I object to the licencing of…

I object to the licencing of the “Hidden Quarry” and pit proposed by James Dick Construction at Highway 7 and 6th Line in Guelph-Eramosa Township. It is not clear to me that there is any assurance that the potential damaging impacts of such an operation can be mitigated. This proposal is for a site which is close to several major aggregate extraction sites where • the aquifer (Guelph’s DoLime Quarry), • private wells (Dufferin Aggregates/Acton) and • structures (Dufferin Aggregates/Milton) have been permanently damaged, in spite of studies and assurances to the contrary. This is just the tip of the iceberg of negative impacts. All of these examples of serious damage can apply to the Hidden Quarry. • It is proposed that aggregate will be mined up to 30 metres below the water table, which may include mining the aquitard stone which protects the aquifer, and risks being cracked; • it is proposed that this pit and quarry be constructed close to (closer than regulations by 10 metres!) a wetland, and that it will be on two sides of a creek, both of which are fragile habitat and both of which are at the high point of the Grand River Watershed, feeding into the cold Blue Springs Creek; • the proposed pit and quarry location, in this region of karst and fragile limestone, may interfere with groundwater and aquifer, both of which are essential to the maintenance of private wells, local residents’ only source of drinking water; and • the proposed pit will involve blasting on a regular basis (including higher impact under-water blasting) in an area with many century homes built on old stone foundations, a gas pipeline and a large sub-division built on land which may not be entirely stable. Other risks to health, agriculture, business and wildlife are self-evident. At the time of James Dick’s purchase of this property in 1988, Rockwood was not as large as it is today. It has moved south and east through several major new subdivisions. All of these new homes are within 1- 1.5 kilometres of the site. Even closer to the site are several stone and log buildings of historical note. This is not a lost corner in the country. This region is now part of the GTA. The community stretches along Highway 7 from Guelph to Georgetown. The region supports/suffers major quarries already, which have permanently damaged their natural surroundings and centuries’ old communities. Just across Highway 7 from the site, in Nassagaweya/Milton, is the northern border of the Green Belt where every effort is being made to protect the natural environment. It is not an appropriate location for a quarry. I believe that the regulations of the ARA do not adequately allow for an overview and mitigaton of the impact of multiplying quarries in particular regions of Southern Ontario. While the need for aggregate is obvious, I believe that we must develop a long term plan to meet this need in smarter ways, a long term plan which exists in the context of a world with finite natural resources and fossil fuel energy. We must also look to minimizing the effect on our communities, our human resources. • We must find more environmentally friendly approaches to the purposes for which ever-new aggregate is used; • We must increase recycling of aggregate, especially in Ontario the world’s largest consumer of aggregate; • We must look to other recycled materials to complement aggregate use; • We must demand that the aggregates industry repay society at higher levels than the current minimal amounts, minimal relative to many other jurisdictions in the world; • We must look into more efficient ways of building our communities – and reducing sprawl which is legislated into maximum aggregate use, instead of minimum aggregate and maximum green space; • We must stop wasting this natural resource, and pitting the earth’s surface wherever an orange box marks a little bit of gravel, and hints at fortunes to be made at the earth’s and society’s expense; • We must find new ways to transport this heavy, dusty load, to look to rail and water so that it stops burning lungs and breaking the roads for which it has been mined. Every Ontario group of citizens (and we are many) which has wrestled with this issue has wrestled with an Act which is about regulated minimums of damage, minimums that do not adequately address the impact of mining in semi-urban and agricultural areas. None of these minimums address the quality of life of the human beings who are impacted. Is it possible that the aggregates which were once meant to serve our needs are now our masters?