L O CA L GOVERNMEN TS’ COMMI TTEE

Columbia River Treaty: Recommendations December 2013

The BC Columbia River Treaty Local Governments’ Committee (the Committee) has prepared these Recommendations in response to the Columbia River Treaty-related interests and issues raised by Columbia River Basin residents in Canada. These Recommendations are based on currently-available information. They have been submitted to the provincial and federal governments for incorporation into current decisions regarding the future of the Columbia River Treaty (CRT).

The Committee plans to monitor the BC, Canadian and U.S. CRT-related processes and be directly involved when appropriate. As new information becomes available, the Committee will review this information, seek input from Basin residents, and submit further recommendations to the provincial and federal governments, if needed.

The CRT Local Governments’ Committee will post its recommendations and other documents at www.akblg.ca/content/columbia-river-treaty.

For more information contact the Committee Chair, Deb Kozak ([email protected] 250 352-9383) or the Executive Director, Cindy Pearce ([email protected] 250 837-3966).

Background Beginning in 2024, either the U.S. or Canada can The Columbia River Treaty (Treaty) was ratified terminate substantial portions of the Treaty, by Canada and the United States (the U.S.) in with at least 10 years’ prior notice. Canada—via 1964, resulting in the construction of three the BC Provincial Government—and the U.S. are dams in Canada—Mica Dam north of both conducting reviews to consider whether to Revelstoke; Hugh Keenleyside Dam near continue, amend or terminate the Treaty. Castlegar; and Duncan Dam north of Kaslo—and Local governments within the Basin have Libby Dam near Libby, Montana. Since 1964 the formed the BC Columbia River Treaty Local Treaty has provided benefits for the Pacific Governments’ Committee (the Committee) to Northwest region in the U.S. and in BC. However, actively and meaningfully engage in decisions here in the Canadian portion of the Columbia around the future of the Treaty. Through the River Basin (the Basin)—the area that was most Committee, with support from Columbia Basin impacted by the Treaty—substantial sacrifices Trust (CBT), Basin local governments are were made by residents during the creation of working together to seek refinements to the the dams and reservoirs, and impacts continue Treaty and to address existing domestic issues as a result of hydro operations. to improve the quality of life for Basin residents.

LEARN MORE AT: www.akblg.ca/content/columbia-river-treaty

2 Recommendations

Respecting Our History forests, wildlife and fish, and related recreation experiences. Economic development in these The signing of the Treaty with the U.S. was a areas has been constrained by the loss of major historical milestone for the Province of valuable low-elevation lands and lack of BC. However, this agreement was signed efficient transportation. without consulting Basin residents or First Nations, and construction of the Treaty-related Some Basin communities feel that dams and the associated reservoirs had commitments that were made about the future massive social, economic and environmental development of infrastructure and economic impacts in this region, leaving deep wounds in opportunities were not delivered by the Basin communities. Our communities and First Province of BC. Some residents feel measures Nations’ communities continue to make to address the social, environmental and substantial sacrifices for the economic benefits economic impacts have not been adequate. that are enjoyed by the entire Province and These issues remain sources of hurt, anger and much of the U.S. Pacific Northwest. mistrust today. In our communities, approximately 2,300 While we remember and recognize this past people were displaced from their homes, often history, Basin residents and the Committee are without adequate or fair compensation, and looking to the future. We see the current more than a dozen small communities lost Provincial Columbia River Treaty Review as an their infrastructure, public spaces and way of opportunity to work collectively with the life. Many of these losses were a result of Province, First Nations, BC Hydro, other hydro- creating the Arrow Lakes, Duncan and electric facility operators and the U.S. Entity to Koocanusa Reservoirs. The industrial improve our quality of life in the Basin, and reservoirs created following the construction retain the benefits of a world-class treaty on of the Treaty-related dams, including the Columbia River. Revelstoke Dam, inundated approximately 120,000 hectares (300,000 acres/470 square Recommendations miles), including over 70,000 hectares The following recommendations are based on (173,000 acres/270 square miles) of lakes, the interests and issues that Basin residents rivers, wetlands, ponds, streams and riparian have said are important to them, and our areas, with related habitats for fish, wildlife, understanding of the currently-available waterfowl, birds and other species being information. affected. First Nations and our communities lost access to unspoiled wilderness, with

December 2013

Recommendations 3

impacts in both the Basin and the U.S., A. International Treaty resulting from the current Treaty The current focus of the BC and U.S. Treaty framework and any future changes, are Reviews is to decide whether BC or the U.S. Entity fully assessed as the basis for sound will recommend to the BC or U.S. governments decisions. respectively, that notice should be given to This must include a thorough assessment terminate the Treaty in 2024. Regardless of of benefits and impacts to Basin residents. whether the Treaty continues, is modified or is This information must be promptly terminated, the Province of BC, the Government of communicated to Basin residents, with Canada and BC Hydro as the Canadian Entity for adequate opportunities for meaningful the Treaty, must address the following priorities input to decisions. for Basin communities, listed here with no priority ranking intended. A current concern of Basin residents is the U.S. expectation of additional water flows Process during the spring and summer. The Committee requests that the Province 1. Local Government Status in International assess the benefits/impacts of this Discussions: To avoid repeating the expectation on Basin interests, then secure unfortunate legacy that resulted in Basin input from Basin residents to incorporate residents not being consulted before the into any decisions regarding this U.S. Treaty was signed, we strongly recommend, in expectation. addition to ongoing input from Basin residents, that local governments and First Nations from Treaty Content within the Canadian Columbia Basin, be directly involved in all international 4. Reduce Negative Impacts to the Basin: discussions regarding the Treaty through: a) a Basin residents strongly support options “guidance team” with representatives from that reduce the current negative impacts both local governments and First Nations, and related to the Treaty. We caution the b) representatives of local governments and Province and Canada against considering First Nations holding observer status. In our Treaty options or hydro system view, the Province would benefit greatly by operations that result in further negative bringing the knowledge of Basin residents impacts in the Basin—our communities directly into these discussions. and residents cannot accept more negative impacts. 2. Continued Engagement with Basin Residents: The interests of Basin residents 5. Equitable Benefit-Sharing: We believe must be incorporated in the ongoing the Downstream Power Benefits provision discussions and decisions related to the Treaty of the Treaty should continue to reflect the by the Province of BC and Canada. New full value of incremental power generation information must be shared promptly with at U.S. facilities as a result of Canadian Basin residents and there must be storage. In addition, we believe the U.S. opportunities for residents in affected areas to receives additional incremental economic fully understand any potential benefits and benefits from Canadian water storage in impacts, and to provide meaningful input to the form of tourism, recreation, any decisions. Basin residents want to receive navigation, ecosystems, and potentially regular public updates about the status of agriculture, which were not accounted for these discussions and decisions. in the original negotiation of the Treaty and should be accounted for now. The U.S. 3. Assess Benefits and Impacts: Throughout should share these benefits equitably with this process it is essential that the benefits and BC.

December 2013

4 Recommendations

It is essential that the Basin receives an the U.S. have not yet reached agreement on equitable share of the benefits to address the how this type of flood management will be ongoing negative impacts of reservoir implemented. In the Committee’s view, operations in this region. The Committee will implementing a carefully-coordinated explore mechanisms to ensure the Basin annual flood management approach has the receives its fair share of benefits. greatest potential to meet Basin interests in flood risk management, as well as the greatest mutual benefit for the U.S. We urge 6. Expand the Focus of the Treaty to Include the Province to seek an agreement for a new Ecosystems and Other Interests: The flood risk management approach through Committee urges the Province to seek the Treaty that maximizes benefits and refinements to the Treaty and/or the supporting minimizes negative impacts to the interests documents that provide for operations, which of Basin residents. Within any agreement, benefit a broad range of interests in this region the Committee asks the Province to ensure and in the U.S. As an initial priority, Basin the definition of “economic losses” under residents support incorporation of ecosystem “Called Upon” operations includes impacts function as a first-order value within the Treaty, on private property, public infrastructure, along with flood control and power production. communities and regional resources. Many Basin residents view a healthy environment as the foundation for economic and The Committee will continue to urge local social well-being in the Basin. governments in the Basin to do what they The Committee expects the Province to continue can to reduce flood risk, and we will to work with Basin residents to model and encourage our local government colleagues explore scenarios that improve ecosystem in the U.S. to address flood risks in their function and support restoration to offset past, respective areas. and any future impacts from dam construction and reservoir operations. 8. Canadian Input to Libby Dam Operations: The Province must bring Libby Dam fully 7. Flood Risk Management: Under the current into the Treaty so that it is managed as the Treaty, in 2024 the existing Assured Annual Committee recommends for other Treaty Flood Control Agreement expires and flood risk dams—for power generation, flood control, management requirements shift to a different ecosystem functions and other interests. approach described as “Called Upon.” Canada and This management needs to include a formal

December 2013

Recommendations 5

mechanism to ensure Canadian interests passionate about returning salmon to the are meaningfully incorporated in Columbia River in Canada. We strongly operational decisions at Libby Dam, as U.S. support agencies and First Nations/Tribes interests are accounted for in the operation on both sides of the border exploring the of the Canadian Treaty dams. As well, a technical and financial feasibility of compensation mechanism, paid for by returning salmon to their historic ranges in those who benefit, is needed to address the the Canadian portion of the Columbia River. negative impacts in Canada from Libby The Committee believes each country Dam operations, such as reductions in fish should take responsibility for restoration and wildlife habitat, floating debris, dust activities in their jurisdiction. storms and economic damage to property and infrastructure from fluctuating water B. Domestic Issues levels, including damage to dikes in the Many of the concerns we have heard from Basin Creston area. residents relate to the ongoing operations of dams and reservoirs in the region. We invite the 9. Power Generation: Basin residents Province and BC Hydro to work collaboratively support the continued supply of reliable with local governments, CBT and others to hydropower from Treaty-related facilities identify and implement practical, effective in the Basin. Any future Treaty-related solutions to the issues below in a timely manner. decisions must ensure that CBT-owned power facilities are not negatively impacted 1. Mitigate and/or Compensate for as these facilities create the funds for CBT Negative Impacts in the BC Basin: The programs that enhance Basin well-being. Treaty is clear that each country is responsible for addressing impacts in their 10. Continue Treaty Rights to Water Use in own jurisdiction. The Committee BC: Existing Treaty rights for Canadian appreciates the Province’s willingness to interests to withdraw water from the continue to work with local governments, Columbia River system for “domestic uses,” CBT, and Basin residents to identify and including irrigation, industrial and then mitigate or compensate, in ways that municipal use, must be maintained. These are acceptable to Basin residents, for rights will continue to be exercised current negative impacts from Treaty- consistent with BC legislation and policy. related dam construction and operation. If changes to the Treaty result in additional 11. Integrate Climate Change: We strongly negative impacts to the Basin, beyond support the continued incorporation of current operations, a clear compensation climate change-related information— model must be implemented to address particularly projected increases in extreme these impacts. events and changes in stream flows resulting in more frequent, deeper 2. Community Economic Development: The droughts—into international hydro system creation of the Treaty reservoirs impacted planning and operations. Any Treaty local economies through loss of settlement negotiations must include this critical lands, fertile agriculture lands, productive factor, creating a flexible, adaptable Treaty forests and recreation/tourism framework that is resilient to changing opportunities, along with related loss of conditions. potential local tax revenues. Economic development is further hampered on an 12. Pursue Salmon Restoration: First ongoing basis by dust storms, navigation Nations and other Basin residents are safety hazards, erosion, expensive roads

December 2013

6 Recommendations

along the edges of reservoirs, ferries rather Libby Dam in the U.S. BC does not have than fixed links, and unsightly mudflats. The jurisdiction over this dam and a fish and communities most impacted by these wildlife compensation program has not been conditions will continue to work with CBT to established to address the historical identify and implement feasible economic footprint impacts of the Koocanusa opportunities. However, the Committee Reservoir in Canada. Compensation expects the provincial and federal governments programs exist for the Canadian Treaty to enforce relevant legislation to avoid further dams in the rest of the Columbia River degradation of the environment, and expedite system. In March 2013, CBT approved one- assistance and necessary approvals for feasible time funding of $3 million (CDN) to establish community economic development initiatives, the East Kootenay-Koocanusa Fish and recognizing the sacrifices our communities Wildlife Program in partnership with the have made for the benefits that are enjoyed by Province and BC Hydro. The Committee the Province and the U.S. looks to the Province to ensure that adequate funding is in place for an ongoing With regard to the fertile agriculture lands that annual program to fully address the were flooded by the Arrow Lakes and footprint impacts in Canada from Libby Koocanusa Reservoirs, the Committee has not Dam. been able to verify the Treaty impacts on the agriculture sector from the available 5. A Water Management Process for the information. We request that the Province Kootenay River: Residents with interests in complete a study to document the impacts to the Kootenay River system in Canada have agriculture in these affected areas so Basin told us they have no clear way of residents can assess whether some form of understanding if and how their interests are agricultural mitigation or compensation is taken into account in operational decisions warranted. about water management in this system. The Committee expects the Province of BC, 3. Meaningful Ongoing Engagement of Basin and all Canadian operators on the Kootenay Residents: Decisions about the operation of River system, to work together to hydro facilities in the Basin impact many Basin collectively initiate a process similar to a residents on a day-to-day basis. Many residents water use plan for the Kootenay River have told us they want to know more about the system to better understand how hydro system and these decisions, and to be involved operations benefit or impact the full range of in these decisions on an ongoing basis. The interests, and to address the impacts. Committee urges the Province to direct BC Hydro to establish some form of long-term 6. Full Implementation of the Columbia and engagement with Basin residents that supports Duncan Water Use Plans: In BC, the meaningful participation in decisions about purpose of Water Use Plans (WUPs) is to hydro operations. To be credible, effective and understand public values and to develop a meaningful, the approach must be transparent, preferred operating strategy through a equitable across the Basin, skillfully-facilitated multi-stakeholder consultative process. and adequately resourced. The Committee is WUPs were approved in 2007 for the dams available to provide advice on this essential along the Columbia River, and Duncan Dam. aspect of successful hydro facility operations in Near the conclusion of the Columbia WUP the Basin. process, all members of the WUP Consultative Committee (CC) who were 4. East Kootenay-Koocanusa Fish and Wildlife present during the final voting process Restoration and Conservation: Koocanusa either endorsed or accepted the overall Reservoir was created by the construction of

December 2013

Recommendations 7

package of WUP recommendations, domestic issues identified by Basin residents. however, some CC members remained Swift, proactive and thoughtful response to concerned that, in their view, the WUP these recommendations is one of the primary results did not fully address the issues and opportunities for the Province, BC Hydro and concerns they had raised. other hydroelectric facility operators, to build trust and goodwill with Basin communities as Basin residents have the following concerns we move forward together to refine the about the implementation of these WUPs: Treaty and address outstanding issues. delays in implementation, difficulty accessing information about implementation Basin residents are concerned about whether and lack of ongoing involvement in plan the Province will act on the commitments it implementation and decisions. There are has made during the Treaty Review and also challenges to accessing reservoirs in address any impacts arising from changes to some locations due to inadequate boat the Treaty in the future. The Committee ramps and poorly maintained roads. These strongly supports the Provincial Treaty issues must be more effectively dealt with Review Team continuing beyond its current under the WUP process. December 2013 mandate to signal the importance of this initiative. The Committee Effective implementation of WUPs is one of will continue to work with the Review Team the primary opportunities for the Province and others to seek solutions to the identified and BC Hydro to build trust and goodwill domestic issues, as a priority. We will also with Basin communities following the legacy monitor BC, Canadian and U.S. processes of negative impacts from the Treaty. The related to the Treaty, and become involved Committee asks the Province to direct BC when appropriate. Hydro to proactively address these concerns regarding WUP implementation, in order to By working together, within the Basin, with begin to build a foundation of trust and the Province, and internationally, with all goodwill. governments, hydroelectric facility operators, 7. Columbia Fish and Wildlife interest groups and residents, we believe it is Compensation Program: Basin residents possible to refine the Columbia River Treaty have expressed concerns about the limited and related documents to enhance this budget and allocation of funds within the agreement, and to address the existing Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program – domestic issues to improve the quality of life Columbia. The Committee needs more for Basin residents. We believe this can be information before it can make done while expanding the benefits to others. recommendations on this topic. This will be As local governments, we plan to continue to a priority for the Committee to research in work together to achieve this vision. 2014.

Continued Role in Treaty-Related Decisions Local governments across the Basin are committed to continuing to advise the Province on Treaty-related decisions, and to work with the Province and others to pursue solutions to

December 2013