It’s hard to conceive of how much damage has been done to Lake Louisa. I never expected this turn of events.
To help pay for the boat wash station, Mayor Jason Morrison took a grant from the Province, but he never told us about the strings attached, AND HE NEVER ASKED OUR PERMISSION. Because of the “free” grant money, we’re now forced to let anyone in the world put their boat in our lake for only $50. (If you don’t believe me, click boat-wash.)
Somebody can buy a pontoon boat, pay the one-time fee, and let their boat sit on the lake all summer long. Not only that, nothing stops them from putting a bedroom, small fridge & stove on their pontoon boat, and thereby having their own private HOUSEBOAT parked on a beautiful lake for only $50/year.
Why buy an expensive cottage, and why pay constantly rising property taxes? It’s way smarter to have a cute little houseboat you can use whenever you want. Not only that, you could BnB your houseboat and make a constant stream of income. In fact, go ahead and buy 10 houseboats, and you could live off that for the rest of your life.
There are about 90,000 people who live within a one-hour drive of the lake. One hour means you could just go up for an afternoon, and spend a lazy dusk floating and watching the sunset. If only 1% of those 90,000 decide to put a boat on the lake, that makes 900 MORE BOATS.
I’m telling you, I’m in shock.
We’re caught in a lobster trap built by Mayor Morrison. Neither him nor any staff live on Louisa, so they don’t pay the cost. (You Dunany people, your day is coming. In my next article you’ll be just as shocked about something else.)
Even though we can’t give back the grant money, and can’t cancel the deal, I think I know a way to break apart this lobster trap.
Elections are on 2 November. Register to vote NOW. Make sure all your contacts at the lake read this article. If YOU don’t vote, and YOU don’t spread this news, then your passivity is going to wreck the lake.
Once every 4 years we have an election, and it’s coming up on 2 November 2025. I am running for Mayor of Wentworth in this election. To be a voter you don’t have to live here full-time. If you own, or co-own, or lease a cottage, you’re eligible to vote.
Further down I put some biographical information. It’s not there so you vote for me personally. I include it only to establish credibility in discussing science-related issues. In fact, if the current Mayor or any other reasonable candidate would fight for these same policies, I wouldn’t even run. I don’t actually want the job, but I do want the policies.
1. TRANSPARENCY
The Current Administration does not believe in TRANSPARENCY. When the current Mayor took office every council meeting was recorded, and the recording was kept available on the municipal website. However, the Mayor ELIMINATED the audio recordings. Following the example of many other municipalities, I will LIVESTREAM council meetings so you can watch from the comfort of your own home.
2. MINOR DEROGATIONS
Minor derogations can allow your neighbour to break the law and build their house too close to your property line. Unlike how it’s done in many other municipalities, the neighbour WHOSE RIGHTS ARE BEING STOLEN has no idea it’s happening. As mayor I’d make it mandatory for the affected neighbour to be notified in advance. They wouldn’t get a veto, but would have the right to present their case against the derogation.
3. MONEY MONEY MONEY
Before this Mayor took office, the Wentworth budget was about $1 million per year. Now it’s ballooned to over $3 MILLION per year. I promise to fight to REDUCE the budget by 5% per year for every year of my 4-year term. This would amount to a saving of around 20% instead of a budget that would have increased by maybe $100 thousand/year. Doing the math: 20% X $3 million = $600,000 + 4 X $100 thousand = $1 million less. If we divide this by the 800 properties in Wentworth =
$1,250 each one of you saves every single year!
(It’s worth knowing I’ve been a business owner for 40 years responsible for spending every penny myself. There’s a big difference between people on salary and business owners. It takes business experience to run the Municipal Corporation of Wentworth.)
4. TOO MANY BY-LAWS
I promise that for every new by-law passed, at least one old by-law will be ELIMINATED. We have too many stale laws clogging up the books. There are also some environmental laws with NO scientific merit that REDUCE THE ENJOYMENT of our properties. In fact, some of these restrictions have even been characterized by the Quebec Federation of Municipalities as “DISGUISED EXPROPRIATIONS”
5. INSANE LAWS
According to Wentworth By-Law 2024-002, if you break environmental regulations, you can be fined $2,000/day for as many days as they deem the regulation was not followed. For instance, if you’re gone for the Winter and let it lapse, they could hit you for 8 months (let’s say 250 days), and then you could be fined $500 THOUSAND. I would PUT A REASONABLE MAXIMUM on any type of financial penalty.
My Brief Partial Science Biography:
– Science Editor for theMcGill Universityadministration newspaper McGill Reporter.
– Science Information Officer for theUnited Nations(UNITAR) energy conference.
– Science & Medicine broadcaster forCBC&CBC International Service.
– Associate Editor ofMontreal Starin charge of Editorials and Op-Eds about science.
– A few published original Science Journal articles like THIS &THIS.
– Occasional pop-science articles likeTHIS ONE for the Sunday Guardian Live.
6. THE LIFE & DEATH OF LAKES
Believe it or not, all lakes have natural lifetimes. If you take an immortality pill and live 10,000 years, Louisa won’t be nearly as nice as today. What will eventually kill our lakes is over-nutrition from leaves and decomposing branches and trees. Studies have shown that shoreline shrubs and bushes prevent erosion just as well as trees, without producing so much extra decomposing biomass. We should be aware that our shoreline by-laws are aesthetic preferences and NOT environmental ones. We may want to leave things as they are, but we should have an open and honest discussion about it.
7. CRIBS
Cribs are what are used to hold up all our docks and boathouses. They are square log structures about the size of a kitchen table filled with heavy rocks. The cribs are massive enough not to get pushed around by ice in Winter. Some idiot in the Quebec government made them illegal. Cribs are ALLOWED IN ONTARIO LAKES, and recommended by the USA EPA. Using the Freedom of Information Act I pried a letter out of the Quebec government admitting they have NO SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT WHATSOEVER for the law. MY ARTICLEat WentworthGazette.com has been read over ten thousand times. If I become Mayor there will be NO ENFORCEMENT OF THIS BAD LAW. You will be able to build and/or repair cribs and I will take personal responsibility. In fact, I’d like them to come after me so this bad law gets changed once and for all.
8. INVASIVE SPECIES
No scary threats about “invasive” species. The LATEST STUDY I could find on Eurasian watermilfoil concludes that maybe they’re finding more because they’re looking more, and THERE MAY NOT BE ANY INVASION WHATSOEVER. In fact, the former Mayor who first started locking the gate at the landing, and introduced the law about boat-washing, told me the secret reason was to create obstacles for the deplorables who can’t afford to buy on the lake, and want only to bring their party boats and stay out on the water. In other words, the “invasive species” they’re really trying to keep out is not “Eurasian watermilfoil” but “impecunious homo sapiens”.
Maybe we want to retain those obstacles, but let’s not inadvertently aggrandize any environmental significance.
9. THE PARAGRAPH ABOVE HAS RADICAL UPDATE IN NEW ARTICLE “I’M IN SHOCK“
A Communication from Jay Brothers, Current Councilor and Mayoral Candidate:
Greetings from Wentworth! I hope everyone is finding some end of summer activities that will take full advantage of our ongoing great weather! We are so fortunate to have our beautiful waters, woods and trails, in all of their seasonal beauty, that provide us with outdoor activities throughout the year. We are also fortunate to be able to appreciate the natural physical beauty of this area as well as the many groups and individuals who provide many services and activities. There are many people within our Wentworth community, who hold a wide variety of interests, and who provide residents with a great number of activities and events including social events for young and old, cultural events and a wide range of physical fitness opportunities that are pursued individually or in groups. Biking, hiking, cross country skiing, snowshowing, sledding, etc. all come to mind.
BRIEF HISTORY:
I want to provide a brief history for those of you who may not know me. As a child, our family built a cottage on Lake Louisa and I was very fortunate to have spent a great amount of time at the lake, enjoying the Lake Louisa Social Club, swimming and boating in the summer and skiing at Carling Lake in the winters.
I have lived full time in Wentworth for thirty years and have been elected and served as a Councilor, in two large increments, for over twenty years.
During our thirty years of living and raising our family here, I have participated in a large number of activities, some volunteer, some in connection with being a Councilor and some through me personal work doing snow removal and renovation work within the Municipality.
When the Fire Dept. consisted of volunteer firemen, I took training courses and worked as a volunteer. Although not within this Municipality, I have served twice, in separate terms, as the President of the Canadian Legion Branch 71 in Brownsburg.
Working for 30 years doing snow removal in Wentworth has brought great familiarity with how snow removal best functions, both on personal properties as well as at the municipal level, within Wentworth. Other files that I have worked on through Council include Neighbourhood Watch and the Fire Department.
In general, Municipal Councilors become very familiar with acquiring information and making decisions on a large variety of Council topics, including making and changing bylaws, working on municipal repairs and projects, becoming informed about and working in conjunction with the MRC and the Provincial Government on Environmental topics, etc.
The Municipality of Wentworth remains an interesting dichotomy between full time residents, which number at roughly 550 and a larger number of part time residents, all of us together enjoying the many benefits of living in this small charming, rural community.
Between those two groups, we likely have some similar visions of how the Municipality can best provide and extend the goods and services that are provided through our taxes. These include things like garbage and recycling collection, snow removal, building regulations and guidelines that provide safe and enjoyable living for all.
Environmental concerns are also important to many individuals. As mentioned above, the Municipality works within a larger framework and in conjunction with the MRC as well as the Provincial Government.
CONCERNS:
I feel concern over the size of our current budget and the extent to which our spending of tax dollars may have exceeded what is reasonable for the size of our Municipality.
A review of services is needed, in my opinion, so that tax payers receive the best services possible, through their taxes, and that are appropriate for a small, rural municipality.
A review and possible changes to Sector Taxes needs to occur. At times, sector taxes are appropriate for one area in the municipality and should not be shared throughout the entire municipality. An example of this might be the creation of a dam on a private lake within the Municipality. In this case a sector tax is appropriate and the cost of this work would not be assumed throughout the Municipality.
However, when improvements to a public road are needed, as another example, the cost should be shared by all and not relegated as a sector tax to only one area in the Municipality.
IN CLOSING:
I do believe that individuals from all areas of the Municipality need to ensure that they are well represented on Council.
VOTING:
Exercising your right to vote is important!
Please register yourself to vote on November 2, 2025. You can vote as a full time resident and also as a home or landowner. Your name must be on the Electoral List. Voting will take place in person or by mail.
If you live permanently in Wentworth, you are most likely already registered to vote. You can check with the municipality to be sure.
If you have a secondary home or property in Wentworth but have not voted in previous elections, (not in person or by mail), registration is required. Completed voting registration forms must be received by the Municipality by Oct. 3, 2025.
If you want to register, go to the website of the Municipality of Wentworth, Quebec, and you should find all the forms there. You might also wish to contact the Municipality by phone. 450 – 562 – 0701 if you require further help.
If you would like to contact me, please call me at 450-533-5823. Taking the time to read this is appreciated!
I wanted to build a dock and was informed that cribs are no longer legal. I was surprised at this, because there’s no more natural part of our lake environment than trees and rocks. I couldn’t imagine any possible way they could be harmful.
Below please find 4 installments in this saga.
1. My back-and-forth with the Quebec Ministry of the Environment
2. What Ontario thinks of cribs
3. What Canada thinks of cribs
4. What the USA Environmental Protection Association thinks of cribs
Enjoy!
***
EMAILS WITH THE QUEBEC MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT
ME
Could you please direct me to a scientific source showing the adverse effects of using cribs made of rocks and logs in a healthy lake?
THEM
In order to answer your demand dated July 13th, we would like to inform you that your demand has been transferred to our regional office in Montréal, who will answer you as soon as possible.
ME
Thank you for your email. My question doesn’t depend on the region. My question is about the science used by MDDEFP. Tree trunks and rocks are a natural part of the Quebec aquatic environment. Tree trunks and rocks are the traditional materials used in Quebec to make cribs as foundation for docks and boathouses.
Quebec law says that docks and boathouses must be supported by metal pilings, not by cribs. Pilings are more expensive, require heavy machinery, and introduce metal into the water. Cribs are 100% natural, and a handyman can make a crib by himself, without machinery.
I notice the bottom of your email says, “Pensons a l’environnement!”. That is what I am doing. I’m writing you to find out the scientific basis for this law. I am asking about science, and the answer should be in a published academic article or research study. Please send my request to a MDDEFP scientist who can tell me where to find the scientific study on which the law is based.
THEM
You indicate in your email that Quebec law requires the platforms be supported on metal pilings. For your information, permission to build a dock by a citizen does not fall within the jurisdiction of MDDEFP but the municipality. In the case of a citizen who wants to set up a dock, MDDEFP acts only as of the water area of the state manager if the platform is implemented on a stream of public property.
[E.G. Big lakes like Louisa, yes, smaller lakes like Dunany, no.]
ME
I’m sorry if I was not clear. I’m not asking a legal question, but a scientific question. I understand the hypothesis that a crib made of rocks and logs might negatively impact aquatic life. What I’m trying to learn is the science that supports the hypothesis. I presume some biologists have conducted experiments, and their papers have been published in journals, but I’ve had no success in researching the matter for myself. Is it possible for you to help direct me to the relevant research?
ME AGAIN
I sent you an email on July 24 and I have not received a response from you. I am writing to find out why. Have you not yet had time to do research? Are you not the person I should ask? Does the lack of response means that scientific research I am looking for does not exist? Please let me know if you are able to help me, and if not, where should I look.
THEM
In response to your email of 2 August for the construction of a dock on crib, we wish to inform you that your application has been forwarded to the Water Policy Department of the Ministry.
ME (GOING THROUGH ACCESS TO INFORMATION)
I tried to get information from MDDEFP and nobody has provided the documents that I requested. I hereby make a formal request through access to information.
I am writing to find the basis for the decision MDDEFP (2.3.2 Licence of Occupation – Art. 10, Regulations), which prevents citizens from the construction of a dock on crib (crib dock). I presume that this law is based on science, and I would like you to send scientific or other justification for this law to me. To save time in the process, there is no reason for you to tell me that the cribs cause loss of fish and wildlife habitat unless you send me the scientific research that supports this type of speculation. If this kind of unproven speculation is the only basis of the law, please confirm that the law has no scientific basis.
THEM
We received your request and will reply within 20 days.
THEM
As allowed by the law, we need an additional delay of 10 days.
THEM After verification, we have been informed that the government doesn’t have one single document providing scientific support for its policy on protection of waterways and flood plains.
“Apres verification, nous sommes informes que le Ministere ne detient aucun document portant sur la justification scientifique de la Politique de protection des rives, du littoral et des plaines inondables.”
(For a full copy of the letter see the article called “Don’t Read This Post”.)
****
ONTARIO: LOG CRIBS FOR DOCKS
Government of Ontario, Ministry of Natural Resources
DO I NEED A PERMIT?
A Work Permit is Not required for the following:
– crib docks where the crib or combination of cribs (i.e. footprint on lake bottom) occupies less than 15 sq m (160 sq ft), and clean rocks from dry land are used
ONTARIO: LOG CRIBS FOR IMPROVING FISH HABITAT
(Canadian Wildlife Service & Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources)
Log cribs are usually made of green cedar logs fastened together in a crib shape and held down with rocks or concrete blocks. Log cribs are often placed on the ice during the winter months and left to drop to the bottom during spring breakup. They work best in inland lakes. However, they can interfere with navigation if they’re not placed in a suitable spot.
****
CANADA: CRIBS MADE OF LOGS AND ROCKS
Fisheries and Oceans Canada www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca
“Where cribs are built from timbers and are filled with rock, it is best if the crib is open-faced. Open-faced cribs without solid planking provide fish and other aquatic organisms spaces to hide from predators. It is best if cribs are placed at least 2 metres out from the average annual high-water mark.”
“Docks and boathouses are acceptable if there is bridging between cribs or poles that allows water to circulate. Vertical planking is not recommended along the sides of a dock because it can restrict water movement.
“If your project requires rocks, they must be clean and free of soil. Rocks must not be taken from the lake or river bottom, or the shoreline. Removal of rocks from these areas could destroy fish habitat and result in charges under the Fisheries Act.
“If your dock requires a concrete abutment, this should be located entirely on the upland property, above the average annual high-water mark.
“If you are planning to use pressure treated lumber for decking, all cutting, end sealing, staining, etc. should be done well back from the water. The wood should be completely dry before being attached to the dock structure. Also, never use creosote treated wood in or near water. These practices will help to reduce the amount of contaminants released into the waterbody. Use untreated cedar or hemlock timbers for structures below the average annual high-water mark. When submerged, these timbers will last a lifetime.
****
PLACING LOG CRIBS IN LAKES FOR IMPROVING FISH HABITAT
Artificial Structures for Fish Cover Environmental Protection Agency, April 2004
Structural features are important in helping to maintain diverse, healthy lake ecosystems and in maintaining gamefish and non-gamefish populations. Structure provides places for fish to hide from predators, shade from the hot summer sun, nesting and spawning habitat, and places for food organisms to live and grow.
Fish like to hide – especially when bigger fish and other predators are seeking a meal. Without hiding places, populations of young fish and the smaller fish species are at risk of being significantly reduced by predation. Ultimately, this can lead to an imbalanced fish population and reduction in gamefish yields.
Fish also like to keep cool. That’s why you’ll often see fish seeking refuge from the hot summer sun under docks, amongst rock outcroppings, and within lily beds.
And of course fish need to eat and reproduce. Algae and other organisms (including bacteria, zooplankton, and aquatic insects), which are important fish foods, use physical and biological structure as growth substrates or habitat areas. Depending on the fish species, physical and biological features are also used for nesting and spawning.
Log cribs filled with rocks are complex structures. That is, they contain a high number of surfaces, holes, and hiding places to maximize areas available for hiding and food growth. They are heavy enough to withstand waves and shifting currents, and are made of non-toxic local natural materials that will not significantly deteriorate in a short time.
Although log cribs are typically used to support docks, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency also suggests placing log cribs at other places in lakes as a form of inexpensive long-term habitat enhancement. Care should be taken to not place log cribs underwater where they are a danger to swimmers, boaters, or skiers; that is, away from swimming areas and boating lanes, and deep enough to allow safe boat passage (at least 4 feet below the water surface.) It also may be wise to mark the location with a buoy or other highly visible object.
****
(Any bureaucrats reading this, at any level of government, please note, there’s a comment section wide open for you to use. If you disagree with anything here, leave a reply. We’ll be happy to publish it. If you don’t leave a reply, we have the right to believe you can’t find anything wrong in this article.)
****
Stay tuned and check back often. Lots of news coming here in the next few weeks.
First of all, we’d like to acknowledge the work of the volunteers who take part in the lake water quality studies. Nothing said below is meant to imply that it’s not worthwhile to monitor the quality of water in our lakes. Even super-athletes need annual medical checkups.
The organization responsible for lake monitoring at Louisa is called the Lake Louisa Property Owners’ Association (LLPOA). The main scientific authority used by the LLPOA at their website is a group of publications called Natural Resources Facts, put out by the University of Rhode Island, College of Resource Development.
Here’s a link to the University of Rhode Island original article called Algae in Aquatic Ecosystems. Following are some quotes.
ALGAE ARE NORMAL & HEALTHY
“Algae are necessary and beneficial to aquatic eco-systems. They form the food and energy basis for nearly all other aquatic organisms. They are part of a healthy lake ecosystem … all lake organisms depend either directly or indirectly on algae as a food source.”
BLOOMS ARE NATURAL
“It is important to realize that algae occur in natural cycles of abundance in aquatic ecosystems. Algal populations are abundant in spring and early summer. As long as algae do not reach nuisance levels, they play an important, essential role in a healthy aquatic ecosystem.”
EXCESS PHOSPHOROUS CAUSES NUISANCE ALGAE
“The best way to limit algal growth is to limit the amount of nutrients that enter the lake …phosphorus is considered the limiting nutrient in most fresh water bodies.”
AUTUMN LEAVES ARE THE SINGLE BIGGEST SOURCE OF PHOSPHOROUS
Now we turn to other sources of science.
British online publication World of Water says that, “Falling leaves in large numbers could clog up ponds and cause a nutrient overload in autumn. This can lead to algal blooms in spring.”
In other words, contrary to popular opinion, the wild and wooly look of a forested shoreline can be exactly what hastens the decline of our treasured lakes.
Here’s what nobody tells you. Roots are tiny foragers. They scrounge around underground collecting the chemicals plants need to grow. Some of these chemicals get transformed into wood and the rest become leaves. Before winter, our trees go dormant and the leaves fall off as waste. Each dead leaf is a concentrated chunk of fertilizer. As far as the lake is concerned, these colourful tidbits aren’t much different than manure (OMG).
SO WHAT
We’re not going to denude our forests (and that would cause even worse problems), but there’s nothing wrong with our established lawns running down close to the lake. Grassy strips provide good buffer zones against nutrient overload from Autumn leaves and other forest detritus. If you have a lawn, don’t fertilize, use a mulching mower, be proud of the way you’re helping the lake – and hope for sensible municipal regulation.
To prevent erosion at the edge of the lake, the best solution is to plant (or let grow) some shrubs and bushes along the first metre or two. If the bushes grow too high or wide, they can be safely pruned in November when they’re dormant in preparation for Winter. Here again are the pictures that the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources provides as examples of “best practices”.
Wentworth says that we have to leave a 10 meter buffer zone around all our lakes. For the old folk, this means that we can’t touch anything growing within 33 feet of the lake (apart from a path to get to the lake). We are under strict orders to let this all grow wild. If we cut a branch, trim a bush, or mow a lawn, we can get a ticket of $450, and be threatened with a fine of $300 per day until we replant. If you don’t believe me, call our bureaucrats at 450-562-0701
What this means, practically speaking, is that we lose the use of most of our waterfront, and waterfront is precisely the reason we got our lakefront properties in the first place. A typical lot can be 100 feet wide X 100 feet deep. If we can’t use the first 33 feet, that means we’re losing the use of 1/3 of our property.
This seems very severe. It would be logical to think there’s a big danger involved. Surely it’s not just bureaucrats gone wild.
To figure this out I’ve become Wentworth’s biggest expert on buffer zones, studying research from all around the world.
The first inescapable conclusion is that all the research in the world has to do with buffer zones where farmland is close to water. The biggest concern is pesticide getting into the water. Of course, in Wentworth there is no farmland, so the primary reason for buffer zones doesn’t exist at all. The next biggest purpose of buffer zones is to stop herbicides from getting into the water. Again, since we don’t farm, this problem doesn’t exist either. The third reason is to prevent fertilizer from getting into water. Again, it doesn’t apply to us.
Before going on, this bears repeating, there’s no research anywhere about the need for buffer zones when there’s nothing to buffer. We’re not surrounded by farms – we’re surrounded by forest. There’s nothing in Wentworth except for lakes and buffer zones. The fundamental purpose of buffer zones is to protect against agricultural surface run-off, but in Wentworth there’s no such runoff.
ABSURDITY ON STEROIDS
In any case, let’s pretend that all our forests are farms, and the land gets plowed, dried out, and compacted so hard that there’s lots of runoff carrying agricultural pollutants into the lake. If so, what exactly would the scientists advise us to plant in the buffer zones? Here is the latest research according to the Swedish University of Agricultural Science, A Review of the Knowledge Focusing on Vegetated Buffer Strips – 2012.
“The choice of plant/s can be important for vegetated buffer strip effectiveness and function … Grass is often more tolerant and … provides good resistance to erosive flows.”
In other words, the plant of choice validated by the most exhaustive and recent study is grass. Remember, this is for buffer zones alongside agricultural land. In other words, if there were anything to buffer, then grass would do a fine job.
Finally, to be very explicit about this, adding trees to the buffer zone doesn’t help according to a major study in March 2010 by a group of Quebec and Canadian scientists (Caron, LaFrance, Auclair et Duchemin) published at www.soils.org, which says that “NO significant difference in the capacity to reduce herbicide exports was observed between grass and grass+tree buffer strip treatments“.
In fact, although it sounds bizarre, trees themselves can cause problems, (Limnetica 2006, The ecology of the Iberian inland waters) because the pretty autumn leaves that fall into our lakes quickly decompose into phosphorus and nitrogen, which are the same runoff fertilizer chemicals that buffer zones are designed to capture. Decaying leaves are the primary non-human source of this “pollution”, so there’s an intriguing case to be made that the best way to preserve our current pristine status is NOT to have so many trees so close to our waterways (see article, Falling Autumn Leaves).
(Incidentally, Ontario allows lawns on waterfront property, but suggest not cutting shorter than 3 inches, so the grass doesn’t dry out. Below please see photo examples of what they call excellent examples of shoreline protection.)
Surely, you think, there must be some explanation. Things couldn’t possibly be so completely upside-down in Wentworth. After all, Wentworth is part of a group of municipalities called the MRC d’Argenteuil, and they’re all guided by the Quebec Government. Well, as you may have read above, after being pushed hard through access to information legislation, the Quebec Ministry of the Environment admitted: After verification, we have been informed that the government doesn’t have a single document providing scientific support for its policy on protection of waterways and flood plains.
“Apres verification, nous sommes informes que le Ministere ne detient aucun document portant sur la justification scientifique de la Politique de protection des rives, du littoral et des plaines inondables.”
In other words the Quebec Ministry of the Environment simply made up policies about buffer strips that have no relationship to science. In a back-handed way to avoid responsibility for its own hollow policy and legislation, the Official Preamble to Quebec’s Law on the Environment (468-2005 Protection Policies for Lakeshores, Riverbanks, Littoral Zones and Floodplains) (translated) says “In order to enable the adoption of measures best suited for a regional municipality [eg Wentworth] …the implementation can take local situations into account [since] strict enforcement of the policy does not always correspond to reality.”
In other words, what Quebec says is that they’re giving a gun to the municipality, and if they choose to use it, it’s up to them. Tempted by these powers, our local bureaucrats passed the most severe laws in the province, and are ordering us to let 10 meters of waterfront grow wild, and doling out tickets of $450 to people for mowing lawns and trimming bushes. All this in a municipality with the healthiest, cleanest and most stable lake water purity in the province.
To add a bit of common sense to this discussion, it’s worth knowing that buffer zones can theoretically do two things, (1) filter out pollutants, and (2) prevent erosion by retaining soil within the plant root structure.
(1) Since there’s no farming in Wentworth, as long as we’re not putting chemicals on our property, there’s nothing to filter. Anyone disobeying common sense would have a lawn greener than others, and would have no dandelions or chickweed. If they were told, they would surely stop without the need for legislative guns, such as $450 tickets and fines of $300 per day.
(2) In order to prevent erosion, any kind of vegetation will do as long as it doesn’t get washed out by waves or rain storms. This is highly dependent on the conditions at each property, and the biggest loser from erosion would be the property owner, since it’s their own shoreline that would slowly dissolve into the lake. Nobody wants that, and wherever necessary, shrubs and bushes could be planted where grass roots aren’t deep enough to resist erosion. Nothing more needs to be done than tell the property owner they’re slowly losing their own property.
The extreme Wentworth prohibitions against trimming lakefront hedges or tree branches are devoid of science and common sense. Remember that when elections come in a few weeks, and be sure you are registered to vote NOW!
(Any bureaucrats reading this, at any level of government, please note, there’s a comment section wide open for you to use. If you disagree with anything here, leave a reply. We’ll be happy to publish it. If you don’t leave a reply, we have the right to believe you can’t find anything wrong in this article.)
***
For what it’s worth here are pictures from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) showing what they call “best practices” for the environment.
MNR: ONTARIO BEST PRACTICES:
Stay tuned and check back often. Lots of news coming here in the next few weeks.
