WATERLOO REGION'S CREDIBILITY CONTINUES TAKING HITS

 

Wow! Today's K-W Record advises us that our vaunted LRT (Light Rail Transit) is having more than teething pains. The lawsuit by  GrandLinq is for $110 million. That's a chunk of change . Regardless of who's right, who's wrong and whether or not we taxpayers yet again end up on the hook; it tends to make us at the very least ask the question: "Are we getting value for money in our political governance?" Or do we have a lot of dead wood on regional council who are simply literally bums in chairs pretending to be administrators and managers of the public interest? Is it possible that half or more of them simply show up in order to receive their pay cheques with absolutely no  concern for the issues or the public interest? It has been said that the greatest and most important skill of a politician is their acting abilities. Pretending to care and pretending to want to resolve problems and disputes would seem beneficial in giving hope and confidence to citizens and residents.

If and when the entire truth is exposed around the destruction of our fabulous water resources; I predict there will be a wholesale abandoning of the ship of state. Politicians may quickly decide that early retirement sure beats being shamed and harassed into resigning mid term. I predict that as early as tomorrow or as late as the August 21 deadline for registering to run in this fall's municipal election; many rats will give varying excuses for stepping down. 

The Region have most recently mistreated Wilmot residents both with the still surreptitious huge land grab as well as the refusal to acknowledge well interference even after breaking the 1980 agreement with Wilmot over the Wilmot Centre Wellfield pumping. They have also broken faith with Woolwich (Elmira) residents for the last 36 years regarding our contaminated local aquifers caused by both private, industrial greed and negligence as well as by provincial oversight gross failures.  The Region's day of reckoning is overdue.

ARE TRAC CAPABLE OF LOOKING STUPID PUBLICLY WHILE LOBBYING BEHIND THE SCENES ?

 

I don't know that to be true but I guess I'm hoping it is so because there are at least two people on that committee (Technical Remediation Advisory Committee) that I believe to be inherently honest. Indeed it is likely to be a couple more but I just don't know them well enough to confirm that. Generally speaking I do know the deadbeats etc. well enough and know who they are.

Jen Lyndall of Integral possibly may decide never to work for Lanxess and her old buddy Hadley ever again. Or otherwise if she has no problem sleeping at night by counting sheep jumping over dead animals, livestock and or human beings.   

I'm going to repeat last Saturday's health criteria here for those with a serious bent for eye blurring numbers. These are the health standards for dioxins/furans and for Total DDT both in creekbank soils and in the sediments on the bottom of the Creek (Canagagigue). None of the criteria change based on depth i.e. surface versus subsurface soils and surface and subsurface sediments.

Soils:               DDT      .078 ppm (parts per million)

Sediments:      DDT      .00119 ppm.

. 

Soils:              dioxins/furans      7  ppt. (parts per trillion)

Sediments:     dioxins/furans       .85 ppt

DDT   in   fish     tissues                 14 ppb. (parts per billion)

dioxins/furans in fish tissues             .71 ppt (parts per trillion)

These are the numbers/concentrations that Jen Lyndall of Integral has utterly failed to put on her Tables and Figures.  Likely/possibly they are buried somewhere in her report. Or not. Starting from Figure 4-24 and going to Figure 4-63 the data tells TRAC, the public and most certainly the politicians absolutely nothing worthwhile without the health criteria being clearly marked on each and every Figure.  Is this failure Jen Lyndall's or did Lanxess (Hadley ?) ensure that this vitally important information was not to be found where it should be?

THIS IS THE FOLLOWUP THAT TRAC NEVER DO REGARDING LANXESS FUNDED SHABBY, IRRELEVANT & RIDICULOUS PRESENTATIONS

 

Regarding Tables 3-3 to 3-6 which describe Total DDT and Dioxins/Furans TEQ (toxic equivalency) generally in Creek Reaches 1-4 except for the last Table which oddly only describes Reach 4 (the Lanxess site). These Tables also represent both surface and subsurface Soils and Sediment readings. Sediments of course are in the bottom of the Creek beneath the water and soils refer to creekbank soils above the waterline. 

Previously mentioned by myself is the fact that in four pages of Tables;  Dioxins/Furans over the four Creek Reaches plus Background (below Reach 1/Grand River) and with 889 samples over many years have an average of 99.87% detection rate. This is beyond incredible, is not remotely normal or ubiquitous and speaks to massive past and ongoing releases of Dioxins and Furans downstream from the Uniroyal/Lanxess property. THIS IS BEYOND SHAMEFUL and no wonder TRAC is so tightly controlled by agenda, membership, meeting times, minutes and limited public access and less.

Total DDT detections are also high although not at the same level of Dioxins/Furans.  The lowest detection rate through five locations is 10% and the highest 100% (twice). The average detection rate in the four Reaches plus Background (Grand River) is 57% . Keep in mind this is for DDT only albeit in both Sediments and Soils both surface and subsurface. This also is not "normal" nor ubiquitous.

Regarding concentrations above health criteria the results are startling. Sediment detections are very high for both surface and subsurface DDT and in fact ALL detections from the highest to the lowest EXCEED the health criteria of .00119 ppm. (parts per million) again for Reaches 1-4 and Background (Grand River). Soil detections for DDT on the other hand while ALL maximum concentrations per area (Reach etc.) EXCEED the health criteria of .078 ppm.; minimum concentrations are all below the health criteria.

Dioxins/Furans maximum concentrations in surface Sediments ALL exceed the health criteria of .85 ppt (Parts per trillion) while only two of five areas (4 Reaches & Background Grand River) of the minimum concentrations exceed the health criteria. Subsurface Sediments maximum concentrations for Dioxins/Furans ALL EXCEED the health criteria whereas only one of five of the minimum concentrations for the five areas exceeds the health criteria. 

Dioxin'Furan Soil maximum concentrations ALL exceed the heath criteria of 7 ppt. whereas 0 of the five minimum concentrations exceed the health criteria. This is the same for both surface Soils and subsurface Soils.  

The title above states that TRAC never do necessary followups to ridiculous presentations. Let me add the following. Maybe they do privately but this is a public process and needs to be clarified to the public each and every time a deceptive, dishonest or blatantly foolish and non factual presentation is made.

 

 

  

GOT SIDETRACKED (WESTWARDS/WILMOT) : BACK TO JEN LYNDALL'S (INTEGRAL) SILLY REPORT TO TRAC

 

Silly is a nicer word than deceptive, evasive, phony or corrupt. As I have mentioned it's hard to write an intelligent and honest data Summary of dozens of sad, pathetic and client driven pieces of garbage (GIGO-garbage in, garbage out). Half the battle is won simply by a single presentation to TRAC followed by...nothing. It takes time to read carefully, analyze, understand and form an intelligent response. I've got that time and ability whereas most TRAC members who have the ability simply don't have the time or the incentive ($$$) to do so. They have paying jobs and careers and homes and families to take up their spare time. 

One of the biggest, most nonsensical pieces of crap that she bestowed upon TRAC are a series of Figures as in Figure 4-24 to 4-63. She referred to these Figures as I believe Box and Whiskey Plots. I don't know the origins of that name. These Figures allege to show large (many not all) amounts of data recorded for DDT and dioxin concentrations in Surface Sediments, Subsurface Sediments, Surface Soils, Subsurface Soils, versus either Location (Reach 1-4, Background) or Time (eg. 1996, 1997, 2013, 2015, 2017, 2022). 

There are a few issues with these Figures which I have previously mentioned such as the vertical (y) scale for concentrations visually minimizing the extent and amount of extremely high concentration readings of Total DDT and or Dioxin/Furan TEQ (toxic equivalency).There are other problems including large numbers of high Method Detection Limits (MDL) leading to far too many orchestrated Non Detects (N.D.) in the data  however the simplest and most obvious problem is the lack of relevance of the concentrations being shown. Yes you can compare the concentrations with location/distance downstream from Lanxess (Uniroyal) towards the Grand River and even somewhat over time (eg. 1996-2022)  but really and significantly what do they mean and how serious are they? Nobody knows and I think that is intentional.

Ms. Lyndall has failed to include any health criteria whether provincial or federal for either Total DDT or for Dioxins/Furans. The accepted health concentrations (which differ) for these two compounds as well as differing whether for Soils or for Sediments are MIA (missing in action). They need to be written on the Figures as well as most importantly drawn as a horizontal line across the Figures hence immediately showing how many of the data points are above (exceed) the mandated health concentrations.

Doing that exposes the massive and major contamination for five miles downstream from Uniroyal/Lanxess. This report was produced on behalf of Lanxess Canada for the purpose of once more snowing and bulldozing TRAC and the public. Mission mostly accomplished.

I THINK THAT WATERLOO REGION'S WATER SYSTEM IS IN BIG TROUBLE

 

This is based upon multiple lines of evidence. Unfortunately it's also based upon multiple lies by the Region over the years. Also multiple deceptions. Lies, bragging and puffery do not produce healthy, clean water. The Region of Waterloo based upon their own self congratulatory back patting seem to think otherwise.

Looking at lists of wells and wellfields throughout the Region I find it disheartening to see the following words after too many listed wells namely: Standby, Disconnected, Purge, Abandoned. Also looking at the Number of Significant Threat Activities and the Number of  Properties with Significant Threats as listed in the Grand River Source Protection Area 2025 is downright scary.  Looking at the various listed threats including Nitrates, TCE, Chemicals, DNAPLS, Pathogens, Salt, Chloride  etc. does not build confidence. Another issue I find strange is that despite off and on warnings of water shortages and for example water rationing for lawns, again far too many wells throughout the Region are NOT pumping anywhere near their stated capacities and alleged abilities. Why is that?

I also am aware of the disinterest in soil and groundwater remediation to the point of denial of known facts by our authorities if it will reduce costs and enhance development and building. Growth apparently is never to be stymied or stalled either by lack of water or excess of contaminants. Workarounds, engineering "solutions", natural attenuation or whatever verbal manipulations are required to promote progress and growth at all costs, always wins out. This game is not sustainable and we, our children and following generations will be the big losers.

WATERLOO REGION ARGUE OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF THEIR MOUTHS REGARDING THE WILMOT CENTRE WELLFIELD

 

Among numerous reference sources I've been reading is the RMOW (Regional Municipality of Waterloo) April 8, 2026 staff report to councillors titled "Wilmot Centre Aquifer Assessment". Hoo boy but it is quite the document.  The Region are arguing both in this report and at the Regional Council level that all is fine at the Wilmot Centre Wellfield.

Here's the rub. They are also advising that between past lower rainfall AND higher pumping rates the aquifer level has dropped three to four metres in elevation. Now perhaps on a municipal wellfield level that is not an unusual situation. Perhaps it is. Regardless if you have a private drilled well that extends 32 metres below ground surface for example and the aquifer level drops from 29.5 mbgs  (metres below ground surface) to 32.5 mbgs then guess what? You're sucking air instead of water. Prior to the aquifer's lowered elevation you had 2.5 metres or over eight feet of water level above your wellscreen (intake). 

Other issues that do not add credibility to the Region's position include their admission that certain groundwater elevation triggers have been crossed at the Wilmot Centre Wellfield already just as they have been crossed at the Mannheim West Wellfield. Then however the Region states "Crossing the trigger levels at Wilmot Centre does not mean that adverse impacts are anticipated at nearby private wells in the natural environment. This is a fundamental difference from trigger levels established under the Mannheim Well Field PTTW." (i.e. Permit To Take Water) .

Other problems with the Region's staff report include Table 1 on page 4 & 5. This Table purports to show pumping levels at three wellfields in Wilmot namely the Erb St. Wellfield, the Mannheim West Wellfield and the Wilmot Centre Wellfield. Clearly there has been increased pumping at the Wilmot Centre Wellfield from 2019/20 until 2025 compared to 1980. Also on page 8 the Region confirm that some of this increased pumping was to make up for decreased water pumping and problems at FOUR Kitchener Wellfields namely Strange St., Parkway, William St., and Greenbrook. Finally I find it peculiar that Table 1 does not include the Mannheim East Wellfield immediately beside but just over the Wilmot boundary from the Mannheim West Wellfield. Perhaps it is the incredible number of wells and total amounts of nearby pumping that is causing likely well interference issues with private wells.

Add to this in the report the Region's immodest attitude is characterized by their self admitted incredible, world class, superior professional and astute management of everything wet in Waterloo Region and you begin to suspect that they've been taking lessons from trash talking MMA fighters prior to losing a major fight (Conor McGregor anybody?). Somewhat like Donald Trump it's almost as if the Region are looking over their shoulder cringing at the expected upcoming disaster but bragging to give themselves courage, or as my father used to say they are whistling by the graveyard to hide their fear.

TOO MANY "GENTLEMENS'" AGREEMENTS BETWEEN POLLUTERS, POLITICIANS & THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

 

I mean one could call it exactly what it is which is corruption. That word however is too coarse for our refined, polished and smooth operators. They are O.K. however with "unwashed masses", lower classes, ne'er do wells,  homeless etc. for all those beneath their high station in life. Supposedly making a buck is a social good according to many. Yes "trickle down" economics is popular especially among the well to do. The theory is that all economic activity from building submarines to widgets helps everybody. The rising tide lifts all boats theory. Naysayers of course suggest that what is "trickling down" may not be of much quality or good. Some even suggest that it is merely the rich peeing on the poor and giving them their refuse, their wastes etc. One example might be the ABTC or A Better Tent City. Geez I hope I've got the right name and location here but my understanding is that the ABTC is situated almost beside the Erb St. Landfill. Lucky them. Not only do they get most likely a plumbing hookup to the nearest water system/wellfield which is the Erb St. Wellfield and it's direct hydrogeologic connection to the contamination plume beneath the dump BUT they also get, depending on the prevailing winds, to enjoy the odours of everybody else's garbage. 

Just try calling the police for illegal dumping on private property albeit with a shared aquifer beneath it. Just try to get a Crown Prosecutor to lay criminal charges for off-site toxic chemical odours leaving an industrial site. There are direct connections between TCE, vinyl chloride, NDMA, benzene and many other volatile organic compounds (VOCs) routinely leaving industrial sites and serious to fatal diseases. Thousands of people die every year just in Ontario from air pollution. Where are the manslaughter or murder charges especially for repeat offenders?

It is our politicians who write our laws including the exceptions and loopholes. How many loopholes do you see for owners of semi detached homes, townhouses or lower cost housing who accidentally spill a couple of gallons of gasoline ?  However if you are a corporation or business person the rules suddenly change and you are given opportunity after opportunity to either mend your ways or at least hide them better. How often do you see serious polluters sent to jail? Severin Argenton (Varnicolor Chemical) in Elmira was one of the extraordinarily few. He was sentenced to eight months in jail after the Ontario Ministry of Environment refused to abide by their own initial Control Order and investigate deeper soils and aquifers on his property. Hence it was twenty-five years AFTER he served his eight month sentence (or part of it) and had passed on before Uniroyal/Lanxess and the Ontario MECP admitted publicly that he had indeed contaminated the Elmira Municipal drinking water aquifers with half a dozen chlorinated solvents. That folks is justice when polluters, politicians and justice system members (eg. Robert Reilly) all socialize together at Westmount Golf Club and other non-public venues.

THE LAKE ERIE PIPELINE IS A GIVEN WHICH EXPLAINS BENIGN NEGLECT TO OUTRIGHT GROSS NEGLIGENCE IN PROTECTING OUR GROUNDWATER

 

The last two Blog postings I have been listing some contaminated wellfields in Waterloo Region as well as some of the dirty polluters who did the deeds as well as the toxic chemicals that they either intentionally or gratuitously deposited into the soils and into our publicly owned aquifers. Today I'm filling in some missed data as well as giving my overall impressions as indicated in the title above. 

Firstly B.F.Goodrich (Epton) and Kaufman Rubber should be on the known polluter's list versus merely suspected as I posted last Friday.  Greb Shoe on Hayward Ave. (Kit.) also needs to be listed here. Regarding contaminated wellfields we also have additions as I've been rereading somewhat. The Lancaster Wellfield located near Lancaster and Guelph St. has been disconnected for many years. The source of the problem was the former Panill Veneer Co. near Louisa and St. Leger St. in Kitchener. The real culprit however was a well known local illuminary who owned the original grossly contaminated property known as the Breithaupt Tannery.

Various landfills causing off-site contamination include the Caroline St. location of a former landfill as well as the Erb St. Landfill which is located far too close to the Erb St. Wellfield. Despite cute drawings pretending that the Erb. St wells do NOT pull contaminated water from the known contaminant plume below and off-site of the landfill; that seems highly improbable. Of course the Ottawa St. Landfill has enhanced the Greenbrook Wellfield as most likely has the larger landfills in Cambridge. In Elmira we have the Bolender Landfill leaking into the Canagagigue Creek with Uniroyal stuff, the First St. Landfill leaking more into the "Gig" a little further downstream and the M1 and M2 Landfills. The second is on the Uniroyal/Lanxess property and prior to 1992 helped enrich Elmira's drinking water groundwater. Varnicolor Chemical in Elmira also deposited toxics at various Kitchener, Waterloo and Woolwich Landfills.

Back to "problematic " we have the Waterloo North Wellfield roughly near the Laurel Ck. Conservation Area with one " disconnected "well which is then described as a "flowing well". This could mean that it is a Purge or Interceptor well being used to catch the front of a sub surface contaminant plume and pump it to waste such as into a ditch or surface water body. The very contaminated William St. Wellfield (TCE) has one purge well pumping as well as one or two others removed from service. The Erb St. Wellfield has well 6A described as "problematic" and not pumping as well as W6B being on "standby". Gee all these pumping wells with provincial PTTW (Permits To Take Water) that either aren't pumping at all or are vastly under pumping what the province has permitted them. You'd almost think that we had excess water available here. The Foxborough Green Wellfield has one well "disconnected" and the New Dundee Wellfield has one well "abandoned".  All the Pompeii & Forwell Wells have been "disconnected" for decades and the Woolner river wells just downstream have been under pumping and or closed off and on. The Strasburg Wellfield has one well that is "disconnected". Likely well E7 at the south end of Elmira will continue as a Purge well in order to protect the never been used for production well yet E10 further south at Scotch Line Rd. 

It isn't just the provincial and regional refusal and failure to stop gross groundwater pollution from 1955 until 2000 that upsets me. It's the blatant lying and denial since to seriously clean up at least the worst of the contamination affecting groundwater, wildlife and human life. Nothing but excuses, drivel and puffery bragging about how technically advanced they are while poisoning everybody. For years I thought that it was misplaced loyalty to both important business people and pro business ideology but now I think that it is worse. It is a long held pie in the sky belief that Lake Erie water will allow permanent growth and expansion in order to keep the money flowing to our industrial and business class also forever. We are on a horrific death spiral and we are being led by greedy idiots.

  

SOME OF THE CHEMICAL ENHANCEMENTS IN OUR WATERLOO REGION GROUNDWATER

TCE is very popular.  Trichloroethylene  can be fatal as a number of persons in the Bishop St. community of Cambridge have learned the hard way. Usually however it leads to years of sickness and ill health first. Dinoseb is some sort of pesticide that we were advised caused the contamination in the northern part of Cambridge. Plasticizers and phthalates have been found in the Grand River and the groundwater at the south end of Cambridge. TCE is also in the same groundwater right beside the Grand River. 1,1,2 Trichloroethane has been found in the groundwater between Bishop St. and the Grand River also throughout the Bishop St. community.

Waterloo has been blessed with TCE in their groundwater and the major wellfield near the downtown. Obviously with coal tar constituents nearby it's difficult to believe that some of them (PAHs?) haven't also been dissolved and mobilized into the wellfield. The same goes for the coal tar found on Gaukel St. in Kitchener by the very old post office. 

Speaking of Kitchener we have TCE in a number of wellfields. It is combined with some other VOCs (volatile organic compounds) that freshened the air inside a former local tire factory. Many workers paid the price for working there. More exotics include P.C.B.s which are better known as floaters on the water table i.e. LNAPLS or light non aqueous phase liquids. Nevertheless they have a small solubility in order to add spice to the groundwater's flavour. Chlorinated solvents as well as oil and gas PHCs (petroleum hydrocarbons) also add to the groundwater mixture between Fountain St. and the Grand River near Breslau.

Elmira literally has dozens to hundreds of chemicals in their groundwater although our authorities have only focused on NDMA, chlorobenzene and ammonia. Lots more PHCs in Elmira as well as Heidelberg. Probably low levels of DDT and Dioxins are also dissolved in the groundwater here.

This is but a sprinkling of the variety available in our groundwater. Let's not forget Glyphosate (Round Up), salt and Nitrates. Lots for everybody  

IS IT RUDE TO SUGGEST PUBLIC HANGINGS IN OCTOBER INSTEAD OF AN ELECTION?

 

Well at least Canada is civilized enough (so far) to cause abhorrence and shock at the title above. That said I just bet that by the end of this post there may just be a few who think it's not that bad of an idea. A little radical and a lot permanent, regardless.

Yesterday's post painted the broad strokes. We have way too much salt, nitrates, pesticides and solvents in our groundwater.  Yes it is fair to suggest that the Region of Waterloo are trying to educate the public about the health threats from two of them namely salt and pesticides. Good but nitrates is at least a little verboten (forbidden) to lecture about because after all it's our farmers who feed us and the world. Politically a no-no. Nitrates are very bad for our older citizens especially those with heart problems. Have we forgotten cryptosporidium I wonder. That's a virus I believe found in cattle crap (dung).  It actually killed several people here in Waterloo Region in the early 1990s. Cattle doing their business in and along rivers and creeks introduced it into the water supply eventually through the Grand River at Mannheim which golly gosh our authorities hadn't considered that special treatment was needed.

The really big one however is solvents which also could include some chemicals also used in pesticides although the Region's focus on pesticides has been primarily garden and lawn overuse. Back to solvents. The following wellfields have measurable, concerning levels of toxic chemicals from industry in them. By the way if you think going after agriculture/farmers is a political no-no; Waterloo Region would prefer to cut off your heads rather than point the SHAME finger at our local industrialists and major polluters. Here goes:    Greenbrook, Parkway, William St., Strange St., Pompeii, Erb St., Middleton, Elmira still!, plus one or two more in Cambridge which have temporarily slipped my mind.  

The business/corporate names include  Ciba-Geigy, Northstar Aerospace, Cnd. General Tower, Canbar, Sunar, possibly the former Seagram's, likely the former Uniroyal Tire on Strange St. (Kit.), Kaufman, Budd Automotive, Safety-Kleen (Breslube), Uniroyal Chemical/Lanxess Canada (Elmira), Strauss Fuels (Elmira), former Strauss service station (Heidelberg),  Kitchener Gas Works (Gaukel St.), Varnicolor Chemical (Elmira), Regina St. Waterloo (coal tar).

Now I've reviewed this list in my memory banks and I'm sure that I've missed several others and as well  I'm wondering now about Kaufman Rubber. Let me transfer Kaufman Rubber at least for now onto the suspected list only, along with B.F. Goodrich formerly at the corner of King and Victoria St. in Kitchener.    

Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the Grand River. Our municipal, regional and provincial politicians have all been grossly negligent in protecting our groundwater mostly originating from the Waterloo Moraine on the west side and a little north of the tri-cities and actually partially extending under them. In reference to yesterday's Blog post let me just say that nitrates are very bad in Wilmot Township presumably due to commercial fertilizers used to grow crops. The other problems in Wilmot include the Region's admitted over pumping in the Mannheim West Wellfield (Wilmot) AND the hydrogeological connection between the Erb St. wells (Wilmot) and the Erb St. Landfill.    

Speaking of landfills how smart do you have to be to locate a landfill anywhere near a drinking water Wellfield? The Region have done it at least twice maybe more if you look carefully in Cambridge.  The second one is the Ottawa St. landfill in Kitchener which has donated 1,4 Dioxane to the Greenbrook Wellfield causing it to be shut down in 2005.  Engineering solutions translate into more and more expensive treatment of our groundwater. By the way reading the Rules & Regs for all of these landfills means very little. Back in the day I exposed mostly Varnicolor Chemical dumping 45 gallon drums of liquid solvents, illegally, into the Ottawa St. Landfill. That did make the K-W Record at the time.

Our groundwater isn't what it used to be and some of the perpetrators are listed here.  

WILMOT'S WATER IS GOING TO BALE THE REST OF US OUT????? OR MAYBE A PIPELINE IS THE PLAN

 

Who are they kidding? At some point in time there will be another water crisis in Waterloo Region. It's a given. This one however won't mostly consist of developers and builders demanding their profits keep on increasing. This next one will be citizens being told that they are on water rationing. They will be told that there will be so many hours per day when their taps will not provide water. Regional Councils and municipal councils are going to want to fortify their council chambers and administrative buildings. Citizens will be outraged as well they should be.

Here is the good news, sort of.  The Region will vehemently protest that it's not their fault. It's Global Warming & Climate Change. Their staff are world class leaders in water protection, water conservation, water distribution and all that. They will go to great lengths to suggest that anyone and anything other than themselves have caused this catastrophic shortage. They might even blame the Federal government and ...holy crap...actually suggest that maybe, just maybe 1,000,000 people in Waterloo Region by 2051 wasn't such a hot idea afterall. Perhaps we should have found more water first. Perhaps we should have built more sewage treatment plants before the influx. Perhaps hospitals, doctors and nurses shortages should have been remedied first. And on and on.

Here however is the reality. We and by we I mean our politicians at all levels have given business and industry a free ride for the last century. Frankly they have done the same thing with our farmers and agriculture in general. We are now reaping the rewards of exempting those two industries from environmental laws, environmental enforcement and environmental stewardship. Perhaps cars and roads are also culprits with he alleged amount of salt now in our aquifers. Agriculture has contributed Nitrates en masse to our groundwater. Industry have contributed solvents including TCE, NDMA and chlorinated solvents. Oil and gasoline are also big culprits whether from service stations leaking tanks or other sources. 

The Region of Waterloo have talked a good game. Unfortunately they started way too late and they've continued heavier with the talk and the reports and studies while ignoring enforcement. They haven't even had the backbone to stand up to the impotent and incompetent Ontario Ministry of Environment (MECP). Contaminated soils and aquifer remediations are a pathetic joke even when they do happen. Underfunded for decades, the MECP get pushed around in and out of court by large industry at will. 

Our aquifers are a mess from all these mentioned contaminants. Never fear because the same folks who made money polluting them will now jump on the PIPELINE bandwagon and invest in bringing polluted Lake Erie water here to Waterloo Region. Money will be made just not by you and me. That is not our purpose in life. We, the public, are here to pay the bills via our taxes. The price of water and water treatment will continue to rise until it's a great excuse to build a pipeline. Taxes will still go up but at least we'll have a secure supply of crappy water for a while. God bless democracy.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? IT'S A MIRACLE! WE MUST ALL BOW DOWN TO THE MAGNIFICENCE OF OUR REGIONAL POLITICIANS & WATER PROVIDERS

 

There are two articles in today's K-W Record. The first is by Joe McGuinty and is on the front page. The second is by Luisa D'Amato and is on page A4. Mr. McGuinty's front page article is dishonestly and deceptively titled "Region finds "significant " new water capacity, easing constraint". While I usually don't begrudge a little literary flexibility in headlines, this one grates me. Absolutely no "significant" new water capacity has been found whether "significant" or "new".  What has been found is a catchall word used by professional liars namely "optimization". It was used up here in Elmira more than twenty years ago and despite serious criticism then and a demand for a clear definition all we got was mumbo jumbo combined with assurances that we, the credentialed suits, know best. In fact  in that case optimization ended up meaning less on-site pumping and treating of highly contaminated groundwater at Uniroyal Chemical's  (Crompton) expense and more off-site pumping and treating which is 50% paid for by the taxpayers.

I might add that the alleged "new" water capacity is the exact same water from the exact same aquifers allegedly being pumped a little harder at one well and perhaps a little lighter at other wells. I have long referred to this regional water management practice as "musical chairs". In Waterloo Region's case they have done it with contaminated wells in order to affect the direction of contamination plumes. As the plume approaches a particular well you shut down pumping and go to another well instead. The contaminant plume will slowly revert to it's natural flow direction under non pumping conditions. Other terms for this practice include "Interceptor Wells".  These are wells that are drilled in front of a contaminant plume and are then pumped to waste hopefully protecting other wells further downgradient.

Not only is there absolutely no new, significant water capacity but in fact what the Region is doing is taking old decommissioned wells due to industrial contamination (solvents mostly) and recommissioning them. I call that retreading them and as I wouldn't put retreaded tires on my car/motorcycle I also don't want to drink water from retreaded wells. 

Ms. D'Amato deserves credit for her article titled "The water crisis is over. Now it's time to ask: Why?" She states that she does not understand what "optimization" really means and : "I'm not a hydrogeologist (and there wasn't one at Tuesday's news conference to ask) but I didn't understand how that worked to increase the overall supply. I wanted more specific answers, and I think the public does, too. "  Ms. D'Amato may be smelling the same horse manure that I am. Apparently yet another "study" is underway that sometime down the road will clarify all this. That is most likely even more bull (or horse) as far too many "professional" studies are simply credentialed suits selling their clients own opinions back to them under the guise of third party, independent and unbiased parties. It's all about credentialism and fooling the general public who are not experienced or knowledgeable on the matters under "study".

IS THE K-W RECORD NO MORE THAN CONTROLLED OPPOSITION FOR THE WEALTHY, POWERFUL AND INFLUENTIAL?

 

I hinted at this yesterday here when I advised that they have full knowledge of  the contamination downgradient from the current Safety-Kleen site and hence should be demanding the release of various hydrogeological reports done decades ago on the area. Secondly on a totally different topic don't you find it strange that despite the Federal government threatening to charge perhaps as many as two million Canadians criminally and then seize their legally acquired private property from them; hardly so much as a tsk tsk out of our local papers. Are they now being financed by federal government handouts in order to survive and at least give the appearance of a strong media standing on guard for Canadian rights and values?

Thirdly is the Elmira Water Crisis. I originally bought the storyline that this is no longer news. It's old hat. It's allegedly not of interest to Waterloo Region citizens, residents and  water drinkers. If perhaps both the Record and the Observer would get off their butts and do their jobs they might just find that this is a huge unfolding story. It's even more than that. It's a coverup of huge magnitude including ALL our local politicians (O.K. only 95%) . Making excuses as they are now doing as the 2028 deadline is looming is one thing. Pretending however that gee willikers there are parts of the Elmira Aquifers that are much less contaminated than they used to be so grab a glass, turn on the tap and we promise you won't die immediately. Honest Injun. Oops! Make that Honest Indigenous because politically correct language including gender pronouns is far more important than minor matters of poisoning (slowly?) Canadian residents and citizens.

  Yes it does go back on us to some degree. If I am virtually the only person ringing alarms and raising red flags locally then we are certainly done. Just mail in your independence, free thinking and rights to demand better from our governments and be done with it. 

IS LUISA D'AMATO BLOWING SMOKE OR JUST PARROTING THE REGION'S LIES?

 

Before expounding upon the title above which is relevant to Luisa's article in today's Record ("Here's the way out of the region's water crisis") I would like to add that I do give Luisa credit for her last Friday article in which she strongly advises the Region not to leave some Wilmot citizens behind as they suffer from well interference issues caused by increased regional pumping of water for our major cities. She makes it clear that the quoted R.J. Burnside 2025 Water Report categorically states, contrary to the regional position, that increased pumping from the Wilmot Centre Wellfield (Shingletown K50/K51)  has lowered the water levels in those wells and in the specific aquifer involved (AFB2).

In today's article however Luisa appears to have swallowed various regional lies . One I would claim is what Luisa calls "Optimization". Here in Elmira we were sold that same big word as if it's official sounding nature immediately makes it true. It does not. In Elmira it eventually meant that rigorous conditions put on the cleanup were relaxed which merely reduced Uniroyal Chemical's cleanup costs and did nothing for the cleanup itself. In fact it may have actually hurt it. 

The second bigger issue is the use of the "river wells" as they used to be called. Luisa stated that these wells on the west side of the Grand River were removed from service because due to water conservation they were no longer needed. HORSE MANURE !  First of all the wells were on both sides of the river with some K80 wells on the west side and wells K70 and K71 on the east side. K by the way stands for Kitchener. The Region I believe lied then when they claimed they were shut down because algae in the very nearby Grand River was causing both odour and taste problems. The reality also consisted of gross soil and groundwater contamination immediately upgradient of these wells located between Forwell Sand & Gravel right next to the river and Safety-Kleen further upgradient (east). The contamination consisted of oils, fuels, solvents and PCBs likely released during the Forsythe or Breslube days prior to Safety-Kleen's purchase of the contaminated property.  

Luisa D'Amato and the Record already know this because I have told them so in writing months ago but perhaps they have a conflict of interest going on. 

REGION OF WATERLOO RACING TOWARDS MORE HUMILIATION & LOSS OF PUBLIC CONFIDENCE

 

Maybe they've already decided that there isn't anyone left in Wilmot who supports any of them hence they may as well throw a tiny group, population wise, to the wolves than to even suggest the tiniest cutbacks on water for the tri cities and the rest of the Townships. By throwing to the wolves I am suggesting that the Region really don't care if every single family in Wilmot Township have to remortgage their homes in order to either drill new, deeper wells or simply to extend their current wells to a greater depth. That might at least partially explain their ridiculous stance on well interference claims. This of course only applies to those rural properties on private water systems. 

The recent R.J. Burnside report is an eye opener in that it clearly states that municipal aquifer levels (AFB2) in Wilmot have been declining for the last six years and that this corresponds to climatic effects AND to increased pumping for use in the rest of the Region. In a nutshell the regional councillors are a bunch of cowardly bullies hiding behind the law, lawyers and Wilmot citizens good nature. That is a long term recipe for disaster and I only hope when the payback comes that it is focused on regional politicians.

The Region are also counting on citizens being preoccupied with families, jobs, climate change (heat domes etc.), health (cancer especially) etc. Distracted citizens work best for a perverted democracy such as we have that refuses to look after all their citizens and in fact plays one group off against another. How many of these Wilmot citizens remember the map that the Record published last January showing the various aquifers and aquitards? That Figure or cross-section is a subsurface conceptual geological model of the Wellesley and Waterloo Moraine and more which clearly indicates how wells need to be drilled deeper as the aquifer levels (AFB2) subside. 

Frankly only liars and sociopaths could continue denying the facts. No politician will ever vote in favour of criminal charges for politicians proven to be liars. Guess why.

ADJUSTMENTS/AMENDMENTS TO LAST WEDNESDAY'S (i.e. GIGO) POST

 

I do not have a Mathematics degree. I did graduate in Economics (B.A. 1974) from the University of Waterloo. Yes I did take a third year Statistics course and passed it with a lot of hard work. That said I can't remember the last time I actually refreshed my memory with Log scales, Logarithmics or for gosh sakes Calculus which I genuinely despised. It's been well over half a century ago approximately. 

Why did I suggest that the vertical scale ( i.e. y axis I believe) was a Logarithmic scale? First of all bear with me if my terminology is incorrect here. Most linear scales for example might be scaled such as 0, 2,4,6,8,10,12 etc. up the y axis. Or they could be 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, etc. 

I believe that I got fooled by the vertical scales in Jen Lyndall's (Integral) report because they were scaled as follows:  .01, .1, 1, 10, 100     Note that each higher number up the vertical scale is TEN times the number preceding it.  Hence the actual numerical difference between spaces of similar length isn't the same as it is with the two linear scales in the preceding paragraph. In this scale presented in this paragraph the numerical difference between marked points is   .1-.01= .09   The next numerical difference between marked points is 10-1= 9    The next numerical difference between marked points is 100-10=90 .

Ms. Lyndall's graphs actually have quite a variety of vertical scales on them including  .1, 10, 1000 as well as .1, 10, 1000, 100,000 and some that I find rather bizarre such as   .03, .1, .3  followed by .03, .1, .3, 1, 3 As weird as these last two are in that they are neither equal difference in values between them like paragraph 2, NOR is each higher up the scale number a similar multiple as in paragraph 3 (i.e. 10 times).

What is my conclusion? Both Log scales (paragraph 3 at first blush) and I hesitate what to call the scales in paragraphs 3 and 4 with either the exact same multiples (i.e. 10) used moving up the vertical scale or as in paragraph 4 the .03, .1, .3 and .03, .1, .3, 1, 3 with different multiples between marked points ( 3.3, 3, ) and (3.3, 3, 3.3, 3) now appear to me to be an aberration. 

To be clear I have been referring to Jen Lyndall's Figures 4-24 up to 4-57. which plot concentrations of DDT and Dioxin/Furans on the vertical y axis and either location as in Reaches 4, 3, 2, 1 downstream or a number of graphs have dates (years) on the horizontal x axis. Now all the graphs have concentrations on the vertical y axis either mg/kg (parts per million) or ng/kg (parts per trillion) depending on which of two contaminants (DDT or Dioxins/Furans) they are looking at.  Regardless these concentrations are marked whereas Logarithmic numerics are not, which has me now believing that these are all linear scales albeit some of them I still believe are bizarrely scaled and labelled.

Is there a purpose to this. Of course there is. All Log scales AND all linear scales using multiples of the previous marked value as they rise up the vertical scale reduce the visual aspect of exactly how high the highest values actually are. If they went up the vertical scale in a linear fashion such as 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18  can you imagine how large the page would have to be to register say a 114 value? Therefore by using a scale such as 2, 10, 50, 250  (multiples of 5) you can readily fit in the 114 value PLUS  visually the 114 value sits much lower on the page and doesn't so drastically appear out of place with all the lower values.

The other advantage for unscrupulous polluters is simple confusion. You can pretend that you are transparent and putting all data on graphs when in fact you are intentionally making the graphs as confusing as possible. 

P.S. Speaking of NOT putting all data in reports shouldn't Table 3-3 of this report under Maximum Detected Concentration for Background (Creeks/Ditches) have a value of  24.4 ng/kg (ppt.) for Dioxins/Furans rather than the 9.0 ng/kg listed? This just happens to be the Stroh Drain which, coincidentally I'm sure, is one of the major coverups Lanxess are involved in.

   

 

AN INCREDIBLE BREAKTHROUGH IN ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY? TRAC ASSISTING WITH VICTIM SURVEYS

In the United States the concept of a "captured" regulator is well understood. Whether this goes so far as to include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency I can not be certain. Up here in Dogpatch (Woolwich Twn.)  it has been readily apparent that for the majority of the decades since 1992 that Uniroyal Chemical and successors have "captured" the public consultation body. This is hardly surprising as even a long term TAG and TRAC member, Sebastian, has written about the deference TAG and TRAC members constantly show to Chemtura and then later Lanxess Canada. Sebastian has also explained in detail how this has occurred including the members simply being overwhelmed with various and numerous technical reports without them having their own technical experts to refute controversial positions and opinions of Lanxess and GHD.

 Regarding victim surveys I expect that Lanxess and the Min. of Environment want to spread the responsibility to include citizens on TRAC. This of course in no way indicates that these citizens have any influence or control whatsoever over the (dirty) polluter and regulator who have thoroughly enjoyed their forever holiday from serious oversight or accountability. By victim surveys I mean TRAC have been asked to come up with questions to presumably ask citizens and residents mostly of Elmira but maybe of Woolwich Township overall. Now here's the rub. There have been all of zero health studies done of human beings in Woolwich or Elmira exposed to Uniroyal's toxic emissions. There has however been testing on fish species in the Creek. Perhaps GHD in their infinite perfection have found a way to survey proven victims of Dioxin and DDT poisoning. Will TRAC therefore be speaking to the fishes?

At first blush I thought that Jen Lyndall (Integral) had carefully ignored tissue residues in fish. That would be understandable considering that they are even more significant than health exceedances found in Creek sediments, creekbank soils, creek waters and floodplain soils of Dioxins/Furans, DDT & metabolutes, PCBs, Mercury , PAHs and more. Fish are living organisms within the Canagagigue Creek and aside from their intrinsic value in the ecosystem they are also in the food chain of bass, the very occasional pike and more likely mink, raccoons, herons, hawks, coyotes etc. Unfortunately these predators up the food chain suffer even more as most of the contaminants mentioned bioaccumulate as they go up the food chain. 

Her two Figures (4-62, 4-63) show Total DDT and Dioxins/Furans concentrations in fish tissue. They do not show the Tissue Residue Guidelines (TRG) for any of the fish species which at least reinforces my negative feelings towards her report (i.e. Data Summary).  Not that I'm considering changing professions from environmental activist to that of a professional, intellectual prostitute, but if I was I too would not include the health criteria in these two Figures leaving as usual the public and TRAC in the dark (& covered in sh*#).  

GIGO - GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT JEN & HADLEY MAKE HORRIBLE MUSIC TOGETHER & CALL IT SCIENCE

 

I sure hope that Jen Lyndall was well paid for the garbage report that she presented to TRAC on Thursday June 18, 2026  titled "Data Summary Report Canagagigue Creek And Floodplain".  I am not bringing into disrepute Ms. Lyndall's qualifications or credentials. I watched the entire on-line video (Woolwich Website) and was quite impressed with her presentation manner, speaking clarity, thinking on her feet handling questions etc. It is the actual content of her report that I find dishonest, disingenuous and disgusting. I expect that a huge part of that is because her report should be more accurately titled  "Data Summary Report of a Polluter's Talented and Energetic, Decades Long Efforts To Minimize and Coverup Toxic Pollution".

I have spent much of the last thirty-six years debunking all the lies and distortions presented by Elmira's infamous polluter.  Sorry I need to be more specific when Woolwich Township have happily hosted Varnicolor Chemical, Rothsay Concentrates, Breslube/Safety-Kleen and Uniroyal Chemical. I am now referring to Uniroyal/Lanxess. I have spoken at UPAC, CPAC, RAC, TAG, Woolwich Council and even Regional Council. I have written reports to all those semi to fully corrupt bodies plus TRAC. The general rule is minimum to zero questions followed by NOTHING. No followup, no requests for clarification, no discussion and no debate. This is essentially how Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura and Lanxess have operated namely by denying occasionally but mostly simply ignoring legitimate, researched opposition. 

This latest report is full of omissions as well as red herrings. DDT breakdown products (DDD, DDE) are not well examined. Numerically lower Reaches (1, 2) in the Creek are given short shrift. Provincial and Federal health criteria are noticeably missing in action. One would think that they have some serious value in a report like this. Logarithmic concentration scales for many of the Figures are a little unusual compared to reports done by CRA/GHD. The charitable view might be that CRA/GHD have more accurately concluded the technical capabilities of most of the public consultation members. The uncharitable view might be that CRA/GHD are simply continuing their amateurish report writing efforts by avoiding logarithmic scales even when they are appropriate and advantageous.

More and better needs to be done with these logarithmic scales. Mostly the vertical scales (concentration) need to be better with more values written on the vertical scale. This would help elucidate the values of the raw data presented by Ms. Lyndall. Also short shrift again seems to have occurred with Lindane in Ms. Lyndall's report. Samples were taken and values determined in some earlier major reports (eg. 2020 GHD) . 

Overall Ms. Lyndall was handed a croc of an assignment. Personally I would be hard pressed to want to put my name on any report that only purports to be legitimate and scientific. Gussying up crap science from those before you is a stinky job with some of the odour bound to transfer your way. All my past objections to these Creek reports continue on here as they have NEVER been honestly or accurately publicly debated. This includes MDLs, shovels versus core samplers and locational sampling biases.