Carter Bay access closed to the public

by Michael Erskine

CARTER BAY-News of the closing of Carter Bay to the public has spread swiftly across Island communities, inciting outrage amongst those who have come to regard access to the beach as a public right, but developer Arend VanVierzen said public abuse and dangerous practices have led 57 out of 60 property owners in the development to call for the closure.

"It was pretty clear," said Mr. VanVierzen. "When we contacted the owners of the properties, the overwhelming majority wanted the gates to be closed."

News of a rare bird found nesting on the dunes may have offered the catalyst for the decision-Mr. VanVierzen said he had promised the Ministry of Natural Resources that he would not discuss the bird-but the decision was really based on many serious factors.

"I had one owner come running in a week or so ago," said Mr. VanVierzen. "They reported that someone had started a campfire and it had gotten out of control. Luckily I had a truck with several hundreds of litres of water on board and we managed to get it put out. It didn't hurt that everything was damp from all the rain we had been getting."

The potential impact of a serious forest fire scared him badly, admitted the development operator. "If there was a major forest fire I would be finished," he said. "It is as simple as that. The person starting the campfire while camping illegally would just jump in their truck and drive away. It is me who would be left holding the bag."

Mr. VanVierzen said that he has had to contend with mounds of garbage left behind by people who felt entitled to use his property and could not be bothered to clean up after themselves.

"You know for 10 years I have left that gate open, graded the road four times a year so people would have smooth access. In all that time not one person stopped in at the office to say to say 'thank you,'" he said. "Now, I close the gate and young people are giving me the finger as they pass me by on the road each day. Everybody thinks they have a right to everything."

Plans to implement a gated community are now going ahead, but Mr. VanVierzen suggests that people in the community look at the glass as half full rather than half empty.

"You know there is a lovely public beach just down the road at Providence Bay," he said. "It has the same lovely sand, the same beautiful view, and it has public washrooms, ice cream, a really wonderful fish and chip place that I highly recommend; these are all small businesses that could really use the support of people around here during these tough economic times."

Many of the people who do come in to illegally camp in Carter Bay "load up in Espanola and don't do any business here on the Island," said Mr. VanVierzen. "They bring everything in with them and just leave behind the garbage."

If there were ever an emergency within Carter Bay, getting assistance in to those in need would be much more difficult than it would be at Providence Bay, he added.

In the end, however, the property at Carter Bay is, and has always been, private property. "I don't know what is about people," he said. "They have access to a well-serviced public property, paid for with tax dollars, yet instead they demand to use someone else's private property as if it was their own, as if they have an inherent right to use and abuse what belongs to someone else for their own purposes. Enough is enough."

Gordon's Park wins designation as national dark sky sanctuary

by Nancy McDermid

TEHKUMMAH-On August 15 Gordon's Park was officially designated a dark sky preserve by the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada (RASC).

Owners Rita and Terry Gordon received the designation and accolades from dignitaries while Manitoulin Star Party guests, local residents and other well-wishers looked on. They are the first commercial establishment in Canada to receive the status.

Dan Taylor, a member of the RASC Light Abatement Committee, presented the award to the Gordons and commented that "they are unique in that they are the first private enterprise to apply for and received this designation."

The park has had a long history hosting the Manitoulin Star party and other astronomy-related events. They have worked for years in conjunction with local municipalities to support practices that help to define

Manitoulin Island as a dark sky sanctuary.

The MC for the ceremony was John Albers who is called the "Island astronomer," and who has been involved with the Gordon's for many years.

Following the official presentation by Mr. Taylor, Craig Maxwell spoke on behalf of MP Carol Hughes. Other dignitaries followed, including Tehkummah Reeve Gary Brown. He stated that it is a "great honour to see this designation created in our township and to be the first in Canada. There are spin-offs for everyone in the community. I am impressed with what you have done here."

Leslie Fields, the reeve for the Township of Assiginack, stated that, "This is an exciting time for all of us on Manitoulin." She acknowledged the accomplishments of both Rita and Terry as well as those who "took chances with their own urge to do something different" and who helped to bring dark sky policies to the Island.

Other presentations and acknowledgements came from Al Tribinevicius, councillor with the municipality of Central Manitoulin, and Sharron Valli who presented an award on behalf of MPP Mike Brown. Ms. Valli also read out letters of congratulation from those who could not attend the event.

The ceremony also included an official ribbon-cutting and ended with comments from both Mr. and Mrs. Gordon and an invitation to join in sharing a special cake and the evening's events.

"We could not have done this without all those who are present and those who are not," Mrs. Gordon stated. It is "very important to Terry and I that we are a designated dark sky preserve within a dark sky sanctuary. I also want to thank Terry who is the hard-working man behind it all."

Ms. Gordon also acknowledged those who nominated the park, and those who wrote letters of support. She thanked the dignitaries for attending and the municipalities for their years of support. Lastly she thanked the people in attendance, some who came from as far as Indiana and Pennsylvania. "Thank you for witnessing this moment; it is very special to us," she said. "As long as we have Gordon's Park this will be available to you."

Star party guests were then able to attend a lecture by Terry Trees of the Kiski Astronomers from Pennsylvania entitled "The Murder of Tycho Brahe?" The presentation described the life of the late Danish astronomer from the 1600s who created 30 to 40 years of data relating to the measurement of the distances between stars. Following his death another astronomer, Johannes Kepler used this data to prove that the planets move around the sun in an elliptical and not circular orbit.

In 1901, on the 300th anniversary of Mr. Brahe's death, a murder mystery began when the government in Prague exhumed the body and snipped off a part of his moustache which, when examined, was found to be full of mercury. This then prompted the question that remains to this day as to how he died. Kepplar is thought to be the prime suspect but as Mr. Trees noted that "more proof is needed to prove he was murdered."

This was just one of three lectures given during the star party which ran from August 14 to the 18.

Larry McHenry also from the Kiski astronomers lectured on Star Myths and Ancient Folklore which included an introduction to constellations and how humans interpret them in relation to our own lives. On Sunday he hosted a solar presentation and observing session to talk about how to safely observe the sun, including sunspots and solar flares. Mr. McHenry noted that we "are in a solar minimum right now which is a quiet time for the sun and have been for a few years. It is the third deepest in this last century."

The Manitoulin Star Party is a yearly event and features lectures, guided viewing and a chance to visit and talk with a number of avid astronomy experts. It is a great opportunity for the public to have a chance to view the night sky through a variety of professional-quality telescopes and to learn about astronomy.

The viewing takes place out in the dark sky preserve. White light is not permitted there so that the stars can be viewed in the darkest setting, and a flashlight covered in red plastic is used to help a person see to get around. One can go from telescope to telescope to view different phenomena such as planets, star clusters and our next galaxy Andromeda. Mr. Albers leads a public observing session with the use of a laser pointer, and other attendees are friendly, patient, and enthusiastic about sharing their knowledge about the skies.

Scott McIlquham of Brantford, Ontario is a regular star party member who returns "for the dark skies, the camping and a great bunch of people." He has been bringing his telescope and setting up in the park for six years. One of his interests is astral photography.

Jeffrey Deans of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario has also been a regular member and was helpful in explaining the phenomenon of the Perseid meteor shower, which was occurring at the time. "The meteors are baseball and basketball size and highly metallic," he explained. "They are like molten glass."

Mr. Deans then used the computer function on the telescope to find interesting astronomical occurrences and invited participants to view and discuss them.

Also included in another area of the park was a chance to view video astronomy, which involves videotaping an image and then projecting it on a small screen.

For further information about astronomy sessions at the park call (705) 859-2470 or visit the website at www.gordonspark.com. Thursday night sessions occur throughout August.

Northeast Town rescinds motion giving setbacks for wind turbines

by Lindsay Kelly

LITTLE CURRENT-As the days count down until the comment period on the McLean's Mountain wind farm ends, the Northeast Town has rescinded a motion that established setbacks for the project.

Members of council spent more than an hour in an in-camera meeting conferring with municipal solicitor Stephen Watt before presenting the decision before the public. The motion rescinds a 2007 resolution that would have determined turbine setbacks.

The vote was unanimous, excepting Councillor Paul Skippen who voted against rescinding the setbacks.

In the original motion, the separation distance from dwellings was set at either 250 metres, or by Ministry of Environment certificate of approval; the participant property line setback was established at 10 metres; and the non-participant property line setback was determined at the rotor radius plus 10 metres.

In addition, the setback from the road right-of-way line was set at the rotor radius plus 10 metres; and the separation distance from non-dwelling principal and accessory structures was set at the rotor radius plus 10 metres.

The diameter of the rotor on the Vestas V90-the model of turbine proposed for McLean's Mountain-measures 90 metres.

Councillor Bill Koehler tabled the motion, citing the impending changes to the Green Energy Act as his motivation for reversing the decision.

"We know the regulations are coming down from the government and they're going to supercede anything the municipality does, so I didn't feel that we should have to rescind it after we already pass something," he said. "I don't think we should go forward with what we have and then find it's a waste of time."

At an earlier meeting, council spent an in-camera session consulting written advice provided by Mr. Watt, but at the end of an hour, council members determined that they needed more advice. It was a decision that doesn't sit well with Councillor Koehler, who believes a verdict should have been made at the earlier meeting.

"The decision was put off and I was very upset by that," he said. "If we as a council can't make a decision, what are we there for?"

But he's pleased with the decision, and suggested that all members of council need more information before going ahead with any further determinations in regards to the wind farm. The town is currently in the process of soliciting assistance from an engineering consultant to provide counsel on the project.

"I know nothing about wind farms, and before I make a decision, I'd like to have someone who can say what should be and what shouldn't be," the veteran councillor said.

Though he voted against the motion, it doesn't mean that he's opposed to the development of the wind farm, he simply wants more information to make an informed decision, he added.

The motion's recall was also welcome news for Al Ryan and Susan Hart, who are members of a group of citizens who are opposed to the current plan for McLean's Mountain and aiming to stall the project.

Mr. Ryan said he was buoyed at council's reconsideration of the motion. "I'm happy that town council decided to lean in favour of the new proposed Green Energy Act," he said.

He believes that it is in the community's best interest for council to take into deliberation changes being made to the Green Energy Act, which the provincial government is expected to put through this year.

Ms. Hart, who had been circulating a pair of petitions encouraging citizens to lobby the town and the greater Manitoulin area to alter the setbacks, was also glad to see council exercising caution. "I'm happy they're not rushing into anything," she said.

The group will continue its lobby beyond council's decision, and was to hold a meeting yesterday (August 18) encouraging landowners, wind farm participants, and members of the public to come listen to presentations about some of the perceived issues surrounding wind farms.

Although the company lobbied against having the motion rescinded-Northland president

John Brace said he would personally take it as a sign of rejection-the decision does not mean the project will be stopped from going forward.

"The town rescinding the setbacks can be interpreted by the opponents of the project as a win and as a lack of support from council," said Rick Martin, Northland's manager of business development for wind power. "However, the provincial government will soon take over site control of matters, so, really, it didn't have a great effect on us."

There may be some impact on the project down the road, but Mr. Martin said he has been assured by the mayor and council that they still support the project.

Ultimately, the company would still prefer to have a resolution that satisfies everyone involved in or affected by the project, Mr. Martin added. He's disappointed that more people didn't take heed of the information in Mr. Brace's presentation, and suggested that when the farm is up and running, "I really think that some of the people who are complaining will be some of the first people going up there to check it out."

The comment period on the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) registry for the Northland Power project will end in less than a week, but there's no sense as to how soon the company will find out whether it can move forward with the next phase of the project.

With the negative public input, "there will be questions that the ministry will have to clarify as a result of the interpretations on the EBR," he said, adding that he believes most of those questions can be resolved fairly quickly.

For example, the project plan indicates that there are to be laydown areas measuring 600 metres that are to be cleared to allow for the transport of machinery and parts, and the thought of clearcutting forests has alarmed people perusing the EBR. However, the laydown area is only applicable to one or two sites for the entire project, and won't be the case at every turbine site, Mr. Martin said.

The sites that are chosen will be those that will be the least impacted, and the company will move to restore it to its natural condition as soon as possible, he added.

"A lot of the process of going forward now will be going through those concerns, but as to how long it will take before going forward, that will be up to the director of the MOE," Mr. Martin said. "But they've indicated to us that the concerns brought up on Manitoulin are not unlike the concerns brought up at other sites."

Although the two sides still seem far apart, Councillor Koehler is also eager to find a solution that is reasonable for both those in favour of the project and those who oppose it.

"I just want to make it fair for everybody-the landowners and the ones who are against it," he said. "I hope it works out so that everybody is happy. I think we can do it."

Comments can be made at the Environmental Bill of Rights registry at www.ebr.gov.on.ca. The deadline is next Monday, August 24.

Access to swing bridge now features two extra lanes

Wider queue designed to prevent traffic buildup in Little Current when bridge swings open

by Jim Moodie

LITTLE CURRENT-Manitoulin's only stoplight now has some company, with two new lanes on the Little Current side of the swing bridge getting a literal green light-and a red one too, of course-late last week.

"We had everything tied in by Thursday evening," said Glen McDougall, area maintenance supervisor with Belanger Construction, which operates the swing bridge on behalf of the Ministry of Transportation (MTO), as well as installed the traffic lights for the project. "We just have a few bugs to work out now, but that should be done early this week."

The lanes themselves were constructed by TeraNorth Construction of Sudbury and finished a few weeks ago, but they couldn't be put into service until the lighting was good to go.

Mr. McDougall admitted that the project was behind schedule, as it was originally expected to be complete by Haweater Weekend. The delay was partially due to changes in the contract, he said, but he also felt that it would be better to wait until after the Civic holiday and the equally busy Country Fest weekend before implementing the new routine, as if there was any glitch during those times the gridlock would have been considerable.

The additional lanes, similar to what motorists experience when they queue up to board the Chi-Cheeman in South Baymouth, were deemed necessary to alleviate traffic backing up into Little Current-and potentially tying up important intersections-during periods of high vehicular volume and frequent bridge swings.

The project was initiated by the Town of Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands, with funding available through the province's Connecting Link program, which enables municipalities to repair roadways that connect two ends of a provincial highway through an urban area. The MTO picked up the $735,000 tab for the work, which is unrelated to the ministry's planned improvements to the swing bridge.

Mr. McDougall said he wasn't a fan of the concept at first, but now believes it's a good thing. "I think it will work," he said. "It should relieve congestion, especially when the ferry traffic is coming up from Highway 6."

The three lanes together can accommodate about 90 cars, said Mr. McDougall, so should eliminate those lineups that used to stretch past the two grocery stores and make access to businesses on either side of the corridor difficult.

The trick now, said the maintenance supervisor, is to "educate people to move over and make use of the lanes." He noted that he visited the site last Friday during the 9 am and 10 am bridge pivots, and a surprising number of drivers weren't catching on to the new drill, despite "signs saying to move over to the right and use lanes 2 and 3."

Belanger doesn't have the resources to supply a person to direct traffic, said Mr. McDougall, so it's up to the motoring public to acquaint themselves with the procedure and fill the lanes as required.

The traffic lights-one for each lane-are activated by "magnetic loops in the road," said the Belanger supervisor, as opposed to the cameras that had previously been used for this purpose, although "we'll still have those in place for backup," he noted.

As for the order in which green lights will come on to empty the lanes, Mr. McDougall said this isn't a set pattern, but one that depends on which lane has a car reach the signalling device first. "If I pull over to the right and pass you and get to the stop block first, then I'm going over first," he explained.

The lights, generally speaking, will stay on for a fixed interval, but the bridge operator can also "override that" by pushing a button in the wheelhouse, said Mr. McDougall, and keep the light green for a longer time "to get people off the Island" or to facilitate the swift passage of an emergency vehicle.

He noted that the previous system allowed for a bit more control for the bridge workers, as "before if we got a call from an ambulance we could touch a button and it would go to green," whereas with the new lighting "we have to wait and catch it as it turns green, and hold it on green."

But the Belanger supervisor doesn't anticipate any major hiccup in this regard, since "for the most part we get a call from the hospital" when an ambulance is on its way, leaving adequate time for the person atop the bridge to adjust the lights accordingly.

In general, he feels the new multi-lane approach will be an improvement on the jams of the past, but it may take a bit of time for people to get used to the new regimen.

"The next few weekends will be a good test," he said. "Especially the long (Labour Day) weekend, with the traffic we'll get then."

EDITORIAL

Ontario hay farmers need to assist Western neighbours

Earlier in this decade, in the years 2002 and 2003, farmers and farm organizations in Ontario and Quebec organized an initiative to assist their prairie province colleagues, especially Saskatchewan and Alberta, whose regions were experiencing severe drought.

With the co-operation of the national railways, the farmers initiated Haywest and sent a great deal of forage (in hay bale format) to their drought-stricken counterparts.

Naturally, there was more demand than supply and, in Western Canada, a lottery system was devised by means of a distribution system to give away the donated forage. Some farmers got extra hay, some didn't.

The other glitch in the program was a requirement that the donated hay should be fumigated to rid it of any pests that would, in the West, be invasive species.

All in all, though, the program helped out many farmers who, because of the weather conditions, were not producing enough forage crops to see their herds through the winter months.

This last couple of years, Alberta in particular is experiencing similar-and worse-drought conditions than that province had six and seven years ago.

Once again, farmers are facing the necessity of radically downsizing their herds, even to the point of selling off all of their animals because the drought and corresponding negligible hay crop leave them no options.

In Ontario, farmers have faced their own set of problems brought on by too much rain: there have been relatively few sufficiently long periods between rains when the forage crop has been dry enough to harvest for winter use.

A drive around Manitoulin, though, shows a healthy (if moist) second cut of hay still standing, already cut and ready for baling or outside storage, or already cut and processed for winter feed.

Because of this province's unusual weather conditions, there would not likely be the same amount of forage available to donate to the Western farmers this year as there was in 2002 and 2003.

But judging by reports of conditions in Alberta, anything at all that might come from Ontario and Quebec would be useful and much appreciated.

The Haywest program in the early 2000s involved Canadian National and Canadian Pacific Rail leaving empty cars at specific regional locations where farmers could bring the donated hay and help load the cars.

When cars were loaded, a passing freight train would simply couple them to a westbound train and drop them off at one of several distribution points in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Judging by the reported plight of the beef and buffalo industry on the prairies, it is more than time to revisit the Haywest concept in 2009.

The last time, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and its Quebec counterpart played pivotal roles in bringing this about.

In the interest of helping to sustain a national beef industry, it is certainly time to revisit the Haywest plan.

Letters to the Editor

Changes need to be made to law to protect youth

Abuse of children is unacceptable

To the Expositor:

I am writing to bring attention to a problem in our legal system and the Child and Family Services Act that needs to be addressed.

On July 1, 2009, a young child was physically and emotionally disciplined by his father for expressing his attachment to his stepfather in the presence of his biological father. The biological parents share joint custody and the child spends alternate weeks with each parent. This young child was merely referring to the stepparent as "dad" while telling the biological father what activities they had done during the previous week's access with his mother. As a result, the child was struck on the bare bottom and confined to a dark room where he was forced to write "lines" apologizing for his mistake and promising never to do it again. The child then was told that he was not allowed to sleep in the bedroom with his father (as he does not have his own bed at the biological father's home), and instead was isolated to the couch for the night.

When this was reported to the OPP by the child the following week during his mother's access, the OPP informed that mother that "Corporal punishment is still acceptable to a degree if a parent so chooses." The Criminal Code, however, fails to explain what force is considered reasonable and for what types of behaviours this type of "discipline" is acceptable. It is completely left open for interpretation and what one parent finds reasonable, another parent finds excessive. To me, this was excessive and completely not punishable behaviour.

The Children's Aid Society (CAS) was notified of the child's allegations of abuse, including a history of emotional abuse inflicted by the parent upon the child. CAS completed an investigation and found that there "was not enough evidence" to support the mother in her efforts to protect the child because it was an "isolated incident."

The child had revealed to OPP as well as CAS that he had never been spanked before, so this means that the father was allowed to abuse his child because he had never done it before. Does that mean that a man is allowed to beat his wife once because he's never done it before? I think not! An abusive husband would be escorted to jail and would be charged for domestic abuse. So why are our children treated any differently? Because children can't fight back, and parents who try to fight back and protect their children from abusers gets punished. The mother was informed by the OPP that if she refused to send the child back to the abusive father, she would be charged with breaching a court order (temporary joint custody order) and the child would be forcibly removed from her home and placed with the parent who abused him.

The child was terrified of returning and when he voiced his fear to CAS, all the response they could give him was, "We talked to your dad, and he says he won't spank you again." So does that mean that an abusive husband needs to merely tell police that "it'll never happen again" and he should be left off scot-free? Isn't it taught that if a man says that he'll never do it again, chances are he will? Why are child protection laws any different than spousal abuse laws? Abuse is abuse, no matter who the victim.

CAS states that their mandate is to protect children from harm and to prevent child abuse and neglect. So why don't they do their job? Because the legal system is set up to protect the abuser and not the abused. The CAS worker involved in this case, should be commended because she tried to go above and beyond, but the laws wouldn't allow her to protect this little boy. This child thinks that CAS doesn't believe him and in his plea for help, he turned to God. He wrote a letter to God asking that he not be forced to return to his abusive parent because he was scared. But still CAS did not/could not protect him. The child asked his CAS worker why she was making him go back and she tried to explain to a young child about custody issues that should not be the concern of a child his age.

This innocent little child was delivered back to the abuser by his CAS worker because the abuse he endured was an isolated incident. Not for long, I say, because these patterns tend to repeat themselves, usually increasing in severity over time. The abusive parent has gotten away with it once with just a slap on the wrist, so why not try again. Only next time, the abuse could be much worse.

This was not an isolated incident. There has been a long history of abusive behaviour exhibited from this person; however, this is the first time physical abuse has been used. There has been a definite pattern of emotional and verbal abuse, along with isolation and parental alienation, but there has been a switch in the abuser's tactics, and now physical abuse is part of his arsenal of controlling behaviours.

I'm sure this case is not the first of its kind, and probably won't be the last, but as parents and caregivers of our precious children, we need to do something to change the system. One person can not do it on their own, but if we all stand together and lobby our government and demand changes to the Criminal Code of Canada and the Child and Family Services Act, to protect our children, maybe fewer children will have to go through what this innocent young victim of abuse has endured. Our children need us. It is our duty as parents and moral citizens to protect these children, our future. To get information on the Protective Mothers Alliance and how to set up a local chapter, go to lundybancroft.com.

Patti McKenzie

Tehkummah

Any change to Fisher Harbour lease requires cottager input

Insurance coverage demanded in event of damage to health, property

To the Expositor:

We would first like to compliment you on the article you wrote after the public meeting in Little Current called by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) for Alexander Center Industries Limited (ACIL). We thought the article was very fair and accurate.

We feel the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour and accordingly we have great concerns about the excessively broad range of commodities for which ACIL is requesting approval. These could include substances that have the potential to do long-term harm to the environment.

Any spill or contamination of the water at the entrance to McGregor Bay, because of its narrow opening and limited ability to flush contaminants, has the potential to be devastating to our area and the potential to eliminate more jobs than ACIL will ever create through their harbour.

Our intention and desire is to protect the environment and economic foundation of all legitimate stakeholders in as co-operative a manner as possible.

To that end, the following is the McGregor Bay Association (MBA) statement on Fisher Harbour, as approved unanimously by the association at its annual meeting held on August 2:

The MBA is deeply concerned that the proposed alterations to environmental protections contained in the original water lease of ACIL at Fisher Harbour have the potential to:

*Cause wide-ranging and irreparable environmental damage to the unique and fragile nature of the ecology, which, among other things, has a geographically limited capacity to "flush" out contaminants;

*Violate the rights and interests of our neighbors in the Whitefish River First Nation, including their important sacred sites of Dreamer's Rock, the Bell Rocks and burial grounds, as well as ceremonies;

*Undercut the quality of life in McGregor Bay as well as the value of several hundred properties currently worth in excess of $50-$100 million.

McGregor Bay borders Killarney Provincial Park, the jewel of the Ontario parks system, as well as Baie Fine and the Whitefish River First Nation. The appeal of its pristine lands and waters is responsible for a significant portion of the predominant local industry-tourism-and the infrastructure and numerous businesses that support this industry. The community of McGregor Bay contributes to local employment to a significantly greater extent than ACIL's Fisher Harbour facility.

While progress and diversification of the economy is highly desirable, no single commercial enterprise should be allowed to endanger this beautiful environment, which is at the same time the primary economic foundation of the North, including the communities of Killarney, Manitoulin Island, Espanola and others.

Past experience with ACIL and the MNR justifies very real concern about the ACIL request to expand the list of authorized commodities for Fisher Harbour shipment.

For example, the original Fisher Harbour lease of 1975 listed seven commodities acceptable for shipment through the port. Salt was not among these. Nevertheless, ACIL began shipping in large quantities of salt without approval or authorization. When this was reported to the MNR, the ministry chose not to enforce the lease, allowing ACIL to continue shipping salt without sanction or penalty. This history, and the proposed expanded commodity list-which is so nebulously worded that even heavy metals, insecticides, pesticides, industrial chemicals, and petroleum products are not excluded-makes the MNR-ACIL Fisher Harbour lease particularly problematic.

We resolve that:

*The present procedure for exercising MNR's leasing authority behind closed doors has not worked with respect to Fisher Harbour and is unacceptable;

*If the lease-renewal process goes forward without our participation we will have no choice but to request a full Part II inquiry; however, the MBA believes it is in the best interest of all parties to come to a timely and efficient resolution of any issues and concerns by including representatives of the MBA to responsibly participate in developing the wording of any lease, including the commodity list and specific enforcement clauses (the Whitefish River First Nation should have a seat on this committee as well as the Bay of Islands Association if they so wish);

In the event that a new lease is issued by MNR we demand that:

*The approved list of commodities must be based on the 1975 list;

*Substances that could be harmful to people, animals or the environment in the event of a spill must be banned;

*Enforcement provisions and government monitoring procedures must be specified with significant penalties delineated.

Finally, our association asserts that it is in the best interests of the community of McGregor Bay that Fisher Harbour, ACIL, Fisher-Wavy and any others operating the port maintain and document an insurance policy, having a minimum face value of $100 million (adjusted for inflation), that specifically covers the residents and property owners of McGregor Bay with respect to any medical harm, and/or loss of property, and/or loss of use of property resulting from the operation of Fisher Harbour.

Gillian Woodrooffe

president

McGregor Bay Association

All landowners within wind farm boundaries should be notified of project

Project not environmentally benign

EDITOR'S NOTE: The following letter has been submitted to Norteast Town council and is reprinted here at the request of the authors.

To the Expositor:

Dear Mayor Stringer and council,

We are writing to you to express our concerns regarding the McLean's Mountain wind farm. While there are a number of points that we will raise in this letter, our main concerns involve communication and property owner rights.

We are non-resident, registered owners of Lot 20, Concession 3 in the Township of Howland. Given that our property is considered as the Green Bush and is several concessions removed from McLean's Mountain, we were both shocked and surprised to recently learn that our property falls within the boundaries of this project. We believe that all registered landowners within the boundaries of this project should be informed directly of this project. It hardly seems reasonable or fair that a project that involves and affects our property can proceed without our knowledge let alone our concurrence.

We have also learned that two wind turbines are to be located on an adjoining property and that these wind turbines will impact on how and where we can use and enjoy our property. It is totally unacceptable that one property owner for their economic benefit can adversely affect the use and enjoyment of adjoining properties by their owners. We most strongly suggest that wind turbines be located within a property so that there is no impact on adjoining properties. More specifically, the setback from the non-participant's property line should be at least the proposed Ministry of Environment recommended 550 metres or 40 decibels of noise, the same setback as prescribed between a turbine and a dwelling. The length of the rotor plus 10 metres as currently prescribed is simply unfair to the non-participant as it affects the use of their property. We would be prohibited from constructing a dwelling-a hunt camp for example-within the area prescribed in the current setback.

We would also like to draw your attention to an article by Michael Erskine in the Manitoulin Expositor dated December 17, 2003. During the intervening five-plus years there is no doubt that change has/will occur as very few things remain static, nevertheless, there are some points raised in Mr. Erskines's article that are worthy of consideration given this passage of time:

"The stately sweep of windmill propellers are to grace the heights of McLean's Mountain before the end of 2004."

"Part of the assessment process will include a $100,000 full simulation model that will give landowners and local residents a clear picture of the visual impact of the project. Those detailed simulations should be available within three to four months."

"The wind farm project will consist of 30 to 36 wind turbines."

"In a more direct benefit, construction jobs in the initial building of the wind farm should give the local economy a boost, even if the actual long-term job impact will be nominal."

"All representatives of the partners in the consortium said they were committed to keeping the lines of communication with local residents open."

"When you know the Island and the way people think here," said Mr. Gagnon (co-owner of REpower Wind Corp. and key local player in the consortium which also included Northland Power), "I feel quite confident people will be very comfortable with this project when they know all the details."

Based on Mr. Erskine's article, there should have been wind turbines in place by the end of 2004. Five years later there are no turbines but there seems to be a rush to get this going now before more stringent regulations take effect.

This project is not environmentally benign. A network of roads and power lines will be constructed for these wind turbines. Both will require maintenance and defoliants will be used to control vegetation. The turbines themselves will create noise, light and affect the skyline. We urge you to seriously evaluate the net benefit not just to NEMI but to Manitoulin Island while respecting the rights of property owners.

Thank you for your consideration of our letter.

Blair Morphet, Ann Morphet and Jamie Morphet

Sudbury