Craig’s Commentary Volume 2 Number 10


No Scientific Evidence Of A Human Waste Management Problem Warranting Sauble Communal Sewers

To: Mayor and Council

Re: Sauble $86,500 “pollution study”

The TSBP sauble sewers ad hoc committee has proposed an $86,500 Pollution Study for Sauble. Council preapproved the $86,500. The plan is to test wells, beach drains, the lake, and the river for E. Coli and a few other biological and chemical parameters. The $86,500 will not cover testing for whether any E. Coli or other indicator found is from humans or from other sources. The testing will not tell whether any E. Coli found is from septic systems.

I believe the $86,500 testing is a total waste of taxpayers money because we already have sufficient decision making E. Coli data on the lake, the river, wells/sand points and even the groundwater below the beach.

Some of the data that we already have is summarized in the report from the Sauble Sewers Parallel Committee at:

http://www.craiggammie.com/My%20Documents/2011%2002%2003%20No%20Scientific%20Evidence%20Of%20A%20Human%20Waste%20Management%20Problem%20Warranting%20Sauble%20Communal%20Sewers.pdf

Furthermore, the data is more than adequate to support the parallel committee report conclusion that there is “No Scientific Evidence Of A Human Waste Management Problem Warranting Communal Sewers” at Sauble.

Craig Gammie

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Craig’s Commentary Volume 2 Number 10

  1. The sewers will come when the Provincial Government forces sewers. The question is by delaying what is to be inflation will force us to our knees.
    As I have said may times we are going to get sewers like it or not!
    I believe that it is better to get a jump on it and get it done.
    You cannot stop the city folks from coming! Get over it!

    BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
    Bruce

  2. rundgrenknows says:

    Hogwash.

  3. Bruce,

    The Province will no more “force” sewers upon the residents than they will “force” you have a baby. There are no plans afoot by the province to “force” anything on anyone. The province has never even committed funds to the pipedream (the province actually *eased* regulations on water systems verses their original plans (Chesley Lake Camp, for example spent many thousands of dollars on a water system in anticipation to the Province’s original plans in response to the Walkerton mishap, only to find out they didn’t need the costly system once the actual regulations came into being)

    Please stop spreading FUD.

    The desire for sewers, at $50,000 per property owner in today’s money, lies purely in the hands of the few (less than 30% of property owners) who wish to impose their romantic view of Sauble (Myrtle) beach upon the majority.
    “We don’t want another Walkerton,” they parrot. “What about e. coli?”. As though the term itself is an indicator of septic problems at the beach.

    First off, “Walkerton” was the result of systemic negligence by Municipal employees overseeing a municipal system. So another “Walkerton” is what the pro-sewer folks are actually gunning for, no?

    In North American recorded history, there has never been a scientific finding that links poor septic management to a health crisis. Nada, not one.

    So, no, the province won’t “force” sewers upon the unwilling residents of the beach, despite what the minority chants.

    Spend millions less dollars establishing a septic inspection program. Mandate that those who fail the septic inspection replace the faulty septic systems.

    Or, let all town taxpayers pay for Sauble sewers, especially since it’s the elected members from outside Sauble who seem to be so keen to have each Sauble property owner fork over $50,000 to see the non-residents dreams through to fruition. After all, if the road in front of your house is repaired, do you pay? Or do all ratepayers?

    • We can agree to disagree on this point!
      Sewers are coming like it or not!
      The players in the sandbox that make things happen are not going away. They have too much invested not to have sewers installed. Yes I agree that that it is a lot of money but, it is only going to get more expensive as time goes by.
      The Walkerton disaster was the result of negligence, however what is there to prevent it from happening again??
      How are we or our grandchildren going to support our existing structure without more tax revenue?/ We need growth, without growth we will crash and burn. The masses are coming to this area we cannot stop them.
      We do not have the infastructure in place to support the growth coming.
      Sewer and water is the foundation to growth.

      I believe that the people with the land being developed shouold be approached to fund the majority of the infastructure required to promote the growth.
      As I understand it there are some 6,000 lots in the area that cannot go because there are no services. If an developpment charge of $20,0000 per lot were to come to be this would generate 120 million enough to provide sewers and water for all with say 10 grand for existing residences, another 45 million.

      No it will not be the quaint village it is but that is a pike dream anyway!

      BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
      Bruce

      • silenthit says:

        On one side we have “show me the test results” and on the other side we have “progress demands sewers” and those two positions will never be reconciled.
        I am looking at it a little differently. We all know that there are substandard septic systems around. Older cottages did not have to meet the same building codes that exist today. There are even properties that share septic systems which would never be allowed today.
        These circumstances bother me and represent a potential issue in the longer term, maybe even in the short term.
        I know of one other municipality where tax dollars are used to empty septic systems every 2 years. What this does is keep the maintenance of septic systems current and allows for an inspection of the system at that time. If the systems are sub-standard or at the end of their useful life they can then be replaced before any significant event occurs.
        We stand to gain a level of comfort that our water systems are not at risk which undermines the entire safety issue that town is perpetuating.
        I accept that the replacement may be expensive but it is certainly less expensive than a sewer system hook-up. Just food for thought……

  4. riddlerray says:

    Bruce:

    You say: “What is there to prevent Walkerton from happening at Sauble Beach?”

    Remembering the nursery rhyme line: “Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water”, we won’t put shallow vulnerable communal or private wells in the valley of a farmer’s field and then spread cattle manure on the field and then drink beer while heavy rain carries E. coli O157:H7 from the cattle manure into the wells and sends it untreated through the town water supply system.

    You say: “it is only going to get more expensive as time goes by”.

    Your error is equating “inflation” with “more expensive”. Sure it is more “dollars” in the future, but they are different dollars, and we will have more of them, so the capital expense is actually the same later as it is now. But when you factor in other costs it is actually cheaper later, because by going “later” we avoid many years of depreciation and operating costs. And of course it’s cheapest by far to not do it at all.

    You say: “We need growth, without growth we will crash and burn.”

    Rubbish. Without growth, people still pay taxes. Those taxes buy municipal services. As long as the local government doesn’t start giving the tax money away (e.g. to the chambers), the system is stable. If the government starts giving our tax money away, instead of using it for municipal services, then we move towards “crash and burn”. Growth adds taxpayers, but when it adds service costs beyond the extra tax revenue we’re actually better off without growth. And we get to keep our Sauble paradise to boot.

    You say: “The players in the sandbox that make things happen are not going away.”

    The “players” that you refer to do indeed have an agenda of big-sewers-Myrtle-beach-style-rows-and-rows-of-tiny-lot-townhouses-and-high-rise-condos.

    But I’ve got news for you Bruce – “they” aren’t in charge!

    You say (to Ralph) “We can agree to disagree on this point!”

    You should speak for yourself. Ralph presented a well considered rebuttal to your post. You responded with the same old unsupportable clichés (Walkerton again, province will mandate, cheaper now). The only thing Ralph should agree to is that you’ve got it all wrong.

    Ray

    • You say: “What is there to prevent Walkerton from happening at Sauble Beach?”

      Remembering the nursery rhyme line: “Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water”, we won’t put shallow vulnerable communal or private wells in the valley of a farmer’s field and then spread cattle manure on the field and then drink beer while heavy rain carries E. coli O157:H7 from the cattle manure into the wells and sends it untreated through the town water supply system.

      Well, the Civil Servants are still running the water system and we are reliant on thier dedication, as they did in Walkerton. Kinda sorta like they are driving the buss! After all we are so smart that we are suing ourselves over a Blog!! You can say it won’t happen but it does!

      You say: “it is only going to get more expensive as time goes by”.

      Your error is equating “inflation” with “more expensive”. Sure it is more “dollars” in the future, but they are different dollars, and we will have more of them, so the capital expense is actually the same later as it is now. But when you factor in other costs it is actually cheaper later, because by going “later” we avoid many years of depreciation and operating costs. And of course it’s cheapest by far to not do it at all

      Never mind the inflationary aspect, what about more rules with more regulations. There is no cap on the Professionals raising the bar without our concent. Over the last 10 years we have seen the addition of 400,000 new regulations in this Province who knows what is comming!
      You say: “We need growth, without growth we will crash and burn.”

      Rubbish. Without growth, people still pay taxes. Those taxes buy municipal services. As long as the local government doesn’t start giving the tax money away (e.g. to the chambers), the system is stable. If the government starts giving our tax money away, instead of using it for municipal services, then we move towards “crash and burn”. Growth adds taxpayers, but when it adds service costs beyond the extra tax revenue we’re actually better off without growth. And we get to keep our Sauble paradise to boot.

      Sorry my friend, we are running in the red now, and can’t keep up, they keep taking more and more. We need growth just to sustain what we have! You cannot stop the clock!!
      If you want to freeze all the land and keep things the way they are then write a cheque and buy it otherwise shut the hell up!!!
      People have made investments! You expect them to stand still because you do not have the forsight to see that the path your are traveling is disasterous!! The only light at the end of your tunnel is a freight train!!!We have no room for NYMBY’s here!!!

      You say: “The players in the sandbox that make things happen are not going away.”

      The “players” that you refer to do indeed have an agenda of big-sewers-Myrtle-beach-style-rows-and-rows-of-tiny-lot-townhouses-and-high-rise-condos.

      No question, they do have an agenda! Build an economy so our children and grandchildren have jobs!
      When are you going to realize that without growth your government cannot sustain pensions, health care etc.Now maybe some have enough that this is not a concern but there are the majority that have to worry about that. If the creators stop creating then you my friend have a big problem! If there is no incentive to go forward they will stop creating!!
      If we don’t provide the opportuity they will stop!!

      You say (to Ralph) “We can agree to disagree on this point!”

      You should speak for yourself. Ralph presented a well considered rebuttal to your post. You responded with the same old unsupportable clichés (Walkerton again, province will mandate, cheaper now). The only thing Ralph should agree to is that you’ve got it all wrong.

      Ralph presented a rebutal that promises the freight train!
      The need will be there as this area grows. It is going to grow! You cannot stop that and maintain what we have. Wake up and smell the coffee!!!

      BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
      Bruce

  5. riddlerray says:

    Bruce:

    So which is it? We’re going to have “Wakerton again” because we don’t have communal sewage services, or we’re going to have “Wakerton again” because we do have communal systems and the Civil Servants will screw it up. Puts a new meaning on “speaking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time”.

    I knock a cannon ball size hole in your argument that “it is only going to get more expensive as time goes by”, and what is your response? “Oh never mind about that finance stuff, let’s change the subject to “lots of regulations””. Why are you so afraid to finish a debate Bruce?

    I knock a cannon ball size hole in your argument that “without growth we will crash and burn”, and you respond, ad hominem, “write a cheque and buy it otherwise shut the hell up” , and “we have no room for NYMBY’s here”. Once again, why are you so afraid to finish a debate Bruce?

    I knock a cannon ball size hole in your argument that “the developers are just going to make us put in communal sewers”, and you argue, ad hominem, “when are you going to realize (you stupid person) ….” .

    I point out the merit in Ralph’s argument and you respond, ad hominem, “Wake up and smell the coffee”.

    Let’s get back to debating the issue.

    Without ever defining a problem, a December 2010 staff report proposed a $70 million dollar “solution”. Council responded by saying we will not implement a sanitary waste solution without a sanitary waste problem, and sent a committee off to see if there’s a problem.

    The “parallel committee” report indicates that we already have the data, and the answer.

    http://www.craiggammie.com/My%20Documents/2011%2002%2003%20No%20Scientific%20Evidence%20Of%20A%20Human%20Waste%20Management%20Problem%20Warranting%20Sauble%20Communal%20Sewers.pdf

    That data shows that there is no sanitary waste problem that would warrant Sauble-wide communal sewers.

    Do you agree or not? And please try to stay focused.

    Ray

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s