SALMON STUDIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE POTENTIAL KEMANO II HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT

VOLUME 7

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACT OF THE KEMANO II HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ON BRITISH COLUMBIA'S FISHERIES RESOURCES

FEBRUARY, 1979 VOLUME 7

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACT OF THE KEMANO II HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ON BRITISH COLUMBIA'S FISHERIES RESOURCES

/--·--...... \ BY \-}-

WILLIAM F. SINCLAIR r~

:;:...;.

-·f"\ < ' r,j r)

D-- r _J FISHERIES AND MARINE SERVICE ci) t DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT I :::+~ VANCOUVER, B.C. t l \/! I 1

FEBRUARY , 1979

I Although the major part of the funding for these studies was provided by the British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority,

the findings and opinions expressed within the report are s~lely those of the author agency. * It should be recognized that these reported findings

are based upon field work completed in 1975, with the

final draft effectively finished in 1976. As with

any dynamic research area, neither information nor

theoretical application has stood still in the interim

Consequently, the reader seeking to apply findings and

conclusions to contemporary problems should consult

author agencies to determine whether updating may be

indicated. PREFACE

Although many will feel that the values presented in this volume underestimate the true worth of the fisheries resource, others will believe that the values are overstated, It is reasonable to ex­ pect that everyone would have their own conception of fishery values. However, my sympathies lie with those who believe the fishery values to be somewhat understated. Throughout the entire presentation, read­ ers are cautioned repeatedly about the conservative nature of the esti­ mates. This assessment, like other assessments of this type, is lim­ ited by both the factual information that is available and the general state of the art. These shortcomings are most likely to result in the underestimation of fishery values. However, no attempt is made to com­ pensate for this by deliberately overstating the values which are cal­ culated using standard economic techniques. Aside from the moral issues involved in this type of arbitrary correction, this practice would not be in the best interests of British Columbians nor the many agencies which have contributed to this presentation, Nonetheless, given the fact that this analysis is based on what is known rather than what is suspected - and on existing methodologies - it is my belief that the values presented in this volume provide a reasonably accurate estimate of the worth of the fishery resource.

I should like first of all to acknowledge with appreciation the general contribution of William D. Masse, Robert W. Morley, Robert A. Robertson and William J. Schouwenburg of the Fisheries and Marine Service. Their assistance and cooperation extends beyond those debts of gratitude associated with specific contributions to this volume. William Masse, Robert Morley and Robert Robertson critically reviewed most of the text. Similarly, Dixon MacKinnon and J. R. MacLeod of the Fisheries and Marine Service reviewed specific portions of the text.

I am indebted to Verne W. Loose and Jon O'Riordan of British Columbia's Environmental Land Use Secretariat who provided comment on (ii)

the sport fish evaluation procedure utilized in this study. I also wish to acknowledge Jack L. Knetsch who provided criticism on the mail questionnaire and the surveys designed specifically to evaluate the sport fisheries. Informal communications with Robert K. Davis of Johns Hopkins University provided me with a better understanding of the "bid­ ding technique" which is described in Appendix VII.

I am indebted also to Colin Campbell, Bruce Hawkes and Scott Gain of the Provincial Parks Branch, Victoria who provided a consider­ able amount of very valuable information on provincial park attendance in northern British Columbia. Ron Thomas and Conrad Thomas of the Pro­ vincial Fish and Wildlife Branch also provided an assistance for which I am indebted.

The study owes much to the British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority who funded most of the field investigations carried out dur­ ing the last two years. Peter Kadak and Nigel Grant were particularly helpful and provided valuable guidance, I also wish to acknowledge the assistance received from David Reid and Rick Higginson of this same organization.

I am grateful also to the staff of the Fish and Wildlife Branch and of the Fisheries and Marine Service for the cooperation and kind courtesies extended to me and my staff while in the field. Part­ icularly, I am indebted to Roger Goodlad, Bob Laidlaw, Jeff Chislett of the Fish and Wildlife Branch, John Tuyttens of the Fisheries and Marine Service, Prince George, Bill Chadyk and Mike Whately of the Fish and Wildlife Branch, Terrace and Smithers, Ed Christiansen, Tom Moojalsky and Bud Bogart of the Fisheries and Marine Service, Kitimat, Prince Rupert and Terrace. Al Groat and Don Meyers of the Fisheries and Marine Service, Smithers, were also very helpful.

It is largely the other members of the Kemano II environ­ mental study team to whom I owe special thanks. This group, col- (iii)

lectively and individually, provided me with very valuable technical information which will ultimately determine the usefulness and the accuracy of this report. I am particularly indebted to R, D. Ferguson of British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority, Fred Andrews and Per Saxvik of the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission and Jim Walker of the Provincial Fish and Wildlife Branch. The Fisheries and Marine Service members of the study team included Bruce Shepherd, Ray Finnegan, Mike Flynn and Tom Cleugh.

I should like to mention the great assistance rendered to me by those who carried out the telephone, shoreline and mail sur­ veys which were used to gather information for this report. This in­ cludes Brent Horsburgh, Victor Barwin, John Boland, Peter Stent, Neil Huckvale, Ray Fung, Bob McGuire and Ljuba Pavlovic. Kon Johansen and Sharon Henderson provided valuable technical assistance.

Many organizations have contributed to the successful comple­ tion of this volume. Space does not permit acknowledgement of all those who contributed. Nonetheless, it would be remiss on my part not to mention the tremendous amount of cooperation which I received from Bri­ tish Columbia's news media. Those to whom I am indebted for helpful cooperation include: CFPR Prince Rupert, the Prince Rupert Daily News, CFTK-TV Terrace and the Terrace News Advertiser and Herald, the Kitimat Northern Sentinel and CKTK Kitimat, CFBV and the Smithers Interior News, Lake District News in Burns Lake, the Vanderhoof Nechako Chronicle, CJCI and CKPG-TV in Prince George and the Prince George Citizen, the CBC Vancouver, and the Vancouver Province and Sun.

Needless to say, while assistance has been rendered by numerous individuals and organizations, the responsibility for the material, ass- essment and conclusions remains exclusively mine.

William F. Sinclair, Chief of Economics and Sociology, Northern Operations Branch July, 1976 (iv)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 1

Chapter One The Economic and Social Importance of 8 Commercial Fisheries That Are Attribu­ table to Waterways Affected by the Kemano II Hydroelectric Development Project

Chapter Two The Economic and Social Importance of 25 the Salmon and Steelhead Attributable to Waterways Affected by the Kemano II Hydroelectric Development Project to the Indian People of British Columbia

Chapter Three The Economic Value of Sport Fishing 49 Activity Attributable to Waterways Affected by the Kemano II Hydroelec­ tric Development Project

Chapter Four The Economic and Social Impact of the 79 Kemano II Power Development Project on British Columbia's Commercial, Indian Food and Recreational Fisheries

Conclusion 94

Appendix I Economic Statement on Fisheries Affec­ 99 ted by the Power Development - by William F. Sinclair, November, 1971

Appendix II Progress on Research Into the Social 103 and Economic Impact of the Kemano Phase II Power Development on Northern Fishery Resources, January 1975 (v)

Appendix III Summary of Survey Methods and Results 108

Appendix IV Long-Term Trends in Skeena Chinook 148 and Sockeye Escapements

Appendix V Indian Band, On Reserve and Off Reserve 153 Indian Population According to River System and Sub-Area Classification

Appendix VI The Criteria for Selection of An Appro­ 157 priate Evaluation Technique with Speci­ fic Reference to the Evaluation Require­ ments of the Sport Fisheries Affected by Kemano Phase II

Appendix VII Surveys, Information and Calculations 178 Used to Establish the Value of the Affected Area's Resident Sport Fishery

Appendix VII I Surveys, Information and Calculations 224 Used to Establish the Value of the Affected Area's Non-Resident Sport Fishery

Bibliography 228 (vi)

LIST OF TABLES

Chapter One

Table 1:1 Estimated Average Annual Commercial 12 Catch of Salmon and Steelhead Attri­ butable to the Waterways Affected by Kemano Phase II

Table 1:2 Landed Price per Pound, Wholesale Price 18 per Pound, and Potential Net Economic Value per Pound of Salmon and Steelhead Trout Caught in British Columbia's Com­ mercial Fishing Industry

Table 1:3 Average Annual Potential Net Economic 20 Yield from Salmon and Steelhead Commer­ cial Catch Attributable to the Waterways Affected. by the Kemano Phase II Develop­ ment Project

Table 1:4 Discounted Present Value of the Commer­ 21 cial Catch Attributable to Waterways Affected by Kemano Phase II Development Project

Chapter Two

Table 2:1 Total Indian Off and On Reserve Popula­ 30 tion and Number of Families Living in Sub-Areas Affected by the Kemano II Deve­ lopment

Table 2:2 Total Annual Individual and Family Parti­ 31 cipation in Indian Food Fisheries Affected by the Kemano II Development by Sub-Area Classification

Table 2:3 Average Annual Fraser and Skeena River 33 Indian Food Fish Catch of Salmon and Steel­ head Attributable to Waterways Affected by the Kemano II Development by Sub-Area Classification (vii)

Table 2:4 Average Landed Value of the Indian Food 38 Fish Catch of Salmon and Steelhead Attributable to Waterways Affected by the Kemano Phase II Development Project According to Sub-Area Classification

Table 2:5 Present Discounted Value of Indian Food 39 Catch of Salmon and Steelhead Attribu­ table to Kemano II Affected Waterways

Table 2:6 Contribution of Annual Subsistence 42 Fishing Income Generated in Affected Food Fisheries to Total Income From Other Sources by Sub-Area Classification - 1970

Table 2:7 Average Fishing Income per Participant 44 and Per Participating Household Genera­ ted in the Affected Food Fisheries and Additional Percentage Contribution of Fishing Income to Income from All Sources by Sub-Area Classification - 1970

Chapter 3

Table 3:1 Population, Number of Fishing Licence 52 Holders and Number of Resident Sport Fishermen Located in Affected Area - 1975

Table 3:2 Average Number and Percentage of Resident 53 Sport Fishing Days per year which Take Place on Waterways Affected by Kemano II and Other Waterways in Affected Area

Table 3:3 Percentage Distribution of Resident Sport 54 Fishermen According to Their First, Second, Third and Fourth Preferred Species of Fish

Table 3:4 Percent Distribution of Resident Sport 55 Fishermen According to the Type of Fishing They Prefer

Table 3:5 Number and Percentage of Resident Sport 57 Fishermen According to Their Favourite Fishing Location and Whether it is Affected by Kemano Phase II Development Project (viii)

Table 3:6 Percentage of Resident Sport Fishermen 58 and Percentage of the Affected Area's Population in each Age Category

Table 3:7 Percentage Distribution of Resident 59 Sport Fishermen and All Residents of the Affected Area According to the Head-of-the-Household's Occupation

Table 3:8 Percentage Distribution of Resident 61 Sport Fishermen According to the Acti­ vity They Would Substitute if No Fishing Were Available

Table 3:9 The Value of the Annual Stream of Bene­ 62 fits Accruing to Resident Sport Fisher­ men From Fishing in Waterways Affected by Kemano II: The Present Discounted Value of the Sport Fisheries Directly Affected by the Development

Table 3:10 Average Annual Number of Non-Resident 64 Canadian and Non-Canadian Fishing Party Visits to the Affected Area, Number of Persons per Party, Number of Fishermen per Party and Total Number of Non-Resi­ dent Fishermen Visiting the Affected Area Each Year

Table 3: 11 Average Number of Days of Sport Fishing 65 Activity Which Take Place Each Year in the Affected Area Which are Attributable to Non-Resident Canadian and Non-Canadian Fishermen According to Affected and Non­ Affected Waterways

Table 3:12 Sport Fishing's Importance in Determi­ 66 ning Whether or Not Non-Resident Fisher­ men Visit the Affected Area

Table 3:13 Non-Resident Canadian and Non-Canadian 67 Visiting Fishing Parties According to the Main Reason for Visiting the Affected Area - 1972 to 1975

Table 3:14 Sport Fishing Preferences Among Non-Resi­ 68 dent Canadians and Non-Canadian Fishermen Visiting Affected Area (ix)

Appendix I II

Table III:l On-Site Survey of Sport Fishing Parties 110 Number of Interviews by Residence Cate­ gory 1972, 1973 and 1974

Table III:2 On-Site Survey of Sport Fishing Parties 112 Surveyed Resident Anglers as a Percen­ tage of Total Resident Anglers in the Affected Area 1972, 1973 and 1974

Table III:3 On-Site Survey of Sport Fishing Parties 113 Surveyed Non-Resident Party Visits as a Percentage of Total Non-Resident Party Visits to the Affected Area - Average 1972' 1973' 1974

Table III:4 Number of Campsite Party Interviews 116 Completed During Campsite Interviews According to Residence Category 1972 - 1975

Table I II: 5 Number of Business Establishments Sur­ 118 veyed Each Year 1972 to 1975

Table III:6 Number and Percent Distribution of Busi­ 119 ness Establishments Surveyed According to Type of Business

Table III: 7 Total Number of Persons and Percentage 122 of Population Surveyed in Telephone Sur­ veys of Households 1973 and 1974

Table I II: 8 Results of 1972 Mail Survey of Kemano 124 Households

Table I II: 9 Total Number of Persons and Percentage 125 of Population Surveyed in the Mail Sur­ vey of Kemano Households, 1972

Appendix IV

Table IV:l Non-Babine Total Sockeye Escapements 150

Table IV:2 Non-Babine Sockeye Escapements to 150 Undeveloped Watersheds (x)

Table IV:3 Sockeye Escapements to Nanika 150

Table IV:4 Chinook Escapements to Babine, Bear, 151 Bulkley, Johnson, Kitwanga, Kloiya, Lakelse, Morice, Nitchyeskwa and Stevens Systems

Table IV:5 Chinook Escapements to Undeveloped 151 Watersheds

Appendix VI

Table VI:l Percent Distribution of Resident 170 Fishing Parties According to the Main Reason for Their Trip

Table VI: 2 Percent Distribution of Resident 171 Fishing Parties According to the Activities Other Than Fishing in Which Members of Their Party Par­ ticipated During the Trip

Table VI:3 Percent Distribution of Sport Fisher­ 173 men Who Live in Selected Communities in the Study Area According to the Fish Species They Most Prefer to Catch

Table VI :4 Percent Distribution of Sport Fisher­ 174 men Who Live in Selected Communities in the Study Area According to Their Most Preferred Type of Fishing

Appendix VII

Table VII:l Results of 1975 Mail Survey of Sport 181 Fishermen Residing in the Affected Area

Table VII :2 Results of 1975 Telephone Survey of 183 Sport Fishermen Residing in the Af­ fected Area

Table VII:3 Resident Sport Fishermen Willingness­ 186 to-pay Per Day of Sport Fishing on the Waterways Affected by Kemano II According to Waterway INTRODUCTION

The Kemano area was first investigated for its hydroelectric power potential prior to 1939. It was recognized, at that time, that the area did have good hydroelectric power potential. However, it was not until 1948 when the Aluminum Company of Canada was encouraged by the provincial government to establish an aluminum smelter mill at Kitimat, that serious plans for tapping the hydroelectric power potential of the area were first initiated. The provincial government and Alcan, under the authority of the Industrial Development Act, entered into an agree­ ment whereby Alcan was given the right to store and divert water subject to th~ conditions laid out in a water licence that was issued on Decem- ber 29, 1950. Alcan undertook the project in two stages (see Map 1). The first stage, to be built immediately, involved the construction of Kenney Dam on the Nechako River above the Grand Canyon. This created a 340 square mile reservoir with a live storage of approximately four mil­ lion acre feet. Water from the reservoir was diverted to the Kemano power plant through.a fourteen mile tunnel. A spillway was constructed on the reservoir adjacent to Skins Lake diverting the excess flow into Cheslatta Lake and the lower Nechako River. This phase of the project was completed in 1957. The power plant has been expanded over the years to a present installed capacity of approximately 812,000 kw.

The second stage of the project, as envisioned at that time, involved the expansion of the power plant by fully utilizing the re­ mainder of the Nechako Reservoir and a diversion of the Nanika-Kidprice system into Tahtsa Lake. This was to be accomplished by means of a tun­ nel. from Nanika Lake to Tahtsa Lake. This second stage of the project remained dormant, at least in the minds of potential developers, for a number of years until 1970, when the provincial government became in­ terested in proceeding with the second phase of the program. However, IO

MAP I #EA AND WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO lI POWER DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS - 3 -

the proposal now contained developments beyond those covered in the original water licence. In addition to the Nanika-Kidprice diversion, consideration was given to the diversion of the upper Dean River and the pumping of Morice Lake. The possible addition of the Dean River and the Morice Lake developments were given serious consideration in 1 a report by the British Columbia Energy Board published in 1972.

The purpose of this presentation is to provide an economic and social assessment of the impact of the Kemano Phase II power de- 2 velopment project on British Columbia's fishery resources. The three major user components are included in the assessment and each is ex­ amined from a different perspective, Those species which contribute to the commercial fisheries are examined with a view to determining their contribution to the economic and social well-being of British Columbians and all other Canadians. The Indian food fisheries are evaluated on the basis of their contribution to the people who directly benefit from these fisheries. The economic and social value of the sport fisheries is determined by measuring the contribution that these fisheries make to people living in the area where the negative impacts of the development are likely to be greatest. A considerable amount of information is presented on the different user groups and on the eval­ uation techniques that are utilized. This is done in the belief that many of the benefits generated in the Indian food fishery and in the sport fishery are of an intangible nature and are not readily suited to precise economic calculation, Nonetheless, standard economic

1 Montreal Engineering Company Ltd., Provincial Power Study, British Columbia Energy Board, Vancouver, 1972, vol. 6, Appendix 7, pp. 187-196.

2 The terms "economic" and "social" are used separately and together throughout this presentation to describe the values being assessed, These terms are not used with any specific distinction of meaning in mind. But rather, they are used interchangeably in a manner which is meant to em­ phasize the broad range of human values which are implicitly and expli­ citly included (although imperfectly) in this assessment. For a better understanding of the scope and limitations of economic studies of natural resources and the environment, see: Robert Dorfman and Nancy S. Dorfman, ed., Economics of the Environment, W.W. Norton and Company Inc., New York, 1972, pp. xi-xxxii. - 4 -

techniques are employed throughout this presentation and supporting doc­ umentation is presented whenever choices are made among standard meth­ odologies. Since the Kemano Phase II power development program contains a number of different project proposals, each feasible development option is identified and subjected to separate analysis.

Even though considerable care is taken to present a clear and concise picture of the economic and social consequences of the Kemano Phase II project on the fisheries of British Columbia, this statement - like all other analyses of this type - will have some limitations. For example, it is impossible to predict precisely what will be the effect of fish losses on other fish stocks in waterways not directly affected by this project. The dissipation of any fish habitat necessarily has some indirect effects on other fisheries. A decline in a particular river's fish stocks likely will encourage commercial fishermen, Indian food fishermen and sport fishermen to seek other fishing alternatives. Increased pressure on the remaining fish stocks will probably adversely affect these fisheries. It should be recognized that this assessment cannot possibly take into account all the indirect or obscure disadvan­ tages which may occur because of the Kemano II project. For this reason, a judicially fair economic and social assessment is more likely to under­ estimate rather than overestimate the true economic value of the fish losses.

The first three chapters are used to assess the total econo­ mic value of fish produced in waterways that are directly affected by the Kemano II project. In particular, Chapter One is used to measure the economic value of each waterway's contribution to British Columbia's commercial fishing industry. Chapter Two is used to assess the social and economic value of the waterways' contribution to the province's In­ dian food fishery. Chapter Three is devoted to assessing the economic and social value of the threatened sport fishery. Although the affected waterways contain many different species of fish, only salmon and steel- - 5 -

head make any contribution to the commercial fishing industry. All fish species, including non-anadromous species, make some contribution to the area's attractiveness as a sport fishery. The economic value of these noncommercial fish species is both directly and indirectly included in the assessment of the sport fishery.

Chapter Four is used to identify that portion of the total value of each of the three fishery components that is likely to be lost because of the Kemano II project. Estimates on the economic and social consequences of the physical disruptions are presented for each of Kemano's most feasible development options. Each feasible development option is assigned two economic cost estimates. These are: (1) the economic and social losses that will be imposed on British Columbians and other Canadians as a result of physical harm to the fishery when viewed from an optimistic perspective and (2) the economic and social consequences which stem from physical harm to the fishery when viewed from a pessimistic point of view. It is expected that the actual value of the fisheries losses will fall somewhere between these two estimates.

An important consideration when assessing the social or eco­ nomic value of natural resource endowments is the choice of an appro­ priate discount rate. The evaluation of any publicly owned resource, the maintenance of which retards the growth of investment, must consi­ der the social opportunity cost of this foregone investment. On the one hand, a low discount rate encourages highly durable government in­ vestments, the bulk of whose benefits will be available in the distant future. On the other hand, a high discount rate encourages the existing generation to use up wastefully the resources which perhaps cannot be replaced. It is generally agreed that the correct discount rate should reflect how society wants to allocate its resources between existing and future generations, between the public and private sectors. The criti­ cal nature of this parameter suggests that it should not be chosen arbi­ trarily or capriciously. A considerable amount of research has been directed at establishing a systematic method of selecting the correct - 6 -

discount rate for evaluating publicly owned resources. The overall re­ sult has been a general consensus that the correct discount rate should be a weighted average of rates of return that the resources otherwise . 3 would provide should they be utilized in the private sector. It has been established that this rate of return in Canada (the social oppor­ tunity cost of government borrowing) was approximately 9.5 percent for 4 the years 1965 to 1969, Since the real rate of return in the private market may vary considerably over time, all streams of benefits in this presentation are discounted at rates of 7, 9 and 11 percent over the period 1975 to 2024. The value loss estimates presented in Chapter Four are discounted at 9 percent per annum over this same 50 year period. It is assumed in this presentation that the single best estimate of the value of a stream of benefits over time is provided using the 9 percent discount rate.

All of the analysis carried out in this presentation is based on the biological and engineering assessments presented in other volumes of this report. In some cases, some of the biological and engineering information is interpreted in a manner which is more readily suited to the requirements of the social-economic assessment. Whenever this oc­ curs these interpretations are always carried out in conjunction with those responsible for the original analysis.

It should be also noted that all of the data contained in this report are taken from the records of various agencies who have partici­ pated in this study and from a series of campsite, business, telephone and mail surveys conducted during 1972, 1973, 1974 and 1975. Preliminary

3 William J. Baumol, "on the Discount Rate for Public Projects," Public Expenditures and Policy Analysis, ed. Robert H. Haveman and Julius Margolis, Markham Publishing Co., Chicago, 1970, p. 274.

4 Glenn P. Jenkins, "The Measurement of Rates of Return in Taxation for Private Capital in Canada," Benefit Cost in Policy Analysis, ed., A. c. Harburger and others, Aldeen publications, Chicago, 1972, p, 226. - 7 -

reports outlining the direction of the original investigations and the progress of field work are presented in Appendices I and II. Appendix III is used to present a description of the survey methods and their results.

I

-,I ~ I -I CHAPTER ONE

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPORTANCE OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES THAT ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

The purpose of this chapter is to provide an assessment of the economic and social importance of the fish production potential of that portion of each waterway that is affected by the Kemano II hydroelectric power project. The intention is to identify and evaluate only that portion of each of the river systems' total commercial fish production which is endangered because of the project. It should be cautioned, however, that the information presented in this chapter should not be interpreted as an assessment of what necessarily will be lost, but rather to identify what is at stake,

A Physical and Geographical Perspective

The wide geographical expanse of the development project to­ gether with the tremendous distance travelled by salmon and steelhead fish which are produced in the affected waterways complicates the econ­ omic and social analysis to a considerable extent. The various diver­ sions, spillways and pumping schemes that are proposed within the over­ all project cover an area of approximately 40,000 square miles. The project directly affects four major systems - the Fraser, Skeena, Dean and Kemano Rivers. These rivers have a total drainage area in excess of 100,000 square miles. More important, from the point of view of this investigation, these rivers together and separately make a major contri­ bution to Canada's commercial fishing industry. The four rivers together account for roughly 40 percent of British Columbia's total salmon and steelhead commercial catch. Salmon and steelhead from these rivers are caught over the entire coastal area of British Columbia, off the coast of Alaska, Washington and Oregon, Salmon and steelhead from the Fraser, Skeena, Dean and Kemano Rivers are caught in practically every major - 9 -

1 commercial fishery off the coast of British Columbia.

Despite the widespread influence on the affected river sys­ tems' fish runs, the impact of Kemano II on the fisheries resource is limited. On one hand, it is limited to the effect that the project will have on the fish production capacity of lakes and waterways direct- 2 ly included in the project. On the other hand, it is limited to only that portion of the affected waterways' total fish production which is harvested or utilized in the commercial fishery. Thus the physical di­ mensions of this segment of the analysis are confined to those tributar­ ies which are directly affected by the project and to those fish species which are commercially harvested. Very roughly, this would include the I natural salmon and steelhead production of all the lakes and tributaries 3 i above Prince George on the Nechako River (Fraser River system). It would include the salmon and steelhead production of the lakes, streams and lesser waterways above Hazelton on the Bulkley River (Skeena River I system) and the salmon and steelhead production of the Dean and Kemano Rivers (see Map 1).

I 1 Salmon and steelhead trout accounted for over 78 percent of the total wholesale value of the fish caught and processed in British Col­ I umbia during the period 1969-1975.

2 The fish production capacity referred to here is the natural rather than the artificial fish production capacity of a waterway. This an­ alysis is not meant, nor should it be interpreted, to include the arti­ ficial or man-made production capability of a waterway. While it is recognised that most rivers probably do have an artificial production potential which is greater than its natural production capacity, it is unreasonable to assume that the artificial capacity can be attained without some minimal amount of investment in incubation boxes, spawn­ ing channels or hatcheries, A river can be developed by man to produce many different types of benefits (farm irrigation, hydroelectric power, etc.). Fish production development is only one of a number of differ­ ent man-made developments which will visibly increase the benefits gen­ erated by a waterway.

3 It should be noted that steelhead trout are usually caught inciden­ tally to salmon. In other words, steelhead trout stocks normally are not intentionally caught by commercial fishermen. - 10 -

The Contribution of the Affected Waterways to the Commercial Fishing Industry

The long term fish production capacity of a waterway deter­ mines its value to the commercial fishing industry. Thus there is an obvious need to determine what the long term natural production capac­ ity is when assessing the value of a river to the commercial fishing industry. In practice however, the long term production capacity is extremely difficult to measure. There are several reasons for this. The most obvious is that during any given time, a waterway's contribu­ tion to the commercial fishing industry may be less than what can be sustained in future. Cyclical variations in salmon and steelhead runs as well as natural changes to the environment contribute considerably to this problem. The problem is further compounded by the activities of the forest products industries, agriculture, food and hydroelectric projects and population growth. Productivity levels which were reached, or even sustained, in the past are likely to be misleading or even ir- 4 relevant. Consequently, it is commonplace when assessing the economic worth of a waterway to assume that existing production levels provide an accurate indication of existing production capacity. In the absence of other evidence, this is reasonable and is the approach used in this assessment. However, there are two situations where it is believed that existing production does not accurately reflect true productive capacity. The Morice and Nanika Rivers are thought to have a productive capability greater than is reflected in existing production levels. The production

4 The average annual commercial catch of sockeye salmon attributable to the Nadina, Stellako and Stuart Rivers over the period 1952 to 1962, inclusive, was about 989,000 pieces. The average sockeye salmon catch that was attributable to these same rivers over the period 1962 to 1972, inclusive was approximately 562,000 pieces, This is a decline in the overall average, between the two periods, of slightly over 43 percent. This suggests that the Nadina, Stellako and Stuart Rivers may not be capable of maintaining the same production levels they have in the past. Interestingly, this production decline occurred in the years following the development of the Kenney Dam on the Nechako River. Another event which may have helped cause this decline was the filling of the Nechako Reservoir and the subsequent release of large water flows through Skins Spillway in 1957, - 11 -

estimates used in the presentation are adjusted to more accurately re­ 5 flect the true productive capabilities of these two rivers. The soc­ keye production of the Nanika River is adjusted from 6,200 to 15,600 and the chinook production on the Morice River was revised from 42,300 to 53,300.

The estimated average annual production of salmon and steel­ head attributable to the waterways affected by Kemano II is presented in Table 1:1. According to the information presented in this table, the waterways affected by the Kemano II project produce an average of 1,098,300 pieces of salmon and steelhead that are harvested by west coast commercial fishermen each year. Of the four main rivers identi­ fied in the table, the Fraser River is the largest single contributor to the commercial fishery. Fraser River tributaries produce 667,800 pieces of sockeye salmon which are caught by the commercial fishermen and are affected by the Kemano II project. Affected Skeena River trib­ utaries produce 97,800 pieces of salmon. More than half of the fish which are influenced by the developments on the Skeena River are chinook and coho salmon, The Kemano River annually produces an average of 213,400 pink and 63,100 pieces of chum salmon that are influenced by the project. All five species of salmon, and steelhead, are affected by the Kemano development on the Dean River.

Another important consideration when determining what portion of the affected waterways' catch should be included in the assessment is the international nature of the west coast commercial fishing industry Approximately 40 percent of the total Fraser River salmon run, slightly over 10 percent of the total Skeena River salmon run and roughly 8 per­ cent of the combined Kemano and Dean Rivers salmon runs are caught by 6 United States commercial fishermen. A considerable amount of the total

5 A discussion justifying this position is presented in Appendix IV.

6 United States commercial catches of Canadian steelhead trout are not included in these estimates. TABLE 1: 1

ESTIMATED AVERAGE ANNUAL COMMERCIAL CATCH OF SALMON AND STEELHEAD ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO PHASE II (in pieces of' fish)

1 3 Fraser River System Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook Steelhead All Species

Nechako River 4,300 4,300 Nadina River 58,200 58,200 Stellako River 261,200 261,200 Stuart River 348,400 348,400

TOTAL FRASER AFFECTED 667,800 4,300 672,100

2 Skeena River System 4 ·Morice River 9,400 2,000 53,300 2,300 67,000 Morice Lake 700 700 4 Nanika River 15,600 700 1,200 17,500 Bulkley River 8,400 800 3,400 12,600

TOTAL SKEENA AFFECTED 16,300 18,500 2,800 57,900 2,300 97,800

2 Kemano River 200 16,500 213' 400 63,100 7,200 300,400

2 Dean River 1,400 9,600 8,700 3,100 4,200 1,000 28,000 --- TOTAL ALL WATERWAYS 685,700 44,600 224,900 66,200 69,300 3,300 1,098,300 ---

1 All Fraser River sockeye salmon catch figures are provided by the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission and averaged from 1960 to 1972. The commercial catch of Nechako River chinook salmon was calculated from the total catch of the Fraser River system averaged 1965 to 1974. The Nechako River chinook figures are based on the present artificial water flow regime regulated by Kenney Dam. 2 All Skeena River, Kemano River and Dean River salmon catches were calculated using Fisheries• and Marine Service commercial catch statistics averaged over the period 1964 to 1974. 3 All steelhead figures were based on British Columbia Department of Recreation and Conservation estimates contained in the reports: T. R. Andrews and H. A. McSheffrey, Commercial Interception of Steelhead Trout Stocks in British Columbia - A Review of Available Information, Marine Resources Research, Department of Recreation and Conservation, Victoria, B. C., November 1975; J. W. Legget and W. T. Westover, Survey of the 1974 Dean River Steelhead Fishery, B. C. Fish and Wildlife Branch, December 1975; Dennis Hemus, Dean River Summer Steelhead - Observations on Life History, Population and the Fishery in 1973", (unpublished report). 4 Based on Fisheries and Marine Service biological staff estimates of the sustained productive carrying capacity of the waterway (see Appendix III). - 13 -

commercial catch, generated by these rivers, is taken by residents of the United States rather than Canadians. However, it does not follow that because non-Canadians benefit directly from the fish production of these rivers, that the fish production capacities of these water­ ways are less valuable to Canadians. Canadian commercial fishermen also capture salmon and steelhead fish species that are produced in rivers located in the United States. Both the United States and Can- ada recognise that they are intercepting the other's salmon and steel­ head. Thus, both countries recognise they are benefitting from salmon produced in the other nation's waterways. The prevailing situation, from a purely economic perspective, may be thought of as an informal trade relationship in which the terms of trade have not been formally 7 established. Therefore, Table 1:1 includes all of the salmon and steel- head production attributable to the affected waterways regardless of 8 which nation is actually harvesting the fish.

The Net Economic Value of the Salmon and Steelhead Production Attribu- table to the Affected Waterways

A considerable amount has been written on the economic rent that would accrue to owners of the fishery resource (the Canadian pub­ lic) if the resource was managed in a manner which did not dissipate net economic rent through imprecise management techniques or excessive

7 Negotiations are currently underway between Canada and the United States to establish a formal agreement on a mutually satisfactory ar­ rangement for allocating salmon catches between the two countries.

8 A treaty between the United States and Canada was ratified in 1937 which established the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission. This treaty only pertains to a small portion of the total amount of sal­ mon interception between the two countries. It deals only with sockeye and pink salmon produced in the Fraser River system that are caught by commercial fishermen in "convention waters". - 14 -

9 inputs of labour and capital. It is for example, generally understood that in a commercial fishery operated under open access conditions (any­ body who wants to fish can fish) there is a tendency to dissipate eco- nomic rents through the creation of excess capacity. More and more man­ power and equipment will be committed to catching the same amount of fish. Fishermen, on average, will earn incomes just sufficient to keep them in the fishery. Providing they have mobility, their fishing incomes should be equal to the amount they would earn in other occupations requiring similar skills. If the fishermen's mobility is limited, they probably will on average, earn less fishing than they would in other occupations requiring comparable skills. Under the restricted access conditions, which currently prevail in British Columbia, the economic performance of the fishery is somewhat less clear. The tendency of the fishery to dissipate net economic rent through the creation of excess capacity may 10 be somewhat less pronounced, but the total economic rents generated by the fishery are more greatly dependent upon the fishery manager's ability to attain optimal factor combinations and maintain rational ex­ ploitation rates over time. In practice, the manager's ability to ensure positive economic rents (or even a satisfactory return to labour and capital) is severely constrained by the biological nature of the fishery and by the fishing patterns of the fleet. Therefore, regardless of whether a fishery is operated under open or restricted access conditions, the actual net economic rent is likely to be less than the potential economic rent that could be generated within the fishery.

Since the amount of labour and capital currently used to har-

9 H. Scott Gordon, "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery", Journal of Political Economy, April 1954, vol, 62, pp. 124- 142. James A. Crutchfield and Giulio Pontecorvo, The Pacific Salmon Fisheries: A Study of Irrational Conservation, Resources for the Future Inc., Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1969,

10 This has not been demonstrated in British Columbia's salmon fishing industry even though there has been a licence limitation program on com­ mercial fishing vessels since 1968. - 15 -

vest existing stocks is excessive, it is frequently argued that the rent generated by the west coast commercial fishery could be increased con­ siderably by merely reducing the number of vessels and persons employed in the industry. But in reality there will always be a considerable dif­ ference between the actual harvest costs and the most efficient harvest costs given the constraints under which the fishery is managed. Tradition­ ally, commercial fishing has played a special role in the lives of many Canadians living in the coastal areas of the country. It has provided jobs for persons who live in remote or isolated communities where the knowledge or opportunity for alternative employment is extremely lim- ll I ited. Commercial fishing provides job opportunities for specific segments of society which do not readily assimilate with the mainstream I 12 I i of Canadian life. The Fisheries and Marine Service, on behalf of the l people of Canada, has chosen to forego the total rents available in ex­ change for certain social benefits, such as providing employment for un­ I skilled individuals, keeping families off welfare and maintaining a way ~ of life for specific segments of Canada's population. i ! i I Standard economic procedure suggests that proper economic evaluation of the fish produced in waterways affected by the Kemano II I ll William F. Sinclair, The Importance of the Commercial Fishing In­ dustry to Selected Remote Coastal Communities of British Columbia, De­ I partment of the Environment, Pacific Region, Fisheries and Marine Ser­ vice, pp. 25-45. William F. Sinclair and John P. Boland, A socio-Econ­ I omic Survey of Commercial Fishermen Living in the Northern Regions of British Columbia 1970, Department of the Environment, Pacific Region, I Fisheries and Marine Service, Northern Operations Branch, Economics and Sociology Unit, NOB/ECON 3-73, June 1973, p. 11. W. Alan Wilson, The Socio-Economic Background of Commercial Fishing in British Columbia, Re­ -1 port No. 1, Department of the Environment, Pacific Region, Fisheries and i Marine Service, August 1971, p. 26, 12 Michael Hunter, "Indian Participation and Performance in the Fish­ 11 I ery 1969-1971 , Department of the Environment, Pacific Region, Fisher­ ies and Marine Service, April 1973, M. J. Friedlaender, Economic Status of Native Indians in British Columbia Fisheries 1964-1973, Technical Report Series PAC/T-75-25, Fisheries Operations Branch, Pacific Region, 1975. - 16 -

project requires the calculation of total net economic returns at both the primary (fish catching) and secondary (fish processing) levels of production. However, excessive labour and capital inputs and the ten­ dency of the government to either implicitly or .explicitly sacrifice economic efficiency for social welfare considerations imply that, even in an industry with the potential of Canada's west coast salmon indus­ try, a simple comparison between gross receipts and total costs will underestimate the true value of these fishery resources to society. Thus it is customary, when measuring the economic value of a commercial fishery, to discount the values of future net yields which could be pro­ duced under present technical knowledge and not those which result from a system which guarantees that costs will always rise to eliminate posi­ tive returns. In what follows, potential net yield rather than actual net yield is used to determine the value of the commercial fishery. The potential net yield is, in effect, the gross value of the catch minus the costs which would be incurred if the most realistically efficient methods of harvesting or processing were utilized.

On surface, the calculation of potential net economic yield appears a relatively simple matter. In practice, however, such calcula­ tions are extremely difficult. The definition of the most realistically efficient method of harvesting or processing the catch always varies with the specifics of the analysis. In this study, for example, the af­ fected waterways support many different races or stocks of fish that spawn in several major lake systems, and a large number of minor ones. Each species of fish has its own migration pattern which together deter­ mines variations in the size and timing of the runs within their respec­ tive river systems. The overall result is a discernable harvesting pat­ tern over British Columbia's entire coast which is heavily influenced by the timing of the salmonid runs. These variations of timing, of pas­ sing through the fishery, will alter the composition, size and gear requirements of the commercial fishing fleet. They also control or lim­ it the processing ability, marketing capability and managerial effect­ iveness of both industry and agencies responsible for maintaining the - 17 -

fishery resource. The dissipation or destruction of only a small part of the fish producing capabilities of the affected waterways, will not necessarily lower (and may even increase) the amount of labour and capi­ tal required to harvest the remaining salmonid stocks. If the commer­ cial fishing operations that are directly dependent upon the affected fish stocks were to discontinue, the only savings to society would be the annual operating costs that are directly attributable to that por­ tion of the stocks which are destroyed.

Several studies have estimated the potential economic yield produced in the various segments of the commercial west coast salmon 13 fishing industry under the circumstances described above. These stud- ies have indicated that the potential net yield to fishermen is between 75 and 90 percent of the total landed value. In this presentation it is assumed that the potential net economic yield at the primary level is 85 percent of the landed value. Further, the minimum costs associated with processing the affected salmonid stocks (all fixed costs are assumed to be sunk costs) are 37 percent of the difference between the landed and the wholesale values. The calculations used to derive the potential net economic yield per pound of salmon and steelhead from both the primary and secondary phases of the west coast commercial fishing industry are presented in Table 1:2. The information presented in Table 1:2 shows that the potential net economic yield ranges from a high of $1.14 per pound for sockeye to a low of 74 cents per pound for pink salmon.

The calculated average annual potential economic yield from the commercial catch of salmon and steelhead trout that are attributable

13 Donald H. Fry, Jr., "Potential Profits in the California Salmon Fishery", California Fish and Game, vol. 48, No. 4, October 1962, pp. 256-266. James A. Crutchfield, TT\Taluation of Fishery Resources", Land Economics, May 1962, vol. 38, pp. 145-154. J. A. Richards, "An Economic Evaluation of Columbia River Anadromous Fish Programs", Ph.D. Thesis, Oregon State University, June 1968. James A. Crutchfield and Giulio Pontecorvo, The Pacific Salmon Fisheries: A Study of Irrational Conser­ ~~tion, Resources for the Future Inc., Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1969. TABLE 1:2

LANDED PRICE PER POUND, WHOLESALE PRICE PER POUND, AND POTENTIAL NET ECONOMIC VALUE PER POUND OF SALMON AND STEELHEAD TROUT CAUGHT IN BRITISH COLUMBIA'S COMMERCIAL FISHING INDUSTRY

Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook Steelhead . 1 Land e d Prices (per pound) $ .67 $ .77 $ .32 $ .60 $ .88 $ .60

Average Percent Landed to Wholesale Value2 44.93 59.13 31.03 47.73 68.63 54.83

Estimated Wholesale Prices (per pound) $1.49 $1.30 $1.02 $1.27 $1.28 $1.10

Potential Net Economic Values3 (per pound) $1.14 $1.05 $ .74 $ .98 $1.07 $ .87

1 Based on marketing information gathered and published by the Fisheries and Marine Service, Vancouver, B. C. 2 Percent landed to wholesale value averaged over a ten year period (1964-73). 3 Net Economic Values are the total value added (gross selling price less cost of production) at both the primary and secondary production levels. Bonuses and final net settlements are in­ cluded in the primary selling values. Sources: Food Prices Review Board, Fish and Fish Products, June 1975. Annual Statistical Review of Canadian Fisheries, Intelligence Services Division, Marketing Services Branch, Fisheries and Marine Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, 1969 to 1974. - 19 -

to the waterways affected by the Kemano II project is presented in Table 1:3. According to the information presented in Table 1:3P the total annual net economic yield produced in the commercial fishing industry by the affected waterways is $7,851,000, Consistent with the information presented previously, of the four major rivers identified in the table, the Fraser River is the largest single economic contributor to the com­ mercial fishery. Fraser River sockeye and Skeena River chinook generate the largest potential economic yield. Chum, pink and coho salmon all produce a substantial economic yield. Steelhead trout are relatively unimportant, economically, to the commercial fishery.

It is now possible to estimate the economic value of this stream of benefits to the people of British Columbia and Canada. Table 1:4 shows the discounted present value of the commercial catch attribu­ table to waterways affected by the Kemano II power development project at discount rates of 7, 9 and 11 percent per annum to the year 2024. In an effort to take account of increases in population, rising per capita incomes and increases in the demand for protein products, it is assumed in these calculations that the real value of salmon and steel.head trout will increase at 4 percent per annum to the year 2000 and at 2 percent 14 per annum thereafter. The discounted value of the salmon and steel.- head trout produced by the affected waterways and caught by the commercial fishing industry ranges from a low of $116,856,000 at the 11 percent dis­ count rate to a high of $200,055,000 at the 7 percent discount rate. The single best estimated value of the annual stream of benefits generated by the salmonids caught in the commercial fishery and produced in the affected

14 The Canadian Consumer Price Index shows that for the period 1961 to 1974 the values of meat, poultry and fish rose at an average annual rate of 1.5 percent relative to the price of all other items. Fish rose in value an average of 5.0 percent annually relative to all items and can­ ned salmon increased an average of 3,4 percent annually relative to all other items. The corresponding figures for the period 1971 to 1975 show that fish rose at 7.8 percent and that canned salmon rose 6.3 percent per annum relative to the price of all other items. See Statistics Canada, ~onsumer Prices an~_!'.rice_~~dexe~, October-December 1975, Ottawa, February 1976 and Statistics Canada, Prices and Price Indexes, January 1975, Ottawa, June 1975. TABLE 1:3

1 AVERAGE ANNUAL POTENTIAL NET ECONOMIC YIELD FROM SALMON AND STEELHEAD COMMERCIAL CATCH ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO PHASE II DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (rounded to the nearest thousand dollars)

Fraser River System Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook Steelhead All Species $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Nechako River 65,000 65,000 Nadina River 438,000 438,000 Stellako River 1,964,000 1,964,000 Stuart River 2,620,000 2,620,000 TOTAL FRASER AFFECTED $5,022,000 $65,000 $5,087,000

Skeena River System

Morice River 69,000 6,000 666,000 22,000 763,000 Morice Lake 5,000 5,000 Nanika River 114,000 5,000 15,000 134,000 Bulkley River 62,000 2,000 43,000 107,000 TOTAL SKEENA AFFECTED $119,000 $136,000 $8,000 $724,000 $22,000 $1,009,000

Kemano River $2,000 $107 ,000 $521,000 $859,000 $68,000 $1,557,000

Dean River $9,000 $60,000 $21,000 $45,000 $53,000 $10,000 $198,000

TOTAL ALL WATERWAYS $5,152,000 $303,000 $550,000 $904,000 $910,000 $32,000 $7,851,000

1 The dollar yield estimates provided in this table are calculated using the average annual catch information presented in Table 1:1 and the potential net economic value estimates presented in Table 1:2. Total catch in pounds was calculated by multiplying total number of pieces caught by the average weight of the fish caught for each of the appropriate statistical areas. - 21 -

TABLE 1 :4

DISCOUNTED PRESENT VALUE OF THE COMMERCIAL CATCH ATTRIBUTABLE

TO WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO PHASE II DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (rounded to the nearest $1,000)

Potential Annual Discount Present Discounted Net Economic Value Rate Value

$7,851,000 73 $200,055,000

$7,851,000 93 $148,843,000

$7,851,000 113 $116,856,000 - 22 -

waterways is $148,843,000.

Other Value Considerations

What cannot be taken into account or included in the calcula­ tions presented above, is the influence that the fish produced in the affected waterways have on the existence and stability of the west coast commercial fishing industry as a whole. The coastal commercial fisheries are made up of many different races or stocks of fish that migrate over thousands of miles and spawn in multitudes of rivers, lakes and streams throughout British Columbia. These stocks or races of fish together form the nucleus upon which a very large commercial fishing industry has been developed. Because of the interaction between different races of salmonids and between the exploitation pattern of fishermen, each race or stock is biologically and economically interrelated. The loss of a single salmon or steelhead producing waterway leads to a chain of events the ultimate result of which cannot be readily determined. In fact, it is practically impossible to ascertain with any degree of con­ fidence what effect the destruction of any single stock or race of fish will have on the industry. More important, when attempting to assess economic value, it is virtually impossible to predict what effect the loss of certain races of salmonids will have on particular coastal fisheries. The loss of a race or run of fish might lead to permanent and irrevers­ ible damage to the total industry. This is not to suggest that the whole industry rests on some undefined and delicate ecological balance, but rather to emphasize that each new encroachment on a salmon or steelhead producing waterway usually leads to some damage to an existing fishery. Multiplied over the entire coast, these many little impingements ulti­ mately will affect the long range health of the industry. The water- ways that are of concern in this study are not small or minor fish pro­ ducers. Therefore, the value of their production to the west coast com­ mercial fishing industry cannot be fully explained in terms of what con­ sumers are willing to pay for this production in the marketplace. If the runs which originate from these waterways are eliminated or seriously - 23 -

15 impaired, major coastal fisheries may become economically destroyed. This will work to the serious disadvantage of certain segments of society which are heavily dependent on the existence of these fisheries for their livelihood. Residents of remote coastal communities or isolated Indian villages may be severely disadvantaged because of the destruction of par­ ticular coastal fisheries. More specifically in the case of Kemano II, there is reason to suspect that injury to the west coast commercial fish­ ery because of this development will seriously harm the long range sta­ bility of the industry and have a disproportionally bad effect on the welfare of communities or villages located in the central coastal areas 16 of the province.

Conclusion

The information presented in this chapter has revealed that the various diversions, spillways and pumping schemes that are encom­ passed within the overall Kemano II hydroelectric power proposal cover an area of approximately 40,000 square miles. The project directly affects the Fraser, Skeena, Dean and Kemano Rivers. These rivers have a total drainage area in excess of 100,000 square miles and account for roughly 40 percent of British Columbia's total salmon and steelhead com­ mercial catch. Salmon and steelhead which are dependent on the Fraser, Skeena, Dean and Kemano Rivers are caught in practically every major commercial fishery off the coast of British Columbia, Fish from these

15 A fishery is economically destroyed when fishermen recognise that their returns from participating in a specific fishery consistently fail to cover the cost of participating in that fishery. When this occurs, rational fishermen will no longer harvest these discrete stocks and society will not benefit from their existence. It should be stressed that this de­ finition depends on the fishermen recognising that the fishery is no longer profitable. It is possible for fishermen to operate at a loss, because they do not recognise the economic unhealthiness of their position.

16 William F. Sinclair and John P. Boland, ~Socio-Economic Survey of Commercial Fishermen Living in the Northern Regions of British Columbia 1970, Department of the Environment, Pacific Region, Fisheries and Mar­ ine Service, Northern Operations Branch, Economics and Sociology Unit, June 1973, pp. 48-49. - 24 -

rivers are also caught off the coast of Alaska, Washington and Oregon.

The estimated average annual commercial production of salmon and steelhead attributable to the waterways affected by Kemano II amounted to 1,098,300 pieces. Of the four rivers affected by the hydroelectric project, the Fraser River is the largest single contributor to the com­ mercial fishery. Fraser River tributaries produce 667,800 pieces of sockeye salmon which are annually caught by commercial fishermen. The Skeena River produces, on average, 97,800 pieces which are caught in the commercial fishery each year. More than half of the Skeena produc­ tion which is affected by the project are chinook and coho salmon. The Kemano and Dean Rivers together, produce well in excess of 300,000 pieces of salmon for the commercial fishing industry each year.

The potential net economic yield from the commercial catch of salmon and steelhead trout that are attributable to the waterways af­ fected by the Kemano II project is $7,851,000, The present discounted value of this stream of benefits over the period 1975 to 2024 ranges from a low of $116,856,000 to a high of $200,055,000. The single best estimated value of this annual stream of benefits discounted at 9 per­ cent per annum to the year 2024 is $148,843,000. This value does not, however, take into account the influence that the fish produced in the affected waterways will have on the existence and stability of the com­ mercial fishing industry as a whole. There is reason to suspect that if the fish produced in the affected waterways were to be destroyed it would seriously harm the long range stability of the industry and impair the welfare of residents of communities or villages located along the coast of British Columbia. CHAPTER TWO

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPORTANCE OF THE SALMON AND STEELHEAD ATTRIBUTABLE TO WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT TO THE INDIAN PEOPLE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

The previous chapter was used to examine the economic and so­ cial significance of the salmon and steelhead produced in waterways af­ fected by the Kemano II project and harvested in British Columbia's I commercial fisheries. Only very limited reference was made to the spe­ cial role that salmon and steelhead play in the lives of those who live in areas adjacent to large salmonid producing waterways and to people living in the coastal areas of the province. The purpose of this chap­ I ter is to identify the economic and social value of salmonid stocks produced in the affected waterways to those who benefit from the Indian food fisheries of British Columbia. Special care is taken to show the overall impact of this fish production on the Indian people of the pro­ vince, To this end, some discussion on the historical and cultural as­ pects of the fishery is undertaken, Participation rates and information on the contribution of the Indian food fishery to total and per capita incomes are presented.

Of the four river systems which are directly or indirectly affected by the development, only the Fraser and Skeena support sub­ sistence fisheries. Accordingly, all of the information contained in •the chapter is applicable to these two main river systems. A consider­ able amount of the information may be appropriate only to one band or to one group of bands located within specified locations along the river. Therefore, in an effort to take account of the differences that occur along these two major river systems, and to accommodate the peculiari­ ties of the analysis, much of the information is presented by geographic

sub~areas. The two sub-areas which are identified on the Skeena River system are Moricetown and the Lower Skeena. The four sub-areas identi­ fied on the Fraser River system include the Nechako River, the Stuart - 26 -

1 River, the Upper Fraser and the Lower Fraser (see Map 2:1),

Background

Long before the arrival of the first European explorers, the Indians of the Pacific Northwest had evolved a complex society. Their economic development was based largely on the abundance of fish resour­ ces, particularly salmon, stee'lhead trout and eulachon. Fish was an important source of food, a valuable trading commodity and served as the focus of attention for a great deal of their social activity. The relationship between salmon and the Indians at the time the first ex­ plorers arrived has been described: The fish determined where the people lived, No accur­ ate figure can be given, but intelligent estimates of the aboriginal population of what is now British Col­ umbia are set at approximately 80,000, an impressively high population density for native North America and about 40 percent of the total native population of all Canada. The obvious reason for this concentration of people was the availability of food and that food was salmon. In the interior the people lived close to the rivers because they were highways through the forests as well as conveyors upon which their protein arrived. A population map would show the areas about the main salmon rivers shaded dark. Rivers which c~nsistently failed to breed salmon were not populated. The location of existing Indian settlements together with the many his­ torical writings suggest the tremendous importance of fish in general, and of salmon in particular, to the social, economic and cultural well- 3 being of the Indian people of the Pacific Northwest.

Even though Indian dependence upon the subsistence fishery has

1 For a detailed breakdown of the Indian bands, Indian band popula­ tions and sub-area classifications see Appendix V 2 Hugh W. McKervill, The Salmon People, Gray's Publishing, Sydney, B. C,, 1967, p.12. 3 Cicely Lyons, Salmon and Our Heritage, B. C. Packers, Mitchell Press Ltd., Vancouver, 1970. R. G. Large, The Skeena - River of Destiny, Mitchell Press Ltd., Vancouver, 1957. I

f! c.J a: ... aj hf:1 ----· r

! t. St. James 1 ! . Prince -1 1 ! ! :::~:~~ i I i -- : E illiams Loke \

;i '\ \ \ ) .~ Legend 50 0 100 200 0 - Indian bands -- - Sub. - area boundaries Scale in miles

Sub- areas I - Moricetown 2 - Lower Skeena 3 - Nechako 4 - Stuart MAP 2= I 5 - Upper Fraser 6 - Lower Fraser LOCATION OF INDIAN BANDS AND SUB-AREAS - 28 -

declined over time, the natives of today regard this fishery as an im­ portant cultural heritage. It also is felt that the Indian food fishery is an important source of valuable food protein. It is in recognition of this, that the government of Canada has made special provision to protect the right of Indians to take fish for food in regulations made under the authority of the Fisheries Act. Indian food fish permits are issued by the Fisheries and Marine Service at local regional offices throughout British Columbia. These permits are not issued in a consist­ ent manner in all parts of British Columbia. For example, in some areas one permit is issued to an entire band, in some locations permits are issued to each family, in others, permits are given to the individual. Permits also vary with respect to the conditions under which they are valid. Officials in some districts find it necessary to stipulate the 4 type of gear that can be used or even the time and place of fishing.

The gear used and the methods of fishing have changed very 5 slowly over the years. This is true of the fishing that takes place on the Fraser and Skeena Rivers as it is true of Indian fishing through­ out the province. Dip nets, small gill nets, spears and gaffs are uti­ lized in these fisheries. The type of gear used varies from one place to the other along the river and appears to depend on existing water conditions. Spear fishing is difficult at points where glacial water enters the river and forms a milky hue or where there is suspended matter

4 In many respects this difference in approach is desirable and allows the fishery officer to adjust to take account of local conditions. How­ ever, in at least two respects the inconsistent handling of permits is found wanting, The permit system as it is now employed provides a lim­ ited amount of good management or assessment information and it is dif­ ficult to enforce. These shortcomings do influence the analysis carried out in this chapter to some extent. Since it is necessary to carry out the analysis on what is known, rather than what is suspected, it is felt that the analysis will underestimate the amount of fish caught in the subsistence fishery and the value of this fishery.

5 Prior to the existence of statutes regulating fishing in British Columbia and to the enforcement of these statutes, Indian fishermen would, in some cases, barricade the rivers and use baskets or spears to capture salmon returning from the sea. - 29 -

in the water. Conversely, the cloudiness which accompanies glacial water obscures the vision of the fish to the point where they have difficulty avoiding dip nets. In clear, slow moving water, spear fishing may be preferred.

Indian Participation and Total Catch

There are 191 Indian bands representing approximately 52,000 registered Indians living in British Columbia. Of this total, 104 bands representing an "on" and "off" the reserve population of approximately 23,600 live in areas adjacent to the Fraser and Skeena River systems. -1i The information presented in Table 2:1 shows the total Indian "on" and I "off" reserve population and number of families living in sub-areas af- I fected by the Kemano II project. According to this information, 11,656 persons have direct access to the Indian food fisheries affected by the Kemano II project. One thousand five hundred and sixty-four families live in the four sub-areas identified on the Fraser River system; 544 families live in the sub-areas located on the Skeena River system.

Total potential access provides only a very rough indication of the total participation in these fisheries. The information present­ ed in Table 2:2 indicates the number of individuals and the number of families who actively participate in the Indian food fisheries affected by the Kemano II power project by sub-area. Five hundred and twenty­ four families or 2,741 individuals participate annually in Indian food fisheries located on the Fraser River and affected by the Kemano II pro­ ject. Similarly, 283 families or 1,543 individuals annually participate in the Indian food fisheries located on the Skeena River that are af- fected by the project. The percentage rate of participation varies from a low of 21.7 percent in the Lower Fraser sub-area to a high of 54.9 per­ cent in the Nechako River sub-area. The overall percentage of participa­ tion in the affected areas on the Fraser and Skeena River systems, re­ spectively, are 32.5 and 52 percent. Thirty-seven point five percent - 30 -

TABLE 2:1

TOTAL INDIAN OFF AND ON RESERVE POPULATION AND NUMBER OF FAMILIES LIVING IN SUB-AREAS AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II DEVELOPMENT

Population Number of On Reserve Off Reserve Total Families

Fraser River System Nechako River 740 339 1,079 237 Stuart River 822 443 1,265 278 Upper Fraser 1,558 680 2,238 360 Lower Fraser 2,459 1,648 4,107 689

SUB TOTAL 5,579 3,110 8,689 1,564

Skeena River System Moricetown 451 177 628 115 Lower Skeena 1,661 678 2,339 429

SUB TOTAL 2' 1.12 855 2, 967 544

TOTAL 7,691 3,965 11,656 2, 108

Source: British Columbia Regional Office of the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, Vancouver, 1975. - 31 -

TABLE 2:2

TOTAL ANNUAL INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY PARTICIPATION IN INDIAN FOOD FISHERIES AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II DEVELOPMENT BY SUB-AREA CLASSIFICATION I l Number of Number of Percentage Rate I Individuals Families of Participation I I Fraser River System - -1 Nechako River 592 130 54.9 Stuart River 694 153 54.9 i Upper Fraser 564 91 25.2

G ' Lower Fraser 891 150 21. 7 - _I SUB TOTAL 2,741 524 32.5

Skeena River System Moricetown 327 60 52,0 Lower Skeena 1,216 223 52.0

SUB TOTAL 1,543 283 52.0

TOTAL 4,284 807 37,5

Sources: Marilyn G. Bennett, Indian Fishing and Its Cultural Impor­ tance in the Fraser River System, published jointly by the Fisheries and Marine Service, Pacific Region, Department of the Environment and the Union of British Columbia Indi­ an Chiefs, April 1973; annual reports of Fisheries and Marine Service field staff, - 32 -

of all Indians living in areas adjacent to the affected food fisheries actively engage in this fishing activity each year.

The average annual Fraser and Skeena River Indian food fish catch of salmon and steelhead attributable to waterways affected by Kemano II is presented in Table 2:3. According to the information pre­ sented in Table 2:3, Indians living in areas adjacent to the affected food fisheries catch 48,600 pieces of salmon and steelhead each year, Forty-three thousand pieces are caught in the Fraser River system and another 5,600 pieces are caught in the Skeena River system. Once again, as was the case in the commercial fishery, a substantial portion of the total catch is comprised of Fraser River sockeye and Skeena River chinook.

The catch information presented in Table 2:3 is an important ingredient for measuring the worth of the Indian food fisheries. Thus, the reader should be aware that the information presented in this table, although the best available, considerably underestimates actual catch in most sub-areas. One reason for this is the lack of a systematic method for gathering information on the Indian food fisheries. Another is that catch and effort usually takes place over a very wide area and most fishing locations are patrolled only irregularly. The problem is furth­ er aggravated by the fact that it is the responsibility of fishery offi­ cers and their guardians to gather this information, Therefore in many cases, this can only be accomplished incidentally to other duties such as regulating the fisheries and the enforcement of the Fisheries Act. Many Indian fishermen are suspicious of officials who question them about their catch when these officials also are responsible for policing their fishing activities. There is also the additional problem that many Indians resent interference by government officials in what they consider a sacred traditional right,

Another reason why the data presented above underestimate to­ tal Indian food fish catch is that this information indicates only what TABLE 2:3

AVERAGE ANNUAL FRASER AND SKEENA RIVER INDIAN FOOD FISH CATCH OF SALMON AND STEELHEAD ATTRIBUTABLE TO WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II DEVELOPMENT BY SUB-AREA CLASSIFICATION (rounded to the nearest 100 pieces of fish)

Sockeye Coho Pink Chinook Steelhead Total

Fraser River System

Nechako River 3,800 100 3,900 Stuart River 3,300 3,300 Upper Fraser 13,600 100 13,700 Lower Fraser 22,000 100 22,100

SUB TOTAL 42,700 300 43,000

Skeena River System

Moricetown 1,100 1,200 500 1,200 200 4,200 Lower Skeena 400 200 100 500 200 1,400

SUB TOTAL 1,500 1,400 600 1,700 400 5,600

TOTAL 44,200 1,400 600 2,000 400 48,600

Sources: International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission - averaged 1960 to 1972; annual reports of Fisheries and Marine Service field staff - averaged 1960 to 1974. - 34 -

was legally caught by Indian food fishermen. A substantial amount of the fish taken from the Fraser and Skeena Rivers, under the guise of Indian food fishing activity, is caught and sold illegally. A recent statement by Romeo LeBlanc, Minister of State for Fisheries, indicated that in some cases fish poaching is a tremendously serious problem. In this same article, it was noted that as many as 100,000 sockeye were 6 taken from the Fraser River without being reported last year. It should be emphasized, that not all of this fish necessarily is caught and sold by Indians. However, this contraband fish does provide bene­ fits, and has the potential to provide benefits, for many British Col­ umbians. Harvests of this size, even though illegal, cannot be totally ignored when assessing the economic and social worth of fish produced in the Fraser and Skeena River systems.

There are several additional reasons why the catch information presented above partially misrepresents the Indian food fishing that takes place in the Moricetown sub-area. The Moricetown food fishery is exclu­ sively a gaff fishery. It has been estimated that 35 percent of the fish gaff hooked in the Moricetown food fishery are not landed. Approximately 7 60 percent of all the fish not landed in that fishery are fatally wounded. On the one hand, the fish that are destroyed in this manner are a cost to society for Indians maintaining their traditional method of harvest. On the other hand, the Indian people take considerable pride in the fact that they are able to catch and process fish in the same manner as their ancestors. Nonetheless, the fish destroyed in this fishery are not in­ cluded in the catch information presented in Table 2:3.

Another important aspect is that Moricetown Indians have tra­ ditionally carried out all of their fishing activities at a spectacular

6 John ·sawatsky, "Big Fines, Seisure Sought for Fraser Fish Poachers", Vancouver Sun, 15 April 1976, p. 1.

7 R. N. Palmer, An Assessment of Salmon Migration and the Native Food Fishery at Moricetown Falls in 1966, Department of Fisheries of Canada, Vancouver, May 1967, p. 4. - 35 -

bottleneck on the Bulkley River which runs through the Moricetown Indian band's reserve. However, in recent years the Moricetown Indians have been getting an ever increasing portion of their total fish catch from the Fisheries and Marine Service fish counting fence on the Babine River. The importance of the traditional Bulkley River fishery to the Morice­ town Indians has not necessarily diminished. The fish taken at the Babine fence is mainly for the older, less active members of the Morice­ town Indian band. Further, the traditional fishery on the Bulkley River attracts many hundreds of tourists each year who stop along the highway to observe the historical activity of Indians food fishing by gaff. This added attraction, to some degree, helps sales in the Moricetown Indian 8 craft store situated above the canyon on Highway 16, Thus there is reason to believe the Indian food fishery on the Bulkley River has in­ creased rather than decreased in importance in recent years. Morice­ town Indians continue to benefit from fish taken from the Bulkley River and indirectly from tourists attracted to the area because of its food fishery.

Despite incomplete catch data, the information presented in this section reveals that Indian people living in the identified sub­ areas are very active in the Fraser and Skeena River food fisheries. More than one-third of all the Indians living in areas adjacent to the affected portion of the Fraser and Skeena Rivers participate directly in food fishing. The benefits generated by the food fish catch have to be considered an important part of the total value of these fisheries.

The Economic Value of the Food Fishery

The selection of an appropriate price for calculating the economic value of the Indian catch is extremely complicated. Standard

8 The Moricetown Indian band also controls access to the sport fishing areas below Moricetown Falls. They charge sportsmen wishing to fish the area below Moricetown Falls $10 for a season fishing permit and $3 for a daily permit. They also levy a $2 per night fee for campers who park on the reservation. - 36 -

economic analysis requires use of a price which reflects what food fisher­ men would be willing to pay for equivalent fish products should their existing supply no longer be available to them, Thus there are in fact four prices which readily come to mind when contemplating such calcula­ tions: the retail, wholesale, landed and black market prices. Unfor­ tunately, none of these alternatives are readily acceptable or necessar­ ily suitable for measuring the value of fish caught in the Indian food fishery. Black market prices, to some degree, would provide an indica­ tion of what those participating in the Indian food fishery would accept in the form of pecuniary benefits to forego the use of their catch for domestic purposes. However these prices are established outside of a formal market mechanism. There is no single black market price and no satisfactory procedure for assessing the quality of fish sold in this manner. Black market prices, even if a single price could be identi­ fied, are not satisfactory for calculating the economic value of the Indian food fish catch.

The choice among the other three price alternatives is equally unclear. If Indian food fishermen find it necessary to purchase their catches through normal market outlets, they would have to pay either re­ tail, wholesale or landed prices. Yet the fish caught in the food fish­ ery are not equivalent to the products represented by these three prices. The salmon and steelhead that are taken in the food fishery are caught while migrating up the Fraser and Skeena Rivers. They experience some weight loss, loss of fat content and become bruised and cut as they pro­ ceed to the spawning grounds from the ocean. Practically all the fish taken in the food fishery are dried and preserved according to the loca­ tion on the river where the fish are caught. The further up the river, the greater the deterioration of the salmon and steelhead flesh, the greater the weight loss and the more necessary it is for the Indians to process their fish to make it palatable and suitable for their own needs. Thus the fish taken in the food fishery are distinctly different from those that are sold in the marketplace. - 37 -

There are a number of other factors which should be taken into account when selecting the appropriate price for evaluation. The first is that the salmon and steelhead sold at the retail level are dressed, head off, while Indian catch is recorded in pounds of round weight. The second is that

vari~tions in the Indian fishermens' preference towards the different species. Consistent with the conservative estimates of value developed elsewhere in this report, 1975 landed prices are used to establish the value of the salmon and steelhead caught by Indian food fishermen, I I The average landed value of salmon and steelhead caught in the

!I Indian food fisheries affected by the Kemano II project according to sub­ L ~ area classification is presented in Table 2:4. According to the informa­ tion presented in Table 2:4, Indian food fishermen catch a total of $224,300 worth of salmon and steelhead in the affected waterways each year. Most of this, or $190,600 is taken from the Fraser River while the Skeena River generates $33,700 worth of production. According to this table, the sockeye taken in the food fisheries each year that are affect­ ed by Kemano II are worth $194,800.

Table 2:5 is used to show the present discounted value of this stream of benefits to Indian people living in waterways adjacent to the affected waterways at discount rates of 7, 9 and 11 percent to the year 2024. The information presented in this table indicates that the value of Fraser River production ranges from a high of $2,813,000 to a low of $1,912,000. The best single estimate of the value of the Fraser River catch is $2,258,000. The salmon and steelhead caught by Indian food fishermen on the Skeena River ranges from $498,000 to a low of $339,000, The best single estimate of the value of catch taken from the Skeena River is $401,000, The total discounted value of the Indian catch ranges from a high of $3,311,000 to a low of $2,251,000, The best single esti­ mate of the total value of the salmon and steelhead caught annually from TABLE 2:4

AVERAGE LANDED VALUE OF THE ANNUAL INDIAN FOOD FISH CATCH OF SALMON AND STEELHEAD ATTRIBUTABLE TO WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY THE KEMA.NO PHASE II DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ACCORDING TO SUB AREA CLASSIFICATION (rounded to the nearest $100)

Sockeye Coho Pink Chinook Steelhead Total $ $ $ $ $ $

Fraser River System Nechako River 16,700 400 17,200 Stuart River 14,500 14,500 Upper Fraser 60,000 600 60,600 Lower Fraser 97,400 900 98,300

TOTAL FRASER SYSTEM $188,700 $1,900 $190,600

Skeena River System Moricetown 4,600 6,300 600 12,000 1,400 24,900 Lower Skeena 1,500 1,000 4,900 1,400 8,800

TOTAL SKEENA SYSTEM $6,100 $7,300 $600 $16,900 $2,800 $33,700

TOTAL $194,800 $7,300 $600 $18,900 $2,800 $224,300 - 39 -

TABLE 2:5

PRESENT DISCOUNTED VALUE OF INDIAN FOOD CATCH OF SALMON AND STEELHEAD ATTRIBUTABLE TO KEMANO II AFFECTED WATERWAYS (rounded to the nearest $1000)

Present Value Present Value Present Value Discounted At Discounted At Discounted At -I 7 Percent 9 Percent 11 Percent Fraser River System

I Nechako River 253,000 203,000 172,000 ! [ I Stuart River 215,000 172,000 146,000 I Upper Fraser 894,000 718,000 608,000 ! Lower Fraser 1,451,000 1,165,000 986,000 \ TOTAL FRASER SYSTEM $2,813,000 $2,258,000 $1,912,000 I I Skeena River System 'f f Moricetown 368,000 296,000 250,000 i, I Lower Skeena 130,000 105,000 89,000 I I TOTAL SKEENA SYSTEM $ 498,000 $ 401,000 $ 339,000

TOTAL $3,311,000 $2,659,000 $2,251,000 II ! ! I - 40 -

the affected waterways is $2,659,000,

Contribution To Economic Well-Being

The discounted present value of the salmon and steelhead caught each year in the food fishery only partially reveals the real value of these fisheries to Indians living in the identified sub-areas. Another important consideration is the contribution that the subsis­ tence catch makes to the total economic well-being of Indians who dir­ ectly and indirectly benefit from the existence of these fisheries. In this regard, it is important to remember that many of British Columbia's Indian people are physically, culturally and economically isolated from the mainstream of Canadian life. The Economic Council of Canada, when discussing poverty in Canada in their 1968 annual report, describe the Indian, Eskimo and Metis existence as a " brutal story If . 9 It was also stated that most Indians live well below the poverty level; that the life expectancy of an Indian woman in Canada is 25 years and that Indians, Eskimos and Metis experience considerable difficulty adapting to the problems of the major society. This is true both because of pre­ sent attitudes within the white community and because of the strong cul­ tural differences. More specifically, for the purposes of this report, it was pointed out that because of the low economic potential of Canada's 2,200 reserves, less than a third of these reserves could possibly pro­ vide sufficient resources to support their present populations. This problem was further aggravated by the rapidly declining opportunities for Indians in making a livelihood by the traditional occupations of hunting and trapping. It is extremely important for those attempting to understand the importance of the food fishery to recognise the special circumstances of the Indian in our present society,

In the previous section, landed prices were used to calculate

9 Economic Council of Canada, The Challenge of Growth and Change, Fifth Annual Report, Queen's Printer and Controller of Stationery, Ottawa, September 1968, pp. 121-124. - 41 -

the value of fish taken in the food fishery. It was argued in that sec­ tion that most of the fish taken in the Indian food fishery are not com­ parable in quality to the fish sold through normal market outlets. It was decided that the more conservative landed prices would provide a basis for estimating what the total value of the physical catch is to the Indian people. In this section our concern is to identify the con­ tribution that the subsistence catch is making to the individual Indian and his family. Landed prices would not adequately reflect this con­ tribution for three reasons: First, the skill with which Indians can dry and preserve their catch, thus making it palatable and perfectly ~ suitable for their own needs. Second, it is traditional for Indians to consume almost the entire fish including the head, tail and the roe. I Third, most Indians live in remote or semi-isolated regions consider­ I I' ably removed from the ocean and in locations where they are unable to I make regular purchases in marketplaces similar to these located in pop­ i ulated centres where the price of salmon and other commodities would be ! lower. Thus in this section, for the purposes of calculating the degree ~ to which subsistence fishing supplements regular income, and for the purposes of providing meaningful comparisons, the 1970 wholesale prices 10 of salmon are used.

Table 2:6 is used to show the contribution of subsistence fishing income generated in the affected food fisheries to total in­ come from all other sources by sub-area classification for the year 1970. The information presented in this table indicates that the Indians living in the four sub-areas adjacent to the Fraser River system earned an equivalent of $245,700 fishing during 1970. Fishing incomes earned by Indians living in the Upper Fraser River sub-area made an additional 4.6 percent contribution to income from all other sources during 1970. Similarly, Indians living in the Nechako River sub-area supplemented their income by 2 percent during 1970 by par­ ticipating in the Fraser River system's Indian food fisheries.

10 The year 1970 is the most recent year that satisfactory infor­ mation on Indian incomes is available. - 42 -

TABLE 2:6

CONTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL SUBSISTENCE FISHING INCOME GENERATED IN AFFECTED FOOD FISHERIES TO TOTAL INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BY SUB-AREA CLASSIFICATION - 1970

Income Percentage Of Fishing From All Fishing Income Income1 Sources2 To Total Income $ $ 3 Fraser River System

Nechako River 22,200 1,118,640 2.0

Stuart River 18,800 1,312,160 1.4

Upper Fraser 78,100 1,702,800 4.6

Lower Fraser 126,600 3,713,710 3.4

TOTAL FRASER SYSTEM $245,700 $7,847,310 3,1

Skeena River System

Morice town 24,900 741,750 3.4

Lower Skeena 7,500 2,767,050 0.3

TOTAL SKEENA SYSTEM $32,400 $3,508,800 0,9

TOTAL $278,100 $11, 356' 110 2.4

1 Fishing income is calculated using 1970 salmon wholesale prices. 2 Income from all other sources contains transfer payments and non­ earned income. 3 Sources: Statistics Canada, Census Survey, 1971. Fisheries and Marine Service, Vancouver, B. C. - 43 -

Indians living adjacent to the Skeena River system supplemented their income by $32,400 by participating in the food fishery during 1970. The additional contribution to the Moricetown Indians' income during 1970 was 3,4 percent. The affected food fisheries of the Fraser and Skeena Rivers generated an addition to existing income of 2.4 percent during 1970,

Perhaps a better understanding of precisely how important the Fraser and Skeena Rivers' food fisheries are to the Indian people is provided by the information presented in Table 2:7. The information presented in Table 2:7 shows the additional percentage contribution to participants, the average fishing income per participating individual and per participating household that is generated in the affected food fisheries by sub-area classification for the year 1970. It is shown in the table that the average Indian participant living in the four sub­ areas located on the Fraser River system earned $90 in the food fishery during 1970. Similarly, it shows that the average participant living in the two sub-areas adjacent to the Skeena River system earned $20 in the subsistence fishery. Average fishing income per participating household varied from a high of $860 on the Fraser River system to a low of $35 on the Skeena River system among the six sub-area classifi­ cations identified in the table. The percentage of fishing income to total average income from all sources among participating households and individual particpants varied from .5 percent in the Lower Skeena River sub-area to a high of 18.1 percent in the Upper Fraser River sub­ area. The average additional percentage contribution to incomes gen­ erated by participation in the affected food fisheries amounted to 6.3 percent.

The Social Significance Of The Food Fishery

It should be noted that the information presented in Tables 2:6 and 2:7 provides a conservative view of the importance of the TABLE 2:7

AVERAGE FISHING INCOME PER PARTICIPANT AND PER PARTICIPATING HOUSEHOLD GENERATED IN THE AFFECTED FOOD FISHERIES AND ADDITIONAL PERCENTAGE CONTRIBUTION OF FISHING INCOME TO INCOME FROM ALL SOURCES BY SUB-AREA CIASSIFICATION - 1970 (rounded to nearest $5)

Average Fishing Average Fishing Percentage of Fishing Income To Income Per Income Per Average Income From All Sources Participantl Participating Household1 Among Households and Participants2 $ $ $ Fraser River System Nechako River 40 170 3.6 Stuart River 25 125 2.6 Upper Fraser 140 860 18.1 Lower Fraser 140 845 15.7

AVERAGE FRASER SYSTEM $90 $470 9.5

Skeena River System Moricetown 75 415 6.4 Lower Skeena 5 35 0.5

AVERAGE SKEENA SYSTEM $20 $115 1.8

AVERAGE $65 $345 6.3

1 Fishing incomes are calculated using 1970 salmon wholesale prices. 2 Income from all other sources includes transfer payments and non-earned income.

Sources: Statistics Canada, Census Survey, 1971. Fisheries and Marine Service, Vancouver, B. C. - 45 -

11 supplement to income provided by the food fisheries. The comparisons made in these tables are between a conservative estimate of the income contribution made by the Indian food fisheries, and the income from all other sources. A substantial portion of the income from all other sour­ ces would be comprised of government transfer payments or other non­ earned incomes. It would be unrealistic to consider non-earned income of the same social importance as income which is earned through the in­ dividual's own initiative. The personal pride and the feeling of accom­ plishment that is experienced when money is earned, or when the head of I household is able to provide for his family through his own efforts, is -I absent in the welfare system. Thus it should be remembered that this I opportunity to supplement the existing income by working in a manner I similar to their fathers, and their forefathers before them, would be ~ t especially important to the Indian people - more important than the money that is received in the form of welfare or in other government transfer payments.

The salmon and steelhead caught in the food fisheries help to provide Indians with some of their basic living requirements. However, the food fishery does more than just provide food protein. The Skeena

and Fraser River food fisheries, like other food fisheries in Can~da, are of considerable social significance to the Indian people. Some families travel for miles in order to participate in the fisheries which take place along these major waterways. In many cases, the annual voy­ age to traditional food fishing areas is considered an important social event. The primary reason for the trip is to fish, but the social ac­ tivities make it much more than just a fishing trip, Fathers teach their sons the unique skills associated with the traditional fishing methods. Mothers with their daughters busy themselves processing the catch and picking berries. In some situations, the sharing of the catch

11 As noted earlier in Chapter One, the price of salmon has risen sub­ stantially in recent years. A similar comparison for 1975 probably would reveal that fish caught in the food fishery would make an even greater addition to Indian income. - 46 -

among band members helps heighten the sense of unity within the groups. For older people, the trip to the fishing areas provides a chance to so­ cialize with other people and to renew old friendships. Life in the fish camps, although primitive, is both a pleasant and a rewarding experience. It is in fact an important part of the Indians' life-style, a cultural heritage, which cannot be measured solely in economic terms.

Conclusion

Long before the arrival of the first European explorers, the Indians of the Pacific Northwest had developed an economic base which was largely dependent on fish resources, particularly salmon, steelhead trout and eulachon. Fish was an important source of food, a valuable trading commodity and served as a focus of attention for a great deal of Indian social activity. Despite the fact that Indian dependence upon these food fisheries has declined to some degree over time, the subsis­ tence fishery is still an important source of valuable food protein and c'ontributes to the cultural well-being of the Indian people.

Of the 52,000 registered Indians living in British Columbia, 23,600 of them live in areas adjacent to the Fraser and Skeena River systems. Nearly one-half of this 23,600, or 11,656 persons, have direct access to the food fisheries affected by the Kemano Phase II power de­ velopment project. Over one-third of all the Indians living in areas adjacent to the affected subsistence fisheries, or 4,284 persons, ac­ tively engage in food fishing activities each year.

Despite data which substantially underestimates the total Indian food fish catch, it has been established that Indians living in the six sub-areas identified in this chapter catch at least 48,600 pieces of salmon and steelhead in the affected waterways each year. The present discounted value of this annual salmon and steelhead catch ran­ ges from a low of $2,251,000 to a high of $3,311,000. The best single - 47 -

estimate of the value of this stream of benefits, calculated at a 9 per­ cent discount rate, is $2,659,000.

Further, it was shown that Indians living in the four sub~ areas adjacent to the Fraser River system earned an equivalent of $245,700 fishing in the affected waterways during 1970. Similarly dur­ ing that same year, Indians living in the two sub-areas identified on the Skeena River system supplemented their income by an equivalent of $32,400 by engaging in food fishing. The total population living in the I six sub-areas identified in this chapter supplemented their income by -1 2.4 percent because of participation in food fisheries affected by the ' Kemano II project during 1970.

The information presented in this chapter showed that the average Indian participant living in the four sub-areas located on the Fraser River system earned $90 in the food fishery during 1970. It was also shown that the average participant living in the sub-areas adjacent to the Skeena River system earned $20 during that same year. The aver­ age fishing income per participating household varied from a high of $860 on the Fraser River system to a low of $35 on the Skeena River system. The percentage of fishing income to total average income from all sources among participating households and individual participants varied from .5 percent in the Lower Skeena River sub-area to a high of 18.l percent in the Upper Fraser River sub-area. The average additional percentage contribution to income generated by participation in the affec­ ted food fisheries amounted to 6.3 percent.

It is impossible to quantify, even very roughly, the human values that should be taken into account when measuring the importance of the Fraser and Skeena Rivers' subsistence fisheries to the Indian people of British Columbia. Practically every Indian living in the areas adjacent to the waterways affected by the Kemano project bene­ fit directly or indirectly from food fishing. Both the historical and - 48 -

cultural aspects of these food fisheries are important and have to be considered valuable to Indians living along the Fraser and Skeena Rivers. These are values which are impossible to express in dollar terms. None­ theless, they are values which should implicitly be taken into account when development projects, such as Kemano II, threaten the existence of fish habitat. CHAPTER THREE

THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF SPORT FISHING ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTABLE TO WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

It is the purpose of this chapter to establish the economic value of the sport fisheries which are affected by the Kemano II hydro­ electric development project. To this end, information is presented on the total amount of sport fishing activity which is specifically depend­ ent on the fish production attributable to the affected waterways. In­ formation on fishermen's occupations and on their fishing preferences is presented and analyzed in terms of what influence these factors might have on the value of the affected sport fisheries. It should be noted that the analysis carried out in this chapter is done on the basis of total sport fishing activity and not on the individual species. The values which are established are meant to include the value of all fish species which spend all or part of their life cycle in the affected waterways and are inten­ tionally sought by sport fishermen. Once again, it should be cautioned that the information presented in this chapter should not be interpreted as an assessment of what necessarily will be lost, but rather to identify the value of the sport fisheries as they presently exist.

The Study Focus and Methodology

If the Kemano II project proceeds, it will have some influence on a significant portion of British Columbia's sport fisheries. It will have, for example, some impact on practically all of the sport fisheries supported by the Fraser and Skeena River systems. This would include the sport fisheries located in Howe Sound, Juan de Fuca and Georgia Straits, and in other places on the coast where Fraser and Skeena River fish are caught, It will also have some impact on all of the sport fishing that takes place on the Kemano and Dean Rivers. In many cases, the probable impact will be barely perceptible and immeasurable. In other cases, the impact will be great or even severe. The area where the impact is likely - 50 -

to be greatest and where the focus of this analysis will be directed is the north central portion of British Columbia as shown in Map 3:1. This area, hereafter referred to as the affected area, includes all of the Nechako River and its tributaries above Prince George, the Skeena River and all of its tributaries, the Kemano and Dean Rivers. This area also possesses m~ny of British Columbia's best known and most desirable sport fishing rivers, lakes and streams. For example, the area includes with- in its boundaries six of the thirteen rivers designated as "special rivers" 1 by the provincial Fish and Wildlife.Branch,

Included among the many population centres located in the af­ fected area are the communities of Prince George, Fort St. James, Vander­ hoof, Hazelton, Smithers, Prince Rupert and Kemano. British Columbians living in this portion of the province, for the purposes of this analysis, are defined as residents. Persons living in other parts of British Col­ umbia or of Canada are termed non-resident Canadians. The term non- Canadian is used to refer to persons who do not reside in Canada.

Numerous different methods have been developed which are suit- able for assessing the economic value of sport fisheries. However, none is universally accepted as being entirely correct. The method used to assess sport fishing in one location may not be valid or even acceptable for assessing the sport fishing activity in another. The selection of the appropriate method usually varies with the situation. In this chap­ 2 ter, two different evaluation techniques are used. The first is the

1 The Fish and Wildlife Branch of the provincial Department of Recrea­ tion and Travel Industry has designated some lakes and rivers of the pro­ vince that support angling of exceptional quality as "special lakes" or "special rivers". The six rivers located in the affected area that are designated as "special" include: the Babine River, the Bulkley River, the Copper (Zymoetz) River, the Dean River, the Kispiox River, the Morice River. .The Bulkley, Dean and Morice Rivers will be directly affected by the Kemano development project. See: British Columbia Sport Fishing Reg­ ulations 1975/1976, published by the Fish and Wildlife Branch of British Columbia, Department of Recreation and Travel Industry.

2 For a detailed discussion on the alternative economic evaluation ------"'1

10 -0 -20 ...... 40 60 --Scale- in miles-

I I I Insert Map 1 i I I I 1 I \ Smithers I

!'

• .'"-..._ ~.. --·· ~ ~."anderhoof Bell~ ·· ·~ Coola "-...______.. ~ ..

MAP 3:1

AREA WHERE SPORT FISHING ACTIVITY IS AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II POWER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. - 52 -

direct survey method which is used to establish the economic value of the resident sport fishing that is attributable to the waterways affected by Kemano II. The second is the expenditure method which is used to deter­ mine the economic value of the non-resident sport fishing that is attri­ butable to the waterways affected by this project. The resident and non­ resident values, together, are used as a reasonable estimate of the total value of the sport fishing attributable to the affected waterways.

The Resident Sport Fishery

One important indication of the value of the affected sport fishery to the resident population is the number and percentage of the population that participate in sport fishing on a regular basis. The information presented in Table 3:1 shows the total population, the

TABLE 3:1

POPULATION, NUMBER OF FISHING LICENCE HOLDERS AND NUMBER OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN LOCATED IN AFFECTED AREA - 1975 (rounded to nearest 100)

Number Percent of Population

Population of Area 113 '200 100.0 Fishing Licence Holders 25,500 22.5

To~~+ rumber of Resident Sport Fishermen 38,000 33.6

Sources: Statistics Canada, Census Survey, 1971. British Columbia Fish and Wildlife Branch, fishing licence sales. Telephone survey, 1973 and 1974. number of provincial fishing licence holders and the number of resident

techniques available, the criteria used to select the most appropriate methodology for assessing the economic worth of the sport fisheries affected by Kemano Phase II and on the disadvantages and advantages of each of the different techniques see Appendix VI. - 53 -

sport fishermen residing in the affected area during 1975. According to the information presented in this table, out of the 113,200 persons liv­ ing in the area, 22.5 percent or 25,500 purchased provincial fishing licences during 1975. More than one third of the resident population, 3 38,000 individuals, sport fish at least once each year.

Table 3:2 is used to show the total amount of sport fishing activ­ ity which takes place in the affected area each year. It also shows the I distribution of this activity between lakes and waterways which are direct­ ly affected by Kemano II and other lakes and waterways located in the area.

-I TABLE 3:2 I i' AVERAGE NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHING DAYS ~ PER YEAR WHICH TAKE PLACE ON WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO II AND OTHER WATERWAYS IN AFFECTED AREA

Angler Days Per Year

No. %

Waterways directly affected by Kemano II 293,900 37,2 Other waterways in the affected area 496' 100 62.8

TOTAL ALL WATERWAYS IN THE AFFECTED AREA 790,000 100.0

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service mail survey, 1975,

This information reveals that the lakes and waterways located in the af­ fected area support 790,000 angling days of resident sport fishing acti-

3 The reason for the difference between the numbers of sport fish licence holders and the total number of resident fishermen is that persons under 16 years of age do not require a licence. Then of course, some individuals choose not to purchase a licence. - 54 -

vity each year. The waterways not affected by the Kemano II project sup­ port 496,100 angler days of resident sport fishing activity each year. Resident fishermen participate in 293,900 angling days in waterways which are directly affected by the Kemano II project. This represents more than 37 percent of all resident angling activity which takes place in the area.

The attitudes and preferences of the resident sport fishermen towards the fishery resource is another important indication of the value of the sport fishery to the resident population. Table 3:3 contains

TABLE 3 :3

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN ACCORDING TO THEIR FIRST, SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH PREFERRED SPECIES OF FISH

First Second Third Fourth Preferred Pref erred Preferred Pref erred Species Species Species Species

Salmon 18.8 23.1 15.8 5.6

Trout 56,0 21.5 14.3 8.1

Steelhead 12. 9 10.2 6,4 3.0

Dolly Varden 1.0 5.9 4.2 3.4

Lake Trout 4,8 16.4 8.2 4.6

Other Species 0.4 3,1 4.9 5.1

No Response or No Preference 6.1 19.9 46.2 70.l

TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

SOURCE: Fisheries and Marine Service Mail Survey, 1975 information which shows the species preference of the resident sport fishermen. According to Table 3:3, exactly 56 percent of those who - 55 -

indicated a preference, chose trout as the fish they most preferred to catch. Almost 88 percent of the sport fishermen indicated that either trout, salmon or steelhead were the species which they preferred to catch. Similarly, 54,8 percent of those who made a second choice indi­ cated that either trout, salmon or steelhead were the second most pre­ ferred species. It is interesting to note that 46,2 percent did not have a third preference.

I Table 3:4 shows the percentage distribution of resident sport I fishermen according to the type of fishing they prefer. More than 42 -I percent of all resident fishermen indicated that they preferred lake

TABLE 3:4

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN ACCORDING TO THE TYPE OF FISHING THEY PREFER

Types of Fishing Percent

Lake 42.1

River or Stream 43,7

Salt Water 0.3 I'I No Preference 13,9

TOTAL 100.0

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service mail survey, 1975.

fishing while almost 44 percent indicated that they preferred river or stream fishing. Less than one percent preferred fishing in salt water - 56 -

and almost 14 percent did not indicate a preference.

Table 3:5 presents information on the number and percentage of resident sport fishermen according to their favourite fishing locations. The table also shows whether or not the fishing location is affected by Kemano II. More than 10,000 anglers, or 26.8 percent of the total resi­ dent angling population indicated that their favourite fishing location is on waterways that are affected by Kemano II. More than 22,000 anglers, or 59.1 percent indicated that their favourite fishing location was on waterways other than those that are affected by the Kemano II project, Slightly over 6 percent indicated that they did not have a favourite fishing location and 8 percent did not respond.

The information presented in Tables 3:3 and 3:4, and to some extent Table 3:5 is consistent with information gathered elsewhere on 4 sport fishermen. Sport fishermen prefer the type of fishing they are most familiar with. Lake fishermen prefer to catch trout, while river and saltwater fishermen prefer to catch salmon. Those who live in coastal areas usually prefer saltwater fishing while those living inland prefer freshwater fishing. The preferences of freshwater fishermen usually are divided between lake fishing and river fishing.

Another consideration which must be taken into account when assessing the value of sport fishing in a particular area, is determin­ ing which segments of the population are enjoying·the benefits. If the

4 Ian D. Thompson, Sport Fishing in Prince Edward Island - A Survey of Anglers, Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Recreational Fisheries Branch, Ottawa, Ontario, 1975, D. Topolniski, Survey of Recreational Fishing in the N,W,T,, Department of the Environ­ ment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Economics Branch, Central Region, May 1974. William F. Sinclair and Obert Sweitzer, The Economic Value of the Yukon Sport Fishery, Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Pacific Region, Northern Operations Branch, Economics Unit, April 1973. William F. Sinclair, The British Columbian Sport Fishermen, Department of the Environment, Fisheries Service, Pacific Region, July 1972. - 57 -

TABLE 3: 5

NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN ACCORDING TO THEIR FAVOURITE FISHING LOCATION AND WHETHER IT IS AFFECTED BY KEMANO PHASE II DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (rounded to nearest 10 persons)

Pref erred Fishing Number of Resident Location Fishermen Percent

Waterways Directly Affected By Kemano II Skeena River 3,040 8.0 Francois Lake 1,600 4.2 Morice River 1,330 3.5 Bulkley River 1,220 3.2 I Stuart Lake 910 2.4 Fraser Lake 720 1. 9 Nechako River 650 1. 7 Nechako Reservoir 420 1.1 Other Rivers and Lakes 310 0.8

SUB TOTAL 10,200 26.8

Other Waterways In Affected Area Kitimat River 2,930 7.7 Babine Lake 1,750 4.6 Lakelse River 1,370 3,6 Cluculz Lake 1,070 2.8 Copper River 840 2.2 Nulki Lake 800 2.1 Kalum River 650 1. 7 Kispiox River 570 1. 5 Other Rivers and Lakes 12 '520 32.9

SUB TOTAL 22,500 59.1

No Favourite 2,300 6.1

No Response 3,000 8.0

TOTAL 38,000 100.0

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service mail survey, 1975. - 58 -

benefi.ts are accruing mainly to upper income groups or to particular age categories, sport fishing is probably of less importance than if it pro­ vides benefits for all segments. of the population. The information pre­ sented in Table 3:6 provides a comparison between the age distribution of resident sport fishermen and that of all residents of the area.

TABLE 3 :6

PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN AND PERCENTAGE OF THE .AFFECTED AREA'S POPUIATION IN EACH AGE CATEGORY

Age Category Resident Fishermen All Residents

0 - 9 Years 12. 7 24.0 10 - 19 Years 23.1 20.0 20 - 29 Years 22.8 17.9 30 - 29 Years 17.7 15.2 40 - 49 Years 12.6 9.6 50 - 59 Years 8.9 6.7 60 - 69 Years 1.9 4.8 70 Years or Over 0.3 1.8

TOTAL 100.0 100.0 = =

Sources: Statistics Canada, Census Survey, 1971. Fisheries and Marine Service Mail Survey, 1975.

According to the information presented in this table, all age groups benefit from sport fishing. Every age category shown in the table contains some participants who fish at least once each year.

Table 3:7 provides information which shows the percentage - 59 -

TABLE 3:7

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN AND ALL RESIDENTS OF THE AFFECTED AREA ACCORDING TO THE HEAD-OF-THE HOUSEHOLD'S OCCUPATION

Occupation Resident Fishermen All Residents

Professional 11. 5 6.2

Managerial 12,4 3,6 -I Sales 8.8 7.6 l Service and Recreational 2.8 7.6

Processing Trades 17.5 21. 8

Primary Trades 10.1 10.0

Transportation 7.8 15.8

Clerical 2.8 4.1

Construction Trades 15.8 11.8

Farming and Ranching 0,9 1.9

Other 8.8 1.3

Unspecified 1. 4 8.4

TOTAL 100.0 100.0

Sources: Fisheries and Marine Service surveys, 1972 to 1975. Statistics Canada, Census Survey, 1971. - 60 -

distribution of resident sport fishermen and all residents of the affect­ ed area according to the head-of-household's occupation category. Once again, sport fishing appears to be popular among a broad cross section of the resident population. A greater .than proportional .segment of the resident population in the construction trades category are sport fish­ ermen. This is also true in the managerial and professional categories. Sport fishing appears popular among members of all occupation categories.

Another consideration which should be taken into account when assessing the importance of sport fishing is the number of alternatives or substitute activities that are available to resident sport fishermen. Table 3:8 is used to present information on the percentage distribution of resident fishermen according to the activity they would substitute if no fishing was available. According to this table, 23 percent of the fishermen interviewed indicated that there was no adequate substitute for sport fishing. Another 13.2 percent of the sport fishermen indicated that hiking or bicycling was a suitable substitute for sport fishing. Camping was a suitable substitute for 12.3 percent. All other substitute categories were suitable as a substitute for less than 10 percent of re­ sident fishermen.

We have to this point shown the percentage of the local pop­ ulation which actively participate in fishing activities each year and the attitude and fishing preferences of the local sport fishermen. We have also identified who benefits according to age and occupation cate­ gories, and the leisure alternatives available to resident sport fisher­ men. The final and most important indication of importance is the value that resident sport fishermen place on sport fishing relative to all other goods and services available to them. Given presently available data, the most.accurate estimate of 1this is the amount of money that local.sport·, fishermen would· b.e willing to pay· rather than- .forego q1eir. right to _fish in affected wat;~rways when taking into accou-qt fishing altel;'natives and the changes in participation that are likely to occur as a result of actually having to pay.* - 61 -

TABLE 3:8

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN ACCORDING TO THE ACTIVITY THEY WOULD SUBSTITUTE IF NO FISHING WERE AVAILABLE

Substitute Activity Percent of Responses

No Adequate Substitute 23.0

Hiking, Bicycling 13.2 I -1 Camping 12,3

I Hunting 9.4 I ~ Boating, Waterskiing 8.1 I

I Swimming 6,0

Summer Sports (baseball, tennis, etc.) 5.5

Golf 3.8

Canoeing 3.8

Sightseeing 3.0

Social Activities 2.1

Relaxing, Television 1. 7 1 Other Activities 5,6

TOTAL 100.0

1 Other activities include winter outdoor activities (skiing, snowshoeing, snowmobiling), winter ice sports (hockey, curling, skating), photography, rock hunting and horseback riding.

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service survey, 1974, - 62 -

This information is presented in Table 3:9.5 Table 3:9 shows the total annual value of the resident sport fishing that takes place ori waterways affected by Kemano II. It also shows the present discounted value of this annual stream of benefits discounted at 7, 9 and 11 percent per annum, assuming a participation growth rate of 5 percent per year6 to the year

TABLE 3: 9

THE VALUE OF THE ANNUAL STREAM OF BENETITS ACCRUING TO RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN FROM FISHING IN WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO II: 1 THE PRESENT DISCOUNTED VALUE OF THE SPORT FISHERIES DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT

Annual Value Discount Rate Present Discounted Value

$8,895,000 73 $248,329,000 $8,895,000 93 $181,750,000 $8,895,000 113 $144,431,000

1 Present discounted values are calculated to the year 2024. It is assumed that resident sport fishing activity will increase at an annual rate of 5 percent to the year 2000 and at zero between 2001 to 2024.

5 A major part of the Fisheries and Marine Service's investigations into the Kemano Phase II power project was directed at determining the economic value of the free sport fishing benefits enjoyed by resident sport fishermen. Appendix VII provides a detailed description of the information gathered in these investigations and the calculations used to establish the value of the resident sport fishery.

6 The assumption that participation in the affected area's sport fish­ ing activity will increase at 5 percent per annum is consistent with the growth rate of the population during the period 1966 to 1971 (Statistics Canada, Census Surveys 1966 - 1971). As noted in William F. Sinclair's The British Columbia Sport Fishermen, Department of the Environment, Fisheries Service, Pacific Region, July 1972, p. 8, average participa­ tion in British Columbia's sport fishery over the period 1967 - 1970 increased at an average annual rate of 6.6 percent. Non-resident par­ ticipation increased at a somewhat faster rate than resident participa­ tion in the British Columbia tidal sport fishery. More recently, V. Kerry Smith and John V. Krutilla, "A Simulation Model for the Management of Low - 63 -

2000 and zero growth thereafter. According to this information, the af­ fected waterways generate $8,895,000 worth of free benefits for fisher­ men living in the affected area each year. The estimated present dis­ counted value of this annual stream of benefits ranges from a low of $144,431,000 to a high of $248,329,000. The best single estimate of the present discounted value of the stream of benefits accruing to resident sport fishermen is $181,750,000.

The Non-Resident Sport Fishery

The previous section was used to present information on the value of benefits derived by resident sport fishermen as a result of

-II fishing for free in the affected waterways. In this section, the con- cern is with identifying the values which all residents of the affected area receive as a result of non-resident sport fishing activity on these same waterways. In practice, these are the benefits which accrue to residents of the affected area from expenditures which non-resident fishermen make on goods and services in the area because of their sport fishing activities. These are in fact, inflows of money into the area's economy which otherwise would not be present if these fisheries did not exist. Viewed from this standpoint, there are a number of factors which should be taken into account. These include the number of fishermen who actually visit the area as a result of the sport fishing opportunities provided by affected waterways and the portion of total expenditures which remain in the area as a benefit to local residents.

Table 3:10 is used to present information on the total number of non-resident Canadian and non-Canadian party visits to the affected area each year. It shows the average number of persons per party, the

Density Recreational Areas", Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, November 1974, Vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 187-201, noted that use data from the U. S. Forest Service, while of indifferent quality until the recent years, nonetheless suggests that the overall use of wilder­ ness and otherwise underdeveloped wildlife areas has increased at an annual rate of about 10 percent over the last three decades. - 64 -

TABLE 3: 10

1 AVERAGE ANNUAL NUMBER OF NON-RESIDENT CANADIAN AND NON-CANADIAN FISHING PARTY VISITS TO THE AFFECTED AREA, NUMBER· OF PERSONS PER PARTY, NUMBER OF FISHERMEN PER PARTY AND TOTAL NUMBER OF NON-RESIDENT FISHERMEN VISITING THE AFFECTED AREA EACH YEAR (rounded to nearest 10 persons)

Non-Resident Non- Canadian Canadian Total Party Visits to the

Affected Area 4,820 I 2,660 7,480

Average Number of Persons Per Party 3,3 3.0 3.2

Average Number of Fishermen Per Party 2.3 2.1

Fishermen as a Percentage of all Party Members 69.7 72.2 70.4

Total Number of Non-Resident Fishermen Fishing in the Affected Area 11,090 5,670 16' 760

1 Data are averaged over the years 1972 to 1975

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service surveys, 1972 to 1975 average number of fishermen per party and the total number of non-resident fishermen who visit the affected area each year. According to this infor­ mation, 4,820 non-resident Canadians and 2,660 non-Canadian parties visit the affected area annually. Almost 70 percent of all members of non­ resident Canadian parties sport fish while in the affected area. A total of 16,760 non-resident fishermen sport fish in the affected area each year. Of this total, 11,090 are non-resident Canadian fishermen and 5,670 are non-Canadian fishermen.

Table 3:11 is used to show the average number of days of sport TABLE 3:11

. 1 AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS OF SPORT FISHING ACTIVITY WHICH TAKE PLACE EACH YEAR IN THE AFFECTED AREA WHICH ARE ATTRIBUTABLE TO NON-RESIDENT CANADIAN AND NON-CANADIAN FISHERMEN ACCORDING TO AFFECTED AND NON-AFFECTED WATERWAYS

Non-Resident Canadian Non-Canadian Total No. 3 No. 3 No. 3

Number of Angler days on Waterways directly affected by Kemano II 22 '375 54.7 16,650 53.5 39,025 54.2

Number of Angler days other Waterways in the affected area 18,500 45.3 14,475 46.5 32,975 45.8

Total number of Angler days on all Waterways in the affected area TOTAL 40,875 100.0 31,125 100.0 72,000 100.0

1 Data are averaged over the years 1972 to 1975 Source: Fisheries and Marine Service surveys, 1972 to 1975 - 66 -

fishing activity which takes place in the affected area each year. It also is used to show the number and percentage of sport fishing days which are attributable to affected and non-affected waterways by residence category. According to the information presented in this table, 22,375 days of non-resident Canadian fishing activity take place on waterways directly affected by the Kemano II project each year. Similarly, 16,650 non-Canadian days of sport fishing activity take place on the same water­ ways. Over 54 percent of the affected area's total non-resident fishing effort is on waterways affected by Kemano II. The affected area supports a total of 72,000 non-resident days of angling activity each year.

In order to assess the influence sport fishing opportunities have on the affected area's economy, it is necessary to determine the part sport fishing plays in attracting non-residents to the area. This information is presented in Tables 3:12 and 3:13 which indicate the

TABLE 3:12

SPORT FISHING'S IMPORTANCE IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT NON-RESIDENT FISHERMEN VISIT THE AFFECTED AREA

In the Absence of Sport Non-Resident Fishing Opportunities Canadian Non-Canadian % % Party would not have visited the affected area 37,3 43.6

Party would have shortened their trip to the affected area 19.6 21.4

Party would have substituted other activities 43.1 35.0

TOTAL 100.0 100.0

reasons non-resident fishing parties visit the area. The information - 67 -

presented in Table 3:12 indicates the degree to which sport fishing in­ fluences non-resident fishermen to visit the affected area. According to the information presented in this table, almost 57 percent of non-resident Canadian sport fishermen would not have visited the area or would have shortened their visit to the area if no sport fishing opportunities had been available. Similarly, 65 percent of non-Canadian sport fishermen would not have visited the area or would have shortened their stay while in the area if no fishing had been available. Over 37 percent of non­ resident Canadians and almost 44 percent of non-Canadians would not have visited the affected area if sport fishing had not been available.

TABLE 3: 13

NON-RESIDENT CANADIAN AND NON-CANADIAN VISITING FISHING PARTIES ACCORDING TO THE MAIN REASON FOR VISITING THE AFFECTED AREA - 1972 to 1975

Non-Resident Non-Canadian Canadian Parties Parties % % Sport Fishing 43.5 39.0 Scenic Beauty 8.8 18.l Vacationing 13,l 10.5 Sightseeing 11.3 14.3 Visiting Friends and Relatives 8.3 3.8 Passing Through Area 5.3 8.6 Business in Area 5,8 2.9 Other Reasons 4,0 2.9

TOTAL 100,0 100.0 = = Source: Fisheries and Marine Service Surveys, 1972 to 1974.

Information which shows the main reasons why non-resident Canadian and non-Canadian fishing parties visited the affected area during the period 1972 to 1975 is presented in Table 3:13. According - 68 -

to this information, 43,5 percent of all non-resident Canadian fishing parties visited the area to participate in sport fishing activities. Almost one third of the non-Canadian fishing parties indicated that scenic beauty and sightseeing were main reasons why they travelled to the area. Over 13 percent of non-resident Canadian fishing parties and 10.5 percent of non-Canadian fishing parties indicated that vaca­ tioning was their main reason for visiting the area.

Table 3:14 is used to show the sport fishing species prefer- ences among non-resident Canadian and non-Canadian fishermen visiting the

TABLE 3:14

SPORT FISHING PREFERENCES AMONG NON-RESIDENT CANADIANS AND NON-CANADIAN FISHERMEN VISITING AFFECTED AREA

Preferred Species Non-Resident Canadian Non-Canadian 3 3 Salmon 35,3 32.3 Trout 34,0 41.5 Steelhead 21,5 19.1 1 Other 3,7 1.8 No Preference 5.5 5.3

TOTAL 100.0 100.0

1 Other includes Lake Trout, Dolly Varden and Kokanee

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service Surveys, 1972 to 1974,

affected area during the period 1972 to 1975. According to this infor­ mation, salmon, trout and steelhead were the three species most preferred by non-resident visitors to the area. Salmon was slightly more important than trout among non-resident Canadians while trout was considerably more - 69 -

important than salmon among non-Canadians.

The information presented in Table 3:15 shows the annual non­ resident expenditures which are attributable to sport fishing on Kemano II affected waterways and other waterways in the affected area, Total expenditures in the affected area by non-resident Canadian and non-Canadian fishing parties averaged, respectively, $831,700 and $706,900 over the four year period 1972 to 1975. Slightly more than one third of all non- resident Canadian and non-Canadian expenditures can be attributed to waterways affected by the Kemano II hydro development project. The total non-resident expenditures which are attributable to waterways affected by Kemano Phase II averaged $518,500 over the four year period.

The information provided in Tables 3:11, 3:12 and 3:15 permits calculation of the average net economic benefits generated by non-resident 7 fishing activity on the waterways affected by Kemano II. It is usually assumed that only a portion of the total non-resident expenditures (which in this case are shown as directly attributable to non-resident fishing on waterways affected by Kemano II in Table 3:15) can be considered a net return to the local population. This is done in the belief that if no sport fishing was available on the affected waterways, then all of the labour and capital employed to service sport fishermen would be employed 8 elsewhere in the area and would earn approximately the same returns. This would be the appropriate approach if the assessment was done at the provincial level. However, in the small area of concern here, it is more realistic to assume that in the absence of fishing related employment, most of the labour currently employed servicing non-resident sport fisher­ men would move to new locations outside the affected area. Thus in this assessment, the portion of a fishermen's spending which benefits the

7 A detailed description of how expenditures attributable to sport fishing activity in the affected waterways are calculated is presented in Appendix VIII. 8 It is assumed that competitive market structures would ensure that wages and other payments to factors of production would remain about the same. TABLE 3 :15

ANNUAL EXPENDITURES ATTRIBUTABLE TO SPORT FISHING ON WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO II, TO SPORT FISHING OTHER WATERWAYS IN THE AFFECTED AREA, TO OTHER NON-FISHING ACTIVITIES AND TOTAL FISHING PARTY EXPENDITURES BY RESIDENCE CATEGORIES - 1972 to 1975 (averaged over 4 years 1972 to 1975 and rounded $100)

Non-Resident Expenditures Attributable to: Canadian Non-Canadian Total

$ % $ % $ %

Fishing on Waterways Affected by Kemano Phase II 247,100 29.7 271,400 38.4 518,500 33.4

Fishing on Other Waterways in the Affected Area 204,700 24.6 235,900 33.4 440,600 28.6

Activities Other than Fishing in the Affected Area 379,900 45.7 199,600 28.2 579,500 37.7

Total Fishing Party Expenditures in the Affected Area 831,700 100.0 706,900 100.0 1,538,600 100.0 - 71 -

area's residents includes all the payments made to the various factors of production (labour and capital) which are located in the area. This 9 local income component refined by the multiplier, provides a reasonably satisfactory estimate of the total net benefits generated by non-resident sport fishing on waterways affected by Kemano II.

The average net economic benefits generated in the affected area as a result of sport fishing activity on affected waterways during the period 1972 to 1975 is shown in Table 3:16. This table shows that _1 the non-resident Canadian and non-Canadian fishing expenditures attribu­ table to the affected waterways produce a local income component of ! $155,500. Using a multiplier of 1.35, the total net economic benefits Ii t generated by non-resident sport fishing on waterways affected by Kemano II ! ¥ amounts to $209,900. i i t Table 3:17 is used to show the present value of non-resident i and non-Canadian expenditures that are attributable to waterways affected I by Kemano II at a discount of 7, 9 and 11 percent to the year 2024. This l~ I - ii table shows that the present discounted value of non-resident Canadian II' l expenditures range from a high of $3,521,000 to a low of $1,858,000, assu­ ming that non-resident Canadian participation will grow at 8 percent per !I ! annum to 1985, at 5 percent per annum from 1986 to 2000 and at zero there­ after. The presented discounted value of non-Canadian expenditures, as­ suming no growth rate between 1976 and the year 2024, ranges from a high 10 Ii of $1,623,000 to a low of $1,103,000. The total present discounted I I 9 The local income component is precisely that portion of each dollar spent in the area which remains in the local economy and contributes to I the profits of the local businessmen, adds to the wages of the local i employees, becomes taxes for local government or rent for local land­ I owners. The multiplier is an economic concept which normally refers to the successive rounds of spending on locally sold goods and services which will ultimately increase the profits, wages, taxes and rents within the local economy. 10 These growth rates are consistent with attendance records of Provin­ cial campgrounds located in the affected area. They are also consistent TABLE 3 :16

ANNUAL NET ECONOMIC BENEFITS GENERATED IN AFFECTED AREA AS A RESULT OF SPORT FISHING ACTIVITY ON AFFECTED WATERWAYS DURING THE PERIOD - 1972 to 1975 (rounded to the nearest $100)

Net economic benefit generated by non-resident Non-Resident sport fishing on 1 Attributable Local Income waterways affected by 2 Expenditures Component Multiplier Kemano II

Non-Resident Canadians $247,100 $ 74,100 1.35 $100,000

Non-Canadians $271,400 $ 81,400 1.35 $109,900

TOTAL $518,500 $155,500 $209,900

1 Estimates of the local income component are based on information presented in Statistics Canada, 1966 Census Catalogue 97-643 Service Trades, and Catalogue 97-603 Retail Trade. Comparable information is not available from the 1971 Census or any source more recent.

2 The multiplier is estimated on the basis of other studies on local economies. See: Charles B. Garrison's "The Impact of New Industry: An Application of the Economics Base Multiplier to Small Rural Areas". Land Economics, 1972, vol. 48, pp. 329-337. B. H. Archer and C. B. Owen, "Towards a Tourist Regional Multiplier", Regional Studies, 1971, vol. 5, pp. 289-294. John Boland, The Importance of Fishery Resources in the Bella Coola Valley, Department of Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Vancouver, 1975. John Vanderkamp, The Growth and Impact of the Mining Industry in British Columbia, a study by Price Waterhouse and Co., 1968. - 73 -

value of non-resident expenditures ranges from a high of $5,144,000 to a low of $2,961,000. The best single estimate of the present discount­ ed value of non-resident sport fisheries affected by the Kemano II pro­ ject is $3,840,000.

TABLE 3:17

1 THE PRESENT DISCOUNTED VALUE OF NON-RESIDENT SPORT FISHERIES AFFECTED BY THE KEMANO II DEVELOPMENT (rounded to nearest $100)

Non-Resident Non- Discount Rate Canadian Canadian Total

7 percent $3,521,000 $1,623,000 $5,144,000 9 percent $2,538,000 $1,302,000 $3,840,000 11 percent $1,858,000 $1,103,000 $2,961,000

1 Present discounted values are calculated to the year 2024. It is assumed that non-Canadian participation will not grow during this period. It also is assumed that non-resident Canadian participation will grow at 8 percent per annum to 1985, at 5 percent per annum from 1986 to 2000 and at zero thereafter.

One other measure of the non-resident sport fishery's impor­ tance to residents living in the affected area is the number of jobs generated by expenditures which are attributable to the affected water­ ways. This information is provided in Table 3:18. Table 3:18 shows the average annual regional employment generated by non-resident expen­ ditures attributable to sport fishing on waterways affected by Kemano II for the period 1972 to 1975. According to the information presented in with fishing licence sales in the area. British Columbia's fishing lic­ ence sales to non-resident Canadians have increased at an average annual rate of about 10 percent over the ten year period 1963-64 to 1972-73 and at 7 percent thereafter. Campsite data indicate that non-resident Can­ adian activities increased at an average annual rate of about 13 percent over the past 5 years. Both fishing licence sales and Parks Branch Data show that non-Canadian activity in the area has not grown in recent years. - 74 -

TABLE 3:18

AVERAGE ANNUAL REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT (MAN-YEARS) GENERATED BY NON-RESIDENT EXPENDITURES ATTRIBUTABLE TO SPORT FISHING ON WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO II, 1972 to 1975

Non-Resident Non­ Canadians Canadians Total

Direct Employment Generated 18 20 38 Indirect Employment Generated 5 5 10

Total Employment Generated 23 25 48

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service Establishment Surveys, 1972 to 1975.

this table, non-resident Canadian expenditures generated 23 man years of employment. Similarly, non-Canadian expenditures generated 25 man years of employment. The total amount of employment which is directly and in­ directly attributable to expenditures by non-resident anglers fishing on waterways affected by Kemano II is 48 man years.

Other Value Considerations

Once again it is necessary to point out the shortcomings in­ herent in the foregoing analysis. It is virtually impossible to take into account all of the many factors which help determine the value of non-marketable commodities such as sport fishing, For this reason, the value of such commodities is often understated. For example, the expen­ ditures made by resident sport fishermen probably generate considerable economic benefits for people living in the affected area. However, in - 75 -

an effort to avoid the problems of having to determine the portion of expenditures local fishermen would not continue to make if no sport fishing were available (and the problem of double counting), resident sport fishermen expenditures are not included in the value calculations presented above.

In addition, many of the rivers located in the affected area 11 provide sport fishing opportunities which can be described as unique. Rivers like the Dean, Kispiox, Morice and Bulkley provide good quality fishing as well as other features which add to the recreational attrac­ tiveness of the area. It is not possible to take into account some of the values which may be generated by these waterways because of the di­ versity and selection of fishing opportunities which they introduce into the area.

Another limitation is that it is not possible to take into account resident sport fishermen's changing attitude towards the sport i fishery as a result of increasing urbanization and population growth. ~ -! Therefore, it has been assumed that fishermen living in the area would have preferences similar to those of the existing population so that a change in the quantity of fishing demanded will be proportional to the percentage growth in population. This is a simplifying assumption, which according to the changes which are taking place in most areas of North America, would tend to underestimate the real value of the area's sport fisheries over the time frame considered in this analysis.

Still another limitation is that the analysis carried out in this chapter is based on fishing activity which took place over the four year period 1972 to 1975. This was a period of considerable un­ certainty for the travelling public, particularly in northern areas of

11 As noted earlier in this chapter, the affected area contains many of British Columbia's best known and most highly regarded fishing rivers. - 76 -

British Columbia and in the area of concern in this analysis. For example, the flooding which occurred on most of the waterways located in the affected area would have had a detrimental affect on local fishing conditions during the spring and early summer of 1972, The gasoline crisis which was predominant in 1973 and 1974 is found to have discouraged many travellers from visiting British Columbia, and in particular,:this northwestern area of British Columbia. This period was also marked by a number of labour disruptions which had a considerable impact on the economic well-being of the affected area. All of these factors together could be expected to have considerable influence on both local and non-resident sport fishermen. It may be the case that the information based on data gathered during this period would tend to underestimate the actual amount of fishing activity which takes place in years when flooding, gasoline crises or strikes do not occur.

In this same vein, probably the most serious limitation is that the analysis carried out in this chapter is subject to most of the problems encountered when attempting to establish the economic value of recreational opportunities located in sparsely populated areas. Like most other attempts to measure the economic and social worth of recrea­ tional amenities, this analysis is based on current use levels. This practically always results in the underestimation of the economic value 12 of wilderness recreational opportunities.

Summary and Conclusions

The area where the impact of the Kemano II hydroelectric development project is likely to be greatest, and where the focus of the foregoing analysis was directed, is located in north central British

12 V. Kerry Smith, "Travel Cost Demand Models for Wilderness Recreation: A problem of Non-Nested Hypotheses", Land Economics, Vol. 51, No. 2, May 1975, pp. 103-111. - 77 -

Columbia where many of British Columbia's most highly regarded sport fishing rivers are located, The affected area has a resident population of approximately 113,200 persons who live in more than twenty different communities. Over one-third of the total resident population (38,000 persons) participate in 790,000 days of angling activity in this area each year. More than one-third of all of this activity (293,900 angling days) takes place on waterways which are directly affected by the Kemano II project. These same waterways support 22,375 non-resident Canadian and 16,650 non-Canadian days of fishing activity each year. According to the information presented in this chapter, almost 57 percent of the -iI non-resident Canadian and 65 percent of the non-Canadian visitors who generated this activity would not have visited the area or would have shortened their stay in the area if no sport fishing had been available. If f ! It is conservatively estimated that the non-resident fishing I activity that takes place on the affected waterways produces a local l [ income component of $155,000, generating 48 full-time jobs, each year f in the affected area. The total net economic benefits generated by I non-resident fishing on waterways affected by Kemano II amounts to $209,900 each year. The present discounted value of the non-resident Canadian sport fishing activity attributable to the affected waterways, for the period 1975 to the year 2024, ranges from a high of $3,521,000 to a low of $1,858;000. The present discounted value of non-Canadian expenditures for the same period ranges from a high of $1,623,000 to a low of $1,103,000, The total present discounted value of all non­ resident expenditures attributable to the affected waterways ranges from a high of $5,144,000.to a low of $2,961,000. The best single estimate of the present discounted value of non-resident sport fish­ eries affected by the Kemano II project is $3,840,000.

It is also estimated that the waterways affected by Kemano II generate $8,895,000 worth of free benefits for fishermen living in the affected area each year. The estimated present discounted value of this annual stream of benefits to the year 2024 ranges from a low - 78 -

of $144,431,000 to a high of $248,329,000. The best single estimate of the present discounted value of the stream of benefits accruing to resident sport fishermen as a result of waterways affected by Kemano II is $181,750,000.

The single best estimate of the present discounted value to the year 2024 of all sport fishing attributable to the waterways effec­ ted by Kemano II is $185,590,000.

The reader should be cautioned not to interpret the values presented in this chapter as representative of the total worth of the sport fisheries affected by Kemano Phase II to all society. The analy­ sis carried out in this chapter is done from a regional perspective. It is meant to show the value of the sport fishing opportunities to people living in that portion of British Columbia which was defined as the affected area. Thus, both the focus of attention and the conserva­ tive approach adopted in the analysis would mislead those who might interpret the values to have a broader meaning than is intended. CHAPI'ER FOUR

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACT OF THE KEMANO I I POWER DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON BRITISH COLUMBIA'S COMMERCIAL, INDIAN FOOD AND RECREATIONAL FISHERIES

The previous three chapters were used to estimate the economic and social value of the commercial, Indian food and recreational fish­ eries attributable to waterways affected by the Kemano II hydroelectric power project. In this chapter the purpose is to identify the economic _I and social losses which will occur as a result of the Kemano II project's impact on British Columbia's fishery resources. The economic and social losses associated with each feasible development option are assigned two economic and social cost estimates. These are: (1) a realistic assess­ I ment of the total economic and social losses that will be imposed on re­ sidents of the affected area and other British Columbians as a result of damage to the fisheries from a pessimistic point of view, and (2) a rea­ listic estimate of the total losses that will be imposed on residents of the area and other British Columbians as a result of damage to the fish­ eries from an optimistic point of view. This is done with the intention of providing a clear perspective of what losses are likely to occur. In other words, if the project does proceed, it is expected that the actual losses will fall somewhere between these two extremes. All loss calcula- tions presented in this chapter are based on the biological and engineer­ ing information gathered to assess the consequences of Kemano II and on the economic and social information presented in the first three chapters 1 of this volume.

1 The biological and engineering information gathered to assess the en­ vironmental consequences of the Kemano II project are presented in Volumes 1 to 6, inclusively, of this report. Although the analysis carried out in this chapter takes into account losses which would occur to all fish stocks, including the non-anadromous fish stocks, this chapter is prepared without the advantage of Volume 4 of this report which is to provide a biological assessment of the impact of the Kemano II project on resident fish populations. Nonetheless, regular consultation with Fish and Wild­ life officials, together with other documents produced by that agency, pro­ vide most of the information on resident fish stocks used in this analysis. - 80 -

Before proceeding however, it should be cautioned that the sum of the losses that are identified for each development within the project does not necessarily equal the total losses for the project. That is, total losses cannot be calculated by simply adding together the loss esti­ mates for each development. Further in this same vein, the reader should be aware that if the calculated losses are used in a manner other than intended, the results will be invalid. For example, it is not possible to manipulate the data to determine the separate effects of the project on individual waterways or individual fish stocks.

Analytical Framework

As noted elsewhere in this report, the Kemano II hydroelectric project is made up of four different developments which are likely to 2 have an adverse effect on British Columbia's fishery resources. These are the Nechako River diversion, the Nanika River diversion, the Morice Lake diversion and the Dean River diversion. Three of these developments, which together provide four different development options, are examined in this chapter. These four development options are: (1) the Nechako River diversion by itself, (2) the Nechako River diversion and the Nanika River diversion together, (3) the Nechako and the Morice Lake diversions 3 together, and (4) the combination of the Nechako, Nanika and Morice di- versions.

There are two basic reasons for not including the Dean in the following analysis. The first is that there is a paucity of biological and engineering information on the Dean River and its fish stocks. The second reason is that the Dean River is a quality wilderness recreational area which is not readily suited to standard economic evaluation tech-

2 The impacts resulting from additional flows into the Kemano River are not included in this chapter. 3 This development option would require the diversion of Morice Lake directly to the Kemano River, - 81 -

niques.. 4

The minimum flow conditions which are required to maintain historical levels of anadromous fish production have been identified for each development in Volumes 1 to 6 of this report. 5 These flow conditions are based on the spawning, incubation, rearing and migration requirements of chinook and sockeye salmon. The minimum required flow conditions and the waterways affected by each of the developments are as follows: (1) "In abnormally warm years the Nechako River diversion which affects the Stuart, Stellako, Nadina and the main stem of the I Nechako River, below Kenney Dam, would require a flow of up to 4,500 cfs at 45°F from the Nechako Reservoir to maintain

water temperatures below 68°F at the St~art River confluence --1 over the period July 20 to September 6. A minimum flow of I 1,000 cfs is required at all times in the Nechako River above I ~ the Nautley River confluence to protect chinook salmon. I (2) The Nanika River diversion which affects the Nanika River, Nanika Lake, Kidprice Lake, and under some conditions, Morice Lake requires a flow of 800 cfs over the period July 23 to October 31 each year. Beginning November 1 a flow of 250 cfs

4 This is not to imply that a properly designed economic study could not provide a reasonable estimate of the economic value of the fish stocks in the Dean River, but rather to suggest that the economic approaches used to investigate the more commonplace problems presented by developments on the Nechako, Nanika and Morice Rivers are not suitable for examining the Dean. A separate economic assessment using the Krutilla approach should be undertaken on the Dean. See: John V. Krutilla, Charles J. Cicchetti, A. Myrick Freeman III, and Clifford S. Russell, "Observations on the Economics of Irreplaceable Assets," Environmental Quality Analysis: Theory and Method in the Social Sciences, Allen V. Kneese and Blair T. Bower ed., Resources for the Future Inc., Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1972.

5 It is assumed that these minimum flow conditions also will be sufficient to maintain steelhead trout production at their optimum levels. - 82 -

6 is required until natural flows drop below this leve1. (3) The Morice Lake diversion which affects Morice River and Morice Lake requires 2,800 cfs over the period May 15 to October 31 and a flow of 1,000 cfs over the period October 31 to December 31 each year. During the period January 1 to May 15, except at those times when natural flows fall below this level, a flow of 500 cfs is required.

The complex nature of the environmental problems created by a project as large as Kemano II makes the precise identification of speci­ fic damages extremely difficult. Minor alterations to the aquatic envi­ ronment may have a major, unpredictable, impact on existing fish stocks. By the same token, a major alteration to the environment may have a less detrimental impact than expected. In some situations, the biological and engineering investigations provide only an educated guess on the most pro­ bable impacts. Therefore, it is assumed that if the flow requirements out­ lined above are maintained, the Kemano II project will have no detrimental

~ffect on existing anadromous fish stocks and only a small effect on the sport fishing activity which is dependent on resident fish populations.

The Economic and Social Costs of Kemano II

Among the many factors which make it difficult to estimate the value of the fisheries losses is the uncertainty of precisely when the losses will occur and the unpredictability of how society's values will change over time. All the fishery values established in this presentation to this point are presented in 1975 dollars and discounted over the 50 year period 1975 to 2024. It follows therefore, assuming all other factors equal, that the further into the future the losses occur, the less costly they are to society. This is a somewhat arbitrary assumption which to some extent ignores the fact that many fish losses do not take place on

6 These flow conditions do not preclude the possibility of fishery losses due to the introduction of parasites into the Nechako River system from Nanika and Kidprice Lakes. - 83 -

one occasion but tend to occur slowly over time. A fish population's future may be doomed long before it is discovered or becomes apparent to those responsible for protecting its existence. In an effort to avoid these problems and to emphasize that small, almost imperceptible, damage to a given stock of fish over a period of time can have a devastating ef­ fect upon a fish population, all value loss estimates are calculated as if the losses occurred during 1975. This is equivalent to assuming that the value of the fishery losses caused by the Kemano II project do not diminish - or that the losses are exactly offset by society's changing I attitude towards the fisheries - over the 50 year period (1975 to 2024) --i considered in this analysis.

I Another factor which makes it difficult to determine the ulti- I I mate economic effects of this hydroelectric project on British Columbians f is the unpredictable relationship between sport fishermen and fish stocks. It is commonplace to believe that anglers are interested solely in catch­

I! ing fish. However, there are other dimensions to the activity of fishing. I l i Many sport fishermen enjoy the seclusion, companionship, aesthetic beauty I --1' and other related enjoyments of sport fishing. The recognition of these f relationships suggests that in some circumstances, partial elimination ( of a waterway's fish populations may totally destroy its value as a sport l fishery. In other circumstances, partial elimination of fish stocks will have no effect on sport fishing activity. In the absence of other infor­ mation, it is assumed in this presentation that recreational sport fishing I is affected in direct proportion to fish losses. In other words, a 20 percent decline in a particular fish population will result in a 20 per- cent decline in sport fishing activity. Information on the timing of I fish runs and on the preference of sport fishermen are also included in I the calculations used to estimate fishery value losses.

I The value loss estimates presented here are based on the fol- lowing premises: First, that it is reasonable to believe that a project as large as Kemano II, which is designed to alter the flow regimes of several major fish producing waterways, will almost certainly cause some - 84 -

minimal amount of damage to fisheries. Second, that it is reasonable to believe that any damage to fish habitat is most likely to occur either during the construction phases or during the early years of the project's operation. Third, that it is reasonable to expect that alterations to the aquatic environment may cause considerable harm to the affected water­ ways' fish populations without being apparent or immediately detected by those responsible for protecting their existence. Fourth, that it seems probable that damage to fisheries located in premium sport fishing areas, such as the area of concern in this analysis, will have an immediate and predictable effect on sport fishermen.

Table 4:1 is used to show the total potential economic and soc­ ial losses for each development option within the Kemano II project. Ac­ cording to the information presented in this table, the potential economic and social losses to the commercial fishery production of the area range from a low of $96,442,000 to a high of $115,853,000, depending on the al­ ternative developments included in the project. Similarly, the Indian food fishery loss potential ranges from a low of $2,257,000 to a high of $2,655,000. The sport fishery loss potential ranges from a low of $61,758,000 to a high of $154,887,000. The total losses, including all three fishery components, for each development option are: $160,457,000 for the Nechako diversion alone, $189,964,000 for the Nechako and Nanika diversions together, $250,283,000 for the Nechako River and Morice Lake diversions and $273,395,000 for the combination of the Nechako, Nanika and Morice diversions. In addition the percentage loss to existing Indian income amounts to roughly 6 percent for each development option considered within the overall project. The potential employment losses in the area as a result of damage to the sport fisheries is between 6 and 23 man years.

The set of potential value losses presented in Table 4:1 repre­ sent a realistic estimate of the value of economic and social losses that would occur if serious damage is imposed on all the fisheries that have been identified by the biological and engineering investigations as likely ' --~ ...----· _....,.,,...,._,,_..,"""""...... ,,,.....,..,.,,. • ..,,,~-..,..,,.,..,,.~"---C'•?''~l,TI"""""°",,_,,.~,,-~, • .,...,,.,;_,-_•.,.,..,,,o~·~=-""""...,..,, ..... ~,·~-"'"=''="°"r"'""""""'.-0..,._~>'00-'•l~•=...,..""""""''l"'"''~·-~-I -·~-

TABLE 4:1

ESTIMATED TOTAL POTENTIAL FISHING VALUE LOSSES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THE IDENTIFIED 1 DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES (rounded to the nearest $1000 - 1975 dollars)

Commercial Fisheries Indian Food Fisheries Sport Fisheries ---Total Percentage to Loss 2 Value Indian Income Value Employment Value Value -$- -$- -$- 3 -$- #

160,457,000 Nechako 96,442,000 2,257,000 6.1 61,758,000 6 Nechako Nanika 98,981,000 2,329,000 6.2 88,654,000 7 189,964,000 Nechako Morice 113,314,000 2,583,000 6.6 134,386,000 22 250,283,000 Nechako Nanika and Morice 115,853,000 2,655,000 6.7 154,887,000 23 273,395,000

1 All value loss estimates are calculated using a 9 percent discount rate.

2 The percentage loss to Indian Income is based on the percentage loss of income among all Indians participating in the Indian Food Fisheries affected by Kemano II on the Fraser and Skeena River Systems. - 86 -

to be harmed by Kemano II. These estimates are an accurate reflection of the value of fish related losses should one major flow disruption occur at each of the developments included within the project each year over the first 5 years of the project. They also approximate the value of the losses that would occur if each year class is subjected to severe harm over the period 1975 to 2024. A number of major flow disruptions or a series of minor fishery mishaps on each development could have the same overall effect should the resulting damage be of sufficient severity to cause serious damage to each year class.

Table 4:2 shows the estimated total economic and social fishery value losses associated with each of the identified development options assuming only intermittent disruption of the optimum flow conditions. That is, the value losses that would occur if disruptions to the optimum flow conditions occur only once every 4 or 5 years (depending on the waterway) over the 50 year period 1975 to 2024. The information pre­ sented in this table shows that, depending on which options are included in the project, if there is only intermittent disruption of the optimum flow conditions, the economic and social losses to the commercial fish­ ery production in the area range from a low of $24,049,000 to a high of $28,535,000. The value losses to the Indian food fishery range from $564,000 to $666,000, and the sport fishery losses range from $7,449,000 to $35,393,000. The total losses, including all three fishery compon­ ents, for each development option are: $32,062,000 for the Nechako di­ version, $39,388,000 for the Nechako and Nanika diversions together, $58,975,000 for the Nechako, Morice River diversions and $64,594,000 for a combination of the Nechako, Nanika and Morice diversions. The loss of Indian income as a result of intermittent disruptions to opti­ mum flow conditions is between 1,5 and 1.8 percent of existing income. The loss of permanent employment due to damage to the sport fisheries ranges from a low of 1 to a high of 6 man years.

In contrast to the total projected damage estimates presented in Table 4:1, Table 4:2 presents a more optimistic view of the potential TABLE 4:2

ESTIMATED TOTAL FISHING VALUE LOSSES 1 ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THE IDENTIFIED DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES ASSUMING INTERMITTENT DISRUPTION OF OPTIMUM FLOW CONDITIONS (rounded to the nearest $1000 - 1975 dollars)

Commercial Fisheries Indian Food Fisheries Sport Fisheries Total Percentage Loss of Loss To Permanent 2 Value Value Indian Income Value Employment Value -$- -$- 3 -$- # -$-

Nechako 24,049,000 564,000 1.5 7,449,000 1 32,062,000 Nechako Nanika 24,677,000 581,000 1.6 14,130,000 1 39,388,000 Nechako Morice 27,921,000 649,000 1. 7 30,405,000 5 58,975,000 Nechako Nanika and Morice 28,535,000 666,000 1.8 35,393,000 6 64,594,000

1 All value loss estimates are calculated using a 9 percent discount rate.

2 The percentage loss to Indian income is based on the percentage loss of income among all Indians participating in the Indian Food Fisheries affected by Kemano II on the Fraser and Skeena River Systems. - 88 -

losses. The loss estimates presented in this table are based on the assumption that only one fish year class will be severely damaged over the period 1975 to 2024. The losses presented in this table accurately reflect the fish related costs of the project should one major flow dis­ ruption occur at each development in the project over the 50 years 1975 to 2024. They also approximate the value losses which could result from a number of minor fishery mishaps if only a very small portion of all year classes are destroyed. However, any serious fishery damage which occurs more frequently than once every 4 or 5 years (depending on the waterway and the fish population) at each development over the 50 years of concern in this analysis, will result in value losses in excess of those presented in Table 4:2. The probability of more than one serious fishery mishap having an impact on the same year class is extremely small.

Ther~fore, the fishery loss estimates presented in this table are consi­ dered optimistic.

The value loss estimates presented in this section are meant to provide a realistic view of the economic and social costs which are imposed on the people of British Columbia as a result of damage to Bri­ tish Columbia's fishery resources because of the Kemano II hydroelectric project. The range of costs represented by the two sets of value loss estimates presented in Tables 4:1 and 4:2 does not permit precise calcu­ lation of the economic and social losses which would result from a par­ ticular development plan. There remains far too little biological in­ formation on the precise physical consequences of the development. This is partly because of the complex manner in which the Kemano II project will affect fish populations. It is also partially due to the fact that no detailed development plan has been available. Nonetheless, the two sets of value loss estimates presented here do provide a range which realistically reflects the fishery related costs of the project to Bri­ tish Columbians. It is expected that the actual economic and social costs of the project will fall somewhere between the two sets of estimates pro­ vided for each development option. The range of the fishing value loss estimates for each development option are presented in Table 4:3. - 89 -

TABLE 4:3

ESTIMATED FISHERY VALUE LOSSES ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF THE IDENTIFIED DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS SHOWING THE RANGE OF VALUES BETWEEN INTERMITTENT OPTIMUM FLOW DISRUPTIONS AND TOTAL POTENTIAL LOSSES 1

Total Fishing Value Assuming Intermittent Total Potential Disruption of Optimum Fishing Value Flow Conditions Losses $ $

Nechako 32,062,000 160,457,000

Nechako Nanika 39,388,000 189,964,000

Nechako Morice 58,975,000 250,283,000

Nechako Nanika Morice 64,594,000 273,395,000

1 All value loss estimates are calculated using a 9 percent discount rate. - 90 -

Other Considerations

One important issue which has not been addressed in this assessment of fishery value losses is the distribution of costs and benefits. Those segments of the population which are likely to enjoy the greatest gains from new electric development facilities are not necessarily the same segments of society which are disadvantaged because of the project. This is true of the Kemano II hydroelectric project as it is true of practically all other hydroelectric developments in 7 British Columbia and the world. The primary users of electric energy usually are people living in large urban centres and the industries located in these centres. In the case of the Kemano II project, large fish producing waterways are being altered mainly for the purpose of providing electrical energy for British Columbia's lower mainland areas. Yet, the people living in north central British Columbia and in areas adjacent to the Fraser and Skeena River systems are those most likely 8 t o b e a d verse 1 y affected by th e proJec· t . s·ince mos t of t h e peop l e living in this comparatively remote area of British Columbia, particu­ larly the Indian people, would not be inclined to use greater amounts of electrical energy than other people living in the province, the con­ struction of Kemano II is, to a large extent, at the expense of people living in the areas affected by the project.

Uncertainty enters into environmental decisions whenever the consequences of a decision cannot be foretold with confidence, which is to say almost always. Both in practical affairs and in theorizing

7 Robert Dorfman, Nancy S. Dorfman, ed., Economics of the Environment, W.W. Norton and Company Inc., New York, p. xxxii,

8 The disproportionate allocation of costs relative to the benefits gained from a hydroelectric project was referred to by a British Columbia Hydro spokesman during the recent dam hearings in Revelstoke, That spokesman stated that "The entire province stands to benefit from the economic electrical energy which the Revelstoke plant would produce ... on the other hand, there are local adverse impacts, some of which can be mitigated, some of which cannot." Vancouver Sun, June 23, 1976, p.2. - 91 -

about them it is frequently expedient to ignore uncertainty - to act as if the consequences are predicted accurately - in order to simplify pro­ blems. This is the course of action followed throughout this chapter. That is to say, the value loss estimates presented in this chapter, con­ sistent with the economic and social values presented in earlier chapters, are conservative and do not make any allowance for those impacts which the biological and engineering investigations have not been able to predict confidently, If Kemano River fish are destroyed or if the introduction of parasites from one waterway to another is found particularly harmful, the resulting damage could be a great deal more costly than the value loss estimates presented here.

Summary and Conclusion

The Kemano II hydroelectric project is made up of four differ­ ent developments which are likely to have an adverse effect on British Columbia's fishery resources. However, only three of these developments, which together provide four different development options, are examined in this chapter. These are: (1) the Nechako River diversion by itself, (2) the Nechako River diversion and the Nanika River diversion together, (3) the Nechako and the Morice Lake diversions together, and (4) the com­ bination of the Nechako, Nanika and Morice diversions.

Information on the minimum flow conditions required to main­

tain op~imum levels of anadromous fish production is identified for each of the developments. It is assumed that if these minimum flow conditions are maintained, the Kemano II project will have no detrimental effect on existing anadromous fish stocks and only a small effect on the sport fishing activity which is dependent on resident fish populations.

The economic and social costs of the Kemano II project's im­ pact on the fishery resources are presented in terms of value loss es­ timates. These value loss estimates are based on four premises: (1) that it is reasonable to believe that a project as large as Kemano II, - 92 -

which is designed to alter the flow regimes of s.everal major fish pro­ ducing waterways, will cause some minimal amount of.damage to the fish­ eries resources, (2) that it is reasonable to believe that any damage to fish habitat is most likely to occur.either during the construction phases or during the early years of the project's operation, (3) that it is reasonable to expect that alterations to the aquatic environment may cause considerable harm to the affected waterways' fish populations without being apparent or immediately detected by those responsible for protecting these resources, (4) that it seems probable that damage to the fisheries located in premium sport fishing areas, such as the area of concern in this analysis, will have an immediate and predictable effect on sport fishermen.

Two sets of value loss estimates are presented. The one set is a realistic estimate of the value of economic and social losses that could occur if serious damage is imposed on all the fisheries identified by the biological and engineering investigations as likely to be harmed by the Kemano II project. The other is a realistic estimate of the total economic and social value losses should only one year class be des­ troyed or seriously damaged by each of the development options considered in the analysis. The highest estimate of total fishing value losses that could occur because of the development is $273,395,000. The lowest esti­ mate of total fishery value losses that are likely to occur if only com­ paratively small damage is imposed on the fisheries is $32,062,000. It is expected that the actual economic and social costs of the project will fall somewhere between these two extremes.

Developments such as Kemano II inevitably redistribute society's resources in favour of those who advocate the development to the detri­ ment of those who oppose the development, In this case, the Kemano II project is generating electrical benefits foi most of British Columbia's population at the expense of those who use the fishery resources that are affected by the project. In this regard, it is shown that estimated loss to existing Indian income is between 6,7 and 1,5 percent. The estimated - 93 -

employment losses in the affected area as a result of damage to the sport fisheries is between 1 and 23 man years.

Even though the loss estimates presented in this chapter are developed on the basis of the best biological, engineering and economic information that is available, there is always the possibility that the resulting damage could be greater and a great deal more costly than in­ dicated here. This suggests that the impact of this project could be assessed with greater precision if further investigations were conduc­ ted on those waterways which are finally included in the project. This is particularly true of the Dean and Kemano Rivers where only minimal knowledge is currently available. Consequently, neither of these rivers was included in the analysis carried out in this chapter. CONCLUSION

The economic and social importance of the commercial, Indian food and recreational fisheries affected by the Kemano II hydroelectric power project are assessed from three separate perspectives in this pap­ er. The commercial fishery is assessed on the basis of its contribution to British Columbians and other Canadians. The value of the subsistence fishery is evaluated in terms of its contribution to the Indian people of British Columbia. The value of the sport fisheries is measured on the basis of the contribution that these sport fisheries make to people living in the north central area of British Columbia.

The various- diversions, spillways and pumping schemes that are included within the Kemano II project cover an area of approximately 40,000 square miles. The project directly affects four major river systems: the Fraser, Skeena, Dean and Kemano, These four river systems together and separately produce roughly 40 percent of British Columbia's total salmon and steelhead commercial catch. More important for the purpose of this presentation, it is estimated that the commercial production of salmon and steelhead attributable to that portion of each system which is directly affected by Kemano II exceeds 1,098,000 pieces each year. The potential net economic yield generated by this annual harvest is $7,851,000. The present discounted value of this stream of benefits over the period 1975 to 2024 is between a low of $116,856,000 and a high of $200,055,000. The best single estimate of value of this annual stream of benefits discounted at 9 percent per annum to the year 2000 is $148,843,000.

Nearly one-half of the 52,000 registered Indians living in British Columbia reside in areas adjacent to the Fraser and Skeena River Systems. Indians living in areas adjacent to the affected food fisheries, catch at least 48,600 pieces of salmon and steelhead each year that are attributable to the affected waterways. The present discounted value of this annual - 95 -

salmon and steelhead catch is between a low of $2,251,000 and a high of $3,311,000, The best single estimate of the value of this stream of bene­ fits, calculated at 9 percent per annum to the year 2024, is $2,659,000.

The additional percentage contribution to the income of Indians who actively participated in food fishing on the affected waterways during 1970 amounted to 6,3 percent. During that same year, the total Indian population living in the areas adjacent to the affected waterways en­ joyed an average addition to their income of 2.4 percent because of par­ ticipation in food fisheries affected by the Kemano II project.

The area where the impact of the Kemano II hydroelectric pro­ ject is likely to be greatest, and where the focus of the sport fishing analysis was directed, is located in north central British Columbia where many of the province's most highly regarded sport fishing rivers are located. This north central portion of British Columbia has a resident population of approximately 113,200 persons who live in more than 20 different communities. Over one-third of the total resident pop­ ulation participate in 790,000 days of angling activity in this area each year. More than one-third of all this activity, or 293,900 angling days, takes place on waterways which are directly affected by the Kemano II project. These same waterways support 22,375 non-resident Canadian and 16,650 non-Canadian days of fishing activity each year. Non-resident fishing activity generates net economic benefits of $209,900, and 48 full-time jobs, each year in the affected area. The present discounted value of both resident and non-resident sport fishing activity that is affected by the Kemano II project ranges from a low of $147,392,000 to a high of $253,473,000. The single best estimate of the present dis­ counted value of all the sport fishing activity that takes place in the affected area each year is $185,590,000,

The combined present discounted value of the commercial, Indian food and recreational fishing activity which is attributable to the water- - 96 -

ways affected by Kemano II, discounted at 9 percent per annum to the year 2024, is $337,092,000.

The Kemano II hydroelectric project comprises of four dif­ ferent developments which have been identified as likely to have an ad­ verse effect on British Columbia's fishery resources. However, only three of these developments, which together provide four different dev­ elopment options, are examined in this volume. These are: (1) the Nechako River diversion by itself, (2) the Nechako River diversion and the Nanika River diversion together, (3) the Nechako and the Morice Lake diversions together, and (4) the combination of the Nechako, Nanika and Morice diversions.

Information on the minimum flow conditions required to main­ tain optimum levels of anadromous fish production is identified for each of the developments. It is assumed that if these minimum flow con­ ditions are maintained, the Kemano II project will have no detrimental effect on existing anadromous fish stocks and only a small effect on the fishing activity which is dependent on ~esident fish populations.

The economic and social costs of the Kemano II project's im­ pact on the fishery resources are presented in terms of value loss es­ timates. These value loss estimates are based on four premises: (1) that it is reasonable to believe that a project as large as Kemano II, which is designed to alter the flow regimes of several major fish pro­ ducing waterways, will cause some minimal amount of damage to the fish­ ery resources, (2) that it is reasonable to believe that any damage to fish habitat is most likely to occur during the construction phases or during the early years of the project 1 s operation, (3) that it is rea­ sonable to expect that alterations to the aquatic environment may cause considerable harm to the affected waterways' fish production without being apparent or immediately detected by those responsible for protect­ ing these resources, (4) that it seems probable that damage to the fish- - 97 -

eries located in premium sport fishing areas, such as the area of concern in this analysis, will have an immediate and predictable effect on sport fishermen.

Two sets of value loss estimates are presented. The one set is a realistic estimate of the value of economic and social losses that could occur if serious damage is imposed on all the fisheries identif­ ied by the biological and engineering investigations as likely to be harmed by the Kemano II project. The other is a realistic estimate of the total economic and social value losses should only one year class be destroyed or seriously damaged by each of the development options con­ sidered in the analysis. The highest estimate of total fishing value losses that could occur because of the development is $273,395,000. The lowest estimate of total fishery value losses that are likely to occur if only comparatively small damage is imposed on the fisheries is $32,062,000. It is expected that the actual economic and social costs imposed on society because of damage to British Columbia's fishery re­ sources will fall somewhere between these two estimates.

Even though the loss estimates presented in this volume are developed on the basis of the best biological, engineering and economic information that is available, there is always the possibility that the resulting damage could be greater and a great deal more costly than in­ dicated here. This suggests that the impact of the Kemano II project could be assessed with greater precision if more detailed plans of the project were available or if further investigations were conducted on those waterways which are finally included in the project. This is par­ ticularly true of the Dean and Kemano Rivers where only minimal know­ ledge is currently available. Value loss estimates were not calculated for either the Dean or Kemano Rivers in this presentation,

In order to give the reader a good appreciation of how sensi­ tive the value calculations are to the discount rate, and to reflect the fact that the most appropriate discount rate may vary considerably over - 98 -

time, all streams of benefits in this presentation are discounted at 7, 9 and 11 percent over the period 1975 to 2024. It is assumed that the best single estimate of the value of a stream of benefits is pro­ vided using the 9 percent discount rate. Accordingly, only the 9 percent discount rate is used to calculate the losses of value presented in Chapter Four. The 50 year time period, over which all streams of benefits were discounted, is consistent with the lengthy period chosen by most power authorities to estimate the value of electrical energy. It could be argued that electrical facilities depreciate in value much faster than that of resources such as fisheries. However, this paper is not the appropriate medium for stirring such debate. It is only necessary for all to be aware that comparisons between the fishery's benefits identified here and other benefits will not be valid unless the value of other benefits are discounted at 9 percent per annum over the same period of time.

One final word of caution is necessary. Water from the Fraser, Skeena, Kemano and Dean Rivers is used for a variety of purposes. For example, water from these rivers is used for human and animal consump­ tion, domestic sewage, industrial waste, irrigation, transportation and recreation as well as for fish habitat. Although all of these uses provide benefits for British Columbians and Canadians, this paper is con­ cerned only with the economic and social costs imposed on society as a result of the Kemano II project's impact on the province's fisheries re­ sources. A complete assessment of the total economic and social conse­ quences of all the environmental damages imposed on society as a result of the Kemano II project would include a detailed examination of its impact on each of these other use activities. APPENDIX I APPENDIX I

ECONOMIC STATEMENT ON FISHERIES AFFECTED BY THE POWER DEVELOPMENT

By: William F. Sinclair November, 1971

Proper assessment of the implications of the Kemano Phase II development includes an economic evaluation of the affected stocks and their contribution to the commercial, native food, and recreational fish­ eries of the province. The data available at this time permits only a cursory look at the overall economic effect of the development. Nonethe­ less, it is obvious from the information available that the project as currently envisioned could result in considerable economic and social hardship to certain segments of the population and to the people of British Columbia. Practically every waterway directly or indirectly affected by the development makes some contribution to commercial, food, or recreational fisheries of the province.

A proper evaluation of the fishery problems associated with the development can only be made with specific reference to each proposal. However, preliminary investigation indicates that a potential commercial landed value loss of between $5 and $7 million annually (1971 dollars) could result from the project. Very roughly, in terms of wholesale values, this would amount to a total annual economic loss in the neigh­ bourhood of $12 million. Moreover, the localized nature of the commercial fisheries in the central coastal region suggest that in some instances loss of income through loss in fish production might cause greater than proportional hardship to certain small communities or Indian villages in thii area.

Studies conducted by the Fisheries Service and by the British - 100 -

Columbia Fish and Wildlife Branch * indicate that in excess of 14,000 resident sport fishermen live in the affected area. Preliminary estim­ ates suggest that perhaps as many as 440,300 angler-days fishing effort take place in both fresh and tidal waters annually by resident fishermen in and around the waterways which are to be incorporated in the develop­ ment. On this basis the area's total recreational fishery would be worth, when considering nonresident participation, well in excess of $3 million annually. The general trend towards more and more participation in all outdoor activities, together with improved facilities and greater access

to the fishing locations in this portion of t~~ province, suggest that

~" ·~ within the next five years the recreational value of the fishery could increase five or even ten times.

In addition to the commercial and recreational/. fisheries, the Indian food fishery is of economic importance to a large number of Indians throughout the province. On the two major river systems affected by the Kemano Phase II power development, the Fraser and the Skeena, there are in the neighbourhood of 1,800 food fish permits issued annually. These permits are issued to Indian families and not to individuals. On the basis of only four persons to a family, a loss of fish in either of the two major systems would, to some degree, affect the economic well-being of 7,200 individual Indians. On the Fraser River system alone, the Nadina and Stellako Rivers account for more than 22 percent of the total Fraser River food catch, As yet, similar estimates have not been developed for the Morice Lake or for the Morice, Kemano, Nanika, and Dean Rivers. However, salmon and steelhead stocks destined for all of these waterways are exploited by significant Indian food fisheries.

The foregoing estimates are based for the most part on existing use of the affected fisheries. In many cases, the total commercial, and especially the recreational benefit potential, is far in excess of the rough value estimates provided here. Some of the rivers included in the

* Study Report No. 4 & 5 on the Economics of Wildlife and Recreation by Pearse Bowden Economic. ._. Consul tan ts Ltd. - 101 -

development have produced runs of several times their current production. It is our belief that in every case when assessing the effect on a par­ ticular river, realistic estimates of total potential fish production should be taken into consideration. This is especially important in light of the diminishing number of waterways which are available solely for fish habitat and the decline in the number of areas which support good quality steelhead and chinook salmon fishing.

The particular area of the province in which this power devel­ opment will take place is one of the main production areas for chinook #!.~ ; salmon and steelhead on the coast. Chinook salmon on a per pound basis •, is our most valuable salmon, and steelhead and chinook salmon are two of the most prized sport fish species available,

Consistent with the belief that potential production should be given consideration, it must be remembered that the very rough values used here are adopted on a "user approach" basis. There are also values over and above user values which should be taken into account. Many Canadians gain considerable utility just from knowing that good fishing and an aesthetically pleasing environment are available. The opportunity to fish, even if never taken advantage of, is worth something to the average citizen.

It is the responsibility of the Fisheries Service of the Department of the Environment to ensure that water resource developments are not pursued at tiie expense of the fisheries resource. Experience has shown that provision of adequate fisheries flows and the maintenance of the natural aquatic environment is the best guarantee to assure the perpetuation of fish stocks. In some instances compensatory facilities such as spawning channels or hatcheries may be considered as a possible alternative. The choice of technique used has to be adapted to the species and problems encountered on the specific river. However, such facilities have not always been successful. In addition they require high capital, operating and maintenance costs and are prone to mechanical break- downs and human error. - 102 -

The method or alternative adopted for maintaining existing fish stocks will depend on the biological, engineering and economic findings of studies initiated for this express purpose. ,. I

APPENDIX I I l I ! I ! I --l\ ! I APPENDIX II

PROGRESS ON RESEARCH INTO THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE KEMANO PHASE II POWER DEVELOPMENT ON NORTHERN FISHERY RESOURCES JANUARY 1975

The Economics Unit, Northern Operations Branch, has been gath­ ering data to evaluate the economic and social consequences of the pro­ posed Kemano Phase II power development on central northwestern fisheries since early 1972. Almost every waterway affected by the proposed project makes some contribution to the commercial, recreational and Indian food fisheries of British Columbia. Thus, a comprehensive assessment of the impact of the Kemano Phase II power development requires that an evalua­ tion of the fisheries associated with each of the affected waterways is undertaken, Commercial and Indian food fish catch statistics are col­ lected on an ongoing basis and major surveys of sport fish activity were carried out during the summers of 1972, 1973 and 1974. A mail survey of sport fish licence holders who reside in northwestern British Columbia is currently underway. The information gathered in these surveys together with information which will be gathered during the summer of 1975 will make it possible to provide fairly accurate information on the total socio-economic impact of the Kemano Phase II power development on those segments of the population which are dependent on fisheries located in central northwestern British Columbia.

! I Commercial fishing cat9h statistics have been gathered and com­ I piled by the Fisheries and Marine Service for many years. Similarly, the ! Fisheries and Marine Service has kept records of their estimates of fish caught by Indians for over 20 years. Data from these two sources will I provide the basic background material necessary to measure the overall impact of the Kemano Phase II power development on British Columbia's commercial fishing industry and the Indian food fishery. Preliminary - 104 -

information indicates that proceeding with the project as proposed by the B. C. Energy board will inflict considerable hardships on segments of the commercial fishing industry and the native Indian population. Estimates on the present and potential value of the affected commercial and Indian food fisheries will be included in the final report.

The economic value of the recreational fishery is particularly difficult to assess. There are two areas of concern when measuring the economic and social impact on regional sport fisheries. The first area of concern is the impact on the indirect benefits that accrue to British Columbians as a result of nonresident participation in the affected sport fisheries. The second area of concern is the impact on the direct benefits accruing to residents who use the resource. This greatly com­ plicates the problem of providing acceptable estimates on the economic losses to sport fishermen. The problem is further complicated by the difficulties associated with identifying the degree and amount of harm that could occur to particular fish stocks. Because o.f the complexity of the task and the controversy that is likely to surround the issue, most of our research efforts have been directed at the recreational aspects of the fishery's resources.

During the summers of 1972 and 1973 major field surveys were carried out in northwestern British Columbia. A survey of business establishments was conducted, a campsite survey was carried out and sport fishermen were interviewed at well-known sport fishing locations. The business establishment questionnaire was designed to provide infor­ mation on the number of jobs and the income generated as a result of sport fishing activity. The campsite and sport fishermen questionnaires were designed to provide information on the total number of anglers in the area, their socio-economic backgrounds, their attitudes and their total expenditures. Much of the data gathered in these surveys was present~d in a report which was published in the spring of 1974.

Similar field surveys were carried out in the summer of1974. These surveys were designed to update the information gathered during the - 105 -

previous two years and to provide necessary additional information. The sport fishermen questionnaire and the survey procedures were revised slightly in order to determine the importance of sport fishing relative to other leisure time activities and to identify alternative recreational pastimes. Further, the length of the field program was extended into the fall of the year and a new section was inserted into the 1974 general questionnaire to include steelhead fishermen. This was deemed necessary because earlier studies indicate that the attitudes and values of steel­ 1 head fishermen differ from other less discriminating fishermen. These two sources together with information which was gathered by the Fish and Wildlife Branch during the fall of 1974 and the annual steelhead catch 2 statistics will give us information on the number of steelheaders, their attitudes and their total expenditures. I I ~ In addition to the general survey and the continuation of the ! establishment and campsite surveys, a telephone survey was conducted in l! Houston, Telkwa and Smithers during the summer of 1974. This survey pro­ l vided valuable information on resident angling effort. The field program ~ of 1974 updated our previous data and provided important additional infor-

I'i mation. I I The next phase of research involves the determination of direct f benefits accruing to residents using the sport fishery. To this end, a i mail survey of sport fishermen who reside in the central northwestern regions of British Columbia is being conducted. A sample of 3,200 sport fish licence holders has been drawn. This represents 12.5 percent of all I central northwestern resident licence holders. A questionnaire has been designed and it is being sent to the group chosen in the sample. Adver­ tistng is underway to ensure a good return and special care is being taken

1 Pearse Bowden Economic Consultants, The Value of Fresh Water Sport Fishing in British Columbia, Department of Recreation and Conservation, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria, 1971, Study Report No. 5. 2 Steelhead Harvest Analysis, Province of British Columbia, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria, B. C., 1970-71, 1971-72, 1972-73. - 106 -

to ensure that residents do not associate the survey with the Kemano power project. Every effort is being made in this survey to ensure an adequate return and telephone interviews will be used as a follow-up to increase reliability of the answers. It is expected that this survey will provide a very good estimate of direct benefits.

It is expected that the final report will be available by December 15, 1975, Table II:l outlines the progress of the research to date and indicates the final steps to be taken before the economic and social aspects of this report are completed. It can be seen that preparation of the final report requires biological and engineering input. Therefore, it is obvious that the final completion date is contingent upon how well the biological and engineering research proceeds. TABLE II: 1

PROGRESS ON THE ECONOMIC PORTION OF THE KEMANO PHASE II IMPACT REPORT TO DATE­ JANUARY 1975

Year Activity Length Results

1972 Establishment Survey May to September Data Survey of Sport -total anglers Fishermen -attitude of (Prince George to anglers Prince Rupert) -expenditures

1973 Establishment Survey May to September Report Survey of Sport (See Appendix II) Fishermen (Prince George to Prince Rupert)

1974 Establishment Survey May to November -update of Survey of Sport previous Fishermen information Survey of Steelheaders -new information (Prince George to Prince Rupert) Telephone Survey -total resident (Houston, Smithers, activity Telkwa)

I 1975 Mail Population January to Early -information I Survey of Residents Summer on direct I (Prince George to benefits to I Prince Rupert) residents I Data Analysis May to September

I Report Preparation September to I Completion I (b!,ogical and ~ (commercial fishery -1 engineering input) and Indian food fishery) i 1975 Preparation of Final Report

Estimated Completion Date - December 1975 APPENDIX III APPENDIX I I I

SUMMARY OF SURVEY METHODS AND RESULTS

The Economics and Sociology Unit, Northern Operations Branch of the Fisheries and Marine Service, has gathered data to evaluate the economic and social consequences of the proposed Kemano Phase II hydro­ electric project since early 1972, Most of these data were gathered in surveys that were carried out in the north central coastal areas of the province shown in Map I (page 168), The six types of surveys that were I I used are: 1. On-site surveys of sport fishing parties. i 2. Surveys of campsite visitors. in I 3. Surveys of business establishments. I 4. Telephone surveys of households. ! 5, Surveys of resident sport fishermen. I 6. A mail survey of Kemano residents. ! I The information gathered in each of these surveys and the I i results are presented in this appendix. A copy of each questionnaire and the enumerators' instructions for each type of survey are presented I on pages 127 to 147. I On-Site Surveys of Sport Fishing Parties

I During the summers of 1972, 1973 and 1974, on-site surveys were carried out in the north central area of the province (copies of I the questionnaires and enumerators' instructions are presented on pages -1 127 to 140). A sport fishing party was defined as a group of individ­ I uals travelling together in one vehicle which contained at least one angler who had already fished or intended to fish while in the area. The surveys were designed to determine the amount of sport fishing activity taking place in the area and to identify the participants. The "head-of-household" member of each contacted party was personally - 109 -

interviewed. The interview followed a strict and consistent format which usually took about eight minutes. Virtually all of the on-site interviews took place at one of five types of locations: on the shore­ line of lakes or rivers, in paid campsites, at fishing lodges, in wilderness campsites and at roadside picnic areas.

The 1972 and 1973 on-site surveys (see pages 127 to 134), were conducted during the months of July and August. Interviews con­ ducted during this two month period provided ample coverage of the summer trout and salmon sport fisheries. However, it did not provide adequate information on steelhead fishing activity. Steelhead fishing activity extends well into the fall and attracts large numbers of non­ resident sport fishermen from the United States and other parts of Canada. The 1974 on-site survey (see pages 135 to 139) was extended through October to obtain additional information on the steelhead 1 fishery. In addition, several questions were added to the 1974 questionnaire to help determine the value of the steelhead fishery to sport fishermen.

Table III:l is used to show the number of on-site surveys completed each year according to residence category. According to this table, 979 resident, 843 non-resident Canadian and 521 non-Canadian sport fishing parties were interviewed during the three year period. The average number of successful interviews completed each year was 781. This table also shows that there was a considerable variation between the number of successful interviews completed during each year over the three year period. This was not due to poor cooperation or due to in-

1 Additional information on the steelhead sport fishery was obtained from the series entitled Steelhead Harvest Analysis, compiled from post­ card questionnaire surveys of licenced steelhead anglers in British Columbia and published by the F'ish and Wildlife Branch of the provincial government. The reports covering the seasons 1971-72, 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75 were used. - 110 -

TABLE III:l

ON-SITE SURVEY OF SPORT FISHING PARTIES NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS BY RESIDENCE CATEGORY 1972, 1973 AND 1974

Yearly 1972 1973 1974 Total Average

Residents 422 235 322 979 326

Non-Resident Canadians 300 232 311 843 281

Non-Canadians 218 196 107 521 174

TOTAL 940 663 740 2,343 781 - 111 -

consistent interviewing technique, but because flooding, labour dis­ putes and the gasoline crisis strongly influenced the amount of trav­ elling which took place in the area during the study period.

The overall success of the on~site surveys is revealed by the information presented in Tables III:2 and III:3. The information presented in Table III:2 shows that 2.4 percent of all resident sport fishermen were interviewed in on-site surveys during 1972, 1.4 percent were interviewed in 1973 and 1.7 percent were interviewed in 1974. On average, 1.8 percent of all resident sport fishermen were included in the survey each year over the period 1972 to 1974.

The information presented in Table III:3 shows the non­ resident fishing party visits contacted in the survey as a percen­ tage of the total number of non-resident fishing parties visiting the area. It shows that 6.3 percent of non-resident Canadian party visits and 7.0 percent of non-Canadian party visits were included in the survey during the years 1972 to 1974.

There are many problems associated with the on-site survey method. Results may be biased because of misleading questions or be­ cause only the more ardent fishermen are included in the survey. To minimize these problems, considerable time was devoted to briefing the enumerators and constructing the questionnaires. The enumerators worked in pairs whenever possible in an effort to avoid any interviewing defic­ iencies that might develop because of interviewing alone over an ex­ tended period. Further, the statistical on-site bias problem was reduc­ ed by interviewing at locations not specifically connected with sport 2 fishing. In this regard, a substantial amount of time was spent inter-

2 For a description of the on-site bias problem see William F. Sinclair and R,W, Morley, "Statistical Bias Problem in On-Site Surveys: the Severity of the Problem and its Potential for Solution" in Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, vol. 32, no. 12, 1975, pp. 2520-2524. TABLE III:2

ON-SITE SURVEY OF SPORT FISHING PARTIES SURVEYED RESIDENT ANGLERS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL RESIDENT ANGLERS IN THE AFFECTED AREA 1972, 1973, 1974

Number of Resident Surveyed Resident Anglers Represented Total Numb er of Anglers as a Percentage Year in the Survey Resident Anglers of Resident Anglers No. No. %

1972 907 38,000 2.4

1973 545 38,000 1.4

1974 634 38,000 1. 7

AVERAGE 695 38,000 1.8 TABLE III:3 ON-SITE SURVEY OF SPORT FISHING PARTIES SURVEYED NON-RESIDENT PARTY VISITS AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL NON-RESIDENT PARTY VISITS TO THE AFFECTED AREA AVERAGE 1972, 1973, 1974

Number of Non-Resident Total Number Surveyed Non-Resident Party Visits Represented of Non-Resident Party Visits as a Percentage in Survey Party Visits of Total Party Visits No. No. %

Non-Resident Canadian 281 4,448 6.3

Non-Canadian 174 2,473 7.0

TOTAL 455 6,921 6.6 - 114 -

viewing sport fishermen at paid campsites and at roadside picnic stops. For this reason, on-site bias is not a problem in the non­ resident sample.

Similar techniques, however, could not be used to eliminate bias in the resident sample. Even though more than half of the resi­ dent interviews were carried out in campsites or roadside picnic stops, a relatively large number of resident parties were interviewed in shoreline surveys. For this reason, the resident sample probably contains a higher than normal portion of ardent anglers. Therefore, information obtained in the mail survey of sport fishermen was used to correct the on-site bias problem in the resident sample.

On-site surveys were found to be an effective method for gathering information on the sport fishing activity that takes place in the north central coastal areas of British Columbia. It was particu­ larly useful for gathering information on non-resident fishing parties. Although somewhat less useful for resident sport fishermen, a consid­ erable amount of information gathered in this manner was found to be accurate when cross-checked with the information from other sources. The fact that on-site surveys were conducted each year over a three year period also helped, Adjustments to the interviewing technique and alterations to the questionnaire substantially improved the quality of the information gathered using this technique.

Surveys of Campsite Visitors

In addition to the on-site surveys described above, surveys of campsite visitors were conducted at campgrounds in the north central coastal area during the summers of 1972, 1973, 1974 and 1975 (see pages 141 to 142 ). These surveys were designed to gather information that was comparable between fishing parties and non-fishing parties. It was intended that this type of survey would provide inexpensive infor­ mation on the relative importance of fishing to other recreational - 115 -

activities in the area. These "blitz" type surveys were conducted in the early evening, or immediately after the dinner hour, in campsites located throughout the area. The number of questions asked during these interviews were kept to a minimum. This was done to minimize the inconvenience to the interviewee and at the same time allow the enumerator to interview all the parties in the campground. Each camp­ ground was surveyed once a week over the summer period. The enumera­ tors were instructed to survey each campground a different weekday night each successive week. This was done to avoid any bias which would be inherent in only visiting certain campgrounds on particular days of the week.

Enumeration was conducted at all of the public and many of the private campgrounds in the north central coastal area. Included in the survey were Roosevelt Park, Prudhomme Lake, Lakelse Lake, Radley Park, 'Ksan, Smithers Municipal, McLure Lake and Beaumont camp­ grounds. Many private grounds around Francois Lake and west on Highway 16 were included in the survey.

Information on the number of campsite interviews according to residence category for each of the years 1972, 1973, 1974 and 1975 is shown in Table III:4. According to the information presented in this table, 1,153 residents, 1,089 non-resident Canadian and 761 non-Canadian parties were interviewed during the four summers 1972 to 1975. More than one-third, of the total 3,003 interviews carried out during this four year period, were completed during 1973. The large number of suc­ cessful interviews completed that year has no statistical significance and merely reflects the emphasis placed on this type of survey during that year.

Once again, it should be noted that good cooperation was ex­ perienced in the campsite surveys. These surveys were successful and did provide inexpensive information on a large percentage of the campers travelling through the area. The success of this survey is reflected in TABLE III:4

NUMBER OF CAMPSITE PARTY INTERVIEWS COMPLETED DURING CAMPSITE INTERVIEWS ACCORDING TO RESIDENCE CATEGORY 1972 - 1975

1972 1973 1974 1975 Total

Residents 214 580 75 284 1,153

Non-Resident Canadians 150 255 292 392 1,089

Non-Canadians 164 180 142 275 761

TOTAL 528 1,015 509 951 3,003 - 117 -

the fact that no changes were made to the original questionnaire developed in 1972. Over the four year period, only small changes were made to the interviewing procedure.

Survey of Business Establishments

A survey of business establishments was conducted in the north central coastal areas of the province during the summers of 1972, 1973, 1974 and 1975 (see questionnaire on page 143). The pur­ pose of this survey was to determine the sport fishermen's contribu­ tion to the business revenues and employment of the area. It also was intended that the information gathered in this survey would help det­ ermine the impact that a decline in the area's fishing opportunities would have on the local economy.

A list of the area's business establishments was taken from the telephone directory of the different communities in the area. Each business that catered to fishermen or other sport enthusiasts was in­ cluded on the original list. The list was later revised to ensure that it included all those businesses that were relevant. Only the owner or manager of each business establishment was interviewed. Each business on the list was revisited in subsequent years to update and improve the quality of the information.

Table III:5 is used to show the number of business estab­ lishment interviews conducted during each year over the four year period. According to this table, a high of 136 establishments were surveyed in 1975 and a low of 75 were surveyed in 1974. Ninety-nine of the 136 establishments were surveyed at least three times, while 75 were surveyed four times over the four year period.

Table III:6 is used to present the number and percentage of each type of establishment included in the survey. As shown in the table, the businesses surveyed included motels, fishing lodges, fishing - 118 -

TABLE III: 5

NUMBER OF BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS SURVEYED EACH YEAR 1972 TO 1975

Number of Year Businesses Surveyed

1972 99

1973 99

1974 75

1975 136 - 119 -

TABLE III :6

NUMBER AND PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENTS SURVEYED ACCORDING TO TYPE OF BUSINESS

Type of Business Number Percent

Hotel/Motel 66 48.5

Fishing Lodge/Resort 34 25.0

Campgrounds 13 9.6

Sporting Goods Stores 11 8.1

Hardware - Sporting Goods 10 7.4

Other 2 1. 5

TOTAL 136 100.0 - 120 -

resorts, campsites, sporting good and hardware stores which sell fish­ ing equipment. More than 48 percent of all the businesses included in the survey were either hotels or motels; 25 percent were fishing lodges or resorts.

Excellent cooperation was received in this survey. Most managers or owners of businesses were more than willing to cooperate with Fisheries and Marine Service personnel to ascertain the import­ ance of sport fishing to the area's economy.

Telephone Surveys of Households

During 1973 and 1974, telephone surveys were carried out in several major municipalities located in the north central coastal area of the province (see questionnaire pages 144 and 145). These surveys were designed to serve two purposes: First, it was intended that these surveys would provide information on the number of sport fishermen living in the area. Second, it was intended that these surveys would indicate the total number of days that resident sport fishermen went fishing in the area each year. The survey was carried out in Terrace, Kitimat and Prince Rupert during 1973. Residents of the towns of Smithers, Telkwa and Houston were surveyed during 1974.

The survey procedure involved randomly selecting a number of names and telephone numbers from municipal directories. Each household selected in .the sample was called and the enumerator asked to speak to the most ardent sport fisherman living in the household, If those contacted indicated that a fisherman did not live in their household this was recorded and no questions were asked. Each house­ hold selected in the sample was called repeatedly, throughout the summer, until contact was made. The enumeration took place during the evenings, immediately after the meal hour period, to ensure a min­ imum of inconvenience to the household. A fisherman, for the purposes of these surveys, was defined as a person who went fishing at least - 121 -

once each year.

Table III:7 is used to show the total number of persons and the percentage of the population included in the survey. According to the in­ formation presented in this table, 5,930 of the estimated 49,270 persons living in the six communities were included in the survey. This represents 12 percent of the total population living in the area.

For the purposes of the telephone survey, it was important to ensure that the enumerators were consistent in their approach. The enu­ merators always worked in pairs to coordinate and monitor each other's manner and to guard against errors. They were cautioned to be polite, to speak clearly and concisely and to thank each individual for his or her time and cooperation. This approach enabled the enumerators to obtain reliable information which made a positive contribution to other infor­ mation gathered during the study.

Surveys of Resident Fishing Licence Holders

A mail survey of resident sport fishermen was carried out dur­ ing January, February and March of 1975. The purpose of this survey was to establish the economic value of the free sport fishing opportunities available in the north central coastal area to its residents. The sur­ vey was conducted during the winter months so that respondents would be able to recall, with fair accuracy, the fishing activities of the previous summer. The choice of this three month period also permitted a timely telephone follow-up survey during the following summer. The results and the approach used in these two surveys are of sufficient importance that a more detailed description of the procedure and the results are presented in Appendix VII. Appendix VI is used to discuss the correctness of using this approach for determining resident sport fishing values.

Mail Survey of Kemano Households

During the summer of 1972, a mail survey of persons living in -···----·~------

TABLE III:7

TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONS AND PERCENTAGE OF POPUIATION SURVEYED IN TELEPHONE SURVEYS OF HOUSEHOLDS 1973 AND 1974

Total Total Number o:f Total Number Number of Number of Persons in Percentage o:f o:f Households Uncooperative Cooperative Cooperative Total Population 1 Contacted Households Households Households Population Contacted

Terrace 343 7 336 1,321 13,885 9.5 Kitimat 418 14 404 1,594 11,803 13.5 Prince Rupert 522 12 510 1,842 16,770 11.0 Smithers 178 4 174 648 3,868 16.8 Telkwa 47 47 194 712 27.2 Houston 85 3 82 331 2,232 14.8 - --- TOTAL 1,593 40 1,553 5,930 49,270 12.0 ---

1 Statistics Canada, 1971 Census. - 123 -

the town of Kemano was conducted. This survey was designed to help determine the amount of sport fishing activity carried out by Kemano residents and its importance to them. The questionnaire asked the number of sport fishermen in each household, the recreational activities in which the household members participated and the relative importance of sport fishing (see questionnaire and a reminder letter on pages 146 and 147).

A list of names and addresses was drawn from the telephone directory. Of the estimated 104 households in Kemano, 45 were included in the sample. The questionnaire was mailed out to the 45 households together with a covering letter explaining the survey. Reminders were sent to persons who did not respond to the first and second sends.

Table III:8 shows the results of the mail survey of Kemano households. Of the 45 households drawn from the sample, 5 had since moved away from the area, leaving a possible 40 households from which to receive answers. Of these 40, a total of 33 households replied. This was a response rate of 73,3 percent.

The information presented in Table III:9 shows the number of persons and the percentage of the total population included in the Kemano household mail survey. According to the information presented in this table, 31.8 percent of all the persons living in Kemano were included in the survey.

The information gathered in this survey was used in conjunction with other information gathered on resident sport fishermen to assess the activity and value of sport fishing in the north central coastal area of British Columbia.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The information gathered in the surveys described in this TABLE III:S

RESULTS OF 1972 :MAIL SURVEY OF KEMANO HOUSEHOLDS

Completed Returns as a Percentage Total Drawn Address Total Sent Number of of Total for Sample Unknown Out Completed Returns Sent Out

# # # # %

45 5 40 33 73.3 - 125 - .

TABLE III: 9

TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONS AND PERCENTAGE OF POPUlATION SURVEYED IN THE MAIL SURVEY OF KEMANO HOUSEHOLDS, 1972

Number of Persons Percentage of Number of Represented in Total Population Households Contacted Population Represented Contacted Households of Kemanol in Survey

33 110 346 31.8

1 Statistics Canada, 1971 Census. - 126 -

appendix is subject to error. However, the considerable care that was taken to train enumerators, to instill consistency and to employ reliable procedures helped to overcome many of the most common problems. More­ over, the long period of time over which most of these surveys were con­ ducted ensured fairly intense coverage of the area and allowed for a considerable amount of adjustment. Many of those included in the sur­ veys were contacted by field enumerators more than once. Members of households contacted by telephone volunteered that they had met field enumerators during family weekend excursions. Whenever interviewing procedure or enumeration technique was found to be in error, adjustments were made during the following period. It is doubtful that any area of North America ever has been surveyed more thoroughly, over such a lengthy period of time, to determine the economic value of a particular recrea­ tional resource. - 127 -

ON-SITE SURVEY OF SPORT FISHING PARTIES 1972 QUESTIONNAIRE (Lower Skeena River Watershed and Upper Fraser River Watershed)

NON-CANADIAN c::J NON-RESIDENT CANADIANc:J RESIDENT OF AREA c:J

Shoreline c::J Picnic l=:J Campsite c::J

Weather Conditions: Water Level: Sunny Hot High Clear· Cloudy Cool Normal Muddy Raining Cold Low

Place of Residence

1. How many people in your party? Adults Children ---- 2. (a) (Non-Canadian and Non-Resident) How many days have you fished on this trip? (b) (Resident) How many days do you normally fish each year?

3. How many nights have you stayed in a motel, hotel, cabin, fishing lodge, or resort in this area? 4. How many nights have you stayed in a public or private campsite in this area? ~------~ 5. Did you arrive in this area of British Columbia by: Car Bus Train Camper Plane Trailer Mobile Home Other 6. Have you rented a vehicle in this area on this trip (Resident - Yearly)? Yes CJ No r::::J 7. Have you rented a boat in this.area on this trip (Resident - Yearly)? Yes c::J NoCJ 8. Have you hired a guide in this area on this trip (Resident - Yearly)? Yes c:::J Noc:J 9. Have you bought equipment in this area on this trip (Resident - Yearly)? Yes c=I Noc:J - 128 -

10. What do you estimate your average expenditures per day to be?

11. (a) How many days will you be in Canada (Non-Resident)? (b) What is the total no. of days you will be on this trip? 12. How many days have you been in this area (Non-Resident)? ---- 13. How many more days do you plan to be here (Non-Resident)? -'----- 14. How many days have you fished in this area? 15. How many days do you plan to spend fishing in this area? 16. If there was no fishing available would you have made this trip anyway? Yes [::J No c:::J 17. How many days do you estimate that you have stayed longer because there is fishing in this area? ------~ 18. What species of fish are you most interested in catching?

19. Which of these species do you most prefer to catch? (List l through 4 with 1 indicating the most preferred choice, etc.)

Salmon Steelhead Trout Other

20. Have you and/or do you plan to fish in any of these waterways (Resident - this year)? Yes r:::J No c:J - 129 -

River, Lake or No. of Plans Stream Fished Days to Fish Species/ No. Species/ No. Species/ No.

Babine L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Babine R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Bulkley R. CJ ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( Burns L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Cheslatta L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ) ( ) Cluculz L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( Endako R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Exchamsiks R. [=:J ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ) Francois L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Fraser L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Gi tnado:i.x R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Kitsumkalum R. l:=J ( ) CJ ) ( ) ( ) Kitwanga R. CJ ( ) CJ ) ) ( ) Kispiox R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ) Khyex R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Kitimat R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ) Lakelse R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ) ,. MacLure L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) f CJ c=J I I Morice L. C:=J ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) I Morice R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) I' Nadina L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) I Ness L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) ! Nechako R. CJ ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) !' I Nulki L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ) Ootsa L. CJ ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) I Owen L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) I Skeena R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) 'I Stellako R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) I Stuart L. c=r ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Stuart R. c=i ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) I! Suskwa R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) - 130 -

River, Lake or No. of Plans Stream Fished Days to Fish Species/ No. Species/ No. Species/ No.

Takysie L. c:J ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Tchesinkut L. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Uncha L. c=J ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) Zymoetz (Copper) R. CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( )

Other: (specify) CJ ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) CJ ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) CJ ( ) c:J ( ) ( ) ( ) c:J ( ) CJ ( ) ( ) ( ) - 131 -

ON-SITE SURVEY OF SPORT FISHING PARTIES 1973 QUESTIONNAIRE

Date Location

Non-Canadian ---- Non-Resident Canadian ---- Resident Shoreline Paid Campsite Lodge Wilderness Camp Picnic

1. Place of residence ~------...,------2. No. of people in party (party defined as one vehicle): Adults Children 11 to 15 Children 10 and Under Fishermen Fishermen ------Fishermen 3. Occupation of head of household: Executive Managerial Retired Professional Technical or Tradesman Clerical or Sales ---- Labourer Self-Employed ---- Other ~------~ 4. What is your destination? (Non-Resident) 5. How many days will you be on this trip? ~------~ 6. How many days will you be in Canada? (Non-Resident) 7. How many days will you be in British Columbia? (Non-Resident) 8, How many days have you been in the area? (Non-Resident) 9, How many nights have you been in a public or private paid campsite in this area? (Resident - yearly) 10. How many more days do you plan to be in the area? (Non-Resident) 11. How many days do you normally fish each year (anywhere)?

12' How many days have you fished in this area? (Resident-yearly) 13. How many more days do you plan to fish in this area? (Resident­ yearly) 14. What are your average expenditures per day? 15. Besides fishing what other activities do you intend to participate in on this trip? Swimming Hiking Boating (motor) Sailing Picnics Visiting friends and/or relatives Hunting Canoeing Other - 132 -

16. What other activities do you participate in during the summer? winter? Swimming Hiking Boating (motor) Hunting Water-Skiing Picnics Skiing Snowmobiling Hockey Sailing Canoeing Photography Other 17. What are your reasons for coming to this area? List in order of importance. Friends and/or relatives Scenic Beauty Working in the area ----- Fishing ----- Vacation Passing through Other 18. If there was no fishing in the area, would you have made this trip anyway? Yes [=:J No(=1 19. How many days do you estimate you have stayed longer because there is fishing available in the area? 20. What type of fishing are you doing on this trip. What type do you prefer? Shoreline on a lake Shoreline on a river Boat on a lake Boat on a river Other 21. What species of fish are you most interested in catching here?

22. What species do you most prefer to catch? Salmon Trout Steelhead Other ------~ 23. Have you visited any other lake, river or stream in this area for any purpose other than fishing? Yesc::J Noc=J

24. (a) Do you plan to visit this area again this year? Yesc::J No [::=J (b) Do you plan to fish during the next visit? Yesc::JNoc=J 25. Were you interviewed by us in 1972? Yesc::JNo c:J - 133 -

No. of Plans River, Lake or Days to Stream Fished Fish Species No. Species No. Species No.

Binta L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Bulkley R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Burns L. ( . ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Cheslatta R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Cheslatta L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Cluculz. L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Endako R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Exchamsiks R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Francois L. ) ( ) ( ) ) Fraser L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Kitsumkalum R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Kitwanga R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Kispiox R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Lakelse R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Lakelse L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Mac Lure L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Morice L. ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Morice R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Nechako R. ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Nulki L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Owen L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Skeena R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Stellako R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Suskwa R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Tachick L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Takysie L. ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Tchesinkut ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Uncha L. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Zymoetz (Copper) R. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) - 134 -

No. of Plans River, Lake or Days to Stream Fished Fish Species No. Species No. Species No.

Other: (Specify)

( ) ( ) ) ( )

( ( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) - 135 -

ON-SITE SURVEY OF SPORT FISHING PARTIES

1974 QUESTIONNAIR~

Yes No

Date Time Location

Non-Canadian Non-Resident Canadian Resident

Place of Residence I I Shoreline Paid Campsite Wilderness Camp Picnic Site I ' I 1. What is the age of each member of your party? (Party defined as one t vehicle). How many sport fishermen are there in your party? I (indicate no. and age). I i Male Fishermen Female Fishermen 'r No. No. No. No.

0 9 years 10 - 19 years 20 - 29 years 30 - 39 years 40 - 49 years 50 - 59 years 60 - 69 years 70 and over

2. Occupation of head of household: Professional Managerial & Administrative Sales Clerical & Related Service & Recreational Processing Primary Transportation Construction Trades Retired Other

3. Type of business (company name and type )

4. How many days will you be on this trip? - 136 -

5. How many days will you be in British Columbia? (Non-Resident) 6. How many days have you been in the area? (Non-Resident) 7. How many nights have you been in a public or private paid campsite

in this area? (Resident-yearly; Non-Resident - so far this trip)~.-

8. How many more days do you plan to be in the area? (Non-Resident)~- 9. How many days do you normally fish each year (anywhere)? 10. How many days have you fished in this area (Resident-yearly)? 11. How many more days do you plan to fish in this area (Resident - yearly)? 12. What are your average expenditures per day? (a) On this trip in the area (b) On the average fishing trip (Resident only) 13, What are your reasons for coming to this area? (Resident - trip). List in order of importance:

Friends and/or relatives ~~~ Scenic Beauty Fishing ~~~ Working in the area Vacation Passing Through Other '· 4' :1.4. What do you consider as Ian alternative to fishing? (Resident only)

(movies, swimming, hunting, watching TV, etc.) 15. Besides fishing what other activities do you intend to participate in on this trip? Swimming Hiking Boating (power) Hunting Visiting friends and/or relatives Other 16. If there was no fishing in the area, would you have made this trip anyway? Yes C::J No c::J 17. How many days do you estimate you have stayed longer because there is fishing available in the area? 18. If you are fishing at this location, what species of fish are you most interested in catching here? 19. What species do you most prefer to catch in the area? Salmon Trout Steelhead Other 20. What is your favourite fishing location in this area? - 137 -

21. As a resident of the area what are the three most important recrea­ tional activities available to you in the area? (Residents only) 1. 2. 3. As a visitor to the area are there any features or amenities avail­ able in the area which you have particularly enjoyed? (Non-Residents only) 22. Are you planning to travel the Meziadin or Stewart-Cassiar Highways? Yes (Destination) No 23. If so, how many days will you be on that portion of the trip? 24. What is your main reason for going up to the Meziadin-Stewart­ Cassiar area? 25. If no fishing was available would you have made the trip to Meziadin- Stewart-Cassiar area anyway? Yes~ No CJ 26. If you did not have fishing available to you in this area what other leisure-time activity would you substitute for fishing?

STEELHEAD INSERT

27. What is your gross total household income? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 28. How many persons live in your household (Permanent place of residence?) 29. What would you be willing to pay rather than give up the right to fish for on this river? Per day -,-~~~~~~~~~~~~-.,... (Species from Question 18) Per annum 30, If you could not fish on this river, what would your substitute be? - 138 -

FISHING LOCATIONS

No. of Plans Catch Days to Quality of River Fished Fish Species No. Species No. Location 1 - Excellent 5 - Poor

1. Lower Bulkley R. (downstream from Moricetown) 2. Moricetown Falls 3. Bulkley at Trout Cr. 4. Bulkley at Smithers 5. Barnet Station and area 6. Upper Bulkley (up- stream from the Morice) 7. Lower Morice R. (downstream from Owen L. Road and Forest Service Camp Area) 8. Upper Morice R. (up- stream from Owen L. Road area) 9. Suskwa R. 10. Trout Creek 11. Talkwa R. 12. Nanika R. 13. Kispiox R. 14. Zymoetz R. 15. Kitsumkalum R. 16. Skeena R. 17. Lakelse R. 18. Kleanza Creek 19. Other River Name: Location: 20. Other River Name: Location: - 139 -

No. of Plans Catch Days to Quality of Lake Fished Fish Species No. Species No. Location 1 - Excellent 5 - Poor

1. Morice L. 2. Owen L. 3. Chisholm L. 4, McBride L. 5. Lamprey L. 6. Mc Lure L. 7. Babine L. 8. Chapman L. 9. Maxan L. 10. Collins L. 11. Francois L. 12. Tchesinkut L. 13. Poplar L. 14. Parrott Lakes 15. Sunset L. 16. East L. 17. Twinkle L. 18. Nadina L. 19. Lakelse L. 20. Other Lake Name: Location: 21. Other Lake Name: Location: - 140 -

INSTRUCTIONS TO ENUMERATORS CONDUCTING INTERVIEWS WITH SPORT FISHERMEN

1. Initial every questionnaire.

2. Always introduce yourself to campground operators before con­ ducting any interviews.

3, All questions must be answered.

4. Weekly reports ~ Must be in mail Thursday p.m. or Friday a.m. Expense accounts Address to W. F. Sinclair and mark PERSONAL.

5. Refer all media questions and any problems to W. F. Sinclair, David Reid and Tom Cleugh.

6. You are in a region whose inhabitants are environmentally con­ scious. Keep this in mind always.

7. Introduce yourselves to local Fisheries Service representatives (Terrace, Smithers) on your arrival in town.

8, Take care of questionnaires. They are worth money. Do not bend, mutilate or lose. - 141 -

SURVEY OF CAMPSITE VISITORS QUESTIONNAIRE

Date Time Location

No. of Campsites No. of Vacant Campsites ~~~~~~~~~~~

No. of No. of No. of Nights No. of Permanent Place People Sport Fishermen Stayed in Campsite of Residence in Party in Party THIS Campsite - 142 -

EXAMPLE OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR CAMPSITE SURVEY

1. To be used at: MacLure Lake Terrace Munic. Seeley Lake Smithers Munic. Ks an Kleanza Creek B.C.F.S. !Owen Lake Morice Lake Morice River

2. Each campsite should be surveyed on 5 different evenings between July 1 and August 31. Two of 5 surveys should be on Friday or Saturday. Plan time accordingly.

3. Example of information required:

Date: Thursday, July 4 Location: Seeley Lake Time: 8 - 10 p.m. No. of Campsites: ------40 No. of Vacant Sites: 16

No. of No. of No. of Nights No. of Permanent Place People Sport Fishermen Stayed Qampsite of Residence in Party in Party at this Campsite

1 California 2 2 1

2 Kamloops 5 0 2

3 Vacant

4 Prince George 3 1 1

etc. - 143 -

ESTABLISHMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Name of Establishment Location Type of Business Respondent's Position: OwnerC::J Managerc=I Employee C:J

1. Does your establishment operate throughout the year? Yes C=:J No c::J

2. In round figures, what do you estimate the amount you pay out in I gross wages and salaries each year? (If speaking to the owner, ask I I him to impute a salary to himself.) $ per year ~~~~~~~~~

3. How many people are employed here or receive income from this ! business on a year-round basis? I 4. What proportion of the business would you say is due to the expendi- I tures by fishermen visiting this area to fish? 3 [" i 5. If there was no sport fishing in this area, would the business be forced to close at this location?

I Yes NoC:J f c::J I ! 6. How is business this summer? i

!: ' ~ ~ 1 I I I I Enumerator's Comments, Observations I I i - 144 -

TELEPHONE SURVEY OF HOUSEHOLDS PROCEDURE AND QUESTIONNAIRE

The following information is intended to assist the telephone enumerator conduct surveys in Smithers and Houston during the summer of 1974. For the purposes of this survey it is necessary that the proce­ dure used by each of the enumerators be consistent and that great care be taken in soliciting information which is precisely what was intended by those who must carry out the analysis of the information. It should be noted by the enumerator that telephone conversations should be as brief as possible and enumerators should be polite and pleasant. This is extremely important. I am not for one moment suggesting that any member of our group is not polite. However, it is important and it is necessary to guard yourself against falling into bad habits on the tele­ phone which may detract from the validity of the results that it bears repeating over and over again. Moreover, it is intended that the enu­ merators work in groups of at least two persons. In this way one person will be able to monitor or listen to the other person and make sugges­ tions and the necessary corrections as they go along.

It is intended that all telephone enumeration will take place between 6:00 and 7:30 PM Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday each week the surveys are conducted. Telephone enumeration is not to be carried out on Thursday or Friday, although "try agains" might be carried out in the afternoon any day of the week. Suggested format is as follows:

Telephone enumerators shall phone the number on the list and shall say "This is , I am a research assistant ~~~~~~~~- with the Fisheries Service, Department of the Environment. I would like to take a moment of your time to ask a few short questions." The questions are as follows: 1. How many persons live in your household? 2. How many sport fishermen live in your household? - 145 -

3. How many times each year do you sport fish? 4. Name your three favourite fishing locations.

If the interviewee answers "none" to Question 2 then end the interview.

The enumerator should initiate each telephone call by asking for the head of the household and should end each telephone call by thanking the individual for his or her time and cooperation.

There are three basic rules for telephone enumeration:

1. Politeness 2. Speak in a clear concise voice - it is absolutely necessary that this be done because a person who is interrupted by a telephone conversation which is not personally directed to them and by what essentially is an invasion of privacy by telephone will terminate the conversation immediately if they do not understand what the conversation is about. 3. It is absolutely essential that when there is no answer that all 'no answers' be tried again several times and make the best possible effort to get hold of the person by telephone when their name is drawn on the sample. 'Try agains' should be tried at least twice in the evening and then perhaps try the next day during the afternoon. - 146 -

1972 MAIL SURVEY OF KEMANO HOUSEHOLDS

QUESTIONNAIRE

1. How many members of your household fish for recreational purposes?

2. Please indicate with../ recreational activities other than fishing that you participate in?

OUTDOOR INDOOR

boating spectator sports swimming card playing water skiing reading picnics watching T.V. hiking hobbies camping gardening hunting attending plays, concerts, movies, etc. skiing bowling skating billiards sledding other golfing (please specify) sight-seeing other (please specify)

3. How would you rate fishing's importance relative to outdoor recreational activities? (Please indicate appropriate rating by a ../ )

very important of little importance important of no importance fairly important

4. How would you rate fishing's importance relative to indoor recreational activities? (Please indicate appropriate rating by a ../ )

very important of little importance important of no importance fairly important - 147 -

41-5-33-3 September 14, 1972

1090 West Pender Street, Vancouver 1, B,C,

I !

Dear _ \ The Fisheries Service, Department of the Environment, is conducting a series of surveys in the Kemano area in an attempt to assess the biological and economic importance of local fisheries.

Your name was randomly selected from residents living in Kemano. Consequently, we sent you a questionnarie approximately two months ago. The questionnaire has not been received and we are send­ ing you another copy. These questionnaries are extremely important to our department and will be used solely for helping us determine recreational and environmental needs of the future.

We urge you to fill out this questionnaire and return it in the postage-paid, self-addressed envelope provided. Your co­ operation and assistance is very much appreciated.

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology, Northern Operations Branch, Fisheries Service, Pacific Region.

Enc. APPENDIX IV Environment Canada Environnement Canada

MEMORANDUM NOTE DE SERVICE DATE February 20, 1976

B. Shepherd, Ourflie Notre reference 5460-S5-K95 FROM: Biologist, DE: North Coastal Division. L _J

I W. Sinclair, I Your file Votre reference Chief of Economics and Sociology, TO: ~ It: , Northern Operations Branch. L_ _J

SUBJECT: LONG-TERM TRENDS IN SKEENA CHINOOK AND SOCKEYE ESCAPEMENTS: SU]ET:

The following analyses were prepared in response to your re­ quest, made during our discussion of February 10, 1976.

Table IV:l gives the total non-Babine Skeena sockeye escape­ ments, 1950-74. It would appear that the non-Babine escapements in 1970-74 were one-half b:fi the 1960-69 period, and one-third of the 1950- 59 period. Four runs to relatively undeveloped watersheds within the Skeena were analyzed separately for 1965-74; overall, these runs have decreased 20% in the past ten years (Table IV:2). Ricker and Howard (1975, J. Fish Res. Bd. Can. 32 (8): 1368-1381) similarly estimated that the Skeena mean natural recruitment at maximum sustainable yield (ie., if effects of past overexploitation and disasters, such as the Babine slide, were removed) would be 17% higher than was recorded in the 1953- 67 period. The Nanika sockeye run seems to be a special case, in that declines have been much greater there despite its lack of development: the 1970-74 average escapement was one-half that of the 1960-69 period, and oniy one-tenth of the 1950-59 period (Table IV:3). It is hypothe­ sized that this drastic decline is due to an interaction between native fishing on the Bulkley River and the rearing capability of Morice Lake (see Volume 5 of Kemano II Environmental Studies)

Table IV:4 and Figure 1 give the five-year running means of the total escapements to ten major Skeena chinook runs, from 1950 to 1974. Chinook escapements have declined steadily since 1957, and are now less than one-half of the historical means. Two runs to relatively undeveloped watersheds were analyzed over 1960-74, and appear to have dropped about 20% over this period. (Table IV:5).

It is therefore recommended that the Nanika sockeye stock be evaluated on the basis of a natural sustained recruitment potential of at least 10,000 spawners, rather than usi'tlg the average of escapements of recent years. Similarly, Morice chinook should be evaluated on the

01-1071 (12/74) DOE-1071 - 149 -

basis of at least 9,100 rather than the recent ten-year average of 7,800 spawners.

• ...... 1 .,..., J . ---. I ·. i -:,.· J . L. I , . ~ '·· . ·~· 1 B. Shepherd, Biologist, North Coastal Division.

Encls. - 150 -

TABLE IV: 1

NON-BABINE TOTAL SOCKEYE ESCAPEMENTS

Year 1950-59 1960-69 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 lOOO's of 92 .o 68.8 34,5 26,0 40.3 38,5 16. 4 Fish (average) (average)

TABLE IV:2

NON-BABINE SOCKEYE ESCAPEMENTS TO UNDEVELOPED WATERSHEDS (five-year running mean)

System Year 65-59 66-70 67-71 68-72 69-73 70-74

Allistair Lk. 2' 960 3,180 3,180 2,480 1,280 1,130 Schulbuckhand Cr. 3,840 3,100 2,550 1,340 720 560 Cedar R. 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,500 1,500 1,350 Johnson Lk./Cr. 385 1,085 2,080 3,430 3,880 3,950

TOTAL 8,585 9,765 9,210 8,750 7,380 6,990 ------

TABLE IV: 3

SOCKEYE ESCAPEMENTS TO NANIKA

Year 1950-59 1960-69 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974

21,000 5,300 4,700 4,300 1, 100 1,000 1,200 - 151 -

TABLE IV:4

CHINOOK ESCAPEMENTS TO BABINE, BEAR, BULKLEY, JOHNSON KITWANGA, KLOIYA, LAKELSE, MORICE, NITCHYESKWA, AND STEVENS SYSTEMS, (five-year running means)

Years No. Years No.

50-54 33 '411 61-65 19,301 51-55 30,156 62-66 19,245 52-56 34,930 63-67 19, 160 53-57 36,835 64-68 17,825 54-58 38,490 65-69 17,910 55-59 39,230 66-70 17,275 56-60 37,645 67-71 15,935 57-61 33,151 68-72 13,999 58-62 30,871 69-73 15,294 59-63 26,821 70-74 14, 939 60-64 21,996

TABLE IV:5

CHINOOK ESCAPEMENTS TO UNDEVELOPED WATERSHEDS (five-year running means)

Years Cedar R. Ecstall R. Total

60-64 75 1,900 1,975 61-65 75 2,300 2,375 62-66 75 2,700 2,775 63-67 80 2,700 2,780 64-68 80 2,300 2,380 65-69 100 2,150 2,250 66-70 140 1,600 3,000 67-71 215 990 1,205 68-72 213 890 1, 103 ·69-73 358 1,290 1,648 70-74 468 1,690 2' 158

--- 51,000

45,300

4opoo

35,700 ..V- ~

~/ ~ 30,000 v £ ' V 5 yr. running mean iL"' 25,500 "' ~ / -0 \ 0 20,400 / z '" .-..,_ -...... 15,300 ~ -

10,200

5,100

0 1950 1952 1955 1957 1960 1962 1964 1967 1969 1972 1974 Year

Figure. I. Total Skeena Chinook Escapements APPENDIX V INDIAN BAND, ON RESERVE AND OFF RESERVE INDIAN POPULATION ACCORDING TO RIVER SYSTEM AND SUB-AREA CLASSIFICATION

1 Population River System Sub-Area Indian Band On Reserve Off Reserve Total

Fraser Nechako River Stoney Creek 307 122 429 Fraser Lake 134 43 177 Stellaquo 107 69 176 Omineca 113 54 167 Cheslatta 79 51 130 740 339 1,079

Stuart River Necoslie 375 208 583 Stuart-Trembleur Lake 447 235 682

822 443 1,265

Upper Fraser Dog Creek 95 (unknown) 95 Quesnel 22 6 28 Toosey 75 25 100 Alexandria 49 8 57 Soda Creek 112 26 138 Williams Lake 184 40 224 Alkali Lake 252 32 284 Canoe Creek 190 66 256 Clinton 26 9 35 High Bar 2 8 10 Pavilion 120 66 186 1 Population River System Sub-Area Indian Band On Reserve Off Reserve Total

Fountain 279 204 483 Bridge River 75 92 167 Lillooet 33 64 97 Cayoose Creek 44 34 78

1,558 680 2,238

Lower Fraser Lytton 670 274 944 Skuppah 11 13 24 Siska 65 54 119 Kanaka Bar 32 36 68 Boothroyd 98 45 143 Boston Bar 60 28 88 Spuzzum 9 34 43 Yale 32 33 65 Union Bar 8 39 47 Hope 43 89 132 Ohamil 14 36 50 Peters 22 13 35 Skawahlook 8 36 44 Seabird Island 251 66 317 Popkum 8 1 9 Cheam 80 66 146 Chehalis 252 173 425 Scowlitz 94 59 153 Lakahahmen 31 67 98 Soowahlie 72 61 133 Aitchelitz 9 2 11 1 Population River System Sub-Area Indian Band On Reserve Off Reserve Total

Yakweakwioose 23 11 34 Skulkayn 39 19 58 Tzeachten 75 33 108 Skwah 112 108 220 Skway 3 36 39 Kwakwawapilt 6 2 8 Squiala 30 27 57 Sumas 73 30 103 Mats qui 16 36 52 Langley 49 17 66 Katzie 104 66 170 Coquitlam 5 13 18 Semiahmoo 20 6 26 Tsawwassan 35 19 54

2,459 1,648 4, 107

ALL FRASER SUB-AREAS 5,579 3,110 8,689

Skeena Morice town Moricetown 451 177 628

Lower Skeena Hagwilget 134 61 195 Hazelton 529 237 766 1 Population River System Sub-Area Indian Band On Reserve Off Reserve Total

Kitsegukla 341 48 389 Kitwanga 264 130 394 Kitselas 42 49 91 Terrace 215 (unknown) 215 Kitsumkalum 54 43 97 Metlekatla 82 110 192 --- 1,661 678 2,339

ALL SKEENA SUB-AREAS 2,112 855 2,967

TOTAL 7,691 3' 965 11,656

1 Department of Indian Affairs, Vancouver, B. C. APPENDIX VI_ - 157 -

APPENDIX VI

THE CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF AN APPROPRIATE EVALUATION

TECHNIQUE WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THE EVALUATION REQUIREMENTS

OF THE SPORT FISHERIES AFFECTED BY KEMANO PHASE II

There exist several different techniques for measuring the economic value of recreation to society. Most of these techniques involve establishing a hypothetical price for the opportunity to participate in free recreational activities. The recreationist's willingness to pay or his willingness to incur costs is used to calculate the value of the recreational pursuit to the whole of society. The method used to assess the value of one type of recreational pursuit is not necessarily the most suitable method for assessing another type of recreational activity. Moreover, the measured values are never directly comparable with the value that would be developed in the market place. Thus, the choice of an appropriate method nearly always depends on the individual analyst's assessment of how the methods fit the realism of a specific research project.

An economic assessment of the value of recreation usually requires the measurement of two kinds of benefits. One is the primary or indirect benefits which accrue to the individual because of par­ ticipation in a recreational activity. The primary benefits are usually the non-priced benefits which accrue to the individual recreationist. Insofar as they benefit particular individuals, it is understood and believed, that they benefit all society.

The other type of benefit is the secondary or indirect bene­ fits. The secondary benefits are the economic gains that are generated - 158 -

in the economy because of the existence of a recreational opportunity. In practice, they are usually the economic gains which are produced in the local economy because of expenditures on goods and services that are used to participate in local recreational pastimes.

The research which has concerned itself with determining the value of these two types of benefits has met with varying degrees of success. Many researchers appear to have found the "expenditure method" 1 an analytically acceptable technique for measuring secondary benefits. If an economic area is carefully defined and a distinction is made be­ tween resident and non-resident recreationists, then it is possible to establish a reasonably acceptable estimate of the total value of secon­ 2 dary benefits generated by recreational activity.

Consequently, the expenditure method has become the most widely used economic evaluation technique for measuring secondary bene­ fits. However, the assumptions implicit in the expenditure method 3 approach make it unsuitable for measuring primary benefits. The two methods which have gained some degree of acceptance as being the analy­ tically correct estimation techniques for measuring primary benefits

1 James A. Crutchfield, "Valuation of Fisheries Resources", Land Economics, vol. 38, No. 2, 1962, pp. 145-154. 2 Ibid., p. 148 3 It is assumed in the expenditure method approach that the value of recreation to society is at least as great as the total expenditures which can be directly attributed to that pursuit. It also assumes that all the attributed expenditures would not otherwise be made in the absence of the recreational activity. The first assumption is not un­ duly restrictive. It does allow the analyst to develop values which are somewhat consistent with the perceived behaviour of society when they choose one product rather than another in the market place. The second assumption does clearly restrict the usefulness of this method for mea­ suring the value of recreation to residents. If the recreational oppor­ tunity within a particular area were to disappear, it cannot be realis­ tically assumed that recreationists will not divert spending to other goods and services, From the standpoint of the local economy, the bene­ fits accruing to those who serve the recreationist may be offset by equal income and employment effects which would develop elsewhere should re­ creational outlays be redirected to other purchases. - 159 -

are the 11 direct survey method II and the 11 travel cost method. 114

The purpose of this paper is to determine the most appro­ priate technique for estimating the values of primary benefits generated by the sport fisheries that will be affected by the proposed Kemano Phase II power project. This investigation will be limited to a com­ parison of the two most generally accepted analytical techniques: the travel cost method and the direct survey method. Since there is no acceptable yardstick for assessing the exact magnitude of the discre­ pancies that might occur as a result of using one method rather than the other, the relevance of each of the two methods will be determined by comparing the assumptions of the two models with the analytical re­ quirements of the investigative research. This is done in the belief that even the most ardent proponent of one method will usually admit that the alternative technique is more suitable for certain types of research. The validity of the assumptions can only be tested with a specific case in mind.

The Travel Cost Method

The travel cost method is used to establish the consumer's willingness to pay for the opportunity to participate in particular recreational pursuits. The basic procedure involves relating the in­ dividual's observed behaviour with his willingness to incur travel costs in order to visit particular recreational sites. The demand for a re­ creational activity is established by using travel costs as indicative of the consumer's willingness to pay.

Since first advanced by Hotelling and applied by Trice and Wood, the travel cost method has been subjected to a number of

4 James A. Crutchfield, "Economic Evaluation of Sport Fisheries: A Progress Report", (unpublished paper), University of Washington, 1965, p. 7. Jack L. Knetsch and Robert K. Davis, "comparisons of Methods for Recreational Evaluation", Economics of the Environment, ed. by Robert Dorfman and Nancy S. Dorfman, W.W. Norton and Company Inc., New York, 1972, p. 390, John V. Krutilla and Anthony C. Fisher, The Economics of Natural Environment, Resources of the Future Inc., Johns Hopkins Univer­ sity Press, 1975. - 160 -

5 refinements. All of these refinements are designed to overcome some of the basic weaknesses encountered when applying the technique. None­ theless, there are a number of basic assumptions upon which the useful­ ness of the travel cost method and all its variations depend. It is the restrictive nature of these assumptions which elicits most of the criticism that is directed at the travel cost method.

There are at least five interrelated criticisms of the travel cost method. The first, and often referred to as the most serious cri­ ticism, is that the method assumes homogeneity in taste among the user population. The value which people living in one area or zone have for a particular recreational pursuit is inferred from the behaviour of those living in other areas or zones. Those individuals who travel furthest, and presumably incur the highest travel costs, are used to calculate the total amount of consumer surplus enjoyed by those living closest to the site. Those living closest to the recreational site are thought to cap­ ture the greatest amount of consumer surplus while those living furthest from the site are thought to enjoy the least amount 9f consumer surplus. The validity of these calculations greatly depend on how accurately the recreational tastes of those living furthest from the site reflect the recreational tastes of those living on or near the site. It is possible for the analyst to allow for some difference in taste by including some socio-economic variables in their demand specification. However, it is doubtful that this would adequately deal with the widely differing tastes of most population groups. People's tastes are influenced by many fac­ tors including the environment in which they live. There is no accep­ table method of determining precise taste profiles of particular groups.

A second, equally serious, criticism of the travel cost method is the inherent assumption that all travel costs are incurred solely for

5 The travel cost method was first suggested by H. Hotelling, and re­ ported by R.A. Prewitt in 11 The Economics of Public Recreation - An econo­ mic Survey of the Monetary Evaluation of Recreation in the National Parks", National Park Service, Washington, D.C., 1949 (unpublished). Andrew Trice and Samuel E. Wood, "Measurement of Recreation Benefits," Land Economics, vol, 34, August 1958, pp, 195-207, - 161 -

the purpose of gaining access to a recreational site. It is implicitly assumed that all trips are made for a single recreational reason and that everyone making the trip is seeking the same type of recreational experience. This, as can be readily appreciated, is a highly restric­ tive assumption. Recent research indicates that the travel cost method is inappropriate for measuring the demand for recreation in low-density 6 wilderness areas. This is because the travel cost method aggregates all trips as if they are homogeneous. It would seem more reasonable to believe that pleasure trips are made for a variety of reasons including the enjoyment of the trip itself. The vast majority of recreationists probably would incur the cost of a trip in order to enjoy the scenery encountered as well as the amenities available at the final destination. A fishing holiday in northern Canada might include a visit with rela­ tives, visits to several historic sites as well as viewing unique nor­ thern scenery. All individuals making the trip would have their own perception of what type of experience they are seeking and their own individual use level. Some may visit an area for swimming while others would wish to fish or water ski. In this sense, the product changes with each individual visitor. The willingness to pay of one individual does not necessarily reflect that of another visitor if they are not 7 consuming the same product, Thus, it is evident that the travel cost method is unable to adequately deal with the multi-purpose trip which is not made for the sole purpose of participating in the recreational opportunities that are available at a particular site. Moreover, it

6 V. Kerry Smith, "The Travel Cost Demand Models for Wilderness Recreation: A Problem of Non-Nested Hypotheses", Land Economics, vol. 51, no. 2, May 1975.

7 This assumption need not be unduly restrictive when the analyst is reasonably sure that most visitors travel to a site solely for re­ creational purposes. For instance, a variation of the travel cost method was used to evaluate Lakelse Lake in Terrace. The vast majority of visitors to Lakelse Lake made their trip for purely recreational rea- sons. See: William F. Sinclair, The Socio-Economic Importance of Main­ taining the Quality of Recreational Resources in Northern British Columbia: The Case of Lakelse Lake, Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Northern Operations Branch, Pacific Region, June, 1974, PAC/T-74-10, NOB/ECON 5-74. - 162 -

cannot be used to assign values to each of the many different recrea­ tional pastimes which might simultaneously occur at a single site.

A third criticism, which is somewhat related to the second criticism above, is that the travel cost method does not permit an assessment that is discriminating enough to take account of the various leisure pastimes which individuals might wish to participate in at a particular site. Each individual would visit a site for his own reason. Some would come for shorter periods while others would stay longer. Thus a visit to a site is not a standard recreational unit. In most cases length of stay would vary with the distance the visitor travelled. Those who travel furthest to get to a specific site would stay longer while those who are travelling a shorter distance would stay only a short period of time. Unless all visitors to a site stay the same length of time and are seeking and participating in the same types of recrea­ tional activity, it cannot be realistically assumed that all visitors are consuming the same product. This further limits the usefulness of the travel cost technique to sites where the length of stay per trip is fairly consistent.

A fourth criticism is that the travel cost method implicitly assumes that all user or consumer behaviour is governed by individual reaction to the opportunity to participate in recreational activities at a specific site. It is also implied that the individual reacts only to the cost of travel to a specific site. It fails to take into account any other factors that would influence consumer behaviour such as the number of recreational substitutes available to the individual closer to his home. Since the willingness to pay of nearby visitors is in­ ferred from the behaviour pattern of distant visitors, the distribution of alternative recreational opportunities throughout the study area is important. Unless alternative recreational opportunities are evenly dis­ tributed throughout the area, the travel cost method is likely to either overestimate or underestimate the true value of recreational opportuni­ ties at a particular site. The availability and distribution of - 163 -

alternative recreational opportunities are not the only factors which will influence the reaction of individual recreationists. It would also seem reasonable to believe that many recreationists are influenced by time constraints, road conditions, availability of scheduled car­ riers, knowledge about alternatives and the availability of complimen­ tary facilities. Further, it may not be realistic to believe that re­ creationists are influenced more by perceived costs than by actual costs. It does not seem reasonable to assume that recreationists' be- haviour will be influenced solely by the opportunity to participate in recreational pastimes or by the actual cost of travelling to a site.

In addition to the foregoing criticisms, there are also some minor shortcomings which together create a number of technical diffi­ culties when using the travel cost method. The travel cost method works best when it is used to evaluate recreational opportunities that are available at a specific site where the cost of travel can be easily specified. Unfortunately, most recreational opportunities are available at a number of different locations and are not necessarily tied to a specific site. Likewise, the cost of travel to the site will vary ac­ cording to how many people are in the visiting group. The more visitors in a group, the lower the cost of travel per individual; the fewer individuals in a group the higher the cost per individual. The analyst usually has to arbitrarily decide what will be included in the recrea­ tional site and what amount best represents the true cost of travel per mile. The problem is further complicated by the fact that much of the information required in the travel cost approach is most easily gathered at the recreational site. The analyst often finds it necessary to carry out on-site surveys. Information gathered in this manner may be unreli- 8 able because of on-site bias problems. The arbitrary selection of these key parameters and the problems which are encountered in on-site surveys, together, further detracts from the usefulness of the travel cost method,

8 Willi.am F. Sinclai.r and Robert W. Morley. "Statistical Bias Pro­ blem in On-Site Surveys: The Severity of the Problem and its Potential for Solution." J-aurnal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, vol. 32, no. 12, 1975, pp. 2520-2524. - 164 -

Although it has a number of shortcomings, the travel cost method is not without merit. It is consistent with the scientific method of experimentation in that it analyses observed behaviour rather than what people say they will be doing under differing circumstances. However, it does not isolate the separate effects of single variables through controlled experiment. Regression models can be used to iso­ late the effects of single variables to some extent, but only where there is very little multi-collinearity. In any case, the fact that the travel cost approach can be adjusted to a regression model enhances its usefulness. When the individual analyst appreciates the many short­ comings inherent within the travel cost method and is willing to adjust the approach to the specific requirements of the project, the travel cost method can be a very useful tool for measuring economic worth. Under the right circumstances, the travel cost method is a cheap and easily implemented method of establishing the economic value of a re­ creational site.

Direct Survey Method

Like the travel cost method, the direct survey method is used to establish the consumer's willingness to pay for the opportunity to participate in particular recreational pursuits. However, unlike the travel cost method, the direct survey method does not calculate values which are based on observed behaviour. The direct survey method asks the individual recreationist how he would react given various hypo­

thetical situations. The recreationist is frequently asked ~o estimate the maximum he would be willing to pay rather than discontinue using the resource, or the compensation he would require in order to volun- tarily forego his. right to use the resource. 9

9 Tll.e maximum amount recreationists will pay rather than voluntarily forego their right to use a resource is known as the price compensating measurement; the minimum amount recreationists would accept to volun­ tarily forego their right to use a resource is known as the price equi­ valent measurement. - 165 -

Like the travel cost method, the direct survey method has been widely criticized for having serious shortcomings. The first of these is that the questions used in the direct survey method are so hypothetical that it is impossible for respondents to provide meaningful answers. Many researchers believe that when you ask hy­ pothetical questions you receive hypothetical answers. On the one hand, it is believed that respondents do not take hypothetical ques­ tions seriously. Therefore, they do not give serious consideration to the answers which will be used to assess the economic value of par­ ticular resources or activities. On the other hand, some believe that even if the respondents do take their answers seriously, they will either deliberately overestimate or deliberately underestimate personal values in order to improve their bargaining position. For example, the recreationist who is asked what is the maximum amount he would pay before he would give up visiting a park, might believe this question is designed to establish a park entrance fee. If this occurs, it would seem reasonable to believe that the respondent would deliberately underestimate the amount that he would pay in hope that he might influence park officials to establish a more modest entrance fee.

Another serious criticism of the direct survey method is the cost of gathering information using this technique, Since ques­ tions are of a hypothetical nature and not always readily understood by those being surveyed, it is practically always necessary to pro­ vide information to potential respondents on the purpose of the sur­ vey and how the information will be used. When using this method it is virtually always necessary to carry out some type of personal in­ terview. Enumerators have to be instructed not to lead their respon­ dents and they must fully understand how the information will be used so that they will be able to interpret the questions for the respondents.

Criticism of the direct survey method can be summarized into - 166 -

three basic problems: (1) formulating meaningful questions, (2) encour­ aging meaningful and useable answers, (3) high survey costs. These cri­ ticisms, while not overwhelming in number, are considered so serious under some circumstances that they totally dispel any of the advantages of the method. Nonetheless, even the most ardent critics will admit that many of these problems can be eliminated by a properly designed survey. Robert Davis has developed what often is referred to as a bid­ ding technique which encourages respondents to provide meaningful 10 answers. Others have argued that respondents can be encourged to give hypothetical questions serious consideration, thereby providing creditable answers, by explaining to the respondents how their answers will be used. The questionnaire can be designed in a manner which permits cross-checking and facilitates response testing. In any case, it is generally agreed that properly designed surveys with carefully 11 chosen questions can yield reasonably reliable results.

There are also a number of advantages to using the direct survey method which are not present in any other type of evaluation technique. One of these is that the method permits the researcher to direct the attention of the respondent specifically to the recreational activity he wishes to evaluate. There is no reason to have product identification problems when using the direct survey method. If the researcher wishes to develop an economic value for skiing on a specific mountain during a certain period of the year, he need only identify the activity in the questionnaire. Another distinct advantage is that the direct survey method is the only method which captures option demand 12 values.

10 Robert K. Davis, "The Value of Big Game Hunting in a Private Forest." Transactions of the Twenty-Ninth North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, March 9, 10 and 11, 1964, Published by the Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D.C., pp. 393-403.

11 James A. Crutchfield, ''Economic Evaluation of Sport Fisheries - A Progress Report," University of Washington, September 1965, p. 8.

12 Peter H. Pearse, "Towards a Theory of Multiple Use: The Case of Recreation Versus Agriculture," Natural Resources Journal, vol. 9, 1969, p. 373. - 167 -

Still another advantage is that the researcher is able to isolate some of the effects of price changes on the consumer. This is particularly important when other variables are likely to have a strong influence on the recreationist's observed behaviour.

In summary, the direct survey method is particularly useful in situations where the problems associated with the travel cost method are greatest. Questionnaires can be designed so that they clearly iden­ tify the product and separate out the effect of price changes on the individual. The analyst can also determine the value for any time period he feels appropriate. He can determine the value per day, per visit or per year. Finally, if the questionnaire is properly designed, and the problems related to the hypothetical questions can be offset, or par­ tially eliminated, the method can be used to measure option demand values.

Application of the Evaluation Techniques

The foregoing discussion was used to outline the main advan• tages and disadvantages of the travel cost and the direct survey tech­ niques. This section will be used to assess which of the two evalua­ tion techniques is most appropriate for measuring the economic worth of fisheries affected by the Kemano Phase II hydro development project. This will be accomplished by briefly comparing particular aspects of the Kemano Phase II proposal with the assumptions inherent in the two eva­ luation techniques. The data used to accomplish this task were gathered in sport fishermen's shoreline surveys carried out in 1972, 1973 and 1974. Some information was also taken from a mail survey of sport fisher­ men conducted during 1975,

The Kemano Phase II hydro development project is made up of two distinct proposals. The first is that a dam will be built on the Nanika River below Kidprice Lake which will affect the Nechako and Morice Rivers (see Map 1). The second proposal is that in addition to MAP I ,GENERAL STUDY AREA

. KEY MAP.

'·-

DIXON ENTRANCE

',•I I I I / Vanderhoo.f ' I ~\ ,f \ ... \ 4-~ Pro nee" q• "\ George i' \~ I ..,., FRASER ,, I ,,rRIVER •I - 169 -

the dam on the Nanika River, dams will be built on the Dean and Morice 13 Rivers with a pumping facility on Morice Lake. Regardless of which proposal is finally adopted, the Nechako, Nanika, Dean, Morice and Kemano Rivers will be directly affected by the project. Likewise, other waterways in northwestern British Columbia will be indirectly affected by the proposals.

Even a very cursory examination of assumptions implicit to the travel cost technique shows that this technique does not readily lend itself to assessing the economic value of sport fisheries affected by the Kemano Phase II project. For example, it was noted earlier that the travel cost method works best when it is used to evaluate recrea- tional opportunities that are available at a specific site. The Kemano Phase II power project will have a physical impact on many miles of northern waterways. Most of these waterways support some form of lei­ sure activities. Fishing, picnicking, swimming, hunting and other forms of recreational pursuits occur almost continually throughout the affected area. There is no entirely satisfactory way of delineating the study area so that one site's recreational activity can be evaluated separately from the activities that take place at other sites using the travel cost method.

Another related problem is the prevalence of multiple purpose trips among those travelling in the study area. Tables VI:l and VI:2, re­ spectively, show the percentage of resident fishing parties according to their main reasons for making the trip and a percentage distribution of resident fishing parties according to other activities which they indi­ cated they would participate in while travelling in the study area during the summers of 1972, 1973 and 1974. Table VI:l shows that 51 percent of all fishing parties indicated that fishing was their main reason for

13 British Columbia Energy Board, Provincial Power Study, 1972, vol, 6, Appendix 7, p, VII.187. - 170 -

TABLE VI: 1

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENT FISHING PARTIES ACCORDING TO THE MAIN REASON FOR THEIR TRIP

Percent

Fishing 51.5

Vacation 27.2

Scenic Beauty 6.0

Friends and Relatives 4.3

Business 4.7

Sightseeing 3.8

Swimming 1. 7

Boating and Canoeing 0.4

No Response 0.4

TOTAL 100.0

Source: Shoreline Survey of Sport Fishermen, 1972, 1973 and 1974 - 171 -

TABLE VI: 2

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENT FISHING PARTIES ACCORDING TO THE ACTIVITIES OTHER THAN FISHING IN WHICH MEMBERS OF THEIR PARTY PARTICIPATED IN DURING THE TRIP

Percent

Swimming 15.1

Sightseeing, Photography, Nature Study 10.1

Boating and Canoeing 11.5

Hiking 6.5

Visiting Friends and Relatives 6.8

Hunting 2.2

Rock Hunting 0.4

Business 1.4

No Other Activities 46 ,0

TOTAL 100.0

Source: Shoreline Survey of Sport Fishermen, 1972, 1973 and 1974, - 172 -

travelling in the area. However, it also shows that 27 percent consi­ dered their trip a general vacation and that 21 percent identified other activities as their main reason for travelling in the area. Table VI:2 shows that only 46 percent of all fishing party visitors partici­ pated solely in fishing activities. The information presented in Tables VI:l and VI:2 suggest that most fishing parties travelled in the study area for a combination of reasons. Use of the travel cost technique would require additional refinements to eliminate some of the biases which would be encountered due to multiple purpose trips.

Another particularly serious concern when using the travel cost approach for assessing the affected sport fisheries is the homogeneity of taste assumption. Tables VI:3 and VI:4 provide a breakdown of fishing preferences according to permanent place of residence. The information presented in Table VI:3 shows that the preferences of sport fishermen for particular fish species vary considerably between communities. For ex­ ample, people living in communities located in the eastern part of the area (Prince George, Vanderhoof and Burns Lake) are more interested in trout fishing than those living in communities located in the western part (Smithers, Hazelton, Terrace, Kitimat and Prince Rupert). Fishermen living in the western part of the area show a distinct preference for salmon and steelhead. This is not surprising as it is normally expected that fisher­ men prefer the type of fishing with which they are most familiar. More critically, from an economic evaluation standpoint, the indicated prefer­ ence of fishermen seems to vary considerably between residents of adja­ cent communities. Slightly less than 21 percent of Smithers' residents prefer steelhead fishing while 44 percent of Hazelton's residents pre- fer steelhead fishing, This apparent paradox also appears to be pre­ valent in coastal communities. Over 50 percent of Kitimat residents prefer salmon fishing, while only 32 percent of Prince Rupert fisher- men preferred to catch the same species. The information presented in

Table VI~4 shows similar variations in fishing preferences. Almost 64 percent of Burns Lake residents prefer lake fishing while slightly more than 46 percent of Vanderhoof residents prefer this type of fishing. TABLE VI:4

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF SPORT FISHERMEN WHO LIVE IN SELECTED COMMUNITIES IN THE STUDY AREA ACCORDING TO THEIR MOST PREFERRED TYPE OF FISHING

Prince Prince George Vanderhoof Burns Lake Smithers Hazelton Terrace Kitimat Rupert

Lake 55.8 46.4 63.8 39.2 25.0 11.1 14.6 21.8

River or Stream 30.7 31.3 20.0 51.5 56.3 74.0 73.4 58.9

No Preference 13.5 22.3 16.2 9.3 18.7 14.9 12. 0 19.3

TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: 1975 Mail Survey TABLE VI:3

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF SPORTFISHERMEN WHO LIVE IN SELECTED COMMUNITIES IN THE STUDY AREA ACCORDING TO THE FISH SPECIES THEY MOST PREFER TO CATCH

Prince Prince George Vanderhoof Burns Lake Smithers Hazelton Terrace Kitimat Rupert

Salmon 7.8 6.1 10.5 17.7 12 .5 38.1 50.5 42.4

Trout 69.9 69.7 60.0 52.3 40.6 29.3 26.4 31.8

Steelhead 8.7 4.0 6.7 20.8 43.8 25.6 17.0 12.6

Dolly Varden 0.9 2.0 0.8 1.5 0.5 2.0

Lake Trout 5.3 6.1 20.0 3.1 1.9 0.7

Other 0.7 1.0 0.5

No Preference 6.7 11.1 2.8 5.3 3.1 3.6 5.1 10.5

TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: 1975 Mail Survey - 175 -

Both Vanderhoof and Burns Lake are located in an area where good lake fishing is readily available. According to the information presented in Tables VI:3 and VI:4, it does not appear as if the homogeneity of taste assumption is consistent with the preferences of people living in the study area.

In addition there are other serious problems created by using the travel cost technique for assessing the impact of Kemano Phase II development proposals on sport fishing. These include the failure of the technique to deal adequately with the effect of alternatives on consumer behaviour, the failure of the technique to deal with varia­ tions in party size and length of stay, and its inability to deal speci­ fically with the act of fishing. All of these problems must be dealt with when applying the travel cost method to the Kemano Phase II develop­ ment project. Fishing opportunities are not evenly dispersed throughout the Kemano study area. There is a considerable amount of evidence to show that both length of stay and size of recreational parties vary con- . 14 siderably throughout the study area. Finally, a proper economic assessment requires measurement of recreational opportunities which are directly related to the fishery resource and not to the opportunities present at a particular site.

In contrast to the travel cost method, the problems commonly associated with the direct survey method are not dependent on specific aspects of a particular development. The three basic problems of for­ mulating meaningful questions, encouraging meaningful answers and high survey costs will be present regardless of what development is assessed. However as noted earlier, the direct survey method is particularly use­ ful in situations where the travel cost method is found least appropriate. Since the travel cost method is not particularly well suited to the research requirements of the Kemano Phase II project, it would seem that

14 David J. Ried, The Importance of Sport Fishing to the North Main­ land Cost and North Central Areas of British Columbia: An Economic Survey, Technical Report Series No. PAC/T-74-11, NOB/ECON 6-74, Fish­ eries and Marine Service, Pacific Region, Northern Operations Branch, June 1974. - 176 -

the direct survey method provides the only reasonable and reliable method of assessing this development project,

Summary and Conclusions

A rapidly increasing number of resource conflicts has encour­ aged the development of several different methods of assessing the eco­ nomic value of recreation to society, It is generally agreed by most economic researchers that all of the techniques which have been deve­ loped are either totally unacceptable or fraught with inadequacies. Nonetheless, out of this mass of economic research, there have emerged two analytically correct methods of measuring the economic value of primary benefits. The two are the travel cost and the direct survey methods. The travel cost method is an assessment technique based on the willingness of recreationists to incur travel costs in order that they may visit a particular site. The direct survey method is an as­ sessment technique which uses recreationists' response to hypothetical questions to measure the economic value of particular recreational pastimes. Both methods have been widely criticised and are known to have serious shortcomings. However, debates over which method should be used usually center on how well the underlying assumptions of the ' two models fit the specific research requirements of the project.

In this paper, the travel cost and the direct survey methods were examined for their appropriateness in measuring the economic ef- fects of the Kemano Phase II power development project. It was shown that the travel cost approach was not well suited to the requirements of the project, It was found that most fishing parties travel for a variety of reasons and visited more than one site on the same trip, The homoge­ neity of taste assumption was found to be inconsistent with the indicated preferences of people living in the study area. Fishing opportunities were not evenly dispersed throughout the area. There was a considerable amount of evidence to show that both length of stay and size of recreational parties varied considerably. Furthermore, it was determined that product - 177 -

identification would present a particularly serious problem if this method was used to assess the economic views of the affected sport fisheries. The large number of problems that can be directly attri­ buted to the travel cost approach suggests that this method is unre­ liable for assessing any portion of the economic consequences of the Kemano Phase II project. It also was shown that the direct survey method was not particularly unsuited to the assessment requirements of the project. Hypothetical questions could be expected to have a negative influence on the reliability of the results. However, most of these problems could be overcome to some degree, Given the pro­ blems associated with each of the two evaluating techniques and the basic requirements of this particular project, it would seem that the direct survey method would provide the most reasonable estimate of the impact of the Kemano Phase II power development project on the direct recreational benefits produced by sport fisheries located in northwestern British Columbia. APPENDIX VII APPENDIX VII

SURVEYS, INFORMATION AND CAI~ULATIONS USED TO ESTABLISH THE VALUE OF THE AFFECTED AREA'S RESIDENT SPORT FISHERY

The economic value of the resident sport fishery was determined 1 using the direct survey method. The direct survey method required that the fisherman be asked directly the maximum amount he would be willing to pay before he would forego his right to fish or the minimum amount he would accept to willingly forego his right to fish. In this study, two different surveys were used to ask resident sport fishermen these two questions. The first was a mail survey which was carried out during Janu­ ary, February and March of 1975. The second was a telephone survey car­ ried out during July and August of 1975. The telephone survey was used as a follow-up to the mail survey in an effort to improve the quality of the answers and to avoid bias.

Mail Survey and Results

The mail survey was drafted in November of 1974 and circulated among members of the economic community for comment. These draft question­ naires also were circulated among members of the Fisheries and Marine Service staff in an effort to assess whether or not specific questions would be understood.

During this same period, a list of resident fishing licence sales in the north central coastal area was obtained from the Fish and Wildlife Branch of the Department of Recreation and Conservation in Victoria. Of the 25,500 fishing licence holders living in the area during 1974, 3,192 names and addresses were randomly drawn. This provided a survey target of approximately 12.5 percent of all fishing licence holders living in the area during 1974. The names and addresses were then edited to ensure that

1 For a detailed discussion on this method, its theoretical foundations and its use in this study, see Appendix VI, - 179 -

no more than one person per household was included. This eliminated 24 names from the list. The remaining 3,168 names and addresses were sent to the post office for a verification of correct addresses. A total of 208 names were removed because of incorrect address, insufficient address or no forwarding address. This left a total of 2,960 fishing licence holders - or roughly 11.5 percent of the total resident licence holders living in the area - in the sample.

In January of 1975, the questionnaire with an accompanying cover letter was sent to those included in the sample. The question­ naire contained 14 questions with additional space for respondent's comments (see pages 188 to 192). The first four questions were on the general socio-economic characteristics of the sport fisherman and his family. The next six questions were on the fishing activity of the household members and the final questions were on the economics of the individual's sport fishing activities. The questionnaire was designed specifically to help provide an understanding of the values that were important to assessing the worth of the fishery resources.

In this regard, a great deal of effort was directed to helping potential respondents understand the questions. The survey and its im­ portance was promoted and reported through the local media. Articles were published explaining the questionnaire in the local newspapers as well as in the major Vancouver papers. Many articles devoted consider­ able space to advertising the survey, its purpose and how it was pro- ceed1ng.. 2 Fisheries Service personnel appeared on radio and television talk shows from Prince Rupert to Prince George. In many cases, individ­ uals who had received a copy of the questionnaire in the mail phoned and asked service personnel to help them answer the question over the air. Up to four reminders were sent to each fisherman who did not re­ spond to previous sends. The follow-up questionnaires were accompanied

2 A file of all newspaper clippings is presented at the end of this appendix: pages 204 to 223. - 180 -

by covering letters explaining the purpose of the survey and the use of the information (see pages 193 to 199).

Also in an effort to create better understandings of the value related questions, special reminders were sent to those respon­ dents who for one reason or another chose not to answer these two questions. These special reminders stressed the importance of the information and helped to explain the value questions more fully.

Table VII:l shows the results of the mail survey of sport fishermen residing in the area. According to this table, out of the 2,960 questionnaires sent out, 2,140 useable questionnaires were returned. This amounts to a response rate of more than 72 percent. This unusually high rate of return is due, in large part, to the ex­ tensive advertising and promotion campaign that accompanied the sur­ vey. It is felt that this rate of response, together with the low number of uncooperatives, suggests that the information gathered in this survey provided a finely accurate reflection of the attitudes, opinions and characteristics of the sport fishermen residing in the area.

Telephone Survey and Results

To further improve the reliability of the questions re­ lating to the value of sport fishing opportunities, it was decided to carry out a more personal follow-up survey of respondents. A list of names and telephone numbers were compiled from the mail survey questionnaire. During the summer of 1975, each respondent on this list was telephoned and asked to review his mail questionnaire (see pages 201 to 203). Each person contacted by telephone was reminded of the questionnaire and the answers he provided. If the respondent was fully satisfied with his understanding of these questions and the answers he originally provided, no further questioning was under­ taken. However, i.f the respondent, in light of a better understanding TABLE VII: 1

RESULTS OF 1975 MAIL SURVEY OF SPORT FISHERMEN RESIDING IN THE AFFECTED AREA

Percentage of Total Drawn Duplicates in Address Total Number Number of Total Useable Useable Returns for Sample Households Unknown of Sends Uncooperatives Returns to Total Sent

3,192 24 208 2,960 27 2,140 72.3 - 182 -

of the questions, wished to change his answer, the enumerator pro­ ceeded with a "bidding technique" to establish a new value estimate 3 for each of the questions. The bidding technique involved gi.ving series of high and low values until the respondent felt that the enumerator had identified a number which most appropriately reflec­ ted the respondent's value of the resource.

A great deal of care was taken in the telephone survey procedures to prevent biased answers. Enumerators were briefed on the concept of recreational resource evaluation and resource alloc­ ation. They were instructed on proper telephone interviewing pro­ cedure and manner. Enumerators always worked in groups of two or more to maintain consistency in the approach and to monitor each other's performance.

Table VII:2 is used to show the results of the 1975 tele­ phone survey of surveyed mail respondents. Of the 2,140 sport fish­ ermen who completed and returned mail questionnaires 1,116 were in­ cluded in the telephone survey. There were 950 completed telephone survey interviews. Slightly more than 85 percent of all those in­ cluded in the telephone surveys were contacted. Almost 45 percent of all those who returned mail questionnaires were successfully interviewed in the telephone survey.

The answers obtained in the telephone survey were used to correct response bias in the answers to the mail survey questions, The replies to questions 13 and 14 (see the questionnaire on pages 190 and 191) were close to the mail survey responses and showed a

3 The actual procedure is presented in the telephone survey question­ naire ..The most well known proponent of this technique is Robert K. Davis. (See Robert K. Davis, "The Value of Big Game Hunting in a Private Forest," Transactions of the Twenty-Ninth North American Wild­ life and Natural Resource Conference, March 9, 10 and 11, 1964, pub­ lished by the Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D.C,) TABLE VII :2

RESULTS OF 1975 TELEPHONE SURVEY OF SPORT FISHERMEN RESIDING IN THE AFFECTED AREA

Percentage of Number of returns completed tele­ Percentage of unuseable, without Number of mail phone interviews completed tele­ Number of telephone numbers survey returns Number of com­ to mail survey phone interviews Mail Survey or disconnected useable in pleted telephone returns useable to all mail sur­ Returns telephones telephone survey survey interviews for telephone survey vey returns

2,140 1,024 1,116 950 85.1 44.4 - 184 -

good understanding of the concepts involved. The answers to these questions were believed to provide a reliable basis for calculating the willingness-to-pay measure of value for resident sport fisher­ men.

There were, however, large discrepancies between the tele­ phone and mail survey answers to question 11, the compensation re­ quired question. The variance and inconsistency in the answers were such that the accuracy of the information was questionable. For this reason only the willingness-to-pay answers were used to calculate the value of resident sport fishing on the waterways affected by Kemano II.

Calculations

The value of resident sport fishing activity on each of the waterways affected by Kemano II was calculated in three stages:

The first, required the calculation of the total amount of activity in the area and the distribution of this activity through­ out the area. This was accomplished by combining Statistics Canada 1971 Census Survey on Population with information gathered in the 1973 and 1974 telephone survey of households and information gathered in the Kemano mail survey to obtain an estimate of the total fishing activity. Total fishing population estimates were used with the average number of days fished each year information gathered in the mail surveys to obtain total fishing activity in the area. The dis­ tribution of fishing activity was determined from the resident mail survey and the on-site survey information gathered during 1972, 1973 and 1974. This procedure provided the annual average number of angler days of resident sport fishing activity for each of the waterways in the affected area.

The second stage required the calculation of the value of - 185 -

each single angler day of activity on waterways affected by Kemano II. This was accomplished by taking the willingness-to-pay answer for each angler in the 1975 mail and telephone survey of resident fishermen and adjusting it for actual expenditures. In other words, if a fisherman said that he would be willing to pay up to $45 per day, including the expenditures of $15 per day which he currently spends to fish at his favourite location, the value of a day's fishing activity at his favourite location was calculated at $30 per day. Since the will­ ingness-to-pay question was posed in a manner which took account of the fact that alternative fishing opportunities were available, it is felt that the answers to this question provided a reasonable estimate of the marginal value of a day's fishing on the individual's favourite waterway (these va.lues are shown in Table VI I: 3).

The final stage required the calculation of the total value of the fishing opportunities provided by the waterways affected by Kemano II to all residents of the area. This was accomplished by multiplying the marginal value of days fishing at each waterway (cal­ culated in stage two above) by an adjusted average number of fishing days of activity that takes place on each waterway per year. The num­ ber of days of activity was adjusted to take account of the decline that would occur in an individual's fishing effort should he actually be charged a user fee (this information was gathered in the resident telephone survey). The adjusted annual average number of days of resident sport fishing activity at each waterway multiplied by the marginal value of a day's fishing at each waterway provided the total value of resident fishing opportunities attributable to waterways affected by Kemano II.

It should be noted, however, that the values presented here are only valid for marginal changes in the resident sport fisheries affected by Kemano II because they refer to single waterways (each sport fisherman was asked only the value of a single waterway). If - 186 -

TABLE VII :3

RESIDENT SPORT FISHERMEN WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY PER DAY OF SPORT FISHING ON THE WATERWAYS AFFECTED BY KEMANO II ACCORDING TO WATERWAY (rounded to the nearest $1)

Waterway Average Willingness-to-pay per Angler-day

Fraser River System

Nechako River 32 Stuart River System 25 Fraser Lake 26 Stellako River 35 Francois Lake 31 Nadina River and Lake 50 Nechako Reservoir 43

Skeena River System

Skeena River 28 Bulkley River 30 Morice River 43 Morice Lake 30 Nanika River and Lake 30

Kemano River 30

Dean River 80

Source: Fisheries and Marine Service 1975 mail and telephone surveys. - 187 -

all the resident sport fisheries on a number of waterways affected by Kemano II were destroyed, the loss likely would not be the sum of the fishing values for each individual waterway. - 188 -

SPORT FISH MAIL QUESTIONNAIRE 1975

Section A This first section asks several questions about members of your household in an effort to ensure that the opinions expressed in this sur­ vey are truly representative of all the sport fishermen living in northern British Columbia and not just isolated segments of the sport fishing popu­ lation.

1. Please indicate in the appropriate space the total number of males and females and the number of male and female sport fishermen (who sport fish at least once a year) who permanently reside in your house­ hold according to age.

Age Fishermen Total Household Residents Male Female Male Female

0 - 9 10 - 19 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60 - 69 70 and over

2. How many days during 1974 did members of your household sport fish in the area between Prince George and Prince Rupert (see Map showing area of concern)? (no. of days during 1974) - 189 -

3. Please indicate (J) which category best describes the occupation of head of the household?

Labourer Tradesman or Technical Professional Sales Clerical Management and Executive Self-Employed Retired Other (please specify)

4. What is the gross (before taxes) total income of your household per year? $ ~~~~~

Section B In Section B we wish to determine the importance of sport fish­ ing and the amount of angling effort on particular waterways located in the central northwestern areas of British Columbia. We are interested in your (you as an individual) fishing activity in the general area be­ tween Prince George and Prince Rupert. We realise that few people keep exact records of their fishing experience, but we would appreciate it if you would answer all questions according to your best estimate.

5. Please indicate how many years you have lived in Prince George or in areas north of Prince George in British Columbia (area of concern as shown on Map)? (no. of years)

6. How many days each year do you normally fish in the area between Prince George and Prince Rupert? (no. of days per year)

7. How many days did you fish in the area between Prince George and Prince Rupert during 1974? (no. of days during 1974) - 190 -

8. Please indicate ( ../ ) what type of fishing you prefer? Lake or River (stream)

9. What species of fish do you prefer to catch? Please list in order of preference (your preferred species first).

1, 2. 3, 4.

10. What is your favourite fishing river or lake and how many days do you normally fish there each year?

(1st favourite location) (days fished per year)

11. What would be the minimum annual cash payment that you would accept to forego forever your right to fish at your favourite river or lake? Please note that you only give up your· right to fish on your favour­ ite river or lake (for all time), but that you still could fish on any other river or lake. $ per year.

12. What is your second favourite fishing river or lake and how many days do you normally fish there each year?

(2nd favourite location) (days fished per year)

13, We would like you to estimate the average cost of a day's fishing on your favourite rivers or lakes. To this end, we ask that you in­ clude any costs that you feel are directly related to your fishing trip. These costs may include travel and equipment costs but will not include any costs that would have been incurred if no fishing trip had taken place. What is the average cost of a day's fishing: ( i) On your favourite river or lake? $ per day (ii) On your 2nd favourite river or lake? $ per day - 191 -

Section C This is a hypothetical question which, if answered correctly, will help us to determine the value of the sport fishery to residents of central northwestern British Columbia. Please consider it carefully and answer according to your best estimate. Please note that Question 14 asks for a maximum "per day" estimate.

14. Suppose the costs of a day's fishing at your favourite river or lake were to rise. What would be the maximum amount that you would pay before you would stop fishing at your favourite river or lake altogether? $ per day.

15. Please feel free to make any comments you wish either about this questionnaire or about any ideas you may have regarding the improve­ ment of sport fishing in the central northwestern area of British Columbia.

~ i i Please note your telephone number in the space provided so that we t will be able to discuss your comments with you or answer any ques­ tions which might arise. Ii Telephone Number t

THANK YOU! Environment Environnement Canada Canada I+ - 192 - Fisheries and Peches et Marine Sciences de la mer• ORIGINAL COVER LETTER

Your file Votre reference

Ourfile Notrereference 41-5-33-3

Please find enclosed a questionnaire prepared by the Fisheries and Marine Service, Department of the Environment, This is one of a series of surveys designed to determine the importance of sport fishing to the people of northern British Columbia.

This questionnaire will take approximately 5 minutes to com­ plete. We hope that you will feel, as we do, that the 5 minutes is a worthwhile investment towards protecting your recreational and environ­ mental needs. Please read the questionnaire carefully and answer all questions using your best estimates, Upon completion of the question­ naire, return it in the postage-paid, self-addressed envelope provided. If you have any questions regarding the questionnaire, please contact 666-3710 in Vancouver or write directly to the undersigned using the en­ closed envelope,

We wish to stress that these questionnaires are extremely im­ portant to us and to you. The information gathered will be treated in strictest confidence and will not be used to set licence fees. The in­ formation will be used to assess the economic and social impact of indus­ trial development in northern British Columbia, The final report will be prepared in a manner which prevents any possibility of disclosure of in­ formation on individual respondents.

We thank you for your assistance and cooperation.

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology Northern Operations Branch

)!:ncl.

Fisheries - Pacific Region Peches - Region du Pac if ique 1090 West Pender Street 1090 rue West Pender Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver (C.-B.) V6E 2P1 V6E 2P1

F·3000 (12/73) Environment Environnement Canada Canada - 193 - Fisheries and Peches et Marine Sciences de la mer

FIRST REM IND ER

Your file Votre reference

Our file Notre reference 41-5-3 3-3

The Fisheries and Marine Service is conducting a survey in northern British Columbia to determine the socio-economic importance of fishing to people living in the northern part of our province. The questionnaire sent to you has not been received yet, In case you have mislaid the original questionnaire, we are enclosing another which we would like you to complete and return in the postage-paid envelope en­ closed with this reminder.

All questionnaires, even if you seldom fish, are equally im­ portant in providing basic information on our sport fishery. The in­ formation asked for is important only when analysed collectively and will not be used or published in a manner which would identify the in­ dividual fisherman. Please answer all questions so we will be able to work i.n your best interests. The monetary questions which might appear irrelevant to you are important in that they will help us convince others of the importance of maintaining the quality of our fishery re­ sources.

Your cooperation in assisting us with this survey is very much appreciated. If you have already returned the questionnaire, please disregard this reminder.

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology Northern Operations Branch

Encl.

Fisheries - Pacific Region Peches - Region du Pacifique 1090 West Pender Street 1090 rue West Pender Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver (C.-B.) V6E 2P1 V6E 2P1

F-3000 ( 12/7 3) Environment Environnement I+ Canada Canada - 194 - Fisheries and Peches et Marine Sciences de la mer SECOND & THIRD REMINDER

Your Ille Votre reference

Ourlile Notrerelerence 41-5-33-3

We have noticed that the sport fishing questionnaire sent to you has not been received yet. We wish to stress that these questionnaires are of vital importance to us and to you, We hope you feel, as we do, that the time taken to complete this questionnaire is a worthwhile investment to­ wards protecting your recreational and environmental needs.

In case you have mislaid the original questionnaire, or have not received one through some postal error, we have enclosed another which we urge you to complete and return in the postage-paid envelope provided.

All questionnaires, even if you seldom fish, are equally impor­ .tant in providing basic information on our sport fishery. The information will be used to assess the social and economic impact of industrial deve­ lopment and fishery enhancement programs in Northern British Columbia.

Please answer all questions so we will be able to work in your best interests. The monetary questions which may appear irrelevant to you are important in that they will help us to convince others, who will not heed arguments they consider emotional, of the importance of maintaining the quality of our fishery resources.

The information received from the survey will not be used to establish any fishing licence fees. The final report will be prepared in a manner which prevents any possibility of disclosure of information on individual respondents.

. ... /2

Fisheries - Pacific Region Peches - Region du Pacifique 1090 West Pender Street 1090 rue West Pender Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver (C.-B.) V6E 2P1 V6E 2P1

F·3000 (12/73) - 195 -

- 2 -

Your cooperation is assisting us with this survey will be very-much appreciated. I hope you feel, as we do, that it is in your own best interests to complete and return the questionnaire. If you have already returned the questionnaire, please disregard this reminder.

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology Northern Operations Branch

Encl. Environment Environnement I+ Canada Canada - 196 - Fisheries and Peches et Marine Sciences de la mer

FOURTH REMINDER

Your file Votre r{Jf8rence

Ourfife Notrereterence41-5-33-3

Due to labour disruptions our postal service is working at less than peak efficiency. The return mail is extremely slow, and in some cases, some of our mail may be lost. Please would you help us by filling out the enclosed questionnaire and returning it in the postage-paid enve­ lope provided, Even if you have already filled out a questionnaire we would appreciate your filling out this new one. However, if you.have not already filled out a questionnaire may I, on behalf of our Service, urge you to fill out the questionnaire and send it to us. The information will be used to assess the social and economic impact of industrial deve­ lopment in northern British Columbia.

Please help us, and help yourself, by filling out the question- naire.

Thank you for your patience and assistance.

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology Northern Operations Branch

Encl.

Fisheries - Pacific Region Peches - Region du Pacifique 1090 West Pender Street 1090 rue West Pender Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver (C.-B.) V6E 2P1 V6E 2P1

F-3000 (12/73) Environment Environnement I+ Canada Canada - 197 - Fisheries and Peches et Marine Sciences de la mer

FIRST INCOMPLETE ANSWER REMINDER

Your file Votre r8f8rence

Ourfile Notrereference 41-5-33-3

Thank you very much for answering our questionnaire. The an­ swers you gave will be used in the best interests of sport fishermen. Unfortunately, we noticed that you chose not to answer Question(s):

(11) which asks about what amount you would accept to give up the right to fish at your favourite lo­ cation, or

(14) which asks what is the maximum amount you would pay before you would stop fishing at your favou­ rite river or lake.

These questions are difficult because fishing is more than a monetary worth. It is a way of life and a heritage which defies trade in the market place. We sympathise with this position but this argument is often referred to as being emotional and without substance by those who do not fish. We asked you Questions 11 and 14 to overcome or bypass this criticism. We feel that answers to Questions 11 and 14 would help us to adequately protect the interests of sport fishermen.

If someone destroys your favourite fishing hole, they are in effect expropriating your fishing location. If this was your home you would expect compensation. Why wouldn't the same be true if someone takes your favourite fishing location? Answer Question 11 as if/you wanted to be compensated for someone expropriating your fishery. /

The information will be used to emphasize the importance of pro­ tecting the interests of fishermen and to point out that these fishing locations are worth a considerable value. The information will not be used to establish fishing fees or in any other manner not in your best interests. Please fill out Questions 11 and 14 in the new enclosure •

. . . . /2

Fisheries - Pacific Region Peches - Region du Pacifique 1090 West Pender Street 1090 rue West Pender Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver (C.-B.) V6E 2P1 V6E 2P1

F-3000 (12/73) - 198 -

- 2 -

In any case, thank you for your cooperation,

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology Northern Operations Branch

Encl. Environment Environnement Canada Canada - 199 - Fisheries and Peches et Marine Sciences de la mer

SECOND INCOMPLETE ANSWER REMINDER

Your file Votre relBrence

Our file Notre reference 41-5-33-3

Our sport fish survey is nearing completion and we have not as yet received your reply to Question(s):

(11) which asks about what amount you would accept to give up the right to fish at your favourite location, or

(14) which asks what is the maximum amount you would pay before you would stop fishing at your favourite river or lake.

We realise these questions are difficult to answer because fishing is more than a monetary worth, but we feel that answers to Ques­ tions 11 and 14 would help us to adequately protect the interests of sport fishermen, If you want your values to be included in our study, we urge you to respond to these questions.

We would greatly appreciate your cooperation in completing Questions 11 and/or 14 in the questionnaire which accompanies this letter.

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology Northern Operations Branch

Encl,

Fisheries - Pacific Region Peches - Region du Pacifique 1090 West Pender Street 1090 rue West Pender Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver (C.-B.) V6E 2P1 V6E 2P1

F·3000 (12/73) Environment Environnement I+ Canada Canada - 200 - Fisheries and Peches et Marine Sciences de la mer

THANK YOU LETTER

Your file Votre reference

Our file Notre reterence 1050-1

Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in filling out our sport fish questionnaire.

Rest assured that this information will be used in your best interests.

Yours truly,

William F. Sinclair Chief of Economics and Sociology Northern Operations Branch

Fisheries - Pacific Region Peches - Region du Pacifique 1090 West Pender Street 1090 rue West Pender Vancouver, B.C. Vancouver (C.-B.) V6E 2P1 V6E 2P1

F·3000 (12/73) - 201 -

TELEPHONE ENUMERATOR INSTRUCTIONS SUMMER SURVEY, 1975

It is intended that all telephone enumeration will take place roughly between 6:00 and 7:30 PM on weekdays. Enumerators are to adhere to the 6:00 to 7:30 PM principle. However, it is expected that they will adjust their hours around that time in a manner which is consistent with their success experience. Telephone try-agains or call-backs may be car­ ried out any time after the initial try. In other words, it is reasonable to expect that for one reason or another certain individuals are never in early in the evening. In that case, calls may be made at noon or on week­ ends. It is not expected that the enumerator will ever have to make calls in the morning prior to noon any day of the week.

Telephone format is as follows:

Hello, my name is I am an economist with the Fisheries and Marine Service, Department of the Environment. I am calling in connection with the mail questionnaire which we sent to you in January this year. May I speak with the person who filled out the ques­ tionnaire? (Might be some explanation required here.)

If the person identifies himself (or herself) as the person who filled out the questionnaire or once the person who filled out the questionnaire comes to the telephone, then you are to say:

I would like to take a few moments of your time to go over some of the answers you filled out on your questionnaire this spring. (Might take some explanation here.)

You might want to clarify some point of misunderstanding about why you are calling and what the purpose of the survey was. However, proceed from here in the following manner:

One of the three questions I want to deal with is the question which asks: What would be the minimum annual cash payment that you would - 202 -

accept to forego forever your right to fish at your favourite river or lake? Your answer was $

Interpret - In other words, you indicated by your answer that you were willing to give us fishing at (favourite location) for a cash payment of $ per year. ~----~--~- Are you satisfied that this answer gives a fair indication of what value you place on your favourite fishing location?

He (or she) will either say yes or no. If he says yes then drop it and carry on with the next question. If he says ~ ask him whether he. thinks the answer is low or high. If he says low or high then start bidding.

(This may need some explanation about rare paintings, etc. and about how you interpret the answer but you should reach a figure that he will find satisfactory with explanation and continual bidding.)

One of the questions asked was to estimate the average cost of a day's fishing at your favourite and second favourite fishing location, Your answer was that on average it cost you $------per day to fish at your favourite location. Are you satisfied with that answer? Do you think that is high or low? Then start bidding if he answers low or high.

Your answer to the second part of that question was that it per day to fish at your second favourite fishing loca- tion. Once again, are you satisfied with that answer? Do you think that it is high or low?

The final question which I would like to review with you is the question that asked you: Suppose the cost of a day's fishing at your favourite river or lake were to rise. What would be the maximum amount that you would pay before you would stop fishing at your favourite river or lake? Your answer was that you would pay up to a maximum of $ ~~~- per day before you would stop fishing at your favourite fishing location. 203 -

Do you think that that answer is a fair indication of what it would have to cost you per day before you would quit fishing at your favourite location? He will say yes or no, then ask him if it is high or low, and then start your bidding.

Is your answer to this question over and above what it costs you to fish each day. (Pause) If he (or she) does not appear to under- stand go on: That is, the maximum amount you would pay is (13(i) + (14)) $ or (just 14) $ ?

In closing you are to thank the person for their cooperation. Say that their information will be treated strictly confidential and that it will be of the utmost value when preparing environmental impact state­ ments or assessing the environmental consequences or particular develop­ ment projects.

The four basic rules for telephone surveys are:

L Politeness 2. Speak in a clear concise voice - it is absolutely necessary that this be done because a person who is interrupted by a telephone conservation which is not personally directed to them and by what is essentially an invasion of privacy by telephone will terminate the conversation immediately if they do not understand what the conversation is about. 3. It is absolutely essential that when there is no answer that all "no answers" be tried again several times. "Try agains" should be tried at least twice in the evening and then perhaps tried the next day during the afternoon. 4. Bidding must be realistically carried out in a casual manner and the enumerator must thoroughly understand the basic argu­ ment about why the economic evaluation of nonpriced resources is important, - 204 -

Prince Rupert Daily News January 29, 1975, p. 4 TH~ __ , o~c..-. With TERRY JOHNSON would pay to retain the rtaht to Three thousand northern B.C. fiSh there. The questions are sport fishermen have been - purely hypothetical and NrVe , selected at random to par­ as the · economist'• only ticipate in a socio-economic measure of the dollar v•e oh study relating to sport fishing~ recreational resource. Questionnaires should have "The questionnaire 'or the already reached through the information received wW not be mail those individuals, selected used for establishirig J sport· from more than 30,000 anglers fishing license fee or anythinc in the area between· Prince like that,'' Bill said. "Nor will George and Prince Rupert. The we disclose any information to simple three-page question­ anyone about the individuals naire has 15 questions and can who respond." He said research be answered in five minutes. agencies are prohibited by the Bill Sinclair, an economist Statistics Act from divulging to with the Fisheries and Marine anyone personal information Service, Department of the about respondents. Environment, said that the Bill's telephone number in questionnaire is part of the final Vancouver is listed on the form phase of a three-year study of and he urges anyone who en­ the social and economic effects counters any difficulty iri filling of industrial development on the out tfie form or who has any quality of life in the north. The questions about the study to call federally-spof\sored study is him collect. · done in co-operation with He emphasized that all several agencies,· including the · questions are of equal im­ provincial Fish and Wildlife portance on the questionnafre Branch, he said. and that the whole form is The first part of the form asks important in helping to plan for about the angler's family, future industrial development employment and income. Then in the north. A postage-paid . it asks his favorite type of addressed envelope is included fishing and favorite lake or with the form, so there'• stream. nothing left.for you to do but fill The third section asks what out the form, stick it in · the would be the minimum cash . envelope, and· drop it in the payment he would accept to nearest mailbox. give up forever the right to fish By doing so you'll be helping on those waters and what would to guarantee the future of your be the maximum amount he sport in this part of the country. Kitimat Northern Sentinal January 30, 1972, p. 7 SPORT FISHING EVALUATED Two hundred Kitimat that you would accept to forego year study, and the study itself, He said it will likely be used The study has cost in excess fishermen will be receiving a forever your right to .fish at which includes sociological and for· consideration of such of $300,000 to date, Sinclair survey by mail this week your favourite river or lake?" other environmental con­ development as hydro-electric said. aimed at putting a dollar figure Sinclair said the results of siderations, will be ready for power, a steel mill and oil Sinclair also headed the on the importance of sport the fishing portion of En­ use in planning by the fall of tanker traffic up the B.C. study in 1974 of .Lakelse Lake fishing as it relates to in­ vironment Canada's three- 1975. coast. near Terrace. dustrial development. Part of a three-year study on industrial development in northern B.C., the survey is being .conducted by En­ vironment Canada under the direction of Bill Sinclair, chief of the department's economics and sociology northern branch. Sinclair explained during an interview Wednesday, the sport fishing part of the present study may give an idea of the money value of sport fishing in the event industrial develop­ ment created. a loss in that area. He ·said the 200 surveys distributed in Kitimat are part of a total of 3,000 throughout the north,· from Prince George to Prince Rupert. He requested participation by those receiving the survey which, he said, would only take 5 minutes to complete. The survey includes questions such as age and sex of the participant, how many days in 1974 a member of the family fished in the north, the type of fishing undertaken by fishermen, favorite areas for fishing and the average cost of a day's fishing. It also asks, "What would be the minimum annual nayment

- 207 -

Prince Rupert Daily News February 4, 1972, p. 1

Fishing_!!P.,lles needed Survey return urged Bill Sinclair, economist for estimated dollar values of the the Fisheries and Marine recreation. Service, wishes to remind those Mr. Sinclair assures the sport fisherµien who received respondents that their replies questionnaires in the mail last . will not be divulged to anyone, week that it is very important nor will they l:w used for setting that the questionnaires be license fees. The questionnaire, returned as soon as possible. he said, is the final phase of a Some 3,000 anglers in the area three-year study of the social between Prince Rupert and and economic consequences of Prince George were selected at industrial development in the random to participate in a study iiorth west. · on the economic values of sport fishing. They were sent a three­ He urges anyone who has page form with questions reeeived the questionnaire to relating to -the individual's call him collect at the number family, occupation, preferred on the covering letter if he has type and place of fishing, and any difficulties with the form.

Prince Rupert Daily News · February 4, 1975

· NOW HEAR. THIS . .. ~ I

• The anglers' survey which hard, cold facts count with arrived in about 1,200 Prince developers who will eventually George homes Monday is no see the information.' place for "fish stories" accord­ mg to study leader Bill SiIJr clair. The 15-point question­ • 'No smoking' motions get naire is meant to place a value support from the least on northern B.C.'s sport expected _guarters. Fort fishery so that the costs of George NDP president I>oug Industrial development in the Smart was searching in vain region are made clear. But for a seconder to a motion to those who would add a few ban smoking during the pounds to "the one that got organization's annual meeting away" should be strictly held Monday when Steve Wood realistic with the question­ volunteered. "I'll second naire, Sinclair said, or the that,'' he said,·" as soon as I results will be worthless. Only finish my cigarette." - 208 -

Terrace News Advertiser February 4, 1972, p. 17

.Fishermen. - ' ' to. be _questioned Environment Canada is · kind of work the person does possible to fish in any given •1ng another mail survey on are to give the study group a area. · northwest B.C. on the ecol!Dlllic method of determining if the In most cases a ·com­ and social conseq~ences of views Of the fishermen pensation price is determined industrial development's effect questioned reflect a. cross­ after a fishing area is displaced on the regfon. · section · of the . general by industry or even oil spills, The subject of the survey will population. . .. he added, and "we want to be sport fishing and is ·being · Sinclair said none of the know what is an acceptable conducted by Bill Sinclair, · information will be used in a price before hand." chief of economics and manner which.will disclose the The questionaires will be sociology-northern operations identity of individual circulated between Stewart branch. Sinclair headed the . respondents. "We ·want to and Kitimat and between study on J.,akelse Lake that was know how they (sport fisher­ Prince Rupert and Prince released last summer. men) feel about their fishing," George. About 3,400 pegple will About 1,500 sport fishermen he added. · be sent one .. The narri~ were in the Terrace-Kitimat and taken from fishing licenses and Prince Rupert areas will be picked at random from 34,000 receiving copies of the names. questionaire in the mail · this Women who receive the week and will be asked to questionaire might object, to it return them to Environment being addressed "Mr." The Canada's offices in Vancouver study group had only the. first in the enclosed addressed and two initials and the last name self-stamped envelope. of those licensed to fish and Sinclair told the Advertiser assumed sport fisherpersons l\:fonday there may be would be male. questions on the questionaire The specific areas of concern people may object to but they are development's effect on the are necessarry for the data commercial fisherman, the being compiled. . Indian food fisherman, the The questions on what the sport fisherman .and the gross. income of a fisherman's general· public. · household per year is and the "Some of the effects on direct users are obvious but the effect on the general public is less obvious and often very difficult .to measure," Sinclair said. , · "The loss of any resource affects the welfare of the Bill Sinclair general public," he added. "It is hoped the information one question that m_ay puzzle ·gathered in this ~urvey will , respondents asks what would help us to protect the interests be the minimum annual cash of the sport fisherman and payment that a · fisherman indirectly, all other .fishermen, would accept to forego forever and also the general public," his right to fish at his favourite he said. river or lake. 'l'hose who wish further in- · Sinclair said the study group formation about the survey are is trying to determine what asked to phone 666-3710 01· write price would be acceptable to Fi_sheries - Pacific Region, 1090 ! fishermen as compensation if a West Pender 'Street, Van­ ' ~m · .~r iµdl!~.tf:Y. lllJ~d~ lt :1111~ · couver, B.C., V6E 2P1. - 209 -

Smithers Interior News February 5, 1975, P. 2 Sports fislting questioned The Federal Department of period for return of question­ Fisheries has sent out 3,000 naires, a process of collecting questionnaires to sports fish­ engineering and biological ermen in northwestern Bri­ data will be undertaken. tish Columbia as part of a It is hoped that .. the s·~udy to measure the econom­ information gathered from ic and social consequences of the questionnaire "will help us industrial development's ef­ . to protect the interests of the fect on the fisheries resources. sport fishermen and indirectly William Sinclair, Chief of all other fishermen, and also Economics and Sociology of the general public. The ques­ the Fisheries Northern Oper­ tionnaire is necessarily com­ ation Branch, told the News plex, but it is hoped that those last week that ·about 31,000 ·who receive one in the mail sports fishing licences had will answer every question been sold in the area last carefully so that the informa­ year,. and ten percent were· tion can be used on their taken as a cross-section. behalf,'' states the summary .. 'l'he sports fishing survey is "It is one of the few a segment of an ongoing study opportunities for the local that has been conducted over fisherman to respond about the past three years. The what is happening to his specific areas of concern are resource,'' added Sinclair. development's effect on the Some of the questions that commercial fishermen, the might cause problems and be Indian food · fishermen, the difficult to answer .include: · sports fisherman, and the What is your gross income; general public. what cash payments .would "Some of the effects on you accept to forego the right direct users (i.e. the fisher· to fish; maximum amount you man) are rather obvious,'' would pay to retain your right states a summary of the to fish. program. "However, the ef­ "I don't like to put an fect of development on the economic value on a thing like general public is less obvious sport fishing, but we have to and often very difficult to have them (figures) in order measure. The loss of any to point oµt to development resource affects the welfare of groups that these resources the general public." are valuable to the public," . The sport fishing survey, stated Sinclair. being conducted in coopera­ The workers assure that tion with the B.C. Fish and "none of the Information will Wildlife Branch, is expected be used in a manner which to be completed by December will disclose the identity of of this year. A telephone the individual respondents. It survey was conducted in t)le would not only be against the area last summer, and follow­ law, but would seriously bring ing the two and a half month . into question the reliability of the results." - 210 -

Prince George Citizen February 6, 1975, p. 4

. ' ...... A ni lin'i for (1, prtee·. The importance of Environmeni · ·. When considering the value of our Canada's angler survey, which northern waters, it is useful to went out to 1,200 Prince George · remember that in England and homes this week, cannot be over· most of Europe there is no '~free stated. · fishing.'' Streams ap.d lakeshores The survey asks the sport fisher- are leased or owned, and the . man to place a dollar value on his privilege of a day's fish on the finest· favorite river or lake ,-·the. max­ ·trout streams costs a princely sum, imum amount he would pay to fish no matter how few, if any, fish are it and the minimum amount he caught. · · would accept to give up his right to fish that river or lake forever. Many Europeans make a busi­ Most fishermen will find these 'ness of renting fishin~ waters, and perplexing questions, because their developers pay heavtly for what­ rivers have always been free. ever damage they cause to these They ~robably think of fishing as rivers or streams. something "beyond price." The In B.C;, Wetters are free, and if pleasures of a day on the. stream. , . strea~s are damaged by pollution, with all its sights, smells, chal~ dammmg or by other methods of lenges ·and surprises just can't be industry it is not a stream bank added up in dollars, many would .o•er who is robbed, but the public. saV.et the effort must be made, Fishing will probably always beca.use ·.. governments and reamin free in B.C. but the purpose · developers don't operate in terms · of the survey is not to set new fish­ of "beyond price." ing fees, rather it is to assess· · Unfortunately, the rivers and . developers for the full cost of their lakes of northwestern B.C. are as deleterious effects on fishing free to. the developers as they are waters. to the angler' and unless .dollar With the possibility of a steel values are established, industries smelter at Prince Rupert or 'will continue to use them as if they .· Kitimat and the prospect of a dam had no value. . . on the Morice River and Nanika The U.S. west coast is a good La.ke, the time has arrived to set,· · example of this "no value" attitude'. a value on our streams. · : It is a little-known fact that Califor· How much is a day's fishing 'nia's Sacramento River, now little worth? · .:· more than a·dfainage ditch, ·once To put things in perspective, · supported a major run of Steelhead Prince George anglers might well · trout. · ask themselves how much the Eng­ Only "hard, cold f1;1cts" as survey · lish or German ansler would pay organizer Bill Sinclair puts it, count for the privilege of fishing what are in the consideration of where future often called the "dream rivers" of lndustr,alization Is to occur. the northwest. Kitimat Northern Sentinel February 6, 1975

-Survey response less than complete

Continued from page .1 said, is concerned with taking Fishing survey emotionally., but also be able to into account the money the state economic terms." fisherman might spend to go to Sinclair said the per cent of another area to fish if closer the 280 surveys distribµted places became unavailable. returns from Kitimat is good. "Say it meant 15 less results incomplete evenings of fishing a year, even ------·~ They are part of some 1,500 sent to fishermen in the A survey mailed to Kitimat answers are sought to give Terrace and Prince Rupert sport fishermen last week is Environment Canada financial areas as well. receiving less than complete terms for argument related to responses according to industrial development. The ·two financial questions preliminary returns. "Any other argument is involved pose the following Designed to protect the in­ termed emotional," he con­ questions: "What would be the terests of fishermen in the tinued, "because there is no annual cash payment you event of industrial develop­ would accept to forego forever ment. the survey is part of a dollar figure attached. We also want to be able to argue on your right to fish at your three-year study being con­ favourite river or lake? ducted by Envrionment emotional terms, but alone these do not carry enough Canada and .seeks to put a · "Supposing the cost of a ·weight. financial figure· on sport day's fishing on your favourite fishing. "These are accepted river or lake rose. What would Bill Sinclair, directing the economic techniques we're be the maximum amount you study. said this week · the using and we're not trying to would pay before you stopped response from Kitimat to date establish licence fees. We want fishing there altogether?" indicates incomplete answers to be able to tell developers Sinclair, author of to two questions relating to how you feel, not only several environmental studies, dollar values of sport fishing. including one last year . of Sinclair said the financial Continued on page 3 Lakelse Lake near Terrace, said the first question is aimed at determining a cash value for · repayment if industrial Bill Sinclair development expropriated a favourite fishing area. if you went to the show that "Dollar values are put on would be $5," he said these things," he stressed, He said the survey looks for "and industrial developers as realistic figures as possible. don't ask you what form of Sinclair said he would be compensation you would like returning some of they surveys when they come in ·and take incompletely answered and away a river." asked those participating to The second question, Sinclair reconsider the questions. - 212 -

Kitimat Northern Sentinel February 6, 1975, p. 3

by J.on Chisholn1 ··'If you have noticed your rod failing to reach distaaces that yell had exi>ected; you may want to take a critical look 11t the size ol y-Our guides.· Somet'iines the large fish Of the Pacific Northwest region necessitate the tise of a heavy line. While it ill generaUy accepted that a full ~ol qf line Q well au light line will get you . the best .distance on a cast; a.light line is not always artance that sport nshing has on our lives and protect our last frontier of freshwater. - 213 -

Vancouver Province

February 8, 1975, p. 9

Sportsmen ask~ed to· put a cash value on fishing Special to The Province LA +•.J PRINCE GEORGE - About Prince George and Prince RU· _j 3,000 northern sport fishermen pert. are receiving questionnaires Study J.eader Bill Sinclair this week in a provincial ef­ said "we have to have hard fort to measure the impact of cold facts to prove the devel· industrial development o n opers the value of what they northern fisheries, are fooling with." The anglers ar·e being asked "If, for example, there is a the annual cash payment they north coast oil spill, this sur­ would accept to give up for­ vey will giv·e us the dollar yal­ ever their right to fish a fa. ues of the fishipg in the rivers vorite river or lake. affected upstream, so that we can say what it. is worth to The fisheries department correct the problem," Sinclair survey , is designed to put a said. dollar value on sport fishing The information may be ap­ in northern B.C. between plied to all types of industrial development, including log­ ging, railways, road improve- r ment, pulp mills, power devel­ opment and steel and copper smelters. Sinclair said a Jot of people say that the value of fishing defi.es monetary considera­ tions. "This is an emotional argument which does not stand up very well with devel­ opers who don't share the aesthetic satisfactions of fish­ il1g." The questionnaire is part of a thre.e-year study which also · includes a tourist survey, steelhead study, biological and engineering studies. Results of the angler's sur­ vey will be released later this year. - 214 -

Prince Rupert Daily News February 11, 1975, p. 1

'ftl~ Fisheries arid Marine ~ice sent out 3,188 total questionnaires to seven areas. They were: · · . - 211 to Prince Rupert ..._ 421 to Terrace - 279 to Kitimat - 256 to Smithers - 244 to Burns Lake - 294 to Vanderhoof - ·1,483 to Prince George Results show to Friday that mly 538 or 16.9 per cent of all those mailed to fishermen have returned them. The breakdown is shown as follows: - 49 from Prince Rupert or 23.2 per cent · - 87 from Terrace or 20. 7 per cent · . · - 68 from Kitimat or 24.4 per cent - 55 from Smithers or 21.5 per cent . - 47 from Burns Lake or 19.3 per cent· .;,,,.. 46 from Vanderhoof or 15.3 per cent Here Bill Sinclair, Chief of Economics and - 186 from Prince George or Sociology, Northern Operations Branch, Depart­ 12.5 per cent Mr. Sinclair urges anyone ,ment of the Environment, is shown in The Daily · who has received the News office yesterday. Mr. Sinclair hopes all sport : questionnaire to call him collect fishermen will rp.ail back a questionnaire sent to at the number on the covering them two weeks ago. letter if he has any difficulties with the form. "This mail survey is directed at the sport fishermen. It is Survey return urged hoped that the information gathered in this survey will help us to protect the interests of the sport fisherman and indirectly for fishing resul~s· all other fishermen, and also the general public. The question­ Sport fishermen throughout naire is necessarily complex, the area, between Prince but it is hoped that those who Rupert and Prince George, are Mr. Sinclair was in Prince receive one in the mail will reminded by Bill Sinclair, chief Rupert yesterday and assuretj answer every question carefully of economics and sociology, local fishermen that their so that the information can be northern operation branch, replies will not be divulged td used in their behalf." Department of the En­ anyooe, nor will they be used for.· He added that the resource vironment, to mail back setting licenc.e fees. The should be protected and "this is questionnaires they received questionnaire, he said, is the one way how. Our concern mollt two weeks ago as soon as final phase of a three-year study im}JOrt11~!lyJ11th«!,~~rce. We ·possible. of. the social and economic need this information to protect . Some 3,000 anglers tn the area consequences of industrial the fishermen.·" weNi Selected at ·random "to development in the northwest. Mr. Sinclair indicated the participatl'l h1 a study on· the "Although these are only results can be up~ated daily so economic values .of sport figures we have received from that the fishermen can have fishii1g. They were sent a three- Friday," Mr. Sinclair ex­ first-ha-nd knowledge of the .· page form with questions plained, "as many as 200 or results of the survey. . • relating to the individual's more could have been added family, occupation, preferred since then." eype and place of fishing, and estimated dollar values of the recreation. Vancouver. Province February 11, 1975, p. 15 Some not-so-dumb questions

It is difficult to put a price continuation of stocks. on something as ephemeral as If you anglers allow any a day in the outdoors. group to limit your use of Yet, three times during the hook types, you are showing past week, I have had people that you wish to be controlled ask me to set that price. One by a stupid, self-serving or in­ questioner was an economist adequately informed group with the Federal Fisheries. which doesn't care a damn He wanted to know, as part of about YOUR rights. But it does care about its bureau­ a questionnaire being circu­ Basically, the problem is it, or do something to fight for haps I have released more of lated by his department; "How cratic subordination to justify that facts are presented in a preservation of natural re­ those fish than the average its own existence. much cash payment would I hard core brief by any indus­ sources in the status quo, angler. Using that experience accept, annually, to forego trial developer which wishes your lake or stream won't as a background, and a pair Yes! That is what it is worth! forever the right to fish my to utilize natural resources, even be there, next time you of needle-nose pliers, or a dis­ favorite river or lake?" such as hydro, minerals, tim­ go to it. gorger as the release mecha­ The other question was on a I told him that in my opin­ ber or land. This coneept Another of the quesiions nism to occasionally augment card required by a charitable ion most people would consid­ shows the probable develop­ was put to me this way. my fingers, there is no occa­ organization, for which I had er the question as: and I gave ment advantages to the dis­ "Mike. Do you know that they sion to discr~t the use of a · agreed to give a day of fish­ him a choice, either stupid, trict, and usually none of the are going to put in regulations treble hook as more or less ing to a winner as a prize. It hypothetical, or totally unan­ disadvantages or losses to the next year prohibiting the use harmful than a single hook. asked for a valuation of that swerable. public as a whole. of treble hooks in fishing?" In fact, the treble hooks are as a donation - not for in­ He agreed that he was hav­ As dollar advantages im­ And, to my reply, "For God's more often in the outer skin of come tax purposes, I pre­ ing dLfficulty getting people of press politically ambitious sake! No!" the informant the fish, where disengagement sume! · the northern British Columbia men, and make good public said, "For what that is worth is more easily achieved, than Well, using current sporting districts to complete the ques­ impressions to the needy, or to you?" in the vital area of the throat guide charges, boat rental, · tionnaire, which was his reason­ avaricious, when used by poli­ Well. It is worth definite or eye, inner mouth or gills. tackle and bait costs and hire, for comfug to see me. Know­ ticians some sort of "dollar and definitive comment. It would he difficult to as­ and assessing the probable ing my attitude toward the value" contradiction is re­ Frankly, I can't believe that sess how many more or less catch on a dollar basis. I Federal Fisheries Branch, in quired to stop unwise, or rip­ even our bureaucratic and fish are taken or lest in the came -up with $150 probable their handling of our fisheries, off development. It is the self-perpetuating civil and use of single or treble hooks, value. I was surprised that anyone only, unfortunately, kind of public wildlife administrators but I'd say either side would I might say that on the last from there would respect that argument that dollar oriented could come up with a serious have difficulty making a solid item there was nothing added opinion - openly. people understand. legislation over something so case. The basic control of fish for the value per ounce, or However, we did have a dis­ Our advice to you people in purile as the banning of treble populations lies with protec­ pound for the fish.· That was cussion of the intent and pur­ the northern districts is to an­ hooks. . tion, by minimum legal limits, just toQ improbable in the poses of the questionnaire, swer it, and to set your dollar During my life as a fisher­ and/or most importantly prop­ case that they take my lake which affects the Prince value realistically high. We man, I have caught literally agation and st.ocking. If there or stream away, and won't George to Prince Rupert wa­ have a promise it won't mean thousands of sports and is a legal limit on the fish allow me to fish with treble tersheds. Both of us gained license increases. coarse fish, using either sin­ taken, the sporting method hooks. Or, won't evaluate the_ from that consideration. In fact, if you don't answer gle, dual or treble hooks. Per- couldn't matter less to the propagation of the fish stocks. - 216 -

Prince George Citizen February 12, 1975

VALUE OF FISHING . I :~ .' , f .••• :,/' ( ,,~,.~""~· Survey failure feared' An important sport fishing according to early retilrns. per cent of anglers must survey that went out to 1,200 The questions ask the answer. these questions prop­ Prince George homes Monday, angle~s to estimate the erly if the survey is to succeed. could be ruined if anglers minimum annual cash pay­ The survey is a first-ever effort refuse to answer two impor­ ment he would accept to give to establish the value of north­ tant questions dealing with the up forever his right to fish his ern rivers and lakes. dollar value of their sport. favorite river or lake, and to · · Information will be used to Bill Sinclair, organizer of the estimate the 'maximum assess the costs of industrial Environment Canada survey, amount he would pay, if costs development in the north .. said about. 40 per cent of were to increase, for a day's , "Some people think we will anglers surveyed in Kitimat fishing on his favorite riPr or use this information to set are not answering the all-. stream. · licence fees - this is not true," fmportant questions ll and 14 Sinclair sald that at lea.Jt IJO Sin<;lair si;iid. "Others say the fishing can't , be valued, but they should ask themselves this: one's home is also above value, but if it is expropriated one must go to court and a cash settlement is finally awarded, which may or may not b~ adequate. "But when industries' destroy a fishery, they exprop­ riate without paying compen­ sation." About 3,0oo· of the question­ naires have been mailed to a random selec.tion of anglers in the north. - 217 -

Kitimat Northern Sentinel February 13, 1975

Several questions are being raised in regard to a survey that was mailed to fishermen in the Pacific Northwest area. Last week's paper stated that preliminary returns show incomplete answers to two of the questions relating to dollar values of sport fishing. I was one of the fishermen receiving a questionnaire and my first response to the question in concern was an emotional answer. After careful consideration I felt that this would not help the fisheries to place a dollar value on sport fishing. I Perhaps the Department of the Environment will be able to figure a dollar value that they can relate to the dollar value of any industrial development in the area. With a figure established they I can possibly determine which will be worth more to the people of ---, the north in terms of dollars and cents. I The two financial questions involved posed the following I questions: "What would be the annual cash payment you would ~ accept to forego forever your right to fish at your favourite river or lake? . t "Supposing the cost of a day's fishing on your favourite river 01· lake rose. What would be the maximum amount you would pay · before you stopped fishing there altogether?" Bill Sinclair who is directing the study said that the second question is concerned with taking into account the money the fisherman might spend to go to another area to fish if closer places became unavailable. The way that I personally dealt with these questions was to take into account the cost to fish the next closest river if this one were closed. After keeping an accurate fishing diary for the past years in Kitimat, I had little difficulty. First I determined the number of trips I took annually and the times that I went before or after work. Due to the distance to the next river, I would need the morning off work or in the case of going after work, I should need the last two hours off work. Then l calculated the difference in cost between fishing that river and the Kitimat River while going fishing as many times in spite of the fact of the distance that I would have normally went. I also took into account the number of fishermen that went on each trip with me and split the transportation costs accordingly (although I am not sure how many might want to travel that distance to fish if the case actually presented itself). Because industrial developers do not ask you what form of compensation you would like when they come in and· take away a river, hence the second question. J.f in the case of the first question, it would cost you three or four thousanddollars extra annually to fish the Skeena watershed, and realistically we will not be com­ pensated for this, then how many trips will you omit or what would be the cost per day before you would quit going fishing altogether. Taking into account the number of lures or extra tackle you would neect to fish the rocky river beds of the Copper and Kalum you should be able to come up with some fairly accurate figures. Although some fishermen would surely move from Kitimat if this river were closed, some fishermen have other interests and a large number are here mainly to make money and anything else is secondary. . While you may not go over to fish for trout every time you feel the urge, you may still make the seasonal journey once or twice per year for steelhead or what ever you feel is justJfied. What would be the cost per trip before you would quit going altogether. Although you may not go fishing in the Kitimat as often for ten dollars per trip, you may still make a trip to fish once or twice a year for the weekend that would cost you a far greater sum. " . - - 218 -

Smithers Interior News

March 5, 1975, p. 18

. Sport fishing surv~y Swual~~u@~Z UU·@~ r0@~~ r®Z~©uu5

· Fifty per cent of Kitimat vironmentalist Bill Sinclair a Other communities involved sports ,fishermen participating week ago of 33.6 per cent. are Terrace, Prince Rupert, in an Environment Canada Overall returns of over 3,000 Burns Lake, Prince George, fishing study have returned of the surveys, concerned with Smithers and Vanderhoof. surveys mailed to them several the effect of industrial . Designed to protect sports weeks ~go. development on sport fishing in fishermen from the results of seven northern communities,. industrial development, the " The return rate is up from a is 42.7 per cent, up by 11 per · survey is part of a three-year report received from en- cent over the report last week. study being conducted by Sinclair on industrial development in the north as it pertains to the environment. It is the concluding portion of the study, which is expec.ted to be available later in the year. Sinclair indiacted this week he has sent out second reminders to participants i!! the survey, now in its sixth week, who have not returned the forms. \ He particularly is interested in responses to two financial questions on the survey, aimed at putting a dollar figw·e on loss of sports fishing op­ portunities due to industrial development. Return rates from other communities included 54.4 per cent from Smithers, 47.4 per cent from Prince Rupert, 43.6 per cent from Vanderhoof and 42.4 per cent from Terrace. - 219 -

Prince George Citizen March 13, 1975

S~irvey of~ anglers __ gets poor response Only 44 per cent of 1,500 ques­ Survey organizer Bill Sin­ tionaires distributed in Prince clair has said the study is George last month as part of needed to provide good argu­ a sport fishing survey have ments against future indus­ been returned so far, Environ­ trial plans which could effect ment Canada reports. the rivers, such as dams, pulp mills and smelters. The figure is 4lmong the low­ Among other things, the est for seven towns included in questionnaire asks the angler the survey which aims to to estimate how much money establish an economic value for a day of fishing on his favorite the sport fishing resource. lake or river is worth to him --1 in dollars and cents. About 60 per cent of the ques­ ~ i tionnaires distributed . in I Kitimat and Smithers were returned, but the Prince George returns are important because. almost half the ques­ tionnaires went to anglers liv­ ing here.

Smithers Interior News March 19, 1975, p. 14

·Sport fishin·g · survey renlinders

Reminders have been sent surveyed, 1,549 (or 48.7%) of out by Bill Sinclair of the the 3,180 questionnaires have Federal Department of Fish­ been received by the depart· eries to people who haven't ment. · filled out and returned the The survey, initiated in questionnaires on the value of February, is' being conducted sport fishing in the north. to determine the economic According to the latest value placed on sport fishing fig-ures compiled l\larch .6th, to enable the department to 150 of the 252 questionnaires give developers comparative (or 59.5%) distributed in the figures of what might be lost Smithers area were returned. should development cause For the seven communities .damage to watersheds. - 220 -

Kitimat Northern Sentinel March 20, 1975, p, 2

Kitintat leads in· fish survey return

Latest returns from an were distributed .to northern Environment Canada fishing sports fishermen, with 280 sent survey of northern sports to Kitimat. ·.fishermen indicate an overall Returns are ·still being ac­ response rate of 48.7 per cent, cepted, according to a return with Kitimat leading six other rate chart received this week communities with 60.4 ' per from environmentalist Bill cent. Sinclair wh~ is conducting the . . Dated two weeks ago, the s~dy. . returns show response rates of Sinclair pointed out several 'the mail survey of 59.5 per cent weeks ago the fishing survey is from Prince-Rupert and 51 .. 7 designed to protect the fishing per cent from Terrace. fights of fishermen in the event Part of a three-year survey of industrial expansion. Jt by the federal en­ particularly attempts to put a vironmentalists on the effects dollar value on sports fishing in of future 'industrial develop­ the north in order to have · ment in the north, the survey is financial arguments to a concluding portion, being developments which ·may conducted In PrJnce Geo~e, threaten the environment. Rupert, Terracfil, Kitimat, · Sinclair is the author · ·of · Smithers, Bums Lake and seyeral environmental reports, · Vanderhoof. · including a study last year of ·A total of over 3,000 surveys Lakelse Lake near Terrace. - 221 -

Vancouver Province March 20, 1975, p. 9

Setting, dollar value B.C. ·anglers A big game guJde said he feels that the steelhead fishery is being wasted and suggested that U.S. fishermen be required to use native Indians as guides while angling for these fish. Th)s writer valued his favorite piece of fishing water at $100,000 • speaking up . "When we. started this survey many people said that sports fishing is something that cannot be valued in dol- By FRED, CURTIN lars and cents," Sinclair said. . "But that is i1ot so and we must put a value on it. Early results of a survey of central B.C. residents "We are able to put a value on the works of the great show that they are much more concerned about their en­ · painters, and people who drive with bald tires when they vironment and natural resources than was expected, says have money in the bank are cert.ainly putting a price on Bill Sinclair of Environment Canada. their lives.'' · Sinclair, chief of the economics and sociology divi­ Sinclair points out that In many countries and .even in sion, is questioning 3,180 residents between Prince George other parts of. Canada people are not free to go fishing. and Prince Rupert on the value they would put on their 'l'l)e resource is privately owne.d and people who use ·it favorite fishing river or lake. nilst pay for it. . The questionnaires went out Jan. 27 and so far he has "'111e big danger of considering our rivers free is that received 1,738 usa\Jle returns.or about 55 per cent. industry also considers them free for its use _:.to take "There is no doubt the return would have been even water for a number of uses and as a place to discharge better ifit weren't for the mail strike but the over-all re: waste.'' suits are very· encouraging," he said. Sinclair, a keen. fisherman himself, said he is . im· pressed by how many people enjoy fishing as a family. The survey is part of a three year stUdy to measure "Certain industries, take a steel mill for instan<.>e, the social and economic impact of industry ancl develop­ would. have a ten·ible impact on this environment and ment on the area. way Of life. · · · 1 '~re "A few of the people we ·polled think we standing " "Other developments like hydro qams and railwiws in the. way of new industry and a few others fear we are provide some local jobs while being built but very fewi · encouraging it. after. "But there has been a minimal amount of misunder­ "We have seen what has happened to rriost of North standing and most of the t;esiclents want soine say about America as each area is opened up. Not enough recogni­ what will happen in the future." tion has been given to the living resources in areas where Sinclear has spent considerable time talking with development takes place. · groups in the area and, as a result, l)as received many "We feel it is most important that citizens answer comments from the persons polled. these questionnaires and express their opinions." · · A Prince George resident wrote back that he consid­ Sinclair hopes to receive more returns before all the e1·s the survey ''a realistic start to preserving the envi­ infortnation goes into the computer for the final report ronment." next year. · A resident of Kitimat replied ~ith a long lettel' on his "We are questioning 12 per cent of the 26,000 resi· concern about the preservation of salmon stocks and citi- dents who took out fishing lk-ences last year. This ~ens' right to fish. . amom1ts to about 10 per cent of the households in the Another writer, however, c,'()nsidered the survey "an area. Ontario and Quebec-based plot to get more taxes out of "I think most of them believe the fisheries service is B.C. resid~nts." working on their behalf." M.any people are c'Oncerned that U.S. tourists are tak· But what about that concerned citizen who answered. ing more than their share Of fish and asked for more po­ the questionnaire with a pamphlet entitled God's Answers licing of the resource. to Man's Questions? Kitimat Northern Sentinel March 27, 1975

Smithers Interior News Speaking with The Sentinel -_ 54. 7 percent last week, he said the return­ March 26, 1975, p. 19 rate from Kitimat is par­ ticularly high in light of answer survey comparison with · that of Smithers where environmental A return rate of 54.7 per cent concern is ve-ry high. of.Environment Canada fishing He pointed out in an in­ surveys mailed to northern terview with a lower mainland c9mmunities in January is newspaper that in many ·. reported by environmentalist countries, and even some parts Bill Sinclair, heading a study of Canada, people are not free attempting t!> determine the to go fishing wherever they effects of industrial develop­ wish, the resource being ment on sport fishing. . privately owned. • · Sports. fishermen from the questionnaires distributed by He added the big danger in Smithers .area are leading in the Federal Department of Sinclair reports the return­ ·considering rivers to be free is the percentage of returns of Fisheries for a survey on the rate breakdowns as follows: that industry also considers value of sport fishing. Kitimat, 66.1 per cent; them free for its use, to take Figures compiled to March Smithers, 67.1 per cent; Prince water from for a number of 12th indicated that 169 of the Rupert, f.5.2 per cent; Terrace, uses, and as a place to. 252 forms sent out to the 56_.7 per cent; Burns Lake, 56.4 · discharge waste. Smithers area had been per cent; Vanderhoof, 49.6 per "Certain industries, take a returned, or 67.1 per cent. cent; Prince George, 50.4 per 5~1 mill for instance, would The second highest percent­ , cent. · ha'-1~ a terrible impact on this age cam~ from Kitimat, where He said 1,738 returns have envir11nment and way of life," fishermen returned 180, or been received from a total of Sinclair said in that interview. 64.3 per ce.nt, pf the 280 forms 3,180 sent out to northern they received. Sincl~~r noted not enough commuriities. . recoi::n~tion has been given to Of the 3,180 questionnaires The fishing study is part of a the hvmg resources in areas sent out to seven communities three-year study by the federal• where development takes in northwestern B.C., 1,682 environmental agency on the place, adding Environment had been returned for an effects of industrial develop­ Canada feels the return of the average of 52.9 per cent. ment in the north. present fishing survey is mc.t Sinclair, the auth!>r of important for that reuea. . ·several environmental studies 1 including one on La.kelse Lake near Terrace last year, says the study is designed to protect the interests of ·fishermen and should put a dollar value of the Joss of fishing rights in the event of industrial develop­ ment. Ottawa Citizen April 23, 1975 B.,C. survey indicates Manv of the respondents "We are able to put a were· concerned that value on the works of the concern for conservation United States tourists are great painters, and people · taking more than_ their · who drive with bald tires VANCOUVER (CP) - naires to residents between Mr. Sinclair has spent share of fish and asked when they have money in Residents of central Brit­ Prince George and Prince considerable time talking for more policing of the the bank are certainly ish Columbia are much Rupert, asking them the with groups in the area resource. - putting a price on their more concerned about value they would put on and, as a result, received A big-game guide said lives." their environment and their favorite fishing river many comments from the he feels the steelhead conservation of natural re­ or lake. persons polled. fishery is being wasted Privately owned sources than Environment Mr. Sinclair said the A Prince George re­ and suggested that U.S. In many countries _and Canada expected, a de­ response rate has been sident wrote - back calling fisberm1.m be required to even in. some parts of partment s11rvey indicates. more than 62 per cent. - the survey .. a realistic use native Indians as Canada.:: peo13le are not Bill Sinclair of the eco­ Most of the respondents start to preserving the guides while angling for free to _fish, Mr. Sinclair nomics and sociology divi­ showed a surprising con­ environmemt. •• these fish. noted. · The resource is sion sent 3,180 question- cern for conservation. A Kitimat resident re­ The guide said his fa­ privat~ly owned and peo­ plied with a long letter vorite piece of fishing wa­ ple who use it must paY about the need for preser­ ter was worth $100,000 to for it. vation of salmon stocks him. The survey is part of a - and the .citizen's right to "When_ we started this three-year study to mea­ fish. survey many people said sure the social and eco- - that 'sports fishing is nomic impact of industry ; Eastern. plot something that cannot be , and development in -cen- -- Another writer, however, : valued in dollars and: tral B.C. oonsidered the survey ..an cents," Mr. Sinclair said. Questionnaires were sent Ontario and Quebec-based "But that is not so and to 12 per cent of the 26, plot to get more taxes ou,t we must put a value on 000 residents of the area­ of B.C. residents." it. who took out fishing li- cences last year. ._ - I -I

APPENDIX VII I APPENDIX VIII

SURVEYS, INFORlVIATION AND CALCULATIONS USED TO ESTABLISH THE VALUE OF THE AFFECTED AREA'S NON-RESIDENT SPORT FISHERY

The value of the non-resident sport fisheries affected by Kemano II was determined using the approach known as the expenditure 1 method. This method measures the value of the secondary benefits that are generated in the area's (see Map I page 168) economy because of the existence of sport fishing opportunities. They are in fact -1 those economic gains which are produced in the local economy because of non-resident expenditures which would not otherwise occur in the I absence of sport fishing. Three basic steps are involved in calcul­ ating the value of the secondary benefits. The first step is to es­ timate the total number of non-resident fishing visitors to the area and their fishing expenditures. The second step is to estimate the amount of fishing activity directly attributable to waterways affected by the Kemano II project. The third step is to calculate the incomes and employment generated by the fishing expenditures attributable to waterways affected by Kemano II.

Total Non-Resident Fishing Party Activity and Expenditures

Information on campground attendance in the area was ob­ tained from the Parks Branch, Department of Recreation and Conser­ vation, of the provincial government. Similar information was ob­ tained from owners and managers of the area's private campgrounds. These two sets of data, made it possible to calculate the total num­ ber of paid campsite nights in the area during 1972, 1973, 1974 and 1975. The number of paid campsite nights information was multiplied by a fishing coefficient (calculated from information gathered in the

1 See Appendix VI for a description of the value techniques and their theoretical foundations. \

\ - 225 -

campsite visitors and the on-site surveys described in Appendix III) to provide an estimate of the total number of non-resident fishermen visiting the area each year according to residence category. The expenditure information, gathered in on-site surveys, was multiplied by the estimate of the total number of visitors to provide an estimate of total fishing expenditures.

The total number of steelhead angler days fishing activity that took place on each stream was taken from the Steelhead Harvest Analysis published annually by the Fish and Wildlife Branch of the provincial government. Data on steelhead fishermen, only a few of whom were interviewed in field surveys, were aggregated with the data from the survey of sport fishing parties to provide a reasonable estimate of total angling activity. Whenever appropriate, allowances were made for double counting arising from the overlap of data from the two different sources ..

Calculation of Non-Resident Expenditures Attributable to Sport Fishing on Waterways Affected by Kemano II -~ I Non-resident angler parties interviewed in on-site surveys provided information which could be used to calculate the amount of expenditures attributable to waterways directly affected by Kemano II. The following procedure was adopted:

1. All interviewed non-resident parties were asked to esti­ mate the average party expenditures per day in the affected area. 2. All interviewed non-resident parties were asked: "If there was no fishing in the area, would you have made the trip anyway?". If those interviewed responded negatively, then all the party's expen­ ditures in the area were attributed to sport fishing. I 3. Those who indicated they would have visited the area even I if no sport fishing opportunities were available, were asked the fol-. l lowing: "How many days do you estimate you are staying longer because \ [

\ l - 226 -

there is fishing available in the area?". All expenditures made on "extra" days were then attributed directly to sport fishing. 4. In those cases where the length of trip would have been unaffected by the existence of the sport fishing opportunities present in the area, no part of the expenditures were attributed to sport fish­ ing. 5, All non-resident parties were asked the number of days they fished on each waterway in the affected area. Adjustments were made in this information to provide a realistic estimate of the total amount of angling effort that takes place on each of the affected water­ ways. 6. The expenditures attributable to each waterway were ap­ portioned according to the amount of angling effort that the waterway supported. One exception to this was the Dean River, where the expendi­ tures attributable to sport fishing on the Dean River were estimated directly from the investigations that took place on that river.

Calculation of Incomes and Employment Generated by Non-Resident Fishing Expenditures Attributable to Waterways Affected by Kemano II

The money spent by non-residents on sport fishing in the area increases the income of residents and the number of employment opportuni­ ties available in the local economy. The initial effect of the expendi­ tures attributable to the affected waterways was calculated assuming a local income component of 0.30. This component measures the first round of local income generated by non-resident spending. In other words, each $100 of non-resident attributable expenditures, results in a local income increase of $30, This initial expenditure generates successive rounds of spending by local residents. Each successive round of spending adds further to the earning power of local residents, which in turn, further increases local spending. The overall impact of the initial local income component diminishes with each successive round of induced spending. The total effect depends upon the size of - 227 -

the local income component and the portion of income that local resi­ dents spend in the area. In this case, the local income multiplier 2 was estimated to be 1.35. The total effect on local incomes of non- resident expenditures was calculated as the product of the spending attributable to the fishing opportunities on the affected waterways, the local income component, and the multiplier.

Non-resident expenditures also generate employment in the l local economy. The number of jobs generated by non-resident fishing ( expenditures attributable to the affected waterways was estimated ~ from information obtained in the surveys of business establishments 'l (described in Appendix III). The enumerators asked the proprietors r and managers of sport fishing establishments the number of full-time employees working in their establishments. They also asked the owners and managers to estimate the proportion of their business which came from sport fishermen. This information, together with the data on non-resident fishing activity (collected in on-site surveys) permitted calculation of the number of jobs generated by non-resident sport fish­ ing on waterways affected by Kemano II.

I I ~

2 A non-resident expenditure of $100 would result in an ultimate in­ crease in the incomes of residents of (($100 x 0,30) x 1.35] = $40.50. - 228 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, F. J. and Bonsor, N. C. "Allocation, Congestion, and the Valuation of Recreational Resources." Land Economics, 1975, vol. 51, pp. 51-57.

Andrews, T. R, and McSheffrey, H.A. Commercial Interception of Steel­ head Trout Stocks in British Columbia - A Review of Available Information. Marine Resources Research, Department of Recreation and Conservation, Victoria, B. C,, November 1975.

Archer, B. H. and Owen, Christine B. "Towards a Tourist Regional Multiplier." Regional Studies, 1971, vol. 5, pp. 289-294,

Baumol, William J, "on the Discount Rate for Public Projects." Public Expenditures and Policy Analysis, ed. Robert H. Haveman and Julius Margolis, Markham Publishing Co., Chicago, 1970, pp. 273-287.

"on the Social Rate of Discount." American Economic Review, June 1968, pp. 789-802.

Beardsley, W. "Bias and Noncomparability in Recreation Evaluation Models." Land Economics, 1971, vol, 47, pp. 175-180.

Bennett, Marilyn G. Indian Fishing and Its Cultural Importance in the Fraser River System. Fisheries and Marine Service, Southern Op­ erations Branch, Pacific Region, Department of the Environment and Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, April 1973,

Brown, William G. and Nawas, Farid. "A New Approach to the Evaluation of Non-Priced Recreational Resources: A Reply." Land Economics, 1972, vol. 48, pp. 403-405.

, Singh, Ajmer and Castle, Emery N. An Economic Evaluation of the Oregon Salmon and Steelhead Sport Fishery. Agricultural experiment Station, Technical Bulletin 78, Oregon State University, Corvallis, September 1964.

, Singh, Ashok K. and Richards, Jack A. "Influence of Improved Estimating Techniques on Predicted Net Economic Values for Salmon and Steelhead. 11 Agricultural Experiment Station, Oregon State University, Corvallis, July 1972.

Campbell, Richard and Sinclair, William, F. "The Indian Food Fishery Part I, Conservation District No. 2, Lower Fraser, Mission­ Harrison and Chilliwack-Yale Sub-Districts, 1952-1968." Economics Branch, Fisheries Service, Department of Fisheries and Forestry, Pacific Region, Vancouver, B.C., August 1970.

Cesario, F. J. and Knetsch, Jack L, "Time Bias in Recreation Benefit Estimates." Water Resources Research, June 1970, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 700-704. - 229 -

Clawson, Marion. "An Economic Aspect of Sport Fishing," Canadian Fisheries Reports, Department of Fisheries of Canada, Ottawa, May 1965, no. 4, pp. 12-24.

and Knetsch, Jack L. Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Resources for the Future,. Inc. , The Johns Hopkins Press, Bal ti more, 1966.

Coomber, Nicholas H. and Biswas, Asit K. Evaluation of Environmental Intangibles. Department of the Environment, Research Co-ordina­ tion Directorate, Policy, Planning and Research Service, Ecologi­ cal Systems Branch, June 1972,

Crutchfield, James A. "Valuation of Fishery Resources." Land Econo­ mics, May 1962, pp. 145-154,

"Economic Evaluation of Sport Fisheries - A Progress Report." University of Washington, September 1965,

and MacFarlane, Dougald. Economic Valuation of the 1965-1966 Salt-Water Fisheries of Washington. State of Wash­ ington, Department of Fisheries, Research Bulletin No, 8, Decem­ ber 1968,

and Pontecorvo, Giulo. The Pacific Salmon Fish­ eries: A Study of Irrational Conservation. Resources for the Future, Inc., Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1969,

Darling, Arthur H. "Measuring Benefits Generated by Urban Water Parks." -1 Land Economics, 1973, vol, 49, No, 1, pp, 22-35, .\ i Davis, Robert K. "The Value of Big Game Hunting in a Private Forest." Transactions of the Twenty-Ninth North American Wildlife and Na­ tural Resources Conference, March 9, 10 and 11, 1964, Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D. C, \ Dorfman, Robert and Dorfman, Nancy S., eds. Economics of the Environ­ ,\ ment. W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., New York, 1972, ! ,\ Edwin, Reid and Associates Ltd. "Recreation Sector Study." Vancouver, \ April 1975. ,\ Fisher, Anthony C. and Krutilla, John V. "Resource Conservation, En­ I vironmental Preservation, and the Rate of Discount." Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol, 89, No. 3, August 1975, pp. 358-370. ( Friedlaender, M. J, Economic Status of Native Indians in British \ Columbia Fisheries 1964-1973, Technical Report Series PAC/T-75-25, I Fisheries Operations Branch, Pacific Region, 1975, \

\ \ - 230 -

Fry, Donald H., Jr. "Potential Profits in the California Salmon Fishery." California Fish and Game, vol. 48, No. 4, October 1962, pp. 256-266.

Garrison, Charles B. "The Impact of New Industry; An Application of the Economics Base Multiplier to Small Rural Areas." Land Economics, 1972, vol. 48, pp. 329-337.

Gordon, Douglas. A Socio-Economic Analysis of Idaho Sport Fisheries, University of Idaho, Idaho Co-operative Fishery Unit, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences, 1970.

, Chapman, D. W. and Bjornn, T. C. "Economic Eval­ ___u_a_t_i_o_n_o_f--Sport Fisheries - What do They Mean?" Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 1973, no. 2, pp. 293-311.

Gordon, H. Scott. "The Economic Theory of a Common Property Resource: The Fishery." Journal of Political Economy, vol. 62, April 1954, pp. 124-142.

Gray, H. Peter. "Towards an Economic Analysis of Tourism Policy." Social and Economic Studies, Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of the West Indies, Jamaica, September 1974, vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 386-397,

Hemus, Dennis. "Dean River Summer Steelhead - Observations on Life History, Population and the Fishery in 1973." Victoria, 1974.

Hunter, Michael. "Indian Participation and Performance in the Fishery 1969-1971." Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Pacific Region, April 1973.

Jenkins, Glenn P. "The Measurement of Rates of Return and Taxation from Private Capital in Canada." Benefit Cost and Policy Analy­ sis, ed. A. c. Harburger and others, Aldeen Publications, Chicago, 1972, pp. 211-245.

Knetsch, Jack L. "Outdoor Recreation Demands and Benefits." Land Economics, 1963, vol. 39, pp. 387-396.

Outdoor Recreation and Water Resources Planning. William Byrd Press, Richmond, Virginia, 1974.

and Davis, Robert K. "comparisons of Methods for ___R_e_c_r_e_a_t_i_' o-n~~Evalua t ion." Economics of the Environment, ed. Robert Dorfman and Nancy S. Dorfman, W, W. Norton and Company, Inc., New York, 1972.

Krutilla, John V. "conservation Reconsidered." American Economic Review, 1967, vol. 57, pp, 777-786. - 231 -

Krutilla, John V. and Cicchetti, Charles J. "Evaluating Benefits of Environmental Resources with Special Application to the Hell's Canyon." Natural Resources Journal, 1972, vol. 12, pp. 1-29,

and Cicchetti, Charles J., Freeman, A. Myrick III, and Russell, Clifford S. "Observations on the Economics of Irreplace­ able Assets." Environmental Quality Analysis: Theory and Method in the Social Sciences. ed. Allan V. Kneese and Blair T. Bower, Resources for the Future, Inc., Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1972.

and Fisher, Anthony C. "Distribution Property Rights, and Values on the Public Lands," The Economics of Natural Environments. Resources for the Future, Inc., Johns Hopkins Uni­ versity Press, 1975,

, Fisher, Anthony C. and Cicchetti, Charles J. 11 The ~~-E-c_o_n_o_m__,..i_c_s__ o~f Environmental Preservation: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis." American Economic Review, September 1972, pp. 605-619.

Large, R. G. The Skeena - River of Destiny. Mitchell Press Ltd., Vancouver, 1957.

Laub, Michael E. '~he Economic Evaluation of Non-Marketed Recreational Resources." Ph.D. thesis, University of British Columbia, August 1971.

Leggett, J. W. and Prediger, G. W. "A Preliminary Survey of the Dean River Steel.head Fishery." Victoria, March 1972.

and Westover, W. T. Survey of the 1974 Dean River Steel.head Fishery. British Columbia Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria, December 1975,

Lyons, Cicely. Salmon and Our Heritage. B. C. Packers, Mitchell Press Ltd., Vancouver, 1970.

McDaniels, Timothy. "Estimation of Recreational Benefits - A Case Study: The Economic Value of Recreation in Howe Sound - 1972." Vancouver, April 1973,

McKervill, Hugh W. The Salmon People, Grays Publishing, Sydney, B.C., 1967.

Mansfield, N. W. 11 The Estimation of Benefits from Recreation Sites and the Provision of a New Recreation Facility." Regional Studies, 1971, vol. 5, pp. 55-69,

Martin, William E., Gun, Russell L. and Smith, Arthur H. The Demand for and Value of Hunting, Fishing and General Rural Outdoor Recreation in Arizona. The Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Ari­ zona, Tucson, Arizona, Technical Bulletin 211, June 1974.

' I\~ I - 232 -

Meldrun, Pixie. Kitimat: The First Five Years. Corporation of the District of Kitimat, Kitimat, B, C., 1958.

Montreal Engineering Company Ltd. Provincial Power Study. British Columbia Energy Board, Vancouver, April 1972.

Palmer, R. N. An Assessment of Salmon Migration and the Native Food Fishery of Moricetown Falls in 1966. Department of Fisheries of Canada, Vancouver, May 1967.

Pearse Bowden Economic Consultants. The Value of Fresh Water Sport Fishing in British Columbia. Department of Recreation and Con­ servation, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria B. c., 1971, Study Report No, 5.

The Value of Non-Resident Sport Fishing in British Columbia. Department of Recreation and Con­ servation, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria, B. C., 1970, Study Report No. 4.

The Value of Resident Hunting in British Columbia. Department of Recreation and Conservation, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria, B. c., 1971, Study Report No. 6.

Pearse, Peter H. "A New Approach to the Evaluation of Non-Priced Re­ creational Resources." Land Economics, 1968, Vol. 44, pp. 87 - 89.

"A New Approach to the Evaluation of Non-Priced Re­ creational Resources: Rejoinder." Land Economics, 1972, vol. 48, pp. 406-407.

Sport Fishery Management in Canada: Emerging Problems and Data Requirements. Sport Fishery Statistics and Valuation Workshop, Ottawa, Ontario, October 1970.

"Towards a Theory of Multiple Use: The Case of Re­ creation Versus Agriculture." Natural Resources Journal, 1969, vol. 9, pp. 561-575.

and Laub, Michael E. The Value of the Kootenay Lake Sport Fishery: An Economic Analysis. Department of Recreation and Conservation, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria, B, C., 1969, Study Report No. 3.

Peterson, G. R. and Hazledine, W. R. "Recommendations for Fishery Protection on the Dean River Drainage." Fish and Wildlife Branch,

Department of Recreation and Conservation, Victoria, B. C. 1 Decem­ ber 1968. - 233 -

Prewitt, Roy A. "The Economics of Public Recreation - An Economic Study of the Monetary Evaluation of Recreation in the National Parks," (Prewitt Report), National Parks Service, Washington, D. C., 1949.

Reid, David J. Revelstoke Project Benefit-Cost Analysis. Systems Engineering Division, B. C. Hydro and Power Authority, Vancouver, B. c., May 1976, 2 vols.

Richards, J. A. '~n Economic Evaluation of Columbia River Anadromous Fish Programs." Ph.D. Thesis, Oregon State University, 1969.

Schiff, A. L. "Outdoor Recreation Values in the Public Decision Pro­ cess." Natural Resources Journal, October 1966, vol. 6, pp. 542- 559,

Scott, Anthony. "The Valuation of Game Resources: Some Theoretical Aspects." Canadian Fisheries Reports, Depa.rtment of Fisheries of Canada, Ottawa, May 1965, pp. 27-47.

Sewell, W. R. D. and Rostron, John. Recreational Fishing Evaluation. Department of Fisheries and Forestry, Ottawa, February 1970.

Sinclair, William F. The British Columbian Sport Fishermen. Depart­ ment of the Environment, Fisheries Service, Pacific Region, July 1972.

The Importance of the Commercial Fishing Indus­ try to Selected Remote Coastal Communities of British Columbia. Department of the Environment, Pacific Region, Fisheries and Marine Service, Northern Operations Branch, Economics and Socio­ logy Unit, August 1971.

The Socio-Economic Importance of Maintaining the Quality of Recreational Resources in Northern British Columbia: The Case of Lakelse Lake. Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Northern Operations Branch, Pacific Region, · June 1974, PAC/T-74-10, NOB/ECON 5-74.

The Kitimat River: Its Use and Its Importance To Residents of the Kitimat District. Department of the Environ­ ment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Northern Operations Branch, Pacific Region, July 1975, PAC/T-75-20, NOB/ECON 9-75.

and Boland, John P. A Socio-Economic Survey of Commercial Fishermen Living in the Northern Regions of British .Columbia, 1970. Department of the Environment, Pacific Region, Fisheries and Marine Service, Northern Operations Branch, Eco­ nomics and Sociology Unit, NOB/ECON 3-73, June 1973.

\

\ - 234 -

Sinc_lair, William F. and Campbell, Richard. "The Indian Food Fishery Part II, Conservation District No. 1, Prince George, Cariboo, Kam­ loops, Lillooet-Merritt." Economics Branch, Fisheries Service, Department of Fisheries and Forestry, Pacific Region, Vancouver, B. C., November 1970.

and Morley, R. W. "Statistical Bias Problem in On-Site Surveys: The Severity of the Problem and Its Potential for Solution." Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, vol. 32, No, 12, 1975, pp. 2520-2524,

and Sweitzer, Obert. The Economic Value of the Yukon Sport Fishery. Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Northern Operation Branch, Economics Unit Vancouver, April 1973, NOB/ECON 2-73.

Smith, V. Kerry. '~ravel Cost Demand Models for Wilderness Recrea­ tion: A Problem of Non-Nested Hypotheses." Land Economics, May 1975, vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 103-111.

and Krutilla, John V. "A Simulation Model for the Management of Low Density Recreational Areas." Journal of Environ­ mental Economics and Management, November 1974, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 187 - 201.

Spargo, R. A. Evaluation of Sport Fisheries: An Experiment in Methods. Department of the Environment, Fisheries Service, Economics Branch, Ottawa, 1971.

Thompson, Ian D. Sport Fishing in Prince Edward Island; A Survey of Anglers. Department of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Recreational Fisheries Branch, Ottawa, 1975.

Topolniski, D. Survey of Recreational Fishing in the N,W,T. Depart­ ment of the Environment, Fisheries and Marine Service, Economics Branch, Central Region, May 1974,

Trice, Andrew H. and Wood, Samuel E. "Measurement of Recreation Bene­ fits." Land Economics, August 1958, vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 195-207,

Vanderkamp, John. The Growth and Impact of the Mining Industry in British Columbia. Price Waterhouse and Co., Vancouver, 1968.

Government Publications -

British Columbia, Fish and Wildlife Branch. Steelhead Harvest Analy­ sis. Victoria, B. C., 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71, 1971-72, 1972-73, 1973-74, 1974-75. - 235 -

British Columbia, Fish and Wildlife Branch. British Columbia Sport Fishing Regulations 1975/76. Department of Recreation and Travel Industry, Victoria, B. C., 1975.

Canada, Economic Council of Canada. The Challenge of Growth and Change. Fifth Annual Review, Ottawa, September 1968.

Canada, Fisheries and Marine Service. Annual Statistical Review of Canadian Fisheries. Intellignece Services Division, Marketing Services Branch, Environment Canada, Ottawa, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974,

Canada, Food Prices Review Board. Fish and Fish Products. Ottawa, June 1975.

Canada, Statistics Canada. Consumer Prices and Price Indexes, October­ December 1975, Ottawa, June 1975.

Canada, Statistics Canada. Prices and Price Indexes, January 1975. Ottawa, June 1975,

Newspaper Articles -

Baines, David. "'Ransom' Asked for Hydro Dam." Vancouver Sun, 23 June 1976, p. 1.

"Let battle commence." The Vancouver Sun, 19 June 1976, p. 4.

Sawatsky, John. "Big Fines, Seizure Sought for Fraser Fish Ppachers." Vancouver Sun, 15 April 1976, p. 1.

"Those energy options." The Province, 19 June 1976, p. 4.