Lake Ontario Basin Update
Citizen efforts lead to charges in Hamilton’s
Red Hill Valley
By Krystyn Tully, Lake Ontario Waterkeeper
On August 4, 2004, stones the size of
softballs went flying through the air in a
Hamilton, Ontario neighbourhood. Area
residents watched as rocks smashed
into a car window, a fence, a roof, and a
driveway. “My kids play outside and if they were out there that
day, who knows what could have happened,” one resident told
the local newspaper. “They could
have been hit in the head.”
The flying rocks came from construction
on the Red Hill Creek
Expressway, about 650 feet away.The
Expressway was being built through
the Red Hill Valley, one of the last
green corridors linking the Niagara
Escarpment to Lake Ontario. Instead
of elevating the highway and
bringing it over the top of the
Escarpment, the City of Hamilton
had opted to blast through the
towering rock face, carving a notch
into it and using the aggregate for
the new road.
The company hired to do the blasting
suspended its work and the city
and labour ministry launched
investigations. After deciding that a
revised blasting program and repairs
to damaged property were adequate,
the City of Hamilton endorsed the
company’s work and construction
resumed.
But local citizens groups were not
satisfied. Members of Environment
Hamilton and Lake Ontario
Waterkeeper talked to residents who
had witnessed the blasting, studied
media reports, and dug up legal
precedents documenting convictions
under Ontario’s Environmental
Protection Act for flyrock.
The two groups put together a brief – a collection of documents
that verified their concerns – requesting that the Ministry
of Environment launch its own investigation. Representatives
of Environment Hamilton and Lake Ontario Waterkeeper
encouraged the Ministry to take every measure to ensure
public safety:
“We believe the City of Hamilton’s past environmental conduct
places an onus on your regulatory agency to investigate
environmental complaints quickly and diligently. As
enforcement of our environmental laws is essential to
preventing and deterring environmental crimes in the future, a
duty of care rests with your office to ensure the facts in this
case are investigated and dealt with in a legal and professional
manner.”
The Ministry of Environment immediately
responded, forwarding the brief
to its enforcement department. A year
and a half later, word came that the
Ministry of Environment had charged
the company with four violations of
the Environmental Protection Act:
Two counts discharging a contaminant
into the natural environment that
causes an adverse effect and two
counts failing to notify the Ministry of
Environment following the discharge
of a contaminant.
After the charges were laid, it took the
efforts of independent citizens’ groups
to again bring the information to the
public. “The Ministry of Environment
no longer announces when charges are
laid,” wrote one local reporter, noting
that it was Lake Ontario Waterkeeper
and Environment Hamilton who made
details of the charges known.
The case has yet to go to court –
a date is set for early February, 2006 –
but Lake Ontario Waterkeeper
and Environment Hamilton believe
the charges will encourage the
company to be more diligent in
the future. The groups also hope their
story will encourage more citizens to
document environmental concerns
and push for better enforcement of
our environmental laws.
For more information and updates on the story:
www.waterkeeper.ca or www.environmenthamilton.org
For more information:
Lake Ontario Waterkeeper
245 Queen’s Quay W., Toronto, ONT M5J 2K9
(416) 861-1237 • krystyn@waterkeeper.ca
Disclaimer:
The interpretations and conclusions presented in this newsletter represent the opinions of the individual authors. They in no way represent the views of the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council, the C.S. Mott Foundation, subscribers, donors, or any organization mentioned in this publication.
|
