Hydro-Projects - Diverting Rivers

Captain Dudds

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure if many of you have heard of this issue before, but to summarize, the prov. gov. is selling our rivers to corporations to set up hydro projects (thus privatizing power). These projects divert about 90% of each river. Their current target is 17 rivers in Bute Inlet. This is obviously not good for salmon...

There is a public meeting in Victoria Wednesday night from 7-9 at UVic. Details are on the calendar of the Save Our Rivers Society website:

www.saveourrivers.ca
http://www.saveourrivers.ca/calendar-mainmenu-35

Here is a map of UVic - the meeting is in the Elliot building - room 168 (ground floor) - top right inside ring road on the map - there is parking just on the other side of ring road:

http://www.uvic.ca/maps/3dmap.html

I hope to see some of you there - I could give more shocking details about the projects but it would be better to hear it at the meeting - either way it doesn't get much worse than ruining 17 rivers in one go...

Captain Dudds
 
Howdy Dudds,

Campbells' agenda is to set up hundreds - I REPEAT: HUNDREDS - of these Run-of-River power projects that will in some cases divert the entire flow of BC's fish-bearing rivers and streams.

Look farther down the road and the bigger-picture becomes clear. As BC has no near term requirement for more electricity, coupled with the fact that it is American companies he's giving our rivers away to, both the power and our water will be headed South if he has his way.


And people wonder why I'm so adamant that this environmental-rapist is unseated from his 'throne' this spring. Gordon Campbell could care less about Wild Fish.

Good post Dudds!

Sadly, Rafe won't be at the meeting at U Vic tonight. Damien should be there though and I hope to meet him. His awesome film work for the Save Our Rivers people has done much to expose Campbell's worst scam since his support of fish-farming.
 
The presentation was quite good - did anybody else make it out?

This project absolutely blows my mind - I don't understand what we're supposed to be getting out of this.

Economically, it makes no sense - we don't need more power and the gov won't let BC Hydro expand but they will sell the rivers to corporations who will make an insane profit (billions) selling the power back to us and California. Since we would then be buying power from the corporations, they choose the price and there goes BC's cheap power - part of the deal is that BC buys power from these corporations for 40 years. The billions of dollars these corporations are going to make selling OUR RIVERS' POWER back to California and ourselves is at the cost of our coastal environment, of particular interest - our salmon.

I simply don't understand what the Liberals think is in this for us...

Environmentally, again it is crazy. Diverting salmon bearing rivers?!?! Sorry Terry but that is worse than farms - this WILL eliminate the salmon from those rivers! (remember, there are hundreds of rivers proposed) - unless salmon can swim through turbines and spawn in giant pipes! This is a crime against nature.

SOLUTION - The best solution so far is to rid ourselves of the liberal government. If they get back into power in May, they will force these projects through with tools such as Bill 30 (which the liberals use to override local gov decisions - ie - locals no longer have any say in what goes on - not exactly democratic is it?). I'm not going to claim the NDP is the solution to all our problems, but they have guaranteed to put a moratorium on these projects. I don't know the Green Party's stance but would imagine it being similar. The important thing is NOT to vote liberal and to convince as many others as possible NOT to vote liberal.



If you want to fight for the future of salmon, I can't think of a better way to make a difference.



Any other thoughts on this?

Captain Dudds
 
It seems that the media has blown some of the facts out of proportion. I am pretty sure that no river will be sucked dry. Not saying that in the past there haven't been cases were it came close to that, however, the government knows how sensitive this is and they would not allow this. There is a change to the current Water Act in the works and I can guarantee you that instream flow requirements for fish will play the</u> major role in the decision making process. So take those reports with a little bit of caution...
 
I agree with you Chris but one big problem is that the government is transferring public lands into private hands and the reward to the public from this will be higher power bills and barring access to these areas.

IMG_1445.jpg
 
Howdy,

Couldn't make the presentation at U Vic.

Chris, you might want to take a minute and look a little deeper into this Private Power thing; it's HUGE!

I am doing what I can to help Rafe and Damien and the good people at Save Our Rivers get the word out to the citizens of BC about exactly what it is that Campbell has planned for HUNDREDS of BC's fish-bearing rivers & streams. I encourage all of my fellow sport, commercial, and Native fishermen to help sound the alarm bell.

http://saveourrivers.ca/latest-news-mainmenu-38/sors-blog-mainmenu-43/290-rafe42

I'll paste the letter below Rafe Mair wrote yesterday that will surely enlighten you all as to both the magnitude of Campbells' assault on BC's rivers & streams, and his complete disregard for our precious Wild Fishes.


The Cat is Out of the Bag - BC Private Power Push All About Exports PDF Print E-mail
Written by Rafe Mair
Thursday, 12 February 2009 09:00

As we at Save Our Rivers plow on, trying to inform the public about the BC Energy Plan and the privatization of our energy providers, we keep coming up against the notion that BC needs energy, badly and quickly. After looking at what BC Hydro has said, namely that we don’t, we’re told by the government to ignore Hydro.

But, the government says, BC has been a net importer for 7 of the last 10 years. So we checked with the Canadian National Energy Board which is responsible for exports of energy and they tell us NO! BRITISH COLUMBIA HAS BEEN A NET EXPORTER OF ENERGY FOR 8 OF THE LAST 11 YEARS (1997 - 2007)!

We point out that private power plants can only supply energy during the spring run-off, when we definitely don't need it, a fact demonstrably not dealt with by the government (which always does have the habit of avoiding the truth); indeed on this point the silence is deafening.&lt;&gt;This raises a pretty obvious question: If private power is not needed by BC - and, even if it were, private power companies will produce far more energy than we need and at a time we don’t need it - why the hell are they destroying our environment with the blessing of the Campbell government to create this power?

The only answer left to the puzzle is that this private energy will be for export, not for the needs of British Columbia’s domestic, business and industrial use.

But how can this be? The former Energy Minister and now Senator Richard Neufeld assured us over and over that BC was in serious need of power. The new Minister, Blair Lekstrom in a recent article in the Victoria Times Colonist said the same.

Well, folks, it remained for Donald McInnis, the president of Plutonic Power, the company seeking to build the biggest private hydropower plant in Canada, bigger than Site “C” would be, to blurt out the truth. McInnis recently stated that "You'd have to be in a coma to not see where the B.C. government is going; now we need consistency of policy and certainty of timelines … "

"An export plan is an obvious place for us to go."

The cat is out of the bag and the stated domestic need the government has peddled to us is just so much barnyard droppings.

Our rivers, up to about 700 applications now, will be butchered to warm California swimming pools. Moreover, once we embark down this slippery slope we’re in this forever. We will be, like Bre’r Rabbit, stuck to the tar baby.

We will devastate our environment so that American states don’t have to ruin theirs. We give up the handsome profits BC Hydro has provided the provincial treasury as we export our power, our environment and our revenue. We will then become hostage to Chapter 11 of NAFTA whose rules, because it is a treaty, will trump any legislation Ottawa or Victoria may pass.

The truth of the matter was told us, the citizens of BC, not by Premier Campbell but by the president of the biggest player in the private energy game.

Premier Campbell’s credibility is that of the clock that strikes 13 – he cannot be relied upon for the truth.

If the government won’t change, we will have to change the government.
 
I agree that what the media states must be taken with caution, but I don't believe that the government knows how sensitive this is - also, the numbers I got were not from the media - they were from the presentation at UVic - specifically Tanis Douglas - who has been studying them for years and recently released this report (Tanis is an ecologist and restoration specialist and is a registered professional biologist):

http://www.watershed-watch.org/publications/files/Run-of-River-long.pdf

The diversions are at around the 80% mark (page 11-13). It goes into detail in the paper DFO plays a role in deciding the flow, but either way, I don't see how diverting that much water won't result in damaged salmon habitat.

Also, I was discussing the issue of salmon with a member of the save our rivers society at the end of the presentation - they have been combing through the governments reports on potential hydro-rivers. In one series of rivers, of which the gov biologists claimed did not have salmon, they found a river that in fact did have salmon, and when confronted, the gov biologists claimed their reports said there were "generally" no salmon, but yes, that specific river does bare salmon?! WTF? Furthermore, they found quotes such as "given the effort put in, there are relatively few salmon..." !! Given this sort of thing and how they have treated salmon in the past (farms, development etc) I don't believe they have done enough or proper research to conclude that this will not damage salmon.

Also, the number of projects is astounding. Here is a pic of google earth with license applications (yellow pegs) and licenses granted (green pegs) - white lightbulbs are already producing power, and greens are under construction.

licenses.jpg



Anyways, that is only one aspect, the economics behind it all are preposterous. I won't get into that again now.

Captain Dudds
 
The way to measure sufficient stream flow is to look at the mean annual flows of each particular river. In general if there is 20% of the mean annual discharge (MAD) in the river there is good flow for all sorts of fish and their activities. You will be surprised to find that a number of rivers in BC naturally fall below 20% MAD in certain periods of the year. So our fish are well adapted to natural drought periods already. So it all depends on when you take 80% out of a river - certainly you don't want to do this during the low flow periods when the river already runs around 20% MAD. However, during the freshet or hight flow periods when the river runs at lets say 200% MAD there may be no problem for the fish if you take 80% out. So be careful in generalizing some of those statements... But it never hurts to be extra careful and we should always error on the side of caution...
 
Back
Top