slipp shoreline care qep outreach meeting 23 november-2011
DESCRIPTION
A presentation given to QEPs at the SLIPP Shoreline Care Workshop on November 23, 2011. Topics include Shorelines, Shuswap Restoration, and RAR.TRANSCRIPT
Shuswap Lake Integrated Planning Process (SLIPP)
Shoreline Care Workshop
for Qualified Environmental
Professionals
November 23, 2011
22
Workshop Objectives
Building partnership with you to ensure a healthy Shuswap watershed
Share information on process for working near Shuswap Shorelines
Establish a common understanding of expectations when working near shorelines
33
Agenda
Shuswap Shoreline Information 15 minutes
Shoreline Management Guidelines 1 hour
Riparian Area Regulations 30 minutes
Update on Okanagan Protocol 10 minutes
Question and Answers 35 minutes
44
SLIPP Website: New Shoreline Page www.slippbc.com
Observed a shoreline
violation? Report it to the RAPP Line
Observed a shoreline
violation? Report it to the RAPP Line
55
The Importance of Shorelines
The shoreline areas of the Shuswap watershed are critical to:
– Sustainability and liveability of the region
– Economic opportunities
– Fish and wildlife populations
– Water quality for drinking and recreation
Shorelines are unique ecosystems that have developed over thousands of years
We all share the responsibility for keeping our shorelines healthy
66
SLIPP’s Strategic Approach to Shoreline Health
Enforcement & Restoration
Outreach and Education
Compliance Promotion/ Voluntary Restoration
SLIPP’s first priority is outreach and education, followed by compliance promotion and finally enforcement, when necessary
77
Shuswap Restoration Project
Strategic shoreline restoration is a key element of SLIPP’s Strategic Approach
What will it achieve?
– Restore shorelines
– Raise awareness and educate
– Deter future shoreline contraventions and promote voluntary compliance
Shoreline sites identified for restoration in 2012, based on:
– Impact on high-value habitats
– Trespass on Crown Land
– No work on private property
Aim for voluntary compliance; use enforcement tools as needed
2 restoration phases: Spring and Fall 2012
88
Shuswap Restorations
BEFORE
BEFORE
99
Shuswap Restorations
AFTER
AFTER
1010
Shuswap Restorations
BEFORE
BEFORE
1111
Shuswap Restorations
Achieved voluntary remediation of groomed beach, partially filled foreshore and cleared riparian area on Mara Lake
Achieved voluntary remediation of groomed beach, partially filled foreshore and cleared riparian area on Mara Lake
AFTER
AFTER
BEFORE
BEFORE
1212
Shuswap Restorations – Eagle River Floodplain
1313
Shuswap Restorations
•Guilty plea by Old Town Bay development
•Settlement of $375,000 for illegally altering fish habitat:
•$300,000 for restoration
•$5000 fine
•$70,000 to FBC for SLIPP
•Site preparation and fencing complete and planting will be completed in spring 2012
•Guilty plea by Old Town Bay development
•Settlement of $375,000 for illegally altering fish habitat:
•$300,000 for restoration
•$5000 fine
•$70,000 to FBC for SLIPP
•Site preparation and fencing complete and planting will be completed in spring 2012
RESULT
RESULT
1414
Shuswap Restorations
BEFORE
BEFORE
1515
Shuswap Restorations: Planned for Spring 2012
AFTER
AFTER
1616
Working Around Water in the Shuswap:An Overview for Environmental Professionals
Presented by:
Bruce Runciman
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
1717
Presentation Objectives
Describe the importance of shoreline areas to the Shuswap Lake system
Describe the expectations of SLIPP members for work in and near shorelines of the Shuswap Lake system
1818
What are shoreline areas?
Shoreline areas include:
• Foreshore areas between the high water mark and the edge of the littoral zone (approximated by the 6 m depth contour at low water)
• Riparian areas within 30 m of the high water mark
With rare exceptions, foreshore areas are Crown land and a public resource, not private property
Floodplain areas are important for water quality, fish and wildlife habitat and flood control
Shoreline areas are the most sensitive and heavily utilized part of the lake
1919
What makes for a healthy shoreline?
Features of Healthy, Sustainable Shorelines
• Functional riparian areas
• Functional wetland and floodplain areas
• Functional fish and wildlife habitats
• Safe drinking water intakes
• Effective waste and storm water management
versus
2020
What do fish and wildlife need?
Shoreline Fish and Wildlife Habitats• Spawning Areas
(both shore and stream)
• Juvenile Rearing /Food Supply Areas
• Migration Corridors• Nesting / Mating /
Wintering Areas• Clean, cool water• Functional,
interconnected riparian areas, wetlands, and floodplains
versus
2121
Development in Shoreline Areas
2222
Extent of Shoreline Development
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
200000
High Moderate Low None
Level of Impact
Sh
ore
Len
gth
(m
)
Shuswap Lake
Level of Impact km %
High 174 43
Moderate 71 17
Low 128 31
None 33 8
2323
Extent of Shoreline Development
Level of Impact km %
High 8.3 10
Moderate 4.8 5
Low 24.5 30
None 44.4 55
2424
Types of Shoreline Development
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000
Agriculture
Commercial
Conservation
Forestry
Institutional
Multi Family
Natural Area
Park
Recreation
Rural
Single Family
Urban Park
Transportation
InudustrialL
and
Use
Typ
e
Shorelength (m)
Natural Shoreline Disturbed Shoreline
Shuswap Lake
2525
Rate of Shoreline Development and Cumulative Effects
Rate of Change: 0.5 - 2.0% per year
Likely similar in other areas experiencing rapid high rates of development
May exceed capacity of fish species and populations to adapt, posing risk of significant habitat-related harm
Okanagan Lake
Residential Development – Shuswap Lake
DFO
Integrated LandManagement
Bureau - MFLNRO
Interior Health
Environmental Protection -
MFLNROWater Stewardship
- MFLNRO
Dept of Transportation – Marine Safety – Navigable Waters
Protection
Who’s Managing Shoreline Areas?
How Are They Doing It?
How Are They Perceived to be Doing It?
Fish & Wildlife - MFLNRO
Front Counter BC Environmental Stewardship -
MFLNRO
Ministry of Transportation
Dept of Transportation – Marine - Office
of Boating Safety
South Shuswap Parks Commission
TNRD
CSRD
NORD
Incorporated Areas
RCMP
Environment Canada
BC Parks
First Nations
Dept. of Aboriginal Affairs &
N. Development
2727
Shuswap Lake Integrated Planning Process
2828
SLIPP Foreshore Development Work Stream
Foreshore Inventory and Mapping, Aquatic Habitat Index and Shoreline Management Guidelines
• Support the SLIPP foreshore development goal of development that respects the environment as well as economic and social interests
• Support SLIPP foreshore development strategies of:•comprehensive foreshore area site sensitivity mapping•managing cross-agency development applications and lake issues•improving the development application review process•creating a model for assessing cumulative impact
• Integrate regulation and policy requirements for protection of fish habitat with best available habitat information
• Support the SLIPP foreshore development goal of development that respects the environment as well as economic and social interests
• Support SLIPP foreshore development strategies of:•comprehensive foreshore area site sensitivity mapping•managing cross-agency development applications and lake issues•improving the development application review process•creating a model for assessing cumulative impact
• Integrate regulation and policy requirements for protection of fish habitat with best available habitat information
2929
Planning a Project near Shuswap Shorelines?
versus
Key Steps to Follow:
• Contact your Local Government and Front Counter BC
• Consult a Qualified Environmental Professional
• Follow the Shoreline Management Guidelines
3030
Shoreline Management Process for BC Lakes
versus
Step 1Foreshore Inventory and Mapping: Provides a biophysical and habitat modification inventory of the shoreline
Step 2
Aquatic Habitat Index: Provides an environmental sensitivity analysis of the shoreline, using existing biological data (e.g., shore spawning locations) and the FIM database
Step 3Shoreline Management Guidelines: Provide design and assessment standards for development activities based on the level of risk they pose to natural shoreline features
3131
FIM and the AHI are a Spatial Inventory
versus
3232
Shoreline Management Guidelines
versus
What are they?
• Guidance to proponents, professionals, contractors, agencies and other stakeholders regarding design and assessment standards for development activities that may affect fish habitat
• A tool for inter-agency planning and streamlining of development applications
What are the benefits?
• Allow low risk development activities to proceed without fish habitat review provided best practices are applied.
• Allow moderate risk development activities to proceed without fish habitat review provided a qualified professional certifies no harm to fish habitat
• Provide a coherent and predictable process for planning and undertaking works that may affect fish habitat on the Shuswap Lake system
3333
Key Steps in Shoreline Management Guidelines
versus
Step 1Identify the “Aquatic Habitat Index” and any “Sensitive Site Types” for the property
Step 3
Step 2Identify the “Activity Risk Rating” for the proposed activity
Identify design, assessment and review process for the proposed activity
Step 4Follow process outlined through SMG. Questions? Ask FrontCounter BC or your QEP
3434
Shoreline Management Guidelines: Maps
versus
3535
Shoreline Management Guidelines: SWARM
Boat LaunchesConstruction of new hard surface boat launch or repair/upgrade of existing hard surface boat launch without land tenure
VH VH VH H H H
DocksDesign and Assessment Flow Chart for Private Moorage
on the System5
Water Withdrawal and UseWaterline - directional drilling
H H MDFO Pacific : Directional
Drilling2
Waterline - open excavation
VH VH VH H M L6
Activity
Activity Risk by Spawning Location and Rank1
Known Char or Sockeye Spawning
(9.6% of total shore length,
2.6% in Moderate and
Low ) 1
Very High(13% of total
shore length
High(34% of total shore length)
Moderate(38% of total
shore length)
Low(14% of total
shore length)
Very Low
(0.7% of total
shore length)
SWARM = Shuswap Watershed Activity Risk Matrix
3636
Shoreline Management Guidelines: SWARM
Low Risk Activities
Pose low risk of harm to fish habitat. Harm to fish habitat can usually be prevented if
experienced contractors complete works following endorsed best management practices.
Supervision of works by a qualified environmental professional is recommended to ensure harm to fish habitat does not occur.
DFO review is not required if works follow endorsed best management practices referenced in activity-specific footnotes to Table 1.
Project proponents are responsible for ensuring that they comply with fish habitat protection provisions of Fisheries Act. section 35(1) (see http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-14/index.html).
Notify DFO 10 working days before starting works by submission of a completed Project Review Application Form to the BC Interior South Referral Centre at [email protected], selecting “Notification to DFO” in (see http://dev-public.rhq.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/habitat/steps/praf/form-formulaire-eng.pdf). Include a cover letter describing how it was determined that works could proceed without DFO review, specifically referencing Table 1, as applicable.
Moderate Risk Activities Pose moderate risk of harm to fish habitat. Some works will require authorization under section 35(2) of the Fisheries Act to
legally proceed. Harm to fish or fish habitat can usually be prevented if appropriate relocation,
redesign and mitigation measures are implemented. Professional planning and assessment is required; costs to the proponent may be
high. Mitigation and compensation costs to the proponent may be high. DFO review is not required if a qualified environmental professional certifies
and documents that harm to fish habitat will not occur if works proceed as planned; notify DFO 10 working days before starting your work by submission of a completed Project Review Application Form to the BC Interior South Referral Centre at [email protected], selecting “Notification to DFO” in Box 1 (see http://dev-public.rhq.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/habitat/steps/praf/form-formulaire-eng.pdf) and including certification of no harm to fish habitat by a qualified environmental professional.
DFO review is required if a qualified environmental professional cannot certify and document that harm to fish habitat will not occur if works proceed as planned: submit a completed Project Review Application Form and Aquatic Effects Assessment to the BC Interior South Referral Centre at [email protected], selecting “Request for Project Review” or “Request for a Fisheries Act Authorization” in Box 1 (see http://dev-public.rhq.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/habitat/steps/praf/form-formulaire-eng.pdf).
3737
Shoreline Management Guidelines: SWARM
High Risk Activities
Pose high risk of harm to fish habitat. Many works will require authorization under section
35(2) of the Fisheries Act to legally proceed. Include significant challenges to prevention of harm
through relocation, redesign and mitigation measures or to compensation for fish habitat losses that may occur.
Professional planning and assessment is required; costs to the proponent may be high.
Mitigation and compensation costs to the proponent may be high.
DFO review is required: submit a completed Project Review Application Form and Aquatic Effects Assessment to the BC Interior South Referral Centre at [email protected], selecting “Request for Project Review” or “Request for a Fisheries Act Authorization” in Box 1 (see http://dev-public.rhq.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/habitat/steps/praf/form-formulaire-eng.pdf).
Very High Risk Activities
Pose very high risk of harm to fish habitat. Most works will require authorization under section 35(2) of the Fisheries Act
to legally proceed. Include significant challenges to prevention of harm through relocation,
redesign and mitigation measures or to compensation for fish habitat losses that may occur.
Professional planning and assessment is required; costs to the proponent may be high.
Mitigation and compensation costs to the proponent may be high. DFO review is required: submit a completed Project Review Application
Form and Aquatic Effects Assessment to the BC Interior South Referral Centre at [email protected], selecting “Request for Project Review” or “Request for a Fisheries Act Authorization” in Box 1 (see http://dev-public.rhq.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/habitat/steps/praf/form-formulaire-eng.pdf).
DFO may determine the risk of harm to fish habitat is unacceptable and not grant Fisheries Act, section 35(2) authorization.
3838
Shoreline Management Guidelines: Figure 1
versus
3939
Important Considerations
• Operational Statements and Best Management Practices rely on proven mitigative measures and/or professional oversight to prevent harm to fish habitat
• As an engineer or geoscientist, you are to ensure that your designs consider fish and fish habitat values at the work location. If in doubt, include a QEP on the project team
• As a QEP, you are expected to have working knowledge of fish and fish habitat values, environmental impact assessment standards and mitigation practices and to certify that proposed works will not cause harm to fish or fish habitat unless a Fisheries Act authorization will be sought
• Important Considerations
• Have you considered important fish and fish habitats identified in the FIM?
• Have you met minimum information standards for the various SLIPP agency’s notification, review or authorization?
4040
Example 1 – Open Excavation Waterlinein a Very Low Habitat Value Area
Subject Property
4141
Example 1 – Open Excavation Waterlinein a Very Low Habitat Value Area
Water Withdrawal and UseWaterline - directional drilling
H H MDFO Pacific : Directional
Drilling2
Waterline - open excavation
VH VH VH H M L6
Activity
Activity Risk by Spawning Location and Rank1
Known Char or Sockeye Spawning
(9.6% of total shore length,
2.6% in Moderate and
Low ) 1
Very High(13% of total
shore length
High(34% of total shore length)
Moderate(38% of total
shore length)
Low(14% of total
shore length)
Very Low
(0.7% of total
shore length)
6. DFO supports installation of waterlines by experienced contractors using open excavation (i.e. trenching) techniques in shoreline segments of Very Low AHI rank because harm to fish habitat can be avoided in these areas by following Operational Best Practices detailed in the BC Ministry of Environment document Best Management Practices for Installation and Maintenance of Water Line Intakes (see http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/BMPIntakes_WorkingDraft.pdf).
4242
Example 1 – Open Excavation Waterlinein a Very Low Habitat Value Area
4343
Example 2 – Joint-planted Rock Retaining Wallin a Moderate Habitat Value Area
Subject Property
4444
Example 2 – Joint-planted Rock Retaining Wallin a Moderate Habitat Value Area
Erosion Control and Foreshore Sediment Control Structures
New groyne construction or maintenance of existing groyne
VH VH VH VH H H
Erosion control (e.g. concrete, rip rap, vegetation, etc.)
Design and Assessment Flow Chart for Lakeshore Erosion Control on the System5
Activity
Activity Risk by Spawning Location and Rank1
Known Char or Sockeye Spawning
(9.6% of total shore length,
2.6% in Moderate and
Low ) 1
Very High(13% of total
shore length
High(34% of total shore length)
Moderate(38% of total
shore length)
Low(14% of total
shore length)
Very Low
(0.7% of total
shore length)
4545
Example 2 – Joint-planted Rock Retaining Wallin a Moderate Habitat Value Area
4646
Example 2 – Joint-planted Rock Retaining Wallin a Moderate Habitat Value Area
4747
Example 2 – Joint-planted Rock Retaining Wallin a Moderate Habitat Value Area
1 Indicators of lakeshore erosion include large areas of bare soil and steep, high banks at the high water mark (HWM), noticeable recession of the HWM over a period of time, leaning or downed trees with exposed roots at the HWM, large patches of muddy water at the lake margin during high water and large deposits of eroded soil on the lakeshore following high water.
2 Erosion-related risks include loss of property and damage or loss of nearshore structures.
3 Maintenance of an existing work is limited to replacement of less that one half of an existing erosion control structure on its existing foundation and must not include any lakeward extension of the existing structure or backfill.
4 On Shuswap Lake, the 1-in-5 year flood level has been calculated to correspond with an elevation of 348.7 m GSC. For Little Shuswap and Mara Lakes, the 1-in-5 year flood level has been extrapolated as 348.0 m GSC and 348.8 m GSC, respectively.
4848
Example 2 – Joint-planted Rock Retaining Wallin a Moderate Habitat Value Area
5 Many lakeshore erosion protection options are available, including planting of native trees and shrubs, planting of native trees and shrubs through a biodegradable erosion control blanket, planting of native trees and shrubs within the joints of a rock matrix and hard armouring techniques. Additional information is provided in the BC Ministry of Environment document Best Management Practices for Lakeshore Stabilization (see http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/BMPLakeshoreStabilization_WorkingDraft.pdf)
6 Applicable Operational Best Practices are detailed in the BC Ministry of Environment document Best Management Practices for Lakeshore Stabilization (see http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/BMPLakeshoreStabilization_WorkingDraft.pdf)
7 Known shore spawning locations are illustrated in Attachment I and on the Community Mapping Network (http://www.cmnbc.ca).
5 Many lakeshore erosion protection options are available, including planting of native trees and shrubs, planting of native trees and shrubs through a biodegradable erosion control blanket, planting of native trees and shrubs within the joints of a rock matrix and hard armouring techniques. Additional information is provided in the BC Ministry of Environment document Best Management Practices for Lakeshore Stabilization (see http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/BMPLakeshoreStabilization_WorkingDraft.pdf)
6 Applicable Operational Best Practices are detailed in the BC Ministry of Environment document Best Management Practices for Lakeshore Stabilization (see http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/BMPLakeshoreStabilization_WorkingDraft.pdf)
7 Known shore spawning locations are illustrated in Attachment I and on the Community Mapping Network (http://www.cmnbc.ca).
4949
Example 3 – Private Floating Dock Outside Mapped Sensitive Site Types
Subject Property
5050
Example 3 – Private Floating Dock Outside Mapped Sensitive Site Types
DocksDesign and Assessment Flow Chart for Private Moorage
on the System5
Activity
Activity Risk by Spawning Location and Rank1
Known Char or Sockeye Spawning
(9.6% of total shore length,
2.6% in Moderate and
Low ) 1
Very High(13% of total
shore length
High(34% of total shore length)
Moderate(38% of total
shore length)
Low(14% of total
shore length)
Very Low
(0.7% of total
shore length)
5151
Example 3 – Private Floating Dock Outside Mapped Sensitive Site Types
5252
Example 3 – Private Floating Dock Outside Mapped Sensitive Site Types
5353
Example 3 – Private Floating Dock Outside Mapped Sensitive Site Types
1 Sensitive site types include mapped: (a) shore spawning sites, (b) high-value rearing sites, (c) vegetated foreshore areas, and/or (d) stream deltas (see Attachment I or the Community Mapping Network (http://www.cmnbc.ca)).
Floating Dock:
Less than 24 square meters in total surface area.
Less than 3 meters wide.
Decking constructed or spaced to allow light penetration to foreshore areas under the dock.
Floats discontinuous and spaced at least 1-meter apart so at least one-third of the dock is free of floats.
Maintained in water depth of 1.5 meters or greater at all times.
If annually removed from the water, this must be completed without disturbance of the lake foreshore.
No permanent physical link to shore (e.g. piles or decks); retractable walkways acceptable.
Floating Dock:
Less than 24 square meters in total surface area.
Less than 3 meters wide.
Decking constructed or spaced to allow light penetration to foreshore areas under the dock.
Floats discontinuous and spaced at least 1-meter apart so at least one-third of the dock is free of floats.
Maintained in water depth of 1.5 meters or greater at all times.
If annually removed from the water, this must be completed without disturbance of the lake foreshore.
No permanent physical link to shore (e.g. piles or decks); retractable walkways acceptable.
5454
Example 4 – Strata Marina in a High Habitat Value Area
5555
Example 4 – Strata Marina in a High Habitat Value Area
MarinasDesign and Assessment Flow Chart for Commercial and
Strata Moorage on the Shuswap Lake System5
Activity
Activity Risk by Spawning Location and Rank1
Known Char or Sockeye Spawning
(9.6% of total shore length,
2.6% in Moderate and
Low ) 1
Very High(13% of total
shore length
High(34% of total shore length)
Moderate(38% of total
shore length)
Low(14% of total
shore length)
Very Low
(0.7% of total
shore length)
5656
Example 4 – Strata Marina in a High Habitat Value Area
5757
Example 4 – Strata Marina in a High Habitat Value Area
5858
Example 4 – Strata Marina in a High Habitat Value Area
1 Wave attenuation structures include standalone breakwaters as well as over-wide outer docks and other structures intended to modify wave conditions in the moorage area and/or near-shore environment.
2 Sensitive site types include mapped: (a) shore spawning sites, (b) high-value rearing sites, (c) vegetated foreshore areas, and/or (d) stream deltas; see Attachment I or the Community Mapping Network (http://www.cmnbc.ca).
1 Wave attenuation structures include standalone breakwaters as well as over-wide outer docks and other structures intended to modify wave conditions in the moorage area and/or near-shore environment.
2 Sensitive site types include mapped: (a) shore spawning sites, (b) high-value rearing sites, (c) vegetated foreshore areas, and/or (d) stream deltas; see Attachment I or the Community Mapping Network (http://www.cmnbc.ca).
3 Draft Integrated Land Management Bureau Thompson Okanagan Strata - Commercial Moorage Guidelines include the following walkout/dock dimensions and shoreline proximity standards:
o Floating portions of the dock must be located offshore of the 6 meter depth contour at mean annual low water.o Access to floating portions of the dock must be achieved by a single elevated fixed deck and ramp that must not exceed 1.5 meters in width. At a
minimum, the base of the elevated fixed deck must be located at least 1 meter above the lake 1-in 5 year flood level. The remainder of the dock surface must not exceed 3 meters in width for any other portion of the dock.
o Supported dock structures must use widely spaced wooden or steel piles that are made of non-toxic materials (solid core docks will not be allowed). Do not use pressure treated wood.
3 Draft Integrated Land Management Bureau Thompson Okanagan Strata - Commercial Moorage Guidelines include the following walkout/dock dimensions and shoreline proximity standards:
o Floating portions of the dock must be located offshore of the 6 meter depth contour at mean annual low water.o Access to floating portions of the dock must be achieved by a single elevated fixed deck and ramp that must not exceed 1.5 meters in width. At a
minimum, the base of the elevated fixed deck must be located at least 1 meter above the lake 1-in 5 year flood level. The remainder of the dock surface must not exceed 3 meters in width for any other portion of the dock.
o Supported dock structures must use widely spaced wooden or steel piles that are made of non-toxic materials (solid core docks will not be allowed). Do not use pressure treated wood.
5959
Example 4 – Strata Marina in a High Habitat Value Area
5 DFO supports proponents receiving term and tenure-type considerations from ILMB where a fish or fish habitat review is not required for proposed works or where an applicant has received a letter of advice from DFO related to proposed moorage works. To ensure protection of fish habitat and meet present-day best practice standards, all new, renewal and replacement tenures for commercial and strata moorages will be subject to this flow chart process.
5 DFO supports proponents receiving term and tenure-type considerations from ILMB where a fish or fish habitat review is not required for proposed works or where an applicant has received a letter of advice from DFO related to proposed moorage works. To ensure protection of fish habitat and meet present-day best practice standards, all new, renewal and replacement tenures for commercial and strata moorages will be subject to this flow chart process.
4 Follow Operational Best Practices detailed in the BC Ministry of Environment document “Best Management Practices for Small Boat Moorage on Lakes” (see http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/BMPSmallBoatMoorage_WorkingDraft.pdf)
4 Follow Operational Best Practices detailed in the BC Ministry of Environment document “Best Management Practices for Small Boat Moorage on Lakes” (see http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/bmp/BMPSmallBoatMoorage_WorkingDraft.pdf)
6060
Example 4 – Strata Marina in a High Habitat Value Area
6161
Shoreline Management Guidelines
versus
Where can I get more information?
• SLIPP: www.slippbc.com
• Request information from Front Counter BC
Riparian Areas Regulation
ObjectiveObjective
RAR processRAR process Yanke decisionYanke decision Next stepsNext steps
What is the RAR?What is the RAR?
a regulation enacted through Section 12 of the a regulation enacted through Section 12 of the Fish Protection ActFish Protection Act
an approach to protecting fish habitat during an approach to protecting fish habitat during residential, commercial, and industrial residential, commercial, and industrial developmentdevelopment
a results based regulation that focuses on a results based regulation that focuses on prescribed setbacks from stream banks prescribed setbacks from stream banks
When does the RAR apply?When does the RAR apply?
The Riparian Areas Regulation applies to riparian The Riparian Areas Regulation applies to riparian fish habitat, and only in association with new fish habitat, and only in association with new residential, commercial and industrial residential, commercial and industrial development on land under local government development on land under local government jurisdictionjurisdiction
ProcessProcessDevelopment Proposed in Development Proposed in Riparian Assessment AreaRiparian Assessment Area
Local Government bylaws Local Government bylaws exceed Riparian Areas exceed Riparian Areas
Regulation?Regulation?
HADD avoided by HADD avoided by assessment resultsassessment results
Local Local Government Government
May May Authorize Authorize
Development Development Subject to Subject to ConditionsConditions
Consider Consider Development Development Opportunities Opportunities
Outside of Outside of Riparian Riparian
Assessment Assessment AreaArea
Site Assessment by Qualified Environmental Professional
no
yes
yesno
Yanke DecisionYanke Decision
Salmon Arm residential property affected Salmon Arm residential property affected by RARby RAR
Owner challenged that RAR didn’t applyOwner challenged that RAR didn’t apply Lower court ruled in favour of property Lower court ruled in favour of property
ownerowner Decision overturned by appeal, however Decision overturned by appeal, however
the Appeal Court decision has implications the Appeal Court decision has implications for RAR implementationfor RAR implementation
Ruling affects:Ruling affects:
Variances, bending and flexingVariances, bending and flexing HADD determinationHADD determination DFO authorityDFO authority
VariancesVariances
““There is no provision allowing any There is no provision allowing any governmental body to vary the extent of governmental body to vary the extent of the streamside protection and the streamside protection and enhancement area.” enhancement area.”
HADD determinationHADD determination
... (LG approval) will depend on whether it is anticipated ... (LG approval) will depend on whether it is anticipated that it will cause a “harmful alteration, disruption or that it will cause a “harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of natural features, functions and conditions destruction of natural features, functions and conditions that support fish life processes in the riparian that support fish life processes in the riparian assessment area” (commonly referred to as a “HADD”). assessment area” (commonly referred to as a “HADD”).
development can occur within a streamside protection development can occur within a streamside protection and enhancement area if the assessment report certifies and enhancement area if the assessment report certifies that the development will not result in a HADDthat the development will not result in a HADD
DFO authorityDFO authority
.... “there is nothing in s. 4 of the .... “there is nothing in s. 4 of the Riparian Areas Riparian Areas Regulation that allows the Department of Fisheries and Regulation that allows the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to veto a development proposal that is before a Oceans to veto a development proposal that is before a local government where the qualified local government where the qualified environmental environmental professional has given an opinion that the proposed professional has given an opinion that the proposed development will not result in a HADD”.development will not result in a HADD”.
““the City could authorize the construction in the the City could authorize the construction in the circumstances of this case without the approval of the circumstances of this case without the approval of the
Department of Fisheries and OceansDepartment of Fisheries and Oceans””
SummarySummary
No provision for variance from legislated No provision for variance from legislated requirementrequirement
QEP determines HADDQEP determines HADD Within RAR model, DFO authority is Within RAR model, DFO authority is
limitedlimited Provided the reporting requirements are Provided the reporting requirements are
met, LG approval process is independent met, LG approval process is independent of senior governmentof senior government
Now what?Now what?
Province is evaluating implications and will Province is evaluating implications and will pursue appropriate legislative changes. In pursue appropriate legislative changes. In the meantime, RAR still applies. the meantime, RAR still applies.
The intent of RAR still applies. Where The intent of RAR still applies. Where setbacks deviate from methodology, setbacks deviate from methodology, recommend that QEPs seek LOA from recommend that QEPs seek LOA from DFO.DFO.
Courts will decide due diligenceCourts will decide due diligence
7474
Okanagan Protocol Update
Jason Ladyman, BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations
7575
Questions and Answers