Engineer's Letter poses a sticky wicket

Essentially the Kipawa can be lost due to this man's interpretation stamped with his engineer's stamp. Anybody that has ever run the Kipawa River at the dam and enjoyed it should provide him with their own evidence that his opinion is flawed and a qualification should be reissued to the EA project officers and to Mr. Laport.

Action: as usual urgent action is required: letters should be sent to


Pierre R. Tremblay, Director de projet (Quebec 22603)
Tecsult International Ltd (TIL)
Street 85 St. Catherine Street West
City Montréal, QC H2X 3P4
Country Canada
Telephone (+1) 514 - 287 85 00
Facsimile (+1) 514 - 287 86 30
E-Mail webmestre@tecsult.com
Internet www.tecsult.com


Dear Mr. Tremblay,

RE:Letter to R. Laport dated June 15, Ref: 0513337-3000

Further to my telephone discussion with you I must ask your indulgence. Your letter to the Mr. Laporte forms the basis for the argument in the Environmental Assessment of the Laniel Dam Refurbishment that the dam is not safe for navigation. I take strong exception to your position.

You may now be aware that in complete opposition to your statement to Mr. Laporte, "Ces conditions ne permettent pas le passage sécuritare d'embarcations quelles qu'en soit le type" kayaks, rafts and canoes have been navigating the Kipawa River at the location of the Laniel dam since 1967 and specifically for the last 19 years of the Kipawa River Rally, held each June in which hundreds of persons have engaged safely in this activity.

I think it would be fair to issue a qualification to your remarks. They aren't based on anything except ignorance or fear of the unknown. Mind you, I don't say that everyone should engage in this activity either, but to say it is unsafe for everyone is absolutely false.

We have a right of navigation of the Kipawa River through a period of longstanding regardless of your opinion and the recreation paddling community will work hard to preserve it including filing a formal complaint to the engineering society unless you qualify your opinion to reflect the reality of the situation. You should at least consult the views of experts in whitewater recreation safety and I can arrange to give you that information.

Here is one example:

Gary Lacy, P.E.
Scott Shipley, Engineer
Recreation Engineering and Planning
485 Arapahoe Ave
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303) 545-5883
(303) 819-3985 (Scott Cell)
http://www.wwparks.com/


Mr. Tremblay, there is much at stake here.

I wanted to try and explain the Navigability issue a bit further.

The Navigable Water's Protection Act is drafted to protect the public's right to navigate our waterways. The navigability of the dam at Laniel is a matter of fact and a matter of law. It has been used commercially (rafts) and recreactionally safely for over 20 years. If navigability of the dam can be maintained, then so can navigability of the entire river since that is where the water is coming from.

We don't want to wait until the water is turned off (diverted) to act. Actually what we want to do is bump up the issue of navigability of the dam to the level of a Federal Court Action to raise general awareness of the issues surrounding the Kipawa. Tabaret and Energex projects are still looming in the wings, in fact the Quebec Government is poised to announce its ruling on Tabaret. These are diversion projects.

Man made structures like dams are navigated at Laniel, Minden, the Magnetawan, the Achigan and Bonnybrook in Quebec,the Moose River in New York, I believe, also one on the St. Lawrence at Long Sault. Its not a new thing, but it is a right of Canadians, part of our national heritage. If we give up that right, without even a whimper it won't be easily won back.

I appreciate your feedback on this issue because ultimately we'll need to address concerns like those you've expressed and we have to raise funds to pay for the court action. I estimate it cost as much as $30,000 to fund the court action which is a Judicial Review of the Transport Minister's Decision and Writ of Mandamus requiring the Minister of Transport to enforce the act to preserve navigability.

See the following past action: lost but instructive: http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fct/2002/2002fct421.shtml

Humber Environmental Action Group and Minster of Fisheries and Oceans.

In that case the judge ruled:

"And at paragraph 93:
I therefore conclude that the record as it stands does not allow the Court to conclude that the primary condition for the Navigable Waters Protection Act, supra, to apply, that is, the navigability of the Eastmain River, has been established. The Minister of Transport could not exercise any decision-making power which would trigger the application of the Order before being persuaded of the navigability of the watercourse."


The current design for the redesigned dam at Laniel has a top release spillway on the south gate much like the current, except it also has a spillway, a rounded hump which accorting to Scott Shipley, a whitewater design engineer from boulder Colorado does not conform to contemporary design features.

What a great opportunity for Public Works canada to assist the local community of Laniel and benefit tourism in the Temiskaming area. The largest group of tourist are the annual groups of paddlers who tour the Kipawa each year. Ask the Mayor of Laniel and local depanneur.The largest tourism event in Laniel is the Annual Kipawa river festival attracting hundreds of paddlers on the Saint Jean Baptist weekend , and other weekends from April to Octobre.
The local community of Laniel with the assistance of the kayaking community, Volet11 program, the MRC Laniel, and Tembec have spent over $100,000 to enhance the Kipawa river experience with the re-creation of a river walking trail.

Now would be a good time for Public Works to do their share and at the minimum investigate the possibility of creating a paddler and navigable dam to continue to add value to the tourism industry for Laniel.

Imagine enhancing a natural" Disneyland" in northern Qubec creating tourism dollars and local jobs and all by having some foresight. Adding a shute for boats is not that different then when dams added sluices for logs. The money is not in logs anymore but in tourism, so please stop thinking like the engineers who wish to create a proven unsafe bottom flow , automated dam controlled offsite in Montreal to the hydro demands from the USA. Let us keep the American and Quebec and Ontario paddlers coming to Laniel instead of creating a dam that will stop this inflow of tourist dollars. Olympic paddling sites were created specifically for paddlers and cost hundred of millions of dollars. You have it in your power to maintain a unique natural paddling experience. The small investment in catering to the tourism industry in Laniel will be paid back for generations to come. Remember that your decision will affect the next three generations if this new dam lasts as long as the present one.

You have the opportunity to do right. Consult the stakeholders other than engineers, like the paddlers, fishermen, hunters and local businesses who are your real constituants.

This work Les Amis are doing, and especially me as president, is arduous, thankless and time consuming. I consider the issue of Navigability to be our one last stand. If we lose this fight, it will be hard to win any other concerning rivers, we'll lose the Kipawa and have no one to blame but ourselves. We may lose the fight, but it won't be because I didn't do everything I could do.

Please reconsider your statements concerning navigability. I look forward to your response to this matter which I consider quite important and serious.

Pete
FYI: http://www3.sympatico.ca/kayaky/peter.htm


cc Kim Turnbull and Gilles Brasseur
Robert Laporte[/b]

Back to top

Peter Karwacki
Guest





subject: Scott Shipley suggests countermeasures



Make them an offer they can't refuse

First of all, I hope that there is some way to go forward without going to court. These fights can be long and difficult and often no one feels like a winner. I would also particularly recommend against attacking anyone’s professional licensure. I think that, often, the best way to go forward is to try and emphasize the positives of these projects in lieu of going the other way.

Secondly, if we know their budget under the current design and whether or not we could offer to take over a part of the project for the same budget. I.E. if they have a scour pad and bank protection that will cost xxx maybe we could create a navigable bypass for the same $$’s. Just a thought.

Lastly, maybe there is a way to sell them on the benefits of these projects in terms of community, economic effect, etc.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today Mr. Tremblay, by telephone refused accept the video evidence which contradicted his opinion to Mr. Robert Laport Project administrator of the Laniel Dam Refurbishment.

In refusing he said,

" Give it to Mr. Laporte and see if he will give it to me"

Wow.

Our only recourse at this point is to write a letter of complaint concerning both Mr. Laporte and Mr. Tremblay to the Quebec Engineering society.

My latest communication with Kim Turnbull the project officer for our EA is that they now have the Kipawa River DVD entered into the EA registry.

They are consulting with their legal advisors concerning this whole matter of the stamped opinion letter from Mr. Tremblay and our request for documentation concerning injuries at the dam and any internal memos and discussion memorandum.


As I've mentioned, the Kipawa is a last stand, what other river has the history, the heritage and value. Let's draw the line at the Kipawa and fight the good fight




The Syndic, Office of the Syndic
Ordere des ingénieurs du Québec
Windsor Station of Montreal
Suite 350,
1100 de la Gauchetière West,
Montreal, Quebec
H3B 2S2

BY FAX 514-845-7780

Dear Sirs :

Regarding : Professional Conduct of Mr. Pierre Tremblay registration #22603

I am asking the Syndic, the professional body of oversight of Quebec’s Engineers to review a recent case involving Mr. Tremblay.

Mr. Tremblay has issued an opinion while in the employ of Tecsult International for his client, Robert Laporte of Public Works, Goods and Services Canada on the question of Navigability of the Kipawa River at the Dam in Laniel. I’ve attached his letter of Opinion currently filed in the registry of the Environmental Assessment of the Laniel Dam Refurbishment.

I’m sending a copy of the letter I recently forwarded to Mr. Tremblay.

I also have a DVD showing the Kipawa River being safely navigated by canoes, kayaks and rafts during one of the recently held Kipawa River Festivals in Laniel. My colleague Dave Pollard asked Mr. Tremblay if he would be interested in reviewing it and received a flat refusal.

My concern is that Mr. Tremblay has issued an Unqualified Opinion on the navigability of the Kipawa River at the Laniel Dam and used his registration as an engineer in Quebec to add credibility to his opinion the use of which in this case is unethical, and unprofessional.

I’ve asked for a qualifying statement from Mr. Tremblay as a remedial action as you can see from the attached letter which was faxed to him on November 9th, 2005.

Your consideration of this matter is extremely important to members of the whitewater paddling community as Mr. Tremblay’s opinion weighs heavily on the Environmental Screening report which will be issued and reviewed as it will unduly influence the Decision of the Canadian Minister of Transport in granting his approval for the refurbishment of the dam at Laniel without qualifications.

Yours Truly,

Peter Karwacki
1620 Trenholm Lane
Ottawa, Ontario
K4A 4B6


Peter, good to see you keeping up the good work.

If I could just make an appeal to paddlers to NOT mention the dam at Minden as part of this letter writing campaign. Technically, running that dam is illegal. My conversations with OPP officers have led me to believe that "staying under the radar" is the best way to ensure that we can keep running it without threat of prosecution. Including it in the letter writing campaign is pretty high profile.


The General membership of Whitewater Ontario in ratifying the decision of WO's executive has pledged $10,000 to support a Les Amis challenge of the Laniel Dam refurbishment if necessary via judicial Review. The president of WO, Cam McDiarmid is going to ask other provincial paddling associations to anti up matching funds.

They see this as fundamental to the question of recreational use of navigable waterways and they see that the dam at Minden could be affected by the outcome. Further they recognized the long history of NOLAC, and Les Amis and their membership with the activities of Whitewater Ontario.

At Les Amis Special General meeting in Montreal on December 3rd the LES AMIS membership will be asked to help pilot our strategy for the next two to six months.

The contract is now awarded



A contract of 13 406 560 $ for the rebuilding of the Laniel stopping OTTAWA, November 7, 2005 - The honourable Jean-C. Lapierre, Minister for Transport and political lieutenant for Quebec, in the name of honourable Scott Brison, public Minister for Labour and governmental Services, announced today the attribution of a granted contract of 13 406 560 $, following an invitation to tender, with the company David S. Laflamme Construction Inc for the rebuilding of the Laniel stopping, which is located at Laniel (Quebec). Work, which aims at replacing the concrete crest gate and the riprap dam of the stopping, will end in autumn 2007. "By replacing the stopping, the government of Canada ensures the best possible investment for the Canadian taxpayers, declared the Lapierre minister. Public works and governmental Services Canada (TPSGC) took time to examine all the options well, and it held of vast consultations before beginning work of replacement of the stopping. The project will be carried out with a view to the environment and according to the principle of durability. One will collaborate with the community to ensure the good course of the process of repair "the Laniel stopping was established in 1911 by the federal ministry of Public works to allow navigation on the river of Outaouais and the energy production. The stopping controls the discharge of river of Outaouais starting from the Kipawa tank located in Témiscamingue, in Quebec. Even if Public works and governmental Services Canada (TPSGC) ensured the servicing of the stopping, the Ministry carries out the rebuilding of the Laniel stopping to ensure the safety of the neighbouring communities. Before allotting this contract, TPSGC held of the meetings of consultation targeted with members of the community, groups of leisures, First Nations and general public to take care that the concerns of those are taken into account. The Ministry also carried out an environmental evaluation to avoid the effects on the habitat of fish and the abrasion in the sector of work of rebuilding. TPSGC will work with the surrounding municipalities and Hydro-Quebec to take care that measurements necessary to the protection of the people and the goods located at the neighbourhoods of the Kipawa tank, the Gordon brook and the town of Témiscaming are taken during and after the building work. For more information on the projects of markets of the government of Canada, consult www.merx.com, the electronic service of invitations to tender of Canada.

Now the original french:

OTTAWA, le 7 novembre 2005 –

L’honorable Jean-C. Lapierre, ministre des Transports et lieutenant politique pour le Québec, au nom de l’honorable Scott Brison, ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux, a annoncé aujourd’hui l’attribution d’un contrat de 13 406 560 $ octroyé, à la suite d’un appel d’offres, à l’entreprise David S. Laflamme Construction Inc. en vue de la reconstruction du barrage Laniel, qui est situé à Laniel (Québec). Les travaux, qui visent à remplacer l’évacuateur en béton et la digue en enrochement du barrage, prendront fin en automne 2007.

« En remplaçant le barrage, le gouvernement du Canada assure le meilleur investissement possible pour les contribuables canadiens, a déclaré le ministre Lapierre. Travaux Publics et Services gouvernementaux Canada (TPSGC) a pris le temps de bien exa-miner toutes les options, et il a tenu de vastes consultations avant de commencer les travaux de remplacement du barrage. Le projet sera réalisé dans le souci de l’environnement et selon le principe de la durabilité. On collabo-rera avec la collectivité pour assurer le bon déroulement du processus de réfection. »
Le barrage Laniel a été établi en 1911 par le ministère fédéral des Travaux publics pour permettre la navigation sur la rivière des Outaouais et la production d’énergie. Le barrage contrôle le débit de la rivière des Outaouais à partir du réservoir Kipawa situé dans le Témiscamingue, au Québec. Même si Travaux publics et Services gouvernementaux Canada (TPSGC) a assuré l’entretien courant du barrage, le Ministère procède à la reconstruction du barrage Laniel pour assurer la sécurité des collectivités avoisinantes.

Avant d’attribuer ce contrat, TPSGC a tenu des séances de consultation ciblées avec des membres de la collectivité, des groupes de loisirs, des Premières Nations et du grand public pour veiller à ce que les préoccupations de ceux-ci soient prises en compte. Le Ministère a également procédé à une évaluation environnementale pour éviter les répercussions sur l’habitat du poisson et le frai dans le secteur des travaux de reconstruction. TPSGC travaillera avec les municipalités environnantes et Hydro-Québec pour veiller à ce que les mesures nécessaires à la protection des personnes et des biens situés aux alentours du réservoir Kipawa, du ruisseau Gordon et de la ville de Témiscaming soient prises pendant et après les travaux de construction.
Pour plus de renseignements sur les projets de marchés du gouvernement du Canada, consultez www.merx.com, le service électronique d’appels d’offres du Canada.

s it worth it to carry on? Good question. Les Amis will have to figure out how to balance the $ and time output for maintaining the runnability of an artificial drop on a river with lots of great natural drops. I would like it to stay runnable, but there may be other fights to fight.




The question now rests with paddling clubs, groups, associations, civil activists, and their ilk who must anti up in terms of cash support.

For the record, I could get no support in cash from the Sierra Club or the Sierra Legal Defense Fund. Elizabeth May, order of Canada, would not return my mail or phone calls.

FQCKEV has no money. The AWA has their own problems. The Mayor of Laniel, just wants the project to get started.

But Whitewater Ontario has pledged $10,000 in support... not enough.

So...

Here we have past practice and a right accummulated over 20 years with a record of safety by recreational users.

We have a government averse to excess liability coupled with a stubborn bureaucracy, tight lipped and uncooperative.

We have closed minded participants with irreconcilable differences.

Les Amis will meet December 3 in Montreal, and decide whether or not to file for judicial review. Our case is strong, none better for recreational users of navigable waterways in recent history. And our cause is just.

The result, creation of jurisprudence, the basis of our legal system, would affect so many other future cases preserving the right of Canadians to paddle navigable waterways and not simply "walk around". Now is the time to act but, as I've always said, Canadians deserve what they get.

So I ask you all, is it worth it?

Pete







If you have oblique or other contacts with benevolent organizations or individuals consider making an appeal on our behalf.

Here is a sample pitch. (also don't forget our special meeting in Montreal December 3rd , 10:00 AM 6925 Rue Lacroix

Would this issue be of any interest to the your organization?

The river preservation group, Les Amis de la Riviere Kipawa wants to preserve the public's long standing right to navigate the Kipawa River at the Laniel Dam but the really big issue is the fundamental right of canadians to navigate our lakes and rivers and the applicability of the Navigable Waters Protection act for recreational use, and the need for third party mediation in the environmental assessment process.

See

www.kipawariver.ca

And for more detailed information:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/kayaky/NOLAC.htm

We've already raised about $18,000 for a judicial review in Federal Court which includes $10,000 from Whitewater Ontario. Just recently the Canadian Minister of Transport has issued his approval for the refurbishment of the Laniel dam which includes a design which is not navigable. PWGSC, dam owner/operator does not want anybody navigating the river through the dam at Laniel. An Environmental Screening report has been issued and the mitigation to paddlers has been identified by the bureaucrats as "walk around" in spite of 40 years of safe navigation of the Kipawa River at the dam by raft, kayak and canoe.

The rationale: excessive liability to the crown.

We think that the Minister of Transport's decision should be sent to judicial review with reference to his responsibility under the Navigable Waters Protection Act to maintain the right of Canadians to Navigate the Kipawa river and review the rather slanted environmental review done by PWGSC on its own project.

We need some cash, legal advice and moral support. Interested?

People ask Me, "So what can I/we do?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

People often ask me what they can do to help the cause of Les Amis and of the Kipawa.

Here are some suggestions:

Pete

1: Make a personal appeal for financing for the Judicial Review of the Minister of Transport's project approval:
Would this issue be of any interest to thyour organization? The river preservation group, Les Amis de la Riviere Kipawa wants to preserve the public's long standing right to navigate the Kipawa River at the Laniel Dam but the really big issue is the fundamental right of canadians to navigate our lakes and rivers and the applicability of the Navigable Waters Protection act for recreational use, and the need for third party mediation in the environmental assessment process.

See

www.kipawariver.ca

And for more detailed information:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/kayaky/NOLAC.htm

We've already raised about $18,000 for a judicial review in Federal Court which includes $10,000 from Whitewater Ontario. Just recently the Canadian Minister of Transport has issued his approval for the refurbishment of the Laniel dam which includes a design which is not navigable. PWGSC, dam owner/operator does not want anybody navigating the river through the dam at Laniel. An Environmental Screening report has been issued and the mitigation to paddlers has been identified by the bureaucrats as "walk around" in spite of 40 years of safe navigation of the Kipawa River at the dam by raft, kayak and canoe.

The rationale: excessive liability to the crown.

We think that the Minister of Transport's decision should be sent to judicial review with reference to his responsibility under the Navigable Waters Protection Act to maintain the right of Canadians to Navigate the Kipawa river and review the rather slanted environmental review done by PWGSC on its own project.

We need some cash, legal advice and moral support. Interested?

2: Other activities

The best thing paddlers can do to help the cause of the Kipawa:

1. attend the rally and bring others including non paddlers to attend and buy beer and have fun

2. write your MP /MNA and raise the issue and post your objections -1 letter = 200 who didn't write

3. Write Thierry Vandal the CEO of Hydro Quebec strongly opposing the 132 MW standard decrying the use of "diversion" as the most environmentally

inappropriate method of power production

4. Write Jean Charest, Premier of Quebec protesting that either the algonquin or the tabaret project will eliminate all other values on the Kipawa River by turning it into a dry gulch.

5. See if you can get other allied groups interested by showing your own interest, ie the Sierra Defense Fund, Earthwild, MEC, and so on.

6. Demand further consultation

7. Currently we are at the point where we need to sway public opinion and raise awareness. We may launch a Writ of Mandamus action against the Minister of Transport to get the court to require him to rule that the Kipawa is navigable and such navigability must be protected, under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. However, if all else fails, don't get mad, simply disrupt, foment, and protest. Have you read "the monkey wrench gang" by Edward Abbey?

8.Action Alert: Help preserve recreational opportunities on the Kipawa: Laniel Dam Refurbishment threatens the "Dam" run.

While Hydro Quebec continues to be a threat to paddling opportunities enjoyed by boaters from Canada and the US. We have reached a major decision point with the Tabaret project and have an opportunity to kill a hydro proposal that threatens one of the finest whitewater resources in Eastern North America.

A key initiative in this strategy is to ensure that the Kipawa River remains naviable at the Laniel Dam. We want to keep that water flowing through there.

This run is a classic road trip destination that is enjoyed by paddlers from around the world, has been featured in kayaking films, and has sections suitable for intermediate paddlers. It is a true classic. This action alert comes to us from Peter Karwacki, a well-known environmentalist and river protection advocate. Letters to the individuals listed below would be a significant help in documenting recreational interest in this river (if you can send e-mails now, then send hard copies later, that would be the best thing). Quick action now will preserve this incredible whitewater resource for future generations. The Kipawa has been featured in whitewater videos, and is a FANTASTIC whitewater resource.

Note:

Navigability Definition

Navigability The determination of whether or not a waterway is actually considered navigable rests solely with the Minister or his/her designated representative. For the convenience of applicants the following administrative definition is provided:

Navigable Waters include any body of water capable, in its natural state, of being navigated by floating vessels of any description for the purpose of transportation, recreation or commerce; it also includes a canal and any other body of water created or altered for public use, as well as any waterway where the public right of navigation exists by dedication of the waterway for public purposes, or by the public having acquired the right to navigate through long use.

I have been working to convince the Navigable Waters Protection Division (NWPD) that we need to have Kipawa River, Laniel Quebec saved as one of the places we do not want to see ANY diversion projects.

We need some IMMEDIATE help with this effort.

We needed the NWPD to attempt to go to bat for the paddlers and say NO. BUT they need as much ammunition as we can provide them, to be able to do so. We have already identified the Kipawa as one of the top rivers in the area. Right now the big-business Quebec Hydro is pressing them. PWGSC is already talking to "others" about divestiture of the refurbished Laniel Dam. Imagine Hydro Quebec as the new owner, able to control the water flow for a more perfect diversion of the Kipawa River!

PLEASE do the following :

Write a letter that outlines your concerns regarding the Kipawa - there is some information at the bottom to assist you in doing so.

Send the letter to the following people - this does not need to be a work of art, or any sort of redneck efforts at bashing the government or the proponent. We need to clearly state some of the key things at the bottom of the page. Please Blind Carbon Copy (BCC) me with your responses.

Get your club to write a letter as well.

We also need letters to the editor, and articles in our local papers.

E-mail the letter to each person individually, and mail them individually to the people below. Try to put your own spin on the words below. YES - this is work, but we have clear indications that this thing can be stopped, if we act together, and act soon. You can be a part of saving this stream - for now and for the future.

Some things that make the Kipawa a spectacular river worth saving as it is:

easy road access to a number of spectacular paddling runs
an incredibly long season
varied opportunities for various skill levels there are easy intermediate runs there are challenging more difficult runs
this is a place you can paddle at any time
the Kipawa has beautiful clear water amazing bedrock exposures, and incredible bank foliage aesthetics that are unmatched by any stream in this area
paddling reaches that are entirely runnable
short portages for those that wish to do the runs without doing the hardest drops
fantastic well-defined features easy access off paved roads
a world-class paddling destination that
you do not want more power lines in the Kipawa River area.

that YOU want a free flowing river. To make your point to local council, also emphasize:

You live and work in this area or you chose this area for whitewater recreation because it is the Outdoor Recreation Capital of Canada - and the Kipawa is a supporting player in the town of Laniel claiming this, that local business depends on recreational draws to this area if applicable that you earn your living in this area from recreational interests - particularly whitewater that you come to this area to recreate because of the opportunities that streams such as the Kipawa offer

The NWPD, and Natural Resources Quebec need to hear this. More importantly you need to tell the Temiskaming MRC.

With the recent call for even more of these projects, it is becoming more important to look to the preservation of some of the finest streams. You need not put forward any earth-shattering points, stay for the entire meeting, or endure long presentations. Come forward and be recognized, and then provide your input (counted as a vote) in opposition to the project. It is key that everyone come, stand up and be counted.

Please circulate this, and encourage everyone to come forward and put forward their opposition to Tabaret and the reconfigured Laniel Dam project which threatens the DAM run. The proponent, Hydro Quebec and PWGSC will be working to have as many people as possible come forward and support the project.


Transport Canada

Quebec Region Regional Superintendent Navigable Waters Protection Transport Canada 101 Champlain Blvd, 3rd Floor Quebec, QC G1K 7Y7 Phone: (418) 648-4549 Fax: (418) 648-7640 Website: http://www.marinfo.gc.ca/en/Services/ppen_loi.asp

Headquarters

Transport Canada 330 Sparks Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0N5 Tel: 613-990-2309 Fax: 613-954-4731 or 613-998-8620 TTY: 1-888-675-6863 Website: http://www.tc.gc.ca

Manager Navigable Waters Protection Marine Safety Transport Canada Tower C, Place de Ville 330 Sparks Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0N8 Phone: 613-990-5929 Fax: 613-998-0637 Website: http://www.tc.gc.ca/marinesafety/Ships-and-operations-standards/nwp

Members of the Temiskaming MRC

villebelleterre@hotmail.com; mun.fug@sympatico.ca; mun.guerin@sympatico.ca; municipalite.laniel@sympatico.ca; muni.latulipe@sympatico.ca; municipalite.laverlochere@sympatico.ca; municipalite.lorrainville@cablevision.qc.ca; munmoffet@sympatico.ca; mrc@mrctemiscamingue.qc.ca; municipalitenedelec@sympatico.ca; municipalitendn@sympatico.ca; mun_remigny@temiscamingue.net; mun.st-bruno-de-guigues@cablevision.qc.ca; municipalitefabre@cablevision.qc.ca; mun.st-eugenes@sympatico.ca; tedraper@sympatico.ca; admintem@vianet.on.ca; vvm.dgst@cablevision.qc.ca; mun.bearn@cablevision.qc.ca

Laniel Municipal contacts

(819) 634-3123 (819) 634-2629 municipalite.laniel@sympatico.ca

Society for the development of temiskaming

Nom Fonction #poste Courriel Aumond Joëlle Agente de suivi 41 joellea_sdt@temiscamingue.net Beaulé Joëlle Agente administrative 22 joelleb_sdt@temiscamingue.net Beauregard Adèle Directrice développement des entreprises 31 adeleb_sdt@temiscamingue.net Beauregard Aline Agente à la direction 21 alineb_sdt@temiscamingue.net Bellehumeur Nadia Conseillère développement des collectivités 24 nadiab_sdt@temiscamingue.net Brunet Beaudry Ann Conseillère développement des entreprises 25 annbb_sdt@temiscamingue.net Falardeau Johane Agente développement Internet 26 webmaster@temiscamingue.net Lamarche Stéphanie Conseillère tourisme 29 stephaniel_sdt@temiscamingue.net Landry Hélène Conseillère en plein air 49 helenel_sdt@temiscamingue.net Lessard Monique Agente de développement en économie sociale 32 moniquel_sdt@temiscamingue.net Lessard Nancy Conseiller financier 23 nancyl_sdt@temiscamingue.net Rannou Josée Directrice au financement 30 joseer_sdt@temiscamingue.net Richer Josiane Agente développement agroalimentaire 51 josianer_sdt@temiscamingue.net St-Pierre Christine Agente de développement aux entreprises et jeunesse 27 christines_sdt@temiscamingue.net Trépanier Guy Directeur général 28 guyt_sdt@temiscamingue.net

Other Important Addresses

Thierry Vandal, CEO,Hydro Québec, 75 boul René Levesque, Montreal, P.Q., H2Z 1A4
Caille.andre@hydro.qc.ca

Minister of Transport
Parliament Hill:
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: (613) 995-7691
Fax: (613) 995-0114
E-Mail: Lapierre.J@parl.gc.ca
Department:
Transport Canada
Place de Ville, Tower C, 29th Floor 330 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N5
Telephone: (613) 991-0700
Fax: (613) 995-0327
E-Mail: mintc@tc.gc.ca


Superintendent
Navigable Waters Protection Program
3rd floor, 901 Cap Diamant
Gare Maritime Champlain
Quebec Qc.
G1K 4K1

Phone (418) 648-5403
Internet demersm@tc.gc.ca

Julie Rousseau
Responsable du Répertoire des barrages

Centre d'Expertise Hydrique du Québec
Direction de la sécurité des barrages
Téléphone: (418) 643-6666 poste 231
Télécopieur: (418) 643-4609
Courrier: julie.rousseau@menv.gouv.qc.ca
http://www.cehq.gouv.qc.ca/

Le Citoyen Rouyn-Noranda, Rouyn-Noranda
819.762-4361 - 819.797.2450 fax
courriel : quebecor@cablevision.qc.ca

La Frontière, Rouyn-Noranda
819.762.4361 - 819.797.2450 fax
courriel : La Frontière, Rouyn-Noranda - quebecor@cablevision.qc.ca



Please let me know if you need any more information.

Sincerely

Peter Karwacki

Les Amis de la Riviere Kipawa Phone/Fax:(807-468-2810 E-mail:kayaky@hotmail.com

UPDATE: Ottawa River Runners Support Les Amis!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The membership of ORR at their AGM last night, held in Ottawa approved the efforts of Les Amis to fight for the access and navigation rights of recreational paddlers.

Their initial donation towards the judicial review case was set at $200.

Here is a note concerning judicial review:

The filing cost is only $50.
The application as it is call, must be filed with the Federal Court Registry within 30 days of notification of the approval of the project. The contract, see above threads, was announced November 7th.

I've asked Ministry of Transport, officials and they are not forthcoming. Osbaldson said, " I don't have the file, you have to speak to Demers".

Just great.

Lips are tighter than a fly's ass in august with the sole intent of defeating us.

Alas we persevere.
Posted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:18 pm
Post subject: Ordre of Engineers of Quebec confirms receipt of request

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In their letter me to I have confirmation that the Order of Engineers of Quebec is currently reviewing my request for oversight of Mr. Tremblay's opinionn letter to Mr. Laporte.

The next step would be the launch of an inquiry, a high powered process, but this would only occur if they felt the complaint had merit.

Les Amis Membership Presses for Mediation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the special meeting of Les Amis on Montreal we considered our options regarding the Judicial Review.

The main point is that the Minister of Transport's decision can only be appealed based on its

1. reasonableness
2. fairness of process
3. unbiased nature

Our case is straightforward, to us, but the governement lawyers will block us at every step, bogging the case down in procedural motions (did the right party get served, is the issue arguable, were the right documents legally files... And so on) each one requiring the intervention of an expensive lawyer.

This means that a case the should only cost $30,000 could cost a lot more.

We know we have a good, and interesting case, and these things don't come up that often. Our moves would benefit all paddling groups but we need them to come forward with funding. Charitiable donations could be funneled through a operation like the Sierra Club or even the Canadian Environmental Action group.

For now we've asked our lawyer to write a letter, identifying the key points of our case, and asking for mediation. Our financial position is not yet finalized to go further than this.

The other thing is that there is no government and won't be until January 23rd or a bit later with the cabinet appointments. Its like limbo.

Most importantly, we've discovered that there are no approvals yet, not for the EA, and not for the refurbishment. Laflamme construction would put themselves in legal jeopardy if they proceed to work without it.

We were concerned about whether or not we had to meet a 30 day time limit from the announcement of the contract to Laflamme on November 7th which have only given us til Wednesday to file. In fact, because MOT may approve "the project" retroactively we could probably be reasonably justified to file our concerns because the issues would not change. But the membership has asked that we try yet again for mediation for the benefit of the government and for us.

Still the Notice of Motion is being refined to mesh with fine points of law. We'll be ready to use it if we must.

Our AGM will be in Montreal on February 4th, at a location to be finalized.

We have this most recent communication from the MOT's office: Dated December 5th for a project awarded November 7th and announced by the Minister of Transport himself on behalf of Scott Brison Minister of PWGSC.

You all figure it out with regard to due process, fairness, reasonableness?



Dear Mr. Karwacki:

On behalf of the Honourable Jean-C. Lapierre, Minister of Transport, I am writing in response to your e-mail of October 31, 2005, which was further to our previous exchanges of correspondence regarding the Laniel Dam on the Kipawa River.

Minister Lapierre has noted your concerns and your willingness to meet to further discuss the Laniel Dam project. As you know, Transport Canada is indeed a Responsible Authority for this project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). The department is collaborating with Public Works and Government Services Canada, the project proponent, to ensure that the environmental assessment considers the measures necessary to mitigate the environmental effects of the project.

Transport Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Public Works and Government Services Canada, the Responsible Authorities for this project, selected screening as the type of environmental assessment to be performed. As you are aware, screening takes into account public comments, such as those you have expressed. I should note that, in this regard, the screening report is not yet finalized. As per Transport Canada's responsibilities under the Navigable Waters Protection Act and the CEAA, the department is still studying the environmental impacts of this project.

Transport Canada appreciates your continued interest in this project. Thank you for writing.

Yours sincerely,


Karine G. Cousineau
Senior Quebec Assistant

the right hand and the left hand are not acquainted

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Karwacki - once again, you are speaking of concerns
surrounding specific operationial project files within the
Province of Quebec which are managed entirely by our Quebec
Office. I have no knowledge of the project to which Ms.
Cousineau refers nor as to whether or not her interpretation of
the events surrounding the project is, in fact, correct.

Again, I refer you to our Quebec Regional Office regarding
answers to these project-specific concerns.

David J. Osbaldeston
National Manager
Navigable Waters Protection Program
Marine Safety, Tower 'C', Place de Ville
330 Sparks Street, 10th Floor, Suite 1055
Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0N8
Telephone: (613) 990-5929
Fax: (613) 998-0637
Cell: (613) 297-1574
e-mail: osbaldd@tc.gc.ca


NWPP Approval - Process


David J. Osbaldeston
National Manager
Navigable Waters Protection Program
Marine Safety, Tower 'C', Place de Ville
330 Sparks Street, 10th Floor, Suite 1055
Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0N8
Telephone: (613) 990-5929
Fax: (613) 998-0637
Cell: (613) 297-1574
e-mail: osbaldd@tc.gc.ca

Much appreciated. In that case let me phrase my questions in a
more general
way.

I learned yesterday, from Karine Cousineau, the past Minister
of
Transport's chief Quebec Assistant that in one certain project,
its
applicable EA was not finalized, that the project was not yet
not approved
under 5(1)a, and yet the Minister of Transport himself announced
the
awarding of the contract prior to its approval, and in doing so
said he was
doing it on behalf of the Minister of PWGSC.

In this regard, don't you think that any reasonable person under
the
circumstances might assume the Minster, in announcing the
awarding of a
contract, was approving it as well since he is the Minister that
is
authorized to approve the project?

Would this be considered standard practice within the Ministry
of Transport?

Is it not true that a company would be in violation of the NWPA
if they
started working on a project without the necessary 5(1)a (NWPA)
approval?

Wouldn't that put the legitmacy of your approval processes into
question?

I would welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss this
issues
further since the application of general rules as they apply to
my specific
case is of great interest, especially since you are in Ottawa
and Mr. Demers
is in Quebec City.


You all be the judge

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since at the present time there is no court case, you all be the judge as to whether the process is fair, and reasonable and unbiased.

Also while you are at it consider whether all the relevant facts have been considered, and the mitigation proposed is reasonable and fair under the circumstances.

Consider that there is an election and that you all might question your own future Ministers of parliament: Ask the following question:


I am interested in hearing each of your opinions on the Navigable Waters Protection Act. This is a piece of federal legislation that is supposed to guarantee the rights of Canadians to navigate our waterways.

Currently the federal government is attempting to replace an existing dam on the Kipawa river at Laniel Quebec. The current dam is navigable and has been used commercially and recreationally for over 20 years. The proposed replacement structure will not be navigable and the mitigation measure proposed is that paddlers will have to WALK AROUND. This mitigation measure is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE. If navigability of the dam can be maintained, then so can navigability of the entire river. I am not opposed to the replacement of the existing dam I just want to ensure that the new structure will retain the navigability of the existing one.

For more information I urge you to visit

www.kipawariver.ca

And for more detailed information:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/kayaky/NOLAC.htm

The Kipawa River and Laniel dam is one facet, yet a pressing one, of this issue. Currently the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources is accepting proposals for the development of a full-range of waterpower opportunities on Crown land, from small-scale development up to and including large commercial developments. These developments have the ability to further effect the navigability of Canada’s and Ontario’s waterways.

A response to this email would be appreciated as I, and other like minded voters in this riding, view this issue as one of great importance.

Thanks for your time.

A Note on Access to Information

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

$5.00 and a good question.

2005 12 05

George Steeves
Access to Information Officer
ph 956-2666
fax 819-994-2119

Dear Mr. Steeves.

Further to your request to me today for clarification:

Please give me the date that PWGSC received approval from the Minister of Transport under section 5(1)a of the Navigable Waters Protection Act for its Laniel Dam Refurbishment contract and any conditions that were attached to that approval.

That contract was awarded by PWGSC, and it was announced by the Minister of Transport on November 7th, it must be approved under 5(1)a, correct?

For your further information:

Peter Karwacki
1620 Trenholm Lane
Ottawa, Ontario
K4A 4B6


Its hard to find approvals which don't actually exist.

David S. Laflamme Inc of Stittsville, Ontario is the construction firm awarded the contract.

He writes:

Mr. Karwacki;

We are in receipt of your e-mail of December 5, 2005. Please direct all inquiries or concerns to the Project Manager, Mr. Robert Laporte P.Eng at tel # (819) 956-7369

Thank you

David S. Laflamme
President


This is the last correspondence I have had from Mr. Laporte:

Dated June 29th

Comme mentionné lors de la consultation publique, il est strictement défendu de descendre le barrage. Les affiches et l'estacade en font preuve.

Robert Laporte
TPSGC


But the signs were only recently put up, after we asked for them. This fellow has been no help at all but he is the project administrator. Give him a call.



LAPIERRE ANNOUNCEMENT BUT NO APPROVAL - How can that be?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Peter Karwacki
President
Les Amis de la Rivière Kipawa
Peter.Karwacki@cognos.com


Dear Mr. Karwacki:

On behalf of the Honourable Jean-C. Lapierre, Minister of Transport, I am writing in response to your e-mails of November 29 and 30, 2005, which were further to a previous exchange of correspondence with this office regarding the refurbishment of the Laniel Dam.

As you know, Transport Canada is currently reviewing this proposed project. In accordance with the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA), the proponent of a project must complete the following steps:

* complete and sign a letter of application and provide supporting information, including environmental assessment information;
* submit a letter of application with the required number of copies of the plans;
* deposit a full set of plans and supporting documentation at the Land Registry office that has jurisdiction over the proposed work site; and
* advertise the work in the legal section of two local newspapers and in the Canada Gazette, Part I.

Please be assured that Transport Canada has not yet issued the approval under the NWPA for the proposed Laniel Dam project. Once the department receives proof of the publications from the proponent, it will review the comments received before making a decision on the project. I should note that the proponent is expected to publish its proposal in the Canada Gazette, Part I, in the near future.

I trust that the foregoing will be of assistance. Thank you for writing.

Yours sincerely,

Leslie Swartman
Chief of Staff


Commentary:

Lapierre Announced the project back on November 7th, saying he was speaking for Scott Brison minister responsible for the project.

I've asked "Is it normal procedure to for the approving minister to announce a project he has yet to approve?, on a design that has yet to be approved?"

------------------------
The current election has left things up in the air.

New Ministers of Transport, PWGSC, Environment and Fisheries may be elected January 23rd at which time Les Amis will attempt to establish communications with the new cabinet members.

I would encourage you all to ask your potential members about the issue of access to whitewater resources. It is the NWPA that allows the Minister of Transport to approve obstructions to navigable waterways or impose conditions for such an approval such as reasonable accommodation.

In so doing the Minister of Transport could approve obstructions to all of our whitewater paddling resources. Its still early in the 21st century. Some might argue, for example, that Quebec Hydro has a plan for every drop of water that runs downhill in Quebec! Our thirst for electric power grows.

There has never been a better time to become politically active. Its up to all of us to work hard to secure our national heritage. Once the dams, diversions, bridges, weirs and other sundry structures are built it will be too late.

Peter

PLANS HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The plans have been deposited in the Canada Gazette.

Posted by our "friend" and fellow paddler
GILLES BRASSEUR of PWGSC Gilles.Brasseur@pwgsc.gc.ca
4156 Canada Gazette Part I December 17, 2005
Vol. 139, No. 51

The nameless boffs of glass and steel have not atoned, rather they proceed with singular manical obsession: only to be counteracted by the paddling community.
Note:

In accordance with the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA), the proponent of a project must complete the following steps:

* complete and sign a letter of application and provide supporting information, including environmental assessment information;
* submit a letter of application with the required number of copies of the plans;
* deposit a full set of plans and supporting documentation at the Land Registry office that has jurisdiction over the proposed work site; and
* advertise the work in the legal section of two local newspapers and in the Canada Gazette, Part I.



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND
GOVERNMENT SERVICES

PLANS DEPOSITED
The Department of Public Works and Government Services
hereby gives notice that an application has been made to the
Minister of Transport under the Navigable Waters Protection Act
for approval of the plans and site of the work described herein.
Under section 9 of the said Act, the Department of Public Works
and Government Services has deposited with the Minister of
Transport and in the office of the District Registrar of the Land
Registry District of Témiscamingue, at Ville-Marie, Quebec, under
deposit No. 12 922 790, a description of the site and plans of
a dam with four gates and one spillway crest, a boom upstream of
the dam, retaining walls and an abutment on the left bank, as well
as temporary structures being coffer dams (upstream and downstream
of the dam), berlin walls and sheet pile walls, in Kipawa
Lake and in the Kipawa River, at Laniel, Quebec. The work is
located at Lot C-1 of Block C, Block 4, Lot 30-11B-1; in part of
Lot 30-11B and part of Lot 30A of Range 8 of the geographic
township; and in part of Block C, part of the bed of the Kipawa
River and part of the bed of Kipawa Lake, located within the geographic
township of Mazenod.


Comments regarding the effect of this work on marine navigation
may be directed to the Superintendent, Navigable Waters
Protection Program, Transport Canada, 901 Du Cap-Diamant
Street, Suite 310, Québec, Quebec G1K 4K1. However, comments
will be considered only if they are in writing and are received
not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this
notice. Although all comments conforming to the above will be
considered, no individual response will be sent.

Quebec's Engineering Syndicat Reviews Complaint

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have confirmation from the Syndicate that they are reviewing this case. The matter has been assigned for inquiry.

See threads above concerning Engineer's letter.

UPDATE: 2007 03 15 as of this date they have not even commenced.

PWGSC has no approval - NWPA is like 1984 "war is peace

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following my request under the Access to Information Act I was told that PWGSC did not have any approval from the Minister of Transport to proceed with their project. "No such document exists" was the official reply.

But under the Navigable Waters Protection Act, retroactive approval is possible. There is jeopardy to the project proponent because if approval was not forthcoming they might have to remove their "obstruction".

But here we have the Minister of Transport, a liberal, Mr. Lapierre, announcing a project, that he has not approved - a blatant disregard for due process, bending the rules. A very liberal thing to do.

The NWPA is designed for the Minister of Transport allow obstructions to navigation which is a bizarre effect of an act named to protect Navigable Waters.

Paddlers must be actively contacting their members of parliament and insisting that the Kipawa be Preserved. Today the Kipawa is at stake but tomorrow it could easily be the Ottawa, the madawaska, or any other recreationally navigable waters. We must insist that our access to our rivers, lakes and streams is maintained and defended by the ministry of Transport, and that obstructions be installed only with satisfactory mitigation of the environmental impacts on recreactional boaters.


Peter

2006 03 03 - Investigation is not complete

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I received a letter from the Quebec Syndicat.

As of today, this investigation is not complete, however, they fully intend on investigating how the engineer could proclaim the river was not navigable, thereby affecting the EA, without properly considering the evidence well available that it had been safely navigated for 40 years.

Federal court file number File Number is T-452-06

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

File Number is T-452-06

Quebec Syndicat advises inquiry has not yet started

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The engineer inquiring into that opinion by PRTremblay, who expressed a professional opinion TO PWGSC that the Kipawa was not navigable no matter what type of craft has not yet begun. It has been deferred due to work issues.

At the last Kipawa rally we discovered that not only was the sluice at the dam navigable before construction, it was also navigable during construction of the northside gates. Of course the kayakers had to roll over, slip under that blasted snowfence, roll back up, and then run the sluice.

I suppose the syndicat must advise me monthly as this is the third such letter I have received.

I sincerely hope that the deferral is only related to how busy the investigating engineer must be and nothing else. Anyway, this is not a dead issue.

The question: should an engineer voice an opinion, stamped with his engineering number, on a matter which is outside the scope of his professional training? In anycase, What tests were done? water depth, channel width, speed of current, approach, downstreamn conditions?

or was he simply blowing smoke?

what exactly? because using the engineer's stamp is a serious business. For sure, questioning its use is also a serious business, but I've done it because it threatens the historical use of the sluice on the Kipawa, and has been seriously considered in the PWGSC self assessment/environmental assessment.

The effects of Dam Refurbishment

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a photograph of the Kipawa at Broken Bridge Rapid dramatically showing the effects of reduced flow on the rapid.

Another photograph shows the maniacal installation of snowfencing above the laniel dam.

The two images juxtaposed paint a horrible picture of environmental assessment gone terribly wrong.

If this is the shape of greening of the environment that PWGSC has in mind, God help us all.

"There's something happening here... what it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there, telling me I got to beware...

You've got to stop now, and look around, everybody look what's going down!"
Buffulo Springfield



1st. Kipawa at Broken Bridge, after the new more "efficient" stoppage of water flow

2nd. Kipawa River, with snowfence above the Laniel Dam Sluice, and galvanized fencing, treacherous portage created on River left

3rd. Sadia Loney running that glorious sluice in better days. Safely and happily.

DAM REFURBISHMENT + PWGSC + P.Q = TABARET!!!!!


The recent announcement by PWGSC minister Fortin about tranferring the Laniel Dam to the Province of Quebec takes us one step closer to the divestment of the dam to Hydro Quebec for its ill conceived TABARET project.

The public is asked to write the Ministry of the Environment to veto any such tranfer subject to a full blown environmental assessment including open and public hearings... in both official languages.

refer to the cnn mathews newswire for "complete" as in as complete as PWGSC would like us to have, coverage:

http://www.ccnmatthews.com/news/releases/search_comp2.jsp?compid=11062&pagesize=25&interval=

Back to top

Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First

ENGINEERS LETTER: still no investigation: what's it been?1yr

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Its been about a year since the TECSULT engineer issued his stamped opinion to PWGSC officials saying that the sluice at the dam on the Kipawa was not navigable by any craft no matter what type.

That sticky wicket is still sticking as the SYNDICAT of Engineers in Quebec still has not begun the inquiry though on engineer has been assigned to that task its been about a year and nothing.

The argument?

The opinion of the engineer was based on ignorance, and fear of the unknown, not hard facts or investigation, which in my opinion, was unprofession and unwarranted. Adding an engineers stamp adds a level of professional credibility that was injurious to the Environmental Assessment that was ongoing at the time and heavily weighed upon by the PWGSC officials.



At the last rally, kayakers rolled upside down, slipped under the cross river snow fence, rolled up and ran the sluice ... as safely as such a manoever would allow.

More kayakers were injured walking the portage around the dam, given the unstable rock embankment.

No injuries at the dam slucie, a perfect track record at the Laniel dam for the past 20 years in spite of the the safety arguments by PWGSC to try and disallow navigation contrary to the navigable waters protection act. They finally had to turn the water off even thought PWGSC officials were on recording saying they would not alter the flow patterns at the dam.