Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Old Black Dog]

Had a chat with people 'in the know' a few days ago. I'm not too sure how pertinent this information is but yes, fish are in the gravel and there will definitely be dead fish. The BC government has an R.P. Bio on site monitoring the operation. The BC government regulations supersede DFO so this is entirely a BC government matter. The BC government could shut the whole thing down if they wanted to without any problems...

You are kidding, this is all about $ and the Liberals will rape and pillage with no cares about fish.

[chris gadsden]

Rumour has it a tug flipped over at the site on the weekend, trying to confirm this, as well someone trying to find out through WCB.

[chris gadsden]

I just got information from Frank that a tug, the "Gravity Puller: did indeed capsize at the Spring Bar gravel excavation site on the Fraser River. Information is sketchy but it was reported it was seen drifting away upside down with the crew hanging on the side.

I Imagine a bit of an oil spill would have occurred as well

I believe the local press was working on the story late today so we should get more details in the next day or so.

[chris gadsden]

Rumour has it a tug flipped over at the site on the weekend, trying to confirm this, as well someone trying to find out through WCB.

Just got word one of the tugs pictured in the pictures above did tip over a couple of days ago. I started a new thread on this with more information.

[river walker]

yep well , that's karma workin.... digging up redds !! that will learn ya!!

[chris gadsden]

 This really hurts me to have to type this and I feel sorry for the FOC staff that most likely got political pressue from some level to issue it.

It is in an article in today's Chilliwack Progress as a further permit now has been given to the gravel excavation project. This permit now allows authorization for works or undertakings causing the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat and for destruction of fish.

Besides the article I have a copy of the 12 page permit issued a few days ago that I was sent yesterday and it just makes me feel sicker than I am with my cold when I read it.

Why in hell are they going to this area to take out gravel if this is going to happen?

I guess if there is a positive to this it will bring it to the attention of many, throughout Canada what is happening here on the West Coast with our precious fish stocks. Precious to us that really care it appears.

The Globe and Mail and other medias are on this also.

A sad day indeed, here in the WACK.

[bentrod]

It's been nice knowing you all.  Looks like I'll be booking my trips in a few years elsewhere due to the lack of returning fish

[Rodney]

Don't be so disappointed bentrod, maybe our only option is to come down to fish with you in a few years from now.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/t...s/13965072.html

Gravel permit leaves fish at risk: biologist
By Robert Freeman - Chilliwack Progress - January 22, 2008

A permit approved by federal fisheries for the largest in-river gravel removal operation in B.C. history opens the door to a fish-kill similar to one that destroyed millions of pink salmon hatchlings at a smaller site in 2006, says John Werring, a biologist with the David Suzuki Foundation.

He said the permit basically authorizes unlimited harmful alteration of fish habitat, and the construction of a causeway to the gravel removal site at Spring Bar in the Fraser River, if a bridge can’t be built. It was a causeway blocking water to nesting sites near Big Bar that killed pink salmon hatchlings in 2006.

“It’s the first time I’ve ever seen one of these,” Werring said about the Spring Bar permit. “I really don’t know what is going on here.”

Authorization permits normally place limits on how much harm can be done to fish habitat.

Werring also said the planned bridge to the Spring Bar site was also approved without proper engineering.

“We can’t for the life of us see how DFO approved such a crossing,” he said. “We have grave concerns” not just for fish habitat but for the truck drivers.

Federal fisheries area director Mel Kotyk did not return phone calls from the Progress yesterday.

A “river watch” launched by environmental groups is keeping an eye on the Spring Bar site, but they admit there is little they can do now to stop the removal short of a court injunction. But no one seems willing at this stage to risk a failed injunction, which would result in liability for the cost of holding up the multi-million dollar project.

Frank Kwak, president of the Fraser Valley Salmon Society, said the Spring Bar operation is located in the main stem of the river where the water is moving “significantly faster” than the site at Big Bar.

It was safety concerns for truck drivers at Big Bar that led to the decision in 2006 to scrap plans for a bridge and build a causeway, which led to the “dewatering” of nesting sites.

“It’s another Big Bar situation all over again,” Kwak said.

Kwak also said he was told by a senior fisheries official that pilings for a smaller bridge at a removal site near Harrison Bar was not proceeding because “they were not sure of the impact of driving the piles” on nearby fish nesting sites.

“They were convinced at Harrison Bar it would disturb a lot of (nesting sites),” he said. “If there’s shock impact there ... there’s an equivalent impact of shocks up at Spring Bar, but at Spring Bar they’ve decided to let it go anyway.”

Kwak and Werring both continue to doubt the flood protection benefits of the Spring Bar removal, despite statements by provincial and Seabird Island Band officials.

“The environmental community is not out to stop gravel removal in the Fraser River, if it has flood protection values,” Werring said.

According to the BC River Forecast Centre, the outlook is “favourable” that last year’s flood conditions in the Fraser River won’t be repeated this year. The snowpack in the Upper Fraser is 97 per cent of normal for January 1, “well below” last year’s level of 128 per cent. Low elevation snow is generally near or slightly above normal.

rfreeman@theprogress.com

[Terry Bodman]

This whole issue is scary indeed. When I sift through all the information I have received on this controversial subject, two statements from a researcher stand out.

1 " ... there are no demonstrated significant benefits to flood protection or erosion contrary to the agencies' satements."

2. " This constitutes one the single largest destruction of this type of fish habiat in mondern history in British Columbia."

In my opinion, these statements say it all.

[bentrod]

You all have been more than hospitable whenever I'm up there fishing.  I'd be glad to return the favor when your fishery goes bad.   

[chris gadsden]

WCB investigating.

[chris gadsden]

Apparently Work Safe BC has shut the site down earlier in the week. Not sure when they will start it up again. Article in today's Chilliwack Progress re this incident

[chris gadsden]

Another article in today's Chillwack Progress as DFO explains the reason for issuing the latest permit.

Check it out on their web page.

I understand Global TV is working on a story as well as another by the Globe and Mail.

A letter has been also sent this week to the PM as well as many other Federal and Provincial Politicans outlining their concern for this project.

The weather may be cold out but this gravel excavation project is getting hotter each day. I have never seen so many groups working together on this. Not sure what the outcome will be but stay tunned.

[Rodney]

http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/theprogress/news/14373257.html

DFO defends gravel removal at Spring Bar
By Robert Freeman - Chilliwack Progress - January 25, 2008

There is “absolutely” no contradiction in federal fisheries’ mandate to protect fish and a permit that allows removal of 400,000 cubic metres of gravel from Spring Bar in the Fraser River, says Mel Kotyk, DFO’s area director.

Earlier this week, opponents of the Spring Bar removal said they were shocked by the lack of limits that would normally be placed in a permit authorizing habitat damage.

However, Kotyk said the permit is the same as any where harmful alteration of habitat is expected, but the usual compensation requirement was not included.

Normally, in a housing subdivision for example, compensation would be required in a permit authorizing harmful habitat alteration, but “how do you compensate for gravel on the bottom of the Fraser River?” he said. “It’s not a simple task.”

Environmental groups and local First Nations are being asked for their ideas on compensation, but no decision has been made yet, he said.

The opponents are also concerned the Spring Bar removal is going to be a repeat of the removal at Big Bar in 2006 where a causeway built to the site led to the “dewatering” death of millions of pink salmon eggs.

But Kotyk said he is confident the design of the Spring Bar site by a registered professional, and the full-time monitoring of the removal operation will prevent the mistakes made in 2006.

“There’s a whole series of lessons learned at Big Bar that are being applied here,” he says. “I do not think what happened at Big Bar is going to be repeated.”

Where the causeway at Big Bar had only two culverts to allow water to flow through to nesting sites, the two causeways at Spring Bar will have a total 14 culverts, he said. The causeways are being built on each side of a 280-foot bridge to the site. The bridge is supported by pilings that will allow the river to flow freely underneath.

There are also “very few” salmon nesting spots at the removal site itself, though more are located upstream and downstream, Kotyk said.

“That’s why this site was chosen, quite frankly,” he said.

A key change in the way gravel removal is now being done has allowed more time for planning, Kotyk said.

Instead of waiting to see if a contractor steps forward to bid on a removal project, the B.C. government now acts as the proponent, removing the uncertainty, he said.

The provincial government is also providing “stable funding” for removal projects using the $10-million flood mitigation fund announced last year.

The government is paying the $564,000 cost of the bridge at Spring Bar, for example, and it is dropping the royalties the contractor would normally have to pay.

“This really does allow us to plan and be more strategic in how we do gravel removal,” Kotyk said.

He hopes the changes will open the door to more discussion by local and senior governments, First Nations and environmental groups about long-term removal plans.

“Let’s put our heads together and see what we can do that is more long-term, instead of doing this bar by bar,” he said.

[bentrod]

It's pretty simple to me.  They need to quit spending the money not on trying to change mother nature, but start buying the people out that get flooded year after year.  They also need to exercise some political will and not allow future development to take place on flood plains.  Take a hint from New Orleans and do what's right, not just politically acceptable.