Hey Lastcar,
The road that went out to the Island in question was built with a bed of rip rap 4-5ft range then bedded with river rock and tailings. The rumored theory behind it was the rip rap was supposed to let enough water through so as not to lower levels in the back water. The original plan was to put in culverts along the road to allow sufficent flow behind the road. Dfo took the blame for flaw in the roadway, but rumors, say the proj manager from dfo was influenced from the contractor and band manager for the proj to allow them to go ahead without. Why that was even considered viable is beyond anyone I deal with thoughts. Given the size of the channel they were trying to cross and the area and volume of water that goes through the particular area there should haven't even been a question in regards to the neccesity of culverts to provide sufficent flow past the access road
On Island 22 there has been work going on by various sectors for years. For years they would berm up the front access drop a couple lge culverts in and work away. It does seem like a logical bar to remove gravel from,large and clean in size,close to highway access,and minimal water crossing.
The process of extraction is not just run the excavators out there and start hoggin material anywhere looks good. First off is there workable and saleable material in the site. If material is too fine or too much sand, it becomes a burden to work with, ie. has to be stock piled in different areas and is more a specialized product.
they are looking for a decent blend of very course and minimal fines, That way from the one stock pile they can run the base product through a screen or the crusher and produce a variety of products which are more saleable.
Contrary to popular environmentalist beliefs, the extraction does not harm the spawning grounds in the area. There is no in stream extractions being done when a contact like this is happening, and in fact when work has been completed the contractor is required to shape the work area back into a that fish would enhabit during high water. this is done by anylizing where the water flowed in the past and recreate channels for it to flow agian in the high water.
One point I read in one of the local gazzettes about the proposal was the fact debris would be washed into the river during and after the extraction process. All material that is classified as debris must be hauled off site, and disposed of accordingly. A nother quick point in regards to stripping the vegetation and trees to access the gravel does not happen, it's not allowed. Basically they are looking for areas that are clear of growth because growth needs topsoil and fines and that's not what they are wanting to clear and move before they can actually start work. I dont have the numbers in front of me, but I do know DFO implemented reg pertaining to the max size of trees and density of undergrowth that were allowed to be removed, if I remember right it was something like 6" diameter on trunks.
The days of just removing what ever the contractor whats are long gone and given the disaster that happened last time someone would'nt listen I think the contractor that recieves this new contract will be under such a fine microscope I would'nt want to drop a timmy ho's cup even close to the water.
Cheers,
Crazy D
I made the call the to the report a poacher and pollutter hotline on my licence when I got home.
