Mary, the problem is getting worse

On October 17th 2016, Environment Minister Mary Polak was interviewed by CBC’s Gregor Craigie – the discussion was about the contaminated landfill in Shawnigan’s watershed owned by Cobble Hill Holdings and operated by South Island Resource Management.

There had been a contact water breach at the site on October 8th that was caught on video by a Cowichan Valley resident; untreated contaminated water flowed from the site during a typical late fall rain storm.  As a result of that breach, and with a major weather system on the way, Ministry of Environment issued a Pollution Prevention Order, that stipulated that the company had to cover the pile of contaminated soil that sits in its active quarry, half way up a mountain overlooking Shawnigan Lake.

img_5638

During her interview, Minister Polak stated that “thankfully the site was secured ahead of the weekend storm” and she went on to state that “it appears that over the weekend the securement [sic] of the site was effective and water didn’t leave the site.”

But water did leave the site, and has continued to leave the site continuously for months.  And for two straight months, every sample of water discharged from this site has failed to meet the basic requirements of the permit – even after the company put a “permanent cover” over the contaminated soil. What is that basic requirement?  That all water leaving this site “must be equivalent or better than the most stringent BC Approved Water Quality Guidelines.”

Over a year ago, on November 30th, 2015, I wrote a post about the water that was flowing off the Cobble Hill Holdings landfill site.  In Mary, we have a problem, I pointed out that several metals were showing up in the water leaving the site at much higher levels that in Shawnigan Creek above the site.

I asked the question that I have not once stopped asking since – is it not a problem that there are elevated levels of metals entering into a creek that feeds our community drinking water?  The landfill is already impacting water quality in our drinking watershed – why is this okay with BC’s Minister of Environment?

Well, the problem has gotten a whole lot worse in the last 12 months.

Last month, I wrote Who decides?  Looking at the data from the Ministry of Environment’s website, it’s clear that untreated contact water is leaving this site – levels of aluminum, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, manganese, silver, vanadium, and zinc all exceeded either drinking water or aquatic life protection guidelines throughout the month of October.

Then, at the beginning of November, the company put a “permanent cover” over the contaminated soil – as seen in this photo submitted to the Ministry of Environment by the company.  (Yes – that “permanent cover” is essentially a tarp with tires on top of it.)

Liner November 4 2016.png

(Here’s what the pile looked like a few days ago – tires have slid down with the snow.)

dsc07135

So if the contact water breach was caused by water running off the contaminated soil, over the quarry floor, and out through the (ineffective) settling pond, then this cover should have solved all of the problems, right?

Not according to the independent experts who weighed in during the Environmental Appeal Board hearings.  They pointed out that there is significant sub-surface water flow at this site, which would allow for contaminants to be introduced to the environment through water flowing under the soil pile and out into the creek that flows off this site, and into Shawnigan Creek and eventually into Shawnigan Lake.

So what has actually happened since the “permanent cover” has been put over the soil?

I’m sorry, Minister – but it’s not good news (and you know it).  Right there on the Ministry of Envrionment’s website, the water sampling data tells the story.

The company has submitted test results from November 9th, 22nd, 24th, 25th, and 26th – and it seems that the cover isn’t really helping matters much.

Let’s look at Aluminum.

aluminum

After the cover was in place, Aluminum levels actually rose in the water being discharged from the site.  And by the end of November, levels were 38 times above Health Canada Drinking Water Guidelines (for operational considerations for drinking water treatment using coagulants).

How about Chromium?

chromiumChromium is well above the Aquatic Life Protection Guideline (Acute) throughout November, and in fact rises to the highest level at the end of the month, more than three weeks after the “permanent cover” was secured over the contaminated soil.  So how could all that Chromium be escaping the site if the soil is covered?  Could it be that the contaminants are leaching into the sub-surface water that flows all over this quarry?

 

Next up – Copper.

copper

Copper exceeded chronic Aquatic Protection guidelines all through November, and then shot up over acute levels on the 26th.

Iron was also a problem all through November  – between 2 and 4 times above Aquatic Protection guidelines, and rising significantly three weeks after the “permanent cover” was in place.

iron

Vanadium also exceeded the Aquatic Protection guideline for all of November, while Manganese went above Health Canada Drinking Water guidelines twice, and Zinc levels were above the Aquatic Protection levels four out of five times.

vanadiummanganesezinc

So let’s go back to the Minister’s October 17th interview.  At one point, Gregor Craigie asked her what the appropriate criteria for revoking the permit would be.

“Untreated contaminated water leaking…for a third time? Is there a certain number of times?  A more serious breach?” he asked.

The Minister responded, “…it’s about [staff] assessment about whether or not the company managing the site are capable of managing the site.  If they at any time believe that [the company] were not capable of securing the site, then they would certainly make that recommendation to me.”

Seems pretty clear that there are some “management” issues at this site.

The December 20th deadline for the company to submit several reports to the Ministry, including contact and non-contact water management reports, has come and gone without any word from Minister Polak.

And yet it would appear that she has all the evidence she needs to recognize that this landfill should never have been allowed in our watershed.  Less than two years in to a fifty-year permit, this site is plagued with ongoing problems, and the evidence is indisputable: it is already having a negative impact on the environment.

And let’s not forget that while the permit is for fifty years, the contaminated soil would be left on site forever.

The Minister said during her interview, “I can’t pull the permit simply because the issue is giving me a political problem.”

This isn’t a political problem, Mary.  This is a real-life problem for the real-life families who live in Shawnigan Lake.  And we expect you, as Minister of Environment, to ensure that our children, and their grandchildren, will have safe, clean water to drink in perpetuity.

 

 

Tidings of Hope

The holidays are here, and I am enjoying the deep contentment that I feel when we have all our children home at the same time.

I am looking forward to the days ahead which will bring much cooking and feasting, laughter and story-telling, and (hopefully) some precious quiet moments for rest and reflection.

We have two sons’ birthdays to celebrate in these busy December weeks, and so last night was a family birthday outing to the new Star Wars movie, Rogue One.

I have been going to Star Wars movies since I was seven years old, and while I lament the path they took in the initial reprisal of the series, I confess that I have enjoyed Episode 8 and this latest backstory.

Something resonates for me – particularly given the last few years we’ve had in Shawnigan – in the story of a small group of feisty rebels standing up against a heartless empire that is more concerned with power than governance.

Tonight, one line in particular stood out for me: “Rebellion is built on hope.”

Hope has been the one thing that I have refused to abandon.  Not for one moment have I given up hope in the outcome that we have been fighting for so hard in Shawnigan.  My hope is deeply entwined with my belief that every effort that each of us make leads us toward the inevitable conclusion of this story: that the permit will be revoked.

Last year at this time, we were mounting our own rebellion as a community – a rebellion against what has felt like a heartless government more concerned with a company’s good fortune than a community’s future.

The final outcome of our rebellion has not yet been achieved (although it will be, eventually), but other outcomes, many of which we could not have predicted, have been.

Two stories out of Shawnigan caught my attention this week.

The first story started out on social media, on the Shawnigan Lake Events, News, Links, Community Forum facebook page.

christmas

Within three days, a family that was facing a Christmas with very little instead is now able to enjoy a tree, a feast, gifts, and provisions.

christmas-2

This captures so completely the spirit of this season – generosity, kindness, compassion, community.

And the second story from Shawnigan also embodies all of these, but extends much further.  CBC National News featured an account of a Shawnigan resident, Jennifer Gwilliam, who is using social media to help families in Canada’s north.  Her facebook page, Helping our Northern Neighbours, connects families here with those in communities up north who face incredibly high costs for food and necessities.  Jennifer acknowledges that long-term solutions are being worked on, but that in the meantime, families in the north need support and help right now.  Her story is both moving and motivating, and it shows that one person can make an enormous difference in the lives of many.

It almost makes me think there must be something very special in the water in Shawnigan.

lake

Photo credit: Laura Colpitts

Over the last few months, I have been contacted by people across the country who have told me that they would like to move here, partly because of the beauty, location, and climate, but also because of what they have seen of our community.  Others who have stopped in or spent a little time in Shawnigan have told me that they come away longing to be part of this place.  One resident of Victoria had stopped in at Shawnigan House and ordered a coffee, then realized that she’d forgotten her wallet in her car.  In the minute or two it took for her to get back to the counter, somebody in the café had paid for her drink.  “I want to live in Shawnigan,” she told me.  “I want to live in a place with that kind of community.”

At one point this last year, after we’d received bad news on the watershed front, a friend said to me, “hope is like putting your heart in a lion’s mouth.”

Her words struck me deeply at the time, as I did feel pain in my heart as we navigated through yet another disappointment.  But even through the pain, my hope has been – and will remain – relentless.

We were hoping for news from Justice Sewell, and we were hoping for a swift response from the Ministry of Environment.  We have not yet received either, but we have learned that our hope must be not only anchored in belief, but also wrapped in patience.

My hope for all this season is some peace, some joy, some rest.  I know that it can be a difficult time for many, but I also see so much compassion, generosity, and kindness – and for this, I am grateful.

Thank you to the people who step up and find ways to make things better, who light a single candle rather than curse the darkness.

You give me hope.

 

 

Will this deadline have any meaning?

Today is the deadline for CHH to submit “an updated closure plan, revised cost estimate, revised security, and reports detailing the review of contact and non-contact water management systems” to Ministry of Environment. This is not the first deadline this company has had to submit these reports – that was actually June 2016, as agreed to by MoE and CHH way back in January 2016.
But the company didn’t meet that deadllne.
A letter from June detailing that missed deadline can be found here.
In August, MoE sent another letter to the company, reminding them that they’d missed the deadline.
Then in October, Mary Polak, the Minister of Environment, sent a letter telling the company she was considering suspending or revoking their permit, since they had missed their deadlines.
In November, Minister Polak sent yet another letter, telling the company that she was “affording Cobble Hill Holdings Ltd. the opportunity to submit information to me by December 20, 2016, which specifically addresses the non-compliant requirements identified. I will reserve my decision regarding the status of Permit 105809 at this time.”
Today, I learned that the company has until midnight tonight to get all of the documents and reports submitted.
And we wonder, of course, if this deadline will have any more meaning that the deadlines of the past.  Will the company, which has been been out of compliance with their permit for over a year, be given any more extensions, or is this truly the final deadline?  Will the fact that the water sampling throughout October shows in no uncertain terms that this company is not meeting the requirement that all water discharged meet the strictest drinking water and aquatic life protection guidelines have a bearing on the Minister’s decision at this time?
And what does the site look like these days?  Here are two collections of photos – one from late November and the other from a few days ago.
The circumstances that we facing as a community are outrageous and unacceptable.  If the Ministry of Environment had heeded the warnings of the independent scientists who identified problems with the location, the geology, the hydro-geology, the design, and the engineering of this site, we would not be in this situation – indeed, the Ministry could have done the right thing at the beginning and refused to issue a permit that allows five million tonnes of contaminated soil to be dumped at the headwaters of our watershed.
But it’s never too late to do the right thing, and to correct the mistakes of the past.  The Minister has the authority – and every reason – to revoke this permit, and order that all soil be removed from this site.  It is the only acceptable course of action at this time.
As we have so many times before – we await a decision.
Let’s hope that this time, it’s the right one.  But if it’s not – we remain undeterred and steadfast in our determination to see an end to this nightmare our community has had to endure for so long.

Who decides?

We anxiously await news on yet another decision on the matter of the contaminated landfill in our watershed.  It takes a terrible toll on our community to have these decisions – decisions that impact our water, our community, and our future – in other people’s hands.  And it makes no sense to us that decisions impacting our watershed and our drinking water have been made over and over again by people who don’t live in this community or drink our water.

And yet, this is the reality we have had to live with for over four years.

Justice Sewell indicated that he would make an effort to give judgment on the Shawnigan Residents Association (SRA) Judicial Review case by the middle of December.  No news so far, and while we wait, we endure the consequences of a misguided decision by the BC Ministry of Environment.

A brief recap of the SRA’s case:

The lawyers for the SRA filed a petition to the BC Supreme Court in May 2015 seeking a judicial review of the Environmental Appeal Board’s decision to uphold the Ministry of Environment’s decision to issue a permit to Cobble Hill Holdings that allows the company to import and landfill five million tonnes of contaminated soil at the headwaters of our watershed.

In July, August, and November 2015, the SRA submitted three more applications to the courts which included evidence of an alleged 50-50 profit sharing agreement between Cobble Hill Holdings and Active Earth, the engineers who signed off on the suitability of the location for a contaminated landfill and submitted the design for the landfill.  The applications also included hundreds of pages of documents, including emails between the two companies.

The Judicial Review was finally heard in the BC Supreme Court in February 2016, after several earlier court dates in the summer of 2015.  We had all hoped for a swift decision from Justice Sewell, but the decision from Justice Mackenzie in the CVRD case seems to have resulted in a slower decision-making process from Justice Sewell.

While these processes slowly weave their way through the court system, what has been happening up at the landfill?

The company imported contaminated soil throughout the summer of 2016, after being granted a stay to the injunction that had been imposed by Justice Mackenzie.  Most of the soil came from the CFB Esquimalt, where remediation of the gravings docks has been ongoing.

On October 8th, during the first real rainfall of the season, a significant breach of contact water occurred at the site.  (You can read about it here: More rain, more concerns.)  This resulted in a Pollution Prevention Order from the Ministry of Environment, and one of the requirements of the order was that the company provide water sampling results to the Ministry.

MoE has published the sampling results up to November 5th on their website (we still await the results from November and early December).

I have spent some time looking through all of the available results, and the data tells a worrying story.

Remember that the permit that was issued to Cobble Hill Holdings is one that authorizes the company to “discharge treated effluent” to the environment.  The permit very clearly states what the quality of that discharged effluent must be:

permit-condition

We have been raising concerns for over a year that the company is not meeting this fundamental requirement of the permit.  (See: Mary We Have a Problem & What Will it Take.)

The water sampling results from October and November make it abundantly clear that in no uncertain terms this landfill site is failing to meet its permit conditions.

Let’s take a look at the data – all of which comes from the Ministry of Environment website. I have compiled it into a spreadsheet (don’t worry – I’ll break it down into bit-sized pieces below).

water-sampling-data

 

Now let’s take a closer look at what’s happening.

Each of the metals that exceeds either a drinking water or aquatic water guideline is highlighted in a colour that corresponds to that guideline (the bright pink for Iron indicates that the levels exceed more than one guideline).

water-sampling-above-limits

Between October 8th (date of the contact water breach) and November 5th, ten metals were above the stated guidelines at least twice, and in some cases every time the samples were taken.

Let’s look at these one at a time.

aluminum

Aluminum levels in the discharge water were at 1370 µg/L on October 8th, the day of the contact water breach.  Twelve days later, the levels rose to 4570 µg/L, then to 7560 µg/L.  On November 5th, nearly a month after the contact water breach, Aluminum levels were more than four times what they were on October 8th, and nearly 57 times above Health Canada drinking water guidelines.

chromium-graphChromium levels in the discharge water rose significantly on the day of the contact water breach (for comparison, chromium levels in Shawnigan Creek  above the landfill site are 0.27 µg/L – which means that on October 8th, the levels at the discharge point were more than 100 times higher).  Over the course of the rest of October, the levels went down, and then back up again on the 20th and 21st.  Five out of nine samples exceeded the guidelines for the protection of aquatic life.

cobalt

Cobalt exceeded the aquatic life water quality guidelines twice – on the day of the breach and again on October 21st.  It is also interesting to note on October 8th, cobalt levels in the discharge water were 670 times higher than the levels in Shawnigan Creek above the landfill site.  Even at the lowest levels at the discharge site on October 16th are 28 times higher than the level above the site.

copper

Copper levels exceeded both chronic and acute guidelines for the protection of aquatic life, and saw three spikes – October 8th, October 20th-21st, and November 5th.  In Shawnigan Creek above the landfill site, there is less than 1 µg/L, meaning levels at the discharge site have been between 2 and 32 times higher than upstream.

ironWhat’s interesting about the Iron levels in the discharge water is that they were not particularly high on the day of the contact water breach, but they have been consistently high over the course of the entire month, with significant spikes on the 20th, and 21st of October, and then again on the 5th of November.  These levels are up to 28 times above Health Canada drinking water guidelines, and over 70 times higher than the levels in the creek above the landfill site.

Lead.pngLead levels at the discharge site varied from a high of 11.3 µg/L on October 8th down to 0.3 µg/L on October 16th.  They climbed again on the 20th/21st and on November 5th.  It’s again important to note that there is virtually no lead (0.054 µg/L) in the creek above the site.

manganese

Manganese levels also spiked three times over the course of the month – the pattern of these spikes seems to be demonstrating that the contact water breach was not limited to October 8th.

silverSilver also spiked significantly on October 21st.  Note that silver is undetectable in Shawnigan Creek above the CHH site, and significantly above aquatic life guidelines on October 21st.

vanadiumVanadium levels rose on October 8th, 20th/21st, and November 5th, and exceeded BC guidelines for protection of aquatic life four times over the month.  On October 8th, Vanadium was 64 times higher at the discharge site than what has been measured in the creek above the landfill.

zinc

 

Zinc followed the standard pattern as well.  Note that zinc is undetectable in the creek above the site.

Those are the metals that exceeded one or more of the water quality guidelines that the BC Ministry of Environment has specified must be met under the conditions of the permit.

And that’s just in one month.

What about some of the other metals in the water over the course of this month?

Let’s start with metals that are undetectable upstream from the site:

boronnickelphosphorussulfur

It would appear that these metals have been introduced to our watershed environment by the CHH site.  The Ministry of Environment will contend that these metals do not pose a health risk, but that is missing the point, as far as I’m concerned.  These metals do not occur naturally in the ecosystem, and they are being introduced by a landfill operation that should never have been allowed in the first place.

Then let’s look at metals that do appear in the upstream testing results.

A few figures to note in all of this.

Silicon is up to ten times higher at the discharge point than upstream, Barium and Strontium 30 times higher, Calcium 36 times higher, and Magnesium 44 times higher.

Sodium is up to 50 times higher, Chloride 90 times higher, Sulfate 148 times higher, and Titanium 217 times higher.

And the turbidity of the water?  A whopping 318 times higher at the discharge point than upstream.

turbidity.png

Now there may be those who say this isn’t scientific enough – and I readily admit that I am a historian, not a scientist (which may explain why I look for trends over time).

However – the independent scientists who assessed this site for its suitability for a contaminated landfill over four years ago identified the location, the geology, and the hydrogeology as presenting a risk to water in the area.

lowen-2012

Denis Lowen pointed out a few more problems with the landfill proposal:

site-hydrologyAnd the company’s claim that water quality would be protected by liners?

lowen-on-linersThis brings us back to the question of who decides what happens in our watershed.

So far, not a single one of the decision-makers has been a person who drinks water from the Shawnigan watershed.

  • Hubert Bunce, Statutory Decision Maker for Ministry of Environment
  • Alan Andison, Brenda Edwards, and Tony Fogarassy, Environmental Appeal Board Panel Members
  • Justice Brian D. Mackenzie, BC Supreme Court (who decided in favour of the CVRD and imposed what turned out to be a short-lived injunction against the company)
  • Justice Pamela A. Kirkpatrick, BC Court of Appeal
  • Justice Daphne Smith, Justice Gail Dickson, Justice Gregory Fitch, BC Court of Appeal
  • A.J. Downie, current Statutory Decision Maker for Ministry of Environment
  • Jennifer McGuire, Executive Director, Ministry of Environment

And now we await another decision from Justice Robert Sewell of the BC Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, the BC Ministry of Environment has all of the information above, and has downplayed the fact that this company is consistently out of compliance with the most basic requirement of its permit (ie. that all water discharged meet water quality guidelines for drinking water and protection of aquatic life).

Minister Mary Polak has issued two letters (Oct 11th and Nov 4th) to the company – after a year of their refusal to do what was being asked of them by ministry staff – and she has given them until December 20th to produce water management reviews of contact and non-contact water.

But I contend that Minister Polak has all the information she needs in order to make the right decision and revoke the permit that should never have been granted in the first place.  We are just 21 months into a 50-year permit, and the problems keep getting worse.

If the Minister won’t make the right decision, she can be assured that the people of Shawnigan will never give up.  Ultimately the decision should be ours – the risk is borne by us, the consequences are borne by us, and the long-term impacts are borne by us.  And we have been clear from the very beginning – we do not accept this contaminated landfill in our watershed, and we never will.

Reflections on a Busy Week

Some weeks, my calendar tells a story in a snapshot.  This has been one of those weeks.

calendar-nov-21

The week began with two very different approaches to bringing about change.  I spent much of Monday at the Forest Hydrology Workshop, which was put on by the Cowichan Watershed Board.  We heard from experts on climate, hydrology, and forestry practices, and engaged in an abundance of solution-oriented discussion around how to ensure a balance between forestry and long-term protection of watersheds.

From there, I went to Victoria to attend a vigil against the proposed Kinder Morgan expansion.  Hundreds of citizens came together to peacefully convey the message that the conditions we face in the world today necessitate a transition away from fossil fuels, and that the expansion of the Kinder Morgan pipeline is a step in the wrong direction. Expanding Kinder Morgan not only poses a serious risk to the coast and the coastal wildlife populations, it contributes to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions at a time when we need to be investing in renewable energy alternatives and dramatically reducing our fossil fuel emissions.

img_8926

While it is daunting to realize that we are facing extraordinary challenges, I am filled with hope and optimism to see the willingness of so many people to tackle these issues in a variety of ways, whether through informing ourselves of the most recent science on watersheds or sending a message to our government – what’s clear is that people are invested in having a say in the future of our province and our planet.

On Tuesday, Blaise attended the climate change discussion at CVRD while I prepared for an interview with Global TV about the recent changes the Ministry of Environment has made to the Contaminated Sites Regulations – changes that have included some decreases in allowable levels of contaminants, but also some extraordinary increases in other levels.  These changes have raised concerns not only among local governments, particularly in rural areas, but also among scientists and environmental advocates.

global-interview

Photo by Laura Colpitts

While my interview didn’t make it to the 2-minute news clip, I was most pleased that our local scientist Bernhard Juurlink was a part of the piece.  Bernie has broken down some of the increases that have been brought in with the new regulations.

contaminants-increased

I have called on the Ministry of Environment to provide independent, peer-reviewed science that justifies these increases in allowable levels.  At a time when we know that toxins have infiltrated our ecosystems and are showing up in our bodies, it seems hard to understand why a government would want to raise levels of contaminants, and it begs the question of whether or not we are seeing a similar situation to the one in the US where industry lobbying has resulted in increased allowable limits of chromium-6. A recent report from Environmental Working Group revealed that over 200 million Americans have unsafe levels of chromium-6 in their drinking water.

chromium

Ultimately, we need government to recognize that it has a duty to ensure the long-term protection of the citizens of BC and the ecosystems that we rely on for our survival.

Wednesday was a series of back-to-back meetings at the CVRD – ranging from conversations with MoTI about plans for Shawnigan’s roads in 2017 to meeting with stakeholders to discuss the potential of tourist accommodation in Shawnigan (I will share more on this possibility in the coming weeks), to learning about the next proposed steps for a South Sector Liquid Waste Management Plan.  We also had three CVRD meetings – Special Board meeting, Regional Engineering Services, and Regional Services – during which we discussed matters that included invasive species, solid waste disposal, economic development, airshed protection, and the Trans-Canada Trail.

Thursday and Friday were set aside for CVRD budget meetings.  We’re back in budget season at CVRD (the year’s second – the first budget season is in late summer), which means that the Directors need to approve each one of the budgets for CVRD’s 176 service functions.  Some of these functions are relatively straightforward, while others – solid waste, for example – are large and complex budgets that encompass a variety of activities.

It is one of the most challenging parts of the job, to try to find a balance between the vision of the Board, the recommendations of the staff, the desires of our communities, and the very real need to ensure that citizens are not subject to overly burdensome tax increases.  One of the factors exacerbating this challenge is the ‘downloading’ from higher levels of government.  Tax cuts at provincial and federal levels can often translate to local governments being put into a position of trying to fill in the gaps created when cuts are made to services that impact the lives of people in our communities.  Local governments are also increasingly bearing the economic brunt of climate change.  In the Cowichan, we’re having to deal with flooding as well as drought, and we’re also taking very seriously the need to assess our water supplies and the potential threats they face.  In Vancouver, the city is planning a long-term strategy for mitigating impacts from climate change, and recognizing that the costs will be significant – one recent news story outlines some of these challenges.

We have four full days set aside for budget discussions, and we have agreed to add another to review the overall impact and look for ways to try to reduce the requisition while ensuring that we are maintaining important services.

Thursday and Friday evenings brought opportunities to embrace the festive season.  We attended the very rainy Ladysmith Light Up on Thursday evening, and then the much less damp festivities in Duncan on Friday evening.  Both events were incredibly well attended and very enjoyable.

I am very much looking forward to the Shawnigan Village light up on Sunday December 4th from 3:30 – 6:30.

post card for 2016 XMAS.jpg

In amongst all the meetings and festivities last week, there were dozens of phone calls dealing with everything from the Elsie Miles revitalization to Ministry of Transportation plans and issues.  There are also hundreds of emails, many of which need follow-up; everything from ongoing concerns with what is happening at the contaminated landfill to appointing a new commission member.  I also needed to write an article for a local publication, do a live interview on CFAX on Thrusday and a recorded interview with Juice FM on Friday about the changes to Contaminated Sites Regulations, making the case that the province needs to create a proper plan for the contaminated soil that protects the water and soil of all communities, rather than creating unnecessary risks, particularly in rural areas.

On Saturday, it was lovely to attend the Shawnigan Lake Craft Fair and to see the incredible array of local businesses offering extraordinary and exceptional items.  We are truly an entrepreneurial community, and I am always amazed at the talent and innovation we have right here in our own neighbourhood.

 

So what are my reflections at the end of this busy week?

I am grateful to have the support of my husband, and I am also grateful for my Alternate Director Sierra Acton, who helps out in many ways and took on the task of organizing the annual CVRD Volunteer Appreciation Dinner.  I am also incredibly grateful for the support and kindness of so many in the community who help out in many, many ways (particularly the good fairy of coffee, who keeps me appropriately caffeinated, and the many good food fairies who are helping enormously).  My friends keep me laughing and feeling cared for, and my kids bring me joy.

With the many busy days in a row, I found myself truly enjoying and being present for quiet moments with family, hearing about the kids’ days at school or enjoying a meal together.  And while it can at times seems like there are a lot of balls in the air – and a lot of items on my to-do list – I feel fortunate and grateful to be doing work that serves the community and provides me with a true sense of purpose.

Give Input to Federal Government: Protect Canada’s Water

You only have until November 9th – please take the time to submit your comments now!

Submit your comments to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities about the the Navigation Protection Act, which was gutted under the Harper government.

The online form is here.

From Council of Canadians Website:

The Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities is accepting written comments on the Navigation Protection Act until Wednesday November 9, 2016. Use this sample letter here as a starting point and the talking points below to urge the standing committee to protect every lake and every river.