Is The Flooding, In The Great Lakes, St. Lawrence, Tributaries Of The Great Lakes A Crime Against Humanity?

"Article 7 Crimes Against Humanity 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: ‘Attack directed against any civilian population’ means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack;..." "According to Article 7 (1) of the Rome Statute, crimes against humanity do not need to be linked to an armed conflict and can also occur in peacetime, similar to the crime of genocide. That same Article provides a definition of the crime that contains the following main elements: 1. A physical element, which includes the commission of “any of the following acts”: d. Deportation or forcible transfer of population;" ?

“Computer simulations show that average annual damages to the Lake Ontario coastal development are expected to be somewhat larger under Plan 2014 than under Plan 1958DD. These long-term simulations are based on estimates of the damages under 1958DD and each alternative plan. For example, the average net increase in damage to all Lake Ontario shore protection structures for Plan 2014 is estimated at $1.94 million per year (the difference between estimated average annual damages of $15.48 million for Plan 1958DD and $17.43 million for Plan 2014). The fact that Plan 2014 would cause more damage on average does not mean that continued regulation under Plan 1958DD would guarantee lower coastal damages. In some future circumstances, Plan 2014 could reduce damages compared to those under Plan 1958DD. The damages summarized in Table 3 are based on thousands of simulations of different water supply scenarios, each representing a different, possible sequence of water flowing into Lake Ontario. Of these, there are more scenarios in which Plan 2014 damages are greater than Plan 1958DD damages, but many in which Plan 1958DD is more damaging. The near-term future could include either type of water supply sequence.”

Support Canada Free Press

Tradeoffs in Managing the Natural and Developed Shore

There are challenges to balancing healthy coastal wetlands and property damage along the Lake Ontario shoreline. In its 2006 report, the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Study Board found that Plan 1958DD came close to minimizing damages for Lake Ontario shoreline property owners but had reduced the diversity of plant types along the shore and populations of animal species that feed on and live in the environments affected by the reduced water level ranges. The Study Board and Working Group produced a range of regulation plans that met the Treaty’s requirements, but that produced different levels of benefits among interests. No plan, however, could completely overcome this inherent conflict. Plans that restored a significant measure of coastal ecosystem health did so with more natural lake levels. More natural levels, by contrast, increased damages to vulnerable shoreline development. An alternative such as Plan 2007, which relaxed the compressed summer levels of Lake Ontario while keeping autumn and winter levels unnaturally low, resulted in a slight reduction in coastal damages on average, but did little to reverse the harm to the environment. In selecting a new regulation plan, the IJC chose to strike a balance between the two objectives. Plan 2014 produces a large improvement in coastal ecosystems in return for a small reduction in the benefits provided in the 1956 Order for those shoreline property owners who need to maintain shore protection to limit erosion and flooding.”

Question - what's more important - a human being and their life's work or a dandelion?

"Among the conclusions of its 2006 final report (IJC, 2006), the IJC’s Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Study Board found that the compression of the range of water levels on Lake Ontario and the upper river has degraded coastal wetlands. It found that environmental conditions could be improved by changing the regulation plan, but not without tradeoffs that will reduce some existing economic benefits. ..."

VIEW Comments