Love having whitewater rapids literally in your backyard? Speak up—let the right people know you oppose the damming of the Petawawa River. Click here for a letter template and mailing list, just fill in the blanks and hit send!

The folks at the Community Alliance to Save the Petawawa (CASP) have made it super easy for you to join the effort and make a difference. Take 60 seconds to follow these three simple steps:

1. Copy and paste the following addresses into an email:

venskaitis@xeneca.com; mholmes@xeneca.com; pgillette@xeneca.com; elaratta@xeneca.com; tsugarman@oel-hydrosys.ca; nwpontario-penontario@tc.gc.ca; mayor@petawawa.ca; minister.moe@ontario.ca; perry.m@forces.gc.ca;info@owa.ca; jbates@owa.ca; petawawa-river@hotmail.com; john.yakabuskico@pc.ola.org; joanna.samson@mnr.gov.on.ca


2.Cut and paste this into the body of the email:

I strongly object to the damming of the Petawawa – both at Big Eddy and at Half Mile.
These projects will negatively impact the quality of life in this community.
I feel that Xeneca is not meeting the requirements of the Class EA, and request that an full, Individual Environmental Assessment be undertaken.
I ask that you take every possible step to prevent the projects from moving ahead.

I have the following questions that must be answered in some detail before I will be able to form an educated opinion on the neccessity, advantages and disadvantages of the project. Without these answers, public consultation will be incomplete, as they have a major impact on the decision-making process.

1. If the public firmly opposes the project, are you willing walk away from the project, or will Xeneca use all available resources to push the project ahead agains the wishes of the local community?
2. How will Xeneca protect and maintain the navigability and the quality of the recreational use of the river in the affected reach and the section of river downstream of the powerhouse?
3. What specifically are you doing to enhance the recreational use?
4. How has the recreational community been involved in the planning process?
5. Will Xeneca release water over the weir on a regular basis to permit the current and historic use of the river for navigation? A portage trail – as mentioned in the Project Description – does not meet this criteria as no known trail exists.
6. On what basis was the Notice of Commencement revised to change the status of the waterway from ‘unmanaged’ to ‘managed’? Be specific please, as no management plan is in place for this section of river.
7. Please provide a copy of the public safety requirements that apply to this project, bearing in mind that the area downstream, from the powerhouse is heavily used for recreation.
8. What are the safety standards that must be met? Do they include a project of this style?
9. Please explain in cubic metres / second, the expected variation, and the possible frequency of this variation, in outflow from the powerhouse. Again, please be specific.
10. Provide an explanation that details the difference between “run of river with modified peaking” and “run of river” but that there will be “minor” fluctuation in the flows as you or your staff have indicated on several occasions. If there is a change in flow rates, the project, by definition, if not ‘run of river’.
11. How does Xeneca propose to ensure that the public retains the right to access public lands and waters in the area upstream, within, and downstream of the weir and powerhouse?
12. Please provide the minimum residual flow value to be committed to for this project so we have time to carry out our own analysis of the consequences of this number on the recreational use of the river.
13. Please provide an indication of the expected downstream extent of any area where river flow will be, even temporarily, reduced to a value below that of the river flow into the head pond.
14. You indicate that the Big Eddy Project will help increase the reliability of electrical service in periods of blackouts. Can you tell me how many blackouts we have had in the last 2, 3, 5 years, and how many would have been prevented as this seems like valid information in light of your claims.
15. How will the safe passage be maintained for sturgeon, walleye and other sport fish?
16. How did you calculate the economic benefits to the Town of Petawawa, as advertised in local papers? Is there a guarantee of local vendors being chosen for the construction? In addition, how many long-term (post-construction) jobs will be guaranteed to operate the dam and powerhouse?
17. Is Xeneca willing to share the Notice of Inspection and/and or subsequent Environmental Report with those who have requested it within 14 days of completing the report? If not, please explain your reasoning, as this document is considered an important component of the public consultation process.


I also wish to be notified of any project developments or opportunity for public input, including Public Information sessions, the Notice of Inspection, the Environmental Report and Notice of Completion.


Your Name & Address


3. Click Send. It is important that you track your responses, or lack thereof. If Xeneca does not respond to you questions, an argument can be made that they are not meeting the intent of the public consultation mandated in the Class Environmental Assessment documents. If you don't get a response to your questions, follow up and be sure to Cc petawawa-river@hotmail.com. Thanks.


Image Credits: Scott MacGregor

Read more about the proposal to dam the Petawawa and find out other ways you can help at www.savethepetawawa.ca. Read Petawawa local Jeff Jackson's impassioned essay "From the Frontlines" in the new issue of Rapid magazine, here.