Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: chris gadsden on January 30, 2014, 10:27:04 AM
-
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/risk-to-b-c-salmon-minimal-from-run-of-river-projects-1.2516563
-
Well whaddaya know, the industry commissioned a study and no problems were found!
Funny how when there are problems, it is always a legacy from the 'bad old days' before the modern red tape. At least 5 years ago.
There are darn few run-of-river plants in BC older than 10 years.
-
The article at the link is about an independent review by the Pacific Salmon Foundation, not a report commissioned by Independent Power Producers Assoc.
-
The article says "
The review was conducted by the Pacific Salmon Foundation, a salmon and watershed conservation group, on behalf of Clean Energy BC representing independent power producers in the province.
" Emphasis added.
-
If the PSF isn't independent enough for you, I'm not sure who is?
-
The article says "" Emphasis added.
Got me ... I'll hide for a while. As nibbles alludes to, the PSF is a solid organization - their review can be taken as credible.
-
Dig a little deeper as to how many of the IPP's reported. Uumm Paul Kariya, now the mouthpiece of the IPP's used to head up the PSF. 18 of these places did not bother to keep records. Dubious, at the very best. I'm sad if this post seems cynical, but there's too many unanswered questions and too much "spooning" for me to take it as 100% gospel.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/risk-to-b-c-salmon-minimal-from-run-of-river-projects-1.2516563
http://www.theprovince.com/technology/Horror+shows+rivers+Wilderness+Committee+gives+handling+river+power+projects/9441418/story.html
-
This is another case where if the public were to just read the title of the article they would not get the whole picture or what was said or done. Remember, the results and the conclusions were based on the data collected (including gaps). The key words in this article are “tentatively” and “caveats”. The review conducted by the PSF has tentatively concluded that run-of-the-river projects have no impact to salmon species where these projects are located; however, the report mentions a series of caveats that go along with the findings. I don’t see anything shady by these results or conclusions. Although I have not read the report (and likely none of the members on this board have either) it appears that the report is attempting to be objective of what they found. As dnibbles pointed out, if the PSF is not independent enough then who is? If some people have trouble trusting the PSF then they will be even more unhappy to know that non-governmental organizations like the PSF will likely become more and more involved in fisheries projects as budgets from governments slowly dwindle. Collaboration with organizations like the PSF or even First Nations and industry is likely going to be the norm for doing business now so get used to it.
The study's authors were only able to judge impacts based on industry-supplied monitoring data from 26 sites. For the remaining 18 generating plants, monitoring records simply do not exist.
I can see how this can be interpreted as “Oh…someone is trying to hide something”; however, there could be various reasons why data collection was not adequate back then and not be something calculated and devious. For instance, the technology used by environmental monitoring used 20 or 30 years ago is not the same as it is now. Regulations/standards in place now were likely not the same 20 or 30 years ago. Training of individuals doing environmental monitoring is not the same as it was 20 or 30 years ago. I believe the thing to take home from this is that these ROR companies need to ensure proper environmental oversight (as indicated by the PSF) as well as ensure that monitoring records exist for all facilities. It will likely never prevent future criticism, but having a robust data series would be much better for public confidence and independent analysis than a data series with many gaps leading to faulty conclusions and an even more distrustful public.
-
--headlines asside... I can see some value to the report.
--for one it should give industry the confidence to supply data knowing that those recieving it will give it a fair review.
--this should bring pressure on those who did not report to start collecting data and showing that they also meet the baseline acceptable standard.
--further for those projects where the data tends to indicate they are operating within the current regulation and that the regulation when followed yields an acceptable and measured result.
--if these projects continue to show acceptable results we may be able to better choose any future projects or tune up current projects that do not meet an acceptable standard.
-- some of these projects were caught in the transition between government workers doing the sampling and record keeping vs the current professional reliance models. This is no excuse for those not reporting to at least meet the current best practices standard... even if they are exempt by law or contract.
-
http://commonsensecanadian.ca/REPORTED_ELSEWHERE-detail/california-rejects-green-label-bcs-private-run-of-river/
-
Let's start with the headline:
"Risk to B.C. salmon 'minimal' from run-of-river projects
An independent review inconclusively finds the hydro projects will have no impact on river salmon"
The PSF reported that they found that the sites (26 out of 44 sites that provided data), appeared to have had minimally impact based on the data they did receive ("The foundation also found fault with the data it did get to see. The companies that collected it never subjected it to any impartial scrutiny. . . 'The lack of independent review and analysis is a serious deficiency in environmental oversight,' reads the foundation's report. 'Without this step, the public cannot be assured of responsible development'").
In other words, take their independent report with a grain of salt.
-
DR. Brian Riddell speaks on this topic:
http://www.psf.ca/newsandmedia/blog/psfinthenews/434-independent-review-potential-impacts-of-run-of-river-power-hydroprojects-on-salmonids