O.K. SO MAYBE AS BAD & CORRUPT AS THE MOE/MECP INHERENTLY ARE AT THE TOP; INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES CAN STILL HELP THE PUBLIC

It's sometimes difficult not to paint the entire Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE/MECP) as corrupt from top to bottom. That they are grossly comprimised and corrupt at the top has to be obvious when one examines the decades old environmental degradation in Ontario, from air, land to ground and surface water. This includes loss of animal habitat, loss of wetlands, nutrient growth in rivers and streams and algal blooms in Lake Erie. Also we humans reflect the state of our environment via our health. Over 40% of us will suffer from one kind of cancer or another in our lifetimes. Climate change is also a direct result of human activity on the planet. Overpopulation only contributes to all the other problems. No, Canada unfortunately is not alone on this planet as each and every other country in the world contribute to these environmental problems. Burning of rain forests to clear ground for more single crop agriculture and burning of coal in China and elsewhere for energy continues on despite knowing the damage it does. .............................................................................................................................. Why do I think that our despised and disrespected MOE/MECP has some lower level redeeming features? There are a couple of things. Occasionally speaking difficult or unpleasant truths to the public is a start. While I have indicated here in the past that the MOE/MECP do criticize in writing much of the Lanxess and their consultants GHD plans and reports, usually at the end of the day Lanxess Canada and their client driven consultants (GHD) carry the day. The MOE/MECP decide, presumably at the top, to back down and avoid either issuing Control Orders or in taking the company to court to enforce the Environment Ministry's position. I have written here my admiration for the critiques of MOE/MECP hydrogeologist, Cynthia Doughty. Similarly in the past I have on occasion admired the work of MOE/MECP employees Jaimie Connolly and Bob Hillier, also hydrogeologists. ..................................................................................................................................... Another huge issue that of course advanced the money and face saving agendas of Lanxess Canada was the use of shovel sampling versus core sampling in the Canagagigue Creek for the last major sediment sampling. Core samples involve a manual hollow rod that is pushed downwards into the bottom of the creek and that can then extract soils/sediments from various depths below the top of the creekbed. With this method detailed and depth specific samples can be taken to determine both the composition and location of contaminants such as pesticides, DDT, dioxins/furans/PCBs and so much more. The shovel method is brutally inexact and inaccurate as it literally involves an attempt to dig out soils/sediments from below both the watersurface and the surface of the creek bed and then bring them through the water column (through the creek water) and to the surface with some sort of ridiculous attempt to claim that you have sampled 10, 15 or 20 centimetres below the creekbed surface and here is what we've found. In reality the creek water washes all the fines and soils off the shovel as you raise it upwards through the water leaving behind stones and coarse gravel. This of course exactly serves the purpose of the owner/polluter as many compounds such as PCBs, DDT and dioxins/furans adhere (adsorb?) to the fines not to the stones and coarse gravel. To the MOE/MECP's credit they too also jumped on this blatant and successful attempt to minimize the "sampled" contamination in the creek. .................................................................................................................... In my opinion, immense credit goes to former TAG member Joe Kelly. He spoke eloquently (& often humourously) to TAG members about this travesty. Not to discredit Lanxess/GHD's never ending and often successful "reasons/rationale/explanations/bulls.it" they claimed that the shovel sample method was absolutely necessary because parts of the bottom of Canagagigue Creek are "armoured". Well! Now I don't believe that there are large areas of the creek with either concrete or steel armor along the bottom. I'm even pretty skeptical about large boulders in the creekbed of the creek. Yes certainly boulders can be found at depth in the overburden on the way down to the bedrock. Yes I'm sure there's even the odd boulder at surface in Waterloo Region. As far as the bottom of the Canagagigue Creek, the onus is on the proponent of the report to prove that very convenient theory. They have not done so nor even tried. They as always pretend that nothing but truth and majesty dribble from their lips. I however have more often found it to be lies and spittle. Other options for using nothing but proper and appropriate core samplers (versus a shovel) include moving your goddamn sample locations to locations where the bottom of the creek is not allegedly "armoured". Anyhow back to the main point. Joe Kelly jumped all over Lanxess/GHD for this crap and to their credit the MOE/MECP have as well.