[ Page 885 ]

CONTENTS

Remarks of Deputy Attorney-General in Globe and Mail. Mr. Macdonald –– 885

Hon. Mr. Williams –– 885

Routine proceedings

Committee of Supply; Ministry of Recreation and Conservation estimates.

On vote 230.

Mr. King –– 885

Mr. Kahl –– 886

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 887

Ms. Brown –– 889

Mr. Lloyd –– 889

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 890

Mr. Kahl –– 891

Mr. King –– 891

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 892

Mr. Shelford –– 893

Mr. Nicolson –– 893

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 895

Mr. Lloyd –– 898

Mr. Nicolson –– 899

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 899

Mr. Kerster –– 901

Mr. Barnes –– 901

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 902

Mr. King –– 905

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 907

Mr. Mussallem –– 907

Mr. Barnes –– 908

Hon. Mr. Bawlf –– 908

The house met at 10 a.m.

Prayers.

MR. MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave to make a short statement.

Leave granted.

MR. MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, in the Globe and Mail of today - referring to yesterday - the Deputy Attorney-General is reported to have made remarks of very grave import to the effect that the people of this province do not mind the illegal activity of the RCMP, and that such an attitude was becoming a way of life in British Columbia, and words to that effect which are now reported in the morning paper.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious matter. I think the Attorney-General (Hon. Mr. Gardom) must investigate at once, without delay, exactly what was said by his deputy minister. The attitude, if it is true, as reflected in those words makes nonsense of any investigation of illegalities, in terms of break-ins by the RCMP, which the Attorney-General has announced. Far more dangerous, the words seem to suggest that certain sections in our society should be exempt from the rule of law. Yet if we condone illegal activities and lawbreaking by one group, we condone it for all; so we undermine the total rule of law.

I'd suggest, Mr. Speaker, that it is a matter of extreme urgency and importance, and that the Attorney-General must immediately repudiate such sentiments and make sure that they are not simply passed off as the right of somebody to speak freely on this kind of a subject. They must be repudiated. They cannot be allowed to seem to be emanating from that ministry.

MR. SPEAKER: A reply?

HON. MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, if I may briefly speak on behalf of the Attorney-General, the matter to which the hon. member has referred is before the Attorney-General now. I will be happy to obtain from Hansard a transcript of the member's statement in order that the Attorney-General may be aware of the devotion which the member and his party have for due process.

MR. GIBSON: Mr. Speaker, I have an introduction to make. In the gallery today there are a score or more of good friends and supporters, ers of the Victoria Lady Laurier Club, and I would ask the House to make them welcome.

Orders of the day.

The House in Committee of Supply; Mr. Rogers in the chair.

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

RECREATION AND CONSERVATION

(continued)

On vote 230: minister's office, $116,724 -continued.

MR. KING: Yesterday afternoon I questioned the minister with respect to the Sport B.C. fund, and the process through which that organization obtains its funding from the provincial government. The minister indicated that the latest grant application, which was submitted in January, has now been approved after some delay caused by - I forget his precise words, Mr. Chairman - some question as to the audit. And I would like to ask the minister whether or not the audit was subsequently changed after the initial application, and whether instructions were issued in writing by his ministry with respect to any alleged irregularities contained within the audit of that organization for the year 1977. Could the minister give me that information, please?

Well, Mr. Chairman, if the minister hasn't got that information, I would be very happy to receive it at his earliest convenience; but there are a couple of other things that I wanted to raise of a more localized nature. The Revelstoke Rod and Gun Club has been requesting restocking of the Illecillewaet River with rainbow trout. As the minister is quite aware, this is a river which had a dam on it since 1904, 1 believe, and that dam has just been removed.

While there are Dolly Varden which travel up that river and spawn, there has been no access for the rainbow trout. The local rod and gun club has been seeking to have the river stocked with rainbow because they probably won't find their way up there. They return on a migration pattern and unless they are stocked in there, they advise me, there will be no annual migration of rainbow up that river. In other words, it won't stock itself. I wonder if the minister could give me some indication whether or not he intends to respond to the Revelstoke rod and gun club's application to pay particular attention to that river.

[ Page 886 ]

It should be mentioned at the same time, Mr. Chairman, that I think this should be a priority, because we have lost a great deal of our fishery in that area due to the construction of the Columbia River dams. Now the construction of the Revelstoke Dam will, within a couple of years' time, shut off the migration of the rainbow trout up the Columbia River and, at the same time, we will lose a great amount of spawning area in the tributary stream between Revelstoke and Mica Creek. So I think that priority should be given to the Illecillewaet project as one avenue of providing mitigation against the adverse impact on our fishery of the Columbia River dam construction and development. I'd be most anxious to hear the minister's comments on that.

The Revelstoke group who have been working quite closely, I understand, with the fish and wildlife biologist from Nelson - I believe it's Mr. Andrusak - would be very pleased if the minister would undertake to come up there and have a firsthand look at the circumstances. I'm sure he would be well received if he can find it in his schedule over the next year to make that journey.

There is another matter that I wanted to raise with the minister, and it's a concern that has been expressed by the Revelstoke snowmobile club. They have quite a vast area on Boulder Mountain where snowmobiling is available for about a 30-mile range. It's alpine territory, and they're concerned, Mr. Chairman, that new regulations are in the offing which would unduly restrict the sport of snowmobiling and class those vehicles in with all-terrain vehicles and four-wheel drive trucks and so on, which do cause problems in some areas of the province to arable land, to the surface of farming land and that kind of thing. The main concern is that there be a recognition that what would be a problem, for instance, in lower reaches of the Okanagan Valley where there is a light snowpack, would not be a relevant consideration on Boulder Mountain at Revelstoke where we have up to 600 inches of snow. Obviously there is little opportunity for any damage to the surface of that alpine range, nor, indeed, to any timber, because it is alpine country.

I think the minister could give great reassurance to agencies such as the Revelstoke Snowmobile Club if he would indicate to the House that he recognizes those differences in geography and climatic conditions and, indeed, in terms of the vehicles that are used. The snowmobile thing has become quite a major recreation in my particular area, with annual races that draw people in from all over the nation. That is not bad for tourism either.

1 would appreciate the minister's reassurance. Most importantly, I think, from the point of view of these local agencies in my particular area, there is a desire for consultation before any changes are contemplated which would affect them. I have had correspondence with the minister and an indication that there would be consultation with the provincial organizations. I suggest to the minister, Mr. Chairman, that that's not quite good enough. I think one agency in Vancouver, or elsewhere, can no more accurately reflect the concerns of this disparate and diverse province than a centralized, authoritarian approach from Victoria by legislators. I'm sure the minister wouldn't want that to happen. I think it is important that the local clubs and agencies be contacted on a regional basis before there are changes of any significant nature contemplated. I would appreciate the minister's response.

MR. KAHL: Mr. Chairman, I have a few points I wanted to cover. One of them is dealing with the B.C. Ferry Corporation.

About a year ago I spoke with the chamber of commerce here in the city of Victoria in regard to the rates on the ferries. 1 suggested at that time that what we should have is a situation similar to other parts of the world which run ferry services - that is, an on season and off-season rate. I wonder if the minister has given this any consideration.

There are a number of things that encourage local residents to travel at times when the ferries are not busy, particularly in the summertime when we have many visitors coming to Vancouver Island. It also provides an opportunity for many sports groups and school children to travel at a time that is far more convenient money-wise. I would like the minister to give serious consideration to that. It is done in other parts of Canada where ferries operate.

It's almost prohibitive for any school group to use the ferry service to go to Vancouver; the cost is extremely high. Many classes that feel it necessary to go to the mainland for one reason or another as part of their studies find it very difficult to raise the necessary finances. I know the corporation offers a reduced rate for sports groups, but I was told the other day by one sports group that it is only offered to foot passengers. It's very inconvenient to drive up the terminal, unload all of the kids from the vehicle they are traveling on, go on as foot passengers, and pick them up at the other end. Surely there must be a simpler way of providing that type of transportation.

[ Page 887 ]

The second point concerns two parks in my constituency which the minister had the opportunity to visit: Sooke Potholes park and a proposed Triangle Mountain park. I'm appreciative of the fact the minister indicated that a third of the funds for the Triangle Mountain park could possibly come from the provincial government, but that's a very complex situation, Mr. Chairman, through you, to the Minister, involving the Department of National Defence, Parks Canada and federal Crown land. I think it needs a little bit more coordinating than simply the giving of one-third of the funds towards the purchase of that park. It needs to be co-ordinated by someone within your ministry, and possibly that could bear some fruit for local residents if it were done that way.

You have a proposal before you from the regional district from a member in Sooke regarding the Potholes provincial park. Again I would suggest to you that that could be included and expanded. It's interesting to note that the park is called the Potholes park but in fact the potholes, which are unique to the area, are not included in the park but are in the private sector.

On numerous occasions I have met with the Victoria four-wheelers group, who are very much interested in the establishment of an all-terrain-vehicle park somewhere in the greater Victoria area. As members, we get constant complaints from various citizens in the private sector as well as from Crown land concerning all-terrain vehicles traveling on properties that are not fitted for all-terrain vehicles. 1 wonder, with all the Crown land we have available in the greater Victoria area, and particularly out into the Sooke area, if, a section of property couldn't be set aside for all-terrain vehicles. I have pursued that, I believe, in a letter to the Minister of the Environment (Hon. Mr. Nielsen) , and I wonder if the Minister of Recreation and Conservation (Hon. Mr. Bawlf) could take that opportunity to work on behalf of the all-terrain-vehicle owners in the greater Victoria area.

The next point I wanted to touch is distribution of moneys to local sports groups. I believe the second member for Vancouver South (Mr. Strongman) talked about it yesterday. It is something that came up at a luncheon with some of the local sports people the other day. Very little of the money that's designated for sports fitness seems to get back to the local level, to the very young people who are taking part in sports activities. They find it very expensive. Traveling is very expensive. Many of them do not have the proper equipment or facilities in which to practise. I think that the money could be a lot better spent if it were spent at the local level rather than for sponsoring a very few people to travel to various parts of Canada or the United States or other parts of the world to compete in sports. I'm not saying you should disregard that, but I'm saying that it would be worthwhile to see that more of that money gets to the local level, to those people who are just starting out and donating a large amount of their time and effort to the organization of the very young.

The last point I wanted to talk about, Mr. Chairman, is the salmonid enhancement program . It's a very active and worthwhile programme as far as the up-Island area is concerned, but does very little on the south tip of Vancouver Island, to the best of what information I can gather, primarily because, I think, the federal people feel too many of those fish that are a result of that programme are fished by other than Canadian fishermen. So the major concentration is placed on the up-Island area. I don't happen to agree- with that, and a lot of fishermen in my area don't either, as well as a lot of the local people. I think that you should take a very close look at the restocking of some of the creeks and rivers on the south end of Vancouver Island in the greater Victoria area, particularly in the Sooke, Jordan River and Port Renfrew area, which provides all of the fresh-water fishing for the people and the fishermen in the greater Victoria area. I would, like to hear some comments on that, to know whether your ministry has taken a look at those four situations and to find out if you have any longrange plans for these particularly.

The community of Sooke sponsored and built a small dam up on Demanuel Creek to slowly let the water out over the summer to look after the fry in the creek. There's some talk of doing a similar project on the Sooke River. Out of Port Renfrew a smaller hatchery is run by local community people. I think that they could use some expertise and a bit more direction from your ministry and undoubtedly some financial support.

HON. MR. BAWLF: First of all, dealing with the remarks of the member for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson) yesterday just prior to adjournment, he was concerned about trapper education, and I'm afraid he left the impression that in some way the minister had interfered with the continuance of the trapper education courses.

I'd like to stress that the first knowledge I had of any interruption in those courses was second hand. In fact, what had happened was

[ Page 888 ]

the funds which the federal government were providing to this programme through ARDA - a programme which I might say was initiated by my ministry - were in doubt at one point, and it was necessary, since we didn't totally have the funds budgeted for this programme, to suspend the programme, I'm told, for some days, pending confirmation that the other funds would be available.

Now in fact what had happened was that in the previous year we held 18 courses with about 570 people attending. These courses were fewer in number in the past year, 16 courses having been held in all seven administrative regions, but approximately 750 people attended. So indeed we did not have any disruption of the trapper education course; certainly there was no interference from the minister. It was a matter of an internal administrative decision and in fact we had more people educated under those courses this year than in the previous year, and the course content for the coming year has been upgraded with still greater emphasis on questions of humane trapping.

Now turning to the matters raised by the member for Revel stoke-Slocan (Mr. King) , he was asking whether there were audit irregularities or whatever.

We routinely request an audit and this is reviewed along with all other matters, applications and so forth by the sport and fitness advisory committee, . who are drawn from the community at large based on their knowledge of this area. They were concerned in receiving the audit of Sport B.C. some time ago that they were unable to account in every respect for their receipts from lottery sales, quite apart from their handling of funds in connection with our grant. After some investigation by officials of my ministry, this matter was established that basically they had placed their handling of the lotteries accounting system in the hands of a private firm. That firm I think had a failure or some breakdown and as a consequence some of the receipts were lost. That has long since been cleaned up and there is a regular accounting system which is now in place and approved by all concerned. That's a fact of some eight months' history now, but still we did take one final look at this because the audited statements were qualified in this aspect.

We have, however, approved the second half of their annual grant, realizing that it's a responsible group of citizens who are essentially the representatives of all the sport bodies in B.C. who are members of their organization. The mistake was beyond their control, it's past history and, in any event, we're satisfied the grant funds for which we are responsible were in every way properly accounted for.

Now going on to the Revelstoke rod and gun club and their concern with the Illecillewaet River, I'm advised that we will be surveying it to see if it can sustain fish, but there are some doubts in this regard. It would appear that the river is not high in priority to date because of its low productivity. It's both cold and silty. The member will know that the technical conditions under which stocking can be successful are very critical. There's a very fine edge as to whether it's feasible or not. But I can tell him that we have approximately $125,000 allocated for habitat improvement on streams tributary to the Arrow Lakes this year and certainly we are examining a number of streams in the area to upgrade fishing opportunities, so I think we're on the same wave length. It's just a case of what the best place is to do that.

At Boulder Mountain, I can tell the member that we have been consulting in regard to the All-Terrain Vehicles Act on a continuous basis with the snowmobile association. His point is well taken that consultation with provincial organizations alone may not suffice and that indeed differences of terrain could be significant here in regulating this. For that reason, we are getting advice supportive to those consultations from all of our regional offices. If the member is concerned that there hasn't been consultation in this instance, I take it as information and we'll certainly look into it.

Dealing with the member for Esquimalt's (Mr. Kahlos) comments on off-season rates, in conjunction with our analysis of all the options for expanded and improved service in the ferry system, which is going on now, we will be giving some consideration to rates. I think the context should be that we must establish what the costs and the nature of this service will be in future and then, having clearly set out those objectives, the second stage will be to determine just what the relationship should be between user pay and subsidy in terms of apportioning the subsidy which is now provided to the corporation among various users, different seasons, different routes and so forth.

I would just point out to the member for Esquimalt that at present the situation is approximately.... If a family of four -father, mother, two children - travel one of the main routes to Vancouver Island and return, the cost overall is approximately $60. The portion they pay is $38. There's approximately a 45 per cent subsidy in place now,

[ Page 889 ]

year-round. We begin from the simple fact that we have a very major subsidy being provided by the taxpayers to the Ferry Corporation and, in the circumstances, if there is to be an improvement in the subsidy, that is to say by reason of a lower off-season or off-peak rate, there has to be an equal and opposite adjustment in somebody else's rate in terms of their facing a higher ratio of fare to cost.

As to a group rate, I'd just like to clarify that the group need not arrive as foot passengers, providing they don't arrive in a large number of vehicles. If they're essentially traveling as a cohesive unit in a couple of buses or a vehicle of some description, that is manageable. But if you're talking about a group rate where 40 people arrive in 40 cars, it's just not practicable.

The Sooke potholes, the member will be aware that I've said that if there's anything we can do to expand on that tremendous public amenity there, and public access to it, we're certainly interested to do so. I can say that some discussions have taken place with the owner. However, there is no conclusion in the matter at this time.

Land for ATVs is certainly a matter which I will take as information and look into it.

MS. BROWN: I'd like to raise the issue of recreational facilities in Vancouver East, and in particular the skateboard park that the Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House has been in contact with the minister about.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, the east end of Vancouver really does not have sufficient recreational facilities for its young people. In particular I'm thinking of the pre-teens, the adolescents right up to about age 19, 20, or thereabouts. One of the things that the young people them elves have decided that they really would enjoy having is a skateboard park. I think that all of the statistics that are out about the kinds of dangers involved in skateboarding on the streets, especially in a busy section like the east end of Vancouver, would indicate that a skateboard park really is a most sensible place for young people who do want to indulge themselves in this particular sport.

Well, they approached the Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House, as you know, and they searched around for a reasonable place in which to build such a park, and they found the old China Creek park, which used to be a garbage dump but it's all filled now. Apparently this is the worst possible place on which to build a skateboard park, but it's cheap because it belongs to the city and they're allowed to have it free. So the design has been made for the park and it's going to cost somewhere between $45,000 and $50,000 because - I don't understand - supports have to be put in to take into account the settling of the garbage, and a special surface cover has to be put over it to be sure that it does not become bumpy after a while.

The Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House approached the NIP committee, and last week they approved $35,000 towards the building of this park. Prior to that, they wrote to you, Mr. Minister, and asked for some kind of commitment from the provincial government to assist with the development of this park. At this time, what they are asking the provincial government for is the sum of $10,000 to deal with the special kind of surfacing which is necessary if it is not to be dangerous, because of the fill settling and the bumps and one thing and another.

I'm wondering if you would be willing at this time, since they're already received a NIP commitment for $35,000, to make a commitment to that $10,000, which is all that they need in order to build this really very necessary recreational facility in an area that really needs recreational facilities.

MR. LLOYD: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to touch very briefly on some of the points that have been raised already, since they do affect my riding considerably. One is the wolf and predator control programme that the ministry went into last year. That's certainly going to be appreciated in the Prince George, McBride and Vanderhoof areas. A good example of why it is needed is that last year, in the McBride area, a sheep raiser lost his entire ewe flock to wolves and predators, so certainly they're going to appreciate the program that was instigated. I'm pleased to see the ministry extending this to also protect the wildlife -the moose, the deer and the caribou, and even the mountain sheep in some areas that are getting cleaned out by the wolves.

The other point that has been raised was the abolition of the leghold traps, and again I'm pleased to see that the ministry isn't making any sudden moves on this. Iove had several letters from trappers in my area, one from the president of the trappers o association, Mr. Joseph Carty, who's asking that no drastic changes be made until a proper alternate trap is not only developed but is put into production. So I'm pleased to see the ministry is holding off on this. He also requests that no legislation be presented until such time as trappers can have their input into it as well, and I understand the ministry has been working quite closely with them, so I am sure they

[ Page 890 ]

will appreciate that.

The other point was the salmonid enhancement programme, and certainly I think we'd encourage anything that can be done to increase the salmon spawning. I think I have to agree with some of the members that there are a good number of salmon beds that are practically supporting their maximum at the present time, and some of the faults are overfishing in the lower rivers and in the gulf. I think this is cleaning up quite a few of them.

One of the other things that is of real concern on the salmonid enhancement programme is the federal government's new Bill C38. The forest industry is really concerned. It would appear that we've had a few years in which people weren't paying any attention to watershed protection. They have now come out with a bill that goes too far the other way. I certainly think it's going to impose real hardships on the forest industry unless a little bit more common sense is used. I think the bill itself needs redrafting or amending. I think there is going to have to be a lot of common sense used in policing the bill or they are going to go overboard on it. I would ask the minister if he would keep in touch with the federal Minister of Fisheries on this, and try to see that there is a more commonsense approach to it. I think B.C.'s industry is still forestry and will be for many years to come; and I think it is important that they learn to live together. I would certainly be interested to hear the minister's comments on that.

I would like to touch briefly on the comments the minister made in his opening remarks concerning the library-funding policy. At the present time, Prince George is in the development stage of a new library complex in the range of $2 million to $2.5 million. This is the start of a full cultural-convention complex, which is down the road a few years. In any event, they are looking for assistance and operational funding for their new library. To the south of us is the Cariboo-Thompson-Nicola region of the provincial library commission which, some people feel, is providing Cadillac-type service at very little cost to the taxpayers in Kamloops and some of the other population centres, particularly in comparison to what the taxpayers in other areas pay. I think this is something the other cities are going to be watching. Victoria itself is another one. I understand the Victoria library is moving into new quarters in a new government building. I understand that they are getting rental-funding assistance, as well as operational assistance. While I certainly don't object to it - they cover a big area - I think it is important that the residents in other centres get similar assistance both in operation and capital expenses

I would like the minister's comments on these few points.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Firstly, Mr. Chairman - on the salmonid enhancement programme - I neglected to comment to the member for Esquimalt (Mr. Kahl) that we do have some plans for enhancement projects this year in the southern Vancouver Island area. We do have a problem, in that a number of streams in this immediate area are too small, and not very productive in relation to rivers along the east coast of the Island. We are doing some work here, and I'd be happy to provide those details.

The member for Vancouver-Burrard will know that our programme for assisting this sort of work is the recreational-facilities assistance programme. Under the new legislation we are endeavouring to bring about a more rational, integrated look at facilities in communities, particularly the larger ones. In the past there has been a tendency for not only the municipalities, but sundry service clubs and neighbourhood improvement groups and so forth, to individually launch various kinds of building projects, some of which have proven to be redundant. In any event, there hasn't been an adequate review at the community level of priorities. Under the new legislation we are looking to the local government to order those priorities. I quite agree with the member that the amount of money would not appear to be any difficulty. I am insisting that we do have this deliberate review at the community level so that these priorities are properly represented and we don't get duplication.

This would be a somewhat unique thing, and it is extremely unlikely that duplication would be a concern. I look forward to receiving the report from the city of Vancouver on these applications. I gather that is forthcoming.

To the member for Fort George (Mr. Lloyd): yes, I appreciate your support in regard to predator-control matters, and also your recognizing the fact that we are in close consultation with the trapping community to make sure that in bringing forward legislation we have legislation which is realistic and practicable as well as humane. I think the relationship between salmonid enhancement and Bill C38 - now passed in the federal House - will be a key part of the agreement we are looking forward to concluding with the government of Canada this year. That is, there should be a proper process whereby the federal fisheries

[ Page 891 ]

jurisdiction is integrated with the provincial resource-planning system to ensure that the right hand knows what the left hand is doing. There may, indeed, be provision for some type of compensation device where there are opportunity costs involved for either the fisheries or forest industry or some other resource user - that these are properly accounted for in the resource-planning scheme.

On library funding, I'm sure the member is aware from the budget address that the intention is to bring about a far more rational and equitable sharing of funding for libraries in the province. At present we have a frankly ridiculous range of support for libraries. It goes all the way from about 5 cents per capita in one instance to about $7.75 per capita in another. We've got apples and oranges and bananas in that scheme, and I think what we really need to do is get down to a fundamental approach which I expect to be able to relate shortly.

MR. KAHL: I'd like to make mention again of something that I spoke of , and that is the rate for school children and sports groups. You had indicated that it was difficult to look after that situation if they arrived in cars and whatnot at the ferry terminal.

HON. MR. BAWLF: If they go on the ferry.

MR. KAHL: Okay, but let me explain the situation to you. You see, it's very simple to arrive in buses and keep track of everyone, but the point that I'm trying to make is that it's difficult enough to afford the pass, let alone afford the bus. In cases in junior play where competition mu t go to the mainland, the transportation must be by cars; there's no other way it can be afforded, you see. So if parents such as myself take our boys to the mainland to play soccer, we take six or seven boys in a car. If there are two or three teams going, ;that amounts to sometimes eight or nine or ten cars, and it's impossible to provide or to pay for the bus as well as the ticket. So I'm sure there's some simple way of local sports organizations simply writing a letter to the B.C. Ferry Corporation saying how many people are coming, and the tickets can go back, they can distribute them and they can walk, ride a bicycle, a bus or whatever. It's a very simple matter.

MR. KING: I want to express my thanks to the minister for his comments regarding plans for the Arrow Lakes tributary stream and the allocation of $125,000, which is not really a great amount. I hope that that's just a start for the initial year. In three or four years' time there's going to be a major impact on the fishery in that whole area, as the minister is well aware.

The other point I would raise just before I move away from that subject is the need for an additional conservation officer. As the minister is probably aware, the conservation officer was moved out of Revelstoke some years ago, and one office was established in Nakusp to service the total area. Really, some pretty bad things have happened subsequent to that, and are continuing to occur, particularly now with the major reservoir behind the Mica Dam. The fishing at this time is pretty good up there, and there is actually no policing whatsoever of the catch. There have been problems both during the construction of the Mica Dam, when the river would be low, and %ben it was actually being diverted that some of the large fish were caught in pools and literally shovelled out. There was no regard paid to catch limitations. That's the kind of thing we don't need in any area of British Columbia. But it's literally impossible for poor old Pete Ewart from Nakusp to service that vast area. The problem is not going away; if anything, it's increasing with increased fishing pressures, with increased hunting and so on. I hope the minister will have a hard look at re-establishing an auxiliary officer or something in the Revelstoke area again.

To come back to the Sports B.C., I'm rather curious about the minister's statement that the audit was not satisfactory with respect to the lotteries handled by Sport British Columbia and their organizations. He indicated that this year the audit firm issued a conditional or a qualified audit. I appreciate that this is not with respect to the allocation made by the minister's office, I appreciate that we have fine public-spirited citizens on the board of directors, and I do not intend to imply or infer any misconduct on their part. But nevertheless, the business of lotteries, The Provincial lottery and the Western Express lottery, must be above any suspicion. It must be above any irregularities in terms of the handling and the conduct and administration of those particular lotteries.

The minister has indicated that this year's audit was by Johnson Rickard. Well, Mr. Minister, I have a copy of last year's audit...

HON. MR. BAWLF: That's what we're talking about, last year's.

MR. KING: ... the audit received and approved on June 21,1977. What happened to the audit for the funds that were allocated to cover the

[ Page 892 ]

year 1977? That audit should have been issued in January of 1978, 1 would think. Now the audit I see here contains this passage, Mr. Chairman:

"Our review of internal control indicated deficiencies in the system of accounting for lottery operations to the extent that we were not able to satisfy ourselves that all transactions involving purchase and sale of lottery tickets, and federation winnings thereon, were properly recorded in the accounts of the federation.

"Because of the possible effects of any adjustments which might have been required, we have been unable to satisfy ourselves concerning inventory of lottery tickets and accounts receivable ... we express no opinion on the overall financial position of the federation as of March 31,1977, or the results of its operations for the year then ended."

And it's signed by Rickard & Company. Now that is certainly a qualified audit...

HON. MR. BAWLF: That's right.

MR. KING: ... and a qualified audit pertaining to the administration of the provincial lottery and the Western Express is something, Mr. Chairman, that, I think, requires more of an explanation from the minister than just the rather vague statement: "We've had a look at it and we've made some adjustments." Now precisely what has the minister ordered, precisely what recommendations have the auditors indicated would be acceptable? Has the federation agreed to a precise formula of accounting which will be satisfactory, and guarantee approval in the future? These are the kinds of assurances that, I think, the House needs when the public of the province finds this kind of qualified report particularly for lotteries. That strikes a little fear into the hearts of most people; and surely that's an area where we should be extremely efficient and extremely businesslike in assuring that all of the receipts are properly accounted for. I would like a further explanation from the minister on this point.

HON. MR. BAWLF: I quite agree with those last remarks of the member, Mr. Chairman - it was a matter of some concern to us. I'd like to again just be clear on the chronology of events here. The current grant period commenced just the first of this month, and the audited statement for this past grant period will be forthcoming, I would expect, in a short time, a matter of weeks. But it will be the sequel to that audited statement which he has cited.

In the receipt of that qualified audit last June we were, of course, concerned. And, as I've said, examination of this in considerable detail and discussion with the auditors, involving the officials of my ministry and Sport B.C., disclosed that they were the innocent victims of having placed their records in the hands of a company - some kind of data processing company - which had folded, and had lost and misplaced some of their records. Quite simply, the auditors could not address any records for a limited period in that operating year which ended April 1,1977.

Since then a proper accounting system has been established, and the board of directors of Sport B.C. have been properly redressed to the matter; and certainly the procedures that had been set out have been carefully laid out by that same firm who conducted that audit and are in place to the satisfaction of everyone concerned. So we're dealing with an historical event which took place the year prior to last, in effect, the fiscal period prior to this last fiscal period - it goes back some time; the problem has long since been rectified.

MR. KING: I'd just like to thank the minister for his response, and I trust that that is the case and that they certainly will pursue accounting procedures which would in no way result in qualified audits in the future, because that has to be a matter of concern to everyone.

Perhaps the minister would undertake to ensure that next year, when the next audit is received, a copy of the audit be filed with the House. I think this would be a healthy practice, particularly with respect to the administration of any funds obtained by any organization that accounts for administration of any provincial lottery. Where audits are supplied to the government on the basis of that administration, I would suggest that they be filed with the Legislature.

Une last thing that I have to request of the minister is a matter that is rather generalized. It's not entirely a local matter in my riding but we do have high unemployment at this particular time of year. We do have the students coming out of school and university. I think that given the high rate of unemployment that we're suffering at the present time, the minister would be well advised to consider an accelerated programme of park development, park clearing, clearing up streams and reservoirs, and work like that which is productive and useful to the public, which would at the same time provide the source of revenue and

[ Page 893 ]

income to students who are trying to obtain assistance to finance their further education.

I would particularly commend to the minister's attention the need for this kind of programme in the Nakusp and New Denver area of my riding. There are very productive streams and tourist attractions in there that have been allowed to deteriorate over the past few years in terms of any proper maintenance of the fishery and in terms of good protection from the ravages of logging that have taken place in that area aver the years. Some stream cleanup programmes, some beach enhancement and public access areas to those waterways would be excellent programmes to keep the young people of the Slocan area working for the summer, and it would certainly assist in what is becoming an ever-increasing tourist area of the province. I would make a strong appeal to the minister to consider that type of approach this summer.

HON. MR. VANDER ZALM: Mr. Chairman, with your permission, might I make an introduction? I unfortunately didn't make it on time this morning because of an accident in the tunnel but I do see in the Legislature, in the gallery, Mr. Rene Massey, a well-known and much-respected teacher in Surrey, and a group from the Guildford Park Community School. I would ask the members present to bid them welcome.

MR. SHELFORD: I just want to make a couple of short points. First of all, I was interested in the concern on poison showed by the hon. member for Burnaby North (Mrs. Dailly) . I would like to merely point out to here that if, for instance - and I do not like poison any more than anybody else - they use cyanide, it's practically instantaneous. 'I've seen cases on the lakes up north where animals have not gone more than three or four feet from the bait.

Another thing I would point out to the minister to keep in the back of his mind is the fact that once we do find new methods to replace the leg-hold trap, the fact will remain that most of these trappers, who are mainly Indians, have at least $2,500 to $3,000 invested in traps. If they're all of a sudden banned and new traps have to be purchased, I would expect that they would be extremely expensive, far more expensive than the present traps. So it's very likely that if you do move into this field, you will have to consider some method of financing. Most of these Indian people, especially, have not got the money to buy all of this new equipment that will be required for the new type of trap when it does come in, if and when it does.

While I'm on my feet, I would also like to ask the minister to again - I've mentioned it before - give consideration to the closing of deer season throughout the central interior due to poor management practices over the last few years. Even if hunting is left open, there are so few deer left that I don't think hunters, even if you send a couple of thousand of them out, would get more than half a dozen deer over that whole country. So I would strongly recommend that this season be closed for at least five years until a proper predator control program has had some effect. It will likely take a lot more than five years -I would expect as much as 15 years - before the deer will come back to that whole central interior area. I would strongly recommend it be closed and closed this year.

Further, I would recommend that you hire predator control people to carry this work out because I think there's no question that you haven't got trained personnel in your department who can carry it out. I don't think they could compete with the experts in this field, which would be the trappers and the guides.

There is another suggestion I would like to make because there's always criticism from people if we'd look at ourselves and make reports on ourselves. I would say this is true in your own department. I would suggest that third-party people be used to carry out game counts. I'm not saying that biologists shouldn't go along. I think it would be good public relations to have third-party people involved. I think you'd get away from a lot of criticism from your own staff.

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Chairman, the minister, in responding to me yesterday, mentioned again that he had asked for a detailed report on the Chauncey-Todhunter-Ewin Creek area, and I thank him for that. I would ask the minister, when he's had a chance to read that - and I would trust he would give it his attention very quickly when he receives it - if he would give a commitment to file that with the House.

Once again I would urge the minister to look into the Sentinel area burning program-. As I understand it, it only involves an expenditure on behalf of his ministry in the order of $2,000 to $3,000. 1 think the holdup is because the forests ministry wants some kind of posting of a bond or something, as I understand it, in some fairly inordinate amount, which creates a difficulty. It's my understanding it has to be done in the spring. In all likelihood, fire would not get away. It would be under control. There would be no need to post a bond between two departments. Quite

[ Page 894 ]

frankly, Mr. Chairman, that sounds rather ridiculous to me. If there was any cost accountability between departments, that might be justified, but I don't think government has embarked upon that kind of bookkeeping, other than in the instance of rentals and such things

I'd like to know about the revenues of the department. This is one of the departments that produces revenues. There was a time when revenues from licence fees and such brought in more money than was actually spent on the resource. I would ask the minister how many licences were sold last year for resident hunting, for resident species and for resident angling. Also, how many non-resident hunting licences, how many non-resident species tags, and haw many non-resident angling licences were sold? What value has been realized from those sales last year, and what are the department's estimates for revenues this fiscal year from those sources? What is the source of miscellaneous revenues from hunting, from fines and from other recoverable funds?

Last year I brought up the matter of trapper education and its cancellation, which I claim occurred for a short period of time. This was cleared up and the programme was continued. But at that time I was given to believe that in the previous fiscal year the Ministry of Recreation and Conservation had borne the entire cost of the trapper education program - that would have been in the fiscal year ending March 31,1977 - that they had not availed themselves of the ARDA share and had lost out on about $7,500. 1 would ask the minister if that was the case. Were ARDA funds lost for one year as a result of failure to take that up? Perhaps that had something to do with whatever trouble we got into. I would certainly like to know the facts in this, as this was certainly given to me as one of the reasons why we got into some difficulty last year.

I'd like to bring to the minister's attention the problem which appears to be happening in terms of tenure for trapline cabins. I don't think anyone else has brought this up in the House. It appears you can get a special use permit and various other types of tenure. It may involve the Ministry of Forests or it may involve some other agency.

I have before me I don't know how many letters that were involved in the case of one individual. This particular individual has no income other than trapping and his small one-acre garden. I would imagine that by now this has been brought to the attention of the minister. I have correspondence that starts in March, 1976. Unfortunately it isn't two-way correspondence; it's mostly a record of letters which have been sent in reply. I take it that the individual attempted to get some tenure for a trapline cabin. I see a letter dated March 15,1976, which says: "Enclosed finally is your copy of the approved trapline transfer from P.B. Wadsworth. Good luck on your new line. Yours truly, the conservation officer." So it appears that something had been going on before that time.

One of the problems was that there is no lands office - the person's address being in Terrace - to handle this type of application. The Department of Lands boundary runs right through the town of Terrace, and they must write to the Prince Rupert land off ice or to the Smithers land office, depending on the location. There is a wildlife branch office, apparently, in Terrace.

We run into problem , July 22: "This will acknowledge receipt of your application for a special use permit for a trappers' cabin near Clear Creek. Your application is being reviewed and you will be further advised in due course." That's from Prince Rupert and from the district forester.

Then there was a letter from the director of land management, Ministry of the Environment:

"Dear Sir:

"Reference is made to your correspondence with B.C. Forest Service concerning ownership of a trappers' cabin. The area is not under the control of the Forest Service. It will be necessary for you to submit an application for a licence of occupation." So instead of getting a special use permit, he has to:

"...apply for a licence of occupation for cabin site purposes on the enclosed forms, which are to be sent to the land commissioner at Prince Rupert. No option is implied or granted by this letter."

The individual sent in a Canadian Cellulose Company map with as good a location of this as possible. He made out an application and now he is into February. This is an earlier application which indicates that.... I don't have a date. Oh, yes, it's October, 1976, so now he's almost ready for the trapping season and he has to make out an application. Because he applied for a special use permit, this was sent back to him because it was the wrong designation and should be for a licence of occupation. So this caused a delay of a couple of months.

The correspondence goes on in November and December, 1976, so now he's getting right into the trapping season: "Your application has been referred to the land management branch.

[ Page 895 ]

You'll be advised in due course."

He received the trapline March 15,1976, and is now advised he cannot occupy his line cabin. So, in effect, he cannot lawfully trap for this season for he must have use of the cabin to work the line. The cost to him for this particular winter might have been in the order of $5,000, and it might have cost him his only livelihood.

And the correspondence goes on, and to the best of my knowledge a use permit has not finally been granted as of some time in March. But what this points out, I think, is this need, which is not unique to the Ministry of Recreation and Conservation and trapline cabins but is a general need for a sort of a one-desk shopping, when people come in and want to apply for some kind of a land use. When people are applying to the department of lands, the onus seem to be on the individual to go around to all kinds of different departments and get clearances. If he had gone first to the department of lands, you could almost rest assured that he would have been referred to the Ministry of Forests in this particular instance; that is just the way things work. We're dealing here with people who are certainly not sophisticated in terms of pushing paper and correspondence around. There should be a branch to serve people, not to just shuffle them to other bureaucracies and thereby kind of wash your hands of the particular problem.

It's also a practice of the forestry branch that as soon as one of these licences or special use permits expires, they go in and set fire to cabins and destroy them. It's been going on for a long time. I know that my first attempt at drafting a private member's bill was toward the protection of wilderness cabins. Some of the leases are easily transferable to the new trapline owner and others aren't transferable. But when there is a transfer, cabins cannot be occupied until the title is approved and that can take a year.

So the person got the trapline, and that was all transferred. Fine, but the cabin which goes along with it....

HON. MR. BAWLF: Do you want an answer?

HON. MR. NICOLSON: Well, okay, if the minister would like to get up, maybe he knows the case I'm talking about. I'd like to know what's happened in this particular case, but more importantly, what is happening in general.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Well, Mr. Chairman, love got to say that I have not got the slightest idea what's happening in that particular case. I must say that while this point is well taken, perhaps there should be a better method of expediting these sorts of applications. Historically we have a problem of this nature. That review, as was pointed out earlier in the session underway and beyond that, is essentially a matter.... That is to say, a permit to obtain a site is something which revolves around primarily lands or forests and really has very little point being raised in my estimates, Mr. Chairman. It is not within my administrative purview.

[Mr. Rogers in the chair.]

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Chairman, I'm sure that a few of the backbenchers would be rather shocked to hear that, because certainly trapping is under the purview of the minister. If the minister isn't going to stand up for the trappers, then I don't know who is in the cabinet or whose responsibility it is.

In some instances, with snowmobiles and such things, you can run a trapline by simply going out and doing it in that way. In other instances, people are using snowshoes. They need these things for safety. Even if a person was to be running a trapline with a snowmobile, they do this alone, and they would be very ill-advised to go out without snowshoes and without having a cabin as a safety measure. In fact, they'd be very irresponsible on their own behalf if they were to indulge in this practice.

The minister perhaps isn't at all familiar with the practice of trapping. These cabins are absolutely essential. While trapping permits are sometimes transferred from one owner to another, and usually the traps and the sets and everything else go along with that, there is a problem over the transfer of leases. I was under the impression that the trappers' association had been in contact with the department aver this problem, but if that isn't the case....

Sure, there are letters here from the Minister of Forests (Hon. Mr. Waterland) and the director of lands and people in the Ministry of the Environment. The whole point of this, Mr. Chairman, is that the onus is put on the trapper to go to all of these different departments. Now he interrupted me before I went through all of the red tape. There's a great deal of it here; there are miles of it. This is a man whose only source of livelihood is the trapline, and he's lost probably two seasons of work because of this. I gave an undertaking to bring this up in the Legislature.

[ Page 896 ]

I have a letter which is actually unsigned, but it makes some very good points. No, it is signed; it's from the Northwest Trappers' Association, Mr. Watmough. They have sent in recommendations on cabin site tenure on registered traplines, and it was also presented to the B.C. Trappers' Association on February 2,1978. I'm sure that as a result of this, something has been forwarded to the ministry. "It says that it must be recognized that the holder of a registered trapline shall be entitled to hold a suitable amount of land as cabin sites, and that such sites shall be and have legal tender under his line registration." This is their proposal; this is what they're asking for. I would ask the minister to consider it.

Point No. 2 is that "Cabin sites shall be restricted to one for every 15 square miles or of one to every eight miles of trapping trail." That certainly seems to be a pretty reasonable request, because eight miles is a fair distance if you have to go through it under winter conditions.

"These sites shall be transferred with the transfer of the registered line." I think that would be one of the crucial points here. These could be transferred in some way.

"Trapping cabins located on these sites shall not be subject to taxation unless they exceed 150 square feet of total floor space." So it's not as if people were looking for a cheap way of building little resort cabins on Crown land or that they're very likely to start squatting in these things.

"The trapping cabins located on these sites shall comply with foreshore zoning and other requirements, " which means that they would not be placed right on foreshores and such in violation of other setback regulations.

"Sites shall be held on all Crown leases, TFLs, grazing leases and permits, mining leases, timber leases, agriculture and residential." And that, Mr. Chairman stems from the fact that if it's on a mining lease, if it's on timber lease, if it's on agricultural or residential or some other type of thing, the person who is very ill-equipped to put up with all of this bureaucracy is shunted from one place to another to another.

"To be recognized as legal, cabin sites must be marked on a map of the registered line of such other description as may be necessary."

"Trappers should deal with one agency to acquire sites from the Ministry of Recreation and Conservation." Mr. Chairman, I think that is one of the most important principles, and one that could also be applied to many other forms of activity.

There is explanation for this. I was under the impression that I had simply received a copy of this, because I'm certainly not the minister. As is often the case when people make copies and they don't have carbon paper around, they type out originals, they mail them to you, and if the minister has not received a copy of this, I will certainly forward him this brief. It's not slick. It hasn't been prepared by a set of consulting firms, but, Mr. Chairman, I think that it is well worth considering; and I would stress in this area that it isn't just trappers who run into this kind of problem; there are many others. Here we have a right which is granted by the ministry and yet, in practice, a person cannot exercise that right, and he's prohibited for two years because of being shunted from place to place.

Mr. Chairman, I'd also like to know more about the salmonid enhancement programme. I really wonder what the chances of success of the salmonid enhancement programme will be if something is not done about the herring fishery. It's my understanding that fishermen are now finding salmon with the lowly bullhead in their stomachs, and that this was virtually unnoticed in earlier times. Mike Cramond, in the Vancouver Province of April 7, wrote a very excellent article in which he talked about the effect of the loss of herring stocks and the depletion of salmonids. If we go and enhance the spawning beds for salmonids, and if we continue to see the depletion of the herring stocks, which are very important feed for salmon and other salmonids, I think that we will not achieve what is intended.

I would also like to know what the $20 million - most of which is going to be spent by the federal government, and $300,000 by the provincial government - is going to be spent on. Are they going to build artificial spawning channels? Are they going to enhance spawning channels? Are they going to put in optimum-sized gravels, remove certain overburdens perhaps, or silted areas, and put in the optimized coarseness of gravel to enhance the aeration, laying and setting of eggs?

I think a failure of the salmonid enhancement programme - and one reason that people are maybe not as enthusiastic as they should be - is that we really don't know what some of the physical measures are going to be. We hear that dollars are going to be expended. But, for instance, would there be something comparable created to compensate for some losses of spawning areas, such as the Meadow Creek spawning channel, created - away from the salt-water fishery - on Kootenay Lake with the building of the Duncan Dam? Are they going to build' this type of physical structure, which

[ Page 897 ]

is a very artificial rearranging of a creek and setting of the creek bed, in such a manner that production actually exceeded that which could be achieved by nature? Is it going to be just a cleaning up of debris throughout certain watercourses? I would like to know that.

Also, I would like to know whether there is going to be any point in doing this if we don't address ourselves to the problem of herring, which are, I would imagine, the most important feed of salmonids. Once we get a very good escapement from our freshwater streams, it will be no good if they don't return because there isn't sufficient feed for them in the oceans. We are coming to realize that feed in the oceans is not unlimited.

In this article by Mike Cramond, he goes back and he says:

"It was at an annual cocktail event of the fisheries association, held in the Vancouver Aquarium, that the then Minister of Fisheries, and my nearby neighbour, James Sinclair, replied to my concern with the over-fishing of herring and other coastal stock with: 'Mike, We do have over-fishing problems in the Pacific Coast, but they aren't anything to what they will be when the Russians and Koreans fully enter these waters."'

"That was a prophetic statement which the former Rhodes scholar could, from his more intimate knowledge of foreign affairs, probably assess with some degree of greater accuracy than most.

"There was concern within the ers of the commercial fishery groups about the netting of herring under arc lights; the high incidence of grilse in seined herring; a diminishing size in the immature springs which were taken at early commercial openings; and a very high incidence of I shakers' (immature blueback-Cohoes) ... being slapped of f the commercial lines during deep trolling for springs.

"Individual commercial fishermen and sports anglers continually brought their concern aver these situations to (Mike Cramond) .

"The enormous catch drawn off the herring populations had reached the magnitude of 260,000 tons per season; and sports anglers were complaining about the abrupt reduction of the number of Cohoes and springs available during their summer fishing activities."

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, the salmonid enhancement programme is admittedly under the Minister of Recreation and Conservation but the subject you're dealing with in saltwater fisheries would almost better be covered in Ottawa under the federal Minister of Fisheries who is responsible for saltwater fishing in this country.

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Chairman, the province is engaged in a programme. There's an item in our budget of $2 million expenditure for salmonid enhancement. If we enhance the nest of the salmon - that is, our stream and rivers - and we spend money on that...

MR. CHAIRMAN: I appreciate your point, hon. member; however....

MR. NICOLSON: ...and if there's no food for them to return, then we will have wasted $2 million of provincial money and a total of $20 million on this program- in this year. There are projected expenditures of up to $750 million on this programme, Mr. Chairman, and British Columbia is playing a very major role in this. What I am suggesting to the minister is that if other steps are not being taken, then I would vote against this. I would call a division on that vote if there was no concern for what is going to happen to our investment. I'm all in favour of this investment, Mr. Chairman - this item in our budget which appears as if the provincial government is putting in $2 million when in fact it's putting $300,000 - but I would not be for that expenditure if it is going to be spent in vain. It would be like performing some sort of a major operation for someone who is known to be perhaps going to die in a day or two of some other terminal illness completely unrelated to the operation. We will be performing an unnecessary operation if, in my opinion, this were not done. I would think I am in order here.

"Places which were once easy to jig for herring as a bait for salmon fishing became barren. Strip-casting, at such commonly frequented spots as the North Arm Jetty, Salmon Rock, Gospel Rock, Gower Point, et cetera, became- unbelievably unproductive. where five years previously the limit of eight salmon for the sports fishermen could be reasonably filled almost any late July and August day, the new limit of four was difficult to catch.

"Anglers began to report commercial fisherman gill-netting intensively in such stretches of water as the shelf of the Sechelt Peninsula, areas which have been almost untouched because of the former availability of fish off the river mouths. Much acrimony arose between these

[ Page 898 ]

two bodies of utilizers. With a group of concerned anglers, (Mr. Cramond) inaugurated the Pacific Salmon Society and in that organization, Dr. George Ward, an accredited economist, compiled the statistics for a brief which showed that the fishery was in definite and continuous decline. Among the items put forth were a limitation of commercial licensing, scientific studies and markings of salmonid and related species, the intervention in foreign fishing off these shores.

"The herring populations crashed in 1967, from the previous year of 181,000 to 19,000 tons, as the society and this writer predicted. In that same period, this writer wrote the Premiers of the Maritime provinces, Stanfield, Robichaud et al.

"The B.C. loss of herring stocks and depletion on salmonids was related to them as it had happened, and it was pointed out that the transference of the Pacific fleet of seiners to the Atlantic could result in a depletion of their own herring stocks within three years.

"It hadn't taken the Russians' and the Koreans' entry into our fishery to dislocate and deplete the former abundances either on the Pacific or Atlantic coasts.

"The herring fishery was closed down for a couple of years under a mandate inspired by the then Minister of Fisheries, Jack Davis, and a protective 'food fishery' rider was placed on herring fishing. This meant that the taking of herring was to be for a viable food source, not for reduction on other extravagant purposes. Permits were issued for small tonnages for food, and bait. The annual take was small.

"This fishing for 'food purposes' was literally pried open by interested commercial groups to allow the fishing for herring and roe for caviar. It has allowed the fishery to take up to 100,000 tons of herring a year, as so-called food purposes., It has reintroduced the reduction of carcasses (85 per cent of the fish catch) for supplementary non-food purposes.

"This is indeed a complete circumvention of the original purposes of the regulations which were expressly made to assist the herring in recovery."

In another article I've read of the incidence of the condition of salmon being such as I mentioned, they're even finding them feeding on bullheads, so I would ask the minister to give us some idea of the physical type of work which is going to be done in the salmonid enhancement programme. Beyond just knowing which rivers are going to enhanced, what is going to be done to enhance them? Will there be artificial spawning channels built? Will there be improvement of gravel deposits and such to optimize the hatch and escapement and such of salmonids? Is there any consideration being given through this joint federal-provincial programme to the very serious situation with herring stock?

MR. LLOYD: I have just a couple of very brief points. I'm going to mention the boat launching on Williston Lake. There was also a boat-launching plan for McNaughton Lake near Valemount, where B.C. Hydro also flooded a basin. This was pretty well promised last year between the parks branch, the B.C. Forest Service and B.C. Hydro. At the present time, since the water has been well drawn down, time is rather of the essence. I'd like to know if the ministry is aware of any co-ordinated effort to prepare this boat-launching site or to decide who's going to put it together. I think there is a lot of co-operation available in the community; the sawmills have indicated they would work on it. As I say, the lake is low so it's an opportune time to get in and get it together.

Another short point is on the stream enhancement. The Spruce City Wildlife Association, based in Prince George, had a very worthwhile programme last year at Purden Lake, particularly in creeks entering Purden Lake. They've done a very nice job there cleaning up the stream and improving the trout spawning beds. I understand their next project is at Jacques Lake just north of Prince George. I think they set a real example of what sports clubs can do in this particular area.

I would like the minister's comment on that. I understand the establishment of a fish hatchery is quite a ways down the road. Prince George would like to be considered as the next priority spot for this when it does come along. In the meantime the sports clubs, particularly Spruce City Wildlife, have indicated that they would be interested in going into a small-scale fish hatchery and they'd probably be looking for technical and financial assistance from the ministry on this. I understand this has been very successful in some of the northwestern United States. They've really supplemented their trout by means of programmes like this. There was a similar programme in Prince George in the late 1930s, which was operated by the Prince George Rod and Gun Club at Klukas Lake, and it worked out very successfully. I think this type of volun

[ Page 899 ]

teer working on small fish hatcheries should be encouraged, and I just wondered if the ministry has anything along that particular line.

MR. NICOLSON: I was hoping that the minister would rise. Well, okay, I'll give you more questions.

In one other aspect of the ministry I mentioned yesterday, the habitat protection programme, it's my understanding that the objectives of the habitat protection programme are to improve resource management in the province in order to lessen the impact on the environment of fish and wildlife resources. by economic and other developments. Mr. Chairman, as I outlined yesterday, the economic development of mining exploration, particularly coal mining exploration which will ultimately lead to strip-mining and which even in the exploration phases has more serious environmental impact than most types of mineral exploration, is proceeding at a pace....

When I mentioned about $7 million, the Minister of Mines (Hon. Mr. Chabot) interjected into the debate: "More." When I said there were 30-odd coal leases advertised in the Gazette, he said: "More." So it is going at a very rapid pace. I pointed out to the minister that many of those coal leases, one of which he has promised me he is getting a report on, lie right aver critical habitat designated by the Canada Land Inventory as being No. I priority land for wildlife ungulates. It seems that where God blessed us with coal, he also blessed us with some very good wildlife ungulate habitat. So while these revenues are coming in at the rate of millions of dollars a year for the coal exploration permits, we're spending less money on habitat protection.

I understood that the branch was hoping to have emphasis on assessing the impact of major development proposals, such as the impoundment and diversions for Hydro generation, forest and mineral resources exploitation, monitoring and evaluating the impact of pesticides, and other major developments in coal mining and related industries.

Here we have coal mining, which is bringing in additional revenues - the Minister of Economic Development (Hon. Mr. Phillips) will boast about it and the Minister of Mines (Hon. Mr. Chabot) will boast about it - but we are spending less money on habitat protection at this particular time. I've asked the minister how much was spent last year and how much is going to be spent this year on habitat protection in the northeast coal block. Perhaps the minister can reply to that.

I'd like to talk a little about the poisoning programme. As things are right now, there is a tremendous threat to wildlife. I'd like to try to bring to the minister's attention and maybe to the attention of urban members who haven't considered these things the threat from predation to wildlife ungulates such as caribou - which has been pretty well outlined in this House - to something which we can see in the cities. Here in Victoria, for instance, we are overrun with crows, and songbirds such as robins cannot survive because we are feeding the crows all the time by having garbage and waste available. These animals can scavenge and they can survive. They don't have to be predators on such animals as robins.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, I must ask you to relate this to the administrative duties of the Minister of Recreation and Conservation. It seems to me that the control of garbage in the city of Victoria to the feeding of crows does not come under the administrative responsibility of the minister. Please relate this to the minister.

MR. NICOLSON: Mr. Chairman, it's just for city members such as yourself that I have gone to a great deal of trouble to bring this analogy to your attention.

Interjection.

MR. NICOLSON: I make a very serious point, Mr. Chairman. As long as there is an ample supply of food for predators, they will survive and there will not be an ecological balance. They will be able to devour such things as robins or, more particularly, raid robins' nests and kill off the songbirds as a dessert but not as a staple of their diet. That is precisely what happens in the case of caribou in the north and in other areas, when, as a result of civilization, we have gone into areas with domestic animals readily at hand upon which wolves also create a very serious problem.

One way of getting rid of some of the problems of predation, and to go back to the situation where the Farley Mowat theory would work, would be if there was not such an availability of domestic animals upon which predators can feed and remain very, very healthy. And when their numbers get way beyond any sort of a natural balance they then take on other animals such as caribou.

We are not going to get rid of domestic animals; we are not going to stop farming. For the reason that we have civilized most parts of this province and brought domestic animals in, there is a need to control predators. We

[ Page 900 ]

have shown concern in this House in the past over the inhumane aspects of using the simple leg-hold trap for all forms of trapping. I would say to this House that my father-in-law was a trapper as well as a guide and outfitter, and I know at least second hand a little bit whereof I speak.

So too does the poisoning of wolves with such things as strychnine-type poisons. I have seen a dog die of strychnine poisoning; it was a neighbour's animal. Somebody had put out poisoned meat. It is not a very pretty sight and it is not a very humane sight.

The amount of money that has been spent on the federal-provincial trapping committee has really been a pittance in the budget. Yet if at least $10,000 or $20,000 could be given in order that some kind of field testing of some alternate method could go on.... Une person jokingly mentioned: wouldn't it be better to give them an overdose of barbiturates? Really, I think that might be where you would have to start in terms of a poisoning programme to come up with something a little bit more humane than strychnine. If -at can be laced with strychnine, it might just as easily be laced with some other type of food which, taken in excess, would have the desired effect.

I know that when my father-in-law went into the Peace River country in 1912 - it might be a surprise even to members who live in that area - there were no moose in the Peace River area within a radius of a couple of hundred miles of Dawson Greek. They had been completely driven away by predation, largely by wolves. We see that in a very short space of time the caribou population has been reduced by half. It's estimated that in 10 years the population of caribou dropped from 25,000 down to 13,000.

1 have made the point that there are three things to be considered in terms of these wildlife populations, one of which is regulation of the hunter, regulation of the harvest, setting of limits and so on. Another is habitat, and that's where it's very important that we have habitat protection, particularly when coal exploration is going ahead at very accelerated rates. We cannot tolerate a reduction in the habitat protection portion of the budget. It really should be doubled at least. I would say doubled because I think the branch might have the ability to respond to a doubling. I would hesitate to go much further than that, although I'm sure more is needed.

HON. MR. BAWLF: It is doubled.

MR. NICOLSON: In habitat protection?

HON. MR. BAWLF: Yes.

MR. NICOLSON: The minister interjects, and I'd like to know what is going to be spent in the northeast coal block as one particular example of the habitat protection programme.

HON. MR. BAWLF: There are a number of questions, Mr. Chairman. First of all, the total revenues from wildlife fees and licences of all description is not complete. They are estimated to be approximately $5,818, 750 for last year. This year $5,875, 750 is projected. Trapper education - have ARDA always participated? To the best of my officials' knowledge, yes, it's always been on a shared basis.

Salmonid enhancement - are we concerned about herring depletion, and what are we doing about it? We are concerned to see the results of reviews that have been conducted by federal fisheries with the benefit of their manpower resources, which they provide for the management of this stock. We have an ongoing communication with federal fisheries on all sorts of matters of this nature. We feel that upon examination of their information at that point or at any time in the future, the provincial interest in terms of the economy and employment, and arising out of any possible deflation or deleterious effects on herring.... If there are any serious implications we will certainly be expressing our concern to federal fisheries which have jurisdiction aver the resource.

The member talked about salmonid enhancement projects, types of improvements. He cited one which I believe is in the Kootenay system, which he'll know has no salmonids in it, but I take it he was just using that as an example.

MR. NICOLSON: Landlocked kokanee.

HON. MR. BAWLF: That example is perhaps a little off the mark, but he cited a number of types of projects and asked me if it is going to be this kind of thing or that kind of thing. I think I can say yes to all of the things he cited as examples, and there are a number of other examples which are heavily documented. Rather than take up the time of the House these are public information with which I'd be happy to provide him.

One more point on the herring matter though: he cited some statistics in the harvest of the herring. We're averaging somewhere around 70,000 to 80,000 tons of herring annually in recent times, and that is just to put an order of magnitude on the current situation.

The member for Fort George (Mr. Lloyd) was asking about McNaughton Lake, I believe it

[ Page 901 ]

was, and I'll just have to say that I'll be checking into that one. We're unable to locate any information on it here.

With regard to a fish hatchery, the situation there is that, as n-m ers will know, we opened the new Fraser Valley fish hatchery this past year, which is a major step in our capability to stock lakes and streams across the province. It roughly doubled our capacity, and we have additional capacity available there by way of expansion of that plant. We can, I believe, double or triple the output of that hatchery. This is probably the finest and most modem of its sort anywhere. So our first priority would be, in terms of expansion of actual fish-growing technology, to expand that plant. But in terms of Prince George, we would be, let's say, considering as a worthy objective in the future some kind of a distribution facility, a holding facility where the fish are moved to the north for stocking lakes in that area.

The other question the member for Nelson-Creston (Mr. Nicolson) raised was habitat protection. I would just point out to him that there has been a reidentification of one position, but it's still essentially involved to a large extent in the habitat protection role. At present, we are looking at just a little less than $1 million for habitat protection, identified as such, of which about $50,000 will be for examining the coal exploration situation the member is concerned with.

However, I would point out to him - and he should be well aware of this because it's right in the midst of his part of British Columbia - that the recoverable funds from B.C. Hydro represent - and here I'm speaking of approximately $1.5 million this year -almost entirely compensation for habitat -habitat projects, of one description or another, to compensate for Hydro projects. This includes Keenleyside, Libby, Pendd'Oreille and Revelstoke Dam , which are all in his area. So, in fact, the habitat protection or habitat enhancement programmes of the ministry are well in excess of something in the order of $2.5 million in this current year.

MR. KERSTER: I'd like to move away from conservation and the way the debate has been going for just a few minutes, and go back to an area in recreation that I think deserves some attention, an area in recreation that is fast disappearing - and that is the motor sport area.

I know, Mr. Chairman, that the area of racetracks and formula racing and drag racing is not a very popular one. It is sometime considered distasteful by many people in many communities, yet there are many people who have adopted that type of recreation and that discipline of recreation as their preferred form of recreating. Some people don't like racetracks and some people don't like children, so I don't think that we should rule it out on the basis of people not liking it.

I know that we do have a definite need for areas for sports-car racing, for formula-car racing, drag racing, motorcross facilities and all-terrain vehicles, because there are many people, as I've said, who really enjoy that type of recreation. For example, the Mission racetrack is, I understand, about to breath its last breath. Westwood was under the gun until about three days ago. The Westwood track, of course, is hosting major races from all over North America at the present time, and should be maintained as a facility, at least until we can come up with something that would be an improved situation. So Westwood is being granted another five-year lease on life through an extension of the lease on their present facilities.

But, Mr. Chairman - through you to the minister - I think that there is a definite need for us to have a strong look at taking drag racing off the streets and putting it back on the tracks where it belongs; and that's where the drag racers would really like to have it. I think there's a need for the ministry to devote some very definite, concerted attention to this need, and consider dovetailing many of these motor sport disciplines into one facility, and putting that facility on the lower mainland.

MR. BARNES: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the House to join me in welcoming a group of students from Springvalley Junior Secondary School in Kelowna.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Is Kelowna part of your new riding?

MR. BARNES: Mr. John Powell is their accompanying teacher.

Before I ask the minister a couple of questions, I'd like to honour a promise I made to one of his Liberal supporters who has been working with me in an unbiased way, a non-partisan way, in helping the students and young people of the province. I understand the minister has seen the light and is now providing for pre-school recreation, and leadership training in the schools and in some of the community colleges. I told the Liberal supporter that I would be sure and pay my respect where it was due, and so in that regard I'd

[ Page 902 ]

like to thank you for that little move. Mind you, I don't know if your card has expired in that. Are you still a member of the Liberal Party, Mr. Member?

Before I sit down I'll ask you one question. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the minister one question and then I'll take my seat. I'd like him to explain to me the procedure that took place in designating the Rogers mansion as a heritage site.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I think, hon. members, perhaps I should get someone else to take the chair, as it's my father's birthplace that's being discussed.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Mr. Chairman, it was designated by the city of Vancouver, I believe, under the authority of the municipal designation procedure which is established in the statutes of the province of British Columbia.

MR. BARNES: Well, Mr. Chairman, I can appreciate the intent of the designation. I wonder if the minister could explain to the House why only part of that site was designated as a heritage site? I understand it consists of a coach house, a garage and some stalls. Were these not part of that facility?

[Mr. Davidson in the chair.]

HON. MR. BAWLF: In these matters the determination as to what constitutes heritage is in the hands of the authority who actually designate. In that instance, the city of Vancouver, through their heritage advisory committee, have doubtless had deliberations to determine what the merits were of designating this part or that part. I'm not privy to any of that discussion or the reasons thereto.

MR. BARNES: I was visiting in the area -incidentally the B.T. Rogers mansion is located on Nicola Street in the West End near Davie - and I was speaking to some of the neighbours of the residence in the area. They were curious as to why one part of a heritage site, a site that apparently was constructed in 1901, 1 believe, by the famous architect who constructed residential buildings, Mr. McClure.... They felt that that was a worthwhile move in making the designation, but were curious as to why only the mansion which housed the Rogers family was being designated. They excluded those people who worked for the Rogers family - that is, the garage, the coach house and all of the stalls, I suppose, which were used in those days by horses and carriages for repairs. But. if we're interested in history and designating our sites for the purposes of posterity as an interest to tourists and so forth, then it would seem strange that no consideration was given to the complete site. You know, it doesn't give a true picture of, I'm sure, the intent of this Heritage Conservation Act.

Mr. Chairman, there is a scenario about the whole thing also that I'd like the minister to explain. At the present time, does the provincial government have any interest whatsoever in that site? Is the provincial government a principal in any way in the old Rogers site?

HON. MR. MAIR: Do you want to buy it, Emery? Do you want to buy it with all your new-found money?

HON. MR. BAWLF: I'm not certain whether the provincial government has any interest. I might say again that I've had no hand in the designation. I'm familiar enough with the building. I've looked at most of Sam Maclure's buildings in the province, of which there are quite a few, and that's one of them. But as to why it was designated and the precise reasons and the extent of the designation and who owns the land and so on....

[Mr. Veitch in the chair.]

Is it Dominion Construction which owns the building which is designated? I heard that they were putting a restaurant in and so forth.

MR. BARNES: Yes, that's correct. Mr. Chairman, I believe the minister's memory is a bit hazy, but it is Dominion Construction that has owned the site since the early 1950s, I believe, having purchased it, if my information is correct, from the Rogers family. In any event, they have owned it for some time. I understand that they have sold part of it to the provincial government, the Housing Corporation of British Columbia, and I was wondering if the minister had any knowledge of that.

Does the minister have any knowledge of the plans for the other half of the site? He indicated that the mansion would be converted into a restaurant. Now the other half of the site is owned by Dominion Construction, and they are renting half of it, from what I understand, to a restaurateur by the name of Mr. Hydro Eisenstadt, who has apparently been quite successful with his chain across Canada. I would like to know if Mr. Eisenstadt has any plans for the whole site. I understand there is something in the works, some talk about a demolition permit to demolish the coach house

[ Page 903 ]

and the Angus garage and the horse stalls. I was wondering if this had anything to do with the mansion, if there was any connection.

It's a rather confusing thing to me to figure out why part of a site was designated heritage, and the other half is going to be razed - and the Housing Corporation of British Columbia having an interest in it, my understanding is, only in the last four months. I'm just curious. I'd like the minister to explain how that could happen. The Act is under his jurisdiction and I would think that he would be concerned about any designations that were only half complete. Certainly there should have been some consultation with him before this last mansion, one of the few remaining mansions of that stature and architectural excellence, was to be preserved; most of them in the West End have been demolished. So the Housing Corporation of British Columbia, in taking over ownership in the last four months, seems to be moving pretty fast. The understanding is that on this site ' which has in part been designated heritage, they intend to construct condominiums of a low profile, consisting of two and three bedrooms, selling for about $45,000 to $55,000 each - some 100 of them.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Yes, I'm told that, indeed, the property which this coach house is on and which is in the hands of the Housing Corporation has come to the attention of the British Columbia Heritage Trust board, who have written to ask some information of the Housing Corporation as to what their intentions are. That's as far as the matter goes so far.

Just to clarify: insofar as the Heritage Conservation Art is concerned, the province has jurisdiction in matters which are deemed to be of province-wide significance - provincial heritage significance. Those which are considered to be of local heritage significance are capable of designation at the option of the local municipal government, and the only requirement of the municipal government is that they provide us with notice that they have designated such and such a property. We try to maintain a register of all these things so that they're co-ordinated. The trust, for its part, is intended to try to assist local government in bringing about preservation. So it is involved, to the extent that I've mentioned, in making some inquiries to this point. That's really all the additional information that I can give the member on that subject, on that Rogers mansion - except to tell him that I live in a house that was built in the same year, 1901, by the same architect. And I wish Mr. Eisenstadt good luck, because it seems to have a great capability to absorb our collective resources - my wife's and mine - in trying to restore it. But the man was a great architect. And I think other British Columbians, in a number of instances, have tried to preserve his buildings because they are a special part of our heritage.

MR. BARNES: I'm not fully apprised of just to what extent Mr. Maclure participated in the overall construction or design of the site but perhaps he was also the architect of those buildings that are going to be demolished. I'm not sure, but that would be an interesting point in light of what the minister has just shared with us.

But the question that I am concerned about is the extent of consultation with all parties involved in a decision to bring the minister up to date about a decision which has been made to construct condominium . An application has been made for a demolition permit from the city of Vancouver. So this being the case, I wonder if the minister is aware that this is quite contrary to the thrust of the budget speech in which the government said that it would be lending assistance to small businesses.

I know that sounds like a confusing statement but perhaps the minister is not aware that in the Angus garage and in the some 20 stalls small private enterprises are operating, some 20 of them to my understanding. One of them is a garage which has been there for nine years. Apparently there is a tenant there who has been operating a successful business for nine years along with a number of other tradespersons ranging from moving and storage, reclaiming of various appliances and so forth and selling them....

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, the Chair is having a little difficulty understanding the relevance.

MR. BARNES: Well, I think it's quite relevant because we're talking about a decision by a committee which is regulated by an Act for which this minister is responsible. All I'm suggesting is that he hasn't kept himself apprised of what's going on. Maybe he has; I'm just trying to find out, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: One moment, please, hon. member. That still wouldn't establish relevance. If it's a municipal body acting under a section of that Act, it wouldn't come under the minister's purview. Just for your edification.

[ Page 904 ]

MR. BARNES: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: But it may not be relevant.

MR. BARNES: Mr. Chairman, I would like for the House to understand the point of what I'm saying. It is that the government in its budget speech said that it cared about small businesses, that it was concerned about small businesses, that it had appropriated funds to assist small businesses, that it would do what it could to assist them because it wanted to create jobs. I'm suggesting that because of a careless act on behalf of authorities who are designating half of a heritage site, they're overlooking the other half. We end up with about 20 businesses being wiped out.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, you're still dealing with the acts of a municipal body which do not come under the purview of this particular ministry, even though the Heritage Act does. I'm sure you understand the point that the Chair is making.

MR. BARNES: Okay, I'll leave that one. I think the point has been made. For a government that cares about small businesses, there are a number of people there who would have doubts.

The minister mentioned the trust fund, the fund that's appropriated to assist in investigating heritage sites and so forth. Now could the minister tell the House whether or not that fund is used in any way to reclaim, in the way of capital improvement, or refurbishor whatever may be necessary on these sites? Specifically, are any of the trust funds being used to restore the Rogers' mansion?

Interjection.

MR. BARNES: I understand that some $500,000 is being spent to renovate the inside of the mansion and a considerable amount also on the outer facilities. Could the minister comment on whether or not the fund would in any way be involved in that?

HON. MR. BAWLF: No.

MR. BARNES: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister if Dominion Construction has any interest in the buildings that are going to be constructed on the other half of the site. No knowledge?

HON. MR. BAWLF: No idea.

MR. BARNES: Could I ask the minister this: did you have any knowledge before the site was designated as heritage what it would be used for?

HON. MR. BAWLF: I don't even know when it was designated.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. Only one member may speak at a time.

MR. BARNES: These are the questions that I think the minister should give some thought to, because the scenario makes one wonder what the government's concerns are. Heritage sites have become potentially valuable, exploitable facilities. When a private person can acquire a piece of property for commercial purposes, under an Act that is supposedly for the public's good such as this one, and develop an enterprise, even though the minister suggests that a favour is being done and he's hopeful that Mr. Eisenstadt will be successful, that's all fine. But I'm wondering if the public's interest is being fully served. In developing that site, it's my understanding that already the Housing Corporation of British Columbia has made certain concessions. For instance it is my understanding that those condominium will be constructed over parking facilities which are necessary....

HON. MR. BAWLF: Order! Why are we talking about the Housing Corporation?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hon. member, the Chair is having difficulty. It's possible you may be discussing the need for legislation; that is not acceptable in committee. If you are referring to the Housing Corporation of British Columbia, that would come under the purview of another hon. minister, and that would not be acceptable in this debate.

MR. KING: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I think the point the member is making is that the minister is responsible for the designation of historic buildings and premises.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Not in every instance.

MR. KING: The point is that if, through that designation, private institutions are able to profiteer - and I'm not using that in an improper sense - then certainly the minister's designation of historic sites in the province of British Columbia becomes a relevant matter of policy that should be discussed during the

[ Page 905 ]

consideration of his administration.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, the Chair will accept all relevant debate, hon. member.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Mr. Chairman, as I've pointed out, this particular line of discussion would perhaps be more appropriate with reference to the fishing part of my ministry than to the heritage part, because, quite simply, I do not have any information, knowledge or involvement in that designation which takes place under the jurisdiction of the city of Vancouver. I do not have any responsibility for what the Housing Corporation is doing and I am only very indirectly aware of this matter.

I would Just say one other thing, however, and let me be specific. There is no money going from any heritage fund or trust or programme connected with the province into that building. I must say, however, that I am delighted to see that the private sector, both Dominion Construction - if they're the owners of the property that is designated - and the restaurateur, are working towards the preservation of a great old house. I think that's to be encouraged. I'm not sure that that member over there is complimenting them or running them down, but in any event his discussion here has drifted far off the point of the administration of my office.

[Mr. Rogers in the chair.]

MR. BARNES: It may be that there's some question as to the specific relevance, but I don't think there's any question of the spirit of what I'm suggesting, that the minister should be concerned about things that happen under his purview.

HON. MR. BAWLF: It isn't in my purview.

MR. BARNES: I would think that the rest of the members aver there would be concerned. I've just said that 20 free enterprise businesses, fledgling operations that have been trying to hang in there, are going to go down because of a decision by the Housing Corporation to give them a 30-day notice.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please.

MR. BARNES: Mr. Chairman, he says: "That's got nothing to do with me."

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. This matter might be discussed under the Economic Development minister or the Minister of Municipal

Affairs and Housing, but it is certainly inappropriate to discuss it under the Minister of Recreation and Conservation. Please proceed to another area.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Find another topic.

MR. BARNES: I think that topic is very appropriate.

AN HON. MEMBER: You've just been ruled out of order.

MR. BARNES: I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the minister says this would come better under the fishing section of his ministry.

HON. MR. BAWLF: All you're doing is fishing.

MR. BARNES: he knows more than he is telling, I suspect, inasmuch as he has put together deals all aver this province. He's got one other one going on in my riding. He should be getting a deal down here on the shore.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I must ask you to withdraw the remarks you made about the minister.

MR. BARNES: I withdraw.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We are here to discuss his administrative responsibilities and nothing else.

MR. BARNES: I withdraw any remarks, Mr. Chairman.

HON. MR. BAWLF: On a point of order. Mr. Chairman, I've just finished telling the member that I have related all the facts I know about the subject he has raised, here. Furthermore, I would point out to him that I did not, have not, and am not putting together deals all aver the province. That's a figment of his imagination.

AN HON. MEMBER: If you have charges to make, make charges.

HON. MR. BAWLF: I would ask if we are sure that he has withdrawn his comments on both counts.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, he said he'd withdraw.

MR. KING: Mr. Chairman, perhaps the minister would like to answer for the house precisely what his policy is with respect to the designation of historic buildings and sites in the

[ Page 906 ]

province. Are there criteria for this type of designation? Is there a committee that investigates the significance of the particular facility to the history of the province?

HON. MR. BAWLF: I just answered that while you were out of the House.

MR. KING: More importantly, Mr. Chairman, since the minister seems to be very hyper and reticent about this particular subject, perhaps we'll come at it from another way.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Go ahead.

MR. KING: It's a bit like licensing in various other areas. There are people who trade in licences and the issuance of licences becomes a matter of some profit, some appreciation in value. Surely if the minister can't understand that the designation of a particular facility as a historic site would appreciate the value of that particular premise, then he's a little bit lacking, in my view.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Perhaps you'd like to tell us how.

MR. KING: If a particular enterprise is operating in a facility and it's not the most popular establishment in the world, certainly the designation of that premise could bring the focus of public attention on it, because presumably it's based upon some historic significance to the province.

That's certainly true with the old house up the street here - what was their name? The poet from Vancouver Island. There are people coming from all over the province on the basis that it has been designated.

Interjections.

MR. KING: Well, Mr. Chairman, I'll wait for the people to cool down over there before I continue. You know, anyone who says this is nonsense.... The man wears the mantle of an idiot when he comes out with a remark like that. Certainly there is a significant interest here. I want to know what the minister's policy is. Does he simply designate in response to an application from a business enterprise?

Interjection.

MR. KING: I didn't say the man was an idiot; I said he wore the mantle of one, and he wears it extremely well.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please, hon. members. The subject that you are discussing is one that's covered actually under legislation in an Act that was passed in this House last year, and if the minister would care to respond....

MR. KING: Mr. Chairman, with great respect, the minister has the discretion, whether it be by legislation or whether it be by any other statute or regulation, and we are dealing with the minister's administration here. Certainly he has the authority within his department to designate facilities within this province. If you can't understand that there might be a relationship in terms of value between a premises that is designated as a legitimate historic site or - I forget precisely what the other designation is they put on - one that is not so designated, then I'm afraid that he and I are just on different wavelengths.

What I'm getting at is, once having designated a facility, what are the ground rules for any enterprise that may take place within that facility from the private sector? Is there a requirement that the enterprise must have been operating there before the designation was made or is there any basis. of competitive bidding for use of the facility for certain types of enterprise after?

HON. MR. BAWLF: Do you mean private property?

MR. KING: Well, it depends. If it's private property, then, of course, you'd have a restricted right to intervene, but if it's a publicly owned facility within which a private enterprise is operating, then we have a significant issue of policy here. And that's what I'm concerned about.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Well, name one.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. I must ask the minister to wait until the member speaking has taken his place.

MR. KING: If the minister would be as vocal and co-operative on his feet as he is from his chair, perhaps we could clarify this matter without any further haggle about it. I would like to hear him respond.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Well, name one of these things.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: I wonder if the House would give me leave to introduce a very special guest in the gallery before the guest

[ Page 907 ]

gets away.

Leave granted.

HON. MR. McCLELLAND: Thank you. I would like the House to make welcome a person who sat in this gallery before any of us were here. He's a former member of the chamber, MIA for Delta from 1946-49 and from 1950-52, seated in the gallery with his wife - Mr. Alec Hope from Fort Langley. Would you make him welcome?

HON. MR. BAWLF: Mr. Chairman, the fishing expedition I referred to earlier is drifting further out to sea. I'm afraid that the member for Revels toke-Slocan is definitely at sea on this subject.

First of all, the subject was raised in relation to a site which was not designated under any action of my ministry or the province of British Columbia. It was designated by the city of Vancouver. It's private property and subject to negotiation of that designation between the city and the private owner. I imagine whatever use is made of the property is a question to be resolved between them.

As for provincial designation, it is not my power to designate. The Lieutenant Governor in Council may designate a site as being of provincial heritage significance. If this is done, it is upon the advice of the provincial heritage advisory board. Again, in the event that it is private property, that property owner is entitled to make such use of the property as is consistent with the designation - that is to say, it does not in any way distract from that which is preserved by way of designation. To the extent that that limits his economic opportunity in that he would otherwise be entitled to on the land, he would have recourse to compensation at a rate to be determined again by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. I trust that covers the subject to his satisfaction.

MR. MUSSALLEM: Mr. Chairman, as a change of pace and something of interest to this House, I'd like to draw the attention of the minister - and I hope he knows about it already - the Warner fishway proposal. Mr. Warner, a very enterprising citizen who lives in our constituency of Maple Ridge, had developed a system of bringing fish over dams without damage and taking them out the same way.

If this can be resolved - and engineers tell me it's absolutely feasible and may be done and can be done - I would enlist the minister's assistance and help in this proposal. I would like to see him authorize that a virtual experiment be made at the Alouette River Dam, which was closed up in 1920 and which landlocked salmon in the Alouette River and almost killed the Alouette River for fishing since that period, although there has been a slight return in the meantime. I do feel, Mr. Chairman, if the minister would take this under special consideration, a great breakthrough could be made in the matter of fish and dam .

It would not only be a breakthrough for this country, but it would be a worldwide breakthrough. The system is simple, but novel. It requires no power to operate, and is operated by the pressure of the water itself. Engineers of note and ability tell me it is most workable, and why hasn't someone thought of it before? If it's that good, I think the minister should take special time in giving it an assessment. I know his biologists have gone into the situation, and they've found out it would be most workable. I hope he would give it special consideration, and bring it up in this forum because I think it needs the impetus because dan-is and fish have always been a problem. If this will work, and it seems to be possible, it would solve this very difficult problem.

MR. BARNES: Just to wind up, Mr. Chairman, I'll be very brief. I know the minister feels that we're labouring the point, but I would just ask him. He's indicated very little knowledge of ;what's happening. He suggested that it's private property and so forth, but I wonder if he is aware that Mr. Eisenstadt was very active in the last campaign in 1975 and that he was a bagman for the Social Credit Party.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That, hon. member, is not related to the administrative responsibilities of the minister.

MR. BARNES: Well, I suggested to the minister that there was a curious sequence of events, and I was only asking him to explain to the House what had happened. The member for Revelstoke-Slocan (Mr. King) tried to get from the minister his philosophy respecting designating properties as heritage, ensuring that these properties would not be used for exploitive purposes, because obviously it's of particular advantage in being designated as a unique facility. Any enterpriser knows that, Mr. Chairman, and I'm wondering, even though it is private property when a designation is made, if certain restrictions are placed on it because there are certain advantages to that. Perhaps some compensation may be involved, but what opportunity does the public have, gener

[ Page 9085 ]

ally, to utilize that facility? He's suggesting that he has no knowledge or concern. Well, the public should have some concern, if we're going to suggest that it concerns the public and it's something of public interest, and it reflects a period of history that means something to the people in the west end, or whatever part of the province that is involved.

I think that we are concerned. We'd like to know that our interest is being protected. I find it curious that those who are already successful in life, and are doing well, get the advantages, and those who are struggling get no advantages. This minister has made no reference....

Interjection.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please. This matter has already been extremely well canvassed. The minister has explained in great detail that this matter does not come under the purview of his ministry. Continue in the debate in some other line, or in some other area of his responsibility. I must ask you to cease discussion of this matter at this time.

MR. BARNES: I don't intend to labour the point. I think the minister knows what I am asking him. If he has nothing to say other than that he has no responsibility, or that it is out of his hands, that's fine, we can leave it at that. But I think there are people in the West End whose livelihood is dependent upon his decision respecting the future of the other half of that site. If he has nothing more to say, and if the decision by the Housing Corporation of British Columbia holds true, then within 30 days those 20 businesses will be out. They are small businesses. If he doesn't see any conflict between that and what they said in the budget, fine, we'll leave it at that. But I'm not impressed with his attitude and I don't think that the people of that particular area will be either.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Just to wrap that particular matter up, I would like to once again say that the matter is in the hands of the city council of Vancouver. They have every power to designate. In fact, their designation can be enforced upon the Crown corporation in question.

Interjection.

HON. MR. BAWLF: Yes, Alderman Harcourt is there and lives and breathes.

Mr. Chairman, the simple fact is that if they have delivered the house into municipal designation, .and given it a status of having a local heritage significance, then surely the coach house, or garage, or whatever it is should be treated similarly and not elevated to that of provincial heritage significance.

I'd like to just deal with one other area for a minute. That is the question of ferries. There were some remarks made in this House some while ago in this session that there had been massive layoffs from the Ferry Corporation which had contributed to the loss of jobs in greater Victoria. I'd like to draw to the attention of those who have been concerned with these remarks by the second member for Victoria (Mr. Barber) that a total of 33 people domiciled in the greater Victoria area were laid off by B.C. Ferry Corporation - and I hope the second member for Victoria is listening, because he has been operating under gross misconceptions again - and an additional 10 people elected to take a form of severance, bringing the total to 43. Since that time, all but two of those laid off have been reemployed by the Ferry Corporation. In addition, there are 26 new positions in headquarters for the B.C. Ferry Corporation in the city of Victoria. I'm sure I needn't work through the arithmetic - notwithstanding the fact that those people on that side count on their fingers - to tell the second member for Victoria - through you, Mr. Chairman - that there has not been a reduction of employment due to ferries in this area.

I would just say further, Mr. Chairman, that I would move that we rise and report progress and ask leave to sit again.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the Chair.

Hon. Mr. McClelland moves adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 12:52 p.m.