PETITCODIAC RIVER CAUSEWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

  Roughly 20 people attended the two hour discussion held at the Hank Braam Kiwanis Centre on Tuesday, January 28, 2003. The meeting began at 7:05 p.m. and was the second in a series of four public sessions held across the Petitcodiac River Watershed in late January.

  Comments, concerns and questions were raised by individual participants on behalf of the following organizations: the Alma Fisherman’s Association, the Village of Hillsborough, Lake Petitcodiac Preservation Association (LAPPA) and the Shepody Fish and Game. Individual citizens have also approached the microphone to make comments, voice their concerns and ask questions.

  Many of the concerns raised during the discussion focused on the risk of future impacts in the local area, as well as in the Upper Bay of Fundy, which could result from a decision to open the causeway gates. Members of the Alma Fishermen’s Association stressed the importance of long-term viability for their fishery and the marine environments in the upper Bay of Fundy. They reported a major expansion in lobster and scallop stocks in their fishing grounds since construction of the causeway. Other participants were concerned that opening of causeway gates could cause erosion or flooding of farm land, and leaching of contamination into the river from the old Moncton dump site. The evening’s discussion also focused on possible Fish Way design options, as well as access to information.

  The Alma Fishermen’s Association and the Village of Hillsborough expressed support for a full EIA study on the issues associated with the causeway. As well, active interest was expressed by the participants in additional stakeholder workshops and other future consultation activities.

Sediment Transport

  Members of the Alma Fishermen’s Association were particularly concerned about the possible transport of sediment down river as far as the Nova Scotia shore of the Upper Bay of Fundy. They are worried that this could potentially endanger very valuable scallop and lobster beds. Referring Study Team members to a map of this area available in the meeting room, a representative of the Association noted that the Upper Bay is shared by fishers in both New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, as well as the Fort Folly First Nations Band from the Joggins area.

  The Association sees their increase in catches over recent decades as a direct benefit of river changes brought on by the construction of the causeway in 1968. They stated that, until 30 years ago, lobster fishing was virtually non-existent in the Upper Bay.

  But over the years, the lighter tidal flow has caused water in this area to clear; creating conditions significantly favourable to both lobster and scallops. As a result, the fishing ground for scallops has been extended 10 miles towards Alma, while the lobster beds have moved into the area above the Cape Enrage Lighthouse. One fisher reported more lobsters of all sizes in these waters, despite being very heavily fished over the last 15 years.

  It was noted that the Association has participated in a number of studies in the last decade, which indicate there are a lot more sub-species in the area representing feed for lobsters. One of the representatives explained that the mud on the bottom has firmed up, providing a place well-suited for these species to breed, feed and grow. He feared that opening the causeway gates would have a very “deleterious” effect on the sub-species in this area. Another fisher noted that it takes seven years to bring up a lobster for market. He appealed to the Study Team to treat these concerns with the seriousness they deserve, since it will take that long to determine if the right decision was made in the end.

  Another fisherman reported observing significant disturbances in one particular area when the causeway gates are opened during spring run-off. He described the area as an “awesome place to fish,” until the mud sets in a week or two later. He invited the Study Team to join him in his boat to witness this phenomenon. Another participant recalled that before the causeway was built, ship personnel had to shovel mud off a ship’s shoe in order for it to lie as it was being loaded.

  Other participants expressed concerns that reopening the river flows would cause the coursing water to carry away the bank on the Moncton side of the Petitcodiac where the former municipal dump is located. In their view, such leaching from the dump site could spread trash, toxins and other pollutants along the river. One speaker reported noticing old trash in his lobster traps following the experimental gate opening in 1998. Other participants questioned the Study Team on what type of studies they foresee in the upper Bay of Fundy area.

  Responding to these concerns, members of the Study Team assured the participants they are most interested in potential effects on fisheries and fish populations. It was noted that the assessment will look at the ‘threshold value’ which lobster and scallop populations can withstand from activities such as sedimentation and contamination. Once this value is established, the Team will look at the likelihood of reaching that threshold value, given any of the project options. The recruitment of each species population, and whether there is bait or other kinds of fisheries in the area, will also be examined.

  The Study Team emphasized that issues identified through these early consultations in the EIA process, together with follow-up information exchange on the various points, would directly influence study operations. For example, participants were assured that the Team would be contacting Dr. Peter Lawton of St. Andrews regarding his field work in the upper Bay of Fundy.

  Dr. Lawton had been mentioned by more than one speaker as a key resource on the fisheries issues involved.

Socio-Economic Issues

  Representatives of the Alma Fishermen’s Association credited the causeway for assisting development of a major fishing industry, employing New Brunswickers from Alma, Hillsborough, Hopewell Cape, Hopewell Hill, West River and Riverside-Albert. A potential decrease in the shellfish stocks identified, caused by a change to existing tidal flow in the Petitcodiac River system, and the effect of such a change on employment, income and the local economy, were key concerns for several of the participants. The difficulty in replacing this type of economic base was emphasized.

  One speaker noted that there were three boats fishing out of Alma 30 years ago. Today, the combined scallop and lobster fishery uses 19 boats. He added that the industry is limited mainly by the size of the local wharf. There are 60 families involved directly in the fishery and another 10 to 15 families involved in fish harvesting, processing and marketing. It was also pointed out that most fishers in the local area are less than 40 years of age.

  The Study Team emphasized in response that much importance is attached to learning how the fishery works in the local context. An informal follow-up stakeholder meeting between Team members and the Alma Fishermen’s Association was proposed, and the Association members who were present indicated strong support for such an approach.

  On a separate issue, a representative from the Lake Petitcodiac Preservation Association questioned how property values would be assessed in the context of the EIA study.

  The Study Team explained that the impact of property values under all of the project options would be considered in detail. It was noted that the socio-economic team from ADI Ltd. will lead this component of the assessment, assisted by David Babineau, a very experienced real estate appraiser, and GPI Atlantic, a firm which specializes in full cost accounting.

Land Use Issues

  The possibility of flooding on farmland adjacent to the river, due to the permanent opening of the causeway gates, was raised as significant concern during the discussion. Attention was focused by some participants on those areas used by farmers for hay production. Possible flooding in the area above the causeway, where dykes have long since deteriorated, was also a concern. One participant stated that farmers fear they will have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to re-dyke their land.

  The Study Team noted that agriculture is one of the important land uses on the margins of the estuary, which will be analysed in the study. It was explained that any conclusions made about the overall effectiveness of a particular option would include considerations of such things as protection of farm land and the cost involved. The Team noted that communications have already begun with the Agriculture Producers Association of New Brunswick and Team members will continue to seek input from them as the EIA process goes forward.

Fish Way Options

  One participant wondered why more recent attempts to provide fish passage through the existing causeway have failed, when Acadian settlers in the 1500’s were very successful in building dykes, small dams and other water control systems, which successfully supported salmon migration. Another speaker suggested that eliminating the gates and replacing them with a dam could solve the Fish Way issue and decrease sediment transport. One participant noted that fish remain plentiful in P.E.I., despite the fact they have 234 Fish Ways on the Island. Exploration of new options to solve the Fish Way problem was seen as advisable by another participant, who felt that the current project options had all been studied in the past.

  Study Team members noted that, in the case of a ‘dam’ option, it would be important to explore whether increasing the groundwater penetration under farm land would increase erosive action. It was also emphasized that the critical difference between past studies and this Environmental Impact Assessment is that other studies to date have not fully examined ways to ‘mitigate’ or remove specific effects associated with a particular project option. The Study Team remains ready to look at any new ideas brought to their attention, and Fish Way experts on the team will be following up on these issues with the participants who raised them.

Fish Stocks

  Various points were raised by participants regarding fish stocks and the possible reasons behind their decline. One participant pointed out that species such as gasperaux and eels continue to migrate to the River Hebert and the MaCann River (also known as Cumberland Basin) where there is no causeway - yet the watershed concerned is still void of salmon, shad and smelts. He stated that this same occurrence is true for the upper waters of the Petitcodiac and Pollett Rivers. Acid rain was seen as one possible reason for fish decline by one participant. He noted that some fish stocks decline steadily in New Brunswick from north to south and this trend continues into Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, where the acid rain belt from the eastern seaboard of the USA passes through. The Study Team thanked participants for all their input in this regard and noted the issues raised for subsequent consideration during the EIA Study.

Public Consultation

  Members of the Alma Fishermen’s Association expressed interest in the Study Team’s offer to provide access to the scientists who are working on the biophysical aspects of the study. A separate meeting in Alma will be scheduled in this regard to further discuss issues concerning the marine environment in the upper Bay of Fundy.

  A representative of the Lake Petitcodiac Preservation Association asked for access to the information which will be presented to the Technical Review Committee (TRC) for its consideration. By having all the information in hand, he hopes to be assured that certain issues, particularly those pertinent to his organization, have been included in such material and, in turn, addressed by the committee.

  A representative of the TRC indicated that such technical committees don’t typically release the information presented to them. Members of the Study Team offered to have their fish way specialist contact the Association representative and give him an opportunity to view any of the information the Team has regarding this issue.

  The Study Team assured participants that an interactive process with the public is integral to this EIA Study. It was emphasized that dialogue with as many people as possible is a priority in order to identify issues of concern. As part of this effort, the Team will be reviewing existing information sources, talking to technical experts, as well as interest and stakeholder groups who have specific knowledge of the area. Future workshops are also planned to discuss what is known, thought to be known, or believed to be missing. It was noted that a publicly available tracking log would also be maintained throughout the process, identifying the detailed issues raised by local residents during their various communications with the Study Team.

  During the next phase, the Team will be collecting data and conducting the component studies. When these individual studies are prepared, they too will be released to the public. The Team will subsequently host open house and town hall sessions to discuss the results and identify if anything has been missed. Then the Study Team will proceed with the third phase of the assessment and the detailed analysis of project impacts.

  Again, the public will have the opportunity to discuss the results of the analysis before a draft EIA report is prepared. Throughout the EIA process, in other words, the Study Team’s objective will be to provide full disclosure of all the issues, analysis and results considered in the EIA documentation.

Municipal Infrastructure

  A spokesman from the Village of Hillsborough expressed concern that their wastewater treatment lagoon is located in an area which could be affected by changes in Petitcodiac tidal flows. He asked that the assessment consider an analysis of any possible impacts, since it remains their only possible site for such a facility at this time. The Team agreed that this issue is clearly important and pointed out that such examples of ‘local’ knowledge are essential for them to understand and address, in order to complete the EIA process successfully.

Other

  One participant questioned how long it would take for the river to revert back to its pre 1967-68 configuration, if the gates were opened. The Study Team responded they that no answer to that question could be made at this very early point in the EIA study. Through physical and hydrodynamic modelling, however, their first objective is to find the rate at which there would be a return from any change, which can be associated with the causeway.