No Water For Fish In Alberta's Water Allocation Review

[Lancaster]

Fish need water. Do I need to write more?

 

The Government of Alberta is going to determine how much water goes to fish this year in what they call a water allocation review. If anglers want to keep water in rivers for their fish, you should keep reading.

 

On November 23, 2009, the Alberta Water Research Institute (http://www.waterinstitute.ca/pdf/summary_report_future.pdf), Alberta Water Council (http://www.albertawatercouncil.ca/Portals/0/pdfs/WATSUP_web_FINAL.pdf), and Ministerial Advisory Report (http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/8239.pdf) all released reports to advise the Government of Alberta on policy options for the upcoming water allocation review. No where in those reports do they make water for fish a top priority.

 

Of course, this isn't all about fish either, we're also talking about water for people, but I am more concerned about the water that needs to be kept in rivers at critical times for pike, trout, walleye, lake whitefish, burbot...etc.

 

Alberta Needs an Updated Water Rights System

The Alberta government needs to improve the laws that govern water use in Alberta by maintaining direct oversight of water allocation and use in Alberta.

 

Prioritize Water for Basic Human Needs and the Environment

Water for basic human needs and the healthy rivers need legal protection under Alberta’s water law. By prioritizing water for basic human needs and the environment, water can be efficiently distributed to its highest and best use.

 

Protect Your Water and Water for Fish by Protecting Rivers

While Alberta’s system of water allocation should guarantee water to some economic uses, roughly 70-90 per cent of the water in every basin should be reserved to meet the needs of Albertans and the fish, wildlife and forests we value, now and in the future. We all depend on healthy rivers

 

Keep water in the rivers for fish, and for anglers. Learn some more about this issue and do your part.

 

Contact the Honorable Minister of Environment Rob Renner. Let him know what you think.

 

The Honorable Robert Renner

Minister of the Environment

425 Legislature Building

Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2B6

Phone: (780) 427 2391

rob.renner@assembly.ab.ca

 

EXAMPLE

 

Dear Honourable Minister Renner,

I am aware the Alberta government is considering changes to the water allocation system. I am writing to you to strongly consider concrete measures to set aside water for fish and people's basic needs as a top priority.

 

To this end, I also urge you to reject proposals to deregulate the water allocation system in favour of alternatives that provide strict government oversight of our water. Water is too precious to be left to the whim of the market that is incapable of safeguarding the complex systems needed to maintain stable economies and healthy ecosystems.

 

Today, there is significant water security for economic users of water, but there is now an even stronger need to guarantee water security for Albertans, the healthy environment we depend on, and the forests, lakes, rivers and fish and wildlife populations we enjoy for recreation.

 

As the supply of water becomes increasingly constrained, we need to ensure that we are conserving water for our priority uses – water for all Albertans and their environment. That is the highest priority.

 

Sincerely,

[name]

[address]

 

NEED IDEAS FOR YOUR LETTER?

 

Ask the Government of Alberta to update the current water rights system to ensure water is set aside (or given priority) for basic human needs and for the environment.

 

Ask the Government of Alberta to give you adequate and meaningful opportunities to participate in this important review.

 

Ask the government to retain their oversight of water on behalf of the public and reject proposals that deregulate water allocation.

 

Write how you feel about water markets.

 

Demand for a better solution from the Government of Alberta to consider pro-active and precautionary policies.

 

Ask the Government of Alberta to protect the rivers that supply you clean water by protecting them with prioritized flows.

 

 

 

 

 

[maxwell]

this is something everyone needs too send letters in too! if not our rivers with irrigations (bow and oldman to name two) will suffer greatley.. they will be drained more and more like this year with no rain too fill the farmers fields.. a good friend once mentioned on how alberta was a frekain desert and alot of the crops we grow are water suckers.. not ideal for our eastern climate.. so the farmers want mroe water! and our streams n resivoirs will suffer!

[nebc]

They cannot go too far overboard on this without contravening - perhaps from ignorance or by purpose - the Federal Fisheries Act.

 

To begin with I would:

Try to determine what is actually being proposed, what the risks are, and what the Federal Government has agreed to, if anything, then refer the matter to the DFO Minister by way of individial phone calls of concern.

 

Find out more about your water licensing system in AB. Things are becoming increasingly hard to figure out here in BC in this regard with respect to northern BC and water allocations, so take it very seriously with this news.

 

THis may be a good forum to find information, but never think for a second all the ranting and raving this will result in on a forum like this will mean much unless you actually go after your local politicians and put the fear of lost votes on their tables. And I do not mean signed petitions, I mean get right in their face and express your concerns.

[Taco]

Is That You Robert Jr?

 

 

[DonAndersen]

This is not Robert JR and even if it was - at least he cares about water.

 

 

Note: some of the below has already happened. You snooze- the fish lose. You can bet your bottom buck that the irrigators were @ every meeting.

 

 

 

The Government of Alberta is seeking input from Albertans on some of the important questions contained in the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan terms of reference. We are looking for input about:

 

o Challenges in developing the region

o Lands which should be conserved

o What you think are high-value tourism and recreation areas

 

Your views will provide important input for developing a regional plan in the South Saskatchewan Region.

You can fill out and submit a South Saskatchewan Regional Plan workbook at the following address:

 

o www.SSRPfeedback.com - Deadline for online submissions is Jan 15, 2010

 

 

 

The Alberta Government is considering amendments to water allocation and water licence transfer systems in the province.

 

 

 

This review is being driven by issues of overallocation of water in some areas of the province and the economic and environmental issues that overallocation has caused.

 

 

 

Jason Unger, Staff Counsel with the Environmental Law Centre, will present a summary review of the three reports that are informing the government's review, as well as address issues that arise from a "First in Time, First in Right" (FITFIR) system, such as whether the licence transfer system is equitable and whether transfers and FITFIR adequately address environmental and economic concerns.

 

 

 

Click on the link below to register. A confirmation email will be sent upon registration. Instructions on how to log on to the webinar will be sent the day before the session.

 

 

Alberta's Water Allocation Review: Who's it "FITFIR"? (Webinar)

 

The Alberta Government is considering amendments to water allocation and water licence transfer systems in the province.

 

This review is being driven by issues of overallocation of water in some areas of the province and the economic and environmental issues that overallocation has caused.

 

Jason Unger, Staff Counsel with the Environmental Law Centre, will present a summary review of the three reports that are informing the government's review, as well as address issues that arise from a "First in Time, First in Right" (FITFIR) system, such as whether the licence transfer system is equitable and whether transfers and FITFIR adequately address environmental and economic concerns.

 

A confirmation email will be sent upon registration. Instructions on how to log on to the webinar will be sent the day before the session.

 

Thanks for your attention and we hope you'll join us on January 13th!

 

 

http://www.waterinstitute.ca/water_allocat...able_future.htm

[Taco]

Well aware of the coming water wars Don. Remember, I was an irrigator @ one time as well as a fisherman so I know better than most both sides of the issue.. My large comment is for current crop of One Post Wonders.

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Well aware of the coming water wars Don. Remember, I was an irrigator @ one time as well as a fisherman so I know better than most both sides of the issue.. My large comment is for current crop of One Post Wonders.

 

You are just wondering if Lancaster is a member of Water Keepers or what ever they are called?

 

I would curious also. I don't see a problem with someone bringing something to the table...but be upfront about agendas etc. That being said we should always be encouraging fishermen to lobby and voice their opinions to our politicians. There is so little that as a group we are effectively powerless compared to similar demographics in the States and even in BC.

 

Minimum flow rates are required to allow for spawning and overwintering and protection from warmer days.

 

I am still not sure anything different is being looked at or if there is just a standard review going on. I am aware that there is an over allocation of water resources in Alberta. I would love to see irrigators NOT water during the heat of the day but rather at night. Taco...is there any rules regarding when you can irrigate as a farmer?

[Taco]

You are just wondering if Lancaster is a member of Water Keepers or what ever they are called?

 

I would curious also. I don't see a problem with someone bringing something to the table...but be upfront about agendas etc. That being said we should always be encouraging fishermen to lobby and voice their opinions to our politicians. There is so little that as a group we are effectively powerless compared to similar demographics in the States and even in BC.

 

Minimum flow rates are required to allow for spawning and overwintering and protection from warmer days.

 

I am still not sure anything different is being looked at or if there is just a standard review going on. I am aware that there is an over allocation of water resources in Alberta. I would love to see irrigators NOT water during the heat of the day but rather at night. Taco...is there any rules regarding when you can irrigate as a farmer?

 

No rules about what time of the day or what weather conditions you can irrigate but my water license was for xx acre feet, about 18" per acre. It takes about 24" of water to grow 2 average cuts of alfalfa and the average growing season rainfall where I was in Southern Alberta is about 6"-8" so it was in my best interests to conserve what I could of my water allotment, particularly in a drought year.

 

 

 

[Lancaster]

Is That You Robert Jr?

 

Hello,

 

I'm sorry to say that I am not Robert Jr. But, I am someone who cares about fish, and I enjoy catching them as much as I like eating them.

 

Sorry,

 

Lancaster

 

[Lancaster]

Don Anderson you are absolutely correct about bringing up the land-use regional plans that are happening concurrently with the water allocation review. Fish don't only need a certain quantity of water at critical times to spawn, but they also need certain level of quality.

 

So, if you were to imagine water to fish (forget about people), I would say the following legislation is going to be passed this year for quantity that is the water allocation review and next year for quality that is the land use framework (which Don is referring to)

 

Thank you for posting that other important piece of the puzzle!

 

[Lancaster]

Hey there NEBC,

 

Thank you for suggesting people learn more about the AB licensing system and the BC example. Your right, there is the Fisheries Act, but the Act doesn't extend to land-use that effect water quality. Furthermore, in terms of flow the Act is also limited under Alberta's current water rights system (First In Time, First In Right). For the SSRB, we rarely make the 45% objective.

 

Lancaster

 

[Lancaster]

Hello there Sundancefisher,

 

Thank you for putting up a reply to my post. I appreciate your tact, which is something I'm working on because I tend to be quite blunt, so if this message sounds dense, my apologies. I am happy to hear that you are informed about what is happening to Alberta's rivers.

 

Firstly, I am not a member of the Water Keepers (not sure who they are either, sorry). I understand the sour taste I get when seeing agendas posted on forum boards, however, I feel strongly about this review, so that is why I posted. The review on water allocations in Alberta is not a standard review. This review is the first time in 12 years, but really 116 years because the provincial government is looking at changing the current water allocation system.

 

I agree that minimum flow rates must be set to allow for spawning and overwintering, which is why I put up the post. Although irrigation does have the largest portion of licenses, and therefore water, they are oddly not the ones who use the most.

 

Lancaster

 

You are just wondering if Lancaster is a member of Water Keepers or what ever they are called?

 

I would curious also. I don't see a problem with someone bringing something to the table...but be upfront about agendas etc. That being said we should always be encouraging fishermen to lobby and voice their opinions to our politicians. There is so little that as a group we are effectively powerless compared to similar demographics in the States and even in BC.

 

Minimum flow rates are required to allow for spawning and overwintering and protection from warmer days.

 

I am still not sure anything different is being looked at or if there is just a standard review going on. I am aware that there is an over allocation of water resources in Alberta. I would love to see irrigators NOT water during the heat of the day but rather at night. Taco...is there any rules regarding when you can irrigate as a farmer?

 

[Lancaster]

Hello Taco,

 

Thanks for that information. I'm impressed that you could grow 2 average cuts of alfalfa 6"-8". You must know more about how irrigation stand with this upcoming allocation review than I do.

 

 

 

No rules about what time of the day or what weather conditions you can irrigate but my water license was for xx acre feet, about 18" per acre. It takes about 24" of water to grow 2 average cuts of alfalfa and the average growing season rainfall where I was in Southern Alberta is about 6"-8" so it was in my best interests to conserve what I could of my water allotment, particularly in a drought year.

 

[Guest Sundancefisher]

Firstly, I am not a member of the Water Keepers (not sure who they are either, sorry).

Lancaster

 

darnit. They throw some wicked parties with some fun celebs...

 

Do you work in the aquatic consulting field or with Alberta Environment or such and can then give us some insights into what the province is leaning towards?

[DonAndersen]

Lancaster,

 

Got to Dept. of Environment site @ http://www.waterforlife.alberta.ca/559.html

 

And read the info Minister's Advisory Group @ http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/8239.pdf

 

This advisory group gives you a real chill and a sense of the Govt "thinking".

 

 

 

 

Taco - father and grandfather were irrigators east of Calgary - they quit doing it when they discovered what happens to the land. I'm fully aware of the impact on both our economy and environment of irrigation. Like the 3 Rivers Dam [that buried reaches of the Oldman/Castle/Crow] cost $800,000,000 & benefited 80 farmers and created 100 jobs. Oh - WHOOPEEE

 

catch ya'

 

Don

[Taco]

Taco - father and grandfather were irrigators east of Calgary - they quit doing it when they discovered what happens to the land. I'm fully aware of the impact on both our economy and environment of irrigation. Like the 3 Rivers Dam [that buried reaches of the Oldman/Castle/Crow] cost $800,000,000 & benefited 80 farmers and created 100 jobs. Oh - WHOOPEEE

 

catch ya'

 

Don

 

Intriguing set of numbers. I've also seen the other set of numbers, I suspect reality is about half way between.

[Lancaster]

darnit. They throw some wicked parties with some fun celebs...

 

Do you work in the aquatic consulting field or with Alberta Environment or such and can then give us some insights into what the province is leaning towards?

 

Hey there Sundance,

 

I actually work for a non-profit known as Water Matters, which is a non-profit that promotes provincial-wide watershed protection. Our work is driven by science and law, and I thought it would be appropriate to post something in this forum for all the anglers out there.

 

That said, I am really looking forward to the summer so I can try angling on a couple lakes up in Canmore for some trout (rainbow) because most of my fishing experience (or lack there of) has been in China and Southeast Asia. And, fishing there is very unconventional compared to the line / tackle I see many employ here. It is almost intimidating.

 

Lancaster

[Taco]

Interesting website Lancaster,

 

Thanks for coming out of the closet

[Lancaster]

Thank you Taco,

 

I've seen enough rivers that don't support fish anymore, and I am excited to be back in Canada where I can eat the fish (or at least most of them) without having to wonder what else I am ingesting.

 

 

Interesting website Lancaster,

 

Thanks for coming out of the closet

 

[jksnijders]

Remember, I was an irrigator @ one time as well as a fisherman so I know better than most both sides of the issue..

 

 

 

There are days when I miss my rubber boots, tarps, and shovel...

[Taco]

There are days when I miss my rubber boots, tarps, and shovel...

 

 

dat be true but da erratic pay are teh suck

[jksnijders]

 

Or, as many people around here call them, Dutch Cowboy Boots...

[Harps]

Fish need water. Do I need to write more?

 

The Government of Alberta is going to determine how much water goes to fish this year in what they call a water allocation review. If anglers want to keep water in rivers for their fish, you should keep reading.

 

Prioritize Water for Basic Human Needs and the Environment

Water for basic human needs and the healthy rivers need legal protection under Alberta’s water law. By prioritizing water for basic human needs and the environment, water can be efficiently distributed to its highest and best use.

 

Protect Your Water and Water for Fish by Protecting Rivers

While Alberta’s system of water allocation should guarantee water to some economic uses, roughly 70-90 per cent of the water in every basin should be reserved to meet the needs of Albertans and the fish, wildlife and forests we value, now and in the future. We all depend on healthy rivers

....

Keep water in the rivers for fish, and for anglers. Learn some more about this issue and do your part.

...

Ask the government to retain their oversight of water on behalf of the public and reject proposals that deregulate water allocation.

 

Write how you feel about water markets.

 

Demand for a better solution from the Government of Alberta to consider pro-active and precautionary policies.

 

Ask the Government of Alberta to protect the rivers that supply you clean water by protecting them with prioritized flows.

 

Hi Lancaster,

Who decides what the best use for water is?

 

There already is a moratorium on new water use in the SSRB (with the exception of the RD). By getting rid of our 100yr old well proven, fair, much studied system we'd be taking water from the land where it is and giving it to cities or popular users (like malls and horse tracks). As it stands we have all the appropriate legislation and power to control existing water resources, just not the public will (much of it ignorance), to determine what is done with the water. I like the FiTFiR system. Its much better than having a gov't decide that the water should go to a bunch of idiots that live in the green lawn, water intensive homes cropping up in subdivisions all over southern Alberta. I think the best thing for water in the province would be a cap on population.

 

There isn't enough water in the rivers right now, but clawing it back will take more then whining. A good court decision for conservation groups accepting water transfers is the best (close to best) way for fish to get water. In the mean time people in Alberta just don't care or know. I'll say one thing... the agricultural community in Southern Alberta are the rivers best friend and worst enemy. The best thing that could happen would be a switch back to smaller ag units and less intensive irrigation. But that is not going to happen. Plus getting rid of FITFIR would mean an end to small irrigators... only industrial agriculture would be able to compete with cities, industry, and other water users.

 

You're new to the site, so I'll let you know I don't always type what I agree with. On that note, I don't really know what your organization stands for (Although I know quite a few of the board members and know of some of the staff).

• What is your stance on current water policy (or your organization's)?
• How would you propose to get 70-90% back to fish... Giving it to communities won't help fish. It is the cities that use the power produced at Kananaskis, the cities use irrigation structures, the people use the reservoirs. Do the people want more water for fish or for themselves?
• I don't agree with deregulation (I believe you're also against dereg), so what other options are being proposed?
• You've been with the organization since Aug (I believe), have you seen the flows, irrigation systems, reservoirs and fish for yourself?

[Lancaster]

Hi Lancaster,

Who decides what the best use for water is?

 

There already is a moratorium on new water use in the SSRB (with the exception of the RD). By getting rid of our 100yr old well proven, fair, much studied system we'd be taking water from the land where it is and giving it to cities or popular users (like malls and horse tracks). As it stands we have all the appropriate legislation and power to control existing water resources, just not the public will (much of it ignorance), to determine what is done with the water. I like the FiTFiR system. Its much better than having a gov't decide that the water should go to a bunch of idiots that live in the green lawn, water intensive homes cropping up in subdivisions all over southern Alberta. I think the best thing for water in the province would be a cap on population.

 

There isn't enough water in the rivers right now, but clawing it back will take more then whining. A good court decision for conservation groups accepting water transfers is the best (close to best) way for fish to get water. In the mean time people in Alberta just don't care or know. I'll say one thing... the agricultural community in Southern Alberta are the rivers best friend and worst enemy. The best thing that could happen would be a switch back to smaller ag units and less intensive irrigation. But that is not going to happen. Plus getting rid of FITFIR would mean an end to small irrigators... only industrial agriculture would be able to compete with cities, industry, and other water users.

 

You're new to the site, so I'll let you know I don't always type what I agree with. On that note, I don't really know what your organization stands for (Although I know quite a few of the board members and know of some of the staff).

• What is your stance on current water policy (or your organization's)?
• How would you propose to get 70-90% back to fish... Giving it to communities won't help fish. It is the cities that use the power produced at Kananaskis, the cities use irrigation structures, the people use the reservoirs. Do the people want more water for fish or for themselves?
• I don't agree with deregulation (I believe you're also against dereg), so what other options are being proposed?
• You've been with the organization since Aug (I believe), have you seen the flows, irrigation systems, reservoirs and fish for yourself?

 

Hello Harps,

 

I guess you have met me in person, although I don't know which presentation in Lethbridge you may have seen me. Thank you for posting, and I sincerely appreciate thoughtful and constructively critical comments from someone like yourself.

 

To answer your questions, ultimately, under the current Water Act, water's best use is under the at the discretion of the Director or Minister of Environment, which will likely remain so after the review. Under the three reports mentioned in the post, water markets are proposed to allocate water to its best and highest use. To be more transparent, Water Matters, the organization who I work for (http://www.water-matters.org), is a non profit with resources dedicated to promote watershed protection provincial wide that is driven by law and science. My work includes looking at existing provincial policy and essentially as if this policy works for the public interest.

 

Water Matters isn't anti-FIT FIR, and the recommendations we make in our Share the Water Report, http://www.water-matters.org/pub/share-the-water, outline our position on what an updated system needs to meet the challenges of the 21st Century.

 

Thankfully neither of us are fans of deregulation, and for us we're not overjoyed at the thought of deregulation for a water market either; but, we're not opposed to market mechanisms because water is strongly related to economic health. Very few people I know have a job that isn't connected to water. Alternatives proposed in Share the Water Report suggest a portion of water be set aside for basic human needs and for healthy river ecosystems that is protected from market prices. This allotment can be calculated and set aside in the portion of water that the Government has identified useful for a water market, in other words, unused water. The rest can go to market.

 

We emphasize water for basic human needs (cooking, cleaning, and drinking) because not all stakeholders are equally careful in using water than others. By making water for basic human needs and healthy rivers that Albertans depend upon for clean water, water for economic uses would be used more efficiently and to its highest use. Please read our report for more detail.

 

I have been with Water Matters since last August, but a year prior to my employment, I traveled from the headwaters of the South Saskatchewan River Basin (SSRB), starting at the Bow, pass the Oldman River, and Red Deer to the South Saskatchewan River on a tour organized by the Canadian Water Network. The tour was with a group of Canadian graduates who study water on a tour to see the challenges facing the Water for Life Strategy in the context of major stakeholders, and water quality/quantity. So, I have seen summer flows, as well as winter flows, I have met with irrigators as well as farmers (feedlots to dry no-till), and reservoirs. As for fish, I have seen those too (more trout than anything), including invasive species in the SSRB.

 

If you have anymore questions, please feel free to contact me again.

 

[Harps]

Thanks for the response, Lancaster.

 

The comment about whether you've seen the system for yourself was an invitation. I'm glad you've had a tour though.

I'm quite cinical about how much water people need versus how much they want... when it comes down to a real decision, a judge decides and that would end up with an undesired decision, I'm sure. Really what judge would take water from an irrigator, water that his livelyhood and children depend on, and give that water to fish?

 

I'll take some time and read the reports in more detail... I've only breifly skimmed them.

Thanks again for the post.

Harps