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.