Re: Is the CRT draft agreement a good deal for Canada?
I read Eileen Delehanty Pearkes’ editorial on the Columbia River Treaty draft. I also read her book, a well-researched reminder of what Canada and B.C. lost when we agreed to the treaty. The Arrow Lakes region was the third biggest food production area in B.C. Named for the alluvial arrows that were formed by the creeks entering the lakes, it was surrounded by beautiful, wildlife rich wetlands, all lost when we built the dam that produced the current reservoir.
The Duncan Dam likewise severely degraded the valley, once home to a wildlife rich 25-kilometre long lake, creating a 45-km stump filled reservoir. I drove up to the north end recently to take a look at the 2,000-year-old cedar that somehow escaped annihilation. It brought tears to my eyes looking at that reservoir and imagining what an incredible place it must have been.
Only 30 per cent of the world’s rivers still flow freely, and many people are realizing that much of that human interference was an environmental mistake. Civilized parts of the world are removing dams and restoring the fabulous ecosystems that were lost. But not the BC NDP. Here we are busy building more environmentally detrimental mega projects. The renegotiation of the CRT was an opportunity to turn back the clock and reverse some of the damage done by previous generations.
The Duncan Dam generates zero electricity. It’s sole purpose is to store water for the dams downstream, mostly in the U.S. That dam could be removed and the valley restored to its former glory. If that had been done I could have understood reduction in the Canadian Entitlement, but sadly those negotiating the treaty refused to even consider doing so. That said I can see no reason why the Canadian Entitlement should do anything but increase. Everything we lost in 1961 is still lost.
Rod Retzlaff
Nelson
