Madoc - 3 - apparently Illegal dams et al.

[Dave2]

This thread deals with the apparently illegal dam related to the Madoc property. To see it look at the Tri-Target aeriel photo.

 http://www.tri-target.com/listlist.php?municipality=Madoc

You will see it in bottom right hand corner of the photo. Note that it is constructed not on the
tax sale land but was constructed by the owner on the neighbours property.

It allegedly also was constructed without proper government permits BUT BECAUSE IT WAS SUPPOSEDLY CONSTRUCTED ON THE WRONG PROPERTY ANY LEGAL ACTION WILL NOT BE REGISTERED AGAINST THE TAX SALE PROPERTY.

Alright smarter members of this board what are your liabilities if you buy this property at tax sale.
Losing the dam maybe the least of your problems.  For those bidders on this property I suggest you select your lawyer now.   

[Dave2]

In this post I outline the goverment legislation.  You are liable to a fine up to $1,000,000 and six months in jail if found guiltly.   

1.  In this Regulation,

?channelize? means to alter the alignment, width, depth, sinuosity, conveyance or bed or bank material of a river or stream channel;

?water crossing? means a bridge, culvert or causeway that is constructed to provide access between two places separated by water but that also holds back, forwards or diverts water. O. Reg. 454/96, s. 1; O. Reg. 160/07, s. 1.

2.  (1)  For the purpose of subsection 14 (1) and section 16 of the Act, approval is required,

(a) to construct or decommission a dam that holds back water in a river, lake, pond or stream to raise the water level, create a reservoir to control flooding or divert the flow of water;

(b) to make alterations, improvements or repairs to a dam that holds back water in a river, lake, pond or stream to raise the water level, create a reservoir to control flooding or divert the flow of water, if the alterations, improvements or repairs may affect the dam?s safety or structural integrity, the waters or natural resources; or

(c) to do any of the following things outside the area of jurisdiction of a conservation authority, or within the area of jurisdiction of a conservation authority that has in effect a regulation governing development, interference with wetlands and alteration to shorelines and watercourses if the area in which the work will be done does not form part of the area covered by the regulation:

(i) Constructing a water crossing draining an area greater than five square kilometres, unless construction is undertaken by a Ministry or municipality on lands owned by the Crown or the municipality undertaking the construction.

(ii) Channelizing a river or stream that may harmfully alter fish habitat or impede the movement of fish in a river, stream or lake, except for the installation or maintenance of a drain, subject to the Drainage Act;

(iii) Enclosing or covering a length of river or stream for greater than 20 metres in length.

(iv) Installing, if the installation may result in damming, forwarding or diverting water, a cable or pipeline into the bed of a river, stream or lake except for the installation of heat loops, water intakes and service cables for private residences.

(v) Installing a temporary dam for the purpose of removing water or water flow from an area during construction of any of the works described in subclauses (i) to (iv). O. Reg. 160/07, s. 2 (1).

(2)  For the purpose of section 16 of the Act, approval is required before a person operates a dam in a manner different from that contemplated by plans and specifications approved by the Minister under section 14 or 16 of the Act. O. Reg. 160/07, s. 2 (2).

3.  No approval is required under section 14 or 16 of the Act for a water crossing to which the Public Lands Act applies or that has been constructed as part of a forest operation to which the Forest Operation and Silvicultural Manual under Crown Forest Sustainability Act applies. O. Reg. 454/96, s. 3.

[Pfm1011]

You may want to take a look at the southwest part of the lake ..west outflow.  there is no dam on 5/26 /2006  google earth  but the Hasting GIS  2008/2009  and the  tritarget /ots images show what appears to be a dam at the west end..could be a bridge  but appears to be a dam on the tax sale piece..

.  however I doubt anything would be done by mnr as this goes on everywhere in that part of the province as there is alot of swamp in that area.   These aren't damns ..they are just dirt levees  so I wouldn't lose sleep ..you might actually want to make them bigger if you can and deny all knowledge..blame it on a pesky beaver

 claimsmap actually show the eastern "dam" or separation of the lakes so the east one could stay ..of course claimsmap also shows this is not a big lake..just a  watercourse /swamp


this is of course is all  just  an  exercise in research and abit of brushing up   as this will redeem..by either the owner or one of  the  mortgage holders 

[Dave2]

.  however I doubt anything would be done by mnr as this goes on everywhere in that part of the province as there is alot of swamp in that area.   These aren't damns ..they are just dirt levees  so I wouldn't lose sleep ..you might actually want to make them bigger if you can and deny all knowledge..blame it on a pesky beaver

 claimsmap actually show the eastern "dam" or separation of the lakes so the east one could stay ..of course claimsmap also shows this is not a big lake..just a  watercourse /swamp

this is of course is all  just  an  exercise in research and abit of brushing up   as this will redeem..by either the owner or one of  the  mortgage holders  

PFM:

I wish I could believe you.  See following article and ad from MNR from North Bay Nugget and Sudbury Star.

Ministry to remove illegal dam on Wasi River
Updated 4 years ago
The Ministry of Natural Resources is reminding Wasi Lake and Wasi River shoreline property owners that the staged removal of an illegal sandbag dam obstructing the Wasi Lake outlet will continue until all sandbags are removed.

This dam removal is expected to lower Wasi Lake water levels by about half a metre by early December.

During the same period, elevated flows and water levels may be expected on the Wasi River between Wasi Lake and the outlet on Lake Nipissing's Callander Bay.



Dam construction must be approved, MNR says (ad from MNR in Sudbury Star)
Posted 4 years ago
The Ministry of Natural Resources reminds the public all dams must be authorized and approved under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act prior to construction.

The reminder comes as work wraps up to remove an illegally constructed dam on Wasi Lake.

The act regulates the location, design, construction and operation of dams. It protects public rights, the interests of owners of homes on waterways and ensures protection from flooding and erosion.

Penalties and enforcement provisions under the act can include fines of up to $1 million and six months in jail, as well as repair and restoration orders.

What they are really trying to do is protect the endangered Canadian gator.  We know they exist because one of our members   has one.  

Actually I think we should lobby for endangered status ourselves.  I hate it when we have these diligent municipal officials who send out final notices (form 4) to 11 different parties
about the taxes owing.  Even both husband and wife.  Maybe in the interest of being green and saving municpal money we can convince the government to send only one notice.

This is shaping up as one of those that we will meet in Tim Hortons at 1:30 on the day of the sale at highway 62 and 7 to go up the road to hear it has redeemed 10 minutes before a bid opening.  Want to bet a coffee that it redeems just before bid opening.

Baller: IF you don't believe PFM or myself pull the legals yourself. You will see why we wea re both saying it will redeem.  In my case I refused to bet on odds of 300 to one.

I am going to work a bit on this one because there is some good educational learning from aspects of this situation we can all learn about.
Dave2

[Dave2]

To Dave and others.

So Dave, how about it - 300 to 1 are big odds to give, but if you win you can finally brag about beating me.

Sorry Netpred:

No bets.  After looking at all the information I have about this one.  It will redeem.

This is a fascinating one however because of the issues it brings up.  I did more investigation then normal early on because of the Longyear information that Jima posted and had more time then normal because while in the Timmies parking lot at the corner of 7 and 62  I got a call from Ottawa advising me that my appointment that afternoon in Ottawa was cancelled.  

I am not worried about the legal liability for the dam directly but indirectly.  None of the people on this board are personally liable but I am worried that the ministry may go after the current owner and put a claim on the property at the last minute before title is transferred but after the tax sale in the very unlikely event that it does occur. Revenue Canada does it all the time.

The other issue as I noted before is that with the dam gone, the lake is gone as well and you are left with a swamp.  There are not a lot of people who are interested in swamps particularly ones that have been flooded and killed all of the previous vegetation.

This is one of two potentially major legal issues with this property that we know of.  I might as well put the other one on the table and get more educated by the more knowledgeable members of the board like you, PFM and Frank. 
 

[netpred]

So if you are so sure that it will redeem, bet me. I will bet you that it does not redeem before bidding closes. But - you must give me those 300 to 1 odds.

[Dave2]

So if you are so sure that it will redeem, bet me. I will bet you that it does not redeem before bidding closes. But - you must give me those 300 to 1 odds.

Normally the odds are the other way admitted on a lower base of you offering me 24 to one.  

I cannot calculate the percentage magnitude of the shift it is so big.  

What odds will you give me it redeems the day of the tax sale or later??? 

I am going to post about the land titles legal issue.  Because it is another problem potentially as big or bigger then the dam one.    

We might as well make this, one of the classic posts.  Lets also deal with the occupied issue as well.

[netpred]

So if you are so sure that it will redeem, bet me. I will bet you that it does not redeem before bidding closes. But - you must give me those 300 to 1 odds.

Normally the odds are the other way admitted on a lower base of you offering me 24 to one. 

I cannot calculate the percentage magnitude of the shift it is so big. 

I am going to post about the land titles legal issue.  Because it is another problem potentially as big or bigger then the dam one.   

You're the one that said you wouldn't take 300 odds against redemption. Well why not give me those odd on that bet?

[Frank]

Decided to ask an amplifying question of the Township on the tax sale property:

Was there ever a building permit taken out for the dam??

Not since the person in the township office running the tax sale has been there; which is since 1994. 

This might also help explain how it got constructed on the wrong property.

Looking more and more like this guy will start to get interested; 

With all this chatter about the property...and Gordo coming up from his deep sleep to comment on what a great deal it would be, I might just have to take a second look at this one.  I'm not too worried about Dave's banjo playing cousins up there, as I have a few of my own.

[Pfm1011]

You may want to take a look at the southwest part of the lake ..west outflow.  there is no dam on 5/26 /2006  google earth  but the Hasting GIS  2008/2009  and the  tritarget /ots images show what appears to be a dam at the west end..could be a bridge  but appears to be a dam on the tax sale piece..

.  however I doubt anything would be done by mnr as this goes on everywhere in that part of the province as there is alot of swamp in that area.   These aren't damns ..they are just dirt levees  so I wouldn't lose sleep ..you might actually want to make them bigger if you can and deny all knowledge..blame it on a pesky beaver

 claimsmap actually show the eastern "dam" or separation of the lakes so the east one could stay ..of course claimsmap also shows this is not a big lake..just a  watercourse /swamp


this is of course is all  just  an  exercise in research and abit of brushing up   as this will redeem..by either the owner or one of  the  mortgage holders 

As painful to my ego as this will be......... I have been PM'd information  which makes my response about the dam being a non factor to be completely wrong...the strange sound you hear is me backpeddling

I will retire from the field of battle and nurse my fragile ( although enormous)  ego  back to health

[Dave2]

  I'm not too worried about Dave's banjo playing cousins up there, as I have a few of my own.

That's why you and PFM are the top dogs.  I assume you mean the distinguished gentleman who is nicknamed after that river in east Toronto; The Don.    

 

[Frank]

  I'm not too worried about Dave's banjo playing cousins up there, as I have a few of my own.

That's why you and PFM are the top dogs.  I assume you mean the distinguished gentleman who is nicknamed after that river in east Toronto; The Don.   

 

We prefer to keep these things strictly within the family....however, if you would like, I could make you an offer you can't refuse.
I'm pretty sure that dam was built by beavers...using front end loaders of course.