On Nov. 9, elected officials voted 5-1 in favour of communicating to the Ministry of Forests their support for the Central Estuary Restoration Project, or CERP, which seeks to remove the middle of the Spit so salmon can swim through to the estuary.
The project is the result of a partnership between the Skwxwú7mesh Úxwumixw (Squamish Nation), the Squamish River Watershed Society (SWRS) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
Coun. Doug Race was the sole elected official opposed to the motion on Tuesday night. Coun. Jenna Stoner did not vote as she was away on maternity leave.
Numbers show that the artificial structure, which was built in the 1970s, contributed to the decline of much of Squamish’s chinook salmon population.
There has been a movement to remove or alter aging artificial structures in other jurisdictions, such as Washington State, California, and the Fraser River Estuary.
The Squamish project’s next step seeks to remove about 300 metres south of the yellow gate in the coming months.
This would leave a weir, which would be underwater about 80% of the time. There are also further ambitions of removing an additional 600 metres in fall to winter 2022 to 2023.
The very tip of the spit will remain as an island, accessible by boat, from where windsports users can launch their crafts into the water.
The District holds tenure through a licence with the province for the area.
As part of the approval process, the CERP team, which is being spearheaded by the Squamish River Watershed Society, must gain approval under the provincial Ministry of Forests’ Water Sustainability Act.
In turn, the ministry is asking two affected parties, the District of Squamish and Squamish Terminals, how the project will affect their interests in the area.
During the council meeting, the municipality’s elected officials voted in favour of responding to the ministry by stating they had “no objection, subject to...safe, unimpeded access to the new end of the Spit outside of active construction dates and, in particular, during the windsports season. This includes adequate parking and a turn-around area to be determined in detailed design.”
They also instructed municipal staff to send a letter to the Ministry of Forests stating that: the District will not seek compensation from the ministry for impact to its licence rights; that access be maintained for windsports when construction is not underway; and that the municipality assumes no responsibility for the ongoing maintenance of the weir structure that will result from altering the Spit.
Race opposed the motion, saying that he wanted more straightforward language in the communication with the ministry.
“The only position that I’m happy with is responding to FLNRO with the statement that we do not expect compensation, and everything else I think is just gratuitous,” he said.
“We have a lot of stakeholders with a lot of different interests and I don’t want to get on one side or the other of that particular issue.”
Coun. Eric Andersen tried to amend the motion to include a condition that the project should not impact Squamish Terminals. He said he had hoped to see reference to the Official Community Plan in staff’s report.
“I think that I’d also like to refer to the District OCP policy on the Spit removal, which I had hoped to see under the policy implications section of the report to council,” said Andersen.
“It [says to] consider changes to the training berm west of Squamish Terminals, such as berm extension, access, realignment or...bridge installation that balance and enhance environmental recreational and industrial values and uses; utilize the project review process outlined in Squamish Estuary Management Plan as appropriate.”
However, Andersen’s amendment did not receive endorsement from other councillors and was defeated.
The Squamish River Watershed Society said that it was pleased with council’s decision.
“Every one of the intentions that council articulated has been a goal of the project from the beginning and the current conversation and something we’re all working towards both with the terminals and with windsports,” said Patricia Heintzman, spokesperson for the Squamish River Watershed Society.
Edith Tobe, executive director of the society, said work will start once they have all the permits in hand, hopefully in the next few weeks. Including the Water Sustainability Act permit discussed in this meeting, there are a total of four permits needed. These will be issued by both Transport Canada and the Ministry of Forests.
The CERP project has also gone through a rebranding, having been rechristened as Restore the Shore.
Heintzman said the change was done to communicate the goals of the project better.
“A lot of the messaging about the importance of salmon restoration and the importance of reconciliation was getting lost in some of the more technical or political stuff,” she said. “We wanted to make sure that message was getting out there, so we just thought of a vehicle or way to communicate that better.”
In the meantime, the deconstruction of the Spit still remains a hot topic in the community, with many having their own ideas on how the project should execute its goal.
Bianca Peters, a resident who’d been remotely watching the meeting, said she would like to see more community input into the process.
“It would also be really nice if we could look at the Squamish Official Community Plan...regarding the fact that the community should really be engaged in what’s going on out there, because it’s in the OCP,” said Peters.
“And we should be referring to the Squamish Estuary Management Plan....I don’t think we’re being transparent enough with the whole community.”
The question has been raised in the community about why the CERP team did not do any studies on Spit realignment, which many believed would happen under this project.
However, in an email, Heintzman said, “The original idea to realign the Spit was perhaps naively aspirational and highly conceptual and not founded on any actual modelling or reports, nor was it admittedly ground-truthed in anything other than naive optimism.”
She said it became clear that the obstacles to making this happen were massive and well outside this project’s scope.
“Unfortunately, a continued analysis of a berm realignment was clearly becoming an effort in futility.…the flogging of a dead horse,” said Heintzman.
“Fundamentally, [it] was not possible or wise or reasonable to continue to throw good money after bad considering the massive roadblocks that were insurmountable within the context of this important rehabilitation/reconciliation project.”
Restore the Shore (CERP) will be hosting an information session on the project on Nov. 17 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Brackendale Art Gallery.
The Squamish Windsports Society did not respond to The Chief’s request for comment prior to press deadline.
