This small excerpt of the 1969 Soil Map of Annapolis County , covering the AHC&D site, shows a small portion of Ha soil, surrounded by M.
Ha (Hantsport) is imperfectly drained:
M (Middleton) is Moderately Well Drained
On the whole map, there are 38 soil types
more than 20% are "Poorly Drained", but not the AHC&D site, nor the soil downhill.
This map is never referenced in the 2017 Environmental assessment. Instead, we are told, many times that "The location within flat topography at a
height of land, away from active watercourses, and underlain by a deep clay subsoil with low
hydraulic conductivity limits some of the potential effects...."
Instead, it should say "The location within wetland at a height of land, near active watercourses, and underlain by moderately well-drained soil raises concerns about the potential effects..."
How did "Moderately Well Drained" become "low hydraulic conductivity? That's the central question of fact. We suspect poorly administered test wells and we have tests of our own that support the "Moderately Well Drained" classification.
That's what we ask - rigorous application of protocol, open publication of results - informed decisions. Don't citizens deserve that? Why does the provincial government resist?
Instead, it should say "The location within wetland at a height of land, near active watercourses, and underlain by moderately well-drained soil raises concerns about the potential effects..."
How did "Moderately Well Drained" become "low hydraulic conductivity? That's the central question of fact. We suspect poorly administered test wells and we have tests of our own that support the "Moderately Well Drained" classification.
That's what we ask - rigorous application of protocol, open publication of results - informed decisions. Don't citizens deserve that? Why does the provincial government resist?
No comments:
Post a Comment