“Drought Proofing the Economy” Meeting
Regina, SK, November 4, 2004
Notes by Elaine Hughes
As part of Phase I of the $299,500 federally and provincially funded 50-year Water Development Plan for Saskatchewan, the Saskatchewan Agrivision Corporation (SAC) held the “Drought Proofing the Economy” meeting in Regina on November 4, 2004. Red Williams and Al Scholz, SAC, began by pointing out that recommendations from the Action Committee on the Rural Economy (ACRE) show that some of the solutions to the province’s economic problems all lead to water, that we’re not making good use of it and that by ‘re-jigging’ current methods, we can find a balance between the economy, the environment and people. Wayne Clifton and Graham Parsons, Clifton Associates, described how their 50-year plan would revitalize the rural economy through enhanced water use. They were followed by short presentations from Saskatchewan Forest Centre, Farm Credit Corp., Blood Tribe from southern Alberta, Tourism Sask, Sask Mining Assoc. Sask Power, with Minister of Rural Revitalization, Clay Serby, as the speaker at lunch.
All participants acknowledged that climate change is a reality, that the glaciers are melting faster than they can be regenerated, that Saskatchewan suffers from drought 2 years out of 10 and how “Saskatchewan’s water flows right past us and makes no contribution to our well being”, that, in becoming the new food processing hub in Canada, southern Alberta (Feedlot Alley!) uses an ever-increasing amount of water from the same rivers that flow into Saskatchewan and, although we say our water is not for sale, the US will soon be wanting our water real bad, etc., etc. So, part of the 50-year plan is to realize our full benefits of water development by building 15 dams and reservoirs on our rivers to, Lake Diefenbaker already being in place. This will ensure a constant supply of water for development – “use it or lose it” for more gas and oil, more mining, more intensive cropping, more value-added processing, and more ILOs for Saskatchewan’s “Green and Prosperous Economy”. Rural development, including processing centres, will be strategically placed in clusters around these irrigation systems, with this activity already occurring in the Outlook area.
Ann Coxworth of the Saskatchewan Environmental Society asked how well do they understand the role played by the underground aquifers in our ecological systems and how would their interference with the natural flooding process which regenerates many aquifers, rivers and lakes affect those systems. In his response, Mr. Clifton indicated that the government was no longer keeping records of the aquifers and that he/they had no data on aquifers - where they are, how big they are, how much water was in them, etc. (In our opposition to the pig factories, we have maintained the terrible threat that this lack of knowledge presents to our precious drinking water.)
Sandra Finley of Saskatoon stated that she was dismayed by the manipulation of information in Graham Parson’s power point presentation. For example, she pointed out that the graph that shows the fluctuation in the water levels of the South Saskatchewan River in the period 1912 to present shows declining fluctuation that is presented as a positive consequence of a large dam on the River. What is the change in VOLUME of water in the River over the same period? The response from Graham Parsons was “yes, the fluctuations have declined….” Ms Finley: “I did not ask about fluctuation, I clearly asked ‘What is the change in VOLUME of water?’” Graham Parsons never did answer the question. (The answer is that over the period 1910 to present, the volume of water has decreased by 80%. The flow level is 20% of what it was in 1910. Several other questions drew attention to the selective nature of the information presented, all of which contributed to a very skewed understanding - provided by an "expert" as newspaper reports referred to Mr. Parsons.)
Following his luncheon address, Isabel Muzichuk of Buchanan asked the Minister of Rural Revitalization, Clay Serby, what his government was going to do about the ongoing toxic emissions from the hog barns at Rama that are making people in the area sick. In his response, he dismissed the issue by pointing out that our regulations are the best in the world and “if we’re producing 1 million hogs per year now, I want to increase that to 2 million hogs per year”.
Some other points of interest: In the future, Prince Rupert will be the port of choice for exporting our value-added goods to Asia, so highways and the port will be improved to accommodate containers loaded at the farm gate and put on ships to Asia. Investors can now apply to Sask Water Authority for permits to build private dams: all the design work for the High Gate Dam on the North Saskatchewan River west of North Battleford is complete. (The spokesperson for that project said in a recent CBC Radio interview that she had private investors ready right now to invest the $700 M for it - private ownership of Saskatchewan’s drinking water.)
In his presentation, Larry Hayes from the Farm Credit Corporation pointed out that his company was available to provide funds for “large up-front capital costs…where infrastructure does not exist.” He added that, as a safeguard to investment, if a water user couldn't make the payments, the outstanding amount would be added to his annual RM taxes. (I recall a TV program I saw recently of African women and children waiting in line for hours to get their daily jug of water – they didn't have the money to pay for it so they didn’t get any water - they busted the meter off its moorings and stole the water under cover of darkness....)
Robin Woodward of the Saskatchewan Forest Centre noted they’re working on a plan to support poplar tree plantations on hog barn sites which would absorb seepage, reduce aerosols, remediate sites, turn waste water into a marketable product, and in 20 years, there would be 100,000 cubic meters of wood to process! (I recently read that farmers who have agreed to have the liquid hog manure spread onto their land are tearing out established windbreaks between their fields so the tractor dragging the manure hose can get through. I also read that because the sludge out of the bottom of abandoned manure cesspools is so toxic, no farmer will accept it on his land. It seems they plant trees over the cesspools with the hope that the trees will clean up the mess left behind.)
Campbell Eaglechild from the Blood Tribe Reserve in southern Alberta demonstrated the workings of their 25,000-acre irrigation project (the largest such operation in Canada, second in size to the world’s largest one belonging to a First Nations in the US). The water they draw from the St. Mary's Reservoir supports 6,000 head of cattle and grows hay which is then shipped to the US and Japan as value-added products. He alluded to neighbouring farmers being unhappy with the tremendous amount of water used by the Reserve but he shrugged and carried on with his presentation. (I couldn't help but compare his ‘commercial’ attitude about water to that of the First Nations people at the recent Safe Drinking Water Foundation Conference. To them, water is a sacred trust to be protected and cherished.)
Mr. Patrick from Sask Power indicated that they had been working closely with the Clear Green Company that has developed a biodigester which uses the manure from one of the mega hog barns at Cudworth to produce electricity for the industry plus the power grid.
In my comments, I pointed out the significant economic benefits our small village receives from the tourism industry, and that changing or fouling our as-yet pristine natural surroundings and water would be “anti-economical” and devastating. I also noted that water is a HUMAN RIGHT and no one has the right to deprive people of it or hold them up for ransom over water! And yet, this 50-year plan appears to be all about privatization of our precious water. I suggested that, for just a moment, we all step out of the little pink bubble we'd been sitting in all day and look at this issue from a different point of view. I added that if Mr. Clifton is correct and if, in fact, they know very little about the location or size of our precious underground aquifers, I would then, on behalf of the yet unborn children of Saskatchewan, request that they apply the Precautionary Principle combined with a Polluter Pay Assurance Bond so that this whole scheme doesn't backfire on all of us. (It’s disconcerting to note that there were no presentations on protection or conservation programs to educate the public about how to more wisely use the water we have - the prevailing attitude is 'if we don't use it, we'll lose it' – it’s business as usual, only more of it.)
In his closing remarks, Mr. Williams offered their federally-funded report, Water Wealth: A 50 Year Water Plan for Saskatchewan for sale at $100.00 each and concluded with a call to arms: “Let’s Get Going”! He then declared Mr. Clifton the Chairperson of the newly formed Saskatchewan Water Council, the mandate of which is to “optimize development of Saskatchewan’s ample water resources”.
The evening concluded with supper and pre-recorded video messages from both Prime Minister Martin and Finance Minister Goodale, congratulating SAC on their 'vision' and on their Report, and promising their support for the project.
Most of the presentations, the Report, the Executive Summary, and the Terms of Reference for the newly formed Saskatchewan Water Council are on the website: http://www.droughtproofing.com/publications.html
Elaine Hughes
Archerwill, SK
============================
----- Original Message -----
From: Elaine Hughes
To: P. Prebble Min.SWA ; David Forbes Min. Envir.
Cc: Nature Sask ; Sask Environmental Society ; Sask Eco Network ; Dr. David Schindler
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 5:54 PM
Subject: Committee looks at dam idea
Minister Prebble and Minister Forbes:
As set out in Agrivision’s “Droughtproofing the Economy” report released November 2004, it appears that this project is being pushed along. On the map (last page) in Agrivision’s Water Wealth report, it appears that the High Gate Dam would be part of the Eaglehill Diversion project which would take water from the North Saskatchewan down to Lake Diefenbaker.
This water would then be available to support Agrivision’s ‘clusters’ (chosen communities supported by tax-funded infrastructure to ensure success), increased irrigation, increased animal factories and processing, services, etc. It would also be available for the city of Regina in the future …..
Of course, as the reservoirs filled, it would cause extensive flooding and loss of wildlife habitat, wetlands, and cultivated land in the immediate area. It would decrease the flow downstream of the North Sask River, threatening wild rice production, fishing, tourism, hunting, trapping industry – all healthy and sustainable now). It would also adversely affect all the aquifers and wetlands and wildlife habitat for many, many miles in all directions.
Is this economic development? How long will this be green and prosperous??
Is this a good idea???
The Report is at: http://www.droughtproofing.com/pdf/ww_reportsummary.pdf
Elaine Hughes
=======================================
Committee looks at dam idea
http://www.canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/news/local/
story.html?id=ed3c1e78-1baf-4a66-841b-ed651bdd0466
Jamie Komarnicki The StarPhoenix Monday, March 14, 2005
Renewed interest in a 30-year-old water project is making a big splash in some communities along the North Saskatchewan River.
North Battleford and several surrounding rural municipalities have come on-stream for a new look at the 1972 High Gate Dam study into a river water containment plan.
The original location was on the river about 10 kilometres north of North Battleford, with a large reservoir stretching west towards Alberta. Last year, the City of North Battleford set up a number of meetings along the river from Prince Albert to Lloydminster to gauge interest before forming the North Sask River Water Resource Committee.
Joan Corneil, North Battleford's economic development officer, said that a dam is only one possibility the steering committee is looking at to secure a stable water supply for the region. "When I first went out and did these meetings, it was based on the idea that we would build a dam at High Gate," Corneil said. "Since that time, people have asked us to look at various options, not only a dam, but possibly a system of weirs."
The committee plans to hold a general meeting later this month to elect a board of directors and put together a working plan, looking at financial, political, economic, developmental, and environmental concerns.
"We're going to see if it's feasible for starters, and then we'll look for funding, probably from the senior levels of government, and possibly in partnership with the private sector," said Corneil.
"Because of seven years of drought in the area, it's not rocket science to realize that there's all kinds of potential for irrigation and different activities in this area," she said, "We're so reliant on agriculture right now, maybe we need to be more focused on value-added, and you can't add value without water."
MORE:
http://www.canada.com/saskatoon/starphoenix/news/local/
story.html?id=ed3c1e78-1baf-4a66-841b-ed651bdd0466
=================================
What about the High Gate Dam?
Published in the Meadow Lake Progress week of November 14, 2005
Dear Editor:
There wasn’t one presentation from environmental groups, First Nations, health or education workers, young people, or retired folks – all equal stakeholders in this province - at the Sask Agrivision water meeting in North Battleford on November 4. And, of the 200 in attendance (mostly bureaucrats), how many were local folks who wished to attend but were refused admission at the door? When will they learn about the $700 million High Gate Dam proposed for 10 miles west of North Battleford?
This project was the topic of the presentation given by Joan Corneil, spokesperson for the North Sask River Water Resource Committee. According to Ms Corneil, that committee is ready to request funds to rejuvenate the 30-year old Saskatchewan-Nelson Basin Study. The 1972 Study, listing 23 diversion projects and 55 dam projects, was shelved because of the enormous opposition from the public. What’s going to be different about a new study?
Furthermore, how, and in what year, did Agrivision come up with a figure of $700 million for a High Gate Dam? The estimated cost for the Meridian Dam on the South Sask River a few years ago was $3.5 to $5 BILLION dollars, figures from Golder & Assoc., an engineering firm out of Calgary, hired by the Governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan to do the pre-feasibility study.
The costs of the ‘hard path’ big fixes, with their dams and diversions and canals, are great: they displace hundreds of people, flood and erode thousands of acres of farmland and wildlife habitat, threaten species of flora and fauna, and cost enormous amounts of money. These fixes brought financial benefits to some people, expanded generation of hydropower and irrigated agriculture, and moderated the risks of devastating floods and droughts. However, more than 300 big dams across North America have been de-commissioned so far – they are unsustainable and the environmental damages far outweigh the benefits.
To meet today’s challenges of global warming and decreasing glaciers and snowmelt, the growing demands for water must be met with the more sustainable ‘soft path’ approach – managing water demand, NOT seeking to increase water supply. Options for such an approach abound: dryland farming suited to the area such as rain-fed crops, drip irrigation and water harvesting, different forms of sanitation such as composting, low-flow faucets, toilets and appliances, and drought-resistant landscapes, to name just a few. An approach that is sustainable, cheaper, can be implemented more quickly, and has much less environmental damage.
Today, the idea that “a growing economy needs expanding water supplies” is old news. Today, the public and policy-makers around the world know that they must work towards ‘sustainable development’.
How long must we wait for Saskatchewan’s decision-makers to adopt this approach also?
Elaine Hughes
Archerwill, SK
====================
Soft Path
Published in the Western Producer November 17, 2005
Saskatchewan Agrivision’s 2005 water meeting was held in North Battleford on November 4, complete with its bureaucrats and colourful PowerPoint presentations. There wasn’t one presentation from environmental groups, First Nations, health or education workers, young people, or retired folks – all equal stakeholders in this province. And, of the 200 in attendance, how many were local folks who wished to attend but were refused admission at the door? When will they learn about the proposed $700 million High Gate Dam just 10 miles west of North Battleford?
In her presentation about this project, Joan Corneil, spokesperson for the North Sask River Water Resource Committee, indicated that they are ready to request funds to rejuvenate the 1972 Saskatchewan-Nelson Basin Study. The original Study, listing 23 diversion projects and 55 dam projects, was shelved because of the enormous opposition from the public. What’s going to be different about a new study?
In the past, the ‘hard path’ approach, with its dams and diversions and canals, brought financial benefits to some people, expanded generation of hydropower and irrigated agriculture, and moderated the risks of devastating floods and droughts. But the costs are great: they displace hundreds of people, flood and erode thousands of acres of farmland and wildlife habitat, threaten species of flora and fauna, and cost enormous amounts of money. Currently, more than 300 big dams across North America have been de-commissioned – they are unsustainable and the environmental damages far outweigh the benefits.
Today, the idea that “a growing economy needs expanding water supplies” is old news.
Today, presented with global warming and decreasing glaciers and snowmelt, the growing demands for water must be met with the more sustainable ‘soft path’ approach – managing water demand, NOT seeking to increase water supply. Options for such an approach abound: dryland farming suited to the area such as rain-fed crops, drip irrigation and water harvesting, different forms of sanitation such as composting, low-flow faucets, toilets and appliances, and drought-resistant landscapes, to name just a few. An approach that is sustainable, cheaper, can be implemented more quickly, and has much less environmental damage.
Today, the challenge is ‘sustainable development’ – NOT more of the same!
How long will it take for that message to get through to our decision-makers?
Elaine Hughes
Archerwill, SK
Droughtproofing the Economy - AGRIVISION
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Droughtproofing the Economy - AGRIVISION
by Oscar » Thu Aug 03, 2006 9:46 am
Last edited by Oscar on Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:43 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
CARDS Funding for 50-Year Water Plan
by Oscar » Thu Aug 03, 2006 9:58 am
Strategic Initiative - 50 Year Water Development Plan for Saskatchewan Saskatchewan Agrivision Corporation Inc.
http://www.sccd.sk.ca/cards/projectsSep03_Dec03_f.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is proposed to undertake a major review of the water resource, constraints and opportunities for the next 50 years, that will lever the province's unique advantages around our water resources, particularly in intensive and value added agriculture. The study will focus on an evaluation of the historical role of water in the economic and societal development of the prairie region, with specific reference to intensive and value added agriculture; a scan of the current environment with respect to supply, demand and governance structures, and identification of strategic issues to be addressed; an assessment of agricultural and agricultural processing and diversification opportunities related to water development; issues and constraints in the development and use of water for agricultural development and diversification; and potential development scenarios or directional thrusts in intensive and value added agriculture, that will provide the highest and best use of water as a lever in the development of the rural economy. The proposed project is a 50 year plan for water development in value added agriculture that will use a consultative community process to engage all stakeholders in the planning, ensuring community and business sectors are active participants, so they become committed participants during the implementation phases. This project will propose planning ideas for value‑added agriculture that necessitate a new look at how we think about our water, how we use it, and how we can better anticipate changes that are yet to come. This project has been developed with both levels of government, to complement their long term water use planning.
Date Approved: November 24, 2003
Project Cost: $299,500.00
CARDS Funding: $204,500.00
=================================
Central Saskatchewan Irrigation Development
Mid-Sask CFDC/REDA
http://www.sccd.sk.ca/cards/projectsSep03_Dec03_f.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This project consists of three phases designed to assemble support for an irrigation project development on the west side of the South Saskatchewan River. The project is envisioned to create public awareness and education, and bring about partnerships with urban and rural entities. Irrigation supports the growth of higher value crops and livestock, so a successful irrigation project will allow for more revenue, per acre. Further, it will encourage the opportunity to create regional water distribution systems from a safe and reliable source, encouraging rural population growth, increased economic activity and partnerships within industry, wildlife, recreation, tourism and service providers.
Date Approved: September 8, 2003
Project Cost: $11,800.00
CARDS Funding: $5,000.00
http://www.sccd.sk.ca/cards/projectsSep03_Dec03_f.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is proposed to undertake a major review of the water resource, constraints and opportunities for the next 50 years, that will lever the province's unique advantages around our water resources, particularly in intensive and value added agriculture. The study will focus on an evaluation of the historical role of water in the economic and societal development of the prairie region, with specific reference to intensive and value added agriculture; a scan of the current environment with respect to supply, demand and governance structures, and identification of strategic issues to be addressed; an assessment of agricultural and agricultural processing and diversification opportunities related to water development; issues and constraints in the development and use of water for agricultural development and diversification; and potential development scenarios or directional thrusts in intensive and value added agriculture, that will provide the highest and best use of water as a lever in the development of the rural economy. The proposed project is a 50 year plan for water development in value added agriculture that will use a consultative community process to engage all stakeholders in the planning, ensuring community and business sectors are active participants, so they become committed participants during the implementation phases. This project will propose planning ideas for value‑added agriculture that necessitate a new look at how we think about our water, how we use it, and how we can better anticipate changes that are yet to come. This project has been developed with both levels of government, to complement their long term water use planning.
Date Approved: November 24, 2003
Project Cost: $299,500.00
CARDS Funding: $204,500.00
=================================
Central Saskatchewan Irrigation Development
Mid-Sask CFDC/REDA
http://www.sccd.sk.ca/cards/projectsSep03_Dec03_f.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This project consists of three phases designed to assemble support for an irrigation project development on the west side of the South Saskatchewan River. The project is envisioned to create public awareness and education, and bring about partnerships with urban and rural entities. Irrigation supports the growth of higher value crops and livestock, so a successful irrigation project will allow for more revenue, per acre. Further, it will encourage the opportunity to create regional water distribution systems from a safe and reliable source, encouraging rural population growth, increased economic activity and partnerships within industry, wildlife, recreation, tourism and service providers.
Date Approved: September 8, 2003
Project Cost: $11,800.00
CARDS Funding: $5,000.00
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Exploiting Saskatchewan's Water - FARMSCAPE
by Oscar » Thu Aug 03, 2006 10:08 am
Articles taken from FARMSCAPE - Farmscape is a presentation of Sask Pork and Manitoba Pork Council
Water viewed as key to Saskatchewan's prosperity
November 3, 2004 Farmscape (Episode 1637)
The Saskatchewan Agrivision Corporation suggests the infrastructure to manage water is one of the keys to the province's long term prosperity. The Phase-1 Report on the "50-Year Water Development Plan" for the province will be examined tomorrow in Regina as part of the conference, "Water: Drought Proofing the Economy". Agrivision President Red Williams says water is critical to the development of more intensive, value-added agriculture and further processing.
Clip-Red Williams-Saskatchewan Agrivision Corporation We're having an obvious decline in rural populations in the prairies with larger farms and the decline of the villages. When you drill down in that sort of thing and how you can bring it back, that means value added industries and that means food processing and other activities. It also means repairing the infrastructure out there, particularly the water supply to centres in the rural areas. As you work through this you soon find that really water is at the basis of the whole thing. When you look at Saskatchewan, of course, we have a good supply of water. It's just the wrong seasons and the wrong locations so what we have to do is build reservoirs and conserve these waters and then pipe water to towns. We have a pretty good system now to some of the parts around the Melville area and out from Diefenbaker to as far as Lanigan and Humboldt. These pipelines are working well. We need to service the rest of the country. Of course then there's irrigation. Climate warming is coming and, with that, will come drying in the south part of the province and up into the central part. This gives us an opportunity to irrigate and support a food production industry. Also irrigation means lots of forages and that means stabilizing livestock industries.
Williams points out Saskatchewan accounts for half of the arable land in Canada and he suggests a little more should be done with that land. For Farmscape.Ca, I'm Bruce Cochrane.
*Farmscape is a presentation of Sask Pork and Manitoba Pork Council
============================================
Prairie agriculture steps up efforts to make more efficient use of water
April 30, 2005 Farmscape Article 1793
Research being conducted in Western Canada is helping address the growing concerns over the society’s ability to meet the expanding need for dwindling supplies of water. The University of Manitoba is urging stakeholders to become more directly involved in meeting future challenges in supplying necessary volumes of clean water.
Asper School of Business Associate Dean Dr. Ed Tyrchniewicz says, “We’re wanting more and more water however, the question is, do we have the quantity of water, do we have the quality of water to do this and do we have it in the right amount and in the right place and at the right time?”
“I think basically, in very simple terms, we need a better handle on what is the availability of water on a water shed basis and, not just on an annual basis, but on a seasonal or monthly basis. We also need to know what is the demand for that water for these competing uses and we need a mechanism for allocating that water. If we had unlimited water, then we could just allocate it as is. We have a current licensing system which is fine to a point but, if we have shortages, we need a mechanism to better allocate that scarce water.”
Regional Friction Over Water Allocation Expected to Increase
Dr. Tyrchniewicz says the allocation of water is emerging as one of the key issues to be addressed as we move through the first decade of the 21st century. He says the diversification of agriculture has brought increased livestock production to the prairies particularly hog production, expanded vegetable and special crop production and increased processing, all of which require large volumes of water.
“We also have interjurisdictional issues on water. For example Manitoba's water, other than what falls from above, comes from other jurisdictions, from Ontario, from the Northern U.S., from across the prairies.”
“Just using the prairies as an example, where Alberta and Saskatchewan are both increasing their agricultural diversification, they're going to want more of that water that is supposed to be flowing into Manitoba. I think we'll have reasons to be scrapping over water with other jurisdictions.”
Saskatchewan Report Identifies Several Economic Opportunities From Water Development
A report that examines the potential of water in Saskatchewan suggests developing the infrastructure to manage water has the potential to add a whole new layer of economic prosperity for rural areas of the province. The Phase-1 Report on the ‘50-Year Water Development Plan’ for Saskatchewan examines water development in Saskatchewan and considers such factors as global warming and its impact on rivers, the volumes of water actually being used in the province and opportunities that exist in water development.
Author Dr. Graham Parsons, with Clifton Associates, is confident expanded programs for water developments have the potential to add a whole new layer to the Saskatchewan economy and offer significant job opportunities, particularly in rural areas.
“There are two big opportunity areas. One has to do with agricultural food processing. A lot of water intensive activities in agriculture, irrigated agriculture in particular, are being forced out by urban development. This is true in California, Florida and many parts of the United States. They're running down their aquifers and their water is starting to become too expensive for water intensive agriculture so there are big opportunities starting to open up. In Saskatchewan we actually have the soils, we have a great lake called Lake Diefenbaker, which we don't use a great deal of.”
“The second big opportunity area lays with respect to energy. There are important energy opportunities available if we wish to develop our hydro power, once again based on water as either a cooling agent for thermal plants or as hydro-electric turbines.”
Simple Adjustments Dramatically Reduce Water Waste
One of Canada’s premier swine research facilities, the Saskatoon based Prairie Swine Centre is taking great strides in developing strategies to help farmers conserve water.
Work at the centre’s Elstow research barn has shown simply adjusting the height of nipple drinkers, the most commonly used method for watering grower-finisher pigs, as the pigs grow and, in most barns, reducing flow rates can save as much as a liter of water per pig per day.
Dr. Harold Gonyou, a research scientist in animal behaviour, says scientists observed up to 45 percent of the water flowing into the barn through the drinker was being wasted.
“The water that comes into a barn via the drinker system is probably about 60 to 70 percent of the total water used by the pigs in a room. There's water used for washing, there’s some moisture in the feed, etcetera but, in terms of the water balance, 60 to 70 percent is coming from the drinker. We can reduce that by probably 20 percent and that can be a substantial reduction of perhaps a half to a litre a day per pig.”
Dr. Gonyou says, in cases where flow rates were higher and water was running more quickly, the level of waste was higher and, where the nipple was at the wrong height making it uncomfortable for the pig to drink the amount of waste increased.
He says wasting less water “also reduces the amount of storage space you need for manure because you don’t have as much water going through. Then the volume that you have to distribute onto the land is reduced as well because you don’t have all the water there. There are a number of points you can save, the cost of the water, the storage capacity and also the cost of hauling and applying it to the land.”
He concludes that by managing both water flow rates and the height of the drinker, it’s possible to bring water use in nipple drinker systems in line with levels common in bowl type drinker systems.
Lower Manure Water Content Improves Application Efficiency
Meanwhile research being conducted by Alberta Pork under the federal greenhouse gas initiative is focusing on improving the fertilizer value of liquid swine manure by reducing its water content. A project on a small commercial operation near High River is demonstrating water conservation equipment and strategies that can be used in the swine barn to reduce the manure’s water content.
Canadian Pork Council (GPC) Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Coordinator Cedric MacLeod says, “The first strategy is to put in conservation drinkers which won't allow the pigs to rub up against the drinkers to cool themselves in the hot weather. Of course you want to make sure that you have a contingency plan in the barn for misters or what not to maintain animal comfort.”
“The second is a monitoring system that monitors water flow through the barn daily so, if you have a pipe that breaks in the middle of the night and is dumping water directly into the manure pit, the alarm will go off because the monitor will sense that elevated water use. Alternatively, if you have a blockage in your line and you're not getting water flow, the alarm will also trigger. It's not only for over water use but under water use as well. It's a way to monitor and manage the water use. Those are the two main strategies and there are other things we're going to try to look at some point.”
He says, on average, total water use and manure volume is being reduced by 33 percent which makes a big difference in the effectiveness of manure application.
Stakeholders Encouraged to Become More Involved
Dr. Tyrchniewicz encourages stakeholders to come together to look at the institutions we have in place and the practices and policies we use for dealing with water. He suggests there is a need to answer such questions as, “What is the availability of water?” and “What is the demand for water for these competing uses?” and then develop an equitable mechanism for allocating that water.
Farmscape Staff
Water viewed as key to Saskatchewan's prosperity
November 3, 2004 Farmscape (Episode 1637)
The Saskatchewan Agrivision Corporation suggests the infrastructure to manage water is one of the keys to the province's long term prosperity. The Phase-1 Report on the "50-Year Water Development Plan" for the province will be examined tomorrow in Regina as part of the conference, "Water: Drought Proofing the Economy". Agrivision President Red Williams says water is critical to the development of more intensive, value-added agriculture and further processing.
Clip-Red Williams-Saskatchewan Agrivision Corporation We're having an obvious decline in rural populations in the prairies with larger farms and the decline of the villages. When you drill down in that sort of thing and how you can bring it back, that means value added industries and that means food processing and other activities. It also means repairing the infrastructure out there, particularly the water supply to centres in the rural areas. As you work through this you soon find that really water is at the basis of the whole thing. When you look at Saskatchewan, of course, we have a good supply of water. It's just the wrong seasons and the wrong locations so what we have to do is build reservoirs and conserve these waters and then pipe water to towns. We have a pretty good system now to some of the parts around the Melville area and out from Diefenbaker to as far as Lanigan and Humboldt. These pipelines are working well. We need to service the rest of the country. Of course then there's irrigation. Climate warming is coming and, with that, will come drying in the south part of the province and up into the central part. This gives us an opportunity to irrigate and support a food production industry. Also irrigation means lots of forages and that means stabilizing livestock industries.
Williams points out Saskatchewan accounts for half of the arable land in Canada and he suggests a little more should be done with that land. For Farmscape.Ca, I'm Bruce Cochrane.
*Farmscape is a presentation of Sask Pork and Manitoba Pork Council
============================================
Prairie agriculture steps up efforts to make more efficient use of water
April 30, 2005 Farmscape Article 1793
Research being conducted in Western Canada is helping address the growing concerns over the society’s ability to meet the expanding need for dwindling supplies of water. The University of Manitoba is urging stakeholders to become more directly involved in meeting future challenges in supplying necessary volumes of clean water.
Asper School of Business Associate Dean Dr. Ed Tyrchniewicz says, “We’re wanting more and more water however, the question is, do we have the quantity of water, do we have the quality of water to do this and do we have it in the right amount and in the right place and at the right time?”
“I think basically, in very simple terms, we need a better handle on what is the availability of water on a water shed basis and, not just on an annual basis, but on a seasonal or monthly basis. We also need to know what is the demand for that water for these competing uses and we need a mechanism for allocating that water. If we had unlimited water, then we could just allocate it as is. We have a current licensing system which is fine to a point but, if we have shortages, we need a mechanism to better allocate that scarce water.”
Regional Friction Over Water Allocation Expected to Increase
Dr. Tyrchniewicz says the allocation of water is emerging as one of the key issues to be addressed as we move through the first decade of the 21st century. He says the diversification of agriculture has brought increased livestock production to the prairies particularly hog production, expanded vegetable and special crop production and increased processing, all of which require large volumes of water.
“We also have interjurisdictional issues on water. For example Manitoba's water, other than what falls from above, comes from other jurisdictions, from Ontario, from the Northern U.S., from across the prairies.”
“Just using the prairies as an example, where Alberta and Saskatchewan are both increasing their agricultural diversification, they're going to want more of that water that is supposed to be flowing into Manitoba. I think we'll have reasons to be scrapping over water with other jurisdictions.”
Saskatchewan Report Identifies Several Economic Opportunities From Water Development
A report that examines the potential of water in Saskatchewan suggests developing the infrastructure to manage water has the potential to add a whole new layer of economic prosperity for rural areas of the province. The Phase-1 Report on the ‘50-Year Water Development Plan’ for Saskatchewan examines water development in Saskatchewan and considers such factors as global warming and its impact on rivers, the volumes of water actually being used in the province and opportunities that exist in water development.
Author Dr. Graham Parsons, with Clifton Associates, is confident expanded programs for water developments have the potential to add a whole new layer to the Saskatchewan economy and offer significant job opportunities, particularly in rural areas.
“There are two big opportunity areas. One has to do with agricultural food processing. A lot of water intensive activities in agriculture, irrigated agriculture in particular, are being forced out by urban development. This is true in California, Florida and many parts of the United States. They're running down their aquifers and their water is starting to become too expensive for water intensive agriculture so there are big opportunities starting to open up. In Saskatchewan we actually have the soils, we have a great lake called Lake Diefenbaker, which we don't use a great deal of.”
“The second big opportunity area lays with respect to energy. There are important energy opportunities available if we wish to develop our hydro power, once again based on water as either a cooling agent for thermal plants or as hydro-electric turbines.”
Simple Adjustments Dramatically Reduce Water Waste
One of Canada’s premier swine research facilities, the Saskatoon based Prairie Swine Centre is taking great strides in developing strategies to help farmers conserve water.
Work at the centre’s Elstow research barn has shown simply adjusting the height of nipple drinkers, the most commonly used method for watering grower-finisher pigs, as the pigs grow and, in most barns, reducing flow rates can save as much as a liter of water per pig per day.
Dr. Harold Gonyou, a research scientist in animal behaviour, says scientists observed up to 45 percent of the water flowing into the barn through the drinker was being wasted.
“The water that comes into a barn via the drinker system is probably about 60 to 70 percent of the total water used by the pigs in a room. There's water used for washing, there’s some moisture in the feed, etcetera but, in terms of the water balance, 60 to 70 percent is coming from the drinker. We can reduce that by probably 20 percent and that can be a substantial reduction of perhaps a half to a litre a day per pig.”
Dr. Gonyou says, in cases where flow rates were higher and water was running more quickly, the level of waste was higher and, where the nipple was at the wrong height making it uncomfortable for the pig to drink the amount of waste increased.
He says wasting less water “also reduces the amount of storage space you need for manure because you don’t have as much water going through. Then the volume that you have to distribute onto the land is reduced as well because you don’t have all the water there. There are a number of points you can save, the cost of the water, the storage capacity and also the cost of hauling and applying it to the land.”
He concludes that by managing both water flow rates and the height of the drinker, it’s possible to bring water use in nipple drinker systems in line with levels common in bowl type drinker systems.
Lower Manure Water Content Improves Application Efficiency
Meanwhile research being conducted by Alberta Pork under the federal greenhouse gas initiative is focusing on improving the fertilizer value of liquid swine manure by reducing its water content. A project on a small commercial operation near High River is demonstrating water conservation equipment and strategies that can be used in the swine barn to reduce the manure’s water content.
Canadian Pork Council (GPC) Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Coordinator Cedric MacLeod says, “The first strategy is to put in conservation drinkers which won't allow the pigs to rub up against the drinkers to cool themselves in the hot weather. Of course you want to make sure that you have a contingency plan in the barn for misters or what not to maintain animal comfort.”
“The second is a monitoring system that monitors water flow through the barn daily so, if you have a pipe that breaks in the middle of the night and is dumping water directly into the manure pit, the alarm will go off because the monitor will sense that elevated water use. Alternatively, if you have a blockage in your line and you're not getting water flow, the alarm will also trigger. It's not only for over water use but under water use as well. It's a way to monitor and manage the water use. Those are the two main strategies and there are other things we're going to try to look at some point.”
He says, on average, total water use and manure volume is being reduced by 33 percent which makes a big difference in the effectiveness of manure application.
Stakeholders Encouraged to Become More Involved
Dr. Tyrchniewicz encourages stakeholders to come together to look at the institutions we have in place and the practices and policies we use for dealing with water. He suggests there is a need to answer such questions as, “What is the availability of water?” and “What is the demand for water for these competing uses?” and then develop an equitable mechanism for allocating that water.
Farmscape Staff
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
RESOLUTIONS - NDP Annual Convention 2006
by Oscar » Thu Nov 16, 2006 10:15 am
RESOLUTIONS - NDP Annual Convention 2006
See the Resolutions being dealt with at the 2006 NDP Convention,
RE: dams, uranium and tarsands!!!
http://www.saskndp.com/cw/pdf/cw_66.5.pdf
NOTE to Readers:
As of September 10, 2007 at 10 a.m., attempt to access the above-noted pdf file resulted in a message which read:
"Warning: file_get_contents(templates/) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in E:\web\public_html\saskndp\includes\template.php on line 15.
See the Resolutions being dealt with at the 2006 NDP Convention,
RE: dams, uranium and tarsands!!!
http://www.saskndp.com/cw/pdf/cw_66.5.pdf
NOTE to Readers:
As of September 10, 2007 at 10 a.m., attempt to access the above-noted pdf file resulted in a message which read:
"Warning: file_get_contents(templates/) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: Permission denied in E:\web\public_html\saskndp\includes\template.php on line 15.
Last edited by Oscar on Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
North Sask Water Supply Feasibility Study Contract Awarded
by Oscar » Sat Feb 17, 2007 9:13 am
North Saskatchewan Water Supply Feasibility Study Contract Awarded
MEDIA RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
JANUARY 31, 2007
The North Sask River Water Resource Committee (NSRWRC) has awarded the contract to execute a feasibility study that will investigate surface water storage alternatives on the North Saskatchewan River in Northwest Saskatchewan to Golder Associates Ltd.
The study is due for completion at the end of November 2007.
The contract was awarded in the amount of $370,000, and when combined with other associated expenses, total costs are expected to be $380,984. Under the Canada Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program, the federal and provincial governments have committed to contributing 90% of this cost equaling 342,887. Fundraising efforts in the summer of 2006 by the NSRWRC resulted in the voluntary contribution of $25,700 from several municipalities and organizations in Northwest Saskatchewan and Northeast Alberta. The remaining $12,397 will be contributed from the Battlefords Regional Economic Development Authority (REDA) through the REDA Enhancement Fund.
The study will be done in two phases. The first phase will be a scoping study to identify and assess water development alternatives and water use options for large scale economic development in the region. These alternatives will include (1) no investment in infrastructure (status quo), (2) non- structural investments to develop the water resource with no storage, (3) the Highgate Dam, and (4) off- channel storage options.
The second phase will evaluate one of the alternatives studied in phase one in more detail.
A series of public meetings is planned for February 20th in Turtleford, February 21st in North Battleford, and February 26th at the Alcurve Hall north of Lloydminster. The meetings will offer the public an opportunity to provide input into the process and will include a presentation of the scope and methodology of the study.
For more information contact the Battlefords REDA at (306) 446-7503.
-30-
For more information contact:
Steve McKechnie, Chairperson
North Sask River Water Resource Committee
(306) 821-6669
D. Ryan Bater, General Manager
Battlefords REDA
(306) 446-7506
rbater@redaalliance.ca
MEDIA RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
JANUARY 31, 2007
The North Sask River Water Resource Committee (NSRWRC) has awarded the contract to execute a feasibility study that will investigate surface water storage alternatives on the North Saskatchewan River in Northwest Saskatchewan to Golder Associates Ltd.
The study is due for completion at the end of November 2007.
The contract was awarded in the amount of $370,000, and when combined with other associated expenses, total costs are expected to be $380,984. Under the Canada Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program, the federal and provincial governments have committed to contributing 90% of this cost equaling 342,887. Fundraising efforts in the summer of 2006 by the NSRWRC resulted in the voluntary contribution of $25,700 from several municipalities and organizations in Northwest Saskatchewan and Northeast Alberta. The remaining $12,397 will be contributed from the Battlefords Regional Economic Development Authority (REDA) through the REDA Enhancement Fund.
The study will be done in two phases. The first phase will be a scoping study to identify and assess water development alternatives and water use options for large scale economic development in the region. These alternatives will include (1) no investment in infrastructure (status quo), (2) non- structural investments to develop the water resource with no storage, (3) the Highgate Dam, and (4) off- channel storage options.
The second phase will evaluate one of the alternatives studied in phase one in more detail.
A series of public meetings is planned for February 20th in Turtleford, February 21st in North Battleford, and February 26th at the Alcurve Hall north of Lloydminster. The meetings will offer the public an opportunity to provide input into the process and will include a presentation of the scope and methodology of the study.
For more information contact the Battlefords REDA at (306) 446-7503.
-30-
For more information contact:
Steve McKechnie, Chairperson
North Sask River Water Resource Committee
(306) 821-6669
D. Ryan Bater, General Manager
Battlefords REDA
(306) 446-7506
rbater@redaalliance.ca
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
[b]People are asking: Does Saskatchewan Need More Dams?[/b]
by Oscar » Mon Feb 19, 2007 2:40 pm
People are asking: Does Saskatchewan Need More Dams?
[ http://environmentalsociety.ca/wp-conte ... g-Dams.pdf ]
1. Are dams the key to economic prosperity?
Promoters of new dams say these projects will create jobs and prosperity. They say that with more water we can irrigate more farmland, and thus produce more cattle, hogs, potatoes, and grain. Expanded and more dependable food production will, they say, attract food processing plants and create jobs.
But Saskatchewan isn’t short of irrigation water. The government says there’s enough water in Lake Diefenbaker to nearly triple irrigation around that reservoir—adding hundreds-of thousands of acres. Wayne Clifton, an engineer and advocate of dams, claims there’s enough water in Lake Diefenbaker to irrigate 3.7 million acres. That’s 11 times more land than we currently irrigate in the entire province. Over the past 40 years, farmers have added irrigation to 250,000 acres. At that rate, it would take 600 years to add 3.7 million acres. Calls for new dams are, at best, premature. Irrigation is expanding slowly, not for lack of water, but because farm financial returns are so bad irrigation doesn’t pay, or it barely pays. Even if we build a new dam, we would likely have to wait two generations before there might be enough irrigated acreage to entice a company to build a food processing plant. Gardiner Dam was completed in 1967, creating Lake Diefenbaker, Canada’s largest irrigation reservoir. Forty years later, that dam and its reservoir have not yet attracted even one major food processing plant to this province. There is no quick and easy path from dams to jobs.
2. Are dams affordable?
New dams, and the canals, bridges, and other infrastructure they require, cost billions of dollars. In 2002, independent engineering consultants Golder and Associates estimated the cost of the proposed Meridian Dam (on the South Saskatchewan River, near the Alberta-Saskatchewan border) at $5 billion. Since then, a boom in Alberta has pushed up labour and construction costs by 25% to 40%. A new dam project here might cost $6 billion to $7 billion in total. There is now a proposal to build four dams in Saskatchewan. This plan, promoted by Agrivision Corporation, would cost $20 billion to $30 billion (including roads, canals, bridges, etc.). That’s nearly $100,000 per Saskatchewan family. Dams’ high costs and their long paybacks mean private companies won’t finance these
projects. New dams will be paid for primarily by citizens through taxes. New dams mean diverting billions of dollars away from schools, roads, healthcare, environmental protection, and other vital investments.
3. Despite the cost, aren’t dams a good investment?
Let’s think about that $20 billion to $30 billion cost for four dams. It’s hard to comprehend that much money. With that amount of money, we could do all the following:
● build wind turbines to supply one-third of the province’s electricity needs ($3.0 billion);
● give a high-efficiency furnace to every household that needs one, along with a credit of $5,000 to put toward energy-saving windows or insulation ($3.0 billion);
● build two new hospitals and a cancer clinic ($2.5 billion), hire an additional 2,000 nurses (interest on $3.0 billion would pay salaries), and buy a half-dozen MRI diagnostic machines (<0.2 billion);
● build five meat-packing and food-processing plants ($0.9 billion);
● build 50,000 homes for low-income families ($10.0 billion); and
● still have billions left over to fix roads, build rinks, fund the arts, and cut tuitions.
4. Don’t we need dams to manage rivers destabilized by climate change?
Dam advocates warn that climate change means less water in Prairie rivers in the future and less-dependable supplies. We need dams, they say, to secure water supplies for communities and agriculture and to stabilize water levels in rivers to protect fish and river-side habitats. Dams don’t create water, however. At best, dams help regulate flows; they can help smooth Saskatchewan Environmental Society the high and low flow periods in summer and winter and give us a very limited ability to sustain river levels during droughts. In theory, dams could help smooth out flows.
But we already have the dams we need to regulate river flows. On the North Saskatchewan River, we have Bighorn and Brazeau Dams in Western Alberta—both built to stabilize flows for the cities of Edmonton, North Battleford, and Prince Albert. On the South Saskatchewan River, we have dams upstream in Alberta and the Gardiner Dam and Diefenbaker Lake that stabilize water supplies for Saskatoon, Regina, Moose Jaw, and other communities. Most important, new dams may actually decrease water supply security and stability. That’s because the plan to build dams in Saskatchewan is part of a larger plan to dramatically increase water use. The plan to build dams goes along with a plan to withdraw more water from our rivers for irrigation and petroleum recovery. That water won’t find its way back into our rivers. Further, reservoirs increase evaporation losses. Water withdrawals and evaporation will mean less water in rivers downstream from new dams.
5. Won’t clean hydroelectric power help slow climate change?
The dams under consideration would be costly relative to their electricity output. For example, SaskPower calculates that the Highgate Dam, proposed for the Battlefords-area, might generate 72 megawatts of electricity, about 2% of the province’s needs. The Centennial Wind Project near Swift Current produces 150 megawatts at peak output and cost $255 million. Even with higher costs today, installing wind turbines equal to the electrical generation capacity of a dam like Highgate would cost less than $200 million. That’s a tiny fraction of the cost of a dam. And if climate change means less river flow and more wind, then wind turbines are better investments than dams.
6. What about water diversions and exports?
The plan to build several dams in Saskatchewan also includes the creation of water diversions. Most of Western Canada’s water flows north. The south, where population and economic activity is centered, is relatively dry. Reports such as the 1972 “Water Supply for the Saskatchewan-Nelson Basin” identify dozens of possible diversions that could send northern water south: diverting the Peace, Athabasca, and Churchill Rivers to the North Saskatchewan; diverting the North Saskatchewan into the South Saskatchewan; and diverting the South Saskatchewan to give additional volumes to the Qu’Appelle and Souris Rivers. De-watering northern rivers would have disastrous effects: on native communities and economies that depend partly on hunting, trapping, fishing, and even tourism; on forestry and logging; and on the environment. The environmental effects would be especially damaging because this depletion would come on top of increased variability triggered by climate change. The effects of reduced water availability—in creeks, bogs, forests, and wetlands—would reach far back into northern ecosystems and habitats, far from the rivers’ edges, up and down food chains. Here’s one example of the complex effects water diversions could have: northern wetlands contain about 150 billion tonnes of carbon in the form of peat. That tonnage is 25 times the amount of carbon released each year as a result of burning fossil fuels in the entire world. If peatlands remain saturated, the carbon remains stable. But if we cut off the water supplies, that carbon could be quickly released. Diverting northern water south would be an economic, cultural, and environmental disaster. Diversions will also facilitate water exports. The dam-and-divert schemes would move northern water toward the Canada-US border—in some cases the water would be delivered to points within 10 miles of that border. In the 1960s and ’70s, individuals and organizations crafted several detailed proposals for “continental” water transfers—diverting northern Canadian waters to the dry southwestern United States. It is reasonable to ask whether the southward diversion of water would stop at the Canada- US border.
7. Is the dam-and-divert agenda linked to water privatization?
Proponents of dams see water as a feedstock resource for agriculture, energy production, and industry. In its reports promoting dams, Agrivision Corporation calls water “the oil of the 21st Century” and, for the most part, they want it treated like oil: privatized, commodified, deregulated, and produced and allocated as a market good on the basis of profit. Agrivision urges the creation of for-profit Water Development Corporations and the buying and selling of water rights. Saskatchewan citizens want sustainable economies and secure livelihoods. But they understand that water serves many roles: in nature, in our economy, as a medium for recreation, and as a determinant of human and ecological health. Most citizens agree that water for basic human needs is a human right. Water should be collectively held as a common trust, managed through democratic processes, regulated in the public interest, and stewarded for the good of future generations. Saskatchewan citizens do not want private corporations to own, control, and sell our water.
8. Dams can’t be so bad. Everybody’s building them; aren’t they?
The great dam-building heyday was the 1970s when, worldwide, two or three large dams (over 15 metres high) were completed each day. Over 40,000 large dams have been built since 1950. But the dam-building heyday is over. The 1970s’ thinking—build dam after dam and endlessly expand water supply and use—has now been replaced by more progressive and ecologically sensitive policies that focus on water conservation and minimizing intervention in watersheds. Today, the US is decommissioning dams faster than it is building them.
9. Conclusion
“The debate about dams is a debate about the very meaning, purpose, and pathways for achieving development. This suggests that decision-making on water and energy management will align itself with the emerging global commitments to sustainable human development and on the equitable distribution of costs and benefits.” —World Commission on Dams.
Before Saskatchewan seriously considers a new dam, citizens and governments must engage in discussions about how best to allocate public dollars to create secure and prosperous communities and livelihoods. The economic arguments for dams are much weaker than they first appear. And the massive and damaging environmental impacts of dams are only now beginning to be fully understood.
December 2006
For more information see:
http://www.wcd.org (World Commission on Dams)
http://www.environmentalsociety.ca (Saskatchewan Environmental Society)
http://www.polisproject.org (The Polis Project on Ecological Governance)
http://www.gordonfn.org/FW-pubs&links.cfm (Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation) or,
contact: Saskatchewan Environmental Society
PO Box 1372
Saskatoon, SK S7K 3N9
ph 306.665.1915
email info@environmentalsociety.ca
online http://www.environmentalsociety.ca
Do you value this information? If so, please support our work by becoming a member or by making a financial contribution. Call, write, or email.
The SES would like to acknowledge and thank the Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation for its generous support of our work in helping inform Saskatchewan citizens on water issues. Cover photo courtesy Saskatchewan Watershed Authority.
[ http://environmentalsociety.ca/wp-conte ... g-Dams.pdf ]
1. Are dams the key to economic prosperity?
Promoters of new dams say these projects will create jobs and prosperity. They say that with more water we can irrigate more farmland, and thus produce more cattle, hogs, potatoes, and grain. Expanded and more dependable food production will, they say, attract food processing plants and create jobs.
But Saskatchewan isn’t short of irrigation water. The government says there’s enough water in Lake Diefenbaker to nearly triple irrigation around that reservoir—adding hundreds-of thousands of acres. Wayne Clifton, an engineer and advocate of dams, claims there’s enough water in Lake Diefenbaker to irrigate 3.7 million acres. That’s 11 times more land than we currently irrigate in the entire province. Over the past 40 years, farmers have added irrigation to 250,000 acres. At that rate, it would take 600 years to add 3.7 million acres. Calls for new dams are, at best, premature. Irrigation is expanding slowly, not for lack of water, but because farm financial returns are so bad irrigation doesn’t pay, or it barely pays. Even if we build a new dam, we would likely have to wait two generations before there might be enough irrigated acreage to entice a company to build a food processing plant. Gardiner Dam was completed in 1967, creating Lake Diefenbaker, Canada’s largest irrigation reservoir. Forty years later, that dam and its reservoir have not yet attracted even one major food processing plant to this province. There is no quick and easy path from dams to jobs.
2. Are dams affordable?
New dams, and the canals, bridges, and other infrastructure they require, cost billions of dollars. In 2002, independent engineering consultants Golder and Associates estimated the cost of the proposed Meridian Dam (on the South Saskatchewan River, near the Alberta-Saskatchewan border) at $5 billion. Since then, a boom in Alberta has pushed up labour and construction costs by 25% to 40%. A new dam project here might cost $6 billion to $7 billion in total. There is now a proposal to build four dams in Saskatchewan. This plan, promoted by Agrivision Corporation, would cost $20 billion to $30 billion (including roads, canals, bridges, etc.). That’s nearly $100,000 per Saskatchewan family. Dams’ high costs and their long paybacks mean private companies won’t finance these
projects. New dams will be paid for primarily by citizens through taxes. New dams mean diverting billions of dollars away from schools, roads, healthcare, environmental protection, and other vital investments.
3. Despite the cost, aren’t dams a good investment?
Let’s think about that $20 billion to $30 billion cost for four dams. It’s hard to comprehend that much money. With that amount of money, we could do all the following:
● build wind turbines to supply one-third of the province’s electricity needs ($3.0 billion);
● give a high-efficiency furnace to every household that needs one, along with a credit of $5,000 to put toward energy-saving windows or insulation ($3.0 billion);
● build two new hospitals and a cancer clinic ($2.5 billion), hire an additional 2,000 nurses (interest on $3.0 billion would pay salaries), and buy a half-dozen MRI diagnostic machines (<0.2 billion);
● build five meat-packing and food-processing plants ($0.9 billion);
● build 50,000 homes for low-income families ($10.0 billion); and
● still have billions left over to fix roads, build rinks, fund the arts, and cut tuitions.
4. Don’t we need dams to manage rivers destabilized by climate change?
Dam advocates warn that climate change means less water in Prairie rivers in the future and less-dependable supplies. We need dams, they say, to secure water supplies for communities and agriculture and to stabilize water levels in rivers to protect fish and river-side habitats. Dams don’t create water, however. At best, dams help regulate flows; they can help smooth Saskatchewan Environmental Society the high and low flow periods in summer and winter and give us a very limited ability to sustain river levels during droughts. In theory, dams could help smooth out flows.
But we already have the dams we need to regulate river flows. On the North Saskatchewan River, we have Bighorn and Brazeau Dams in Western Alberta—both built to stabilize flows for the cities of Edmonton, North Battleford, and Prince Albert. On the South Saskatchewan River, we have dams upstream in Alberta and the Gardiner Dam and Diefenbaker Lake that stabilize water supplies for Saskatoon, Regina, Moose Jaw, and other communities. Most important, new dams may actually decrease water supply security and stability. That’s because the plan to build dams in Saskatchewan is part of a larger plan to dramatically increase water use. The plan to build dams goes along with a plan to withdraw more water from our rivers for irrigation and petroleum recovery. That water won’t find its way back into our rivers. Further, reservoirs increase evaporation losses. Water withdrawals and evaporation will mean less water in rivers downstream from new dams.
5. Won’t clean hydroelectric power help slow climate change?
The dams under consideration would be costly relative to their electricity output. For example, SaskPower calculates that the Highgate Dam, proposed for the Battlefords-area, might generate 72 megawatts of electricity, about 2% of the province’s needs. The Centennial Wind Project near Swift Current produces 150 megawatts at peak output and cost $255 million. Even with higher costs today, installing wind turbines equal to the electrical generation capacity of a dam like Highgate would cost less than $200 million. That’s a tiny fraction of the cost of a dam. And if climate change means less river flow and more wind, then wind turbines are better investments than dams.
6. What about water diversions and exports?
The plan to build several dams in Saskatchewan also includes the creation of water diversions. Most of Western Canada’s water flows north. The south, where population and economic activity is centered, is relatively dry. Reports such as the 1972 “Water Supply for the Saskatchewan-Nelson Basin” identify dozens of possible diversions that could send northern water south: diverting the Peace, Athabasca, and Churchill Rivers to the North Saskatchewan; diverting the North Saskatchewan into the South Saskatchewan; and diverting the South Saskatchewan to give additional volumes to the Qu’Appelle and Souris Rivers. De-watering northern rivers would have disastrous effects: on native communities and economies that depend partly on hunting, trapping, fishing, and even tourism; on forestry and logging; and on the environment. The environmental effects would be especially damaging because this depletion would come on top of increased variability triggered by climate change. The effects of reduced water availability—in creeks, bogs, forests, and wetlands—would reach far back into northern ecosystems and habitats, far from the rivers’ edges, up and down food chains. Here’s one example of the complex effects water diversions could have: northern wetlands contain about 150 billion tonnes of carbon in the form of peat. That tonnage is 25 times the amount of carbon released each year as a result of burning fossil fuels in the entire world. If peatlands remain saturated, the carbon remains stable. But if we cut off the water supplies, that carbon could be quickly released. Diverting northern water south would be an economic, cultural, and environmental disaster. Diversions will also facilitate water exports. The dam-and-divert schemes would move northern water toward the Canada-US border—in some cases the water would be delivered to points within 10 miles of that border. In the 1960s and ’70s, individuals and organizations crafted several detailed proposals for “continental” water transfers—diverting northern Canadian waters to the dry southwestern United States. It is reasonable to ask whether the southward diversion of water would stop at the Canada- US border.
7. Is the dam-and-divert agenda linked to water privatization?
Proponents of dams see water as a feedstock resource for agriculture, energy production, and industry. In its reports promoting dams, Agrivision Corporation calls water “the oil of the 21st Century” and, for the most part, they want it treated like oil: privatized, commodified, deregulated, and produced and allocated as a market good on the basis of profit. Agrivision urges the creation of for-profit Water Development Corporations and the buying and selling of water rights. Saskatchewan citizens want sustainable economies and secure livelihoods. But they understand that water serves many roles: in nature, in our economy, as a medium for recreation, and as a determinant of human and ecological health. Most citizens agree that water for basic human needs is a human right. Water should be collectively held as a common trust, managed through democratic processes, regulated in the public interest, and stewarded for the good of future generations. Saskatchewan citizens do not want private corporations to own, control, and sell our water.
8. Dams can’t be so bad. Everybody’s building them; aren’t they?
The great dam-building heyday was the 1970s when, worldwide, two or three large dams (over 15 metres high) were completed each day. Over 40,000 large dams have been built since 1950. But the dam-building heyday is over. The 1970s’ thinking—build dam after dam and endlessly expand water supply and use—has now been replaced by more progressive and ecologically sensitive policies that focus on water conservation and minimizing intervention in watersheds. Today, the US is decommissioning dams faster than it is building them.
9. Conclusion
“The debate about dams is a debate about the very meaning, purpose, and pathways for achieving development. This suggests that decision-making on water and energy management will align itself with the emerging global commitments to sustainable human development and on the equitable distribution of costs and benefits.” —World Commission on Dams.
Before Saskatchewan seriously considers a new dam, citizens and governments must engage in discussions about how best to allocate public dollars to create secure and prosperous communities and livelihoods. The economic arguments for dams are much weaker than they first appear. And the massive and damaging environmental impacts of dams are only now beginning to be fully understood.
December 2006
For more information see:
http://www.wcd.org (World Commission on Dams)
http://www.environmentalsociety.ca (Saskatchewan Environmental Society)
http://www.polisproject.org (The Polis Project on Ecological Governance)
http://www.gordonfn.org/FW-pubs&links.cfm (Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation) or,
contact: Saskatchewan Environmental Society
PO Box 1372
Saskatoon, SK S7K 3N9
ph 306.665.1915
email info@environmentalsociety.ca
online http://www.environmentalsociety.ca
Do you value this information? If so, please support our work by becoming a member or by making a financial contribution. Call, write, or email.
The SES would like to acknowledge and thank the Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation for its generous support of our work in helping inform Saskatchewan citizens on water issues. Cover photo courtesy Saskatchewan Watershed Authority.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
ALBERTA WATER COUNCIL
by Oscar » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:15 am
The Alberta Water Council (First Progress Report, 2004/2005 at: http://www.waterforlife.gov.ab.ca/awc/d ... Report.pdf ) appears to have similar goals to those of the Saskatchewan Water Council - to 'manage' the water so as to increase 'economic development'.
-----------------
Reprinted from an article entitled: Water Policy Review in the Western Producer, Feb. 15.07
"The Alberta Water Council, an independent, multi-stakeholder expert group, will begin a review of the province's water management policy governing criteria for transferring water between rivers within the same major basin.
Current policy permists this type of transer as long as the water is safely available from the source and the new withdrawal does not affect existing ;icensed water users. The council will determine if the current approach is still valid and wat, if any, changes should be made to existing policies.
The Alberta Water Council was appointed in May 2004 to provide direction and advice to the government, stakeholders and the public.
It is expected to provide its recommendations to the provincial environment minister this fall.
For more information, vist www.waterforlife.gov.ab.ca.
===============================================
ALBERTA WATER COUNCIL: http://www.waterforlife.gov.ab.ca/awc/index.html
The Alberta Water Council is a partnership between governments and stakeholders with a vested interest in water issues. Membership consists of representatives of four broad categories including: industry, non-government organizations, provincial ministries and agencies, and other governments.
Industry Representatives
Irrigation - David Hill, Executive Director, Alberta Irrigation Projects Association
Forestry - Keith Murray, Director, Environmental Affairs, Alberta Forests Products Association
Livestock - Larry Nolan, Owner and Operator, Cattle and Irrigation Operation
Chemical and Petrochemical - Al Kennedy, Senior Environmental Engineer, Nova Chemicals
Power Generation - Mike Kelly, Director of Environment, Health, and Safety, TransAlta Utilities
Oil and Gas - Kevin Stashin, Vice President, Operations, Devon Canada Corporation
Mining - Judy Smith, Manager of Environment for Athabasca Oil Sands Project, Shell Canada Ltd.
Non-Government Organizations
Wetlands - Dr. Jonathan Thompson, Senior Research Biologist, Ducks Unlimited Canada
Fish Habitat - Ron Pearson, Trout Unlimited Canada - Alberta Chapter
Lake Environment Conservation - Jay White, Member, Alberta Lake Management Society
Environmental - Danielle Droitsch, Member, Bow Riverkeeper
Watershed Planning and Advisory Councils - Bill Berzins, Chair, Bow River Basin Council
Other Governments
Large Urban - Al Maurer, City Manager, City of Edmonton
Small Urban - Richard Quail, Municipal Manager, Town of Okotoks
Rural - Brian Hammond, Reeve, Municipal District of Pincher Creek
Metis Settlements General Council - Gerald Cunningham, Vice President, Metis Settlements General Council
First Nations - Lisa King, Environmental Specialist, Athabasca-Chipewyan First Nation
Federal - Jim Vollmershausen, Regional Director General Prairie and Northern Region, Environment Canada
Provincial Ministries and Agencies
Alberta Environment - Peter Watson, Deputy Minister
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development - Brad Pickering, Deputy Minister
Alberta Energy - Joe Miller, Executive Director
Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development - John Donner, Assistant Deputy Minister, Sustainable Agriculture Sector
Alberta Health and Wellness - Dr. Nicholas Bayliss, Provincial Health Officer
Alberta Science and Research Authority - Linda Van Gastel, Board Member
Alberta Economic Development Authority - Kim Sturgess, Board Member
-----------------
Reprinted from an article entitled: Water Policy Review in the Western Producer, Feb. 15.07
"The Alberta Water Council, an independent, multi-stakeholder expert group, will begin a review of the province's water management policy governing criteria for transferring water between rivers within the same major basin.
Current policy permists this type of transer as long as the water is safely available from the source and the new withdrawal does not affect existing ;icensed water users. The council will determine if the current approach is still valid and wat, if any, changes should be made to existing policies.
The Alberta Water Council was appointed in May 2004 to provide direction and advice to the government, stakeholders and the public.
It is expected to provide its recommendations to the provincial environment minister this fall.
For more information, vist www.waterforlife.gov.ab.ca.
===============================================
ALBERTA WATER COUNCIL: http://www.waterforlife.gov.ab.ca/awc/index.html
The Alberta Water Council is a partnership between governments and stakeholders with a vested interest in water issues. Membership consists of representatives of four broad categories including: industry, non-government organizations, provincial ministries and agencies, and other governments.
Industry Representatives
Irrigation - David Hill, Executive Director, Alberta Irrigation Projects Association
Forestry - Keith Murray, Director, Environmental Affairs, Alberta Forests Products Association
Livestock - Larry Nolan, Owner and Operator, Cattle and Irrigation Operation
Chemical and Petrochemical - Al Kennedy, Senior Environmental Engineer, Nova Chemicals
Power Generation - Mike Kelly, Director of Environment, Health, and Safety, TransAlta Utilities
Oil and Gas - Kevin Stashin, Vice President, Operations, Devon Canada Corporation
Mining - Judy Smith, Manager of Environment for Athabasca Oil Sands Project, Shell Canada Ltd.
Non-Government Organizations
Wetlands - Dr. Jonathan Thompson, Senior Research Biologist, Ducks Unlimited Canada
Fish Habitat - Ron Pearson, Trout Unlimited Canada - Alberta Chapter
Lake Environment Conservation - Jay White, Member, Alberta Lake Management Society
Environmental - Danielle Droitsch, Member, Bow Riverkeeper
Watershed Planning and Advisory Councils - Bill Berzins, Chair, Bow River Basin Council
Other Governments
Large Urban - Al Maurer, City Manager, City of Edmonton
Small Urban - Richard Quail, Municipal Manager, Town of Okotoks
Rural - Brian Hammond, Reeve, Municipal District of Pincher Creek
Metis Settlements General Council - Gerald Cunningham, Vice President, Metis Settlements General Council
First Nations - Lisa King, Environmental Specialist, Athabasca-Chipewyan First Nation
Federal - Jim Vollmershausen, Regional Director General Prairie and Northern Region, Environment Canada
Provincial Ministries and Agencies
Alberta Environment - Peter Watson, Deputy Minister
Alberta Sustainable Resource Development - Brad Pickering, Deputy Minister
Alberta Energy - Joe Miller, Executive Director
Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development - John Donner, Assistant Deputy Minister, Sustainable Agriculture Sector
Alberta Health and Wellness - Dr. Nicholas Bayliss, Provincial Health Officer
Alberta Science and Research Authority - Linda Van Gastel, Board Member
Alberta Economic Development Authority - Kim Sturgess, Board Member
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
North Saskatchewan Water Supply Study
by Oscar » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:26 am
North Saskatchewan Water Supply Study
INFORMATION SHEET
This document is intended to provide a brief introduction to the project that is being undertaken and the public meetings that are being held on February 20, 21 and 26, 2007.
North Sask Water Resource Committee
c/o Big Gully REDA, Border REDA
and Battlefords REDA
1202 –101st Street North Battleford, SK S9A 0Z8
Phone: 306.446.7503 Fax: 306.446.7442
E-mail: drose@redaalliance.ca
Why is this study taking place?
The North Saskatchewan Water Supply Study was commissioned by the North Sask Water Resource Committee to investigate 4 alternatives for the future of water supply management in the area.
The goal of the study is to evaluate 4 water management options. A comparison of the alternatives will be made based on advantages, disadvantages and ability to maximize economic development and other benefits in the region.
The study requires consultations with stakeholders in the area to discuss
the history of the project and the process that is being employed.
What are the 4 Alternatives?
1. No investment
2. Non structural investment
3. Highgate dam
4. Off-channel storage location
The Process:
Phase 1: Scoping Studies —
Determine water availability, water demands, conceptual layout and costing for each alternative, economic, environmental and social assessments.
Phase 2: Feasibility Assessment—
Evaluate one of the alternatives in more detail and expand on comparison of the alternatives with respect to costs, benefits and trade-offs.
Phase 3: Consultation—
A first set of stakeholder meetings will be held to inform concerned individuals about the purpose of the project and the alternatives being considered as well as to develop a better understanding of local concerns and desired benefits to use for evaluation purposes. The second set of meetings will present the feasibility assessment findings and gather feedback from stakeholders.
The first set of stakeholder meetings are scheduled as outlined below:
Meeting Locations:
Feb 20th 7-9pm Turtleford Community Centre
Turtleford Agricultural Grounds
Feb 21st 7-9pm North Battleford Chapel Gallery
891–99th St (River View) N. Battleford
Feb 26th 7-9pm Alcurve Hall
Corner of Hwy 17 and 3(SK)/4(AB)
Next to Oliver’s Border Jct Gas Station
INFORMATION SHEET
This document is intended to provide a brief introduction to the project that is being undertaken and the public meetings that are being held on February 20, 21 and 26, 2007.
North Sask Water Resource Committee
c/o Big Gully REDA, Border REDA
and Battlefords REDA
1202 –101st Street North Battleford, SK S9A 0Z8
Phone: 306.446.7503 Fax: 306.446.7442
E-mail: drose@redaalliance.ca
Why is this study taking place?
The North Saskatchewan Water Supply Study was commissioned by the North Sask Water Resource Committee to investigate 4 alternatives for the future of water supply management in the area.
The goal of the study is to evaluate 4 water management options. A comparison of the alternatives will be made based on advantages, disadvantages and ability to maximize economic development and other benefits in the region.
The study requires consultations with stakeholders in the area to discuss
the history of the project and the process that is being employed.
What are the 4 Alternatives?
1. No investment
2. Non structural investment
3. Highgate dam
4. Off-channel storage location
The Process:
Phase 1: Scoping Studies —
Determine water availability, water demands, conceptual layout and costing for each alternative, economic, environmental and social assessments.
Phase 2: Feasibility Assessment—
Evaluate one of the alternatives in more detail and expand on comparison of the alternatives with respect to costs, benefits and trade-offs.
Phase 3: Consultation—
A first set of stakeholder meetings will be held to inform concerned individuals about the purpose of the project and the alternatives being considered as well as to develop a better understanding of local concerns and desired benefits to use for evaluation purposes. The second set of meetings will present the feasibility assessment findings and gather feedback from stakeholders.
The first set of stakeholder meetings are scheduled as outlined below:
Meeting Locations:
Feb 20th 7-9pm Turtleford Community Centre
Turtleford Agricultural Grounds
Feb 21st 7-9pm North Battleford Chapel Gallery
891–99th St (River View) N. Battleford
Feb 26th 7-9pm Alcurve Hall
Corner of Hwy 17 and 3(SK)/4(AB)
Next to Oliver’s Border Jct Gas Station
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
NORTH BATTLEFORD,..... AND AREA BENEFIT FROM FEDERAL FUNDING
by Oscar » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:39 am
AGREEMENT ESTABLISHES URBAN PARK FOR THE BATTLEFORDS
http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=106779 ... ba2f95835d
March 30, 2007
Environment Minister John Nilson, North Battleford Mayor Julian Sadlowski and Battleford Mayor Chris Odishaw signed an agreement today to establish the Battlefords River Valley Urban Park. Health Minister and Battlefords MLA Len Taylor was also in attendance.
“I believe that urban parks contribute to our quality of life and sense of well-being,” Nilson said. “Saskatchewan people care deeply about our parks and green spaces and this investment will provide opportunities for residents and visitors alike to enjoy outdoor recreation and will contribute to a lasting legacy for future generations to enjoy.”
“These dollars will go a long way to encourage new development in our river valley. The Battlefords are in a unique position that we share the river valley, which will enhance this partnership,” Town of Battleford Mayor Chris Odishaw said.
“We are very pleased with the allocation of funding for the development of our river valley, an area of our community that holds potential for exciting developmental possibilities that will further enhance the amenities that the citizens of our community may enjoy,” North Battleford Mayor Julian Sadlowski said.
“The people of the Battlefords have worked hard for this day. They love the natural setting encompassing this area and it is a great pleasure for me to be here to witness the signing of the agreement creating this urban park,” Taylor said.
This urban park is located along the North Saskatchewan River between the City of North Battleford and the Town of Battleford. This river valley is rich in both natural and cultural history.
Battlefords River Valley Park is one of seven urban park partnerships in Saskatchewan. The other parks are Wascana Centre in Regina, Wakamow Valley in Moose Jaw, Meewasin Valley in Saskatoon, Chinook Parkway in Swift Current, Pêhonân Parkway in Prince Albert and Tatagwa Parkway in Weyburn.
Battlefords River Valley Park is a member of the Association of Saskatchewan Urban Parks and Conservation Agencies.
The Saskatchewan Government will provide $73,000 this year. In future years, funding will be determined on a per capita basis. The Battlefords will match this annual funding.
The Battlefords will be responsible for the development, maintenance and operation of the urban park. The Saskatchewan Government will also participate in a five-member board that will make recommendations regarding implementation of the Battlefords River Valley Master Plan.
-30-
For more information, contact:
Art Jones
Environment
Regina
Phone: 306-787-5796
Email: art.jones@gov.sk.ca
============================================
NORTH BATTLEFORD, LLOYDMINSTER AND AREA BENEFIT FROM FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING
http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=aa31e7 ... 97a5851fae
April 3, 2007
North Battleford, Lloydminster and 13 nearby communities will benefit from a $5.5 million investment for infrastructure projects from the Government of Canada and the Province of Saskatchewan through the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund (MRIF).
Today’s announcement includes $1 million for the City of North Battleford to expand the capacity of its ground water treatment plant and upgrade roads in eight communities. In addition, four surrounding communities will receive funding to upgrade their water treatment plants and the City of Lloydminster and Town of Kindersley will use funding to improve their wastewater treatment systems.
The Honourable Rona Ambrose, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister of Western Economic Diversification, and Saskatchewan Health Minister Len Taylor on behalf of Saskatchewan Government Relations Minister Harry Van Mulligen, announced the investment today.
“Canada’s New Government is working with other orders of government to get things done for the people of northwestern Saskatchewan by investing in road upgrades, water treatment and wastewater systems,” Ambrose said. “Our investment will improve quality of life and strengthen the infrastructure foundation in these 15 communities for years to come.”
“Today’s announcement of funding from the province of more than $2.7 million for 15 projects in North Battleford, Lloydminster and area demonstrates the Government of Saskatchewan’s commitment to supporting infrastructure,” Taylor said. “We are dedicated to making life better for Saskatchewan families and to building an even better future here for our young people.”
Before receiving final approval, community projects undergo a review process under both the Canadian Environment Assessment Act and The Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan).
The federal and provincial governments are investing a total of $76 million in the four-year Canada-Saskatchewan Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund. Participating communities are expected to contribute one-half the cost of any project, which will raise the total infrastructure investment above $152 million.
More information on the Government of Canada and Province of Saskatchewan’s infrastructure programs is available online at www.infrastructure.gc.ca or www.municipal.gov.sk.ca/mrd/prosimsi.shtml.
Municipalities seeking more information may contact the Canada-Saskatchewan MRIF Joint Secretariat at 306-787-7414.
-30-
For more information, contact:
Brenda Tarasiuk
Western Economic Diversification, Canada
Saskatoon
Phone: 306-975-5943
Gladys Wasylenchuk
Government Relations
Regina
Phone: 306-787-1370
http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=106779 ... ba2f95835d
March 30, 2007
Environment Minister John Nilson, North Battleford Mayor Julian Sadlowski and Battleford Mayor Chris Odishaw signed an agreement today to establish the Battlefords River Valley Urban Park. Health Minister and Battlefords MLA Len Taylor was also in attendance.
“I believe that urban parks contribute to our quality of life and sense of well-being,” Nilson said. “Saskatchewan people care deeply about our parks and green spaces and this investment will provide opportunities for residents and visitors alike to enjoy outdoor recreation and will contribute to a lasting legacy for future generations to enjoy.”
“These dollars will go a long way to encourage new development in our river valley. The Battlefords are in a unique position that we share the river valley, which will enhance this partnership,” Town of Battleford Mayor Chris Odishaw said.
“We are very pleased with the allocation of funding for the development of our river valley, an area of our community that holds potential for exciting developmental possibilities that will further enhance the amenities that the citizens of our community may enjoy,” North Battleford Mayor Julian Sadlowski said.
“The people of the Battlefords have worked hard for this day. They love the natural setting encompassing this area and it is a great pleasure for me to be here to witness the signing of the agreement creating this urban park,” Taylor said.
This urban park is located along the North Saskatchewan River between the City of North Battleford and the Town of Battleford. This river valley is rich in both natural and cultural history.
Battlefords River Valley Park is one of seven urban park partnerships in Saskatchewan. The other parks are Wascana Centre in Regina, Wakamow Valley in Moose Jaw, Meewasin Valley in Saskatoon, Chinook Parkway in Swift Current, Pêhonân Parkway in Prince Albert and Tatagwa Parkway in Weyburn.
Battlefords River Valley Park is a member of the Association of Saskatchewan Urban Parks and Conservation Agencies.
The Saskatchewan Government will provide $73,000 this year. In future years, funding will be determined on a per capita basis. The Battlefords will match this annual funding.
The Battlefords will be responsible for the development, maintenance and operation of the urban park. The Saskatchewan Government will also participate in a five-member board that will make recommendations regarding implementation of the Battlefords River Valley Master Plan.
-30-
For more information, contact:
Art Jones
Environment
Regina
Phone: 306-787-5796
Email: art.jones@gov.sk.ca
============================================
NORTH BATTLEFORD, LLOYDMINSTER AND AREA BENEFIT FROM FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING
http://www.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=aa31e7 ... 97a5851fae
April 3, 2007
North Battleford, Lloydminster and 13 nearby communities will benefit from a $5.5 million investment for infrastructure projects from the Government of Canada and the Province of Saskatchewan through the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund (MRIF).
Today’s announcement includes $1 million for the City of North Battleford to expand the capacity of its ground water treatment plant and upgrade roads in eight communities. In addition, four surrounding communities will receive funding to upgrade their water treatment plants and the City of Lloydminster and Town of Kindersley will use funding to improve their wastewater treatment systems.
The Honourable Rona Ambrose, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and Minister of Western Economic Diversification, and Saskatchewan Health Minister Len Taylor on behalf of Saskatchewan Government Relations Minister Harry Van Mulligen, announced the investment today.
“Canada’s New Government is working with other orders of government to get things done for the people of northwestern Saskatchewan by investing in road upgrades, water treatment and wastewater systems,” Ambrose said. “Our investment will improve quality of life and strengthen the infrastructure foundation in these 15 communities for years to come.”
“Today’s announcement of funding from the province of more than $2.7 million for 15 projects in North Battleford, Lloydminster and area demonstrates the Government of Saskatchewan’s commitment to supporting infrastructure,” Taylor said. “We are dedicated to making life better for Saskatchewan families and to building an even better future here for our young people.”
Before receiving final approval, community projects undergo a review process under both the Canadian Environment Assessment Act and The Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan).
The federal and provincial governments are investing a total of $76 million in the four-year Canada-Saskatchewan Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund. Participating communities are expected to contribute one-half the cost of any project, which will raise the total infrastructure investment above $152 million.
More information on the Government of Canada and Province of Saskatchewan’s infrastructure programs is available online at www.infrastructure.gc.ca or www.municipal.gov.sk.ca/mrd/prosimsi.shtml.
Municipalities seeking more information may contact the Canada-Saskatchewan MRIF Joint Secretariat at 306-787-7414.
-30-
For more information, contact:
Brenda Tarasiuk
Western Economic Diversification, Canada
Saskatoon
Phone: 306-975-5943
Gladys Wasylenchuk
Government Relations
Regina
Phone: 306-787-1370
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Is This the Beginning of the End for Damming America's Big R
by Oscar » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:43 am
Is This the Beginning of the End for Damming America's Big Rivers?
http://www.alternet.org:80/environment/55587/
By Tara Lohan, AlterNet
Posted on July 2, 2007, Printed on July 2, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/55587/
Usually shareholders meetings don't include traditional Native American salmon bakes and intertribal healing dances. But at the recent shareholders meeting for Berkshire Hathaway -- owned by investment icon Warren Buffett -- Omaha, Neb., got a taste of native culture -- all the way from the Pacific Northwest.
Yet the tribes -- the Karuk, Yurok, and Hoopa of California, and the Klamath Tribes of Oregon -- weren't there to sing Buffett's praises like most of the attendees. They were there to introduce people to threatened native cultures and let Buffett know he made a really bad investment a few years back when his subsidiary Mid-American Energy Holdings bought power company PacifiCorp.
By doing so, Buffett, who is known as one of the world's savviest investors, landed himself in the middle of a social justice and environmental conflagration. While Buffett's investments are making (the investments are still making money, right?) many millionaires, his company is impoverishing the people of the Klamath Basin in Southern Oregon and Northern California who depend on a now ailing Klamath River for their livelihoods and cultural traditions.
The tribal members, who are part of a coalition of native tribes, evironmentalists and fishermen, were at the shareholders meeting to pressure PacifiCorp to help save near endangered salmon populations by removing four hydropower dams on the Klamath River, which snakes from the central Oregon-California border, out to the Pacific Ocean, 20 miles south of Crescent City.
The dams are blocking fish passage to necessary spawning grounds and water trapped behind them creates a bath tub affect, heating up the river and causing toxic algae blooms that threaten the health of salmon populations, which tribal members depend on for food and fishermen depend on to make a living. Today 90 percent of the members of the once resource-rich tribes like the Karuk are living below the poverty line, and downstream fishermen have seen their income fall by up to 90 percent in recent years.
If the dams come down, it would be the biggest dam removal project in U.S. history and would revitalize one of the country's best salmon rivers and one of the region's last subsistence economies.
The prospect used to be a big "if," but lately the coalition has been gaining momentum and is backed by local, state and federal agencies. They even have environmental advocate Robert Kennedy Jr. and top lawyer Joe Cotchett (who is currently representing Valerie Plame in her suit against the Bush administration).
The coalition believes they are solidly in the right in terms of environmental concerns, social justice and even economics. All they really need is for the power company to see the light -- and they are hoping Warren Buffett can be the spark.
"We have been hoping Warren will realize these dams are a bad investment and realize that they are causing disease and poverty all over the north coast and southern Oregon," said Regina Chichizola of the organization Klamath River Keeper. "We are hoping that he will realize that if he is going to be a philanthropist, trying to solve issues of disease and poverty in third-world countries that these dams are causing the same issues that he is trying to fight in other places."
A river, a culture threatened
FULL STORY AT: http://www.alternet.org/story/55587/
http://www.alternet.org:80/environment/55587/
By Tara Lohan, AlterNet
Posted on July 2, 2007, Printed on July 2, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/55587/
Usually shareholders meetings don't include traditional Native American salmon bakes and intertribal healing dances. But at the recent shareholders meeting for Berkshire Hathaway -- owned by investment icon Warren Buffett -- Omaha, Neb., got a taste of native culture -- all the way from the Pacific Northwest.
Yet the tribes -- the Karuk, Yurok, and Hoopa of California, and the Klamath Tribes of Oregon -- weren't there to sing Buffett's praises like most of the attendees. They were there to introduce people to threatened native cultures and let Buffett know he made a really bad investment a few years back when his subsidiary Mid-American Energy Holdings bought power company PacifiCorp.
By doing so, Buffett, who is known as one of the world's savviest investors, landed himself in the middle of a social justice and environmental conflagration. While Buffett's investments are making (the investments are still making money, right?) many millionaires, his company is impoverishing the people of the Klamath Basin in Southern Oregon and Northern California who depend on a now ailing Klamath River for their livelihoods and cultural traditions.
The tribal members, who are part of a coalition of native tribes, evironmentalists and fishermen, were at the shareholders meeting to pressure PacifiCorp to help save near endangered salmon populations by removing four hydropower dams on the Klamath River, which snakes from the central Oregon-California border, out to the Pacific Ocean, 20 miles south of Crescent City.
The dams are blocking fish passage to necessary spawning grounds and water trapped behind them creates a bath tub affect, heating up the river and causing toxic algae blooms that threaten the health of salmon populations, which tribal members depend on for food and fishermen depend on to make a living. Today 90 percent of the members of the once resource-rich tribes like the Karuk are living below the poverty line, and downstream fishermen have seen their income fall by up to 90 percent in recent years.
If the dams come down, it would be the biggest dam removal project in U.S. history and would revitalize one of the country's best salmon rivers and one of the region's last subsistence economies.
The prospect used to be a big "if," but lately the coalition has been gaining momentum and is backed by local, state and federal agencies. They even have environmental advocate Robert Kennedy Jr. and top lawyer Joe Cotchett (who is currently representing Valerie Plame in her suit against the Bush administration).
The coalition believes they are solidly in the right in terms of environmental concerns, social justice and even economics. All they really need is for the power company to see the light -- and they are hoping Warren Buffett can be the spark.
"We have been hoping Warren will realize these dams are a bad investment and realize that they are causing disease and poverty all over the north coast and southern Oregon," said Regina Chichizola of the organization Klamath River Keeper. "We are hoping that he will realize that if he is going to be a philanthropist, trying to solve issues of disease and poverty in third-world countries that these dams are causing the same issues that he is trying to fight in other places."
A river, a culture threatened
FULL STORY AT: http://www.alternet.org/story/55587/
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Canada's water 'on the negotiating table,' report says
by Oscar » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:53 am
Canada's water 'on the negotiating table,' report says
Monday, September 10, 2007 7:08 AM
As reported in today's Globe and Mail, "Despite regular assurances from the federal government that Canada won't allow water exports, the country remains vulnerable to water diversions to an increasingly thirsty United States, says a new research paper commissioned by the Munk Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto."
The article also notes, "The paper...concludes that the various bans federal and provincial governments have put in place against bulk shipments 'probably will not stand up to court challenges.' It also said the status of water as a tradable commodity remains ambiguous under the North American free-trade agreement and exports are open for discussion at the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America..."
It also notes that, "The report recommends that the federal government end uncertainty about water exports by issuing an unequivocal statement to the governments of Mexico and the United States informing them that bulk water removals from Canada's major drainage basins will not be permitted."
In an editorial in today's Ottawa Citizen by Andrew Nikiforuk, Adèle Hurley and Ralph Pentland, they state, "Settling the ambiguity of water as a tradable cross-border commodity is more important than ever. The fate of our water resources is now dependent on shadowy discussions taking place under the aegis of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), the all-purpose negotiating forum set up by the three NAFTA leaders in 2005."
For information on the Council of Canadians water campaign, please go to http://www.canadians.org/water/index.html.
The Munk Centre's 'On The Table' report is expected to be posted on their website this morning - I'll send you that link when it becomes available.
Brent
Canada's water 'on the negotiating table,' report says
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... y/National
Vague wording in NAFTA doesn't protect country against bulk shipments and other forms of sale to the U.S.
MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
The Globe and Mail September 10, 2007
Despite regular assurances from the federal government that Canada won't allow water exports, the country remains vulnerable to water diversions to an increasingly thirsty United States, says a new research paper commissioned by the Munk Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto.
The paper, to be released today and one of the most comprehensive to date on the controversial issue of water sales, concludes that the various bans federal and provincial governments have put in place against bulk shipments "probably will not stand up to court challenges."
It also said the status of water as a tradable commodity remains ambiguous under the North American free-trade agreement and exports are open for discussion at the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, the three-way forum set up by Canada, the United States and Mexico for expanding continental integration.
"Make no mistake, Canada's water, through diversion, transfer, sale, trade or all of the above, is on the negotiating table in Canada/U.S. relations," the paper said. "As long as its status as a negotiable resource remains unclear, pressure to access Canada's water will continue to grow ever stronger."
The issue of possible water sales to parched areas of the United States is one of the most contentious in Canadian politics.
Over the past four decades, there have been regular proposals to divert Canada's water resources, but none have gotten off the ground, in part because they typically face vociferous public opposition and uncertainty over their legality. But last month, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion, citing information he said he couldn't disclose, alleged that there have been secret talks between the Canadian and U.S. governments on the topic of water sales.
Although the claim prompted a denial by the government, the idea of selling Canadian water resources is frequently raised by business-oriented groups, most recently by the Conference Board of Canada and two other pro-business think tanks from the other NAFTA countries.
The Munk Centre's report will be released at a conference at the University of Toronto today. It was based on contributions from a number of prominent Canadian environmental lawyers and water policy experts, including Adele Hurley.
Ms. Hurley, director of the Munk Centre's program on water issues, was the former Canadian co-chair of the International Joint Commission, the Canada-U.S. body that manages waterways the two countries share.
"I think it's important for Canadians to understand that there is growing demand for our water and that in the final analysis, we're not really protected," Ms. Hurley said in an interview.
She said that when NAFTA was being negotiated, early versions of the pact contained language stating that water wasn't a "tradable good," but this wording wasn't in the final deal, fuelling some of the fears about the security of the resource.
The report recommends that the federal government end uncertainty about water exports by issuing an unequivocal statement to the governments of Mexico and the United States informing them that bulk water removals from Canada's major drainage basins will not be permitted.
The new report also cast doubt on the claims sometimes made that the sale of water could become a lucrative sideline for Canada.
FULL STORY AT: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... y/National
---
Sold down the river
Despite claims to the contrary, water is on the table in trade negotiations -- we need to be clear with our neighbours that we intend to keep this precious resource
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/new ... 888ca85995
Andrew Nikiforuk, Adèle Hurley and Ralph Pentland
Ottawa Citizen
Monday, September 10, 2007
Are Canadians ready for the next big trade issue -- a concerted effort by the United States to acquire Canada's fresh water, and a willingness by some influential Canadians to sell it? They should be.
It will come as a surprise to many Canadians, but water is on the table. The various treaties and international agreements that govern Canada-U.S. water somehow all manage to skirt the issue of whether it can be exported across the border.
While there are many well-publicized statements and written documents indicating that Canada's water is not for sale, experts believe these have little or no legal force.
Both the 1989 Canada-U.S. Free-Trade Agreement and the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, which includes Mexico) were supposed to settle the water question. It didn't happen. As an afterthought, the Canadian, Mexican and U.S. governments issued a joint statement in 1993 saying NAFTA creates "no rights to the natural water resources" of any trading partner. To this day, the statement remains unsigned.
Settling the ambiguity of water as a tradable cross-border commodity is more important than ever. The fate of our water resources is now dependent on shadowy discussions taking place under the aegis of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), the all-purpose negotiating forum set up by the three NAFTA leaders in 2005.
Just last month, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Felipe Calderón met in Montebello, Quebec, to discuss how to advance the SPP's goals of further continent-wide economic integration.
Mr. Harper played down the significance of the Montebello discussions, and Canadian officials took pains to insist that Canadian water transfers were not a negotiating item at this meeting.
"Not yet," they might have added: the SPP, never subjected to legislative debate or approval, provides an ideal framework for negotiating away the rights to Canada's water.
For more than six years a variety of academic papers, think tanks, consultants and government reports have strongly advocated putting water up for sale.
These studies come from a variety of sources: an Industry Canada discussion paper, the federal government's Policy Research Initiative, the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, several high-powered think tanks, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a U.S. group that arranged a closed-door meeting in Calgary just last spring that included discussion of water exports.
Armand Peschard-Sverdrup, a director of the CSIS project, said: "It's no secret the U.S. is going to need water. ... It's no secret that Canada is going to have an overabundance of water. At the end of the day there may have to be arrangements."
But should there be? While some continental integrationists argue that water should be a resource for sale just like lumber, minerals or energy, scientists suggest this could lead to Canada's greatest environmental catastrophe.
As far back as the 1950s, Gen. A.G.L. McNaughton, who co-chaired the International Joint Commission, noted: "It is nonsense to talk about a surplus and it's dangerous folly to even contemplate selling water."
Other environmental experts note that Canada has already mismanaged its water supply -- many of our waterways are grossly polluted, there is still no national water policy and, just as our fishery officials miscalculated our fisheries' health, our water officials have no comprehensive national inventory of Canada's water supplies.
In 2005, former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed pleaded that, "We should not export our freshwater -- we need it and we should conserve it. And we should communicate to the United States very quickly how firm we are about it."
FULL STORY AT: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/new ... 888ca85995
Brent Patterson
Director of Campaigns / Organizing
The Council of Canadians
700-170 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5V5
1-800-387-7177 ext. 291
bpatterson@canadians.org
www.canadians.org
Monday, September 10, 2007 7:08 AM
As reported in today's Globe and Mail, "Despite regular assurances from the federal government that Canada won't allow water exports, the country remains vulnerable to water diversions to an increasingly thirsty United States, says a new research paper commissioned by the Munk Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto."
The article also notes, "The paper...concludes that the various bans federal and provincial governments have put in place against bulk shipments 'probably will not stand up to court challenges.' It also said the status of water as a tradable commodity remains ambiguous under the North American free-trade agreement and exports are open for discussion at the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America..."
It also notes that, "The report recommends that the federal government end uncertainty about water exports by issuing an unequivocal statement to the governments of Mexico and the United States informing them that bulk water removals from Canada's major drainage basins will not be permitted."
In an editorial in today's Ottawa Citizen by Andrew Nikiforuk, Adèle Hurley and Ralph Pentland, they state, "Settling the ambiguity of water as a tradable cross-border commodity is more important than ever. The fate of our water resources is now dependent on shadowy discussions taking place under the aegis of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), the all-purpose negotiating forum set up by the three NAFTA leaders in 2005."
For information on the Council of Canadians water campaign, please go to http://www.canadians.org/water/index.html.
The Munk Centre's 'On The Table' report is expected to be posted on their website this morning - I'll send you that link when it becomes available.
Brent
Canada's water 'on the negotiating table,' report says
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... y/National
Vague wording in NAFTA doesn't protect country against bulk shipments and other forms of sale to the U.S.
MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
The Globe and Mail September 10, 2007
Despite regular assurances from the federal government that Canada won't allow water exports, the country remains vulnerable to water diversions to an increasingly thirsty United States, says a new research paper commissioned by the Munk Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto.
The paper, to be released today and one of the most comprehensive to date on the controversial issue of water sales, concludes that the various bans federal and provincial governments have put in place against bulk shipments "probably will not stand up to court challenges."
It also said the status of water as a tradable commodity remains ambiguous under the North American free-trade agreement and exports are open for discussion at the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, the three-way forum set up by Canada, the United States and Mexico for expanding continental integration.
"Make no mistake, Canada's water, through diversion, transfer, sale, trade or all of the above, is on the negotiating table in Canada/U.S. relations," the paper said. "As long as its status as a negotiable resource remains unclear, pressure to access Canada's water will continue to grow ever stronger."
The issue of possible water sales to parched areas of the United States is one of the most contentious in Canadian politics.
Over the past four decades, there have been regular proposals to divert Canada's water resources, but none have gotten off the ground, in part because they typically face vociferous public opposition and uncertainty over their legality. But last month, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion, citing information he said he couldn't disclose, alleged that there have been secret talks between the Canadian and U.S. governments on the topic of water sales.
Although the claim prompted a denial by the government, the idea of selling Canadian water resources is frequently raised by business-oriented groups, most recently by the Conference Board of Canada and two other pro-business think tanks from the other NAFTA countries.
The Munk Centre's report will be released at a conference at the University of Toronto today. It was based on contributions from a number of prominent Canadian environmental lawyers and water policy experts, including Adele Hurley.
Ms. Hurley, director of the Munk Centre's program on water issues, was the former Canadian co-chair of the International Joint Commission, the Canada-U.S. body that manages waterways the two countries share.
"I think it's important for Canadians to understand that there is growing demand for our water and that in the final analysis, we're not really protected," Ms. Hurley said in an interview.
She said that when NAFTA was being negotiated, early versions of the pact contained language stating that water wasn't a "tradable good," but this wording wasn't in the final deal, fuelling some of the fears about the security of the resource.
The report recommends that the federal government end uncertainty about water exports by issuing an unequivocal statement to the governments of Mexico and the United States informing them that bulk water removals from Canada's major drainage basins will not be permitted.
The new report also cast doubt on the claims sometimes made that the sale of water could become a lucrative sideline for Canada.
FULL STORY AT: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... y/National
---
Sold down the river
Despite claims to the contrary, water is on the table in trade negotiations -- we need to be clear with our neighbours that we intend to keep this precious resource
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/new ... 888ca85995
Andrew Nikiforuk, Adèle Hurley and Ralph Pentland
Ottawa Citizen
Monday, September 10, 2007
Are Canadians ready for the next big trade issue -- a concerted effort by the United States to acquire Canada's fresh water, and a willingness by some influential Canadians to sell it? They should be.
It will come as a surprise to many Canadians, but water is on the table. The various treaties and international agreements that govern Canada-U.S. water somehow all manage to skirt the issue of whether it can be exported across the border.
While there are many well-publicized statements and written documents indicating that Canada's water is not for sale, experts believe these have little or no legal force.
Both the 1989 Canada-U.S. Free-Trade Agreement and the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, which includes Mexico) were supposed to settle the water question. It didn't happen. As an afterthought, the Canadian, Mexican and U.S. governments issued a joint statement in 1993 saying NAFTA creates "no rights to the natural water resources" of any trading partner. To this day, the statement remains unsigned.
Settling the ambiguity of water as a tradable cross-border commodity is more important than ever. The fate of our water resources is now dependent on shadowy discussions taking place under the aegis of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), the all-purpose negotiating forum set up by the three NAFTA leaders in 2005.
Just last month, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, U.S. President George W. Bush and Mexican President Felipe Calderón met in Montebello, Quebec, to discuss how to advance the SPP's goals of further continent-wide economic integration.
Mr. Harper played down the significance of the Montebello discussions, and Canadian officials took pains to insist that Canadian water transfers were not a negotiating item at this meeting.
"Not yet," they might have added: the SPP, never subjected to legislative debate or approval, provides an ideal framework for negotiating away the rights to Canada's water.
For more than six years a variety of academic papers, think tanks, consultants and government reports have strongly advocated putting water up for sale.
These studies come from a variety of sources: an Industry Canada discussion paper, the federal government's Policy Research Initiative, the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, several high-powered think tanks, and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a U.S. group that arranged a closed-door meeting in Calgary just last spring that included discussion of water exports.
Armand Peschard-Sverdrup, a director of the CSIS project, said: "It's no secret the U.S. is going to need water. ... It's no secret that Canada is going to have an overabundance of water. At the end of the day there may have to be arrangements."
But should there be? While some continental integrationists argue that water should be a resource for sale just like lumber, minerals or energy, scientists suggest this could lead to Canada's greatest environmental catastrophe.
As far back as the 1950s, Gen. A.G.L. McNaughton, who co-chaired the International Joint Commission, noted: "It is nonsense to talk about a surplus and it's dangerous folly to even contemplate selling water."
Other environmental experts note that Canada has already mismanaged its water supply -- many of our waterways are grossly polluted, there is still no national water policy and, just as our fishery officials miscalculated our fisheries' health, our water officials have no comprehensive national inventory of Canada's water supplies.
In 2005, former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed pleaded that, "We should not export our freshwater -- we need it and we should conserve it. And we should communicate to the United States very quickly how firm we are about it."
FULL STORY AT: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/new ... 888ca85995
Brent Patterson
Director of Campaigns / Organizing
The Council of Canadians
700-170 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5V5
1-800-387-7177 ext. 291
bpatterson@canadians.org
www.canadians.org
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Highgate Dam - Ph. II Study Report
by Oscar » Wed Mar 26, 2008 12:40 pm
EXCERPT from SES Newsletter March / April 2008 3
The Highgate Dam proposal - an update By Michelle Heiser, Watershed Protection Programmer
On February 27th the North Saskatchewan River Water Resource Committee (NSRWRC) held a public meeting to discuss the results of the second phase of the North Saskatchewan Water Supply Feasibility Study. The meeting took place in Maidstone, SK., and eight SES members attended.
The first phase (for those unfamiliar with the process thus far) was a scoping study designed to identify and assess water development alternatives and water use options for large scale development on the North Saskatchewan.
These alternatives included: no investment in infrastructure, non- structural investments to develop the water resource with no storage, Highgate Dam, and other off- channel storage options. The report is available at http://www.nsrwrc.ca/pdf/consultation_p ... 2007_2.pdf.
The second phase of the Feasibility Study (of which the results were presented February 27th ) further investigated on-stream storage options including the Highgate Dam and the development of a fifth option: a weir system. The second phase of the study was funded through the Canada Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program (90%) and by municipalities and organizations in Northwest Saskatchewan and Northeast
Alberta (10%).
The report has yet to be posted online, but will eventually be available at http://www.nsrwrc.ca. The following is a summary of the results presented at the public meeting.
(ED. PLEASE NOTE: Unfortunately, the formatting of the chart below will not hold - please continue to check the North Saskatchewan River Water Resource Committee at: http://www.nsrwrc.ca)
Development Options
Non-Structural
Measures
Off-Channel Storage Weirs Highgate Dam
Benefits Presented
Irrigation • Irrigation
• Water supply ‘security for future
• Irrigation
• Water supply ‘security for future
• Irrigation
• Industry
• Hydropower
• Recreation
• Flood Control in P.A.
• Transportation
• Water supply ‘security’ for future Concerns
• Threat to Lake Sturgeon population
• Water quality concerns downstream of weir
• Lack of consultation with First Nations
• Threat to Lake Sturgeon population
• Threat to heritage resources
• Infrastructure damage (homes, farms, roadways, oil and gas)
Cost Ratios (return on the $) $1 $3 $0.90 $0.40
The results of the study indicated that to proceed with Highgate Dam would be environmentally, socially and financially illogical. If the Lake Sturgeon are placed on the endangered list, it will make Highgate Dam a nonstarter.
Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that the NSRWRC will not attempt to push for further funding from the government despite these concerns. Thus, SES will continue to work to inform and engage the public, as well as work with government regarding our concerns with the Highgate Dam proposal.
The Highgate Dam proposal - an update By Michelle Heiser, Watershed Protection Programmer
On February 27th the North Saskatchewan River Water Resource Committee (NSRWRC) held a public meeting to discuss the results of the second phase of the North Saskatchewan Water Supply Feasibility Study. The meeting took place in Maidstone, SK., and eight SES members attended.
The first phase (for those unfamiliar with the process thus far) was a scoping study designed to identify and assess water development alternatives and water use options for large scale development on the North Saskatchewan.
These alternatives included: no investment in infrastructure, non- structural investments to develop the water resource with no storage, Highgate Dam, and other off- channel storage options. The report is available at http://www.nsrwrc.ca/pdf/consultation_p ... 2007_2.pdf.
The second phase of the Feasibility Study (of which the results were presented February 27th ) further investigated on-stream storage options including the Highgate Dam and the development of a fifth option: a weir system. The second phase of the study was funded through the Canada Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program (90%) and by municipalities and organizations in Northwest Saskatchewan and Northeast
Alberta (10%).
The report has yet to be posted online, but will eventually be available at http://www.nsrwrc.ca. The following is a summary of the results presented at the public meeting.
(ED. PLEASE NOTE: Unfortunately, the formatting of the chart below will not hold - please continue to check the North Saskatchewan River Water Resource Committee at: http://www.nsrwrc.ca)
Development Options
Non-Structural
Measures
Off-Channel Storage Weirs Highgate Dam
Benefits Presented
Irrigation • Irrigation
• Water supply ‘security for future
• Irrigation
• Water supply ‘security for future
• Irrigation
• Industry
• Hydropower
• Recreation
• Flood Control in P.A.
• Transportation
• Water supply ‘security’ for future Concerns
• Threat to Lake Sturgeon population
• Water quality concerns downstream of weir
• Lack of consultation with First Nations
• Threat to Lake Sturgeon population
• Threat to heritage resources
• Infrastructure damage (homes, farms, roadways, oil and gas)
Cost Ratios (return on the $) $1 $3 $0.90 $0.40
The results of the study indicated that to proceed with Highgate Dam would be environmentally, socially and financially illogical. If the Lake Sturgeon are placed on the endangered list, it will make Highgate Dam a nonstarter.
Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that the NSRWRC will not attempt to push for further funding from the government despite these concerns. Thus, SES will continue to work to inform and engage the public, as well as work with government regarding our concerns with the Highgate Dam proposal.
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Saskatchewan Agrivision Seeking Dissolution
by Oscar » Wed Jun 11, 2008 12:33 pm
From: Elaine Hughes
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 9:04 PM
Subject: SAC Inc - - - - - FINAL ISSUE - - - - Monday Morning Memo - June 9, 2008
Agrivision (http://www.agrivision.ca/) long-standing advocates for pig factories, SARM's Clearing the Pathway, ACRE's Recommendation of 'cluster' regions, ethanol plants, Highgate Dam and the Prairie Inland Port, etc. - closing shop!!!
See Report on Saskatchewan's contribution to the NAFTA Highway: Prairie Gateway - Interim Progress Report at:
http://www.agrivision.ca/pdf/other/Prai ... t%20(Final).pdf
==========================
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan SAC Inc
To: info@agrivision.ca
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 12:26 PM
Subject: SAC Inc Monday Morning Memo - June 9, 2008
Making Transformational Change in the Business of Agriculture
Monday Morning Memo – June 9, 2008
FINAL ISSUE - “When you come to a fork in the road, take it” - Yogi Berra
Saskatchewan Agrivision Seeking Dissolution
The Board of Directors of Saskatchewan Agrivision has passed a resolution to wind-up operations and dissolve the organization effective immediately.
Agrivision has not been able to sustain the revenue required to maintain operations. At the April 22 Annual General Meeting, a budget was presented which required funds for a 6-month “Transition” period, during which time a more sustainable funding model would be developed. Agrivision was unsuccessful in securing the funds needed to complete the transition process and the Board of Directors has made the difficult decision to dissolve the organization.
There remains strong support for Agrivision’s mandate to “Make Transformational Change in the Business of Agriculture”. Since the organization began in June, 1999, it has made a significant and measured impact toward the mandate. The attached document titled, “Saskatchewan Agrivision Multiplier Report” documents the most significant projects that Agrivision has undertaken.
There are many important issues in the business of agriculture that have the potential for transformational impact. The attached Transformational Challenges document outlines some of these challenges and opportunities. While Agrivision will not be able to pursue these opportunities, we would encourage everyone to give thoughtful consideration to these important issues and how action might be taken to advance the objectives.
The dissolution process includes closing the office and giving lay-off notice to the remaining staff. The contacts for any remaining Agrivision issues will be C.M. (Red) Williams and the Chair of the Board of Directors, Neil Ketilson. Their contact information is below.
In closing, our sincere thanks on behalf of the Management Team and Board of Directors for those who have supported Agrivision over the years, most particularly Agrivision’s Investors.
C.M. (Red) Williams, President
Tel: (306) 966-4157
Email: red.williams@usask.ca
Neil Ketilson, Chair
Email: nketilson@saskpork.com
Tel: (307 244-7752
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 9:04 PM
Subject: SAC Inc - - - - - FINAL ISSUE - - - - Monday Morning Memo - June 9, 2008
Agrivision (http://www.agrivision.ca/) long-standing advocates for pig factories, SARM's Clearing the Pathway, ACRE's Recommendation of 'cluster' regions, ethanol plants, Highgate Dam and the Prairie Inland Port, etc. - closing shop!!!
See Report on Saskatchewan's contribution to the NAFTA Highway: Prairie Gateway - Interim Progress Report at:
http://www.agrivision.ca/pdf/other/Prai ... t%20(Final).pdf
==========================
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan SAC Inc
To: info@agrivision.ca
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 12:26 PM
Subject: SAC Inc Monday Morning Memo - June 9, 2008
Making Transformational Change in the Business of Agriculture
Monday Morning Memo – June 9, 2008
FINAL ISSUE - “When you come to a fork in the road, take it” - Yogi Berra
Saskatchewan Agrivision Seeking Dissolution
The Board of Directors of Saskatchewan Agrivision has passed a resolution to wind-up operations and dissolve the organization effective immediately.
Agrivision has not been able to sustain the revenue required to maintain operations. At the April 22 Annual General Meeting, a budget was presented which required funds for a 6-month “Transition” period, during which time a more sustainable funding model would be developed. Agrivision was unsuccessful in securing the funds needed to complete the transition process and the Board of Directors has made the difficult decision to dissolve the organization.
There remains strong support for Agrivision’s mandate to “Make Transformational Change in the Business of Agriculture”. Since the organization began in June, 1999, it has made a significant and measured impact toward the mandate. The attached document titled, “Saskatchewan Agrivision Multiplier Report” documents the most significant projects that Agrivision has undertaken.
There are many important issues in the business of agriculture that have the potential for transformational impact. The attached Transformational Challenges document outlines some of these challenges and opportunities. While Agrivision will not be able to pursue these opportunities, we would encourage everyone to give thoughtful consideration to these important issues and how action might be taken to advance the objectives.
The dissolution process includes closing the office and giving lay-off notice to the remaining staff. The contacts for any remaining Agrivision issues will be C.M. (Red) Williams and the Chair of the Board of Directors, Neil Ketilson. Their contact information is below.
In closing, our sincere thanks on behalf of the Management Team and Board of Directors for those who have supported Agrivision over the years, most particularly Agrivision’s Investors.
C.M. (Red) Williams, President
Tel: (306) 966-4157
Email: red.williams@usask.ca
Neil Ketilson, Chair
Email: nketilson@saskpork.com
Tel: (307 244-7752
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
North Saskatchewan River Water Supply - Feasibility Study
by Oscar » Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:47 pm
North Saskatchewan River Water Resource Committee
http://nsrwrc.ca/projects.php
In 2005 application was made to the Canada Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program (CSWEP) for funding to execute a feasibility study assessing surface water availability and evaluating water development alternatives along the North Saskatchewan River.
= = = =
The North Saskatchewan River Water Supply - Feasibility Study was completed by Golder Associates in March 2008. The study was funded under the Canada - Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program (CSWEP). The program provided 90% of the study costs, the remaining 10% came from local contributions.
STUDY: http://nsrwrc.ca/projects.php
http://nsrwrc.ca/projects.php
In 2005 application was made to the Canada Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program (CSWEP) for funding to execute a feasibility study assessing surface water availability and evaluating water development alternatives along the North Saskatchewan River.
= = = =
The North Saskatchewan River Water Supply - Feasibility Study was completed by Golder Associates in March 2008. The study was funded under the Canada - Saskatchewan Water Supply Expansion Program (CSWEP). The program provided 90% of the study costs, the remaining 10% came from local contributions.
STUDY: http://nsrwrc.ca/projects.php
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
Drought-proofing the Economy is still on Williams' mind!
by Oscar » Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:53 pm
Drought-proofing the Economy is still on Williams' mind!
Red Williams’ Comment from his Monday Morning Memo – December 7, 2009:
1.1 Drought and Water
Climate change aside, we have the problems of drought and water management as issues to deal with in a forth right manner. There is good evidence that droughts have plagued the prairie basin ever since the ice age; often longer than any in living memory, with one lasting a century. There is also substantial information on the disappearance of glaciers feeding the rivers in the prairie basin, and plausible suggestions that the annual flow will increasingly be concentrated in the spring of the year.
Droughts will happen when they will, since they are the result of natural causes ranging from sun spot activity to the temperature shifts in the waters of the Pacific Ocean. To mitigate the impact of droughts it is possible to institute plans all the way from programs to assist the worst affected, to improving the predictability of such occurrences, and to securing water supplies particularly to meet animal and human requirements.
We are far behind where we should be in developing water management systems for the prairies. The existence of watershed councils (Alberta) and watershed advisory committees (Saskatchewan) reflect the elementary stage of planning. On the positive side we do have the irrigated districts in Alberta and a more rudimentary system around Lake Diefenbaker, as well as some substantial pipeline systems. We also have the 1972 study by PFRA on managing the Saskatchewan – Nelson River system which should be upgraded and activated.
The risks from a drought and the demands for a sustainable water supply are increasing with time. It is our responsibility to develop plans, short and long term.
- - - -
See also: North Saskatchewan River Water Resource Committe -Feasibility Report at:
http://nsrwrc.ca/projects.php
Red Williams’ Comment from his Monday Morning Memo – December 7, 2009:
1.1 Drought and Water
Climate change aside, we have the problems of drought and water management as issues to deal with in a forth right manner. There is good evidence that droughts have plagued the prairie basin ever since the ice age; often longer than any in living memory, with one lasting a century. There is also substantial information on the disappearance of glaciers feeding the rivers in the prairie basin, and plausible suggestions that the annual flow will increasingly be concentrated in the spring of the year.
Droughts will happen when they will, since they are the result of natural causes ranging from sun spot activity to the temperature shifts in the waters of the Pacific Ocean. To mitigate the impact of droughts it is possible to institute plans all the way from programs to assist the worst affected, to improving the predictability of such occurrences, and to securing water supplies particularly to meet animal and human requirements.
We are far behind where we should be in developing water management systems for the prairies. The existence of watershed councils (Alberta) and watershed advisory committees (Saskatchewan) reflect the elementary stage of planning. On the positive side we do have the irrigated districts in Alberta and a more rudimentary system around Lake Diefenbaker, as well as some substantial pipeline systems. We also have the 1972 study by PFRA on managing the Saskatchewan – Nelson River system which should be upgraded and activated.
The risks from a drought and the demands for a sustainable water supply are increasing with time. It is our responsibility to develop plans, short and long term.
- - - -
See also: North Saskatchewan River Water Resource Committe -Feasibility Report at:
http://nsrwrc.ca/projects.php
- Oscar
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9964
- Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm
16 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests