Flood Mitigation Study Report – An Insult to Perth-Andover Flood Victims
Well, we finally got our report – right on schedule I might add. What a colossal waste of taxpayer money and valuable time! Our government insisted from the start that this report was absolutely essential and would serve as the basis of action so that the plight of our village could be addressed once and for all.
Quite frankly, this report, which could more accurately be called “Mitigation Lite”, contains no new information other than some snappy colored maps of the river and it is hard to imagine how it could serve as the basis of anything other than a shining example of procrastination and dithering. If our government ever decides to actually do something about our situation, it won’t be as a result of anything contained in this document that was not available before.
We have wasted 4 valuable months; our entire summer is gone and the chance of anyone being relocated this year lessens with each passing day.
This report was prepared by the government for the government and it delivered the precise findings that the government wanted. The very wording, presentation and direction of the report (not to mention the findings) was controlled by senior bureaucrats in Fredericton from day one and they never wavered in their determination to deliver a product that suited the government’s purpose (ie to do nothing once again and absolve NB Power from any responsibility).
Sure, the village had 2 representatives on the study group and we had a representative from the Flood Victims Committee all of whom spoke out loudly and forcefully on our behalf but the die was cast from day one and it was clear that the report would turn out pretty much the way it did. The biggest concession the bureaucrats made to us was to allow both Perth-Andover and Tobique First Nation each to attach a community input section as appendices to the report. Turns out, these appendices were the most complete, professionally-done and thoughtful components of the entire study! The rest is milque-toast.
The report runs a full 16 pages! Pages 1 to 3 contain the title and a brief introduction; pages 14 to 16 contain a 2 sentence conclusion, a table format summary and a list of attachments and this leaves a grand total of 10 pages representing 4 months of work and several hundred thousand dollars of expense by an untold number of bureaucrats and consultants. Nice. Now if those 10 pages actually contained some valuable information that would be fine. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. Here’s what’s in there for those of you who haven’t read it (don’t worry, this won’t take long). The report is laid out in accordance with the Terms of Reference and I’ll use that format.
5.1.0 The known and anticipated risks of ice jam flooding…
Here the study re-iterates the previous floods we have had (19 in all); measures the elevation of all buildings in town so that we would know how much water we had; and includes maps of the river showing the extent of recent floods and the impact of higher water levels. Further study is being done on these models. This is reference material – useful but nothing really new. There is a recommendation to spend $400,000 to improve monitoring of flow and water levels which seems like a good idea.
5.2.0 The extent to which the river itself is a factor and possible measures to reduce same.
The study notes that ice jams occur usually at bends, narrow sections and shallow depths. Seems reasonable. There are 10 colored maps showing water depths from Tobique to Beechwood. Apparently one consultant sounded the entire length and breadth of the river and could not find any shallow areas, sand bars, etc that might be candidates for dredging (interestingly, on Labor Day a family member of mine nearly grounded his boat on a sand bar in the middle of the river just above the dam). Dredging is essentially dismissed as a possible solution because it is too time consuming and expensive (and of course there are no areas that need it!). The Irving piers at Beechwood could be removed at a cost of $1.5 million but it’s really not worth it. So it doesn’t look like they are going to do anything with the river.
This river sounding needs to be compared with previous measurements in order to get a real handle as to how bad the siltation is occurring but preliminary comparisons “are inconclusive” which means we need to do this analysis ourselves because if there was even a hint that no siltation had occurred over the past years this would be hi-lighted in the report!
5.3.0 Possible non-structural mitigation measures…
Provide the community with the services of a planner re land use, relocation, mitigation, etc. Hard to find fault with this.
5.4.0 Measures to manage ice and river flows…
NB Power reviewed its operating procedures and apparently did everything right. This was confirmed by an independent consulting firm (Hatch Canada) which NB Power has hired on a number of occasions over the years. The report notes that “by and large” (apparently not in every instance) Beechwood followed established operating procedures and there is no reason to change anything. Comforting!
This section of the report contains the following priceless explanation of the cause of the flood…”The 2012 ice jam flooding was the result of an early and rapid rise of flow in the River to a peak value well in excess of that required to realize flood levels in Perth-Andover,; these hydrographical attributes being the consequence of natural climatic events and beyond human control”. How can you not love consultants? Of course Beechwood dam has absolutely nothing to do with the flooding.
The report notes that another consulting firm is looking at 6 possible measures to break up and manage the ice (blasting, etc) but anticipates these would be too costly and environmentally unfriendly. So it appears they don’t want to do this either.
5.5.0 Possible structural mitigation measures….
Finally, the meat of the report…buyout, relocation and flood proofing measures! This actually covers 3 pages of the report. Unfortunately the first of these is completely wasted on a cynical attempt by a high ranking bureaucrat to try to spin this whole issue such that he has Perth-Andover property owners contributing to the costs of relocation/flood proofing though these property owners have not contributed one iota to the flooding problem we face. That blame rests entirely at the feet of government through NB Power and that’s who should be footing the bill for the remedy…not us! He refers to various other jurisdictions in Canada and the US where mitigation projects have been undertaken but only rarely have public funds been used to flood proof, buyout or relocate private property. Fair enough, but we are the exception. NB Power brought the flood zone to us….we didn’t locate into it! So smarten up!
This section reiterates our demands for residential relocation and for financial assistance for our business community for recovery/relocation and it estimates there are 72 candidates for relocation at an average cost of $100,000. It goes on to mention necessary repairs to Route 105 and other roads (about $25 million) and that a new bridge would cost about $20 million. Other mitigation measures would address flooding from Tibbitts Brook and others at a cost of $1 million.
And there you have it. That’s 4 months of work. We would have all been much better served if our government would have acted immediately to do what is obviously the most reasonable and practical thing. Had they done so many of our residents would be sitting safely on high ground today rather than huddled in their flood ravaged homes waiting for the next one.
How much more of this abuse are we going to take?
Al McPhail
Chair
Perth-Andover Flood Victims Committee
