DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessments on the Oak Ridges Moraine

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessments on the Oak Ridges Moraine TOWARDS A MULTI-PARTY POLICY MONITORING FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING INFRASTRUCTURE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS ON THE OAK RIDGES MORAINE by Katrina Broughton A thesis submitted to the School of Urban and Regional Planning In conformity with the requirements for a degree of Master of Urban and Regional Planning Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (September, 2008) Copyright © Katrina Broughton, 2008 Abstract The Oak Ridges Moraine, located in south-central Ontario, is recognized for its ecological importance in providing “clean and abundant water resources, healthy and diverse plant and animal habitat, an attractive and distinct landscape, prime agricultural land, and sand and gravel resources” (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2002). It is protected by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2002). A number of initiatives are ongoing to develop monitoring capabilities across the Oak Ridges Moraine (Monitoring the Moraine Project, 2008; Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs, 2008). The purpose of this thesis is to develop and test a multi-party policy monitoring framework to determine if infrastructure environmental assessments on the Oak Ridges Moraine comply with the policies of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) and meet best practices of environmental assessment identified in the literature. The multi-party policy monitoring framework developed for this research has two dimensions: 1. A moraine-wide survey and map of infrastructure environmental assessments contributing to a “governance watch” (Francis, 2006a; Francis, 2006b) perspective of infrastructure; and 2. An evaluation of an infrastructure environmental assessment case study (York Region’s Lower Leslie Street Trunk Sewer and 19th Avenue Interceptor Sewer) against a set of criteria to determine if it complies with the ORMCP and environmental assessment best practices. The results of the environmental assessment map show a distinctive pattern of infrastructure development, concentrated in the eastern half of the moraine, and within designated settlement areas. That being said, infrastructure networks are expanding to i connect settlement areas outside the Greater Toronto Area. The environmental assessment map shows the importance of thinking of infrastructure as a networked system, rather than as discrete projects. The results of the case study evaluation showed that the Lower Leslie Street Trunk Sewer and 19th Avenue Interceptor Sewer Environmental Assessment complied with the minimal requirements of Section 41 of the ORMCP, and in some cases went above and beyond the requirements of the ORMCP. The results suggest, however, that some criteria drawn from the literature, would be better addressed by strategic environmental assessment of infrastructure master plans. ii Executive Summary The Oak Ridges Moraine, located in south-central Ontario, is recognized for its ecological importance in providing “clean and abundant water resources, healthy and diverse plant and animal habitat, an attractive and distinct landscape, prime agricultural land, and sand and gravel resources” (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2002). It is protected by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2002). A number of initiatives are ongoing to develop monitoring capabilities across the Oak Ridges Moraine (Monitoring the Moraine Project, 2008; Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs, 2008). The purpose of this thesis is to develop and test a multi-party policy monitoring framework to determine if infrastructure project environmental assessments on the Oak Ridges Moraine comply with the policies of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) and meet best practices of environmental assessment identified in the literature. The multi- party policy monitoring framework developed for this research has two dimensions: an environmental assessment survey and map, and an evaluation of an infrastructure case study. The environmental assessment survey maps all infrastructure environmental assessments undertaken on the moraine since the introduction of the ORMCP and contributes to an emerging “governance watch” capacity (Francis, 2006) for the Oak Ridges Moraine. The results of the environmental assessment map shows a distinctive pattern of infrastructure development, concentrated in the eastern half of the moraine, and within designated settlement areas. That being said, infrastructure networks are expanding to connect settlement areas outside the Greater Toronto Area. The environmental assessment map shows the importance of thinking of infrastructure as a networked system, rather than as discrete projects. iii As a case study, York Region’s Lower Leslie Street Trunk Sewer and 19th Avenue Interceptor Sewer Environmental Assessment was evaluated against a set of criteria to determine if it complies with the ORMCP and environmental assessment best practices. The evaluation of the case study environmental assessment showed that it complied with the minimal requirements of Section 41 of the ORMCP, and in some cases went above and beyond the requirements of the ORMCP. The results suggest, however, that some criteria drawn from the literature, would be better addressed by strategic environmental assessment of infrastructure master plans. I developed several recommendations based on the research results for policy makers, environmental assessment proponents and MTM partners including: 1. Proponents of infrastructure environmental assessments should adopt a tiered decision making approach by applying strategic environmental assessment (SEA) to infrastructure master plans. SEA should assess network-wide impacts, while project level environmental assessments should continue to assess project level impacts. 2. Proponents of infrastructure projects should consider infrastructure supply and demand in relation to the environmental capacity of the Oak Ridges Moraine and its natural resources; and the impact of infrastructure on regional urban growth. 3. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Ministry of the Environment should develop a formal and coordinated process to track and evaluate infrastructure environmental assessments subject to the ORMCP. 4. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing should more clearly define conformity with ORMCP regarding infrastructure development. They should also coordinate with the Ministry of the Environment to provide guidance on how environmental assessment proponents should achieve this conformity within the existing EA legislation. iv Acknowledgements First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Graham Whitelaw for your continuing support and encouragement. When I began I could not have imagined that my humble research could turn into an important project. That it happened is a credit to your vision and willingness to think outside the box. Above all, thank you for treating me like a colleague. This project would not have been possible without the support of the Monitoring the Moraine project partners. First and foremost, I am indebted to Debbe Crandall for your feedback and support, both academically and practically. Your enthusiasm and commitment to the moraine and to this research project is an inspiration. I also received a great amount of assistance from STORM Coalition staff Jen Bedford, Nathan Fahey, Tahira Qamar, and Kate Turner. Thank you to all of the municipal and conservation authority staff I have had the pleasure of working with, and the staff at York Region in particular. Thank you as well to the anonymous participants of the Case Study Workshop for providing such valuable feedback. Finally, thank you to Citizen’s Environment Watch for providing funding to extend my research beyond this thesis. I truly feel as though this research was a joint effort and would not have been possible without partnering with all the people mentioned above. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for whom I would never have been able to finish this journey without. Thank you to all my friends from Queen’s, SURP, Almonte and beyond for keeping me sane and listening to me complain. Thank you to Mom and Dad for believing in me when I needed you to and being there when I needed you. I know you would have done anything in the world to help me succeed. Thank you to Christopher and Matthew for reminding me there were more important things in life than school, even though I did not always believe you. Thank you to Dave for being my editor, friend and love. v Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................ vi List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. x Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Context ...............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Ontario Fish Communities and Fisheries
    LAKE ONTARIO FISH COMMUNITIES AND FISHERIES: 2013 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE LAKE ONTARIO MANAGEMENT UNIT LAKE ONTARIO FISH COMMUNITIES AND FISHERIES: 2013 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE LAKE ONTARIO MANAGEMENT UNIT Prepared for the Great Lakes Fishery Commission 2014 Lake Committee Meetings Windsor, ON Canada March 24-28, 2014 © 2014, Queen’s Printer for Ontario Printed in Picton, Ontario, Canada March 2014 Report ISSN 1201-8449 Please cite this report as follows: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2014. Lake Ontario Fish Communities and Fisheries: 2013 Annual Report of the Lake Ontario Management Unit. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Picton, Ontario, Canada. Report available on the following website: http://www.glfc.org/lakecom/loc/mgmt_unit/index.html TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword ............................................................................................................................................. v 1. Status of Fish Communities 1.1 Nearshore Fish Community .................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Offshore Pelagic Fish Community ....................................................................................... 1 1.3 Offshore Benthic Fish Community ...................................................................................... 2 2. Index Fishing Projects 2.1 Ganaraska Fishway Rainbow Trout Assessment .................................................................. 3 2.2 Eastern Lake Ontario and Bay of Quinte Fish Community Index Gill Netting
    [Show full text]
  • Ganaraska River Watershed Background Report
    GANARASKA RIVER WATERSHED BACKGROUND REPORT For the Ganaraska River Fisheries Management Plan, Community Advisory Committee Prepared by: M. Desjardins, J. Lapierre and A. Smith March 2007 Ganaraska River Watershed Background Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The Ganaraska River Watershed has long been recognized for its clear cold water and excellent trout and salmon fisheries. Historically, the Ganaraska River supported healthy resident brook trout populations and migratory Atlantic salmon from Lake Ontario. In the early 1800s, dams near the mouth of the Ganaraska River blocked Atlantic salmon runs. By the 1870s, Atlantic salmon populations had collapsed in most Lake Ontario rivers. The role of Atlantic salmon as a top predator in Lake Ontario has since been replaced with stocked Pacific salmon and trout. The Ganaraska River ecosystem has seen a significant positive change since the 1940s when a series of studies and restoration projects began. Currently the Ganaraska River Watershed supports one of the largest wild rainbow trout runs in the Lake Ontario basin. In the past, fisheries management of the Ganaraska River was guided by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Lindsay District Fisheries Management Plan. In 2000, the plan expired and the lead agencies responsible for fish and aquatic habitat management merged to direct the development of a new management plan. A Technical Steering Committee (TSC) was established to help guide the development of a background report and fisheries management plan. Since 1994, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) have collected information on the current state of the fisheries and aquatic habitat across the Ganaraska River Watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • 3. G1--' 419 -.7- \99Ditj1'
    NOTICE OF MEETING FOR CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BRIGHTON BOX 189, BRIGHTON, ONT. KOK IHO MEETING DATE: January 8, 2007 TIME: 7:00 P.M. - AGENDA - 1. CALL TO ORDER- APPROVAL OF AGENDA- 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — Approval of December 18/06 Minutes 3. DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTERESTS 4. ( PLANNING ISSUES 1) By-Law Number 426-2007 — Rezoning George & Diane Allore- Proposed Kennel 5. DELEGATIONS “I) Rick Norlock, MP _2) Nancy Anderson — Setting Up a Municipal Heritage Committee 3) Dave Cutler — Setting Up a Local Architectural Advisory Committee _4) Rev. Doug Brown & Rev. Rylan Montgomery- St. Andrews Presbyterian Church 5) Correspondence The Presbytery of Lindsay-Peterborough re: Andrew’s Presbyterian Church 6) Correspondence from Joan Waddling re: St. Andrews Presbyterian Church 7) Correspondence from Margaret & Joe Sare re: St. Aiidrews Presbyterian Church 6. STAFF UPDATES I) CAO, Bruce Davis 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - 8. NEW BUSINESS - 9. RESOLUTIONS & BY-LAWS - 1. Approval of Accounts 2. By-Law Number — 428-2007 Interim Tax Levy . I 3. G1--’ 419 -.7- \99DitJ1’ 10. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES AND BOARIS - NONE 11. CORRESPONDENCE - 1) LTC —2007 Business Plan/Levy 2) Quinte Access — Update 3) Northumberland Food for Thought — Request Support 4) BHSC — Loan Update 5) Year End Summary — MPP Lou Rinaldi 6) MMAH — Amendments to Municipal Act, 2001 Proclaimed 7) McGuinty Gov’t Improves Local Planning 8) City of Toronto Act 2006 Proclaimed 9) IVTIVIAH — Energy-Efficient Building Standards in Canada 10) AJvIO Alert — OMPF Allocations for 2007 / ‘-p 11) Press Release MPP Rinaldi — OMPF 12) MMAH — Municipal Statule Law Amendment Act 2006 13) Ontario Parks — Deer Herd Reduction to Move Fonvard 14) Letter to Peaceflul Parks Coalition 15) Letter to MNR re: Cormorant Management 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Trent Source Protection Area
    VU37 Tweed North Bay Marmora VU37 Georgian Bay VU28 Township of Havelock-Belmont-Methuen HASTINGS COUNTY Lake Huron Kingston Havelock Lower Trent Toronto Lake OntarioWarsaw Lakefield Source Protection Area Ivanhoe Watershed Boundaries Lake Erie Norwood Legend VU62 Township of Stirling-Rawdon Roslin " Settlements 938 938 Township of Centre Hastings Railway PETERBOROUGH COUNTY Highway Multi-lane Highway Campbellford Watercourse Hastings Stirling Lower Tier Municipality 935 Upper and Single Tier Municipality Waterbody 98 Source Protection Area 45 9 Foxboro Municipality of Trent Hills 930 Keene CITY OF QUINTE WEST 924 Frankford Rice Lake Warkworth Roseneath Belleville 929 VU401 Wooler 940 Harwood NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY Gores Landing Trenton 925 Municipality of Brighton Castleton ± Centreton 922 0 3 6 12 18 Bay of Quinte 92 Kilometres 23 9 Brighton Township of Cramahe Little Trent Conservation Coalition Lake Source Protection Region Camborne www.trentsourceprotection.on.ca Township of Alnwick/Hadimand Baltimore THIS MAP has been prepared for the purpose of meeting the 2 Colborne9 Consecon provincial requirements under the Clean Water Act, 2006. If it is proposed to use it for another purpose, it would be advisable to first consult with the responsible Conservation Authority. Grafton PRODUCED BY Lower Trent Conservation on behalf of the Trent Conservation Coalition Source Protection Committee, March 2010, with data supplied under licence by members of the Ontario Geospatial Data Exchange. Wellington Lake Ontario Made possible through the support
    [Show full text]
  • September 2017
    D Ganaraska Forest Management Plan: 2018 to 2038 (Draft as of June 2017) Page | 1 September 2017 The Ganaraska Forest Management Plan 2018-2038 was written to provide guidance and recommendations for the sustainable use and conservation of the Ganaraska Forest. Recommended management actions are based on scientific data collected as part of a forest inventory, as well as municipal, stakeholder and public input. Further, this Plan satisfies requirements of the Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program (MFTIP) and forms the bases for Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certification. The Ganaraska Forest Management Plan 2018-2038 was written by Lawrence Powell, RPF, Madawaska Forestry Inc. under the direction of the Ganaraska Forest Management Plan Steering Committee: Linda Laliberte, CPA, CGA, CAO/Secretary-Treasurer Amy Griffiths, Marketing and Communications Officer Steve McMullen, B.Sc.F., B.Ed. Forest Recreation Technician Fraser Smith, RPF, Forester (2015-2016) Mark Peacock, P.Eng., Director, Watershed Services Technical and information services were provided by GRCA staff: Kim Baldini, Corporate Services Finance Clerk George Elgear, General Superintendent Linda Givelas, Forest Centre Property Manager Pam Lancaster, B.Sc., Stewardship Technician Brian Morrison, B.Sc., Fisheries Biologist Jessica Mueller, PhD, P. Geo. Watershed Hydrogeologist Jeff Moxley, GIS Coordinator Brock Prescott, Forestry Technician Gustav Saurer, M.F.C., Forest Technician Mike Smith, B.Sc., Water Resource Technician Ken Towle, M.E.S., Ecologist Julie Verge, Corporate Services Assistant The Ganaraska Forest Management Plan 2018-2038 is dedicated to Bob Penwell, RPF who devotedly managed the Ganaraska Forest for over 35 years. Correct citation for this document: Powell, Lawrence. 2017. Ganaraska Forest Management Plan 2018-2038.
    [Show full text]
  • Ganaraska River Watershed Plan 2010
    Ganaraska River Watershed Plan 2010 GRCA Board Approval April 15, 2010 Resolution Number FA 15/10 Township of Hamilton The Ganaraska River Watershed Plan was written to provide guidance and recommendations for the conservation, enhancement and sustainable management of the Ganaraska River watershed and its resources. Recommended management actions are based on scientific data presented in the Ganaraska River Background Report: Abiotic, Biotic and Cultural Features, as well as municipal, stakeholder and public input. The Ganaraska River Watershed Plan was written by Pam Lancaster, B.Sc., Stewardship Technician and Mark Peacock, P. Eng., Director, Watershed Services with technical assistance from staff of the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA): Brian Morrison, B.Sc., Fisheries Biologist Ken Towle, M.E.S., Ecologist Magdi Widaatalla P.Geo., M.Sc., Manager, Watershed Services Maps were created by the GRCA GIS Department. Brian Curran, B.Sc., GIS Technician Jeff Moxley, Manager GIS/IT Steve Nowak, B.A., GIS Technician Photo Credits: GRCA staff, Sally Walsh and Kris Vande Sompel This document was created for the residents, communities, municipalities and stakeholders of the Ganaraska River watershed. Review and input into this document by the Ganaraska River Technical Review Committee, Ganaraska River Community Advisory Committee, stakeholders and residents occurred through the watershed planning process. Financial support for the Ganaraska River Watershed Plan was provided by the Regional Municipality of Durham and the Municipality of Port Hope. Correct citation for this document: Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. 2010. Ganaraska River Watershed Plan. Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority. Port Hope, Ontario. The Ganaraska River Watershed Plan was written with review and input from members of the Ganaraska River Technical Review Committee and Ganaraska River Community Advisory Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Ganaraska River Background Report: Abiotic, Biotic and Cultural Features
    Ganaraska River Background Report: Abiotic, Biotic and Cultural Features for preparation of the Ganaraska River Watershed Plan October 2009 Ganaraska River Prepared by Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority The Ganaraska River Background Report: Abiotic, Biotic and Cultural Features was written to document the historical and current conditions of the Ganaraska River watershed. This document creates the foundation of the Ganaraska River Watershed Plan. The Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority would like to thank the many seasonal staff that provided field assistance and the landowners who granted permission to collect data from their property. This document was written by Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff members Pam Lancaster, B.Sc., Jenny Dai, M.Eng., Brian Morrison, B.Sc., Mark Peacock, P.Eng., Mike Smith, B.Sc., Ken Towle, M.E.S., and Magdi Widaatalla, M.Sc., P.Geo. for the residents, communities, municipalities and stakeholders of the Ganaraska River watershed. Maps were created by the GRCA GIS Department, Brian Curran, B.Sc., Steve Nowak, B.A. and Jeff Moxley. This document complements Richardson (1944) and the 1966 and 1976 Ganaraska Region Conservation Reports (Department of Energy and Resources Management 1966, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 1976). Certain sections of this report have been summarized from peer reviewed or consultant documents, and review and input into this document by committee members, stakeholders and residents occurred in 2009. The Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority envisions that this document will serve to aid in the conservation, enhancement and sustainable management of the Ganaraska River watershed and its resources. ________________________________________________________________ Correct citation for this document: Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Report
    Research Report Summary of Project Findings and Recommendations October 2009 Working together for our future success! Research Report Summary of Project Findings and Recommendations October 2009 Working together for our future success! Northumberland County Premier-ranked Tourist Destination Project – Research Report This Project was funded in partnership with the Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges & Universities, the Ontario Ministry of Tourism and the Government of Canada. Project facilitated by: Northumberland Economic Development and Tourism 555 Courthouse Road, Cobourg, Ontario, K9A 5J6 (905) 372-3329 or 1-800-354-7050 Northumberland County Premier-ranked Tourist Destination Project – Research Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements...…………………………………………………...………………………………….…4 Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………....6 Premier-Ranked Tourist Destination (PRTD) Background………………………...……………………12 Project Milestones ………………………………………………………………………….….....………….14 Purpose of Premier-Ranked Tourist Destination Framework (PRTDF) in Northumberland County...16 Northumberland County Community Profile…...………..………………………………………………...17 Premier-Ranked Tourist Destination Framework Overview….……………………………………..…...18 Evaluation……………...…………………...………………………………………..……………………….20 Product A. Distinctive Core Attractors…………….…………………………………………….……..24 B. Quality and Critical Mass………..…………………………………………..….…………47 C. Satisfaction and Value……….…………………………………………….…….…………57 D. Accessibility………………..……………………………………..……….……….………..59 E. Accommodations Base………..………………………..……………….………….……..63
    [Show full text]
  • Peterborough Social Planning Council, “Quality of Life Report for City & County of Peterborough: Indicators Vital to Our Community”, 2012
    Quality of Life Report 2015 1 Quality of Life Report Table of Contents (1 of 4) Introduction Section Pages 6-22 What is Quality of Life? ............................................................. Page 6 Credibility of Sources ................................................................ Page 7 Background ............................................................................ Page 8 Evolution of Quality of Life Reporting ............................................ Pages 8-10 Sections of the Report .............................................................. Page 10 Team ................................................................................... Page 11 Contributors to the Report ......................................................... Pages 12-14 Greater Golden Horseshoe .......................................................... Page 15 Population Trends Across Peterborough & Beyond .............................. Pages 16-21 Access to Health (Care) Pages 23-36 Health Profile, December, 2013 ................................................... Pages 24-26 Community Supports ................................................................. Page 27 Cost of Care ........................................................................... Page 28 Long Term Care ...................................................................... Page 29 Central East Community Care Access Centre .................................... Page 30 Peterborough Regional Health Centre ............................................ Pages 31-32 Primary
    [Show full text]
  • Trent Assessment Report
    TRENT CONSERVATION COALITION SOURCE PROTECTION REGION Approved Trent Assessment Report Approved October 1, 2014 Volume 1 of 3 Effective Janurary 1, 2015 Updated February 15, 2018 Trent Source Protection Areas: Crowe Valley Source Protection Area Kawartha-Haliburton Source Protection Area Lower Trent Source Protection Area Otonabee-Peterborough Source Protection Area Made possible through the support of the Government of Ontario www.trentsourceprotection.on.ca This Assessment Report was prepared on behalf of the Trent Conservation Coalition Source Protection Committee under the Clean Water Act, 2006. TRENT CONSERVATION COALITION SOURCE PROTECTION COMMITTEE Jim Hunt (Chair) Municipal The Trent Conservation Coalition Source Dave Burton Protection Committee is a locally based Rob Franklin (Bruce Craig to June 2011) committee, comprised of 28 Dave Golem representatives from municipal Rosemary Kelleher‐MacLennan government, First Nations, the Gerald McGregor commercial/industrial/agriculture sectors, Mary Smith and other interests. The Committee’s Richard Straka ultimate role is to develop a Source Protection Plan that establishes policies for Commercial/Industrial preventing, reducing, or eliminating threats Monica Berdin, Recreation/Tourism to sources of drinking water. In developing Edgar Cornish, Agriculture the plan, the committee members are Kerry Doughty, Aggregate/Mining Robert Lake, Economic Development committed to the following: Glenn Milne, Agriculture . Basing policies on the best available Bev Spencer, Agriculture science, and
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority 2018
    Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority 2018 ANNUAL REPORT SPECIAL THANKS The GRCA is grateful for its partners in the community, and appreciates the continued support and encouragement. It is important to sustain the connection between a healthy watershed and healthy and strong communities.Thank you to those who continue to support Ganaraska Forest recreational and forest management; especially the volunteer forest patrollers, the Ontario Federation of Trail Riders, the Ganaraska Snowmobile, and Ganaraska Forest Horse Clubs. Thank you to the Ministry of Education for providing three experiential education grants in support of the Ganaraska Forest A YEAR IN REVIEW Centre for the fourth consecutive year; to both Canada Summer Jobs and Parks and Recreation Ontario for supporting seasonal As the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) wraps up staff; to the Capstone Infrastructure Corporation for sponsoring the another year, the Conservation Authority reflects on the continuous Centre’s public events, including Owl Prowl and Under the Stars; growth and prosperity it has experienced. Since its inception in and to the Vanhaverbeke Foundation for their very generous support 1946 as one of Ontario’s earliest Conservation Authorities, the of the education program, with a particular focus on STEM (Science, GRCA has been working with watershed municipalities, government Technology, Engineering and Math) skills development. partners, community members, organized stakeholders, and individual landowners to protect people and property from flooding A special thank you to the dedicated committee members, and erosion, improve water quality, provide advice, and guidance on volunteers, local businesses, organizations, artists and attendees of municipal planning matters, and provide education and recreational the annual fundraiser in support of the Ganaraska Forest Centre opportunities across local watersheds.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Scan and Strategic Plan for an Environmental Program
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN AND STRATEGIC PLAN FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM Prepared for CAMPBELLFORD/ SEYMOUR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION by Alan Appleby Trent Valley Consulting , Campbellford, Ontario and William Van Geest Touchstone Consulting, Woodbridge, Ontario February, 2008 Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................... iii 1. Introduction ...............................................................1 a. Campbellford/ Seymour Community Foundation .............................1 b. Environmental Scan Project ..............................................2 2. Background ...............................................................3 a. CSCF History of Environmental Grants ....................................3 b. Comparable Environmental Grant Programs .................................4 3. Environmental Scan ........................................................ .4 a. Natural/ Environmental Assets of Seymour Township .........................4 b. Environmental History of Campbellford/ Seymour Township ...................5 4. Public Consultation .........................................................6 a. Report on Stage One Public Consultation ...................................7 b. Report on Stage Two Public Consultation ...................................7 5. Strategic Plan ..............................................................8 a. Introduction: .........................................................8 b. Strategic Elements: ....................................................9 c. Funding
    [Show full text]