The committee met at 8:32 a.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): Good morning, everyone. My name is Bob D’Eith. I’m the MLA for Maple Ridge–Mission and the Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services. The select standing committee is a committee of the Legislative Assembly that includes MLAs from the government and opposition parties.

I’d like to acknowledge that I’m joining you today from the territories of the Katzie and Kwantlen First Nations.

I’d also like to welcome everyone listening to and participating in the virtual public hearings for Budget 2021 consultations. The committee, of course, typically visits communities around the province to hear from British Columbians about their priorities for the next budget. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, all public hearings are being held virtually this year.

Our consultation is based on the Minister of Finance’s budget consultation paper that was released on June 1. We invite all British Columbians to participate by making a written submission or by filling out our online survey. The details for that are on the website at bcleg.ca/fgsbudget. The consultation closes at 5 p.m. on Friday, June 26, 2020.

We will carefully consider all of the input to make recommendations to the Legislative Assembly on what should be in Budget 2021. The committee intends to release its report sometime in August.

As far as format, presenters are being organized into small panels by theme. We’re finishing off the week with some environmentally related topics. This morning will include panels on invasive species, fish and wildlife, parks and recreation, and water.

Each presenter has five minutes for their presentation. Following presentations from all panellists, there will be time for questions from committee members. We request, please, that you keep your comments to five minutes.

Today’s meeting is being recorded and transcribed. All audio from our meetings is broadcast live via our website, and a complete transcript will be posted.

Now I’d like to take a moment to allow the members to introduce themselves. We’ll start with Ronna-Rae.

R. Leonard: Good morning, everyone. I’m Ronna-Rae Leonard, the MLA for Courtenay-Comox.

I’m sitting here in the traditional territories of the K’ómoks First Nation.

[8:35 a.m.]

M. Dean: Good morning, everyone. I’m Mitzi Dean. I’m the MLA for Esquimalt-Metchosin.

I’m honoured and privileged to be speaking to you today from the traditional territory of the Songhees, Esquimalt and Scia’new Nations.

D. Barnett: Good morning. I’m Donna Barnett. I’m the MLA for Cariboo-Chilcotin.

N. Simons: Good morning. I’m Nicholas Simons. I represent Powell River–Sunshine Coast.

I am coming to you today from Tla’amin territory.

D. Clovechok (Deputy Chair): Good morning, everybody. Good morning from the Kootenays. I’m Doug Clove­chok, the MLA for Columbia River–Revelstoke.

I’m sitting today on the shared territories of the Shuswap and Ktunaxa people.

I want to say good morning to one of my favourite constituents — that would be Robyn — and one of my pet projects that she’s got. I’m looking forward to your presentation.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Wonderful. Assisting us today are Susan Sourial and Stephanie Raymond from the Parliamentary Committees Office and Billy Young from Han­sard Services, who are making all of this happen.

First up we have our witnesses. So Robyn Hooper from Columbia Shuswap Invasive Species Society.

Robyn, please go ahead.

Budget Consultation Presentations
Panel 1 – Invasive Species

COLUMBIA SHUSWAP
INVASIVE SPECIES SOCIETY

R. Hooper: Thank you very much for having me. My name is Robyn Hooper.

I’m coming to you from Revelstoke, the traditional territory of the Secwépemc, the Ktunaxa, the Syilx and the Sinixt.

It’s very nice to see you all here in this virtual format.

I’m the executive director of the Columbia Shuswap Invasive Species Society. As a witness to the B.C. budget review, I have some key messages to present on behalf of our board of directors, our staff and our partners.

Firstly, we would like to call for increased, long-term, stable funding to support CSISS and other regional invasive species programs, including aquatic, plant and other invasive species. An investment of over $15 million annually is recommended. Our regional land and water resources are threatened by a number of invasive species, including zebra and quagga mussels, and we require financial support for our regional education programs.

We were grateful to receive a long-term provincial grant for coordination and awareness activities in the past two years, but this year funding was received as a one-year grant only. Whenever possible, long-term grants allow for greater stability and planning as not-for-profits. As well, we are able to leverage our funding significantly.

The second key message we have is that we need the province to provide leadership in implementing the invasive species strategy for B.C. The invasive species strategy for B.C. must be strengthened, updated and implemented. This includes an updated B.C. Weed Control Act regulation and a new invasive species act that prohibits the sale of invasive species and includes enforcement. This was recommended in the report to the budget in the 2017, 2018 and 2019 consultations, as well as in 2016, 2013 and 2014. So every year for the last six years.

This key message continues to be recommended, and we have yet to see action on creating this new regulation, which is key to the management of invasive species in B.C.

Finally, our last key message is to close high-risk pathways that introduce and spread invasive species, such as the pet and aquarium trade, horticultural trade, boating and water recreation, recreation and tourism transport. In particular, invasive mussels are the number one threat to B.C. in terms of invasive species. All watercraft from outside B.C. should be required to be inspected to prevent this emergency threat to B.C.’s water bodies and infrastructure. A lot of work has been put into this already.

Additionally, prevention and immediate investment avoid perpetual, ongoing costs of invasive species. With over 94 percent Crown land, government needs to increase investment and enrich partnerships that will fiscally leverage non-government funds.

Invasive species cost the B.C. government, landowners and industries and create a loss of revenue. Investment in prevention through educational programs and control results in net cost savings for government. Regional not-for-profit societies such as CSISS are able to leverage funding sources, as I mentioned.

CSISS and the other regional invasive species groups are poised to adapt and work through the pandemic situation with on-the-ground vegetation management programs and creative online outreach mediums.

I thank you for your time and consideration of our presentation. I’m happy to answer any questions.

I see I have a little bit more time. So I’ll just say that my colleagues that are also on the panel today have a number of other key messages that we support. We have communicated on our key messages across the province and are aligned in these messages.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, Robyn.

Kendal Benesh from East Kootenay Invasive Species Council, please go ahead.

EAST KOOTENAY
INVASIVE SPECIES COUNCIL

K. Benesh: Thank you, Robyn.

Good morning, everybody.

I am joining you from the East Kootenay region, which is the traditional territory of the Ktunaxa and the Shuswap First Nations.

[8:40 a.m.]

I am the program manager for the East Kootenay Invasive Species Council. We are one of the 13 regional invasive species organizations, two of which are here today, along with the Invasive Species Council, that work to educate, prevent, coordinate and foster expanded support for the control of invasive species in B.C.

Thank you for providing the opportunity for me and my colleagues to present to you this morning. We’re really happy to be here.

Invasive species are widely acknowledged as causing varying degrees of social, environmental and economic impacts across the globe. For example, invasive species are recognized as the second-largest threat to biodiversity after habitat loss. Agricultural weeds alone account for the greatest economic impact of all known pests, and they not only threaten forage availability on rangelands, like the species spotted knapweed or blueweed that we’ve been fighting for a while here, but can also be toxic to livestock and wildlife — for example, hoary alyssum or leafy spurge.

We currently also receive government funding from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Environment, through B.C. Parks, but we also work tirelessly to secure funding from private industry, conservation organizations and granting agencies to increase support for invasive species management and outreach across the region.

For example, in 2019, we secured over $900,000 in revenues to work toward fulfilling our mission, and almost half of that was provided by non-provincial agencies. We share the concerns of the other organizations on this panel. To reiterate some of the messages that Robyn put forward, we have the following key messages to put forward.

First, increased and continued investment is essential to avoid the perpetual ongoing cost of invasive species management. Without multi-year commitments and plans, we risk losing our previous investments on the landscape and further harm to our environment. The majority of the land base in B.C. does belong to the Crown or is public land, and the government should increase investment as a basic level of stewardship to support prevention, monitoring and response, and to address all invasive species, not just invasive plants and invasive mussels.

We also recommend that funding is in place to respond to natural disasters to ensure immediate monitoring, treatment and restoration, which can, again, help reduce long-term costs from invasive species infestations.

Next, provide leadership and implementing of the invasive species strategy for B.C. Although agencies such as ourselves can gather public support and leverage funds for more comprehensive education or treatments, we don’t have the authority to administer the Weed Control Act or bring about enforcement actions. As mentioned, we need an updated B.C. Weed Control Act regulation and a new invasive species act that prohibits the sale of invasive species and covers all species, not just plants and animals.

We would also like to see increased enforcement by government to ensure that land occupiers, including the provincial government, are in compliance with existing and upcoming regulations and legislation.

Finally, better manage high-risk pathways that introduce and spread invasive species. Closing or better managing pathways is vital to avoid new invasive species introductions and ongoing management costs. For example, the pet and aquarium trade, the horticultural trade and recreational activities are still major vectors for the introduction and spread of new and existing invasive species. This doesn’t mean totally preventing that activity but controlling key factors that introduce their introduction.

Finally, I would just like to add that invasive species are certainly an issue that affects all British Columbians, one that will require durable and adequate funding for ongoing prevention and management across public and private lands. Investing in invasive species management is crucial in supporting the industries that our regional economy and residents rely on. This, of course, includes agriculture but also forestry, recreation, tourism and more.

Finally, as Robyn mentioned as well, we’re ready to adapt and deliver invasive plant management within the new health and economic landscape. Throughout this pandemic, we’ve been able to keep our core staff employed full-time, support our contractors with fee-for-service work and have been able to hire two summer positions throughout the end of August.

I thank you for this time and the opportunity to put forward our concerns. As well, I’m open to any questions.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, Kendal.

Next up we have Barb Stewart from Boundary Invasive Species Society.

Please go ahead, Barb.

BOUNDARY INVASIVE SPECIES SOCIETY

B. Stewart: Good morning, Mr. Chair and standing committee members. I’m the program manager with the Boundary Invasive Species Society, joining you today from Rock Creek, B.C., which is a very small community in southern B.C., and sitting in the traditional territory of Syilx Nation.

[8:45 a.m.]

You may remember me presenting last year, jointly with the Okanagan and Similkameen Invasive Species Society, about invasive species concerns. As you’ve heard, many of the different regional groups work very closely together. Our concerns include invasive plants that reduce forage for cattle and range clients and affect flood and fire. Down in the south, we’ve been highly affected by flood and fire in the last few years. We’ve spoken on identifying gaps in legislation and the need to prevent introduction of invasive zebra and quagga mussels. These concerns are shared across the province, as you’ve heard this morning.

The last two years we spoke, you listened. You provided a very impressive summary on invasive species in the report last year. We thank you for doing that. Over the past two years, we have placed importance on responding to areas that have been disturbed by floods and fires and issues of uncontrolled invasive plants along recreation trails and resource roads. In the 2019 report, you concluded, on page 1, that the invasive species represented a significant threat to the province’s ecosystem and economy. You stressed the urgency of addressing this issue.

I ask you now to refer to the handout which we have provided which lists the recommendations which were also mentioned by the Columbia Shuswap group over the last six years. They state that invasive species are a critical issue requiring aggressive, urgent action and strongly urge government to make this a priority. Under the recommendation, you recommend establishing a single invasive species act and providing robust funding for education, prevention, monitoring, response and enforcement, including streamlining regulation to better monitor and manage high-risk pathways.

So where are we at? I mean, there’s a list of…. This has been brought up so many years. We have a Weed Control Act that’s too archaic to update. The province hasn’t put in any new legislation that’s been asked for at least the last 12 years. We need invasive species legislation to prevent the sale of invasive garden plants.

There are insufficient resources in the ministry budget. The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations manages over 80 percent of the land base, and their staff struggle to find funds. They often rely on fiscal year-end funds, which is what happened this year. It’s great that you guys were able to provide that, but when it’s inconsistent funding or just each year — and you don’t really know what’s coming — it makes it very difficult to deliver.

Down here we’re experiencing more floods and fires. With no dedicated funding for the response programs to deal with invasives, it’s like invasives are…. They put out the fire, or they put up all of their sandbags and do all of that, and then they think of invasives later. Meanwhile we already have big problems on the land base as a result of these events.

Recreation trails are overrun with invasive plants. This has become a real concern for the ag producers in our area. There’s one rancher who estimates that his annual income loss, if the weed hoary alyssum gets into his hayfields, will be over $80,000 a year for that single farmer. That’s a pretty significant impact on agriculture adjacent to recreation trails. This is something that needs to be dealt with by the province. The role of government and legal responsibility is for you to control designated noxious weeds and to protect ecosystems and agricultural land.

Where’s the government’s action on this? I mean, it just doesn’t seem to be happening. There are many gaps on prevention specific to mussels, which you’ve heard from the Columbia Shuswap group. These invasive species do not recognize boundaries and are moving fast. It’s imperative that partnerships are strengthened and augmented to do more. We have many stories of success, but we could do so much more with additional funding — dealing with the new normal, which is what we’re definitely experiencing as a result of climate change.

We really want to see you guys put in legislation and adequately fund and resource the implementation of that legislation. There needs to be an investment into on-the-ground treatment to address declining range forage, which seems to have not been a priority with the province for a very long time. Also management of recreation trails seems to be an afterthought. You need to provide dedicated funding to address effective rehab post-fire and -flood — there’s talk that it happens, but it’s not actually happening on the ground — and ensure action is taken to prevent introduction and establishment of these species.

We understand that lots of funds have been redirected to COVID. We totally understand that this year. If we don’t continue to invest in this, we will lose ground, and it will cost more later.

Thank you for your time and listening to our concerns. We’re open to questions after.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, Barb.

Next up we have Gail Wallin from Invasive Species Council of British Columbia.

Please go ahead, Gail.

INVASIVE SPECIES COUNCIL OF B.C.

G. Wallin: Again, thank you for the time and opportunity to be here.

[8:50 a.m.]

I’m with the Invasive Species Council, which is a provincial organization. We work in partnerships with many of the people you have on the phone today and others. We’re actually the largest and oldest provincial organization in Canada dedicated to invasive species, and both our organization and your government are actually seen as a lead in Canada. I think that’s something we should be proud of.

Our organization is actually modelled on a three-chamber board. We have, on our board, governments, which include provincial, federal, local and Indigenous, along with business and industry and community groups. So we have a diverse board, and that reflects the kind of work that we do.

A lot of our work we do through partnerships. As was said already, invasive species don’t respect boundaries. We were set up as…. It was actually a call from the Cariboo — MLA Barnett came out of this region — to approach invasive species differently than in the past. It called for that collaboration.

Today our council…. Besides our board structure, we work with a number of networks. We work with an Indigenous invasive species network. We work with a local government invasive species network. We work with the affiliates of eight different regional organizations across the province. We work with a wide range of provincial organizations. We’ve been working with the B.C. Wildlife Federation, the B.C. Cattlemen’s, the B.C. Landscape and Nursery Association, the Outdoor Recreation Council and a number of forest companies. Those are people that we’re partnering with to deliver programs.

I’m not going to repeat some of the messages you’ve heard already. I’ll just try to augment some of them. But definitely the impacts are big. In your budget consultation papers, environment is not high, so that will be responses you’ll be getting back from a number of organizations, including us. But recognizing that the impact on species at risk — which is actually an important one for our province because we have a high number of species at risk in addition to our biodiversity — is really important.

Economics. Barb has spoken to the agriculture side, but it has a huge economic…. Also, local governments. People are sometimes focused on mussels, but there’s a number of other species that are costing us in our local governments, whether you’re rural or urban. They’re costing us in the forestry world. They’re costing us in the parks world. So invasive species are actually a really amazing opportunity to work cross-sector with so many different organizations.

I want to go back and pull out a number of recommendations that our council has identified, definitely building on the invasive species strategy. It was released by two of your ministers in 2017, the Minister of Forests and the Minister of Environment. It’s definitely calling for some action which has been referred to by the previous speakers. Those need to be enforced.

The idea of multi-year, stable funding is vital. The minimum, working with the provincial government, would be $15 million a year — not just to government but to partner with organizations like ourselves.

The second thing is investing in an invasive species trust fund, which was identified in all three provincial strategies. That’s meant to have a $10 million trust fund. When the funds aren’t there at fiscal year-end or whatever and you get the new Asian giant hornet or the new northern snakehead fish, there’s actually an opportunity to respond or to do some enhanced work. Those are a couple of things.

I actually definitely want to move on to responding to COVID. In 2008, with the economic downturn at that time, invasive species was an ideal place to invest in because it provided employment in all sorts of corners of British Columbia. It actually responded to increasing our inventory and improved our infrastructure. So today, in COVID-19, we’re actually working with the provincial and federal governments to find those provincewide programs that can be delivered to create the same thing. There are opportunities for you to meet your economic goals, employment goals and infrastructure goals by looking at invasive species.

When you look at some of the key areas that have been impacted by COVID — agriculture, recreation, parks, tourism — those are all places that we can create employment in and make a difference on the ground in those communities. When you take a look at agriculture, there are all sorts of employment opportunities now for agriculture, and we need you to take a look at it from an invasive species lens.

I just wanted to add in one other thing. Most invasive species today are reported or first found by citizens. Whether it’s the Asian giant hornet, the northern snakehead fish or feral pigs, those are coming in to us by citizens. So we’re calling on the provincial government to partner with organizations like ourselves to engage citizens to report and take action in their local communities. Right now, with people working from home, we have way more opportunity to engage them.

Again, thank you for your time. We look forward to your questions and definitely looking to the provincial government to be the leaders and even stronger leaders in Canada than you are recognized for now. So thank you.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much. Yes, as you’ve mentioned, in the previous years of the committee, we’ve looked at this issue in great detail, and we appreciate all of the continued advocacy that you have.

First up we have Donna Barnett.

Please go ahead, Donna.

[8:55 a.m.]

D. Barnett: Good morning, Gail.

It’s an issue that, as Gail said, needs better attention. I’ve spent, I guess, the last 11 years working with Gail, and she’s done amazing work. A lot of work was done over the years, as Gail said, with different programs, like the jobs and training program. I even got to go pick weeds with her.

This program, to me, needs full support. If we don’t take care of the landscape, because of the fires and floods…. I live with them too. What is happening to our ranchers, to our trails, to our foreshore and to all the landscape out there — we need to deal with immediately.

Girls, you have my full support. I thank you for everything you do.

M. Dean: Thank you for all of your work and for your presentations today.

I was actually out in a park close to my house last Friday having a look at invasive species in our native forests here in my community. What I learned about was the problem of the different levels of government. Between the province, the regional and the municipal levels of authority, there was a challenge in identifying really localized priorities. So it was actually really difficult to be able to tackle some invasive species in certain parks and areas of the municipality that I live in.

I was just wondering if somebody — it’s probably Gail — could comment on how you would vision moving forward in terms of making sure that we actually prioritize and direct the resources in a provincial way but also to be able to tackle really local areas of concern as well.

G. Wallin: You’re right. Our province is big, and the issues in the north are very different than the issues in the south. Definitely, in the south, there are way more invasive species issues currently. As we expect climates to warm, we’ll expect those species to spread north. So you’re right.

There’s a challenge even within the provincial government. How are the priorities set? Are they set at a provincial level? How do they reflect those local issues? How do they reflect that local issue that’s got a specialized habitat or a specialized species at risk?

A number of people have called on different regulations, and that’s definitely key. The current regulations are outdated. They have different lists. Like, invasive plants are listed across three different regulations.

Local government has one tool. Not all local governments use a community charter as a way to identify local priority species for that area. There are existing tools that enable local prioritization, but there needs to be a better, consistent approach, which is why we’ve got the Local Government Invasive Species Network working with us and provincial government to try to address some of those gaps. But a different outcome is….

We need different provincial regulation. We need local communities to adapt and use the community charter powers that they have already. But we need the provincial government to recognize that it’s not one cut fits all, because it will vary hugely from your area to the Peace.

R. Hooper: Can I add something in?

I think there’s a role here to play, as well, with our regional societies. Our regional groups include diverse board members, board directors that include local governments, different provincial agencies, community groups. Some of the work that we do is, annually, bring together land managers and talk about local regional priorities. So I really see regional groups as a great way to bring together those different groups to talk about the local regional priorities.

As Gail mentioned, in terms of enforcement and legislation, doing some work to empower local governments and regional governments with enforcement capabilities is also important.

I also just want to recognize that our local municipalities in rural B.C. don’t have the capacity. They don’t have the budget and the staff to do any work on invasive species, which is why they partner with the regional groups such as CSISS and some of these other groups to help them with invasive species management. So I see our role here on local priorities, as well, within the regional societies.

R. Leonard: Thank you, everyone, for your presentations. It’s good to have you back.

Gail, in your background — is that some knotweed?

G. Wallin: That is some knotweed. It’s now dead, but it’s still knotweed, yeah.

R. Leonard: I’m glad to hear that it’s gone, if you say it’s dead.

That was my favourite project when I worked on invasive species. I had a goat project to manage. It was pretty cool.

[9:00 a.m.]

Anyway, you say you want $15 million. I wanted to know what kind of figure you’re working with in this past year and if you can monetize and share the value of volunteerism within your sector, just so I can get a sense of the engagement in communities throughout B.C. on this matter.

G. Wallin: I’ll start off on the $15 million. Others might want to add to it. The $15 million has come to us from the provincial government. We said: “What kind of funding do we need, from your perspective, to address invasive species?” The number is at least $15 million, part of which would be spent within government and part of which they would invest with partners like ourselves and others in doing work.

The recent numbers of…. I’m actually just waiting for the provincial government to give me their last year, but it’s usually in the seven-to-ten range. Sometimes that number is bumped up on a fiscal year-end investment. I’m waiting for the final numbers, but it’s usually in the seven-to-nine range that they’re budgeting annually.

It’s been particularly focused on invasive plants and now mussels, but there are a lot of other species that fall through the crack. Common wall lizards — half a million down in lower Vancouver Island and no program on it at all. So those are the kinds of things that need to be addressed.

Volunteerism. The others might want to add to this. Generally, we say investment with non-government like ourselves — that we leverage about four to five times. Because of that, we’re finding other funding from private sources, federal government, local governments, etc., and adding in volunteerism. Normally it’s about a 5-to-1 ratio. We’re just verifying that. But those are ballparks to go with.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thanks, Gail.

Did anyone else want to comment on that?

D. Clovechok (Deputy Chair): I thank each and every one of you for the work that you’re doing. It’s incredibly important. I want to reflect what Donna said as well. It’s a tsunami that’s coming our way. It’s already here. I just want to thank you for that.

I know that out here in the Kootenays, it’s not just mussels, but it’s agriculture. I thank Barb for mentioning agriculture. We have ranching communities out here, and I hear about that all the time.

I’m just really interested. What kind of skin in the game do the feds have in terms of support for you folks?

G. Wallin: I’ll start off with this. Officially, they don’t have a big cash investment in British Columbia. They’ve actually increased some federal staffing in B.C., like through DFO. That’s new. But the cash investment for invasive species outside the federal agency is actually quite low. It has actually grown in the last couple of years because of some the job creation programs they’ve had, but it has never focused on invasives. It’s always taking a youth training program and converting it into invasive.

There’s definitely a call on, and this is an ideal time in the COVID world, because in 2008, the federal government was a 60 percent to 70 percent partner with the provincial government, with you being the smaller part. That brought in millions of dollars into British Columbia. I think it’s an ideal time as they look at western diversifi­cation. They look at Environment Canada to invest in the west and in invasive species.

So low. Somebody else can add, but it would be…. From the knowledge that we have, the investments would be, I’m going to say, below $2 million for outside partners. We’d have more money for staffing internally.

B. Stewart: I was just going to add that the federal government…. They have a role, I think, with the detection of new species coming into B.C., through the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and that type of thing.

When it comes to the land management, that’s a provincial responsibility. So I think the fact is that the feds invest less because they’re more dealing with the borders, which is a super important thing, especially with mussels and with new species coming in that could affect crops and stuff. But it’s a different perspective than the actual on-the-ground management that we’re dealing with in the province.

R. Hooper: I was just going to add that we spoke as a witness to the federal aquatic invasive species review last spring. The report detailed how so much of DFO’s funds are spent in eastern Canada on Asian carp and eel and a very tiny amount spent in the west. As Gail said, there are some funds that moved west, but that seems to have gone to staff. We haven’t seen much action really happening here regionally.

I feel like if there is an area for the feds to be involved, it would be in invasive mussels, protecting our borders. It is a federal issue, as there are invasive mussels in eastern Canada but not in western Canada. Because of their role in terms of land management, like on the ground, the waterways is an area where they could maybe be involved.

[9:05 a.m.]

D. Clovechok (Deputy Chair): Again, I just want to thank you guys for your work. You know that you have a real advocate in this MLA. I’m going to be doing that for you. Thank you so much.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. I also wanted to recognize that MLA Rich Coleman has joined the committee.

Any other questions from members? Okay.

I wanted to also thank you very much. While we would much rather be seeing you in person, one of the nice things about this format is that we can interact and hear all of you together, which is actually really impactful. I really appreciate everything you’re doing for the province and appreciate your comments around the COVID-19 and the pandemic and its impact. Interesting to hear there is an opportunity that comes out of crisis.

Thanks for that, Gail.

Thanks, everybody.

With that, let’s take a short recess, and we’ll be back at 9:15.

The committee recessed from 9:06 a.m. to 9:15 a.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): Welcome back to the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services. Welcome, presenters.

Next up we have Lina Azeez from the Watershed Watch Salmon Society.

Please go ahead, Lina.

Budget Consultation Presentations
Panel 2 – Fish and Wildlife

WATERSHED WATCH SALMON SOCIETY

L. Azeez: Hello, everyone. Good morning. My name is Lina Azeez, and I work for the Watershed Watch Salmon Society as the lead on our initiatives to improve flood control and the salmon habitat in the Lower Fraser.

I’m joining you today from the city of Vancouver on the unceded territories of the Musqueam, Tsleil-Waututh and Squamish Nations, where salmon habitats have been decimated.

I see it as my responsibility to do what I can, where I can, to improve this habitat and bring back this important fish.

I am here today to highlight the historic opportunity we have to restore and protect wild Pacific salmon while ensuring that lower Fraser communities are protected from flooding and climate change impacts. We already know that costly infrastructure upgrades are required to address flooding in many B.C. communities. We are also aware that current flood control structures — those are dikes, floodgates and pumps — are aging, undersized for climate change and blocking salmon access to important former habitats.

We have lost over 1,500 kilometres of salmon habitat in the Lower Fraser River floodplain alone, which are impacted by these flood control structures. Nature-based flood control solutions that provide both flood protection and fish passage are currently not required by regulators or by funding programs for upgrades of the existing structures, even though they are well proven to be effective. In fact, these win-win solutions provide excellent return on investment and can make our communities even safer from flooding but are severely underfunded here in B.C.

Funding should be directed to high-priority regions such as the Lower Fraser, where project sites have already been identified. I’ll speak briefly to one example of a worthy project to fund. The Resilient Waters project, which is funded through the B.C. salmon restoration and innovation fund, is conducting a comprehensive study of flood infrastructure sites in the Lower Mainland. The plan is to identify sites to improve flood mitigation while also improving fish passage and habitat.

From an initial list of over 150 sites, they have identified roughly 25 priority projects that will require approximately $100 million. Over the next few months, they will be providing further feasibility, scoping and recommendations on how these projects could proceed. Currently, full-priority projects could be initiated within the next few months with adequate funding and political support.

One of these projects is the Maple Creek pump station in Port Coquitlam, which would replace the end-of-life pump there with fish-friendly pump alternatives and cost approximately $3.4 million and bring in at least 20 jobs.

We strongly recommend that the B.C. salmon restoration and innovation fund have continued support by the province to ensure execution of the priority projects identified by this study over the next four years. A major flood with our current infrastructure would be catastrophic.

We heard directly from Premier Horgan a few weeks ago that upgrading flood infrastructure is a high priority for capital spending. The solution can be one that provides multiple benefits — that creates green jobs, helps us adapt to climate change, advances reconciliation and UNDRIP commitments while also improving recreational and aesthetic values and, of course, is economically smart.

[9:20 a.m.]

Expanding on this last point, existing flood mitigation funding can be leveraged for multiple benefits. Studies have found that investment in ecosystem services generates significant economic value and helps communities avoid millions of dollars in future costs. In addition, investing in natural flood control is often cheaper and more efficient than investing in grey infrastructure, not just in Canada but across the world.

Finally, data from the United States shows that short-term economic benefits, such as jobs and other economic spinoffs, from watershed restoration projects are equivalent to other kinds of public infrastructure work. For example, a $1 million investment in watershed restoration creates between 13 and 22 jobs and $2 million to $3.4 million in economic activity.

In short, we are requesting the province of B.C. to provide direct funding for upgrading flood control through continued and additional support through the B.C. salmon restoration and innovation fund, the creation of a $200 million watershed security fund, which I believe our colleague from B.C. Wildlife Federation will be speaking to a bit further on, or through a stand-alone fund for salmon-safe flood controls. It is also essential that existing funding mechanisms for flood control, such as EMBC and others, adopt criteria to ensure that all new and existing flood works are safe for salmon.

I want to stress that implementing these solutions will make our communities just as safe or even safer from flooding. There’s also broad support for this approach from First Nations, farmers, fishers, local governments, including two LMLGA and UBCM resolutions, and from the people of B.C.

Thank you for this opportunity to present our work and requests. I strongly encourage you to consider the benefits that having a healthier reconnect to the ecosystem can have, not just in the next year or two but into the future as we work to build back a better B.C.

Sorry for going over time.

B. D’Eith (Chair): That’s okay, Lina. Thank you.

Dustin Snyder from Spruce City Wildlife Association.

SPRUCE CITY WILDLIFE ASSOCIATION

D. Snyder: I’d like to just start by thanking you guys for the opportunity here. Obviously, you guys represent the province, so you are from all over the province. You know that the province is likely one of the most diverse areas in our country. We have mountains, we have deserts, and we have this really awesome watershed that connects every inch of the landscape.

Spruce City Wildlife is asking to have a dedicated wildlife funding model brought on. This is something that has been discussed for quite a few years, I believe, from quite a few different groups, including ourselves and the B.C. Wildlife Federation. One thing about a dedicated funding model is that there need to be targets, goals and an overall ecosystem management. It’s not necessarily just funding specifically for wildlife, but we need this to be translated into more of an actual ecosystem-based model rather than just a wildlife funding model.

Currently in a lot of areas, although forestry and wildlife fall under the same ministry, those two things are managed very differently and not always hand in hand. A good comparison would be: how do you manage the people when they potentially have nowhere to live? That’s kind of how we’re looking at wildlife right now. There’s a lot of management of the forests, and there’s a lot of management of the wildlife themselves, but those two aren’t always married together. It’s hard to move them forward if they’re not being looked at under the same scope.

We see the dedicated funding model as somewhat similar to the way Freshwater Fisheries Society is managed, where the dollars from hunting licences would go back into that resource. We also believe that there should be many contributors to that — anybody who is impacting that landscape and that ecosystem chips in a little bit; whether it is forestry or wildlife viewing, everybody is impacting on some level — to be able to see a larger-scale scope, rather than just hunting and fishing licences being put into that pot.

Again, one thing that needs to be considered is the increased costs. It’s not just as the cost of living rises, wages increase and that sort of thing. One thing that I know Freshwater Fisheries has struggled with is that there has not been an increase to the fishing licences. Likewise with hunting licences, those costs have been the same for a very long time.

[9:25 a.m.]

I think hunters and anglers would be comfortable with an increase, as long as they knew that that increase was going back to the resource, as opposed to going somewhere else. With the Freshwater Fisheries Society, they have increased costs, such as their operations costs. They have maintenance costs, as well as staff. When those costs rise, they’re on that limited budget of the same amount of income every year. Again, looking back to the dedicated funding model, that can be one flaw that needs to be looked at in advance.

I’d like to touch on salmon as well. Spruce City Wildlife operates the only hatchery north of the Kamloops area. I’m sure you all have heard about the Big Bar landslide that took out approximately 89 percent of the spring chinook last year. That was already an endangered stock, and they took an 89 percent hit on top of that.

In the Legislature in Victoria there, I believe fishing was noted as one of the four founding industries in B.C., and for the most part, until recently the province hasn’t been overly involved in salmon. I think this is a good opportunity, given the potential to give not only an economic value for the coastal communities but a value for the First Nations communities in the Interior and throughout the province.

Again, looking at the ecosystem-based management, salmon bring a lot of nutrients to the Interior that come from the ocean, and that sort of thing. There is a large population of wildlife that does rely on those fish. As those populations decrease, we are losing not only the potential economic value on the coast, not only the potential economic value in the Interior but the ecosystem value — the value in the forests, the value for the wildlife — and all of that sort of thing as well.

I think it wouldn’t be overly difficult for the province to get involved here. Whether this is as a partnership with DFO or in different fisheries issues, I definitely see significant value for the province to get involved.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Hey, Dustin. You’re out of time. If you could wrap it up, I’d appreciate it.

D. Snyder: Okay. That was pretty much where I was headed. Thank you very much for your time today.

B. D’Eith (Chair): No problem. Thanks, Dustin.

Next up we have Dylan Eyers from B.C. Backcountry Hunters and Anglers and EatWild.

B.C. BACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS AND ANGLERS,
EATWILD

D. Eyers: Hi, everybody. Thanks for having me here. I was asked to come and join the meeting. I read through some of the stuff the BCWF had presented. I think they’ve done an excellent job of laying out the need and benefits of just doing a better job of wildlife management here in British Columbia.

In my background, I teach people to hunt. I started a business about eight years here in the Lower Mainland mainly focusing on helping people from non-traditional hunting families to learn how to hunt. What was happening in my life….

I come from a long…. I’m Métis, and my great-grandmother is Cree. We’ve always hunted for food. That’s just our way of life, but I grew up in the city. The people around me in the city, around ten years ago, started asking me more and more about how I secure wild food. There has definitely been momentum within the city. People are making different decisions around where their food is coming from. They want to know more about securing protein that is organic or at least ethically treated. People started asking questions around hunting and if that could be part of their life.

Now, there’s a big journey to be someone from the city and moving over to a way of life that includes being able to go out on the land and harvest food. My business is to help people do that. What I have seen in that journey is that there’s a diversity of people coming to hunting, wanting to learn about hunting, and that has been interesting.

It’s not just…. I think a lot of us, including myself, think of hunting as a rural thing. We think of hunting as people in Prince George and Smithers, who really care deeply about their way of life around hunting. But it’s not that. There are people that are part of the fabric and the network of the urban communities here in Vancouver and Victoria that have discovered hunting as a way of life, as a way of securing organic, healthy food, as a way of connecting to nature, as a way of building community out in nature.

[9:30 a.m.]

It’s a growing community, and what I find is so interesting is that it’s a diverse community as well. It crosses all ethnic backgrounds and all orientations. What’s cool about it is that there are more people coming to it. There are more people that care about wildlife in B.C. every day. It’s not just a rural issue.

With that, I recognize that as I’ve grown up as the hunter…. In the 40 years that I’ve been cruising around, hanging out on the land in B.C., I’ve seen an incredible landscape change throughout B.C. We’ve done a pretty good job of cutting every tree in the province. We’re doing a really good job eroding most of British Columbia for industrial uses, and that has an impact on wildlife. That has a direct impact on my way of life to continue to hunt and gather wild food to sustain myself.

I know it has an incredible impact on the Indigenous communities throughout British Columbia. Now it’s going to have an impact on these people who are now discovering this new way of life — these urban folks who have found connection with nature through hunting and gathering of wild food. It’s a significant impact on people’s way of life if we don’t do a better job of managing for wildlife and managing for habitat.

I would like to see a commitment to managing for habitat and wildlife as a primary focus of our land management model. I think that in British Columbia, we have a long history of our forest economy. We’re a resource development economy, but we put our resource extraction ahead of the needs of wildlife.

My concern is…. I think we can do a really good job of putting the needs of wildlife and the needs of habitat ahead of some of our resource extraction needs, or I think we can do it in balance. I think if we give our biologists in the province the tools and power to make the decisions they need to make to protect habitat, to enhance habitat, to protect wildlife that we will have an abundance of wild food for all people who rely on it for a way of life. That includes Indigenous communities, resident hunter communities, people who just love being in the wilderness and seeing wildlife.

I think we can do a better job. I urge you to look at the financial model that B.C. Wildlife Federation has put forward and consider that as a way forward for us and our wildlife here in B.C.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you so much, Dylan.

Next up we have Chuck Zuckerman from B.C. Wildlife Federation.

Please go ahead, Chuck.

B.C. WILDLIFE FEDERATION

C. Zuckerman: Good day. I am Chuck Zuckerman, vice-president of the B.C. Wildlife Federation, the leading conservation organization in British Columbia, promoting the wise use of our fish and wildlife and habitat.

On behalf of my 43,000 members, we welcome this opportunity to address your select standing committee regarding the vital issues that relate to natural resource management and wildlife sustainability.

B.C.’s fish and wildlife management agencies have historically been understaffed and underfunded. They have not lived up to our province’s motto of “Splendour without diminishment.” While B.C. is the most diverse jurisdiction in North America, when it comes to funding, we spent $34 million on fish and wildlife management in 2017, while Idaho state, 1/5 the size of British Columbia with one-third the population, spent three times more — $34 million compared to a whopping $106 million.

The results of our inadequate funding are the following:

(1) Mountain caribou are endangered, and caribou herds have declined across the province.

(2) Chilcotin and Thompson River steelhead face imminent extinction. Annual returns of 5,000 fish and more are estimated to be fewer than 50 fish this year in the Chilcotin system.

(3) Moose populations have experienced 70 percent declines in the last decade.

(4) Mule deer and elk populations are also experiencing severe decline throughout the province.

The mountain pine beetle epidemic, inadequate fire suppression methods and climate change have all had deleterious effects on our forest ecosystems. At the same time, more British Columbians experience our province through various recreational and sustenance activities.

[9:35 a.m.]

Hunting participation for sustenance food has increased from 86,000 participants in 2005 to 112,000 participants in 2015, more than a 30 percent increase.

Both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people exercise their constitutionally protected right to a sustainable harvest. Hunting and angling continue to be cultural family activities through which natural organic food is harvested and community traditions and ethics are passed on to future generations. Chronic underfunding and resulting harvest declines have, unfortunately, divided these commitments.

What needs to be done? Our first recommendation is to establish wildlife governance and funding models in 2020 following the Premier’s mandate to improve wildlife management and habitat conservation and to collaborate with stakeholders by (1) dedicating all hunting licence fees to wildlife management; (2) dedicating a portion of all revenue from those who profit from our natural resources to fish and wildlife management; (3) ensuring that all funding is leveraged and results in on-the-ground management activities; (4) setting objectives for habitat, fish and wildlife in legislation; (5) ensuring that those who purchase licences have a say in how those fees are allocated via an inclusive governance model; and (6) ensuring that First Nations are included.

Our second recommendation is to establish a $200 million permanent water security fund that would (1) develop collaborative partnerships at the appropriate watershed scale, (2) modernize watershed-based land use plans, (3) develop community-driven restoration initiatives and (4) develop innovations supporting provincewide advancements in watershed protection.

Your children and their children are depending on you to make the right decision. They are depending on your parties to be their voice to restore their mountains, waters and forests. It was only a very short time ago when a person could easily see mountain caribou or catch a world-renowned Thompson steelhead. Sadly, tomorrow they will have to visit a museum.

We can change the future today. We can fix these problems today by providing adequate, stable and continuous appropriate funding. Success or failure is in your hands.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thanks very much, Chuck and all the presenters.

Questions from members?

D. Clovechok (Deputy Chair): Thank you, each and every one of you, for your presentation today. As a guy who pulls a trigger, I totally get where you’re coming from. I try to harvest an animal every year. It’s really important. Wildlife management and a comprehensive program are incredibly important. You know, prior to the 2017 election, there was a huge meeting in Cranbrook that talked about exactly that.

The mismanagement of wildlife in this province goes all the way back to the ‘50s. It’s not a partisan issue. It’s something that hasn’t been funded in any way, shape or form near to where it should be.

As far as I’m concerned, and I know my fellow rural MLAs as well…. You certainly have advocates sitting here today. We’re going to be trying to push this forward, because it’s something that we all actually believe in, and hopefully, we can get it across the goal line.

Thank you for your presentations. It’s important work.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thanks, Doug. Well said.

Other questions from members?

N. Simons: Thanks for your presentation.

I’m wondering if these are the same messages we heard last time the Finance Committee came traipsing through the province. I’m wondering, Chair, what the recommendations were around this particular sector last time.

B. D’Eith (Chair): That’s a very good question.

Stephanie, can you help us with that at all?

N. Simons: We can find that for later. It’s just for my curiosity.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Nicholas, there was certainly, last year, an emphasis on environment, wildlife, invasive species. Actually, over the last couple of years, I think there’s been a continued commitment from the committee to the types of recommendations that are being made.

[9:40 a.m.]

D. Clovechok (Deputy Chair): I just want to agree with that. We’ve had presentations but…. Honestly, last year there were good presentations, and I do remember them because this is important to me and my constituents. I thought today was a far more comprehensive presentation in terms of solutions than I saw last year. So congratulations, gentlemen.

B. D’Eith (Chair): There’s a plus and minus. We’ve talked about this with other presenters. It’s nice for us to be able to get out into the province, especially into rural and remote B.C. But one of the nice things is being able to get a group of like-minded advocates together so that we can actually have a concentrated presentation. So thank you very much for your presentation and everything you do for B.C. wildlife.

I just had one question, too, for Lina, in regards to fish restoration. I know that the federal government has made some commitments. I’m wondering how those are coming along in terms of relationship with the province, especially for wild salmon.

L. Azeez: Thank you for your question, Bob.

First of all, I have to say I’m not exactly sure why I’m in the fish and wildlife group. I’m pretty sure that when I submitted my application, I was just talking more about the infrastructure side of things and watersheds, but it’s okay. Still glad to be here.

On your question about the federal government, while they did reinstate a number of protections for salmon through the Fisheries Act that kind of came into play last year, they do have the B.C. salmon restoration and innovation fund, which is a partnership with the province. Our project…. Not our project, but the project that we have supported, Resilient Waters, has been kind of formed through that.

We are still having some challenges between DFO and Infrastructure Canada having some conversations, especially on the topic of our interest, which is flood infrastructure, because we don’t have the appropriate regulations or guidance direction in place to support what we’re calling Salmon-Safe for fish-friendly flood control.

It’s still a bit of a work in progress. We have a meeting this morning, actually, with DFO to move this conversation along. So still plugging away.

B. D’Eith (Chair): That’s good. Obviously, pump stations and other types of mitigation do have such a profound effect on running salmon. I appreciate all the work that you’re doing.

L. Azeez: Great. Thank you.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Awesome. Any more questions from members?

Seeing none, thank you very much to all of you for your presentations and your commitment to wildlife, to salmon, to the watersheds — very important for British Columbia. We appreciate the presentations.

With that, if we could take a short recess until ten o’clock. Thank you very much, everyone.

The committee recessed from 9:42 a.m. to 10 a.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): I want to welcome our participants. This subsection of the themed panels is on parks and recreation.

First up we have Tori Ball from Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, British Columbia.

Budget Consultation Presentations
Panel 3 – Parks and Recreation

CANADIAN PARKS AND WILDERNESS
SOCIETY, B.C. CHAPTER

T. Ball: Good morning, committee. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak with you this morning.

I’m coming to you from the shared traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations. These nations have stewarded the lands and waters that I now call home since time immemorial, for which I’m eternally grateful to them and their ancestors.

My name is Tori Ball, and I work for the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, British Columbia. We at CPAWS B.C. want to see an investment made in the nature and outdoor recreation of B.C. by increasing the B.C. Parks budget by an additional $60 million in 2021.

No matter if you are new to B.C., or your family has lived here since time immemorial, the rugged and rich beauty of this province is mesmerizing and likely holds a special place in your heart,` as it does in mine. Unfortunately, this system has suffered severe budget cuts in the early 2000s and has yet to recover up to levels sufficient to take care of the over 14 million hectares of our provincial parkland.

This is why we are advocating for B.C. Parks to get a raise in the 2021 B.C. budget. The current levels of funding have left staff extremely overworked. If you ever get a chance to go to visit the Garibaldi ranger station, you’ll see that it’s set up to host dozens of staff. This one park alone used to post 70 rangers. Now I’m not even sure that we have 70 full-time rangers throughout the entire province.

The lack of staff on the ground leaves areas vulnerable to neglect and misuse. Media reports have highlighted a recent rise in illegal activity, including wildlife poaching, moose kills, on Vancouver Island, and illegal logging and dumping in the South Okanagan. All of these activities threaten vulnerable wildlife populations.

The chronic underfunding has resulted in a decade-long backlog in much-needed maintenance and management plans. In some regions, there are 100 years’ worth of management planning to do. Pinecone Burke Provincial Park remains dramatically underdeveloped, while its neighbouring parks have overflowing parking lots, and it’s impossible to secure campsite reservations.

B.C. Parks plays a crucial role in supporting the mental and physical health of British Columbians. In a recent survey, 94 percent of respondents said that access to nature was important to their mental health. B.C. Parks provides one of the most affordable ways to be active in the outdoors. This system sees over 25 million visitors in a year, and we’ve seen an overwhelming amount of demand for parks to reopen and provide safe recreation activities for people during the current health pandemic. With proper funding, B.C. Parks can support our physical and mental health, secure employment and sustainable tourism, and it can safeguard natural systems that we all depend on.

The Finance Committee has suggested an increase in the B.C. Parks budget in the last four of the five consultation recommendations. We know that this is a good investment in our communities, our economy and our shared lands and waters. The same recent survey that I mentioned earlier found that over 70 percent of British Columbians also support an increase in funding to B.C. Parks. I urge you to make a compelling recommendation to the Minister of Finance to invest in B.C. Parks.

We would like to see an increase of $60 million of additional funding to support the ability of B.C. Parks, provincial parks, to safely welcome visitors, provide world-class outdoor recreation and protect wildlife and natural systems.

We have several specific program areas that could desperately use an upgrade to create secure, lasting jobs within the parks system — specifically, hiring more full-time, year-round park rangers and First Nations stewards, to be not only the boots on the ground but the eyes and ears for the entire system, and expanding the successful student ranger program. There are a number of projects in any of the regions, and one crew can simply not begin to cover the vast areas that they’re assigned to.

[10:05 a.m.]

Build and improve park infrastructure and facilities, expanding campgrounds and parking lots, and upgrading and creating new trails. This will support sustainable tourism and improve visitor safety, especially in times when physical distancing is recommended by our public health officer.

Updating and completing management plans. Nearly 30 percent of B.C.’s protected areas lack a management plan, and many that exist have not been upgraded since their creation 15 or 20 years ago. Having up-to-date plans helps B.C. Parks deliver on its dual mandate to promote outdoor recreation while preserving ecological integrity.

We realize that Budget 2021 will be a challenging one, yet we hope the committee recognizes the necessity and value of our provincial parks and will commit to helping them work towards a long-overdue raise.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to your questions after my fellow speakers have finished.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, Tori.

Next up we have Louise Pedersen from Outdoor Recreation Council of British Columbia.

OUTDOOR RECREATION COUNCIL OF B.C.

L. Pedersen: Thank you very much. My name is Louise Pedersen. I’m the executive director of the Outdoor Recreation Council.

The Outdoor Recreation Council is a charity that works on behalf of more than 50 provincial and regional member organizations, including paddlers, hikers, mountain bikers, equestrians, quad riders, sport fishers and nature interests to protect and promote responsible outdoor recreation. We’re very pleased to have this opportunity to provide our recommendations for the 2021 provincial budget.

The majority of British Columbians can recall the feeling that we had when we returned home from a hike, a ride, a paddle or a fishing trip. Spending time outside is a source of physical activity, socializing, enhanced knowledge of our natural surroundings, enjoyment and quality of life. Outdoor recreation plays a significant role in invigorating and strengthening communities all across B.C. in several ways economically, through the creation of trails and facilities as amenities that spur economic development and diversification in our rural towns.

Although B.C. is among Canada’s fastest-growing provinces, our rural population is projected to shrink, with a population decrease of 12½ percent between 2011 and 2025. But some small communities, including Kimberley, Revelstoke, Penticton and Cumberland, are bucking that trend, maintaining stable and even growing populations with revitalized economies and cultures. Most of these communities are experiencing an influx of new residents attracted to their natural beauty, unique lifestyle and opportunities for outdoor recreation. These new arrivals have been dubbed “amenity migrants” and are amongst the most critical drivers shaping the future of B.C.’s rural landscape.

Outdoor recreation opportunities, trails and parks are essential for improving and maintaining healthy communities. Communities that have easy access to outdoor recreation opportunities also tend to have safer and livelier neighbourhoods and higher levels of volunteer engagement and environmental stewardship. Social bonds are strengthened when families and community members participate in outdoor recreation together and when seniors and individuals with disabilities are actively engaged in recreation activities, including organized club activities.

Outdoor recreation can play a critical role in supporting Indigenous reconciliation. There’s tremendous value in incorporating Indigenous knowledge, culture and perspectives in the planning and management of recreation and trail projects. With each of these efforts, there’s an opportunity to foster the kinds of relationships with our Indigenous communities that we want to build for the future.

It’s not just the residents of B.C. who enjoy our parks and recreation opportunities. More than 50 million tourists visit B.C. every year, and the vast majority come here to participate in activities such as hiking, skiing, mountain biking and whale watching. B.C.’s tourism industry added the most significant value to the provincial economy between 2007 and 2017 relative to primary resource industries, which makes B.C.’s spectacular scenery, recreation infrastructure and diversity of outdoor activities some of our most valuable assets that we need to protect and invest in.

The vision of the trail strategy of British Columbia is a world-renowned, sustainable network of trails that provide benefits for trail users and communities in the province. At the moment, we have around 30,000 kilometres of recreational trails on Crown land in the province. These trails are largely built, maintained and paid for by volunteer outdoor groups, in partnership with two provincial agencies, B.C. Parks and Recreation Sites and Trails B.C.

Trails related to outdoor recreation are being increasingly popular with locals and visitors. It puts a lot of demands on these volunteer groups and on the agencies that have the overall responsibility for the trails. Strategic investments in outdoor recreation have tremendous returns in terms of health, social cohesion, rural economic development, sustainable resource management and Indigenous reconciliation.

Our recommendations are to increase the annual operational budget of Recreation Sites and Trails B.C. with $4 million. This agency is pivotal in facilitating rural economic development, achieving community health benefits and fostering reconciliation through the development of trails and recreation sites across B.C. With only 50 staff members and an $8 million annual budget, it’s evident they are severely underfunded and do not have the needed capacity to meet current demands.

An annual budget uplift of an extra $4 million in operational funding over the next couple of years will allow Rec Sites and Trails to increase its staff by 33 percent and increase its operational budget by 30 to 40 percent.

[10:10 a.m.]

This is a small boost, but it will allow for better planning and communications with Indigenous people and recreational user groups who are instrumental in developing and maintaining facilities and trails under partnership agreements with this agency.

As we’ve advocated for before and as you’ve just heard Tori talk about, we’ve also asked in the past for an increase in the annual budget of B.C. Parks by $60 million, and this is what we will put forward this year as well. Every dollar invested in B.C.’s protected area system generates $8 in visitor spending, and in total it provides a $392 million boost to GDP and supports over 5,000 full-time jobs. The ORC suggests that any additional funding for B.C. Parks will result in similar economic benefits.

The B.C. parks system is vital for the B.C. economy and the well-being of residents in B.C., which is why the 2021 B.C. budget must help ensure the long-term health of B.C.’s environment, economic interests and the recreational assets within the park system.

Lastly, the ORC is a member of the Watershed Security Coalition. We ask the provincial and federal governments to invest $600 million to create a B.C. watershed security fund. This has been put forward by the ORC’s rivers chair, Mark Angelo, who has advocated for the need for such a fund for the last several years.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Well done, Louise. You nailed it. Excellent.

Next up we have Ciel Sander from Trails Society of British Columbia.

Please go ahead, Ciel.

TRAILS SOCIETY OF B.C.

C. Sander: Good morning, everyone. My name is Ciel. I represent the Trails Society of B.C. as the board president. I live and work on autonomous Sinixt territory that’s also claimed by the Ktunaxa and Syilx Nations through the colonial land claims process. I live in Greenwood, B.C. Thanks for the opportunity to present.

Trails B.C. is a 25-year-old volunteer organization that was created to assist in the routing of the Great Trail in British Columbia, formerly known to most of us as the Trans Canada Trail. We advocate for quality trail experiences for active recreation and active travel on trails in British Columbia, such as the Kettle Valley Rail Trail in south-central interior British Columbia.

Throughout the pandemic, the number of people of all ages and abilities using provincial trails, some for the very first time, has been a welcome sight. However, people wanting to bicycle and walk low-gradient rail trails such as the Kettle Valley face poor surface conditions due to lack of maintenance. Thanks to the work of [audio interrupted], we now have a B.C. active transportation strategy, and our smaller and rural communities along these rail trails in the southern interior are primed to be further improved as active transportation routes for both visitors and for residents.

We recommend annual provincial budget line items in the amount of $4 million for operational costs, for recreation sites and trails and $60 million for B.C. Parks.

In 2012, the province identified five key benefits of trails. The first was economic. It brings economic tourism spending, greater business development, enhanced property values and higher tax revenues.

The second was community, with increased economic development and diversity, increased understanding and respect for heritage and culture.

The third was improved health and physical well-being for both individuals and communities.

The environment is improved by enhanced environmental awareness, better understanding of heritage and better stewardship.

Lastly, transportation. In 2012, this was recognized as greener transportation and commuting use of trails that contribute to [audio interrupted] community and regional sustainability.

Let’s fast forward to 2020. These benefits of recreation trails haven’t really changed. The province recently undertook a public survey on the B.C. trails strategy. The results identified two [audio interrupted] benefits of trails. The first: trails increased the physical and mental well-being of users and enhanced quality of life and community cohesion. The second was that trail systems improve environmental awareness and facilitate educational opportunities.

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, there was increasing pressure on recreation sites in Trails B.C. and B.C. Parks. With not enough money and further reduction in the provincial budget for these agencies, how can they strive for quality trail? British Columbia’s population has steadily grown since 2001 and recently surpassed five million people. Projections estimate that by 2038, there will be over six million people living [audio interrupted]. Trail counts are seeing higher use than in previous years as people are taking advice from the provincial health officer by going outdoors and getting exercise.

[10:15 a.m.]

We know of examples of this happening all over the province. In addition, bicycle sales for many shops are up dramatically, some up 300 percent. Cycling has experienced continued growth [audio interrupted], and this year cycling has exploded worldwide due to the pandemic. The pandemic has also underscored the importance of trails, being in nature and green space for both our physical and our mental health.

Greenway trails provide us with the chance to connect with birds, wildlife and enhance our community by being outdoors. By allocating funding in the amounts of [audio interrupted] in operational costs to Rec Sites and Trails B.C. and supporting $60 million to B.C. Parks…. This will pay for the amount of necessary work for the boots on the ground, as Tori said, to manage these valuable public assets. These are small amounts of funding compared to the benefits of trails, tourism recovery, economic vitality of communities, conservation and climate change mitigation and the health and well-being of all British Columbians.

Thank you for the opportunity to present this morning.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you, Ciel. Appreciate that.

Next up we have AJ Strawson from International Mountain Bike of Canada.

Please go ahead, AJ.

INTERNATIONAL MOUNTAIN BICYCLING
ASSOCIATION CANADA

A. Strawson: Thanks, everyone. Good morning. I appreciate you taking the time to listen to us today. As you mentioned, my name is AJ Strawson. I’m the executive director for the International Mountain Bicycling Association of Canada. Through our mission, we serve non-profit trail associations across B.C. so that they can continue to provide recreation through the stewardship of our natural spaces.

Today I want to talk to you about equity and equity as it relates to trails and recreation. Equity is defined as the quality of being fair and impartial. What would that mean for recreation? It means two very important things. It means fair access to recreation for each person, no matter their individual circumstances and, secondly, fair access to the economic benefits provided by recreation in our province.

Traditional recreation is expensive. Facilities-based arenas are expensive for people to participate in, and many can’t afford the ongoing costs for equipment and other fees associated with traditional recreation. The Canadian Public Health Association notes that access is also limited by the availability of built and natural recreation spaces in both urban and rural environments. They note that it’s greatly related to economic status, colour, gender, religion or ethnic origin.

Many of these same people who are challenged, perhaps, to access facilities-based recreation already likely own a pair of shoes or a bike, and along with a little bit of imagination, that’s all it takes to be exploring our natural spaces. This provides an opportunity to ensure that each British Columbian has fair and equitable access to recreation.

In addition, not all people are suited to structured recreation, which the Canadian Public Health Association further notes. Non-structured recreation is the opportunity to participate in an imaginative and outdoor experience, guided by whatever your desire of the day is. Trails offer that opportunity for non-structured experience.

Differences in resources among trail associations in various regions across the province mean that we have a significant diversity and lack of consistency in how people can access different opportunities to recreate. Investment across the province in trails and trail infrastructure will help greatly remedy this. Investment in B.C. Parks and Rec Sites and Trails B.C. will further mean that authorization to build trails in communities all across the province can happen in a timely fashion.

We also know that accessible, fun trails are expensive. We have a huge number of trails all across the province, and many of them were built by people who are very experienced in the back country and the outdoors. As such, many of those trails are of a high difficulty level, and we lack, significantly, access to green, fun trails that many people without much experience or a high investment in equipment can go and enjoy.

Equity also means fair access to economic opportunity granted from productive forests in a growing economy. This government has recognized the importance of a strong and diversified forest economy. Investments and skills in forests have been an ongoing commitment. However, tourism is also a forest product. As we know from the Sea to Sky Economic Impact Study, trails are a huge reason why people choose to visit this and other places in our province.

[10:20 a.m.]

While these assets are promoted to the rest of the world through Destination B.C., they’re largely neglected when it comes to, in comparison, the millions that are dedicated to enhancing forests for more traditional forestry economics.

To remedy all of these equitable issues that we have in terms of trails and trail access, we ask for $16 million to be allotted for the maintenance of existing non-motorized single tracks within the province. This funding will allow for trail associations to continue maintaining the world-class trails we have come to depend on, both economically and for our physical and mental health.

We also call for an additional $4 million in funding for Recreational Sites and Trails B.C. A process to get a new trail approved can vary widely from six months to multiple years, depending on the complexity of the land base. It’s not from a lack of effort on the part of Recreational Sites and Trails B.C. We simply need more resources to make more of these decisions.

Third, we ask for an additional $60 million in funding for B.C. Parks. With a significant shortfall in labour and boots on the ground in helping manage the incredible increase that we’ve seen in recreation in our provincial parks, the additional $60 million will help ensure that we have fair and equitable access for all persons in British Columbia.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, AJ.

Members. First up we have Mitzi Dean.

M. Dean: Thank you all for all of your work, for your advocacy and for your presentations here today.

AJ, I was really interested when you were talking about equity and access — fair and equal access for all British Columbians. But I think it isn’t just the equipment or the structures that put those barriers there in place for people. There are also things like child care or even just feeling like you belong in places. Having options for families, for people of all different ages to be able to participate together in whatever it is, whatever kind of recreation.

I just wondered whether you had given any thought to that, whether you had any recommendations to overcome some of those other obstacles that are there.

A. Strawson: There also needs to be a commensurate amount of work done internally within trail associations to set a culture of diverse access for all persons who want to recreate. That’s a strong theme we heard in the 2018 diversity symposium that we hosted in North Vancouver.

I’ll also note that on a personal level, with my young toddler, who likes to come mountain biking with me, it can be quite challenging to find the right trail to ride here in Squamish. I think increased investment for trails that are accessible for all British Columbians will help to steer that culture away as well.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you, AJ. It’s interesting. I look at previous reports, and usually, with cycling particularly, there is the active transportation, and then there’s parks and recreation. They’re in different sections. I think that’s something that we probably should talk about as a committee — that connection.

Active transportation, generally, is part of the whole discussion, as well as parks and recreation, in maintaining our parks. So it’s all sort of part of a continuum. There has been a bit of a disconnect between, at least, how we’d approach that. I think we might look at it a little bit more holistically. I’m certainly hearing that from presenters this year.

I think having the groups that we’re having is actually helping to pull some of these thoughts together. Thank you so much for that.

D. Clovechok (Deputy Chair): Thank you for your presentations. I think you’ve already answered my question partly, anyway, about accessibility. That’s got to be a really important one, especially for those that have physical disabilities and so on and so forth. You kind of addressed that, so I’m good.

I just want to thank you for your work. My communities out here from Revelstoke to Kimberley are big trail places, from Rails to Trails to the Markin trail that was just put in. Thanks for what you’re doing. It’s important work for us out here too, so keep it up.

R. Leonard: Hello, everybody. Thank you for your presentation.

The question that I have is around COVID-19 and safe distancing. I know that in some trails, we’re talking about not a lot of room. When I go on certain trails, I’m climbing into the forest to create that space. I’m wondering if that has been factored into your calculations on what you’re looking for — to make trails more accessible for folks, especially during this time.

[10:25 a.m.]

A. Strawson: I think that it’s important that we have enough spaces for people to recreate in. I know through this whole time, with my young family, I’ve been accessing the trail behind my backyard. Not everybody is as privileged to have that opportunity. So I think the first note is that as we start up again — and we ensure that we’re following safe social distancing — trail development can continue because it’s very easy to maintain social distancing during that time.

Secondly, if we are able to provide more accessible trails for young families, for people who are new to recreation, we’ll be able to provide them more opportunity to space themselves out, rather than some of the bottlenecks that we’ve been seeing in communities that do have a shortfall in accessible recreation opportunities in natural spaces.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thanks, AJ.

The Chair recognizes the hon. Nicholas Simons.

Please go ahead.

N. Simons: So formal this morning.

I think Louise wanted to add something first. So I’ll defer.

B. D’Eith (Chair): I didn’t see that, Louise. I apologize. Go ahead.

L. Pedersen: I want to say that it was a really good point that was brought up. Increase in path use over the last couple of months has increased by like 84 percent. And that’s based on Google location data. So a lot of people are really just realizing the value of, maybe more so than those trails that are far away, those that are right within their own neighbourhood.

That really should be part of the discussion that we should be having as a province — making sure that we have a variety of different options. We have trails that are close to where people live, especially in rural places but also in urban places.

I’m happy that you brought that point up about COVID and increased interest.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thanks, Louise.

N. Simons: My question was answered. As a representative of the Sunshine Coast, trails are really important. I just thank you all for your advocacy. You have allies. So thanks for your presentation.

D. Barnett: Here’s a question to Ciel Sander. I’ve been involved in building trails in the Cariboo-Chilcotin since 1970. We built a major trail here for snowmobiling, horseback riding, etc. So 30 years later, our trail is almost finished because of the bureaucracy we have to go through. It gets worse ever year. How frustrating is it for your trail society to get through all of the hoops and jumps and loops?

C. Sander: Well, what I’d like to say is that this trail, the Great Trail, which has been worked on for quite a long time isn’t probably as accessible to most people in British Columbia, just because of the surface conditions. There’s not good equity on it.

Right now in British Columbia, most people are probably not going to be travelling outside the province this year, and they’re going to have an opportunity to come see for themselves what this long-distance rail trail is all about. We just want to keep pushing to get it improved and that Rec Sites and Trails B.C. has the necessary means to actually do the work. It’s pretty obvious to us that they’re doing everything they can [audio interrupted] percent to make things work the best they can for everyone.

We definitely need to have people on trails that are for different users. What ends up happening is that the rail trails, in particular, can’t really be maintained sustainably with a lot of different users on them all at the same time, and it creates problems for the users that they were intended for.

I hope that answers the question.

D. Barnett: No, I’m sorry. My question was…. It is frustrating for volunteers — I’ve been one, like I said — to get through all the bureaucracy and the different ministries and different this and different that to build these trails.

[10:30 a.m.]

A lot of volunteers just leave, and we don’t have successes because mostly it’s done by volunteer organizations. How do you feel that we could make this a little easier for all these societies and organizations and volunteers to move forward with trails?

C. Sander: There’s got to be…. I mean, we need to get rec sites funded. A lot of this work, like what AJ was talking about…. [Audio interrupted] society of B.C. has lost a lot of volunteerism because they don’t want to work on trails that are being used by people that are going to wreck them. It’s not the people that wreck them; it’s just the machines.

We’re going to persevere. When I moved to Greenwood, B.C., the trail was in better shape than it is now. I’m [audio interrupted], because I see this as the future. We could have trails for everyone, just not everybody on the same trail.

It’s frustrating, but we’re not going to give up.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Louise, go ahead.

L. Pedersen: I totally hear what you’re saying. It is very frustrating. I think definitely part of it, a big part of the problem, is that Rec Sites and Trails, which is ultimately the agency that deals with authorizations of trails outside of provincial parks and municipalities…. You know, it just kind of highlights that need for more funding.

We do have what is called the B.C. trails strategy. That’s a working group. It’s representatives from different ministries and also the Outdoor Recreation Council and the outdoor recreation set as a whole. It’s called the Provincial Trails Advisory Body. Our job is to move the provincial trail strategy forward. The strategy identifies a number of actions that will lead to the sustainable network of trails that provides tremendous benefits to British Columbia.

Definitely, some of those issues that you just brought up, it’s part of those…. There are some actions in the trail strategy. But, yeah, the frustration is just that there is just not a lot of funding for Recreation Sites and Trails to really help move this strategy forward.

There are some good things happening. We are moving it forward. There’s a review happening right now. It’s still ongoing until the end of the year, and the Provincial Trails Advisory Body will be presenting some recommendations to the provincial government. But I would love to maybe have a chat with you later on about some specific ways that we could help you in the Cariboo.

D. Barnett: Thank you. Give me a call any time.

L. Pedersen: Sounds good. I’ll do that.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Tori, you haven’t had a chance to weigh in. Is there anything that’s been brought up that you wanted to comment on?

T. Ball: Yes. Thank you for that.

On the COVID point, for the trail, specifically in these times when physical distancing is required. In a survey that we conducted of over 1,000 British Columbians across the province, we found that the number one concern was overcrowding on trails, and the second one was contracting coronavirus. It really reflects, I think, the state of our trails compared to the demand for recreation across B.C. It wasn’t focused in urban centres; it was geographically representative.

I just wanted to mention that.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Yeah, I just saw a picture on Facebook the other day. “I went into the wilderness to get away from everybody, and it’s just a long bunch of cars and everybody lined up.” It’s like, okay, yeah, we obviously need to work on this a bit.

T. Ball: Yeah.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Well, we’re out of time. I don’t see any other questions.

I did want to take the time to thank all of you for your presentations and advocacy and passion for this area. We certainly recognize everything that you’ve done. Particularly, we’re also looking at the impacts of COVID-19. We appreciate your comments on that as well.

Thanks very much, everybody, for doing that.

We could now take a recess until 10:40. Thanks, everybody.

The committee recessed from 10:34 a.m. to 10:40 a.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): Next up we have a panel which is dedicated to water. First up we have Danielle Paydli from the Canadian Freshwater Alliance.

If you could please go ahead, Danielle.

Budget Consultation Presentations
Panel 4 – Water

CANADIAN FRESHWATER ALLIANCE

D. Paydli: My name is Danielle. I’m the B.C. organizer for the Canadian Freshwater Alliance, and I lead a grassroots coalition of amazing groups across this province that are working on water issues in their local communities. Thank you so much for having me back again this year.

I’m calling in from the traditional territories of the Snuneymuxw First Nation.

I’m here on behalf of my organization, but I’m also here, because it can’t really be separated, as a mother on behalf of my children, Cova and Heaton, who’ve spent countless hours of their little lives knee-deep in water, catching crayfish and swimming and exploring through the forests of their watershed. I’m here as a community member on behalf of my neighbours on the Island, who I’ve been visiting with as we plant our gardens, as I’m sure a lot of you are — and who, if it’s anything like last year, I will once again be commiserating with in a few short months as we deal with watching our plants wilt during water restrictions.

I’m also here on behalf of 13,000 British Columbians who, just in the last four months, have joined a community of people calling for water security across the province through the CodeBlue B.C. campaign. CodeBlue is a plan to secure and sustain waters in B.C. through tougher rules, better enforcement and stronger penalties for water wasters and polluters, through ensuring that big industrial users pay the true costs of using B.C.’s water, and by giving local people the power and the resources to restore and manage their local waters.

Drought, overuse, climate change, industrial impacts and other threats are jeopardizing B.C.’s fresh waters and the communities that depend on them. Public opinion research conducted in 2018 shows that more than half of British Columbians worry about the potential for a major water crisis in their community. Another 87 percent believe the province will face a serious problem if nothing is done to improve the management of water resources in B.C. Three in four people agree that B.C.’s freshwater problems are primarily a management and planning issue, not a scarcity issue. This polling signals that there is a real, clear public mandate for the government to be more proactive and to prioritize watershed security in all decisions moving forward.

Needing to invest in our waters and our watersheds is not new news. Over the past year, these threats have been identified. We have seen the Preliminary Strategic Climate Risk Assessment for British Columbia, where seasonal and long-term water shortages are identified as high-ranked risks facing this province. And the 2019 Auditor General report The Protection of Drinking Water notes that accountability to ensure drinking water is protected “is of grave concern.”

Both the people of B.C. and the government itself have identified the problem, and we’re offering a solution — a really huge step toward addressing these complex issues. That is, a watershed security fund. This massive step towards watershed security has been endorsed by dozens of organizations across this province, including the B.C. Assembly of First Nations and others, some of whom you’ve heard from or will hear from today.

Of course, I also gratefully recognize the recommendation from this committee last year for a dedicated, sustainable annual funding source for First Nations, local governments, local watershed protection agencies and community partnerships. Unfortunately, regardless of a loud and powerful voice of support, we did not see this reflected in this year’s budget.

B.C. really has an opportunity to avoid the mistakes made in places like California and Australia, where they failed to tackle water issues until it was too late. By investing in the security of our watersheds, the B.C. government has this tremendous opportunity to choose a different way forward.

We can create a fund that invests in partnerships, supporting the necessary Indigenous capacity and relationship-building needed to forge strong and lasting partnerships with First Nations, local governments and community organizations. It can invest in places, supporting watershed initiatives in key regions of the province that connect land and water and people to place, including comprehensive watershed planning. And it really can invest in people, prioritizing the creation of good, local jobs that support farmers to produce sustainable local food and strengthen community connection with our watershed.

To ensure a meaningful provincewide impact, the target for annual expenditures for the fund should be at $40 million per year. It needs to be an independent and external fund to ensure that it is sustainable and addressing long-term threats, allowing for the development of community collaboration and to enhance resilience.

[10:45 a.m.]

We’re asking that the province create an endowment fund, of which many good examples in the province exist, like the new relationship trust. This endowment fund would be supplemented by an ongoing contribution from resource revenues, such as water rental fees.

There’s also a real strong precedent for this type of sustainable funding. For example, the majority of the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation revenue arises from surcharges placed on hunting, angling, trapping and guide-outfitting licences sold in B.C.

It would really be essential that this type of fund have a co-governance structure with representation from Indigenous and non-Indigenous watershed experts and knowledge-holders. This plan presents an opportunity to advance Indigenous-led governance in the context of a legacy-defining investment into water security and rural economic development that is broadly and deeply supported by the public and especially by people displaced from traditional resource economies who would benefit most from investment in local water jobs.

There are a lot of really important conversations happening around a just and green post-pandemic recovery. What you have here is an opportunity to recommend a long-term investment in transitioning our economy to thrive for future generations.

I really hope you’ll take this opportunity and really hear from my fellow panellists regarding what water security could look like in their local communities.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much.

Next up we have Nicole Charlwood from West Kootenay EcoSociety.

Please go ahead, Nicole.

WEST KOOTENAY ECOSOCIETY

N. Charlwood: I’m Nicole Charlwood. I sit here on the traditional territory of the Sinixt, the Ktunaxa to the east and the Okanagan to the west.

I’m a member of the regional district of Central Kootenay’s area E watershed advisory committee, supporting our watershed sustainability project. Thank you for this opportunity to share why we support the idea of a water security fund.

Today I’m representing thousands of domestic water users and taxpayers who rely on surface water from creeks, streams, brooks and the majestic Kootenay Lake. Residents who access area E water number approximately 14,000, including the city of Nelson. Area E itself has 3,800 residents and 1,800 rural properties.

We have built both residential and business infrastructure that is among the most highly taxed in the regional district based on the availability of high-quality water. Area E has agricultural land and irrigation licences that are also dependent on surface water. Additionally, the area has residents that draw on healthy aquifers to supply water to their wells.

Most residential development and subdivisions manage their water infrastructure. The regional district owns only two water systems that provide water to approximately 400 properties. The number of independent systems is so large that the regional district cannot support them all.

Source protection for these water systems is key to water health and healthy communities. One issue we are currently facing is the expense of water treatment systems, and these expenses have been increasing as our water source becomes degraded as a result of disturbing the land around our creeks.

The area E water sustainability project is attempting to coordinate the many complaints, questions and requests for help from water users concerning extensive water source degradation. Currently forestry, mining, motorized and non-motorized recreation, commercial and industrial installations and cannabis operations are developing without an overarching watershed conservation plan, let alone water use plans. The community does not know the carrying capacity of their creeks to see if they can meet new demands, and no work has been done by the government to determine the effects of climate change on surface water. Also, the symbiotic relationship between surface water and aquifers is unknown.

We see warmer aquatic environments, redirection of water, increased forest fires due drought, downstream sediment, landslides and sloughs, all of which have occurred in area E. Residents are getting really scared.

Water is arguably an essential resource for our health and well-being, forests, agricultural land, rural economic development and real estate activity. There are no cumulative impact studies, no ecosystem-based planning to protect water resources and little collaboration between silos of economic activity. There is very little coordination among provincial ministries concerning water quantity and quality, with forestry and mining activity superseding domestic and irrigation uses in practice and legislation.

[10:50 a.m.]

Here in the Kootenays, isolated operating areas have resulted in a fragmented landscape. Professional reliance has let us down, and scientific studies don’t enable short-term economic activity rather than to determine the carrying capacity of the land base to produce high-quality water.

A watershed security fund is a concept that can help us create exciting new opportunities by funding collaborative community processes that prioritize freshwater conservation by determining the carrying capacity of creeks with monitoring and analysis, by determining the abundance and health of aquifers, by incorporating planning for the risks to water and communities associated with climate change, by restoring riparian areas that have been degraded by past activity, and by planning for industrial use areas and methodologies that do not put water sources and communities at risk.

The 2019 Auditor General’s report The Protection of Water: An Independent Audit was a call to action, and communities in the Kootenays are very willing to be a part of the solution. We request that you include funding with government oversight to assist in reaching the goal of safe and secure water for all.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much.

Next up we have Chief William Seymour from the Cowichan Watershed Board.

Please go ahead.

COWICHAN WATERSHED BOARD

W. Seymour: [Hul’q’umi’num’ was spoken.]

I want to thank everyone for today and for inviting us to talk about our issues and to listen about our concerns and how we need to look after our water sources. My name is Squtxulenuhw. I am Chief of the Cowichan Tribes, and I co-chair the watershed board.

We acknowledge the presentation done by Danielle in regards to the watershed security fund. We support those efforts that was done by that group, and we’re part of that group as well.

We need to work together. Everybody in our province needs to work together to adapt to this climate change. Everybody has so many issues when it comes to our water sources. Because of the droughts that we’re having in our rivers, the Cowichan River does need to raise a weir. I know I spoke to this committee last year on what the Cowichan Watershed Board does and encouraging that funding be provided to build a new weir so that we can store more water in Lake Cowichan.

To ensure that our rivers are high enough where we’re…. We don’t want to see where our river goes down to four cms anymore. We need to keep our river sustainable for our fisheries. We need help with funding for the water storage.

I do need to speak on…. If you recall, we did sign an agreement with Minister Donaldson here to supply some money to do some studies on the Koksilah River. Up until last year, we hadn’t really bothered. But when we look at the drought situations in the Koksilah watershed and the minister having to ask the farmers to get away from the rivers….

[10:55 a.m.]

They couldn’t water their crops and their fields. Right now RFPs have gone out, and on June 16 we’re going to be having community meetings with the residents in the Koksilah watershed area.

The CVRD, Catalyst and the Cowichan Watershed Board, along with the Cowichan Tribes, were successful in getting disaster mitigation funding that’s being used to look at the engineering design for a weir…. But when we look at the needs of the Cowichan River, the flows in the wintertime force all the gravel down to the bottom. It’s ruining our salmon beds. The Cowichan Tribes have been able to source funding to do some sediment removal and logjam removal, and we are in dire need to do a proper job.

I keep saying that all we’re doing is Mickey Mousing everything. We’re removing 15,000 cubic metres of gravel in an area because the riverbed is dry, trying to open it up so that our fishers can survive. The reality is that every year during the winter, the river brings down 17,000 cubic metres. The reality is that for us to do a proper job in those areas, we’re looking at having to remove 100,000 cubic metres of gravel to properly open up these rivers. Erosion is a big issue.

Those kinds of things that we do…. We don’t get any funding for any dike maintenance. In January, we had the big flood, and there was a few breaches in our dikes that need to be repaired. [Audio interrupted.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): I think I may have lost you there.

W. Seymour: We are requesting that as back up.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great, thank you.

Next up we have Georgia Peck from the Lake Windermere Ambassadors Society.

Georgia, please go ahead.

LAKE WINDERMERE AMBASSADORS SOCIETY

G. Peck: Thank you, Bob.

Hello. Thank you for taking the time to hear our concerns for the 2021 B.C. budget.

I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are on the traditional lands of the Ktunaxa peoples.

My name is Georgia Peck, and I am speaking to you today on behalf of the Lake Windermere Ambassadors and other water stewardship organizations within the Columbia Basin and British Columbia.

The ambassadors have a vision of an ecologically healthy Lake Windermere, with balanced management approaches that support recreation and traditional uses, high fish and wildlife values and economic prosperity in the region. We strongly believe that British Columbia needs to prioritize fresh water through a watershed security fund in the upcoming 2021 budget.

I am fortunate enough to be part of a group of engaged citizens who conduct high-quality water monitoring which fills knowledge gaps in order to support local, regional and Indigenous governments to meet their mandates of working to build communities that are resilient to climate and economic changes. We closely follow both federal and provincial water monitoring protocols when collecting this data.

The biggest challenge faced by our organization is financial capacity and the ability to keep up with the ever-changing landscape of our community.

While we are often able to find funding for new projects as they are needed, we consistently struggle to support ongoing monitoring and the related administrative or overhead costs that are required. We also face the challenge of funders changing their interest areas and commitments over time.

Related to this problem…. By constantly searching for funding opportunities, we are taking away capacity from our organizations that could be used to improve programs and further protect the environmental and economic integrity of our water.

[11:00 a.m.]

Each year that Lake Windermere continues to grow in popularity as a tourism destination and experiences housing and commercial development around its shoreline, the risk of negative environmental impacts occurring to the water quality as well as risks of disturbance to local fish and wildlife populations increases significantly.

Case studies demonstrate that lakes, rivers and marine water bodies — which undergo significant pollution events, algal blooms or invasion by non-native species — inevitably lose a significant amount of tourism and recreation-based revenue and suffer possible irreversible environmental changes. Additionally, climate change is beginning to influence the hydraulic regimes in the Columbia Valley by causing hotter, drier summers and warmer, wetter winters, all of which compounds human influences on water quality.

To combat these potential threats and impacts, the Lake Windermere Ambassadors are pursuing multiple projects to address these challenges. For over one decade now, we have been running a water quality and quantity monitoring program throughout the lake as well as on two tributary streams that feed into the lake.

Currently we are compiling all of this historical data into a state-of-the-lake report. The goal of producing this report is to provide residents, decision-makers, stakeholders and visitors with a snapshot of the health of Lake Windermere over time, its current and potential water quality threats and impacts, and to highlight the role of the ambassadors as monitors and stewards of the lake.

Among other projects, we will be providing an update to the foreshore integrated management plan on Lake Windermere, first conducted in 2006 to 2009, to help gain insight into landscape-level changes that have occurred over a ten-year time frame. The information collected will guide policy and management practices and educate individuals in the community. Through our management plan and our ongoing projects, the Lake Windermere Ambassadors strive to use an upstream approach to prevent environmental or economic challenges before they occur.

It is time that British Columbia took a stand in protecting our waters for future generations and resilience. The countless community-based organizations made up of committed and engaged citizens, some of whom are committing hundreds of hours of volunteer time each year, can help make this happen. However, we need support from our government.

Please consider implementing a watershed security fund to support the work to protect our shared fresh water.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, Georgia and the other presenters.

Do we have questions from members?

I did have a comment, perhaps worth talking about. We’re seeing from the presentations that obviously, access to fresh water is very important for all of us but, also, the connection with invasive species, the connection with watershed protection and not only that, protecting species like salmon stock and others — the ability to run up rivers and get through sections of water pumps safely. There are all these connections.

We actually noticed last year, I think, with our committee, as well, that it’s very much a holistic approach. I’m wondering if anyone would like to comment on that at all.

D. Paydli: Maybe I could just briefly. I agree, Bob. I think that it is that there are so many groups….

This is something I’ve noticed as I’ve come in. I’ve got a year under my belt now with the Freshwater Alliance. I’ve noticed there is such a willingness within this community to work together, to support one another and to support the work that everyone is doing. I know even the folks on the panel here today have been really amazing. Everyone is so busy and has so much on the go, but people are still willing to sit and talk and share knowledge. It’s been a real amazing experience for me to be able to be part of something like this.

It does kind of show that holistic nature — that when we’re talking about water, it’s not this in-a-box environmental issue. Water is something that affects all of us. It affects farmers, it affects small business, and it affects all different communities.

I think that you kind of hit the nail on the head that it is this really holistic…. It encompasses so much, and it can be used in a way that can really address so many of the different issues that we’re facing in our province today.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you, Danielle.

[11:05 a.m.]

D. Barnett: Thank you, all, for your presentations.

If I could ask a question of Chief Seymour. The Cowichan River — is that also part of the watershed that feeds communities like Chemainus over there?

W. Seymour: Yeah, the Cowichan River is part of the Cowichan watershed. If you’re looking north of Cowichan, the Chemainus River, etc., is a different watershed. It’s one that we haven’t addressed yet.

We know there’s a lot of work cut out for us as a watershed board. As I stated in my comments, over these past few years, we’ve been concentrating on the Cowichan River, knowing that the Koksilah River and the Koksilah watershed had a lot of issues. We’re just now starting to have a look at that direction. At some point, we think we’re probably going to be heading towards the Chemainus River watershed area.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Nicholas, did you have a comment, a question?

N. Simons: I was just wondering. Manitoba has a minister responsible for water stewardship. That hasn’t coming up as a recommendation before. What are your thoughts on that?

B. D’Eith (Chair): Did you want to address that to someone?

N. Simons: Whoever would like to take that up, and if you don’t want to, that’s okay. It’s just a comment that one particular province does have…. It’s obviously different….

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay, Nicole is going to jump in.

N. Charlwood: Yeah. I think if there’s a minister of anything, there are some dedicated resources. I think the stewardship of water is probably language and attitude that’s appropriate for what we’re looking for. If the minister came with a fund, of course, that would be great.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Unfortunately, that doesn’t always happen.

Well, are there any other questions from members?

Seeing none, I want to thank all of you for your work. Obviously, water is an incredibly important part of our community, and there are so many parts to it. Thanks so much for your presentations and everything you do to protect our watersheds and our water.

Let’s take a short recess until 11:20. Thanks, everyone.

The committee recessed from 11:08 a.m. to 11:20 a.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): For the two presenters, Bob and Steven, unfortunately, there won’t be time for questions. This is just…. At the end of our sessions, we have five-minute presentations. So we’ll just do the two presentations.

Let’s start, if we could, with Bob Peart.

Please go ahead.

Budget Consultation Presentations

BOB PEART

B. Peart: Thank you. My name is Bob Peart. I’m speaking to you today as a concerned citizen, a biologist and someone with nearly 50 years of conservation, land use and park management experience throughout the province and on the Saanich Peninsula, where I live.

Like you, I love this province, and like you, I want to keep B.C. beautiful and have it remain as one of the best places on earth to live. My remarks today are within the context of the climate situation that we face and the context of UNDRIP. I also appreciate I’m speaking today in a province where the rights and title of most First Nations have not yet been legally resolved.

My remarks today also stress the importance of recognizing that B.C. is one of the few places left on earth where our natural systems function as they have for centuries. As such, British Columbia is a gift to the world. As your committee deliberates, it’s critical that you fully appreciate the responsibility that B.C. has to the health of this planet.

I’ve read the three recent economic framework reports by Don Wright, Alan Winter and Kathy Kinloch. My first recommendation is that their advice be implemented as cornerstones to B.C.’s economic recovery plan. These reports, along with CleanBC, can serve as building blocks for forging a new, exciting and innovative vision for this province. Please take these reports seriously and don’t leave them to gather dust.

During the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s, British Columbia was a world leader in conserving and respecting the environment, and we were all proud of our wildlife, provincial parks, rivers and salmon fisheries. Unfortunately, for the last 20 years, this situation has no longer been true. Successive governments have been unwilling to address the public’s concerns related to such matters as old-growth logging, declining fisheries, species at risk and managing the forest environment.

The government has recently made some positive changes with respect to professional reliance, FRPA, wildlife strategy and water sustainability. However, without changing how we manage our forests, these initiatives will be largely unsuccessful, which leads to my second recommendation.

Now is the time to provide the financial support across government to develop a long-term, holistic vision for B.C.’s forest landscape. Our forests have been described as the status quo, with diminishing returns. It’s time for bold, innovative leadership to move toward value, not volume. Such change would be well received by tourism, rural communities, First Nations and the public.

British Columbia is 94 percent provincial public land, and the key mechanism for conserving these lands is our park and protected areas system, which currently sits at about 15 percent. The prevailing government theme we hear is that the parks agenda is done. This viewpoint, however, is not publicly defendable, given current conservation science and B.C.’s diversity. Canada has adopted a plan to conserve 30 percent of its land and water by 2030. British Columbia needs to do the same.

This leads to my third recommendation: that as we restart B.C.’s economy, we invest in the protection of our natural environment as a partner with Canada. This conservation initiative is Indigenous-led, climate-based and would be largely funded by Canada, so it would have minimal cost to the B.C. treasury.

[11:25 a.m.]

In closing, I’d like to make a fourth recommendation: that the aid-based budget for B.C. Parks be increased significantly so that the basic inventory, management and enforcement can occur. On a per-hectare, per-park basis, B.C. Parks is one of the poorest-funded park systems in Canada and the United States. Although heralded around the world for its beauty and diversity, many organizations decry the chronic, consistent underfunding. The operational budget of B.C. Parks needs to be at least $100 million. It could be achieved incrementally over three to five years.

Thank you for your time. Scientists have underscored the connection between the ongoing destruction of the natural environment and increasing risks to our health and well-being. British Columbians understand that it’s not an either-or. It’s not the economy or nature. It’s a both-and. It’s keeping the environment healthy that contributes significantly to a sustainable economy and to our communities. Together we can build a province that’s cleaner, healthier and more sustainable for today’s communities and future generations.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you so much, Bob. You are actually echoing many of the same comments that have been made today. Thank you so much for that.

Next up we have Steven Jones.

Please go ahead, Steven.

STEVEN JONES

S. Jones: Thank you for making the time to hear my comments today. I’m speaking as a concerned citizen as well. I’ll keep it fairly brief — three main points here. I’ve had the chance to present in previous years and similar themes, but I want to look at it a little bit differently today with three hypothetical questions.

The first is: what would you do in your own house if there was a leak in the roof? Of course, you would repair it right away. You wouldn’t wait until the water had ruined the ceilings and the walls and the floors and caused much more damage. That’s the basic idea of ensuring that you’re investing appropriately in maintenance and that your deferred maintenance isn’t becoming too large.

Throughout the B.C. Parks system and the B.C. Recreation Sites and Trails system, we’re seeing massive amounts of deferred maintenance, and it’s being tackled in a way that’s very inconsistent from other areas of government. If the roof in a school was leaking, that would be repaired right away. If the roof in a hospital was leaking, that would be repaired right away. But in the Recreation Sites and Trails system and the Parks system, that’s not happening.

It might be because it’s very hard to account for this type of maintenance, because it’s not hard infrastructure often. Some of this stuff I’ll try and send as a follow-up. When we look at pictures of what’s happening in the Bowron Lake trails, for example, where the portages are getting graded and getting wider and wider each year because they’re too muddy so people try and go around them, what could have been a simple fix will become a fix that costs thousands and thousands of dollars to bring in gravel and install culverts. It might take decades for some of the vegetation to regrow. This is happening throughout the system.

I really would like to see my government spend money in my Parks system and Recreation Sites and Trails system in the same responsible way that it’s spent in other areas. That means tackling maintenance while you can still repair something before it becomes a full replacement.

Operational budgets are a huge issue in both B.C. Rec Sites and Trails and B.C. Parks. The operational funding issue is so serious that at the same time we’re opening new campsites, we’re actually closing old ones because we don’t have the operational budget to do basic things like cut down danger trees or fix picnic tables. It’s a really wild situation right now just how poorly financially managed it is.

The second question I would ask is: if you were an owner in a business and there was a rock-solid business case, would you invest in that business case? Of course, the answer is yes. Your own research shows quite clearly the value of tourism to British Columbia. It’s really an excellent opportunity for us to continue to diversify our economic base. We’re four times as large as New Zealand. We have everything from oceans to mountains to grasslands — just huge untapped potential. Of course, a lot of it…. Tourism is an important sector of our economy already, but I think there is huge opportunity for it to increase.

What a lot of people may not realize is that in recent years, tourists have not been able to visit B.C. as much as they want to. Even in areas like the Sea to Sky corridor, bookings in Garibaldi Park frequently fill up. Places like Joffre Lakes may be moving to a system where it’s not first come, first served. So people go to Alberta or Washington or Alaska or New Zealand or other areas that have similar experiences, because we’ve reached capacity.

[11:30 a.m.]

We need to stop investing in Destination B.C., or continue investing there but make sure there is equal or larger investments in the actual on-the-ground infrastructure.

The third question I have is: what would you do as a citizen if you were contributing year after year to a panel of experts, and they were putting forward a recommendation year after year, and it was ignored year after year?

This panel has, year after year after year, made the same recommendation to the government: invest more operational funding in B.C. Parks and B.C. Rec Sites and Trails. You look at the report last year. Recommendation 32 was worded perfectly. I wouldn’t change it at all. Coming out of that report, I felt very optimistic about what we were going to see in the budget. But what we effectively saw was, I believe, that it actually came out to a decrease in funding once you account for inflation.

I’m a little frustrated as a citizen. I know that your time is extremely valuable. We only have a very small number of people to run this province. You’re taking the time. You’re putting together thoughtful reports, and they’re getting ignored. If this consultation process is false, I would actually encourage the government to disband this committee. If the committee is going to continue to meet, the recommendations need to be acted on.

Thank you for your time today.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. Thank you very much. As I mentioned, there is no time for questions, unfortunately.

Thank you both for your presentations. As I said earlier, many of your points were certainly…. You were echoing many of the points that were brought forward by other presenters today in this theme. Thanks very much.

With that, if I could have a motion to adjourn, please.

Motion approved.

B. D’Eith (Chair): We are now adjourned until two o’clock.

The committee adjourned at 11:31 a.m.