Proposal for Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River Regulation

Comments Received Online

The public comment period is closed as of August 31, 2013.

*Terms and Conditions

Submit a Comment
 
 
Thomas S. Richards 30th August 2013 01:56:32
NY, Rochester,
See attached response
Stephen Schultz 30th August 2013 01:52:16
NY, Rochester,
I support Plan 2014 and would like to see it implemented immediately. The ecosystem of the Lake and St. Lawrence River should be put in the forefront above all other interests. Thank you.
Robert Miron 30th August 2013 01:19:17
New York, Syracuse ,
We have a once in a lifetime opportunity to restore the health of theSt. Lawrence River. I support Plan 2014 and urge is full and speedy implementation. The plan will begin to reverse more than 50 years of damage to the River and ensure that future generations will inherit and enjoy a world class water body. I have had a second home on the St. Lawrence river for approximately 25 years and have been visiting for over 50. Please don't lose this opportunity. Thank you for your consideration
Martin Jean 30th August 2013 00:04:55
Qc, Boucherville,
aJe souhaite par la présente vous faire part de mon soutien au Plan 2014 et vous appeler à pleinement et entièrement adopter dès maintenant cette nouvelle approche de gestion du fleuve Saint-Laurent et du lac Ontario. C’est grâce au Plan 2014 que nous pourrons assurer un avenir viable à ce bassin versant emblématique en lui permettant de retrouver des niveaux et débits plus naturels, et que nous permettrons la restauration d’un écosystème précieux pour la faune et toutes les communautés qui l’habitent. Le plan doit permettre de réaliser le but ultime de la CMI, soit de redonner des flux et débits plus naturels à ces cours d’eau, au bénéfice de l’environnement et tout en tenant compte d’autres intérêts. La santé des écosystèmes d’eau douce est indissociable de celle des communautés, de la faune et de la flore, et de la viabilité de notre économie. Ainsi en implantant une meilleure gestion du fleuve Saint-Laurent et du lac Ontario, nous offrirons une meilleure qualité de vie à tous les citoyens qui vivent, travaillent et vont se ressourcer le long des berges du fleuve et du lac. Ce nouveau plan contribuera également à la viabilité économique, environnementale et sociale de cet immense bassin hydrographique que constituent le lac et le fleuve. C’est donc avec enthousiasme que j’appuie cette nouvelle démarche en vue de la régularisation des niveaux d’eau dans le fleuve Saint-Laurent et le lac Ontario. Je vous remercie de tenir compte du témoignage de ma position dans ce dossier.
Dr. Daniel Barletta 29th August 2013 23:44:16
NY, Rochester,
LEVELER 25
Patrick Moynihan 29th August 2013 23:40:26
New Uork, Clayton,
I STRONGLY support plan 2014 for healthier waterway!!!
Kevin Heffron 29th August 2013 21:58:54
New York, Wellesley Island,
I Support Plan 2014 and believe it should be implemented now
Ted Mascott 29th August 2013 20:27:36
New York, Clayton,
As a nearly 20 year resident of the Thousand Islands region and an active boater, I support Plan 2014.
Christopher Whipp 29th August 2013 19:25:28
Quebec, Montreal,
I write today to express my strong support for Plan 2014 and call for the full and speedy adoption of this new management approach for Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. Plan 2014 will help ensure a healthy future for this iconic water system by returning to more natural levels and restoring the ecosystem for local communities and wildlife. The plan achieves the IJC’s ultimate goal of “moving toward more natural flows to benefit the environment, while respecting other interests.” Healthy freshwater ecosystems are foundations for healthy communities, healthy wildlife, and sustainable economies. Improving the management of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River will enhance the quality of life for all citizens who live, work and recreate in the coastal zones of the lake and river. This new plan will also contribute to the economic, environmental, and social sustainability of the Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence system. Again, I strongly support this new approach to water level regulation in Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. Thank you for considering my comments.
Jacqueline Hamilton 29th August 2013 18:29:54
Ontario, TORONTO,
International Joint Commission: I write today to express my strong support for Plan 2014 and call for the full and speedy adoption of this new management approach for Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. Plan 2014 will help ensure a healthy future for this iconic water system by returning to more natural levels and restoring the ecosystem for local communities and wildlife. The plan achieves the IJC’s ultimate goal of “moving toward more natural flows to benefit the environment, while respecting other interests.” Healthy freshwater ecosystems are foundations for healthy communities, healthy wildlife, and sustainable economies. Improving the management of Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River will enhance the quality of life for all citizens who live, work and recreate in the coastal zones of the lake and river. This new plan will also contribute to the economic, environmental, and social sustainability of the Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence system. Again, I strongly support this new approach to water level regulation in Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. Thank you for considering my comments. Sincerely, Jacqueline
Helen Elam 29th August 2013 18:10:22
New York, Rochester,
The Town of Irondequoit’s letter references plan B7 however, plan 2014 is no better. I am appalled by the way plan 2014 was communicated to the public. The research and findings are not in laymen’s terms; rather they are in jargon only a statistician can understand - if that! The so-called “public meetings” were held at times/ locations strategically chosen to prevent the majority of the stakeholders from attending. An attempt by the IJC to squelch stakeholder’s from commenting. I did not see any media coverage of the meeting held in downtown Rochester on 7/16/13. Did the IJC purposely pay the media to stay away that day? As a member of Nature Conservancy, what I find ironic is the fact that the IJC wants to increase the lake levels during the Spring, a time when it is already naturally high due to the winter melt and subsequent run-off from the land up-stream, as well as the natural flow from the other Great Lakes. The IJC that has been using the environmental groups such as the Sierra Club and TNC to gain political momentum, when in reality it is not about the environment or water quality at all. It’s all smoke & mirrors to get their agenda approved. The IJC let a professor from Ottawa, a former member of the IJC, speak beyond his 3 minutes. Why? Because he was behind the anti-democratic position to allow the “people” a voice (his stipend was probably funded by the hydro-electro company!). I understand that the funding has to come from somewhere, that we need alternative sources of energy and that wetlands are the sponge of the ecosystem, absorbing all of those bad chemicals…but the clinker is that the professor actually said that the IJC should not be concerned about the riparian’s problems on the south shore. Who needs all those riparian tax-paying people anyway? He also added that the IJC should neglect the law from 1999 mandating that the governments of the US and Canada be involved in this decision; just move on and approve plan 2014!! That was his 6th point which he admitted he never previously expressed, but certainly made it his #1 priority on the 8/27/13 teleconference! Please stop insulting our intelligence and the our hard-earned money that went into funding these studies and just come out and say it; the lake level has to rise because the hydro-electric power company needs it to do so. If it is really a concern for water quality and diversity of species, then the focus should be on reducing shoreline development, upstream pollution, i.e. eliminating fertilization of suburban yards, farms and antiquated septic systems and stopping companies and municipalities from pumping (stealing) fresh water to make profits. If plan 2014 is truly about the environment and getting Lake Ontario to a more natural state (as it was prior to the 1950’s), then why not propose eliminating the Saunders-Moses dam and the St. Lawrence Seaway altogether?
AL GROTH 29th August 2013 18:02:34
NEW YORK, CAPEVINCENT,
its not a good thing when your grand kids cant fish off the dock . or you cant put your boat in the water and you cant pump water to your house. We NEED THE LEVEL TO STAY UP!
Terry L. Yonker 29th August 2013 17:21:26
New York, Youngstown,
I urge the IJC to adopt the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence Plan 2014 along with the implementation of the Directive to the International Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Board on Operational Adjustments, Deviations and Extreme Conditions. The Plan is best for the health of the Lake Ontario ecosystem and fair to US and Canadian riparians. Opposition to this and previous proposed plans is overblown. The Castle at Old Fort Niagara at the mouth of the Niagara River will not be in danger of falling into Lake Ontario because of this plan. Erosion at Old Fort Niagara has been occurring for centuries and will not change because of this plan. Lake levels a few inches higher in the spring and a few inches lower in the fall will not change the actual erosion rate. It is the more frequent storms that threaten the fort. The erosion at Fort Niagara is an issue that the State of New York has neglected for years and needs to address quickly before additional storm damage occurs. Twenty-five years ago I was appointed to the Natural Resources Working Group of the IJC Water Levels Reference Study that looked at the possibility of regulating all five Great Lakes to maintain water levels so that levels did not vary more that one foot from the long term mean. The issue then was high water. The study board concluded that further regulation of Great Lakes water levels was not practical, nor economic, nor called for, except for some modest efforts to adjust water levels to better protect the health of Lake Ontario’s fragile ecosystem and downstream St. Lawrence River. My training is as a meteorologist. I was the first to introduce the prospect of climate change into the five lake study. I have studied global warming and subsequent climate change for 50 years. In the long term, water levels of the Great Lakes are expected to decline, in some models by several feet. As Gordon Lightfoot noted, Lake Ontario takes what ever flows into it from the upper lakes, be it more or be it less than historical flows. Over the next several decades we will be tackling an altogether new set of issues: maintaining flows over Niagara Falls, limiting hydro power production, limiting shipping through the St. Lawrence Seaway, limiting recreational activities that depend on higher water levels, and protecting emerging wetlands from development. Please adopt the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence Plan 2014.
Michael J Sinnott 29th August 2013 17:13:27
New York, Sodus Point,
I am opposed to Plan 2014!
Catherine BoothSmith 29th August 2013 17:05:04
Ontario, Bowmanville,
I strongly support Plan 2014. The iconic Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River watershed needs and deserves our help to become and stay healthy for generations to come.
Karen McKergow 29th August 2013 17:01:54
NY, Alexandria Bay,
I Support Plan 2014 and believe it should be implemented now. I believe this to be the best plan for the health and sustainability for Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River.
Jeremy T. Smith 29th August 2013 16:46:57
NY, New York,
I Support Plan 2014 and believe it should be implemented now.
Bruce Radicello 29th August 2013 16:39:41
NY, Baldwinsville,
I cannot support plan 2014 unless it is modified with provisions to make it more equitable. Power generating facilities and Shipping industries will benefit, while riparian landowners have been unfairly asked to take the full cost burden. The warnings are clear - if plan 2014 is put into place, there will be significantly more damage during periods of high water management. If IJC plan 2014 is approved anyway, it signifies is that the governing body believes that the public benefits outweigh the damages inflicted upon the landowners. The landowners will have loss of use of waterfront as erosion washes away land and property. Make no mistake; this is not natural erosion, but rather accelerated erosion, possibly with devastating results, through intentional flooding called upon by the water management plan 2014. By the IJC’s own estimation, Plan 2014 will cost landowners $3.5 M per year. Some will lose property, others may lose homes, but it amounts to land intentionally taken. Property rights routinely receive constitutional protection. ( Water Rights). “The EMINENT DOMAIN CLAUSE of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution limits the power of state and federal governments to impinge on the riparian rights of landowners. It requires the government to pay the victims of takings an amount equal to the fair market value of the water rights.” Eminent domain has four elements as set forth in the Fifth Amendment: (1)private property (2) must be taken (3) for public use (4) and with just compensation Some will argue that plan 2014 will only manage the Lake Level at its “normal and more natural state”, but this is a false assumption. We don’t know what the natural state is anymore since the Moses-Saunders Power Dam has managed water levels for 55 years. In addition, the Great Lakes watershed and streams have been altered in those decades as well. Let us be fair and open on the options. There are three possible outcomes of this process: - Amend the plan to budget for payment for damages inflicted upon private landowners as a direct result of plan 2014; money that can be used for seawall construction, shoreline conservation and restoration, beach replenishment, structure relocation or protection, and other appropriate mitigations. - Or explain why the IJC Plan strips property owners of their Constitutional right - Or do not implement plan 2014 Take responsibility for your actions, and do not abandon those who are harmed by your actions, because that is not what we do to our citizens in the United States. Environmental needs must be weighed against the good or harm it does to others. Rethink this plan and win over the landowners with a modified plan that does not trounce their interests and rights. An environmental win at the expense and misery of others would be appalling. It diminishes its legitimacy, and would be a hollow win that could well backfire. And what does that kind of imperious action say about us as a people, and as a society?
June Summers 29th August 2013 16:21:03
NY, Rochester,
I support Plan 2014 because of the possibility of wetland and economic recovery under the plan.
Debra Ryan 29th August 2013 16:06:07
NJ, Westfield,
I own a cottage on 6th St in Sodus Point, NY and am opposed to plan 2014.
Carrie McNally 29th August 2013 16:05:54
NY, Fineview,
I Support Plan 2014 and believe it should be implemented now.
George Textor 29th August 2013 15:50:39
n.y., wellesley island, ,
I support pkan2014. The current plan is not adequate fr the 21st century and the more complex water needs and issues on the St Lawrence and Lake Ontario
Cheryl A. Gressani 29th August 2013 15:50:06
NY, Syracuse,
I am a property owner along the eastern shore of Lake Ontario in the Town of Ellisburg (Montario Point), where my family has been summering since the 1930s. I am writing to express my strongest OPPOSITION to the IJC’s Plan 2014 for the following reasons: • Plan 2014 would cause severe erosion of my property under its high water scenario • Plan 2014 does not provide for compensation for mitigation strategies or loss of land. • Plan 2014 violates a principal guideline of the IJC 2006 study, namely: “No plan should be implemented that results in a disproportionate loss to any one user group or geographic area.” • Plan 2014 was not recommended during the 2006 IJC study because it will cause far greater damage to Lake Ontario’s southern and eastern shore owners while offering little additional benefit to the environment. • Plan 2014 was crafted largely in secret, closed door negotiations, whereas the IJC conducted its 2006 in many public forums and study groups over the course of many years. • Plan 2014 is based on outdated and incorrect assumptions and speculative data (refer to the Study Board Minority Report of 2007 that pointed out these numerous errors). For these and many other reasons, I respectfully request that the IJC REJECT in its entirety Plan 2014. Furthermore, I suggest that the IJC immediately enact a moratorium on the development of any future proposals to modify the range of water levels on Lake Ontario until the completion of a thorough, objective analysis of the potential economic impact on the shoreline’s riparians, recreation, tourism and business. Sincerely,
Anthony Mollica 29th August 2013 15:46:50
New York, Alexandria Bay,
I totally support Plan 2014 and hope it will be implement now
Sara Gillespie 29th August 2013 15:37:56
Ontario, St.Catharines,
Lake Ontario needs a lot of help to keep it healthy and provide life we should take pride in Lake Ontario as well as the St.Lawrence River . Both give something for local people to do as well as tourists having them polluted is frankly embarrassing lets take care of the problem .