The Salmon Enhancement and Habitat Advisory Board

Here is a series of emails and photos received from a concerned Vancouver Island Streamkeeper.

Hi Zoanne,

I am once again concerned abut the environmental reporting process and fish habitat incidents that I see that should never occur. The incident I am attaching is my third report to government agencies about habitat impacts by Highways operations on this area in the last year.

I took these pictures yesterday (June 10) at Cathedral Grove in the Highways construction zone.

There's been impacts into the feeder streams of the river, affecting spawning and rearing habitat.

I observed 15-20 m of a blanket of fresh sediment from the road grading covering the stream bed to over 4 inches thick. (See photos, this is Creek 2). This was caused by poor ditching and grading practices accompanied by no identification of the stream or protective structures (I have hung "Fish Stream" ribbon on the Creek 2 site)

There are huge piles of uncontained sediment adjacent the Cameron River (within 5 feet of the high water mark for several hundred feet.)

The ditches leading to the Cameron, and tributaries 1 and 2 are unprotected, both tributaries have sediment depositions into them. Creek 2 as I said is more significant as it is likely an important trout spawning site where the impact occurred.

And that is before any significant rain events happen. Expect that this weekend.

I am disgusted with the lack of environmental concern and protection at this site. It is a drive by for lots of HWYS, and MWLAP staff.

A week ago I called DFO and they said to call the province as it is a trout stream. They have been down sized enough that they have to concentrate on salmon streams first. They have always had more clout. There is no habitat tech in the BC govt ( The fellow retired in March and the field component taken from the job description).

I called the CO service yesterday via the hot line after driving through the site yesterday and noticing no change since a week ago when I called DFO. On my return I took pictures (its hard to get out of the vehicle as the whole area is an isolated construction zone most of the day) or I would have observed that the habitat destruction in creek 2 likely occurred last week.

1. I am worried about the fact that it is hard to get anyone to respond before hand. Calling a CO or a FO is too late (the offense has already occurred, I need prevention) and respectfully, the enforcement officers are generalists, they may not have the environmental expertise to acknowledge all of the operational and habitat impacts that a person dedicated to environmental monitoring has. We have lost the on-site inspection staff and that used to be done by Habitat Technicians and Biologists in both Federal and Provincial governments. Who is minding the fish habitat on the planning, monitoring and referral side?
2. What is happening with referrals and environmental Best Management Practices for Highways? The work was done outside the fish window, it has long exposed erodible surfaces - these are "no-brainers" in BMP's for protection and location. Why are highways allowing such shoddy work, do they not have staff to monitor their contractors or is this intentional ignorance?
3. Who in the government agencies monitors the BMP's of Highways around environmentally sensitive areas? Where are the Habitat Technicians?
4. Who reviews the requirements based on environmental sensitivity for getting an environmental monitor on a job site? Why does this job not have a professional independent Environmental monitor full time?
5. We streamkeepers definitely need to start documenting the habitat offenses, their follow up and monitor any trends that show a decline in environmental protection. We then need to be looking at help with advocating against any declines in environmental protection, could we do it or should we ask government, ngos (WCEnv Law?) for help?

I am waiting for return calls from the CO I reported to thru the hot line yesterday and the MWLAP Habitat Technician that I left a message with.

Click on these photos to view larger versions
Piles next to river	Piles next to river	Creek 1 ditch
Creek 1	Piles at Creek 2	Creek 2 ditch
Creek 2 bank	Creek 2 sediment	Sediment in Creek 2
Creek 2 sediment in creek

Message 2

after all the emails...

I got a response from my hwys associate who put my concerns to the road building contractors, I then called one of their supervisors and he said they were not aware of the creeks and they were looking for a monitor. It sounded like they were going to take some sort of action. I guess I appreciate the frank honesty of that. I told him I was concerned about the sediment and damage and further risk. I wanted sediment control ASAP. I gave him names of two environmental consultants to consider for hiring. I haven't heard what they did today. I did fling all sorts of suggestions at him (hay, sediment cloth, rock weirs, plastic, tarps,), I also turned down an offer to look after it as I felt it was a conflict.

I got a late call today from Maggie Henigman of MWLAP who says their CO (Ben York) was on site and doesn't recognize the tributary drainages I am concerned about as fish streams!!! There is no mention about the Cameron River concern. I walked Creek 2 last winter all the way to the Cameron Floodplain,it is a creek! I am wondering when I'll get the expertise from either agency needed to address all the problems. I am booked with real work tomorrow in Chemainus or I'd go up and talk about the definition of a creek to a Conservation Officer. Geez I wonder if they care at all about the sediment piles on the Cameron either. They could have called me earlier today or last week when I first reported it and then maybe I could have gone up.

No further word from DFO except apparently my concerns passed up the pole by Mel Sheng to area habitat chief.

Oh well there's always hope highways will hire a skilled environmental consultant who can manage the sediment and come up with a restitution of said tributary, it doesn't look like any leadership from govt is going to happen. I'm serious about that, I'll take a fix any way I can get it. We can look at the why did it happens later. If highways learns now it will be better than nothing.

Message 3

I got a phone message at 5 PM today from Maggie Henigman saying the CO didn't think the two tributaries I saw filled with sediment were actually creeks! No word about the Cameron River status and the piles of sediment there!

Anyways, thanks to some prompting by your concern I did go to the site last December 12 2003, and take these shots of the channels below the highway which connect to the highway crossings.

Creek 1 is located further west of the parking lot turnoff and creek 2 is located on the Nanaimo side of the turnoff at the east entrance sign. They connect in floodplains east and below the proposed parking lot gate entrance.

They look like creeks to me. They have high water connected flow over low gradient habitat leading to upstream spawning gravels and feeding areas. Creek 2 does not dry up, it has year round pool habitat in the upper reaches by the walking trail while Creek 1 is seasonal for spawning and rearing although its upper reaches were still flowing riffle/pool last week before the rain as well. They both connect together below the parking lot logging slash on left and enter the Cameron through a series of floodplain channels.

By the way, Weyerhaeuser should not have left the falling debris in the floodplain of that slash. It has impaired flow and created debris jams that may impair seasonal fish access. Over time, this will heal.

I might add, it is the lower reaches of these two creeks where I am concerned about the development of the parking lot (footprint, riparian impacts, channel impacts, people crossings).

This is exactly the sort of surprises that any development, a highway, parking lot or logging show will get into when they do not appreciate the fact they are in a major river floodplain where rapid rises in water level occur and they spread in sheet fashion over the forest. The actual amount of wetted area is not appreciated by just examining for defined channels in spring and summer. One must visit the site during flood events or be very astute in determining the evidence. The water comes up from the water table under your feet as well as along flood channels, you can see this in some of the pictures, and remember these shots were taken at less than 100% bankfull stage (est. 60%). I saw evidence of flood heights to 0.5m along creek 1/2 confluence. Fish would be all over the logging slash (an fsz).

I wish the CO had phoned me I gave him my card last Thursday at my last contact about this I am now away tomorrow on south end (Kuper Island/Chemainus).

Click on these photos to view larger versions
Slash	Creek 1 mid reach	Creek 1 mid reach
Creek 1 at fall corner	Creek 1 FP	Creek 2 at end slash
Creek 2 at dj below highway	Slash FP	Slash FP