NECHAKO
WATERSHED COUNCIL:
INTERIM
REPORT TO THE
NECHAKO
ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT FUND MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
October
1999
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 A NEW APPROACH: DEVELOPMENT OF THE WATERSHED COUNCIL
2.1 The British Columbia Utilities Commission
2.2 Exploring the Concept
2.3 Setting the Stage
2.4 Transition
2.4.1 Geographic Scope
2.4.2 Recognition of Existing Legal Rights
2.4.3 Informed Decision Making
2.4.4 First Nations
2.4.5 The BC/Alcan 1997 Agreement
2.4.6 “Neighbors in the
Watershed”
3.0 THE NECHAKO WATERSHED COUNCIL
3.1 Membership
3.2 Structure and Operations
3.2.1 Coordinating Committee
3.2.2 Finance Committee
3.2.3 Communications Committee
3.2.4 Irrigation Licensing Sub-committee
3.2.5 Cold Water Release Facility Sub-committee
3.2.6 Structure and Operations Sub-committee
3.3 Secretariat Services
3.4 Schedule of Meetings
4.0 THE ISSUES
4.1 Background
4.2 Information Gathering
4.3 Issues Management System
5.0 CONCLUSION
APPENDICES
A. NWC Terms of Reference
B. Member Organization Profiles
NECHAKO WATERSHED COUNCIL:
INTERIM REPORT TO THE NECHAKO ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT
FUND MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The Carrier phrase N’cha Koh, from which the Nechako River probably derives
its present name, refers to a river of strong undercurrents. Another translation
refers to Ni-tcah-khoh – “flowing side by side river”.
Together, the two descriptions more or less describe the recent history
of the river – strong political, economic and social undercurrents, and a more
recent attempt to reconcile these often-competing streams through a cooperative
watershed process.
The Nechako Watershed Council is intended to provide for this
process, a forum where people with diverse backgrounds and interests can work
cooperatively to enhance the long-term health and viability of the Nechako
watershed. This submission to the
Nechako Environmental Enhancement Fund Management Committee introduces the
structure, history, achievements and potential of the Nechako Watershed Council,
and makes recommendations with respect to where participants in the Council
believe the NEEF Management Committee should focus its upcoming efforts.
2.0
A NE
W
APPROACH: DEVELOPMENT OF THE WATERSHED COUNCIL
2.1 The British
Columbia Utilities Commission
On December 16, 1994 the British Columbia Utilities
Commission filed its Kemano Completion
Project Review – Report and Recommendations to the Lieutenant Governor in
Council into “the nature and extent of the effects of the Project on the
physical, biological, social and economic environments in the Kemano and Nechako
Watersheds, and the Nechako Reservoir“. The interplay of complex technical issues and deeply held,
value-based regional positions which the Commission was tasked to examine had
been growing for nearly fifty years. This
history arguably establishes the Nechako Watershed as one of the most complex in
British Columbia.
Simultaneous with the Commission’s hearings, the Fraser
Basin Management Board initiated exploratory discussions with various local
interests regarding possible approaches to reconciling these diverse local
interests through increased participation in watershed management issues.
This concept had been enjoying growing support in other areas, including
community watershed processes throughout North America.
Based on the Board’s submission to the hearings, the Commission
recommended:
“the
immediate establishment of a watershed management agency for the Nechako
reservoir and watershed. The
Commission notes that hearing participants supported an approach that is
flexible, involves stakeholder participation and is based on consensus-based
decision-making. … The Commission believes that the stakeholders in the region
should determine the structure and mandate of the agency and how they want the
process of establishing the agency to be conducted.”
2.2 Exploring the
Concept
As a result of the Commission’s recommendation, the Fraser
Basin Management Board, now known as the Fraser Basin Council, renewed its
approaches to community interests, federal and provincial agencies and local and
First Nation governments. Based on
consistent interest in finding new ways to deal with issues in the watershed,
the Council organized an exploratory workshop at Saik’uz (Stoney Creek Indian
Reserve) on June 15, 1996.
One hundred and seven people from throughout British Columbia
attended to address the threshold question: “what will it take to create a
cooperative management process that I can support?”
After an exhaustive examination of this question, including listing of
issues which would need to be addressed in any process and two secondary
questions related to identifying the elements of a cooperative management
process and next steps, participants agreed to move forward. A volunteer Working
Group made up of 10 – 15 individuals and representatives of organizations
having a balance of interests in the sustainability of the watershed was tasked
“to set the stage for developing a cooperative management process that
recognizes the values of all interests in the Nechako Watershed and the
communities that depend upon the watershed.”
2.3
Setting the Stage
Its formal Terms of Reference instructed the Nechako
Working Group to review the information resulting from the exploratory workshop,
to explore options for developing a cooperative management process for the
Nechako Watershed identifying strengths and weaknesses for each option and to
identify priority issues requiring immediate attention.
In addition to the information base provided by the
Saik’uz meeting, the Working Group reviewed similar cooperative processes
throughout North America, including the Yakima River Watershed Council, the
Prince George Land and Resource Management Planning process, the Seven Sisters
Local Planning Initiative, the Nisqually River Management Plan, the Mackenzie
River Basin Transboundary Waters Master Agreement, and the Bow River Basin Water
Council. One of the members also attended an Environment Canada national
conference on ecosystem objectives in Montreal on October 18 – 20, 1996.
The Working Group was further tasked with preparing a
scoping document which included cooperative management options for the Nechako
Watershed, including a recommended option with an associated budget and workplan
for submission to the federal and provincial governments, the appropriate local
and First Nations governments and non-government organizations.
Finally, the group was instructed to report back to the participants of
the June 15, 1996 workshop.
This Working Group met twice before reporting back to a
second full sector workshop in Smithers on November 29 – 30, 1996.
This session endorsed further efforts to formalize a watershed council
and struck a Nechako Transition Group of 15 – 20 members to continue the
formative process.
2.4 Transition
The Transition Group met on seven occasions between
February 1997 and May 1998. Its
primary focus was on formalizing the Terms of Reference for a Nechako Watershed
Council. However, as in any such
negotiations, the process was as significant as the product.
Participants quickly had to come to terms with several fundamental issues
and higher-level background developments that established a broad policy basis
for the new organization. These included:
2.4.1
Geographic Scope
There was considerable initial discomfort regarding the
relationship between residents of the Nechako Watershed, which experiences the
predominant downstream effects of industrial development, and the Kemano
watershed and the communities of Kitimat and Terrace, which enjoy the
predominant economic benefits. It
was ultimately recognized that existing realities so closely bind both
watersheds that a common forum is essential to the long-term success of either.
Thus, although the focus of the Nechako Watershed Council is on the
Nechako River and its watershed, representation from interests in the
communities of Kemano, Kitimat and Terrace is strong, welcome and necessary.
2.4.2
Recognition of Existing Legal Rights
After considerable debate, participants also accepted
the proposition that, while they are not required to accept existing rights, the
Nechako Watershed Council recognizes that it must operate against a backdrop of
existing legal rights and obligations. These
include Alcan’s water license and agreements, the statutory basis of Alcan’s
operations, individual water licenses, land tenures and common law aboriginal
rights and title.
Concerns that the watershed process could result in
conflict or inconsistency with provincial Land and Resource Management Planning
processes in the Vanderhoof Forest District were addressed and resolved through
this approach.
2.4.3
Informed Decision Making
Participants recognized early in the process the
importance of a valid technical information base.
At the same time, it was recognized that issues in the Nechako Watershed,
while often having a technical aspect could not be entirely resolved on the
basis of scientific merit alone. Through
the evolution of the Council and its approach to becoming informed, participants
have achieved much greater mutual sensitivity to the social, political and
traditional influences that must be taken into consideration when making
watershed decisions. The
Council’s decision-making process therefore makes every effort to reflect a
balance between data-based and value-based models.
2.4.4
First Nations
First Nations in the Nechako and Kemano watersheds
declined to participate in the British Columbia Utilities Commission hearings in
part for reasons of capacity, and more importantly, because of risks to
aboriginal rights and title inherent in government consultation policies.
The Crown is required to consult meaningfully with First Nations whose
rights and title may be affected by government decisions.
First Nations, including the Cheslatta Carrier Nation and Lheidli
T’enneh, and the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council participated in the process and
Transition Group until conclusion of the BC-Alcan Settlement Agreement in August
1997. Since that time, the Council has received information
presentations from the Burns Lake Native Development Corporation and the
Aboriginal Business Development Association. The Cheslatta Carrier Nation made a
formal presentation to the Council on July 16, 1999 regarding the Cheslatta
Redevelopment Project.
A February 19, 1998 Resolution of the British Columbia
Aboriginal Fisheries Commission, a provincial umbrella organization dedicated to
advancing aboriginal fishing rights, highlighted this consultation issue, but
supported a “multi-level water release facility be constructed at the Kenney
Dam to facilitate water management to support wild salmon recovery.”
A representative of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council seconded the
resolution.
2.4.5
The BC/Alcan 1997 Agreement
Early discussion about a cooperative process took place
against the backdrop of out-of-court negotiations between the province and Alcan
regarding settlement of litigation resulting from the provincial government’s
January 1995 cancellation of the Kemano Completion Project.
The Agreement was reached on August 5, 1997, midway through the
Transition Group’s efforts. However,
by then the Working Group had met with negotiators John Allan and Han van der
Toorn in Kitimat on October 26, 1996 where it received an update on negotiations
and explored possible relationships between the proposed Watershed Council and
the BC-Alcan negotiations.
As a result of this meeting, the negotiators indicated that
they were prepared to accept input on issues related to a water release facility
at the Kenny Dam, as well as downstream water management issues, including water
quality, flood releases and redistribution of the short term annual water
allocation if a release facility were to be built at Kenney Dam.
Following conclusion of the Agreement, the Transition
Group was briefed by teleconference and personally by John Horgan, Director of
Corporate Relations, BC Crown Corporations Secretariat and Deputy Minister to
the Premier Tom Gunton.
The potential of the Council as a consultation
mechanism on these and other issues was reflected in the BC/Alcan agreement.
Section 11 of Schedule IV obligated the Nechako Environmental Enhancement
Fund Management Committee to “consult with the Nechako Watershed Council, if
formed …” and the province undertook to continue its assistance in the
following terms:
“14. Formation
of the Nechako Watershed Council
Immediately following the execution of this Agreement, the Province
will
help to facilitate the formation of the Nechako Watershed Council
(the
“Council”), in order to provide advice to the Management Committee
on
the uses and priorities of the Nechako Environmental Enhancement Fund.”
2.4.6
“Neighbours in the Watershed”
The Transition Group withstood a set back following
ratification of the BC/Alcan 1997
Agreement when several formerly active organizations withdrew from the
initiative. These included: A River
Forever; the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union/T. Buck Suzuki
Environmental Foundation; the Cheslatta Carrier Nation: the Carrier Sekani
Tribal Council; the Allied Rivers Commission; the BC Wildlife Federation; the
Federation of BC Naturalists; the Upper Nechako Property Owners Association and
the Nechako Nyenk’ut Society. These subsequently coalesced in a Nechako River
Alliance.
The Fraser Basin Council and remaining participants
took this event very seriously. Fraser
Basin Council staff and various individual Transition Group participants met
with these individuals and organizations. It
was determined that concerns included the volume of the Alcan water license,
participation by Alcan and residents from Kemano, Kitimat and Terrace, lack of
assurance that any conserved water would be distributed to Nechako River
conservation and downstream users, lack of federal government participation,
First Nation concerns about government consultation policies, political
allegiances to the withdrawing organizations and pending litigation.
It is noteworthy that none of the former participants
expressly oppose the work of the Nechako Watershed Council.
Rather the refusal to participate is founded on a belief that the
initiative cannot succeed. As well, some active Council members share interests and
perspectives represented in the Nechako River Alliance.
Former participants receive notices of meetings,
minutes and information packages. Some
have attended Council meetings as observers. The Cheslatta Carrier Nation has
made a formal presentation on its interests to the full Council.
The Nechako Watershed Council has also made it clear that the former
participants are welcome at any time to assume full membership in the Council
and personal contacts are ongoing.
An October 5, 1997 letter to the Prince George Free
Press from the Northwest Communities Coalition succinctly summarized the
sentiments of the full Council:
“There is work to be done and we all need to pull
together. Everyone’s voice
matters. We’ll be there at the
Council table, and we hope that our neighbours in the watershed will be there
too.”
3.0
THE
NECHAKO WATERSHED COUNCIL
Two years of intensive effort and development work
culminated on June 29, 1998 when nineteen organizations endorsed the Terms of
Reference and formalized their membership in the Nechako Watershed Council to:
“enhance
the long-term health and viability of the Nechako Watershed with consideration
for all interests, and to provide a forum to address water management and
related issues in the Watershed and to work toward cooperative resolution of
these issues.”
The Terms of Reference are included as Appendix “A”
of this submission.
3.1
Membership
Membership as of September 1999 is as follows. Brief profiles
of each membership organization appear in Appendix “B”:
·
Alcan British Columbia
·
BC Trappers Association
·
City of Terrace
·
Community Futures Development Corporation of Stuart Nechako
·
District of Fort St. James
·
District of Kitimat
·
District of Vanderhoof
·
Kemano Community Association
·
Kitimat Chamber of Commerce
·
Lheidli T’enneh
·
Nechako Valley Regional Cattlemen’s Association
·
Northwest Communities Coalition
·
Province of British Columbia
·
Regional District of Bulkley Nechako – Area D
·
Regional District of Bulkley Nechako – Area E
·
Regional District of Bulkley Nechako – Area F
·
Southside Economic Development Association
·
Terrace and District Chamber of Commerce
·
Tweedsmuir Recreation Commission
·
University of Northern British Columbia
·
Vanderhoof and District Chamber of Commerce
·
Vanderhoof Fish and Game
In addition, a regional staff person from the
Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada attends regularly in an observer
capacity. However, the Department
has declined to become a full member of the Council in view of concerns
regarding the potential effect of participation in consensus-based processes on
legislative and regulatory responsibilities, funding implications and the
withdrawal of some interests from the Council. Two Council members participated
in a Department of Fisheries and Oceans “New Direction Habitat Conservation
and Stewardship” forum in Vancouver on January 8 – 9, 1999.
Other regular observers include the Upper
Fraser-Nechako Fisheries Council and the Cluculz Livestock Association. The
Fraser Basin Council was originally a member of the Council, but withdrew its
membership when the Nechako Watershed Council became independently functional
and it was retained by the NEEF Management Committee to assist in the
consultation process.
3.2
Structure
and Operations
During the first year of operations, the Council has
focussed on developing its structural capacity and on preparing itself to
provide informed and consistent advice to the Nechako Environmental Enhancement
Fund Management Committee.
As a preliminary step, the Council conducted two
professionally facilitated self-development sessions. On November 22, 1998 staff of the Cornerstone Planning Group
assisted with problem solving and issues tracking techniques.
Nancy J. Cooley of Cooley/Olson Inc. addressed collaborative approaches
and decision-making techniques on February 26 and 27, 1999.
Although the Nechako Watershed Council is ultimately
accountable to its members seated in the full Council, several subcommittees
have been tasked with ongoing administration and operations:
3.2.1
Coordinating Committee
A Coordinating Committee made up of the Chair,
Vice-chairs, committee chairs and any member who wishes to attend, meets weekly
by teleconference to maintain continuity between Council meetings and to assist
the Chair. The Coordinating
Committee prepares the annual business plans and operating budgets for review
and approval by the Council, organizes Council meetings, conducts the interim
affairs of the Council, manages the financial functions of Council and performs
a policy analysis and monitoring function.
3.2.2
Finance Committee
Routine financial administration is the responsibility
of the Finance Committee. Individual
member organizations are expected to support their representative’s
participation where possible, assist the Council by contributing expertise,
funds or in-kind support to the best of the organization’s ability, and to
uphold the Council’s Terms of Reference. Limited travel assistance is made
available to those requiring it. To
date, the Council has been supported through contribution agreements with the
Province of British Columbia and Alcan, plus in-kind contributions from member
organizations. For example, the Faculty of Natural Resources and Environmental
Studies at the University of Northern British Columbia provides office space and
equipment access valued at approximately $15,000 annually.
The Fraser Basin Council contributes half the time of its Upper Fraser
Regional Coordinator.
3.2.3
Communications Committee
The Communications Committee that has developed a
formal communications plan, the key objectives of which are to enhance public
awareness of the Nechako Watershed Council, to report on current activities and
accomplishments and to encourage new members.
Among other initiatives, the Committee has developed and widely
circulated a brochure outlining the Council’s structure and operations. It
also issues area-wide press releases to update the public on the proceedings of
each Council meeting.
3.2.4
Irrigation Licensing Sub-committee
This sub-committee, which included representation from
the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, addressed the “moratorium” on
the issuance of new water licenses agreed to by the province and the Department
of Fisheries and Oceans in anticipation of reduced flows under the Kemano
Completion Project. The issue has been successfully resolved and water license
applications are again being processed. Although Fisheries and Oceans Canada
continues to have some reservations, this was the first marked success of the
Nechako Watershed Council and has contributed significantly to confidence in the
process. The sub-committee has been
dissolved.
3.2.5
Cold Water Release Facility Sub-committee
The Council has identified a series of issues in the
watershed, which are being approached through a systematic process of
information gathering and analysis. As
an experimental approach to such analysis, a Cold Water Release Facility
Sub-committee selected four priority cold water release facility designs from
among the nine presented at the June 28, 1998 workshop and rated the
effectiveness of each in addressing the issues that had been identified at that
time. This information continues to
inform Council deliberations, and the sub-committee is in abeyance.
3.2.6
Structure and Operations Sub-committee
This sub-committee examined and recommended various
organizational models for the Council. Upon
structuring the Council, this sub-committee was dissolved.
3.3
Secretariat
Services
The Fraser Basin Council was established in June 1997
as the successor organization to the Fraser Basin Management Board.
Its mandate is to pursue the long-term economic, social and environmental
sustainability of the Fraser River Basin. It has been a regular contributor and
provided all secretariat services from the June 1996 meeting in Stoney Creek
until the spring of 1999. In
keeping with its own mandate and increased capacity, the Nechako Watershed
Council retained an independent contractor to perform this function. The Fraser
Basin Council Regional Coordinator continues as advisor and facilitator to the
Nechako Watershed Council, and links between the two organizations remain
strong.
3.4
Schedule
of Meetings
By way of summary, the effort and commitment which has
gone into achieving the present position is suggested by the following summary
of meetings:
4.0
THE ISSUES
4.1 Background
The use and management of the Nechako River consists of
a myriad of issues. Each issue in
itself is complex in terms of scientific understanding and human values.
The linkages among these issues and their potential solutions compound
the complexity. The Council and its formative working groups have from the
beginning recognized the importance of being well informed on these issues and
initiatives affecting the watershed, including scientific, technical, political,
policy and constitutional contexts.
The NWC created a list of issues at its September 1998
meeting, as a way of organizing them to begin addressing each one, while
recognizing the complexity and connections.
The list was based on a number of sources, including Nechako Watershed
Council members and their respective organizations, former Working Group and
Transition Group members who chose not to join the Council, the BC Utilities
Commission Kemano Completion Project hearings and the June 1996 exploratory
workshop hosted by the Fraser Basin Management Board.
Issues were accepted as presented. All issues were considered equally important and were given
equal weight in discussions. The
list was not intended to be exhaustive and new topics are added as they are
identified.
Once issues were identified, the Council began addressing
them strategically. The approach
contained two aspects:
·
to understand the problem and become better informed; and
·
to develop an information management system for tracking the
issues.
The identified issues are as follows:
Water Volume
·
Downstream users cannot get licenses
·
Not enough water for non-licensed uses
·
Recreational user safety
·
Cattle are not contained on properties bordering the river
·
Flooding
·
Water volume needs for Chinook spawning
·
Aesthetic considerations
Water Quality
·
Water temperature needs of fish
·
Municipalities cannot meet effluent dilution standards
·
Weeds
·
Sedimentation
·
Quality of water for recreational users
River Structure
·
Changes in the nature of the river
·
Damage to Murray-Cheslatta system
Fish
·
Migration conditions for sockeye salmon
·
Number of returning Chinook
·
Diversity and population numbers of resident fish
·
Resident fish issues in Murray-Cheslatta system
·
Resident fish and other issues in Nechako Reservoir
Water Uses
·
Economic Development (main stem)
·
Economic Development (Southside)
·
Recreation
·
Power generation at Kemano
·
Power generation at Kenney Dam
·
Semi-aquatic fur bearers
4.2
Information Gathering
As a preliminary step in reaching a common understanding of
the issues, the Council organized a thorough series of presentations to examine
each one in detail. A number of formal presentations took place before the
Council was officially formed and the Council participated in a Nechako
Environmental Enhancement Fund Cold Water Release Facility Workshop on June 28,
1998 that examined nine theoretical design options for such a facility at Kenney
Dam. These options have provided a
framework for many of the subsequent discussions on specific issues and
alternatives.
The full series of presentations was as follows:
·
BC-Alcan 1997 Settlement Agreement Negotiators, October 26,
1996
·
Nechako Reservoir Operations, May 5, 1997
·
Nechako Fisheries Conservation Program, May 5, 1997
·
BC-Alcan 1997 Settlement Agreement, Dr. Tom Gunton, November
7, 1997
·
Fisheries and Oceans Canada, November 22, 1998
·
Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks Fisheries, February
26, 1999 re: sturgeon
·
Cattle Containment, April 9, 1999
·
Vanderhoof Sewage Treatment, April 9, 1999
·
Aquatic Vegetation, April 9, 1999
·
Recreation Values, April 9, 1999
·
Flow Regimes, April 9 and July 16, 1999
·
Nechako Reservoir Management, April 10, 1999
·
Flooding/Flood Hazards, April 10, 1999
·
Water Licensing, May 28, 1999
·
Erosion and Sedimentation, May 28, 1999
·
Murray-Cheslatta-Southside Environmental and Economic
Development issues, May 28 and July 16, 1999
·
Regional Economic Development, May 28, 1999
·
Power Generation at Kemano and Kenny Dam, June 25, 1999
·
Resident Fisheries and Salmon, July 16, 1999
·
Agriculture, July 16, 1999
·
Nechako Fish Conservation Program and Alcan’s Economic
Contribution, September 17, 1999
Council members have also gained an “on the ground”
understanding of the watershed through guided tours of Alcan’s Kitimat and
Kemano operations, the Skins Lake Spillway, Kenney dam, all reaches of the
Nechako River above the Stuart River confluence, the Murray-Cheslatta Watershed,
Cheslatta Falls and the Cheslatta Fan, agricultural operations in the
Vanderhoof/Fort Fraser area, a variety of Nechako Fisheries Conservation
Program-related activities and various local economic development initiatives.
4.3 Issue Management System
At the November 1998 meeting, members explored each
issue to discover what the issue meant to them and to develop a common group
understanding of each problem. Staff from the Cornerstone Planning Group
facilitated these discussions.
Cornerstone also provided an issue management system that
allows the Council to track each issue through individual Issues Records.
The Issue Records also include a priority rating.
As stated above, the NWC considers all issues to be equally important.
The priority rating is simply a management tool to help organize the
NWC’s efforts; for example scheduling guest speakers and developing meeting
agendas. An example of an Issue
Record appears below.
Nechako Watershed Council Issues Record
Draft
(26/08/99)