Reminder About Bear Attractant Management

Photo by Peter Sulzle

We recently had an incident in Lac Le Jeune where a bear, reported to have to been feeding on garbage and dog food left outside, was shot by a local resident.

This is the time of year that we often see bears in our neighbourhoods as they descend from the mountains and begin their final feeding frenzy before winter sets in. It seems like a good time to remind residents that attractant management is the way to prevent conflict.

Obvious good practice includes ensuring garbage is secured inside a building, and feeding birds only when bears are hibernating. But some suggestions are less obvious. Did you know that petroleum products can attract bears? Also, consider that even though a bear might not be able to get into a compost or garbage bin, he was still attracted to the smell in the first place.

Yesterday I emailed Miranda Brooke, the Kamloops Bear Aware  Coordinator, to see if she had any data to share on bear deaths due to poor attractant management. Just by coincidence that information was published in the Kamloops Daily News today: "Bear Aware campaign ramps up after two killed" I wonder if it includes Lac Le Jeune, because it seems in some years we've had more bears killed out here than the totals listed for the area. Also mentioned in that article -- bears need 20,000 calories a day, the equivalent of 40 big macs!

I also asked Miranda for some help in crafting a clear message that would have some impact. I haven't heard back yet, but maybe these wonderful photographs from local photographer, Peter Sulzle, will help! (Thanks, Peter, for permission to share these on our blog.)

For heaps of good information about bears visit the Bear Aware Website. To report a problem, call the Conservation Officer: 1-877-952-7277.

Photo by Peter Sulzle

Photo by Peter Sulzle

Photo by Peter Sulzle

Kamloops Fire Centre Newsletter

The lastest issue of the Kamloops Fire Centre Newsletter is now available online.

As you can see from this map, most of our area has a high or extreme danger rating.

Open publication - Free publishing - More fire

Water Stewardship - Working Group Meeting

Marge Sidney, Water Technician for Ministry of Environment Water Stewardship Division, and Thompson Nicola Regional Director of the BC Lake Stewardship Society visited Lac Le Jeune yesterday evening and met with members of the LLJCA Water Stewardship Working Group.

Topics covered and items for follow-up included:

1. Ways to provide outflow and flushing from the Little Lake (which is one cause of the large fish kill this past spring).
2. Sources of funding for groups such as the Lac Le Jeune Conservation Association for environment enhancement projects.
3. Ministries such as Water Rights, Fisheries, Water Management (MOE), Forestry and Parks that are in a position to make decisions that could impact Lac Le Jeune and contact people in those Ministries.
4. Invasive Species (terrestrial) contacts.
5. Water contact person for Lac Le Jeune at the local MOE.

Remarks for Public Hearing: Howard Mattfeld

Howard Mattfeld prepared these remarks for the Lakeshore Development Public Hearing.

A FLAWED PROCESS

By: Howard Mattfeld - a long-time resident of Lac Le Jeune

Introduction:

To date the process to rezone the subject property has not been conducted in a fair and honest manner by the TNRD.

Arguments:

1. This rezoning process began a considerable time ago. The Developer has kept the people of Lac Le Jeune informed as to the plans which they put forward to regulators, and to some of the changes which they have applied. The TNRD has invited some stakeholders to be a part of the process: Native Bands, The Provincial Water Comptroller. However, the Regional District has never communicated with the people affected by the zoning changes. The residents of Lac Le Jeune have never been asked for their input, their expertise, event their opinion.
2. There have been a number of changes to the property zoning from the start of this process. District Staff have engaged with the developer and appear to have done everything in their power to accommodate the Developer's wishes. Not once in this process have Staff asked for any input from the people living in the area. Not once has Staff contacted the locals regarding verification of information submitted by the Developer. There has been no communication to local residents by anyone at the TNRD during this process.
3. This process of non-communication has proceeded through the 1st Reading. The only stakeholders who were made aware of the 1st Reading were the TNRD and the Developer. It was only by chance that a search of the TNRD website showed a meeting was to be held. Nobody informed the residents of Lac Le Jeune. There was no invitation to the Conservation Association. There was no invitation to the Water Society. And of course, the 1st Reading was a formality. All discussions and fact finding had already been done. There was no verification of the developer's information, no scrutiny of the information submitted. If there had been, then the TNRD staff would have found a great deal of old information, unverified opinions, and incomplete data.
4. There was in interesting side note to the 1st Reading. A convenant which was tied to the subject property was included in the 1st Readings There was no noticed of this, no discussion, just added to the Reading. Do you not think that the residents should have been informed that a property which was not to be developed, by convenant, was about to be changed? Again, no communication by the TNRD to those who would be affected the most.
5. This process has been very enlightening for the Lac Le Jeune residents. There has always been the expectation that the TNRD Staff and the TNRD Representatives worked on behalf of everyone within their respective jurisdictions. This is in fact not the case. The lack of communication by the Area Representatives, and by the Staff shows that only some entities received TNRD support. Despite contact from the Lac Le Jeune Conservation Association and the Ridgemount Estates Water Users' Society asking to be kept informed, to be kept up to date, no communication came from TNRD.
6. This meeting is a good example of TNRD process.
   a) An invitation to attend this meeting was sent out to those who live within 100 metres of the development. What does 100 metres have to do with this? The entire community will be affected to some degree. The Notice of Public Hearing states "that all persons who believe that their interest in property may be affected by the proposed Bylaw shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to be present written submissions at the Public Hearing". And exactly how are these persons to do so when they have not been made aware of the Public Hearing? This is how the TNRD communicates with their electorate.
   
   b) The Notice of Public Hearing discusses the proposed zoning change. There is no mention of the proposal to remove the Convenant on the Subject Property. The Convenant may seem to be a minor part of the Reading, but to the residents at Lac Le Jeune it is a major achievement dating from a pervious property rezoning of the current Ridgemount Subdivision. Again, no communication by Staff or TNRD Representatives to this proposed major shift in property designation.
   
   c) Not only does this 2nd Reading include the Convenant change, it also included a combining of the 2nd and 3rd Readings. The TNRD appears to be intent on having this proposal passed with a minimum of work. This is another example of where the concerns and schedule of the developer have been addressed, but where due diligence has not. The TNRD is being perceived as less than honest in its dealings. The TNRD is operating through a rezoning process by Decree.
7. The Rezoning affects everything which will occur on the Subject Property. Therefore, it is amazing that water and sewer are not considerations for this Reading. The TNRD may not have the final say in the water allocation, however, it is something which must be discussed as to the preferential options and feasibility. Water is an item which may become a solely TNRD responsibility at a future date. The sewer is definitely within the TNRD mandate and is a vital part of any application for rezoning. How do you know that you are able to proceed on the Proposal if there is no facility for sewer, or if the impacts are unknown? Impacts sucha as catchment problems close to the Little Lake have not ever been examined. 

Summary:

1. The majority of the constituents you represent are not very happy with the way in which this rezoning application has been undertaken. This rezoning process has been flawed.
   - No verification of the developer's data
   - no input from other stakeholders
   - a condensed process to accommodate the developer's schedule
   - the TNRD looks as if it is not being honest with the lack of communication and transparency
2. Residents are not against this development. They want a say in the process and to be kept informed as to what occurs. It will affect their properties in many ways.
3. This 2nd Reading should be cancelled.
   - TNRD staff should request input from the other stakeholders so that their concerns can be addressed, and problems with the developer's submission be corrected.
   - TNRD Representatives can then receive an unbiased Board Report upon which to base their vote.

TNRD Approves Lakeshore Development

Today's Kamloops Daily News has a front page article about the Public Hearing: Despite opposition, TNRD approves Lac Le Jeune development. According to this article 25 Lac Le Jeune residents were present at the hearing. "None spoke in favour."

The LLJCA representatives at this hearing made it clear that the association's mandate is to ensure the protection of our lake environment. They presented evidence to support a recommendation to defer Application No. BA 24 until the issues raised in the submissions are resolved.

Ronaye Elliott, our TNRD Area J Representative, followed the presentations with a comment that the developer "has done more than required to communicate with LLJ residents by making presentations at the last three AGMs". Another director criticized the LLJCA for not responding to the development plans sooner. The motion for removal of the convenant passed unanimously, with perhaps a couple of abstentions.

Despite the outcome of the vote by regional district directors, there will continue to be opportunities for LLJCA to offer expertise to the developers, and for ongoing discussions to ensure environmental concerns are addressed.

You can browse blog posts related to the Lakeshore Development by selecting the 'development' label.

photo by Jenny Perry

Remarks for Public Hearing: David Wyse

David Wyse prepared these remarks for the Lakeshore Development Public Hearing.

===========================

Thank you for allowing us to speak to you this afternoon. We appreciate the opportunity to express our concerns to you and hope that you will share our concerns.

My name is David Wyse. I am President of the Lac Le Jeune Conservation Association. Currently, 68 households at Lac Le Jeune are members of this association. Most, if not all of the membership are concerned about the impact on our water supply by further development. Our mandate is stewardship. We are not opposed to development. But we are opposed to development when due diligence in ensuring the sustainability of the area’s water resource has not been carried out. With that, there can be no compromise.

I will speak to you first followed by Howie Mattfeld, a LLJCA executive member, Elna Strand, a member of the LLJCA and finally, Bob Brown, Vice-President of the LLJCA.

We attached six pictures to our September submission to you. Two of them are aerial photographs from Google Earth that show the area much more clearly than the maps provided to you in the Notice of Public Hearing. There is one picture of Big Lac Le Jeune, two pictures of Little Lac Le Jeune (one taken from the east end of the little lake and the other from the west end). The sixth picture documents a few of the many fish who perished in the Little Lake over the winter.

Would you be concerned if you were told that the guidelines for lakeshore development outlined in the 2004 TNRD publication on Lakeshore Development were no longer relevant?

Would you be concerned if, after repeated requests to suggest other guidelines that would be relevant to protect the water resource you are told to limit the speed of boats on the lake?

Would you be concerned if the environmental impact assessment was not done on the lake the development was being proposed to be built on, but rather on an adjacent lake?

Would you be concerned if the data used to support the conclusions reached in the impact assessment were, for the most part, over a third of a century old?

Would you be concerned that a lake, already designated “Critical” by the TNRD, already 100% overdeveloped based on TNRD criteria, already with a notation that there should be no further development has received approval for further development by the Planning Department of the TNRD?

Would you be concerned if no reassurance had been given to you about the sustainability of your water supply knowing that the development being proposed would draw at least 4.5 million gallons of water from the Lac Le Jeune aquifer annually.

Would you be concerned if the water monitoring program carried out by volunteers from the LLJCA and supported by the MOE and BCLSS since ice-off in May this year found alarming levels of increase in both phosphorous and specific conductivity compared to the 35 year old data used by Mr. Holmes from the wrong lake?

Would you be concerned when you discovered that the proposed development had moved another 60 feet closer to the lake in the past few months. It is now 40 meters from high water mark. And Mr. Holmes, when writing the Cariboo District Lakeshore Guidelines stated that planners “should ensure that buffer leave strips of 250 meters are required on all developments adjacent to high sensitivity lakes.”

From Little Lake

From Little Lake

(show picture of dead fish from the kill this spring)

Would you…please…be concerned enough about our area to ensure that safeguards are put in place to protect our and future generations water resource.

Thank you for your consideration of these comments.

Remarks for Public Hearing: Elna Strand

Elna Strand has prepared these remarks for the Lakeshore Development Public Hearing.

==================

My name is Elna Strand---we live at Lac le Jeune.

There are 2 separate questions being considered at this public hearing.

1. The cancellation of an existing restrictive covenant on DL 5739, and 
2. The approval of a proposed residential sub-division to be established on this land once the restrictive covenant is removed. 

I will speak about the cancellation of the existing restrictive covenant.

 In 1978 a subdivision on DL 5739 was approved. As part of that approval the TNRD requested the owner to enter into a restrictive covenant on the remainder of the District Lot which reads “…That the Grantor will not subdivide for residential purposes those lands known legally as District Lot 5739…”. Now that is precisely what the owner of the property proposes to do.

You may say that conditions have changed since 1978. Indeed they have—conditions at Lac Le Jeune have deteriorated. We have been devastated by the pine beetle. Areas around the lake, including the Provincial Campsite have been clear cut in an unsuccessful effort to control the pine beetle. We no longer have the forest canopy to reduce the run-off of heavy rains and to absorb snow melt. Partly as a result of this the quality of the lake water is deteriorating. The lakes are the source for our drinking water.

The pattern of development has also changed. No longer do people purchase land at Lac le Jeune to build “a cabin in the woods” or small homes. The recent development pattern is to clear the lot and build a large suburban type dwelling with out-buildings, paving and lawns. I foresee this type of building pattern in the proposed sub-division unless restrictions on site clearing and site coverage are put in place. Without these the run-off problem will increase.

Further, while you are being asked to remove the restrictive covenant from all the remaining part of DL 5739 you are being asked to establish an LR-1 and P-1 zone on only part of that property. I assume that the remaining property would remain within the AF-1 zone. If so, the proposed large “estate lot” of over 53 hectares could (at sometime in the future) be divided into smaller lots. This should not be permitted.

Public regard for elected officials has sunk to an all-time low. This is because those officials have not kept promises made to the citizens that elected them. If this restrictive covenant is removed it is another promise broken. The TNRD should think long and carefully before breaking its promise to the citizens of Lac le Jeune. The restrictive covenant should not be removed.

Thank you

Lakeshore Development Public Hearing

This letter was delivered to TNRD in preparation for the Lakeshore Development Public Hearing.

=================

September 18, 2012

Public Hearing Comments

The mandate of our Association is stewardship. We are not opposed to development. We are opposed to development when due diligence in ensuring the sustainability of the area’s water resource has not been carried out.

We have the following concerns:

1.     All criteria developed by the Thompson-Nicola District (TNRD) regarding Lakeshore Development have been ignored. According to the 2004 TNRD publication, “Lakeshore Development Guidelines”, Big Lac Le Jeune has been classified as “Development Lake sub-class” with the notation in the document that there should be NO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT. This classification is based on the two criteria used by the TNRD, namely “perimeter development” and “user unit ratio”, both of which are currently exceeded.   Again, based on TNRD criteria, Little Lac Le Jeune, the lake the proposed development will be adjacent to, has been classified as “Critical” with the notation that there should be NO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT. Little Lac Le Jeune has been given a Critical designation because of several factors. It has a mean depth of less than 5 meters. The size of Little Lac Le Jeune (between 60 and 100 hectares) allows for 20% perimeter development. Currently there is approximately 40% development. Ministry of the Environment personnel have determined that Little Lac Le Jeune is eutrophic. (overly rich in nutrients…i.e. nutrient pollution)

2.     The TNRD requires that an environmental impact assessment be completed prior to any lakeshore development. Our letter to the TNRD dated December 11, 2011 outlines our concerns with the study done by Lakeshore Environmental Ltd. (Please refer to #3)  Further to the concerns we mentioned, we are particularly concerned that the assessment was done on Big Lac Le Jeune when the proposed development is immediately south of Little Lac Le Jeune. We are also concerned that the data used was extremely dated. The most recent data cited in the report came from 1996 with the bulk of the data thirty-five years old from 1977. Wrong lake with data over a third of a century old!

3.     In our December letter, we expressed concern regarding the sheer volume of water that would be taken from the lake or water table if the proposed development proceeds. We are concerned about the potential draw of 4,471,250 gallons of water from the supply (based on 250 gallons per day with 49 proposed homes). Can the lake and water table sustain an additional draw of this annual amount?

4.     Since we wrote the December letter to the TNRD we have undertaken a water monitoring program supported by the Ministry of the Environment and the British Columbia Lake Stewardship Society.  Preliminary reports from our monitoring since ice-off in May, 2012 indicate an alarming increase in the phosphorous levels (over 1300%) and an almost doubling of the Specific Conductivity of the lake since the reports cited by Lakeshore Environmental Ltd. This information is in addition to the concerns raised by testing of water samples taken from Lookout Road by Interior Health prior to the installation of a filtration system mentioned in Concern #5 in the December letter.

5.     Since earlier this year, the proposed development has moved over 60 feet closer to the lake (from 60meters from high water mark to 40 meters).

Lakeshore Environmental Ltd. was contracted to write the Cariboo District Lakeshore Development guidelines. In that document, Mr. Holmes writes “ENSURE THAT (our capitalization) buffer leave strips are required on ALL developments within 150 meters of a low sensitivity lake and 250 meters of a high sensitivity lake to protect water quality.”  (Little Lac Le Jeune would be defined as a High Sensitivity Lake.)  He also states that “prior to further development there should be a water quality sensitivity rating. This should include a map of the lake basin morphometry, lake volume, depth, surface area, perimeter development, chemical sampling of lake at spring overturn, calculation of mean phosphorous concentration rate, calculation of flushing rate, watershed boundaries and information on land uses within the watershed. Mr. Holmes also recommended that a “Lake Carrying Capacity” measurement be done to “determine the capacity of the lake to support additional development. Of course, none of this good advice was followed when Lakeshore Environmental Ltd. wrote its environmental impact study to support Lakeridge development.

6.     We were informed that an engineering firm would be hired to do an impact assessment of the proposed development on the lake. This has not materialized.

7.     We described a number of anecdotal concerns in the December letter (refer to concern #6). Subsequent to this, we were alarmed this spring at the significant fish kill in the little lake. While there is usually some fish kill over winter, long term residents report that they have never seen anything that approached the magnitude of the fish kill this spring.

Perhaps Don Holmes of Lakeshore Environmental Ltd. said it best when writing for the Cariboo District.  “Even if each development was properly managed, this might not be adequate to protect lakes from the cumulative impact of many developments in high demand areas.”

Photographs to support these comments are available online: http://goo.gl/bosWu

Thank you for considering our concerns.

                                                       

Sincerely,

                                                             

David Wyse, President, LLJCA

Notice of Public Hearing: Lakeshore Development

This Notice of Public Hearing was distributed by TNRD to Lac Le Jeune residents who live within 100 metres of the proposed development site.

Background reading

• TNRD BOARD REPORT, September 7, 2012 : Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 2390, Application No. BA 24 (PDF)
• Lakeridge at Lac Le Jeune Q&A

====================

THOMPSON-NICOLA REGIONAL DISTRICT

Notice of Public Hearing

The Board of Directors of the Thompson-Nicola Regional District hereby gives notice that it will hold a Public Hearing:

Thursday, September 20, 2012 at 1:15 p.m.

at the Thompson-Nicola Regional District Boardroom, 4th Floor, 465 Victoria Street, Kamloops, BC, to consider Bylaw No. 2390, a Bylaw to amend Zoning Bylaw No. 2400.

The purpose of proposed Bylaw No. 2390 is to rezone portions of the subject land at the south end of Lac Le Jeune Road from AF-1 (Agricultural/Forestry) to P-1 (Recreational) Zone and to LR-1 (Lakeshore Residential Single Family) Zone via a site-specific provision. The applicant wishes to develop a fee simple 45 lot residential subdivision; new community park facilities; and a sales/presentation centre.

The following is proposed to be added to Bylaw No. 2400 as s. 11.2.1: 

11.2.1 Parcel Size and Density – Site Specific

Notwithstanding the preceding limits to parcel size and number of dwellings per parcel, residential development on lands zoned LR-1 off the south end of Lac Le Jeune Road and legally described as District Lot 5739, KDYD, except Plans 15863 and 29344, is limited to a maximum density of 45 parcels whereby any parcel having an area of 0.45 hectares or more can be used for no more than one single family dwelling; except that any parcel with an area of 0.8 hectares or more may have one additional detached single family dwelling.

The following is proposed to be added to Bylaw No. 2400 as s.11.6.4 (b):

(b) one sales and presentation centre of a maximum of 250 square metres gross floor area is permitted on any portion of District Lot 5739, KDYD, except Plans 15863 and 29344.

The subject property owned by Cressida Holdings Ltd. is located at 5805 Lac Le Jeune Road, Lac Le Jeune, BC, as shown below.

Notice of Public Hearing on September 20, 2012 

Bylaw No. 2390 File No. BA 24

FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that all persons who believe that their interest in property may be affected by the proposed Bylaw shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the Public Hearing on the matters contained therein. Those unable to attend the Public Hearing may mail (#300–465 Victoria Street, Kamloops, BC V2C 2A9), fax (250-372-5048), email admin@tnrd.ca or hand deliver written submissions to the Regional District office on the 4th Floor, provided that all submissions are received prior to 4:30 p.m. on the 19th day of September, 2012;

AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that no representations will be received by the Board of Directors after the Public Hearing has been concluded;

AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that a copy of the proposed Bylaw Amendments may be inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday to Friday, except Statutory Holidays, at the Thompson-Nicola Regional District Office, 4th Floor, 465 Victoria Street, Kamloops, BC, from the 6th day of September, 2012 until 1:15 p.m. on the day of the Public Hearing.

R. Sadilkova
Director of Development Services 

Close call

+

careless person

=

This time the careless person was a Lac Le Jeune resident, who was seen throwing a cigarette out of a car window into a ditch along the main street. This time we were lucky there were no flames.

Cigarette photo by kjetilhr 
Wildfire photo by ressaure 

Cougar shot at Ridge Lakes

A hunter killed a cougar yesterday afternoon by Ridge Lake after he could not deter it from stalking him while walking on a trail. Conservation Officer Service has been advised and they feel that the appropriate action was taken by the hunter. He was left with no choice after his attempts to deter and scare off the cougar were ignored by the cat. It was at least 120lbs and not the least bit put off that it was preying on a full grown man in full view of its intended prey who was bigger than the cougar itself.

Posted by Kecia Turunen

TODAY! Ajax mine forum

Ajax mine forum 

2:00pm - 4:00pm September 9, 2012 

Thompson Rivers University, Clock Tower Room: Alumni Theatre 

This forum dealing with mining related issues is the first in a series to be held at TRU.

Gus Johnson Work Party Part 2

Thanks to those who offered to join the Gus Johnson work party and to everyone who replied to the request for help. As it turns out, last week someone jumped the gun and cleaned the Gus Johnson trail. 

Noelle Kekula of Recreation Sites and Trails BC has been clear that the Stake Lake and Gus Johnson Trails are closed to motorized vehicles. Therefore, we need a permit to access to the trails with motorized vehicles or we risk a fine. Noelle did say the process for receiving permission will be quicker next time. As always, cleaning of the Gus Johnson Trail by the Lac Le Jeune Conservations Association will follow this process for obtaining a permit.

Thanks to Jim Phillips for this update and for continuing to oversee the Gus Johnson clean-up project!

Reforestation Activities

These reforestation activities are being coordinated by Forsite Consultants Ltd, on behalf of Woodco Management. The following outlines Woodco’s (Forsite Consultant’s) Mechanical Site Preparation plans for the Lac Le Jeune area. Jim Phillips is liaising with the company on this project and will respond to any questions or concerns.

IMPORTANT:  People must remain clear of any equipment as well as any blocks where treatments are being conducted. This is important for their safety. 

Planned start date 
Monday September 10, 2012.

Anticipated completion date 
The completion date will be subject to daily equipment production, however, we expect to be completed all trenching activities by September 22, 2012.

Planned site preparation activities (mechanical site preparation - disc trenching)
Site preparation activities will be conducted using skidder mounted disc trenchers. The skidders will be operating on the previously harvested blocks around the Lac Le Jeune area and also on the Ross Moore Forest Service Road. The skidders / trenching equipment will be delivered to the area utilizing lowbeds. In some cases it will be necessary to unload / load the equipment along the public road system. Wherever possible the contractor will load / unload the equipment on side roads where traffic levels will be lower.

Location of planned activities
These two maps of the Lac Le Jeune area indicate all blocks. Click to enlarge.

Planned activities

The majority of these blocks will be either entirely disc trenched or partially disc trenched. Specifically, the following blocks are planned for disc trenching treatment at this time:

• CP 200 Block 1
• CP 200 Block 2
• CP 200 Block 3
• CP 200 Block 5
• CP 200 Block 6
• CP 200 Block 7
• CP 200 Block 8 

Note - these overview maps are intended to indicate the blocks where mechanical site preparation treatments are planned. If there is interest regarding the plans for specific blocks, then that information can be made available.

Project Rationale 
Treatment of these previously harvested areas is necessary in order to meet our reforestation obligation(s). The treatment is being conducted in order to address grass competition and to mechanically create plantable spots for our planned 2013 tree planting activities.

August 29 LLJCA Executive Meeting

Lac Le Jeune Conservation Association Executive:

President:  David Wyse
Vice President: Bob Brown
Secretary:  Sylvia Currie
Treasurer:  Corinne Shock
Area Reps:

Lower subdivision: John Krawchuk
Upper subdivision: Howie Matfeld
Lookout Road: Pam Sheridan
Little Lake: Jenny Perry
Water Street: Jaquie Bruegger
Park Drive East: John Watson

The new executive held its first meeting on August 29, 2012.

Agenda, decisions, and action items: 

• Loss of core funding to the BC Lake Stewardship Society from the Ministry of the Environment. Letter to the Minister requesting that he reconsider this decision. 

• Utilities Commission / Comptroller of Water Rights.
  Letter requesting to be kept informed regarding any decisions impacting Lac Le Jeune.

• Lakeshore Monitoring (Gus Johnson trail clean up, rehabilitation of spawning streams, invasive plant species)
  Contact M.O.E. to request their advice on how to proceed and invite Marg Sidney to attend an executive meeting.
  Explore best options for walking access across main mud hole; suggested boardwalk could work. 

• TNRD communication.
  Letter to Ronaye Elliott, our TNRD Area J Representative, informing her of the new executive and requesting that we be kept informed and involved in the processes leading to any future development. 

• Follow up correspondence from LLJCA AGM
  Letter to Logan Lake RCMP thanking them for their participation in the AGM.
  Letter to Derick thanking him for use of the lodge and for supplying refreshments. 

• Review of the Constitution
  Agreed there is a need to revise.
  As a preliminary step, the documents will be distributed to executive members for review. 

• Communication with relevant agencies
  Letters to TNRD, MOE, and Forestry Branch requesting to be informed of and involved in any decisions impacting LLJ. 

Statement from the Executive

Our executive is committed to the preservation of the quality of life that we all enjoy here. This includes fishers, skiers, ATVers, snowmobilers, hikers, and so on. We are focused on preserving the quality and sustainability of the water we live beside. We also aim to be participants in any decisions made that could potentially impact any of this.

Please use your area representatives to bring forward any issues you would like your LLJCA executive to address.

David Wyse can be contacted at 250-374-8542, or dkm_wyse@telus.net