There’s a-whole lotta movin’ and a-shakin’ down here on Whitewater’s Grant Settlement Road (GSR) these days. Three plus newspaper pages dedicated to a council meeting between WR, “Whitewater Ontario” and the many and varied ‘stakeholders’ speak to the complex nature of an opportunity which exists because starting as early as April last year, the paddling community (90% of who come from away) were prohibited from entering the all important “Lunch Spot” (mid-point of the river) where folks like to play in the surf. This conflict (and rumours abounded of nasty boardroom brinkmanship within the river community) came to a head when River Run was sold to Wilderness Tours. Back in the Day, the kayakers could play one landowner off against the other in an uneasy truce for take-out access (put-in is at the unfortunately named “McCoy Chutes Trail” about 5k upriver). But now one company owns both access points and likely sees little financial gain and some risk catering to a group, known for a singular lack of community investment beyond their paddling needs.
The paddling community posted “fight for access” signs as rumours flew of gates closed, opened, closed again. It was an uncomfortable state for weekend warriors who might drive 5 hours from Toronto for the privilege of playing in what has become one of a premiere destinations for paddlers across the globe. It was all a bit heavy handed.
So the more organized of our newer local resident kayakers reached out and now Whitewater Ontario has agreed to bear the cost of excavating the McCoy Road allowance from GSR to riverside. It is a fine idea and these folks are all to be commended for “opening up” the best natural tourism opportunity for WWR, except that . . .
Within a half kilometer along the GSR, there are already three privately owned access points, two of which would support the emergency services needed to access the river once paddling down this potentially dangerous stretch of current becomes unregulated (it is currently regulated and made safe by the rafting companies). Do we really need another road which ends at a cliff overlooking the river 50ft below (not great for boats, really bad for ambulances). Council rightly said “Tell us more”. Its complicated.
But hey. Kayakers 1, Rafting companies 0, right?
If I owned land along that road allowance and could get someone else to pay the cost of putting in a road, that’s just good business and I believe the rafting companies own both sides of the road allowance. But the loser will most likely be our shoreline and the kilometer+ unspoilt natural buffer zone so important to wildlife in our area. If these folk could only come to a legally enforceable agreement using one of those existing (and better) points of access, the shoreline which has already suffered from questionable development, might remain as lovely as it is today.
I hike and snowshoe regularly down this right of way and I seldom see another on this land. I see lots of birds, wildlife wild leeks and other edibles. It is a wild and wonderful place. I could be wrong, but it looks to me impractical to punch a road all the way down to the shoreline without a lot of excavating and maybe even a whiff of dynamite.
So council is hung and so they should be. Hopefully that movin’ and shakin’ will include some thinkin’ and the talkin’.
Simon Tunley. Property owner, McCoy Road
