Come on everyone..lets shut the door in the face of our over spending mayor and council on the dyke. Go the PG city website and fill out NO on the waste of money.

Correct me if I am wrong. Please go to the web site for the petition and on the 2nd page it says “ be a Canadian citizen;
 be at least 18 years of age;”

To me an 18 year old CAN vote as it says “at least 18 years of age.”

Be sure to send in BOTH pages 1&2 or it is invalid.

I don’t think this has anything to do with flooding. It’s all about forcing what industry is left out of the area so that CN can expand their intermodal and rail yard.

Guesswhat. I agree that if an individal is 18 years old they can vote. In additin people do not need to be registered voters, or property owners. If they cannot sign on line, then they should get to City Hall and obtain a copy (or copies) of the petition.

People can obtain from the City as many copies as possible, and make their own copies and go door to door and get people to sign. In order to get 5351 signatures, people need to make an exceptional effort to get this job done.

Here is some background on the reason for the dike for those that may be interested:

*****
History has shown that all along a river there will always be a concern about flooding and the Nechako is no exception. So, if people and business elect to build on a flood plain why should the rest of the citizens of Prince George have to cover part of that cost?

The decision to build Prince George in the flood plain dates back 100 years and we live with the legacy. The City is in fact moving towards reclaiming lands adjacent to the Nechako River along River Road that are vulnerable to flooding and changing the land use to eventually become parkland (see the City’s current OCP). The River Road Dike project will help provide flood protection to about 300 hectares of developed industrial lands and businesses with an estimated value of assets of a minimum of $300million (this is a conservative estimate). In addition, the dike will provide flood protection to the CN yard and trans-provincial railway. The dike provides confidence to CN and its customers that products and materials in transit would not be held up in arriving at their destination during a flood event. All citizens of Prince George at least indirectly benefit from the dike.

*****
The Nechako River has had gravel removed from the river bed during low water periods in the past. Why can’t we just do that and solve the problem?

Prince George can experience flooding at the confluence of the Nechako and Fraser Rivers during a freshet flood (last major flood was 1972, after which the majority of the Island Cache residents were re-located and the property sold to industrial and commercial companies) and during ice jam floods.

During a major freshet flood the entire confluence is flooded resembling a lake or slow moving bulge in the river. No amount of gravel removal at the confluence would have any impact as the flooding is caused by inability of the downstream river valley on the Fraser to handle the extreme volumes of discharge.

During a major ice jam event, the Fraser River freezes over before the Nechako and it is the frazil (slushy) ice forming from cold weather (-15 to -20C) that begins to build up against the Fraser River ice. Eventually the frazil ice compresses and lifts up. It then freezes hard and because of the restriction the ice floats and causes the river current to flow under the ice cover. Because it is restricted, water levels rise behind the constriction, but the flow begins to find its way through the restriction once the velocity and flow of water balances out.

According to the river engineering ice-jam specialists, further excavation will actually cause more ice to build up because the velocity is slowed down and the frazil ice is held up. There is no benefit to excavation of the river bed. If gravel removal did have some benefit, the excavated area will fill in within a few years and the removal would have to be re-done. This would result in an ongoing cost.

*****
Past history: According to my research, gravel removal at the confluence was never done for flood mitigation purposes. In the 1960’s and 1970’s there were commercial operations (permitted by the province) that used gravel for selling aggregate or making concrete. In the 1980’s gravel from the confluence was used to construct the CN overpass and the Yellowhead Bridge. Some may say that because of this activity flooding was prevented. However, according to the river flow information since the late 1970’s, the reason flooding did not occur is that Prince George experienced about two decades of exceptionally low flows, likely because of climate variation during those years.

*****
If a dike is built, won’t the water just go under it or come up under it?

The dike will be designed to help mitigate the flow of groundwater underneath the dike and River Road. In 2009, the City received funding from the province to construct a subdrain and pumping chamber system that extends about 1700 metres along River Road. This installation was the first phase of the dike system.

The dike project includes the estimated cost to construct a groundwater cut-off installed about 5-6 metres below the ground surface adjacent to the subdrain. The concept is that during a flood event, flood response crews will be able to deploy portable pumps at the chambers to pump groundwater that migrates under the cut-off.

*****
A river is constantly eroding it’s banks and changing its course to follow the easiest route. How is the dike going to deal with this?

The dike is an offset dike constructed well back of the river – on average about 50 metres – leaving room for possible river erosion and possible river re-routing.

*****
Will the City be looking at putting up dikes along Pulp Mill road, Paddle Wheel Park, and Morning Place to list a few?

The flood mitigation strategy sets out a plan to meet with residents and property owners in the various flood risk areas within the City to consider the options that were presented in the City’s Flood Risk Evaluation and Flood Control Solutions Phase 2 report (eDocs #135993). The City has not decided on flood protection projects for any residential areas at risk of flooding.

*****
I have, and continue to, champion the need for more funding for our roads. However, voting no on this is not the answer.

Cameron Stolz
Councillor
City of Prince George

Neither provincial nor federal governments should ever dangle time-limited carrots in front of the noses of municipal governments.

This often causes local governments to go into a panic and throw common sense and order of priorities to the wind in a rushed effort to take advantage of the *offer* before it expires and is withdrawn.

How else can it be explained that all of a sudden additional funds can be *found* and that additional debt loads can be rationalized when it is impossible to find any of this for the more mundane (but more urgent!) purpose, such as properly repairing pothole strewn streets and busted sidewalks?

The fact of the matter is Council, and Administration are in fact doing everything in their power to ensure that taxpayers do not get a vote on these money issues, even though we are entitled to a referendum under the BC Government Act and the Community Charter.

The Charter states that if Municipalities want to borrow money beyond a 5 year period they must get the **accent** of the Electors. They can do this through the Alternative Approval Process (Elector Response Form) or by having a Referendum.

To my knowlege the City has not voluntarily gone to a referendum, they always chose the AAP which requires those opposed to their borrowing to get 5351 votes. Why do they go to the AAP??

One reason they state for going to the AAP is because it is cheaper than a referendum, and therefore saves money. However the fact that they have never made a serious attempt to go to a referendum leads one to beleive that they use the AAP to circumvent our ability to vote on money borrowing issues. The last six borrowings by the City have all gone to the AAP, even though some of them could have been put on the ballot in the last election, and would have cost the City nothing.

Furthermore the City estimates that a referendum would cost in the area of $65,000.00 which they deem is too expensive, however at the same time they give a grant to Theatre Northwest for $114,000.00.

The real reason we do not get a referendum on these issues is because the City is afraid that we will vote the issue down, and they will not be able to proceed with some of their pet projects, completely ignoring the fact that that is the reason the legislation is there in the first place.

The City has to be more honest and upfront with these borrowing issues, and give us a referendum. If we vote that they cannot borrow the money then they will have to learn to live with **NO** .

As is stands now we are for all intents and purposes being **conned**.

We want money spent on roads, and infrastructure, they want to spend the money on useless dikes, and a fancy $3 Million office building for purchasing staff.

If we dont get off our butts and get the necessary 5351 signatures, they win.

Have a nice day.

That’s great and if all the money for the dike had been provided by the federal and provincial governments I would think that the project would go ahead without too much criticism of the local taxpayers.

However, it appears that The City is seriously UNDERESTIMATING the level of dissatisfaction and anger of the citizens with the abysmal state of our infrastructure such as pothole strewn streets and roads for which the City claims it is UNABLE to find any additional funds!

The City is willing to borrow and spend for this dike project, but it appears to be unwilling to re-assess its priorities and address the fact that PG has become the pothole capital of the North!

“This would result in an ongoing cost.” .. and the dike doesn’t?

“The City has not decided on flood protection projects for any residential areas at risk of flooding” .. no, that would be wrong, but it’s ok to spend taxpayers money on saving industrial land and private business.

The scare that it will somehow effect our economy because of the CN customers might get antsy about late freight it just more of the scare tactics coming out of city hall. It seems CN has been putting up with this uncertainty for quite some time now and continue to prosper. Not a whole lot different than that the chicken littles running around saying Canadas’ national energy needs will be met with enbridges’ pipeline. It has nothing to do with helping the average Canadian, just like this dike really doesn’t help the average citizen of PG. As Ben says, if this dike is such a good and necessary project, then why not sell it on its’ merits through a referendum instead of doing the backdoor process of an AAP. I’ll tell you why, because it is hard to convince enough people that shit doesn’t stink.

Palopu, the City also side-stepped the necessity of a referendum when it enlisted the help of MLAs Boone and Ramsey to approve fluoridation for Prince George, resulting in the expenditure of over half a million dollars for a new fluoride injection system for our tap water and an annual expense of close to a hundred thousand dollars!

The controversial practice was legislated in Victoria WITHOUT Prince George citizen approval!

Democracy denied!

BTW, local pharmacies are now selling fluoride-free toothpaste for children!!!

If it’s bad for children’s health, what does that mean?

What is the stuff doing to children and adults in our tapwater when they drink it and bathe with it?

City councillors and mayors do NOT always know what’s best for us and our children!

Lets quit the BS.

1.Firstly since when is the flooding of a River the responsibility of a Municipality. This is a Provincial, and Federal Responsibility. The damage caused by the last flood 2007/2008, was paid for by the Provincial Government. (The work was done by the City)

2. The consultants report indicates that the flooding caused by ice jams was in fact caused by an unusual amount of water released into the river and suggested that the MOE work with Rio Tinto Alcan to ensure that during the winter, and especially during ice jams that there be better controls on water release. Maybe Mr. Stolz can tell us if these discussions have ever taken place, and if so what were the results.

3. The reason that there is not going to be anything done about the flooding at Morning Place, the North Side of the Nechako River (Pulp Mill Road) and South Fort George, is because the City and their **Grant sniffers** applied for the funding of a **dike** from the Federal and Provincial Government under a specific program, and now must build the dike in order to get the money. The problem is that the money has strings attached. ie; $3,558,000.00 borrowing from the City, and $2,750,000.00 from the Citys Land Reserve Fund. For a total commitment from Prince George taxpayers of $6,308,000.00 plus interest of approx $2 Million over 20 years.

4. CN Rail established in Prince George in 1915, and actually located along 1st Avenue to avoid paying the high cost for property that people in South Fort George, and Central Fort George were asking. The result was **Prince George** and the City then grew around the Railway. We as citizens of Prince George (taxpayers) have absolutely no responsibility for any flooding to the CN Operation. This is the Railways responsibility. Not only in Prince George, but from Prince Rupert, to Halifax. CN Rail has suffered many floods over the years, and that is just part of the cost of them doing business. In additon if they were really worried about flooding then why would they build their new container facility and warehouse in a flood zone.

5. Federal Railways do not pay taxes. They pay some sort of a grant to Municipalities in lieu of taxes. Maybe Mr Stoltz can tell us how much CN Rail pays to the City and how this money stacks up against other business, and industry in the City.

6. If the City was concerned about flooding on River Road, why did they locate thier Community Energy System at Lakeland Mills, which is located in the flood zone?? Could it be because they really are not concerned about flooding?? You bet.

7. Dredging. While the science about the water depth etc; would actually contribute to the problem during an ice jam, is on the surface somewhat correct, the fact of the matter is this science is usually based on water flow over a long stretch of River or Delta. The water on the Nechako (in the flood area during an ice jam) has to travel less than a kilometer. Hardly time for additional problems to occur if the dreding was done properly.

8. Since the building of the Kenny Dam there have been very few instances of problems with the Nechako River flooding, and in fact will be even less if the Kemano Two tunnel is built.

9. This whole concept is a waste of money, and effort, and we need to take a step back, and give our heads a shake.

10. Getting 5351 signatures and forcing this issue to a referendum will allow us, and the City and Councillors, etc to have a full blown debate on the issue.

11. The days of the City and Council bulldozing there way into spending without the proper input from taxpayers has to end.

PS.

Seems to me Councillor Skakun voted NOT to receive the $5.4 Million from the Federal/Provincial Governments, because after spending $7 Million on River Road in 2010 he felt that was sufficient, and spending further money would not be benificial. He was of course voted down.

Also Frank Everitt voted against going to the AAP process, stating that spending $65000.00 to give people in a democracy the chance to vote would be the right thing to do. He too was voted down.

Have a nice day.

Cameron_Stolz says:(see the City’s current OCP).

Why are you suddenly concerned of the OCP Mr. Stolz? It appears to me in many previous rezoning you do not follow the OCP. “It is a guideline only: so why now?

Yes we do live with a “Legacy”. This includes city hall not listening to the people – the taxpayer. I personally will be going to all the people I know and my kid’s friends that are in Grade 12 etc that are 18 years old.

Hopefully many other parents will consult with their kids also. Do not forget, Prince George City was one of the municipalities to vote on increasing the AAP process from 5% to 10% of the voters. Shame

Atleast Stolz has the nards to post on this site. I wonder where Green is? Oh yeah she doesn’t like OP250 truths.

Mr. Stolz read the 11 facts that Palopu posted.

So we should now heed what Cameron writes. To bad he would not spend as much effort explaining why we have to live with atrocious roads, buying the old PG hotel, and spending tax dollars.
In reality he is just another member of gang green spouting off the official city hall line of BS.
Sign the forms and put an end to the eternal waste of our tax dollars by city hall.

Ben, please clarify that that legl age is 19. One does not need to be 19 to sign this petition. Very important to attain extra signatures!

Resident. Hear, hear! Spot on.

“In addition, the dike will provide flood protection to the CN yard and trans-provincial railway. The dike provides confidence to CN and its customers that products and materials in transit would not be held up in arriving at their destination during a flood event. All citizens of Prince George at least indirectly benefit from the dike.”

This made me gag…guess what, if CN cares so much about providing confidence to their customers they can fork out the dough. How much are they putting up for flood mitigating purposes?

…Yeah just what I thought.

Stolz, you have wasted enough of our money already.. when will you and council realize the trough has been empty for a long time. Putting us in deeper in debt isnt the answer…

Do you run your household like this..if you did you would constantly be chased by bill collectors.

Reality is a hard thing to face..but give it a try Cam.

Palopu wrote: “While the science about the water depth etc; would actually contribute to the problem during an ice jam, is on the surface somewhat correct, the fact of the matter is this science is usually based on water flow over a long stretch of River or Delta.”

I do not agree that is the fact of the matter.

The fact of the matter is that the velocity of the water is the concern.

Higher velocity = less ice formation. Lower velocity = more ice formation.

Velocity is dependent on the cross sectional area of a river channel at any given point.

Reduce the area, as in a canyon, the water flow will speed up. Increase the area and the flow will slow down.

If you want to see this in action, there is a water table in the science section of the museum for kids to play with relocating pretty coloured blocks to restrict and redirect water flow …… ;-)

Adults are not restricted from the area ….

Seems to me that the CN railyard ought to be relocated out of the bowl! And not just because of a once in two hundred years flood threat but because of all the air pollution which is produced from the shunting and sorting of rail cars by non-electric diesel powered locomotives!

Also, I would inform Rio Tinto/Alcan that dumping excess water into the Nechako when its outflow is already frozen, jammed and restricted is a no-no!

From my point of view, this is about a number of things.

1. The cost of this should be borne 100% by senior governments.

2. If a cost sharing is required by those governemnts for some reason or other, the cost of this should be shared by the industries in that area and by residences affected in other areas, not by the general population of PG.

3. For the long term, unless there are viable projections that the Nechakio watershed will have significant less flow into the Fraser River at PG as a result of proposed changes at Kemano, I think the study conducted by the engineers did not look at all the alternatives, including removal of industry from the area and allowing the river to “live” in its natural delta formation.

4. The final issue that may have come to the head in this case as a result of other inabilities of the City to deal with ever increasing issues over the last couple of decades at least, is the issue of how this City should vote on money issues.

As they say on Dragons’ Den …. “for those reasons, I’m out” ;-)

Dead on Prince George … an opportunity has been provided to this community and there are too many people who are too dumb to use it.

Cameron Stolz, we were told that the high cost of River Rd. and the very expensive drainage system was “The Dike”. We were told that further diking was not needed and when some companies complained that they were on the wrong side of the dike they were told the drainage system would also protect them.

So why do we need a new dike now?

Although I no longer work on River Road the contacts I have down there say they do not need the dike.

Gus. Thanks for the input. Lets think about this for a moment. (We could go to the library, however I think I can explain it here)

Lets assume that your statement as to velocity is correct, then it would logically follow that if you dug a wide trench by dredging the South Side of the River, on the North Side of the channel already there, you would in effect increase the velocity through this area, much like going through a canyon as you stated.

Where the confusion seems to come from is that one thinks of the dredging as being equal across the width of the river, and of course this is incorrect.

In fact once you did sufficient channel dredging on the south side the water would once again flow through to the Fraser on the south side and decrease the amount of water that is now forced to go to the North side and into the Fraser. The natural course of the River is on the South Side. Sediment build up since the Kenny Dam was built in 1955 has over time forced the water to the North side.

So Deep Channel on South Side=Increased flow in channel which= Higher velocity which= Less ice jamming, and therefore, less flooding.

**Your welcome**

Guesswhat.

The Elector Response Form (Alternative Approval Process) clearly states.

1. Be a Canadian Citizen
2. Be at least 18 years of age
3. Have lived in BC for at least 6 months and
4. Have lived within the City of Prince George for at least 30 days.

So go ahead and sign up all the 18 year olds you can.

Palopu –

I have challenged my 18 year old to get some petitions signed. It has cost me to make 60 copies to get signed. 30 for the 18 year old to have friends etc to sign. I have matched it with 30 to get signed. Who ever gets them all signed will be treated to doing the other’s chores. (I do not believe in monetary rewards ;)).

I hope this city does not underestimate the students – young adults in this city. Many do not want to be continuously paying for someone elses “legacies”.

I was at city hall last week paying my garbage and water taxes. I signed the form after I paid my taxes. When I got home I read on Opinion 250 that the city purchased a $50 thousand dollar electric car. They never asked me. I have yet to read about this purchase in our local rag. My question of the day is , does Mr. Stoltz get a turn to operate this car? Please fix our G.D. roads. Thanks. G.D? (Gosh Darn).

There is the other fact of physics that one has to consider. Water seeks its own level.

Unless you close the north channel, the two channels will work together.

Take a cross section of the entire river from shore to shore ….. it is the profile of the entire river at that point and the total combined area below the level of the water to the river bed.

It does not matter how many channels there are, unless blocked by sluice gates or some such method, the water control where it will flow, and it will flow according to the laws of phsysics, which in this case is the study of fluid dynamics.

Stand by a fast flowing river at a section of rapids …. some great places in the Fraser Canyon area for that during the spring freshettes ….

In fact, any experienced whitewater kayaker is able to read the water to see where the slower flowing areas and the faster flowing areas are … and will actually experience it when taking the chose slow or fast route.

http://www.princegeorge.ca/publicsafety/RRDP/pages/default.aspx

What the good Councillor posted is at the above link on the City’s web site.

Not linked anywhere else I believe, unless you go to the petition.

This takes you directly to an enlarged map of the area in question.
http://www.princegeorge.ca/publicsafety/RRDP/PublishingImages/RiverRd_Dike_Project_Webversion.jpg

I went to City Hall to ask for more information about what this part of the project scope will be. It is not even clear what work has been done and what work is yet to be done. In addition, there is no cross section through the road, dike and underground cutoff in the area where all of this wokr has already been done and in the are where it is yet to be done.

I blieve, but I see not proof of that, the work to be done is from the Lakeland Mills entry to the start of the River Rd. overpass across the CN tracks.

The interesting thing about such topics as fluid dynamics is that sometimes the theory is hard to grasp ….. That is why labs in science are so great …. one can actually set up experiments to see whether the theoretical studies hold up in practice …..

How many people, for instance, can explain why the velocity of air travelling over an airplane’s wings is greater than the velocity of the air travelling below the wing … and more importantly, why that results in an upward force on the wing enabling the plane to fly …..

I am encountering the same problem with river flow here. Both the wing and the channel flow conditions are explained by fluid dynamics.

I’ve tried to print the forms now on three different computers and it just freezes my printer for about ten minutes and then prints a blank page? Is there a special program one needs to print the form… can we print a copy of the form from another location, or will I need to go to city hall to get a copy that I can photocopy and pass along?

If in Cameron’s words there is a busines investment of 300 million plus dollars why would it not be in their interest to pick up the 6 million the city is about to dump into the dike project. It amounts to 2% or less of the the businesses value Cameron has stated.
Anyone owning a $300,000.00 house probably pays 2.5% of the value of the home over a 10 year period just for house insurance. Surely a one time cost of 2% to these businesses is a bargain.

years ago when the thermal plant was built at Winton Global which is located on the banks of the Nechako the oil lines were installed underground from the thermal plant to the dry kilns. In the spring it was a common occurence to look in the pit where the oil lines entered the ground and see the water boiling around the oil lines.
lots of concern now but not much 25 years ago to the possibility of dumping 75,000 liters of oil into the river.
Are in fact the oil lines now empty or just waiting for the pipe to rust away and create an enviromental disaster?

Sooo what about the light industrial side of Queensway? Will this dyking help there? With the large snowpack this year and the right spring temperatures, ought to be interesting.

Cameron as mentioned earlier just fix the dam roads and maybe there might be more support for the dyke.

Now CN, Lakeland and others all knowingly built on a flood plain. Why is it taxpayers money to mitigate any problems?Oh silly me I forgot, private business likes taxpayer welfare.

The frazil ice is getting hung up on the bottom of the very shallow Nechako river bottom not the Fraser ice Cameron. Dredging the confluence from the Nechako boat launch to the drop off into the Fraser WILL solve the ice jamb flooding issue. Freshet flooding is an entirely different issue.

Councilor Stolz while I admire the fact that you put your name and thoughts down for public scrutiny what remains to be seen is will you and your colleagues listen and consider the thoughtful responses and collective advice being offered? Know it well, the engaged general public that you promised to represent is NOT buying what you’re sell’n and this dyke business is but one example.

Did you not run your past two terms with the big giant letters beside your name “for better roads”?

Gone fast are the days when folks actually trusted that their political leaders at all levels actually truly gave a CRAP for doing the right thing….we have been burned too damn many times and are tired and scared as our communities, province and country slowly fall apart to the great benefit of the 1% and corporations. The BS is just astounding.

Do the right thing and lose the arrogance that this council exudes. After all, this is your community, too.

Gus. There are a lot of things that people do not understand. As an example if you stand approx 10 ft from a tree with a 303 rifle and fire into the centre of the tree, the shell in all probability will not go through the tree. However if you stand back say 20ft it will. Used to make some money on that one.

The fact of the matter is we are getting too technical on a simplistic problem. Dredging a channel on the South side will automatically take some of the water that at present goes to the North Side. Its as simple as digging a hole in a mud puddle.

Water doesnt go where it wants, it goes downhill, and if you give it a hill to go down, **walla* it will go.

“I have, and continue to, champion the need for more funding for our roads. However, voting no on this is not the answer.”

So tell us what the answer is? The roads are the worst I have seen since I have moved to this town. There was supposed to be more money for patching, and an additional crew or two, and more money for resurfacing.

Whether more money has been provided, who knows. It is difficult to follow the bouncing balls at City Hall.

The issue is important enough that a portion of the City’s web site ought to be dedicated to the roads, identifying what the next 5 year plan is that will bring all the roads within the city up to a tolerable level over that time.

Then again, looking at the River Road project and the lack of clarity of the information on the net, the City has a long way to go to provide clear communication of the projects which are being done on our behalf. I have to ask myself, what is the problem?

In the meantime, say thank you very much to the Feds and the Province, tell them the City has new priorities, the folks are getting restless and the City’s component of the money will be spent this year on the roads, after an AAP is put in place for the money needed to be borrowed for that purpose. Very few people will likely sign such a document.

“The fact of the matter is we are getting too technical on a simplistic problem”

LOL …. I think you phrased that the wrong way.

I will phrase it correctly for you:
“The fact of the matter is we are getting too simplistic on a technical problem”

Tell you what.

Do a bit of walking through the internet and find locations which have river ice problems and find one or two where dredging has been been used, and has solved the problem.

I’ll even help you along a bit. The Northeast of the USA has quite a bit of experience with river ice jams and what SEEMS to work and what SEEMS to not work.

Here is the latest where an engineer feels dredging will do the trick …. and look who Council thinks should pay for it.

http://www.sarniathisweek.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3439013

Eagleone. I have heard other people complain about not being able to print this form off the City website. I didnt have any problem (adobe), nor did many others, so if you cant get if off the site, then you will have to go to City Hall. I understand that there is a table set up at the Northern Hardware where you can sign or get a copy.

When you make copies be sure to copy both sides on one sheet.

GUs, if Councillor Stolz indeed just did a copy and paste I would be really disappointed! It’s far to easy to just do that, it doesn’t require any research and no personal evaluation and verification of evidence!

Here is something I researched extensively and I am contributing it here in my own words:

Hexafluorosilicic acid (used in PG for tap water fluoridation):

BANNED in Japan, Sweden, China, Norway, Belgium, Austria, Denmark, Hungary, Finland, Germany …etc. Most common reason given: No increase in cavities after fluoridation stopped. Others: No safety data available, naturally occurring calcium fluoride is alright, the hazardous waste product hexafluorosilicic acid is not, perceived benefits may be far outweighed by long term detrimental effects on human health…

Conclusion: Those governments and local councils listened and acted on the side of safety and precaution.

Other councils and authorities do not!

Gus.

1. Do the other places you mention, have two rivers with one running into the other??

2. Do they have a dam upriver, that releases water during times when ice is on the river thus adding to the problem.

3. Do they have 55 years of silting because of the diversion of river water into the Pacific Ocean (Kemano One) as opposed to its natural flow through Prince George.

4. It is the silting of the river because of the loss of water, that is causing this problem. Dredging will give the river a better chance to run on the South side and into the Fraser as it used to do. Some co-ordination with Rio Tinto Alcan will do the rest.

5. This is the 5th year since the flood of 2007/2008 and we havent had any problems. We have not even been able to see how the upgrade of River Road at a cost of $7 Million will work, because we havent had any high water to deal with.

6. As for the technical part.

**There was a convention attended by all the brainiacs to debate the causes of alcoholism. They had two full days of stating all the various reasons, all beating their chests, and full of pomp and circumstance.

A little old lady in running shoes, got sick and tired of hearing all the BS so she stood up and stated.

((I will tell you what causes alcoholism, drinking alcohol causes it)) and she sat down.

Needless to say this statement was much to simplistic for the brainiacs to comprehend, and of course if it was true then it was a direct threat to their job security, which was and is dependent on being technical.

There you go …. someone has mixed up alcoholism and drunkeness …..

Drunkeness is caused by drinking alcohol.

Alcoholism is caused by a number of different factors, including genetics, social pressure, scial disorders such as depression, etc.

Yes he did ….. go to the web page that I linked above and expand the sections ….. It’s the City’s mantra …..
http://www.princegeorge.ca/publicsafety/RRDP/pages/default.aspx

Alcohol is addictive. If you drink it over a period of time you will become an alcoholic.

The factors that you mentioned some of which are not true, such as genetics, are symptoms of alcoholism and may be the reason why people drink, but not the reason why they become alcoholic.,

Take away the alcohol, and you still have the factors you mention.

Have a nice day.

Actually, he did change something ….

He wrote “according to my research” which replaced the words “according to City Staff research” on the web site…

So, whose research was it. Enquiring minds want to know. LOL….. I think I already know….. ;-)

I think I am starting to understand how you think Palopu …. LOL…. keep posting …

http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa60.htm

That starts off with the statement:
“Research has shown conclusively that familial transmission of alcoholism risk is at least in part genetic and not just the result of family environment “

But hey, those scientists know from nothing so I don’t know why I keep posting that stuff.

I’ll just work it like you. I know I am right. I don’t need a bunch of scientists to tell me what to think …

Final answer? Genetics plays a part in determining whether an individual has a tendency to alcoholism. And don’t anyone dare doubt me …. ;-)

I apologize for not being clearer in my post. I stated “Here is some background on the reason for the dike for those that may be interested:” I should have included “that have been provided by city staff”.

There are some interesting facts around this discussion.

One, despite saying roads are a priroity this Council opted for the status quo. After seven or eight straight years of increasing the amound put into roads, this council froze the budget this year. Tells you of their priorities. (They did though give themseleves a pay increase of 30%)

Two, with the recent firings at the city, they got rid of their engineer (moved him somewhere else). Too bad because he could have responded to questions on this project.

Three, one of the mayor’s big campaign contributors was John Brink who just happens to own property at risk. He will be among those who benefit the most from this publicly funded project.

Four, the Nechako is a controled river and Rio Tinto have a great deal of influence over whether it floods in Prince George. Good and bad so what changes are they making to mitigate future floods?
Um. Interesting.