- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
This whole thing about meetings that lets the public have input, is B.S. right from the start. The direction that this will take has already been decided and they are going through the motion. Recently the public input from the residents in the 148th ave./16th st. intersection was a sham. We were destined for traffic lighys right from the start. The same thing happened when Zero Avenue was deliberately crippled years before that. The township will go for this like a father who knows best, unless Kurt's puppets support the lone voice of Richter.
If Richter is so opposed to this plan, whay is her smiling face attached to it here:
http://www.tol.bc.ca/index.php?o...1550&
Itemid=596
And why does she talk so glowingly of it here:
http://www.tol.bc.ca/index.php?o...1681&
Itemid=596
How do you go from being on the planning committee and supporting it in several council votes, to a vocal opponent in less than three months? Are you no longer impressed with the hard work of the volunteer stakeholders as you were in August?
Ms. Richter,are you going to throw the baby out with the (depleting) bathwater, or are you going to continue to take part in the planning so the proceedural questions you have about the makeup of the "board" or "comittee" or whatever, is more to your liking? Or are you just being contrary for the sake of being contrary? Even if it is yourself you are being contrary to!
Blair says:
'They pick the experts and the panel and then put them to work. The public is deemed unqualified to supply useful input and therefore only lip service is paid to the public input stage. I’m surprised that Langley doesn’t have policies that would prevent this being forced down out throat this way. Especially in a situation like this where we will be taking the brunt of any new plan.'
Between this letter and Methinks' comments, one would think you were talking about the farce called consultation that the central Langley schools just went through. This should give you a very good idea where our frustration comes from.
RC/Lone Voice again:
Thank you for your comments. I think perhaps some clarifications are in order. Please see my detailed reponse to your concerns posted on the front page (Richter Report - November 23, 2007).
Am I passionate about protecting groundwater? You bet! But not at the cost of another bureaucracy and that's what I'm afraid this is going to turn out to be.
I hope I've answered your questions, RC/Lone Voice. Thank you again for taking the time to write.
Kim,
Regarding your comment about protecting our groudwater, I am certain that everyone will agree with you on that point. I am having trouble with the farce about metering our well water in the process. I can see where there are some commercial/Agricultural operations that control of usage would be considered, but the vast majority of us on wells use it for household purposes, and a few animals in some cases (Hobby Farms?). Is the cart before the horse on this issue?
Methinks:
I also had trouble with the idea of universal metering but now believe it's an equity issue. I don't think we can "cherry-pick" different users and say you have to have a meter but others don't. I think all this will lead to is more domestic or residential wells being drilled that end up being used for industrial and agricultural purposes. I think the only way we're going to be able to stop water abuses is to meter everyone. So the question now becomes how are we going to pay for it and I don't think a water board with taxing authority is the best answer.
Kim,
Your comment about equity does not fit the situation when we compare the users and abusers of our ground water. We are very much a varied lot. You could compare us well owners though to the thousands upon thousands of city water users all through the Lower Mainland who follow an honor system of sorts, when water rationing is asked of them. The same understanding would work just as well in out rural area with some modifications.
It bothers me when I think that it does not take a magnifying glass to see that our ground water is being neglected and abused by all levels of goverment on an enoromous
scale....township included? I say clean up this, as well as that of other major offenders, and then think about our Jack and Jill wells after governments have set a shining example. I am sure that from your previous experience, you are aquainted with many people in our own community, who could give us a tour showing examples of the disgraceful neglect of our streams alone, and it goes on at this very moment. That's how I see the cart being placed in front of the horse...big time.
I'd like to know who 'donated' Langley township to be the guninea pig for this so called 'pilot project' in the first place. When the Township provides me with the water to my tap, and only then, would I ever pay a red cent for my water. I look at it as just another cash cow for the Township to pay for all the other mindless things they have wasted of our tax dollars.
The only problem with your comment willy: The water in your well is not "your water".
Of course, it is like saying the only problem with the hindenberg was a fire....
RC,
Are you telling us that willynilly's water belongs to the township?
No, it belongs to the province.
RC and methinks,
More specifically, Willy is using a well installed and maintained at his own expense to make use of a common resource that is owned by the crown.
It is no different then in my old home where we had a water intake hooked into the lake except that in this case the water is hidden underground.
At any time the crown can legally shut off access to the resource should they decide it is in the best interest of the crown or for the common good. They are loathe to do so but do have the right, under legislation, to do so.
RC,
Then the township should not be the pawn of the Ministry of Agriculture.
Through this act, the Ag people have allowed industrial farming to go to extremes, and the result has become rape of the land instead of use of the land. Between that kind of abuse and the township's damn the torpedoes development schemes, private well owners are about to foot the bill. If they do, they will get the wrap as well for being the cause of Aquifer depletion. They are not the cause..... period.
Good example Blair, especially since I think your family would now need a licence from the province to draw water out of a lake...
Surface water legislation is 20 years ahead of groundwater.
Commenting by HaloScan
