DOCSLIB.ORG

For the Development of the Mattagami Lake Dam Generating Station

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Final: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MATTAGAMI LAKE DAM GENERATING STATION Submitted To: Ontario Power Generation Inc. Submitted By: SENES Consultants Limited and C. Portt & Associates November 2010 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MATTAGAMI LAKE DAM GENERATING STATION Submitted to: Ontario Power Generation Inc. 700 University Avenue Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X6 By: SENES Consultants Limited Prepared by: November 2010 Mr. Phil Shantz Date EA Consulting Team SENES Consultants Limited Reviewed by: November 2010 Mrs. Gillian MacLeod Date Environmental Lead Ontario Power Generation Inc. Approved by: November 2010 Mr. Matt MacDonald Date Project Manager Ontario Power Generation Inc. Environmental Review Report For The Development Of The Mattagami Lake Dam Generating Station EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ontario Power Generation Inc. (OPG) is proposing to develop a 5 - 7 megawatt (MW) hydroelectric Generating Station (GS) (the Proposed Undertaking) in the immediate vicinity of OPG’s existing Mattagami Lake Dam. The Proposed Undertaking also includes construction of a new transmission line. This Environmental Review Report (ERR) is prepared for the Proposed Undertaking for review (by the Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and other agencies. Ontario Power Generation respectfully requests acceptance of the Proposed Undertaking as described herein, under the terms of the Guide. The Proposed Undertaking is located within the traditional territory of Mattagami First Nation (MFN). OPG and Mattagami First Nation have entered into a non-binding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to discuss the possibility of the parties entering into a commercial relationship with respect to the Proposed Undertaking. MFN’s Reserve is located less than 20 kilometres south of Mattagami Lake Dam. Description of the Existing Dam and Proposed GS The existing Mattagami Lake Dam was built in 1921 and purchased in 1944 by a predecessor company to OPG. The Mattagami Lake Dam is located at the outlet of the Mattagami Lake (at Kenogamissi Falls) on the Mattagami River, about 54 km southwest of the City of Timmins and about 20 km north of the Mattagami First Nation Reserve. The dam controls the flows from the Mattagami Lake into the Kenogamissi Lake, which is the forebay of OPG’s Wawaitin Generating Station. The dam is an important flood control facility for the City of Timmins, which is downstream of the site. The site is about 2 km east of Highway 144 and accessible by Kenogamissi Falls Road, a primary forest access road located in the extreme southern end of the Romeo Malette Forest. The existing Mattagami Lake Dam structure includes east and west earth dykes, east and west concrete gravity walls, and a central concrete sluiceway. The overall length of the dam structure is approximately 115 metres. The proposed GS would include a powerhouse that will enclose a single Kaplan turbine unit capable of generating 5 - 7 MW. Several similar units have already been installed and successfully operated in Canada. The proposed GS will have an average gross head of about 16 metres and design flow of about 40-47 cms depending on the final plant capacity. The proposed GS will include an intake, a penstock, a powerhouse with a tailrace channel, a powerhouse switchyard, a 3km 115 kilovolts (kV) Transmission line, and a connection switchyard (the Project). The powerhouse switchyard will be adjacent to the powerhouse to accommodate the power transformer, breaker and other electrical connection equipment. A vehicle parking lot will be located north of the powerhouse. The proposed GS will be connected Final ES-1 November 2010 Environmental Review Report For The Development Of The Mattagami Lake Dam Generating Station to the provincial grid via an existing Hydro One 115 kilovolts (kV) Transmission line (T61S) located about 3 kilometres (km) to the east. The proposed GS will be operated in compliance with the amended Mattagami River System Water Management Plan (MRSWMP). A minimum flow requirement has been agreed to by OPG and government agencies and would be included in the amended MRSWMP. The facility will be operated remotely and maintained by OPG’s Northeast Plant Group staff located in Timmins, Ontario. The remote control and automatic gate will facilitate faster response to changing conditions in the Mattagami Lake watershed than the current on-site log operations that are required as the flows and levels in the system change. OPG will also construct an approximate 3 km long transmission line from the proposed generation station to Hydro One’s existing 115 kV T61S transmission line running from Timmins Transformer Station to the Shiningtree Distributing Station. Existing Environment The Proposed Undertaking is situated in the boreal forest on the Canadian Shield. The soil types vary from sands, gravels, clays, and boulder tills to mixtures of sand, clay and silts. Forest cover in this area is ubiquitous and dominated by typical boreal species such as black and white spruce, jack pine, trembling aspen and white birch. The proposed GS and associated transmission line will be located generally in forest ecosystem areas of mixed woods and planted spruce and jack pine plantations. Associated vegetation is typical for the boreal forest. Some wetlands and creeks occur in the wider area. Wildlife in this area is typical for boreal forest with moose and black bear being the largest land mammals. No vulnerable, rare, threatened or endangered species occur in the area of the Proposed Undertaking. The Mattagami River is located within the Moose River drainage basin of the Hudson Bay Drainage System and traverses three physiographic regions: the Canadian Shield, the Great Clay Belt and the Hudson Bay Lowlands. The fish community in the vicinity of the proposed GS reflects the relatively simple community structure that is typical of many of the rivers in the Hudson Bay drainage basin, as well as the mainly shallow riffle habitat, with occasional deeper areas, that is present in this section of Mattagami River. The small fishes captured here are typical for this location and habitat. Logperch and longnose dace are common species inhabiting riffle habitat in riverine situations. Yellow perch are more common in Kenogamissi Lake, but some likely inhabit the slower flowing habitats of the River. The section of the Mattagami River downstream of the Mattagami Lake Dam is known as an important walleye and lake whitefish spawning area for populations of those fishes in Kenogamissi Lake. Walleye and lake whitefish are also part of the fish community in the River during their respective spawning runs and during the incubation and hatching period as embryos and fry. No species considered at-risk occurs in the vicinity of the Mattagami Lake Dam or the proposed GS. Final ES-2 November 2010 Environmental Review Report For The Development Of The Mattagami Lake Dam Generating Station The area of the proposed GS is a wilderness area with light public use. Kenogamissi Falls Road is a forest access road maintained by Tembec for access to a large section of the southern part of the Romeo Malette Forest. While forest harvesting and renewal is the main economic activity, other socio-economic uses in the area include trapping, hunting, fishing and snowmobiling. A couple cottages are located within one kilometre of the site and both Mattagami and Kenogamissi Lake are popular cottaging lakes for residents of Gogama and Timmins. Public, First Nations and Aboriginal Peoples and Government Consultation Public, First Nations and Aboriginal Peoples, and government agency consultations have been a key part of the environmental assessment process for the Proposed Undertaking. Public consultation has been conducted with two open houses/public meetings in Gogama and Timmins; a project website; newsletters; and the facilitation of on-going public inquiries. While the public raised several questions during the consultation process, no one voiced opposition to the Proposed Undertaking. First Nations and Aboriginal Peoples consultation has occurred and been particularly extensive with Mattagami First Nation. Consultation has also taken place with the Métis Nation of Ontario. Offers of consultation to other First Nations were also made. As well, the Mattagami First Nation has fielded direct questions from some of these First Nations on the project. Concerns during the process by the local community councils of the Métis Nation of Ontario have been addressed through consultation and mitigation measures. Extensive consultation has occurred with several government agencies including the Ministries of Natural Resources; Tourism and Culture; and, Environment and the federal departments of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Transport Canada. Approximately, two years of extensive discussions occurred with the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) on an operating regime. This culminated in an agreement over an “ecological flow”. In OPG’s view, there are no outstanding issues with these agencies with respect to the environmental assessment. Environmental Effects of Development This environmental assessment has examined the impact of the Proposed Undertaking on the aquatic, terrestrial, cultural and socio-economic environments. Provided that the recommended mitigation measures are implemented, it is our opinion that the development of the Mattagami Lake Dam site, and the subsequent operation of the proposed GS, will not
Recommended publications
  • Growth Responses of Riparian Thuja Occidentalis to the Damming of a Large Boreal Lake

    Growth Responses of Riparian Thuja Occidentalis to the Damming of a Large Boreal Lake

    53 Growth responses of riparian Thuja occidentalis to the damming of a large boreal lake Bernhard Denneler, Yves Bergeron, Yves Be´ gin, and Hugo Asselin Abstract: Growth responses of riparian eastern white cedar trees (Thuja occidentalis L.) to the double damming of a large lake in the southeastern Canadian boreal forest was analyzed to determine whether the shoreline tree limit is the result of physiological flood stress or mechanical disturbances. The first damming, in 1915, caused a rise in water level of ca. 1.2 m and resulted in the death of the trees that formed the ancient shoreline forest, as well as the wounding and tilting of the surviving trees (by wave action and ice push) that constitute the present forest margin. The second damming, in 1922, did not further affect the water level, but did retard the occurrence of spring high water levels, as well as reduce their magnitude. However, this did not injure or affect the mortality of riparian eastern white cedars. Radial growth was not affected by flooding stress, probably because inundation occurred prior to the start of the growing season (1915–1921) or was of too short duration to adversely affect tree metabolism (after 1921). It follows that (i) the shoreline limit of east- ern white cedar is a mechanical rather than a physiological limit, and (ii) disturbance-related growth responses (e.g., ice scars, partial cambium dieback, and compression wood) are better parameters than ring width for the reconstruction of long-term water level increases of natural, unregulated lakes. Key words: compression wood, eastern white cedar, flooding, ice scars, mortality, partial cambium dieback.
  • Kap Community Final Version

    Kap Community Final Version

    COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN 2016-2020 Photo by User: P199 at Wikimedia Commons Table of Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... 5! 1.0 Introduction and Background .................................................................................................... 6! 1.1 Developing the Community Vision and Mission Statements ................................................. 6! 1.2 Vision Statement ..................................................................................................................... 6! 1.3 Mission Statement .................................................................................................................. 6! 2.0 Communications and Consultation ............................................................................................ 7! 2.1 Steering Committee ................................................................................................................ 8! 2.2 On-line Survey ........................................................................................................................ 8! 2.3 Focus Groups .......................................................................................................................... 9! 2.4 Interviews ............................................................................................................................... 9! 2.5 Public Consultation ...............................................................................................................
  • Appendix a IAMGOLD Côté Gold Project Aboriginal Consultation Plan (Previously Submitted to the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines in 2013

    Appendix a IAMGOLD Côté Gold Project Aboriginal Consultation Plan (Previously Submitted to the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines in 2013

    Summary of Consultation to Support the Côté Gold Project Closure Plan Côté Gold Project Appendix A IAMGOLD Côté Gold Project Aboriginal Consultation Plan (previously submitted to the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines in 2013 Stakeholder Consultation Plan (2013) TC180501 | October 2018 CÔTÉ GOLD PROJECT PROVINCIAL INDIVIDUAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROPOSED TERMS OF REFERENCE APPENDIX D PROPOSED STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PLAN Submitted to: IAMGOLD Corporation 401 Bay Street, Suite 3200 Toronto, Ontario M5H 2Y4 Submitted by: AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, a Division of AMEC Americas Limited 160 Traders Blvd. East, Suite 110 Mississauga, Ontario L4Z 3K7 July 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Provincial EA and Consultation Plan Requirements ........................................... 1-1 1.3 Federal EA and Consultation Plan Requirements .............................................. 1-2 1.4 Responsibility for Plan Implementation .............................................................. 1-3 2.0 CONSULTATION APPROACH ..................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Goals and Objectives ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Stakeholder Identification ..................................................................................
  • Report on the Basin of Moose River and Adjacent Country Belonging To

    Report on the Basin of Moose River and Adjacent Country Belonging To

    REPORT ON THE BASIN OF MOOSE RIVER AND ADJACENT COUNTRY BELONGING TO THE PROVI1TGE QIF OI^TTj^JRXO. By E. B. BORRON, Esq. Stipendiary Magistrate. PRINTED BY ORDER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. TORONTO: PRINTED BY WARWICK & SONS, 68 AND 70 FRONT STREET WEST. 1890. RE POTT ON THE BASIN OF MOOSE RIVER AND ADJACENT COUNTRY BELONGING TO THE PRCVI1TOE OW OHTABIO. By E. B. BORRO N, Esq.. Stipendiary Magistrate PRINTED BY ORDER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY. TORONTO : PRINTED BY WARWICK & SONS, 68 AND 70 FRONT STREET WEST 1890. , — CONTENTS PAGE. Introductory remarks 3 Boundaries and area of Provincial Territory north of the water-parting on the Height-of-Land Plateau 3,4,5 Topography. Naturally divided into three belts 5 ] st, the Southerly or Height-of-Land Plateau 5 2nd, the Intermediate Plateau or Belt 5 3rd, the Northerly or Coast-Belt 5 The fundamental rocks in each 5 Explanations of possible discrepancies in the statements contained in reports for different years in regard of the same or of different sections of the territory 5 Routes followed in lb79 6 Extracts from Report or 1879. Description of the Height-of-Land Flateau from repoit for that year 6 The Northerly or Flat Coast Belt 7 The Intermediate Plateau or Belt 7 James' Bay exceedingly shallow 7 The Albany River and Abittibi, Mattagami and Missinaibi branches of Moose River navigable by boats for some distance in spring 7 Few if any mountains in the two northerly divisions 8 Shallowness of rivers, and slight depth below the general surface of the country 8 Ice jams at or near the mouths of Moose and Albany Rivers 8 Moose Factory, the principal trading post and settlement in the territory 8 Extracts from Reports of 1880.
  • Petition to List US Populations of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser Fulvescens)

    Petition to List US Populations of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser Fulvescens)

    Petition to List U.S. Populations of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) as Endangered or Threatened under the Endangered Species Act May 14, 2018 NOTICE OF PETITION Submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on May 14, 2018: Gary Frazer, USFWS Assistant Director, [email protected] Charles Traxler, Assistant Regional Director, Region 3, [email protected] Georgia Parham, Endangered Species, Region 3, [email protected] Mike Oetker, Deputy Regional Director, Region 4, [email protected] Allan Brown, Assistant Regional Director, Region 4, [email protected] Wendi Weber, Regional Director, Region 5, [email protected] Deborah Rocque, Deputy Regional Director, Region 5, [email protected] Noreen Walsh, Regional Director, Region 6, [email protected] Matt Hogan, Deputy Regional Director, Region 6, [email protected] Petitioner Center for Biological Diversity formally requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) list the lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the United States as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544. Alternatively, the Center requests that the USFWS define and list distinct population segments of lake sturgeon in the U.S. as threatened or endangered. Lake sturgeon populations in Minnesota, Lake Superior, Missouri River, Ohio River, Arkansas-White River and lower Mississippi River may warrant endangered status. Lake sturgeon populations in Lake Michigan and the upper Mississippi River basin may warrant threatened status. Lake sturgeon in the central and eastern Great Lakes (Lake Huron, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River basin) seem to be part of a larger population that is more widespread.
  • Geology of Foleyet and Ivanhoe Townships; Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5851, 42P

    Geology of Foleyet and Ivanhoe Townships; Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5851, 42P

    ISBN 0-7778-1337-8 THESE TERMS GOVERN YOUR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT Your use of this Ontario Geological Survey document (the “Content”) is governed by the terms set out on this page (“Terms of Use”). By downloading this Content, you (the “User”) have accepted, and have agreed to be bound by, the Terms of Use. Content: This Content is offered by the Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) as a public service, on an “as-is” basis. Recommendations and statements of opinion expressed in the Content are those of the author or authors and are not to be construed as statement of government policy. You are solely responsible for your use of the Content. You should not rely on the Content for legal advice nor as authoritative in your particular circumstances. Users should verify the accuracy and applicability of any Content before acting on it. MNDM does not guarantee, or make any warranty express or implied, that the Content is current, accurate, complete or reliable. MNDM is not responsible for any damage however caused, which results, directly or indirectly, from your use of the Content. MNDM assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the Content whatsoever. Links to Other Web Sites: This Content may contain links, to Web sites that are not operated by MNDM. Linked Web sites may not be available in French. MNDM neither endorses nor assumes any responsibility for the safety, accuracy or availability of linked Web sites or the information contained on them. The linked Web sites, their operation and content are the responsibility of the person or entity for which they were created or maintained (the “Owner”).
  • ONTARIO Lake Abitibi Islands

    ONTARIO Lake Abitibi Islands

    .. ONTARIO Lake Abitibi Islands ~;;;;;;;.~_......,.1 Interim Management Statement PARKS ® Ontario 2007 ',;; APPROVAL STATEMENT I am pleased to approve this Interim Management Statement for Lake Abitibi Islands Provincial Park. Ontario's Living Legacy Land Use Strategy (OMNR 1999) identified this area as a nature reserve class provincial park. This park was regulated under the Provincial Parks Act in May of 2005 (0. Reg. 180105). This Interim Management Statement provides direction for the protection and management of Lake Abitibi Islands Provincial Park. February 12. 2007 Paul Bewick Date Zone Manager Northeast Zone Ontario Parks · . TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Objectives 1 2.0 Management Context 1 2.1 Environmental Assessment 5 3.0 Park Features and Values 5 3.1 Geological Features 5 3.2 Biological Features 5 3.3 Cultural Setting 5 3.4 Recreation 5 4.0 Aboriginal Uses 6 5.0 Stewardship Policies 6 5.1 Terrestrial Ecosystems 6 5.1.1 Harvesting 6 5.1.4 Wildlife Management 7 Hunting 7 Trapping 7 5.1.5 Industrial Resources 7 5.1.6 Access and Crossings 7 Access 7 Recreational Trails 7 5.1.7 Adjacent Land Management... 9 Forestry 9 Conservation Reserves 9 Provincial Parks 9 5.1.8 Land Disposition 9 Land Use Permits, Licenses of Occupation, and Unauthorized Occupations ......................................................................................................................9 Patent Land 9 Boat Caches 9 5.2 Aquatic Ecosystems 9 5.2.1 Water Management 9 5.2.2 Fisheries Management 10 Sport Fishing 10 Commercial Fishing 10 Commercial Baitfish Harvesting 10 Fish Stocking 10 6.0 Operations Policies 10 6.1 Recreation Management 10 6.1.1 Motorized Recreation 10 Motorboats 10 Aircraft 10 Snowmobiles 10 6.1.2 Non-Motorized Recreation 10 Hiking 11 Canoeing/Kayaking 11 6.1.3 Emerging Recreational Uses 11 6.2 Development 11 7.0 Cultural Resources 11 8.0 Heritage Education 11 9.0 Research 11 10.0 References 13 11.0 Appendix A: Background Information 14 Cultural Resources 17 Recreation & Tourism 17 ~ .
  • Draft Environmental Report Ivanhoe River

    Draft Environmental Report Ivanhoe River

    Draft Environmental Report Ivanhoe River - The Chute and Third Falls Hydroelectric Generating Station Projects Revised May 2013 The Chute and Third Falls Draft Environmental Report May 2013 Insert “Foreword” i The Chute and Third Falls Draft Environmental Report May 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Waterpower in Ontario ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Introduction to Project .................................................................................................. 1 1.2.1 Zone of Influence .................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Overview of the Environmental Screening Process ........................................................ 4 1.4 Approach to the Environmental Screening Process ........................................................ 5 1.4.1 Legal Framework ................................................................................................... 6 1.4.2 Characterize Local Environment of Proposed Development ................................... 7 1.4.3 Identify Potential Environmental Effects ................................................................. 8 1.4.4 Identify Required Mitigation, Monitoring or Additional Investigations ................... 8 1.4.5 Agency and Public Consultation and Aboriginal Communities Engagement ............ 8 2.
  • Appendix F Environmental Features

    Appendix F Environmental Features

    Appendix F Environmental Features YELLOW FALLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT APPENDIX F Note Prior to the release of the Draft EA, the Project was referred to as the Island Falls Hydroelectric Project. Following release of a draft environmental assessment report for review by First Nations, agencies, and members of the public, numerous comments were received. As a direct result of agency and public consultation, YFP made a decision to relocate the Project two kilometres upstream of Island Falls to Yellow Falls. Accordingly, the Project name has changed to the “Yellow Falls Hydroelectric Project” and the Project nameplate capacity has changed from 20 MW to 16 MW. The following Environmental Features report details existing natural and socioeconomic conditions and was prepared for the Island Falls location. Project relocation has not appreciably altered descriptions of existing natural and socioeconomic conditions. The Yellow Falls Project location has been provided on figures to indicate how the revised location corresponds with existing natural and socioeconomic environmental features. Appendix F1 Environmental Features Report ISLAND FALLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT APPENDIX F1 – ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES File No. 160960168 Prepared for: Yellow Falls Power Limited Partnership c/o 500, 1324 – 17th Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2T 5S8 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 70 Southgate Drive, Suite 1 Guelph ON N1G 4P5 February 2009 ISLAND FALLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT APPENDIX F1 – ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1
  • Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser Fulvescens) As Endangered Or Threatened Under the Endangered Species Act

    Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser Fulvescens) As Endangered Or Threatened Under the Endangered Species Act

    Petition to List U.S. Populations of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) as Endangered or Threatened under the Endangered Species Act May 14, 2018 NOTICE OF PETITION Submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on May 14, 2018: Gary Frazer, USFWS Assistant Director, [email protected] Charles Traxler, Assistant Regional Director, Region 3, [email protected] Georgia Parham, Endangered Species, Region 3, [email protected] Mike Oetker, Deputy Regional Director, Region 4, [email protected] Allan Brown, Assistant Regional Director, Region 4, [email protected] Wendi Weber, Regional Director, Region 5, [email protected] Deborah Rocque, Deputy Regional Director, Region 5, [email protected] Noreen Walsh, Regional Director, Region 6, [email protected] Matt Hogan, Deputy Regional Director, Region 6, [email protected] Petitioner Center for Biological Diversity formally requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) list the lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the United States as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544. Alternatively, the Center requests that the USFWS define and list distinct population segments of lake sturgeon in the U.S. as threatened or endangered. Lake sturgeon populations in Minnesota, Lake Superior, Missouri River, Ohio River, Arkansas-White River and lower Mississippi River may warrant endangered status. Lake sturgeon populations in Lake Michigan and the upper Mississippi River basin may warrant threatened status. Lake sturgeon in the central and eastern Great Lakes (Lake Huron, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River basin) seem to be part of a larger population that is more widespread.
  • Forest Health Conditions in Ontario, 2011 Forest Health Conditions in Ontario, 2011

    Forest Health Conditions in Ontario, 2011 Forest Health Conditions in Ontario, 2011

    Forest Health Conditions in Ontario, 2011 Forest Health Conditions in Ontario, 2011 Edited by: T.A. Scarr1, K.L. Ryall2, and P. Hodge3 1 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Forests Branch, Forest Health & Silviculture Section, Sault Ste. Marie, ON 2 Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Great Lakes Forestry Centre, Sault Ste. Marie, ON 3 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Science and Information Branch, Inventory, Monitoring and Assessment Section, Sault Ste. Marie, ON © 2012, Queen’s Printer for Ontario For more information on forest health in Ontario visit the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources website: www.ontario.ca/foresthealth You can also visit the Canadian Forest Service website: www.glfc.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca Telephone inquiries can be directed to the Natural Resources Information Centre: English/Français: 1-800-667-1940 Email: [email protected] 52095 ISSN 1913-6164 (print) ISBN 978-1-4435-8489-0 (2011 ed., print) ISSN 1913-617X (online) ISBN 978-1-4435-8490-6 (2011 ed., pdf) Front Cover Photos: Circular photos top to bottom – Diplodia tip blight (W. Byman), Snow damage (S. Young), Emerald ash borer galleries (P.Hodge), Spruce budworm (W. Byman), Forestry workshop in Algonquin Park (P.Hodge). Background: Severe defoliation caused by forest tent caterpillar in Bancroft District (P. Hodge). Banner: Hardwood forest in autumn (P.Hodge). Forest Health Conditions in Ontario, 2011 Dedication We are proud to dedicate this report to the memory of our friend, colleague, and mentor, Dr. Peter de Groot, 1954-2010. Peter was a long-time supporter of forest health, forest entomology, and forest management in Ontario and Canada.
  • Ontario Aboriginal Waterpower Case Studies Ontario 3

    Ontario Aboriginal Waterpower Case Studies Ontario 3

    Footprints to Follow Ontario Aboriginal Waterpower Case Studies Ontario 3 9 8 6 5 4 2 1 7 Welcome – Aaniin, Boozhoo, Kwey, Tansi, She:kon A core tenet of the Ontario Waterpower Association’s (OWA’s) approach to achieving its objectives has always been working in collaboration with those who have an interest in what we do and how we do it. The OWA has long recognized the importance of positive and productive relationships with Aboriginal organizations. An emergent good news story, particularly in waterpower development, is the growth of the participation of Aboriginal communities. Aboriginal communities have moved from being partners in a waterpower project to the proponent of the project. Waterpower projects are long-term ventures and investments. Projects can take years to bring into service and a decade or more to show a simple payback. However, once in service, a waterpower facility literally lasts forever. Aboriginal partners and proponents taking this long-term view are realizing the multigenerational opportunity to support local capacity development, training, job creation and community growth. Revenue generated from waterpower development can be reinvested in the project to increase the level of ownership, used for other community needs such as housing and infrastructure development, or investing in other economic opportunities. Ontario is fortunate to have significant untapped waterpower potential. In the north in particular realizing this potential will undoubtedly involve the participation of Aboriginal communities. Importantly, a successful industry/First Nations relationship can help establish a business foundation for further expansion. This catalogue aims to share first hand stories in proven Aboriginal communities’ waterpower developments.