bit in the news. Why would I deny it?

COUNCILLOR SCOTT HAHN IS BACK TO COURT NEXT MONDAY

The issue really is quite simple. The Municipal Elections Act (MEA) is quite clear. There are rules written down that candidates for municipal election MUST follow. If they do not then they are to be charged. The offences fall under Provincial Offences which could be somewhat compared to traffic offences in regards to severity. For example simple speeding results in a charge, a conviction and a penalty usually of a fine, sometimes along with demerit points on your license. That said there are driving offences which if severe enough possibly including serious injury that can lead to criminal charges. Examples include drunk driving, vehicular homicide, criminal negligence etc.. The MEA charges can be upgraded upon certain very strict conditions and are described as corrupt practices. These do not remotely include simple incompetence, laziness or sloppy record keeping. A judge would have to determine an intentional attempt to bypass the law for personal gain and possibly even more.

The MEA includes a clear provision for citizens to take the law into their own hands if you will. It is referred to as a not withstanding clause. Not withstanding the actions of the municipal council, MECAC committee (Compliance Audit Committee) or the candidate themselves a citizen can lay a private charge if he believes and preferably has evidence that the MEA has been broken. In all three cases in Woolwich Township the lawbreakers (Bauman, Shantz & Hahn) all publicly admitted to their contraventions of the MEA. Professed ignorance of the law is not a defence to any of the charges. Yes it certainly speaks to the penalty phase after conviction.

All three candidates/politicians contraventions were way beyond blatant. They could be described as stupid unless of course two of the three had a history or say a "tradition" of bending the rules without consequence. Then "stupid" becomes more "convenience" than anything else.

This coming Monday 9 am. in Provincial Offences Court 77 Queen St. Kitchener, Courtroom #101, we will see what the Crown has planned. As similar with the Sandy Shantz case the Crown has not been communicative with the complainant myself including even acknowledging receipt of materials and evidence sent to him. I have advised the Crown that while my preference is that he takes on the case I am unwilling to see the Hahn case go the same route as the Shantz case. In other words I am willing to step in if necessary to act as the prosecuter if the Crown for some unfathomable or subjective reason is not. Keep in mind that while there was extremely strong evidence that Sandy Shantz still had not fully complied with the MEA and had her charges dropped; Mr. Hahn does have a professional $12,000 forensic audit as evidence against him.

BACK TO THE "GAP", THE "STROH DRAIN" AND THE "SINK"

Geology is the study of the physical earth, its' core, its' plates, its' rocks and soils. Hydrogeology refers to the study of water below the ground's surface ie. groundwater. Topography refers to the surface elevation of the ground. In other words the height above sea level of hills, valleys and everything in between. Topography basically determines for example the location and flow direction of surface water ie. creeks, rivers and streams. They run through lowlying surface areas from source (higher areas) to discharge into lower areas such as other rivers, lakes or finally the ocean.

We have received over the last three decades very few topographical maps of the Uniroyal/Chemtura site. Those few times that we have had elevation (contour) lines in metres above sea level (masl) on site maps the contour lines have strictly ended at the company's property lines. That said there have been two relatively recent exceptions. Peter Gray of MTE Consulting provided CPAC with an excellent one as did Conestoga Rovers in their reports on the GP1 & 2 remediation. What a revelation they both were.

Jeff Merriman of Chemtura (now retired) attempted to misdirect and deceive us at a TAG meeting earlier this year by suggesting that the approximately 170 metre area that was not sampled along their south-eastern property line (ie. the "Gap") was because it was high ground and surface wastewaters could not have flowed in that direction. Nonsense. Many months earlier he had advised CPAC that the area was a former wetland and I had agreed then added that it was a "former" wetland because the manmade "Stroh Drain" had done its' job and drained it. The topographical maps confirm this is a very low area on the Chemtura site which essentially drains surface runoff including historical wastewaters from their east side pits (RPE1-5) over on to their neighbour's property namely the Stroh farm.

Once across the property line historically these surface waters and wastewaters ponded in an even lower swampy area on the Stroh farm. This area has an elevation of only 345 metres above sea level, much lower than the high nearby gravel ridge which runs diagonally in a NW to SE orientation from Chemtura over onto the Stroh property. This lowlying former swampy area has also been drained by the construction of the Stroh Drain around 1985. I call this area the "Sink". It makes sense that as Uniroyal wastewaters all flowed south both naturally as well as by swales and furrows they would not have primarily flowed into the alleged location of GP1 but rather south-eastwards into the "Sink". GP1 is almost totally blocked from surface flow by the high diagonal ridge of gravel which has topographical contour lines of 346.5 at the bottom rising to 348.5- 349 metres above sea level.

I use the word "Sink" in reference to carbon sinks. Trees and plants are known as carbon sinks or in other words they accumulate carbon and store it. This area on the Stroh property is most likely a sink storing Dioxins, DDT and even P.C.B.s. These hydrophobic compounds were mobilized by wastewaters from the east side pits containing solvents. Most solvents will dissolve and mobilize hydrophobic compounds. Later the solvents either evaporated or moved downwards through the ground's surface leaving the hydrophobic (water avoiding) compounds attached to soil particles. Since 1985 heavy storms will have eroded and washed some of these compounds into the Drain where it flows southwards until it discharges into the Canagagigue Creek. Without proper remediation this area will be a decades to centuries long source of Dioxins/Furans, DDT and P.C.B.s to the environment both on the Stroh site and to life in the Canagagigue Creek.

THE IRONY : M.O.E. & CHEMTURA BEHAVING EXACTLY AS CPAC ADVISED WOOLWICH COUNCIL

Jason Rice of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment is talking more now that Terri Buhlman has run for cover. Apparently having the PHd Chair of TAG calling her out for her many misinformations and deceptions isn't to her liking. Jason advised us using bureaucratic lingo and jargon that they prefer a more holistic and comprehensive approach. I interpret that as their plan being full of holes and hence they must bullshit and bafflegab even more comprehensively than usual. The M.O.E.'s approach via Risk Assessment was summed up nicely by a master of BS in her own right, Pat McLean. She stated that the Risk Assessment (HHRA) process won't clean up the creek. That is the bottom line.

Who is the audience for Mark and Sandy's sudden conversion to emvironmental activism? Who is the audience for Pat and Susan's opposition to a Human Health Risk Assessment? Indeed they are currently speaking in favour of the environment and what myself and CPAC want to hear. As the media are nowhere in sight and only a couple of other citizens were present then I have to believe that they are posturing for CPAC members. We are the only real opposition to Chemtura and the M.O.E. now that Dr. Jackson has resigned, albeit not until December 31/16.

Therefore Mark and Sandy especially will risk being hypocrites by publicly (sort of) going head to head briefly with Chemtura and the M.O.E.. Those parties have all been playing the game long enough to know that one step back will often lead to two steps forward. That is what democracy is all about. Lie like dogs, object and demand better then accept a couple of token concessions and call it a comprimise on behalf of the public. Let's see exactly how long the co-opted ones (Pat & Susan) and Chemtura's sniveling in pocket councillors actually continue to oppose the HHRA.

At the end of the Wednesday afternoon RAC meeting we were advised that there are "bed structures" in the Canagagigue Creek allegedly at three sites downstream to allow cattle to cross the creek without disturbing the sediments. How odd that for a decade we were advised that the creek had been "fenced off" in order to keep the cattle out of the creek. This was but one more private initiative by Susan Bryant this time with the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) mostly for good PR not for the environment. In fact the cattle were never "fenced off" or fenced away from the creek at all. That never really made much sense because that creek attracted farms and farming in order to provide free water in the first place.

I made a short environmental field trip yesterday and determined that there is a creekBANK manmade structure on the north side of the Canagagigue downstream (75 m.) of the New Jerusalem Rd. bridge. In fact the cattle cross the creek here on their own when they want. There is a rather pathetic minimal attempt on the south side to prevent bank erosion. I went right down the north side concrete ramp to the water to ascertain if the concrete went under the water across the bottom of the creek. I looked carefully and saw no such thing. The bottom was sand and gravel. If in the unlikely case that there is concrete along the bottom of the creek it is covered with new sediments and indeed the cattle use this crossing, drink the water and stir up the sediments. I fail to see this as fencing the cattle out of the creek. Is this typical blatant M.O.E. lying or typical M.O.E. incompetence? Sometimes it is difficult to tell.

SOME INTERESTING NOTES AT YESTERDAY'S RAC MEETING

Well the usual suspects attended including one from the M.O.E. (Jason Rice), two from Chemtura , one from GHD (Louis Almeida), The Region of Waterloo (Eric Hodgins) and one from the G.R.C.A. (Nancy Davy). Also Mark and Sandy attended from Woolwich with three from TAG namely Dr. Jackson, Susan and Pat.

I presented as a Delegation and received excellent support from the Township's support staff Lisa Schaefer. My comments on behalf of CPAC were focused on the "GAP", the Stroh Drain and the "SINK". The "GAP" is the 170 metre long area intentionally not tested by GHD/Chemtura in their surficial soil testing report from last December. Louis Almeida afterwards indicated that they would be looking at that area in their next testing. The Stroh Drain is the manmade Drain which runs north to south along Chemtura's eastern property line with the Stroh farm. The "SINK" is a lowlying area next to the "GAP" which encompasses the lowest area on both properties and is the likely capture zone for decades of Uniroyal overland flowing waste water coming from the upgradient east side pits. Regarding the "SINK" Mark Bauman strongly advised GHD and Chemtura that that area needed to be well tested for their report to have any credibility at all.

The other big issue yesterday was in regards to the M.O.E. and Chemtura's plans to do an HHRA or Human Health Risk Assessment on the downstream Canagagigue Creek. Both Dr. Jackson and Susan Bryant strongly criticized that plan and clearly indicated their preference for hard and fast guidelines or criteria regarding things like chemical contaminants in sediments. Jason Rice solemnly informed RAC that those criteria simply don't exist which was unadulterated bullshit. From the gallery I pointed that out while waving a copy of the Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for Dioxins/Furans. Dr. Jackson also indicated that Hatfield Consultants had set a sediment level for Dioxin cleanup in Vietnam.

Both Pat Mclean and Dr. Jackson said it out loud at least a couple of times that TAG and local citizens had zero confidence in the entire Risk Assessment process. This is based upon the history of the last one in 2003 which was basically an exercise in nonsense and futility. No cleanup followed as the risk assessment did its' job by pretending that risks were minimal thus justifying no cleanup of DDTs and Dioxins on the Chemtura site. Meanwhile they are still leaving the site and being flushed down the creek. Dr. Jackson referred again to the 2004 Wallenstein flood in which 25,000 litres per second of water was leaving the upstream Woolwich Dam and 50,000 litres per second was discharging into the Grand River. The increase of course was due to additional tributaries along the way such as Larches Creek, Shirt Factory Creek and landfill Creek to just name three. These volumes of water would have scoured the creek beds and sediments and mobilized even the deeper ones. This is why they can not just be left in place.

DECADES OF CLIENT DRIVEN TECHNICAL REPORTS

Even the most biased and perverted environmental technical reports usually have some redeeming social value. It's been my experience after nearly thirty years that you can often learn where the skeletons are buried by noticing what isn't in these reports. What chemical compounds are not tested for. Is the sampling always groundwater sampling without any soil samples also being done? Is the sampling done at regular intervals (both timing and location) or is it literally all over the map with little rationale or reasoning?

This evening I will be a Delegate at RAC at 4 pm. in Council Chambers. There are two recent GHD Reports that I will be focusing on although I will mention one or two other recent reports briefly. None of these reports are perfect although there is one that I personally believe is the best of the lot. GHD by the way are the new name/owners of Conestoga Rovers (CRA) whose reports I have strongly criticized for a very long time.

Most of these reports are valuable despite some incredibly blatant and self-serving Conclusions made from the data. I have long ago lost count of how many reports at the end make Recommendations based upon the author's Conclusions that simply are not remotely supported by the evidence presented in the report. How do they get away with this? A big part is by being the only paid professionals examing the issue whatever it may be. As the only paid professionals you are most likely to be employed by the polluting party, developer or proponent. It's not much of a gunfight when only one party is carrying a loaded gun. Of course sometimes the Ontario Ministry of the Environment bring along their professionals. Calling them the corrupt local Sherrif is just such a huge understatement. Their individual professionals may be just that but they also know where their bread is butterred and if they contradict their employers publicly don't expect to see them back anytime soon.

I have long wondered but never been able to prove any instances of jiggered lab results. I am aware that various labs over the decades in North America have had various scandals. Toronto's Centre for Forensic Sciences has had a couple including the recent "Mother Risk" Program. That said oftentimes high groundwater (especially) and rarely high soil test results grab our attention. Similarily in recent years we've seen some astoundingly high sediment test results in the Canagagigue Creek. This is why I read all reports distributed to the public. They all have some important data in them. The fact that the vast majority of politicians, bureaucrats and citizens wouldn't even consider reading these technical reports in their entirety is a huge part of the problem. Then the polluters and their partners in pollution can have their way with the data.

GRAVEL WATCH ONTARIO

Last week's Woolwich Observer carried an interesting report on Gravel Watch Ontario. The current vice-president of Gravel Watch is Tony Dowling of West Montrose, a former neighbour of mine. Tony helped lead the charge a few years back to protect the Covered Bridge area and experience from gravel pits being located extremely close nearby. Capitol Paving was but one of the developers who had bought a local farm or two for the purpose of turning it into a gravel pit.

A public meeting was held last evening in Aberfoyle by Gravel Watch and the Deputy Environmental Commissioner, Ellen Schwatrzel attended. The meeting was to better inform citizens regarding the potential environmental risks surrounding gravel pits. Overall one of Gravel watch's key aims is to provide resources for citizens to help them be better equipped to deal with gravel pit applications in their neighbourhoods.

The meeting was held at the Puslinch Community Centre in Aberfoyle and located next to the Nestle water operations in Aberfoyle. Currently Nestle are attempting to install a backup plant in Elora and if necessary extract water from wells on Middlebrook Rd. just outside Elora.

REMEDIATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING (RAC) THIS THURSDAY 4 PM. IN WOOLICH COUNCIL CHAMBERS

Item 1. on the Agenda is Disclosures of Pecunairy Interest. That will be the start of the deception as all parties will deny having any. But for pecuniary interests why would anyone tolerate Chemtura or the Ontario Ministry of the Environment? Jobs and taxes for the former and provincial money from the Ontario government to the Township with the latter.

Item 3. Delegations. CPAC will be giving a Delegation to RAC in regards to Item 4.2 on the Agenda namely "Supplemental and east Side Surficial Soil and groundwater Investigation Report - Chemtura".

Other items on the Agenda include 4.1 Responsible care Update - Chemtura. What a joke. Will Pat McLean, friend and supporter of Chemtura be back on the local group "judging" (HA!) Chemtura. She voted in favour of them last time. Dr. Dan Holt did not and surprise, surprise do you see him back on that group? Not bloody likely.

Agenda Item 4.3 Canagagigue Creek remediation...reports...response to Chemtura letter. The M.O.E. want field work and a report completed by the end of this fall. Chemtura prefer next year. Guess who will get their way?

Agenda Item 4.4 is Groundwater Clean-up response to findings at technical Experts meeting - MOECC. This could get interesting. More is needed than even enhanced pump and treat. Bioremediation, ISCO etc. are being suggested.

RAC are Sandy Shantz's alleged "stakeholders". Funny how most of them were nowhere to be found for over a decade including the Region of Waterloo and the Grand River Conservation Authority. Now they're back - sort of. Four public meetings a year. I sure hope this isn't a strain on them including Chemtura, M.O.E., Woolwich Township etc.. The good news was Dr. Jackson although he's resigned effective December 31/16. A Neil Thompson from the University of Waterloo Civil Engineering (& Environment?) is assisting Chemtura. Dr. Jackson vouches for him which is a good sign.

This is a public meeting folks so come on out.

WOOLWICH STYLE DISCUSSION - ONE SIDED, ANONYMOUS AND FROM THE SHADOWS

In hindsight the shooting of an upstairs bedroom window in my house is a metaphor for discussion and debate about public interest issues here in Woolwich. It perfectly describes how some parties believe public interest issues, including the destruction of our mutually owned water supply, should be handled. The public should be allowed to comment on them, albeit always carefully and respectfully, and then they should shut up and let the so called authorities, technical experts, qualified persons etc. do their thing without scrutiny or criticism. Of course those are exactly the same people who got us into this mess in the first place.

Last Friday's Waterloo Region Record carried this story titled "Woolwich council watcher surprised by hole from "projectile" shot through window". Yes I was surprised briefly. Then I thought back to vandalism that occurred here in Elmira nearly twenty-seven years ago. Two outspoken critics of Uniroyal Chemical, shortly after our wellfields were shut down, had their homes vandalized by unknown cowards. John Lojek and Esther Thur made their disgust with Uniroyal Chemical's behaviour known publicly via media interviews. A couple of those with opposing opinions, anonymously and from the shadows showed their disagreement.

I expect that the attempted intimidation towards me was more in regards to anger over holding half our Council accountable for their blatant nonchalance towards the Municipal Elections Act versus in regards to my longstanding criticisms of Uniroyal/Chemtura and the Ministry of the Environment. Indeed the Record article written by Paige Desmond does focus on our Councillors and their tribulations either with the Municipal Elections Compliance Audit Committee (MECAC) or with various courts in Kitchener.

In regards to the two most likely reasons behind the two recent behaviours let me advise you that the next court date for Councillor Scott Hahn is 9 am. Monday September 26, courtroom #101 in Provincial Offences Court, 77 Queen St. Kitchener. Regarding Chemtura there is a meeting of RAC (Remediation Advisory Committee) this Thursday at 4 pm. in Woolwich Council Chambers. My final comment about the level of "debate" demonstrated on my property is a quote from the movie "Forrest Gump" namely "stupid is as stupid does".

FURTHER DISCUSSION & COMMENTS FROM LAST WEDNESDAY'S TAG MEETING

Dr. Jackson repeated his comments that the fifty years of contaminants leaching into the aquifers and aquitards (1948-1998) will be equalled by fifty years of trying to pump them back out namely from 1998 until 2048. The thirty year remediation time span was simply a guess, an estimation or my belief just wishful thinking.

The Supplemental On-Site (East Side) Investigation Report was completed July 29 and distributed to a few folks on August 10/16. Long involved members of the public such as myself received an electronic copy yesterday September 9/16. In the scheme of suppressed reports, private meetings, delays and lying by Chemtura and the M.O.E. this barely rates a C for poor public consultation.

Further comments that I interpret as frustration and possibly even disgust by Dr. Jackson towards the Ontario Ministry of the Environment include his mentioning that the M.O.E. advised in March that they would be requesting Chemtura to do an off-site east side study but they didn't write and send the letter until the end of July, four months later. Dr. Jackson also commented about Chemtura's request for all data from the M.O.E. by initialling saying it was "the same damn data I've been trying to get from the M.O.E. since February." He then apologized for the use of the word "damn". Is it possible that one or two of our incompetent, ill educated Councillors & Mayor took it upon themselves to upbraid Dr. Jackson privately regarding their personal preferences for behaviour? That would be polluters, regulaters and consultants lying like dogs but never swearing or raising their voices. If so that would be one way short of firing to get rid of him. Why would a man of the international stature of Dr. Jackson, whose knowledge base even leaves other professionals in the dust, be willing to work for an extraordinarily modest honourarium for a Council/Mayor who are either too stupid or dishonest to appreciate him?

Susan Bryant also had a couple of nice quotes. She asked why a Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) again "after a failure to act on the last one.". She also referred to sampling on the former on-site landfill M2 "where they've done nothing". Nice. Finally again in reference to the proposed HHRA she said " the creek should be the top priority not doing an HHRA for a small population.".

Dr. Jackson mentioned again that Jackfish Bay on Lake Superior is one of the formal Areas of Concern yet their concentrations of Dioxins are less than those in Canagagigue Creek. He also pointed out that Terri Buhlman (M.O.E.) had indicated that she couldn't recall the M.O.E. ever acting upon any HHRA reports that had ever been done for them. Dr. Jackson mentioned that the M.O.E. couldn't even manage to get their modelling expert to show up at the recent Technical Experts meeting. The next one is in late September or early October. It is disgraceful and reprehensible that the by far most knowledgable and technically competent long time Woolwich citizen, myself, is excluded from these technical meetings. This clearly shows that our local Councillors are all about appearances and not about actually accomplishing anything at these meetings.

Both Dick Jackson and Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach took turns castigating the M.O.E. and Chemtura especially during the discussion to censure Chemtura. Sebastian used words such as lassitude and disingenuousness for the M.O.E. as well as hubris and arrogance regarding Chemtura and Conestoga Rovers. Dick referred to the lethargic pace and lack of urgency by both parties. Pat, Susan and disappointingly Joe Kelly refused to support a censure. Give it time and I hope that Joe will see the big picture more clearly. The other two are bought and paid for one way or the other whether by the Region, GRCA, CRA, Woolwich or the CIAC (Chemical Industry Assoc. of Canada).

Dr. Jackson's resignation is a bodyblow to the efforts, even the pretend efforts of Woolwich, to accomplish anything further. I believe Pat McLean may have suggested that there were still good people left on TAG after Dr. Jackson's December 31 resignation. Yes there are Pat although you're not one of them. Most of the "good" people have little or no pertinent knowledge. Sebastian is a proven real deal; David, Linda, Bill and Joe overall look very promising with David being the most competent technically. Given time and honest leadership we might have seen continued progress from TAG. Unlikely now.

"WOOLWICH COUNCIL DIDN'T BREAK LAW"

That's right you read it here. Woolwich Council did NOT break the law. Once in a row. Good for them. Their unscheduled(?), private, non-transparent "one on one discussions", "with a quorum present" were perfectly legal according to Ontario's new Ombudsman. I wonder if the old Ombudsman, Andre Marin, would have come to the same conclusion. Or even done an "investigation" without, after the initial written complaints, having interviewed/asked questions of the two persons closest to the action namely Dr. Holt and myself.

Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carried the following story titled "Woolwich Council didn't break law" with the sub heading of "Ombudsman finds unscheduled meeting was legal". Regardless of whether Woolwich Council once again broke the Municipal Act they most certainly behaved atrociously and all of Waterloo Region and beyond are aware of it. They flatly refused to let Dr. Dan Holt speak even though he was a properly registered Delegate and on the Agenda. Only his backbone and willingness to simultaneously take on the entire Council (less Patrick M.) in open, public debate saved the day. Dr. Dan can be a pitbull when provoked and those idiots on Council certainly did that.

The main issue of course was Council's pathetic discrimination against longtime Woolwich volunteers who served honourably and with the full support of the prior Council who had appointed them onto CPAC (Chemtura Public Advisory Committee). CPAC were incredibly effective and too functional for both Chemtura and the Ontario M.O.E. who suddenly the instant a new Council more to their liking were elected began to boycott public CPAC meetings. This was a manufactured crisis courtesy of Sandy and Mark who needed some flimsy excuse to not reappoint the ongoing CPAC members to the incoming CPAC term. Council were so biased against these strong and professional CPAC members that they even threw out the original Applications in which all CPAC and SWAT (CPAC sub-committee) had applied along with Sandy's two buddies Pat Mclean and Susan Bryant. The problem was that even though there were more than enough applicants they weren't the "right" ones to suit Chemtura, M.O.E., Sandy or Mark B.. So they even went so far as to rig the Applications for CPAC specifically to remove the old members.

That folks is the moral and ethical background of most of Woolwich Council. Why are you then surprised to learn that they routinely violate the Municpal Act and Election Financing Laws? Not to mention whatever we haven't discovered as yet.

Dr. RICHARD JACKSON RESIGNS AS TAG CHAIR

Not even close to a surprise. Prior to the start of the meeting I went up to Dr. Jackson and asked him if he was planning on staying on for another year. He advised that he would make a formal announcement at the end of the meeting regarding that. Also recently here in the Advocate (Fri. Sept. 2 ) I advised that Dr. Jackson's likely departure would look very bad on Mark B. & Sandy. In fact they were both present last evening and I expect it was to "observe" Dr. Jackson and whether or not he threw any stones their way. He firstly suggested he wanted to retire then he added that the issues were "intractable". Finally he commented that the "intractable" issues were not technical, they were public policy issues. O.K. now that is hitting the mark! Public policy issues as in politics front and centre.

Dr. Jackson referenced the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) which was signed on to by Ontario as well as Canada and the U.S.. He also stated that Terri Buhlman of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment has stated that Article 2 regarding eliminating or reducing threats to the Great Lakes does not apply to the Canagagigue Creek which via the Grand River empties into Lake Erie. Dr. Jackson made several other comments again last evening castigating the Ontario M.O.E. for their stalling, delays and overall refusal to follow either their own or Canadian Sediment Guidelines in the creek. Finally he also commented upon the federal government passing the buck back to the Ontario M.O.E. when they should be stepping in. Through all of this he took no direct shots at Sandy and Mark. Chemtura, CRA, M.O.E. absolutely. He advised that TAG had a decision to make regarding Media Strategy which I will follow up on later.

There was a Supplemental On-Site Investigation of the East Side received by TAG on August 10/16. I spoke up and asked whether it would be made available to the public or not. It turns out there was a snafu and only a couple of TAG members received the hard copy and none an electronic version which could be put on the Township website. Lisa Schaefer indicated that she would look into it and post it on-line as soon as possible. The results indicated more of the same contamination found over a year ago. Conestoga Rovers (Alan Deal) claim that perhaps contaminated fill from a cleanup in the 80s is to blame. Nice try there Mr. Deal.

To her modest credit Susan Bryant is opposed to another useless and biased HHRA (Human Health Risk Assessment) being done.
Afterall the only reason Chemtura and the M.O.E. want to do it is because they can control the result. They will interview local creek residents who will say they are aware and they avoid the creek as much as possible. End of story right there allegedly for health risks. TAG (Technical Advisory Group) have already passed a Motion opposing an HHRA study.

Dr. Jackson kind of put it to TAG in requiring a decision regarding a media strategy. Pat Mclean unsurprisingly spoke the strongest against TAG even having such a strategy. She wants RAC (Remediation Advicory Committee) to handle it which essentially means zero or less public transparency regarding contamination cleanup failures.

Sebastian pressed for a Motion of Censure against Chemtura due to their adamant decades long claims that yes they would clean up the Elmira Aquifers by 2028. Now in the last couple of months they are admitting that that is unlikely to happen. David Hofbauer assisted Sebastian with a friendly Amendment but only the two of them voted in favour. Again it was Pat Mclean coming to Chemtura's defence as expected. As she probably is still receiving expense paid trips around North America due to Chemtura's positive reference getting her put on the National Advisory Panel of the Chemical Industry Association of Canada; this is no surprise to me.

Dr. Jackson's resignation takes effect on December 31, 2016. This is a major loss to the public although Chemtura, the M.O.E. and certain local politicians are thrilled. Those politicians will be even more thrilled if Dr. Jackson confines his criticism to the big players and avoids naming the local, little fish.

M.O.E. MISDIRECTION: HIDING THE FOREST WITH MORE TREES

M.O.E.: Purveyers and Apologists of Human Misery


There was sampling in the creek during the summer of 2015. That has not been released to us the public as yet. I am also doubtful that it has gone to TAG yet. RAC which includes the M.O.E. and Chemtura obviously have had it for a long while.

The Ontario M.O.E.C.C. (M.O.E. plus Climate Change) have ordered/requested/begged Chemtura to do more sampling of sediments and floodplain soils this fall. The M.O.E. then want that data used to produce a Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA). If they really want to punish us and waste more taxpayers money they'll bring back their pony-tailed, number crunching/manipulating contaminant risk specialist who believes that a detonated atomic bomb is not a hazard unless human beings are within range of it.

We have creek data from 1995-96, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 although the latter is being kept hidden from us. The data we have indicate that sediments are exceeded for DDT dramatically and also by Dioxins/Furans. Mercury and P.C.B. data strangely have not been made available to us. Fish residues have also been tested in 2014 along with a May 2016 report advising us as to the process behind the testing. That report indicates that fish in the Canagagigue which are available for consumption by both humans and wildlife (mink, muskrat, raccoon, coyote, blue heron, hawk etc.), are contaminated with Dioxins/Furans, P.C.B.s, DDT and Mercury. Again the Dioxin and DDT contamination alone far exceeds the CCME (Cnd. Council of Ministers of the Environment) Guidelines. Mercury and P.C.B.s exceed the Guidelines in some of the fish. These Guidelines are referred to as Tissue Residue Guidelines (TRG).

So with recent data proving that the sediments are highly contaminated and unsurprisingly so are the fish then why are we doing more studies and why are we doing a HHRA (Human Health Risk Assessment)? There is but one reason. Doing those studies and mathematically and statistically "proving" a low risk is much cheaper for Chemtura than actually remediating the Canagagigue Creek from their plant all the way down (5 miles) to the Grand River. And afterall, money is more important to a corporation than human life and health and especially more important than a few dead, malformed or sterile "critters" in and around the creek.

ONT. MIN. OF ENVIRONMENT - ARE THEY DECEIVING US AGAIN?

At the May 12/16 TAG meeting we were presented with a report titled "Eating Fish from Canagagigue Creek". I believe that that report is a crock of contaminated, putrid fish.

Some of the obvious nonsense included the exquisitely careful way that the contaminant testing was done. By their own admission, parts of the fish that contained the highest levels of contaminants were not tested. This included fatty areas, internal organs such as the liver and the skin itself. Then there are the slightly more subtle games. For example the contaminants we are testing for bioaccumulate. They move up the food chain from prey to predator. With that we are breezily informed that Northern Pike which is the top predator in the creek is not targeted for organic contaminant analyses. These would include of course P.C.B.s, Dioxins and DDT all of which bioaccumulate and biomagnify as they go up the food chain. Hence ignoring both the top predator in the creek for testing as well as not mentioning mamalian predators outside the creek who eat fish, clams etc. grossly minimizes the negative effects upon wildlife dependant upon the creek.

Basically this entire report from the M.O.E. is a scam. It is minimizing the toxic effects from Chemtura and possibly others discharges into the environment by focusing solely on human consumption. Even that is minimized by looking at tissue residues individually. The big four would most likely be Dioxins/Furans, P.C.B.s, Mercury and DDT. We are advised that there were no advisories due to DDT presence. That makes exactly zero sense as huge DDT sediment results in the Creek are what started this whole process in the first place. Therefore the human consumption guidelines are based upon studies of one chemical alone in the tissues of fish. White suckers have guidelines exceeded by three contaminants and yet these are the individual guidelines for each contaminant. No one knows if the three together (P.C.B.s, Dioxins & Mercury) have synergistic effects such that Zero meals per month is more appropriate than the pronounced eight to sixteen per month. Would you eat any meals per month of a fish with those contaminants in it?

DDT was eventually banned because of its' effect on wildlife reproduction. It apparently had little effect on human beings at the concentrations it was in birds of prey such as eagles and hawks. I do not know how detrimental it is to raccoons, foxes, coyotes, mink, muskrats etc..

This report may not be full of lies but it sure as hell is full of deception and deceit. We are told that the Canagagigue meal guidelines are comparable to other waterbodies in Ontario. We are not advised that B.C. and Ontario have the highest Dioxin concentrations in Canada.

We are told that 8 meals per month and above is defined as "unrestricted". That is blatant M.O.E. bullshit. By the definition of the word "resticted" any advisory not to eat more than ten, twelve, fourteen or fifty meals per month is a RESTRICTION.

The eight meal guideline for DDT is 11,732 ng/g for HUMAN BEINGS. The concentrations in fish tissue that is part of the "Canadian Tissue Residue Guidelines for the Protection of Wildlife consumers of Aquatic Biota" is 14 ng/g. What the hell! Thank you for not telling us this Ontario M.O.E..

This report is a stinker of the quality that we in Elmira have come to expect from either Chemtura or the Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Of course our local politicians gobble up this bullshit from those two parties and ask for more.

ALGAL BLOOM IN CONESTOGO LAKE

Last Wednesday's (Aug. 31) Waterloo Region Record carried the following story titled "No swimming at Conestogo Lake due to algae". The algae are of the blue-green variety and can be toxic either by ingestion or even by skin contact. The Grand River Conservation Authority issued the warning including signage at the park gatehouse and beach. The actual toxin is called microcystin and is released into the water when the algae die. The same problem occurred a couple of weeks ago at Belwood lake outside Fergus resulting in water restrictions for about a week.

The Record article refers to algal blooms as being a natural phenomenon that occur during hot, dry weather. Fair enough however they are also the result of human activities and interference in the natural environment. First of all free flowing water especially if shaded by trees and bushes doesn't warm up as much as water dammed and spread out over a large area receiving the full effect of the sun's rays. Secondly these blooms are also assisted by additions to the natural environment such as phosphorous and nitrogen. These present in the water courtesy of agricultural fertilizing of the nearby land promote the growth of algae. Last but not least I suspect would be the addition of septic tank runoff. That too would assist the growth of algae. Keep in mind that the need for a dam in the first place is for flood control as humanity have first cut the trees and drained the wetlands that were the natural flood controls in the first place. Maybe not so natural afterall.

HISTORY REPEAT - ANOTHER CRAPPY HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT (HHRA) AT CHEMTURA (UNIROYAL)

Here we go again. Apparently the more obvious the need for remediation the more "studies" and "sampling" required. What exactly are the Ontario M.O.E.C.C. trying to do here? Are they hoping to coordinate a sampling round a week or two after the worst storm of the decade scours the creek bottom and flushes more tons of contaminants downstream into the Grand River? We now have some data from 1995-96, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015. That said the M.O.E. are still sitting on the 2015 data and refusing to share it. The evidence is overwhelming that more, much more, needs to be done. Instead the M.O.E. are "requesting" another sediment and soil investigation this year "to support a screening level human health risk assessment (HHRA)". What the hell is a "screening level" HHRA? Is that bureaucratese for a HHRA with holes in it big enough to drive a truck through?

The other possibility long practiced by the M.O.E. and other government agencies is to hide the forest with the trees. In other words as bad as 1995-96 and 2012 were hopefully more data at different times of the year, different locations (even slightly), different sampling methods and or simply more data will confuse the picture. Right now with over a quarter of a century of reading technical reports I find simultaneously examining multiple reports to be much more difficult than simply looking at one report at a time. Also the M.O.E. and Chemtura are masters at cherrypicking the results that they want. The more reports, studies, data and sampling the more likely you will find something, somewhere to back up your do little, spend less remediation philosophy.

Approximately thirteen years ago Chemtura, O.K. Crompton or whatever their name was that year, did both an HHRA as well as an ERA or Ecological Risk Assessment for their own property. I would describe both of them as garbage on paper. Dr. Henry Regier and I led the charge with questions and comments that were poorly if at all answered. Dr. Regier with decades of scientific expertise went right to the heart of the Risk Assessment process and found it wanting. He personally went to the M.O.E. offices to interview and discuss the "science" behind Risk Assessments. Dr. Regier has advised that in his opinion the M.O.E. brains behind the HHRA and ERA were out of their depth and had only a basic, peripheral understanding of what they were doing.

The final synopsis of a years long waste of time process for the HHRA was that the Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura site was only a hazard to the occasional trespasser (me??) and not to employees or the general public. Regarding the ERA the site was only a hazard to insectivorious shrews on the site who dug down into the earth. Seriously that's what those twits found. Even the M.O.E. have recently expressed skepticism regarding the last go round with Risk Assessments. Dear God save us all from client driven, pony-tailed PhDs who have never found a toxic chemical without some redeeming social values. Meanwhile the M.O.E. are now conceding that diluted contaminants from the Chemtura site miles downstream have the potential to adversely affect recreational users in the creek. What about 24/7 life in the creek? Don't they count anymore? Amphibians, reptiles, insects, the benthic community, fish, and predators all the way up the food chain don't seem to be of concern. My expectation is that if necessary the M.O.E. will continue having Chemtura "study" the environmental disaster until the day the company finally and at long last departs for greener pastures with blunter politicians who aren't trying simultaneously to suck and blow. Corporations are searching for money making opportunities with the least amount of government interference possible. Even so called "democracies" are pathetic at holding corporations accountable. Trade agreements such as NAFTA, TPP etc. exacerbate the shift in power towards money, profits and corporations at the expense of human beings.

M.O.E. REVERSE THEMSELVES, CHEMTURA CONTINUE THE LONG STALL

Well the last nonsense we heard from Teri Buhlman of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment was that the Canagagigue Creek did not represent any threat to human or wildlife. If you will recall this includes her refusal to have the M.O.E. involved in warning signage at three areas along the creek regarding toxic contaminants in the fish. You may also recall her presentation in which we were advised that while yes the fish are contaminated the actual concentrations are less if you assiduously avoid the organs (especially liver), fatty areas and the skin. I recall at the time wondering here in the Advocate as to what language the warning signs should be in in order to ensure that foxes, raccoons, coyotes, hawks and blue herons etc. avoid eating specific parts of the fish that they catch.

Yesterday we received the TAG package including Agenda for next Wednesday in Woolwich Council Chambers. This package included communications back and forth between the M.O.E. and Chemtura regarding more testing in the creek as well as a "screeing level" Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA). While this somewhat indicates a turnaround on the part of the M.O.E. only Pollyanna could believe that this indicates a sincere about face by the M.O.E.. It would seem clear to me that Dr. Dick Jackson's firm stance has set the Ministry back on their heels.

Speaking of Dr. Jackson is he still with us? Chemtura and the M.O.E. whined for help from the Township due to huge breakthroughs by CPAC regarding the 2028 deadline failure (May 2012 Resolution) as well as with the off-site east side contamination of the Stroh farm. Furthermore CPAC and SWAT in conjunction with MTE Inc. determined that the Stroh Drain was collecting both ground and surface water and discharging it further east and south back into the Canagagigue Creek. This is likely but one more source over the decades of ongoing contamination to the downstream creek. Sandy and Mark B. hired Dr. Jackson to head up the new "cringeworthy" public consultation bodies namely RAC and TAG. To our pleasant surprise and to Chemtura's horror, Dr. Jackson is the real deal. He's given Terri Buhlman of the M.O.E. fits and made CPAC look like the ladies and gentlemen they always have been. Dr. Jackson's continued presence will be a huge test for Sandy & Mark. If for any reason he departs then Chemtura and the M.O.E. will once again be publicly seen to be pulling the Township's strings.

The M.O.E. want Chemtura to complete further sediment and floodplain sampling this fall with an analytical report due by October 28/16. Chemtura and their consultants (GHD-formerly CRA) don't want to do the sampling till spring with a "screening level" HHRA completed a year from now. Chemtura argue that they need to do parts of the HHRA first, setting criteria, determining various receptor pathways and other risk factors BEFORE doing their sampling. In my mind besides their usual stalling they are merely trying to set up their targets ahead of time in order to sample in a fashion to avoid exceeding criterias or in order to minimize the likelihood of boxing themselves in and being ordered to do expensive remediation. Risk Assessments are a game and both the M.O.E. and Chemtura know it.

Even if Chemtura follow the M.O.E.'s requests the whole thing is rigged. The M.O.E. have already publicly made it clear that they don't want to order Chemtura to do remediation. This whole thing is a setup to once again make the public think that Chemtura & the M.O.E. are open to public input and comment. They are not. It is and always has been a closed shop with the public (most) being the only honest party.

COUNCILLOR SCOTT HAHN BACK TO PROVINCIAL OFFENCES COURT ON SEPTEMBER 26/16 9 am.

Both the Waterloo Region Record (Local Section) and the Woolwich Observer carry articles today regarding yesterday's visit to Provincial Court in downtown Kitchener (77 Queen St.). The Observer story is titled "Scott Hahn case adjourned as Crown decides if action warranted". The Record's brief story is titled "Case against Woolwich councillor adjourned to Sept. 26".

The key to Mr. Hahn's case is the Forensic Audit produced by Froese Forensic Partners and paid for by Woolwich Township. The Audit Committee (MECAC) who are a bunch of political appointees courtesy of multiple Region of Waterloo townships and cities determined that it was necessary to order this Forensic audit based upon Scott Hahn's initial ridiculously bad Financial Statement as well as based upon conflicting or unclear facts which surfaced at the MECAC hearings. How difficult or technical was this decision? In my opinion any honest, unbiased Woolwich citizen who invested fifteen minutes of their time to get informed would have made the same decision.

Froese Forensic Partners listed a number of apparent contraventions of the Municpal Elections act (MEA) in their report for BOTH of Mr. Hahn's Financial Statements. His first Statement and by the way only legal Statement claimed $258 expenses above and beyond his $100 deposit. His second Amended and illegally accepted and commissioned Financial Statement stated that he had $3,200 in expenses. This second Amended Statement was improperly and illegally accepted by Woolwich Township on May 11, 2015 approximately two months after the legal deadline. Talk about the blind leading the blind. In the words of Justice Quinn of Superior Court (St. Catherines) "Ignorance of the Act is not a defence; neither is relying on the ignorance of others.".

In regards to the Crown advising the Judge yesterday that he was missing vital information I believe that to be correct. That said I believe that part of that information simply was not sent from Superior Court (Intake Court) up to Provincial Offences Court as it should have been. That at least is what I was advised weeks ago when I filed the Affidavit of Service with Provincial Offences Court. The lady behind the counter advised me then that she had as yet not received the Summons and Information (charges) from Superior Court. Weird.

Regardless I provided extra copies of what I had yesterday to the Crown including for a second time the Forensic Audit produced by Froese Forensic Partners. Yesterday afternoon I then provided 21 more pages to the Crown including Scott's two Financial Statements. Finally I advised where on line all these documents were publicly available.

While I respect that the Crown needs to do his due diligence I can unequivocally advise that our judicial system to date has not inspired confidence in me or other well informed Woolwich residents in regards to enforcing the Municipal Elections Act.