Scores of concerned Pembertonians, and others, descended upon
the old Pemberton Community Centre Thursday night to express their opinions about
a proposed run-of-river project on the Ryan River.
Many of those present didn’t have to speak to let their
opinions be known — they wore nametags that read “No DAM way” and brought
signs that read, “Keep the Ryan Wild” and “Stop the Ryan Ru(I)n of River
Project.” Others concerned about what they see as threats to wildlife, held
pictures of fish and grizzlies.
Throughout the meeting comments from the audience ranged from
questions about the privatization of B.C. rivers to outright accusations of
theft.
Some Pemberton residents noted after the meeting that people
who live outside the valley took up a lot of time asking questions, while local
residents didn’t get as much opportunity to speak.
The meeting was part of the public consultation process
overseen by the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO). That’s a joint office of
the federal and provincial governments that brings together all departments and
permitting agencies that review a run of river project before an environmental
assessment can move forward.
The Ryan River project currently lies within the “Information
Requirements for Application” phase. It’s the second of eight phases in the
EAO’s review process.
The current phase, which includes accepting public comments on
the project, will conclude Dec. 15. The next phase involves preparing and
submitting an application to the EAO.
Regional Power Inc., a Toronto-based subsidiary of Manulife
Financial, wants to establish a 145-megawatt run-of-river power plant on the
Ryan River. The project will have a powerhouse with three to five turbine
generators. Some of the river water will be diverted through a 9.5-km tunnel
that will be burrowed through Sugarloaf Mountain.
The water will then enter the powerhouse at the end of the
tunnel. A 26.5-km transmission line will carry the electricity from the Ryan
River to a substation located near the Rutherford Creek Hydro Project
powerhouse.
Electricity generated at the Ryan River plant will be fed into
the Western Interconnection, a power grid that distributes electricity in
Western North America, over the Rocky Mountains in Canada and south to Baja
California in Mexico.
A unique feature of the project will be a man-made salmon
habitat that will increase the fish population in the Ryan River, according to
Nigel Protter, the principal of Exergetics Development Co. and a consultant who
providing information about the project to Pemberton and surrounding
communities.
In 2005 Regional Power Inc. won the UNESCO/International
Hydropower Association Blue Planet Prize for “social, environmental and
technical excellence” demonstrated at its Sechelt Creek hydropower project. The
project helped re-establish a salmon run in the creek.
Regional Power expects to do the same thing with the Ryan,
re-establishing a salmon run that was devastated in the mid-20
th
century by dyking along the river, said Protter.
“Where the Ryan pours into the valley, that has historically
been a very significant salmon breeding and brooding habitat,” he said in an
interview. “We'll build back a strong, bio-diverse Coho salmon and bull trout
population, but mostly Coho in there, and it's going to be an amazing thing.”
The project has nevertheless been controversial, both within
and outside Pemberton. Dozens of protesters attended Thursday’s meeting, some
of them from Pemberton but others from various organizations including the
Western Canada Wilderness Committee and the Save Our Rivers Society.
Protesters first directed their rage at Derek Griffin, who
delivered a presentation on the EAO’s environmental review process.
Joe Foy of the Western Canada Wilderness Committee, who is not
a Pemberton resident, was the first to query him.
“There are literally hundreds of these things (run of river
hydro projects) being proposed across B.C., and well over 100 in this area,” he
said. “Will this process look at the cumulative impact on the fish and wildlife
in the area, if all these things go forward, or will this process simply look
at this one?”
Griffin responded that the cumulative effects of the Ryan River
project would be assessed as part of the EAO’s review process, but he couldn’t
speak to specifics regarding other projects in the area.
“Many of those applications are not applications to our
process,” he said. “They are applications for water licenses and a number of those
projects may be large enough to warrant projects in our process.
“My understanding is that most of those projects have not
proceeded very far along in terms of the water licensing and land itinerary
process, and it’s very difficult for us to know right now how many of those are
likely to come forward.”
Despite what Griffin said about the progress of other
run-of-river projects in the area, Whistler resident and activist Pina Belperio
expressed concern that “110 of these projects” could be built in the Sea to Sky
corridor and there wouldn’t be enough time to do a full environmental
assessment of them.
“I had the opportunity to meet somebody who works at the
Ministry of the Environment in the water department, and she confirmed to me
that most of you guys have about 15 to 20 minutes allotted for a project, for
the assessment process,” she said.
“I’m just wondering how much time you’re allocating towards the
environmental process.”
Griffin said he couldn’t comment on how much time government
agencies have for environmental assessment reviews. He did, however, say that
“weeks of work” has already been put into the review of this project and
others.
Hamish Nichol, a Pemberton resident and activist with B.C.’s
Save Our Rivers campaign, asked whether there’s an opportunity for the public
to say “no” to a project during the EAO review process.
“Is there any way, for example at this meeting tonight, we
could say no to this process, and anyone would pay attention to it?”
Many in the audience applauded his question.
Griffin, looking visibly nervous, said that any member of the
public is as “free as everybody here” to make their views known about the
project through the EAO process — but the public comment period ends Dec.
15.
“The environmental assessment legislation is developed in a way
that offers the proponent an opportunity to put forward what they think is a
good project,” Griffin said.
Griffin was dogged with several more questions before turning
it over to David Carter, executive vice-president of Regional Power, who showed
a video and gave an overview of the Ryan River project.
Carter told the audience that the Ryan River has been
“adversely impacted” by human activity and said he wants to bring fish back “in
large numbers” to the watershed. He drew on Regional Power’s experience
developing the Sechelt Creek project, which he said brought grizzlies back to
the area.
“With the fish, you bring back the grizzlies; with the
grizzlies, you bring back the eagles and so forth,” he said.
An audience member with a video camera then interrupted and
accused Carter of lying to the public.
“We’re not talking about Sechelt Creek, we’re talking about the
Sea to Sky Land and Resource Management Plan,” he said, drawing attention to a
plan that identifies the entire Sea to Sky corridor — not just the Ryan
River — as a grizzly bear recovery area.
Another audience member asked the cameraman to let Carter
finish talking and then called him a “turkey.”
At one point Foy asked Carter, “How many people have to say no to make you go away?”