Save the Bala Falls

It is time for you to tell Premier Wynne – People Would Drown

Summary
The proposed hydro-electric generating station at the Bala falls would drown people.

The proponent’s only response is that people already shouldn’t be in the water. This makes no sense and is not an acceptable plan as people would see that the proposed station would not operate during summer mornings and they would therefore see it was safe and be in the water when the proposed station would automatically start, without warning, at about noon. This cycled mode of operation would be a death trap.

Now is the time to e-mail Premier Wynne, letting her know the proponent has no plan to keep people from drowning:

• Our two-page summary is here.
• Click here (see pages 6 to 13) to see Bracebridge Generation Ltd.’s presentation on a tragic drowning of a 16 year old boy in 2008 at a nearby generating station with less than one-tenth the flow of that proposed for Bala.
   

Here are three important facts:

1. The proposed generating station would drown people
   A few km north of Bracebridge is the Wilson’s Falls generating station. In 2008 it caused the drowning of a 16 year old boy who was out swimming with some friends.The station is owned and operated by Bracebridge Generation Ltd., who provided this presentation in 2010 on the tragedy to an industry conference. On page 13 are the key facts (emphasis added):
   • “The 21 year old climbed over the rocks, jumped in and swam through the discharge from the tailrace and over to the rocks on the falls.”
   • “Jose was coerced by his peers into the water where he attempted to swim though the current but was overcome and didn’t make it.”

   Additional significant points are on page 16:

   • “Generally children/teens do not obey signs.”
   • “A similar circumstance could still occur.”
   • “Staff had counseling.”

   What does this mean for the proposed Bala station …

   • It is the treacherously fast and turbulent water exiting hydro-electric generating stations that is so dangerous to in-water recreation. Of huge concern is that the proposed Bala station would have more than ten times the flow of the Wilson’s Falls station.
      
   • While the Bracebridge Generation Ltd. “staff had counseling”, a few years later they quadrupled the capacity of their Wilson’s Falls generating station. That is, these stations are deadly dangerous, and their operation won’t be changed even if they kill people. While people rarely swim at Wilson’s Falls where there was a drowning in 2008, the Bala station would have ten times the flow and this flow would be just a few feet from the extremely popular area where people swim and boat. The government should not be allowing this insanity.
      
   • The proponent just says that people already shouldn’t be swimming there because there is one of these signs on the Bala north dam (even though nobody can even read the little icons). This makes no sense – does this mean there’s no fishing or boating the Moon River. The proponent has no rights to declare the area a “no swimming” zone. And even if they did, then what about upstream – Diver’s Point is called that because people Scuba dive there. This Scuba diving upstream of the proposed generating station would be as dangerous as Scuba diving above Niagara Falls, as every second there would be literally tons of water flowing into the proposed station’s 30′-deep x 30′-wide intake trash rack. Scuba divers would die as they would be held underwater against the trash rack until someone could phone the operator in Bracebridge to get the station stopped.
      

   The proponent and government must figure this all out now and deal with the life and death situation now. Continuing to ignore it is not acceptable.

2. Muskoka is for everyone (but the proponent would make it only for people with cottages)
   Anybody can come to Bala, and park for free, and fish or swim for free, or bring a picnic and watch the beautiful falls for free – even the washrooms are free. There are stores and restaurants, and you can rent a canoe or kayak and go exploring. But this proposed Bala project would make most of the only public shoreline in Bala too dangerous to access. If visitors have no falls to look at (94% of the water would go through the proposed station), and can’t swim or boat, then they won’t visit Bala. This would ruin the area’s economy just so private developers could profit.

   During these hottest days of the year electrical demand is the highest, but this is when the proposed Bala station would make the least power because during the summer there the least flow of water, so this makes no sense for Ontario.

   The proposed Bala station would make the most power in the spring and fall as that is when there is the most water. Unfortunately that is also when there is the least demand for power. Ontario’s misguided energy policy would result in the Ontario government paying full price for electricity even when it isn’t needed and must be sold at a huge loss to the US. This helps the US economy while ruining ours. So the proposed Bala station would contribute to raising electricty costs for all consumers in Ontario, just to pay a private developer. This makes no sense.
    

3. This mess can be stopped at no cost to Ontario
   The proponent has reneged on fundamentally-important commitments they made in their proposal, for which they agreed that if they provided inaccurate or misleading information the government could cancel their contracts and the proponent would have no right to claim any costs or expenses. We need to ask the government to cancel this mess.
    

Write Premier Wynne
Now is the time to send an e-mail to Premier Kathleen Wynne and let her know that:

• Generating stations are never built this close to swimming, boating, public docks, and private residences.
• The proponent has no plan to keep their proposed generating station from drowning people.

Your e-mail should copy your local MPP and local newspapers (and if you like, copy info@SaveTheBalaFalls.com as well). Make sure you ask for a reply to your specific questions.

A two-page flyer on the above three facts is here.
 

An Update of the Current Situation
For an update of the current situation, including a photograph of the person funding the proponent, click here. One interesting fact is this same person was also funding a proposed project for 14 to 18 wind turbines in Thunder Bay, and they also had years of strong community opposition. Last year the Ontario government cancelled the project (another article here), we look forward to the same happening in Bala.
 

Investor’s Corner
Not only does the proponent not have all required approvals for construction or operation, potential investors should be concerned about the approvals the proponent doesn’t have, for example:

• Investors want to know what their profit would be, and this means knowing how much water would be available. Not only does the proponent not have the Permit To Take Water to guarantee them use of the required water, but the operator of Bala’s Mill Stream generating station has requested to substantially increase the flow through that station (which gets priority as it is already there). This would reduce the water – and profit – to the proposed Bala station.
• If one is going to fund a construction project, one would expect that approvals have been received to not only start the project, but to also finish and operate the project. The proponent does not have the approvals to finish or operate the proposed project, which should be of concern since the proposed construction does not comply with the Muskoka River Water Management Plan.
• The proponent has been actively working for over 2½ years on getting their approvals from the Ministry of Natural Resources under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement act, yet they still don’t have approval for the construction (which is called “Phase 2”). As the MNR desperately wants to give this approval, and the proponent has one of the world’s largest engineering companies working on the design, this shows the proposed project has many fundamental problems.

So let’s summarize: unknown profit and high risk of both construction problems and operating problems. If the “smart money” isn’t interested, what does that other kind say.
 

Saturday August 1, 2015 – FUNdraiser and Donations Update
We have very strong arguments, but the proponent and government are equally intent on ignoring them. We need funds for professional services. Come out to our FUNdraiser this Saturday August 1, from 8:30 am to 11:30 am, we’ll be set-up in front of Skirt (at the corner of Muskoka Road 169 and Portage Street) with information, T-shirts, buttons, and lawn signs.

We need 500 people to each donate $500. Of course this is a lot of money, until now this has been a ten-year battle by volunteers. But now we need to use professional services and be prepared as required.

Donations can be made on-line here and you can immediately receive your charitable donation income tax receipt as approved by the Canada Revenue Agency. Or you can print this form and mail it with a cheque, you’ll receive your tax receipt by return mail.
 

Saturday August 8, 2015 – ACO Picnic and Heritage Walks
Bala has always been a major transportation hub, as over the years it has been at the confluence of the Bala Portage, steamships from Lake Musoka, smaller boats on both Lake Muskoka and the Moon River, the CP Rail line, and automobile traffic.

In the last 12 years, due to the good and successful efforts of the Township of Muskoka Lakes, its Heritage Committee, and the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario Muskoka Branch, several properties have been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.

Learn more about Bala’s heritage and the planned Heritage Conservation District at the ACO’s picnic on Saturday August 8, 2015 from 11:00 am to 1:30 pm in Margaret Burgess Park. Bring your picnic lunch (and get more goodies at Don’s Bakery and the other nearby restaurants), join a heritage walk, and listen to music. More details here.
 

Filmmaker Rob Stewart’s Video Fight for Bala, Part 1
See Rob Stewart’s Fight for Bala video here. All funds raised go directly to SaveTheBalaFalls.com
 

Concert at the Gravenhurst Opera House
There is a concert which includes supporter and tenor Frederic Mahood at the Gravenhurst Opera House (which is air conditioned) this Saturday evening. Tickets are still available, more detail is here, and the box office is at 705 687-5550.
 

SaveTheBalaFalls.com

Summary
Many of you recently received one or two letters from government Ministries concerning the proposed project to build a hydro-electric generating station at the Bala Falls.

Unfortunately these letters do not provide the full story, as the proponent; still does not have all required approvals for either construction or operation, and still has not addressed major issues.

The earliest the proponent could start real destruction/construction (that is, not just site preparation) is June 2016 – about a year from now. So we’ll keep working to save the Bala falls, and we are supercharged; by the fantastic fundraising results, by the great turn-out at the Township’s special Council meeting last week, and by your continued concerns about the bullying and abusive behavior by the proponent.

This proposed project has too many risks and dangers, and would be bad for the community and bad for the proponent’s investors. There are two ways it can be cancelled without the proponent having any rights to claim any costs or expenses they may have incurred. Now is the time for the Ontario government to cancel.

Detail
Letters from Ministries
Many of you will have recently received this letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources and this letter from the Ministry of the Environment (and thank you to so many of you for forwarding to us the letters you received, it is always helpful to track the Ministries’ messaging).

The Ministry of the Environment’s letter states they agree with the proponent’s assertion that the many changes the proponent has made to their plans are “minor and that no further study is required”.

The Ministry of Natural Resources’ letter states that the MNR has “finalized and issued documents (including occupational authority and work permits) that allow SREL to now begin Phase 1 construction on the associated Crown lands. This work includes installation of the upstream and downstream coffer dams and the construction of intake and water channel structures of the facility, as well as any fencing or tree removal required to facilitate construction”.

The above may be true enough, but there is much more to the issue, for example:

1. Major work cannot start until after June 1, 2016!
   • The municipality may allow the proponent’s requested shoulder widening after Cranberry Festival weekend. And the proponent may be allowed to cut down the trees and remove some dirt from the proposed construction site.
   • But the proponent will not be allowed to begin any in-water construction work, such as installing cofferdams or doing any excavaton until after June 1, 2016.

   If need be, we will be continuing our work to save the Bala falls until then, and after then. We’re here to save the Bala falls, no matter how long it takes.
    

2. Proponent does not have MNR approval to build their proposed hydro-electric generating station. The MNR’s letter says the proponent can “now begin Phase 1 construction” – which is preparing the site for the actual construction (removing topsoil, building cofferdams, and installing a tower crane). That is, the proponent does not have approval for any Phase 2 work (which would be the excavation and construction).

   The proponent has been working on getting this Plans and Specifications approval for well over a year and they still don’t have all of it:

   • Clearly they have not been able to come up with a safe and credible design and construction sequence. If they can’t even plan, one wonders if they could execute.
   • The proponent initially expected this approval would require only a few months (and then decided to split their application into Phase 1 and Phase 2, and later still decided on a further split of Phase 1 into Phase 1A and Phase 1B). As their estimate to do the planning for this application was wrong by more than a factor of two, one must question their schedule for the actual construction work.

    

3. Proponent has not resolved or even investigated the groundwater contamination issue. The proponent’s 2013 testing found Zinc contamination in the groundwater at the proposed construction site. As their testing was upstream of the likely source, the problem is probably actually worse. So the extent of this problem, and the cost and time required to deal with it are not known. Remediation could take months, delaying the entire project.

   The proponent has known about this issue for almost two years, yet they have not done the retesting required to better understand the problem. They could have completely understood, addressed, and remediated this problem by now, but have instead left this as a huge unknown cost and schedule risk for their investors.
    

4. Environmental approval could be invalid. As we present in this article, the changes the proponent has made since they received environmental approval do appear to be environmentally-significant, so we sent this letter to the MoE. We await a reply.
    
5. The required process for the Muskoka River Water Management Plan amendments required for station operation has not even been initiated, which is significant as the proposed station cannot be operated until this amendment process is completed.
   • Also, for both of their environmental approvals the proponent committed that throughout their proposed construction they would maintaiin the continuous minimum flow down the Bala north falls which is required by the MRWMP. However the proponent changed their plans so their construction plans also would not comply with the MRWMP.
   • Therefore, the proponent requires an amendment to the MRWMP for construction, and this amendment process has not been initiated either.
      
6. The proponent requires a building permit from the Township of Muskoka Lakes, and they also require a Permit to take Water from the MoE to allow the operation of their proposed generating station. They do not have either of these permits.
    
7. The proponent has not addressed the drowning risk. Perhaps because they have spent so much time and money, both the MNR and proponent have decided they will ignore this issue of drowning people. But this risk should be a major concern for the proponent’s investors, due to the; liability, insurance costs, likely operating restrictions, and being permenently associated with facilitating the construction of a death machine.
    
8. The operator of the Mill Stream generating station may receive approval to use more water, and this would correspondingly reduce the water available for, and revenue to, the proponent’s proposed station.
    
9. As has been widely reported over the past weeks, Ontario’s credit rating has been reduced because Ontario is spending more than it receives through taxes. Ontario’s Liberal government has decided they are smarter than the rest of us and that they know which businesses and industries to subsidize, but they ignore that the resulting high cost of electricity is ruining the rest of the economy.

   On July 8, 2015 the Toronto Sun published an article by Christina Blizzard and an article by Candice Malcolm showing this makes no sense. Subsidizing the Bala proponent $100,000,000 (over the initial 40-year term of the proponent’s Feed-In Tariff contract) through the above-market rate which the Bala proponent would receive to produce the most power when it is least needed (in the spring and fall) is a waste of taxpayers money and is bad for Ontario’s economy.

   On July 10, 2015 the National Post published an article about a recent Ontario Chamber of Commerce study which found that one option would be to cancel existing FIT contracts. While they dismissed this due to the legal costs for cancelling other FIT contracts, for this proposed Bala project, there are two ways the FIT contract could be cancelled for free, as noted in this article.

   The proponent is pursuing this opportunity only because of their FIT contract, which requires the proponent be in commercial operation by April 2018. The proponent cannot start heavy construction until June 2016, leaving only 22 months. The proponent claims they could finish the proposed Bala project in less time, but this is complete and wishful fantasy. Much smaller projects with much simpler construction sites take longer, such as has the nearby Wasdell Falls project. Just remediating the groundwater found to be contaminated with Zinc could take months, yet the proponent has not even begun investigating this, and has not allowed any time in their schedule for this. Also, there are so many timing restrictions (such as when cofferdams can be installed or when in-water work is allowed) that a month delay will quickly become a year delay.

   So it is a risk the Ontario government will decide it doesn’t have $100,000,000 to waste on this proposed Bala project and will use the proponent missing their Commercial Operation Date deadline to cancel this mistake of a project.

The proponent needs to borrow more than $25,000,000 for the proposed construction, which as shown above has many risks of both delay and additional cost.

The proponent’s decision to not permit the planned Canada Day celebration last weekend shows how the proponent continues to bully and abuse the community. Without earning the social licence to proceed, the proponent has created a hostile construction and operating environment – which would be most undesirable for this prominent facility that would usually be unattended.

There is much more to this story than we hear from either the govenment or proponent. It is time for this proposed project to be cancelled.
 

Thank you supporters
The proponent’s Notices of Trespass which stated they would instruct the Ontario Provincial Police to arrest anyone attending the Moon River Property Owners Association’s 5^th annual Canada Day evening celebration and the SaveTheBalaFalls.com event which was scheduled earlier that same July 4, 2015 day rightly concerned the community enough that there was a fantastic turn-out at the July 3, 2015 Township of Muskoka Lakes special Council meeting.

As this same Council had recently accepted an offer from the proponent that they would not impact Margaret Burgess Park, we hoped the Councillors would have been interested in discussing the proponent reneging on their offer. However the Council voted to not hear this issue. The July 9, 2015 issue of the Bracebridge Examiner had a total of four articles concerning the proponent’s and Council’s actions, and the effort to save the Bala falls.

Good work in letting everyone know we care about Bala and our rights. And thank you all for the great response to our FUNdraiser on July 4, 2015.

As we are beginning to use professional services, fundraising is an important part of saving the Bala falls. Ways to donate are here, and you can support filmmaker Rob Stewart’s work to create a documentary at FightForBala.com.
 

SaveTheBalaFalls.com

We have posted articles (here and here) about the dangers the proposed hydro-electric generating station would create for the in-water recreation that would be just a few feet away. We have noted that the situation for the Bracebridge falls generating station is different, since the swimming area is 1,000′ away, and even the boating is protected by a 110′-long concrete breakwater. The proposed Bala generating station would have a maximum flow of 96 m³/s, which is more than three times the 27 m³/s maximum flow in Bracebridge, yet in Bala there would be no protection for boats, and the popular swimming area would be just a few feet away.

A few km upstream of the Bracebridge falls, Bracebridge Generation also owns and operates the Wilson’s Falls generating station. Before it was expanded in 2012/2013 to its current capacity, the Wilson’s Falls generating station had a maximum flow of 8.5 m³/s, according to the Muskoka River Water Management Plan. Yet even this low flow, less than 10% that proposed for the Bala generating station, caused a tragic drowning in 2008.

The Bala proponent says they have no plans to fence-off the area and their plant would be automatically and remotely started without any warning or advance notice. Silently and within a minute the fast and turbulent water would cause people swimming in front of their generating station to either sink and drown or would push them out to the middle of the Moon River.

Is a “no swimming” sign supposed to solve this problem? Is that the plan? Is the plan to wait for people to drown and then come up with a plan? This makes no sense.

Please:

1. Attend a special Township of Muskoka Lakes Council meeting this Friday July 3, 2015 at 1:00 pm, in the Council Chambers in Port Carling.
   This is short notice, but events are happening quickly, please come out, this is important.
    
2. Do come visit our FUNdraiser this Saturday July 4, 2015 any time from 8:00 am to 2:00 pm, but DO NOT ENTER Margaret Burgess Park or wear your Save the Bala Falls T-shirts as you enter Don’s Bakery.
    
3. Note that the proponent has not given permission for the Moon River Property Owners Association’s Canada Day party free cupcake, ice cream and fireworks event this Saturday July 4, so this event has been cancelled.
    
4. Check out Rob Stewart’s article in the Huffington Post and video introducing his work to save the Bala falls and his Indiegogo campaign to raise funds to produce a more detailed documentary and to support SaveTheBalaFalls.com

Detail

Proponent reneges and says NO TRESPASSING to all of Margaret Burgess Park on Saturday
The Township of Muskoka Lakes passed a resolution on May 15, 2015 accepting the proponent’s offer that the proponent would not use or impact Margaret Burgess Park in return for using the Township’s Portage Landing (the land south of the proposed construction site) for the two years of their proposed construction.

That is, the proponent agreed they would not use or impact Margaret Burgess Park (which is the Crown land owned by the Ministry of Natural Resources, directly north of the Bala north falls).

However, earlier this week the proponent sent out two Notices of Trespass:

• This notice not allowing SaveTheBalaFalls.com “or its guests” to use Margaret Burgess Park (or Diver’s Point, or the land beside Purk’s Place).
• This notice not allowing the Moon River Property Owners Association to use Margaret Burgess Park for their 5^th annual free Canada Day party, which includes cupcakes, ice cream, and fireworks, and to which they invited everyone.

 Both notices stated:

• “you and your group are not, under any circumstances, permitted access to, nor permitted to use for any public gathering or event, any of the following list of provincially owned property in Bala”
• “If you do not comply with the above, the Ontario Provincial Police (‘OPP’) will be contacted and instructed to arrest you and to charge you with an offence.”
• “No further warnings will be given.”

As both SaveTheBalaFalls.com and MRPOA have run similar events in Margaret Burgess Park in the past, clearly the proponent has already reneged on their agreement to not impact Margaret Burgess Park, and this is even before they start their proposed construction. Further, the proponent refused:

• Provide evidence that they have the authority to issue these Notices of Trespass.
• To tell us to whom we need to request permission and how much in advance.
• To tell us for what events permission is now required to use Margaret Burgess Park (for example, it is also used for Church picnics, weddings, and bus-loads of tourists).

It appears the proponent thinks they are running the town and don’t have to answer to anyone.

We need to let the Township of Muskoka Lakes Council know that the proponent is not honouring their agreement. Please attend the Council meeting tomorrow, Friday July 3, 2015 at 1:00 pm in Port Carling (1 Bailey Street). We don’t often ask everyone to attend a Council meeting, but this one is important, and as this issue is not on the Agenda, we need to show there is very strong community interest for this completely inappropriate attempt by the proponent to exert control over this public property.
 

Don’s Bakery
While Don’s Bakery has been a fantastic supporter, their landlord has told them they are not to allow any support of SaveTheBalaFalls.com on their property. So please don’t look like supporters when you go in to support Don’s Bakery.
 

Rob Stewart and Huffington Post
Award-winning documentary film maker Rob Stewart has just had an article published in the Huffington Post and has released a video about his work to save the Bala falls. The purpose of this article and video is to inform people – he has a world-wide audience – about this issue, and to raise funds (through this Indiegogo campaign) for both SaveTheBalaFalls.com and for a longer documentary with more detail about what is wrong with this proposed project.

SaveTheBalaFalls.com

Summary
We have detailed to the Ministry of the Environment many environmentally-significant changes the proponent has made to the plans they had approved several years ago. In response to our concerns, the proponent replied to the Ministry that their changes were minor, but the proponent’s response was written by someone not competent in the areas required, and included false, deceptive, and nonsense statements.

Detail
While the proponent received environmental approval two years ago, they have since made environmentally-significant changes to their plans. They are attempting to use their approval to build something in a manner which was not approved.

Over the past months we have sent several letters detailing these changes, for example:

• This January 8, 2015 letter to the Ministry of the Environment describes some of the proponent’s proposed construction changes, asking that the envronmental significance be assessed through the required Addendum process.
• This March 10, 2015 letter to the Minister of the Environment detailing further environmentally-significant changes, again asking that the proponent be required to submit an Addendum.
• This April 8, 2015 letter to the Minister of the Environment noting that his Ministry has not replied to my letters, and again presenting the concerns.
• This April 17, 2015 letter requests the Minister of the Environment to require the proponent to prepare an Individual Environmental Assessment, as this formally requires the Minister to be involved, as it appears our requests are not actually being received by the Minister.

While the Ministry did not respond to any of these letters, they did forward our April 8, 2015 letter to the proponent, who then provided this May 14, 2015 response, which was forwarded to us with this May 26, 2015 response from the Ministry of the Environment.

The current situation therefore is:

1. We have detailed many environmentally-significant changes the proponent has made to their approved plans.
    
2. The proponent claims their changes were all minor, and the Ministry of the Environment has so far accepted these claims, so has not required the proponent do any further environmental assessment work.
    
3. We have carefully reviewed the proponent’s May 14, 2015 response, and find it:
   • Includes nonsense, and false and deceptive statements.
   • Makes unsubstantiated claims in areas outside of the author’s competence.
   • Demonstrates dishonourable conduct and a complete lack of respect for the public, public input, and the environmental assessment process.

   Our detailed response to the Ministry of the Environment is in this June 15, 2015 letter.

4. We have asked that if the proponent will not provide another Addendum, as this proposed project has enough fundamental major problems, it should be cancelled.
   The provincial government and the taxpayers of Ontario will be comforted to know that according to the Ministry of Natural Resources’ well-written RFP to which the proponent responded, the proponent could not claim costs or expenses as they chose to not honour their commitments and therefore they provided incorrect and misleading statements in their original proposal pursuing the opportunity for this work.
   We await a response from the Ministry of the Environment.