| Abstract/Description or Keywords |
The technical analysis in this report was limited to Canadian interests that have the potential to be affected by operations at Columbia River Treaty dams (Mica, Arrow, Duncan and Libby). This limited the geographic study area to the reservoirs and downstream river (and lake) segments on the Kootenay and Columbia rivers to the US border. Okanagan salmon that migrate through the lower Columbia River in the US to the confluence with the Okanagan River and up into Canada are also of interest and are being assessed in a separate report. The Ministry of Energy, Mines and Natural Gas Columbia River Treaty Review team has overall responsibility for the Treaty Review process. Working with BC Hydro and a team of independent facilitators and consultants, their tasks include technical modelling and analyses, stakeholder engagement, First Nations consultation, and making the recommendations to provincial Cabinet. 1.3.1 Environmental Advisory Committee and Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee: The Columbia River Treaty Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) was formed to advise and provide policy and technical input to design, evaluation and implementation of the outcomes of the environmental studies for the Treaty Review. The EAC has representatives from the provincial Ministry of Energy, Mines and Natural Gas, the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, the federal departments of Natural Resources Canada, Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and BC Hydro. The EAC focused on exploring opportunities to further enhance environmental values under the Treaty Review. The Columbia River Treaty Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee (FWTC) was assembled to provide technical support and advice to the project. It is made up of technical advisors with expert knowledge of fish and wildlife issues in the Columbia and Kootenay River systems and includes representatives from Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, BC Hydro, Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, Ministry of Environment, the Canadian Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, the Ktunaxa First Nation and Sexqeltkemc te Sewepemc First Nation. The FWTC worked with the provincial review team to develop different flow alternatives for the Columbia and Kootenay operations as well as objectives and performance measures that could be used to compare and contrast those alternatives. More specifically, the FWTC focused on the following tasks: _ Developing performance measures for the Kootenay system _ Reviewing existing performance measures from previous planning processes on the Columbia River and Duncan River _ Developing hypothesis of beneficial flow management regimes in the Columbia River below Arrow _ Reviewing alternative modelling results _ Reviewing this report. Appendix A contains the Terms of Reference, meeting schedule and topics discussed. 1.3.2 Water Use Plan and Structured Decision Making Process: In the late 1990s the province of British Columbia ordered BC Hydro to undertake a program of Water Use Plans (WUPs) at its hydroelectric facilities. The consultative planning process involved participants from provincial and federal government agencies, First Nations, local citizens and other interest groups. For the most part, WUPs employed a structured decision making approach to explore the impacts of water management alternatives on environmental, social and economic interests. Structured decision making involves a systematic analysis of how various interests are affected by possible management alternatives. In this case, interests were expressed where possible as fundamental objectives (e.g. cost, fish and fish habitat protection, wetland protection, recreation opportunity, etc.) and performance measures were created to compare how the different water management alternatives meet these objectives. This enabled a values-based discussion on the trade-offs presented by the different alternatives. As a result of the WUP, BC Hydro undertook operational changes and physical works on the Columbia system that benefited fish, wildlife, cultural heritage, recreation and other interests, while still being able to maintain power generation. After the development of a consensus decision for the Columbia WUP, several other BC Hydro planning processes, while different, built on this evaluative framework, including the Revelstoke Unit 5 and Mica Units 5&6 capacity expansions projects and, most recently in 2010, the process for the Non-Treaty Storage Agreement renegotiation with the United States. Links between the Columbia River Treaty, Non-Treaty Storage Agreement, and Water Use Plan are described in Chapter 2. The evaluative framework and knowledge from previous planning work on the Columbia River is helpful in understanding the potential implications of the Columbia River Treaty strategic decision on social and environmental interests. Much less is known about the potential impacts of water management alternatives on values in the Kootenay River system, however, since no such comparable planning process has taken place on the Kootenay River system to date other than the Duncan WUP. A Kootenay Lake Water Use plan has not been conducted because BC Hydro is not the owner of the storage water license. As part of the Columbia River Treaty Review process, the project team undertook studies to fill in some of the information gaps on the Kootenay system. |
