Wetland Management?
Who really benefits and at what price?

On march 28/07, I attended Dick Dekker’s power point presentation to the Sherwood Park Fish and Game Association. There were many different groups at the meeting with various levels of involvement on the topic of the lake’s disappearance. This included representatives from Ducks Unlimited, CWS, the Alberta Water Branch and the Beaver Hills Initiative and other government people who could have a say in implementing future solutions.

No doubt Dick Dekker had spent more time at the lake than anyone and shared his honest and unbiased observations concerning the future of Beaverhills Lake. On top of that, he also spent a lot of time and research in the creation of this excellent presentation.

Dick’s talk was about his concerns on the drying up of an internationally recognized bird lake. He showed a photo taken in September 2006 of a completely dried Beaverhills lake. What remained was huge expanses of mud flats with large, deep cracks. Dick said he watched as winds during the summer would push the remaining water inland into these cracks. When the wind direction changed the same thing would happen on the opposite side of the lake. This process greatly speeded up the evaporation rate. The lake was essentially drinking itself dry! His explanation for the original drying and slow recovery of the lake was two--fold. Nature [primarily the drought of 2002] and the cumulative withholding of inflow waters by Ducks Unlimited [DUC] since 1974. He showed the historical high and low levels that the lake experienced in the last 100 years. Dick also pointed out that there is no proof the lake was ever as low as today. Although he believes the lake can recover through a very high precipitation year, he feels proper stewardship is still necessary.

Even though his Graphs showed us the lake experienced average to even above average precipitation in the four years that followed the drought of 2002, the lake still dried up! Also with another graph from a study done on a similar lake in the United States, he was able to show how the evaporation rate doubled as the lake levels were halved. In other words Beaverhills was simply evaporating water out faster than what was coming in. Because of restriction on inflow waters, Dick feels the lake has been seriously damaged. This leaves only two possibilities for the lake to recover -- either above average precipitation or stop impediment of inflow waters.

DUC’s defence has been that the amount of withheld waters is negligible. I personally do not believe they have the figures to back that up. Especially if the impediment effects need to be calculated over a period of 34 years after the weir and dams were built.

After the talk, a discussion followed. Dick generously said he would be happy to read a headline in the news papers that how DUC was working for the recovery of Beaverhills Lake. Another topic was brought up and that was to pump water into the lake from the North Saskatchewan river. That lead to lots of input from various groups of people. Another person talked at length about further studies and different considerations. I would like to offer my own opinion on this issue…

I am a birdwatcher, photographer and concerned observer of our changing natural world. The unique position I think I might have is that I’m not involved with any government position or organization that might restrain my view.

I have spent a lot of time watching birds in three watersheds that are within a half hours drive from my home. Whitford Lake, Chipman wetlands and Beaverhills lake are three major staging areas for migrating birds as well as nesting birds. All three of these beautiful wetlands have been altered as stated above, for monetary gain. And all three have suffered because of it. [Beaverhills the most because of its large size].

LEAVE IT TO BEAVER
In the case of Chipman, a drainage canal was installed by DUC in 1989 to moderate high water levels in the slough. This benefits only one or two farmers who can flood their pastures in the spring and open the canal in summer to lower water levels, thus gaining more pasture land for cattle in late summer and fall. Effectively, this prevents the slough from ever attaining abnormally high water levels in wet years, leaving no safety margin if the following year should happen to be low. As a result of this practice, I watch [almost every year] shorebirds like avocets and yellowlegs in August standing in 3’’ inches of water …. in the middle of the slough! I have also seen years where the drainage culvert is left unregulated and wide open.

Another local farmer who is not too fond of the canal, said there was always much higher water levels in the past. There was even years when fish could be found in the slough-- something unheard of now!

So my question would be, is it logical to expedite the drainage of a relatively scarce commodity--water-- off our prairie surface, into the Saskatchewan river and finally into the Hudsons Bay for such a small gain?

Another interesting problem that seems to appear in the canal every year comes from a champion of running water--the beaver! The beaver has a “hard to rid” perseverance and seems to show up every year. The beaver is a master of drought management and in a matter of a few weeks is quite capable of slowing down waters destined for some distant ocean. Sadly, I see almost every year all their hard work fall victim to a backhoe or dynamite. Even the builders are sometimes shot [which I think is illegal]. If I could respectfully offer my solution to DU, it would be this: why not strike a deal with the farmers to leave the beavers do their work in creating new wetlands [the same business you’re in] and pay farmers compensation for lost acreage?

Whitford is another lake where I have spent a lot of time watching and photographing birds [25--30 spring days for 3 years before the lake dried]. I consider it a world class lake like Beaverhills. It had an island that hosted possibly 50 thousand franklins gulls and in spring one could see almost as many snow geese stopping over during migration. I’ve also seen rare visitors like the whooping crane, black necked stilt while others have reported the piping plover.

Whitford has suffered a double blow! Inflow waters have been impeded by Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Association (PFRA) to create upstream wetlands, and a drainage canal was dug to prevent high water levels. Again, the canal would benefit the farmers that surround the lake, giving them more acreage. Also, it possibly would help the oil and gas industry who have well sites that seem to be close to, or in, the former lake basin. Like Beaverhills, this lake is also slow to recover and when it does [by a major weather event], it should also receive better stewardship. To this issue, I would like to add a little human irony about Whitford lake. The town of Andrew boasts having the worlds largest mallard duck in celebration of a great waterfowl habitat. After many meetings, the town voted on digging a canal to drain high water levels into the Saskatchewan river and again, it was for monetary gain!

To conclude, I feel there is a need to re-evaluate our practises of water usage. I feel DU and other groups believe they are doing the right thing by creating upstream habitats with water impediment. I personally believe this could work but only when water levels are at a very high surplus. Otherwise we end up doing just what Dick Dekker says--‘we’re stealing from Peter to give to Paul!’

Brian Genereux, naturalist/photographer