Peace and Environment News * December 2000-January 2001

Adams Mine: the Real Story

by Moe Garahan

Community members turn their backs on the first train coming through, October 20, following the police removal of the protest barricade over the tracks that were to be used to carry the garbage north. Photo: Jim Garahan.

The announcement came on October 21st that the controversial Adams Mine garbage plan had died because the city of Toronto and Rail Cycle North, the consortium backing the project, couldn't agree on a liability clause. It was a proud day for northerners and their allies in the fight against the dump.

The following week three hundred people gathered around the old Adams Mine, located 600 km north of Toronto in the Temiskaming District, to celebrate. They renamed the area Lake Mamowediwin, meaning "Coming Together," to honour the process of struggle that brought together Quebecers, Ontarians, First Nations people, farmers and environmentalists.

The happy story ends here. Right?

Perhaps not so fast. This plan has been 10 years in the making. Have we really seen the last of it?

Upon initial investigation, the idea seems ludicrous. Twenty million tons of waste would have been dumped into the old Adams Mine pit, which is now a lake situated in fractured, fissured rock on a high point of land. Lake Mamowediwin is part of the Temiskaming water table, with groundwater flowing freely to feed Lake Temiskaming, the headwaters for the Ottawa River Valley.

Three hundred million litres of fresh water flowing through the waste each year would have been contaminated, then pumped to the surface, filtered and returned to nearby rivers. The developers estimated this active treatment phase would have had to last at least 100 years. The garbage was meant to travel 600 km north from Toronto over 20 years. Who was to ensure that the pumps would continue working for over 100 years if profits ended within 20 years?

Corporations and politicians

How did this environmental disaster of an idea even advance to the point that it did?

Enter the strong lobbying Rail Cycle consortium. First there is North Bay promoter Gordon McGuinty, who still holds the rights to Lake Mamowediwin and has an ongoing certified license to dump waste there. He has been very clear that the offer remains on the table.

Next we have Canadian Waste Services, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Houston waste giant Waste Management Inc., a company whose many repeated criminal charges and convictions include environmental infractions, illegal dumping, fraud, and fabricating environmental groups to support their landfill projects. It is this company who would have been entrusted with the job of making sure the pumps ran for a century after the dump profits from Toronto ceased. How safe does that make you feel about your water? Unfortunately WMI also holds a lion's share of landfill projects in Southern Ontario and continues to seek business across Canada.

Then there is Mel "too-little, too-late" Lastman, the man who feels that plastic moose statues scattered among the streets of Toronto render it the "Moose Capital of Canada." His further blunder that "no one lives within an 80 mile radius of the mine" suggests that he cares and knows little about anyone outside of the city limits, and certainly not in the North.

Finally, Canadian National and Ontario Northland Railways would have shipped the toxic cargo north along the very tracks that protestors blocked during the days leading up to Toronto's decision. There are also some townsfolk in the district who were, understandably in a depressed area, seeing "jobs, jobs, jobs," unfortunately of the short-term variety that is consistent with economic development opportunities going north.

It is truly heart-wrenching to see the natural resources stripped away, with waste added to the assault on the Earth. Northerners have had enough!!

Who shut the public out?

You can almost understand how these for-profit establishments were going along for the potential $1 billion ride in the hope that the deal would go through. However, where was the public voice? The major partner of this deal were the provincial Conservatives, who have pushed for major changes to the Environmental Assessment Act, including limiting public input, public participation and allowable scope of hearings. The so-called environmental hearing that occurred had all the earmarks of a political process—purposely narrow in scope, with refusal to examine such key questions as the ecological, social and cultural effects on the district, and the cost and feasibility of repair in case of failure.

All that northerners have asked for over 10 years is for a full environmental assessment to take place. This seems fairly reasonable given the scale of potential environmental, human and economic devastation. However, as Grand Chief Carol McBride of the Timiskaming First Nations insists, "No firm assurances have been given that the health and safety of downstream residents will not be negatively affected." Given the reality that "we all live downstream," this becomes a bit alarming.

Power for change

What does all this mean? Many claim that the only reason that the deal failed was that it was a bad business plan. The deal was stopped by the bureaucrats, they say, not the protestors.

The reality is the deal continues to be one that people fight. Northerners are attempting to remove McGuinty's license at the Lake for good. Toronto is still looking for a site to send its residential and municipal waste to. There will be other targets within Canada and abroad. In Michigan, the new home of Toronto's commercial waste, a group called No Waste (Network of Waste Activists Stopping Trash Exports) has been seeking support in its efforts to refuse Toronto's garbage.

The belief that we can produce waste and expect that poorer, outlying areas like Michigan or the Canadian North will take care of it, is as strong as it is short-sighted. This has got to change. Lastman plans to hit a new target of 60 percent recycling of trash in Toronto by 2006 (up from 25 percent currently). Although recycling is part of the picture, reduction needs to be the main focus.

As people who care about our environment, we need to continually challenge ourselves to break out of comfortable habits. I believe that recycling has encouraged us to feel good about purchasing wasteful packaging. All of us need to be vigilant in reducing our own waste.

I further believe we need to understand our power in making change and not allow others to sway us. Technicalities were not the reason this deal failed. And it certainly wasn't only about price. It is about people questioning actively when government is changing law to enhance private gain at the expense of healthy and safe communities. This questioning must continue—for we all live downstream.

Moe Garahan grew up in New Liskeard, on Lake Temiskaming, and is presently questioning anything and everything to do with private-public partnerships.

Converted May 14, 2001 - Lg

To follow up on this article, contact the author or the organizations/individuals mentioned; do not contact the Peace and Environment Resource Centre - we cannot provide follow up or contact information. This article is an archival copy of the printed one in the Peace and Environment News (PEN). Viewpoints expressed should not be taken to represent the opinions of the Peace and Environment Resource Centre, the PEN, or our supporters.

[ Search Contact ]