The
following almost identical letters appeared in the Nelson Daily News
and the (Slocan) Valley Voice (serving communities between Edgewood and
South Slocan) on August 18, 2004. They are co-authored by Tap
Water Alliance Coordinator Will Koop, and Marilyn Burgoon, Director of
the Slocan Valley Watershed Alliance.
Nelson Daily News
August 18, 2004
Letter to the Editor
Pay Close Attention to Water
Your recent article on water conservation is a timely article.
However, despite its obvious importance, the provincial government has
failed to protect the very water sources that provide the same water
referred to for conservation. Nelson and the surrounding Regional
Districts have a responsibility to protect drinking water not simply
talk about conservation, and should be following the example of the
Greater Vancouver District.
On June 30, 2004, landmark provincial legislation was re-enacted,
re-establishing local, autonomous control for the purpose of protecting
Crown forestlands within 60,000 hectares of Greater Vancouver’s three
drinking water source watersheds, the Capilano, Seymour and
Coquitlam. (See BC Tap Water Alliance news release, website,
www.alternatives.com/bctwa) Back in 1927, the newly created Water
District was granted a 1,000-year lease of Crown lands to protect its
drinking water from future logging. However in 1967 politicians
and administrators were duped into transforming the lease agreement
into a logging licence. That’s when all the trouble began.
That licence is now terminated and the original legislation is back in
place.
Over the course of 25 years government and Water District foresters
ordered 300 kilometers of logging roads to be bulldozed through the
three watersheds (two were in a pristine state) and over 5,000 hectares
of forests clear-cut logged. They planned to liquidate all the
old growth forests that scientists state provide us with the highest
quality drinking water. This resulted in the ruination of Greater
Vancouver’s water quality identified by health committees in the 1980s
with their resultant recommendations to construct expensive water
filtration treatment plants. The Water District is now in the
process of spending over $600 million in federal, provincial and local
tax dollars for an elaborate water filtration system, a system that
will need $12 million in annual operating costs. In comparison to
the few millions generated to the provincial government in stumpage
fees and the short- term profits by the Water District since spent,
they pale in comparison to the costs of filtration and the health risks
to which the public has been subjected. This is an important
lesson for us all.
Back in 1936, Water District Commissioner E.A. Cleveland, who had
organized all the original legislative protections, proudly stated,
“The District is as completely protected as the laws of the Province
will permit in the enjoyment of what amounts to exclusive rights to all
the water…. The District’s policy is to preserve all the timber both
commercially loggable and otherwise in the watersheds for the
conservation of the run-off and to preserve the area from human
occupation either temporary or permanent. I would not attempt to
set a value on the watershed lands in the Coquitlam, Seymour, and
Capilano watersheds as they constitute an almost invaluable asset of
the District permitting the complete and entire control of the purity
of the water supply for all time so that neither now nor in the future
will filtration or sterilization of the water be required.” His
vision, supported at the time by a dozen municipalities, was later lost
to a few fools out to make a profit at the public’s expense.
All BC’s Regional Districts should follow the wisdom of Greater
Vancouver’s elected representatives who did the right thing by once
again taking protective control of their watershed resources. The
original Land Act legislation set out in 1908 for such protection for BC municipalities and communities still exists. Though some of the Land Act
wording has changed, the government can still provide perpetual
protection of Crown lands to the public for its drinking
watersheds. The biggest obstacle, as shown from government
records, is our provincial government, which has repeatedly refused
numerous community applicants for such protection since the
1960s. They even refused the City of Nelson’s requests in the
late 1970s and early 1980s: “The City of Nelson has gone on record now
as “opposed to all road building and logging” unless they are granted
leasehold status and control of the Crown land. They have
approached both Vancouver and Victoria who have advised them in this
direction” (Letter to Deputy Minister of Forests, Mike Apsey, July 16,
1981). As another government source put it in 1971: “only
outright ownership of lease give substantially complete control to the
water authority” (Water Investigations Branch, July 14, 1971).
We have an opportunity to follow in the footsteps of Greater Vancouver
to establish local, autonomous control for the purpose of protecting
those Crown forestlands within the catchment basins of our domestic
watersheds. All other BC municipalities and communities that have
been denied the right to administer their water supplies deserve equal
legislative rights from the provincial government, for the perpetual
benefit of all. Anything less will lead to problems that
conservation will never remedy.
-------------------------
The Valley Voice
August 18, 2004
Letter to the Editor
How do we preserve our water sources?
There is much discussion about water conservation when we enjoy the
Slocan Valley's hot summer weather. However, despite
the obvious importance of conservation, the provincial government has
failed to protect the very water sources that provide the same water
referred to for conservation. Regional Districts and city
councils have a responsibility to protect drinking water not simply
talk about conservation, and should be following the example of the
Greater Vancouver District.
On June 30, 2004, landmark provincial legislation was re-enacted,
re-establishing local, autonomous control for the purpose of protecting
Crown forestlands within 60,000 hectares of Greater Vancouver’s three
drinking water source watersheds, the Capilano, Seymour and Coquitlam.
(See BC Tap Water Alliance news release, website,
www.alternatives.com/bctwa) Back in 1927, the newly created Water
District was granted a 1,000-year lease of Crown lands to protect its
drinking water from future logging. However in 1967 politicians and
administrators were duped into transforming the lease agreement into a
logging licence. That’s when all the trouble began. That licence is
now terminated and the original legislation is back in place.
Over the course of 25 years government and Water District foresters
ordered 300 kilometers of logging roads to be bulldozed through the
three watersheds (two were in a pristine state) and over 5,000 hectares
of forests clear-cut logged. They planned to liquidate all the old
growth forests that scientists state provide us with the highest
quality drinking water. This resulted in the ruination of Greater
Vancouver’s water quality identified by health committees in the 1980s
with their resultant recommendations to construct expensive water
filtration treatment plants. The Water District is now in the process
of spending over $600 million in federal, provincial and local tax
dollars for an elaborate water filtration system, a system that will
need $12 million in annual operating costs. In comparison to the few
millions generated to the provincial government in stumpage fees and
the short- term profits by the Water District since spent, they pale in
comparison to the costs of filtration and the health risks to which the
public has been subjected. This is an important lesson for us all.
Back in 1936, Water District Commissioner E.A. Cleveland, who had
organized all the original legislative protections, proudly stated,
“The District is as completely protected as the laws of the Province
will permit in the enjoyment of what amounts to exclusive rights to all
the water…. The District’s policy is to preserve all the timber both
commercially loggable and otherwise in the watersheds for the
conservation of the run-off and to preserve the area from human
occupation either temporary or permanent. I would not attempt to set a
value on the watershed lands in the Coquitlam, Seymour, and Capilano
watersheds as they constitute an almost invaluable asset of the
District permitting the complete and entire control of the purity of
the water supply for all time so that neither now nor in the future
will filtration or sterilization of the water be required.” His
vision, supported at the time by a dozen municipalities, was later lost
to a few fools out to make a profit at the public’s expense.
All BC’s Regional Districts should follow the wisdom of Greater
Vancouver’s elected representatives who did the right thing by once
again taking protective control of their watershed resources. The
original Land Act legislation set out in 1908 for such protection for BC municipalities and communities still exists. Though some of the Land Act
wording has changed, the government can still provide perpetual
protection of Crown lands to the public for its drinking watersheds.
The biggest obstacle, as shown from government records, is our
provincial government, which has repeatedly refused numerous community
applicants for such protection since the 1960s. They even refused the
City of Nelson’s requests in the late 1970s and early 1980s: “The City
of Nelson has gone on record now as “opposed to all road building and
logging” unless they are granted leasehold status and control of the
Crown land. They have approached both Vancouver and Victoria who have
advised them in this direction” (Letter to Deputy Minister of Forests,
Mike Apsey, July 16, 1981). As another government source put it in
1971: “only outright ownership of lease give substantially complete
control to the water authority” (Water Investigations Branch, July 14,
1971).
We have an opportunity to follow in the footsteps of Greater Vancouver
to establish local, autonomous control for the purpose of protecting
those Crown forestlands within the catchment basins of our domestic
watersheds. All other BC municipalities and communities that have been
denied the right to administer their water supplies deserve equal
legislative rights from the provincial government, for the perpetual
benefit of all. Anything less will lead to problems that conservation
will never remedy.