Juan de Fuce officials Galvanize to Battle Stupid DFO Move

Derby

Crew Member
Juan de Fuca officials galvanize to battle 'stupid' DFO move




By Judith Lavoie, Times Colonist January 28, 2012 6:33 AM



0



Story
Photos ( 2 )






More Images »



Glen Varney of Sooke Salmon Enhancement Society on top of the dam spillway over De Mamiel Creek looking to see how much water is in the reservoir.
Photograph by: Supplied photo, Sooke Salmon Enhancement Society, timescolonist.com
One of the most productive coho salmon runs on southern Vancouver Island is likely to be wiped out by a Department of Fisheries and Oceans decision to destroy a dam that was built to conserve salmon.

It is not an easy decision, but because of budget constraints and liability fears, DFO is reviewing all its infrastructure and maintenance costs, said Adam Silverstein, DFO area manager for ecosystems management.

"The De Mamiel Creek dam is a particularly expensive piece of infrastructure," said Silverstein, who believes the coho run will survive, even if water dries up in summer.

The decision to decommission the dam has horrified Sooke Salmon Enhancement Society members, who have worked for decades to build up a coho run that, their records say, brings in between 2,500 and 5,000 spawners annually.

"We have been working on this since the early 1970s, just to bring up the number of fish," said society spokesman Glen Varney.

"If they do this, the whole upper reach of the creek will be devoid of life," he said.

The decision is being hammered by all levels of Juan de Fuca politicians.

Everyone works together when something stupid happens, said Juan de Fuca NDP MLA John Horgan, who, with regional director Mike Hicks and Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca NDP MP Randall Garrison, is appealing to DFO to reconsider.

"That's what is happening: something stupid," Horgan said.

Garrison believes DFO wants to rid itself of all dam liabilities; Silverstein could not say how many other dams in B.C. could be affected.

"I really think it comes down to some directive to get rid of all the dams and the liability - the fish be damned," Garrison said. "This is lawyers, rather than biologists, running DFO."

Hicks mused about how a federal agency charged with protecting wild fish could deliberately kill a coho run. "DFO has a legal and moral obligation to maintain the dam for the survival of the coho and trout," he said.

The Bill James Dam is on De Mamiel Creek, about 11 kilometres northwest of the mouth of the Sooke River, and water is regularly released during dry summer months, allowing salmon fry to survive.

Without that water release, the upper reaches of the creek, where coho spawn, will dry up, Varney said.

Silverstein, who admits concerns about liability have grown since the 2010 collapse of a privately owned dam near Oliver, said an engineering review of the De Mamiel dam is needed and that will cost more than $50,000.

Then there will be the costs of whatever upgrades are needed, Silverstein said. "We realize that this is not without some impact, but we simply don't have the dollars to continue to operate this facility in a safe way or in a way that complies with legal requirements," he said.

However, David Genn, an engineer who lives downstream from the dam, does not believe there is any risk, even if the dam broke, because the reservoir contains only 53,300 cubic metres of water and the nearest occupied dwelling is eight kilometres away.

"They are making up all sorts of nonsense to try and convince us they have to destroy the dam," he said.

Silverstein said DFO's studies shows the dam provides marginal benefits for fish because it does not store enough water. Also, fish numbers cannot be confirmed because DFO does not do a stock analysis on De Mamiel Creek, he said.

The dam fight has seen some bizarre incidents.

When society members found the control valve had been removed this fall, they assumed it was vandalism, so they replaced it, Varney said.

DFO staff then saw "the valve had been vandalized and replaced, so we re-removed it," Silverstein said.

DFO then contacted the society and told them decommissioning was underway, Varney said. "We saw DFO had come back and cut the valve and busted up the pipe."

jlavoie@timescolonist.com

© Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist


Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/Juan+F...+stupid+move/6067011/story.html#ixzz1klrJrMJ9
 
I know, instead of giving fish farms money to promote themselves, they spend the money on enhancement! But that would make way too much sense.
 
They probably want to open a farm in the harbour
 
As said before, it's not too late yet. If the sportfishing community gets up off their a$$es this time maybe there is a way to stop this. Here is another chance to see if we are just talkers or maybe doers for a change. Can't just rely on the few who always fight for us. This will only be stopped in a concerted effort by many and with bold ideas and real commitments. A good gauge for our real priorities.

If you want to find out more about this, you should contact the responsible regional dam safety officer:

John.Baldwin@gov.bc.ca
Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations
Nanaimo
250 751-3179

Ask him why it is removed and if the environmental consequences have been properly studied. A lot of concentrated pressure may still be able to stop it and find an alternative solution. But you have to be swift and in numbers.
 
I think I found a couple of DFO's problems in their salmon management - They believe salmon don't need water? And, fish numbers cannot be confirmed, as they don't do stock analysis?

Adam Silverstein, DFO area manager for ecosystems management, who believes the Coho run will survive, even if water dries up in summer says:

“Silverstein said DFO's studies shows the dam provides marginal benefits for fish because it does not store enough water. Also, fish numbers cannot be confirmed because DFO does not do a stock analysis on De Mamiel Creek, he said.”

Then they want you to believe a "reservoir contains only 53,300 cubic metres of water and the nearest occupied dwelling is eight kilometres away" will cost to much to maintain and is a danger? Yep, guess I would start looking for those upcoming "fish farm" applications in Sooke, also??
 
Adam Silverstein, DFO area manager for ecosystems management
The great example of the Peter Principal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle
[FONT=&quot]The Peter Principle states that "in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence", meaning that employees tend to be promoted until they reach a position in which they cannot work competently..

Can we vote him off the island?
GLG
[/FONT]
 
Some fact about the dam

I thought DFO was here to protect salmon and habitat. With the removal of the Bill James Dam on DeMamiel Creek it will destroy and remove vital salmon and trout habitat. Coho adults in the fall like to travel to the upmost reaches of the creeks they inhabit. This will void fish life and kill fry in the summer months, which will reduce the salmon population on DeMamiel creek.

In 1998-2000, the Sooke Salmon Enhancement Society, Pacific Salmon Foundation, volunteers and DFO SPENT OVER $250,000 on rebuilding this dam and making it structurally sound. The dam stores water in the winter and this enables a release of water in the dry, summer months. It is controlled by a release valve operated by volunteers. With this flow in the summer months, salmon fry are able to survive the dry months. Coho live in the creek for over a year prior to going out into the ocean. It is important that the creek does not dry up in the summer in the upper reaches where these fry are living.

If this dam is removed, what a waste of money and destruction of a valuable fish habitat and it makes me feel like not donating money to salmon enhancement projects where and when D.F.O. is involved. I feel the community base groups know more about the watersheds in their area than D.F.O. with their budget and liability cutting mentality.

This dam is operated by the SSES volunteers and there is no cost to D.F.O. to operate and maintain it.

Please write to stop this ludicrous idea of DFO

Rather than sending in the mail, letters addressed to the Regional Water Manager may be e-mailed to John.Baldwin@gov.bc.ca . They should be cc'd to Richard Powley ( dfo) Richard.Powley@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
 
Holy chit..... Welcome to the board Glen.

Other than (including) writing what can we do?


I shot off a E and wanting to know more of Mr. Horgans stance
 
Town Hall Meeting

Holy chit..... Welcome to the board Glen.

Other than (including) writing what can we do?


I shot off a E and wanting to know more of Mr. Horgans stance

I feel we need to have a TownHall Meeting But I feel DFO has lost sight of the prime directive.

1) they have lost sight about fish and habitat
2) They are so concern about ways to cut budgets and liability issues
3) They do not care about the sport charter fleet with issues like the Halibut opening and quotas

We need action NOW Town Hall Meeting and a BIG Protest
THIS IS FAR FROM OVER
 
What is the T'Sou-ke Nation's position on this one? Are they on side to stop this? They should be.
 
"This dam is operated by the SSES volunteers and there is no cost to D.F.O. to operate and maintain it"

My question is this. Why can't the SSES take over complete maintenance and control (and liability) for the dam from DFO and tell DFO to bugger off???
 
If I recall correctly, the dam safety section identified a number of deficiencies at the dam and the cost to study and fix it would be a couple of hundred grands or so. SSES does not have pockets deep enough for that. If you want to know the details, contact John Baldwin.
 
The dam issues

As for taking over the dam and assuming lieablity it would then become a privately owned structure.This would be very high cost for insurance I beleave. DFO did the final upgrades in 2000 and the only deficiency that I am aware of is the water release valve was placed on the down stream side of the dam. It should have been in the pond side or centre of the dam. The dam that let go in Oliver had a culvert for a overflow channel and it got pluged up and then spilled over the top and it eroded away. The Bill James dam has a proper spill channel and that would never happen here.
 
Hey tiger, if all the upgrades were made then I do not understand what the big issue is. It definitely cannot be insurance as you do not have to have insurance to own and operate a dam. BC Hydro does insure some of their dams at very high cost but those are higher risk class dams and BC Hydro is a different entity altogether. There are hundreds of private ranchers and irrigators in BC who own and operate private dams and they all have no liability insurance - as far as I know. Demamiel Dam has the lowest dam failure consequence classification and should therefore come with minimal liability risks.
 
Hey tiger, if all the upgrades were made then I do not understand what the big issue is. It definitely cannot be insurance as you do not have to have insurance to own and operate a dam. BC Hydro does insure some of their dams at very high cost but those are higher risk class dams and BC Hydro is a different entity altogether. There are hundreds of private ranchers and irrigators in BC who own and operate private dams and they all have no liability insurance - as far as I know. Demamiel Dam has the lowest dam failure consequence classification and should therefore come with minimal liability risks.

I guess the SSES has been told wrong so why does DFO say there is a high cost to operate it each year?
 
Town hall meeting............. Who's going to do it?

You've been in the TC and the local rag in the last 2 days.. get a Hall meeting on the news with a turn out..?

I think that this is stupid.
 
Quite bizarre this whole thing! I have a feeling that there is hurt pride and political power games at play. Following this dam failure incidence in the interior, the province ordered all dam owners to inspect and report on their dams. DFO, as the owner and operator of Demamiel Dam, complied but was probably pissed to have to follow orders by others and made sure to find something to have a good reason to make the province look bad in the media over their decision to take DFO to the task. DFO knew this will blow up in the province's face and probably just chuckle now and can lean back and say "we just do what we've been told to do and since we have no money we are getting this problem out of this world". I am speculating but I am probably not far off....
 
Chris if that is the case their plan holds no water with me. (no pun intended) They can spin it any way they want...DFO is responsible for the welfare of salmon here in BC, not the province.
 
Back
Top