Dear Mr. Levi,
I was pleased to see that you have responded to the Millstone pre-election questionnaire, and that your answers to many questions are reasonable.
However, I am concerned about one paragraph in your comments on the Enerdu situation. That paragraph reads:
“The Appleton wetlands is a separate issue from the Enerdu project. I still am waiting for a final report from MNR on the Appleton wetlands. It has been reported to me that the similar soft maple swamp above Ferguson Falls is dying much quicker than Appleton.
No Enerdu there.”
The evidence in the Mississippi Valley Field Naturalists report on the Appleton Wetland makes it very clear that the current water management by Enerdu has resulted in elevated summer water levels in the wetland, that these levels are well above what can be tolerated by the maples, and that this is the direct cause of the tree damage in the wetland. With this direct linkage, the wetland is not a separate issue from the Enerdu project.
If you really believe that these are separate issues, please support your views with some concrete evidence that the Appleton tree mortality is not caused by Enerdu.
In the latter part of the quoted paragraph you allude to a similar soft maple swamp above Ferguson Falls that is dying and conclude with the statement “No Enerdu there.” The implication appears to be that if trees are dying well beyond the influence of Enerdu, the Appleton trees are likely suffering from the same problem. That is not necessarily true, and would require some careful observation and analysis to determine the real cause of any dead trees above Ferguson Falls.
I would note that the wetland immediately above Ferguson Falls is the Innisville Wetland, a Provincially Significant Wetland, and photographic evidence as recently as July 10 of this year shows it to be lush, green and very healthy. If the reported trees above Ferguson Falls are really dying, please provide their exact location so that a more complete analysis of the problem can be done.
Regards – Al Seaman