According to Kevin Falcon, the government is waiting for an answer from their hydrologist, who they expect to determine whether they should take the gravel out of Brown’s Pit. When opinions have been given by several other studies and those express reservations regarding that controversial option, should our government move on the opinion of only one? Is that not taking a gamble, the gamble being that only one person is right? Now what if that one person is wrong and the others are right. Then what is to be done? Our water would be contaminated by the gravel removal! What other option would we have? We would have gambled and lost. I’m not a moonlight gambler. I cannot afford to loose the water we depend on and neither can the other people of the Municipality of Langley. Water is a necessity of life.
In case you missed today's Langley Advance you might want to click on this link for a little chuckle:
http://www2.canada.com/langleyadvance/news/opinion/story.html?id=b694dc25-d173-42a5-a497-2ef86bf83e58&p=1
Saturday, March 28, 2009
The Plans to Reopen Brown's Pit Must Stop Now!
Karren Winther, another neighbour lists her reasons for opposing the reopening of Brown's Pit, which lies over the Hopington Aquifer.
Located at 240th street and 68th avenue in Langley
Beneath it lies the already overpumped and fragile Hopington Aquifer which supplies drinking water to well over 3000 homes – studies completed as early as last year which this government participated in classify it as one of the three most fragile aquifers in the province
This ex gravel pit was mined up until, and then closed in 1963 – 11 years later the area developed - wells were drilled and homes built. More recently legislation to prevent open pit gravel mining in the municipality was put into place.
Now, 46 years later this B.C. government wants to reopen this mine, enlarge it and extract gravel from this sensitive area – literally in our backyard
We were here first – this is not acceptable!!!
At risk is the quality and quantity of drinking water to thousands of people
We know gravel pits are bad (as quoted from a Fraser Health employee)
Case studies show that the result of ground vibrations from extracting and filling results in increased levels of arsenic in drinking water and phospherus levels in fish bearing creeks (the Salmon River and Couglan Creek surround this area)
Furthermore the water table is dropping at an alarming rate now – and plans to extract over one million (1,000,000) cubic metres of gravel (the largest pit Langley has ever had application for!!) will result in a hole 400 feet by 700 feet by 50 to 100 feet deep.
There are no other options for water here - the Township of Langley has assured us there is no hope of having city/municipal water in this area for at least 10 – 15 years.
There are many other sources for gravel – Heidleberg, Mainland Sand and Gravel, Valley Sand & Gravel and Lafarge to mention only a few. Gravel can be barged down the river directly from the Sumas pit at a fraction (1/20th) of the cost as mining and transporting it by truck.
Contact Number 604-530-6106 or
www.hopingtonaquifer
Located at 240th street and 68th avenue in Langley
Beneath it lies the already overpumped and fragile Hopington Aquifer which supplies drinking water to well over 3000 homes – studies completed as early as last year which this government participated in classify it as one of the three most fragile aquifers in the province
This ex gravel pit was mined up until, and then closed in 1963 – 11 years later the area developed - wells were drilled and homes built. More recently legislation to prevent open pit gravel mining in the municipality was put into place.
Now, 46 years later this B.C. government wants to reopen this mine, enlarge it and extract gravel from this sensitive area – literally in our backyard
We were here first – this is not acceptable!!!
At risk is the quality and quantity of drinking water to thousands of people
We know gravel pits are bad (as quoted from a Fraser Health employee)
Case studies show that the result of ground vibrations from extracting and filling results in increased levels of arsenic in drinking water and phospherus levels in fish bearing creeks (the Salmon River and Couglan Creek surround this area)
Furthermore the water table is dropping at an alarming rate now – and plans to extract over one million (1,000,000) cubic metres of gravel (the largest pit Langley has ever had application for!!) will result in a hole 400 feet by 700 feet by 50 to 100 feet deep.
There are no other options for water here - the Township of Langley has assured us there is no hope of having city/municipal water in this area for at least 10 – 15 years.
There are many other sources for gravel – Heidleberg, Mainland Sand and Gravel, Valley Sand & Gravel and Lafarge to mention only a few. Gravel can be barged down the river directly from the Sumas pit at a fraction (1/20th) of the cost as mining and transporting it by truck.
Contact Number 604-530-6106 or
www.hopingtonaquifer
Friday, March 27, 2009
Update on Saving our water at Brown's Pit over Hopington Aquifer
My neighbour Bob Moats had this to say about the mining of Brown's Pit:
The proposed mining of Brown's Pit in Langley Township for provincial Port Mann and freeway construction gravel is an unconscionable act which cannot occur without every aspect of community, water safety and environmental integrity being devastated. This is in spite of a long standing moratorium on gravel extraction in the Township of Langley.
Our community group learned that “the plan” calls for 1 million cubic yards of gravel removal. This makes their claim of no damage to the aquifer, water quality and community and leaving this ALR land in improved agricultural shape when finished an untrue statement.
Let’s put size in context: My home is a 6.4 acre lot bordering the south 700 feet of Brown's Pit (the area that still has gravel). The footprint of 1 million cubic yards is one-third the volume of the Gizza Pyramid whose base covers 13 acres (exactly double my lot) and attains a height of 450 ft. So the ground footprint of the excavation of my north border would be 700 feet long and 400 feet wide (the pit itself isn’t that wide so it would have to go deeper than 50 – 100 foot deep to round out to 1 million cubic yards. This is a frightful image.
The damage to the Hopington aquifer would be stunning. All the oil and other toxic material dripping from machinery would travel for miles in the gravel (anyone remember Walkerton?). The gravel is God’s water filter and with the extraction the gravel would be gone. The natural filtering process destroyed – the damage incalculable.
I have questions and so should you all.
If the provincial government is so incredibly comfortable turning their back on fair play on the Cambie Street corridor and in Delta – would we expect to be treated differently? Should we be comforted by “we’ll do a study” (surveying for the freeway ramp is done, as are four test wells). Is surveying part of the pre-study process? Do they, as we suspect, consider this a “done deal”?
With a gargantuan hole 700x400x50-100 feet deep does anyone believe that they will “restore it for agricultural use”? That is being economical with the truth – more precisely a lie. Such a fill project would be virtually impossible – whose quality soil would they steal to fulfill this pipedream?
We recently (last two years) were subjected to the filling of part of the old pit. They hauled for weeks, making our roads unsafe and dumping illegal material (hog fuel) into the old pit. They contaminated adjacent wells (hog fuel) and when finished it didn’t make a dent in the old gravel evacuation space. Restore to agricultural use indeed!
Is the ALR protecting our breadbasket or are they a thinly veiled Liberal rubber stamp? We’re told that this project has preliminary ALR approval – how can that be possible if anybody is doing their job?
Our group is methodically gathering facts and information and the more we gather the more frightened and outraged we become.
Meanwhile, I will not stand quietly and idly by while unprincipled people in government without a conscience commit a premeditated “rape of Langley”.
Bob Moats, Langley
The proposed mining of Brown's Pit in Langley Township for provincial Port Mann and freeway construction gravel is an unconscionable act which cannot occur without every aspect of community, water safety and environmental integrity being devastated. This is in spite of a long standing moratorium on gravel extraction in the Township of Langley.
Our community group learned that “the plan” calls for 1 million cubic yards of gravel removal. This makes their claim of no damage to the aquifer, water quality and community and leaving this ALR land in improved agricultural shape when finished an untrue statement.
Let’s put size in context: My home is a 6.4 acre lot bordering the south 700 feet of Brown's Pit (the area that still has gravel). The footprint of 1 million cubic yards is one-third the volume of the Gizza Pyramid whose base covers 13 acres (exactly double my lot) and attains a height of 450 ft. So the ground footprint of the excavation of my north border would be 700 feet long and 400 feet wide (the pit itself isn’t that wide so it would have to go deeper than 50 – 100 foot deep to round out to 1 million cubic yards. This is a frightful image.
The damage to the Hopington aquifer would be stunning. All the oil and other toxic material dripping from machinery would travel for miles in the gravel (anyone remember Walkerton?). The gravel is God’s water filter and with the extraction the gravel would be gone. The natural filtering process destroyed – the damage incalculable.
I have questions and so should you all.
If the provincial government is so incredibly comfortable turning their back on fair play on the Cambie Street corridor and in Delta – would we expect to be treated differently? Should we be comforted by “we’ll do a study” (surveying for the freeway ramp is done, as are four test wells). Is surveying part of the pre-study process? Do they, as we suspect, consider this a “done deal”?
With a gargantuan hole 700x400x50-100 feet deep does anyone believe that they will “restore it for agricultural use”? That is being economical with the truth – more precisely a lie. Such a fill project would be virtually impossible – whose quality soil would they steal to fulfill this pipedream?
We recently (last two years) were subjected to the filling of part of the old pit. They hauled for weeks, making our roads unsafe and dumping illegal material (hog fuel) into the old pit. They contaminated adjacent wells (hog fuel) and when finished it didn’t make a dent in the old gravel evacuation space. Restore to agricultural use indeed!
Is the ALR protecting our breadbasket or are they a thinly veiled Liberal rubber stamp? We’re told that this project has preliminary ALR approval – how can that be possible if anybody is doing their job?
Our group is methodically gathering facts and information and the more we gather the more frightened and outraged we become.
Meanwhile, I will not stand quietly and idly by while unprincipled people in government without a conscience commit a premeditated “rape of Langley”.
Bob Moats, Langley
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Brown's Pit and Hoppington Aquifer Part 3
Some interesting information has come to my attention on the internet today. The Globe and Mail has an article relating to the controversy regarding gravel mining in Brown's Pit and the effect this could have on the Hopington Aquifer. It can be found at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090326.BCLANGLEY26/TPStory/TPNational/BritishColumbia/
For anyone interested in reading the transcript of the legislative discussion relating to this subject I found them at:
March 24th
http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/38th5th/H90324y.htm
March 25th
http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/38th5th/H90325y.htm
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090326.BCLANGLEY26/TPStory/TPNational/BritishColumbia/
For anyone interested in reading the transcript of the legislative discussion relating to this subject I found them at:
March 24th
http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/38th5th/H90324y.htm
March 25th
http://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard/38th5th/H90325y.htm
Brown's Pit and Hopington Aquifer Continued
For two days now, our legislature has discussed the proposed gravel removal at Brown's Pit above the Hopington Aquifer. Shane Simpson, the NDP Environmental Critic brought the subject up in question period during the afternoon session on March 24th. He addressed his question to the Liberal Environment Minister, Barry Penner who appeared to be unaware of the problem. His response was that he would look into it.
Giving the government 24 hours to get the information, Shane Simpson again brought the subject up again on March 25th. He stated that the Environment Minister should have been aware of the problem with mining over the Hopington Aquifer at Brown's Pit as the information had been delivered to him by several interested parties over a period of weeks, beginning in January and February and included a 309 signature petition.
The buck was then passed by Barry Penner, the Environment Minister to Kevin Falcon, the Minister of Highways. Who responded to each of the three NDP MLAs who spoke on the subject. His repeated response to each question was that his government would "make the decision with facts given to them by people who have a lot of expertise in the area." I am wondering how they pick and chose which of the experts that they hire are the ones they can listen to. They already have two studies produced by branches of their government that claim the Hopington Aquifer is fragile and should be protected. Now Falcon says they are waiting for a hydrologist's report. Tell me, does that report negate the two previously produced reports?
Is this a new policy of this government? I attended a meeting in Chilliwack on March 19th at which a series of experts stood up and declared that gravel mining on the Fraser River would do nothing for flood control but would seriously destroy gravel beds that are used by salmon, sturgeon and other fish to lay their eggs. The government has consistently ignored the advice of the experts who have filed reports advising them of this fact. If the government had taken the time to consult and listen to some of their own experts they might have made better choices for the location of their gravel dredging permits for the Fraser River bars. The only fish the government seems to be interested in are the red herrings they throw out to divert the attention of citizens from getting the facts.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Hopington Aquifer, Brown's Pit and the Gateway Project
This blog was intended to feature stories relating to travel, however at this time my attention has been riveted on a site much closer to home - Brown’s Pit and the Hopington Aquifer. Water is a necessity of life and therefore anything that threatens our water supply is a threat against each of us who depend on the Hopington Aquifer for our water supply.
I have traveled to many places in the world and seen how people’s concerns about the environment are making a difference. The indigenous people of Taiwan took the responsibility to bring back depleted fish stocks; the native people of Borneo are replanting trees in the rainforest to replace the food sources for the animals that live in the corridors that run beside their river.
It makes me sad to know that in Canada our British Columbia government is basically ignoring our environmental concerns. They are not providing good environmental leadership. How can our provincial government claim to be “going green” when their big move has been to add two cents to our gas price! Get traffic moving so that we don’t use so much gas! Twinning the Port Mann Bridge has been discussed for years. Now we have the big plan for a new 10 lane bridge. How much longer will it take to get that one on the road?
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m in favour of a bridge that will meet the present and future needs of the Fraser Valley community. People who live out in the country don’t have access to public transportation, although we are expected to subsidize it. However, the need for that bridge has only been given lip service for many years, while commuters have been left to idle their engines on the Highway 1 parking lot for those many years.
With an election in the offing and federal money being offered the government is now going to move with a newer bigger plan – one 10 lane bridge. What happened to twinning I might ask? The plan includes widening Highway 1 east while the bridge is being done. Both ideas seem to be well received here in the Fraser Valley. Anything is better than nothing!
Now we come to materials to see this plan come to fruition. Gravel is a much needed commodity for construction anywhere and especially for road construction. Gravel is also worth big bucks to the construction industry. To the government, Brown’s Pitt became their obvious solution. It is just south of the freeway and could be reached by building off-on ramps at 240th St. between the 232nd and 264th exits. No further need to worry. Just get the ALR to remove the land from the agricultural land reserve, build a couple of on-off ramps and they would be in business. They say, “Anyone who might oppose our plan is not in favour of progress.”
But just wait a minute. We have a major environmental concern. Brown's Pit is on top of the Hopington Aquifer.
Brown's Pit, also know as the Brown Road Pit. is pastoral farmland located at 240th Street and 68th Avenue in Langley. It has been such for 46 years. It was part of the Agricultural Land Reserve. Beneath it lies the already over pumped and fragile Hopington Aquifer which supplies drinking water to the wells serving over 3000 homes over a large area of the Municipality of Langley. Studies completed as late as last year, in which this government was involved, classify it as one of the three most fragile aquifers in the province. Meaning that if it is not protected it could be destroyed! What would happen to all the people and animals that depend on that water for their homes? Where is the alternative water supply if removal of the gravel from Brown's Pit causes arsenic to leach into our water supply? Would the government pipe water in from somewhere else? Would you really believe that? That would involve big bucks again. Some people on piped municipal water currently may not realize that their water comes from community wells that get their water from the Hoppington Aquifer. Rich Colman sent us a letter telling us they are waiting for the results of a study that will be completed AFTER the election. Yes, but what about the studies already done stating that the Hoppington Aquifer is fragile, so gravel removal would be hazardous. Why are those studies being ignored? What are we supposed to do if their predictions come true?
Secondly even with the on-off ramps at 240th the multitude of gravel trucks would be traveling the freeway at all hours causing major disruptions in the traffic during those hours. Currently that area is one of the problem areas on Highway 1 east. Traffic is subject to frequent stoppages on a regular basis. Traffic frequently comes to a standstill between 232nd and 264th especially during rush “hour.” The so called “rush hour” is a misnomer. “Rush hour” on Highway 1 is no longer an hour, but is from 5:30 a.m. until 9:30 a.m. traveling west and heading east it conservatively from 2:30 to 6:30 p.m. and maybe longer.
There is another more ecologically friendly alternative that does not appear to be considered. We have been told that the gravel could be barged along the Fraser River at a fraction of the cost and inconvenience – not disrupting traffic on Highway 1 to the same degree. It could be brought to site from either under the Port Mann Bridge or under the new Golden Ears Bridge which will open later this year. A mountain of gravel is being extracted from the Vedder Mountain. Gravel is now being barged to California from Sechelt and Texada Island. That option could not only save the project money, it would save some of the traffic congestion, which wastes fuel and time, but it would also help to save the Hopington Aquifer. When it comes to water v.s gravel – water has to take precedence every time. Water is a necessity of life.
B.C. citizens must let our government know that Brown’s Pit is not the ecologically friendly way to obtain gravel for the new bridge and freeway expansion. Abusing the Hopington Aquifer is not an option. Serious consideration must be given to other options including barging the gravel along the Fraser River. If it is cost effective for Californians to barge gravel from B.C. Why would it not make a lot of sense for that gravel to be used for B.C. construction purposes? As B.C. citizens we need to be confident that our government considers it their business to protect our water and our environment.
I have traveled to many places in the world and seen how people’s concerns about the environment are making a difference. The indigenous people of Taiwan took the responsibility to bring back depleted fish stocks; the native people of Borneo are replanting trees in the rainforest to replace the food sources for the animals that live in the corridors that run beside their river.
It makes me sad to know that in Canada our British Columbia government is basically ignoring our environmental concerns. They are not providing good environmental leadership. How can our provincial government claim to be “going green” when their big move has been to add two cents to our gas price! Get traffic moving so that we don’t use so much gas! Twinning the Port Mann Bridge has been discussed for years. Now we have the big plan for a new 10 lane bridge. How much longer will it take to get that one on the road?
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m in favour of a bridge that will meet the present and future needs of the Fraser Valley community. People who live out in the country don’t have access to public transportation, although we are expected to subsidize it. However, the need for that bridge has only been given lip service for many years, while commuters have been left to idle their engines on the Highway 1 parking lot for those many years.
With an election in the offing and federal money being offered the government is now going to move with a newer bigger plan – one 10 lane bridge. What happened to twinning I might ask? The plan includes widening Highway 1 east while the bridge is being done. Both ideas seem to be well received here in the Fraser Valley. Anything is better than nothing!
Now we come to materials to see this plan come to fruition. Gravel is a much needed commodity for construction anywhere and especially for road construction. Gravel is also worth big bucks to the construction industry. To the government, Brown’s Pitt became their obvious solution. It is just south of the freeway and could be reached by building off-on ramps at 240th St. between the 232nd and 264th exits. No further need to worry. Just get the ALR to remove the land from the agricultural land reserve, build a couple of on-off ramps and they would be in business. They say, “Anyone who might oppose our plan is not in favour of progress.”
But just wait a minute. We have a major environmental concern. Brown's Pit is on top of the Hopington Aquifer.
Brown's Pit, also know as the Brown Road Pit. is pastoral farmland located at 240th Street and 68th Avenue in Langley. It has been such for 46 years. It was part of the Agricultural Land Reserve. Beneath it lies the already over pumped and fragile Hopington Aquifer which supplies drinking water to the wells serving over 3000 homes over a large area of the Municipality of Langley. Studies completed as late as last year, in which this government was involved, classify it as one of the three most fragile aquifers in the province. Meaning that if it is not protected it could be destroyed! What would happen to all the people and animals that depend on that water for their homes? Where is the alternative water supply if removal of the gravel from Brown's Pit causes arsenic to leach into our water supply? Would the government pipe water in from somewhere else? Would you really believe that? That would involve big bucks again. Some people on piped municipal water currently may not realize that their water comes from community wells that get their water from the Hoppington Aquifer. Rich Colman sent us a letter telling us they are waiting for the results of a study that will be completed AFTER the election. Yes, but what about the studies already done stating that the Hoppington Aquifer is fragile, so gravel removal would be hazardous. Why are those studies being ignored? What are we supposed to do if their predictions come true?
Secondly even with the on-off ramps at 240th the multitude of gravel trucks would be traveling the freeway at all hours causing major disruptions in the traffic during those hours. Currently that area is one of the problem areas on Highway 1 east. Traffic is subject to frequent stoppages on a regular basis. Traffic frequently comes to a standstill between 232nd and 264th especially during rush “hour.” The so called “rush hour” is a misnomer. “Rush hour” on Highway 1 is no longer an hour, but is from 5:30 a.m. until 9:30 a.m. traveling west and heading east it conservatively from 2:30 to 6:30 p.m. and maybe longer.
There is another more ecologically friendly alternative that does not appear to be considered. We have been told that the gravel could be barged along the Fraser River at a fraction of the cost and inconvenience – not disrupting traffic on Highway 1 to the same degree. It could be brought to site from either under the Port Mann Bridge or under the new Golden Ears Bridge which will open later this year. A mountain of gravel is being extracted from the Vedder Mountain. Gravel is now being barged to California from Sechelt and Texada Island. That option could not only save the project money, it would save some of the traffic congestion, which wastes fuel and time, but it would also help to save the Hopington Aquifer. When it comes to water v.s gravel – water has to take precedence every time. Water is a necessity of life.
B.C. citizens must let our government know that Brown’s Pit is not the ecologically friendly way to obtain gravel for the new bridge and freeway expansion. Abusing the Hopington Aquifer is not an option. Serious consideration must be given to other options including barging the gravel along the Fraser River. If it is cost effective for Californians to barge gravel from B.C. Why would it not make a lot of sense for that gravel to be used for B.C. construction purposes? As B.C. citizens we need to be confident that our government considers it their business to protect our water and our environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)