Save the Bala Falls

1. How will the economy of Bala be affected?
   SIGNIFICANTLY! – Bala’s main source of revenue is tourism. 18 months of construction and traffic interruption would deter people from visiting the town. It will take years to get those people back as they would have adopted alternative destinations.
   Bala had experience with a situation like this about 10 years ago with the construction of the sewers which made tourists and cottagers avoid Bala and had a serious negative economic impact on the town from which Bala only slowly recovered.
2. Will the farmers’ market operate during construction?
   NOT LIKELY! – the Canadian Shield parking area would be commandeered by THE PROPONENT during construction for a materials and heavy equipment storage area.
3. Will Cranberry Festival be affected?
   UNKNOWN! – no assessment completed.
4. Will the extra traffic and visitors on long weekends and holidays be affected?
   UNKNOWN! – no traffic pattern assessment completed.

1. Is this a “Done Deal”?
   NO! – We need to continue to document the numerous negative effects this proposal would have on the environmental, social, cultural and economic life of Bala. We need to make this known to the Minister of the Environment who can cancel the project. We need to raise money to pay environmental specialists and lawyers to achieve a “bump up” for Swift River’s screening assessment expected to be completed either in December 2008 or early next year. Please see http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/env_reg/ea/English/General_info/PartIIOrders.htm
2. How long will this construction take?
   WE DON’T KNOW FOR SURE. While estimates differ, the proponent’s projection is 18 months, barring unforeseen problems. They would plan to start construction in November 2009, completing before May 24 weekend in 2011. But – have you ever seen a complex construction project completed on time?
3. Would this newly generated power be used in Bala?
   NO! – It just goes directly into the power grid.
4. What is the mechanism for accountability?
   At present, there appears to be:
   • NO MECHANISM for accountability.
   • NO RECOURSE should the economy of our town be damaged.
   • NO RESPONSIBILITY assumed by the town, district, province, proposed developer, or proposed operator.
5. Do the risks of this project outweigh the benefits of the power production?
   YES! – Sacrificing the environmental, social, cultural and economic health of our community cannot be justified by the relatively tiny amount power generated. See the Independent Electricity System Operator, a not-for-profit corporate entity established in 1998 by the Electricity Act of Ontario.

   The ISSUES we have with this project are:

   a) Socio-economic

   • The lives of the permanent town community would be seriously disrupted – negatively affecting the economy and social events.
   • The cottage/waterfront community would be affected by unnatural fluctuations in water levels and dangerous and fast water currents.
   • Restricted access to the town dock.
   • Restricted swimming and scuba diving.

   b) Engineering

   • Safety – many traditional boating and swimming areas would become dangerous. Ambulances, fire departments and police would be delayed by construction traffic congestion and stoppages for trucks and blasting.
   • Water flow and lake levels – fast water would make many areas dangerous for recreation. The water levels would no longer be managed by the MNR, but by an absentee for-profit landlord.

   c) Environmental

   • Fish habitat near both sides of the falls would be destroyed.
   • Noise, dust, traffic congestion, blasting, and trucking would make Bala a less-than-desirable tourism destination.
6. Who would benefit financially from this exploitation of Ontario’s water resources?
   Principally Swift River Energy Limited and Lakeland Power.

   BALA GETS NOTHING and LOSES HER MOST IMPORTANT ASSET.

7. Has the proponent completed an economic impact study?
   NO! – The developer stated at their presentation to the Moon River Property Owners Association that they are not required to do an economic impact study. This is one of the reasons we will be requesting a “bump up” to the more detailed Environmental Assessment Review.

The initial draft/potential/possible plan provided for the power station building was as shown below (click on any of these images for a larger view):
While ugly and just waiting for the grafitti to appear some night, it is a realistic view of the size and shape of some of what the station would need to have: ventilation louvres, fencing, concrete, a huge concrete rectangle as the view from the Moon River – and it would dominate the panorama as you look across the falls from the picnic area on the north side.

Then the developer thought that by piling rocks up the side we would think the entire power station was buried, and they provided this fantasy-land rendering:
They seem to have now agreed this was completely not to scale and omitted some important details.

So this next rendering was provided. They now seem to agree that even Muskoka trees are not going to grow out of the concrete top, and a fence will be required along the side so people don’t fall down the 15′ of rocks piled steeply up the side of the station (hey, how did they “forget” to include the required downstream safety boom):
While pleasing to look at, this rendering is still fraudulently deceptive; it is completely not to scale (compare it to the top image, which is real-world), makes it look like the rocks piled up the side of the concrete bunker are Muskoka bedrock, neglects to show the 50′-wide water intake upstream. So look at the next image…

As you can see from our marked-up image below, their most-recent rendering is still more wishful thinking than reality. Please click on the image to review some of the omissions for yourself:

Due to their possible liability, and due to fatalities that have occured, Ontario Power Generation has a publicity campaign to warn people about the dangers of hydroelectric dams and stations.

We understand that perhaps these warnings may have been intended for larger stations, narrower rivers, or that perhaps the proposed power station would never be operated remotely or automatically, but right now, we don’t know.

Firstly, in the poster above, note the many warning signs – not a pretty, or comforting sight!

Next is some text, copied directly from from OPG’s Stay Safe, Stay Clear brochure.

• Dams and hydroelectric stations are not recreation areas. Be wise not to treat hydroelectric facilities as fishing holes, boating areas or swimming areas. These areas are not safe for any recreational activities, including camping, picnicking or even winter activities such as snowmobiling or cross-country skiing.
• Stay Clear, Stay Safe, around dams, hydroelectric stations and surrounding waterways.
• Stay out of dry or calm riverbeds below dams. They can quickly change into rapidly flowing waterways with dangerous currents
• Stay a safe distance outside of warning signs, buoys, booms and barriers and be alert for changes in water levels.
• remotely-operated dam gates can quickly turn calm waters or dry riverbeds into dangerous flows.
• Getting too close to dams and hydroelectric stations is always dangerous. A spot that seems calm and safe one moment can turn into a dangerous surge of rising and fast-flowing water – quickly and often without any warning.
• Our operators can’t see you: Most facilities are remotely-controlled by operators many kilometers away. They open or close dams, to manage river flows, and start or stop generators throughout the day and night as demand for electricity rises and falls.
• This may result in frequent, rapid and dangerous changes in water levels and flows, changes that can harm those who venture too close.
• In areas above and below dams, fast-moving water creates dangerous turbulence and strong undercurrents which are not always apparent from the calm looking surface waters.
• BE ALERT: Even if you can’t see a generating station or dam, waterways upstream and downstream can still be affected by their operations. It’s important to be aware of the potential dangers caused by changing flows, and stay clear of waters near stations and dams.
• Don’t find yourself on thin ice: Winter brings more dangers. Ice forming near a dam or hydroelectric station can be thinner and less consistent than ice in other locations because of changing water flows beneath it.
• Avoid snowmobiling, cross-country skiing, skating or ice fishing on rivers or lakes near dams and generating stations.
• Don’t risk walking onto a river or lake around dams and generating stations where the ice may be thin due to the current. Changing water levels can crack the ice, leaving it weak and unstable.
• Please respect the hazards near our dams and stations, and obey all warning signs, booms, buoys, and barriers. They are there for your protection.

Hundreds of people came to our meeting in the Bala Community Centre on September 14, 2008 (click on the image for a larger view).

Mitchell Shnier’s presentation is here