Feature Article - February 7, 2008.class { BORDER-RIGHT: black 1pt solid; BORDER-TOP: #000 1pt solid; BORDER-LEFT: black 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: black 1pt solid } .class1 { BORDER-RIGHT: #9f5128 1pt solid; BORDER-TOP: #9f5128 1pt solid; BORDER-LEFT: #9f5128 1pt solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #9f5128 1pt solid } .class2 { FONT-SIZE: 8pt; COLOR: #666 }

Back toHome

Feature Article - February 7, 2008 Uranium mining in Ontario: Economic Boom or Environmental Disaster?By Jeff Green

The Stanrock Tailing Wall int eh Elliot lake are: the 30 ft high will in the background is composed of millions of tons of radioactive mill waste.

The impasse over uranium exploration in North Frontenac is being played out as a jurisdictional dispute between two local Algonquin communities and the Province of Ontario, and the situation in and around the Robertsville mine remains unresolved.

The question at the heart of the current situation is that of the relative merits of the Algonquins’ claim to the land. It was the government, through the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, that granted Frontenac Ventures Corporation the right to explore for uranium on a 30,000 acre tract in North Frontenac Township.

Disputes over jurisdiction between local Algonquins and Ontario are not new. Just last year the Ardoch Algonquins assumed the Pine Lake boat launch; and the Algonquin Land Claim process itself, which is intended to settle jurisdiction once and for all, has a long, tortured history. The difference in this case, and the reason why the Robertsville mine has become such a major political and ideological battle and has been the catalyst for a new alliance between environmentalists and aboriginals, is the mineral that is being explored: uranium.

Uranium mining has been a profitable venture in Ontario throughout the 20th Century, and although the last active mine was shut down in the early 1990s, the likelihood is good that mining will resume within 10 years. Just west of Bancroft, two companies: copper mining giant El Nino, and an Arizona-based exploration company, Bancroft Uranium, have plans to do test drilling for uranium in the coming months.

And at Elliot Lake, the site of the largest uranium mines in Ontario, at least one company, Pele Mountain Resources, has been test drilling on a 4,000 hectare site that is about 11 km east of the City of Elliot Lake. The Pele Mountain project has progressed to what is called the scoping stage, and in a press release from October 7, the company announced that the field work for the first phase of its baseline environmental studies has been completed. There are also site plans and drilling proposals available as part of the material the company has put together to promote their project.

The Pele Mountain site is similar to the Frontenac Ventures site in North Frontenac in that although it has been explored on several occasions over the past 50 years and test holes have been drilled, there never has been a mine at that location.

The impacts from the historic Elliot Lake uranium tailings ponds and a hydrochloric acid plant have been heavily felt on the Serpent River Reserve, whch is located downstream from the mines near Lake Huron. These impacts have been documented in a book called “This is my Homeland” by Lorraine Reckmans. The book contains interviews with a number of people from the Serpent River Reserve who have developed a variety of cancers that Reckmans attributes to exposure to radioactivity.

Still, the Serpent River Band Council is considering working in concert with Pele Mountain on their proposed development. The Serpent River First Nation's traditional territory, according to a document posted on the Union of Ontario Indian's website, “extends from the waters of the North Channel of Lake Huron, Serpent River Basin; north beyond the city of Elliot Lake, encompassing the area of the Elliot Lake Uranium Mine Project currently being explored by Pele Mountain Resources Inc.”

Environmental surveys of the proposed Pele mine site, and botanical, fisheries and wildlife surveys of the site have been completed by a team that includes a member of the 1138-person Serpent River First Nation.

The band asserts that the provincial and federal governments have a “duty to consult” the First Nations on any propsed development on their traditional territory, which is something that will be familiar to people following the dispute in North Frontenac.

There are differences in Serpent River, however. Serpent River is a reserve and the community is a “status” band in the terms of the Indian Act, which makes their relationship with the Government of Canada different. There is also a co-operative relationship between the band council and Pele Mountain.

Chief Isadore Day said, “We are encouraged that Pele has acknowledged the vital role of Serpent River First Nation in the exploration and development of natural resources within our traditional territory. While there is a great deal of work to be done, we look forward to beginning work with Pele on the development of a consultation framework and a process that is consistent with our Constitutionally-protected Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. Consultation with our Community is paramount; and as stated to Pele in the past, Serpent River First Nation maintains the right to oppose this project at any stage”.

While there are members of the Serpent River First Nation who oppose any further uranium mining upstream from the community, it seems Pele Mountain has been able to convince the band council that new regulations and modern “best practices” have made it possible to mine uranium safely.

This is certainly the claim of the mining industry.

But there are others who argue that, even if the mining process can be improved to the point where the people working at the mine and living around the mine are not exposed to radiactive dust as the ore is extracted and separated from tons of rock by-products, the problem of tailings remains.

Photo of a historic uranium mine in the Northwest Territories.

In December, Mining Watch Canada released a long-anticipated policy statement on uranium mining. In it they call for a moratorium on uranium exploration and new mines across Canada until three conditions are met. The first is a public concensus over nuclear power in Canada; the second is a clean up of existing contamination and compensation to those who have suffered as a result of contamination; and the third is the development of a “sound, long-term, economically feasible, scientifically demonstrated, and publicly acceptable means of isolating radioactive wastes (from the mining, processing, and use of uranium) from the environment and from human communities.”

According to Jamie Kneen of Mining Watch Canada, “Storage methods that are being employed for tailings at the active Saskatchewan mines might work, but we are 50, 75, or even 100 years away from knowing if the storage systems work as advertised.”

A variety of storage systems are in use to store the fine particles that are left behind when uranium is processed, including burial, underwater storage, and placing the tailings in open pit mines and berming or damming up the sides of pit to prevent the material from getting out.

Above: a ridge of tailings at the old Dyno mine near BancroftRight: Broken signs, posted at the Dyno mine

According to Gordon Edwards, who has chronicled the environmental and health impacts of the nuclear industry for the past 30 years with the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsbility, there is a significant danger from radon gas in the early stages of tailings storage, but in the longer term it is the long-lived elements and their short-lived so-called “daughter elements” that make tailings ponds such ticking time bombs.

Thorium in particular, which takes hundreds of thousands of years to break down completely, is toxic in extremely low doses, Edwards says.

Edwards has said that if, in the mining process, elements such as thorium were removed as uranium is extracted, the tailings ponds would not be such a long-term hazard.

“However, there is no economic value to thorium, and it would have to be stored as toxic waste as well,” said Jamie Kneen.

A different picture of tailings storage emerges from industry-friendly sources.

For instance, in the promotional material prepared by Aurora Energy, a company that is proposing to build a uranium mine in Labrador, tailings are characterized as manageable.

According to Aurora’s material, “Radioactive elements have always been in the ground in Labrador and they will remain there essentially forever. For this reason, it is important that any tailings storage structure or management system be able to contain tailings materials with little or no active management. When such structures are designed properly, tailings can be contained even as the land is returned to normal use, such as wetlands or green spaces with growing trees and ground plants, with no impact on the people, plants, fish, or animals in the area.”

The argument that radioactive elements are naturally occuring and tailings ponds are no more dangerous than other naturally occuring radioactive locations is not supported by Gordon Edwards.

“It makes a huge difference,” he said in a presentation in Carleton Place last fall, “when radiactove elements that are encased in rock are brought to the surface, crushed and exposed to oxygen, and then piled. The level of radioactive elements remains elevated for hundreds of thousands of years and we don't have the capacity to design containment structures for that length of time.”

According to Edwards, aboriginal peoples are predominantly the ones who suffer exposure to radiation.

“The first casualties of uranium mining were Dene in the Northwest Territories, and aboriginal peoples always seem to be the ones who suffer.”

Gordon Edwards has been a vocal critic of all things nuclear for the past 30 years, and over that same period of time Douglas Chambers, a Toronto-based consultant with the SENES corporation, has been doing risk assessment work for private corporations in the nuclear field since graduating with his PhD in Physics from McMaster University in 1973. He has a particular focus in risk assessment for uranium mill tailings. He has done work for Frontenac Ventures Corporation, preparing an affidavit on the environmental impacts of test drilling for uranium for court proceedings last summer.

In a telephone interview, he told the News that from his point of view uranium tailings can indeed be managed safely over the long term, and that the “regulatory strcuture for uranium tailings is quite stringent currently”. He pointed out that in the current regulatory environment, any company seeking approval for a new mine, “must have financial sureties in place.”

Chambers does not discount the concerns that people have, saying that in dealing with these issues over the years, “I have developed a comfort level, but any new development has to solicit local opinion, and deal with the actual effects on the environment.”

The basic difference between Chambers’ viewpoint and that of Edwards is in the potential impact of mine tailings, and mining operations as well, on public and environmental health, In Chambers’ view, the risk can be controlled, and is minimal to begin with, but Edwards argues that it is great, it persists over time, and it is impossible to control effectively.

“I think Dr. Edwards honestly has those concerns, but I feel he is mistaken,” Chambers concludes.

Jim Harding is another critic of the uranium and nuclear industries. He is a retired Professor of Environmental Studies from Regina who recently published a book called “Canada's Deadly Secret” which is about uranium mining in Saskatchewan.

Saskatchewan is home to Canada's richest uranium deposits, and is the current source of all uranium produced in this, the largest uranium producing country in the world.

Jim Harding outlines several breaches of regulations and failures of containment systems in the Saskatchewan mines, which he says have taken place since new regulations came into force.

Among the examples he points to are the McArthur mine, the largest in the world, which opened in 1999 and is still operating, but which had to be supended in 2003 becaue of a flooding problem, and the slumping of a tailings pond serving the Key Lake mine in 2004.

In 2003, Harding writes, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission renewed the license for the Rabbit Lake Mine in Northern Saskatchewan, allowing the mining company, CAMECO, to breach a dike that separated a mined-out pit from Wollaston Lake.

According to Harding, even though Mining Watch and the nearby community of Wollaston Lake opposed this action, and sought a full assessment, the commission classed the breaching of the dam as “site rehabilitation” and a consultative process and environmental assessment were circumvented.

Closer to home, a group called FUME (Fight Uranium Mining and Exploration) has sprung up to oppose uranium exploration near Bancroft, where a junior mining company called Bancroft Uranium is active.

There are signifigant tailings storage facilities near Bancroft from mines that have been closed, such as the former Dyno mine, and members of FUME have documented that security at the sites is less than lax. There is no fence, no security personnel, only a few broken signs, and no sign that any monitoring is taking place, but lots of evidence that the site has become popular with hunters.

Feature Article - February 14, 2008

Back toHome

Letters - February 14, 2008 LettersFebruary 14

Re: Uranium Coverage, Shastri Ablack

Re: Uranium Coverage, Ken Fisher

Re: Former Candidate Reports Back, John McEwen

Justice?, Mavis Wade

Re: Uranium Coverage

I read with great interest the articles in your Feb. 7 issue concerning the Robertsville Site (page1) anduranium mining in Ontario (page 10). I must confess that although I am aware of thedebatein recent years on the subject of the use of nuclear energy,I have been somewhat ignorant of the facts surroundingthe fiasco to resolve the issue at Robertsville. From these articles it would seem that a compromise was about to be reached when the Ontario (government?) negotiator insisted on sabotaging the process. Whatwas hispoint ofinsisting that"drilling would have to take place" during consultation? As it stands now, there is no consultation and there is no drilling. Had ClarkacceptedLovelace's alleged proposal, perhaps the process would have movedmuch closer to a resolution.

It also seems to me that the currentnegotiations should not befocused on the land claimissue but rather on the health and safety aspect, after which resolution the claims issue could, more comfortably, be tackled. Nuclearpower plantsappear to be the more economically feasible source of energy to satisfy the growing needby the masses of humanity. However, if isotopes are needed for energy production and,to save human lives elsewhere, we mustalso protect the lives of,not only those who produce the material but also the wider community, which would suffer from the effects of the by-products of uranium mining.

No question, the issue is a complicated one; and the governmentappears to be rather silent, neglectingits responsibility.The powers to be should thereforeremove the blindfolds "protecting their turf", look at the bigger picture and get on with developing a scientific strategy to safely and effectively store/dispose of tailings/thorium/radon or whatever. Meantime, a moratoriumon drillingis in order.

Thanks to Jeff Green forthrowing some light on the subject for me.

Shastri Ablack

Re: Uranium coverage

Thank you for your continued balanced coverage of the possibility of uranium mining at Robertsville.While we quickly have to abandon carbon-based sources of power, and develop alternatives that may include the nuclear option, it is a disservice to the human community to impose any alternative unilaterally.

Why is our provincial government so tuned-out to the obvious need for a moratorium?Where is Queen’s Park’s transparency on what is so obvious a basic need for the safety and respect of the rights of all our citizens?What is the basis of their intransigency?What accountability does the government view itself as having that supersedes the resolutions of the adjacent municipalities?The McGuinty Government’s actions are in defiance of the democratic process that we have taken centuries to develop.Like others, I am beyond perplexed.

While repeating the obvious, as referenced in your recent article, I am of the opinion that our provincial government’s policy sequence should be:

The settlement of aboriginal land claims;

Changing the mining act to enfranchise land owners;

Respect the resolutions passed by all the adjacent municipalities;

Clean up all existing contamination and compensate commensurately;

As a bio-region, as a province, and as a country, rethink and re-decide our investment in a nuclear future; and...

If technically possible, establish millennial standards for the processing of tailings.

If this is too daunting, then a moratorium should last until all of the above is resolved. Given the pace of our democratic process, the moratorium would last a few decades.

In the immediate, I hope the O.P.P. with its mandate of keeping the peace will keep the drill rigs stuck on the 401.

Ken Fisher

Re: Former candidate reports back

Last week Jerry Ackerman asked, "What can we do to ensure that the electoral process works for us and helps us ensure the well-being of our children and our grandchildren?"

We have a great deal to be thankful for, including a country where we can speak our minds, albeit at times it seems no one listens. Also, with embarrassing exceptions, we all eat every day, and we all have shelter. I'm throwing that part in because it's important that nations enjoy that basic degree of stability in order to get to any degree of "democracy". And we have to accept that "at the end of the day" a person, or a small group of people, will make decisions, at times tough ones, on our behalf. Be it a dictatorship, a monarchy or a republic... decisions have to be made and functional societies move in but one direction at a time.

We are blessed with a system, which, yes is dominated by parties, but which still allows for independent candidates to voice their concerns. This system was created here, in Upper Canada, by regular Upper Canadians fed up with the previous "Family Compact" system. It was no small feat; be very proud Ontario.

As to party politics - don't think that just because a party has mustered out a “Policy", everyone in the party agrees with it. All those "real" critical issues Mr. Ackerman mentioned get kicked around all the time, but as party A or B, we gestate a policy that we all can "live with”. In my party, the Liberal party, policy is created from the bottom up. A riding association presents a policy to the party as a whole to be voted on, and if the "whole" passes the policy, it becomes the party's policy.

Re: parties answering to corporate concerns: I own a corporation consisting of one person - me. Incorporating simply provides a convenient legal framework so that I can operate my business effectively. Corporations are not necessarily evil by definition, and they are a necessary component of modern society. If not for the corporation, what would you be driving and how would you put fuel in it? And where would many of us be working? So, yes, parties answer to corporate concerns; but parties also answer to "labour" concerns as well.

I guess the question is, how much influence do corporations have?

Enter Elections Canada, and Elections Ontario, independent bodies we created to ensure "fairness". Federally a party CANNOT accept any money from any corporation, mine, or GM. Further, there are limitations on how much any individual can donate (generally $1200). Beyond that, there are limitations on the amount we can spend on an election - about $80,000 / riding, but $30-$40,000 will buy you a decent campaign. Compared to the US of A, and the way we "used to do business here", it's good. Not perfect, but not bad either.

As to citizens not voting, I don't see a problem with 40 to 50% of the electorate “taking a pass". Many people have absolutely no interest in politics. It tells me that things are "good enough" for these potential voters and that overall they don't feel compelled to vote. God forbid we should ever have an issue that would demand 90% of the population vote.

My advice: find a party you're comfortable with and help them create the policy you want, and if that doesn't work out, change parties. It's as easy as picking up a phone and contacting a riding association. That will cost you $10 a year. If "mainstream" does not suit you, support independents like Jerry; at one time Tommy Douglas was an "independent", as was Preston Manning,

Still not happy? Be an independent. Elections Canada and Elections Ontario will support your efforts.

Too much effort? Pick up a pen and send a letter regarding your concern to your MP and/or MPP. If they are doing their job they will reply. Reply not to your liking? Send a copy to the premier or prime minister. They do get read. Further, all parties comb the papers, even the Frontenac News, feverishly trying to get the "feel" of the public.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

When I was a child (and grandchild), good political things were done by political parties for me on my behalf by adults. I'm an adult now (more or less) and I will similarly try to pass "good stuff” on to future generations. Finally, we are a truer democracy one day every four years. Thank God & the Upper Canadians who marched the streets of Toronto to make that happen. I suggest you take advantage of that right. I'm sure on that one point at least, Jerry will agree with me.

John McEwen

Justice?

The Funk & Wagnalls Dictionary defines "Justice" as: “(7)The abstract principle by which right and wrong are defined”.

Believing that, as you sit in a court of law, you think that whether you are right or wrong, you will be heard and you will be treated fairly.One does not expect to feel that no matter what your argument you will be deemed wrong and guilty.Such was the feeling in the Superior Court in Kingston on Feb.12 at the hearing for individuals charged. No matter the argument, it appeared that the result was a foregone conclusion. As is the "new norm", it is not a matter of right or wrong, it's a matter of what government wants, and what money will buy.On both counts we continue to fight an uphill battle against mining uranium.

Mavis Wade

Feature Article - February 21, 2008

Back toHome

Letters - February 21, 2008 LettersFebruary 21

Statement from Shabot Obaadjiwan

Statement from Ardoch Algonquin

Ackerman Responds, Jerry Ackerman

Rule of Law,Hedy Muysson

Anti Mining Coverage,Kimberly E. Bate

Political Prisoner, Sulyn Cedar

Contempt, Count Me In!, Bob Miller

Does the Mining Industry Control the Government?, Daniel White

Statement from Shabot Obaadjiwan

On February 12, 2008 the leadership of the Shabot Obaajiwan Algonquin First Nation appeared in a Kingston court to stand trial for their role in the ongoing struggle to stop a proposed 30,000-acre uranium mine on unceded Algonquin land just north of Sharbot Lake, Ontario.

In keeping with the spirit of goodwill and peace in which the Shabot Obaajiwan having been conducting themselves throughout this conflict, Chief Doreen Davis and War Chief Earl Badour Sr. have agreed to continue to abide by the terms of a court ordered injunction issued on September 27, 2007 with which they have complied since the blockade was dismantled on October 11, 2007. The Shabot leadership will ask their community to comply with this order and the “undertakings” negotiated by crown attorneys and Shabot defence lawyers until the case is reconvened for sentencing on March 17, 2008.

This trial is further illustration of the lack respect and indifference with which the Ontario government has consistently chosen to treat the concerns of First Nations people. Ontario has failed to abide by their own legally binding duty to consult Algonquin First Nations before initiating mining exploration on their lands. Instead the government has chosen to hide behind the courts. By attempting to bury this significant political and environmental issue in the mire of the legal system, they have clearly proven that their loyalties lie with industry rather than with people. Ontario has once again elected to promote the profit-seeking ventures of industry over Aboriginal rights and values. In spite of such bad faith on the part of Ontario, Shabot Obaajiwan leaders have consistently demonstrated their willingness to negotiate this issue through consultations with the government.

The Shabot Obaajiwan leadership remains committed to the opposition of the uranium mine, the disastrous effects of which would be felt for many hundreds of kilometres along the watershed and for many hundreds of years. They appeal to members of the Shabot Obaajiwan community as well as other communities of First Nations and settlers involved in the anti-uranium struggle to continue to conduct themselves in the spirit of peace.

We Live to Fight Another Day!

Shabot Obaadjiwan First Nation

Statement from Ardoch Algonquins

In a travesty of justice, AAFN Spokesperson Robert Lovelace was sentenced in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Kingston to 6 months incarceration and crippling fines amounting to $50,000 for upholding Algonquin law within our homeland. An additional sanction of $2,000 per day will be imposed for every day that Bob continues to obey our law rather than the court order. In addition, our community was fined $10,000 and Chief Paula Sherman $15,000, and our statement of defense was struck out, which means that we are forbidden from challenging the constitutional validity of Ontario’s Mining Act. The court made it clear that First Nations’ laws do not exist in Canada’s legal system and anyone who tries to follow First Nations law will be severely punished.

Shouts of “shame!” erupted in the courtroom as the sentences were read by the judge and Robert was taken into custody. Many were aghast at the harshness of the sentencing imposed for participation in a peaceful protest against uranium exploration which was approved by the Province of Ontario without any consultation with our community.

Chief Paula Sherman said: “No consideration was given to the circumstances that led to our actions. The testimony given under oath by Robert Lovelace outlined Algonquin Law and the corresponding responsibilities of Algonquin people with respect to human activity in our territory. It was tossed aside by the judge and deemed to be of no relevance. The message delivered clearly through this court decision is one of domination and oppression; the law will enforce one set of values with respect to human relationships with the land in Ontario and there is no room for Algonquin laws or values.”

Ontario and Canada portray themselves as shining examples of democracy and human rights for the world to emulate, all the while creating laws, policies, and value systems that oppress and deny Aboriginal peoples’ human right to life as distinct people. Robert testified that Algonquin identity is tied to the relationships that we maintain with the land.

Lovelace is now in jail in Quinte Correctional facility in Napanee. Chief Sherman said: “He is a political prisoner of the Government of Ontario and Ardoch Algonquin First Nation places blame for his incarceration on Premier Dalton McGuinty and the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, Michael Bryant. We have repeatedly asked for consultations on the mineral claims on our lands within the larger Algonquin homeland. We have offered Ontario a variety of options to enable consultation. Every option was rejected out of hand. Ontario’s position has been consistent: Drilling on our land must occur. Our position has equally been consistent: Meaningful consultation must occur before any of our land is damaged or alienated to mining companies.”

Ardoch Algonquin First Nation

Ackerman Responds

I'm pleased to say something that responds to my deep and continuing concerns for the community and country in which I have lived these many years. I especially welcome John McEwen's attempts to defend the political system that satisfies him. It does not satisfy me. I am willing -- even anxious-- to challenge his assumptions with hard data and hard times I have witnessed or experienced.

Have his "proud Ontario" MPs arranged our economic and financial future to his liking? Is he pleased with being able to fund an otherwise failing business the size of General Motors or Ford? Does he approve of Ontario's financial expert (now finance Minister for the entire country) turning over to the chartered banks the entire surplus of the year, $13,000,000,000 to rescue them from their foolish lending and investing decisions? Did he salute the selection of Lockheed Martin (largest war weapon maker of the world) to supply Stats Canada with the means of carrying out our census? Was General O'Connor -- longtime lobbyist for the military John's choice for Defence Minister? This man spent $20,000,000,000 of my taxes and yours to enrich the weapons industry of Canada and the US, encouraging our youngsters toward endless combative conflict with the rest of the world -- on John McEwen's behalf? As I remember it, none of these actions were mentioned during the election campaign. Did I not hear some one ask?

Instead of funding wasteful and destructive follies, I want our central bank to be creating the funds for everybody's roads, bridges, hospitals, schools and parks. Such a plan worked well from 1939 to 1972. Then the chartered banks rewrote the Bank Act that was designed to regulate their activities. Result? A perfected conflict of interest situation over which an ordinary Canadian anywhere has no say and zero control. And a national debt composed of over 90 % compound interest.

Maybe John will explain for me why 29,000 eligible voters did not vote.

Jerry Ackerman

Rule of Law

Judge Cunningham, in his preamble to the sentencing of Bob Lovelace and Paula Sherman of the Ardoch Algonquin Nation, was concerned about the rule of law.Whose law and for whose benefit?The laws of the original inhabitants of this land, which served them well for many centuries, have been completely ignored once again.

Lovelace and Sherman are trying to protect the integrity of their land from the devastation of uranium mining, which will affect us all far beyond the immediate area and poison the land, air and water forever.

In my eyes, Paula Sherman and Robert Lovelace now join the ranks of Nelson Mandela and Rosa Parks in their fight against injustice.Ultimately this travesty of justice and the results ofwillful ignorance of the dangers of uranium mining will rest squarely on the shoulders of Premier Dalton McGuinty.

Hedy Muysson

Thank you for your fine coverage of the Robertsville anti-mining protests.

I look forward to detailed news of the 13 February court events and an update on Robertsville. Additionally thousands need to know of the well-being, situation and future of Bob Lovelace who was arrested on Friday. He pays the price for all of us, as do his students, children and family.

I am stunned that the eloquent, peace-keeping, law-abiding and gentle Lovelace sits this moment in a jail cell. Ironic since he has done much social service toward improving prison programs. His crime: standing up for his values, his People, and the care of the Earth. Do we imprison people for peaceful expression and taking a stand? Do we also go ahead with plans to ravage thousands of acres, endanger waterways, ignore resident and landowner rights, and violate land claim law, when there’s serious potential for harm to the public?

We must be able to rely upon the good and just laws of free nations. The courts must protect the welfare of People. They must uphold the law. They must be a source of strength and right for us all. Yet we witness a betrayal. “For shame,” the people called out to the court. I must agree.

Many misunderstand this as a local Native land claim. This is a fight for all people everywhere who want an Earth to safely live upon. Algonquin have a special legal place in this protest, yes. But your neighbors, local lands, cottages, lakes, other mining sites, world organizations, and religious groups—are involved.

Why is the court unwilling to hold off on drilling until investigations and talks conclude? In this time of Green, carbon footprint, environmental crisis, shouldn’t the courts be more, not less, cautious? We turn off faucets, replace our light bulbs, and take the commuter train to work. While mining companies press harder for access to areas so vast we can hardly comprehend, without clean up regulations. And the courts say, “Sure.”

I recently learned Minnesota has a huge increase in mining. In a down economy? The reason: the buyer is China.

Is it possible this free pass from the courts is not because we need uranium for X-rays; nor for nuclear energy as we’ve been told, but to feed the ravenous appetite of an up-and-coming industry? We’re selling our land and safety down the river to meet the demands of a booming China? Then as individuals we’ll pay China for our own resources come back to us as Wal-Mart goods. You know Wal-Mart violations of ethical and environmental policies are well documented. Is this free trade? Prosperity? Let’s pay attention folks. I ask you, get up off that couch and do something.

Kimberly E. Bate

Political Prisoner

Ontario's citizens care about healthy communities.Therefore it’s of the utmost importance to protect that which we love, and act now to stop uranium mining in our region. Our Algonquin neighbors have stepped up to the plate and one man in particular is suffering the consequences of taking a strong stand against this environmentally destructive industry.

Bob Lovelace is a political prisoner.I'm angry and sad that the justice system failed on February 15 at the Frontenac County Court in Kingston regarding contempt of court charges for interfering with the business of uranium mining.

If there's to be hope for dealing fairly with First Nations issues we must address racism within our legal system.Bob Lovelace spoke about Canadian history and why he has an obligation to stop uranium mining in Algonquin territory, on unceded Crown land.He presented a very clear case in support of the defendants’ position against Frontenac Ventures Corporation.

Justice Cunningham failed to understand the Ardoch Algonquins’ constitutional rights and Ontario and Canada's duty to consult with them regarding use of Crown land.His decision to incarcerate Bob Lovelace and inflict a heavy fine reflects the colonialist bias of the courts.I'm ashamed of our legal system.

What do we do now?Join us in protest this Saturday, February 23, at 11AM at the Quinte Detention Centre where Bob is a prisoner. Check www.ccamu.ca for actions and events and help us stand strong against uranium mining.

Sulyn Cedar

Contempt Count Me In

Contempt! Count me in! You might add “disgust” as well.

I believe in the “Rule of Law”, but keep in mind that laws have been used to subjugate Native people for centuries. Laws evolve, and that’s why we call it a “Justice System” and not a “Law System”. The Native boarding school fiasco was enforced under the law, and how do we feel about that now?

What is worse, is that this government has put itself above the law in refusing to come to the table in this affair. Hardly a level plating field! The courts have the responsibility to sort this out, and somehow come to a just determination. If Friday’s decision was “just”, shouldn’t the Premier be in jail also? The court could have mandated that ALL parties come to the table. Instead, it chose to use its weight to grind down and punish a few individuals who have taken on the responsibility of representing the will of their people.

Shame! Rightful authority is replaced by “Rule of the big stick”. Well, carve another notch in it. What I learned on Friday is that Native people will find no justice in this court. They need to look elsewhere, perhaps to the international community. They need to find a bigger stick.

Bob Miller

Does the Mining Industry Control the Government?

I am appalled at the government’s decision toincarcerate people who arepeacefully attempting to protect themselves and other residents of this provincefrom an arrogant, aggressiveand financially motivatedmining industry. These peoplehave done nothing wrong. What is wrong, is the current mining act and the lack of the government’s effort to correct it.

Superior Court Justice Douglas Cunningham's decisionpresents itself asagovernmental system having complete power byforcibly suppressing opposition, criticism, and regimenting all industry. The conduciveforce behind his decision being the mining industry andits obvious attempt to acquire additional profits regardless of what harmmay be caused to the residents of Frontenac County and surrounding areas. It would appear that the government has decided to sacrifice its ownprovince andresidents due to the growing world demand for uranium. This is Capitalism at it's worst.

The Whig Standard stated that "Cunningham, in explaining his reasoning for the sentence, said that the adoption of self-help flaunts the rule of law and can't be tolerated because respect for our court system evaporates and our entire society suffers as a result." "Self help flaunts the rule of law?" What a ridiculous statement. If the government chooses not to help its own citizens what other choice exists? Society will suffer to a much greater extent if the mining industry is allowed to be its controlling factor.

I don't see this as an Indian affairs issue, but as a moral human rights issue for all residents of Canada.Frontenac Ventureswasgiventhe right by the government to invade and destroyeveryone's land, the land that we worked for and rely so heavily upon for our very existence. Is this Canada's version of justice? Residents of Ontario, even those who appeared to have a complacentoutlook on life, are now beginning to understand the consequences of not participating in the attempt to change the current mining laws.

I believe that Court Justice Douglas Cunningham's morally incorrect decision sent a message that will promote additional activity in the fight against current mining laws, not prevent it. People with political influence,local municipalitiesand all of their council members who believe thatchanges should be made, need to become more actively involved with this atrocity and not be sitting on a fence waiting to see which side of the fence becomes greener first.

Daniel R. White

Letters - February 28, 2008

Back toHome

Letters - February 28, 2008 LettersFebruary 28

Re:Cover Photo,Bill Deacon

Warning from Bancroft,Ian Whillans

Pigment Impaired,Glen Pearce

19th Century Mining Act,Don G. Campbell

Re: Cover Photo

On the front cover of your Feb. 14 paper was a colour picture of Doreen Davis, Chief of the Shabot Obaadjiwan Algonquin group from Sharbot Lake. It is a remarkable picture in that it shows clearly a very proud and stately lady leaving a court that heard contempt of court charges against her and the Ardoch Algonquin First Nations.

These charges arose out of the Aboriginal communities’ blockade of uranium mining operations at Robertsville to try to stop the mining of this substance which has been proven to be extremely dangerous to both people and the environment.

We who are following this know that even though the Native community was willing to negotiate with the Liberal government, who gave the drilling rights to Frontenac Ventures over many protests (even a hunger strike!), it seemed the government in Toronto couldn’t care less about known facts on the damage caused by uranium mining, and are determined to allow mining no matter the costs.

I have nothing but respect for Chief Doreen Davis and the members of the Ardoch Algonquins who stood up to the mighty power of the Government of Ontario, its courts and judges (who are all paid with our tax money). The government didn’t hesitate to use their “big stick” contempt charges against them.

Chief Doreen Davis is a lady of principle who believes in saving her people from possible harm by any means she can. She can be proud to wear her headdress and Native clothing, for if there ever was a chief of the Algonquin peoples she is one.

Now we wait. All we can hope for is that Frontenac Ventures does not find enough uranium to bother taking it out of the ground. Whatever the outcome, we who for whatever reason (myself included) did not take an active part in trying to stop uranium mining in Robertsville, owe a debt of gratitude to those who did.

To our Aboriginal people from Sharbot Lake and Ardoch who risked contempt charges and going to jail to save us from a possible disaster, I say thank you, and hope our governments will at last sit down and negotiate an honest settlement for any and all land claims you might bring to the table.

I have followed the events of this dispute as they unfolded and I thank you for your unbiased and fair-minded reporting of these matters, which that could greatly affect the lives of us all. Reading my paper “The Frontenac News” is a pleasure I don’t miss.

Bill Deacon, Kingston

Warning from Bancroft

My wife and I have been keeping a close eye on the news concerning the proposed uranium mine near Crotch Lake.We sold our cottage near Bancroft because of the three abandoned uranium mines around the lake. There are tailings at the mines and one had to be cleaned up due to the fact it was placing radioactive matter into the lake.Now according to some recent tests one of the other mines is sending radioactive matter into the lake.

I now understand that the courts have convicted some individuals for contempt of court, with fines totalling $50,000 and some jail time. This dispute isn't just a legal matter, it is a moral issue as well as an environmental issue. The government should step in to protect the land and the people who occupy the area around the Robertsville mine.

I have one request of Mr. Neal Smitheman, the lawyer for Frontenac Ventures. Why don't you and your family move up to the area around the Robertsville mine and see if your legal judgement is still clouded by a big salary and an appetite to defeat the defendants at any cost to your moral judgement?

Ian Whillans

Pigment Impaired

Since the draconian incarceration of Bob Lovelace, the perception is that this is a matter of the pigment-impaired vs the natives, but it's not, really.We shouldn't lose sight of the fact

that our legal system (I can't dignify it by calling it a 'justice system') and oft-times our government, is an equal-opportunity system.It doesn't really care who it victimizes, as it operates on the basis of big vs small, strong vs weak, well-connected vs powerless.That's how it was, is, and will be.

That said, is there any country on earth with a better system?If there is, we should all be working tirelessly to emulate it.If there isn't, we should all be working tirelessly to optimize ours and set an example we need not be ashamed of.

Glen Pearce

19th Century Mining Act

The recent sentencing of Native leaders because of their legitimate concern for the consequences (consequences which they would have to live with)which could derive from theadventures of Frontenac Ventures in North Frontenac, is just anotherexample of the Wild West mentality aliveand well in Ontario's nineteenth century Mining Act. These people have been on this land for generations, going back long beforeEuropeans arrived in Eastern Ontario. Their dispute is well documented. Frontenac Ventures is a junior mining company with a limited track record and a seemingly undue haste. If the demand for uranium is indeed legitimate, and that is a moot point, it will be there for the long term, and the economic return will remain firm. Why the need to be in such a hurry to punish the Native community? Why the need to be so heavy handed?

Last July the Ministry of Mines and Northern Development proposed changes to the Mining Act and invited public input and consultation; and the public did respond. MNDM is, supposedly, in the process of reviewing this "public consultation" and bringing forth revisions to Ontario's Mining Act. One of the proposals proffered by MNDM was that of more consideration for Aboriginal rights. Was this whole "consultation process" just a hollow public relations gesture? Where are the proposed amendments to the Mining Act?

Regrettably, this whole thing smacks, not of long term, legitimate mining, but of mining promotion and speculation opportunity; intended to take hasty advantage of the current strong base metal price and fostered bylong out-of-date mining legislation. Is it?MNDM appears unwilling to look after the larger public good, acting as it does as advocate for the mining community. Who looks after the big picture, taking into consideration all the effects on theland surface and the people who live there, both now and in the future? Where were the premier and the cabinet while this sorry escapade was playing out?

Sad to say, but sometimes I am simply ashamed to be a citizen of Ontario.

Don G. Campbell, Ottawa

Feature Article - March 6, 2008

Back toHome

Feature Article - March 6, 2008 Citizens Inquiry sets hearings for Sharbot LakeBy Jeff Green

The Concerned Citizens Against Mining Uranium (CCAMU) have set the schedule for a public inquiry on the impacts of the uranium cycle.

The inquiry came about as the result of the hunger strike staged by Lanark resident Donna Dillman last fall. Chief among Dillman’s demands was a public inquiry into all aspects of uranium mining, an inquiry that she hoped would set the stage for a moratorium on uranium mining and exploration in Eastern Ontario, and eventually, the entire province.

"It became clear that the Government of Ontario was not going to put a moratorium in place before they recessed for the Christmas holidays and wasn't listening to concerns around the exploration for uranium that is taking place in eastern Ontario. A team is in place and plans for the inquiry are well underway," stated Donna Dillman, as she resumed eating on December 13, after 68 days without food.

When the government did not agree to establish an inquiry, the CCAMU stepped in and said they would do it themselves.

Several organizations, including Greenpeace, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, David Suzuki Foundation, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, Voice of Women, Mining Watch Canada, Students Against Climate Change and Sierra Club of Canada stepped forward to support a citizens' inquiry.

Organizations and members of the public are invited to participate in the inquiry, the scope of which is broad.

Among themes that will be up for discussion are several related to mining itself. These include: claim staking, exploration, mining, transportation, processing, waste, and uses (power generation, weapons, medical). The inquiry will also be considering issues such as public and environmental health and safety, social responsibility, economics, political responsibility, and community self-determination.

The citizens’ inquiry comes about as organizations from throughout eastern Ontario have been making their views known about the uranium project in North Frontenac, as well as projects near Bancroft, at Elliott Lake, and in the Outaouais that are in various stages of exploration.

The City of Ottawa has recently joined the City of Kingston, Frontenac County, Lanark County, the towns of Perth and Carleton Place, and Beckwith, Tay Valley, Lanark Highlands, North, South and Central Frontenac townships in calling for a moratorium on uranium mining and exploration.

The inquiry will be kicked off in Sharbot Lake on April 1, and will travel to three other locations later in April: Kingston (April 8), Peterborough (April 15), and finally Ottawa (April 22).

The inquiry will be accessible to citizens and experts alike. Presentations at the inquiry venues can be in a variety of forms and will be limited to 10minutes each. "Because people express their ideas in different ways, we're inviting people to communicate through narratives, poems, skits, and songs as well as with written submissions," said Dillman.

Advanced registration is recommended by the organizers. This can be done online at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; by phone (613) 259-9988; or by mail to 279 McDonalds Corners Road, RR#3, Lanark, ON, K0G 1K0. Written submission can also be sent to the above addresses.

The Sharbot Lake hearing will be held at St. Andrews Anglican Church, 1028 Elizabeth Street, on April 1, and at Queen Street United Church (corner Clergy and Queen) in Kingston on April 8. Both hearings will run from 1-5 pm and 6-9 pm.

Information about the Peterborough and Ottawa hearings is available at www.uraniumcitizensinquiry.com.

Letters - March 6, 2008

Back toHome

Letters - March 6, 2008 LettersMarch 6

Re:Bob Lovelace Sentenced 6 Months, Ron Carmichael

Invisible Nuclear Particles, Sulyn Cedar

Fine Unnecessary, Brittany Taylor

Re: Lovelace Sentenced 6 months

Did the stiff sentence handed down by Superior Court “Justice” Cunningham really surprise anyone? It sure as heck didn`t surprise this guy. After all, big money and influence seem to have the courts in their pockets. Seems like the whole court side of the issue might have been dealt with long before Cunningham passed his sentence for contempt on Mr. Lovelace and Paula Sherman and the others. I just expected a little more deliberation (and fairness?) on the judge`s part. A case of this magnitude might have been a little too complex for a deputy judge to hear. I really believe it should have been taken to the Supreme Court of Canada and there the case could have been drawn out, much to the chagrin of Frontenac Ventures and our “esteemed Premier of Ontario”. It could have been tied up for years with appeals, etc., eventually wearing down the resolve of the mining company and all those determined to ruin our lands and the health of our children. All sides would have at least equal consideration and perhaps the outcome would have been more favourable.

I believe that the sentence passed down to Mr. Lovelace trampled on his rights: the right to peaceful protest, the right to freedom of opinion and his beliefs. I also believe strongly that the sentence was intended to silence Mr.Lovelace and any others committed to voicing their opinions.

I’d like to say to Mr.Lovelace,…you are a hero! I say this because you backed up what you believe in and stood your ground! I’ve never met you personally but from what I have read about you in this fine newspaper and heard about you since this issue first started, I have to say that I have nothing but great respect for you and your allies in this cause.

Based on your personal convictions, I’m sure that you sleep well at night. I wonder though, how does the other side sleep!?

Ron Carmichael

Invisible Nuclear Particles

I appreciate this paper's role in facilitating a public discussion about issues that are important to our community.Decades ago I saw a political cartoon with a survivalist standing in the arctic, all bundled up with arms outstretched, proclaiming his safety and freedom far from civilization. Invisible nuclear particles were spinning all around him.My utopian dreamer back-to-the-land bubble burst.I realized that there's no place on earth that's safe from nuclear madness. How could I raise healthy children in an apparently clean and beautiful countryside that shares air and water with an industrial society that creates and releases deadly particles as a matter of business as usual?Making nuclear energy and nuclear weapons includes waste products that science still doesn't know what to do with. We are stockpiling millions of tons of radioactive waste that dangerously degrade over thousands of years.

Stopping the uranium mine in our backyards is about protecting us here, now.It’s also about doing our level best as global citizens to protect and preserve our beautiful planet.We must stop really bad ideas like nuclear power and weapons from becoming more cancers, more birth defects, more species extinctions and tons more radioactive waste for generations to come.

Taking action means doing something, whatever's in your heart to do.Join us in the Community Coalition Against Mining Uranium at www.ccamu.ca and sign on to the Uranium News, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Together we will create a kinder, gentler, more peaceful world.

Sulyn Cedar

Fines Unnecessary

I am writing to you on behalf of Mr.Balogh's grade 10 civics class at Sydenham High School on the matter of your article "Lovelace Sentenced 6 Months For Contempt of Court". We believe that we would have to agree that Robert Lovelace was doing the best that he could for the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation but then the law has to get involved- just like they do with everything else that gets "out of control".

It really isn't fair the way some of us treat aboriginals- it's as if we have all forgotten where we have come from. None of us are actually pure-bred Canadians because Canada is made up of immigrants. We should look at it the way that they would see it through their own eyes. To be quite honest we don't think that they would take complete control over everything the way we have.

We do realize that every time that people protest (whether they're aboriginal or not) they have their own costs- it could be their lives, their job, personal possesions or maybe it comes with a cost like a fine or jail time, just like Robert Lovelace had to face. We do belive that Robert Lovelace should have been put in jail for failing to listen to and respect a court order but we don't believe that a $25,000 fine is neccessary.

As for the matter of Paula Sherman, we agree with the court’s decision to let her go so that her children would remain in her custody. We do not, however, agree with the outrageous amount that she has been fined. We believe that she should be punished in some way for failing to respect a court order but a fine of that amount is pointless.

Sincerely, Brittney Taylor

Letters - March 20, 2008

Back toHome

Letters - March 20, 2008 LettersMarch 20

Re:Pan Fish, Fred Gardner

Re: Pan Fish, Joanne Pickett

North Frontenac Township Commitment, Edith Beaulieu

Open Letter to Dalton McGuinty,Wanda Recoskie

Thanks to Those Who Cared For Us this Winter, Rev. Art Turnbull

New Landowners Association, Edward Kennedy

Nuclear Versus Solar,Carl Winterburn

Nuclear Energy: Not Safe, Clean, or Affordable,Susan McLenaghan

Re: Letter From Mayor Ron Maguire,John Kittle

Re: Pan Fish

I am writing in response to the article published in March 13, 2008 edition of the Frontenac News -(Local Resort Owner Raises Alarm Over Pan Fish Limits).

The Ministry of Natural Resources carefully monitors fish stocks all over the province and if they feel that a limit is necessary, I believe them. We must remember the health of an eco-system is dependant on the management as a whole, and that pan fish are only one piece to the puzzle. Mr. Spirala and other resort operators have to wake up to the new paradigm of Resource Management in a modern age.

This is not the 40s or 50s. It is about time we put some limits on our fisheries and stop allowing the pillage of our natural resources by local and foreign anglers alike. You would think Mr. Spirala would be more ecologically and environmentally conscious about the effects of the old no limit fishing regulations and wouldn't be so short-sighted. Responsible management of the fish stocks secures the resource for future generations, which in turn secures a future for the operation of his resort. Or maybe Mr. Spirala is more concerned with short-term gain and when Lake Kennebec has no more fish, he plans on selling and moving on to another lake.

Fred Gardner, Friend of Lake Kennebec

Re: Pan Fish

Before you let Cezar Spirala get the last word on the issue of limits on sunfish, please get some facts from the ministry and give them some press also.

I remember as a little kid the hordes of sunfish we fed at the end of our dock - big ones too, with fillets way bigger than the size of a potato chip. We caught them as food fish too but we certainly didn't need to harvest vast quantities even to feed our family of 9.

I never see those big sunfish anymore and the number of little ones has declined considerably over the years. Our lake association has (regrettably) held several sunfish derbies over past years but the notion of hundreds of tourists hauling away freezers full of sunfish each and every year is appalling. As we all (should) know, sunfish play an important role in the aquatic food chain and unchecked fishing of any species cannot be a good thing for the sustainability of our fish stocks.

I think we can probably blame the cost of fuel and the low American dollar above all else for the decline in the number of American tourists in recent years.

Perhaps Mr. Spirala could direct some of his energy toward the movement against uranium mining in Sharbot Lake. A uranium mine down the road - now THAT would be bad for tourism.

Joanne Pickett

North Frontenac Township's Commitment?

As President of the Ompah Community Centre Organization I believe I speak for most of our local citizens in congratulating Mr. Ladouceur on last week's letter to the editor. It reflected the exact sentiments of most of the people in our community with respect to the lack of township funding for the fire hall, its equipment and the community centre.

At a recent township council budget meeting we were told that the Ompah community would be expected to raise a portion of the money needed to construct a new fire hall. Does the council not appreciate that this community has already donated the whole complex that exists as the Ompah fire hall and community centre? That includes the land, the buildings, all fire trucks, the air ambulance pad, and the majority of the equipment. Over 30 years that amounts to much more than $100,000. This money came from organizations such as the Volunteer Fire Auxiliary, the Skidoo Club, the Community Centre Committee, the Volunteer Firemen, local small businesses, personal donations and memoriams for deceased relatives and friends. The township got it all for free.

The township's demand that we raise more money for a new fire hall is insulting to those who have already worked so hard and given so much. Who would support new fund raising initiatives besides these very same people? It is time that council faces the fact that the free ride on Ompah's generosity is over. Everyone who benefits from the services of our fire department should pay their share through taxes. The funding burden should not rest on a few of us tired volunteers.

Mr. Ladouceur was right. Our community has shown their support and commitment. Instead of demanding more and more, it would be nice if the mayor and councilors could give us something back.

Edith Beaulieu

Open letter to Dalton McGuinty

Well, Mr. McGuinty - it turns out that we Southeastern Ontarians are initially right and you are initially wrong. Now that we have the support of the mayors of Toronto, Kingston, Ottawa, along with the mayors of 10 communities around us in Lanark Highlands, it is obvious that there should never be uranium exploration or uranium mining where thousands of people live.

So it is therefore quite ironic that you have legislated non-smoking in vehicles with children to protect them from second-hand smoke, yet you are more than willing to let the air they breathe, the water they drink and the lands they enjoy all around them to be decimated with radio-active pollution.

I am appalled at your lack of insight to the dangers of uranium mining and exploration after all the information that has been sent to you – showing you that 80% gets exported and we only keep 20% for Canada - and you want to let our lands be destroyed for more uranium? I will tell you what - why don't you contact the Deline Village of Widows, the Natives on the Serpent River in Elliot Lake, the Navajo peoples of Arizona, and while you're at it - fly over the 10 lakes filled in around Elliot Lake with 175 million tons of radio-active waste which is leaching into Lake Huron via the Serpent River, and check out northern Saskatchewan. Perhaps you also are too blindsided by the rich mining corporations. You are not doing a very good job for us Southeastern Ontarians by ensuring we would continue to live in a healthy environment as you said in your letter to me.

Well, we will not be brainwashed by false statements of safety bullcrap provided by uranium mining companies, nor geologists who say that uranium rock is safe no matter what is done to it. It is only safe if it remains undisturbed. Instead we will rely on and believe those who are suffering and the true photos of Robert Del Tridici that clearly show one of the 10 lakes in Elliot Lake with a 30-foot-high wall of radio-active waste. We also choose to believe well renowned, well respected world-wide scientists who have studied for 20–30 years the dangerous elements of decaying left over uranium rock, namely Dr. Gordon Edwards, Dr. Syd Brownstein and Mr. Jim Harding.

You have eroded our faith in the democratic, political, and justice systems, which has definitely proven that we have no rights to protect our lands or our environment and the people who live in the area where the devastation will take place have NO SAY! What part of "We don't want uranium exploration or uranium mines in Southeastern Ontario, Lanark Highlands, or Frontenac Ecosensitive area" do you not understand? Please tell your Minister of Tourism to stop putting out pamphlets advertising Land o' Lakes Tourist area in Lanark Highlands. Because it will be open pit mining, there will be NO tourist area left.

Wanda Recoskie

Thanks to those Who Cared For Us This Winter

This winter has been particularly difficult. One snowstorm after another with spells of thawing followed by freezing made roads and pathways treacherous.

During this winter a few people in each of our communities worked hard to keep the streets and sidewalks open. In particular I would like to acknowledge the hard work of Mr. Percy Snider and his employees who did snow removal in the Sydenham area. Within a day after each storm the roads were widened as the men worked around the clock. Within 48 hours of even the heaviest snowfalls the sidewalks were passable. Mr. Snider and his crew are appreciated.

Others also need to be acknowledged. The men and women who collect the garbage and recycle material never missed a pickup all winter in my area. The highway snow clearance was done by dedicated people who kept the roads safe. Our emergency response medical and fire employees and volunteers never missed a call. The police were present throughout the county ensuring our security.

In theory, winter has come to a close and spring is here. We can be grateful that the people and equipment are at the ready just in case Mother Nature does not know that it is time to stop snowing.

Thanks to good workers and neighbours, we have come through a tough winter. Easter this year is a good time to express appreciation to those who cared for us all winter.

(The Rev.)Art Turnbull

New Landowners' Association

I notice with suspicion many local sessions about “clean water” and water sources, and especially at town council regular meetings.

A lot was heard last provincial election about the Clean Water Act and the ramifications of this on rural property owners, specifically the intent to “meter” rural wells and have yearly inspections of both them and septic systems. While the liberal candidates across the province shrugged this off as something that would never happen, these provisions of that “ACT” are still integral to its content, and can be used at any time. The Sydenham water fiasco was a typical example of impositionally decreed tyranny/financial hardship imposed on rural town dwellers, an assault on freedoms, and bureaucratic meddling run amok.

Like the “sword of Damocles”, the provisions of this and other “Acts” concocted by Queen’s Park lie threateningly over the heads of rural dwellers, landowners and country vacation property owners. Land appropriations continue, while urban spread increases across the land. The increase in urban land area from 1971 to 2001 was 4300 square kilometers, an area the size of Prince Edward Island. Bureaucrats, those typical meddlers and enemies of freedom through the imposition of more and more rules on all of us, waste upwards of $250,000,000 yearly in tax dollars spent on lodging at resorts. Figures for 2003/2004 for number of rooms that our tax dollars paid for in Cancun was 800, in Barbados 636, in San Jose 523, and in Jamaica, 167. So while bureaucrats enforce more and more laws, we have to not only pay for their enforcement by bureaucrats, but also fund vacations for these types.

These are but concerns that few are thinking about, being more focused on personal matters that take their time and efforts. While we have elected a liberal government in Ontario, things in rural Ontario have continued to decline but Landowners Associations have sprung up and prospered, buoyed by their message and resulting actions of defending freedoms, and rural rights, while opposing meddling bureaucracies and government injustices.

While there are roughly 17 Landowners associations across the face of Ontario, we have not had any in this riding of Frontenac, Lennox and Addington. That is about to change, as a preliminary meeting held March 8 at the Newburgh Community Hall brought a round table meeting of several grassroots people together to discuss plans for the formation of the new Frontenac, Lennox and Addington Landowners Association.

The dream will become reality with the first meeting slated for the Kaladar Community Center, already booked, for a meeting in early April. This organization will be affiliated with the Ontario Landowners Association, bringing the power, numbers, expertise, and organized strength of 17 other established Landowner organizations across Ontario into our sphere of influence and allowing rural people the ability in organized numbers to protect our rights, effect change, and oppose bureaucratic meddling in our affairs.

An advertisement will be run in this paper in the next few weeks announcing the time, and location, scheduled speakers, and a listed email and telephone number to contact for info.

Governments are, by and large, urban institutions of organized hypocrisies, with “ignorance on autopilot” when it comes to rural affairs. Our goal is to change that and judging by the many successes of our sister/brother Landowners organizations, change that we will.

Edward Kennedy, Harrowsmith

Nuclear Versus Solar

The pathetic race (40 years ago) to be best with our nuclear program ended with Ontario Hydro somewhere around $40 billion in debt. Nuclear is very high tech, any mistakes or break downs can be deadly and very expensive. The programs result in a lot of pollution at and around the mines, refineries and Chalk River Research facility.

To even suggest three more reactors in or near Toronto is unconscionable! Accidents and miscalculations will happen. Look for reference on the internet for happenings around mine sites, refineries, and Chalk River problems. Toronto’s citizens don’t deserve this!

When are terrorists going to select a reactor for their next disruption of our society?

Hydro One estimates residents use 40% of their household electric bill heating water! I was recently told that 40% of all electricity produced went to residential use. It follows then that 16% of all energy produced goes to heating water in Ontario. This is a great way to go green.

Recently Chrysler laid off a large number of people. There are others doing the same thing. More and more people can get only part-time jobs. We are in a down-turn. Building refineries and reactors employs relatively few people and takes decades. Making and installing solar and wind generation takes a few weeks giving us almost instant alternate green power.

I’d recommend solar voltaics as the extra energy reaped - can all be reaped. e.g. charging batteries for emergencies. e.g. electric cars. It is my understanding that Europe (especially Germany and Holland) are way ahead of us.

Solar and wind are pure green and low tech to build and install. They have a life expectancy of 40 some years. They are easy to repair. Solar can start easing our energy problem now. A green win-win situation.

The same money that would be spent on nuclear reactors would pay 50% of putting a solar water heater on every residence in Ontario. And set up a long-term industry making, installing and maintaining the installations, just like an appliance repairman.

Subsidize solar or wind 50% and you get double the economic effect.

Jobs versus big money squandered on nuclear.

- Carl Winterburn

Nuclear Energy – Not Safe, Clean, or Affordable

That Bob Lovelace, one of the leaders of a peaceful, principled resistance to uranium prospecting/ exploration in the Mississippi watershed remains incarcerated and subject to heavy fines should strike fear in the heart of every ordinary Canadian. If nothing else, the refusal of the Ontario government to respond to legitimate concerns voiced by many is indicative of the level of power and influence the nuclear industry holds in the halls of government in this country.

The nuclear industry (of which uranium exploration/ mining is a part) promotes itself as clean and safe…a solution to climate change. However, consider this:

There is no known way to effectively sequester and monitor radioactive mine tailings for the thousands of years they remain active. Bear in mind that radioactivity is undetectable to the human senses and compromises all life on our planet.There is no proven and safe long-term storage solution for the spent nuclear fuel that is accumulating around the world. Did you know that governments/ industry are now proposing that producers of uranium "rent" the yellowcake to consuming nations and then "reclaim" it for storage? In addition to mountains of radioactive mine tailings, how would you feel about a nuclear fuel storage facility in the headwaters of the Mississippi?Canada sold Candu reactors to India, Pakistan, China, South Korea. India and Pakistan then used the technology and spent fuel to develop nuclear weaponry technology…a small example of Canada's complicity in the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the development of an Asian arms race.Uranium from Canadian mines finds its way into the military-industrial complex in the United States through the use of depleted uranium in modern weaponry. The US illegal war in Iraq is leaving Iraqi civilians with a vicious legacy of nuclear contamination that will endure for generations…ditto Afghanistan.Nuclear energy is inefficient, expensive and subject to massive subsidization by various levels of government that makes it appear economically viable. Witness the recent $300 million dollar federal government payment to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) in the 2008 budget, another $500 million for waste management, another $100 million over the last three years and $100 million annually for R&D. That debt retirement charge on your Ontario Hydro bill? Ask Dalton McGuinty how much in total (including refurbishment) the Pickering generating station has cost Ontario taxpayers. The billions of tax dollars that goes to support the nuclear energy system in this country is money that is consequently unavailable for conservation, energy efficiency improvements and the development of clean, safe, inexpensive renewables (solar, wind, tidal etc).

Governments are very much into "accountability" these days. How about a little (make that a lot) on the nuclear energy system file?

- Susan McLenaghan

Re: Letter from Mayor Ron Maguire,

I wish to comment on Mr. Maguire’s position on uranium mining affecting North Frontenac’s future. In his letter enclosed with the recent tax bill, he states that this issue is “properly the responsibilities of the Ontario and Canadian governments” and that North Frontenac will “remain guided by their decisions and actions”. This seems to imply that council has no role to play in challenging the province’s mining decisions on behalf of North Frontenac taxpayers.

This must be Mr. Maguire’s personal opinion because last fall a majority of North Frontenac Council voted to petition the province for a moratorium against uranium exploitation in eastern Ontario.

North Frontenac Council has added its voice to 12 other eastern Ontario councils, plus scores of organizations and thousands of people demanding that the province stop uranium exploitation in eastern Ontario. Perhaps Mr. Maguire believes that due democratic process and public opinion are not important.

I hereby request that Mr. Maguire set the record straight by mailing out a retraction of his misleading statements related to uranium mining and to properly inform taxpayers that North Frontenac Council has petitioned the province for a moratorium against uranium exploration and mining in eastern Ontario.

John Kittle

Feature Article - April 10, 2008

Back toHome

Feature Article -April 10, 2008 Citizens’ Inquiry draws a crowd in Sharbot Lakeby Jeff Green

Back in the cold days of December, when Donna Dillman was two and a half months into a hunger strike, and waiting in vain at Queen’s Park for the Province of Ontario to declare a public inquiry into the uranium cycle. That’s when the idea of going to the public directly with an inquiry was hatched.

Donna agreed to eat, which was the first objective for Wolfe Ehrlichman and Marilyn Crawford, who were with her in Toronto. Since then a lot of work has been done to establish a process to give people an opportunity to have their say on the broad issues surrounding uranium exploration, mining, processing, use of nuclear facilities, and the entire matter of the disposal of waste products.

The first hearing was scheduled for April 1st, at Sharbot Lake. This was in recognition of the role the protest against the Frontenac Ventures Corporation mining claim near the village has played in galvanizing interest in a whole complex of issues.

“We had presenters lined up for a full day of hearings,” said Donna Dillman (at left), “but we did not realise that so many people would come to hear what people had to say.”

The hearing room, which was the Anglican Church Hall in Sharbot Lake, was too small for the crowds, and eventually the hearings were moved to the main chapel of the church to accommodate everyone. Among the spectators were members of the Aboriginal studies class at Sharbot Lake High School.

Thirty-five pre-registered presenters each were given ten minutes to speak, and were encouraged to also submit their presentations in writing to the inquiry. The spoken submissions were made to the large public audience as well as to three invited panellists for the session. These included former public servant Fraser McVie, journalist Cameron Smith, and Central Frontenac Mayor Janet Gutowski.

“People want to be heard,” said Donna Dillman, “They have been writing to politicians and getting no response to their letters. What we provided is an opportunity for them to express their views, without pre-judging what these would be.”

Dillman said that there were many heartfelt presentations in Sharbot Lake about a broad range of issues connected to the nuclear industry and its impact. There was a focus on uranium mining and “the community, the water, the land, and the future.”

“This hearing took place so close to where the exploration project is located, and at a place where people have been living with this for the past nine months, that people had a lot of heartfelt things to say. I expect we will see different kinds of presentations at the next hearings, which are taking place in Kingston, Peterborough and Ottawa - locations that are somewhat removed from the direct impacts of the local project,” Dillman said. She added that in Peterborough delegations are coming from Bancroft, where there is a history of uranium mining and active exploration projects that are further advanced than the one in Robertsville.

Although letters went out to several provincial ministers and the premier, there were no ministry or premier's office representation at the Sharbot Lake session. There were, however, a dozen plain-clothed members of the Ontario Provincial Police in attendance.

“Considering the high profile of this issue, it's unfortunate that the government didn't send a representative,” said Dillman.

A letter from Minister Gravelle, from Mining and Northern Development, was received by the Concerned Citizens Against Mining Uranium, CCAMU, the group behind the inquiry.

In it he said he was unable to attend, and made a couple of points in regards to uranium exploration in Ontario, including the following: “Modern exploration for uranium deposits involves the use of geophysical instruments or drilling, which have very little impact on the environment.”

CCAMU sent a response to Minister Gravelle. On the issue of exploration it said, “CCAMU is concerned that exploration and mining is considered to be the best use of land, without first considering other land uses, such as residential, farming and recreational land use. We are concerned that there are no considerations given to the current use of land and the impact on people and community. There has been no consideration for the resolutions passed by 14 local municipalities, counties and cities from Kingston through to Ottawa, related to exploration for uranium.”

The Kingston hearing, which took place on Tuesday, had over 30 presenters, and almost 40 are booked for each of the Peterborough and Ottawa hearings. Ninety written submissions have been received thus far, and they are still being accepted at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The results of the inquiry will be encapsulated in a report, tentatively scheduled for release on June 28, the one-year anniversary of the occupation of the Robertsville mine.

Editorial - April 10, 2008

Back toHome

Editorial -April 10, 2008 Province Should Show Common Courtesyby Jeff Green

At the citizens’ inquiry into the uranium cycle, people from four communities around Eastern Ontario are expressing opinions and concerns about a set of complex political, scientific, and environmental issues that the Government of Ontario clearly feels have already been settled.

The government has set out a request for proposal for the building of $42 billion worth of nuclear power plants. In terms of uranium mining, they have made it clear they consider exploration as unproblematic, and express confidence in federal regulations as far as mining itself is concerned.

The premier’s office, and the ministries involved: the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Energy, and even the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs (because uranium and aboriginals always seem to go together) are all confident that the scientific jury has come in, and all is well.

Not only do they feel they have found the answers to all possible questions on these matters, they also feel it is unnecessary to send a single representative, even a minor official, to hear what the people in Sharbot Lake, Kingston, Perterborouogh or Ottawa have to say.

It can’t be a matter of money, because they are spending plenty by maintaining a force of half a dozen officers on hand to witness the proceedings.

There must be an intern from one ministry or another who is capable of taking notes and reporting back, even as a courtesy to the people involved in the inquiry.

I would not suggest for a minute that any of the 150 or so presenters will have any insight into the uranium cycle that has not already been well considered by the sharply-honed Ontario bureaucracy. It’s just that it would be nice if Ontario even pretended to be interested in what the people have to say.

Letters - May 1, 2008

Back toHome

Letters - May 1, 2008 Letters: May 1

Lovelace Speaks Out, Bob Lovelace

Re: Composting Plan Faces Opposition, John Waddingham

Citizen's Inquiry into Uranium, Donna Dillman

Lovelace Speaks Out

Editor's Note: At the final session of the Citizens’ Inquiry into the uranium cycle, which was held in Ottawa, Mireille Lapointe, a co-chief with the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation, read a portion of a submission written by Ardoch former chief Bob Lovelace, who lives at Canoe Lake in Bedford District of South Frontenac. Lovelace has been in jail at the Central East Correctional Facility since February 18 after leading guilty to a contempt of court charge for refusing to honour a court injunction barring him from blocking the gate in front of the Roberstville mine in North Frontenac. He refused to enter into an undertaking to desist from blocking the mine, which is being used as a staging ground for a drilling program by the uranium exploration company Frontenac Ventures Corporation, and was sentenced to serve six months by Superior Court Justice Cunningham.

He is scheduled for release on August 18. He was also fined $25,000. An appeal to his sentencing will be heard on may 28 in Toronto.

Below is reprinted the final few paragraphs of the text,For an electronic version of the entire text, click on the following link lovelace-citizens-inquiry.pdf (21 kb)

I have come to understand that uranium and the military industrial complex that it feeds, is the forbidden fruit of our generation. It is the turtle with the ring of moss on its back. It is the glittery box on which Pandora speculates. My investment in the future will not be in uranium nor its allied industries. I chose the morality of Algonquin Law and I will let posterity be my judge. I have never been reconciled with Solomon's view that all is vanity. The beauty of a frozen swamp in the middle of winter is not a self-absorbed pretension. The beauty of a rainbow, a sunset, a fungus growing in layers along a fallen tree, a world independent of human comings and goings, all in all, never less than any which may be contrived. The goal of living is not in attaining beauty but in accepting it. Desire is what blinds us to invent beauty, to invent confections for the heart and mind. And in doing so we live our lives out as caricatures on Vanity's stage. As an Anishnabeg person I am not long out of the forest and I know that water in its natural form is beautifully clean, the wind is warm and full of song or cold and clear, the earth after a billion years still smells fresh and clean, one sea will produce ten, a hundred, even a thousand fold. I know that the earth is a quiet place as though listening to itself. When it speaks it does so in an immense diversity of voices, some cautious, some cautioning, all beautifully distant but urgent to be heard. It is such a world that vanity seeks to erase.

I believe that at not other time in history have humans collectively had such a clear view of the whole frame. At once it is possible to see our beginnings and the possible futures a head of us. This perspective however will not last. As we advance further a history of over consumption and unmanageable waste the opportunities for sustainability and the perceptible choices become fewer and fewer. Social change does not come easily. The defences against colonialism have had only marginal success and more often than not have resulted in violence and counter revolution. However when we look at the natural world we can see their powerful forces with which human beings ally. Within our human nature are forces with which we can endure through the harshest challenges. Collectively, the bonds of family, clan and community are far stronger than the deceptions that divide us. In pursuit of positive social change we need to activate within ourselves the gifts endowed upon us through creation. Perception, logic, discipline, imagination, courage and insight are only a few of the powerful gifts within us. We need to activate ourselves to ask less and give more so our local communities become stronger. We need to embrace silence so when we do speak the clarity of our voice will be unmistakable.

Changing the intentions of governments can be even more difficult than effecting social change. I have no doubt that more people will have to go to prison before Ontario becomes nuclear free and we embrace a society that undertakes real sustainability. The whole basis of sustainability is local communities meeting local needs. Big government simply does not fit into this picture and neither does corporate construction of need fulfilment. Sustainability is not about turning back the clock but rather the long overdue evolution of rationalizing real human needs with real earthy processes. As a society in change Ontario will need every bit of the wealth now destined for nuclear development to effect the transitions that are required. Urban structures need to be reinvented. The meaning of labour will need to be redefined. Eco-cartography will reshape political boundaries. And most of all people will change culturally. The present energy crisis and the need for sustainable economies necessitate a renaissance of humanity but present governments resist such change because the old means of governance; repression, false promises and popularity contests are not sufficient to control populations through emergent creativity. For today's governments it will seem easier to deny, pretend, punish and finally abdicate responsibility. People need to take initiative on there won and they need to do so now. There is a great need to defend the earth and our relatives in creation. Stopping uranium exploitation is definitely an important action in defending the earth. The coalitions that are created are nexus of shared knowledge and mutual concern. But simply shutting down the machines, turning off the taps and extinguishing the lights is not enough to meet the challenges of an over consumptive society. We need to reinvent ourselves.

Last year when I learned that 30,000 acres of our homeland had been staked for uranium exploration with the potential for an open pit mine, my first thoughts were how to protect Algonquin rights and interests. Since then my knowledge and understanding has grown beyond parochial interests to include my non-Algonquin neighbours and a struggle that goes further than mere resistance to colonialism. However my core understanding of what is to be Anishnabeg (human being), my knowledge of the land (aki) and my acceptance of the meaning of creation still inform who I am and what I believe. Going to prison is a small price to pay for one's integrity and even a smaller price to pay for the right to care for the earth, our mother and home to all of our relations. Sacrifice is the work that binds us with the rest of humanity who struggles to preserve their homelands, sustainable cultures and natural justice. As each day passes I believe more and more that to live free, active, intelligent, compassionate lives is our inheritance. Imprisonment is never the end of the struggle for change. It is the beginning of conviction. To be a human being is to find peace and good will taking only what you need and giving back everything.

I am humbled to be able to share my thoughts with the Citizens' Inquiry and I commend all of you for your hard work and sacrifices bringing this forum to the people.

Bob Lovelace

Re: Composting Plan Faces Opposition

Having read your article, I wish to point out that Mr. Shea has made statements that are somewhat misleading.

He states that the “MoE is very vigilant when it comes to procedures.” This may be true in regards to opening a site of this nature, but it has been proven in Thorold that, once opened, the MoE has neither the resources nor the inclination to monitor the site nor address issues that arise. Mr. Zelisnak stated that he and others complain regularly about odours, but the MoE does nothing – so much for the $100,000 a day fines Mr. Shea says he could face. And Mr. Shea has told us that his site is patterned off of the Thorold site, and they have or are acting as consultants to Earthworx.

Mr. Shea is quoted as saying “I’m not getting rich here.” Yet, based on calculations of the cost of compost at Earthworx last summer and the volume of compost Mr. Shea has told us will be taken from the site, Earthworx could gross over $5 million per year. Even if Mr. Shea runs a poorer than normal business and only maintains a 10% net from gross (versus the industry standard of 15-20%), he will earn $500,000 per year for the 20 years that he has told us this site will be in operation. This may not be seen like “getting rich” to Mr. Shea, but I question how many residents of Central Frontenac would view it as such. There is a lot riding on this site for Mr. Shea and Earthworx, and he has shown that he will say anything to defuse opposition…

As residents of Central Frontenac, my wife Martina and I have a question for Council:What does Central Frontenac get out of the Earthworx proposed zoning change?

Central Frontenac has allowed Earthworx to strip 42 acres of prime farming soil and sell it to Kingston customers. We have allowed Earthworx to start an open pit mine to take sand and sell it to their Kingston customers. And now they are asking us to allow them to open their site for table scraps and, they've told us, in the future, commercial scraps from the City of Kingston, and the townships of South and Central Frontenac. After the material has rotted sufficiently, they will sell the resulting compost to their Kingston customers.

Kingston and South Frontenac have municipal garbage collection. It would be fairly easy for them to start organic waste collection. It will be much more difficult and costly for Central Frontenac to do the same. So, predominantly, the organic waste going into the site will be from Kingston and South Frontenac.

Central Frontenac doesn’t get a new industry – this is a Kingston company with Kingston customers. And, we do not get an increase in our tax base, as this is just a zoning change.

What we do get is, first, the infrastructure cost if Westport Road doesn’t stand up to the large volume of heavy truck traffic – ten or more double trailer loads a day. Second, we get the potential health problems from airborne pathogens when the multiple rows of compost are each turned two or three times a week. Third, we get the sight, noise, smell and large carbon emissions of the compost and of the heavy equipment, which will be operating 11 hours a day, six days a week. And fourth, we get the potential for contaminated ground water -contamination, which, according to research papers on the Ministry of the Environment web site, may not be detected for up to 10 years, but, once present, would take 50 to 100 years before the water is drinkable again.

So I ask Council: Why would we take the risk, no matter how small, of the cost to our infrastructure and the potential for damage to our environment and the health of our residents and get nothing in return – no usable compost site (for us), no new industry, no new jobs, no new revenues, nothing? I seriously ask Council to vote NO to the Earthworx proposed zoning change.

John Waddingham

Citizen's Inquiry into Uranium

Having heard 140 presentations, witnessed by approximately 600 observers in four venues in eastern Ontario, including over 30 presentations in Kingston on April 8, 2008, the Citizens' Inquiry into the Impacts of the Uranium Cycle has completed its mandate.

Wethank each and every one of the presenters for speaking their truth,regardless oftheir worldview in regards to the issue. Their energy, time commitment, passion, dedication and courage are appreciated and were the core to the success of the Inquiry. Many of the stories were sobering, sometaking usto the verge oftears, others uplifting andmany very educational. People travelled from as far away as Manitoulin Island, North Bay, Montreal, and Toronto to participate. The expertise that came together over the month-long period was impressive, with many dozens of organizations and two politicalpartiesrepresented. Far too many to name individually, we thank each and every one.

Panelists Fraser McVie, Cameron Smith, Marion Dewar, Janet Gutowski, Jamie Swift, Rev. Laurie McKnight-Walker and Lorraine Rekmans deserve special mention for their willingness to sit and take notesthrough 80 collective hours of presentationsand their continued dedication as they sift through notes to formulate comments for the forthcoming Report.

Thanks, too, to all who gave of their time to be present, whether to learn more about the uranium cycle or to support the effort to raise public awareness on allof uranium's many aspects. Both sidesagreed that uranium, once disturbed, is one of the most dangerous substances on the planet and many questions were addressed, including:

Is it true that we need nuclear energy, despite the known health and environmental risk factors, the billions in cost and billions more in cost overruns and the fact that we have yet to figure out what to do with the accumulating waste at both ends "in order to keep the lights on in Ontario" to quote Premier McGuinty and the nuclear lobby?

Is it really as clean, green and affordable as that lobby would have us believe? Who benefits, and who loses as a result of this lobby?

Where do people and the environment fit when there is big money to be had by a few?

Do we want to spend another 42 billion tax dollars on nuclear generation when we are still paying off the nuclear debt on our hydro bills every month from decades past?

While the Earth will regenerate even if it takes hundreds of thousands of years, does society, our children, grandchildren and those not yet born, have that kind of time, or should we be thinking more seriously about conservation and putting our dwindling resources into renewables?

The material presented to the Inquiry panelists, as well as the submissions received, totalling approximately 200 to date, ranging from a single sentence to hundreds of pages,will form a report thatwill be published by June 28 and all submissions that fall within the scope of the Inquiry will be available on the website: www.uraniumcitizensinquiry.com.

Likeso much else, the Inquiry would not have been the success it was without the efforts of those behind the scenes, whether arrangingvenues, preparing food and refreshments, helping with promotion, or simply providing feedback when needed.You all know who you are and we do, indeed, thank you.

Donna Dillmanfor the Citizens' Inquiry Committee