STREAMSIDE PROTECTION REGULATION ADVISORY GROUP (SPRAG)

Members
Draft Terms of Reference
Action Items: Group Meeting #1

MEMBERS

Committee Members

• Rod Davis
  Habitat Branch Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection

• Jennifer Atchison
  Stewardship Action Network

• Susan Wilkins
  Urban Development Institute
  & Pottinger Gaherty Environmental Consultants

• Mary Sutherland
  British Columbia Real Estate Association
  Greater Vancouver Real Estate Board

• Robert Hobson
  UBCM

• David Lane
  T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation

• Kim Grout
  District of Maple Ridge

• Bruce Reid
  Fisheries and Oceans
  Lower Fraser Area Habitat and Enforcement

• Tim Bekhuys
  National Association of Industrial and Office Parks

Secretariat

• Jodi Dong
  Habitat Branch, Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection

• Bob Cox
  Habitat Branch, Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection

• Andy Witt
  Fisheries Branch Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection

• Harriet Rueggeberg Lanarc Consultants

Return to document list

DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE

The Streamside Protection Regulation, under the Fish Protection Act, was enacted to protect streamside riparian areas, which are critically important to healthy populations of fish, from the impacts of urban development. Implementation of the Regulation must be consistent with the Government's commitment to a scientifically-based, balanced and principled approach to environmental management.

Goal

To work in a cooperative, solutions focussed manner to advise government on how to implement the Streamside Protection Regulation in a manner that ensures that fish habitat is protected yet is flexible to meet local circumstances, is practical to implement within the resources of the provincial and local governments and minimizes the impacts on the value of property.

Objectives

• To ensure that all working group members have a clear understanding of the Regulation and how it was intended to be implemented
  
• To develop recommendations on how the regulation can be more effectively implemented
  
• Where issues cannot be resolved through the current framework, to provide alternatives for implementation

Tasks

• Develop a clear and common understanding of how the regulation is supposed to work
  
• Develop a clear and common understanding of the status of implementation including the guide etc.
  
• Understand and agree on what is meant by a results based/flexible approach
  
• Identify barriers to a results based/flexible approach in the current implementation approach
  
• Develop recommended actions to overcome the barriers identified.

Roles & Responsibilities of Group Members

• See agreement on recommendations to meet the mandate using an interest-based approach, i.e., a proposal that meets all identified interests should be agreed to by all
  
• Build as much agreement as possible by resolving as many issues as possible and providing the reasons that outstanding issues are not resolved including actions that could be taken (or were considered) in order to resolve those outstanding issues, i.e., close the gap as much as possible and be constructive about the differences that remain
  
• Communicate effectively by listening, asking questions to improve understanding, sharing information and explaining reasons for disagreement
  
• Focus on interests. Positions that have been taken need to be explained in terms of the interests they serve
  
• Work together in a cooperative and respectful manner that facilitates an efficient an constructive dialogue
  
• Think creatively and consider the full range of ideas in a search for elements of the solution rather than reasons for rejection
  
• Represent and communicate with constituents regularly and positively. Tentative agreements must be presented to constituents in a positive manner including joint presentation with other advisory committee members where this is appropriate.

Process/Timing

• Workshop: Oct 10, 2001. Issues and solutions scoping: SPRAG announcement
  
• 3 SPRAG working sessions: Oct-Dec
  
• Report to Minister: Dec. 21

Return to document list

ACTION ITEMS: ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING #1
(Content provided by J.Dong, Habitat Branch)

Topic
Who is responsible
• Action

Ministerial Commitment
Rod to communicate to Minister

• Advisory Committee requests that the Minister direct concerns regarding the streamside protection regulation and the review process that are brought to her attention to the Advisory Committee.
  
• Advisory Committee recommends that the Minister begins to secure financial and human resources to support implementation of the regulation after the Advisory Committee recommendations have been implemented.
  
• Advisory Committee recommends that work on the case studies, the mapping and inventory and the ICA template sections of the Implementation Guide be continued provided that this is not interpreted as endorsement of the guide by the Committee and that there are funds/contract time reserved to make additional changes to the guide after the Advisory Committee has completed its recommendations.

• Refine Terms of Reference as per the discussion in Meeting #1. Revised draft will be circulated for review.

• Circulate Watershed Fish Sustainability Planning Guidebook
  
• Circulate Canada-BC Agreement

• Circulate Chilliwack Case examples, and Appraiser's Report on them
  
• Circulate draft Statement of Cooperation
  
• Circulate Harriet's Workshop Summary
  
• Circulate Summary Report on Status of Local Government Streamside Protection Measures Coordinate changes to Part 26 powers under Local Government Act as a result of Community Charter
  
• Circulate Summary Report of Pilot Projects

• Determine whether signing an ICA would ensure same or different level of liability protection under federal Fisheries Act

• Will find what are costs associated with variances that would be required to change as SPEA

• Will bring specific examples of differences of SPR interpretation by local governments

• Will explore how current regulation impacts property values - What are current mechanisms for compensation? How have impacts been considered in development of regulation?
  
• Case studies provided
  
• Examples of how response to regulation has increased protection requirements beyond what would have been required by DFO

• Send examples of alternative "flexible" approaches to implementing the reg/meeting its intent "the suite" to Bob Cox who will collate and send out to everyone for review.

• Bob and Jodi to circulate an email explaining why "potential" vegetation was included in regulation. Everyone to consider the explanation and respond with suggestions as to how these underlying needs could be provided for.

• Provide analysis/critique and rationale for definition of streams in the regulation

• Summary and discussion of all issues related to consistency among local governments, across land uses and between regions

• Provide description of federal/provincial strategy for resourcing implementation including and regional staff delivery, inventory, technical and financial support etc.
  
• Include description of roles of various provincial agencies (i.e. MSRM, WLAP etc.)

• Invite Peter Lewis, MWLAP regional rep as required

• Clarification of what local governments need and expect with reference to commitments already made to UBCM
  
• Description of how community based groups (e.g. streamkeepers) can support implementation.

• All participants to forward concerns regarding Enforcement and Monitoring to Bob who will collate and circulate to all.

• Will do short presentation overview at next meeting

• Will continue work on Implementation Guide components including Inventory and Mapping, Case Studies, ICA template
  
• Provide examples of how we would know, "is it working"?
  
• Email out case studies that were discussed

Return to document list