|
Cuts to the Provincial Environment Ministry
Subject: Report On Cuts To Environment
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 09:37:45 -0800
From: tomburgess <tomburgess@telus.net>
Greetings, friends.
The HELP MELP Campaign is continuing efforts to achieve stabilization and
eventual recovery of the Wildlife, Fisheries, Habitat Protection and Parks
Programs, formerly part of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (MELP).
To this end I have just completed a report on the implications of all the
announced cuts. It is appended to this email.
As before, I ask that you make yourself aware of the problem and that you pass
on the information to whomever you think might be able to use it. If you feel so
inclined, a letter to your MLA, the appropriate Ministers and the Premier would
be in order. Only by informed public pressure will we have any hope of turning
this government around.
Thanks for your attention. Best wishes, Tom Burgess.
Material follows:
ENVIRONMENTAL CUTS WHAT WERE LOSING
INTRODUCTION:
On January 17th, government announced plans to downsize most of its Ministries,
including Water, Land and Air Protection (WLAP) and Sustainable Resource
Management (SRM). These two Ministries contain all the elements of the Wildlife,
Fisheries, Habitat Protection and Parks Programs (the Four Programs) which had
been included in the former Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (MELP). The
Four Programs have been the focus of the HELP MELP Campaign. We are aware,
however, that there will be cuts to other elements of the former Ministry,
specifically to Pollution Prevention and Water Management, a loss of at least
100 positions, and to the Conservation Officer Service, a loss of at least 25
positions. At January 17th, government figures were indicating a planned
reduction from both SRM and WLAP of 983 positions, a 35% reduction.
Utilizing government information sources, it has been possible to determine the
precise number and likely effect of the planned cuts in Victoria and in all nine
Regional offices.
1/ PREVIOUS CUTS:
Before considering this information, however, it must be understood that the
announced cuts are not being taken from fully staffed Programs. Under the
previous government administration, Wildlife, Fisheries and Habitat Protection
had ALREADY been reduced to only 50% of their former strength over a seven year
period. The Parks Program had been downsized earlier and had been spread
progressively thinner as additional areas and Park numbers were increased. By
last July, Parks staff were responsible for over 800 Parks. The number of field
staff then available provided a ratio of 5 Parks per field staff.
2/ MINISTRY OF SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT:
A further compounding factor was the formation of the new SRM Ministry.
At least 52 staff were taken from Wildlife, Fisheries and Habitat Protection and
placed into SRM. Some continued their former duties (the 11 member Habitat
Inventory Group; the 15 member Conservation Data Center) but others found
themselves with new duties. Where their duties changed, the efforts of the
Wildlife, Fisheries and Habitat Protection Programs were diminished. This was
particularly true for Area Management, Hunting Regulations, Wildlife Inventory
and Habitat Protection efforts dealing with fish/wildlife/forestry issues.
Following January 17th, figures were provided showing that SRM was to be cut 37,
135, 175 and 238 positions, respectively, over four fiscal years, a total of 585
positions and a 38% cut. We know that 12 of the 52 SRM transferees from
Wildlife, Fisheries and Habitat Protection are to be cut this year. We do not
yet have information on the remainder of the 52, nor on any other possible
transferees. From the 12 known cuts from this year, we will lose support for:
Watershed Restoration; Wildlife Inventory; and Habitat Protection efforts in
forest habitats. Thus, what might have originally appeared as a simple transfer
to new duties is now revealed as a permanent loss to the Wildlife, Fisheries and
Habitat Protection Programs.
3/ CUTS TO MINISTRY OF WATER, LAND AND AIR PROTECTIONS FOUR PROGRAMS:
Cuts to the Wildlife, Fisheries and Habitat Protection Programs under the
previous government removed 300 dedicated environmental workers. The cuts
recently announced by our current government will take yet another 74 workers,
38 now, 36 later, reducing Program strength to only 32% of the mid 90s levels.
There will be only 225 staff left for the entire province, charged with the
responsibility of maintaining fish and wildlife populations and their habitats
and providing us with various opportunities to enjoy them.
Our Parks Program fares even worse. Earlier downsizing had not been as severe,
but the Parks system has doubled in recent years. Last July the ratio of staff
to Parks was one field worker for every 5 Parks. Current government plans will
cut staff by 63, 33 now, 30 more later. This is a 34% cut bringing field
strength to only 120. This will have the effect of increasing the ratio to one
field worker for every 7 Parks.
The above losses of dedicated and knowledgeable staff are a disaster, plain and
simple. But, to make matters worse, in numerous Regions, some of the Four
Programs suffer disproportional losses, in the range of 40% to 50%.
INDIVIDUAL PROGRAM CUTS AND IMPLICATIONS:
1. WILDLIFE PROGRAM:
The over-all cut to Wildlife is 23%, 20 workers, 11 now, 9 later, leaving only
66 to care for Wildlife throughout the Province. Four Regions are more heavily
impacted, losing the following: Vancouver Island - 50%; Lower Mainland - 43%;
Cariboo - 40%; and Skeena - 33%. Losses to this extent simply devastate Regional
Programs. Knowledge, experience and manpower are taken away. Workers remaining
are proportionately more heavily burdened with administrative and regulatory
tasks. There is less time to conduct field activities and to liase with public
groups and other agencies. Partnerships suffer. Staff increasingly lose contact
with the resources they are trying to manage. These ill effects affect all four
Programs.
While there are many losses to the Wildlife Program, two stand out in
particular. The first is Area Management, a function consisting of various
activities conducted to legally designate, manage and monitor especially
valuable habitats, along with highly valued or threatened populations. These
include our Wildlife Management Areas (22 of them) and a list of more than 300
other reserves. At least 5 staff directly responsible for these functions are
being cut. Others less directly involved will not be able to spend sufficient
time on this function to do it justice. The Area Management function is now
being placed under the Parks Program, in spite of it being already understaffed
and due to suffer a 34% staff cut.
The second heavy loss to Wildlife is in the area of population and habitat
inventory. There will be 10 staff cut from this function. These include
long-service Wildlife Technicians with extensive experience and several
Biologists, recent graduates of university, with the latest knowledge of survey
techniques. The Program will be seriously damaged by these cuts, with losses to
the inventory functions for big game, large carnivores, raptorial birds,
non-game birds, and species at risk. The latter three categories are of primary
concern in both the Vancouver Island and Lower Mainland Regions, which are being
most heavily cut.
2. FISHERIES PROGRAM:
Cuts to the Fisheries Program are nearly 30% overall, with the loss of 26
positions, 17 now, 9 later, leaving only 64 Fisheries staff to do the job. Two
Regions are particularly heavily impacted, Vancouver Island losing 60%, and the
Lower Mainland losing 50%. Within the Program are several areas of interest that
have been particularly heavily impacted.
The first of these is the Urban Salmonid Habitat Program. Begun with MELP
funding in 1995/96, it was focused on Vancouver Island and the Lower Mainland.
Its primary goal was ensuring sustainable wild salmon and other salmonid stocks
and habitat in populated areas of the Georgia basin. It was hoped to build
partnerships with other levels of government, to initiate community involvement
and increase public awareness. Judged to be a tremendous success, plans were
being made to expand the Program to the Thompson and Okanagan Regions. Funded
first by MELP, then Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries and latterly by
Fisheries Renewal BC now defunct it provided almost $6.4Million of project
funding over seven years. Ten staff were hired, three each in Victoria and the
Lower Mainland, four on Vancouver Island.
Working with 32 different local governments on 129 projects, the Program
provided $3Million, initially paying salaries for more than 20 local government
Environmental Coordinators. For the Community Stewardship efforts, run entirely
by volunteers, the Program paid over $3.3Million to fund 252 projects with 89
local Stewardship groups formed specifically to pursue the goals of the Program.
These local groups undertook Watershed Assessments (over 100 are ready to go
with restoration work on Vancouver Island alone), and protection, enhancement
and restoration efforts. Many are now focused on Watershed Planning and Public
Education efforts just what was desired. The volunteer Stewardship efforts
over the seven year period are estimated at over 400,000 hours, valued at
$4Million.
Local Stewardship groups have advised Fisheries staff that they want to see more
of them in the field, to provide technical advice. Also considered desirable is
much greater public involvement in Watershed Planning, considerably more
development of Official Community Plans and Bylaws to protect small streams, and
increased volunteer involvement in long term protection and restoration of
Watersheds.
Regretably, all this good work is now in limbo. Eight of the 10 USHP staff have
been cut, the remaining two transferred. There are no project applications being
taken, no funding has been identified, and the future of the Program is in
question. Although the Living Rivers Strategy and the Forest Investment Account
might provide some limited assistance, it seems apparent that the USHP Program
as originally envisaged and practiced, is a thing of the past.
The second Fisheries area of interest heavily impacted is the Watershed
Restoration Program. Funded entirely by Forest Renewal BC, it was only one of
several investment initiatives. Its goal was to identify, assess and
subsequently restore watersheds which had been negatively impacted by past
logging practices. In the process, it would provide jobs and education for local
citizens and First Nations and opportunities for public information. Over the
first five years (94 to 99), this Program provided just over $302Million to
the effort. An estimated 2,800 watersheds needing restoration, (725 high
priority, 425 medium priority), were the original focus. Of these, 860
watersheds received detailed assessment, and 150 had restoration efforts
completed. Another 320 watersheds were only partially restored. Restoration
efforts included road deactivation or rehabilitation, slope stabilization and
fish and aquatic habitat restoration (riparian plantings, spawning/rearing
channel replacement, fertilization).
This Program was substantially reduced over the past two years, then cut, along
with the FRBC Program. As successful as it was and it was very successful it
leaves a great deal undone. Only 150 high priority watersheds were considered to
be restored 20%. There are another 575 high priorities to complete plus 425
medium priorities and 1,650 other watersheds. We still have a great deal to do.
The Fisheries Program provided 10 positions to this effort. Seven of these are
now cut, 2 others will go over the next year or two. One has been transferred.
Other areas of interest where Fisheries is suffering staff losses include:
Steelhead Management: the loss of four staff, one now, three later, including
Biologists and Technicians with decades of experience, from Victoria, Nanaimo
and Surrey; 5 Technicians with many years experience in fish and fish habitat
inventory; 2 Biologists, from Vancouver Island, and Kootenays, trained to deal
with recommending BC Hydro dam flows to ensure adequate water for fish, and with
independent Hydro operations (there are 600 of these proposed for BC, 50 on
Vancouver Island alone).
3. HABITAT PROTECTION PROGRAM:
Cuts to the Habitat Protection Program overall are 23%, a loss of 28 positions,
10 now, 18 later, leaving 95 positions to carry the provincial load. Three
Regions are disproportionately impacted, Vancouver Island at 35%, Lower Mainland
at 42% and Kootenays at 33%. Habitat Protection (HP) staff typically deal with
either urban/rural or fish/wildlife/forestry issues.
The urban/rural areas of the Province, southern and southeastern Vancouver
Island, the Lower Mainland and the Okanagan, have moderate climates and inviting
landforms which attract human development. They also support a high proportion
of special habitats and an increasing number of wildlife and fish populations
considered "at risk". Habitat protection efforts in the past have focused on
identifying these special habitats and on working with local governments via a
"referral" system to avoid or mitigate developments impacting them. With rapidly
increasing human populations, the referral system became unweildy. In recent
years, HP staff have begun to develop "Best Practices" documents.
These provide Local Governments, Developers and Consultants with the means of
identifying special habitats and of avoiding impacts upon them.
This new approach depends on successful partnerships, constant education and
updating for approval authorities and ongoing monitoring efforts to correct
deficiencies. Sadly, 11 urban/rural HP staff have been, or soon will be, cut.
These people dealt with Municipal "Best Practices" partnerships, Streamside
Protection guidelines, urban planning, local government liason, community
watersheds and referrals on the Fraser Estuary and in Burrard Inlet. The efforts
of their remaining colleagues are now made much more difficult.
Elsewhere in the Province, HP efforts focus more on issues of wildlife and
fisheries habitat in forested areas. With the imposition of parts of the Forest
Practices Code and the announced intention to re-write the FPC to simplify
regulations which would free up more timber for harvesting, the new duties of HP
staff remain yet unclear. What is not unclear, however, is that there were never
enough staff nor adequate policies and procedures to do an effective job of
protecting critical habitats in our forests. Now, government intends to take
away 8 more staff from this function. It remains to be seen whether the staff
that are left will be sufficient to do an effective job or if the new procedures
being developed will be any improvement on past efforts.
4. PARKS PROGRAM:
Cuts to the Parks Program are the heaviest of the Four Programs, at 34% overall.
There will be a loss of 63 positions, 33 now, 30 more later, leaving 120 people
to carry on with, in many cases, half their former numbers, but with additional
duties. The Vancouver Island and Lower Mainland Regions are very heavily
impacted. Both are reduced from 2 Districts each, to one. Vancouver Island loses
51% of its staff, the Lower Mainland, 45%. The Victoria unit which supports
Districts with its Planning, Acquisition, Extension and Statistical functions,
is cut by
35%. Both the Thompson and Okanagan Districts are cut by 33%.
4/ DISTRICT EXTENSION OFFICERS
One of the most serious losses to the Parks Program is the loss of all 13 of the
District Extension Officers. These are the people who provided the public
outreach and who nurtured the Community Relationships so necessary to the Parks
Program. They are the staff who provided the field efforts which lead to public
understanding of Park values, to appreciation, and thence to public support for
protection of those values.
All Parks field staff undertake a certain level of extension duties, but the
Extension Officers are the ones with the primary responsibility and the special
training and experience to do the job. They handled many of the thousands of
public inquiries that come in weekly during the high-use seasons, many of which
cannot be satisfactorily handled by a webpage. They put together the Parks and
Districts Communication Plans, deciding what messages to get out, what tools to
use and with what design and cost. They were the staff who worked with
Contractors and Volunteers to provide the very popular and informative
Interpretive Programs the campfire and daytime session which tell us of Nature
Lore and present us with information on conservation issues and outdoors safety
tips. They arranged for the various spring School programs dealing with nature
appreciation, back country education and safety practices. Now, all
Interpretation efforts, formerly carried out in 43 Parks, have been terminated.
All Nature Houses will be closed. Of all North American states and provinces,
only BC and Mississippi now have no Interpretation Program.
Extension staff had primary responsibility for delivering the Volunteer
programs. In 2001 they dealt with 2,070 volunteers, providing, free to the
government, 130,000 hours of effort valued at $1.3Million. This included the
Campground and Back-country Hosts, the Ecological Reserve Wardens, and a wide
range of Special Projects: trail and cross country ski trail development and
maintenance; tracking and surveying wildlife and habitat; mapping caves and
other natural features; providing viewing facilities and signs, and planting
trees. In addition to all this, they raised funds from outside sources, local
governments, companies and private donors. In 2001 this provided for 77
different projects, valued at over $500,000, not including the value of
volunteer hours. The Extension group was bringing in more than twice the value
of the wages and benefits paid to them.
In addition to loss of the Extension efforts, the loss of so many front-line
staff places immense burdens on those members remaining. These are the people
who provide all the Parks management functions.
Among a wide range of functions are the following: provide and monitor Park Use
permits; identify and deal with developing conservation and maintenance issues;
supervise back-country use; plan and maintain trails, cross-country ski
networks; investigate and take action regarding illegal Park uses; provide for
public safety; answer public inquiries; and work with Contractors, E-Teams,
Volunteer groups and individual on a wide range of subjects.
Front-line Parks workers are now being expected to take on some new duties.
These are associated with management and maintenance of Wildlife Management
Areas (22 in the Province) and a wide range of Fish and Wildlife reserves over
300 in all many (65) of which have licences, leases and management agreements
to administer. A daunting task formerly for Fish and Wildlife staff, this new
duty for Parks staff will be impossible for them to carry out without some kind
of relief.
When front-line worker numbers are reduced to the extent planned by government,
the services they provide are diminished, former service levels are made
impossible, and Program changes must be contemplated.
5/ AFTER THE CUTS WHAT THEN?
The above information indicates what functions and services will be lost as a
result of the announced cuts. But it is beyond reason to assume that staff
remaining will be able to carry on as before. Clearly, government intends a wide
range of changes. Staff and public will be learning of these changes over the
next weeks and months.
For now, we know of some of the intended changes from government releases.
Government "will focus on client service", "will do away with constraints on
economic development", "will facilitate sustainable economic development", "will
eliminate regulations to facilitate industry competitiveness", "will trim
regulations to foster a more competitive investment climate" and will "approve
projects in a more timely, cost-effective and certain fashion". Government
intends to encourage industry, local government and private organizations to
take on a much greater environmental management and protection role, leaving
government staff the role of monitoring and enforcement. How this is to be
delivered after all the staff cuts remains unclear. How staff already handling
scores of partnerships in every Region of the Province are to take on even
more partnerships with less staff, is inexplicable.
Our Parks system is due for some major changes: no more extension or
interpretive efforts, unless someone else pays the bills; less field staff to
watch over the public interests; less staff to develop partnerships and work
with the volunteers; campsites closing (40 to 50 this year); Parks closing (100
or more possible); and Parks assigned to the Federal government, or to Regional
and Municipal authorities or private interests. A new approach to Parks
management which meets public expectations may yet be developed, but it looks
years away at this point.
There are many environmental concerns raised by both the staff cuts and the
newly announced government intentions for the environment. The above are only
the most obvious.
Thomas E. Burgess, RPBio (retired)
for the HELP MELP Campaign February 28, 2002
tomburgess@telus.net
|
