COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 Community Meetings Summary Report Contents

1 | INTRODUCTION ...... 3 4.3 Creston ...... 15

2 | BACKGROUND ...... 4 4.4 Castlegar ...... 17

2.1 Treaty ...... 4 4.5 Nelson ...... 20 2.2 Columbia River Treaty Review ...... 5 4.6 Valemount ...... 23 2.3 ...... 5 4.7 Revelstoke ...... 25 2.4 Columbia River Basin ...... 6 4.8 Golden ...... 28 3 | 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS ...... 8 4.9 ...... 30 3.1 Format of Public Meetings ...... 8 4.10 ...... 32 3.2 Meeting Attendance ...... 9

4 | COMMUNITY MEETING SUMMARIES . . . 10 5 | CONCLUSION ...... 36

4.1 Meadow Creek/Lardeau Valley . . . . 10 6 | NEXT STEPS ...... 37

4.2 Jaffray ...... 12 7 | FEEDBACK ...... 38

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 2 ] 1 | Introduction

There was a lack of consultation with Basin residents and First Nations when the Treaty was first negotiated, and feelings of hurt and anger remain to this day. The Province is committed to ensuring that this time, as and the U.S. seek to modernize the Treaty, the people of the Basin are meaningfully consulted, kept informed, and see their input reflected in the Treaty negotiations.

This commitment began in 2012, when the Province conducted in-depth public consultation, and government-to-government consultation with Basin First Nations, to identify important Treaty-related interests. The meetings summarized in this report In June 2018, the Province of held a sought further input from the public on their priority series of nine community meetings in the Canadian interests, and what issues they felt should be included Columbia River Basin (Basin) to seek residents’ input in Treaty negotiations. on modernization of the Columbia River Treaty (Treaty). The timing of the meetings coincided with During these meetings, community residents the beginning of Treaty negotiations between discussed the importance of enhancing ecosystems, Canada and the (U.S.). The Province agriculture, tourism and recreation in the Basin. held a subsequent meeting in December 2018 for the They supported First Nations’ participation in the communities near the headwaters of the Columbia negotiation process, and reintroducing salmon to River. The information in this report summarizes input the Canadian Columbia Basin. They expressed their received by the Province’s Columbia River Treaty desire for fair compensation for communities that are Team (Treaty Team) from attendees at these ten impacted by Treaty dam operations, and encouraged community sessions. equitable sharing of benefits between Canada and the U.S. A key theme throughout these meetings The Treaty was ratified in 1964, and was created was to acknowledge what has been lost as a result to manage flood risk and enable hydropower of Treaty dam operations, and enhance what remains. generation on the Columbia River. Four dams were built as part of the Treaty: the Duncan, Hugh The Province will continue engaging with the public L. Keenleyside and Mica dams in B.C., Canada, and to further refine issues and priorities throughout the in , U.S. The filling of these Treaty negotiations. dams’ reservoirs flooded large sections of fertile valley bottom land and resulted in the displacement of over 2,000 people.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 3 ] 2 | Background

Canada’s constitutional jurisdiction for international treaties, it requires Canada to obtain the agreement of the Province before terminating the Treaty.

The U.S. prepaid Canada $64 million for 60 years to provide assured flood control operations that resulted in reduced flood damage and increased safety for U.S. citizens. The U.S. also committed in the Treaty to paying Canada half of the incremental power potential that could be produced because of the new flow regimes made possible by the Treaty co- ordination.

The Treaty reservoirs inundated 110,000 hectares (270,000 acres) of Canadian ecosystems, displaced 2.1 COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY more than 2,000 residents and First Nations, and impacted transportation, farms, tourism and In 1964, Canada and the U.S. ratified the Columbia forestry activities. River Treaty, a transboundary water management agreement. The impetus for the Treaty was the flood Consultation with First Nations and the public at the of 1948, which devastated the City of Vanport in time the Treaty was developed could be considered and cost many lives, along with growing inadequate to non-existent by today’s standards, and power demand in the Pacific Northwest. In exchange feelings of hurt remain to this day. It is a priority for the Province to ensure communities and First Nations for providing flood control and for an equal share are consulted this time, and see their input reflected of the incremental U.S. downstream power benefits, in a modernized Treaty. Canada agreed to build three dams – Duncan, Hugh L. Keenleyside and Mica - in B.C., and allowed the U.S. The Treaty has no end date but either country can to build a fourth dam, the Libby Dam, that flooded unilaterally terminate the Treaty from September into Canada. The Canadian facilities vastly reduced 2024 onwards, provided at least 10 years’ notice is flood risk in B.C. and the U.S. The Treaty also enabled given. This ability to terminate the Treaty, and the the construction of new hydroelectric projects in changing flood control provisions that will occur the B.C. portion of the Columbia Basin, which today post-2024 whether the Treaty is terminated or not, provide approximately half of the potential power prompted both countries to undertake a review of generation in the province. Treaty power operations the Treaty to determine its future. These reviews also allow for the production of significantly more occurred between 2011 and 2014. electricity at U.S. hydropower facilities. After completing their respective reviews, both The Canada-British Columbia Agreement (1963) Canada and the U.S. decided to move forward allocated most Treaty rights, benefits and obligations with negotiating a modernized Treaty. Negotiations to the Province. Although this agreement retains between the countries began in May 2018.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 4 ] 2.2 COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY REVIEW CBRAC’s membership includes citizens from across the Basin, and representatives from First Nations, local In 2011, the Province initiated a Treaty review process governments, BC Hydro, FortisBC, Columbia Power to evaluate whether it should terminate the Treaty, Corporation, , the Province of continue the Treaty as is, or enter into discussions B.C. and Government of Canada. with the U.S. to seek improvements to the Treaty.

The Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum 2.3 FIRST NATIONS Resources is the lead provincial agency for the The provincial Crown has a legal duty to consult Treaty, and established the Columbia River Treaty potentially affected First Nations when decisions by Review Team (Treaty Team) to undertake analysis the Crown may impact Aboriginal rights and title, and provide recommendations. Canada supported which are protected under the Canadian Constitution. British Columbia’s lead role in the Treaty review, Columbia Basin First Nations are the Ktunaxa Nation, and collaborated with the Province throughout Secwepemc Nation, and Okanagan (Syilx) Nation. the process. First Nations were not consulted when the Treaty In 2012 and 2013, the Province conducted its was established, and Aboriginal rights and title were extensive review, including in-depth public not considered. In light of this, the Province has been engagement, First Nations government-to- consulting separately with Basin First Nations since government consultation, and technical analysis, 2012 in order to meet constitutional obligations, all of which informed the B.C. Decision and Guiding and to understand and address First Nations interests. Principles, released in 2014. The Decision was to This process is conducted on a government-to- continue the Treaty and seek improvements within government basis and is not public. its existing framework. This position is supported In addition to this process, the Province and Canada by Canada, and has since informed its mandate have been working closely with Basin First Nations for negotiating the Treaty with the U.S. since February 2018 to collaborate on defining First Since the B.C. Decision was released, B.C. and Canada Nations’ involvement during the negotiation process, have been working closely together, in consultation and to seek their input into negotiation objectives, with First Nations and local governments, to prepare options and positions. for negotiations with the U.S. Both B.C. and Canada are committed to aiming Elected officials in the Basin have been engaged to secure First Nations’ free, prior and informed through the Columbia River Treaty Local consent on the outcome of Treaty negotiations, Governments’ Committee1. The Columbia Basin consistent with each government’s commitment Regional Advisory Committee2 (CBRAC) has provided to reconciliation, and adoption of the United Nations a Basin-wide forum to bring forward community Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. interests, help inform domestic hydroelectric operations in the Columbia Basin, and advise on potential future improvements to the Treaty.

1 http://akblg.ca/columbia_river_treaty.html 2 https://engage.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty/ columbia-basin-regional-advisory-committee/

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 5 ] 2.4 COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN

2.4.1 MAP

The maps below show the full Columbia Basin and identify Treaty dams, major non-Treaty dams, Treaty reservoirs and communities.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 6 ] 2.4.2 POPULATION

There are approximately 160,000 residents in the Canadian Columbia River Basin area3.

3 This refers to the portion of the Columbia Basin that drains into the main-stem of the Columbia River, North of the Canada-US border.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 7 ] 3 | 2018 Community Meetings

In 2018, the Province hosted a series of ten meetings 3.1 FORMAT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS throughout the Basin to continue its engagement with residents as Treaty negotiations between These community meetings were held in Meadow Canada and the U.S. began. Nine of these meetings Creek, Jaffray, Creston, Castlegar, Nelson, Valemount, took place in June, and one meeting took place in Revelstoke, Golden, Nakusp and Invermere. Meetings December. The meetings were intended to: were facilitated by a Basin-based consultant4, and ĦĦ Return to the communities visited during the hosted by the Treaty Team. A representative from 2012-2013 Treaty Review Public Consultation; Global Affairs Canada attended the Revelstoke, Golden and Nakusp meetings to provide an update ĦĦ Provide an update to the public on the status on negotiations and hear Basin citizens’ input first of Treaty negotiations with the U.S.; hand. The Treaty Team communicated this same ĦĦ Review key issues gathered during the 2012- update on behalf of Global Affairs Canada at the other 2013 Public Consultation, and discuss how seven meetings. these issues are guiding Canada and B.C.’s negotiating positions; The meetings began with opening remarks from local ĦĦ Seek further input from the public on refining key government representatives, sharing their perspective issues and priorities; on the importance of the Treaty and how they had ĦĦ Share how to stay connected and up-to-date been engaged in the pre-negotiation period. on Treaty negotiations and related issues; and The meetings continued with a statement from ĦĦ Answer questions from the public. Canada’s lead negotiator, Sylvain Fabi. Mr. Fabi was unable to attend in person; however, he provided a letter addressed to the Basin citizens, which was read by Kathy Eichenberger, the lead B.C. representative on the negotiating team, and primary host of these community meetings.

4 The meeting in Invermere was facilitated by the Province’s Treaty Team.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 8 ] Each session followed a similar format: 3.2 MEETING ATTENDANCE ĦĦ Introduction and welcome by a region-specific representative of the Columbia River Treaty Local The public meetings were advertised in local online Governments’ Committee; and print newspapers, on the Province’s Treaty 5 ĦĦ A Columbia River Treaty update provided by website , Facebook page and Twitter feed, and by members of the Treaty negotiating team as email to a range of organizations and stakeholder described above, followed by a question and groups. Members of the Local Governments’ answer period; Committee and the Columbia Basin Regional ĦĦ A review of community feedback captured during Advisory Committee passed invitations along through the 2012-2013 public consultation; their networks. Facebook posts were shared by Minister Katrine Conroy, MLA Doug Clovechok and ĦĦ Breakout group discussions to gather attendees’ the Columbia Basin Trust. views on òò key interests that may be missing from ATTENDANCE BY LOCATION the public input received so far; and DATE LOCATION PARTICIPANTS òò priority issues or interests that should June 11 Meadow Creek 39 be considered during negotiations; and June 12 Jaffray 38 Ħ Ħ Next steps and information on how to stay June 13 Creston 21 connected and find information on the June 14 Castlegar 64 negotiation developments. June 15 Nelson 50 A summary of feedback received from each meeting June 18 Valemount 15 is included in this report. Presentations and materials June 19 Revelstoke 46 used during the community consultations are posted June 20 Golden 44 to the Treaty Review website: June 21 Nakusp 46 https://engage.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty/2018- Dec. 5 Invermere 60 community-meetings/ TOTAL 423

5 https://engage.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty/

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 9 ] 4 | Community Meeting Summaries

INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 MEADOW CREEK MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance of Basin-wide interests identified in 2012-2013.

The following issues were discussed: ĦĦ Decommissioning – Participants felt that this should be a priority if power generation with fish passage cannot 4.1 MEADOW CREEK/LARDEAU VALLEY be established. There was a request for a feasibility study for providing fish passage, June 11, 2018 – 39 people in attendance as well as documenting the pros and cons at the Lardeau Valley Community Centre of decommissioning the dam. in Meadow Creek ĦĦ More stable reservoir levels – Reducing the BASIN RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM significant water level fluctuations in the 2012-2013 PUBLIC CONSULTATION reservoir was a priority interest. Participants felt that water level options should be researched The Treaty Team provided the following summary to better meet local interests, including improved of Basin resident interests captured during the ecosystem viability and recreation uses. A water 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review Public management plan that includes water retention Consultation. These Basin-wide interests were to counter droughts was also an interest. presented instead of Meadow-Creek specific interests, ĦĦ Treaty flexibility – Participants expressed the because meetings were not held in Meadow Creek need for flexibility to be built into the Treaty in during the 2012-2013 Public Consultation. order to incorporate unknown factors such as BASIN-WIDE INTERESTS IN 2012-2013 INCLUDED: climate change. An example for how to do this is the requirement for regular re-negotiation of ĦĦ Ecosystems, including salmon restoration; the Treaty. ĦĦ Flood risk management; ĦĦ First Nations’ voice – Ensuring the affected Ħ Ħ Libby Dam co-ordination /Koocanusa First Nations have a voice in a collaborative Treaty Reservoir management; modernization process was raised. ĦĦ Power generation and the Canadian Entitlement; ĦĦ Cumulative effects of multiple dams – ĦĦ Socio-economic issues, including community There were concerns about, and interest health, water levels for recreation and tourism, in understanding, the cumulative effects of economic development, and water supply; and multiple dams on the river system, such as the ĦĦ Treaty governance. effects of the Libby and Duncan dams on the system.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 10 ] PRIORITIES improvements and/or other impact mitigations. Attendees were asked to consider all the interests There was concern raised that the community that have been identified by their community and and habitat surrounding the dam had sacrificed ecological integrity and recreational values for identify their top priorities. very little return, and that the benefits of the Participants identified the following list of priorities, dam are going to more populated areas when in general order of importance: they should be more specifically directed toward the affected community to mitigate social and ĦĦ Ecosystems – A number of issues were environmental impacts. raised related to ecosystems, including ecosystem function and protection. Specific ĦĦ Fish passage at Duncan Dam – Participants priorities included: supported adding fish passage to the Duncan Dam. A local non-profit organization, Friends of òò Canada having an equal say in Libby Dam the Lardeau River, has written a discussion paper operating decisions to restore nutrients to on this option. for fish and eco-biodiversity; ĦĦ Treaty processes and governance – Attendees òò Creation of a Fish and wildlife restoration encouraged a Treaty process that allows for program, funded through the Treaty, negotiators at the table who belong to local that focuses on revitalizing areas that communities, as well as mechanisms for affected were damaged, and to create habitat communities to have a significant role in defining and protected areas for wildlife; Treaty objectives for ecosystem restoration. There òò Encouragement of a forward-thinking was interest in reviewing the modernized Treaty view of the value of water as an ecological before it is signed. resource, rather than primarily for the ĦĦ Agriculture – Participants expressed how hydroelectricity that it can produce; and important agriculture is to this region, and òò Efforts toward environmental protection encouraged the Province to explore ways and preservation should be made for the to support it. A suggestion was made to set sake of the environment itself, rather than up an agriculture land trust. considering only the benefits for human use. ĦĦ Water supply – There was concern about OTHER COMMENTS expectations that the growing water needs in the ĦĦ Some asked to ensure that issues raised in U.S. will be met by the Columbia River when there consultations will be brought to the negotiating are limited water conservation practices in the U.S. table and not be overridden by corporate and ĦĦ Decommissioning non-generating dams – political priorities. Participants supported decommissioning non- ĦĦ While the Libby Dam is not in this (Meadow generating dams, specifically Duncan dam, or Creek) area, its impacts were noted and there establishing power production on these dams. was support for compensation or mitigation ĦĦ Distribution of benefits – It was a priority for in some way. participants that Treaty benefits, including the ĦĦ It was suggested that Dutchy Wageningen be Canadian Entitlement, be distributed to impacted honoured posthumously for single-handedly communities in the form of funding, quality of life saving the spawning bull trout.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 11 ] INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 JAFFRAY MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance of interests identified in 2012-2013.

The following issues were discussed: ĦĦ Acknowledgment of losses – Attendees shared stories of the losses experienced by families, local communities and the agriculture industry. This past hurt continues to be felt. Concern was 4.2 JAFFRAY raised that history may repeat itself unless what happened in the area is given proper recognition. June 12, 2018 – 38 people in attendance It was emphasized that what was lost is gone at the Jaffray Community Hall now, but what remains needs to be protected, enhanced and supported. It was noted that the JAFFRAY RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM 2012-2013 story of the impacts from the Koocanusa Reservoir PUBLIC CONSULTATION has not been compiled and written up, as has The Treaty Team provided the following summary been done for the other Treaty reservoirs. of interests captured in and around Jaffray during ĦĦ Agricultural industry – Attendees voiced the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review concerns that the agricultural sector in the area Public Consultation: was sacrificed, and that the community considers ĦĦ Stable water levels to improve agriculture, it a priority to address this. Suggestions to support and fish and wildlife habitat; the sector included: ĦĦ More equitable, ongoing funding to enhance òò Land-use zoning for agriculture around fish and wildlife values; the reservoir and in the drawdown zone; ĦĦ A water management plan for òò Irrigation of areas that experience droughts, Koocanusa Reservoir; to support agriculture and wildlife habitat; ĦĦ Improved economic development opportunities òò Compensation to farmers for requiring involvement from local government; wildlife use on irrigated lands; ĦĦ Greater compensation and support to sustain òò An agricultural recovery program; the agricultural sector; and òò A collaborative approach for tourism/ ĦĦ Better compensation for local impacted residents. recreation uses and agriculture; òò Low interest loans that support agriculture; òò An agricultural land bank; òò Funding for enforcement of existing regulations (example: preventing mechanized recreation/tourism from damaging Crown lands around the reservoir);

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 12 ] òò Recognition of the ecological goods and ĦĦ Ecosystems and habitat – Many break-out services provided by agriculture; and groups listed ecosystem function and habitat òò Support for all types of agriculture, restoration and enhancement as priorities to not just livestock. benefit wildlife, humans, infrastructure and agriculture. Many thought ecosystems should It was suggested that there be funding to research be an equal priority in the Treaty, with a board of solutions to address challenges in the area’s ecologists to implement adaptive management. agricultural industry. Views were expressed that, A group brought up the issue of reservoirs in the past, ecological and wildlife issues have causing habitat fragmentation with losses for generated more concern, and therefore more caribou, grizzly bears, and wolverine. The inclusion funding was allocated to these issues. Participants of salmon reintroduction in Treaty negotiations explained that because of the ailing local agriculture was also an important issue. industry, many young people do not want to stay in ĦĦ Benefit sharing – There was a strong feeling the community and work on local farms, which take that the area did not receive its proper share of generations to build. Participants agreed to organize the benefits from the Treaty, compared to how a later meeting to provide specific recommendations much was sacrificed. The negotiating team was to the Province to better support the local agriculture encouraged to ensure that the value of water sector.6 flows from Canada, especially for flood control, ĦĦ Koocanusa Reservoir and Libby Dam – Many as well as all other benefits in the U.S., is fully participants believe there needs to be a water recognized in the negotiations. In addition to management plan for the Koocanusa Reservoir; the agriculture supports listed above, direct that there should be shared, or Canadian, compensation to the area from the Province, control of the Libby Dam; and that the dam and regional or Koocanusa-specific funding for must be managed under the Treaty, consistent tourism/recreational management, including with the Treaty dams in Canada. Failing this, enforcement, were suggested ways to better it was suggested that a weir be constructed on share benefits from the Treaty. One discussion the Canadian side of the Koocanusa Reservoir group requested local representation on the to facilitate water management to meet local board of the Columbia Basin Trust for the Jaffray, interests. It was proposed that the reservoir be Wardner and Grasmere area. publically called Koocanusa ‘Reservoir’, rather than ĦĦ Tourism and recreation – It was voiced that ‘Lake’ Koocanusa, to manage tourist expectations. tourism impacts are not all negative, and that ĦĦ Negotiations process – The negotiating team tourism brings new income to the Kootenay/ was repeatedly encouraged to be firm and Koocanusa region. Participants said that there steadfast in their negotiations with the U.S. needs to be a collaborative approach toward It was suggested that all negotiation meetings tourism, environmental interests, and agricultural take place in the Basin. support, as well as programs to control recreation so that it does not negatively affect agricultural lands.

6 This group met in July 2018 and presented a summary of prioritized recommendations to the Province. The Treaty Team has reviewed the recommendations and is exploring next steps.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 13 ] PRIORITIES OTHER COMMENTS The conversation on interests, summarized above, There were questions raised around First Nations filled the majority of the evening. A number of involvement in the Treaty negotiation process. participants left after this initial conversation, feeling Some stated that the First Nations in the Basin they had said what they needed to. Remaining need to be present at the negotiation table. attendees were asked to consider all the interests that have been identified by their community and pick their top priorities.

The following priorities were identified by participants who remained for this final exercise, in general order of importance: ĦĦ Enhance agriculture in the region; ĦĦ Obtain more input/control over Libby Dam operations; ĦĦ Create a water management plan for Koocanusa Reservoir; and ĦĦ Restore impacted ecosystems.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 14 ] INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 CRESTON MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance of interests identified in 2012-2013.

The following issues were discussed: ĦĦ Data – Attendees said there is a need for more accurate, detailed quantitative data, as well as qualitative data on impacts, to inform negotiations and ongoing operations. It was felt 4.3 CRESTON that the Canadian database is lacking, compared with the U.S., and to plan properly, there must June 13, 2018 – 21 participants in attendance be more funding put towards data collection. at the Creston and District Community Complex Suggestions include: òò Funding for university graduate CRESTON RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM 2012-2013 students to gather data and conduct PUBLIC CONSULTATION climate studies in the area; and The Treaty Team provided the following summary òò The creation of a provincial government of interests captured from Creston meetings during fund to provide resources to local the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review governments for local studies, such Public Consultation: as inundation risks and values. ĦĦ Reduce flooding and water level fluctuations; It was noted that this work should begin as soon ĦĦ Provide compensation for water fluctuations eroding dykes, which causes risk to agriculture; as possible to produce adequate information for the negotiations. ĦĦ Assess Koocanusa early refill benefits – beach and boat recreation earlier in the season; ĦĦ Regional thinking – Participants identified the ĦĦ Assess Koocanusa early refill impacts – reduced need for residents and the negotiating team to flood control, more debris, more water spilled think regionally about the system and its impacts. without generating power; All were encouraged to look beyond ‘backyards’ and who was ‘most entitled’. ĦĦ Increase nutrient loading to enhance spawning kokanee numbers, which have decreased ĦĦ Dyke management – There were concerns significantly in some Kootenay Lake tributaries; about the erosion of area dykes, especially at ĦĦ Reduce high-water levels at southern end of corners or bends in the river. Participants felt that Kootenay Lake, which cause more mosquito nothing will be done about dyke management infestations and, therefore, increased risk until something happens that causes damage to of West Nile virus; private property, economic development, and/or ĦĦ Develop a proposed Economic Development the highway, and by then it will be too late. While Plan and Agricultural Sustainability Plan for recognizing that this won’t be dealt with in the the region; and Treaty, the development of a remediation plan, and funding to properly maintain and manage ĦĦ Better monitor snowpack, and improve co- local dykes, was proposed. ordination of water-level management between the U.S. and Canada.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 15 ] ĦĦ Management of Libby Dam – The co-ordination ĦĦ Agriculture – The agriculture sector was of Libby Dam operations was raised as a priority, recognized as a priority, somewhat based on with participants asking for benefits upstream the belief that the growth of the as well as downstream. Better information on agriculture sector has been due in part to water management practices for the dam and impacts flows under the Treaty to meet irrigation needs, in the Kootenay Valley is needed. People at this creating unfair competition and declines in the meeting said that management of Libby should B.C. agriculture sector.7 focus on ecosystem sustainability, rather than only ĦĦ Community engagement – Low meeting power production. Participants would like local attendance was a concern for some attendees. interests to take precedence over benefits in the They would like to see a better turnout and lower (U.S.) Basin. more representation from farmers, First Nations ĦĦ Environment – The environment was a topic and young people. Because this is an important raised throughout the evening in a variety of issue that impacts everyone in the area, the ways. Some include: group discussed how to advertise and plan òò Acknowledge the harm already done to to have more people participating in future ecosystems and the environment; community meetings. òò Establish effective management and PRIORITIES planning to mitigate environmental damage in the future; Attendees were asked to consider all the interests that òò Pay more attention to the compromises made have been identified by their community and identify around the Duncan Reservoir, with a focus their top priorities. They identified the following list of on managing and mitigating damage there, priorities, in general order of importance: specifically regarding fish populations; and ĦĦ Better data on the impacts and benefits òò Address concern about Lake of the Treaty; Roosevelt contamination from the ĦĦ Dyke management; Canadian smelting industry. ĦĦ Management of Libby Dam; and ĦĦ Climate change – Participants said negotiators ĦĦ Acknowledgement of environmental damage should pay attention to the impacts of climate and effectively managing what we have left. change, now and in the future, and emphasized the importance of adapting accordingly. OTHER COMMENTS ĦĦ First Nations’ views – Participants expressed ĦĦ The negotiating team was encouraged that Indigenous views on governance and to host Treaty negotiations in the Basin. the environment should be included in Treaty ĦĦ There were questions about how and when negotiations. There was discussion of First residents would be informed about the outcomes Nations involvement in the negotiation process, of negotiating sessions. and a request that work be done to bring Ħ First Nations representation to negotiations, Ħ Participants wondered about the challenges and to include First Nations’ views at future of negotiating with the U.S. during the current community meetings. political regime.

7 The Treaty manages water flows for flood control and power generation, and under supplementary agreements, for fish population enhancement. It does not regulate flows for agriculture purposes. Withdrawals for consumptive use (irrigation, municipal water supply) are explicitly allowed in both countries.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 16 ] INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 CASTLEGAR MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance of interests identified in 2012-2013.

The following issues were discussed: ĦĦ Improved access infrastructure in Lower Arrow Lake area – Some residents are upset that areas isolated due to the flooding of the valley still have not been provided the public access that 4.4 CASTLEGAR they were promised. There was a call to build infrastructure (roads and bridges) to connect June 14, 2018 – 64 people in attendance at the communities and properties in the Lower Castlegar and District Community Complex. The Arrow Lake area. Honourable Katrine Conroy, Minister Responsible for ĦĦ Attention to impacts – There was recognition the Columbia River Treaty, shared opening remarks that Treaty dams provide important water storage and her support for public input in this process. for power production benefits including back- Minister Conroy participated in the full meeting. up for alternative energy sources, but there also CASTLEGAR RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS needs to be adequate attention to addressing FROM 2012-2013 PUBLIC CONSULTATION negative impacts. Reservoir debris removal and salmon restoration were specific The Treaty Team provided the following summary additional interests identified to address impacts. of interests captured from Castlegar meetings ĦĦ Minimum reservoir water levels – The increasing during the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty probability of a drier future and receding glaciers Review Public Consultation: must be taken into account when negotiating ĦĦ Support maintaining a constant elevation minimum reservoir water levels. of Arrow Lakes Reservoir; ĦĦ First Nations involvement – There was much Ħ Ħ Optimize ecosystem health of the whole Basin; discussion about First Nations involvement in ĦĦ Reintroduce salmon to the Columbia River and Treaty negotiations, making clear that participants also focus on other viable fish species; would like to see First Nations included in the ĦĦ Avoid pitting one reservoir against another; negotiations, and involved in forums such as this one. ĦĦ Evaluate agricultural impacts; ĦĦ Retain public ownership – All Treaty ĦĦ Restrict development on flood plains; infrastructure and fresh water must continue ĦĦ Include Libby Dam operations in negotiations; to be publicly owned, not privatized. Ħ Ħ Target benefits to address environmental ĦĦ Increasing youth participation – The lack of restoration and impacted communities; youth participation led to discussion on how ĦĦ Engage Basin citizens, including youth, to involve younger generations in the Treaty, as throughout negotiating process; and they will be living with the impacts of decisions ĦĦ Seek improvements to the Treaty in the spirit made now. Suggestions to address this include: of co-operation that has succeeded in the past.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 17 ] òò Promote the public consultation/community ĦĦ Ecosystem function – Many shared concerns meetings on the issues themselves, about the impact that current changing water rather than the Treaty (e.g. fluctuating levels have on local ecosystems. Ecosystem water levels, access to Arrow Lakes function was identified as a priority, including Reservoir, endangered species, etc.); the following: òò Keep groups like the Columbia òò Consideration of climate change impacts; Basin Trust Youth Links going; òò Consideration of rare and endangered species; ò ò Integrate the Treaty into school curricula from òò Management of invasive species; and a young age, particularly the history of impacts, ò and how it was before/after the Treaty; and ò Salmon reintroduction; though some questioned its feasibility, some participants ò ò Have a more experienced focus thought salmon restoration would provide on social media - using Facebook missing nutrients to the river and reservoir events pages, Instagram, Twitter, systems, and the recovery of riparian and and a more engaging website. associated ecosystem components would ĦĦ Equitable benefit sharing – Attendees feel likely not succeed without salmon. that it is a priority to ensure all Treaty benefits ĦĦ Stable Water levels – Complaints were voiced are accounted for in the negotiations, and that about extreme water fluctuations, and the impact Canada not compromise on fair compensation for that these fluctuations cause. Stabilization of the benefits provided to the U.S. Specific mention reservoir water levels was identified as a priority was made of: for ecosystem benefits such as supporting fish òò Recognizing the inherent value of water enhancement, including the return of salmon, within Treaty negotiations, and the likelihood as well as for optimum recreation use. It was also of it increasing in value over time. Water recognized that stable levels could conflict with values are seen to be related to ecosystems, flood control storage. including restoration, as well as to community ĦĦ Flexibility – It was repeated several times that social and economic development; because of the uncertain future with climate òò Accounting for the benefits of water change, the Treaty needs to be flexible and flows for U.S. fisheries and salmon forward-looking so it can be adapted accordingly. recovery generally, recognizing that Participants encouraged simulating a range of it is hard to value these benefits; future water regimes before reaching decisions òò Including the value of developments on about the Treaty, and avoiding getting tied the bottomland that has and could be into reservoir operations that might be to our developed in the U.S. because of the flood disadvantage in the long term. management services through the Treaty; and ĦĦ Flood risk management – Meeting participants òò Sharing benefits equitably in B.C. between reinforced that continuing flood risk management communities, based on sacrifices made. (i.e. flood control) in B.C. is a long-term priority.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 18 ] PRIORITIES OTHER COMMENTS Attendees were asked to consider all the interests Participants posed questions and raised concerns that have been identified by their community and about how the U.S. is using the flows provided identify their top priorities. through the Treaty and how they are managing flood risks, specifically: Participants identified the following list of priorities, Ħ in general order of importance: Ħ The amount of water from Treaty flows that is currently used for U.S. irrigation, and possible ĦĦ Include the environment and expectations for B.C. to provide more storage ecosystems, including salmon restoration, to increase U.S. water supply; and in Treaty negotiations; ĦĦ Concerns that the U.S. may continue to allow ĦĦ Consider climate change impacts; development in floodplains, which increases their ĦĦ Stabilize Arrow Lakes Reservoir water levels; need for B.C. to store water to manage floods. ĦĦ Secure equitable distribution of benefits, This could potentially increase impacts in B.C., between Canada and the U.S., and within and is a frustration, especially while construction impacted Canadian Columbia Basin communities; in floodplains is not supported locally. ĦĦ Maintain flood risk management in Canada; Some participants mentioned the benefit of ĦĦ Recognize the value of water and seek to dams being used to backup wind and solar protect it; energy generation. ĦĦ Include First Nations involvement in negotiations; and ĦĦ Seek greater youth engagement.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 19 ] INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 NELSON MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance of interests identified in 2012-2013.

The following issues were discussed: ĦĦ Negotiating perspectives – Canadian negotiators were encouraged to recognize the power imbalance in negotiating with the “America First” mentality. 4.5 NELSON ĦĦ Decommission Duncan Dam – Some attendees suggested that the Duncan Dam should be June 15, 2018 – 50 people in attendance removed to restore fish passage, and return at the Nelson and District Rod and Gun Club the reservoir area to wildlife habitat, perhaps as a wildlife reserve. NELSON RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM 2012-2013 PUBLIC CONSULTATION ĦĦ Alternative energy sources – There was interest in using technology to establish alternative The Treaty Team provided the following summary energy sources to reduce dependence on of interests captured from Nelson meetings during the river and dams for hydropower. the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review Ħ Public Consultation: Ħ Agriculture sector – There was support for expanded agriculture in the area, including Ħ Ħ Enhance ecosystems; protecting agriculture lands from flooding. ĦĦ Reintroduce salmon; People said that the impact of increasing farming ĦĦ Fund research on climate change and in floodplains and the potential damage to water ecosystem improvements; quality in case of flooding should be considered. ĦĦ Mitigate Treaty impacts and address socio- ĦĦ Libby Dam – Participants said that changes economic issues faster; should be made in the operation of Libby Dam ĦĦ Enhance food security with sustainable to better account for B.C. community interests. agriculture system improvements; PRIORITIES ĦĦ Increase Koocanusa flood control to decrease impacts on Kootenay Lake; Attendees were asked to consider all the interests ĦĦ Examine Grohman Narrows for future dredging that have been identified by their community and or excavation; identify their top priorities. ĦĦ Consider installing hydro-electric generating Participants identified the following list of priorities, station at Duncan Dam; in general order of importance: ĦĦ Engage youth; and ĦĦ Involve First Nations in Treaty negotiation process.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 20 ] ĦĦ Negotiations process – Participants òò Duncan Dam habitats – Attendees voiced a number of priorities related to the reinforced the views of other communities negotiation process: that restoring wildlife habitats in the òò Involvement of First Nations – Participants Duncan Dam area was a priority, as well supported the direct involvement of First as creating fish passage at the dam; Nations in Treaty negotiations. Some òò Ecosystem valuation – Negotiators were participants requested that the people encouraged to act on First Nations research of the area, including family interests and on ecosystem function and natural capital; and traditional leadership, also be included òò Education – Initiatives including active in the negotiation process. There was a education on the value of water and request for a presentation on First Nations watershed protection were supported for interests at future community meetings; all ages, with a specific emphasis on youth. ò ò Substantiating demands – Attendees ĦĦ Recognizing and addressing impacts – supported more data collection, Participants placed a priority on recognizing the ideally jointly with the U.S., to historical and ongoing losses and impacts from substantiate negotiating positions; the Treaty dams, with suggestions about how òò Transparent process – Participants called for a these could be addressed: transparent process going forward. There was òò Adequate funding – Participants stated a request for summaries from all community that the Basin should receive adequate meetings to be shared at these meetings; and funding to address the damage to the area, òò Formal reference/advisory groups – Many including some of the Canadian Entitlement felt that there needs to be formalized input coming directly to the region; and coming from groups representing the interests òò Cross-border civilian connections – of ecosystems, local communities, social issues It was suggested to hold meetings with and more. Some suggested the creation neighbours across the Canada-U.S. border. of transparent reference groups to provide Meetings could include discussions about advice and input to the negotiation team. the upstream and downstream impacts ĦĦ Ecosystem protection and restoration – to strengthen understanding and cross- Addressing the many impacts of the Treaty border relationships. Transboundary on ecosystems and habitats was a priority, with community forums were supported. a focus on: ĦĦ Flood risk management – There was support òò Salmon – Many participants requested for continuing flood risk management as a that salmon reintroduction be brought priority within the Treaty. Local governments into the Treaty as a top priority. Specific were encouraged to keep development out mention was made of bringing of floodplains, and there was a call to provide salmon back to the Slocan River; support for small communities to strengthen òò Water management – Holding water as a their flood protection. paramount value, including the protection ĦĦ Alternative local energy sources – All levels of watersheds and the conservation of of government were encouraged to pursue water, was a priority. Fluctuating reservoir alternative, local energy sources. water levels was a concern for some, who noted that the levels should be based on what is better for the ecosystems, not only for power generation and flooding;

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 21 ] OTHER COMMENTS ĦĦ Trust in the process – Some shared concern about the process itself. The community consultation process was questioned, expressing uncertainty as to whether what individuals say in these meetings will matter moving forward in the negotiations, and whether the commitment to come back to communities as the negotiations proceed will be honored. ĦĦ Community engagement – Some people expressed concern about a low turnout at the meeting and the lack of community engagement on this topic. It was suggested that the Treaty Team connect with local groups, such as the EcoSociety, beforehand to spread the word, and to use available local formats, such as the City Facebook page, to advertise future meetings. The engagement of youth could be increased by incorporating the Treaty into school curricula, and providing sessions directed at young people. ĦĦ Climate change – It was noted that the Treaty must be flexible and include consideration of the impacts of climate change. ĦĦ More detailed information – People at the meeting wanted more comprehensive information being made available, particularly about ecosystems.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 22 ] INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 VALEMOUNT MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. The following interests were discussed: ĦĦ Distribution of benefits – Participants believe there should be more distribution of Treaty benefits to the Basin, with particular emphasis on affected areas. More compensation in the area would help mitigate the damage suffered. Some project examples include: 4.6 VALEMOUNT òò Compensation for Valemount for the loss of tourism and recreation; June 18, 2018 – 15 People in attendance at the òò A road connecting Valemount to Revelstoke, Valemount Community Hall with a long-term goal of a road circling the Kinbasket Reservoir; and VALEMOUNT RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM 2012-2013 PUBLIC CONSULTATION òò Lower electricity prices for the area, or provide an alternative form of heat. Valemount The Treaty Team provided the following summary does not have access to natural gas, and of interests captured from Valemount meetings many people choose wood burning during the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review stoves as a cost-effective way to heat their Public Consultation: homes. Offering lower electricity rates ĦĦ Compensate communities on Kinbasket Reservoir for the area would help reduce wood- for negative impacts such as: burning and its negative health impacts. òò diminished wildlife populations; PRIORITIES òò lack of transport corridors between Golden and Revelstoke; Attendees were asked to consider all the interests that have been identified by their community òò timber cut loss; and identify their top priorities. òò dust storms at low water; Participants identified the following list of priorities, òò discontinued access to local hot springs; and in general order of importance: òò poor recreational and boating opportunities. ĦĦ Distribution of benefits – As identified above. ĦĦ Better manage debris that negatively impacts ĦĦ Dust storm health risk – A strong priority for recreation on the water; and participants was reducing the dust storms that ĦĦ Enhance ecosystems –though there is a general blow silica sand through the community when understanding that if Kinbasket operated at full Kinbasket Reservoir is drawn down each year, pool for ecosystems, other reservoirs would be leaving miles of mudflats south of the community. impacted by increased power operation and Silica sand is carcinogenic8, and residents asked ATV recreation. that this issue be taken very seriously. There was a request for health data collection and research to look at the impacts of silica dust in the area. 8 https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes- prevention/risk/substances/crystalline-silica

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 23 ] ĦĦ Weir – Many participants suggested that building OTHER COMMENTS a weir in the reservoir to greatly reduce the dust ĦĦ The low attendance at the meeting was raised storms was the preferred way to reduce this as an issue – mostly the lack of younger people impact. Some people at the meeting were not and families. confident in the previous feasibility study done ĦĦ It was suggested to engage youth by by BC Hydro, and wanted a further review of collaborating with local events and this option. They suggested specifically looking incorporating information about the Treaty at costs related to securing materials, which are into school curricula. available nearby, and conducting a comparison Ħ with the cost of the causeway on Williston Lake. Ħ People commented on the success of the 9 Some participants believe that a weir and more BC Hydro debris management program , through the face-to-face committee meeting stable reservoir water levels would encourage in Golden and Valemount and the additional summer homes and tourism in the area as was funding approved by the BC Water Comptroller. promised before the reservoir was flooded. This program has apparently cut debris in half If a weir isn’t feasible, participants felt that other in 11 years. ways to cover the silica sand must be found.

9 https://www.bchydro.com/content/dam/hydro/medialib /internet/documents/environment/pdf/ wup_clbworks_23_kinbasket_and_arrow_ lakes_reservoirs.pdf

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 24 ] INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 REVELSTOKE MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance of interests identified in 2012-2013.

The following issues were discussed: ĦĦ Ecosystem function and information – Groups identified the following additional ecosystem interests: òò Habitat impacts – Attendees discussed 4.7 REVELSTOKE the impacts on aquatic habitats in the Revelstoke Reach and the potential June 19, 2018 – 46 people in attendance for fluctuating reservoir levels to affect at the Revelstoke Community Centre mountain caribou and migrating birds; òò Nutrient flows – There was concern REVELSTOKE RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM about water sterility below the dams 2012-2013 PUBLIC CONSULTATION due to the blockage of nutrient flows; The Treaty Team provided the following summary òò Natural capital evaluation – Participants of interests captured from Revelstoke meetings raised the U.S. report10 that produced data during the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review on the natural capital in the U.S. Basin Public Consultation: from ecosystems. For some, this financial ĦĦ Maintain constant water levels; valuation is not how Basin residents see ĦĦ Keep lower water levels lower to benefit ecosystems – it is their heritage and is very recreation and environment values; important to them beyond financial values. For others, this or some other method is ĦĦ Address impacts of residents recreating needed to quantify the value of ecosystems in the reservoir drawdown zone; for the purpose of negotiations; and ĦĦ Assess how high reservoir levels affect ski òò Reintroduce Salmon – it was conditions by creating a warmer microclimate suggested that the loss of salmon that shifts precipitation at low elevations from to the ecosystem be evaluated. snowfall to rainfall; Ħ ĦĦ Enhance type and quality of fish in the reservoir Ħ Treaty infrastructure – Several interests were compared to when it was a river; and raised related to the Treaty dam infrastructure: ĦĦ Increase public connection with òò Lifespan and replacement plans – As the Treaty BC Hydro’s Water Use Planning process. dams are aging – most of the infrastructure has been in place for about 50 years – participants are interested to know more about the lifespan and replacement timelines for the existing infrastructure; and

10 https://ucut.org/habitat/value -natural-capital-columbia-river-basin/

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 25 ] òò U.S. compensation – There is an interest òò Minimizing fluctuating reservoir in ensuring the U.S. not only compensates levels – Minimizing the fluctuating B.C. for the construction of the dams, reservoir water levels was a priority to but also for their maintenance. reduce the ecological impacts; ĦĦ U.S. benefits, Canadian damage and fair òò Value of water – Attendees advised the compensation – Participants felt it is important negotiating team to keep in mind the value to understand the benefits that the Treaty has of water itself as a resource. The Canadian brought to the U.S., especially in the agricultural negotiating platform should be forward- sector. They felt it necessary to understand thinking in this regard, and not negotiate the financial value of the benefits to the U.S. away Canadian water rights; and compared to the negative impacts in B.C., in order òò Riparian habitats – People at the meeting felt to adequately assess fair compensation for B.C. it was important to recognize and protect the areas that suffer the consequences of flooding. fragments of riparian habitat that remain in Multiple people suggested increasing Crown the local valley bottoms. The importance of land in B.C. for agricultural use. this valley as a major bird flyway was noted. Ħ Ħ Climate change – Attendees highlighted the ĦĦ Agriculture losses and opportunities – Local increasing importance of food security and hydro food security, ideally through local agriculture power production as the climate changes. production, was a frequently identified priority, ĦĦ Impacts of reservoir management practices  especially with the changing climate. Recognition – People at the meeting were interested in the of the challenges created by the loss of fertile impacts of different reservoir management agriculture lands within the reservoir drawdown practices on recreation opportunities, private zone was emphasized, as well as the U.S. irrigation property values, and access to remaining heritage benefits from Treaty flows. Several ways to sites, including indigenous archeological sites. support local food security were suggested: òò Ensuring water rights for PRIORITIES agriculture production; Attendees were asked to consider all the interests òò Promoting innovative farming practices; that have been identified by their community and òò Adequately funding local/regional identify their top priorities. agriculture production facilitation groups; Participants identified the following list of priorities, òò Increasing access to Crown land in general order of importance: for agriculture uses; and ĦĦ Ecosystems – Ecosystem values, impacts and òò Creating an agricultural trust fund. related restoration/enhancement were frequent ĦĦ Hydropower production – Attendees recognized priorities, including: the importance of the continuing value of òò Salmon restoration – Several break- hydropower generation. Several priorities were out groups chose the reintroduction related to ongoing hydropower operations: of salmon as a top priority. There were òò Increased compatibility with regional questions about a long-term plan to bring needs – There was a call for operations salmon back to the headwaters, and a to be changed to be more compatible request to assess the implication of the with broad regional needs; loss of salmon to regional ecosystems;

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 26 ] òò Penalties for infractions – The Treaty should OTHER COMMENTS include penalties for infractions by either BC ĦĦ People were curious about how well the Hydro or the U.S. agencies, and the provincial negotiations with the U.S. were proceeding, government should invoke penalties for and what the process was, with a comment infractions against provincial legislation; and on the importance of ‘standing fast’. òò Water Use Plan (WUP) review – The upcoming ĦĦ Attendees wanted to know how the negotiating WUP review should not be constrained by team would respond to the U.S. if they are the Treaty, as the original process was. unwilling to continue paying the Canadian ĦĦ Recognition of impacts on local communities  Entitlement at the level it has been in the past. – Attendees recognized the need to evaluate ĦĦ Participants questioned how ecological/ the benefits to B.C. in a scenario where flows ecosystem expertise will be included in the were optimized for B.C. interests as a means Canadian negotiating team with a comment of documenting ongoing impacts. that reliance on professionals in local water management processes has disenfranchised ĦĦ Flexibility – Changing economies, and the regular citizens at times. potential for changes in local water needs, which must be met first, were suggested reasons to ĦĦ People requested frequent updates prioritize flexible, adaptable Treaty requirements. on the negotiations and the Canadian negotiating platform. ĦĦ Involvement of First Nations – The desire that First Nations be engaged directly in Treaty negotiations was a stated priority, with questions about how First Nations will be involved if they are not on the negotiating team.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 27 ] INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 GOLDEN MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance of interests identified in 2012-2013.

The following issues were discussed: ĦĦ Kinbasket water levels – Residents are interested in finding ways to control reservoir water levels to reduce impacts on community values. ĦĦ Benefit sharing – Several interests related 4.8 GOLDEN to benefit sharing were raised: òò Full cost accounting for local losses and U.S. June 20, 2018 – 44 people in attendance benefits – The need for the negotiating team at the Golden Civic Centre to consider the economic and other losses GOLDEN RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS locally as well as the benefits in the U.S. was FROM 2012-2013 PUBLIC CONSULTATION emphasized. This would be achieved ideally through full cost accounting, which provides The Treaty Team provided the following summary assessments beyond financially valued factors; of interests captured from Golden meetings during ò the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review ò Adequate “payment in lieu of taxes” – Participants called for fair distribution of Public Consultation: payment in lieu of taxes for communities Ħ Ħ Poor road access to the reservoir on poorly that have been impacted; maintained gravel roads; òò Distribution of the Canadian Entitlement – ĦĦ No camping and recreational sites as promised; Attendees pointed out the lack of public ĦĦ Widely fluctuating water levels – more than at input on the distribution of the Canadian other reservoirs; Entitlement, which currently goes to ĦĦ Large amounts of debris on Kinbasket Reservoir; provincial general revenue, and the perception that the Province should be ĦĦ Boat ramp at Bush Harbour in need of upgrading or replacement – not providing low-water access; contributing to offset community impacts, in addition to what BC Hydro does; ĦĦ Erosion of archeological sites due to fluctuating water levels; and òò Power production benefits to local communities – Participants sought ĦĦ Inadequate compensation to Golden for Treaty clarification of what portion of the economic impacts – tie benefits and compensation to benefits from the Treaty-related dams in impacted communities. the Basin go to local communities; and òò Offsetting local impacts – Residents called for support for new economic drivers, such as fish guiding, to offset the social and economic impacts.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 28 ] ĦĦ Ecosystems – Ecosystem interests include: ĦĦ First Nations involvement – Attendees òò Management and restoration – Attendees strongly supported including First Nations on wanted a better understanding of what the negotiating team. Some questioned the is possible to achieve by enhancing credibility of the process without First Nations ecosystem values, and how funds are at the table. It was expressed that this as a lost being/can be spent for these activities; opportunity to work towards reconciliation. òò Increased transparency about BC Hydro ĦĦ Stabilized reservoir water levels – Controlling operations decisions – Residents requested fluctuations or maintaining stable water more information about how BC Hydro factors environmental objectives into its operating levels in Kinbasket Reservoir was important decisions, with a view that since it is a Crown to many participants. corporation, it is self-policing and these ĦĦ Recreation opportunities – Enhanced recreation decisions are not adequately transparent; and on Kinbasket Reservoir, particularly through òò Water use plans (WUPs) – Residents asked improved road access, was another priority. for more empowerment of WUPs to address environmental impacts, and creation ĦĦ Climate change and water supply management  of WUPs for all reservoirs – including – Attendees felt that water supply management Koocanusa where there is currently going forward is critical, especially considering not a water management process. climate change, with expected acceleration of ĦĦ Recreation – Participants expressed the desire snow and glacier melt rates. A guaranteed water for increased access to Kinbasket Reservoir, and supply in times of scarcity was proposed, with expanded recreational property ownership, a commitment that local demands will be met. which is currently limited due to lack of access and fluctuating water levels. OTHER COMMENTS ĦĦ Health risk from wood burning stoves – Golden ĦĦ Some participants were concerned that does not have access to natural gas, so relies on stakeholders in the U.S. have the perception that hydroelectricity for power, with many households using wood-burning stoves to reduce costs. This no further compensation to Canada is needed, causes air quality levels that become health risks. and that Canada has been sufficiently paid for The community is interested in finding solutions the construction of the dams. This view does to reduce this risk. not consider true cost accounting for the loss of environmental values such as old-growth PRIORITIES forests, or the ongoing damage from operations. Attendees were asked to consider all the interests ĦĦ Participants hope there will be strong alignment that have been identified by their community and between the Province of B.C., the Government identify their top priorities. of Canada, and the Columbia River Treaty Local Participants identified the following list of priorities, Governments’ Committee. in general order of importance: ĦĦ Outreach was recommended on the U.S. side ĦĦ Equitable benefit sharing/fair compensation – of the border to explain the socio-environmental Equitable benefit sharing between Canada/B.C. impacts of the dams in Canada. and the U.S., between B.C. and Basin communities, and amongst Basin communities was a frequently ĦĦ Questions were posed about how salmon raised priority. Specifically: recovery will be achieved through the Treaty òò Providing social and economic benefits; and when is not a Treaty dam òò BC Hydro funding to be devoted and it is one of the barriers to fish passage that to fish and wildlife rehabilitation must be overcome before salmon can return and compensation for losses. to Canada.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 29 ] ĦĦ A fixed link crossing at the North end of Upper Arrow Lake Reservoir would provide better transportation access, and attract people and industry; and ĦĦ An Economic Development and Opportunity Plan is needed.

INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE JUNE 2018 NAKUSP MEETING – Not in order of priority Attendees were asked to identify any additional interests that were not captured during the 2012- 2013 public consultation. Conversations included new issues, as well as confirming the importance 4.9 NAKUSP of interests identified in 2012-2013. The following issues were discussed: June 21, 2018 – 46 people in attendance at the Nakusp Community Complex and Arena ĦĦ Negotiation process – Residents were concerned about the negotiations, and were curious to NAKUSP RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM 2012-2013 know about the makeup of the U.S. negotiating PUBLIC CONSULTATION team, and about the process that the Treaty will follow in the U.S. once an agreement is reached. The Treaty Team provided the following summary They asked for confirmation that the Treaty of interests captured from Nakusp meetings during will be presented to the communities of the the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review Canadian Basin before a final agreement is made. Public Consultation: The imbalance in size (and power) of the two ĦĦ This area was impacted the most by dam countries was noted. construction with relatively little in return; ĦĦ Stable reservoir levels – Many break-out groups ĦĦ Communities need fair and equitable promoted the stabilization of Arrow Lakes compensation for impacts; Reservoir levels, saying that reduced fluctuations ĦĦ There needs to be better clean-up and debris would benefit the economy, recreation, removal from the reservoir; and ecosystems. ĦĦ The reservoir needs to be as close to a natural ĦĦ Ecosystems – Attendees talked about improving system as possible, and include recovery of flow management with ecosystems in mind, white sturgeon; re-establishing small wetlands, reintroduction of ĦĦ Return of the salmon should be a priority; salmon, and adaptive management. Some added that ecosystems for their own sake need to be a ĦĦ The re-vegetation program should be enhanced; top priority, not just for economic development ĦĦ More stable reservoir elevation levels are needed or recreational purposes. to enhance ecosystems and recreation; ĦĦ First Nations involvement – Participants ĦĦ Low water levels make it hard to access water expressed their support of First Nations being for irrigation and industry; at the negotiating table, not just consulted ĦĦ There is a need for better communications to beforehand, stating that First Nations’ the community in the event of extreme high perspectives and needs are very important. water levels;

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 30 ] ĦĦ Fixed link – Participants raised the issue of the PRIORITIES fixed link at Fauquier, and a connecting road Attendees were asked to consider all the interests to Passmore. Access to these communities was that have been identified by their community and promised to the people of the Arrow Lakes Valley, identify their top priorities. but nothing has been built, and some participants asked that those promises be kept. Participants identified the following list of priorities, ĦĦ Development in floodplains – Some participants in general order of importance: raised concern that development on the ĦĦ Stable water levels in Arrow Lakes Reservoir; floodplains in the U.S. puts pressure on Canada ĦĦ Fair compensation for communities on Arrow to reduce high water levels south of the border, Lakes Reservoir; which has a negative impact in the Canadian ĦĦ Continued input into the Treaty process from Basin. It was requested that this be part of local people; the discussions with the U.S., and that there be regulation put in place on both sides to ĦĦ First Nations involvement in negotiations; discourage development on floodplains. ĦĦ Guaranteed access to Canadian water for ĦĦ Distribution of benefits – Many felt that Canada, Canadians; and and specifically the Basin, has not received ĦĦ Ecosystem protection and wetland restoration. adequate benefits equivalent to the sacrifices made for the Treaty. They would like to see OTHER COMMENTS compensation specifically in the affected areas. ĦĦ Opportunities should be explored to enhance ĦĦ Water Supply – Participants emphasized that agriculture in the Basin (e.g. use water for dry Canadians’ access to Basin water should be land fish farming); and guaranteed, and that the U.S. should use their ĦĦ Participants were concerned that their water wisely before Canadian water. They communities have minimal political impact encouraged the Canadian negotiating team because of their small populations. not to sell Canadian water.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 31 ] ĦĦ Socio-economic issues, including community health, water levels for recreation and tourism, economic development, and water supply; and ĦĦ Treaty governance.

Priorities from June 2018 meetings ĦĦ Ecosystem protection and enhancement; ĦĦ First Nations participation in negotiations; ĦĦ Salmon reintroduction; ĦĦ More stable reservoir levels; ĦĦ Agriculture sector enhancement; ĦĦ Water supply protection for Canadian Basin; 4.10 INVERMERE ĦĦ Flood risk management; ĦĦ Equitable benefits to Canada; December 5, 2018 ĦĦ Fair compensation for impacted communities; During the June 2018 meetings, there were requests and to hold a session for those living near the Columbia ĦĦ Libby Dam/Koocanusa Reservoir operations River headwaters. 60 people attended this meeting coordinated between Canada and the U.S. at the Columbia Valley Chamber of Commerce. Opening remarks were provided by MLA Doug INTERESTS DISCUSSED AT THE DECEMBER 2018 Clovechok, Chief Barb Cote of the Shuswap Band, INVERMERE MEETING – Not in order of priority Chief Alfred Joseph of the Akisqnuk First Nation, and Attendees were asked to identify any additional Stan Doehle, Area Director for the Regional District interests that were not captured during the 2012- of East Kootenay. They remained to participate in 2013 public consultation or June 2018 Community the meeting. Meetings. Conversations included new issues, BASIN RESIDENTS’ INTERESTS FROM 2012- as well as confirming the importance of interests 2013 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND JUNE 2018 previously identified. COMMUNITY MEETINGS The following issues were discussed: The Treaty Team provided the following summary ĦĦ Importance of the Columbia River headwaters  of Basin resident interests captured during – Participants expressed how important the the 2012-2013 Columbia River Treaty Review Columbia River headwaters are, and how crucial Public Consultation, and from the June 2018 it is to maintain the health of this portion of Community Meetings. the river. They asked that the communities in this area continue to be included in Treaty Basin-wide interests in 2012-2013 included: public engagement. ĦĦ Ecosystems, including salmon restoration; ĦĦ First Nations involvement – Participants, which ĦĦ Flood risk management; included members of the Shuswap Band and ĦĦ Libby Dam co-ordination /Koocanusa Akisqnuk First Nation, emphasized the importance Reservoir management; of First Nations being part of the Canadian ĦĦ Power generation and the Canadian Entitlement; negotiating team. They also expressed the need to acknowledge the impacts the Treaty has had on indigenous communities, including

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 32 ] displacement of people, damage to ancestral ĦĦ Impacts from development and recreation  grounds, and loss of culture. The United Nations – Participants expressed frustration with the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples damage to farm and crown land caused was referenced11. It was suggested that there by recreation and development. They also should be more information shared on how the expressed frustration with trespassers, and Ktunaxa, Secwepemc, Syilx (Okanagan) Nations, lack of enforcement to prevent damage to Canada and B.C. are working together to develop their properties. and refine Canada’s negotiating positions ĦĦ Compensation for affected communities – and options. Many participants felt that affected communities ĦĦ Agriculture industry – Many participants have not been adequately compensated for expressed the need to acknowledge past and Treaty impacts. It was suggested that Basin present impacts the Treaty has had on the residents should receive compensation for agriculture sector, and to enhance this sector providing approximately half of B.C.’s electricity moving forward. A number of participants shared from the Columbia Basin. Some suggested stories of how their families’ land was flooded by indigenous Elders should have access to free the Koocanusa Reservoir, forcing them to relocate. electricity. Participants strongly encouraged These people spoke of how farming opportunities the negotiating team to seek fair compensation have diminished significantly with the loss of from the U.S. for downstream benefits such as land, and it is difficult for Basin farmers to sustain flood risk management, irrigation, recreation, their livelihood. They expressed the importance navigation, environmental habitat and of understanding and recognizing how the Treaty power generation. has affected those who live(d) in the Basin, as ĦĦ Youth and broader public engagement – well as seeking ways to compensate for those Attendees acknowledged the need for broader impacts. They felt agriculture losses have not education and awareness on the Treaty been compensated for in the same manner as fish throughout the Basin, specifically with youth. and wildlife impacts were. Some suggested that Some suggestions for how to do this included Canada should be compensated for water used engaging with the school districts and developing by the U.S. for irrigation. Suggestions for how an education centre at the headwaters of the to support the agriculture sector included: Columbia River. One participant pondered òò Creating an agriculture trust fund; whether improving the social economics of òò Giving fair payment to landowners for affected communities could encourage a younger expropriated land (some landowners feel generation to take on the ‘challenge’ of living in that they were not paid fairly for their land affected communities. when Koocanusa Reservoir was created); ĦĦ Koocanusa Reservoir and Libby Dam – òò Enforcing regulations regarding Participants believe there needs to be a water damaged property from trespass; management plan for the Koocanusa Reservoir, and that control of the Libby Dam should be ò ò Providing assistance for land purchases; shared between Canada and the U.S. ò ò Introducing young people to agriculture; and ĦĦ Water supply – Participants want to ensure òò Increasing availability of low Canada has a protected and secure water supply interest mortgages. in the future, for agriculture, food security, fisheries, and drinking water.

11 https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents /DRIPS_en.pdf

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 33 ] ĦĦ Flood risk management – Participants ĦĦ Diversion of Kootenay River – A number acknowledged that flood risk management of people asked whether the ability to divert is an important aspect of the Treaty. They also the Kootenay River to the Columbia is being discouraged development in floodplains. considered as part of Treaty negotiations. ĦĦ Ecosystems – A number of issues were raised They wondered if Canada would choose to divert related to ecosystems: the Kootenay River to the Columbia River. Ħ òò Participants emphasized the importance Ħ Cultural heritage – Some participants of ensuring that water level and flow expressed that, in addition to acknowledging needs are met for aquatic life, including Indigenous culture and heritage in the Basin, fish, specifically sturgeon, trout, and non-indigenous culture and heritage should salmon, if successfully reintroduced; also be acknowledged, such as David Thompson, explorations, and other area settlements. òò Attendees noted that flooding blocks wildlife Ħ corridors, and wondered whether alternate Ħ Data – Participants raised many questions passage or connectivity can be created; about the reliability of data being used and/ or collected to make decisions on future ò ò Participants emphasized the importance Treaty operations. They emphasized the need of Columbia River wetlands as a to consider cumulative effects. Participants bird migration area, and expressed encouraged rigorous studying and monitoring that it must be protected; and of impacts through the Basin, including òò Attendees expressed that invasive impacts of pollution, fluctuating water levels, species must be considered. damages from unregulated development ĦĦ Salmon reintroduction – Many participants and recreation, water quality and flood risk supported efforts to bring salmon back to the management scenarios. Canadian portion of the Columbia River. Some questioned how this is being studied and what PRIORITIES the feasibility of reintroducing salmon is – salmon The conversation on interests, summarized above, have been gone for so long, would they survive if filled the majority of the evening. Participants reintroduced? What would the impacts on other captured their priorities in writing on the discussion species be? Participants expressed how salmon is guides at each table. The following priorities were a key part of the ecosystem, and are important for identified on those discussion guides, in general bears, birds, forests and the land. It was suggested order of importance: that the U.S. should fund salmon reintroduction since the Grand Coulee Dam has blocked them. ĦĦ Fair compensation to impacted communities; Ħ ĦĦ Climate Change – Participants wondered how Ħ First Nations involvement in negotiations; climate change will affect the headwater region, ĦĦ Ecosystem protection and enhancement; and encouraged Canada and the U.S. to jointly ĦĦ Salmon reintroduction; monitor for climate change. ĦĦ Agriculture enhancement; ĦĦ Equitable sharing of benefits to Canada; ĦĦ Public education and community involvement; ĦĦ Water level management; and ĦĦ Flood mitigation.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 34 ] OTHER COMMENTS ĦĦ Balancing ecology and economy – One participant acknowledged that tourists, nature and residents interface, and are all affected by the Treaty. They asked the question, how do we honour all who/that are affected by the Treaty? ĦĦ Coordination of interests around Koocanusa – Participants acknowledged that there are many diverse interests around the Koocanusa Reservoir. It was encouraged to increase communication between stakeholders so that different interests may be understood and addressed. ĦĦ Greenhouse gas reduction – One attendee asked whether the Treaty can be used to encourage greenhouse gas reduction, perhaps by encouraging the use of hydroelectric power over more carbon intensive energy sources. ĦĦ Canadian Entitlement – Some people mentioned that there are more hydroelectric facilities operating in the U.S. than are accounted for in the Canadian Entitlement, and that Canada should receive higher compensation.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 35 ] 5 | Conclusion

These meetings were of great value to the Province, ĦĦ Water supply – Communities expressed the and Canada’s negotiating team. They confirmed that importance of Canada ensuring that water the issues captured during the 2012-2013 public is available for its own domestic use. consultation are still important to Basin citizens today. ĦĦ Fair compensation for impacted communities  They also shed light on new interests and issues, and – Communities most impacted by the Treaty provided concrete suggestions for how to potentially felt that they are not adequately compensated. reduce impacts and increase benefits to the Canadian ĦĦ Salmon reintroduction – Many community Columbia Basin. The Province will consider the members supported efforts to bring salmon recommendations, explore ways to address them, back to the Canadian Columbia River Basin. within or outside the Treaty, and report back to ĦĦ Flood risk management – It was recognized that Basin communities. the Treaty’s original intent to prevent flooding The Province acknowledges that the perspectives in Canada and the U.S. was essential to maintain, of Basin residents who shared their views with the though participants felt the U.S. should be Treaty Team during these meetings do not necessarily required to utilize their reservoirs for flood risk reflect the perspectives of the entire Columbia River management more than they do now. Basin population. That being said, the people who ĦĦ Equitable benefits to Canada – Communities took the time and made the commitment to share felt that the U.S. receives more benefits from the their views, must be listened to. Treaty than Canada does, and that a renewed Treaty needs to reflect the original intent Though each community has its own specific of sharing benefits equitably. interests and concerns regarding the Treaty, ĦĦ Libby Dam – Many participants felt Canada there were common themes that emerged. should have more input into Libby Dam ĦĦ Ecosystems – Communities emphasized the operations, to minimize impacts of the importance of including ecosystems as the Koocanusa Reservoir. third component of a modernized Treaty. ĦĦ First Nations participation – Communities The results of these meetings have been shared with voiced support for First Nations to be part Global Affairs Canada, and Canadian Basin interests of Treaty negotiations process. continue to inform negotiating positions developed by Canada and the Province, which will be raised ĦĦ Stable reservoir levels – Communities voiced at the negotiating table with the U.S. a desire for reducing fluctuation of reservoir levels to benefit ecosystems, local economies, recreation and tourism.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 36 ] 6 | Next Steps

The Province will return to the Basin for another round of public meetings in 2019 when there is substantive progress or new developments from negotiations to share. Until then, the Province will continue to provide Treaty updates through the Columbia River Treaty website12, Facebook, Twitter, and through its quarterly newsletter.

To sign up for the newsletter, visit https://engage.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty/sign-up/

12 https://engage.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 37 ] 7 | Feedback

The Province wants to make sure this report reflects what was said at these meetings. If you have questions, notice something missing, or would like to share further comments on Treaty issues that are not captured in this report, please send them to the Treaty Team via ĦĦ Email: [email protected] ĦĦ Phone: 778 698-7277 ĦĦ Mail: Columbia River Treaty Team Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, PO Box 9314 Stn Prov Govt, Victoria BC V8W 9N1; or ĦĦ Message the Treaty Team through the Columbia River Treaty Facebook page.

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY 2018 COMMUNITY MEETINGS SUMMARY REPORT [ 38 ]