(Table 1, page 204), Minor element concentrations in nodules of lake Ontario at Glenola, Bay of Quinte

Spark source mass spectroscopy was used to analyze 61 elements in ten ferromanganese nodules found near Glenora in the Bay of Quinte at the eastern end of Lake Ontario. Most minor elements, including As, Pb, and Hg, have concentrations between 1-100 µg/g. F, S, Co, Zn, and La have concentrations in 100 µg/g range. Ba and Sr are present at levels of 1% and 0.1% respectively. Compared to similar measurements on nodules found in the Great Lakes and in other parts of the globe, values reported here are generally lower. Compared to their marine equivalents, lake nodules appear to be inferior scavengers of minor elements. Examination of all available data corroborates the postulate that marine biological material is an important source of minor elements found in oceanic nodules.

(Table 3, page 309) Mercury content of concretions from Grand Lake (GL) and Ship Harbour Lake (SH), Nova Scotia and Mosque Lake (ML), Ontario

Ferromanganese concretions from Grand Lake and Ship Harbour Lake in Nova Scotia and Mosque Lake in Ontario are most common in water 0.5 to 2 m deep. X-ray diffraction studies show the ferromanganese portions of the concretions to he amorphous. Petrographic and electron probe studies of the ferromanganese material reveal chemical banding of iron and manganese. Bulk chemical analyses indicate that the Fe:Mn ratios of concretions from different sites within a single lake are similar, whereas concretions from different lakes have characteristic Fe:Mn ratios. Trace element concs are different in different lakes and are generally several orders of magnitude less than those of oceanic nodules.

(Table 1) Water chemistry of groundwater and snow samples from three sites in Ontario, Canada

Snow samples collected from hand-dug pits at two sites in Simcoe County, Ontario, Canada were analysed for major and trace elements using the clean lab methods established for polar ice. Potentially toxic, chalcophile elements are highly enriched in snow, relative to their natural abundance in crustal rocks, with enrichment factor (EF) values (calculated using Sc) in the range 107 to 1081 for Ag, As, Bi, Cd, Cu, Mo, Pb, Sb, Te, and Zn. Relative to M/Sc ratios in snow, water samples collected at two artesian flows in this area are significantly depleted in Ag, Al, Be, Bi, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Sb, Tl, V, and Zn at both sites, and in Co, Th and Tl at one of the sites. The removal from the waters of these elements is presumably due to such processes as physical retention (filtration) of metal-bearing atmospheric aerosols by organic and mineral soil components as well as adsorption and surface complexation of ionic species onto organic, metal oxyhydroxide and clay mineral surfaces. In the case of Pb, the removal processes are so effective that apparently ''natural'' ratios of Pb to Sc are found in the groundwaters. Tritium measurements show that the groundwater at one of the sites is modern (ie not more than 30 years old) meaning that the inputs of Pb and other trace elements to the groundwaters may originally have been much higher than they are today; the M/Sc ratios measured in the groundwaters today, therefore, represent a conservative estimate of the extent of metal removal along the flow path. Lithogenic elements significantly enriched in the groundwaters at both sites include Ba, Ca, Li, Mg, Mn, Na, Rb, S, Si, Sr, and Ti. The abundance of these elements can largely be explained in terms of weathering of the dominant silicate (plagioclase, potassium feldspar, amphibole and biotite) and carbonate minerals (calcite, dolomite and ankerite) in the soils and sediments of the watershed. Arsenic, Mo, Te, and especially U are also highly enriched in the groundwaters, due to chemical weathering: these could easily be explained if there are small amounts of sulfides (As, Mo, Te) and apatite (U) in the soils of the source area. Elements neither significantly enriched nor depleted at both sites include Fe, Ga, Ge, and P.

Implementing the Physical Literacy Component of the 2015 Ontario Health and Physical Education Curriculum: Is the Stage Set?

Introduction: Current physical activity levels among children and youth are alarmingly low; a mere 7% of children and youth are meeting the Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines (Colley et al., 2011), which means that the vast majority of this population is at risk of developing major health problems in adulthood (Janssen & Leblanc, 2010). These high inactivity rates may be related to suboptimal experiences in sport and physical activity stemming from a lack of competence and confidence (Lubans, Morgan, Cliff, Barnett, & Okely, 2010). Developing a foundation of physical literacy can encourage and maintain lifelong physical activity, yet this does not always occur naturally as a part of human growth (Hardman, 2011). An ideal setting to foster the growth and development of physical literacy is physical education class. Physical education class can offer all children and youth an equal opportunity to learn and practice the skills needed to be active for life (Hardman, 2011). Elementary school teachers are responsible for delivering the physical education curriculum, and it is important to understand their will and capacity as the implementing agents of physical literacy development curriculum (McLaughlin, 1987). Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the physical literacy component of the 2015 Ontario Health and Physical Education curriculum policy through the eyes of key informants, and to explore the resources available for the implementation of this new policy. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with seven key informants of the curriculum policy development, including two teachers. In tandem with the interviews, a resource inventory and curriculum review were conducted to assess the content and availability of physical literacy resources. All data were analyzed through the lens of Hogwood and Gunn’s (1984) 10 preconditions for policy implementation. Results: Participants discussed how implementation is affected by: accountability, external capacity, internal capacity, awareness and understanding of physical literacy, implementation expertise, and policy climate. Discussion: Participants voiced similar opinions on most issues, and the overall lack of attention given to physical education programs in schools will continue to be a major dilemma when trying to combat such high physical inactivity levels.

A Minor Change?: A Case Study of Carleton Place's Integration of Minor Variance Procedures into Ontario's Development Permit System

The Development Permit System has been introduce with minimal directives for establishing a decision making process. This is in opposition to the long established process for minor variances and suggests that the Development Permit System does not necessarily incorporate all of Ontario’s fundamental planning principles. From this concept, the study aimed to identify how minor variances are incorporated into the Development Permit System. In order to examine this topic, the research was based around the following research questions: • How are ‘minor variance’ applications processed within the DPS? • To what extent do the four tests of a minor variance influence the outcomes of lower level applications in the DPS approval process? A case study approach was used for this research. The single-case design employed both qualitative and quantitative research methods including a review of academic literature, court cases, and official documents, as well as a content analysis of Class 1, 1A, and 2 Development Permit application files from the Town of Carleton Place that were decided between 2011 and 2015. Upon the completion of the content analysis, it was found that minor variance issues were most commonly assigned to Class 1 applications. Planning staff generally met approval timelines and embraced their delegated approval authority, readily attaching conditions to applications in order to mitigate off-site impacts. While staff met the regulatory requirements of the DPS, ‘minor variance’ applications were largely decided on impact alone, demonstrating that the principles established by the four tests, the defining quality of the minor variance approval process, had not transferred to the Development Permit System. Alternatively, there was some evidence that the development community has not fully adjusted to the requirements of the new approvals process, as some applications were supported using a rationale containing the four tests. Subsequently, a set of four recommendations were offered which reflect the main themes established by the findings. The first two recommendations are directed towards the Province, the third to municipalities and the fourth to developers and planning consultants: 1) Amend Ontario Regulation 608/06 so that provisions under Section 4(3)(e) fall under Section 4(2). 2) Change the rhetoric from “combining elements of minor variances” to “replacing minor variances”. 3) Establish clear evaluation criteria. 4) Understand the evaluative criteria of the municipality in which you are working.