IJC compromise met with anger

ALEXANDRIA BAY — International Joint Commission's spokesman Frank A. Bevacqua told the audience at Wednesday's informational session on new water management plans that the IJC has found a workable compromise in Plan 2007.

But the public brought a different message to the table.

"You don't care what happens upstream," said Eric J. Nash, Clayton, at the informational session.

Mr. Nash said the IJC's water management has been damaging his property and others' along the St. Lawrence River.

"Don't start taking out water before September," said Mr. Nash, who has lived in Clayton about 30 years. "I got no problem getting higher waters in the winter."

He argued that the newly proposed plan isn't a significant improvement over the current 50-year-old water regulation plan.

"There is no change. You aren't doing anything," Mr. Nash said.

Some speakers noted the geographical disparities of various interest groups.

"The south shore is holding us hostage and you guys are allowing it," said Twyla Webb, Clayton.

Mrs. Webb said the IJC was not taking the whole river community into consideration.

"People can't even get their boats out. How would you mitigate that? How do you mitigate wetland damages?" Mrs. Webb said.

In response to a question whether the commission has been sued over its plans, Mr. Bevacqua said Lake Ontario south shore property owners threatened to sue them over Plan B+, considered the balanced environmental plan and strongly favored along the river and the east shore of Lake Ontario.

"The commission really likes B+ a lot, but there are problems with it," Mr. Bevacqua said.

Mr. Bevacqua said Plan B+ would cause significant damage and would cost millions for shoreline protection.

He said as soon as the state and the provinces of Ontario and Quebec implement a mitigation plan to protect the interest of the property owners on the south shore of Lake Ontario, the IJC will implement Plan B+.

"There are several B+ variations," Mr. Bevacqua said. "All of them need mitigations."

He suggested the state take action to either offer buyouts along the shoreline or offer to insure the properties.

Mr. Bevacqua said when the three initial plans, Plan A+, B+ and D+, were presented to the public last year, opinions quickly became polarized.

"People on the south shore didn't want B+. They wanted the status quo," he said.

He said the IJC presented several variations of the plans and the commissioners chose one the versions of D+, which was renamed Plan 2007.

"We have a strong interest in environmental improvement," Mr. Bevacqua said. "Plan 2007 is a significant improvement over D+."

However, Plan 2007 will have only a third of the marshland improvements Plan B+ would have in the course of 50 years, according to Mr. Bevacqua. The disappearance of wetlands has long troubled residents and environmental groups.

"It is important to get in some benefit, although it might not be as benefiting as Plan B+," Mr. Bevacqua said.

The head of a north country river watchdog group sharply challenged that contention.

"All the scientists we talked to said to us that the benefits of Plan 2007 are negligible," said Jennifer J. Caddick, executive director of Save the River, an environmental group based in Clayton.

Dalton P. Foster, Hill Island, said he was "extremely disappointed" in the IJC's response to public concerns raised at the informational session.

"Basically, it was a canned review of what they are going to do," said Mr. Foster,

Mr. Foster, who was also the first U.S. chairman of the Public Interest Advisory Commission which gave copious public input during the IJC's five-year study, said it is important that people not be discouraged by the commission's attitude.

"They should write to their elected government officials. Thousands should show up to meetings like this," he said.

The IJC will hold 10 public hearings in June, including June 25 at Bonnie Castle Resort, Alexandria Bay. Public comments will be accepted by the IJC until July 11.