Water Sustainability and the City

Water Sustainability and the CityLeveraging B.C.’s Water Sustainability Act in Support of Urban Watershed Management

Report Outline EXECUTIVE SUMMARY page 4

1. INTRODUCTION: URBAN WATERSHED SUSTAINABILITY page 11 1.1. Overview and Purpose 1.2. Approach 1.3. Definitions

2. ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES IN URBAN WATERSHEDS page 16 2.1 AnOverviewofUrbanWatershedChallenges 2.2 AssessingEnvironmentalChallengesinB.C.’sUrbanWatersheds 2.2.1 Severity of Environmental Issues 2.2.2 DifferentConcernsinDifferentRegions 2.3 CausesandCulpritsofEnvironmentalChallengesinB.C.’sUrban 2.3.1 Watersheds 2.3.2 Prevalenceoftriggers 2.3.3 RegionalDifferences

3. LOCAL WATERSHED MANAGEMENT: TOOLS AND CHALLENGES page 28 3.1 ExistingTools 3.1.1 Bylaws,Zoning,andDevelopmentPermitAreas 3.1.2 Waterdemandmanagementprograms 3.1.3 Fundingintegratedwaterinfrastructure 3.2 ChallengestoSustainableWatershedManagement 3.2.1 Voluntaryvs.mandatedprotections 3.2.2 Long-termwatershedplanningvs.shorttermpoliticalcycles 3.2.3 Piecemealapproach 3.2.4 Lackofresourcestosupporton-the-groundwork 3.2.5 Accountabilityofprovincialgovernment 3.2.6 Fragmentedwaterframework 3.2.7 (Un)collaborativedecision-making

4. LEVERAGING THE WATER SUSTAINABILITY ACT page 44 4.1 LeveragePointsoftheActrelatedtourbanwatershedmanagement 4.2 RecommendationsfortheProvincetosupporturbanwatershedmanagement 4.2.1 ConnectinglandandwaterthroughWaterObjectives 4.2.2 Improvingcoordinationandtransparencydecision-making 4.2.3 Securingadequatefundsforwatershedmanagement 4.2.4 Ensuringwaterisprotectedfornature 4.2.5 Monitoringandreportingonwatershedhealth 4.3 Practitionerfeedbackonrecommendations

5. CONCLUSIONS page 51

APPENDIXA page 52 APPENDIXB page 53 APPENDIXC page 55 APPENDIXD page 57

© 2017 by the Canadian Freshwater Alliance - Tides Canada. Water Sustainability and the City: Leveraging B.C.’s Water Sustainability Act in Support of Urban Watershed ManagementismadeavailableunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives4.0Licence(international): https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

SuggestedCitation:Mettler,C.(2017,November).WaterSustainabilityandtheCity:LeveragingB.C.’sWaterSustainabilityActinSupportofUrbanWatershedManagement.TheCanadianFreshwaterAlliance-TidesCanada,Canada.

Acknowledgements

This report was made possible through a partnership between the Canadian Freshwater Alliance and Evergreen with funding by the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia and the Bullitt Foundation.

ThedevelopmentofthisdocumentwasguidedbythethoughtfulinputofdozensofurbanwatershedprofessionalsthroughoutBritishColumbia.Toprotecttheanonymityoftheircontributionsinthereport,wedonotnamespecificindividualswhocontributed.However,itshouldbenotedthattheirobservationsandinsightswereinvaluable,andformthebasisofthefindingsandrecommendationsofthisreport.

Theinputandguidanceofanadvisorycommitteewasalsoinstrumentalinshapingthescopeandcontentofthisreportandfeedbackofpeerreviewershelpedtolendrigoranddepthofexpertiseandexperiencetothefinalproduct.Weacknowledgethattheinputoftheadvisorycouncilandpeerreviewersdoesnotnecessarilyengendertheirfullendorsementofthereport’scontentsorconclusions.Wespecificallythankthefollowingindividualsfortheirinputandsuggestions:

OliverBrandes,POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernanceDeborahCarlson,WestCoastEnvironmentalLawJamesCasey,BirdStudiesCanadaTheresaFresco,FraserBasinCouncilAmyGreenwood,formerlyofFraserBasinCouncilJordiHoney-Roses,SchoolofCommunityandRegionalPlanning,UniversityofBritishColumbiaRosieSimms,POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernanceLindsayTelfer,CanadianFreshwaterAlliance

Cover Photo Credits (left to right)MillCreekinKelowna.PhotoCredit:ChristineMettlerStreetsideraingarden.PhotoCredit/GreenCommunitiesCanadaFraserRiveratNewWestminster.PhotoCredit/waferboard.CCBY2.0GreendevelopmentinVictoria.PhotoCredit/J.ScratchleyCC-BY-ND2.0PhotoCredit/ephien.CCBY2.0StillCreekinVancouver.PhotoCredit/DuncanCreamer.CCBY2.0

WaterSustainabilityandtheCity 4 |

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overthree-quartersofthepopulationinBritishColumbialiveinurbanizedwatersheds.Thesewatershedsprovideavarietyofecological,health,social,economicandculturalfunctionsforthepeopleandecosystemsthatdependonthem.Yet,despitetheimportantrolethesewatershedsplay,theyaresomeofthemostdegradedwatersheds.Localgovernmentsarewell-positionedtoinfluenceenvironmentaloutcomesinwatershedsthatfallwithintheirjurisdictions.Butmanywatershedpractitionersworkinginlocalgovernmentshaveexpressedconcernabouttheirabilitytomitigateenvironmentalpressuresthatareresultinginwatersheddegradationinurbanareas.Urbanwatershedsustainability—keepingwatershedsinconditionstosustainthefunctionsthatcontributetohumanandecologicalwell-beingforcurrentandfuturegenerations—isachallenge.

B.C.’snewWater Sustainability Act(WSA)enablesthedevelopmentofregulatoryandpolicytoolsthat,ifeffectivelyseized,couldincreaselocalgovernments’abilitiestomoresustainablymanagelocalwatersheds.Manyofthesetoolshaveyettobedeveloped.Thisreportidentifiesopportunitiesforthedevelopmentandimplementationofregulations,policies,andprogramsundertheWSAthatcouldaddresschallengeshamperingwatershedsustainabilityinurbanareasacrossB.C.

Inordertoidentifytheseregulatoryandpolicyinterventions,wefirstneededtoanswerthefollowingquestions:

1. WhatenvironmentalchallengesareprevalentinB.C.’surbanwatershedsandwhatactivitiesarecausingthem?

2. Whattoolscurrentlyexisttoaddressthosechallenges?

3. Whydolocalgovernments,despitethetoolsthatcurrentlyexist,continuetoexperiencechal-lengesinaddressingwatersheddegradation?

Wesoughttoanswerthesequestionsbyreviewingresearchandliteratureonurbanwatersheds,andbyaskingurbanwatershedpractitionersfortheirperspectives.Specifically,wesentanonlinesurveyto79urbanwatershedpractitionersthroughoutB.C.andconductedfollow-upinterviewswithfivesurveyrespondents.Respondentswereprimarilyfrommunicipalities,followedbyregionaldistricts,governmentalagenciesorcollaborativepartnerships,not-for-profitorganizations,FirstNations,andconsultingfirms.TheyworkedinurbanwatershedsintheMetroVancouverarea,EasternVancouverIsland,theOkanaganandtheKamloopsareas.


Environmental Challenges

Respondentswereparticularlyconcernedaboutriparianhabitatlossanddegradation:80%ofrespondentssaidthiswaseithera“notable”(4outof5inseverity)or“verysignificant”(5outof5inseverity)concern.Droughtandlowstreamflow(71%ofrespondentssaidthiswasa“notable”or“verysignificant”concern)wasthesecondlargestconcern,followedbyflooding(57%ofrespondentssaidthiswasa“notable”of“verysignificantconcern).Generallyspeaking,respondentsintheMetroVancouverareaweremostconcernedaboutriparianhabitatdegradation.RespondentsintheOkanaganandKamloopsareaweremuchmoreconcernedabouttheirdrinkingwaterqualityandquantitythantheircounterpartsfromtheMetroVancouverareaandEasternVancouverIsland.

Environmental Pressures

Land-usechangewasratedasthemostsignificantpressurecausingenvironmentaldegradation.83%ofrespondentssaidthiswasa“notable”or“verysignificant”threat.Onlyonerespondentsaiditwasamildthreat(2outof5inseverity)andnoonesaiditwas“notatall”athreat.Impervioussurfaceswasidentifiedasthesecondmostprevalentpressure(71%ofrespondentssaiditwasa“notable”or“verysignificant”threat),followedbyclimatechange(63%saidthiswasa“notable”or“verysignificant”threat).Respondentsfromurbanareaswithhighpopulationdensities(i.e.withanaveragepopulationdensityofover1,000peoplepersquarekilometer)thoughtimpervioussurfaceswereabiggerchallengethanland-usechange.Respondentsfrom“moderatelyurban”(250-999inhabitantspersquarekilometer)municipalitiesinMetroVancouverwerethemostconcernedaboutland-usechange,with100%ofrespondentsidentifyingland-usechangeaseithera“notable”or“verysignificant”threat.


Existing Tools

Localgovernmentshaveanumberoftoolsattheirdisposaltoaddresstheenvironmentalissues—andpressuresthatgiverisetothem—identifiedabove.Althoughnotanexhaustivelist,thisreportidentifiedthreecategoriesoftoolsthatarecommonlydeployedbylocalgovernments.Thesetoolsarenotnecessarilyexclusivefromoneanotherandmaybeusedincombination.

1. BylawsandDevelopmentPermitAreas.Provinciallegislationgiveslocalgovernmentsauthoritytoregulateinanumberofareassuchasland-usechange,drainage,andinsomemattersrelatedtothenaturalenvironment.Inthevastmajorityofthecases,whileprovinciallegislationdoesgiveauthoritytolocalgovernmentstoregulate,itdoesnotrequireregulationtoprotectenvironmentalvalues(withsomeexceptions,e.g.localgovernmentsmustcomplywiththefederalFisheriesAct).Whenandiflocalgovernmentsdocreateregulationsintendedtoimprovewatershedoutcomes,itcannotviolateprovinciallegislation(e.g.theRighttoFarmAct).

2. Waterdemandmanagementprograms.Localgovernmentsmayuseacombinationofbylawsandothermeasures—suchaseconomicandfinancialmeasures—toencouragewaterconservation.Forexample,theymayestablishbylawsthatrequireefficientplumbingandfix-turesinnewdevelopmentsorbylawstominimizerun-offvolumesgeneratedbydevelopments.Economicandfinancialleversincludeestablishingconservation-orientedpricingforwaterdeliveryservicesorrequiringwatermetersforcommercialand/ordomesticusers.

3. Infrastructurefunding.GovernmentsacrossCanadaarereinvigoratingtheircommitmenttoinfrastructureinvestment,afterseveraldecadesofunderinvestmenthasledtoalarge“infra-structuregap.”Inadditiontotraditional“grey”infrastructure(e.g.engineeredworkssuchaspipes,sewers,anddetentionponds),thereisanincreasingrecognitionoftherolethat“green”infrastructure(e.g.naturalandconstructedfeatures,suchasurbanforests,parkspace,wet-landsandriparianzones,greenroofs,raingardens,bioswales,andretentionponds)canplayinimprovingurbanwatershedhealth—forexamplebyminimizingrun-offfromprecipitationevents.Localgovernmentsmayapplytofederalorprovincialgrantstohelpwiththeseinfra-structureinvestments.Despitethisfinancialaid,localgovernmentspayamuchlargershareforfundinginfrastructuretodaythantheydidseveralyearsago.Tofundtheseinvestments,somehaveoptedtoinstitutecost-recoveryprogramssuchasstormwaterordrainagefees.


Management Challenges

Despitethetoolsthatlocalgovernmentshavetoaddresstheenvironmentalchallengesandpressuresthatgiverisetothem,manywatershedpractitionersworkingin—orcloselywith—localgovernmenthaveexpressedthatthereremainsignificantbarrierstoprotectingwatershedhealthinB.C.’surbanareas.Whenasked“Canlocalgovernmentsadequatelyaddresswatershedsissues,”thevastmajoritysaid“someofthem/inpart”,whilejustunderonefifthofrespondentssaid“no.”

Usingdatacollectedinthesurveyandthroughone-on-oneinterviews,weidentifiedsevenbarriersthatimpedetheabilityoflocalgovernmentstoplanforandmanagewatershedssustainably.

1. Voluntaryvs.mandatedprotections.Provinciallegislationhasenabledlocalgovernmentstomakeregulationstoprotectenvironmentalandwatershedhealth,but,by-in-large,hasnotre-quiredlocalgovernmentstodothis(withsomeexceptions).Surveyandinterviewrespondentsexpressedconcernthatthishasresultedinalargediscrepancybetweenlocalgovernmentswithregardtopoliciesandactionsthatprotecturbanwatersheds.Somenotedhow,withoutprovincialstandards,localdecision-makersmayresistenactingprotections,orthereisanincreasedlikelihoodofspecialinterestsinfluencingdecision-making.Thenotionthatmanylocalgovernmentslacked“politicalwill”wasbroughtupbyseveralparticipants.

2. Long-termwatershedplanningvs.shorttermpoliticalcycles.Restoringhealthywater-shedprocessescantakealongtime.Thebeneficialimpactsofarestorationprojectmightnotreveal themselves for as little as a few months to a year, to as many as over a hundred years. However,localgovernmentsareunderpressuretoshowtheirconstituencieshowpublicfundsarebenefittingthecommunityonamuchshorterterm,orrisklosingelections.Surveyandinterviewrespondentsnotedthatthissometimesresultsinotherpriorities—wherebenefitsmanifestthemselvesonamuchshorterterm—takingprecedenceoversustainablewatershedmanagement.

3. Piecemealapproach.Manyofthetoolsthatexistforlocalgovernmentstoinfluenceactivi-tiesthatimpactwatershedhealtharetoolsintendedtopreventfuturedegradation(i.e.theyareaimedatmitigatingharmcausedbynewdevelopments)andaresitespecific(i.e.theyareenactedonalot-by-lotbasis).Althoughtheseinterventionsmayhelptostoporslowharm,theyaretypicallynotenoughtorestoretheimpactsofpastdegradation.Thisleadsomepar-ticipantstoexpressthatitishardtomakegainsonoverallwatershedhealth—insomecasesnecessaryforwatershedstofunctionsustainably.

WaterSustainabilityandtheCity 8|

4. Lackofresourcestosupporton-the-groundwork.Surveyparticipantsidentifiedalackoffinancialresourcesasthelargestchallengetobeingabletosustainablymanagewatersheds,with71%ofrespondentssayingthiswaseithera“large”or“verylarge”barrier.Surveyandin-terviewparticipantsindicatedthatconstrainedresourcesinhibitedtheirabilitytoperformactiv-itiessuchasimplementingandenforcingrulesandpolicies,monitorwatershedhealth,conducteducationandoutreach,andensurethecontinuityofwatershedprogramsingeneral.Partic-ipantsnotedthatconstrainedresourcesnotonlyaffectslocalgovernments,butthatitalsohampersprovincialgovernmentstafffromfulfillingitsdutieswithregardtowatershedman-agementandprotection(e.g.conductingwatermonitoringandscience,issuingandreviewinglicenses,enforcingrules).Thisinturncanmakeputmoreofaburdenonlocalgovernments.

5. Accountabilityofprovincialgovernment.Severalinterviewandsurveyparticipantsnoted,withoutprompting,thattheyperceivedanaccountabilitygapamonghigherlevelsofgovern-mentwithregardtofulfillingtheirdutiesandenforcingtheirownrules.Participantsidentifiedthisbarrierasmostsalientwithregardtotheprovincialgovernment,althoughsomepartic-ipantsdididentifythefederalgovernmentaswell.Thiswasnotedinparticularwithregardtoenforcement,especiallyinregardstooversubscriptionofwater,illegalwaterwithdrawals,unmonitoreddischargesintowaterbodies,andactivitiesoncrownlandthatcompromisewa-tershedhealth.Someparticipantssharedaconcernthatthisunderminedlocalgovernments’abilitiestoprotectorrestorewatershedswithintheirjurisdictions.

6. (Un)collaborativedecision-making.Participantsidentifiedaneedforcollaborativewater-sheddecision-makingbetweendifferentlevelsofgovernments,butmanynotedthatcurrentmechanismsandsupportswerenotadequate.Thereisnooverarchingpolicyforcollaborativeordelegateddecision-makinginB.C.,andconsequentlythereisalargevariationacrosstheprovincewithregardtowhatkindofmechanismsexistandwhoisinvolvedindecision-mak-ing.Someregionshaveformalwatershedentitieswithlegalstatusandfunding,othershaveinformalgroupswithsomefundingbutlittlecapacity,othershavead hoccommitteeswithlittlefundingandcapacityforcollaborativewatersheddecision-making.Insomeregions,represen-tativesfrommultiplelevelsofgovernmentareatthetable.Inotherregions,localgovernmentsmakedecisionslargelywithoutconferringwithprovincialandfederalgovernmentsorFirstNations.SomeparticipantsrelayedthatFirstNationsareoftenexcludedfromlocalwatersheddecision-makingaltogether,andthatwhentheyareincluded,itisinaconsultative,notcollabo-rative, manner.

7. Fragmentedwaterframework.InB.C.,thereareanumberoflawsandregulationsthatper-taintoorhaveimpactsonurbanwatershedmanagement(e.g.theDrinkingWaterProtectionAct,theForestRangePracticesAct,theB.C.BuildingCode,etc.).Someparticipantsexpressedconcernthatrequirementsunderotherlawsorregulationsinhibittheirabilitytoprotecturbanwatershedhealthduetoconflictingindications.Otherparticipantsnotedhowthecurrentframeworkisdifficulttonavigate,andhardtoknowwhichstatutetakeslegalprecedencewhenmakingdecisions.SeveralparticipantsrelayedtheneedfortheWaterSustainabilityActtocon-siderandbuilduponpreviouswatershedplanningworkdoneatthelocallevel.


Towards Solutions: Leveraging the Water Sustainability Act

Althoughtheabovearenotinsignificantchallenges,thereareinterventionsthatcanhelptoaddressthem.ThenewWater Sustainability Act(WSA)presentsatimelyopportunitytodothis.Asprovincialstaffcontinuetodevelopregulations,policies,andprogramstosupportimplementationoftheAct,localgovernmentswoulddowelltoseizethisopportunity.ThisreportsuggeststhatwatershedpractitionersworkinginorwithlocalgovernmentswouldbemuchbetterpositionedtosustainablymanageurbanwatershedsiftheProvinceweretodevelopregulatoryandpolicytoolsthat:

1. ConnectlandandwaterthroughWaterObjectives

2. Improvecoordinationandtransparencyindecision-making

3. Secureadequatefundsforwatershedmanagement

4. Ensurewaterisprotectedfornature

5. Facilitatemonitoringandreportingonwatershedhealth

Specifically,thereportoutlines14recommendations(andseveralsub-recommendations)intheseareasthat,ifeffectivelyimplemented,willincreasethecapacityoflocalgovernmentstoaddressandreverseurbanwatersheddegradation.WesuggestthatlocalgovernmentsadvocatetotheProvincetotakeactiononthoserecommendations.

These recommendations are:

1. Developregulationsthatuseperformance-basedcriteriatoestablishobjectivesforwaterquali-ty,quantityandecosystemhealth.

2. DevelopWaterObjectivestoapplytourbanizedwatersheds.

3. MonitorandreviewimplementationofWaterObjectives.

4. Developguidanceandprocessesforlocalgovernmentsonhowwatersheddecision-makingwillbeaffectedbyimplementationoftheWaterSustainabilityAct.

5. Developwatershedgovernancepilotsinpriorityareas,whichcouldformthebasisfor‘water-shedentities.’

6. Establishathird-party,capacity-buildingentitytocoordinateandfacilitateknowledgetransferwithinandbetweenwatershedentitiesanddifferentlevelsofgovernment.

7. WhenWaterSustainabilityPlansaredesignated,ensureplansconsiderandincorporatetheeffortsofpreviouswatershedplanningefforts(e.g.WatershedAssessment&ResponsePlans,WaterUsePlans,etc.)andlocalgovernmentCommunityPlansandbylaws.

8. ReviewthecurrentfeesandratesstructuresetoutintheWaterSustainabilityFees,ChargesandRentalsRegulationtodeterminewhethercurrentstructureishighenoughtoprocurenec-essaryfundstofullyimplementtheAct.

9. WorkwithaSustainableFundingTaskforcetoexploreandtestimplementationofothersus-tainablefundingmechanismsforwatershedmanagementattheprovincialandwatershed


level,suchasincreasingrevenuefromlocaltaxbases,Crownresourcerentals,etc.

10. Establishlegallyenforceableregulationstoprotectenvironmentalflows.

11. DevelopanEnvironmentalFlowsTaskforcewithparticipationoflocalgovernment,FirstNations,andthefederalgovernmenttoestablishwhetherexistingwaterallocationsaresustainable.

12. Identifyopportunitiestocoordinateandstreamlinewaterdatafromdifferentmonitoringoper-ationstoenhanceknowledge-sharingandreduceduplicationofefforts.

13. Requireallwateruserstomonitorwaterwithdrawalsandreporttheirusetogovernment.

14. CompileasummaryofwaterdataintoaStateofOurWatersreport,apubliclyaccessiblereportissuedeveryfiveyears.

Therecommendationswerepresentedtoover50watershedpractitionersataone-dayforuminOctober2017forinput.Thisfeedback,whilevaluable,doesnotconstituteofficialconsultation.Therewasgeneralagreementthattherecommendationsabovewouldbehelpful.Thosepresentreiteratedthataneedforresources,collaborationandsharingofresponsibility,clarityanddirectionandcontinuingeducationaskeyelementstosupportthesuccessfulimplementationoftheAct.


1. INTRODUCTION: URBAN WATERSHED SUSTAINABILITY

1.1. Overview and Purpose

Urbanwatershedshavespecificchallengesthatrequiretailoredsolutions.AlthoughthevastmajorityofBritishColumbia’slandmassisclassifiedasrural,overthreequartersoftheprovince’spopulationlivesinhighlyurbanizedwatersheds.1ThevastmajorityofB.C.’sresidents,therefore,aredependentonasmallnumberofwatershedsforavarietyofecological,economic,socialandhumanhealthfunctionsthatarevitaltohumanwell-being.However,urbanwatershedsalsotendtobethemostdegradedwatersheds.2AspopulationpressuresgrowinB.C.inthecomingyearsandtheimpactsofclimatechangebecomemoreapparent,thesewatershedswillcomeundermorestrain.Developingeffective,comprehensivestrategiestoconserveandrehabilitateurbanwatershedsisatimelyandimportanttask.

InBritishColumbia,alllevelsofgovernmentplayaroleinwatershedmanagement,butlocalgovernmentshaveauniqueandsignificantroleinoverseeingactivitiesthatimpactwatershedhealth.ThelegalframeworkinBritishColumbiaprovidestoolsthatfacilitatelocalgovernments’abilitytoinfluencesuchactivitiesintheirjurisdiction.However,despitethesetools,manylocalwatershedmanagershaveexpressedconcernthatthecurrentframeworkandthewayinwhichitoperateshassignificantgapsthatcompromisetheirabilitytoensurethesustainabilityofurbanwatershedsintheircommunities.

TheWater Sustainability Actprovidesanopportunitytoaddresssomeofthesechallenges.CalledintoforceinFebruaryof2016,theWater Sustainability Act(WSA)istheprovince’sprincipallegislationgoverningwateruse,replacingtheWaterActof1909.ThenewActexpandsthescopeofthelegalframeworkforwaterinBritishColumbia.Forexample,itexpandstheregulationofwaterusefromsurfacetogroundwater,requiresthatdecision-makersconsiderenvironmentalflowneedswhenconsideringapplicationsfornewwaterlicenses,andprovidesforthecreationofregulatoryauthorityinseveralareas,includinglinkingland-usewithwatershedoutcomes.3

ThevastmajorityofdetailconcerningtheimplementationoftheWSAisandwillbecontainedinregulationsandoperatingpolicies.AninitialsetofregulationswasreleasedinFebruary2016,whentheActwascalledintoforce.However,therearemanyareasofregulationsthathaveyettobedeveloped.ThescopeoftheActalsoprovidesavarietyofopportunitiesfornewoperatingpoliciesandprogramstobedeveloped.

1Rothwell,Neil.Canada’sWatersheds:The Demographic Basis for an Urban-rural Dialogue.StatisticsCanada, AgricultureDivision,2006.2Hughes,RobertM.,etal.“Areviewofurbanwaterbodychallengesandapproaches:(1)rehabilitationand remediation.”Fisheries39.1(2014):18-29,citingStanfieldetal.2006andStranketal.2008. 3Brandes,Oliver;Carr-Wilson,Savannah;Curran,DeborahandSimms,Rosie.AwashwithOpportunity:Ensuringthe sustainabilityofBritishColumbia’snewwaterlaw.ThePOLISProjectonEcologicalGovernance(November2015).


Thepurposeofthisreportistoidentifyopportunitiesforthedevelopmentandimplementationofregulations,policies,andprogramsundertheWater Sustainability ActthatcouldimproveenvironmentaloutcomesinurbanwatershedsacrossB.C.Itisintendedfortwoprincipalaudiences:(1)urbanwatershedmanagers4withinlocalgovernments(definedasmunicipalities,regionaldistrictsandirrigationdistricts)andFirstNations5inBritishColumbiaand(2)keystaffworkingonpolicydevelopmentoftheWater Sustainability Actwithintheprovincialgovernment.Thereportislaidoutaccordingly:

• Section2discussesenvironmentalchallengesinurbanwatersheds,andevaluatestheextenttowhichthesechallengesareprevalentincitiesinBritishColumbia;

• Section3providesanoverviewoftoolsthatcurrentlyexisttoimproveurbanwatershedsustainability,challengesthatimpedethispursuit,andpotentialsolutions.

• Section4assesseshowtheWater Sustainability Actcouldbeleveragedtoaddresstheidentifiedenvironmentalandmanagementchallengesthroughthedevelopmentofregulations,policiesandprograms.Thissectiondrawsfromandbuildsuponthesolutionslistedinsection3.

1.2 Approach

Thereportauthorsusedmulti-prongedresearchandengagementapproachwasusedtoinformthefindingsandrecommendationscontainedinthereport.Specifically,theauthorandadvisorycommitteeundertookaliteraturereview,conductedanonlinesurveyandinterviewswithwatermanagers,soughtexpertadvice,heldanonlineworkshopandorganizedaforumwiththeparticipationofapproximatelyfiftyurbanwatershedprofessionals.

Literature Review

Intheliteraturereview,weexaminedacademicarticles,greyliterature(includingtoolkits,guidancematerials;andreportsfromnon-profitassociations,variouslevelsofgovernment,academicandresearchinstitutions,andconsultingfirms),newsarticles,relevantlegislation,regulation,andpolicydocumentsinorderto:

• Identifykeyenvironmentalissuesaffectingurbanwatershedsingeneral,andB.C.’surbanwater-shedsinparticular;

• ContextualizeB.C.’scomplexjurisdictionalframeworkwithregardtourbanwatershedmanagement,includingexistingtoolsandmechanismsinplacetoaddressenvironmentalchallenges;

• Identifysuccessfactorsforeffectiveurbanwatershedmanagement,whichareintegratedintorec-ommendationsinSection4.

4Urbanwatershedmanagersinclude:land-useandenvironmentalplanners,publicworksmanagersandstaffinpublicworks,waterpolicyanalystsandrelatedprofessionswhoseworkcouldbeimpactedbytheimplementationoftheWaterSustainabilityAct.5RightsandresponsibilitiesofFirstNationswithregardtowatermanagementareuniqueanddifferfromthoseoflocalgovernments.Thegovernanceandmanagementcontextdescribedinthispaperappliesmostspecificallytolocalgovernments.However,sincemanyFirstNationsareinvolvedinlocalwatershedmanagement,thefindingsofthispapermaybeofinteresttostaffandcouncilofFirstNationsaswell.


Online Survey and Interviews

TogleanmorespecificinformationregardingthescopeandseverityofenvironmentalchallengesinB.C.’surbanwatersheds,weengagedindividualsworkinginurbanwatershedmanagementinurbanareasintheprovince.

Anonlinesurveythatcontainedquestionsregardingurbanwatershedmanagementchallengeswassharedwithindividualsworkinginurbanwatershedmanagementaroundtheprovince.Wefocusedonthoseworkingin:

• TheMetroVancouverarea;

• TheOkanaganregion,specificallyindividualswhoseworkisrelevanttowatershedsinPenticton,WestKelowna,KelownaandVernon;

• TheKamloopsarea;and

• EasternVancouverIsland,withafocusontheNanaimoandVictoriaareas.

Theseareaswerechosenastheycorrespondtothedefinitionof“urban”chosenforthepurposesofthisresearch(seesection1.3,“Definitions”).Thesurveywassentto79individuals.Intheend,35individualsfrom25organizationsrespondedtotheonlinesurvey.Themajority(80%)ofrespondentswerefromlocalgovernmentsorganizations(municipalitiesorregionaldistricts)andFirstNationsgovernments,howeverthereweresomeparticipantsfromnon-profitorganizationsandconsultingfirmswhoworkextensivelyonurbanwatershedmanagement.AppendixAprovidesademographicbreakdownofsurveyrespondents.

Inadditiontotheonlinesurveypreparedforthepurposesofthisproject,wealsoanalyzedanearliersurveyonurbanwatershedchallengesadministeredbythenon-profitorganization,Evergreen,in2016.TheresearchcontainedinthisreportitselfbuildsuponEvergreen’spreviousworkregardingurbanwatershedsustainability.TheEvergreensurveycontainedresponsesfrom13individualsinthenonprofitstewardshipcommunityandlocalgovernment.Althoughthesurveycontainedsufficientlydifferentquestionsfromtheofficialprojectsurvey,relevantandrelatedthemesemergedfromresponses,whichhelpedtovalidateoraddbreadthtotheanalysis.

Inordertohoneinonanddeepenanalysisofinformationcollectedintheliteraturereviewandtheonlinesurvey,weconductedinterviewswithurbanwatershedmanagersandknowledgeholdersfromdifferenturbanareasinB.C.Intotal,weconductedfivefollow-upinterviews.WealsohadconversationswithfourprominentB.C.waterexpertstofurtherguidetheanalysis.

Inthereport,responsesofsurveyandinterviewparticipantsareanonymized.Anonymitywaschosensothatparticipantswouldfeelcomfortablespeakingfreelyaboutchallengestheyfaceinandoutsideoftheirorganizationwithregardtourbanwatershedmanagement.


Expert advice

Inordertoensurearigorousanalysisofenvironmental,legal,andgovernancefactors,advicewassoughtfrompractitionerswhoholdin-depthknowledgeofthevarioussubjectareasthisreportcovers.Specifically,anadvisorycounciloffiveindividualsfromfourorganizationsguidedthedevelopmentoftheresearchandreport.Inadditiontothoseontheadvisorycouncil,thisreportwasalsoreviewedbytwocontentexperts.

Online Workshop

Totriangulatethefindingsfromtheliteraturereview,onlinesurveyandinterviewsandensuretheanalysiscontainedhereisconsistentwiththeexperiencesoflocalgovernment,weheldawebinartopresenttheworktodateandtogatherfeedback.Tenurbanwatershedpractitionerswerepresent.Feedbackfromparticipantsduringthewebinarconfirmedthefindings.Participantsalsoexpressedaninterestinseeingthefindingsmobilizedintoactionableitems.

Water Sustainability and the City forum

Finally,weinvitedwatershedprofessionalsfromdifferentorganizationsincludingmunicipalities,regionaldistricts,FirstNations,non-profitorganizationsandtheB.C.provincialgovernmenttoaforumtodiscussfindingsofthisreportandrecommendationsforactions,aswellastoprovideanopportunityforpeerlearningonaddressingurbanwatershedchallenges.Duringtheforum,weheldaone-hourworkshopsessionwhereparticipantsprovidedfeedbackontherecommendationscontainedinSection4.Adiscussionofthisfeedbackisprovidedinsection4.3.Itisimportanttonotethatthisfeedback,whilevaluable,doesnotconstituteconsultationwithregardtoregulatorydevelopmentoftheActandshouldbeconstruedassuch.

Rain in Coquitlam. Photo Credit: Jason V. CC BY 2.0


1.3 Definitions

Urban

Forthepurposesofthisreport,wechoseanoperationaldefinitionof“urban”basedoncriteriausedbyStatisticsCanadaincensusanalysis.AlthoughStatisticsCanadausesapopulationdensityof400peoplepersquarekilometerwhendefininga“populationcentre”(formerly,an“urbancentre”)6,weoptedforabroaderdefinitionof250peoplepersquarekilometer.ThisallowedforgrowingmunicipalitiessuchastheDistrictofWestKelowna,theTownshipofLangleyandtheTownshipofMapleRidgetobeincludedinthisanalysis.Thisresearchalsofocusedonareasthathavepopulationsof10,000ormoreresidents.7 “Cities”isoftenusedinterchangeablywith“urbanareas”throughoutthereport.

UrbanwaterprofessionalswhoseworkappliestowatershedswithinMetroVancouverandtheOkanaganregion,aswellasKamloops,NanaimoandVictoriawereengagedforthisresearch.Althoughthereareareas(e.g.NelsonandPrinceGeorge)thatmeetthecriteriaoftheoperationaldefinitionof“urban”inthisresearch,wedecidedtolimitthescopeoftheresearchtotheaforementionedareas.Nonetheless,theoutcomesofthisreportarelikelytohaverelevanceforotherurbanareasbothinsideandoutsideofBritishColumbia.

Watershed Sustainability

“Watershedsustainability”doesnoteasilylenditselftoanoperationaldefinition.Instead,thedefinitionhereservesasaconceptualframethatgivescontexttothechallengesidentifiedinthereport.FollowingtheBrundtlandCommission,sustainabilityrequiresthatenvironmentalresourcesandecosystemsaremaintainedinconditionssuchthattheneedsofbothcurrentandfuturegenerationscanbemet.8,9Thiscanextendtonon-human(e.g.ecological)needsaswellashuman(e.g.economic,social,cultural,health-related)needs.Watersystemsaredynamicandabletorenewthemselvesiftheymaintainabaselineofecologicalandhydrologicalintegrity.Ensuringsustainablewatershedsmayrequirebothpreventingandreversingdegradationsothattheycansustainthefunctionsthatcontributetohumanandecologicalwell-being.

Whentheecologicalandhydrologicalintegrityofwatershedsisthreatened,wecanassumethatthewatershed’sabilitytosustainitselfandmeetecologicalandhumanneeds—i.e.watershedsustainability—isalsothreatened.AppendixBcontainsmorediscussionofconsiderationsrelatedtowatershedsustainability.

6StatisticsCanada,“PopulationCentre.”(2015).Retrievedfrom:http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/geo049a-eng.cfm 7StatisticsCanadadefinespopulationscentreswith10,000residentsormoreasa“coreagglomeration”initscensus.8Brundtland,G.,&Khalid,M.(1987).UNBrundtlandCommissionReport.Our Common Future:ReportoftheWorldCommissiononEnvironmentandDevelopmenthttp://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf 9AlthoughtheBrundtlandCommissiondefinitioniswidelyusedindiscussionsregardingenvironmentalsustainability,itshouldbenotedthatthedefinitiondoesnotadequatelyencompassFirstNationsculturalandlegalconcepts.AmoreintegrateddefinitionthatincludesFirstNationsperspectiveson“sustainability”couldlendmorerobustnesstothisdefinitionandtoitsoperationalization.


2. ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES IN URBAN WATERSHEDS

2.1 An Overview of Urban Watershed Challenges

Populationtrendsassociatedwithurbanizationputpressureonwatersheds.Highpopulationdensitiesinurbanareasgiverisetodensebuiltenvironmentsthatareoftenextensivelyalteredfromnaturalstates.Further,thelargenumberofpeoplelivingincitiesmeansthattherearegreaterdemandsonnaturalresourcesinagivenarea.Thissectiondiscussesfourprincipalenvironmentalchallengesassociatedwithurbanization,asidentifiedinaliteraturereview:land-usechangeand“urbanstreamsyndrome”,wastewaterandemergingcontaminantsofconcern,competingdemandsonwater,andclimatechange.

i) Land-use change, “urban stream syndrome” and lost streamsLand-usechangesthatdisplacenaturalfeatureswithagriculturalorurbanlandcoverareamajorfactorthatleadsto“urbanstreamsyndrome”10.Urbanstreamsyndromeincludessymptomssuchas:

• Increasedvariabilityinstreamflows(mosturbanstreamsbecome“flashier”,i.e.experiencemoreandmoresuddeninstancesofhighflows;someurbanstreamsalsoexperiencemoreprolongedlowflows11);

• Impairedwaterquality(e.g.increasedturbidityandpresenceofchemicaland/orbiologicalcontaminants);

• Lossofcomplexecologicalfeatures(e.g.streammeanders,wetlandandriparianareas)thatresultsinphysicalhabitatlossforfishandwildlifeandoveralllossofbiodiversity;

• Higherwatertemperaturesdueto“urbanheatisland”effect.12

10Walsh,ChristopherJ.,AllisonH.Roy,JackW.Feminella,PeterD.Cottingham,PeterM.Groffman,andRaymondP.MorganII.“Theurbanstreamsyndrome:currentknowledgeandthesearchforacure.”Journal of the North American Benthological Society 24.3(2005).11Konrad,ChristopherP.,andDerekB.Booth.“Hydrologicchangesinurbanstreamsandtheirecologicalsignificance.”American Fisheries Society Symposium.47(2005).12Somers,KayleighA.,etal.“Streamsintheurbanheatisland:spatialandtemporalvariabilityintemperature.”Freshwater Science 32.1(2013).

Flooded residential neighbourhood. Photo Credit: Center for Neighbourhood Technology. CC BY-SA-2.0


Thesesymptomsoccurbecauseofland-usechangesinorclosetostreams,butalsoduetoland-usechangesthroughoutthewatershed.Urbanizationbothcompactssoil,lesseningitsabilitytoinfiltrateandretainwater,anddisplacesnaturalfeatureswithimperviouselements.Consequently,stormwaterrunofffromprecipitationeventsenterswaterbodiesfromalloverthecatchmentarea,oftenwithouttreatment.Notonlydoesstormwaterputvolumepressuresonurbanwaterbodies(increasingtheriskoffloodingandstreambankerosion),but,initsoverlandflowcourse,itoftenpicksupcontaminantsandsedimentonthegroundthatendupinurbanstreams,rivers,pondsorlakes.Thesecontaminantscanaffectthephysical,chemicalandbiologicalpropertiesofurbanwaterbodies.Forexample,floodinginthespringof2017inB.C.’sinteriorpromptedwarningsaboutwaterqualityinbothsurfaceandgroundwatersources.13

Thereisastrongrelationshipbetweenthetotalareaofimpervioussurfacesinawatershedandurbanstreamdegradation.Themoresurfaceareaofthewatershedisimpervioussurface,themoreimpairedstreamhealthtendstobe.14However,evenrelativelyminimalimpervioussurfacecovercanhavenotableimpactsonstreamhealth.Studieshavefoundthatstreambiodiversitydeclinesrapidlyinwatershedswithmorethan5-15%imperviouscover.Inonesuch,researchersfoundthatsalmonidswereeliminatedfromstreamsinOntarioandMarylandinwatershedswithonly4-9%ofimperviouscover.15Typically,urbanareascontainbetween20-60%imperviouscover.16Howurbanstreamsyndromemanifestsaroundtheglobehasbeencharacterizedas“strikinglysimilar”,despiteregionalvariationsinclimate,geology,biotaandurbaninfrastructure.17Land-usechangeinurbanwatershedsalsomakesthemlessresilienttowithstandextremeevents,hastenedbyclimatechange.

Land-usechangenotonlynegativelyimpactsstreamsinurbansettings,butinsomecasestotallydisplacesthem.IntheVancouverarea,thevastmajorityofpre-settlementstreamshavebeenburiedorculverted.18These“loststreams”haveeffectivelybeeneradicatedoftheirecologicalandhydrologicalfunctions.SomecitiesinB.C.andhaveundertakendaylightingprojectstobringloststreamsbacktomorenaturalconditions.

13Britten,Liam.“FloodingraiseswaterqualityconcernsinB.C.Interior”.CBCNews.(2017,May12).Retrievedfrom: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/interior-flooding-water-quality-1.4114039.14Wenger,SethJ.,etal.“Twenty-sixkeyresearchquestionsinurbanstreamecology:anassessmentofthestateofthescience.”Journal of the North American Benthological Society28.4(2009).15Hughes,RobertM.,etal.“Areviewofurbanwaterbodychallengesandapproaches:(1)rehabilitationandremediation.”Fisheries39.1(2014),citingStanfieldetal.2006andStranketal.2008.16Nowak,DavidJ.,andEricJ.Greenfield.“TreeandimperviouscoverchangeinUScities.”Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11.1(2012).17Booth,DerekB.,etal.“Globalperspectivesontheurbanstreamsyndrome.”Freshwater Science35.1(2016).18Fisheries&OceansCanada.“Threatened,EndangeredandLostStreamsoftheLowerFraserValley.”SummaryReport.Lower Fraser Valley Stream Review 3(1997).Retrievedfrom:http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/mpo-dfo/Fs23-304-8-1997-eng.pdf


ii) Wastewater, Emerging Contaminants of Concern (CECs) and microplasticsAnotherproblemofurbanizedwatershedsisthereleaseofwastewatereffluentintoreceivingbodies.Thismightcomeascontrolled(andmostoften,treated)oruncontrolled(anduntreatedreleases).Uncontrolledreleasesoftenoccurbecauseofcombinedseweroverflows(CSOs),wherebysewersthatcollectbothrawsewageandstormwateroverflowintimesofheavyrainorsnowmelt.Insuchcases,stormwaterinfrastructurethatisdesignedtodrainexcesswatermayactuallyexacerbatepollutionintoreceivingwaterbodiesbymixingwithsewage.Thiseffectisfurtheramplifiedwhenstormwaterdrainagepipesarerouteddirectlytosurfacewaterbodies,asisthecaseinmanyurbanareas.Oldandaginginfrastructureincities,combinedwithimpervioussurfacesthatgeneratelargevolumesofstormwaterrunoff,aretwomajorculpritsleadingtoCSOs.CSOscancauseseriousdamagetowildlifepopulationsandhabitat,releasehighlevelsofdangerousbacteriaintoreceivingwaters,andcontributetoharmfulalgalblooms.19

Thereisincreasingconcernaboutthepresenceofunregulatedchemicalandorganicsubstancesandmicroplasticsinwastewaterandstormwater,andtheimpactthesecontaminantsarehavingonecologicalvaluesanddrinkingwaterquality.Evenwhenwastewateristreatedandreleasedatwatertreatmentsplants,manydonothavethetechnologytoadequatelyfilterthem.Therearehundredsofemergingcontaminantsinwaterways,manyofwhichareunregulated20,andthereremainsignificantknowledgegapswithregardtohowthesecontaminantsinteractovertimeandspaceandhowtheyimpactwaterqualityandecologicalandbiologicalfunctions.21A2011reportconductedperrecommendationsoftheCohenCommissionsuggestedthereisastrongpossibilitythatover200CECsintheFraserRivercouldberesponsiblefordeclineandabnormalitiesinsockeyesalmon.22Becausetheyareunregulated,monitoringforthesecontaminantsisnotcommonplaceinmanyurbanareas.RecentstudiesalsoconfirmthepresenceofmicroplasticfibersinforagefishinseabirdsintheSalishSea.Wastewatereffluentisbelievedtobeanotablesourceoftheseplasticsenteringwaterways.23

19Wengeretal.(2008).20Hughesetal.(2014).21Pal,Amrita,etal.“Impactsofemergingorganiccontaminantsonfreshwaterresources:reviewofrecentoccurrences,sources,fateandeffects.”Science of the Total Environment408.24(2010).22MacDonald,Donetal.“PotentialEffectsofContaminantsonFraserRiverSockeyeSalmon.”The Cohen Commission of Inquiry into the Decline of Sockeye Salmon in the Fraser River Technical Report 2.(February2011).Retrievedfrom:https://www.watershed-watch.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Exh-826-NonRT.pdf23Bertram,D.,Robinson,C.,Henneks,M.,Galbraith,M.,Dangerfield,N.,Gauthier,S.,&Woo,K.“PlasticingestionbyPacificSandLance(Ammodytespersonatus)intheSalishSea.”Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference. Vancouver, BC. (April2016).Retrievedfrom:https://www.eopugetsound.org/sites/default/files/Bertram_SSEC_Plastics%20in%20Pacific%20Sand%20Lance%2013%20April%202016.pdf

Photo Credit: ephien. CC BY 2.0


iii) Competing demands on water Urbanareasaremajorwaterconsumers.Waterdemand,combinedwithhighpopulationdensities,canputstrainonwatersupply.Waterinurbanareasmaybeusedforavarietyofpurposes:domesticuse,commercialorindustrialuse,agriculturaluse,ecologicalusesandmore.Asaresultofthesemanydemandsonwater,manyurbancentresaroundtheworldareexperiencingwatershortagesandB.C.isnotexemptfromthistrend.Smallercommunitiesinparticularhavefoundthemselvesvulnerabletowatershortages.Forexample,duringthedrysummerof2015,theSunshineCoastsufferedseverewatershortages,comingwithin30daysofrunningoutofwater.24Inthesummerof2017,reservoirsinSummerlandwerenearlyemptiedwhenresidentsturnedonsprinklerstoprotecttheirpropertiesfromanearbywildfire.25Watershortagesraisequestionsaboutmonitoringandmeasuringwateruseincities.FewwaterpurveyorsinB.C.havemandatorywatermeteringpolicies,andthreequartersofresidentialwaterconnectionsintheprovinceareunmetered.Theabsenceofwatermeterslimitstheabilityofmunicipalgovernmentstomanagedemand,pricewaterappropriately,penalizeexcessiveconsumptionoridentifywaterleaks.26

Inadditiontowaterwithdrawals,urbanland-usechangeisafactorthatcanfurtherstrainwatersupplies.Forexample,groundwaterdepletion—aglobalphenomenoninagriculturalandurbanareas27—ishastenedbywaterwithdrawals,butalsobydevelopmentthatinhibitsaquiferrecharge(e.g.impervioussurfaces).Becausegroundwaterfeedsstreamsandwetlands,particularlyinthesummermonths,depletionofgroundwatercanresultinsustainedlowflows.InB.C.,evidencepointstodeclininggroundwaterlevelsinareasofintensiveurbandevelopment,suchasintheLowerMainland,theOkanagan,thesoutheastcoastofVancouverIsland,andtheGulfIslands.28

Strainedwatersystemscanresultinsignificantecologicalharm,forexample,bycompromisingsurvivalratesoffish,andmaypotentiallyprovokeconflictbetweenusers.Ensuringasupplyofwaterwhenitisneeded,whereitisneededandatasufficientquality,withoutcompromisingtheecologicalandhydrologicalintegrityofthewatershed,isasignificantchallengeforurbanwatershedsustainability.

24 Simms,R.&Brandes,O.M.(2016,September).Top5WaterChallengesthatwillDefineBritishColumbia’sFuture.Victoria,Canada:POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernance,CentreforGlobalStudies,UniversityofVictoria.25Bouey,Kate.(2017,September4).“Alarmed&usingupwater.”Castanet.net.Retrievedfrom:https://www.castanet.net/news/West-Kelowna/205769/Alarmed-using-up-water. 26Honey-Rosés,J.,J.Bailey,O.Brandes,D.Gill,L.Harris,J.Janmaat,D.Klein,C.Pareja,H.Schreier,S.Shah.2016.DroughtPreparednessinBC:WorkshopSummary.WaterPlanningLab.SchoolofCommunityandRegionalPlanning.UniversityofBritishColumbia.Retrievedfrom:http://hdl.handle.net/2429/5791027Howard,KenWF,andRaufG.Israfilov,eds.Current problems of hydrogeology in urban areas, urban agglomerates and industrial centres.Vol.8.SpringerScience&BusinessMedia(2012).28Nowlan,Linda.“Outofsight,outofmind?TakingCanada’sgroundwaterforgranted.”Eau Canada: The Future of Canada’s Water. UBCPress.Vancouver,BritishColumbia(2007).


iv) Climate ChangeClimatechangeisanticipatedtoexacerbatetheaboveenvironmentalchallenges.BecauseclimatechangeinthePacificNorthwestisexpectedtobringincreasedandmoresevereprecipitation,morestormwaterrunoffislikelytobeproduced,whichcouldinturnmakeurbanstreamsyndromemoresevere.Thereisalsomountingevidencethatcombinedseweroverflowsarebecomingincreasinglycommonduetoclimatechange.29MoreandmoreintenseprecipitationhasbeendocumentedintheCityofSurrey.In2016,thecityrevisedtheirIntensity-Frequency-Durationcurveforrainfall,andfoundthatrainfallvolumeinthecityhadincreasedbyanaverageof30%since1991.30ArecentstudybytheFraserBasinCouncilestimatedthatchangingweatherpatternsareincreasingtherisksandimpactsofsignificantfloodingintheLowerFraserRiver.Theyestimatethatdamagesfromamajorfloodintheregioncouldcost$20-30billionormore.31

Ontheotherhand,evidencesuggeststhatclimatechangeisresultinginlessprecipitationandmoreevapotranspirationinthesummerandautumnmonthsinthePacificNorthwest32, and that there are “strongandsignificantdeclines”inannualstreamflowinmanyPacificNorthweststreams.33 Thiswillputgreaterstrainonwatersystemsthatprovidewaterformultipleneedsanduses.

29Fortier,Claudine,andAlainMailhot.“Climatechangeimpactoncombinedseweroverflows.”Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management141.5(2014).30PersonalInterview,August2017.31FraserBasinCouncil.“LowerMainlandFloodManagementStrategy,Phase2.”Flood Strategy Briefing: Bulletin 1(September2017).Retrievedfrom:http://www.fraserbasin.bc.ca/_Library/Water_Flood_Strategy/lmfms_fsb_sept_2017_web.pdf. 32Abatzoglou,JohnT.,DavidE.Rupp,andPhilipW.Mote.“SeasonalclimatevariabilityandchangeinthePacificNorthwestoftheUnitedStates.”Journal of Climate27.5(2014).33Luce,CharlesH.,andZacharyA.Holden.“DecliningannualstreamflowdistributionsinthePacificNorthwestUnitedStates,1948–2006.”Geophysical Research Letters36.16(2009).

Mill Creek flood in Kelowna. Photo Credit: Christine Mettler


2.2 Survey Responses: Environmental Challenges in B.C.’s Urban Watersheds

Theprevioussectiondescribesmajorwatershedchallengesassociatedwithurbanization,andgivessomemoreextremeexamplesoftimesthosechallengeshaveaffectedcommunitiesinB.C.Inthisresearch,weaimedtoidentifynotjustextrememanifestationsoftheseenvironmentalchallenges,butalsohowtheyaffecturbanwatershedsonamoreordinarybasis.34 In order to assess this, we invited waterprofessionalsinurbanareastoparticipateinanonlinesurvey.Follow-upinterviewswerealsoconductedwithsixindividualswhoparticipatedinthesurvey.

2.2.1 Severity of environmental issues

Weaskedrespondentstorankfromascaleof1-5theseverityofsixenvironmentalchallengesintheirwatersheds.1was“notaconcern”,2was“mildconcern”,3was“moderateconcern”,4was“notableconcern”and5was“verysignificantconcern”.Surveyparticipantsreportedseveralconcernsregardingthesustainabilityofurbanwaterbodies.Thetopthreeconcernswere:

• Riparianhabitatloss.Thiswasratedasthemostsignificantconcern,withmeanresponsevalueof4.00.80%ofrespondentssaidthiswaseithera“notable”or“verysignificant”concern.

• Droughtand/orlowstreamflow,withameanvalueof3.91.

• Flooding,withameanvalueof3.66.

Respondentsweretheleastconcernedaboutdrinkingwaterquantityandquality,withameanratingof2.86and2.49respectively.

Figure 1: Perceived severity of environmental issues

Thesurveyalsoincludedquestionswhereparticipantscouldindicateenvironmentalchallengesorconcernsthatwerenotdirectlylistedinthesurvey.Oneparticipantnotedthat“instreamhabitat


damage,especiallydredging”wasthemostsignificantchallengeintheirwatershed.Anothersaid“lossofhabitatalonglakeshorelinesandforeshore.”Onerespondentnotedthatinvasivespecieswasanissueofnotableconcernintheirwatershed.Theremainingcommentslargelyreiterated,inotherwords,issuesincludedinthesurvey.Forexample,therewereanumberofresponsesthatreiteratedtheperceivedchallengeoflossofriparianareasandhabitat. 2.2.2 Different Concerns in Different Regions

Breakingdowntheseresponsesbygeographicareayieldssomevariationinresponses.Forthepurposesofanalysis,respondentsarebrokendownintothreeregionalgroups:MetroVancouver-highlyurbanized35,MetroVancouver-moderatelyurbanized36,andSouthernInterior(specifically,urbanareasintheOkanaganandKamloops).37

Figure 2: Perceived severity of watershed issues by region

i) Metro Vancouver - moderately and highly urbanized ResponsesonlyvariedslightlybetweensurveyparticipantsinhighlyurbanandmoderatelyurbanareasofMetroVancouver,sowehavegroupedthemtogetherforthisportionoftheanalysis.Forthisgroup,riparianhabitatremainedthemostsignificantconcern,anddrinkingwaterqualityandquantityremainedthelowestconcerns.Thatdrinkingwaterconcernswouldbelistedlowinseverityisnotsurprising,sincethemunicipalitiesofMetroVancouverenjoydrinkingwaterfromtheCapilano,SeymourandCoquitlamwatersheds,whicharesourceprotected.38AlthoughrespondentsinMetroVancouverwereconfidentinthequalityoftheirdrinkingwater,thisgroupwasthemostconcernedaboutwaterqualityintheenvironment,rankingdegradedwaterqualityafullpointhigherthanrespondentsfromtheOkanaganandKamloopsarea.

34Thisinformationisrevealingbecauseitpointstotheextenttowhichecologicalandhydrologicalintegrityarecompromisedinurbanwatershedsand,consequently,theresilienceofwatershedstowithstandextremeevents.Themorecompromisedawatershed’sfunctions,thelessableitistowithstandextremeevents.35Includesrespondentsworkinginmunicipalitieswithpopulationdensitiesofgreaterthan1000peopleperkm2.36Includesrespondentsworkinginmunicipalitieswithpopulationdensitiesoflessthan600peopleperkm2.37SincetherewereonlytworespondentsfromVancouverIsland,itisdifficulttoinferwithanyconfidencewhethergeographywasasignificantfactorinresponsevariation.Therefore,wedonotexpanduponresponsevariationofrespondentsfromthatregion.38TheGreaterVancouverWaterDistrict(GVWD)hassoleuseandcontrolofthelandssurroundingMetroVancouver’sthreewatershedspertheLandAct,whichentitlestheWaterDistricttoa999yearleaseofthelands.In1999,theGVWDAdministrationBoardpassedaresolutiontoprotectthewatershedsfromusesthatwouldthreatenwaterquality.See:http://www.bctwa.org/AboutGreaterVanWatersheds.pdf.


ii) Southern Interior (Okanagan and Kamloops area) ForthoserespondentsintheSouthernInterior,drinkingwaterconcernswereratedasnotablymoresignificantthantheircounterpartsinMetroVancouver.Here,respondentsnotedthatdrinkingwaterqualityandquantitywasamoderatetonotableconcern.DrinkingwaterintheseregionsdoesnotenjoysourceprotectionasdothewatershedsthatprovideMetroVancouver’sdrinkingwater.

WhilerespondentsinSouthernInteriorurbanareasweremoreconcernedaboutdrinkingwaterthantheircounterpartsinMetroVancouver,theywerelessconcernedaboutwaterqualityintheenvironment,ratingit2.77oramildtomoderateconcern.ThisislikelybecausetherearemoreintactnaturalareaswithintheboundariesofurbancentresintheSouthernInteriorand,onaverage,notablylessurbandensityandimpervioussurfaces.Respondentsintheinteriorwerealsolessconcernedaboutripariandegradationandhabitatloss,ratingitasa“moderatetonotable”concern(3.67forinteriorrespondentsasopposedtoanaverageratingof4.03),ostensiblyforsimilarreasons.Droughtsandfloodswereratedasthegreatestconcerns,onaverage,amongrespondentsintheinterior.Theseconcernsareparticularlypertinentin2017,wherethespringinitiallybroughtseverefloodingtotheOkanaganandKamloopsregions,followedbyprolongeddrought.

2.3 Survey Response: Causes and Culprits of Environmental Challenges in B.C.’s Urban Watersheds

2.3.1 Prevalence of environmental pressures

Surveyparticipantswereaskedtoidentifythefactorstheythoughtwerecontributingtotheaboveenvironmentalchallengesbyratingtheseverityofvariousenvironmentalpressures39 out of 5, where 1 was“notatallathreat”,2was“minorthreat”,3was“moderatethreat”,4was“notablethreat”and5was“verysignificantthreat.”Overall,themostsalientthreatswere:

• Land-usechange.Thiswasidentifiedasthelargestthreat,withameanscoreof4.17outof5.

• Impervioussurfaces,withameanscoreof3.97outof5.

• Climatechange,withameanscoreof3.91outof5.

Figure 3: Perceived severity of environmental pressures

39FollowingtheUnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency’sDPSIRFramework,“pressures”aredefinedashumanactivities…thatinducechangesintheenvironment.”Anenvironmentalpressureisanactivitythatimpliesacause-and-effectrelationshipbetweenthatactivityandtheimpact.See:U.S.EPA.“UsingtheDPSIRFrameworktoDevelopaConceptualModel:TechnicalSupportDocument.”EPA/600/R-15/154(August2015).Retrievedfrom:https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_record_report.cfm?dirEntryId=311236.


Inanopen-endedquestionregardingthebiggestthreattowatershedhealthintheirareaofwork,27outof35respondentsidentifiedland-usechange,developmentand/orimpervioussurfaces.

Ontheotherhand,respondentsindicatedthattheywerenotparticularlyconcernedaboutthereleaseofwastewatereffluentintoreceivingwaterbodies,ratingitonlyaminorthreat(meanscore2.06).Althoughsurveyrespondentsrateddroughtsandlowstreamflowsasoneofthemostsignificantchallengesintheirurbanwatersheds,mostdidnotlinkthiswithimpactsofwaterdiversions,ratingitaminortomoderatethreat(meanvalue:2.86).

2.3.2 Regional Differences

Someinterestingdifferencesemergedwhenbreakingdownperceivedthreatsbyregionofrespondents.

Figure 4: Perceived severity of environmental pressures by region

i) Metro Vancouver - highly urbanized ResponsesamongparticipantsinMetroVancouvervariedbasedonwhethertheyworkedinhighlyurbanizedwatersheds,ormoderatelyurbanizedwatersheds.Thoseinhighlyurbanizedwatershedsindicatedthat:

• Impervioussurfaceswerethelargestthreattowatershedhealth,withallparticipantsbutoneindicatingthatthiswasanotableorverysignificantthreat(meanvalue4.42).

• Land-usechangewasalsoratedasaconcernofnote,withameanvalueof4.25.

Thatrespondentshereplacedgreateremphasisonthethreatofimpervioussurfacesthanonland-usechangeisnotsurprising,sincehighlyurbanizedareasliketheCityofVancouverandtheCityofNorthVancouverarenearlyentirely‘builtout.’Therefore,itmaynotbeachangeinland-usethatisthemostconcerninginthesehighlyurbanizedareassomuchasimperviousareasthatalreadyexist.

Relativetorespondentsfromotherregions,participantsfromhighlyurbanizedwatershedsinMetroVancouverratedgrowingwaterdemandaslessofaconcern.Thisisperhapsbecausetherearenotmany newdemandsonwaterinhighlyurbanized,builtoutareassincethevastmajorityoflandthatcanbedevelopedhasalreadybeendeveloped.Nonetheless,respondentsheredidstillratethisconcernasmoderate(meanvalue3.08).


ii) Metro Vancouver - moderately urbanized Inmoderatelyurbanizedmunicipalities,land-usechangeandimpervioussurfaceswereonceagainratedasthemostsalientthreats,buttheirorderofprecedencewastheinversefromrespondentsinhighlyurbanizedmunicipalities.Thatistosay,respondentshererated:

• Land-usechangeasthemostsignificantthreat(meanvalueof4.63),

• Impervioussurfacesasthesecondlargestthreat(meanvalueof4.25).

Respondentsinthiscategoryratedland-usechangeasamoresignificantthreatthanrespondentsfromothercategoriesratedanyotherthreat.Thissuggeststhatland-usechangeisasignificantconcerninmoderatelyurbanizedareasinMetroVancouver.ThisresultmakessenseinthecontextofpopulationpressuresinMetroVancouver,particularlyinareasoutsideofVancouver.Toillustrate,theDistrictofLangley’spopulationgrewby12.6%between2011-2016andMapleRidgegrewby8.2%.40 Althoughagriculturalrunoffwasrankedasoneofthelowestconcerns,asawhole,byrespondentsinhighlyurbanizedareasofMetroVancouver,thosewhoseworkappliestomoderatelyurbanizedwatershedsindicatedthisthreatismuchmoreprevalent(meanvalue3.50formoderatelyurbanizedwatershedsvs2.17forhighlyurbanizedwatersheds).Thisisnotparticularlysurprising,sinceagriculturaloperationsaremarginalinmosthighlyurbanizedmunicipalities,butprevalentinthelessurbanizedmunicipalitiesontheperipheryofMetroVancouver.Regardlessofdensity,forthoserespondentswhoworkinmunicipalitieswithmorethan10%oflandmassintheAgriculturalLandReserve(PortCoquitlam,Surrey,Delta,theTownshipofLangleyandMapleRidge41)concernsaboutagriculturalrunoffareevenmorepronounced:ameanvalueof4outof5,oranotableconcern.

Surveyparticipantsinmoderatelyurbanizedareasalsoappeartobemoreconcernedaboutincreasingdemandsonwaterthantheircounterpartsinhighlyurbanizedareas,withanaverageresponsevalueof3.75comparedto3.08.SinceallmunicipalitiesinMetroVancouvergettheirdrinkingwaterfromtheGreaterVancouverWaterDistrict,thisdiscrepancyislikelyduetotheprevalenceofagriculturallicensesinthelessurbanizedmunicipalities.

40Althoughtheseareaswereclassifiedas“highlyurban”forthepurposesofthisanalysis,theCitiesofSurrey,CoquitlamandNorthVancouveralsoexperiencedsignificantgrowthbetween2011and2016,withgrowthratesof10.6%,9.8%,and9.8%respectively.See:StatisticsCanada.Census Profile, 2016 Census.(2016).http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E 41See:AgriculturalLandCommission.LandWithintheALRbyRegionalDistrictandMunicipality.(2000).http://www.alc.gov.bc.ca/assets/alc/assets/library/land-use-planning/planning_for_agriculture_resource_materials_part_4_appendices.pdf


ii) Southern Interior (Okanagan and Kamloops) Land-usechangewasratedasthemostsignificantthreatbyrespondentsintheOkanaganandKamloopsarea(meanvalueof3.92).However,respondentsdidnotconsideritassignificantathreatasdidtheirpeersinMetroVancouver.Thismaybebecause,althoughtheseurbanareasarealsoexperiencingnotablegrowthrates42,thereisnotthesamelevelofcompetitionforlandinKamloopsandtheOkanaganasthereisinMetroVancouver.SimilartorespondentsfromlessurbanizedareasinMetroVancouver,surveyparticipantsfromtheinteriorsimilarlyindicatedimpervioussurfacestobelessofathreattowatershedsustainabilitythantheirpeersinhighlyurbanizedMetroVancouverwatersheds(meanvalue:3.54).

Interestingly,surveyparticipantsfromtheInteriorratedthesecondmostsalientthreatsfacingwatershedsas“climatechange”and“infrastructuredeficit”(meanvalueof3.77).Whilerespondentsfromallregionsthoughtclimatechangetobeamoderatetonotablethreat,infrastructuredeficitwasratedasahigherbyparticipantsintheInterior.Hereaswell,growingwaterdemandwashigherthanthegroupaverage.

42IntheCityofKamloops,thepopulationgrewby7.2%between2011and2016;thepopulationgrewby4.2%inVernon;by5.7%intheDistrictofWestKelowna;by8.4%inKelowna;andby2.4%inPenticton.

Streetside sprinklers. Photo Credit: Arlington County. CC BY-SA 2.0


2.4 Connecting watershed degradation and pressures

Theenvironmentalchallengeslaidoutinsection2.2donothavealinearrelationshipwithanyonepressureinsection2.3.Rather,therelationshipiscomplex,multifacetedandoverlapping.ThetablebelowsummarizeswatershedchallengesinB.C.’surbanareasandsomeprincipalpressures.Thisisnotanexhaustivelist,butratheranoverviewofkeyactivitiesandcontextsthatmaybringabouttheaforementionedenvironmentalchallengesinwatersheds.

*Scale(severityoutof5)

4-4.5 3.5-4 3-3.5 2.5-3 2-2.5 1.5-2

Watershed Issue Level of concern* Pressures and Stressors

MV – HU MV – MU Interior

Riparian degradation and habitat loss • Land-use change in foreshore areas and riparian zones, which may directly displace natural

features

• Impervious and hardened surfaces in watershed, which produces more runoff that could

hasten streambank erosion

• Changes in and about streams (channelization, dikes, dams) which may directly alter habitat

or increase volume and therefore erosion

Low streamflows and droughts • Land-use change that displaces natural features with agriculture and built environments,

changing the ecosystem’s ability to hold onto water in the dry season

• Impervious and hardened surfaces in watershed, which inhibit groundwater infiltration

resulting in lower flows in dry season

• Water withdrawals from surface water and connected groundwater sources for domestic,

agricultural, industrial and commercial uses, which put pressure on water supplies

• Changes in and about streams (channelization, dikes, dams) which may impede or decrease

stream discharge

• Climate change, which is bringing about longer, hotter and drier summer seasons

Flooding • Land-use change that displaces natural features with agriculture and built environments,

changing the ecosystem’s ability to absorb excess water

• Impervious and hardened surfaces in watershed, which inhibit infiltration and produce more

runoff that overwhelms the carrying capacity of natural water bodies

• Old and aging infrastructure, which pipe stormwater directly into natural water bodies

• Changes in and about streams (channelization, dikes, dams) which may increase stream

discharge

• Climate change, which is bringing about more intense precipitation events that produce large

volumes of stormwater in short time framers

Degradation of water quality in environment • Land-use change that displaces natural features with agriculture and built environments,

changing the ecosystem’s ability to filter contaminants in runoff

• Impervious and hardened surfaces in watershed, which generates stormwater runoff that

carries pollutants on its overland flow course to natural water bodies

• Old and aging infrastructure, where combined sewer overflows introduce untreated waste

and stormwater into natural water bodies

Strained drinking water supply • Water withdrawals for domestic, agricultural, industrial and commercial uses, which put

pressure on water supplies

• Climate change, which is bringing about longer, hotter and drier summer seasons

Degradation of drinking water quality • Land-use change that displaces natural features with agriculture and built environments,

changing the ecosystem’s ability to filter contaminants in runoff

• Multiple activities (logging, resource extraction, recreation) in source water areas, which may

produce sedimentation and other concerns that compromise water quality.


3. LOCAL WATERSHED MANAGEMENT: TOOLS AND CHALLENGES

3.1 Existing Tools

Avarietyoftoolsexisttohelpwatershedplannersandmanagersworkinginlocalgovernmenttoaddressandmitigatetheenvironmentalproblemsandunderlyingcausesoutlinedintheprevioussection.However,despitethesetools,watershedpractitionershaveindicatedthatthereremainsignificantchallengesthatcompromisesustainablewatershedmanagementinB.C.’surbanareas.Thesechallengeswillbediscussedinsection3.2.

Inthissectionofthereport,weprovideanoverviewofsometoolsthatexisttoaddresstheaforementionedwatershedchallengesandtheirunderlyingcauses.Therearemanytoolsavailableandthislistisnotexhaustive43,butratherprovidesasummaryoftoolsthataremorecommonlydeployedbylocalgovernments.Thesetoolsarenotnecessarilyexclusivefromoneanotherandmaybeusedincombination.Ofcourse,thesetoolsonlyapplyinareaswherelocalgovernmenthavejurisdictionandauthoritytoeffectchange,inparticularland-useplanning,oversightofdevelopment,servicinganddrainage,floodprotection,andinwaterandwastewatersystems.Althoughitisnotdiscussedinitsownrighthere,publiceducationandoutreachisatoolthatcan(andshould)beusedincombinationwiththetoolsdescribedbelow.Itshouldbenotedthatmunicipalitiesandregionaldistrictshavedifferent—althoughoftenoverlapping—jurisdictionandprocedures.44Toavoiddelvingintothiscomplexity,wedonotdistinguishbetweenthesetwohere.

3.1.1 Bylaws (including zoning), and Development Permit Areas

Pressurespotentiallyaddressed: land-use change, impervious surfaces, growing water demand, climate change

ProvinciallegislationinB.C.giveslocalgovernmentstheauthoritytoregulateactivitiespertainingtolanduseintheirjurisdictions.45Localgovernmentsprimarilyregulateland-usewithzoningbylaws—rulesthatestablishwhatkindofdevelopmentcanandcannottakeplaceonagivenparcelofland—andDevelopmentPermitAreas—toolsthatallowlocalgovernmentstorequirespecialpermitsbeforedevelopmenttakesplacesinenvironmentallysensitiveareas.Inadditiontoregulatoryauthorityrelatedtoland-use,municipalitiesmayalsocreatebylawsto“regulate,prohibitandimposerequirementsinrelationtothenaturalenvironment,”46aswellaspublicplaces,trees,animals,buildingsandother

43Foranextensivesummaryoftoolsavailabletolocalgovernments,seeD.Curran,E.Krindle&M.Hulse.Bylaws Toolkit for Conserving Sensitive Ecosystems.(2016).Retrievedfrom: http://www.greenbylaws.ca/.44FraserBasinCouncil.“RethinkingourWaterWays.”Vancouver,BC,Canada.(2011);Curran,Krindle&Hulse(2016).45ThisauthorityisgiventhroughtheLocal Government Act. 46Persection8(3)(b),(c),(j),(k),(l)and(m)oftheCommunityCharter.RelatedauthoritiesfortheCityofVancouverarealsodelegatedviatheVancouver Charter.


structures,andtheremovalordepositofsoil.47Therefore,localgovernmentsmayinfluenceavarietyofactivities,suchasland-usechange,whereandhowdevelopmentcantakeplace,buildingandplumbingrequirements,wateruse,andactivitiesthatcouldimpactwatershedhealth,liketheapplicationofpesticidesonprivatelandortheobstructionofawatercourse.Assuch,bylawscanbeeffectiveinterventionstoaddressconcernsrelatedtoland-usechange,impervioussurfaces,andgrowingwaterdemand,whichcaninturnbuildlocalresiliencetoclimatechangerelatedimpacts.

Theadoptionandapplicationofthesetoolsareoftendeterminedbylargerpolicydirections,laidoutindocumentssuchasRegionalGrowthStrategies,OfficialCommunityPlans,neighborhoodandotherplans(e.g.liquidwasteandstormwatermanagementplans48)orstrategies.Provinciallegislationgiveslocalgovernmentsdiscretionaryauthorityinestablishingtheserulesandregulations,andthereforewhetherandhowlocalgovernmentsusethesetoolsvariesquiteabitfromonelocalgovernmenttoanother.However,theredoesexistlegislationthatrequireslocalgovernmentstoadheretoitsstipulationswhenconductingbusiness.AnexampleofthisistheRiparianAreasRegulation(RAR),provincialregulationsthatrequirelocalgovernmentstoprotectripariancorridorsinfishbearingstreamsfromimpactsofdevelopment.49ManylocalgovernmentsadheretothesestipulationsbyincorporatingthemintobylawsorDPAs.50

47Overlapping,orconcurrent,jurisdictionbetweenmunicipalitiesandtheProvincewithregardtothenaturalenvironmentmeansthatmunicipalitiesmaysometimesneedministerialapprovalbeforeenactingbylaws.Areaswherepermissionisnotneededincludepesticidecontrol,alieninvasivespeciesandwatercourseprotection.48InMetroVancouver,membermunicipalitieshavecollectivelyagreedtoprepareandadoptIntegratedStormwaterManagePlansforwatershedswithinmunicipalboundariesthatare20%ormoredeveloped.Theseplansmaytriggercommitmentsfromdecision-makerstofundspecificprojects(e.g.raingardens,bioswales,reforestation,etc.),developoramendbylaws,orrequiredeveloperstoadheretocertainstandards.49TheRARwasdesignedtomeetconcurrentobligationsunderthefederalFisheriesAct.Theregulationrequiresmunicipalitiestofollowaprocesssothatproposeddevelopmentswithin30mofwaterbodiesthatsupportfishhabitatdonotcauseharmfulalteration,disruption,ordestructionofnaturalfeaturesthatsupportfish.LocalgovernmentsmayadoptrulesthatexceedtherequirementsoftheRAR—forexample,byestablishingbylawsthatforbidanydevelopmentwithinaripariancorridorofagivenarea(e.g.15moneithersideofastream).50B.C.MinistryofForests,LandsandNaturalResourceOperations.Review of Local Government Implementation of the Riparian Areas Regulation.(2015).Retrievedfrom:http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/plants-animals-and-ecosystems/fish-fish-habitat/riparian-areas-regulations/lg_rar_implementation_compliance_report_september_14_2015_r.pdf

Kelowna Marsh. Photo Credit: OBWB/Okanagan WaterWise


DespitetheabilityoflocalgovernmentsinB.C.toregulateactivitiesrelatedtothenaturalenvironmentandotherareas,suchrulesmustnotsupersedeprovincialorfederallegislation.Forexample,theFarmPracticesProtection(RighttoFarm)Actprohibitslocalgovernmentregulationfrominterferingwith“normalfarmpractices,”51aconstraintonlocalgovernments’abilitytocurbagriculturalpracticesthataffectwatershedhealth.

3.1.2. Water demand management programs

Pressurespotentiallyaddressed:growing water demand, climate change

Localgovernmentsmayencourageprudentuseofwaterthroughavarietyofmechanisms.Asdetailedabove,theymaydothisthroughtheestablishmentofbylaws.Forexample,theymayestablishbylawsrelatedtolandscapingrequirementsaroundnewdevelopmentsthatservetominimizethevolumeofwaterneededtoirrigatetheland,bylawsthatrequireefficientplumbingandfixturesinnewdevelopments,orbylawsthatallowthelocalgovernmenttorestrictwateruseatcertaintimes.52

Localgovernmentsmayalsouseeconomicandfinancialmeasurestoencouragelowerdemandonwatersupplies,suchasinstitutingconservation-orientedpricingandratestructuresforwaterdelivery,orofferingrebateprogramstoresidentswhoinstallwater-efficientfixturesintheirhomesorbusinesses.Theymayalsoconsiderprogramssuchasgreywaterrecoveryandrainwaterharvestinginordertoreducethevolumeofbluewaterthatisdivertedfromsurfaceorgroundwatersourcesfornon-drinking,cookingorhygienicuse.Installingwatermetershasbeenshowntoreducewateruseby10-40%,evenwithoutchangestotheratestructure.53

Thissuiteoftoolscanbeframedandprioritizedwiththeuseofawaterconservationplan.SuchplanshaverecentlybeenmadearequirementinordertoreceivecapitalgrantsfromtheProvincefordrinkingwaterandwastewaterinfrastructure.54

3.1.3 Funding integrated water infrastructure

Pressurespotentiallyaddressed: land-use change, impervious surfaces, wastewater effluent, growing water demand, climate change

Thereisanincreasingrecognitionamongurbanwatershedpractitionersoftheneedtounderstandandplanforinfrastructureholistically,andthatinadditiontotraditional“greyinfrastructure”(e.g.engineeredworkssuchaspipes,sewers,anddetentionponds),watermanagersshouldalsoviewnaturalassetsas“greeninfrastructure”(e.g.naturalandconstructedfeatures,suchasurbanforests,

51Curran,Krindle&Hulse(2016).52Belzileetal.(2013).Belzileetal.(2013).Belzile,J.withM.Martin,L.Edwards,G.Brown,L.Brandes,A.WarwickSears.WaterConservationGuideforBritishColumbia.Victoria:BCMinistryofCommunity,Sport&CulturalDevelopment,POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernance,OkanaganBasinWaterBoard.(2013).53Ibid.54Ibid.


parkspace,wetlandsandriparianzones,greenroofs,raingardens,bioswales,andretentionponds)andincorporatethisintowaterplanning.Greeninfrastructurecanhelpremovestrainfromtraditionalinfrastructurebyminimizingrunoffandhelpingtoinfiltratestormwaterwhereitfalls.TheB.C.StormwaterGuiderecommendsthatlocalgovernmentsplanfordevelopmentandinfrastructurethatinfiltrates90%ofstormwaterwhereitfalls.55

Incommunitiesacrossthecountry,includingB.C.,therehasbeenareinvigorationininfrastructureinvestmentafterdecadesofunderinvestmentleadingtoan“infrastructuregap”valuedatapproximately$145billion.56TheFederalGovernmenthascommittedtodoublinginfrastructurespending,withaplantospend$180billiononinfrastructureover12years.57Manycommunitiesareupgradingtheirtraditionalwaterinfrastructure(waterandwastewatertreatments,pipesanddrains,etc.)aswellasmakingsignificantinvestmentsingreeninfrastructure.Insomecases,thisincludesriparianrestorationprojectsandurbanretrofits.Theseinfrastructureinvestmentscanslowandinsomecasesreverseland-usechangeandtheprevalenceofimpervioussurfaces;makedrinkingwatersystemsmoreefficient,takingpressureoffdemand;andimprovethequalityandquantityofstormwater and wastewater releases.

InB.C.,localgovernmentstypicallyfundinfrastructurewithassistancefromtheprovincialandfederalgovernments.Inparticular,theB.C.FrameworkforSustainableAssetManagementoutlinescriteriabywhichlocalgovernmentscanapplyforfundingfromtheProvinceforinfrastructureupgrades.Despitegrantsthatexist,anincreasingburdentofundinfrastructureprojectshasfallentolocalgovernmentsoverthepastseveraldecades.Whereasin1950localgovernmentscontributedonaverage27%toinfrastructureinvestments,by2010theywerepayingforover48%.58Therefore,localgovernmentshavehadtofindadditionalwaystofundinfrastructureimprovementsandmaintenance.Someareturningtofees,leviesortaxestodothis.Forexample,theCitiesofVictoriaandtheSurreyhaveestablishedspecializedutilitiestooverseestormwaterinfrastructure.Eachmunicipalityfundstheirutilitythroughdifferentfeemodels.

3.2 Challenges to Sustainable Watershed Management

TheenvironmentalchallengesoutlinedinSection2andthefactthattheyimpactB.C.’surbanwatershedstovaryingdegreesisnotnewknowledge.Indeed,manyoftheissuescontainedwithinthisreporthavebeenidentifiedbylocalgovernmentsthemselvesandavarietyoforganizationsandindividuals.Severaloftheseorganizationsandindividualshavedevelopedmaterialsandinterventionstohelpaddresstheseissues.Forexample,whileconductingresearchforthisreport,weidentifiedover

55 BritishColumbiaMinistryoftheEnvironment.StormwaterPlanning:AGuidebookforBritishColumbia.(2003).Retrievedfrom:http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/DownloadAsset?assetId=FA2C4B4B9B9F47F5981272B98894655D56MacKenzie,H.Canada’sInfrastructureGap:WhereitCameFromandWhyitWillCostsoMuchtoClose.(2013).Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.Retrievedfrom:https://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National%20Office/2013/01/Canada%27s%20Infrastructure%20Gap_0.pdf. 57InfrastructureCanada.InvestinginCanadaPlan.(August2017).Retrievedfrom:http://www.infrastructure.gc.ca/plan/about-invest-apropos-eng.html 58MacKenzie,H.(2013).


30toolkits,guidelinedocuments,andmanualspreparedbyavarietyofauthors(e.g.theGovernmentofBritishColumbia,researchersandlegalanalysts,localgovernments,environmentalorganizations,etc.)inthepasttenyearstohelplocalgovernmentsinBritishColumbiastaffmakesounddecisionsforwatershedsustainability.AppendixCliststhosedocuments.

Notwithstanding,theavailabilityofinformationdoesnotalwaysbuildknowledgeortranslateintoaction.Onesurveyrespondentremarkedonthisinanopencomment:“Informationisgood,butifwedon’tknowhowtoapplyitthenunintendedoutcomesarise.Weneedtobuildknowledge.Andweneedtocommunicatedecisionmaking.”Inresponsetothesurveyquestion“doyouthinklocalgovernmentsareabletoadequatelyaddresstheissuesandthreatsyounotedabove”,only2of35respondentschose“yes.”Sixparticipantschose“no”,21participantschose“someofthem/inpart”,and4chose“mostofthem.”

Figure 5: Can local governments adequate address watershed issues?

Inafollow-upinterviewwithaparticipantwhoselected“yes”tothisquestion,theyclarifiedthattheirresponsemeantthattheybelievelocalgovernmentshavetheknowledgeandtechnicalabilitytoimprovewatershedoutcomes,howeverthatknowledgeandabilitydoesnotalwaystranslateintoactionforanumberofreasons.

Participantswereaskedtoratewhattheythoughttobethelargestbarrierstosustainableurbanwatershedmanagement,with1being“notabarrier”and5being“averylargebarrier.”ResultsarepresentedinFigure7.

Figure 6: Barriers to urban watershed management


Theseresponses,incombinationwithinterviewresponsesandkeythemesdeducedfromtheliteraturereview,allowedustoidentifysevenkeythemesthathinderlocalgovernments’abilitiestomanagewatershedssustainably.Eachbarrierisaccompaniedbya“solutionsbox”,informedbyideasfrominterviewees,surveyrespondents,andtheliterature,regardingwaysinwhichthebarriercouldbeaddressed.

1. Voluntary vs. mandated protections

AccordingtothePartnershipforWatershedSustainability,

BC is perhaps the least prescriptive province, and BC local government is among the most autonomous in Canada. The Province enables local government by providing policy and legal tools in response to local government requests. […] The enabling approach means the onus is on local government to take the initiative and implement.59

Inotherwords,provinciallegislationhasmadeitpossibleforlocalgovernmentstoenacttheirownrules,buthas,byandlarge,notrequiredgovernmentstoadoptrulesfortheprotectionofenvironmentalvalues,withsomeexceptions(e.g.theRiparianAreasRegulation).Further,therearenooverarchingprovincialstandardsforenvironmentalwaterquality,quantity(includingenvironmentalflows)andprotectingecosystemvaluestowhichlocalgovernmentsmustadhere.60,61

WhilesomehaveheraldedB.C.’sframeworkofenablinginsteadofrequiringactionasonethatallowsforflexibilityinadoptingresponsestolocalconcernsandneeds,thisresearchrevealedalackofstandardizationcanmakeforunevenimplementationofprotections.Tothispoint,inthesurvey,participantsrated“insufficientpolicies,guidelinesandstandardsfromhigherlevelsofgovernment”asa“moderate”to“large”barrier(meanvalue3.60outof5)toaddressingwatershedissuesatthelocallevel.

Onesurveyparticipantnotedthat“localgovernmentculturesvarywidelywithrespecttopriorityofwatershedissues.Sometakeenvironmentalissuesveryseriouslyandarequitepro-active.Otherscareaboutfloodcontrolandviewspeciesatrisk,fisheriesandotherenvironmentalvalueswithambivalenceorevendisdain.”Whenaskedwhattheythoughtaboutastandardizedapproachcomparedtoavoluntary,enablingapproach,anintervieweestatedthat“‘enabling’isafancywordfor‘downloading’.”Theyelaboratedthattheybelievedaninflexible,one-size-fitsallapproachisnottheanswerandthattheprovincialgovernmentneedstorespectlocalconcernsandtakethemintoconsideration.However,theyemphasizedtheneedforregulationthatcouldallowlocalgovernmentstomeetstandards.Theintervieweeexpressedconcernthatcorruptionismorelikelywithoutstandardizedapproaches,sinceoneorafewindividualscouldhaveadisproportionateinfluenceondevelopmentorotherdecisionsatthelocallevel.

59PartnershipforWaterSustainability.BeyondtheGuidebook2010:Implementing a New Culture forUrban Watershed Protection and Restoration in British Columbia.(2010).60Nowlan,L,andBakker,K.Delegating water governance: Issues and challenges in the BC context. (2007).Vancouver:ProgramonWaterGovernance,UniversityofBritishColumbia.61Althoughtherearenotstandardsforwaterintheenvironment,therearefederalstandardsforwastewatereffluentreleases.However,asnotedinSection2,theseregulationsdonotextendtocontaminantssuchasCECsandmicroplastics.


Inasimilarvein,someparticipantsexpressedthatdecisions-makerscanberesistanttotakingactiononprotectingenvironmentalvalueswhentheyarenotrequiredtodoso.Surveyrespondentsrated“supportfromseniordecision-makers”asthesecondmostsalientbarrierwhenitcomestosustainablewatershedmanagement(meanvalue3.71,orbetween“moderate”to“large”barrier).Inaninterview,oneparticipantdescribedhowanimportantwaterwayinthecitydidnotqualifyforanintegratedstormwatermanagementplanbecause,eventhoughthelowerpartofthewatershedwasextensivelyurbanizedandhasexperiencedconsiderableenvironmentaldegradation,thewatershedasawholedidnotreachthedevelopmentthresholdnecessarytorequireaplan.Asaresult,decision-makershavenotsupportedthecreationofanintegratedmanagementplanforthiswatershed.Voluntaryprotectionsrequireacertainpoliticalwilltoimplement.However,twosurveyparticipantsnamed,unprompted,‘politicalwill’asasignificantbarriertosustainablewatershedmanagement.Thisisfurtherexemplifiedbysurveyrespondentsrating“supportfromseniordecision-makers”asthesecondmostsalientbarrierwhenitcomestosustainablewatershedmanagement(meanvalue3.71,orbetween“moderate”to“large”barrier).

Evenwhentherearerequirementsforlocalgovernmenttohaveplansinplace,itmightnotnecessarilyspuraction.Anintervieweespokeabouthowhavingarequirementforaplandoesnotalwaysresultinoutcomes.Whenaskedhowwellintegratedstormwatermanagementplanshavetranslatedintooutcomes,theynotedthatseniordecision-makersmaysometimesrespondthat“it’saplan,itdoesn’tmeanit’sa‘haveto.’”Inotherwords,therequirementwastodevelopaplan.Thisdoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheplanwillbeactedupon.

Towards Solutions

Developingprovincialstandards,orobjectives,thatrequirecommunitiesacrosstheprovincetomeetestablishedbaselinesforwatershedhealthwouldaddresstheissueofpoliticalwill.Includingperformancemeasuresinthestandards—i.e.measuringsuccessbyoutcomes,ratherthansolelybyprocessrequirements—couldaddresstheunevennesswithwhichwatershedprotectionsareimplementedandacteduponinB.C.whilealsoallowingforflexibilityandadaptationtolocal context.62MorethanoneparticipantfamiliarwiththeWater Sustainability Act noted how Water Objectivescouldbeaneffectivemechanismbywhichtodothis.Onesurveyparticipantplainlynoted:“Weneedtogetaprocessrollingwiththeexplicitoutcomeofsettingalegallybindingwaterobjectiverelatedtoeitherwaterqualityorquantity.”

Althoughlegallyenforceablestandardswereidentifiedasdesirablebymanyparticipants,thiswouldalsorequirealevelofoversightanddedicatedresourcestoensurecompliance.

62Cf.Curran,Krindle&Hulse(2016).


2. Long-term watershed planning vs. short term political cycles

Restoringhealthywatershedprocessescantakealongtime.Thebeneficialimpactsofarestorationprojectmightnotrevealthemselvesforaslittleasafewmonthstoayear,toasmanyasoverahundred years.63However,localgovernmentsareunderpressuretoshowtheirconstituencieshowpublicfundsarebenefittingthecommunityonamuchshorterterm,orrisklosingelections.Thismaymeanthatotherpriorities—wherebenefitsmanifestthemselvesonamuchshorterterm—takeprecedenceoversustainablewatershedmanagement.

Aninterviewparticipantdiscussedthistension,remarkinghowbudgetsandpublicagendascanbedeterminedbywhatismostpoliticallypalatable,notnecessarilywhatisbestforthecommunity.Theynotedhowcrisesorpublicattentionmightcausecounciltodivertresourcesfromwatershedmanagementtoemergingprioritiesofpublicconcern.Thisconcernwasalsoechoedbyasurveyparticipant:“Wearenottakingadvantageofeveryredevelopmentopportunitytohelprestoreanaturalwaterbalance.Wehavethetechnologyandcapabilitytodothis.Wearesensitivetowhatourresidentsandcouncilfeelarehigherprioritiesandthereforemovingveryslowly.”

Towards SolutionsThetensiondescribedaboveisnotspecifictowatershedmanagementinB.C.,butisawell-documentedtensioninenvironmentalmanagementmoregenerally.However,thereareinterventionsthatcouldhelptomitigatetheissue.Forexample,anintervieweesuggestedthatthird-partyorganizationsthatarenotinfluencedbypoliticalpressurecouldlendaccountabilityandstabilitytolong-termwatershedmanagementandplanning.Forexample,inOntario,ConservationAuthoritiesaredesignedasnon-political,non-profitorganizationsthatarefundedthroughtaxlevies,provincialandfederalgrants,andself-generatedrevenuesthatareresponsibleforwatershedmanagement,enforcement,andrelatedtasks.64The“Solutions”boxinchallenge7furtherdiscussespossibilitiesforthirdpartyorganizationssuchaswatersheddecision-makingentitiesthatcouldaddressthischallenge.

Adoptingstructureddecision-makingprocessescouldalsolendconsistencyandtransparencytowatersheddecision-making.Structureddecision-makingisamethodthatfollowsaprocesstoevaluatepotentialoptions,andtheconsequencesandtrade-offsinvolvedforeachoption.Structureddecision-makinghasbeenwidelycreditedasakeyfactorinthesuccessofmanyofB.C.Hydro’swateruseplanningprocess.65

63Hughesetal.(2014).64ConservationOntario.ConservationAuthoritiesofOntario.(n.d.)Retrievedfrom: http://conservationontario.ca/about-us/conservation-authorities65Mattison,J.,Nowlan,L.,Lebel,M.,andOrr,C.“WaterforPower,WaterforNature:TheStoryofBCHydro’sWaterUsePlanningProgram.”Vancouver:WWFCanada.(2014).Retrievedfrom: http://awsassets.wwf.ca/downloads/wup_report_r04.pdf.


3. Piecemeal approach

Manyofthetoolsthatexistforlocalgovernmentstoinfluenceactivitiesthatimpactwatershedhealtharetoolsintendedtopreventfuturedegradation(i.e.theyareaimedatmitigatingharmcausedbynewdevelopments)andaresitespecific(i.e.theyareenactedonalot-by-lotbasis).Forexample,theymayrequiredeveloperstoinfiltratestormwateronsite,ortoleaveamplesetbacksfromawatercourse.Althoughtheseinterventionsarenecessary,theymaynotbesufficient.Toolstorestorepastdegradation,andwhichallowrehabilitationatthewatershedscalemaybenecessarytorecoverlostordegradedhydrologicalconnectivity,geomorphologicalcomplexity,andecologicalfunctionofwatersheds.66

Oneinterviewparticipantelaboratedonthiswhentheydescribedhow,despitemeaningfuleffortstoimproveurbanwatershedmanagementinthelocalgovernmentwheretheywork,thetoolsattheirdisposalare“slowingdownloss”butarenothelpingtomakegains.Forexample,theysaiditwas“veryhardtomovetheneedleforward”onthingslikeincreasingwatershedforestcoverorrehabilitatingdegradedriparianareas.Thisrealitymightexplainwhy,despitetoolssuchastheRiparianAreasRegulationineffect,localwatershedpractitionersarequiteconcernedaboutthewelfareofriparianareas—particularlyinhighlyurbanizedwatersheds.Thecurrentsuiteoftoolsatbesthelptopreventfuturedegradationandatworseslowdowntherateofdegradation.Theyareonlyabletoaddresspastripariandegradationorlargeswathesofimpervioussurfaceareaswhenaparceloflandisre-developed,whichhappenssporadically.

66Hughesetal.(2014).67Ibid.68UnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(U.SEPA).StormwaterRetrofitTechniquesforRestoringUrbanDrainagesinMassachusettsandNewHampshire.TechnicalDocument.(April2011).Retrievedfrom:https://www3.epa.gov/region1/npdes/stormwater/assets/pdfs/BMPRetrofit.pdf 69U.SEPA.ManagingWetWeatherwithGreenInfrastructureMunicipalHandbook:GreenInfrastructureRetrofitPolicies.(2008).Retrievedfrom: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/gi_munichandbook_retrofits.pdf.

Towards Solutions Strategiesthatadvancebasin-scalewatershedprocessesaremuchmorelikelytobringaboutpositiveenvironmentaloutcomesthansite-specificimprovements.67Completerestorationofecologicalandhydrologicintegrityinanurbancontextisnotpossible,butitispossibletorehabilitatewatershedstosupportdesirablewaterqualities,quantitiesandecosystemfunction.Somejurisdictionsemployregulatorytoolsthatfacilitateexistingdevelopmentsandinfrastructuretoberetrofitted.Forexample,MassachusettsandNewHampshirerequirepermitsforurbandrainagesthatreleaseintoimpairedwatersheds.ThesepermitsmayrequireretrofitsinordertoensurethedischargesmeettheTotalMaximumDailyLimitofcontaminantsenteringwaterbodies.68TheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyhasfoundthatacombinationofincentives,complianceassistanceandregulationsweretogethereffectiveatretrofittingurbanareaswithgreenstormwaterinfrastructure.69


4. Lack of resources to support on-the-ground work

Alackofresourceswasidentifiedbysurveyparticipantsastheforemostchallengetowatershedsustainability.Themajorityofrespondentsratedittobea“largebarrier”(16outof35respondents)ora“verylargebarrier”(9outof35respondents).Whenaskedtoelaborateontheirresponsetomanagementbarriers,onesurveyrespondentsimplywrote,“Hugewatershed.Somanystakeholders.Notime.Nofunds.”Surveyandinterviewparticipantsindicatedthatinsufficientfundswereavailableforactivitiessuchasimplementingandoverseeingrulesandpolicies,datacollectionandmonitoring,educationandoutreach,andensuringthecontinuityofwatershedprogramsmoregenerally.Othersnoted,asindicatedabove(insection3.2.2),thatfundingforwatershedmanagementmaybedivertedtocompetingpriorities.

Anintervieweereflectedonhow,despitetheregulatorynecessitytodoso,somemunicipalitiesinMetroVancouverhavenotimplementedtheirintegratedstormwatermanagementplanbecausetheydidnothavethefundsorcapacitytodoso.ThisobservationwasalsonotedinrelationtouptakeandimplementationofRiparianAreasRegulationrequirementsamonglocalgovernments.AreviewbytheMinistryofForests,LandsandNaturalResourceOperationsnotedthat“anumberoflocalgovernmentsraisedconcernsabouttheircapacitytoevaluateRARstandardsandtakeactiononcontraventions,which[…]oftenrelatestoavailableresources.”70

Thelackofresourcesforwatershedmanagementisnotonlyabarrierforlocalgovernment,butalsoforprovincialgovernmentoperations.Morethanonesurveyandinterviewparticipantnotedthatgovernmentofficesareunderstaffed,andthattheirabilitytoconductwatershedmonitoringandscience,issueandreviewlicenses,andenforcerulesisroutinelystrained.Asurveyrespondentnotedhowthelackofcapacityofprovincialstafferstorespondtorequestswasinturnhamperinglocalgovernment.Therespondentnotedthatlocalgovernmentsandnonprofitorganizationsoftenendedupfillingthegapandtakingonworkthatisundertheprovince’smandate.Theynotedthat“whileIapplaudtherecentchangestotheAct,IfeeltheProvincewillbehardpressedtorespondtothenewworkitwillgenerate.”Aninterviewparticipantaffirmedthispoint,notinghowtheprovinceoftentakesalongtimetoapprovelicensesnecessaryforlocalgovernmentstodoworkssuchasimprovementsinandaboutastream.

70B.C.MinistryofForests,LandsandNaturalResourceOperations.Review of Local Government Implementation of the Riparian Areas Regulation. (2015).Retrievedfrom:http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/plants-animals-and-ecosystems/fish-fish-habitat/riparian-areas-regulations/lg_rar_implementation_compliance_report_september_14_2015_r.pdf


5. Accountability of provincial government

Anissuethatmaybe,inpart,relatedtoconstrainedresourcesisaperceivedaccountabilitygapofhigherlevelsofgovernmentwithregardtofulfillingtheirduties.Thisissuewasbroughtupseveraltimes,unprompted,bothinthesurveyandintheinterviews.Althoughthistrendwasobservedwithregardtoboththeprovincialandfederalgovernments,participantsmorefrequentlynamedthisasaprovincialissue,likelybecausetheProvinceistheleadjurisdictionformanagingwaterresourcesinBritishColumbia.Participantsnotedhowthisperceivedlackofaccountabilityunderminedlocalgovernmenteffortstoprotectandrestoretheirwatersheds.Onesurveyrespondentdirectlylinkedtheideaofunderwhelmingenforcementeffortsattheprovinciallevelwithbeingunderstaffed:“therearenotenoughenforcementofficersallocatedtoprotectwaterinaproactivemanner.Ithasbecomeareactivesysteminresponsetocalls,longafterthedamageisdone.”Anothernotedthat“theProvinceneedstobetterenforceexistingwaterlicenses(irrigationwithdrawalandpumpingback)aswellasillegal[water]withdrawals.Manyofourriversdonotflowinthesummerduetooversubscriptionofthewater.Waterqualityprovisionshouldalsobebetterenforcedwhenitcomestoprivatelanddischargingintothereceivingenvironment.”Athirdlamented“higherlevelsofgovernmentnotenforcingtheirmandates…[suchas]waterallocations(overallocatingwaterforirrigationornotchasingillegalwithdrawals),notenforcingriparianorfisheriesinfractionsorpollutionevents.”

71NowlanandBakker(2007).

Toward SolutionsAlthoughalackofresourceswasidentifiedasthelargestbarrierbysurveyrespondents,itis,arguably,oneoftheeasiestproblemstoaddress.Atthelocallevel,targetedleviesorfeesareincreasinglybeingadoptedbygovernmentstoraisefundsforgreeninfrastructure,restoration,orrelatedprojects.Forexample,anintervieweediscussedhowtheirorganizationadministersadrainageparceltaxthatfundsadrainageutility.Thefundsraisedthroughthistaxaresufficienttofundavarietyofinnovativestormwaterandfloodprotectionprojectsandstudies.Forthisinterviewee,resourceswasonlyaminorbarriertosustainableurbanwatershedmanagement.

Attheprovinciallevel,thenewWater Sustainability Actprovidesanexcellentopportunitytoprocureresourcestofundimportantwatershedmanagementinitiatives—bothatthelocalandprovinciallevels.Forexample,newgroundwaterfeesenabledbytheAct,ifsetatanadequateandsufficientrate,couldfundmorestaffhours,monitoringprograms,andothersupportstomakewatershedmanagementmorerobustandeffective.EstablishingnewfundingleverscouldputprovincialinvestmentinwatermanagementonparwithprovinceslikeOntarioandAlberta,whichallocatenotablymoreresourcesforthispurpose.71


Twointerviewparticipantsalsobroughtuptheissueofprovincialaccountabilitywithregardtoenforcingrules.Onenotedthat“We[BritishColumbia]doactuallyhaveagoodcultureofrule-making.However,wehaveapoortrackrecordofenforcement.”Anothernotedthatenforcementwasparticularlyunderwhelmingoncrownlandareasintheupperwatershedsthatprovidesourcewaterfordrinking.TheintervieweenotedthattherearenotenoughConservationOfficerstoadequatelymonitorthreatstowaterquality(e.g.suchastheuseofmotorizedoff-roadvehiclesinsourcewaterareas),whichcanhavedownstreameffects.

72Brandes,OliverM.,andDeborahCurran.“Changingcurrents:AcasestudyintheevolutionofwaterlawinWesternCanada.”InS.Renzetti&D.Dupont[Eds.]Water Policy and Governance in Canada.SpringerInternationalPublishing.(2017).

Towards SolutionsInthisresearch,astrongdesirewasexpressedfortheProvincetoreinsertitselfinwatershedmanagementafteraperceivedwithdrawalfromitsduties.Asdiscussedabove,ensuringadequateresourcesareallottedtotheMinistriesofEnvironmentandForests,Lands,NaturalResourceOperationsandRuralDevelopmentforwatershedmanagementandenforcementwasseenasanimportantsteptowardthis.AsonerespondentoftheEvergreensurveynoted,“Theprovinceismostlyabsentexceptasaregulatorybody.[...]IbelievetheProvincecouldbeavaluablepartnerifwecouldbringthemtothetable.” Tobuildtrustwithlocalgovernmentandothercommunity-basedwatershedactors,theProvincecouldalsorenewitscommitmenttofulfillingitswatermanagementduties.OneaspectwheretheProvincecouldimproveaccountabilityistoprepareandreleasea“StateofOurWaters”report,acommitmentmadeintheir2008LivingSmartWaterPlan.ThePlanoutlinedtheintentiontoreleaseaninitialreportby2012,andeveryfiveyearsafter.Todate,nosuchreporthasbeenreleased.Reportingisanimportantwaytodemonstratetransparencyandacommitmenttoaccountability,twocornerstonesofgoodgovernance.72


6. (Un)collaborative decision-making

Becausewatershedboundariescrossjurisdictionalboundaries,effectivewatershedmanagementrequiresorganizedcoordinationbetweenjurisdictions.Inrecentyears,manyjurisdictionshavemovedawayfromastrictly“top-down”approachtowardamorecollaborative,“bottom-up”approachtowatershedmanagement.Onewayinwhichthiscollaborativetrendhasmanifestedisthroughlocallybasedwatershedpartnerships.73Thissometimesinvolvesthedelegationofdecision-makingpowerfromhigherlevelsofgovernmenttothelocallevel.

AcrossCanada,includinginB.C.,therehasbeenanincreasingtrendtowarddelegatingwatersheddecision-makingtomorelocallevels.However,thereisnooverarchingpolicyorlawthatguidesdelegatedwatershed-leveleffortsandalackofguidanceonwhichlevelofgovernmentretainstheauthoritytomakewaterdecisions.74Consequently,thereisquiteabitofvariationacrosstheprovincewithregardtowhatkindofwatersheddecision-makingmechanismsexistandwhoisinvolvedindecision-making.Insomewatersheds,therearewatershedentities—althoughtheyvaryintermsoftheirlegalformality,mandates,humanandfinancialresources.Inotherwatersheds,therearenoformalwatershedentities,althoughtheremayexistmulti-governmentalcommitteesthatcoordinatedecision-makingrelatedtowatershedissues.

Anumberofsurveyparticipantsandintervieweesattestedtotheirfrustrationatthecurrentmechanismsthatexistforcollaborativemanagementintheirwatershed.Oneintervieweelamentedhowforumsforcollaborativedecision-makingintheirwatershedareveryadhoc,andthatthereislittlecapacityorpoliticalsupport.Theynotedhowtherewasformerlyacommitteethroughwhichwatershed-relateddecisionsweremade,buttheprovincialandfederalgovernmentsstoppedparticipatingandthecommitteewasdissolved.Anotherintervieweerecountedasimilarstoryoflackofparticipationfromhigherlevelsofgovernment,howevertheircommitteecontinuestoexist,largelytoshareinformationbetweendepartmentsintheirorganization.

Someparticipantsnotedhowcoordinationisparticularlyimportantduetothenatureofsharedresponsibilitiesforwatershedmanagement.Onesharedthat“citiesonlyhavelimitedpowers[and]DFOandMFLNROneedtostepinandhelpattimes.Also,somehigherlevels[are]allowedtodomorethanothers,especiallywhenlargeinfrastructureprojectsareinvolved.”Anintervieweenotedhowastormwaterprojecttheirorganizationwasundertakingwasderailedwhen,eventhoughtheyhadbeencoordinatingwithasectionintheB.C.MinistryoftheEnvironment,anothersectiondidnotgivefinalapprovalsrightbeforetheprojectwastogotoconstruction.Alackofeffectivemechanismsforcoordinationwithinandbetweengovernmentswasnamedasanissuethatultimatelycreatesmoreworkforallinvolved.

73Koontz,TomasM.,andJensNewig.“FromPlanningtoImplementation:Top-DownandBottom-UpApproachesforCollaborativeWatershedManagement.”Policy Studies Journal 42,no.3(2014). 74Ibid.


AfurtherissuethatwasraisedwasthatFirstNationsareoftenexcludedfromwatersheddecision-making,andthatwhentheyareincluded,itisofteninaconsultative—notcollaborative—way.AparticipantlamentedthatFirstNationsparticipationinurbanwatersheddecisionsisoftenonthetermsofcolonialgovernments,andthatissuesarestillprimarilyframedwithWesternvalues.Theywrote:

Our watershed issues tend to be focused on traditional European values: property protection, water for consumption, water for industry (economic opportunities), water for recreation, etc. First Nation heritage values are overlooked as municipalities do not feel it is their duty to consult and accommodate (and therefore will not pay for it) and leave it to the province, even if there is no trigger for this process. Issues related to all values should be identified.

Towards Solutions Manyparticipantsexpressedadesireforaprovincialframeworkthatofferssustainedsupportforcollaborativewatersheddecision-making.AnEvergreensurveyparticipantrelatedthat“acollaborativeapproachwithasmanypartnersaspossibletoprovidediversityandexpertiseaswellassustaininitiatives[overthe]longterm”was,intheirview,animportantsteptoincreasingresilienceandsustainabilityinurbanwatersheds.Threeintervieweesdiscussedhowtheythoughtwatershedentitieswerethebestwaytofacilitatecollaborativedecision-making.ThissuggestionissupportedbyrecentB.C.researchbythePOLIS Project on Ecological Governancethatindicatesthatsome85%ofthoseworkinginwatershedmanagementandprotectioninB.C.agreethatlocalwatershedentitiesarenecessarytoimplementtheWSAtoitsfullestpotential.75Oneintervieweediscussedthepotentialofnestingbottom-up(e.g.watershed-scaleentities)withtop-down(e.g.aprovince-widebody)approachestowatersheddecision-making.Theysuggestedthataprovince-wideorganizationcouldfacilitatethesharingofknowledgeandresourceswithandbetweenwatershedentities.TheaforementionedPOLISreportdemonstratednotablesupportfora“central,province-widecapacity-buildingorganizationforwatershedgovernance,”76whichcouldpotentiallyfillthismandate.77

AninterviewparticipantnotedthenecessityofensuringwatershedentitiesenablecollaborationbetweenFirstNationsandotherlevelsofgovernment—animportantstep,theynoted,toadvancingreconciliationandmovingbeyondthecentralityofcolonialwatersheddecision-making.TherecentexamplewhereIndigenousandnon-IndigenousgovernmentsnegotiatedtheMackenzie River Basin Bilateral Water Management Agreementsusinga“collaborativeconsent”approachcouldserveasamodelforstructuringcollaborativedecision-making.78

75Brandes,Oliver,etal.Illumination: Insights and perspectives for building effective watershed governance in BC. POLIS Project on Ecological Governance.(2016).76Ibid.77Despitethepromiseofwatershedentities,BakkerandNowlanwarnthatresearchsuggestswatershedentitiesdonotalwaysleadtoimprovedenvironmentaloutcomes.Theyidentifysettingclearparametersforcollaborativeprocesses,ensuringscienceisgivensufficientweightindecision-making,andallottingadequatefinancialandhumanresourcesupportsasimportantconditionsforsuccess.ThissentimentissupportedbythePOLISreport,whichindicatessome91%agreethatlong-termfundingforwatershedentitiesisdesirable.Onesurveyparticipantsuggestedthatfundingforcollaborativewatersheddecision-makingcouldbe“fundedthroughwaterfeesfromgroundwaterextractionoperators.”78Phare,M-A.,Simms,R.,Brandes,O.M.,Miltenberger,M.CollaborativeConsentandBritishColumbia’sWater:TowardsWatershedCo-Governance.POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernanceandCentreforIndigenousEnvironmentalResources.(2017).Retrievedfrom:http://poliswaterproject.org/polis-research-publication/collaborative-consent-british-columbias-water-towards-watershed-co-governance/


7. Complex and fragmented water framework

AlthoughtheWaterSustainabilityActisB.C.’scentralpieceoflegislationgoverningtheuseandprotectionofwaterintheprovince,thereareseveralotherlawsandregulationsthatapplytowatermanagementandaffectwhatkindofdecisionsandactivitiescanbetaken.AmongthesearetheDrinking Water Protection Act, the Local Government Act, the Water Protection Act, the Dike Maintenance Act, the Environmental Management Act, the Forest Range and Practices Act, the Land Act, the Building Act and more.AlloftheseActsandcorrespondingregulationsenableauthoritiesandsetoutrequirementsregardingissuesthatimpactwatershedmanagement.SomeoftheseActsenablethecreationofavarietyofplansrelatedtowatershedmanagement.79

Severalsurveyandinterviewparticipantsexpressedconcernaboutthecomplexityofthisframework,andhowprovisionsinsomeoftheseActshampertheirabilitytoengageinsustainablewatershedmanagement.Asurveyparticipantcommentedaboutperceivedconflictsofinterestbetweendifferentpiecesofthelegislation:“Regulationsareofteninconflictwithwaterandtheresourceitisregulating,[for]example...[theForest Range Practices Act],Mining Act,[and]Agriculturewasteregulations.”Otherparticipantsdiscussedhowthisframeworkprovidesoftenconflictingmandatesforlocalgovernments.Forexample,asurveyparticipantnotedhow“thereareconflictingmandatesforlocalgovernmentstoaddsourcecontrolsandenforcethe[B.C. Building Code],”becausethecoderequiresinfrastructuresuchaseavestroughstobeconnectedtostormdrains,whichunderminestheabilityoflocalgovernmentstoencourageinfrastructurethatinfiltratesstormwateratthesource.80

AnintervieweeexpressedthattheyfoundtheintersectionsbetweentheDike Maintenance Act and Water Sustainability Actconfusing.TheynotedhowtheDike Management Act is out of date, and does notappeartoallowforgreeninfrastructurealongshores.TheyexpressedtheneedtobringthisActuptodateandtosynchronizeitwithotherlegislation.AsurveyparticipantalsorelatedtheneedforsynchronizationbetweentheauthoritiesandrequirementsunderdifferentActs.Theyasked:“HowwillWaterSustainabilityPlansintersectwithWatershedAssessment&ResponsePlans?...[L]ocalgovernmentsarealreadychallengedtoachieveregulatoryrequirementssotheseplanningprocessesneedtobecoordinatedtoavoidduplication.”AninterviewparticipantlamentedhowaWaterUsePlanhadrecentlyexpiredandwasnolongerineffect,andwonderedwhatwouldhappennext.

Bioswales in a parking lot. Photo Credit: Green Communities Canada

79SeeAppendixCforalistofdifferentkindsofwater-relatedplansinB.C.80Areviewofempiricalstudieson“lessonslearned”fromwatershedpartnershipsnotedthat“adequatefunding”wasidentifiedasthemostimportantkeytosuccess.Thesecondmostimportantfactorwasparticipationbyaneffectiveleaderorfacilitator.See:Leach,WilliamD.,andNeilW.Pelkey.“Makingwatershedpartnershipswork:areviewoftheempiricalliterature.” Journal of water resources planning and management 127.6(2001).


Towards SolutionsThefragmentednatureofB.C.’swaterframeworkfurtherunderlinestheneedforincreasedcollaborationandcooperationbetweenactorsinvolvedinwatershedmanagement.Asnotedabove,aframeworktofacilitateconsistentandsustainablecollaborativewatersheddecision-makingacrosstheprovincecouldbeparticularlyusefulinfurtheringthisgoal.Sustainablefundingiskeytoensuringthesuccessofdelegatedwatersheddecision-making.

Additionally,guidancematerialsthatoutlineauthoritiesandresponsibilitiesofdifferentlevelsofgovernments,currentlegalandpolicytoolsthatimpactwatershedmanagement,clarificationonhowandwhentoolsareemployedandwhichtakelegalprecedencecouldlendsignificantclaritytothecomplexwatershedmanagementframework.Developingnewtoolsthattakelegalprecedenceoverotherenactmentscouldensurethatwatershedprotectionisnotsidelinedbystipulationsinothernaturalresourcelegislation.Newtoolscouldrecognizeandbuilduponpreviouswatershedplanningprocessesundertakenatthelocallevel.

Downspout to permeable rocks. Photo Credit: Centre for Neighbourhood Technology. CC BY-SA-2.0


4. LEVERAGING THE WATER SUSTAINABILITY ACT

4.1 Leverage Points

The Water Sustainability Act (WSA)presentsatimelyopportunitytoaddresssomeoftheenvironmentalandmanagementchallengesdiscussedabove.Localgovernmentshavemanytoolsattheirdisposal,anditispossibleforlocalgovernmentstoaddresssomeoftheissuesabovewithouttheadditionalsupportspotentiallyofferedbytheWSA.Localgovernmentsshouldincreasetheirunderstandingofwhatcanbeaccomplishedwithintheirpurviewandtakeactionaccordingly.However,giventhatprovincialstaffarecurrentlydevelopingregulations,policies,andprogramstosupportimplementationoftheAct,thereexistsarareopportunitytoimprovewatershedmanagementacrossB.C.LocalgovernmentsshouldseizethisopportunitybyaskingtheProvincetodeveloptoolsthataddresschallengestourbanwatershedsustainability.

TheActlargelyenablespowerspertainingtothelicensingandallocationofwaterresources,buttherearesomeareasintheActthatalsopertaintowaterqualityandecologicalhealth.SomeoftheseareascouldalsobeleveragedtoaddresstheenvironmentalandmanagementbarriersdiscussedaboveandoffersupportforeffectivemanagementforurbanwatershedsustainabilityinB.C.WehaveidentifiedthefollowingareasoftheActaspriorityareasforfurtherdevelopment:

• Provisionsthatenabletheconsiderationofwaterinland-usedecisions,inparticularWaterObjectives(enabledinsection43oftheAct)andWaterSustainabilityPlans(enabledinDivision4);

• Provisionsthatenabledelegateddecision-making,inparticularsection126(“Regulationsrespectingadministrationandgovernance”)andDivision4;

• Provisionsthatenabletheappropriationoffeesandcharges,whichcouldbechanneledforfinancialsupportforwatershedmanagement,inparticularsection118;

• Provisionsthatprotectenvironmentalusesofwater,inparticularsection15(“Environmentalflowneeds”)andsections86-88(“Declarationsofsignificantwatershortage”,“Criticalenvironmentalflowprotectionorders”,and“Fishpopulationprotectionorders”);and

• Provisionsthatenablereportingandmonitoringrequirementsforwaterusers,aslaidoutinsections15,17(“Sensitivestreamsmitigation”),23(“Thirty-yearreviewoflicencetermsandconditions”),30(“Beneficialuse”)and131(“Regulationsrespectingmeasuring,testingandreporting”)oftheAct.

TherearemoreareasoftheActthatcouldpertaintoandhaveramificationsforurbanwatershedmanagement,however,wehavefocusedonareaswherewethinktherearethemostobviousopportunitiestoaddresstheenvironmentalandmanagementchallengesidentifiedinthisreport.


4.2 Recommendations for the Water Sustainability Act in support of urban watershed management

Insection3,weoutlinedmanagementchallengesthatimpedeurbanwatershedsustainabilityandpotentialinterventionsthatcouldmitigatethosechallenges.Therecommendationsbelowbuildontheideascontainedinthe“solutionsboxes”insection3bysuggestingwaystheWaterSustainabilityActcouldsupport—eitherthroughregulatory,policyorfundinglevers—decision-makerstosurpassthosechallenges.WealsosuggestsomeimplicitareasforpotentialdevelopmentthatarerelatedtobutbeyondthespecificauthoritysetoutinAct.Wesuggestthat,shouldtheserecommendationsgoforward,localgovernmentswouldbeinanimprovedpositiontomakedecisionsthatprotectandimprovethehealthofurbanwatershedsintheprovince.Therefore,wesuggestthatlocalgovernmentsadvocatetotheProvincetotaketheactionslistedbelowwhendevelopingaspectsoftheAct.

4.2.1 Connecting land and water through Water Objectives

Managementchallengespotentiallyaddressed:voluntary vs. mandated protections, long-term watershed planning vs. short term political cycles, piecemeal approach, fragmented water framework.

5. Developregulationsthatuseperformance-basedcriteriatoestablishobjectivesforwaterquality,quantityandecosystemhealth

a) InvolvelocalgovernmentsandFirstNationstoidentifyvaluesanddesiredoutcomestoinformtheseobjectives

b) GivelegalprecedencetoWaterObjectivesdespiteanyotherenactmentc) MakeWaterObjectivesapplicabletoallwatersacrosstheprovince,butallowforflexibility

andcustomizationatthewatershedleveld) Ensureobjectivesarespecificenoughtooperationalizeanddevelopcriteriaforevaluatione) Ensureobjectivesapplytoallactivitiesinthewatershedthatimpactwatershedhealthf) IncorporateparametersfromexistingAmbientWaterQualityObjectivesintoWater

Objectivesg) Includeobjectivesrelatedtomostcommoncontaminantsofemergingconcernh) Requireallrelevantdecision-makerstoconsiderobjectiveswhenissuingwaterlicenses,

permitsorotherauthorizationsthatmayimpactwatershedhealthi) iSupportlocalgovernmentstoensureWaterObjectivesareintegratedintolocalplanning

processes(OfficialCommunityPlans,RegionalGrowthStrategies,liquidwasteandstormwatermanagementplans,etc.)

j) Giveatimeframeforcompliancethatspursactionbutisrealisticandachievable (e.g.fiveyears)


k) EnsureadequatesupportsareavailableforlocalgovernmentstobeabletoactonWaterObjectives(see:Section4.2.3forrecommendedwaystostrengthensupports)

6.DevelopWaterObjectivestoapplytourbanizedwatershedsa) Triggerfundingforrestoration/retrofits,wherenecessarytomeetobjective(see4.2.3for

suggestedfundingsource)b) Enshrineminimumrun-offcontroltargetsinregulationc) Developinfiltrationobjectivesforaquifersconnectedtosurfaceswatersd) IdentifyhowWaterObjectivescanbelinkedtogreeninfrastructureandsupportfunding

requestforcapitalgrants

7.MonitorandreviewWaterObjectivesa) Delegateauthoritytoathird-partyentity(seerecommendation10)toreviewandreporton

objectiveseveryfiveyearstoensureconsistencyinimplementationandenableevaluationofprogramoutcomes

b) Includespecificindicatorsrelevanttourbanwatersheds,suchaschangesinimpervioussurfacesandadoptionofgreeninfrastructure

c) IncludehighlightsofmonitoringinState of Our Waters report(seesection4.2.5)

4.2.2. Improving coordination and transparency in watershed decision-making

Managementchallengespotentiallyaddressed:Long-term watershed planning vs. short term political cycles, piecemeal approach, lack of resources to support on-the-ground work, fragmented water framework, (un)collaborative decision-making

8.Developguidanceandprocessesforlocalgovernmentsonhowwatersheddecision-making willbeaffectedbyimplementationoftheWater Sustainability Act

a) OutlinehowrequirementsandprogramsundertheActwillintersectwithotherlegislation,policiesandprograms

b) Indicateprocessesforcoordinationbetweendifferentlevelsofgovernmentc) Developandcommunicateaclearoutreachstrategythat(i)outlinestheprocessforengag-

inglocalgovernmentonregulatorydevelopment,and(ii)includestimelinesandprocessesforregularimplementationupdates

d) Adoptastructureddecision-makingprocessforprovincialwater-relateddecisionstoincreaseconsistencyandtransparencyandcommunicatethisprocessclearlytodifferentlevelsofgovernmentandstakeholders

9.Establishathird-party,capacity-buildingentitytocoordinateandfacilitateknowledgetransfer withinandbetweendifferentlevelsofgovernment

a) Ensurelocalgovernmentsaremeaningfullyinvolvedb) InvolveFirstNationsinaco-governancerolec) Ensureadequateandsustainedfundingisavailable(seesection4.2.3.)d) Includeaframeworkthatensuresconsiderationofscienceandtraditionalecological

knowledgeindecision-making


e) Considerintegratingstructureddecision-makingprocessesintopilotsf) Drawfromthesepilotstodevelopastrategythatoutlinesconsistentparametersforthe

creationandoperationofwatershedentitiesacrosstheprovince

10.Establishathird-party,capacity-buildingentitytocoordinateandfacilitateknowledgetransfer withinandbetweenwatershedentitiesanddifferentlevelsofgovernment

a) Includeparticipationfromdifferentlevelsofgovernmentinthegovernanceofthisentityb) AllowthisentitytooverseethedeliveryofDivision4(Watersustainabilityplans)andmoni-

toringandevaluationrelatedtoWaterObjectives(seerecommendation3)

11.WhenWaterSustainabilityPlansaredesignated,ensureplansconsiderandincorporatethe effortsofpreviouswatershedplanningefforts(e.g.WatershedAssessment&ResponsePlans, WaterUsePlans,etc.)andlocalgovernmentCommunityPlansandbylaws.

a) RequireWaterSustainabilityPlansto“meetorbeat”watershedhealthobjectivesdetailedinWaterObjectives

4.2.3. Securing adequate funds for watershed management

Managementchallengespotentiallyaddressed: lack of resources to support on-the-ground work, accountability of provincial government, (un)collaborative decision-making

12.ReviewthecurrentfeesandratesstructuresetoutintheWater Sustainability Fees, Charges and Rentals Regulationtodetermine:

a) Whetherthecurrentstructureisabletoadequatelyfundprovincialresponsibilitiesandcommitmentsrelatedtowatershedmanagement,includingenforcementduties

b) Whetherthecurrentstructurereflectsthevalueofwaterresources,promotesconserva-tionanddrivestechnologicalinnovation

c) AssesshowthecurrentratestructurecouldbealteredtoraiserevenueforaWaterSus-tainabilityFundthatwoulddedicatedongoingfundingforwatershedmanagement,includ-ingwatershedentitiesandotherwaterstewardshipefforts

d) Alterwaterrates,ifnecessary,toadequatelyfundprovincialresponsibilitiesandcommit-ments,andsupportthecreationofaWaterSustainabilityFund

13.WorkwithaSustainableFundingTaskforcetoexploreandtestimplementationofother sustainablefundingmechanismsforwatershedmanagementattheprovincialandwatershed level,suchasincreasingrevenuefromlocaltaxbases,Crownresourcerentals,etc.

a) Ensurefundingsourcesdonotcompromiseorpotentiallyleadtoaconflictofinterestbetweenrevenueandwatershedhealthobjectives

b) WorkwithInfrastructureCanadatostreamlineinfrastructurestimulusspendingtogreeninfrastructureprojectsandurbanretrofits


4.2.4 Ensuring water is protected for nature

Managementchallengespotentiallyaddressed:Long-term watershed planning vs. short term political cycles, piecemeal approach

14.Establishlegallyenforceableregulationstoprotectenvironmentalflowsa) Basetheseregulationsonapresumptiveprovincialstandardb) RequireWaterSustainabilityPlansforwatershedsthatdonotmeetthepresumptivestan-

dard c) IncollaborationwithlocalgovernmentandFirstNations,establishtheaquaticvaluesto

beincludedinthedecision-makingprocessfortheconsiderationofEnvironmentalFlowsNeeds

15.DevelopanEnvironmentalFlowsTaskforcewithparticipationoflocalgovernment,FirstNations, andthefederalgovernmenttoestablishwhetherexistingwaterallocationsaresustainable

a) Identifystreamsofconcernwhereenvironmentalflowsorcriticalenvironmentalflowsarethreatenedandreviewhowlicensesareaffectingflowregimes

b) Identifywhichgroundwaterlicensescouldbeconnectedtostreamsandworkwithpart-nerstodeveloptransitionstrategiesforthoselicenses

c) Conductactionstoreducewithdrawalvolumesifnecessaryd) Determinewhetheradditionstreamsshouldbedesignatedas“sensitive”persection128

oftheAct

4.2.5 Monitoring and reporting on watershed health

Managementchallengespotentiallyaddressed:Accountability of provincial government, (un)collaborative decision-making

16.Identifyopportunitiestocoordinateandstreamlinewaterdatafromdifferentmonitoring operationstoenhanceknowledge-sharingandreduceduplicationofefforts

a) Createacentralizeddatahubthathousesdatafrommonitoringoperationsbydifferentlevelsofgovernment

b) Enabledatacollectedfromcitizenscienceandcommunity-basedwatermonitoringopera-tionstobeincludedinthishub

c) Makehubaccessibletostaffanddecision-makersatalllevelsofgovernment

17.Requireallwateruserstomonitorwaterwithdrawalsandreporttheirusetogovernmenta) Includethisinformationindatahubb) Spacializedatabycreatingamaplayerwithcoordinatesofall“pointsofdiversion”associ-

ated with withdrawalsc) Phasethisrequirementinoverfiveyears,startingwithwaterscarcebasins

18.CompileasummaryofwaterdataintoaStateofOurWatersreport,apubliclyaccessible reportissuedeveryfiveyears


a) Includeinformationpertainingtowateruse(asinrecommendation12),WaterObjectives(asinrecommendation3),andenforcementactionstakenbytheprovincialgovernmentundertheauthorityoftheAct

4.3. Practitioner feedback on recommendations

AttheWater Sustainability & the City foruminOctoberof2017,approximately50individualswhoseworkisrelevanttourbanwatershedmanagementgatheredtoassesstheserecommendationsandtolearnfromthecollectiveknowledgeofattendees.Participantsincludedplanners,engineers,watershedmanagers,environmentaltechnicians,researchers,policyanalysts,environmentaleducationspecialistsandmorefromB.C.municipalities,regionaldistricts,FirstNations,theProvincialgovernment,non-profitorganizationsandacademicinstitutions.

Afterpresentingasummaryofthefindingscontainedinthisreport,participantstookanhourtodiscusstherecommendationsinsmallgroups.Theywereaskedtoconsiderwhethertheysupportedtherecommendations,whatkindofsupportsmightbeneededshouldtheserecommendationsbeimplemented,andwhatroletheywouldliketoseedifferentorganizationsplayinthecontinueddevelopmentoftheWater Sustainability Act.Weassessedthisfeedback,andgroupedinputintomajorthemes,detailedbelow.Itshouldbenotedthatthisinput,althoughrevealing,doesnotconstituteofficialconsultationonmattersrelatedtothedevelopmentorimplementationoftheActandshouldnotbeconstruedassuch.

4.3.1 Reiterating the need for resources

Therewasstrongsupportinthegroupfortherecommendationspertainingto“securingadequatefundsforwatershedmanagement”(section4.2.3).ParticipantsidentifiedadequatefundingasanoverarchingissuethatfedintothesuccessfulimplementationofotheraspectsoftheAct.Theynotedthatfundingwasanimportantfactorinensuringtheparticipationofdifferentgroupsincollaborativewatersheddecision-makingandinthesuccessfulimplementationofWaterObjectives.ParticipantsalsonotedtheimportanceofincreasedfundingtosupportFirstNationsinrespondingtoconsultationrequestsandprocessapplications.Onegroupwonderedwhetherfundingfromincreasedlicensefeeswouldbechanneledonlyintoprovincialoperations,andnotedthatawatershedfundthatcouldprovideresourcesatthelocallevelcouldwasdesirable. 4.3.2 Collaboration and sharing of responsibility

Participantsreiteratedtheneedforcollaborationfrommultiplelevelsofgovernment,andreinforcedtheideathateffectiveurbanwatershedmanagementrequiredtheProvincetoresumeanactiveroleinlocalwatershedmanagement,particularlywithregardtomonitoringactivitiesandenforcementofrulesandviolations.TheyalsonotedtheimportanceoftheProvincesupportingcollaborativewatersheddecision-making—asopposedtofacilitatingpilotprojectsandsteppingbackfrominvolvementinthatprocess.Participantsnotedhowcreatinginformationinfrastructureforsharingwaterdataacrossjurisdictionswasanimportantstepforwardtocollaborativedecision-making.


Municipalitiesvoicedtheneedforsharedriskandliabilitybecausetheyaretheonesthatarechargedwithreconcilingon-the-groundactivitieswithregulatoryrequirements,andbearconsequenceswhenandifthesecomeintoconflictwitheachother.Participantsalsoindicatedtheneedtoinvolveseniorlocalgovernmentdecision-makersincollaborativewatershedprocesses,asthisgivesgreaterlegitimacytotheprocess.

FirstNationsparticipantsspokeabouttheneedtobeinvolvedinindecision-makingearlieronintheprocess—forexample,beingincludedinhowdecisionsaremadeasopposedtobeingconsultedafteracourseofactionhasalreadybeenproposed.Somefeltthatinputfromconsultation,asitcurrentlyhappens,isnotmeaningfullyintegratedintodecisions.TherewasalsoaconcernthatFirstNationsvoiceswerenotacknowledgedwithintheActitself.Forexample,the“FirstInTime,FirstInRight”approachtowaterlicensesdoesnotrecognizetraditionalusesofwater.

4.3.3 Clarity and direction

ParticipantsemphasizedtheneedforclarityanddirectionfromtheProvinceastheWSAcontinuestoberolledout.ManywereunclearofhowtheActwouldapplyinurbanwatershedsandhowitcouldaffectlocaloperations.TheywonderedifandhowregulationslikeWaterObjectiveswouldtakelegalprecedenceoverotherlegislationandwhatthatwouldmeaninpractice.Therewasadesireforfutureregulationsandplanningeffortstobuilduponpreviouseffortsandknowledge(forexample,Integrated Stormwater Management Plans thathavebeenadoptedbyMetroVancouvermunicipalities).

Forumparticipantsalsoindicatedadesireforclearcommunicationonprocessesfordecision-making.Forexample,onegroupnotedhowactionsrelatedto“emergencyworks”didnotrequireconsultation,butitwasnotclearwhatconstitutedan“emergency.”

4.3.3 Investing in education

Finally,participantshighlightedtheneedforeducationinordertoensureimplementationoftheActanditsregulatoryrequirementsaresuccessful.Theynotedaneedforeducationgearedbothtowardthebroaderpublic,butalsoforfrontlinestaffanddecision-makerswithinlocalgovernments.Someattendeesnotedthatmanystaffintheirorganizationsdonothaveastrongunderstandingofprovincialandfederalrequirementswithregardtodecisionsthataffectwatersheds.Othersnotedthatabroad,publiceducationstrategyisnecessarytoengageconstituenciesinconversationsaboutthevalueoffreshwaterandthenecessityofactiontoprotectit—whichmaysometimesincludehowtradeoffsbetweenenvironmentalprotectionandhumanuses.


5. CONCLUSIONUrbanwatershedsinBritishColumbiaprovideessentialservicestothemillionsofresidentsthatliveinthem,aswellastotheecosystemsthatdependonthem.However,thesewatershedsareunderstress.Aspopulationsgrowandtheimpactsofclimatechangebecomemoreapparent,thesestresseswillintensify.Localgovernmentshaveresponsibilitiesandauthoritytoprotectwatershedhealthwithintheirboundariesforthewellbeingoftheirconstituents.However,anumberofwatershedmanagersworkingforlocalgovernmentshaveexpressedconcernaboutthehealthoftheirwatersheds.Theyhaveidentifiedchallengesthathampertheirabilitytomitigateandreversethepressuresthatgiverisetowatersheddegradation.

ThenewWater Sustainability Actprovidesanopportunitytoaddresssomeoftheseenvironmentalandmanagementchallenges.TheActenablestheprovincialgovernmenttotakeactioninanumberofareastostrengthenwatershedmanagementatboththeprovincialandlocallevel.Thisresearchhassuggestedthat,iftheopportunityiseffectivelyseized,suchactioncouldengenderimportantstepstoharmonizingthewatermanagementframeworkinBritishColumbia,minimizingtheimpactsofland-useactivitiesonwatershedhealth,improvingcoordinationindecision-making,securingadequatefundsforwatershedmanagement,ensuringwaterisprotectedfornature,andestablishingarobustmonitoringandreportingprogram—actionsthatcouldgoalongwaytoaddresschallengesthathinderlocalgovernmentsinsustainablymanagingurbanwatersheds.

Streetside rain garden. Photo Credit/ Green Communities Canada


APPENDIX A - Demographics of Survey Respondents


APPENDIX B - On Watershed SustainabilityIfwatershedsustainabilityentailswatersystemsthatareabletomeettheneedsofcurrentgenerationswithoutcompromisingthoseoffuturegenerations,thenitfollowsthatasustainablesystemisonewherethecurrentgeneration:(i)consumesrenewableresourcesataratelessthantherateatwhichtheyarerenewed;(ii)consumesnon-renewableresourcesataratelessthantherateatwhichsubstitutescanbe found;and (iii)emitspollutionataratelessthanthecapacityoftheenvironmenttoabsorbthepollutants.81

Needsvarybetweenwatersheds.Theymayincludehumanhealth,economic,social,culturalandecologicalneeds.Watersystemsmustmaintaintheirecologicalandhydrologicalintegrityinordertoprovidewaterquantitiesandqualitiesthatallowsfortheseneedstobemet.Ensuringsustainablewatershedsrequirespreventingdegradationsothattheyareabletorenewthemselvesandsustainthevariouspracticesthatcontributetohuman(andnon-human)well-being.However,itmaynotbeenoughtopreventdegradationaswatershedfunctionsmayalreadybedegradedinwaysthatcompromisetheirintegrity.Inadditiontopreservingtheecologicalandhydrologicalintegrityofwatersystems,watershedsustainabilitymayalsorequireenhancingthecapacityofwatershedstoprovidequantitiesandqualitiesthatmeethumanandecologicalneeds.Althoughpristine,pre-developmentstatesareallbutimpossibleinurbanizedwatersheds,therearemanyactionsthatcanbetakentobringurbanwatershedstoasnaturalawaterbalanceaspossible,andencouragehighqualitywaterforhumanandecologicalhealth.82

Thisviewofsustainabilityimpliesthatprudentplanningandmanagementisnecessaryinordertoensurethatcurrentneedsdonotcompromisetheabilityofwatersystemstoprovideforfutureneeds.Watershedplannersandmanagersmustunderstandandaccountforhowwatershedprocessesfunctionoverspaceandtime,andhowhumanneedsandactivitiesimpactthesefunctions.Ofcourse,whatthefutureholdsandhowfuturesocial,economicandenvironmentalcircumstanceswillimpacttheneedsofgenerationstocomeisuncertain.Wedoknowwithsomecertaintythatclimatechangeandpopulationgrowthisexpectedtoputmorestrainonwatersheds,butexactlyhowtheimpactswillbeborneoutareunclear.83Therefore,planningforsustainablewatershedswillinvolvetakingintoaccountuncertainty.Aguidingprinciplehereistointerfereaslittleaspossiblewithwatershedfunctioning,inordertomaintainoptionsforfuturegenerations.Thismayinvolvetradeoffs,suchascostsassociatedwithpreservingorenhancingwatersheds,orreductionoftheimmediatebenefitsofcurrentgenerations.84

81 Daly, Herman E. Steady-state economics. Island Press. (1991).82 Loucks, Daniel P. “Sustainable water resources management.” Water international 25.1 (2000). 83 See for example McDonald, Robert I., et al. “Urban growth, climate change, and freshwater availability.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108.15 (2011) and McDonald, Robert I., et al. “Urban growth, climate change, and freshwater availability.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108.15 (2011). 84 Loucks, D.P. (2000).


Sustainablewatershedplanningandmanagementrequirenotjustcommitmentstomaintainingwatershedsinhealthyconditions,butalsotheresourcestoachieveplans.Thisincludesbothfinancialresourcesandhumanresourcecapacity—includinginvestmentincapacitybuilding.Thiswillbefurtherenabledbyincreasedintegrationandcoordinationbetweenamultiplicityofindividualsandorganizationswhoseactivitiesaffectorareaffectedbywatershedsustainability,aswellasaninvolvedandsupportivepublicwhoareawareofthenecessityofplanningforwatershedsustainabilityanditsassociatedtradeoffs.

ItshouldbenotedthattheabovediscussiondoesnotexplicitlyincorporateoracknowledgeIndigenousworldviews.Althoughaspectsofthisdiscussionimplyaconnectednessbetweenhumansandtheirenvironmentandhumanstoeachother,theideathat“everythingisprofoundlyconnected”isacornerstoneofmanyIndigenousphilosophiesofsustainability.85ItisbeyondthescopeofthispapertoattempttoreconcileWesternperspectivesonsustainabilitywithIndigenousperspectives.However,suchworkcouldlendrichnessanddepthtofutureworkrelatedtooperationalizingandimplementingsustainabilityplanninginB.C.andelsewhere.

85 Hall, David Edward. Sustainability from the perspectives of indigenous leaders in the bioregion defined by the Pacific Salmon runs of North America. Portland State University (2008).


APPENDIX C - Environmental Toolkits and Guides Climate Change

1. AdaptingtoClimateChange:ARisk-basedGuideforLocalGovernments,2010(NaturalResourcesCanadaandtheInstituteforCatastrophicLossReduction)

2. BCClimateActionToolkit(UBCM,GreenCommunitiesCanada,FraserBasinCouncil)

3. ChangingClimate,ChangingCommunities:GuideandWorkbookforMunicipalClimateAdaptation,2014(ICLEILocalGovernmentsforSustainability)

4. CreatingComplete,CompactandEnergy-EfficientCommunitiesinBC:HowFiscaltoolscanbeanOpportunityforLocalGovernments,2015(SustainableProsperity)

5. OfficialCommunityPlansSupportingClimateResilience,2015(ColumbiaBasinTrust)

6. PreparingforClimateChange:AnImplementationGuideforLocalGovernmentsinBC, 2012(WestCoastEnvironmentalLaw)

7. RetoolingforClimateChange(FraserBasinCouncil)

Green Community Planning

8. ConnectingtheDots:RegionalGreenInfrastructureNetworkResourceGuide,2013 (MetroVancouver)

9. DevelopwithCare2014:EnvironmentalGuidelinesforUrbanandRuralLandDevelop-mentinBritishColumbia,2014(BCMinistryofEnvironment)

10. GreenBylawsToolkitforConservingSensitiveEcosystemsandGreenInfrastructure , 2016(DeborahCurranandCompany)

11. EconomicRationaleforIntegratedStormwaterManagement2006(UBC,fundedbyBCMOE)

12. AGuidetoGreenChoices:Ideas&PracticalAdviceofLandUseDecisionsinBirtishCo-lumbiaCommunities,2008(MinistryofCommunity,SportandCulturalDevelopment)

13. TheGreenInfrastructureGuide,2007(WestCoastEnvironmentalLaw)

14. GreeningShorelinestoEnhanceResilience,2014(StewardshipCentreforBritishColumbia)

15. SmartPlanningforCommunities(FraserBasinCouncil)

16. TopsoilBylawsToolkit,2012(OkanaganBasinWaterBoard)


Watershed Management

17. “BeyondtheGuidebook”documents(producedbythePartnershipforWaterSustainability inBC)

18. ClimateChangeAdaptationandWaterGovernance:SummaryforDecision-Makers,2011(AdaptiontoClimateChangeTeam,SimonFraserUniversity)aa

19. FromRaintoResource:ManagingStormwaterinaChangingClimate,2010(OkanaganBasinWaterBoardandtheBCWaterandWasteAssociation)

20. GroundwaterBylawsToolkit,2009(OkanaganBasinWaterBoard)

21. PeelingBackthePavement,2011(POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernance)

22. RethinkingourWaterWays,2011(FraserBasinCouncil)

23. ThinkingBeyondPipesandPumps:Top10WaysCommunitiesCanSaveWaterand Money,2006(POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernance)

24. SoakItUp!Toolkit,2016(GreenCommunitiesCanada)

25. StandardsandBestPracticesforInstreamWorks:UrbanStormwaterManagement, 2008(BCMOEandDFO)

26. StormwaterPlanning:AGuidebookforBritishColumbia,2002(GovernmentofBC)

27. ToolsforClimateChangeVulnerabilityAssessmentsforWatersheds,2013(CanadianCouncilofMinisteroftheEnvironment)

28. WaterConservationPlanningGuideforBritishColumbia,2009(POLISProjectonEcologicalGovernance)


APPENDIX D - Types of Water Plans in B.C.85 PLANS TO ADDRESS WATER QUANTITY CONCERNS

Drought Management Plans

Droughtmanagementplansaretypicallydevelopedatthecommunityorregionalscale.Theyfocusonmanagingdemand,reducingconsumptionandimprovingefficiencyofwateruse,withanemphasisonreducingwaterdemandandaddressingextremecircumstancesassociatedwithdrought.Droughtmanagementplansdevelopspecificresponsestothesedroughtstagesandtriggers(e.g.,limitinglawnwateringifareservoirdropstoaspecifiedlevel).86

Water Allocation Plans

WaterAllocationPlansareconsideredregionalpolicy,andtheMinistryofForests,LandsandNaturalResourceOperationsusestheseplanswhileexercisingitsauthority(e.g.issuingwaterlicenses)underthe Water Act.TheplansareoperationaltoolsdevelopedandusedbytheMinistrytohelpdeterminethequantityofwaterrequiredinawatershedtoprotectecosystemhealth,andthequantityofwateravailabletobeallocatedforhumanuse.

Water Conservation Plans

Waterconservationplansfocusonmanagingwaterdemand,reducingconsumption,andimprovingefficiencyofwateruse.Theseplansextendbeyondhouseholdwatersavingstoincludeindustrial,commercial,institutionalandagriculturalwaterusers.LocalgovernmentsinBCarenowrequiredtohavewaterconservationplanstobeeligibleforprovincialcapitalgrantfundingfordrinkingwaterandwastewaterinfrastructure.

Water Use Plans

TheComptrollerofWaterRightsorotherappropriateauthoritiesundertheWaterActmayrequirethataWUPbepreparedforanyexistinglicence.Expectedprioritiesforthecompletionofplansarepowerdevelopments,municipalwatersystems,andlarger-scaleindustrialoperations.Forthemostpart,WUPshavebeenassociatedwithwaterpowerlicencesthatareheldbyBCHydro.WUPsmayalsoberequiredforotherwatercontrolfacilitieswherethereisanundesirableeffectonfish,aquatichabitat,orotherimportantvalues.WhileWUPsforexistinglicencesmayberequiredasneedsareidentified,plansmayalsoberequiredasaconditionofproponentsseekingnewlicencesforlarger-scaleoperations(industrial,agricultural,municipal,orotherfacilities),orforworkslocatedonparticularlyvaluableorsensitivestreams.

85 Content in this appendix was adapted from the Fraser Basin Council’s 2011 document Rethinking our Water Ways. 86 Metro Vancouver has a “Water Shortage Response Plan” (see http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/water/WaterPublications/WaterShortageResponsePlanFeb2016.pdf) which may trigger actions set out in local bylaws, such as the Surrey Water Shortage Response by-law (see: http://www.surrey.ca/bylawsandcouncillibrary/BYL_reg_15454.pdf).


PLANS TO ADDRESS WATER QUALITY CONCERNS Drinking Water Protection Plans

DrinkingWaterProtectionPlans(DWPPs)aredesignedtoprotectwaterqualityandquantityfromawiderangeofpressures.Theplansaretypicallydevelopedforaspecificsourceofdrinkingwatersupply,suchasawatercourse,watershed,reservoiroraquifer.Part5oftheDrinking Water Protection ActoutlinestherequirementstodesignateanareaforaDrinkingWaterProtectionPlan,theplanauthority,andtheplanningandimplementationprocess.ThedecisionwhethertoinitiateaDWPPisonefortheMinistertomake.Asof2011,noDWPPshadbeencompletedordesignatedinBC.Theyareconsideredtobealastresortbecauseofthestringentrequirementsassociatedwiththem,andshouldonlybeconsideredwhereitcanbeestablishedthatregulatorytoolsarerequiredtoachievetheplanningobjectives.

Watershed Response & Assessment Plans

Under Part 3 of the Drinking Water Protection Act,adrinkingwaterprotectionofficermayorderawatersuppliertocompleteawatersourceandsystemassessment.Thepurposeoftheassessmentisto:

• assessthedrinkingwatersourceinrelationtolanduseswithinthewatershedandactivitiesthatmayaffectthesource;

• inventorythewatersupplysystem,includingtreatmentoptionsandoperationalprocedures;

• assessthemonitoringrequirementsforthedrinkingwatersourceandwatersupplysystem;and

• identifycurrentandpotentialfuturethreatstodrinkingwater.

Well Protection Plans

WellprotectionplansarebasedonatoolkitdevelopedjointlybyProvinceofBC,EnvironmentCanadaandBCGroundwaterAssociation.Theplansbyberequiredby:

• Healthauthoritieswhentheyreviewanoperatingpermitforalargedrinkingwatersystemthatincludeswells;

• Theprovincialgovernmentasaconditionofgrantinginfrastructurefundingfornewmunicipal/re-gionaldistrictwells;and,

• Asaconditionofaprovincialenvironmentalassessmentforproposedlargewithdrawals.


PLANS TO FACILITATE INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

Water Management Plans (WMP)

Part 4 of the old Water ActspecifiedthattheProvincemayissueanOrderforaWaterManagementPlantobecreatedtoaddressconcernsinawatershed.TheTownshipofLangleywasthefirstandonlylocalgovernmenttodevelopaWMPduetosignificantconcernsregardingcontaminationofthetown’saquifer.However,theplanhasnotbeenbroughtintoforceandmanyactivitiesoutlinedintheplanhavenotbeenimplemented.

Watershed Plans

WatershedPlansassessthestateofawatershedandpresentsdetailedmanagementinformationintermsofanalyses,actions,participantsandresourcesrequiredfordevelopingandimplementingtheplan.BChasnoformalrequirementsorstipulationsforundertakingwatershedplanningprocessesbeyondtheprovisionsundertheWater ActtodevelopaWMP,withapprovalfromtheprovincialgovernment.

Integrated Stormwater Management Plans (ISMPs)

MetroVancouver’smembermunicipalitiesISMPshavecollectivelyagreedtodevelopandimplementISMPsinaccordancewiththeIntegratedLiquidWasteandResourceManagementPlan.Theyapplytowatershedsthatare20%developedormore.

Documents

Water Sustainability and the City