Derby
Crew Member
Fraser gravel mining threatens ecosystem, residents
By Rudy North, Vancouver Sun December 12, 2011
The Fraser River between Mission and Hope is the largest natural salmon spawning channel in all of North America and a world-class natural heritage area of incredible value. The heart of the Fraser is out of sight of the Trans-Canada Highway, and consequently out of mind for most of the residents of the Lower Mainland. It is also an important gravel-removal site for the construction industry of the eastern Fraser Valley.
My initial interest in the area was in preserving the unique ecosystems found in this stretch of the Fraser before they are lost forever; however, I soon got caught up in the human-safety issue of the residents of the flood plain area.
The obvious merit of protecting this natural treasure is complicated by the need to assure the inhabitants that a flood of record such as those that occurred in 1894 and 1948 will not be a danger. The dikes are the front-line defence, and most obvious solution to the problem. They were upgraded after the flood of 1948. Since then, despite more than 60 years of population growth in the area, these dikes have not been adequately upgraded.
This is not being addressed by governments of any level. The constant political fight over who is responsible and therefore who should foot the bill for dike upgrades has resulted in infrastructure inertia, and the adoption of a policy of gravel removal as a cheaper form of flood protection. A "common sense" argument was used to assert that gravel removal in the order of 500,000 cubic metres was needed to offset new gravel coming down the river to prevent flooding. This benefited both commercial interests, as well as political interests that could point to yearly gravel extraction as progress being made for the safety of their constituents.
Studies criticizing the mining of the gravel reach have been challenged as being based on inadequate data. However, over the past decade, new and more detailed studies have been conducted and have resolved the uncertainty on the effects of gravel removal. The findings are:
"We know from substantial experience that individual sediment removal short of the order of a million cubic metres will not substantially affect local water levels in the short term. But sediment removal on such a scale would very significantly disrupt the aquatic ecosystem. There is, furthermore, concern that the current program pays too little attention to the potential ecological costs of sediment removal."
The quote above is from the 2010 report by Dr. Michael Church of the University of B.C., a leading fluvial (river) geomorphologist who is the foremost expert on the movement of gravel in the Fraser River system. This and similar findings in previous studies have been repeatedly ignored by the Ministry of the Environment.
Yet the dikes still have not been sufficiently upgraded, and gravel continues to be mined under the pretence of public safety, even though it has been proven to be ineffectual in mitigating floods. Unfortunately the issue has become an unresolved political football, championed by the provincial government with the complicity of the federal government and Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Gravel mining of up to 500,000 cubic metres a year has been sanctioned since 2004 and it is the official policy of the provincial government that removed the environmental arguments from the table by putting the program under the management of Emergency Management B.C.
The inhabitants of the area have been sold a misleading claim that has nothing to do with assuring their safety or protecting their property values from the prospect of floods. They should be outraged by this apparent deceit. If I lived in the area and my family and property were being put at risk, I would be tempted to use much stronger language to describe the issue.
But what is a worried homeowner in the Mission to Hope stretch of the Fraser River flood plain to believe? It should be obvious that flood safety and a healthy river environment are in fact complementary. Gravel removal poses serious environmental problems with no meaningful protection against flooding. Adequate dyking is expensive but the only realistic solution to flood risk.
As of Dec. 6, the provincial government has decided against further gravel mining in the Fraser River for the coming year. The government has stated that it is liaising with DFO to create a long-term management strategy for the gravel reach of the Fraser, which is to be commended as a first step toward protecting both the residents of the Fraser River flood plain and the spawning grounds of North America's most important salmon run.
For further information on gravel in the Fraser River, go to: BCIT Heart of the Fraser
http: //commons.bcit.ca/heartofthefraser/
UBC Fraser River Gravel Reach studies
www.geog.ubc.ca/fraserriver/index.html
Fraser Basin Council
www.fraserbasin.bc.ca/programs/fvr.html
Rudy North is an investor and philanthropist from Vancouver. He was admitted to the Order of Canada for his environmental philanthropic work last year.
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Fr...em+residents/5845702/story.html#ixzz1gLDTgNds
By Rudy North, Vancouver Sun December 12, 2011
The Fraser River between Mission and Hope is the largest natural salmon spawning channel in all of North America and a world-class natural heritage area of incredible value. The heart of the Fraser is out of sight of the Trans-Canada Highway, and consequently out of mind for most of the residents of the Lower Mainland. It is also an important gravel-removal site for the construction industry of the eastern Fraser Valley.
My initial interest in the area was in preserving the unique ecosystems found in this stretch of the Fraser before they are lost forever; however, I soon got caught up in the human-safety issue of the residents of the flood plain area.
The obvious merit of protecting this natural treasure is complicated by the need to assure the inhabitants that a flood of record such as those that occurred in 1894 and 1948 will not be a danger. The dikes are the front-line defence, and most obvious solution to the problem. They were upgraded after the flood of 1948. Since then, despite more than 60 years of population growth in the area, these dikes have not been adequately upgraded.
This is not being addressed by governments of any level. The constant political fight over who is responsible and therefore who should foot the bill for dike upgrades has resulted in infrastructure inertia, and the adoption of a policy of gravel removal as a cheaper form of flood protection. A "common sense" argument was used to assert that gravel removal in the order of 500,000 cubic metres was needed to offset new gravel coming down the river to prevent flooding. This benefited both commercial interests, as well as political interests that could point to yearly gravel extraction as progress being made for the safety of their constituents.
Studies criticizing the mining of the gravel reach have been challenged as being based on inadequate data. However, over the past decade, new and more detailed studies have been conducted and have resolved the uncertainty on the effects of gravel removal. The findings are:
"We know from substantial experience that individual sediment removal short of the order of a million cubic metres will not substantially affect local water levels in the short term. But sediment removal on such a scale would very significantly disrupt the aquatic ecosystem. There is, furthermore, concern that the current program pays too little attention to the potential ecological costs of sediment removal."
The quote above is from the 2010 report by Dr. Michael Church of the University of B.C., a leading fluvial (river) geomorphologist who is the foremost expert on the movement of gravel in the Fraser River system. This and similar findings in previous studies have been repeatedly ignored by the Ministry of the Environment.
Yet the dikes still have not been sufficiently upgraded, and gravel continues to be mined under the pretence of public safety, even though it has been proven to be ineffectual in mitigating floods. Unfortunately the issue has become an unresolved political football, championed by the provincial government with the complicity of the federal government and Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Gravel mining of up to 500,000 cubic metres a year has been sanctioned since 2004 and it is the official policy of the provincial government that removed the environmental arguments from the table by putting the program under the management of Emergency Management B.C.
The inhabitants of the area have been sold a misleading claim that has nothing to do with assuring their safety or protecting their property values from the prospect of floods. They should be outraged by this apparent deceit. If I lived in the area and my family and property were being put at risk, I would be tempted to use much stronger language to describe the issue.
But what is a worried homeowner in the Mission to Hope stretch of the Fraser River flood plain to believe? It should be obvious that flood safety and a healthy river environment are in fact complementary. Gravel removal poses serious environmental problems with no meaningful protection against flooding. Adequate dyking is expensive but the only realistic solution to flood risk.
As of Dec. 6, the provincial government has decided against further gravel mining in the Fraser River for the coming year. The government has stated that it is liaising with DFO to create a long-term management strategy for the gravel reach of the Fraser, which is to be commended as a first step toward protecting both the residents of the Fraser River flood plain and the spawning grounds of North America's most important salmon run.
For further information on gravel in the Fraser River, go to: BCIT Heart of the Fraser
http: //commons.bcit.ca/heartofthefraser/
UBC Fraser River Gravel Reach studies
www.geog.ubc.ca/fraserriver/index.html
Fraser Basin Council
www.fraserbasin.bc.ca/programs/fvr.html
Rudy North is an investor and philanthropist from Vancouver. He was admitted to the Order of Canada for his environmental philanthropic work last year.
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Fr...em+residents/5845702/story.html#ixzz1gLDTgNds
