Timmins Local Citizens Committee

DRAFT Minutes of the May 11, 2005 Meeting

May 11 hours: 18
Year to date: 473.6
Total: 4155.40

Date: April 13, 2005

Location: Gallery Meeting Room, Gold Mine Tour

Present: Bill Russell, Marvin Frew, Jenny Millson, Mark Joron, Mike Malek, Shawn Connors, Bill Hutchison, Robert Vien, Robert Calhoun,.

Regrets: Gary Scripnick, Dino Pellerin, Bob Bielek, Greg Corrigal

MNR: Terry Pawson, Mac Kilgour, Randy Pickering, Peter Hynard

Guests: Gerry ??, Louis Dines, Les Brown Gogama Area Citizens Committee, Don Bazley Tembec

6:57 p.m. Meeting called to order by chairman, Bill Russell

CHAIRMAN’S COMMENTS and CORRESPONDENCE:

None

Shawn Conors moved that the minutes of April 13, 2005 be accepted as amended. Seconded by Robert Calhoun. Motion carried.

Timmins Fur Council Annual Clean-up Bill Hutchison

· Took place on Saturday May 7, 2005
· Side roads off of a stretch of 4 km. of Pine Street south in the Wealthy Lake area
· 2 forty yard bins of construction material, automotive parts, household waste and 140 tires from passenger to industrial tires.,
· one individual site had 5 pick up truck loads removed and 4 loads remain
· Marcel Desjardins from Timmins MNR was on site to gather evidence for follow up.
· All sites in the Timmins area are problematic and the single biggest issue is tires
· Cooperation for the cleanup was received from: the City of Timmins ( No tipping fees at the City Dump), Canada Waste (Free garbage Bins), Feldman’s and Domtar, general public, trappers and students volunteered their time

Discussion about the issue of excessive garbage in the bush
· Lack of signs – No signs = No fines
· Difficulties in prosecuting offenders
· Tires are not just from individuals but also from commercial operators
· Many volunteers are dedicating time to combat this problem
· Expression of opinion that there has to be a much harder line drawn on enforcement ( Original commenter plus 3 more people raised this issue)
· Garbage being deposited on private land is also an issue for landowners
· More public exposure of the problem through the local media is required.

ACTION ITEM – Illegal waste disposal on Crown lands should be on a future agenda

Forest Roads and Water Crossings Initiative (FRWCI) presentation by Peter Hynard

Get a copy of Peter’s Presentation materials for Timmins and Gogama Committees

Questions during the presentation

Marvin – there is a problem with the Federal regulations prevent the use of screens at culverts to impede beavers from damming culverts – screens impede fish migration and this must be avoided.

Comment by Louis D. that plastic culverts with smooth interior surfaces can be used and help prevent beaver blockage problems as they are self flushing

Gerry – why would good culverts be removed – ans – to maintain raodless areas for a variety of land use strategies. This led to an explanation of different iuse strategies and limiting factors ie large expensive bridges with limited life spans. Emphasis was made that a Road Use strategy is an essential part of the planning process to ensure good public consultation

Les – rhetorical Why would a company want a road after they are finished with it? Thus problems would all just revert to MNR

Gerry – why can’t all roads just be left in place? – liability problems

Marvin – more effport has to be made to try to foster new partnerships to avoid having to physically decommission roads

General Comment – there are two main schools of thought – leave in all access and remove access once the original intent (harvest and renewal operations are complete.) of the road has been met. It is a very difficult task to balance these two very oppositional points of view.

Mark Joron suggestion that all roads within conservation reserves should be physically decommissioned thus giving these reserves a more wilderness like appearance and limiting access.

How will the roads strategy address the fact that roads are the single greatest impact on the landscape yet leaving timber behind in harvest areas to achieve Natural Disturbance Pattern Emulation Guidelines and wildlife habitat requirements will effectively increase the number of roads on the landscape? No answer at this time.

Bill H – Are any roads total decommissioned by removing the road bed and returning it to nature? Not a normal practice yet but it is an option.

Gerry – Can MTO transfer abandoned highways back to MNR? No clear answer to this as it can be an issue at times.

Les – A cottage owner has a road to his cottage for which he is responsible – Is there a need for him to carry insurance. No, but there is no guarantee that he will not be held liable by a competent court. All parties responsible for a road must exercise due diligence.

Over riding theme – Liability is an issue.

Louis – understands that there is no requirement for Liability Insurance if a user takes over responsibility for an existing water crossing but there is no guarantee that you can avoid being sued. However through performing and documenting Due Diligence you can reduce the risk.

Les – Waste disposal Site liability insurance – why is this a necessity when not a necessity on roads. In the case of a group or individual operating a waste disposal site on Crown land they become a contractor of the Crown and thus must have the required liability insurance to be a contractor

What happens when a group, cottagers for example, have responsibility for a road which forest industry wants to use. This and many similar questions are arising in this process and must be addressed.

Les – Does anyone responsible for a road on Crown land have the right to close it to Public access. – Yes under a variety of conditions, LUP and Private Forestry road are two cases

Bill R – How do we transfer this information to the general public – one suggestion was to encourage people to attend open houses. Also Roads which are proposed to be decommissioned as part of the FRWCI will under go Public Consultation as part of the process unless the road is decommissioned under emergency circumstances.

Marvin – Is it possible to get a list of roads in an area proposed to be decommissioned. Yes – As part of the process all roads will be inventoried and get a Use strategy and if decommissioning is part of the strategy there will be public consultation.
Louis – likes the idea of having the LCC members attend a Sportsman Show or similar event to help get new rules publicized.

Les – how does the Government propose to allocate funds to individual roads without creating conflicts between individual users. – No easy answer – stronger emphasis on User pays.

Randy – heads up to users of the Papakomeka Road that there will be meetings and consultation this summer regarding future funding and maintenance of the road by the Users.

Marvin – if LCC is going to participate in the Sportsman Show then there should be some pre planning and a better presence – develop a strong theme annually

Action item – By December of 2005 there should be a plan for what the LCC wants to do at the 2006 Sportsman show.

Les – a person responsible for road maintenance should be able to charge other users to help pay the fees.

Bill R – proposed that Peter come back in late fall to give the LCC an update of progress made.

Note – this maybe a function of the reviews carried out on the local units and the LCC will be kept current on the status through the FMP process.

Les – Thanks for the opportunity to have the Gogama committee come up to take part in this session.

Bill thanked the Gogama reps for attending and expressed the desire to continue this type of interaction between the committees when required and he also thanked Peter Hynard for coming to the meeting.

Bill adjourned the meeting at 9:03 pm

The next meeting will be held on June 8, 2005 in the Gallery Meeting Room at the Timmins Underground Goldmine Tour. (behind the Shania Twain Centre)

Dinner at 6:00 p.m. Meeting at 7:00 p.m.

Minutes prepared by Terry Pawson