Quarry quandary

Concern about Melancthon mega-quarrys impact on water growing By Paige Desmond, Chronicle Staff
Wednesday, July, 20, 2011

A proposed limestone extraction mega-quarry in the Township of Melancthon has locals and politicians up in arms. The 2,316-acre quarry would blast 200 ft. below the water table and be 1.5 times deeper than Niagara Falls. It would be the second largest quarry in North America and located just east of the Grand River watershed boundary. The Township of Melancthon is located in Dufferin County, about 60 km north of Guelph. Alisa McClurg, a member of the Waterloo Citizens Environmental Advisory Committee (WCEAC), is concerned the water supply in Waterloo Region will be impacted if the project goes ahead. As the largest quarry application ever in Canada, this proposal brings with it a high potential for serious negative, environmental, social and economic impacts, McClurg said. Lindsay Broadhead, spokesperson for The Highland Companies, said the demand for aggregates is coming from the provinces $100 billion 10-year infrastructure plan and there are limited locations where extraction can occur. Some sites are located in the greenbelt, Niagara Escarpment and protected areas, she said. So it becomes a question to the public: where do you want the aggregate to come from, Broadhead said. McClurg joins a growing group opposed to approval of the quarry. The Orangeville community, First Nations peoples, farmers and other groups have spoken out against the operation by The Highland Companies, owned by Boston-based hedge fund Baupost Group. Kitchener-Conestoga MPP Leanna Pendergast and Guelph Liberal MP Frank Valeriote both voiced concern in recent weeks.

But Dave Schultz, communications coordinator for the GRCA, said the water supply here is not likely to be impacted if the quarry goes ahead, based on the information in The Highland Companies application. The site is not in the Grand River Watershed, it is east of a shared boundary, Schultz said. It is entirely contained within the Nottawasaga Watershed. Surface water is unlikely to be affected while the groundwater will be affected in the immediate area, Schultz said. Groundwater moves in its own direction and the GRCA does have some concerns about potential impacts on groundwater west of the quarry site, he said. That could lead to issues for well-water users, wetlands and springs. In the GRCAs comments to the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry, under the Ontario Environmental Registry, the conservation authority expressed concern about the lack of information provided by The Highland Companies. One of the things we raised in our report is that we dont have enough information, Schultz said. The report requests further information about perpetual pumping that would be required to maintain mitigation measures. Without those measures, the report said there would be impact on groundwater and the potential for impact on the Grand River watershed further from the quarry. The GRCAs report raises several other issues with The Highland Companies application, including contradictory statements, a general lack of detail, misleading information, out-of-date studies and issues with the proposed rehabilitation plan. Eric Hodgins, manager of hydrogeology and source water for the Region of Waterloo, agreed with the GRCA, saying there is little concern about an impact here. Any extraction or effect on water supplies is likely to be minimal in the Grand River watershed, he said. If anything, Hodgins said the dewatering process could temporarily draw small amounts of groundwater from the Grand River watershed. Dewatering occurs when drilling is performed to extract aggregates, he said. When water is vacuumed out to reach the aggregate material, some

could be drained from outside the Nottawasaga watershed but likely would not even be noticeable here. If any dewatering occurred it would be mitigated by reservoirs, Hodgkins said. Broadhead said all concerns will be addressed before the quarry project goes ahead. The project will not proceed unless its approved under (the regulatory) process, Broadhead said. The company is committed to meeting or exceeding all the environmental and regulatory requirements. McClurg isnt so convinced. On June 27th she pleaded with City of Waterloo council to participate in the projects approval process by filing comments on the bill of rights registry. She said she was let down by an approved council motion to defer the task to the GRCA. The city seems the more appropriate vehicle for representing public opinion on the issue, McClurg said. Deadline for comments to be registered was July 11 but the GRCA had already filed its comments back in April. Coun. Angela Vieth voted against the motion. Because this is outside of our immediate boundaries, I guess municipalities just dont feel that they should step outside their boundaries, Vieth said. She said council should have backed the concerns of citizens. In my opinion this is a huge, huge hole in the ground that is going to effect, maybe not now, maybe not tomorrow, but in years to come, the City of Waterloo, she said. It bothers me that the people that are pulling together this land. They are not from here. They dont care about us. Coun. Jeff Henry said deferring to the GRCA was the right move because city staff had neither the timeframe nor expertise to comment on the proposal.