Leasehold land

[danmartin]

Gone Fishing wrote:
The GVRD with an excluded watershed does not treat its water any differently than DLC or any other water purveyor. Thus, exclusion does nothing to improve "water quailty" at the point of consumption. The reservoirs from which DLC draws were never intended for human consumption, only as farmland irrigation.[/quote]

Firstly, you are wrong in your statement that "GVRD does not treat its water any differently than DLC or any other water purveyor. To meet Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines GVRD has spent many many millions building Seymour-Capilano water filtration Plant and will spend millions more in tunnels to connect different water reservoirs to this facility. They have severely restricted access to these watersheds to protect them because they recognize that human activity adds to increased turbidity and pollution. Vernon needed to built Duteau Creek Water Treatment Plant and West Kelowna has built Powers Creek Water Treatment Plant. District of Lake Country and City of Kelowna to date have not needed to do this but for how long? If we keep abusing our water reservoirs we will need to as well. My taxes are high enough now so I don't want to pay for a water treatment plant and its maintenance any sooner than necessary! What will happen to the small water purveyors that many are still on if our water sources aren't protected? Boil water advisories are happening more and more as guidelines change. High turbidity is a major cause of these advisories because it can reduce disinfection efforts. Human activity in a watershed can increase turbidity as well the likelihood of other contamination which will cost us dearly!

I'm not sure what your statement about DLC reservoirs were never intended for human consumption is suppose to imply. The fact is we do rely on these reservoirs now. I'm including Okanagan Lake in this.

[Gone_Fishin]

The studies done a couple of years back analysed the contaminants in upper reservoirs: 1/3 avian, 1/3 bovine, and 1/3 canid/ungulate/other. When asked if cattle and human influences were eliminated and what that would mean for water treatment, head of the Water Supply *bleep*'n said "Nothing, as the avian alone would require the same treatment we are doing now, not to mention every other wild animal's influence on water." So, unless your plan includes banning birds from flying and deer from pooping as well, it would accomplish nothing toward water quality.

[danmartin]

To Gone Fishing,
I see you have avoiding most of the issues that I pointed out as to why we must protect our reservoirs. Your misinformation about other purveyors not treating their water differently is ignored and you try to cloud the issue by given some info from a "study done a couple of years back" High turbidity levels is mostly what the water plants are trying to address as that inhibits the disinfection of the water so that it can meet drinking water standards and be safe to distribute. Obviously appearance, taste etc. are also addressed but that isn't the health issue that causes most boil water advisories and the need for treatment to reduce it. We will always have to disinfect our water so it is safe but using chlorine and or UV treatment is 'cheap' as compared to building and treating water in water treatment facilities. After the Walkerton tragedy Canadian Drinking Water standards have been adjusted. That is one of the reasons why there has been so many boil water advisories in the last 10 years.

I don't profess to know all the answers but I'm aware of what the value of safe drinking water and I'm concerned that health authorities will demand more treatment then we presently need. West Kelowna, Vernon, GVRD and many more purveyors didn't build treatment plants to create employment. Controlling activity in reservoir watersheds as is done in many places is done for a reason.

[Rwede]

What effect does a cabin have on water turbidity downstream? None whatsoever.

You do realize that even gated watersheds in GVRD have been extensively logged and roaded, don't you?

[danmartin]

What effect does a cabin have on water turbidity downstream? None whatsoever.

You do realize that even gated watersheds in GVRD have been extensively logged and roaded, don't you?

Your opinion on water turbidity is supported how? Do they log these watersheds now? Do they allow people to maintain homes in these watersheds or travel the roads that are there now? Restrictions were put in for reasons. Is some use acceptable? I don't have the expertise to make that decision and as such will trust the experts to make it and hope they are right. On some reservoirs they have allowed some activity but most don't allow homes and power boats.

[Donald G]

To danmartin ...

Nowhere in your response about what SPECIFIC damage the Leaseholders that the Mayor went after are FALSELY alleged to have done do you actually identify ONE actual incident of damage in the forty and fifty years that they have had summer weekend cabins on the lake.

Keep in mind that over the years there have been hundreds if not thousands of deer, moose, bears, skunks, muskrats, fish, herons, cows, coyotes, squirrels, chipmunks, ducks, loons, mice, moles, cows, horses, not to mention a wide assortment of insects and bird being born, living, dieing and rotting away to nothing on your pristine watershed. How many large and small rotting carcasses would have gone into your watershed in forty to fifty years? HOw much animal urine and other body wastes do you think passed through your water system during those years?

Yours and the Mayors suggestion the the expensive legal suit was brought against the few Leaseholders included concern for the health of the watershed HAS TO BE ONE OF THE MOST DISHONEST ALLEGATIONS EVER MADE BY A MAYOR AGAINST COMPLETELY INNOCENT TAXPAYERS. IMO IT BORDERS ON CRIMINAL FRAUD.

ONE HALF OF ONE PERCENT of the water that goes through the lake in any given year is what the Mayor is trying to deprive the Leaseholders of ... LESS THAN HALF OF THE WATER THAT EVAPORATES from the lake over one summer, when the lake is not frozen over.

[Donald G]

I appreciate that the other Mayors of the Okanagan Towns and Cities DID NOT support the mayor of Lake Country in his endeavor to use taxpayer money to REPEATEDLY try to strip the few long term Leaseholders of their long standing access to MINIMAL amounts of water.

That tells me that most of the Okanagan is in the hands of responsible municipal government regarding the issue. Lake Country seems like it could be run by ... (insert your belief here).

[Donald G]

Mayor Baker "et al" ...

Very few of the people with the 40 and 50 year old "cabin" leases spend any time out on their properties in the winter so the ONE HALF OF ONE PERCENT OF THE WATER THAT GOES THROUGH THE RESERVOIR SYSTEM THAT THEY WERE ALLOTTED WILL NOW BE SAFE FOR THE WINTER.

Do you intend to continue to go after them again in the spring in your effort to cut them off from all access to water in order to drive them out? Or possibly by applying to raise the water level another eight or ten feet in an effort to now flood them out?

Do you intend on spending a few more hundred thousand dollars of taxpayer money? How many of the people in Lake Country actually know what you have been up to for the past few years and authorized the spending of the several hundred thousand dollars you do not deny having spent on the project to date?

It is no wonder that taxes are going up another $250.00 per household per year in Lake Country.

[Donald G]

When is the next Municipal election in Lake Country? This thread should be an issue in it.

[Donald G]

$250.00 per household

[RVThereYet]

$250.00 per household

Source? Link?

[Donald G]

To Bah Humbug ...

I thought you would never ask. As soon as the Mayor and Council see fit to confirm that between two and three hundred thousand dollars had to have been spent on their multi year ongoing efforts to force the long term Leaseholders off of their lots by repeatedly trying everything possible to deny them access to water I will be glad to explain the $250.00 to you.