South Bruce Peninsular - Life Sustaining H2O - Comments

We can't even agree

Dan O. — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:13:33 -0400

Second time around for thsi reply:

Skyhawk; What you say is true but if the residents of a small town like SBP can't even agree about water how can the international community? It's sad but it all comes down to use it or lose it. Those that want to make money press for development. The general population can try to resist but it becomes a never ending story.

The americans drain the upper great lakes and try to blame global warming. Too bad they didn't agree that global warming is real and wouldn't agree to reducing it. Without the diversions that they're making the Missisippi would become a mud hole.

It sounds great to say that we should share this great natural resource but in reality the US will take what they want. Multinationals will obtain the rights to making shipments and only the wealthy that can afford to pay will get the water.

Our pristine northern lakes are the sewage disposal areas of the sky. Do a scan on PCBs and Inuit. They didn't produce the chemicals, they just have to eat them.

At this time in Canada water has no value. The plastic drinking bottles cost more than the contents in them. By shipping water this way we fill dumps with waste, burn large amounts of oil for transportation and only supply a select few. The same was true of trees to the original settlers, until they learned the value of keeping a woodlot.

The best we can do is protect what we have. Don't pollute, minimize use and treat the resource so your greatgrandchildren will be able to enjoy it in this area the way you do.

Dan O.

Uranium

Dan O. — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:20:47 -0400

Gary; I believe that this is what you asked about. It sounds like just exploration at this point.

http://toronto.nooneisillegal.org/node/728

http://www.nowpublic.com/censored-algonquin-resisting-uranium-mining-brace-police-raid

http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press1592.htm

Dan O.

The Water Speculators

garym — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 17:19:16 -0400

At our weekend deepwoods campsite a friend of mine had an interesting observation I throw out for the general consideration: In all the Ontario communities still with quality watersheds, we are seeing a rapid pace of development aimed specifically to sell off all nearby lots to (relatively) rich city buyers, primarily retiring Boomers, and thereby not only endangering all these water systems, but handing the control of them over to developers who, being off-site faceless corporations, have no real vested interest in the local ecology.

First they came for Muskoka, and I said nothing, because I am not a Muskokan.
Then they came for Wasaga, and I said nothing, because I am not a Wasagan.
Then they came for Haliburton and I said nothing again.
Then they came for Sauble, and I said nothing because I realized that all along I had really been one of them by my silence.

I don't know if this is related, but at the same campfire I was told of large tracts of land out beyond Perth Ontario that are being systematically scraped clean of the top 25 feet of top-soil in an earnest effort to find all that fresh Uranium that we'll need for all that swell new nuclear power. Anyone know anything about that?

garym: ict evangelist - musician - whatever

An after tought.

skyhawk — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 08:32:13 -0400

Regarding clean water. Is it not ironic that the KYOTO Accord is only focusing on the reduction of green house gases? We might eliminate smogdays but die of thirst!

I HOPE NOT

skyhawk — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 09:24:06 -0400

mxyzptlk, I understand your concerns. However, if we adapt a rigid policy where we refuse to share the water resources on the North American continent, then we are inviting unavoildable political and economic challenges in the future.
If our neighbours to the south should run low, or even run out of clean drinking water sources,they would in all likelihood ask us for water. If we were to say no and their economic survival would depend on this, then our neighbours would come in forcefully and take what they need. At that point in time I cannot see where our interests would be considered. I hope we will never see such a scenario, but we do not know what the future holds. Wars have been and will be fought over water around the globe. Even though it would appear that in Canada we have an abundance of clean water, we must start treating our water like liquid gold and consider sharing someday.
If we approach this explosive water sharing issue in North America with our neighbours on our terms and conditions, then we can expect hundreds of thousands of new future Canadian jobs in the gathering of water, transportation, purification, bottling, distribution activities, etc.
OPEC will need to take a second seat to the new OWEC (Organization of Water Exporting Countries)
We are very furtunate that in Canada we have enough water to go around, provided we don't give it away and stop polluting through industrial and private activities.

I Wonder

mxyzptlk — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 07:21:20 -0400

hi skyhawk, i wonder what would happen if our neighbours to the south run out of potable water and we refuse to let them take ours. giving away rights to our water and resources is one of the objectives of the security and prosperity partnership. we need to stop the insanity.
kltpzyxm

Life Sustaining H2O

skyhawk — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 20:54:37 -0400

Many scientists do not put political spins on environmental issues. A small group of such experts recently expressed serious concerns regarding the availability of clean drinking water for the global population.
Approximately three questers of the earth's surface is covered with water, albeit the biggest bodies of water are salty. Only about three percent of all water is drinkable, and most of this is frozen in polar caps and glaciers. Only a tiny fraction (approximately 3 of 1000 liters or 0.3%) is actually useful drinking water.