Monday, 2 February 2015

Protecting Wetlands

King John Alive and Well and attacking the Magda Carta* in Niagara

Chapter One…

The Gail Ross/Rick Scime Story

A great Canadian used to say; ‘It takes all kinds and we’ve got’m’!

Society can only surmise it to be the case when an intelligent woman would decide to buy a 30 acre property that was deemed to include 28 acres of Provincially Significantly Wetland. (SWAMP)

When asked, her reply was ‘her love of nature’ and all that a ‘wetland entails’. She made up her mind to acquire the wetland the moment she heard the sound of the creatures inhabiting the place. The icing on the cake was learning there was ample room on the high ground, where the former owner claimed he once farmed, totally suitable to build a home and garage.

It was a beautiful May Day in 1998 when Gail Ross bought and then proceeded to create her dream. She busied herself to obtain every permit required, determined to do everything by the book, determined to prevent anyone interfering with her objective. However, following the rules did not prevent interference from several sources.

She learned that the former owners received $1,000.00 cash predicated on the fact that the property was basically a wetland. That was immediately reduced to a tax rebate. ‘Small potatoes’! she exclaimed.

Gail and her partner Rick brought in a trailer both as project office and to serve as on site living quarters. They first started ‘walking the property’ picturing how and where their home would fit in and imagining logistics for services, locates and all of the necessities of modern life in order to fit in with this delightful environment.

 The Home building proceeded diligently with of course the few minor glitches of most projects but what was more disconcerting were things happening to their beloved wetlands that was beyond their control. The neighbors to their West were diverting water onto their wetland instead of sending it West to the nearby waterway.  This washed away the covering of their septic bed! The neighbors to their South were actually and physically trespassing on their wetland property to seriously divert and drain the wetland for his farming purposes!

The Northern boundary of their wetland property is bordered by a rural road con. 3.  The farm to the north suffers flooding. That flooding is trapped in the north-side ditch because the farmer’s lane onto his property has NO culvert to allow his flooding to travel west to the nearby waterway. Therefore the excess water is forced uphill through a roadway culvert to the south side ditch.

The excess flood water cannot travel west to that same nearby waterway because the municipal authorities claim they cannot open the blockage to the west of Gail’s entrance driveway, which DOES have a culvert for just that purpose!

Con. 3 sports two very healthy ditches which would easily take any excess flood water and deliver it the short distance downhill to a proper waterway and not spew it into Gail and Rick’s sensitive wetland. That is it would if the ditches were properly maintained by the municipality!

With the ditches blocked, the excess water is forced onto Gail and Rick’s wetland. Gail and Rick were frantic. They correctly felt that they had taken on the legal responsibility to husband their wetland. They called for help and e-mailed for help but, all to often, no one even bothered a return call or email.

With no help in site Rick took a half truck load of excess dirt, to build a check-dam against the encroachment of water-born pollutants.

Predicated simply on Rick’s effort to PROTECT the wetland in question, the NPCA laid the following charges against the only people doing their utmost regarding the preservation of their Provincially Significant Wetland.

1.  Where no person shall undertake development without authorization, did undertake development without authorization, in a wetland as referred to in ONT REG 155/06 s.2(1).

2.  Where no person shall undertake development without authorization, did undertake development without authorization, within other areas where development could interfere with the hydrologic function of a wetland, including area up to 120 meters of all provincially significant wetlands as referred to in ONT REG 155’)^ s.2(1) (e) and

3.  Where no person shall straighten, change, divert or interfere in any way with the existing channel for a river, creek, stream or watercourse or change or interfere in any way with a wetland, did interfere with a watercurs and wetland as referred to in ONT REG 155/06s.5. 

After failing in their several attempts to hang a charge on the couple, the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA) seized on Rick’s proper effort (See MNR support letter) to protect the wetland as a means to extort the couple for many $thousands.

The 'Pretrial Brief' favoring the victims was disregarded.

What other conclusion can one deduce when the NPCA passed on so many opportunities to do exactly what the NPCA is charged to do as clearly stated in Conservation Authorities Act 21(j)   to control the flow of surface waters in order to prevent floods or pollution or to reduce the adverse effects thereof; 

The NPCA even stated that they had no problem with the threats to the wetland by the actions of the wetland neighbors!

The NPCA failed to protect the wetland from being deliberately drained by the farmer to the South.


The NPCA failed to protect the Wetland property from unnecessary flooding from the West and they failed even more miserably in protecting the wetland, Conservation Authorities Act 21(j), from slovenly ditch maintenance by the municipality.


This leads to the question of why the NPCA would shield those that are actually doing harm to a wetland and then to proceed with a 'zero tolerance' attack on the only people trying their best to preserve their precious wetland? In the letter below the MNR clearly states that Gail Ross IS the official MANAGER of the Provincially Significant Wetlands in her care!

Click here for the wetland manager's responsibility

Perhaps it’s time for the NPCA to explain the family relationship of the three neighboring properties and their potent connections regarding the municipality?

It gets worse! 

Click here to view NPCA Activities

Chapter Two…

Regional Government in Action 

Jefferson said that ‘Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operation, perverted it into tyranny'. 

Hopefully, Jefferson was talking about tyranny up to and including his time. Surely his words have no bearing on modern Canada let alone here in our Niagara Region of Ontario.

However, there they where, those same extraordinary words from a judge who saw through a specious Government attack on the White Family were he chastised the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority’s (NPCA) lawyer (Region’s Lawyer) for using the court system as a weapon against common people. For those not in the council chamber for Dave Honey’s NLA presentation here is the most disturbing segment.

The Conservation authority drained ‘CONSERVATION Land’ onto the White Family farm. Mr. White senior died under the strain of illicit litigation leaving Son Dave and his Mother to carry on defending their innocence against NPCA employee perjurers, who were themselves terminated for not lying good enough! 

Dave White complained because they were flooding his land. So the Conservation Authority simply changed the designation of Dave’s land to wetland and charged him and his mother with farming a wetland. After four years in court, their entire life savings was sucked out of them.

The Region’s lawyer, representing the Conservation Authority asked the judge to have Dave White and his 85-year-old mother thrown into prison for 2 years and he also requested a $50,000 fine plus costs in the NPCA’s attempt to pad their bank account.

However, Dave White had proven that the Conservation Authority had changed the mapping and the water course flow in the creeks — amongst other things — to suit their own case. 

People must be forgiven for believing that the expose´ of the NPCA’s dishonorable conduct in the White Family case would bring these barbarous activities to an end. You might be forgiven but you would be wrong.

On October 2, 2014 the whole sordid story was related, in a presentation to the Niagara Regional Council by Niagara Landowners Association’s (NLA) President Mr. Dave Honey, nothing has changed; not a blessed thing! 

If anything, citizens are suffering more fallacious court cases plus repeated appeals at outrageous cost to our citizens based on spurious and illegally contrived charges for paltry, if any, transgressions. 

The Following Newspaper Poll, is at least a guide.

Do you think conservation authorities have the right to go on private property in the name of conservation?
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
53 votes
Yes, at any time
146 votes
Yes, but only as a last resort
2394 votes
No, never

There has been a marked increase in trespassing, deception, extortion, legal trickery, judicial bias, evidence tampering and perjury, which is continually being discovered and yet those who we have placed our hope and trust in, sit in abject silence and tacit approval of conduct that is nothing short of criminal! 
*Criminal, because no one has authority over private property except the owner! The sovereign letters patent of land grants says so! 

Although repeatedly asked, the NPCA refuses to provide evidence that they have authority over any private property!

Our Niagara Regional Councilors must swear an solemn oath to the sovereign following which they astonishingly dishonor sovereign law such as the crown letter patent of land grants, which is not superseded by anyone or anything!

Sadly many of these Regional Councilors sit on the board of the NPCA; some holding high office! One must assume these Regional participants of the NPCA are aware of criminal acts and if not why not?

Our illustrious governments have created these arms length fiefdoms to absolve themselves of accountability. The fiefdom may be out of the reach of mere citizens but the politicians are not! They are still responsible to the voter. 

It is incumbent on the citizenry to hold feckless politicians accountable. It is the responsibility of the citizens to expose politicians that fail their electorate as they have in this empire building, criminally active, extortion ridden, environmentally abusive, waste of finite financial resources and more than willing to accept financing from waste companies to build commercial banquet halls and offices in our UNESCO World Biosphere Park of the Balls Falls conservation area and elsewhere.

It Gets markedly Worse!

Representatives of the Niagara Landowners Association (NLA) made a third attempt, Oct.2/14, Jan,29/15 budget meeting regarding NPCA funding and then again Feb. 5/15 in a vain effort to the find relief from a total financial onslaught by the NPCA. 

When attempting to present their story, they referenced the plight of members being abused by the NPCA. For that the region's lawyer Jennifer Feren (not the same region's lawyer Mickey Cruickshank persecuting landowners) tried TWICE to censor any reference to cases before the courts. Fortunately, Councilor Wayne Redekop (also a Lawyer) intervened stating that a reference was not discussing the details of any case before the courts. 

What is interesting is the reaction of the councilors. Immediately following the NLA presentation, the presenters and a couple dozen victims of the NPCA left in silence. Not a single councilor cared enough to ask a question or show even a modicum of concern for their constituents being bankrupted by their (still) out of control bureaucracy.

However, at the end of the council meeting under 'other business' our 27 year veteran Councilor George Marshall rose to question the NLA's right to present to council! Councilor Marshall suggested it was akin to having people line up to complain every time the police are on the agenda. Strange how Councilor Marshall thinks the Niagara Regional Council has some say over the police and the police budget yet no sway what so ever when it comes to the NPCA!

Fourth term Councilor Brian Baty, and NPCA Board Member and also past chair of the infamous 'CORK COMMITTEE', readily agreed with Marshal and proceeded to suggest that the NLA and member victims should take their concerns to the NPCA, which is the very body that is abusing them!

Even our popular councilor Bart Maves, and NPCA Member not only agreed with Councilor Marshall  but added that a letter be sent to the presenters to guide them to other venues.

Last but not least councilor Bruce Timms the actual Chairman of the NPCA also agreed with Councilor Marshall that the victims of NPCA abuse should bring their concerns to his board for a solution.
But Bruce Timms also says his gang doesn't trespass on private property even though that is exactly what happened in the Barnfield case

Get a load of CAO Carmen D’Angelo's comment that 'we prefer to settle our charges out of Court'! Of coarse they do, but if their victim refuses to pay as is the case with Gail Ross and Rick Scime who were given an ultimatum to pay $tens of thousands or face court at a much greater cost! And this from a guy that can't even look after the NPCA books, sends NPCA Liars to attend Court or keep track of NPCA files!

The comments of the four regional councilors prompted a conversation on how the region's bylaw rules can be changed to block interest groups from presenting to council. Sound much like Councilor Baty's failed attempt to totally ban Niagara Citizen from ever speaking or presenting their concerns in their public forum known as Niagara Regional Council.  

Never mind the four vocal councilors advocating for the banning of citizens groups from being allowed to make presentations in their own public forum to their own Regional Councilors! 

The question is why did the rest of the councilors sit in silent and tacit approval of a ban on their constituents? Not one of the silent councilors raised objections to sending the presenters back to the bureaucracy that they were complaining about.

Selina Volpatti
During Regional Council's February 26, 2015 session, council finally brought up the idea of having a 'Value for Dollar' review of the NPCA after they had already approved nearly 6% increase amounting to $Millions only three weeks earlier! 

Regional council gave away $Millions to an unaccountable rogue outfit in the face of  Councilor Volpatti's stated concern regarding the lack of shelter for the homeless during record cold!

Following Volpatti, Commissioner Community Affairs, Katharyn Chislett, gave a verbal presentation regarding the dire straits of homeless men particularly during this record cold Canadian winter.

Apparently the whole of our Niagara Regional Government considers that their 'citizens in distress' are simply an annoyance, a bother that must be avoided! 

Is it reasonable to assume that the victims are turning to their Regional Government for help precisely because they are already in the clutches of the very bureaucracy that is abusing them. 

Click here for 'The Barnfield Story'

Chapter Three...

Echoing in the back of the mind are the famous words that, 'Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done'.  

Most thinking men and women would like to believe that our Canadian laws are strongly based on common sense, fairness and above all, justice.

For better or worse, most thinking men and women have put their faith in the hands of those that create our Canadian laws. Why would anyone think otherwise? After all aren’t these  the same individuals that Canadians have elected and hired?

However, unlike justice, which squares with natural law, history has proven that laws created by man can also be perverted by man! Surely we don’t have to mention the numerous examples of historic and recent horrendous perversions of justice perpetrated by governments elected and bureaucrats hired by their citizens. 

In the January 27, 28, 29, 2015 case of Niagara Region Conservation Authority vs. Gail Ross and Rick Schime, we witnessed a seemingly normal application of law. 

That is, until the defense called its first witness.

Prosecutor Mickey Cruickshank couldn't fault the defense witness's impeccable credentials as an eminently qualified Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) expert, an expert that had extensive knowledge of the wetland in question, an expert that had compiled a 180 page report exclusive to that very same wetland.

The prosecutor knew exactly what the defense witness was about to say. The Good Folks at the NPCA had already taken some of their valuable time to interfere with the defense witness!

The Bench also knew what the defense witness was about to say and based on that knowledge Justice of the Peace Froese proceeded to suspend the proceedings for the future date of May 8, 2015. 

Surely JP Froese didn't act just to give the losing prosecutor, region's lawyer Mickey Cruickshank, time to come up with something to save his case?

Not being versed in the normal proceedings in courtrooms, we mere citizens are confused and asking if the justice would have postponed an expensive court trial on behalf of the defense if the tables were turned.

Question: Is this justice that is seen to be done?

Check back after May 8, 2015...

Are you suffering from Bureaucratic Bullying?
You have Rights!

Conservation Authorities Act
R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER C.27
Last amendment:  2011, c. 9, Sched. 27, s. 22.
21.  (1)  For the purposes of accomplishing its objects, an authority has power,
         (a)               to study and investigate the watershed and to determine a program whereby the natural resources of the watershed may be conserved, restored, developed and managed;
         (b)               for any purpose necessary to any project under consideration or undertaken by the authority, to enter into and upon any land and survey and take levels of it and make such borings or sink such trial pits as the authority considers necessary;
         (c)               to acquire by purchase, lease or otherwise and to expropriate any land that it may require, and, subject to subsection (2), to sell, lease or otherwise dispose of land so acquired;
         (d)               despite subsection (2), to lease for a term of five years or less land acquired by the authority;
         (e)               to purchase or acquire any personal property that it may require and sell or otherwise deal therewith;
         (f)                to enter into agreements for the purchase of materials, employment of labour and other purposes as may be necessary for the due carrying out of any project;
         (g)               to enter into agreements with owners of private lands to facilitate the due carrying out of any project;
         (h)               to determine the proportion of the total benefit afforded to all the participating municipalities that is afforded to each of them;
         (i)                to erect works and structures and create reservoirs by the construction of dams or otherwise;
         (j)                to control the flow of surface waters in order to prevent floods or pollution or to reduce the adverse effects thereof;
         (k)               to alter the course of any river, canal, brook, stream or watercourse, and divert or alter, as well temporarily as permanently, the course of any river, stream, road, street or way, or raise or sink its level in order to carry it over or under, on the level of or by the side of any work built or to be built by the authority, and to divert or alter the position of any water-pipe, gas-pipe, sewer, drain or any telegraph, telephone or electric wire or pole;
         (l)                to use lands that are owned or controlled by the authority for purposes, not inconsistent with its objects, as it considers proper;
         (m)              to use lands owned or controlled by the authority for park or other recreational purposes, and to erect, or permit to be erected, buildings, booths and facilities for such purposes and to make charges for admission thereto and the use thereof;
         (m.1)           to charge fees for services approved by the Minister;
         (n)               to collaborate and enter into agreements with ministries and agencies of government, municipal councils and local boards and other organizations;
         (o)               to plant and produce trees on Crown lands with the consent of the Minister, and on other lands with the consent of the owner, for any purpose;
         (p)               to cause research to be done;
         (q)               generally to do all such acts as are necessary for the due carrying out of any project.  R.S.O. 1990, c. C.27, s. 21; 1996, c. 1, Sched. M, s. 44 (1, 2); 1998, c. 18, Sched. I, s. 11.
Approval of Minister
            (2)  If the Minister has made a grant to an authority under section 39 in respect of land, the authority shall not sell, lease or otherwise dispose of the land under clause (1) (c) without the approval of the Minister except if,
         (a)               the disposition is for provincial or municipal infrastructure and utility purposes;
         (b)               the province, the provincial agency, board or commission affected by the disposition or the municipal government, agency, board or commission affected by the disposition has approved it; and
         (c)               the authority informs the Minister of the disposition.  2010, c. 16, Sched. 10, s. 1 (1).
Terms and conditions
            (3)  The Minister may impose terms and conditions on an approval given under subsection (2), including a condition that the authority pay a specified share of the proceeds of the disposition to the Minister.  1996, c. 1, Sched. M, s. 44 (3).

Crown Grant

If the patents mean nothing, why is there a Public Lands Act?

If the patents mean nothing, then why are they mentioned in people’s deed…”subject to any reservations in the Crown Grant”?

If the patents mean nothing, why is there section 109 of the BNA, supported by section 56 of the draft of the BNA?

If the patents mean nothing, then why did it take letters patent to constitute the 1982-83 Constitution?

If the patents mean nothing, then why do the Letters Patent of privilege still stand from 1947 for the Governor General, where it is only the sitting Sovereign, their heirs and successors who can, under section 15, revoke, amend, repeal said letters patent?

If the patents mean nothing, then why is the Royal Proclamation of 1763 still alive in section 25 of the present constitution, as the R.P. of 1763 is letters patent? 

If the patents mean nothing then why is it that the Native’s must respect our property and it is government which must pay out for land claims…why not just kick us off? Because they can’t, it’s based on the treaties and the patents of the land, because the “fee” is not in the Crown or the province???

If letters patent mean nothing, then why is it that the courts still use Magna Carta to support their positions, why is it that the legislators use Magna Carta to support their positions, why is it that the anniversary of Magna Carta is so important to Canadians and that lawyers state that it is the foundation of the British Commonwealth, considering Magna Carta is Letters Patent?

If the patents mean nothing, then why does Magna Carta still stand?

If the patents mean nothing, then where is the support for common law rights, as common law rights are protected under Magna Carta and the British North America Act…that is why we still have private property rights?

If the patents mean nothing, then why does the Federal governments guide to Real Property state that the patents are a) need to be kept for jurisprudence, and b) are the writing of the Sovereign, sealed with the Great Seal?

If the patents mean nothing, then Randy Hillier cannot be an MPP because it took letters patent for his position?

If the patents mean nothing, then there can be no courts, there can be no judges, there can be no senators…and there can be no municipalities or conservation authorities?

There are a number of different letters patent, so for anyone to state that some still have authority and others do not, they don’t even understand these documents. 

When it is letters patent for land, and the right, title and interest which go with said patent, the Crown domain has been removed, therefore, those opposed to the patents have nothing. 

If not for letters patent the entire country fails, because the Sovereign had to remove it’s domain over the “land” and everything that went with it for the country to even be created, and during the creation of the country, granted the administrative authority over what Crown and/or public land/property which had not already been granted/patented or had been established as public property. 

That is why we still have Supreme Court cases which support the private property rights of the people, because they are protected under the BNA.  We just need to be thankful that property rights are NOT entrenched in the Charter (1982-83) or we wouldn’t have any rights at all.

If letters patent under the Great Seal, other than letters patent that grant or concede lands, or documents under the Privy Seal of the Governor General or person administering the Government of Canada, have been issued to or in the name of the wrong person, or contain any
clerical error or misnomer or wrong description of any material fact, the Registrar General of
Canada, when authorized by the Governor in Council, may direct that the defective letters
patent or documents be cancelled, that a minute of the cancellation be entered in the margin of
the registry of the original letters patent or other documents and that correct letters patent under the Great Seal or documents under the Privy Seal be issued in their place.

P.S. Follow-up Information:
 The following letter informs Regional Lawyer Cruickshank that the official managers of the PSW was the correct action to save the PSW.

 After over 140 complaints regarding outside assault on their PSW the letter below confirms their position...

Done: June and July 2015
June 25, 2015
Upon inspection there was evidence of cut logs piled in the south ditch approximately 20m west of the entrance culvert for 7806 Concession Road 3.
Earth fill was found to be in the south ditch approximately 10-15m west of the entrance culvert for 7806 Concession 3 Road.
Pictures were taken for documentation purposes.
Resident from 7807 came out to speak to Township Employees, and claimed to have witnessed the filling of the ditch by the contractor hired by the landowner of 7806. The resident also claimed to have pictures and a diary log noting the events.
July 10, 2015
On-site review indicated that the roadside ditching is insufficient and substantial flooding on both the north and south sides of the road.
Preliminary review indicates that the natural grade of the road and ditches fall from east of 7806 and 7807 to the west of the said properties to a natural watercourse.
·         Survey Roadway, North Ditch and South Ditch to determine the existing grade and determine a rate of fall
·         Remove cross culvert at 7806 and 7807 Concession 3 Road
·         Grade north and south ditches from east to west, draining to the natural watercourse
·         Place new entrance culvert at 7807 Concession 3 Road

·         Follow-up discussions with both residents indicate that this would be a reasonable solution to the drainage issues.

·         Report by:      Brett R. H. Jackson, C.E.T. Drainage Superintendent

·         Township of West Lincoln

Are you suffering from Bureaucratic Bullying?
You have Rights!