Slike strani
PDF
ePub

press release from the International Joint Commission dated April 17, excerpts from the debate in the Canadian House of Commons for April 14 and 28, 1964, and Mr. Roncalio's letter of April 28 to the President may be printed in the Record at this point.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Hon. DEAN Rusk,
Secretary of State,
Washington, D.C.

U.S. SENATE, Washington, D.C., April 15, 1964.

DEAR MR. SECRETARY: As I am sure you know, the waters of the Great Lakes are of vital importance not only to the people of the States adjacent to the Great Lakes, but to the people of the entire United States. Any substantial reduction in either quality or quantity of these waters is a direct threat to the future well-being of the Nation.

The lowering of the water levels of Lakes Huron and Michigan to the lowest levels ever recorded has adverse effects on the Nation's commerce, welfare, economy, navigational channels, water supplies, sewage disposal facilities, recreational developments, wildlife, and many other elements vital to our way of life and indeed to our continued existence.

It is, of course, a matter of record that the levels of the Great Lakes rise and fall in cycles of high and low water and over a period of time regain their normal levels-only to fall or rise again.

The natural regimen of the lake levels has been altered through deepening the navigation channels connecting the Great Lakes to take advantage of the St. Lawrence Seaway which was constructed through the combined efforts of the United States and Canada.

Portions of the Great Lakes form the boundary between the United States and Canada; our two countries share the benefits and the problems of this great water basin. We are in it together, and neither can operate it alone. In my opinion, we should not undertake to do unilaterally what affects us both.

Accordingly, and in view of the above, I hereby request that you explore with Canada the possibility that both Governments might request the International Joint Commission to examine into and report, as soon as possible, on the feasibility and economic advantages of diverting additional water into the Great Lakes basin in order to raise the levels thereof.

Specifically, I would hope the Commission would be requested—

1. To examine into and report whether it would be feasible and economically advantageous to bring new supplies of water into the Great Lakes Basin, and if so, from what source or sources and to what governing levels. 2. To make an estimate of the costs of diverting the said water to such levels.

3. To make an economic appraisal of the value of the two countries, jointly and separately, of diverting the said water to such levels.

4. To access the merits of the various alternative proposals.

5. In making such report, to bear in mind the benefits which the raising of the lake levels would have in terms of power, commerce, industry, agriculture, conservation, recreation, and other beneficial uses.

I have no doubt that such an undertaking would have the overwhelming support of the Members of Congress from the Great Lakes area and of the people whom they represent. The situation has reached critical proportions.

Sincerely,

HON. PHILIP A. HART,
U.S. Senate.

PHILIP A. HART.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, April 30, 1964.

DEAR SENATOR HART: Thank you for your letter to Secretary Rusk dated April 15, 1964, in which you request that the Department of State explore with Canada the possibility that the Governments of the United States and Canada request the International Joint Commission to study the feasibility and economic advantages of diverting additional water into the Great Lakes Basin.

The Department has initiated consultation with other interested agenices of the Federal Government with a view to obtaining an administration position on your proposal.

The American Embassy at Ottawa has brought your proposal to the attention of the Canadian Department of External Affairs indicating that publicity for your proposal was planned for April 29.

On April 17, 1964, the U.S. section of the International Joint Commission issued a press release, two copies of which are enclosed for your information, in which reference was made to the low water levels and flows in the St. Lawrence River and to the benefits resulting from the hydroelectric power installations constructed in the St. Lawrence River.

You may be assured that the Department will do all that it can to assist you and will keep you informed about developments in connection with your proposal. Sincerely yours, FREDERICK G. DUTTON, Assistant Secretary.

INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION PRESS RELEASE

At the semiannual meeting of the International Joint Commission, United States and Canada, held in Washington, April 7-10, 1964, the Commission received and considered the report of its International St. Lawrence River Board of Control, relating to current and prospective levels and flows in the international section of the St. Lawrence River.

Due to abnormally low precipitation in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Basin in recent years, the levels and flows throughout the system have inevitably been below average and in fact on some occasions have dropped below the record lows of the last 100 years.

Through the operation of the regulating works erected in the St. Lawrence, substantial improvements over natural conditions have been obtained both in Lake Ontario and downstream as far as Montreal Harbor, through the cooperation of users with the Commission's Board of Control.

As the prospects for this year are not encouraging and supplies in the upper lakes are below normal, the International Joint Commission and its Board of Control will direct their efforts to alleviate the effects of low water conditions to the maximum extent possible.

Under the Commission's Order of Approval of 1952 and 1956, the St. Lawrence structures are to be operated to maintain Lake Ontario levels from 6.6-foot unregulated range to a regulated 4-foot range from elevations 246.77 to 242.77, during the navigation season with due regard for other requirements both upstream and downstream.

The prescribed range of stage has been maintained with resultant improvement of conditions both upstream and downstream. In 1963, despite the fact that the water supplies in the area were the lowest in more than a hundred years of record, Lake Ontario levels were maintained within the prescribed range and above the stage that would otherwise have resulted. In the last 4 months of the year, for example, the lake was from 1.2 to 1.8 feet higher and outflows were from 6,000 to 21,000 cubic feet per second greater than would have resulted had there been no regulation. This has been accomplished by retaining water during the high-flow periods and releasing it during the low-flow period. The above operation benefited all the users, both upstream and downstream.

The Commission considers that acceptable results have been achieved despite extraordinary adverse conditions. It feels however, that all affected interests should be forewarned that notwithstanding the fact that all regulatory works will continue to be operated in accordance with the order of approval, a continuation of the existing drought could result in water supply conditions worse than experienced last year.

APRIL 17, 1964.

[From the Hansard, Apr. 14, 1964]

SHIPPING: STATEMENT BY MINISTER ON GREAT LAKES WATER LEVELS

Hon. ARTHUR LAING (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources). I should like to lay on the table a report dealing with the matter raised by a number of members in the house, namely, the water level of the Great Lakes. Since the statement I have prepared is of considerable length, and since I believe it would be valueless unless read, I ask permission to have it printed in Hansard.

I should like at the same time to table two copies of the 1961 report of the International Joint Commission entitled "Water Levels of Lake Ontario" which deals with the water levels of the Great Lakes system.

A number of honorable members have asked what plans are being made for the relief of this problem. I must tell them we are aware of the plan in respect to the so-called grand canal in connection with which it is proposed to generate power from three rivers in northern Quebec and to use as a storage basin Abitibi Lake, thence to have the water flow south to the Great Lakes system. It is the opinion of the appropriate branch of my department that any cost efficiency study of this plan should be preceded by a conference between the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario, who are the owners of the resources.

May I have permission to table these documents?

Mr. SPEAKER. Does the House give permission?

Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre). As to the request that this statement be included in Hansard without being read, I should like to suggest it be included as an appendix. It seems to me that putting into the pages of Hansard statements which are not read is a questionable practice.

Mr. SPEAKER. Does the House consent to this statement being printed as an appendix to today's Hansard?

Some HONORABLE MEMBERS. Agreed.

(EDITOR'S NOTE.-For text of document above referred to, see app. B.) [Later.] On the orders of the day:

Mr. HEBER E. SMITH (Simcoe North). Mr. Speaker, flowing from the statement of the Minister of Northern Affairs or perhaps, more accurately, not flowing from his statement-I have a question for the Minister of Public Works. In view of the exceedingly low water levels in the Great Lakes, are any plans being made for emergency dredging in those harbors where shipping is being seriously affected?

Mr. SPEAKER. This is a question for the order paper.

Mr. D. R. MITCHELL (Sudbury). Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Is the Minister aware that private sources are prepared to make a survey of the Grand Canal project and, if so, is his department ready to give all necessary assistance to this survey? Mr. SPEAKER. This is also a question for the order paper.

[From the Hansard, Apr. 14, 1964]

APPENDIX B

GREAT LAKES-REPORT ON LOW WATER LEVELS

Several honorable members have recently expressed concern respecting the low water levels currently prevailing throughout the Great Lakes Basin and I can now make a statement concerning this matter. On page 1,647 of Hansard I provided the honorable member for Leeds with the water levels at Kingston, Ontario, and Prescott, Ontario, and the outflows of Lake Ontario since 1938. I am tabling today two reports of the International Joint Commission dated December 1958, and April 5, 1961. The first report summarizes all available information on the comparison of Lake Ontario water levels including the effects of precipitation, evaporation, winds and barometric pressure changes, ice retardation and crustal movement, diversions into and out of the Great Lakes Basin and operation of the outlet control of Lake Ontario and Lake Superior. The second report deals with methods of regulation and includes the text of orders of approval for the construction and operation of the St. Lawrence power project.

As honorable members will realize the principal cause of current low water levels is the abnormal low precipitation which was about 3 inches below normal during 1962, and 5 inches below normal in 1963 over the Great Lakes Basin. In addition above normal temperatures have caused higher than usual evaporation. Due to the enormous storage capacity of the Great Lakes levels change very slowly and while the normal seasonal rise will produce some improvement for the present, below normal levels will obtain generally during the balance of this year. Honorable members will recall that some 12 years ago the situation was quite the opposite with much damage resulting along the shoreline during the highwater levels. These cycles have persisted over

the period of water level records on the lakes and there is no evidence to show a long term rise or fall in the average water level.

In view of the concern which has been expressed in this house and the complexity of the problem and profusion of available reports and data, I have asked the water resources branch of my department to prepare a report_summarizing the studies on the fluctuation of the levels of all the Great Lakes as well as the effect of regulatory measures both in operation and proposed, [From the Hansard, Apr. 14, 1964]

SHIPPING REPORTED U.S. ACTION TO CONTROL LAKE HURON WATER LEVELS Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER. The first question is from the honorable member for Lambton West.

Mr. WALTER F. FOY (Lambton West). Mr. Speaker, the reason I asked the Minister of Transport a question this afternoon was because the harbors along the shores of Lake Huron are becoming useless. This year I understand the drop in the level of water has reached the point where the water level is approximately 3 feet below average. My riding, like others in the Lake Huron area, is suffering a great deal because of this. For example, Grand Bend has a number of fishing companies which produced about $750,000, 5 years ago, quite a large amount for a small area. This is now reduced to about $500,000 per year. The harbor has been dredged each year, but if the harbor has no water all the dredging that can be done is not going to help the fishing boats in and out of the harbor. What they need is water.

Following along the Lake Huron shore of my riding I come to Port Franks, Perch Creek, and Point Edward where there is a great deal of commercial fishing which is very important to these areas. Business that requires river dockage suffers at the port of Sarnia. I believe the port of Sarnia is classified as part of the seaway and if the water levels of the lake continue to go down that very busy port of Sarnia will be in real trouble unless something is done. This is the reason I asked the Minister of Transport this question this afternoon. Honorable J. W. PICKERSGILL (Minister of Transport). Mr. Speaker, the question raised by the honorable member for Lambton West has to do with a matter that was decided in principle some years ago. According to the information available to me, at the time the dredging was started in the St. Clair River-I recall the very beginnings of that because I was minister of citizenship and immigration at the time and it affected the Indian reserve on Walpole Island— the U.S. Government also proposed that they should make a study of the possibility of putting some kind of barrier in the river just below the Blue Water Bridge in order to maintain the levels as much as could be done in that way without interference, with naviagation, and to offset any possible effect that dredging might have.

However, this was not the kind of thing that could be done very effectively without a good deal of model testing and experimentation. The Government of Canada agreed in principle to having this matter considered. The information I have is that agreement was given in 1962 by the previous administration, and I think very wisely, and that this experimentation is now going on. I sincerely hope, as I am sure all honorable members do, that it may be successful and that some definitive action may be taken as the result of it.

I am afraid, however, that however valuable this may be as a long-term measure it is not going to have very much effect and, in fact, cannot possibly have any effect at all in the present season. We are faced with a very grave problem, indeed, not only in Lake Huron and Georgian Bay, and a great deal of concern has been expressed to me in this regard by many honorable members and by many outside the house through considerable correspondence. I think the honorable member for Lambton West is quite right in saying that the problem cannot really be cured by dredging.

The Minister of Public Works (Mr. Deschatelets) and I and our officials have been considering this matter and we are going to do anything we can to alleviate the situation by dredging. But the water just is not there. This is something that I am afraid can only be cured by more water.

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER. Order. I am sorry to interrupt the Minister but his time has expired. The honorable member for Parry Sound-Muskoka.

SHIPPING EXPERIMENTS BY U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Mr. G. H. AIKEN (Parry Sound-Muskoka). Mr. Speaker, my question is along similar lines and perhaps the Minister will have an opportunity to complete the second installment of his reply.

Mr. PICKERSGILL. Part 2.

Mr. AIKEN. I have a somewhat similar question to that of the honorable member who just spoke. The low water levels on the Great Lakes and the Georgian Bay have been causing concern for about a year now. In 1963 it was generally felt that the problem was one of a natural cycle. It was to explain to those of us who made inquiries and it was said that it would soon right itself. However, when the ice went out in 1964 it became obvious that this was not just a low cycle. There was no restoration of the water level and, at the moment, it is not just a problem for many places along the lakes: It is a disaster. I saw pictures published in the Parry Sound North Star and in the Globe and Mail this morning which indicate how disastrous this situation is.

As the Minister has just stated, members representing constituencies, particularly along Georgian Bay and Lake Huron, have been very concerned. The Government, if I may be fair, I believe has accepted the advice it received that this was a cycle and there was not much that could be done about it. While this is undoubtedly a factor, and while undoubtedly there is low precipitation, many of us fear that underlying this may be something more fundamental, that there may be not just a short-term problem but a major one such as the drainage away of water.

In asking the numerous questions that have been asked, we are not trying to attach blame. We are merely attempting to get the Government to undertake some active measures to have the situation rectified. Several indicators show that the lack of precipitation is not the whole answer. Over the weekend, I verified this. For example, the Muskoka Lakes and most of the smaller inland lakes have normal water levels now. Lake Nipissing, according to an answer I received yesterday, has water 1 foot higher than it was last year or the year before. We are not suggesting that any of these lakes should be lowered because that would merely be extending the problem into other lakes.

We do feel that the studies that are being undertaken by the U.S. Corps of Engineers now indicate there is a problem to be met. We are hoping that some long-term measures will be seriously considered so that we will not find the situation is a permanent one. My question is really to determine whether the Government has now been persuaded that some action is necessary and that some research will have to be done. If the Minister of Transport would make a statement along those lines, then I am sure we would all like to hear that statement.

Hon. J. W. PICKERSGILL (Minister of Transport): I could not agree more with what the honorable gentleman has just said. I do not pose as an expert, myself, but I do not believe, although there has been a serious lack of precipitation in the last 2 or 3 years, that is the whole answer to the problem. I did not bring the figures with me but I have been looking at them. It is quite apparent that there has been, over 2 or 3 years, a lack of precipitation. There may be something cyclical about these things. However, it is a little questionable whether our records extend back in a really accurate way long enough to be sure about that. There is not any doubt that the rate at which water is being used at the present time, particularly in highly settled areas like the old part of Ontario, and the gradual denuding of forest cover, have contributed to what may be a long-term situation. Since this situation has been partly created by man, perhaps it will need man to do something to offset it.

I would be hopeful that the ARDA program would have some effect in helping in the conservation of water. We are going to have to look quite seriously at this. With respect to some of the streams that were diverted into Lake Superior, the diversions were started about a generation ago, and perhaps steps no one would have once contemplated even a very few years ago will have to be studied. I do not think there is any possibility of doing too much research into this problem. More and more we come to realize, not only all over this continent but throughout the world that water, which seems in many respects to be the cheapest commodity of all, is the most precious resource we have.

Speaking for myself, and I think for those of my colleagues who have a special responsibility in this matter, I will endeavor to see that everything is done that

« PrejšnjaNaprej »