Valhalla Wilderness Society

P.O. Box 329, New Denver, British Columbia, V0G 1S0 Phone: 250-358-2333; Fax: 358-2748; [email protected]; www.vws.org

October 10, 2012

Integrated Land Management Bureau Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources Re: (File #4404712) Proposed Investigative Permit for an IPP on the Incomappleux River

To Whom It May Concern:

Enclosed please find the submission of the Valhalla Wilderness Society (VWS) on the above-named file. This submission includes consulting reports, articles in peer-reviewed journals, government reports, and photographs togeth- er with a detailed summary of the relevant information. These documents will verify that:

The proposed weir, water pipes, and dewatered portion of the river lie in an intact wilderness adjacent to the southern boundary of Glacier National. In 1984 a report produced by Environment Canada recommended that the area was important for the survival of grizzly bears using the park, and that it should receive special protection for that purpose. (Tighem and Gyug, Vol. II, 1984). (Details provided on pg. 8). Over the last ten years, grizzly bear sign has commonly been seen in the area. Servicing an IPP would apparently require punching a road to the weir site, to within one-and-a-half kilometers of the park boundary, shattering the ability of the area to function as grizzly bear security habitat, and a critical buffer zone and connectivity corridor for the park.

The weir and a large portion of the penstock route lie in an area swept by massive avalanches. TransAlta’s application makes no mention of how it intends to operate an IPP 11 or 12 km. from the existing road in an area of huge avalanches that will leave many metres of snow covering the valley floor each winter.

The downstream end of the dewatered area, powerhouse, and return of the water to the river are in the core of critical spawning and rearing habitat for the blue-listed bull trout (Hagen and Decker, 2004, 2007, 2008). Bull trout mi- grate up the river to a point just upstream from the confluence of the Incomappleux River and Battlebrook Creek. The water run would through a turbine and back into the river through a pipe approximately at the confluence. It is common for bull trout to congregate at the upper end of their range for several weeks before dispersing down stream to spawn. (Decker and Hagen, 2008) In this case, the staging area would be in the dewatered stretch, and the spawning is concentrated for five or six kilometers downstream from the powerhouse. (See maps, Hagen, 2012)

This river is the second most important bull-trout spawning and rearing tributary for the Arrow Lakes Reservoir (ALR) fishery (Decker and Hagen 2007). The government has spent millions of dollars over many years to restore the fisheries of the Arrow Lakes Reservoir. The Battlebrook IPP, and other IPPs in the tributaries to the Incomap- pleux, would have a devastating impact on the fish habitat.

Damage to the fish and their habitat would include erosion, increased bedload of creeks and rivers, changes in hydraulics, channel instability and water level fluctuations. (Bergdahl, 1998; Nagrodski, et al., 2012, see enclosures). Some of these impacts can have direct lethal effects on fish, as well as sublethal deterioration of their health, and inhibit spawning. This submission includes examples of three BC rivers that have dried up below an IPP weir, caus- ing riparian damage and/or fish deaths: the Mamquam, Ashlu and Akolkolex Rivers. The Akolkolex is another tributary to the Arrow Lakes Reservoir, and is a case where the government spent nearly $185,000 restoring the fish habitat only to have an IPP dry up the river. These IPP damages will be cumulative, as they will add to similar damages already caused by logging.

The powerhouse and staging/switching area also lie within the very heart of a remnant of a rare forest type, antique Inland Temperate Rainforest, with trees up to four metres in diameter and 1,800 years old. The forest is the site of the discovery of an extraordinary profusion of lichen diversity, with many rare lichens; seven lichen species new to science were found here in recent years. Many of these lichens were found very near site of the proposed powerhouse or along the transmission corridor. Amongst the enclosures there are articles from peer-reviewed scientific journals, as well as from magazines with more general readership, about these discoveries.

2 At the time of the initial lichen research, the area was flagged for road building and logging. In 2005 Ministry of Forests (MOF) old-growth specialist, Dr. André Arsenault, confirmed the existence of a rare forest type and rare species all around the site of the proposed powerhouse at the confluence of the Incomappleux River with Battle- brook Creek (Dr. Arsenault’s report is attached). Many of the rare coastal lichen species would have disappeared if the forest canopy were opened up. As a result, the logging was cancelled and the area was identified on forest plan- ning maps by MOF and Pope & Talbot as a non-legal Old-Growth Management Area (maps enclosed). These same impacts would accompany the IPP, only very much worse because of the transmission corridor.

The discovery of a truly virgin forest with an unexpected level of biodiversity, and a concentration of rare species, catapulted the Incomappleux into recognition in international scientific circles. VWS has facilitated access and ac- companied numerous researchers into the Incomappleux Valley. We submit the reports of Dr. Toby Spribille of the University of Montana and the University of Graz, BC Lichenologists Curtis Björk and Trevor Goward, Curator of Lichens at UBC, documenting the extraordinary lichen diversity and species new to science; BC mycologist Dr. Oluna Ceska, and land snail experts Dr. Jeffrey Nekola of the University of New Mexico, Dr. Michal Horsák of the Marysk University in the Czech Republic, and Dr. Brian Coles, Research Associate, National Museum of Wales.

Most of these professionals, who are recognized experts in their fields, made discoveries of rare species (the excep- tion being the Harvard team, which has not yet reported its results). Their surveys have made significant contributions to worldwide scientific knowledge of the biodiversity and distribution of species in BC’s very-little-studied Interior Wetbelt. While it is well-known that the Incomappleux has blue-listed Bull Trout, blue-listed Great Blue Heron, quite likely the blue-listed wolverine, the blue-listed grizzly bear and, according to a study by Pope & Tal- bot, possibly blue-listed Fishers, these are species that once blanketed a large area of BC. In contrast, biodiversity studies going on in the Incomappleux are uncovering species never before known to exist in the interior, or in the province, or in some cases even in Canada..

The upper Incomappleux valley bottom from Boyd Creek to the southern boundary has been proposed for a provincial park or an extension of Glacier National Park. VWS submissions include a petition for this proposal signed by 4,758 people. The park proposal has the support of ten environmental groups and the Golden Chapter of the Council of Canadians. The BC public and many Canadians are aware of the upper Incomappleux through years of slide shows, newspaper and magazine articles, and more recently through a very popular film produced Riel Marquardt, a member of the Kelowna-based group, Nature’s Presence. The last ten years have seen increasing recreational use of the old game trail through the forest, as well as the rise of kayaking on the river. The Minister of Environment, Hon. Terry Lake, has been briefed on this proposal, as well as MLAs Katrine Conroy, Michelle Mungall and Norm Mac- Donald, whose ridings contain parts of the park proposal. The NDP has sent MLA Michael Sather and MLA Guy Gentner to view the Incomappleux and its ancient forest.

With the weight of this evidence, VWS urges you to turn down the application for an investigative permit. Even an area slashed out at the Battlebrook confluence for a helicopter landing and for drilling and digging equipment would do devastating damage to a very rare, very ancient intact rainforest loaded with rare species. By permitting investigative activities, the ILMB would be inviting the proponent to spend large sums of money on a project that would be wantonly and shockingly destructive. Once TransAlta has paid for the studies, it will expect a permit, and use the expenditures as leverage. The very proposal of an IPP in this area suggests that either TransAlta is a corporation with no environmental conscience that cares for nothing but its profits, or else it hasn’t seen the area.

Digital copies of the reports are being sent today to the Cranbrook ILMB office. Hard copies of supporting \ will be sent by mail. Immediately following this cover letter, you will find VWS’s detailed review of information in these reports, as well as some photographic pages.

Sincerely,

Craig Pettitt Director

3 (File #4404712) Valhalla Wilderness Society, October 10, 2012

Detailed Response to Application for Investigative Permit For an IPP on the Incomappleux River

I. THE PROPONENT’S APPLICATION

The information provided with the permit application of TransAlta/Galena Bay Power is inadequate as a basis to approve an investigative permit:

• The proponent has not detailed how it intends to maintain an IPP in winter in an area swept by massive avalanches, where many metres of snow can be dumped in the valley bottom.

• Investigative activities include geotechnical drilling and pitting, yet the application makes no reference to the measures that will be required to get the equipment on to the sites.

• The application refers to “access clearing” for the studies, yet fails to state the precise location and extent of the clearing. Are we talking helicopter access or road access?

• The proposed IPP would divert the river for 8.8 kilometres. This often entails a dam and reservoir, but the application does not mention this infrastructure.

• TransAlta/Galena Bay Power also fail to mention whether the penstock will be buried or on the surface. Usually they are buried, entailing a huge amount of clearing and soil disturbance.

• The map provided does not provide the fine detail needed to pinpoint the location of the staging area and switching yard as to the complex terrain at the confluence of the Incomappleux and Battlebrook.

However, it’s obvious enough that drilling equipment doesn’t levitate itself into place in the midst of an untracked wilderness, and water pipes and power lines can’t be threaded through an intact rainforest. Below we discuss the unavoidable inferences of this proposal, the values at stake, and the likely impacts:

II. FISH and FISH HABITAT

1. SPECIES OF MOST CONCERN — The blue-listed bull trout is most threatened by this project. In addition, there are Kokanee salmon and the red-listed White Sturgeon in the Beaton Arm at the mouth of the Incomap- pleux. The Kokanee salmon are a keystone species, being major zooplankton consumers and the most important prey of Rainbow Trout, Bull Trout and other large fish species. The Kokanee inhabit the lower five kilometers of the river, up to an obstruction that is a barrier to them. A few years ago VWS staff were present when a film crew put a waterproof camera on a pole into the pool just below this obstruction, and photographed numerous large Kokanee at spawning time. They have been seen by hundreds of people in Riel Marquardt’s film, The In- comappleux.

2. ARROW LAKES BULL TROUT FISHERY — In the six years from 2003-4 to 2008-09, the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program spent a minimum of $11.87 million of public money restoring the fisheries of the Arrow Lakes Reservoir and Kootenay Lake (we don’t have segregated figures). (CBFWCP An- nual Reports, 2003-04 to 2008-09, enclosed.) Since 1999 Columbia Basin Trust and the Columbia Power Cor- poration (CPC) have contributed an additional $1.5 million to fish fertilization on the upper Arrow Lake alone. (CPC website page enclosed) The goal was to increase the number and size of the keystone species, Kokanee salmon, and blue-listed Bull Trout, to support the sport fishery. Today the recreational lake fishery is worth $1 million direct revenue per year in the local community, and an additional $2 million indirect revenue. About 60% of the fishing targets Bull Trout (pers. comm., Steve Arndt, MFLNR).

4 3. BULL TROUT SPAWNING IN THE INCOMAPPLEUX — The Incomappleux River is the second most important spawning and rearing tributary for Arrow Lakes Reservoir Bull Trout. In 2007, out of six major Bull Trout producing tributaries of the Arrow Lakes Reservoir, the Incomappleux River had 17% of all spawning nests (redds), and 26% of all juvenile Bull Trout (Decker and Hagen, 2007, attached). In 2011, every major tributary except the Incomappleux River had drastically reduced redd counts, amounting to a 50% reduction for the ALR. The Incomappleux redd count stayed steady and now had 25% of the redds. (Hagen, 2012, enclosed)

The majority of Bull Trout spawning in the Incomappleux is in the mainstem of the river. Ninety percent of redds in the Incomappleux watershed in 2011 were between Kellie Creek (the site of another proposed IPP) and Battlebrook Creek, the location of the proposed powerhouse and staging/switching area for the IPP.

There is a second barrier to Bull Trout migration in the mainstem Incomappleux River, just upstream from its confluence with Battlebrook. This marks the upper limit of Bull Trout range in the Incomappleux. Bull Trout commonly congregate at the uppermost end of their range, before dispersing downstream to spawn. In a report for the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Decker and Hagen state:

“It is common for a large proportion of a bull trout spawning population to stage for several weeks at the base of an obstruction or barrier. For example, all 59 adults observed in Caribou Creek during a pre-spawning survey on September 15, 2006 (see Decker and Hagen 2007) were within 100 m of either the barrier or the major obstruction downstream. The construction of diversion tunnels, head pools and penstocks in canyon sections used as staging areas by adult bull trout may affect their spawning distribution and eventual reproductive success.”

Thus the proposed IPP would wipe out the Bull Trout staging area in the Incomappleux River. At the powerhouse site the water would be returned to the river. THESE FEATURES WILL CHANGE THE HYDRAULICS OF THE RIVER AND THE RIVERBED DOWNSTREAM. THE IMPACTS WILL BE MOST SEVERE CLOSEST TO THE STRUCTURES, BUT WILL TRAVEL ALL THE WAY TO THE MOUTH OF THE RIVER. MAPS OF THE 2011 BULL TROUT REDD COUNT SHOW THAT 46% OF THE REDDS WERE DISTRIBUTED OVER A FIVE OR SIX KILOME- TER STRETCH DOWNSTREAM FROM THE PROPOSED POWERHOUSE. (See maps, Hagen, 2012) . 3. FISHERIES ALREADY UNDER THREAT — The BC Government admits on its website that “The Bull Trout is a blue-listed species because populations are declining throughout its global range. The threats include “any ac- tivity that results in significant modification of stream channel stability, substrate composition, instream or streamside cover, water temperature, stream hydrodynamics including groundwater quality and quantity and migratory corridors should be considered a threat, in addition to overfishing and poaching.” (Bergdahl, 1998)

The Arrow Lakes Reservoir (ALR) has one of the largest fish recovery projects in the world, but recovery has not by any means been complete, and success in the long term is uncertain. In 2011, the redd counts for every major ALR tributary were the lowest on record. SOME IMPACTS CANNOT BE MITIGATED, AND THAT IS TRUE OF IPPs AS WELL AS LARGE DAMS.

Logging in the tributaries compounded the damage of the dams to Bull Trout breeding and rearing habitat. Lex- ington, Kellie, Boyd, Sable and Pool Creeks also produce Bull Trout, but the mouths of some of these creeks have been wrecked by logging. Nevertheless, Kellie Creek is a major spawning site in the Incomappleux, second only to the mainstem downstream from Battlebrook. VWS is concerned about the impacts of the transmission line corridor for the Battlebrook IPP traversing these areas or the slopes above. To make matters worse, there are applications for IPPs on some of these creeks. Bull Trout can only ascend for 1.6 kilometres up Kellie Creek, 1.8 up Boyd Creek and 1.2 up Pool Creek, so it would not be difficult to totally wipe out these fish producing areas with an IPP. The application for the Boyd Creek IPP calls for a 300-metre wide transmission corridor crossing the valley to the west side of the river, meanwhile the transmission lines for the Battlebrook IPP would parallel the road on the east side.

4. BULL TROUT SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON INTACT HABITAT — The concentration of Bull Trout at the upper end of their range in the Incomappleux mainstem correlates to the well-known fact that Bull Trout inhabit streams with a high degree of intactness. Due to the combination of Glacier National Park and the intact wilderness south of its southern boundary, there are 25-30 kilometres of roadless, wild river upstream of the Bull Trout spawning habitat. Further, some of the creeks coming into the upper Incomappleux have little or no logging except in the valley-bottom, due to inoperable terrain. Although the fish cannot get very far past the confluence with Battlebrook, this intactness contributes to keeping the downstream spawning habitat viable. 5

“Field data available from central Idaho consistently indicate the survival of salmonids is 10-55 times higher in streams that have not been subjected to logging, grazing, and mining than in streams in man- aged watersheds (Rhodes et al. 1994). Survival of salmonids is lowest in streams subjected to multiple impacts. For instance, egg-to-parr survival is about 0.5% in Johnson Creek in Boise National Forest, a highly degraded watershed subjected to grazing, mining, roads and timber harvest. Similarly, it is about 3.3% in the highly degraded Bear Valley Creek which is subjected to the same activities (Scully & Petro- sky 1991). In the wild and roadless watersheds adjacent to these streams, salmonid survival averages about 29% (Scully and Petrosky 1991; Boise National Forest 1993).” — Dr. James Bergdahl, 1998.

The Incomappleux River has characteristics that are especially favourable to Bull Trout that these U.S. streams probably do not have. One is water from vast glaciers in Glacier National Park. Bull Trout need very cold water, and the glacial flour in the Incomappleux makes the water turbid and thus less penetrable by sunlight, thus providing more stability of temperature. In addition, there is an obstruction at 5 kilometres from the Arrow Lakes Reservoir that Rainbow Trout cannot pass, thus eliminating competition for Bull Trout, which can jump the obstruction. However, it is believed that sediment in the stream beds is the chief factor in the demise of Bull Trout in the US (Bergdahl, 1998), and IPP development in the upper stretches of the Incomappleux will certain- ly produce loads of sediment.

5. EXPECTABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED IPP ON FISH

a. Erosion/Channel Stability — Eleven kilometers of road built into an untracked wilderness, 8.8 km of buried penstock, enormous amount of trees cut for the transmission corridor, all predict massive changes to the hydrology of the now-intact area, with increased erosion into the river, increased bedload, increased channel instability in the river. The impacts on Bull Trout would be devastating. While Kokanee and White Sturgeon are of less concern, government biologists should consider the impact of these changes on those species. It is our understanding that increased sediment will be deposited at the mouth of the river where the White Sturgeon can be found.

b. Water fluctuations, like increased sediment, will travel all the way to the mouth of the river, albeit in reduced intensity. Fisheries managers counting Bull Trout jumping the barrier at 5 km. say that only the big Bull Trout can make it, and some have to try at least twice. (Kootenay Fisheries Field Report, 2006-07) The ability to get past the barrier at 5 km is marginal. What is the risk that abnormally high or low or sud- den changes in water level caused by an IPP could make this obstruction impassable to Bull Trout?

In 2005 a large part of the adult Bull Trout populations in another Arrow Lakes Reservoir (ALR) tributary, Caribou Creek, died while trying to ascend a waterfall to their traditional spawning grounds. Low flows may have contributed to the deaths. In their study of Bull Trout in these tributaries, authors Scott Decker and John Hagen (2007) state:

“These observations demonstrated the vulnerability of Bull Trout in ALR tributaries to disturbances to the stream channel, particularly disturbances at points of difficult passage … In the Incomap- pleux system, most Bull Trout spawning tributaries showed signs of serious channel instability that was often associated with extensive streamside logging, and poor bridge and culvert road construction. In some cases, channel movement likely prevented adults from accessing spawning habitat. Managing and restricting resource development in Bull Trout spawning and rearing areas should be given high priority.”

The same history of industry intent to maximize profits, operator negligence, and government indulgence exists with IPPs as with the other resource industries. Between 1997 and 1999 the Ministry of Environment spent a minimum of $186,000 (that can be found on the public record), to restore westslope cutthroat trout habitat in the Akolkolex River after heavy impacts from logging. In 2005 the IPP operator allowed the river to go dry downstream from the weir for three days. Investigation found that the operator had never even installed the necessary equipment to measure the water levels. Although government investigators wanted to press charges, this did not happen. Documentation of this is on the government’s OpenInfo website at http://www.openinfo.gov.bc.ca/ibc/search/browse_results.page?recorduid=3034567&title=FOI%20Request %20-%20MOE-2011-00216. This highlights the fact that the government has shown neither the will, nor has in maintained the staffing levels, to enforce permit conditions. The IPP changed hands, and the new owner of the facility with this sorry story is TransAlta, which now knows what it can get by with. 6

A recent Vancouver Sun article reported on fish deaths on the Mamquam and Ashlu Rivers due to IPPs. The article highlights the profit motive at work:

“Water is money to this fast-growing industry. The volume of water that power plants are required to leave in streams on a continuing basis as well as the rate of short-term ramping affect their ability to produce electricity. The more water they have to leave in the river, the less they have for power production.

“Companies ‘argue economic hardship’ when it comes to diverting water because of fish, the federal department of fisheries and oceans (DFO) states in minutes of a July 21, 2001, inter-agency meeting on a proposed run-of-river project on the Kokish River on northeastern Vancouver Island.

“Government officials face a ‘significant challenge’ to reduce water available for power genera- tion ‘because proponents are reluctant to reduce revenues,’ the minutes stated … DFO has observed “considerable non-compliance,” and the success rate of complying with in-stream flow re- quirements “is not very good.”

III. RARE FOREST TYPE

1. A RARE RAINFOREST REDUCED TO A FRAGMENT — The virgin forest in the Incomappleux Valley would have been very similar to the renowned rainforest of Olympic National Park in Washington State. Unfortunate- ly, interior BC has no parks in the Interior that contain such forest.

The lower thirty-five kilometers of the Incomappleux Valley bottom were savagely clearcut down to the river banks, leaving vast cottonwood, poplar, fir and spruce plantations. Lichen researchers in the Incomappleux say that, with the degree of diversity in the fragment that remains, it is quite likely that many small species were extirpated or destroyed by logging before we even knew what they were. The endangered Mountain Caribou was known to inhabit this valley, but past logging has made their visitation rare.

Fortunately the logging left a five-kilometre stretch of Inland Temperate Rainforest that starts north of McDou- gal Creek and runs along the Incomappleux River for 1.7 kilometers past Battlebrook, as well as on both sides of Battlebrook for some distance. There is no such forest, with trees up to four metres in diameter, left in the interior south of the Robson Valley, and even there it is in much smaller fragments than in the Incomappleux.

When compared to the area of the rest of the Incomappleux Valley that has been clearcut, this remaining intact forest is just a tiny fragment containing only 1,500 hectares of commercial forest (the rest being inoperable due to terrain conditions). But one can walk in this forest all day and not come to the end of it. The unbroken size of this fragment is incredibly important to its function as rainforest; it is large enough to maintain the high moisture that supports an explosion of biodiversity with many coastal species very rarely found in the interior. The proposed powerhouse, staging area and switching area would be set down in the very heart of this remnant forest, and the transmission corridor to it would shatter the visual and ecological integrity of this forest forever.

2. INLAND TEMPERATE RAINFOREST — The enclosed scientific reports will verify that this forest is a rare forest type that has been recognized by numerous scientists, including the Ministry of Forests old growth expert in 2004, as having global significance: antique Inland Temperate Rainforest of the “very wet” type —Interior Cedar-Hemlock (ICHvk). Inland Temperate Rainforest exists nowhere else in the world but in the Interior Wet- belt of BC, and even there only in the wettest pockets. The Valhalla Wilderness Society tree-aging project has conservatively estimated some of the larger trees to be 1,800 years old, the exact figure reached by the U.S. Forest Service for western redcedar trees of similar size. Further, the forest is believed to be far older than its oldest trees, and some scientists say it could have been growing undisturbed since the last Ice Age. Its intact size is a key part of what is rare about it and why it contains so many rare species: this is not a grove of trees, it is a forest large enough to retain the moisture to function as a rainforest. As a result, it is a repository of a profusion of coastal species rarely found in the interior of BC; some are associated only with very old, very wet forest and are hardly found anywhere at all, they are so rare. Any further reduction by punching a service road through it, and a transmission corridor from the powerhouse, would irreparably damage its rainforest nature, its ability to sustain species, and its wilderness character.

7 3. OTHER UNCOMMON HABITATS — The Incomappleux Valley has other unusual habitats including an extensive wetland at Kellie Creek. Due to dams the Columbia Basin lost 26% of its wetlands, and the Kellie Creek wetland is likely amongst the very few of its size. It consists of an unusual mosaic of wetland types including open sedge meadow, marsh, shrub carr, floating mats and open ponds. There are also stands of riparian cottonwood left in the Incomappleux. All of these habitats are threatened by impacts from the transmission corridor for the Battlebrook IPP, and by other IPPs on Kellie Creek, Boyd Creek and perhaps others as well.

IV. BIODIVERSITY AND RARE SPECIES

Throughout the Incomappleux Valley there can be found species that may have always been rare in the BC interior, or are rare now or have been designated as species at risk. They have been found at several points, including in the canyon section near Camborne, along Boyd Creek, in the Kellie Creek Wetland, and in ancient rainforest.

1. LICHENS — Nearly 300 species of lichens alone have been found in the Incomappleux Valley by Dr. Toby Spribille, Trevor Goward, and Curtis Björk. (List enclosed, Spribille, 2006) The lichens seven species new to science. Most of the species were found in the ancient rainforest. The confluence of the Incomappleux and Bat- tlebrook Creek, as well as Boyd Creek Canyon, are hotspots for rare lichens. Loxosporopsis coralifera, a lichen very rarely found inland, and several that were published as new to science in 2008, were found at the mouth of the Boyd Creek Canyon. These lichens were found during cursory examinations; Dr. Spribille expects that a thorough search of this forest would yield significantly more species

2. RARE SPECIES NEAR OR ON THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED POWERHOUSE AND DIVERSION STRETCH The confluence of the Incomappleux River and Battlebrook is a particularly wet area, both on the ground and in the air. It does not have a waterfall, but it supports a profusion of coastal lichen species very rarely found in the interior, and then sometimes only in waterfall spray zones. Thus this confluence and two of its species, Hy- pogymnia oceanic Goward and the COSEWIC Species-of-Concern Nephroma occurltum, are mentioned in an article on the lichens of waterfall spray zones in the journal, Evansia (Björk, et al., 2009). Lichen species Bacid- ina contecta, Biatora aureolepra, Biatora ligni-mollis, Pertusaria diluta (exclusive to old-growth forests), and Myochroidea minutula Printzen were published as new to science in 2008 (Spribille, et al., The Bryologist, 2008; Printzen et al., 2008, enclosed.) They have all been found either in the immediate area of the confluence, or within two km downstream, in the path of the proposed transmission corridor. M. minutula Printzen has never been found anywhere else in the world; B. ligni-mollis has since been discovered in one other location, in the ICHvk of the Penfold Valley.

Of land snails, Vertigo modesta sculptilis Pilsbry was found so near the site of the proposed powerhouse that its location would likely be obliterated by the development. The subspecies has never before been recorded for BC or Canada. (Nekola, et al., 2012)

A coastal moss that is very rare inland, Hookeria lucens, known in only one other site in the interior in recent history, was found upstream on Battlebrook near the diversion stretch. (Spribille, 2005) This is only those species found on or very near the development site; species for a broad swathe on either side of any cleared areas will be affected. We go on to name a few:

3. MUSHROOMS - Mycologist Dr. Oluna Ceska and Dr. Adolf Ceska, a former BC Conservation Data Base biologist, surveyed mushrooms. Twenty species were found in a clearcut, but a spectacular 80 species in the ancient rainforest. 41 of the 80 were coastal species, including the rare Phaeocolybia piceae. Usually found only in the wettest and oldest coastal rainforest such as Olympic National Park and the Redwoods (Ceska, A. 2006), before the discovery in the Incomappleux old-growth its only known location in BC was on the coast in Carmanah.

4. PLANTS - Scientific teams take note of plant species. Their discoveries include the red-listed Botrychium mon- tanum, a primitive fern, found in the ancient forest. Plant species at risk in the Kellie Creek wetland: Liparis loeselii, one of Canada’s rarest orchids; Urticularia ochroleuca, a carnivorous plant, both red-listed; and Eleo- charis rostellata, blue-listed. (Spribille, 2006)

5. LAND SNAILS -In 2011 a team of international experts on land snails — Dr. Jeffrey Nekola, Dr. Brian Coles, and Dr. Michal Horsák and Veronika Schenková, a Ph.D. program student, from Masaryk University in the Czech Republic visited the Incomappleux Valley, doing surveys in Camborne Canyon, the ancient rainforest and the Kellie Creek wetland. In the wetland they found substantial quantities of the red-listed snail, Vertigo elatior, a species previously believed to have been extirpated from BC. A blue-listed species, Vertigo arthuri 8 von Martens, was also found in the wetland. Besides the V. modest sculptilis Martens mentioned above at the powerhouse site, a blue-listed species was tentatively identified in the ancient forest, but definitive identification of the species is difficult and would require another sample.

6. RECOGNITION BY MINISTRY OF FORESTS — The general location of TransAlta’s proposed powerhouse and transmission line was slated for road building and logging in 2003, until Dr. Spribille discovered the rare species of lichens at or near Battlebrook confluence. The Ministry of Forests sent in their old-growth specialist at that time, Dr. André Arsenault. He reported a “generally rare forest type of global significance”. (Arsenault, 2004, enclosed) He described most of the surrounding forest as “very old” or “antique” forest and confirmed Dr. Spribille's findings on the presence of rare lichens. Dr. Arsenault took lichen samples from eight areas around the confluence and adjacent slopes. His report stated: “Our ground survey in 2003 confirmed that the confluence of the two rivers had at least moderate levels of cyanolichen diversity which included the rare species Nephroma occultum ... The Upper Incomappleux Valley is clearly one of the hotspots for epiphytic lichens.” The two scientists listed many other coastal lichen species.

7. OLD-GROWTH MANAGEMENT AREA — As a result of Dr. Arsenault’s report, logging plans for the SE block of timber bounded by Battlebrook Creek, the Incomappleux River and Glacier Creek were cancelled and the area was considered an Old Growth Management Area (OGMA). This OGMA, as identified in Pope & Talbot’s and MOF’s maps, included the riparian area on the west side of the Incomappleux and a substantial area on the north side of Battlebrook Creek. (The maps are included in the photograph pages.)

8. EXPECTED IMPACTS

“Forests of the calibre of the upper Incomappleux are in a class of their own, owing both to their great age, which has allowed thousands of years of colonization for rainforest- dependent species, and their structural complexity – the interactions of the hundreds of plants and fungal species with thousands of poorly known invertebrate organisms. The fragmentation of this forest would represent a direct and immediate threat to many species whose distribution is limited to short distances, and for whom a clearcut represents an immense migration barrier. Fragmentation would create canopy gaps allowing valley winds to penetrate into the heart of forest canopies that have been sheltered and humid for over a thousand years, drying out the habitats of species, such as the COSEWIC-listed Species of Concern Nephroma occultum, whose existence depends on very stable humidity and constant, undisturbed conditions.” Dr. Toby Spribille University of Montana

V. WEIR AND WATER DIVERSION STRETCH

1. AVALANCHES —From what we can determine from the proponent’s maps, and transposing to Google Earth, it is very plain to see that this intake is located in a massive deposition zone for avalanches that run most years from both sides of the valley. These zones deposit heavy loads of debris-laden snow that will keep the intake area buried until late June or early July, making for a maintenance nightmare. The penstock will have to cross a minimum of 10 avalanche runout zones before reaching the powerhouse. This will not be an inexpensive project, and the road will have to be kept open to keep the intake and penstock functional which will entail a high and costly level of maintenance.

2. RECOMMENDED BY ENVIRONMENT CANADA BIOLOGISTS FOR PROTECTION — The Incomappleux was noted by Environment Canada biologists to have the highest number of grizzly bears seen in their 1984 inventory. Their report recommended that intact habitats outside the park boundaries are critical for the support of the grizzly bear population and ought to be protected:

Page 210: “As areas adjoining MRNP and GNP are opened up by logging, the parks are increasingly becoming isolated reserves for grizzlies. Improved access increases legal and illegal hunting pres- sure, and the presence of isolated work camps at numerous locations in the Selkirks and Purcells increases the opportunities for grizzlies to be attracted to garbage and food and shot as nuisances. The provincial Fish and Wildlife Branch is inadequately staffed to deal with the plethora of wildlife management concerns attendant on resource development in the Kootenay region (J. Turnbull, Chief Park Warden, pers. comm.) It is essential that land-use policy for the areas adjoining these parks take 9 into account the inability of these small parks to sustain a grizzly population that does not cross park boundaries (Hamer 1974A, Mundy 1963).

Page 249: “Grizzly bear populations in MRNP and GNP are small (see grizzly bear species account) and the parks do not support self-contained populations. As a result, the population may be particularly sensitive to additional losses beyond natural mortality- particularly now that access to the parks is increasing from all sides. Grizzly bear management in the parks is increasingly influenced by land use policy adjacent to the parks …. To reduce grizzly mortality from control actions to protect recre- ationists, it has been recommended before that Clachnacudamn and Mountain Creek watersheds be given special protective status (Mundy 1963, Hamer 1974a, Marsh 1972). MOST GRIZZLY SIGHTINGS BY WILDLIFE INVENTORY STAFF WERE IN THE INCOMAPPLEUX AND FLAT CREEK WATERSHEDS, AND WE RECOMMEND THAT THE INCOMMAPPLEUX BE GIVEN SIMILAR STATUS.” “Ecological Land Classification of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks, British Colum- bia”, Environment Canada, 1984.)

3. IMPACTS —According to bear biologist Wayne McCrory, RPbio, this may displace the grizzly bears from prime habitat, and may likely lead to grizzly bear deaths, as well as increased bear-human conflict in Glacier National Park

VI. LEGAL PROTECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

The federal government has gutted the fish habitat provisions of the Fisheries Act. It has dismissed DFO employees in the Kootenays and the Nelson office is closing. There will be no DFO to monitor fish in our area, they will have to come from Vancouver, an office that has also been crippled by lay-offs of professional staff. Meanwhile BC Hy- dro has apparently taken over the Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Compensation Program that formerly funded fish studies in the Arrow watershed, laying off eleven employees, and has reportedly been heard to complain that buying fertilizer for the Arrow Lake is too expensive. This same BC Hydro would be purchasing power from the IPPs. We get the point — that the federal and provincial governments intend push ahead development at the expense of killing fish. But a complication in this case is the years of public money spent and the self-congratulations and image building that BC Hydro and the governments took from working to restore fisheries. The idea that the damage done by the IPPs could be “mitigated” will not survive the view that the governments and BC Hydro can be seen tearing down and stamping on the mitigations efforts for previous damages.

VII. PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR PROTECTION

The Selkirk Mountain Caribou Park Proposal is supported by the Purcell Alliance for Wilderness, Nature’s Pres- ence, West Kootenay Ecosociety, Western Canada Wilderness Committee, Save-the-Cedar League, Raincoast Con- servation, the Golden Chapter of the Council of Canadians, Pacific Wild, Raincoast Environmental Society, Applied Ecological Stewardship Council of BC, the Craighead Environmental Research Institute, and the Conservation Biol- ogy Centre. The petition in support of this park proposal is still active. At present there are 4,758 signatures, of which 3,973 were gathered in Revelstoke, Nakusp, Nelson, Slocan Valley, Kaslo, Golden and other towns in the region; 498 from Okanagan, and 232 from the coast. The rest are from other provinces, with a few from other coun- tries. A film on the upper Incomappleux by Riel Marquardt of Nature’s Presence, an organization based in the Ke- lowna area is on the internet at http://www.theincomappleux.com/about.htm and has been shown to hundreds of people in numerous audiences.

No other river in this West Kootenay region is known to retain such a spectrum of rare ecological values. The Inco- mappleux is one of the few undammed rivers left in this region. It should be maintained free of any sort of hydroe- lectric development. We urge the ILMB to reject the application at the investigative stage.

Sincerely,

Craig Pettitt

References

Glacier National Park

“Ecological Land Classification of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks”, British Columbia, Vol. 2, Envi- ronment Canada, Tighem and Gyug, 1984.

Inland Temperate Rainforest and Rare Species

Arsenault, A. and Goward, T., “Ecological Characteristics of Inland Rain Forests,” At Risk: proceedings of a con- ference on the biology and management of species and habitats at risk, Kamloops, BC 15-29, ed. L.M. Darling, 1999, Vol. 1, pp. 437-439.

Spribille, T., “Lichens of an old-growth inland rainforest, Incomappleux River drainage, southeastern BC: prelimi- nary inventory and implications for conservation,” 2006, updated 2012.

Spribille, T., “Oceanic Macrolichens in the Incomappleux River Valley, southeastern British Columbia,” Report to the Valhalla Wilderness Society, 2002.

Spribille, T., “Report on botanical surveys in the Incomappleux River,” Report to the Valhalla Wilderness Society, 2004.

Spribille, T., “Report on Botanical Survey of the West Bank of the Incomappleux River, 2005.

Björk, C. T., Goward and T. Spribille. 2009. New records and range extensions of rare lichens from waterfalls and spray zones in inland British Columbia, Canada. Evansia 26: 219-224.

Spribille, T., Björk, C., Ekman, S., Elix, J., Goward, T., Printzen, C., Tonsberg, T., Wheeler, T., “Contributions to an epiphytic lichen flora of northwest North America: I. Eight new species from British Columbia inland rainfor- ests,” The Bryologist, bryo-112-01-08.3d 24/7/08 12:44:30.

“Myochroidea, a new genus of corticolous, crustose lichens to accommodate the Lecidea leprosula group,” Christian Printzen, et al., The Lichenologist, 40(3): 195-207 (2008)

Ceska, O., “Incomappleux Valley – Macrofungi,” Sept. 12, 2004, www.vws.org.

Ceska, A., “Phaeocollybia piceae Confirmed from the Interior of British Columbia, Botanical Electronic News (BEN), No 359, Mar. 24, 2006.

Nekola, J., Coles, B, Horsák, M., “Land Snail Diversity Assessment for Selkirk Mountains Park Region in South- eastern British Columbia, 2012.

Sherrod, A., “The Incomparable Incomappleux”, Menziesia, October 2005, Vol. 10 (3).

Sherrod, A., “The Incomappleux Discoveries”, Menziesia, October 2007, Vol. 12 (3).

Fish and Fish Habitat

Bergdahl, J.C., “Bull Trout Streams of the Upper Columbia River Basin of Southeast British Columbia, with Notes on the Char’s Ecology and Conservation Biology,” Mar. 16, 1998.

Columbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Compensation Program, Annual Reports, 2003-04 to 2008-09.

Decker, S., and Hagen, J., “Distribution of Adfluvial Bull Trout Production In Tributaries of The Arrow Lakes Res- ervoir And The Feasibilty Of Monitoring Juvenile And Adult Abundance,” Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Com- pensation Program, B.C. Hydro, June 2007.

11 Decker, S., and Hagen, J., “Adfluvial Bull Trout Spawner Abundance in Tributaries of the Arrow Lake Reservoir (2004-2007),” Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, B.C. Hydro, June 2008.

Hagen, “Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Spawner Abundance in Tributaries of the Arrow Lakes Reservoir”, Fall 2011, Fish & Wildlife Compensation Program, Feb., 2012.

Nagrodski, A., et al., “Fish stranding in freshwater systems: Sources, consequences, and mitigation,” J. Env. Mgmt., 103 (2012) 133-141.

Legebokow, C.S., “Akolkolex River: Addressing Fish and Wildlife Habitat Values,” Streamline: Watershed Resto- ration Technical Bulletin, Vol. 2, No. 4.

Columbia Power Corporation website @ http://www.columbiapower.org/news.asp?ID=130. Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program website @ http://fwcpcolumbia.ca/version2/info/pressrel/release_template

BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, and Ministry of Forests, “Annual Compendium of Aquatic Rehabili- tation Projects for the Watershed Restoration Program, 1998-1999,” Watershed Restoration Project Report No. 13, 1999, Kootenay Region, pp. 4-1 to 4-3.

BC Min. of Env., Lands and Parks and Min. of Forests, “Akolkolex River Streambank Stabilization, Bioengineer- ing/Riparian Restoration and Surface Water Intake,” Kootenay Region, pp. 4-1 to 4-3.