PUSLINCH – More concerns have been raised about how an application for a permit to take water from a longstanding gravel pit will impact the surrounding environment and wildlife.
Puslinch council previously objected to an application by John Dick Construction to extract nearly 15 million litres of water per day for at least four months of the year for up to 10 years at the Glen Christie Quarry at 2145 Waterloo Regional Road 24. Several concerns were raised about the permit's potential impact on surrounding water sources, local drinking water and neighbouring private and municipal wells.
One site, called Lower Quarry Lake, would see up to 13.7 million litres of water taken per day for up to 120 days per year for 10 years while the second, called Quarry Sump, would extract nearly a million litres per day every day for 10 years.
Councillors stood by their objection at a Puslinch council meeting Wednesday afternoon after a newly-submitted Natural Environment Assessment (NEA) report and Environmental Compliance Approval (ECA) raised more concerns about impacts on wildlife like brook trout and the surrounding environment.
Council later asked staff to state their objection to the ECA application and request a meeting with the Grand River Conservation Association, MECP, consultants and impacted municipalities to discuss the concerns and related recommendations.
The township is a commenting agency on the application. It does not have final say.
Ecologist Cheryl-Anne Ross said her biggest concerns with the application are related to groundwater inputs to brook trout streams like Tributary 4, which is located north of the Lower Quarry Lake, especially given baseline studies haven't been conducted to determine whether the area is a Brook trout spawning zone.
According to Ross, direct and indirect impacts on Brook trout and their spawning "were not adequately investigated" given they are known to frequent Tributary 4 and the potential spawning habitat "may be impacted or eliminated due to reduced baseflow."
"The report notes that potential impacts to fish and fish habitat within watercourses that receive reduced baseflow inputs will be temporary. Relative to the lifecycle of a fish (five-seven years) and generation time (two-three years), these impacts are not temporary," said Ross, in the report.
Another concern Ross raised was the NEA dismissing increased volume due to discharge to the Speed River as "insignificant," given the removed water discharge has the potential to impact the existing natural features through temperature, water chemistry and sedimentation changes.
The report also "dismissed potential impacts" of the proposed water drawdown on upland vegetation which Ross disagreed with, saying vegetation composition changes and/or tree health decline are possible.
In general, Ross said additional information is needed to fully assess the proposal's potential impacts including additional field investigations and further assessment of the impacts of the proposed additional discharge on the receiving waterbodies.
"These are concerning things and it's concerning to know that this could be considered with a lack of significant baseline data to even make the decision," said Coun. Jessica Goyda.
Senior hydrogeologist Angie Mason said potential impacts are anticipated to be the most pronounced in areas with higher drawdown in the bedrock aquifer and features receiving shallow groundwater inputs like marsh and swampy wetlands are "the most at-risk."
Impacts may include reductions in baseflow to watercourses, the reduction/loss of fauna and the loss of plant species dependent on groundwater and seasonal hydro-period conditions.
The full report is available here, starting on page 215.
Isabel Buckmaster is the Local Journalism Initiative reporter for GuelphToday. LJI is a federally-funded program.