May 172011
May 16, 2011 was a very busy day.
At the Township of Muskoka Lakes Council meeting in the morning SaveTheBalaFalls had an opportunity to delegate and our presentation is here.
In the evening we delegated to the District Municipality of Muskoka and our presentation is here.
At both Council meetings lawyers for the proponent also delegated and made some surprising claims, such as if they had not pursued Option 2, then Option 1 would have been built and producing power for 2 years already.
The lawyers’ statements are based on Option 1 being defined as requiring only land owned by the Ministry of Natural Resources (also called crown land). What is surprising is that:
- There are many reasons why the proponent could not receive environmental assessment approval for Option 1. For example, in the proponent’s own environmental screening report, for Option 1 they note “The tailrace of the powerhouse would be located in close proximity to the falls which could cause safety issues”. In addition, we believe there are many other reasons why Option 1 could not, and would not be built, as described here and here.
- Option 1, as proposed in the proponent’s environmental screening report could not have been built solely on MNR land as the required driveway, the retaining wall for it, and a substantial portion of the proposed generating station itself would not be on MNR land, as shown on the marked-up drawing from the proponent’s environmental screening report here.
- They claim that the public information centre held in August of 2007 presented Option 1 on only crown land, yet as shown on the version of Option 1 presented in August 2007, this too would not fit solely on MNR land. So there never was an Option 1. So if they didn’t know what they were talking about, what exactly are we arguing about.