Proceedings - Teaching and Learning Centre - Simon Fraser ...

Fraser River Action Plan 3rd Research Workshop
invertebrate community structures can be interpreted in the context of land use alterations and water
chemistry (i.e., integrate with Ken Hall’s work). On a good note, streams of Brunette and Salmon River
watersheds still have fair bit of biodiversity.
Belzer: There is definite atmospheric deposition and it probably contributes to what’s showing up in Ken
Hall’s stream data. How do we interpret data with respect to toxicology; is it useful? Is what we’re seeing
toxic over brief rainfall periods? What happens over the long term, with flushing-out of watersheds? Are there
cumulative effects? PAH source appears primarily to be traffic component; rest of data still needs to be
analyzed.
Chambers: Most of the point source nutrient load is from pulp mills (as opposed to industry). Absolute
contribution small (~ 10%), but not insignificant as anthropogenic sources have high concentrations of
bioavailable forms. As for anthropogenic non-point source nutrient loading (forestry, land use changes,
agriculture), it’s less well understood.
Kooi: Monitoring is problematic for urban runoff; it’s unpredictable and site-specific. This makes measuring
success rate of any abatement programs difficult. In past we’ve developed guideline documents but we don’t
know how or where we’re going to download all the information; municipalities don’t want it as they can’t
enforce regulations. In future, strong, working partnerships between different levels of government will be
required to implement any abatement strategies.
Hall: First, related to stormwater monitoring, need to recognize that the system is incredibly physically
dynamic with rapid flow changes over few minutes. Think about this when relating types of organisms in
systems (John Richardson’s work) to contaminant effects. Perhaps this could lead to controlling toxicity by
controlling flow. Second, how to communicate science to regulatory agencies? Hold workshops to present
data summaries, and to address what policies government should create, and what personal choices must we
all make for better ecosystem.
For myself, I am currently working on synthesis reports (water quality, hydrocarbon, and sediment data). In
context of the Brunette system, a BMP and stormwater report is in progress,. Also a working group
coordinated by GVRD, (phase II of Liquid Waste Management Plan) to determine goals and actions to be
achieved in Brunette watershed. Hans Schreier and I are working on hypertext document putting together
three watershed projects, making information accessible to everyone. It will give some “what-if” scenarios,
making it more interactive.
Chambers: What kind of world do we want? With regard to licensing, do we regulate on accepted BAT or
acceptable ecological responses? Also an issue is what do we consider as acceptable nutrient conditions in
our rivers? What endpoints do we regulate on, e.g., are rivers indeed polluted, or are we just “fertilizing”
them to enhance salmon production?
Gray: Are urban runoff impact studies done in lower Fraser easily transferable to Kamloops and Prince
George regions?
Hall: Each watershed is unique as there are seasonal and storm-event differences. Only at gross level can
data be transferred; you need to get site-specific.
Gray: Were non-point source contaminant fall-out figures from E.P.A.?
Kooi: That was just one source, the inventory includes GVRD data as well.
Hall: These were Stanley Engineering reports?...To come up with loading values, they use same
concentration parameters (e.g., hydrocarbon concentrations) for both residential and industrial/commercial
and distinguish between the two by using different runoff coefficients for summer and winter (in winter soils
more saturated so they get higher percent runoff).
Page 315