Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Water Use Planning in British Columbia Campbell River Case Study Flow 2008 Conference October, 2008 San Antonio, TX Dan Ohlson, M.Sc., P.Eng., MCIP.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Water Use Planning in British Columbia Campbell River Case Study Flow 2008 Conference October, 2008 San Antonio, TX Dan Ohlson, M.Sc., P.Eng., MCIP."— Presentation transcript:

1 Water Use Planning in British Columbia Campbell River Case Study Flow 2008 Conference October, 2008 San Antonio, TX Dan Ohlson, M.Sc., P.Eng., MCIP

2 The Water Use Planning Process 2 Step 4: Confirm specific water use objectives. Step 5: Gather additional information about impacts Step 6: Create operating alternatives Step 7: Assess the tradeoffs in terms of objectives. Step 8: Document areas of consensus & disagreement. March 6, 2008Compass Resource Management

3 Case Study Campbell River Watershed Hydropower Facilities on Vancouver Island with capacity of ~ 250 MW (52%) World-famous Chinook salmon runs and endangered steelhead runs Facilities within B.C.s oldest Provincial Park – significant recreation use area First Nations resource claims under negotiation; particular controversy over inter-basin water transfers. 3Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

4 The Process 4 Planning Period 2000 – 2003 20 Consultative Committee meetings Dozens of Technical Committee meetings Fish, Wildlife, Recreation, First Nations Participants: BC Hydro (Crown Corporation) Federal Government (DFO) Provincial Government (MOE) Local Government First Nations Local Business, Residents Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

5 Campbell River Watershed 5 B.C. Vancouver Island Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

6 Campbell River Watershed 6Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

7 CEMA - SWWG Seminar7 1,500 square kms 3 Main Dams & Reservoirs 3 River Diversions Annual Inflows = 100 cms/days HUGE Hydrologic variability Gold River Campbell River next Compass Resource Management October, 2008

8 8 Strathcona Dam (1958) High recreation use Fish / wildlife use 500 metre-long dam 6,700 hectare reservoir 1 Million m 3 storage return Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

9 9 John Hart Dam (1947) Significant canyon / mainstem habitat Community water supply return Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

10 10 Heber Diversion Inter-basin diversion, First Nations rights Relatively low volume, yet high financial value Heber River steelhead under a recovery plan return Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

11 From Issues to Objectives Initial Issues List developed through: Public open houses Past technical planning efforts Initial Committee brainstorming Translated into explicit planning Objectives by: Screening assessments and scope /process definition Use of influence diagrams 11Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

12 12 Influence Diagrams Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

13 13 Influence Diagrams Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

14 14 Setting Objectives Recreation Enhance and protect the quality of recreation; increase the quantity of recreation and tourism opportunities Flooding and Erosion Minimize adverse effects of flooding and high water levels on private and public property and personal safety Fish Maximize the abundance and diversity of indigenous fish populations Wildlife Protect and enhance the quantity and quality of wildlife habitat Object Direction of preference Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

15 15 Setting Objectives Water Quality and Supply Protect and maintain drinking water quality, and maximize the availability of drinking water supply Heritage and Culture Protect heritage values and enhance opportunities for cultural activities Power / Financial Maximize the value of power generation to BC Hydro, Vancouver Island, the District of Campbell River and the Province Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

16 16 Developing Performance Measures Performance measures are specific metrics for comparing the predicted consequences or impacts of the alternatives on the objectives. Calculated in their Natural Units Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

17 17 Example 1: Effective Littoral Zone Objective: Reservoir Fish Measure of overall fish productivity (abundance) Units = hectares / year Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

18 18 Example 2 – Weighted User Days Objective: Reservoir Recreation Measure of quality and opportunity for recreation Units = weighted user days Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

19 19 Summary: Objectives & PMs ObjectivesPerformance Measures Recreation User Days (weighted by season & elevation) Erosion Erosion Days (weighted by elevation) Flooding Flood Days (weighted by flow level) Fish % Available Habitat, Risk Indexes, Littoral Zone Wildlife Habitat Suitability Rating Water Supply Water Quality Impact Rating F.N. Heritage Consistency Rating Financial Annual Revenues M$ / Year Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

20 20 Modelling Overview Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

21 21 Summary Consequence Table next Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

22 22 Highlighting Tradeoffs Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

23 23 Making Trade-offs Principles: Explicitly asked for peoples preferences Required that peoples choices are based on an understanding of trade-offs Explored and discussed risk and uncertainties in all results Used structured methods designed to improve quality of individual judgments and quality of group dialogue Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

24 24 Making Trade-offs Rank the alternatives in order of preference Top Down (holistically) Two basic ways to explore trade-offs and preferences: How important is a 15% gain in fish habitat relative to a loss of 25 quality recreation days? Bottom Up (analytically) Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

25 25 Method 1: Direct Ranking 1 2 3 5 4 6 100 80 70 40 50 10 Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

26 26 Method 2: Swing Weighting 1 1 2 4 2 3 1 100 50 100 50 70 10 Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

27 27 Uncovering Bias and Anchoring Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

28 28 Informing the Negotiations Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

29 29 Working Toward Consensus Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

30 30 Working Toward Consensus Next Steps Included Refining the operating alternatives for the mainstem river and diversions Designing physical works or non-operating projects Designing and prioritizing monitoring programs Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

31 31 Building the Package Monitoring Programs Physical Works Final Operating Alternatives Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

32 32 Final Outcome Upper Campbell Reservoir + reduced shoreline erosion + improved recreation + improved fish productivity Lower Campbell Reservoir O no change in erosion + improved recreation + improved fish productivity Campbell River + reduced flooding risk - reduced recreation quality + improved fish productivity System-wide + increased operating revenues (offset by investments in monitoring and works) + decommissioning Heber diversion Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008

33 33 Lessons Learned A structured process can help participants focus their dialogue on interests rather than positions. Success depends on the rigorous, defensible treatment of both facts and values Collaborative development and exploration of alternatives enabled participants to make trade-offs Commitment to monitoring programs and their link to future decisions was key to agreements It is possible to engage multi-party committees in technically rigorous resource management decision processes. Process facilitators required analytical skills Compass Resource ManagementOctober, 2008


Download ppt "Water Use Planning in British Columbia Campbell River Case Study Flow 2008 Conference October, 2008 San Antonio, TX Dan Ohlson, M.Sc., P.Eng., MCIP."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google