Nova Scotia Fishing Forum banner
1 - 20 of 177 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am doing some research on the Alton Gas brine water dumping into the Shubenacadie River and its not looking to good to me. Is there anyone who can explain to me how this is all going to work and not effect the Striped Bass spawning area not to mention all other wildlife in the river?? They will be taking 110000m3 of water daily from the river for their dilution process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
In my opinion...this will be the end of striper fishing as we know it in the rivers...hard to beleive the govenment is allowing this to happen in the last spawning rrivers in the bay of fundy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
Sign the petition. If that doesn't stop it from happening, im sure they will face resistance and confrontation from dedicated Bass anglers like myself, not to mention Millbrook Band will have a hard time letting it happen. I don't know about you but I have a dufflebag for just such an occasion ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I have signed the petition, but more will need to be done. I was always thought that the brine water was going to have the salt removed and sold before it was released into the river but this is not the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I have signed the petition aswell..It really surprises me that more fisher people..its not just going to effect the river fuishers but the whole bay aswell... and just people in general are not up in arms over this...the way of life around these rivers has been going on for years and years and to just let a n alberta gas company come in and change evrything seems so immoral on the NS Gov part.As far as i understood the salt water being dumped back in is suppose to be diluted..but striped bass need a certain salinity to spawn and once hatched the young need a certain period of time in low salinity aswell...i cant be told dumping all this salt back into the upper part of the shubie river right below the mouth of the stewiacke.. wont damage the spawning in the Stewiacke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,129 Posts
I am unfamiliar with the issue. Has the NS Dept of the Environment approved the proposed dumping of this effluent?? I cannot believe that the brine will not be remedialized or treated in any way prior to its release into the river???

Regards
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
135 Posts
thank you for making this thread. i think ALOT of people have no idea about this. i thought it was bad just from reading your original post. but after looking into it further this is absolutly appalling . from what i can tell the dumping part has been approved and it will NOT be treated in any way. even if it is treated how the hell did or does anyone think this is a good idea? this project should of never even been considered let alone the fact it has gone from 4 caverns to 18 now and the size of them is more then double the original proposal. they have not recieved full project approval , yet. the only way its not going to be green lighted is if enough public stink is kicked up.

petition signed and shared as much as possible. please everyone do the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
Sign the petition. If that doesn't stop it from happening, im sure they will face resistance and confrontation from dedicated Bass anglers like myself, not to mention Millbrook Band will have a hard time letting it happen. I don't know about you but I have a dufflebag for just such an occasion ;)
Millbrook already got their cheque from this project . And its too late...you guys should have been on board 3 years ago when it was in the paper and on social media to stop it . All we can do is sit back ffs .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
thank you for making this thread. i think ALOT of people have no idea about this. i thought it was bad just from reading your original post. but after looking into it further this is absolutly appalling . from what i can tell the dumping part has been approved and it will NOT be treated in any way. even if it is treated how the hell did or does anyone think this is a good idea? this project should of never even been considered let alone the fact it has gone from 4 caverns to 18 now and the size of them is more then double the original proposal. they have not recieved full project approval , yet. the only way its not going to be green lighted is if enough public stink is kicked up.

petition signed and shared as much as possible. please everyone do the same.
You don't lay the pipes down like they are doing now unless you have approval .
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
135 Posts
im only going by the info i was able to find. and everything i have read says they still havent met all the requirements needed for full approval . i have not been able to find what the requirements and such actually are though.

i was out west 3 years ago , never heard anything about it. neither has anyone ive asked here in nova scotia. was it a weekly local paper and myspace instead of facebook? doesnt seem like the word got out very well.

and we can be assured ALOT more then millbrook was paid off for this one . love how backroom deals run this province lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Just one more reason to get the hell out of this province.....the government doesn't care as long as they can just keep taking money to whomever will give it to them to do whatever they want to our resources. Look at Waterfront Development Corporation (A crown corporation), they are proposing infilling(partially complete) the Bedford Basin to put up condos. This will effectively destroy Crosby Island (now peninsula, as they have filled in up to one side) and to bury a natural tidal pool and reef that is used for staging by salmon and trout going up the Sackville River.

The funny part is we know how slow government is to act when poor joe blow citizen wants to do something or get something from the government, but yet WDCL was able to purchase from the feds the parcels of land in a mere 30 days. No environmental impact study done, nothing! So then the provinicial government deems the location a dumpsite and now they are dumping acidic pyritic slate there from all over the Maritimes. This slate will be used as the base for the infill to build all these condos on. These approvals have gone back many years (quietly of course) and now the entire project is on hold because citizens formed a group to oppose and question their methods and the need for such a development. Our group has put a lot of pressure on WDCL, HRM and the province. The infilling has all but stopped for th e past two years, pending an infrastructure study on traffic and other services. If you read the terms of reference for the study, there was absolutely no way for the study to not be approved, it is absolutely ludicrous that government operates this way. But go ahead and try and put a little sand or move a few boulders on your waterfront property and you will descended on by the Feds with fines up the wazoo.

This province and city are completely out of touch with how the natural resources of this province get destroyed all in the name of a few bucks.

So it's never too late, you just need to have enough people to begin the ground swell of getting the actual information out there. Also everyone needs to write their local politicians(Councillors, MPs, MLAs, Premiers, Federal Fisheries, Natural resources) everyone that might have a say in this. In our efforts to stop the waterfront infill we have aquired thousands of documents through the Freedom of Information act, which show all of the letters the public has written in about ths project. This is part of our defense that the "public" doesn't want this development, despite our local councilor's assertion that he has knocked on thousands of doors of people who are supporting this. I call BULLSHIT!

We held a public information session and got more people out to one event than the developers and government could get to all of their sessions combined. Thats what happens when development announcments get buried in the backpages of the newspaper. Check out this short video, pretty much shows how government operates and why apathy is so high when it comes to these types of developments or projects.

***EDIT: oops frogot the video link

www.savebedfordwaterfront.ca
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Yeah, I wish I would have known all of the info 3 years ago as well, but its better late than never to become informed on whats going on. I don`t know for the life of me either how this has been allowed. I don`t know what to do other than keep sending emails to agencies like cosewic, SARA, DFO, our MP, and MLA to try and persude all of them that they have failed to protect this river. What in the world is there any need for SARA, and Cosewic if they let this happen to endangered species? Its all so maddening, the more research I do the madder I get.

A couple of facebook groups are talking about protests but need more members. Concerns about the Alton Natural Gas storage Project, and Stop Alton Gas are the names of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Stripperguide, it was approved 7 years ago, but they had a lot of work to do to supposedly prove that this will not harm fish habitat and will continue not to harm the entire ecosystem when the brine is being dumped. I cannot find where this has been proved, and they will be pumping brine within a month or two.

SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
REGISTRATION DOCUMENT FOR THE PROPOSED ALTON
NATURAL GAS STORAGE PROJECT

Maritimes Region Alton Natural Gas Storage Project

Appendix A
Scientific Review of the May 16, 2007 "Striped Bass Egg and Larvae Monitoring
Proposal"
Based on the information that is known about the Shubenacadie-Stewiacke striped bass
population, DFO Science has suggested an alternative monitoring and evaluation approach.
These suggestions are intended to improve the basis for assessing the feasibility of mitigating
the effects of the brine discharge process, for age 0+ year diadromous fishes, including striped
bass.
Some things which are known about the Shubenacadie-Stewiacke striped bass population
include:
• striped bass eggs will occur in abundance within the vicinity of the proposed area of
activity,
• there is substantive inter-annual variability in timing and duration of the spawning
season,
• spawning is triggered when water temperatures rise to approximately 16°C,
• spawning events can be of very short duration (e.g., measured in hours and possibly
minutes on some days), and
• spawning events are largely independent of the spring-neap cycle, as was hypothesized
by Rulifson and Tull (1999).
These features (i.e., listed above) indicate that while a predictive basis (e.g., real time water
temperature data) to scheduling water extraction and/or brine release around striped bass
spawning activity is feasible,
1) a high degree of active management would be required, and
2) it would probably not satisfactorily minimize risk of entrainment and/or exposure to brine to
not only the eggs but to larvae and young juveniles.
It is suggested that the simplest and safest recourse is not to allow activities associated with the
dilution and discharge of brine to take place during the striped bass spawning season. Late April
to early July is a sensitive period for most of the other local populations of diadromous fish
species, for spawning (e.g., alewife, blueback herring, American shad, Atlantic silversides,
rainbow smelt), for outmigration (e.g., inner Bay of Fundy Atlantic salmon smolts), or recruitment
to the river (e.g., American eel elvers). Collectively, these processes represent a level of
biological complexity that could not easily be accommodated within a mitigation framework.

Therefore, it is suggested that the proponent focus on monitoring and evaluation activities that
can be linked to specific actions that would be taken to mitigate the effects on very young fish.
As stated in the proposal, these actions are entrainment into the water intake and the brine
dilution facility, and exposure to effluent from the facility.

Exposure

It is doubtful that any information concerning the effects of exposure to brine (at varying
concentrations) is available for any or most of the diadromous species present within the
Shubenacadie River Estuary. However, the infrastructure and expertise to assess the effects of
exposure to brine on juvenile diadromous fish is available at a local university. The need to look
at exposure effects would be contingent upon the relative difference between the chemical
composition of the brine and seawater occurring naturally in the river. If the proponent cannot
produce information that shows the chemical properties of the brine at the point of discharge:
a) does not differ from that of seawater, and
b) would not harm fish at the proposed dilution, upon release into the river,
then it is recommended that studies be scheduled to assess both the lethal and sub-lethal
effects of exposure, minimally on juvenile striped bass.
None of the above is intended to imply that fulfillment of the activities recommended in this
document will address all fish conservation issues. Rather the suggestions should be regarded
as advice on where the proponent might more effectively direct their monitoring activities in
2007.

Conclusions

The Shubenacadie River Estuary at the proposed location of water withdrawal and discharge for
the Alton Salt Dome project is a dynamic receiving environment possessing a high level of
natural variability, which has not been fully characterized within the Environmental Registration
document. Existing uncertainties associated with natural variability in the underlying physical
and climatological dynamics of, and their interaction within, the receiving environment
complicate the task of prediction of potential environmental effects on aquatic ecosystem
components. Both the design and implementation of measures to mitigate the impacts to
aquatic ecosystem components, such as the timing of brine discharge, may be therefore equally
complicated.
Given the presence of a species listed as endangered species under the Species at Risk Act
(inner Bay of Fundy salmon) and other regionally rare and sensitive species (striped bass and
Atlantic sturgeon), it is expected that a lower than average level of risk tolerance may be applied
to projects proposed for this environment. At present, the Environmental Registration document
contains insufficient information to enable full evaluation and risk assessment of the potential
impacts to aquatic ecosystem components, including species at risk.
Given that advice has not been provided by DFO Maritimes Science on this type of project in
the past, and given that this is only a preliminary evaluation of the information contained within
the Environmental Registration, it is recommended that a DFO-led scientific peer review
meeting be conducted to more fully evaluate the scientific and technical information available for
this project, to discuss additional mitigation and monitoring options, to determine what
information may be required (if any) to address outstanding knowledge gaps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Since the 2007 science review striped bass posted there was another report with alot of the questions posed answered. I read it at the time but don't have a copy it was out around 2010. The salt from the deposit although it seems like alot would be diluted in so much water that it wouldn't change the salinity of the river much if at all. Even so they are supposed to not deposit the salt solution around the striped bass spawning. I think they did some testing of the salt to make sure there was nothing else deleterious which could impact the river. I do not believe they found anything out of the ordinary. I remember being concerned about this development like most here but was not after I read the updated DFO science review. It would not have been approved if science did not give the project a conditional OK. Like the 2007 report says they are concerned and imposed a "lower then average level of risk tolerance in this environment".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I have been looking at all of the research documents on the DFO website, and I can not find one. I`ll keep looking.

I can not accept the fact that pumping that much salt into a tidal river that pushes the same water back and forth with each tide for 7 to 10 years will not change the salinity levels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I was hoping SF would post on this as i am sure he knows the ins and outs of the project and the effects,so what he is saying has alleviated a little of my stress but still if there would be a way to get this stopped that would be even better...Striped bass do you have any contacts for the agencys and people you listed?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
1,353 Posts
  1. Any biologist worth their salt ( No pun Intended) well maybe......would even think of changeing the salt content in the estuary of a river stripers use for spawning. It is a delicate balance that allows the striper eggs which are free floating to hatch. Even with things remaining the same it doesn't happen each year successful. The Annapolis Rivert lost its ability to successfully hatch the eggs because the salt content changed with the tidal power in the estuary with the causeway.We have screwed two major striper spawning rivers in eastern Canada the St John and the Annapolis by changing the salt content in the estuary used for spawning. Where is DFO? Why is it up to Recreational fishers to point out the potential disaster? We are just ignored as a small thorn in the road to prosperity! DFO fiddled while Rome burned!
 
  • Like
Reactions: girlfisher

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Well said Perry...couldn't agree more
 
1 - 20 of 177 Posts
Top