From: on behalf of Panel Registry Subject: FW: TNG registration of ...

something that is proposed and ‘put out there’ to be ‘fixed’ later if
it does not work. The public deserves better.
6
Prosperity Lake - Shoreline Erosion
Beyond consideration of the three above compensation
elements, the newly formed lake must provide productive and
sediment free habitat for the trout fry that enter it.
The compensation plan does not address the question of
shoreline erosion and sediment suspension, caused by wind and
wave action, during the first few years following the lake filling.
This matter may be relevant because of the potential distribution of
young trout in Prosperity Lake. Young trout upon entering Loon
Lake (near Clinton B.C.) tended to remain near shore, following their
entry, during the late summer.
Will the near shore littoral zone be free from suspended
sediment during windy conditions, and will the lake bottom in this
zone be stable and free enough of moving sediment to provide food
and/or permit feeding among young trout? These questions are not
discussed in the compensation plan.
Providing for No Net Loss
If we move past the above four parts of the water provision
system, in which the potentials for risk or failure are additive, there
is then serious doubt that the compensation program could provide
‘like for like’ particularly at the commonly prescribed ratio of 2:1 for
compensatory area to lost habitat area.
Lake Replacement
The Environmental Impact Statement, Summary section, Fish
and Fish Habitat, page 1-4, states that “The Compensation Plan has
been designed to go beyond the replacement of surface area of lost
habitat and address some of the regional MOE priorities … etc.”
Information in the “Compensation Plan’ itself does not indicate that
such will happen.