Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: chris gadsden on May 26, 2020, 02:09:57 PM
-
It is good to be a small park of this committee with 4 others on the stewardship group who have spent many hours on this file and other years as well attempting to protect the habitat and fish stocks of our river. The last time gravel and sediment was taken out was in 2016 and the picture in this story was one I took when gravel was last taken out. We had a good Zoom meeting with FOC today too. Global may do a story this week as well.
https://www.theprogress.com/news/potential-for-gravel-removal-this-summer-in-chilliwack-has-riled-river-stewards/
-
Yup, just another money grab for some politicians buddies. If they want to do this for flood protection take it from the canal, make the whole canal 20' deep right out to the mouth
-
if there is a petition we could sign please post a link here.
-
Yup, just another money grab for some politicians buddies. If they want to do this for flood protection take it from the canal, make the whole canal 20' deep right out to the mouth
Bang on x2
-
if there is a petition we could sign please post a link here.
No we have not at this time but here is the full letter we have sent to all 3 levels of government and many others, a lot of work has been put into this including a lot of Zoom meetings with many.
The Honourable Bernadette Jordan, Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and Canadian Coast
Guard, Canada
The Honourable Doug Donaldson, BC Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource
Operations and Rural Development
Mayor Ken Popove and Council, City of Chilliwack
Mayor Henry Braun and Council, City of Abbotsford
Mr. Ted White, Comptroller of Water, Victoria
Re: Proposed Gravel Removal for the Vedder River and Canal 2020
Dear Sirs and Madams:
I am writing on behalf of our group, the Gravel Stewardship Group, to express our
concerns regarding plans being put forward by the City of Chilliwack to remove gravel
from the Vedder River and Canal in Chilliwack, British Columbia this coming summer
(2020).
The 2020 gravel removal plan was initiated by the City of Chilliwack and vetted last
week (May, 2020) through the Vedder River Management Area Committee (VRMAC), a
joint body comprised of the City of Chilliwack, City of Abbotsford, Province of BC, and
federal Department of Fisheries and Ocean Canada. The VRMAC is a group charged
with the responsibility of removing gravel for the purpose of flood protection.
I am a member of the VRMAC and represent several stewardship and angling groups,
including the Fraser Valley Salmon Society. I attended this meeting and I was not
impressed as to the outcome. Hence this letter.
This project is ostensibly for flood protection. However, it is the opinion of the group that
I am representing that, based on all of the technical information being made available in
support of this proposal by the City of Chilliwack, there is no discernible merit for this
2
proposal particularly when balanced off with the environmental damage that it will cause.
The 2020 plan by the City of Chilliwack is to remove up to 95,000 cubic meters of gravel
from eight sites from the Vedder River and Canal. This is an operation that would
significantly harm, alter, disrupt and destroy sensitive fish habitat in one of British
Columbia’s most important salmon and steelhead streams. Notwithstanding our opinion,
we note that the environmental report for this project is largely deficient in quantifying
habitat values, the damage that this project would cause, and any appropriate fisheries
offsets as required under the Canada Fisheries Act legislation.
The purported immediate flood-reduction benefits, which relate to freeboard concerns at
just one short area of dike (Great Blue Heron Reserve) are tiny and will amount to just
6.2 cm (2.4 inches) over a vertical flood elevation of streambed-to-top-of-dike of 8.5 m
(28 ft.). Moreover, the water surface elevation has been naturally declining, mostly
stable, or only slightly rising from 2018-2020. This is a normal condition for gravelbedded streams and does not indicate any real concern for the need to take large volumes
of gravel out since we already know that the Vedder River is currently in a naturally
degrading mode.
Thus, this proposal is not an acceptable trade-off considering the large-scale damage to
the aquatic ecosystem that we believe this project will cause.
This 2020 gravel removal project is being proposed despite the fact that even in 2018,
which was the last year that this action was previously contemplated, removal operations
were cancelled when it was realized then that the river was degrading due to a lack of
gravel deposition.
Since then, the stream has now extensively lost even more gravel on its own accord due
to natural erosion processes. For example, the Vedder River portion of the floodway has
undergone a state of extensive losses between 2018 and 2020, losing 50,000 cubic
meters of critical spawning and rearing gravels during the interim period. Moreover, the
Vedder Canal has naturally eroded compared to the 2016 bed levels as well. Also, there
have been large-scale historic losses in both portions of the floodway management area
compared to the baseline years of 1981 and 1991, respectively.
Let me emphasize: The stewardship groups I represent are not against gravel removal per
se from the Vedder River provided there is a demonstrable benefit to lowering the flood
profile where it is legitimately required, and where environmental damage can be
reasonably mitigated.
I have attached for your review, our overview of the 2020 Vedder River and Canal
3
Hydraulic Profile provided to the VRMAC by the environmental engineers, KWL
consultants. The information in this report was used by the City of Chilliwack to provide
the rational to mine the gravel but our re-assessment of the information provided shows
that the City does not have a reasonable argument for removal.
The KWL report of modelled water surface flood profiles show that under the criteria that
the provincial agencies use for flood protection, the surrounding areas are well protected
within the guidelines set by the Provincial diking authorities with the small and modest
exception of one area (1.7% of the total dike length). Here, on the Right Bank dike, at
the Great Blue Heron Reserve, there is now an historical lack of design freeboard
capacity (0.75 m) because of higher risk-averse standards that have been implemented
since the dike was constructed many years ago.
It is also important to recognize that this 2020 proposal is in direct contradiction to the
City of Chilliwack’s publicly stated positions in 2017 and 2018 when the riverbed was
also seen to be dropping naturally, and where the agencies deemed there was no need to
take any gravel out at that time.
Indeed, Chilliwack’s Manager of Engineering, David Blain, was quoted in the Chilliwack
Progress on May 14, 2018: “There haven’t been any really big storms for several years,
which will move large amounts of material into the river…Over the last two years in
particular there was no need to take any out. We only take it out to protect against
flooding, so if no gravel comes in, there is no reason to take it out.” (my emphasis).
Moreover, the City of Chilliwack has repeatedly stated, in a November 27, 2017 meeting
with the stewardship folks on this issue, that they would not take gravel out of the
floodway if not required.
It is very concerning that the City is now going back on its stated words.
We are also very concerned with regards to the lack of transparency that the City of
Chilliwack has given us. This year, we were given the relative information being used to
make this decision only 24 hours before the VRMAC met in May 2020 despite the fact
that we first asked for this information back in February 2020. Based on this fact alone, it
is clear to us that the City of Chilliwack has little interest in fulfilling their commitments
and promises to British Columbian to engage in an open and collaborative approach.
I respectfully request that the authorizing Ministers emphasize to your regulatory staff the
importance of protecting fish, fish habitat under their respective environmental legislations.
Moreover, you are certainly aware of the significance of the economic and recreational
value this river provides to our community and to thousands of fishers from across the
entire Lower Mainland and elsewhere. These statutes should protect against capricious and
inappropriate removal of gravel where it is not warranted for flood protection.
4
Thus, we are asking that the regulatory agencies including BC FLNRORD (under the
Water Sustainability Act Section 11) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada, (under the federal
Fisheries Act Section 35) refuse to grant the necessary permits for this damaging gravel
removal project for 2020.
Thank-you for the opportunity to bring this concern to your attention. I look forward to
your responses.
Sincerely,
Dean Werk
President, Fraser Valley Salmon Society (est. 1984)
-
Very well written letter.
They want to remove gravel from 8 areas. 95,000 cu meters.
Is this about 1/2 km x 8 areas ...how much are we talking here?
But regardless it does not seem to have any need to take out the gravel.
If I read right only one area the dike should be higher .
-
Very well written letter.
They want to remove gravel from 8 areas. 95,000 cu meters.
Is this about 1/2 km x 8 areas ...how much are we talking here?
But regardless it does not seem to have any need to take out the gravel.
If I read right only one area the dike should be higher .
Here is a lot of reading for you.http://www.vedderriver.ca/reports/16_2020_Vedder_River_and_Canal_Hydraulic_Profile_May_7_KWL%20presentation.pdf
-
This has and continues to be nothing more then a money grab. A cub of gravel
Goes For for about 6 to 10 Bucks so do the math on that.
They also happen to only do this when the
Prices are high. Sand sources are Getting harder and harder To come By.
-
Global TV has contacted us to cover this story too, I will let you know when it airs.
-
Yup, just another money grab for some politicians buddies. If they want to do this for flood protection take it from the canal, make the whole canal 20' deep right out to the mouth
while I can understand why this would be suggested it won't provide any sort of flood remediation. When the Fraser is lower the Canal is subject to tidal influence. That means it has about the same basal level as the river. Dig it down 20 feet and it will become a backwater for the Fraser and fill with it's water. In the event of a flood it just increases the risk higher up since the water has no where to go when it hits the canal.
-
With the recent damage to the Rotary trail at the Vedder River Campground from high water, I can see the economic need for a large area from app Webster Road to the campground, south side of the river, being rip rapped very soon. This will lead to even more degradation of the limited rearing area for steelhead and coho.
I know I will be flamed for this but IMO the sad reality is the lower Vedder, apart from the man made off channel areas, is poor salmonid rearing habitat, and gravel removal, as it is currently practiced, will have limited impacts on the spawning areas currently available for chum and pinks.
-
With the recent damage to the Rotary trail at the Vedder River Campground from high water, I can see the economic need for a large area from app Webster Road to the campground, south side of the river, being rip rapped very soon. This will lead to even more degradation of the limited rearing area for steelhead and coho.
I know I will be flamed for this but IMO the sad reality is the lower Vedder, apart from the man made off channel areas, is poor salmonid rearing habitat, and gravel removal, as it is currently practiced, will have limited impacts on the spawning areas currently available for chum and pinks.
Found this on the web why gravel extraction is bad for fish and the river. Comments on this Dave?
"Gravel is usually extracted from rivers and burns in an attempt to increase the flow of the river by deepening or widening the channel, to deepen shallow zones for fish movement, or simply to provide gravel for road or other building work. Movement of gravel within a river system is a vital natural process. Gravel extraction will therefore inevitably have knock-on effects and can be extremely damaging, resulting in increased erosion in other parts of the river and causing direct disturbance and damage to aquatic environments.
Upsetting the width:depth ratio of the watercourse will result in increased erosion elsewhere, both upstream and downstream. Areas from which gravel has been extracted rapidly refill as the river tries to restore its balance. Gravel also often constitutes the coarse armouring layer of the river bed. Once removed, the fine sediments underneath may erode very rapidly, and then be deposited elsewhere downstream.
Release of fine sediment into watercourses can cause serious pollution. Fish are particularly affected, as their gills become clogged up with the sediment. The sediment can also damage invertebrate habitats and spawning beds.
Removal of gravel at any time may destroy spawning beds, and could wipe out a whole seasons potential young fish supply. Also, any emergent vegetation developing on the river bed will be lost, and recolonisation will be slowed by river deepening and loss of bed material."
-
All of the above is true, no denying it. What Marvin wrote is also true, every word of it. What isn't being mentioned is this loss of habitat on the lower river has been happening for many years, wild fish stocks are near zero, and basically it is too late to save the mainstem river as anything more than good spawning gravel for pinks and chum, and a quality area for sports fishing.
Juvenile steelhead are counted, I believe annually, throughout the entire river system - data shows the lower river to be the poorest for rearing of wild fish, and when was the last time you saw a juvenile coho in the mainstem lower river?
I believe the entire lower river will soon be armored on both banks, leaving off channel areas the best option for rearing wild salmonids in this area. The effort you guys have put in is amazing but perhaps it's time for a different tactic .. maybe lobby for whoever is making money on this project to donate a portion of the profits to the Fraser Valley Watersheds Coalition, who will work to mitigate the loss with further off channel work.
-
Gravel removal and flood mitigation work has wiped out 2 of my favorite winter cutthroat spots on the Fraser near the Agassiz Bridge.
In one case gravel removal caused a side channel to shift during the freshet and gouged away large gravel bars leaving step inaccessible banks and no beach. It amazed me how just what looked to modest removal could lead to such a large and altered spring erosion pattern.
In the other an existing dike was rip rapped with huge boulders the size of a sub compact car compete with massive gaps between the rock. Existing access was destroyed and not replaced. I'm not about to try scrambling down the boulders at this stage of my life.
In both cases a km and more of fishable water that not only produced trout but also bull trout, pinks and even the odd winter steelhead is lost or no longer accessible to shore bound anglers.
-
maybe lobby for whoever is making money on this project to donate a portion of the profits to the Fraser Valley Watersheds Coalition, who will work to mitigate the loss with further off channel work.
I believe its the City of Chilliwack,
-
We just completed a story with Global Vancouver this afternoon regarding this issue. It should run tonight during the 6 News Hour. Rod was good enough to provide a fishing video he filmed this year in the Vedder Canal that they may use to go for the story, Thanks Rod. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URRrP882DvA
Global is presently at Chilliwack City Hall getting the staff's side of the proposed project.
-
After we completed the interviews after with Global I filmed Marvin Rosenau and he will give you a good picture of why we are against this project. It is impossible to get the true message out in a 2 minute news clip. I will have one with John Werring later. https://youtu.be/OuYnRTlOJ50
-
After we completed the interviews after with Global I filmed Marvin Rosenau and he will give you a good picture of why we are against this project. It is impossible to get the true message out in a 2 minute news clip. I will have one with John Werring later. https://youtu.be/OuYnRTlOJ50
Your voices are making a differance.
Without opposition possibly gravel extraction would be a yearly happening !!! ( on this river/canal. )
And it would be done in the name of flood control.
The heart is desperately wicked who can know it !!!!!!!
-
Here is the video with John Werring I filmed after we did the story with Global. https://youtu.be/xDBz_uw5R2k
-
https://globalnews.ca/video/7006252/controversy-over-plans-to-mine-gravel-from-vedder-river-in-chilliwack
-
This is what gravel mining looks like on the Vedder River, I filmed this in 2016 the last year they took gravel out. Do you think this is good for fish habitat? https://youtu.be/aj13jRub9Ik
-
I just read the application for this work and part of the applications says "to be authorized to carry on work that "WILL RESULT IN SERIOUS HARM TO FISH". So they are admitting they are harming fish in the application, how can this be allowed? :o :o
-
I emailed my concerns over the gravel extraction planned for the Chillwack Vedder river.
Below is a response I got from the Director of Planning & Engineering Chilliwack.
"Thank you for your email and your concern regarding protection of the Vedder River habitat. The City of Chilliwack shares your concern with the long-term protection of this valuable asset. The current Sediment Removal Program has been ongoing for over 30 years and the following document provides a summary description of the Vedder River and Canal history and process for sediment removal:
http://vedderriver.ca/reports/1-APEGBC-Article--Flood-Mngt-Vedder-River_Canal.pdf
“Natural river processes carry sediment from the upstream Chilliwack River Basin into the Vedder River and Canal. Historically, approximately 50,000 cubic metres of sediment are deposited, on average, every year. The sediment reduces the channel’s capacity to convey the Design Flood Event (DFE) and thereby increases flood threat to surrounding communities. Sediment removal is necessary to maintain the provincially recommended level of flood protection (Q200), and removal sites are selected to preserve sufficient freeboard along the diking system during the DFE”
The environmental planning and monitoring of sediment removal has a long history of demonstrating that the process is able to accommodate the sediment removal to provide the necessary flood protection while also providing habitat enhancements. The habitat conditions for excavations are evaluated in detail pre and post excavation. Looking at the history of excavations on the river, the analysis shows that most excavations yield positive or neutral habitat outcomes. Excavation strategies to encourage habitat diversity and offsets, built into each excavation, helps to assure these results. The removal of sediment follows a set of guidelines and best management practices developed with input from experienced fish habitat biologists, various river engineers, and agency experts that has been shown, over more than two decades to yield a consistent set of flood protection and habitat benefits. The following website provides the background for the Vedder River Management Area Committee and includes links to previous and current planning and environmental reporting:
http://vedderriver.ca/
Frank Van Nynatten, in our Environmental Services Department is pleased to discuss this program in further detail or answer any questions you may have. Feel free to contact him at vanny@chilliwack.com or call 604 793-2720
Thank you again for your interest in this process and taking the time express your concerns.
Best regards.
David Blain
David Blain, M.A.Sc., MBA, P.Eng. | Director of Planning and Engineering
P: 604.793.2907 | F: 604.793.2756 | E: blain@chilliwack.com"
Seems they feel justified in their approach, confident in their reports and NOT inclined to listen to concerns.
-
I emailed my concerns over the gravel extraction planned for the Chillwack Vedder river.
Below is a response I got from the Director of Planning & Engineering Chilliwack.
"Thank you for your email and your concern regarding protection of the Vedder River habitat. The City of Chilliwack shares your concern with the long-term protection of this valuable asset. The current Sediment Removal Program has been ongoing for over 30 years and the following document provides a summary description of the Vedder River and Canal history and process for sediment removal:
http://vedderriver.ca/reports/1-APEGBC-Article--Flood-Mngt-Vedder-River_Canal.pdf
“Natural river processes carry sediment from the upstream Chilliwack River Basin into the Vedder River and Canal. Historically, approximately 50,000 cubic metres of sediment are deposited, on average, every year. The sediment reduces the channel’s capacity to convey the Design Flood Event (DFE) and thereby increases flood threat to surrounding communities. Sediment removal is necessary to maintain the provincially recommended level of flood protection (Q200), and removal sites are selected to preserve sufficient freeboard along the diking system during the DFE”
The environmental planning and monitoring of sediment removal has a long history of demonstrating that the process is able to accommodate the sediment removal to provide the necessary flood protection while also providing habitat enhancements. The habitat conditions for excavations are evaluated in detail pre and post excavation. Looking at the history of excavations on the river, the analysis shows that most excavations yield positive or neutral habitat outcomes. Excavation strategies to encourage habitat diversity and offsets, built into each excavation, helps to assure these results. The removal of sediment follows a set of guidelines and best management practices developed with input from experienced fish habitat biologists, various river engineers, and agency experts that has been shown, over more than two decades to yield a consistent set of flood protection and habitat benefits. The following website provides the background for the Vedder River Management Area Committee and includes links to previous and current planning and environmental reporting:
http://vedderriver.ca/
Frank Van Nynatten, in our Environmental Services Department is pleased to discuss this program in further detail or answer any questions you may have. Feel free to contact him at vanny@chilliwack.com or call 604 793-2720
Thank you again for your interest in this process and taking the time express your concerns.
Best regards.
David Blain
David Blain, M.A.Sc., MBA, P.Eng. | Director of Planning and Engineering
P: 604.793.2907 | F: 604.793.2756 | E: blain@chilliwack.com"
Seems they feel justified in their approach, confident in their reports and NOT inclined to listen to concerns.
Thanks for writing to them, the answer is what they give to all that write to them. The Gravel Stewardship Committee has been working hard on this and have had several meetings including with FOC. Our techancial people show the river is degrading of gravel the last while. There is so much more than what the City is saying. I feel it is more about getting easy access to gravel for construction purposes than flood control. In 2016 the last year they took it out they wanted it for the new Molson brewery plant in Chilliwack and sub division development. The stewardship committee was able to stop the mining in 2018 and hope to stop this destruction of fish habitat this year too.
As many people know any gravel extraction in a river is bad news. Thanks again for writing and posting it here.
-
We just got notified that the gravel extraction application by the City of Chilliwack has once again been denied. Thanks to the work of the Stewardship Committee for their hours of work on this file. This now will be 6 years that environmental damage has been prevented as the last year the river was mined was in 2016 and now it will be until 2022 before another application can be filed.
-
Fantastic News. Thanks Chris,
Hat's off to the effort of everyone involved. Getting this years gravel extraction application denied ,may be a short lived victory.With the expansion of development facing the valley, one can only assume the need for cheap access to clean gravel will result in the need to go thru this same exercise again in a years time. Unfortunate, but you may want to keep that file on the top of the cabinet.
But for today,
Cheers :)
cf
-
We just got notified that the gravel extraction application by the City of Chilliwack has once again been denied. Thanks to the work of the Stewardship Committee for their hours of work on this file. This now will be 6 years that environmental damage has been prevented as the last year the river was mined was in 2016 and now it will be until 2022 before another application can be filed.
Awesome stuff. Job well done by yourself and the Stewardship Committee.
-
Thanks for all your efforts chris.
-
thank you Chris and others!
-
I miss those dug out ponds for coho fishing in the fall.
-
I miss those dug out ponds for coho fishing in the fall.
Yes they were good areas to fish but the environmental damage these projects do to any river is the main reason to have them stopped.
https://www.theprogress.com/news/potential-for-gravel-removal-this-summer-in-chilliwack-has-riled-river-stewards/
-
Agreed.
But the lower Vedder is not just any river.
-
The article says the so called environmental damage is not an issue and that their a net benefit as reported by their professional biologist. Ethereal is the evidence that this removal is causing long term biological harm? The gravel is used in habitat restoration projects. This is not a mining operation where a proponent is profiting from extract and leaving a mess. And as noted by Jr. there are very few decent places on the river for fly fishers so now you have reduced our enjoyment of the river significantly. I don’t see this as a balanced decision at all.
-
The article says the so called environmental damage is not an issue and that their a net benefit as reported by their professional biologist. Ethereal is the evidence that this removal is causing long term biological harm? The gravel is used in habitat restoration projects. This is not a mining operation where a proponent is profiting from extract and leaving a mess. And as noted by Jr. there are very few decent places on the river for fly fishers so now you have reduced our enjoyment of the river significantly. I don’t see this as a balanced decision at all.
He said/She said argument, depends on who and how you interpret it.
The gravel operation was never intended to be used for habitat restoration, and anyone who witnesses this extraction will tell you the same. The piles of gravel removed is NOT used for anything but making money.
And yes this is a mining operation, with very little benefit to flood mitigation and it certainly does leave a mess. Maybe not in the form of garbage, but how do you think those big parking lots where made? Trees where cut, ground was leveled for large storage of gravel for trucks to haul away to quarry's throughout the lowermainland, and who knows where else.
The whole river is full of quality locations for fly fishing, they just do not resemble the swimming pools most are used to in their back yard.
-
https://www.theprogress.com/news/vedder-river-gets-reprieve-from-gravel-removal-this-summer/
-
we'll have to watch to see if stopping the bi-annual gravel extraction leads to the gravel paving of the lower river. The lower section no longer has a natural course and if rivers can't drop flood sediments to their sides and move laterally back and forth then they will drop them in their beds leading to extensive lengths of shallow water. In low water conditions fish may not be able to ascend these. Similar things have happened on some rivers on the Island.
-
we'll have to watch to see if stopping the bi-annual gravel extraction leads to the gravel paving of the lower river. The lower section no longer has a natural course and if rivers can't drop flood sediments to their sides and move laterally back and forth then they will drop them in their beds leading to extensive lengths of shallow water. In low water conditions fish may not be able to ascend these. Similar things have happened on some rivers on the Island.
From the X sections that were analyzed by the Stewardship technical people it was shown the river and canal is degrading the last few years. When this was presented to the City, FOC and the Province the application was withdrawn
-
I appreciate that Chris - I was trying to say is that if some years from now it looks like the lower river could benefit from gravel removal it could be done then. No need to do it every 2 years.