Community Consultation

2.1 Pre – Consultation

A consultation strategy was initially developed by the Treaty Review Team and later refined based on feedback from the Local Governments’ Committee, the CBT and attendees at the first round of community consultations. The feedback led to identifying two main audiences and approaches.

A large number of people wanted to be kept informed of the overall progress of the Columbia River Treaty Review on both sides of the border and favoured evening workshops held in communities. Another group, of which many had a long and continuing interest in the Treaty and hydro operations in their region, wanted more detailed information and an opportunity to question experts, including BC Hydro’s technical team, on the analysis being undertaken as part of the Treaty Review. A number of informed residents also wanted an opportunity to share their local expert knowledge and to engage in a discussion on the key elements the Province should consider as part of the future of the Treaty. This latter group was in favour of at least one conference on the Treaty and the formation of a cross-Basin group of local experts, which became the Columbia River Treaty Sounding Board, to provide direct feedback to the Treaty Review Team.

The Treaty review used the various consultation events as an opportunity to gather feedback from Basin residents on the values and interests they wanted considered in future decisions regarding the Treaty. The values and interests gathered were reviewed by the Treaty Review Team, Local Governments’ Committee and Sounding Board Group and were divided into those interests that could be addressed domestically outside of the Treaty, and those that could be impacted by the strategic decision on whether to continue or terminate the Treaty.

Almost everyone the Treaty Review Team consulted expressed concern about youth participation in the Treaty review process. The Treaty Review Team developed a multi-pronged approach to engage youth including the use of Social Media.

The Treaty review utilized Columbia Basin goods and service providers as much as possible in developing and delivering consultation events. Over ninety percent of materials used for the community consultation events were printed in either Trail or Cranbrook. Local contractors helped develop and deliver the community consultations and conference and all but one of the summary reports. Venue rentals were almost all community-owned facilities and catering was supplied by small local caterers, coffee shops or community groups.

2.1.1 Social Media – Online Engagement

Website

The Treaty review website was launched in early May 2012. The website supports the consultation process by providing a single location where Basin residents can find historical information about the Treaty and ongoing reports and discussion papers produced as part of the Treaty review process. The website provides information about upcoming consultation events as well as the presentations, handout materials and summary reports of the entire Province’s Treaty Review public consultation sessions. The website also has features that allow Basin residents to submit questions to Treaty Review staff and, through the website blog, engage in discussion with other Basin residents.

E-Newsletter

The first Columbia River Treaty Review e-newsletter was published in August 2012 and distributed to approximately 300 email addresses obtained from attendees of the May/June community 2012 consultation sessions. Anyone can subscribe here: https://blog.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty/review/updates/ and review all previous issues. The e-newsletter now has over 500 subscribers. The newsletter keeps Basin residents and others informed about upcoming events and the outcome of these events, and about new reports or discussion papers prepared by both B.C. and U.S. Treaty review teams. Each month it also features an in-depth explanation of a frequently asked question on the Treaty.

Twitter

The Columbia River Treaty Review’s Twitter presence, @CRTreaty, began in August 2012. The Treaty Review Team tweets bi-weekly in order to keep a growing number of followers, currently numbering 190, informed about the latest news in B.C. and the U.S. on the Treaty review. One enthusiastic follower tweeted:

Facebook

The Columbia River Treaty Review Facebook page began in early October 2012 (see https://www.facebook.com/pages/Columbia-River-Treaty-Review/471508369560835). While the page has just 92 likes, the information posted on the Facebook page often reaches more than one hundred people, with one recent post about the Treaty Review Team discussion paper, U.S. Benefits from the Columbia River Treaty – Past, Present and Future: A Province of British Columbia Perspective, reaching over 270 viewers. A Facebook page was recommended by Basin residents as a way to engage Basin youth in the discussions around the Treaty. Facebook was also suggested by a First Nations representative as a way to provide information to First Nations. Facebook advertising has also been used for some events.

2.2 Phase 1 Community Consultation Workshops – Collecting Views

Phase 1 of the Treaty Review public consultation process was carried out in May and June 2012. Sessions were held in the following seven communities selected by the Treaty Review Team with guidance from CBT and the Local Governments’ Committee: Jaffray, Creston, Nakusp, Castlegar, Valemount, Golden and Revelstoke. The events were advertised in 23 local papers at least twice during the two weeks prior to community sessions. For rural communities not serviced by a local newspaper, CBT mailed out post cards with information about the sessions. BC Hydro provided information about the sessions at their community update meetings and to their email distribution list. Service BC offices in the region displayed handbill posters of the sessions and the posters were provided to the Local Governments’ Committee for display at local government offices. Information about the sessions was included on the provincial Treaty Review website and e-Newsletter and in CBT’s e-newsletter.

Over 360 people attended the seven community sessions. Participants were provided with a folder of materials to use during the evening and to take away with them. The folder included frequently asked questions, Treaty highlights, an overview of the Treaty review, a pre-paid postcard to send comments or questions, information about community interests assembled from previous water planning processes, and a discussion document to identify how people want to be consulted going forward.

The afternoon sessions began with a CBT open house followed by in-depth discussion facilitated by the CBT and the Treaty Review Team on topics identified in previous CBT workshops. After dinner provided by CBT and a welcome by local government leaders, the Province began its first phase of the consultation on the Treaty with an overview of the Columbia River Treaty Review process followed by a presentation by BC Hydro on known Basin interests that have previously been identified through other initiatives such as the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Columbia and Duncan Water Use Plans, and Non-Treaty Storage Agreement discussions. The Province also shared information on the future Treaty scenarios being analysed, technical studies planned and underway, and preliminary B.C. and U.S. perspectives. The Province and BC Hydro’s presentations in Golden were videotaped and, together with the PowerPoint presentations and all the material distributed, made available to the public on the Columbia River Treaty Review website: gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty.

Prior to the community consultation sessions, the Treaty Review Team had assembled a list of interests and issues already identified by Basin residents in other planning processes such as the BC Hydro Water Use Plans, Environmental Assessments, and more recently the Non-Treaty Storage Agreement. The Treaty Review Team asked participants to identify what was missing from the list. Participants identified new interests: some were specific to reservoir operations, while others were more general and regional in nature. Residents raised many questions including those focused on the Columbia River Treaty provisions and distribution of benefits.

The Treaty Review Team heard a number of interests and concerns that were common across the Basin. Overall, most people are interested in balancing competing land use needs, managing water (water levels, quantity and quality) for a range of interests, and understanding and adapting to climate change. Many residents are keen to see full implementation of the Water Use Plans, and to establish a “water use plan like” process for the Kootenay system that is influenced by Libby Dam operations. Participant interests can be broadly categorized as follows: recreation and transportation; water levels (including flood control and erosion); First Nations and cultural heritage; environment and climate change (including impact on sustainability and ecosystem function, wildlife and vegetation, fish and aquatic resources); economic opportunities and costs; and engagement and collaboration in water management and the Treaty review process.

See the Phase 1 Consultation Summary Report – Spring 2012.

2.3 Phase 2 Community Consultation Workshops – Reviewing the Analysis

Phase 2 consultation workshops were held in November 2012 in eight communities: Jaffray, Creston, Trail, Nelson, Nakusp, Revelstoke, Golden and Valemount. The Trail workshop was live-streamed, providing an additional opportunity for public participation inside and outside the Basin. The Treaty Review Team also held two meetings, in Cranbrook and Castlegar, with regional district and municipal elected officials.

The community events were advertised in 21 local newspapers at least twice during the two weeks prior to the sessions; Facebook advertising was also used. CBT mailed post cards with event information to some rural Basin residents. The community events were posted on the Treaty review website and on Twitter and announced in the September and October Treaty review e-newsletters which are mailed to approximately 450 email addresses. Notices about the events were provided to the Local Governments’ Committee for distribution and for posting in local government offices, and CBT included information in their e-newsletter and on their website. Information about the events was also distributed by BC Hydro during their regional update meetings and in their update emails. The Treaty Review Team also sent emails about the events to Selkirk College and College of the Rockies instructors of relevant courses and telephoned high schools in some communities where the sessions were held.

Approximately 360 people attended the fall sessions and LiveStream option. Participants were provided with information folders that included frequently asked questions, Treaty highlights, an overview of the Treaty review, a pre-paid postcard to send comments or questions, and copies of the reports that were presented at the meetings. A feedback form and pre-paid envelope were also provided. The sessions began with an open house that included three videos produced by CBT explaining the basics of the Treaty and display material, and Treaty Review Team members were available to answer questions. Following a welcome by a Local Governments’ Committee representative, the Treaty Review team provided an update on the Treaty review process, studies completed and underway, and a timeline of the Treaty review. The session also included presentations on two reports commissioned by the Province in response to questions and issues raised by residents during the spring Phase 1 consultation process – A Review of the Range of Impacts and Benefits of the Columbia River Treaty on Basin Communities, the Region, and the Province and Libby VARQ Flood Control Impacts on Kootenay River Dikes, and in Valemount and Golden, a review of a BC Hydro high level report on the Feasibility of Kinbasket Reservoir Dams.

BC Hydro then did a presentation on the outcomes of modeling three key Treaty scenarios (Treaty Terminate, Treaty Continue, Treaty Plus), including financial, social, and environmental impacts, benefits and trade-offs. The evening ended with small group discussions on key issues that could potentially be related to the Treaty. Presentations and handout material used during the November community workshops are available at the Treaty review website at https://blog.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty/community-sessions/.

Stable water levels for recreation and ecosystems, First Nations involvement, attention to environment and ecosystems, equitable compensation, and economic development were key topics heard at the majority of the consultation sessions. Many concerns and much advice brought forward were directly related to continuing, amending, or terminating the Treaty, but others were often long-time issues that residents felt had no other avenue for expression. Some of those issues were not related to the treaty, but may be addressed through other processes.

A detailed description of the information collected by the Treaty Review Team, Phase 2 Consultation Summary Report – November 2012, can be found here.

2.4 Phase 3 Community Consultation Workshops – Options and Interests

During Phase 2 community consultation workshops, the Treaty Review team committed to returning for further discussions if invited by a community. Golden and Nelson took up the offer and the Treaty Review Team held an evening community session in Golden on March 20, 2013 and an evening session in Nelson on March 21, 2013.

Advertisements and invitations combined details of the two communities evening sessions with information about the Treaty review technical conferences planned for Golden on March 20 and Castlegar on March 22. Print ads ran in 21 local papers for one day for generally each of two weeks approximately one month prior to the events. Online ads on nine local paper websites ran each day for the two weeks prior to the events. A notice about the Golden evening session and conference was displayed on the marquee of the Golden Civic Centre for 2 weeks prior to the two events. Information about all the March 2013 events was featured on Treaty review website event calendar, e-newsletter, Facebook and Twitter sites. Information was also included with update emails distributed by BC Hydro, Columbia Basin Trust and the Local Governments’ Committee. CBT also included information about the community sessions in its newsletter. Strong local interest also prompted a subsequent community workshop in Fauquier.

Although the March 20 conference in Golden was cancelled due to very low registration, approximately 35-40 residents from Golden, Invermere and the surrounding areas attended the March 20 evening event at the Golden Civic Centre. Approximately 20 residents from Nelson, Kaslo and surrounding areas attended the March 21 evening event in Nelson. Information folders from the November 2012 community consultations were available and pre-paid postcards for comments were handed out.

The Local Governments’ Committee worked with the Treaty Review Team to identify agenda topics tailored for the Golden and Nelson evening sessions. The Treaty Review Team provided attendees with an update on the Treaty review process and U.S. perspectives on the Treaty from their respective review process. The Treaty Review Team also provided information on the Treaty’s strategic decision options and the potential impact on broad Basin interests. A presentation on Basin-wide and local interests that could have solutions that did not involve the Treaty led to discussions about domestic solutions.

A key concern raised by numerous attendees in Golden is the impact the creation of Kinbasket reservoir has had on the local forestry industry. The issues raised were about the loss of public and low cost transportation links increasing timber harvesting costs, causing permanent job losses, resulting in the weakening of the forestry industry in the area. Another concern was the lack of recreation and boat launch sites on the Kinbasket Reservoir, infrastructure the community says was promised when the reservoir was created. Other interests discussed were the need to more closely link distribution of Treaty-related benefits to impact on communities and the return of salmon to the Upper Columbia River.

Discussions in Nelson focused on: mitigating the ecological and fisheries impacts caused by the dams and the fluctuating water levels in reservoirs; reclaiming agricultural land lost to reservoirs; including climate change in future scenario analysis; and shortening the time frame of any future Treaty agreements. The relative merits of removing Hugh Keenleyside and Duncan dams were also discussed.

A summary of the Golden and Nelson evening sessions can be found here.

The Treaty Review Team also hosted an all day workshop in Fauquier on June 15, 2013. Approximately 75 people attended with several attendees coming from outside the Burton-Fauquier-Edgewood Nakusp area. The workshop was advertised locally by mailed postcard invitations and posters in the community. It was also advertised at least twice in two regional newspapers and included on the Treaty website event calendar.

Working closely with a group of interested local citizens, workshop topics and guest speakers and agenda were chosen by consensus. The workshop began with a welcome by the Vice – Chair of the Columbia River Treaty Local Governments’ Committee and was followed by a presentation on a report commissioned by the Province – A Review of the Range of Impacts and Benefits of the Columbia River Treaty on Basin Communities, the Region, and the Province (see https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads/sites/6/2012/07/Fauquier-Review-of-the-Range-of-Impacts-and-Benefits.pdf

The next presentation, on water governance and issues affecting future transboundary water management, was followed by an update on the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program. The Treaty Review Team then gave an overview of the fall 2013 strategic decision and the results of the BC Hydro modeling and analysis of the implications of the two key scenarios: Treaty Continue or Treaty Terminate. The last presentation was on work commissioned by the Province on Arrow Lakes Reservoir options after 2024. Four options were presented. The workshop concluded with a two hour question and answer session with a panel that included all the presenters and a BC Hydro representative.

Discussion during the Fauquier workshop centered around: the distribution in Basin communities of benefits arising as a result of the Treaty; ecosystem, fisheries and wildlife impact, appropriate mitigation and future consideration under the Treaty; public and, in particular, First Nation participation in future Treaty discussions and operations; the benefits of stable Arrow Lakes Reservoir levels, preferably at mid- elevation; and flood plain management. There was considerable discussion on whether terminating the Treaty or negotiating changes under the Treaty was the best approach to getting the results attendees wanted. In a straw poll two-thirds of attendees favoured terminating the Treaty.

Further details regarding the June 15, 2013 Fauquier meeting can be found in the summary report at Summary Report of Columbia River Treaty Review Fauquier Community Workshop

2.5 Further Consultation: Examining the Details

2.5.1 Columbia River Treaty Review Technical Conference

When Basin residents were asked in Phase 1 how they wished to be consulted, many residents wanted the Province to host a conference that would allow interested parties to review the technical results of Treaty review technical studies and receive more-in depth information on the modeling and operational alternatives.

Two Columbia River Treaty Review technical conferences were planned for March 2013. A conference was scheduled for Golden on March 20 and Castlegar on March 22. A LiveStream option was also available for the Castlegar conference. The conference in Golden was cancelled due to low registration (seven people), and those people who had registered were offered travel cost assistance to attend the Castlegar conference. A few people took advantage of the offer and several Golden residents opted to participate via LiveStream. A bus was provided to assist residents from areas heavily impacted by the creation of Arrow Lakes Reservoir – Edgewood, Fauquier, Burton, Arrow Park, and Nakusp – to attend the conference. Approximately 120 people attended the Columbia River Treaty Review Technical Conference at the Castlegar Sandman Inn. A feedback form and pre-paid envelope were provided at the end of the conference.

The conference began with BC Hydro presenting an overview of the technical studies and the rationale and modeling analysis undertaken to assist the public, stakeholders, First Nations and government decision makers in examining the Treaty Terminate versus Treaty Continue strategic decision options in fall 2013. Following the BC Hydro presentation, attendees participated in two rounds of breakout sessions where details of the technical studies results were discussed by sub-region: Kinbasket and Arrow Lakes Reservoirs; Lower Columbia River; and, Kootenay System.

Lower, stable water levels at Arrow Lakes Reservoir were a main topic of discussion in the Kinbasket and Arrow Lakes Reservoirs breakout sessions. There was extensive review of the 2012 high water levels, and subsequent flooding, during the Lower Columbia River breakout sessions. Discussion also focused on: fish (sturgeon, whitefish, trout) and fish habitat; ecosystem impacts (with fluctuating water levels being attributed the most negative impact); and dam safety. A Kootenay Water Use Plan, return of salmon, and flood risk management were the main topics in the Kootenay System breakout sessions.

An update on the Treaty review work underway in the U.S. was presented by the U.S. co-chairs of the Columbia River Treaty Operating Committee. Attendees also participated in breakout sessions on topics suggested by Basin residents during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the consultation process: archaeology performance measures for power system planning; return of salmon in the Upper Columbia River; climate change impact on the Columbia River; and flood management operations and bylaws.

Further details can be found in the conference summary report at: https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads/sites/6/2012/07/Summary-Report-CRT-Review-Technical-Conference-March-22-2013.pdf

2.5.2 Columbia River Treaty Review Workshop for Basin Environment Leaders

An all day Treaty workshop attended by local watershed and ecosystem experts received support from the Treaty Review Team. The workshop included a presentation on hydrological and climate issues and a presentation on climate implications for the Kootenay region. The workshop also included facilitated discussions exploring various environmental considerations that could be included in the future of the Treaty.

2.6 Focused Consultation: Identifying Key Elements for Recommendation

2.6.1 Sounding Board

The twenty-eight members of the Sounding Board were invited by the Review Team to form a geographically balanced representation of Columbia Basin residents who have knowledge of dam/reservoir planning and operations and/or are recognized in their communities as knowledgeable in one or more key areas of interest. Sounding Board members are to provide a broad perspective and contribute positively to discussions on Treaty-related matters.

The purpose of the Sounding Board Group is:

To act as “sounding board” on Treaty reports and other information, providing feedback, opinions and suggestions for improvement;
To provide feedback to key Treaty review questions, in particular regarding Basin interests (e.g. environment, socio-economic, domestic); and
To help inform recommendations to government on the future of the Treaty.

The first face-to-face Sounding Board meeting took place in Nakusp on June 3, 2013, with twenty-four members in attendance. The Sounding Board reviewed nearly 100 interests/issues that had been collected by the Treaty Review Team during public consultations to determine whether or not the interest/issue was directly, indirectly or not affected by the strategic decision to continue or to terminate the Treaty. In the end, Sounding Board members concluded that just a fraction of the issues was directly affected by the strategic decision and most of the interests/issues could potentially be addressed without involving the Treaty.

Sounding Board members also reviewed the results of the Treaty review technical studies and questioned whether the bookend alternatives modeled in the technical studies showed the full range of physically possible operations under the two key scenarios for the strategic decision and challenged the technical studies team to expand the bookends.

The second Sounding Board meeting was held on July 5, 2013 in Cranbrook with twenty-two members attending. Sounding Board members discussed whether the preferred outcomes for Basin residents were more likely to come about if the Treaty were terminated or, if the Treaty continued, could Basin interests be included in negotiations and result in an improved Treaty. Some members thought terminating the Treaty would result in the best outcome for ecosystems in Arrow Lakes Reservoir while not increasing impacts on Kinbasket Reservoir while other members were concerned about potential impacts to Koocanusa Reservoir and to the Kootenay River system if the Treaty were terminated.

Generally, Sounding Board members felt consideration should be given to continuing the Treaty and negotiating enhanced B.C. benefits, while keeping open the option to terminate the Treaty if no progress can be made. Sounding Board members also identified and prioritized key elements of Basin interests they felt should be considered in the recommendation to Cabinet and negotiations for an improved Treaty.

Further details regarding Sounding Board meetings can be found at https://blog.gov.bc.ca/columbiarivertreaty/sounding-board/

Previous: Introduction
Next: Other Columbia River Treaty Review Engagement