Summer 1999

Auditor General Calls for Protection of Water Sources

B.C.'s Auditor General has called for increased protection of water sources for small communities and increased participation of drinking-water interests in government decisions. Auditor General George Morfitt made the comments in a report entitled Protecting Drinking-Water Sources released April 6 and available from his office and on the Internet. The report found evidence of surface-water degradation as water sources are encroached upon by logging, cattle grazing, outdoor recreation and other human activities. It concludes that the water systems of small communities and individual properties, in particular, face problems in dealing with the impacts of these activities. Many areas are facing large expenditures for treatment of drinking-water supplies, the report says, and more attention to drinking-water sources would result in reduced or deferred expenditures. ³Attention to water-source protection now would prevent or delay costly treatment needs in the future,² says Mr. Morfitt. The report makes 26 recommendations for increasing the protection of drinking water supplies, particularly in small communities. Currently seven provincial government ministries and two agencies share responsibility for drinking-water resource management in BC. The report says the result is a piecemeal approach, it suggests a lead agency is needed to ensure drinking-water interests are represented in government decisions and to improve accountability. The SVWA agrees with the Auditor General that protection of drinking water sources is far superior to trying to "fix" them after they're damaged. So-called "watershed restoration" projects have been woefully unsuccessful. We also agree that water users should be involved in decisions affecting their water supplies. The SVWA has argued long and hard for these two principles, and it is encouraging to have the Auditor General onside. Are the MoF and MoE listening?

Elliott-Anderson-Christian-Trozzo (EACT): Endangered Watersheds

Residents of the EACT drainage have worked for over 17 years to protect the quantity, quality and timing of flow of their watershed. EACT Watershed Committee has virtually unanimous support from nearly 140 water users. In 1997 over 90% signed petitions requesting SFP and MoF to work with the SVWA on a watershed planning method which is ecologically responsible and sensitive to the needs of water users. Despite this impressive community consensus, SFP and MoF are moving ahead to build logging roads and to create clearcuts without adequate community involvement. SFP applied to MoF to build a road into the EACT drainage in June 1997. The application is still being processed. Numerous concerns have yet to be addressed including the long term effects on water quality and quantity, risk analysis, lack of protection through the Forest Practices Code, and the lack of data. Our information is that SFP intends to upgrade the road into the Trozzo watershed this summer. This would give access to MoF¹s Small Business Program south of the road, and to SFP¹s area north of the road which was brushed out last fall. Hydrologist Al Isaacson found numerous concerns in his 1997 review of the Elliott Forest service road (access for the EACT watershed): "After adding up all the impacts, my conclusion is that the proposed road construction and cut blocks contain too many potential hazards on a small and fragile landscape ŠWhen combined, the impact of both is synergistic and would cause damage to the water sources and the water supplies for many individual water users. I strongly recommend against the proposed road location and cutting blocks." The EACT Watershed Committee will review the proposed work on the Trozzo access road this spring. Your donations are most welcome and very much appreciated. Please send cheques payable to the EACT Watershed Committee, G 4 C17 RR#1 Winlaw, BC V0G 2J0. A general meeting on the current situation will take place in the next month. For more information, please call Stephan Martineau at 355-2206.

The Slocan Valley Community Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Program

The Slocan Valley Community Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Program is entering its third year and, after compiling, reviewing and graphing reams of data we¹re beginning to see meaningful trends emerge. Community monitoring is based on the fact that the health of the creek depends on what happens to the land surrounding it and what humans do to the land. Those who live near a creek, the local community and especially those who obtain water from it should be responsible for its well being and have a say in how forests in its watershed are managed. The goal of the program is to characterize some of the important creeks we depend on for drinking water and that support life in our watersheds. We were until recently sponsored by the Watershed Alliance with assistance from Ministry of Environment and funds from Forest Renewal. Currently we are sponsored by the Winlaw Watershed Commitee. Over 20 readers are involved: valley water users keep records, read gauges, collect samples, and meter flows, while Passmore Laboratory does water quality tests and Nelson based scientists act as advisors. Eleven creeks are studied: Cadden and Bonanza in Hills, Harris and Bartlett near New Denver, Hasty near Silverton, Lemon, Elliot, Jerome, Winlaw, McFayden and Airy in the South Valley. All are measured for flow, sediment, temperature and conductivity (hardness). Some are tested for low level metals and coliform bacteria. We also look at the bugs -- insect larvae, worms and other invertebrates that live on the bottom of the creek in a related program. Why so many different tests? Flow levels and sediment are the most important tests and the core of the program. They relate to impacts from logging and road building -- a concern and possible source of disturbance in our watersheds. Coliform bacteria are checked because they indicate the cleanliness of water used for human consumption. Other tests give basic information that relates to health and is useful to MoE. Information on weather and visual conditions in the creeks written down by observers are also important, as well as rainfall from Environment Canada. A review of many different parameters allows us to document changes in the watershed. What have we learned? Here are a few observations:

In the north valley, Bonanza is critically important for its fisheries' value and relation to Bonanza Marsh. Data collected in 1997 indicates that the creek channel filled in with a layer of sediment that changed the profile of the channel. We don¹t know how fish were affected or if this is a normal occurrence. It didn¹t happen in 1998.
Harris Creek in New Denver flows relatively high in the spring and drops to very low levels in fall and winter.
Hasty Creek data reveals that its wetlands have a moderating effect on flow during spring while keeping levels up in the fall; acting, in effect, like a sponge.
In the south valley, Elliot is notable for its low sediment and early run off. These observations make sense when you hike in the watershed, see water held in marshes and streams on small "wetland" benches and see abundant woody material acting like a filter in the stream.
Data collected from McFayden confirms assessments done by hydrologists who tell us that its flow is "flashy" e.g. dramatically high in spring, dropping to very low levels in dry conditions. Its water temperature is also extremely sensitive to air.

In summary, much of the data reinforces what experts have told us. Monitoring, however, brings to light subtleties in the way these watersheds function that can only be detected by empirical (hands/eyes-on) observations, confirming or disproving expert predictions. The program is based on recognized standard methods including quality control and technically valid sampling procedures. One of the criteria for a study like this is to continue for at least 5 years in order to account for variation in the natural world, satisfy statistical requirements and ensure validity of trends that are being observed. The expense, effort and expertise involved in setting up and carrying out such a program warrants allowing it to be done right. We are thankful to Forest Renewal for continued support of the program.

HASTY-VEVEY COMMUNITY WATERSHED APPLICATION -- WHAT HAS HAPPENED?

- Submitted by Red Mountain Residents Association In August 1997, with encouragement from the SVWA, residents of the Hasty-Vevey drainage on Red Mountain near Silverton applied for community watershed status to secure some extra protection for the drinking water of 30 families. In March l999, MoELP and MoF finally made a decision on that application. While our application was being "reviewed", Brian Simpson, the MoF district manager, was on orders from his political masters to commence the process of logging in consumptive use watersheds. In spite of many unresolved issues, cutting permits have been signed, and a permit has been issued for Road 200 which cuts through every creek in the watershed and some very sensitive wetlands. Our application has been a very convoluted process. In spite of clear guidelines regarding community watershed status in the Forest Practices Code, the ministries decided that they needed extra guidelines. It took them approximately one year to come up with these. They appear to be designed to make it even more difficult for communities like ours to achieve community watershed status. Our application was rejected. In his "decision", John Dyck, Regional Water Manager, made no reference to the new guidelines. Instead, he rejected the application because of the existence of an old diversion on crown land, constructed in the l920's to supply more water to the now defunct Galena Mine. This structure diverts water from the Vevey drainage into the Hasty drainage effectively combining the two drainages into a single watershed. Mr. Dyck says that "the diversion structure issue" has to be "resolved" before proceeding with any community watershed designations in the area. Apparently, the diversion structure is an "issue" when it comes to our application for community watershed status, and is mysteriously not an "issue" when it comes to signing road and cutting permits.

[top of page]

More logging approved for Bonanza/Wragge

by Richard Allin Arrow Forest District Manager Brian Simpson approved 248 hectares of cutblocks in Bonanza and Wragge Creek on March 30. With two blocks approved under another permit, SFP now has the go-ahead to log nearly 300 hectares in the area encompassing Bonanza Creek and Marsh and the slopes along Slocan Lake to the north of Valhalla Park. Two of the blocks exceed maximum allowable size under the Forest Practices Code, but Mr. Simpson says these are allowable because more than 40% of the blocks will be left uncut (retained) in the first pass. SFP¹s plans call for a maximum 50% harvest in any block in the first pass. However, silvicultural engineer Dean Berg, who reviewed the Bonanza plans last year, pointed out that, ³Šthe value of retention is that it is retained. The plans, I am told, are that the units will be liquidated in 15-20 yearsŠ² The Bonanza-Wragge approval also exceeds Visual Quality Objectives (VQOs) which had been established. Mr. Simpson approved this in the Wragge unit, using his discretion as district manager. He also approved a 57% increase in size of the adjoining Hills landscape unit which has the highest visual sensitivity rating. Residents are concerned that this expansion will result in more visible clearcuts since the VQO is achieved by limiting the percentage of the area that may be visibly altered by logging. ³Since the intent of the VQO is to manage the visible consequences of logging so as not to jeopardize other forest values related to the viewscape,² wrote Hills residents in a letter to Mr. Simpson, ³it is important that the VQO system not be manipulated in ways which would undermine this intent.² The major concern for Hill residents and others, however, is protection for Bonanza Creek and Bonanza Marsh. Bonanza Creek is the most important fish spawning creek on Slocan Lake and the marsh has been recognized as one of the most important wetlands in the Kootenays. SFP¹s logging plans have been criticized for faulty and missing data. Early reports claimed that there was no fall spawning run on the creek and that the marsh and creek were not connected and therefore what happened to the creek would not affect the marsh. Bonanza Creek was the site of a blockade and arrests during the summer of 1997. ³SFP has not inspired our confidence, and both the company and the MoF refused to come to Hills to discuss these issues before the logging started² said Richard Allin of Hills ³We are watching the logging closely.²

Report From Goat Mountain

Goat Mountain is the local name for Mount Carpenter, the picturesque backdrop for the village of New Denver which spreads from Wilson Creek and Rosebery, past the golf course, to the village, and along Hwy. 31a towards Kaslo. Goat Mountain provides licensed domestic and commercial water for about 40 families via numerous small creeks, springs and seepages. The Goat Mountain Water Users Assoc. was formed in 1998 to maintain the quality of the water supply and the economic diversity of this area. SFP has proposed logging on the southwest face of Goat Mountain, the face most easily seen from New Denver, Slocan Lake and Valhalla Provincial Park. In this sensitive watershed, a small area of old growth trees helps maintain a relatively stable flow of pure clean water. The proposed logging across creeks, seepages and streams could disrupt water quality, quantity and timing of flow. So could the road building with its potential erosion, slides and washouts. The local economy could suffer because of clearcut landscapes, potential slides, threatened water supplies, and reduced commercial recreation opportunities and property values. Slocan Lake is the largest unpolluted lake in southern B.C. with clean water, magnificent views, and prime recreation potential. SFP¹s recently approved Forest Development Plan is the start of 4 patch cuts, from 1-2 hectares, in a very sensitive domestic watershed. They are slated for harvesting January 1st, 2000; a nice way to start the new millennium. - Submitted by Mike Simpson, 358-7767

LOGGING IN WATERSHEDS

What SFP & MoF say they are planning for this year

Climax Ck: road upgrade in June; logging in mid/late summer
Bonanza: road work in July/Aug; logging lower blocks in fall (see article)
Elliot/Anderson: MoF reviewing cutting & road permits, low priority for SFP & MoF (see article)
Goat Mtn: road building & logging Dennis Ck block mid/late May; logging in first or second of small patches not sure of at this time
Hasty Ck: upgrading Hewitt Rd in mid/late May; logging in June; building of Road 200 in July (see article on Community Watershed Status)
Hills: Small Business Program licence put up for sale soon
New Denver Flats: some road building in late June with logging to follow; some logging already accessible & may occur in mid/late June
Ringrose: road permit application likely be ready for submission to MoF mid/late June with road building in fall depending on permit approval date; cutting permit application in fall at earliest year
Silverton: permits approved; road finished; logging started early May. Small Business Program licence put up for sale soon
Springer: priority to build main line access mid/late June; logging could occur early/mid fall
TFL 3: continued logging with small amount of road building first
Trozzo: contract to upgrade road is approved & work will likely start mid/late June; cutting permit application to be submitted soon with logging in mid/late summer depending on cutting permit approval date. Small Business Sale being developed. (see article)

As the above list shows, industrial logging is planned or underway in all consumptive use watersheds in the Slocan Valley. It is time to stop the madness of putting our homes, families, environment, and the long-term economy of the Valley at risk in order to continue this unsustainable logging. For almost two decades the SVWA has worked to protect these watersheds. We know there is an alternative to MoF & SFP¹s plans: ecosystem-based planning. It would ensure a healthy environment and a healthy economy for the people who live here. Join us in working towards solutions for the whole Valley. The logging plans underway for Goat Mountain were also discussed in a recent insert of Valley Voice entitled "Saving the Golden Goose". Please refer to it to understand the threat to the economy of the area as well as to its water quality or call Mike Simpson at 358-7767

SFP's BURNER

Despite increasing protest and documented facts condemning beehive burners, SFP just got a two-year extension from the provincial government for their Slocan burner. Sierra Legal Defense Fund is fighting extensions for four of the worst burners in the province (2 in the Bulkley Valley and 2 in Smithers), arguing that the burners violate the Charter of Human Rights. If they win, it will set a precedent that could lead to more rapid closure of all beehive burners. We will know in a few months. BC Medical Association Supports Protection of Water with the following resolutions at its 1998 convention:

Be it resolved that the BCMA recommend to all regional health districts in BC that they protect their water supply.

Be it resolved that the BCMA requests the GVRD to revise the Amending Indenture to remove its focus on timber harvesting, and to implement a complete moratorium on road building and logging in the Greater Vancouver Watershed District watersheds until conditions of the 1991 BCMA Annual resolutions are met. (the 1991 resolution stated in part that the "BCMA is opposed to roadbuilding and logging in GVRD watersheds until the fully funded independent study of industrial practices in the three watersheds in the GVRD is completed")

Did you know?

that water users are increasingly under pressure to "treat" their water?
that chlorine does not kill giardia or cryptosporidium?
that there are conclusive studies linking long term use of chlorinated water to bladder cancer?