Blog

Photo by Linda HeronPhoto Credit

Category Archives: Lakes & Rivers Improvement Act

Hillsburgh Dam and Bridge Class EA – Part II Order Request

It is imperative that the Town of Erin examines every means possible to make its community more resilient to climate change, and most importantly, to protect its finite freshwater resources and its fishery.  In fact, consideration of climate change was not even mentioned within the EA documentation, and ORA sees this as a major flaw, when it should have been included as a key consideration in the Scoring Matrix.

Continue reading


Decision Notice: Alterations, Improvements & Repairs to Existing Dams, LRIA

Misner Dam, Port Dover

In November of 2015, Ontario Rivers Alliance (ORA) commented on EBR 012-5093,  regarding a Technical Bulletin for the Alterations, Improvements and Repairs of Existing Dams.  You can find our submission on our Blog here.  On March 24, 2016, ORA received a Decision Notice, as well as the approved Technical Bulletin. Continue reading


EBR 012-5093 – LRIA – Alterations, Improvements and Repairs to Existing Dams Technical Bulletin

Twin Falls GS, Abitibi River

ORA is very pleased to offer our comments on this EBR posting regarding the administration of Section 16 of the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA).  However, to our knowledge, no decision has yet been made on the comments ORA submitted in January of 2014, regarding EBR 012-0562, the Technical Bulletins designed to provide guidance for dam location, operation, maintenance, amendments, reporting and approval under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA).  Effective LRIA guidelines and policies are essential to regulating dams and maintaining healthy rivers.

Continue reading


Hydro Impacts 101 – The Trade-offs

MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release:         5 November 2015

Hydro Impacts 101 – The Trade-offs

Significant environmental damage from hydroelectric power generation has been ongoing for many decades in Ontario and in other locations throughout the world, yet the public has been led to believe that it provides a clean and green source of energy because there is no smoke, no ash, and no radiation. Indeed, some mistakenly think that all hydro contributes positively to the climate change issue.  “This report will help to set the record straight on just how clean and green waterpower really is”, said Linda Heron, Chair of the Ontario Rivers Alliance (ORA). Continue reading


Recommended Phosphorus Reduction Targets for Lake Erie

lake-erie-algae-4[2]

Toxic and nuisance algal bloom occurrences in Lake Erie have increased over the past decade. The blooms threaten drinking water quality, increase costs associated with treatment needs, and occasionally force closures of treatment plants. They clog industrial water intake systems, adversely impact commercial and recreational fishing activities and other recreational pursuits, and degrade fish and wildlife habitat and populations.

Environment Canada solicited input on the draft target recommendations of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) Nutrients Annex Subcommittee from June 30 to August 31, 2015. Following consideration of input received, Environment Canada and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will finalize targets by February 2016. Development of binational phosphorus reduction strategies and domestic action plans to meet the objectives for phosphorus concentrations and loading targets in Lake Erie will be developed by 2018.

For more information about the GLWQA please visit Binational.Net(External link).

Submissions:

Download (PDF, 229KB)

Download (PDF, 142KB)


Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act – MNR Technical Bulletins – EBR 012-0562 – ORA Submission

Wabagishik Rapids, Vermilion River

Excerpt:  “Our intention in commenting on these bulletins is to help ensure that waterpower projects developed under the LRIA are not approved until the effects on the environment and aquatic ecosystems are fully identified, understood, and effectively mitigated.  It is also vital that the public has a mandated role and a voice in these processes.

It is also disturbing that the MNR is considering all responsibility for fish habitat and fish passage as out of scope, and is divesting its interests by way of these bulletins, with no clear MNR role mentioned, to the Department of Oceans and Fisheries (DFO).  This is at a time when the federal government has just announced the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the DFO and the National Energy Board (NEB) to relinquish much of its oversight of fish habitat along pipeline corridors.  This news was quietly released just before Christmas, and only highlights the need for the Ontario government to look after its own interests and not rely on federal protection for any of our crown resources.  Unfortunately many elements of these bulletins do the very opposite.  It is even more disturbing that this deferral was carried out despite the Fish Habitat Compliance and Referral Protocols for Ontario which was approved by government and identifies and enables roles for MNR in the matters of fish habitat and fish passage.

The exercise of reviewing these technical bulletins has been very disturbing to say the least.  It is as though the bulletins were written by the waterpower industry instead of MNR. This series of bulletins reflect an abdication of the MNRs responsibilities under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA).

It is ORA’s view that this government must continue to play a strong role in ensuring effective mitigation of the impacts of development to meet their strategic directions for sustainable development; and certainly that will be what Ontario taxpayers expect.  It is vital that these bulletins reflect a commitment for inter-governmental cooperation, in a holistic and collaborative way, to ensure there are no gaps in fulfilling all responsibilities and commitments legislated under LRIA.”

Continue reading


Coordinated Policy Guidance for Waterpower Projects – EBR 012-0290

MOECC Decision Notice – 5 October 2016:  Following the posting of the Proposal Notice on the Environmental Registry, the Ministry decided not to move forward with Coordinated Policy Guidance for Waterpower Projects after considering EBR comments and having discussions both internally and with stakeholders. MOECC continues to look for ways to modernize and improve approvals and permitting for Waterpower Projects in a way that is fully protective of human health and the environment.

MOECC Proposal:  The proposed Coordinated Policy Guidance for Waterpower Projects has been developed by MNR and MOE to clarify roles and responsibilities. The proposed Guidance document provides clarification of Ministry specific roles and responsibilities for waterpower projects, in reviewing and issuing authorizations. This proposed policy guidance does not alter the powers or duties of either ministry in their administration of any Act or regulation.   Ontario Rivers Alliance and Robert MacGregor made the following submissions on this posting: Continue reading


Dam the American Eels, by Gord Miller, ECO

In Ontario, many rivers and streams have been fragmented by dams and hydro-electric stations, creating substantial barriers to fish migration. For example, Ontario Power Generation (OPG) operates 65 hydro-electric stations and 240 dams on 24 river systems. While hydro-electric dams contribute to Ontario’s energy supply, these structures can have damaging effects on aquatic ecosystems and species. Dams can fragment aquatic ecosystems, create barriers to fish migrating upstream, alter river flow and temperature, and kill fish in turbines during downstream passage.

Dams and hydro-electric stations along the St. Lawrence River, such as the Moses-Saunders Power Dam near Cornwall, are considered a threat to the survival of the American eel (Anguilla rostrata) population in Ontario. It is classified as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA).

Eels have a complex life cycle. They are born, spawn and die at sea, have a single breeding population, and some migrate to freshwater to mature. The eel has a vast range on the western side of the Atlantic Ocean from Venezuela to Greenland and Iceland. They migrate great distances throughout their life stages, some travelling as far as 6,000 km. The species’ native Canadian distribution includes all fresh water, estuaries and coastal marine waters that are accessible from the Atlantic Ocean. Juvenile eels (elver) migrate through the St. Lawrence River to Lake Ontario, where they mature into silver eels and migrate back to the Atlantic Ocean, to spawn in the Sargasso Sea. More than 25,000 dams block the eels’ freshwater range, from Florida to Ontario.

Eels are an important fishery worldwide, for both Aboriginal traditional use and as a commercial fishery. Eels are harvested at virtually all life stages and in most of their habitats, such as freshwater lakes and rivers, estuaries and marine environments. However, a plummeting eel population forced MNR to close Ontario’s commercial eel fishery in 2004 and the recreational fishery in 2005.

Eels were once abundant in the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario, which by some estimates comprised approximately half the fish biomass in the 1600s. Since the 1970s, the eel population has been declining at an alarming rate and the full causes for the decline are unknown. However, dams have an impact on eel populations in two ways: they restrict access to upstream habitats and cause eel mortality in turbines.

In the St. Lawrence River watershed, over 8,000 dams restrict access to more than 12,000 km2 of freshwater habitat for eels. Two major dams block eel migration from Lake Ontario; the Moses- Saunders Power Dam (which includes the R. H. Saunders Generating Station in Ontario and the Robert Moses dam in New York State) constructed in the 1950s and the Beauharnois dam near Montreal constructed in the 1930s. Both dams were retrofitted with eel ladders in 1974 and 1994, respectively, to facilitate the upward passage of eel migration. Unfortunately, eels migrating downstream are estimated to suffer at least 40 per cent mortality due to passage through turbines.

MNR has monitored eels ascending the Moses-Saunders Dam ladder since its construction. In 1982 and 1983, more than 26,000 eels per day were observed ascending the ladder during peak migration; by 2002, eel passage declined to approximately 55 eels per day. The Lake Ontario Committee of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission issued a statement in 2002 that without management intervention, extirpation of the eel in the Great Lakes Basin is likely and that management actions within the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario should be taken to reduce eel mortality at all life stages and to encourage safe, effective upstream and downstream migration.

In 2007, eels were classified as an endangered species under the ESA. Ontario Regulation 242/08 under the ESA exempts hydro-electric generating stations from the prohibitions against killing and habitat destruction if an agreement is entered into with the Minister of Natural Resources. While all other stations have a three-year grace period to enter into an agreement, the R. H. Saunders Generating Station had one year (until June 2009) to enter into an agreement respecting eels.

In June 2009, the Minister of Natural Resources entered into a 20-year agreement with OPG under the ESA respecting eels at the R.H. Saunders Generating Station. The agreement includes a five-year implementation plan consisting of a trap and transport project (to capture, transport and release large eels upstream and downstream of the generating station), a juvenile eel stocking program (to supplement natural recruitment loss) into the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario, and requirements to operate and maintain the existing eel ladder. Under the agreement, OPG is required to implement and monitor the effectiveness of the implementation plan. MNR will audit OPG at least once a year to review compliance with the agreement.

It is noteworthy that the eel recovery strategy and the government’s response were not finalized prior to this agreement. The ECO believes that the agreement should be amended if necessary to reflect both documents once they are completed. While the agreement appears to mitigate some of the effects of the hydro-electric station on eels (e.g., stocking and transporting eels), it does not effectively address the protection and recovery of eels. For example, the agreement’s pilot trap and transport program superficially addresses safe downstream migration of eels – it artificially relocates eels that may or may not be ready to migrate. An amended, strengthened agreement would emphasize safe, natural migration of eels downstream, such as the installation of bypass structures or altering the timing of operation (turn off turbines at night during migration) to reduce turbine mortality.

Safe and effective natural passage of eels, both upstream and downstream, must be addressed at dams along the St. Lawrence River and tributaries if Ontario’s eel population is to recover. Given these concerns, the ECO cautions MNR in using this agreement as a template for other hydro-electric stations where eels are present. Although the Moses-Saunders and Beauharnois dams have eel ladders to help migration upstream, there are many dams in Ontario with no fish or eel ladders. For example, the Ottawa River is blocked by 12 hydro-dams, none of which are equipped with an eel ladder. Fragmented rivers and streams have damaging effects on the survival of many other aquatic species: dams prevented Atlantic salmon from reaching their spawning grounds, and were considered to be a significant factor in their decline and ultimate extirpation from Lake Ontario.

The ECO believes that MNR should require, through approvals issued under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA), that all new dams facilitate natural passage of fish by installing fish ladders or other similar structures. In addition, MNR should require all existing dams to be retrofitted with fish ladders or other similar structures to facilitate safe and natural migration along the course of all Ontario’s streams and rivers, through LRIA approvals for improvement or repair to dams.

Read original article here.


Navigable Waters Protection Act: Lakes and Creeks: Government – CBC Radio 1

 In Question Period today, Transport Minister Denis Lebel was once again answering questions about the environmental impact of the changes he plans to make to the Navigable Waters Protection Act.We had hoped to ask the Minister some questions of our own on Tuesday. That’s when news broke that ninety percent of the ninety-seven lakes that will continue to be covered by the law are either inside, or lapping against, Conservative ridings.We didn’t hear back from the Minister’s office. But we did talk to the Ottawa Citizen reporter who broke the story.

That conversation led to this e-mail from Joan and Larry McFarlane, who have a cottage on Skeleton Lake, a hundred-and-fifty kilometres northeast of Edmonton.

“What protections were in place for the thousands of lakes before this change? Can we access a list of the old and new protected lakes. We don’t recall any mention of lakes in Saskatchewan or Alberta. Also, how did the government decide which lakes to include now? We would really like some more info on all this.”

You and me three, Joan and Larry McFarlane.

We’ve got a list of the bodies of water that made the cut. We’ll get that up on our Facebook page.

For the rest, we’re hoping Nathan Gorall can help. He’s a Director General at Transport Canada. We reached Mr. Gorall in Ottawa.

Listen to CBC Taped Interview – Part Three



Sign a Petition

 

Dam Decommissioning

Modify or add your own comments in the petition below (optional)

[signature]

Share this with your friends: