-Concerned with the permit…

-Concerned with the permit application to draw water.
-Concerned with the application to install wash ponds onsite, risk of contamination to neighboring wetland that is the immediate vicinity. Also concerned of contamination of Source Water Protection Area, Waterloo moraine, and private wells.
-Concerned of any possible materials (i.e. fuel tanks, etc.), that would contaminate.
-Concerned of environmental impact, and possible contamination of proposed used asphalt, and concrete recycling operations on-site.
-Concerned of negative effects of dust to the neighboring community of Shingletown.
-Wilf Ruland (P. Geo.), a highly trusted Geo-Expert on issues related to groundwater, has recommended to deny the application.
-Concerned with the elimination of filtration within a Regional Recharge Area, significant to drinking water to the Region of Waterloo, as RoW is reliant on groundwater for its residents.
-Concerned with homes that are located within 120 meter setback of the proposed pit.
-Concerned with the hours of operation, and "possible" night operations.
-Concerned with the wetland, the areas dependency to it, and its resiliency throughout the operation.
-Concerned with the cumulative effects that another application will bring to the ecosystem of the area, i.e. water, noise, dust, carbon, etc.
-Households with private wells have a greater risk of contamination with gravel pits.
-Concerned that a hole in the ground (i.e. gravel pit) acts as a conduit for contamination, and possible risk that piercing the water table, there is always a risk for contamination.
-Water is a non-renewable resource (a finite resource), it is a resource of vital economic to Waterloo region, and cannot be readily replaced.
-Douglas Huber, Professional Geoscientist (worked at the Ministry of the Environment as a surface water quality specialist for over 29 years) is concerned that individual domestic wells will potentially be impacted as a result of this proposal, as well as surface water.
-Concerned with the lack of evidence that suggests an acceptable aquatard is present throughout the property, especially the Source Water Protection Area.
-Concerned that reassuring claims made, which are not backed up by data or analyses in the report- most significant potential groundwater impacts (silt contamination of groundwater from aggregate washing) not mentioned or dealt with in report.
-Inadequate information and analysis of potential threat to Wilmot Centre Well Field.
-Potential impacts on neighbouring wells not satisfactorily addressed.
-Concerned with the inadequacy of the proposed monitoring program.
-Concerned wash pond location, and the depth of pond, and the risks of contamination.
-Inadequate research on existing environmental impact from past feedlot operation.
-Concerned underground liquid manure distribution systems not mentioned or location identified.
-Concerned that state of agricultural ruins and onsite wells drilled prior not mentioned.