BCGWA - The British Columbia Ground Water Association

This Newsletter is published quarterly, March, June, September and December by the B. C. Ground Water Association. For more information please contact: Secretary Treasurer, Joan Perry, 1708 - 197 A Street, Langley, B. C. V2Z 1K2 Phone or Fax: 604-530-8934

Click here for the BC Government Document: NEW STANDARDS TAKE EFFECT FOR PRIVATE WELL OWNERS

Click here to download the PDF file of an important update on Ground Water Protection Regulation (GWPR) from the BC Ministry of Environment. (updated Sept 17, 2007)

September 2007 Newsletter

President’s Address

Another summer come and gone! Hopefully it’s been a busy season for everyone. I have spoken to many industry players, and most have been going flat out with their hair straight back, and busier than one legged butt kickers. In spite of full schedules I know that many have been able to sneak off for a little R & R. A week or two at the lake or at least a few weekends away from the phone are what’s needed to regain your sanity and reflect on the things that really are important. Family, friends and the future that we are creating for our descendants are at the top of my “Worthy of Concern List”. The bent casing shoe, the failed pump test or the broken drive shaft are certainly stressful at the time, but in the big picture of your life they will be insignificant. But that’s enough philosophy for now. I’ll get back on the soapbox elsewhere in the newsletter in my “Out of the Closet” article.

So what has your association been up to over the summer? Well let me tell you.
We have been working with Mike Wei at the MOE and have managed to secure over $40,000 from the federal and provincial governments to deal with the backlog of well records not entered in the data base. We have also received an expression of interest from the Real Estate Foundation to provide funding in 2008 to maintain the Data Base and keep up with the approximate 3,000 well records that are submitted each year. So if you want your work to be part of the permanent provincial record, get those well records in to Tammy Blair ASAP.

We are having a lawyer review some of the agreements contractors are asked to sign and may have some presentations on “What Not to Sign” or “Contract Law 101” at the coming regional or annual meetings.

Managing Director Gilles Wendling and myself met with James Mattison in August. Mr. Mattison is the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Environment and we requested the meeting to discuss several issues of importance to the BCGWA. The main topics of discussion were:

1. Sustained funding for the Groundwater Data Base: It is our contention that the Provincial Government should know that up to 3,000 well records per year will be submitted and that this priceless information provided by our members should get the respect and funding it deserves. Records must be entered and the data base maintained as a public resource.

2. Restoration of lost data: Thousands of records have been lost, corrupted, or had information deleted during “system upgrades” to the data base. We feel that this data gathered through the blood and sweat of generations of drillers and entrusted to the Provincial Government must be restored.

3. Aquifer “mining” by large commercial ground water users: There are areas in the province where aquifers are in decline, but large ground water users continue to extract with disregard for other users or for the

Environmental Assessment regulations which may apply. In many cases the EA limit of 75 l/s (1,000gpm) is far too high and depends on the user to initiate and pay for an Environmental Assessment. Another case of leaving the fox in charge of the hen house. This is not a sustainable way to manage a precious resource.

4. Use of toxic fluids in ground loop geo-exchange systems. There is currently no restriction on what type of fluids can be used for heat transfer in geo-exchange systems. This means that ethylene-glycol (automotive anti-freeze) and methanol (wood alcohol) which are both poisonous, can be used in ground loop systems, regardless of proximity to aquifers or water wells. A number of US states have recommended or regulated the use of only non-toxic fluids in ground loop systems, and in BC, lake and ocean loop systems must be non-toxic. Does groundwater not deserve the same level of respect and protection?

5. Criminal charges against drillers using surface waters for well drilling purposes: It is against the law to take water from a river creek, stream, lake or other surface water without authorization. This law has resulted in some of our members being issued tickets and fines, and makes law-breakers out of many well drillers. We lobbied the ministry to create an annual permit that would allow limited volume access to surface waters for the purpose of well drilling in various regions of the province.

We did not receive any promises from Mr. Mattison, but he listened closely to our concerns and agreed to take them to the minister. If you want more details on any of these issues, or have other issues you want the BCGWA to pursue, please let us know.

In other news, we are having a regional drillers workshop on Vancouver Island in early November. We are also hoping to host Canadian Groundwater exams for Well Drillers and Pump Installers at the workshop. This is a way for workers with a minimum of 4,000 hours (2 to 3 years) working in the drilling or pump industry to become qualified to apply for registration with the province as a well driller or pump installer. Persons wishing to challenge the exam must be a member of the BCGWA. Forms needed to write the exam are available on the internet at www.cgwa.org or call the BCGWA office.

If you haven’t taken your summer break yet, it may not be too late. As I write this, we have a forecast of 5 sunny days and I have all of the gear packed for a 4 day canoe and hiking trip to Della Falls. It is the highest waterfall in Canada (go ahead google it) and should be a great chance to experience some of our fading wilderness and to hear from some of those muscles I haven’t used in years!

He’s being polite…

A substitute teacher was trying to make use of her psychology background. She began her class by saying, “Everyone who thinks you’re stupid, please stand up.”

Liability and Yield Assessments for Domestic Water Wells in British Columbia

Recently, I completed a review of the subdivision by-law servicing requirements for water supply for many of the municipalities and regional districts across British Columbia. The exercise re-kindled my amazement at the variability which exists between local governments across BC and the consistent substantial difference in what is being requested for assessments of well yield as compared to guidelines which we as an industry helped develop many years ago.

Specifically, I refer to the significant differences between local government requirements and: the “Guidelines for Minimum Standards in Water Well Construction” [1982] and the “Draft Code of Practice for Construction, Testing, Maintenance, Alteration and Closure of Wells [1994]. For example, some local governments are requesting as little as an air lift test to determine long-term yield and others call for testing at a high rate for 2 hours, immediately followed by testing at a lower rate until 1440 gallons have been pumped (equivalent to 1 USgpm for 24 hours). Furthermore, most local governments do not require that the recovery rate for a well be determined, that the potential influence of a negative (aquifer) boundary condition be accounted for, or that the potential for mutual well interference with adjacent wells and the influence of concurrent pumping on aquifer yield be considered. On the other hand some jurisdictions are requesting full hydrogeological reports, which address all of these issues.

I can see that local government is trying to keep the costs down for development in semi-rural areas, but as development progressively moves from the base of valleys (where alluvium exists) up into highland areas (where bedrock dominates), the complexity of our task will only escalate as will the potential for water supply problems resulting from inadequate investigation.

Therefore, while we must acknowledge that some terrain types require more detailed evaluation as they are geologically complex, subject to substantial seasonal variation in aquifer recharge and storage, and are under intense development pressure, we must also acknowledge that air lift testing or a 6 hr pumping test are not adequate methods for determining well yields in semi-rural settings where subdivision by-laws are applied.

The Problem -

The real potential danger in less stringent by-law requirements for well yield assessments, is that of increased groundwater supply problems in the not too distant future. To be blunt, we are not helping anyone in the long-run, either our clients, neighbours of our clients, municipal planners, nor ourselves by completing less than satisfactory assessments. Nobody wants the late night call from the small groundwater user who has run out of water and wants to know why. Even more important - nobody wants to be implicated in a law suit.

To complicate things further, as a consultant, I have always been uncomfortable with the limitations and liability wording that some local governments expect in consultants reports regarding the limitation of liability to government. My question is therefore - in complying with such local government by-laws, are we completing well yield assessments with reasonable care? Keep in mind that in a court of law, the objective of the Plaintiff is to prove negligence and the onus of the Defendant is to prove that work has been completed with reasonable care. Furthermore, legal decisions are biased towards compromise, which means that we are exposed to some level of liability, so long as there is an outstanding difference between the by-laws which exist and ANY guideline which is out in the public domain (for example the 1982 and 1994 documents mentioned earlier).

The Solution -

At some point, a future phase of the Groundwater Protection Regulation will formally incorporate minimum requirements for testing, analysis and reporting, at least for public water supply systems (with 2 or more users) and for wells with relatively higher yields.

In the short term, I am arguing that, as an industry, we need to immediately look towards “raising the bar” and encourage our clients to exceed the requirements of local subdivision by-laws. This means sticking to our better judgment and undertaking more comprehensive testing and reporting for small-scale rural water supply wells, including monitoring nearby wells for mutual well interference and looking at local water balances.

For the long-term, I believe we should be lobbying the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) to also raise the bar and promote standardization of the subdivision servicing by-laws throughout the Province. Regardless of if, or when, the Groundwater Protection Regulation incorporates formal requirements for well yield assessments for public systems, we need to work with UBCM to develop a standard which is appropriate for semi-rural domestic wells and universally applied throughout the Province.

In closing, I would argue that the planners at the local government level would welcome some consistency in how we report yield assessments. This will only make their job easier in the long run, will benefit our industry overall and make us all sleep better at night.
What do you think?

Upcoming Events

Six-one day workshops have been scheduled for small water systems this fall in cooperation with Interior Health and Northern Health.

September 17 -            Cranbrook
September 28 -            Williams Lake
October 1       -            Salmon Arm
October 15     -            Terrace
October 17     -            Prince George
October 19     -            Fort St. John

Contact Denny Ross-Smith
Small Water Users Association of BC
118 Chatham Street
Nelson, B. C. V1L 3Y8
Ph: 250-505-5150 www.smallwaterusers.com

Atlantic Water Well Convention

Driller’s Workshop in Duncan, B.C.

NGWA Convention & Trade Show

BCGWA Convention

The Grand Okanagan Lakefront Resort
and Conference Centre
Kelowna, B. C.
Contact: BCGWA 604-530-8934

May 14-17, 2008
CanWell 2008
Shaw Conference Centre
Edmonton, Alberta
Contact: 780-386-2335
e.mail: awwda@xplornet.com

Membership Changes

Fyfe’s Well Drilling Ltd.
Rep: Glen Fyfe
Ph: 250-240-3933
e.mail: fyfedrilling@shaw.ca

Pinnacle Drilling Products, Inc.
5160 Still Creek Avenue
Burnaby, B. C. V5C 4E4
Ph: 604-678-8508 Fax: 604-678-8509
Rep: Allan Zdunich

Ministry of Environment
PO Box 9341 STN PROV GOV
Victoria, B. C. V8W 9M1
Rep: Christina Sinnemann
A/Manager, Water and Air Monitoring
and Reporting
Ph: 250-387-9385

Rutland Waterworks District
#106-200 Dougall Road, N.
Kelowna, B. C. V1X 3K5
Ph: 250-765-5218 Fax: 250-765-7765

Kalwij, Ineke Margot
33673 Blueberry Drive
Mission, B. C. V2V 6Z7
Ph/Fax: 604-820-0997
e.mail: imk@cc.usu.edu

- In space, astronauts cannot cry, because there is no gravity, so the tears can’t flow!
- A sneeze travels out your mouth at over 100 miles per hour!
The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909

CGWA

I hope everyone has had a chance to read the well researched article in the Ground Water Canada magazine which offers information on the cost of drilling water wells. This document was conducted by Chartered General Accountants, Paulin, Ladouceur, Fauvel and commissioned by The Quebec Association of Well and Pumps. Chris Skalkos has printed the highlights of this very important information.

This is a very detailed study and is aimed at establishing a cost per foot for well-drilling activities and a cost per installation for pump installation activities by surveying the main costs linked to those activities.

If you have misplaced your copy and would like to read the study, please contact the office.

OUT OF THE CLOSET

Finally, after all these years I have decided that I can no longer keep my feelings inside. I can’t go on smiling at the jokes and pretending not to care. I can no longer maintain the facade of the tough guy redneck driller while in reality I am a member of Greenpeace.

There. I’ve said it. I am a closet environmentalist. I had been a supporter for years but after David Suzuki spoke at Canwell in Kelowna, I was moved. We bought a gas electric Hybrid Toyota Prius as the family auto and I cranked up the pressure on my better half to buy local and buy “green” whenever possible. This is all good, and I would recommend a Prius to anyone. I would also encourage everyone to recycle, compost and conserve energy at every opportunity. However, changing to compact fluorescents, and driving electric cars will do little to address the fact that at the current rate of increase, the population of Southern BC is likely to double in the next 20 years. Canada’s population is set to increase by 50% in 40 years and the world population could double within 80 years.

We are all intelligent people, entrepreneurs, tradesmen and academics. We know that our vegetable garden and rose bushes can support only a limited number of rabbits and deer. And we know that this is true of any system, be it snails in an aquarium, bears in the bush, or lemmings on an arctic island. So is there not also a limit to the number of people that can be sustained in a “reasonable” fashion by one small planet?

I think that most of us would agree that all people are deserving of a “reasonable” standard of living. My trip to Tanzania last year brought home the fact that we in the developed nations won the birth lottery, but that we deserve only limited credit for our wise choice of parents. Those in the third world are striving to attain the schools, hospitals, homes, cars and opportunities that we take for granted. So the question is: “If all of us humans want what we in the West take for granted, is there enough to go around?” Never mind 20 or 50 years from now when 50% more of us may be asking “How did we let this happen?”
I keep coming back to the lemming analogy, where these arctic rodents are said to multiply at an ever-increasing rate until after 7 years they can no longer be sustained by their environment. They then rush blindly and en mass off cliffs to perish in the sea. We are of course smarter than lemmings, in that we all know the cliff is out there, but that knowledge seems to do little to slow the rush.

We have all heard talk of “sustainable growth”, but who would believe that continuous growth in any place or practice can be sustained indefinitely? So the term “sustainable growth” is truly an oxy-moron.

Recycle? Of course! Conserve more and consume less? Absolutely! Support geo-exchange and other “green” technologies? You bet! But the most important things we can do are use our dollars to support “future friendly” groups, corporations and technologies because money talks. Use our voices and actions to teach the value of our natural environment because people sometimes listen. And use our votes to put people in positions of power, who understand that the short term gains of subdividing forest and farmland, of building more roads for more cars and extracting resources at constantly increasing rates, brings us ever closer to the lemming leap.

“What,” you might ask “does this have to do with ground water?” Specifically, not much, but if we as Canadians cannot find a sustainable road to the future and show that road to the world, it is only a matter of a generation or so before the USA hunger and thirst for our resources and our water make us look a lot like a Northern Iraq. Remember, we don’t have any weapons either.

Don’t get me wrong. We live in a beautiful part of a vibrant and amazing world. I just hope we can find the leadership and the fortitude necessary to ensure our grandchildren don’t hate us for what we did not do.

At our last convention, we held a very successful driller’s workshop. The B. C. Ground Water Association will be hosting a similar workshop on Vancouver Island on November 9, 2007. The location is the Travel Lodge Silver Bridge Inn, 140 Trans Canada Highway in Duncan. Ph: 250-748-4311.

This will be a one day event and is sponsored by the BCGWA, the MOE, Agriculture Canada and Johnson Screens and is designed to bring a higher level of professionalism and consistency to drilling records, (locating wells and well log completions and on line submission of records), soils and rock identification, well testing and aquifer analysis and GPS use.

The course includes lunch, and all participants will receive a copy of the Ground Water Protection Regulation Handbook, a soils classification field guide by Johnson Screens, and for Association members and employees of member companies, a free hand held GPS unit.

If you are not from the Island but wish to attend this workshop, then please fill out the registration form below and mail or fax it back to the office. This course will also be offered again at our Convention in March in Kelowna. Registration forms will be mailed to Vancouver Island Companies.

1. You accidentally enter your password on the microwave.
2. You haven’t played solitaire with real cards in years.
3. You have a list of 15 phone numbers to reach your family of 3.
4. You e.mail the person who works at the desk next to you.
5. Your reason for not staying in touch with friends and family is that they don’t have e.mail addresses.
6. You pull up in your driveway and use your cell phone to see if anyone is home to help you carry in the groceries.
7. Every commercial on television has a web site at the bottom of the screen.
8. Leaving the house without your cell phone, which you didn’t have the first 20 or 30 (or 60) years of your life, is now a cause for panic and you turn around to go and get it.
9. You get up in the morning and go on line before getting your coffee.
10. You start tilting your head sideways to smile.

A New Career Opportunity

I’d like to let you all know that Tammy Blair, our GW data technician, is taking on a Temporary Assignment (TA) with the integrated Land Management Bureau (ILMB) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands in Victoria. Tammy will be on TA starting October 9, 2007 to May 8, 2008; it is an excellent career opportunity for her.

Tammy’s presence in our little shop will be sorely missed. She sheparded the development of EWELLS with Rod Zimmerman, oversaw processing of well records, Schedule 2’s, and worked closely with me on driller and pump installer registration and provided support to regional GW staff on projects (e.g., VI DW inventory). Tammy also supervised 3 auxiliaries last year. Tammy also developed excellent relations with drillers and pump installers and co-delivered training workshops at the BCGWA AGM. I want to thank Tammy for all that she has done and for giving everything of herself in her/our work.

In Tammy’s absence, Lindsay MacFarlane will be taking on Tammy’s role – the details are still to be worked out. Lindsay came to WSD in August, 2006 as an auxiliary to help Tammy and me with registration of drillers and pump installers. She has since been working with Tammy on locating wells and cross-referencing Schedule 2’s, processing well record data, among other things.

On a related note, I also have some staff updates to tell you about. We have 3 new auxiliary staff coming in this Fall to help with our work: Erin Park: Erin has a BSc in Environmental Science from Royal Roads University. Erin will be with us until the end of the fiscal. Erin’s main responsibility is to work on compiling data for the Cordillera Hydrogeologic Region Chapter of GSC’s book. Groundwater Resources of Canada, and developing information for drillers and pump installers for Phase 2 of the GWPR. Erin is partly funded by the GSC and by Water Stewardship Division (WSD). Erin administratively reports to Kevin Ronneseth.

Emilia Saarinen: has been hired to fill in Lindsay’s position (as Lindsay fills in for Tammy). Emilia starts September 24 and will be with us until March 31, 2008. Emilia will be working on well record processing.

Kirstin Gustavsen: has also been hired to work on well record processing. Kirstin starts September 24 and will be with us until March 31, 2008. Both Emilia and Kirsten are funded by WSD and will report to Lindsay.

If you have any questions, comments, concerns, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Mike Wei, P. Eng.
Water Stewardship Division
395 Waterfront Cres
Victoria, B. C.
Ph: 250-356-5062 Fax: 250-356-8298
e.mail: mike.wei@gov.bc.ca

Help Wanted - MOE

Ministry of Environment
Regional Ground Water Hydrologist/ Regional Ground Water Engineer
Penticton, BC

Opportunity:
An outstanding opportunity for a Ground Water Hydrologist or a Ground Water Engineer with the Ministry of Environment, Water Stewardship Division.
You thrive on the success of meeting challenges. As a qualified ground water hydrologist or ground water engineer, you have enjoyed the experience of building your career and serving in the vital role as ground water expert.

Your ideal opportunity has arrived. We are presently accepting applications for Regional Ground Water Hydrologist and Regional Ground Water Engineer for our Penticton office.

Functioning as the prime ground water expert in the region you will be responsible for fulfilling statutory ground water responsibilities under the Water Act and Ground Water Protection Regulation. You'll protect the ground water resource; conduct complex hydrogeological assessments, lead and participate in planning processes, and provide ground water expertise to the Division, Ministry, other ministries, local governments, public agencies, and the general public.

For complete information on the Regional Ground Water Hydrologist position please visit the job posting on the BC Government Job Opportunities website at http://employment.gov.bc.ca/?view_posting=038087
For complete information on the Regional Ground Water Engineer position please visit the job posting on the BC Government Job Opportunities website at http://employment.gov.bc.ca/?view_posting=038075

For more information about the position contact Des Anderson at 250-490-8221 or Des.Anderson@gov.bc.ca . For more information about Penticton go to http://www.penticton.ca/

Cellphones and Driving Don’t Mix

We’ve all used the daily commute to get a phone call out of the way at least once-if not nearly every single day. Still, despite it being common practice, statistics say approximately three-quarters of Canadians believe cellphone use while driving is hazardous. That’s not exactly breaking news considering the amount of media coverage cellphone use has received lately. But look a little deeper into the subject and you may be surprised, if not downright shocked.

When you dial home to remind your spouse that your son needs a ride home from hockey practice, you probably don’t equate your driving ability with that of a drunk driver. But you are wrong. “It’s actually the equivalent of being impaired,” says Dr. Louis Francescutti, founder of the Coalition for Cellphone-Free Driving. “There are studies where they’ve actually put people in simulators and fed them alcohol, tested their driving ability and then did the same thing with people talking on cellphones. There’s a very strong correlation.”
Francescutti, one of Canada’s foremost injury prevention advocates, is an emergency physician in Edmonton’s Royal Alexandra Hospital and a professor at the University of Alberta’s Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry. He says misconceptions about the use of mobile communication devices are common, citing the supposed advantages of hands-free phones and headsets as a prime example.

“It has absolutely no difference whatsoever. It’s the conversation itself that’s the distracter,” says Francescutti. “People ask ‘what’s the difference between talking on a cellphone and talking to another passenger?’ and the difference is that a passenger adjusts the conversation based on traffic flow, speed, weather conditions etcetera, as opposed to somebody who is on the other end of the line.”

For years now, the information has been piling up. Organizations ranging from Harvard University to the city of Grande Prairie to corporations like Exxon have launched their own studies, all coming up with facts that point to one conclusion: cellphone use and driving don’t mix. A recent study conducted by Exxon determined that drivers who are talking on a cellphone take three times longer than impaired drivers do to activate the brakes, and show a reduced ability to maintain lane position in heavy vehicles.

That’s no surprise to Francescutti, whose Coalition for Cellphone-Free Driving is counting an increasing number of high profile companies such as Halliburton, Schlumberger and Sterling Crane among its safety-minded membership. Finning (Canada) is one of the newest members, and according to Tom Petras, Finning’s Environment, Health and Safety Manager, joining the coalition made perfect sense.

“We always reflect on our core values and safety is a value that influences everything we do,” says Petras. “What really prompted us was that there’s an endless number of studies that keep coming out on the risks of cellphone use while driving. It’s unbelievable.” Finning has now banned the use of all wireless communications devices by employees and onsite personnel while driving motor vehicles. (The company makes an exception to this ban for drivers on logging and mine roads where frequent calls are necessary to prevent collisions with logging and mining trucks.) Violation of the policy can result in discipline up to and including termination of employment-but Petras doubts such measures will be needed.

“The feedback has been really positive thus far,” says Petras. “It sounds contrary but we’ve talked to people who say productivity actually goes up because memory and recollection of phone calls degrades when they’re trying to drive and take a call.” He points to a recent press release from AMEC, a global engineering firm that polled its employees one year after implementing a similar ban.

Despite some scepticism at first, more that 95% of employees reported no decrease in productivity at all. In fact, 83% have now reduced or quit using cellphones while driving outside of work hours as well. And that’s something both Petras and Francescutti hope to see with Finning employees.

“It’s the same sort of attitude and philosophy people should have in their private lives,” says Francescutti. He adds that the pressure you might feel to answer your phone can be eased by changing the outgoing voicemail message to indicate that you may be unavailable simply because you’re driving at the time. “Don’t put yourself in a situation where you’re tempted to answer,” says Francescutti. “Let it ring if need be. There’s no phone call that’s worth a human life.”

Better Time Management

Do you have plenty to do, but don’t have enough time to do it all in? Check out these suggestions from management expert Dan Preston:

The BC Ground Water Association (BCGWA) is pleased to have been solicited by the Council of Canadian Academies to provide an opinion on various important issues related to groundwater in Canada.

The Council of Canadian Academies has been asked by the federal Minister of Natural Resources: “From a scientific perspective, what is needed to achieve sustainable management of Canada’s groundwater resources?” Scientific knowledge is broadly interpreted to include natural sciences and engineering as well as health and social sciences.

The response of the BCGWA to the Expert Panel on Groundwater with regard to their specific questions is presented below.

1. What are the opportunities, challenges or emerging crises for sustainable groundwater management in Canada?

Canada has the opportunity to become a leader in groundwater stewardship in the world. Canada is perceived as one of the main “owners” of fresh water in the world. This perception can be the opportunity to express that we don’t own the water but that we are stewards of this dynamic resource.

Canada can also help to define what “groundwater sustainability” means. Understanding that surface water and groundwater are one resource and that this water is already fully allocated on a global level (from an environmental/ecosystem standpoint), is a very important starting point. The acceptance of this reality allows a shift in perception from “We can extract and use groundwater without effect” to “There is an effect: Let’s assess and monitor the effect and make decisions based on the understanding and monitoring of phenomena”.

Being viewed as generally a water-rich country, Canada will likely experience pressure to share its water resources with other countries. Canada’s best defense to counter this pressure will be to show the sensitivity of watersheds to water diversion, by investing more in the basic process of watershed definition, starting with increased hydrometric and groundwater monitoring, and continuing with more comprehensive basin-scale water management studies on a prioritized basis (see Priorities below).

Canada can and should endeavor to protect watersheds allowing them to remain in their natural state for the sake of understanding and monitoring watersheds not yet disturbed by human activities, as well as for other (ecological) benefits.

Groundwater can be a secure source of safe water for drinking purposes even in population centers where surface water is needed to meet public demand. If surface water were contaminated through accident or malicious intent, groundwater could provide a safe source of drinking water if wells were placed and maintained in population centers.

Groundwater can provide relief for environmental and human strife caused by drought or climate change, through the “topping up” or recharging of wetlands and watercourses.

There is an opportunity to develop Canada-wide standards for wellhead protection planning. Not wishy-washy guidelines, but real standards (i.e. enforceable rules), like those produced for many technical procedures by the Canadian Standards Association or CSA. Currently, there is some provincial/territorial guidance, but no national standard for provinces to rally around, or at least compare with. This work is typically done at the local level and is often hindered by a lack of funding that makes it very difficult to achieve the stated objectives of groundwater protection plans.

A similar opportunity exists for developing Canada-wide standards that address the health concerns related to groundwater under direct influence by surface water (GUDI).

BC, a province with considerable water resources, still does not license the withdrawal of groundwater. As expanding population and industry place more and more demands on groundwater, the possibility of conflict between multiple groundwater users, or between groundwater users and surface water license holders, increases. At this time, there is a specific opportunity to be pro-active, by aligning BC’s stewardship of its water resources with those existing in other jurisdictions before problems associated with unregulated use become widespread, and more difficult to solve with reactive legislation and rule-making.

One challenge that must be faced it the perception that we have the best and most plentiful water in the world and that this will be the case forever. This so-called ‘myth of abundance’ is a major impediment to proper stewardship.

In addition, there is the perception that water is a gift from nature and that it should come free of cost. Most people do not realize the cost of water services and the cost of important work in understanding, monitoring and protecting aquifers. The vast majority of the population is unaware of the complexity of understanding aquifers, watersheds and the dynamic between surface water, groundwater and ecosystems, and the associated costs.

Groundwater is out of sight and out of mind for most people. The oil slicks and brown foam, or drying reservoirs and retreating water levels seen with surface water are not visible for the ground water resource, but loss or degradation are just as real and significant as for surface waters. Another important challenge is to educate the population and decision-makers in government as to the value and the vulnerability of this tremendous resource, and to have firm, enforced rules regarding the management and use of groundwater. If we can provide good information about aquifers and wells, and quality-control in well construction and maintenance, awareness on the part of groundwater users and credible enforcement from appropriate government agencies, crises are likely to be few and minor.

In BC, regulations pertaining to groundwater extraction are lacking. Furthermore, there is a lack of political will to develop such regulations. This is probably due to a lack of awareness and a lingering “new frontier” mentality where the land has to be “used” and “mastered” and not “protected”.

In most of BC, over-extraction of groundwater will continue until enforceable regulations are in place. In some areas, there is still ample surface water left to be licensed and until it is licensed out (as is the case in Washington State) there is likely to be little political will at the provincial level to control groundwater except when a crisis arises. This sets the stage for future legislation that will be reactive instead of proactive. A challenge then is to communicate to the province that the needed regulation is founded on the principles of good water stewardship and that in the long term this is ‘good for business’. For the public at large to be behind such changes, the challenge will be to communicate why groundwater management is needed, and that the legislation will not restrict economic activity or become yet another source of tax revenue for the government.

Another challenge in groundwater management is the current exclusion of oil, gas and coal bed methane (CBM) exploration from groundwater legislation. Players in this industry often pump and re-inject huge volumes of groundwater (much more than would normally trigger the BC Environmental Assessment Act, 75 L/s) but are not even on the radar screen. We agonize over 10's or 100's of gpm, when thousands are being handled with no groundwater legislation oversight . The Oil and Gas Commission and the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources are not operating with a prime mandate of protecting water resources but to promote activities contributing to the general revenue of BC .

An additional challenge associated with oil and gas and CBM exploration and production is the misconception that these activities only impact the deep subsurface and they have nothing to do with shallow or surface water and groundwater interaction. Where do shallow conditions end and where do deep conditions start? The complex relationship between shallow and deep groundwater is most often not assessed. In early August 2007, there were 23,000 wells listed in the Oil and Gas Commission database. Information from these wells should be integrated into the BC Water Atlas.

2. Do important gaps exist in knowledge or access to knowledge on groundwater issues? If so, what are they?

Yes, major gaps exist in the knowledge and access to knowledge of groundwater issues. BC is still in its infancy in the definition and mapping of aquifers and in making this information easily accessible.

The gaps in knowledge in BC exist mostly because of a voluntary submission system for water well records, and the present under-capacity of the Provincial authorities to effectively catalogue the well records that are provided. Data base problems and data entry problems continue to hobble the system.

There is no water-centric approach to land use planning by decision makers and regulators. Groundwater management and monitoring is still shared between various Ministries (Environment; Health; Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources; Forests and Range) and various levels of government (Ministries, Regional Districts, Municipalities).

Groundwater and surface water have to be assessed and monitored together and simultaneously. All of this requires a good network of monitoring stations (climatic stations, river gauging stations, monitoring wells) and a system to collect, present and provide access to the information.

3. Are there important gaps in the application of existing knowledge on groundwater? If so, what are they?

Water purveyors are still operating water systems relying on groundwater without adequate and proper monitoring, and without understanding the effect of their operation on the aquifer(s) and watershed(s).

Municipalities and regional districts are responsible for developing Official Community Plans (OCPs). They have very little knowledge of the surface water and groundwater dynamic in their territory, and are most often not in a position to make land use decisions based on the knowledge of what effects these decisions may have on the water resources.

Even though there are many gaps in the knowledge, there is no evidence that much available knowledge has been put to use in BC. Areas of aquifer decline have been identified in many parts of the province but the Provincial Government has imposed no restrictions on extraction from any aquifer zone. Well drilling on coastal islands vulnerable to seawater intrusion continues unabated even when there is already known to be high chloride content in wells. Other areas of high aquifer vulnerability to contamination have been identified, but no Provincial restrictions on land use have resulted from this knowledge.

The principles of sustainable groundwater management are not well-understood in part because regulations are not in place requiring that these principles be applied (i.e. treating surface water and groundwater as one connected resource).

4. Are there gaps in capacity (e.g. infrastructure, appropriate skills, information systems, regulatory frameworks) for sustainably managing groundwater in Canada?

Yes there are gaps in capacity. Staffing and funding are not adequate to assess and monitor every river and aquifer in BC, although this should be done as water is one of our most important assets.

Currently the regulatory framework places groundwater under the jurisdiction of each province, not the federal government. To minimize political differences in Canada, it should stay that way and not be regulated by the federal government. The federal government (with our tax money), should fund research and locally-focused projects in each province using local people who have expert knowledge.

Infrastructure: Various elements of the frame are in place. It will need adjustment and reinforcement and an increase in dimension. For example the monitoring network should include at least two monitoring wells per aquifer.

Appropriate skills: BC and Canada have very qualified professionals and training opportunities. However, their numbers will not be sufficient to meet the growing and anticipated future demand for water resources assessment, monitoring and protection.

Information Systems: Tools are available but not sufficiently developed, essentially due to lack of funds and human resources. There are still major gaps in data collection, data entry, and data base management. The information system should be able to provide continuous access to a sophisticated Water Atlas where users could zoom in on any area in the province and have access to:

Regulatory framework: This still needs to be created for the most part, in BC. The design and implementation of adequate groundwater regulation has started but it needs to be accelerated and given strength for credible enforcement. Voluntary compliance based on industry education is a passive management strategy; we need active management, with meaningful enforcement resources and actions. A challenge exists to bring groundwater licencing to all parts of Canada. With no licencing (as is the case in BC, unless under a cumbersome bureaucratic Water Management Plan process for municipalities), there is no avenue for the required monitoring and control of groundwater use. We can't manage what we aren't measuring, and we can’t control what we aren’t willing to enforce.

BC needs to institute groundwater withdrawal licensing by first defining at what level use should be regulated (e.g., > 5,000 I gpd) and the conditions under which licensing applies. A logical starting point would be to use Alberta Environment’s policy on evaluating, regulating and managing groundwater use from surficial (sand and gravel) aquifers near surface water bodies – such uses are regulated in Alberta in the same way as licensed surface water. Further policies could be developed to evaluate, regulate and manage confined aquifer use to prevent problems with well interference and depletion.

Priority #1: Regulate groundwater extraction and use. This will generate a process where by water purveyors, managers, regulators and users will need information in order to meet the regulatory requirements. This need will in turn provide the impetus to start collecting, compiling, interpreting and presenting information on groundwater, and to start the necessary monitoring and management.

Another key activity will be to complete comprehensive watershed-scale basin plans that provide an integrated understanding of the surface water and groundwater systems. Such plans provide a scientific framework allowing for water stewardship to occur on a watershed scale, as opposed to using arbitrary political boundaries. Funding from all levels of government for basin and local-scale watershed studies is critical in laying the groundwork for science-based management and regulation.

We need national and provincial standards for data collection, compatible archiving and retrieval frameworks, reasonable extraction limits and legislated protection with enforcement for vulnerable and threatened aquifers.

We should focus on areas in the country that currently have or will soon have, groundwater extraction and/or contamination problems.

6. Are there jurisdictions or particular situations in Canada which are exemplary (i.e. cases where groundwater is managed in particularly successful or innovative ways)?

The initiatives coming out of Alberta’s Water for Life strategy and policy bear mentioning. This is resulting in, among other things, the development of comprehensive basin plans for key watersheds, such as the South Saskatchewan where the stewardship approach of managing surface water and groundwater as one resource is being applied, and regulation in groundwater development and use has been instituted.

7. Do you have any additional concerns or insights on the management of groundwater in Canada which you believe would be helpful to the Expert Panel?

Geoexchange or ground source heat pump systems typically used for building conditioning are becoming increasingly common, with growth at over 13% per year. Appropriate studies should be conducted as to the potential human or ecological risks due to operation and use of properly designed and installed closed loop systems (using an antifreeze liquid circulating in subsurface pipes) and open loop systems (typically pumping and reinjecting groundwater). Collaboration should be fostered between groundwater and geoexchange industry associations at both the provincial and federal level for education, training, and information exchange. This should be accompanied by regulations protecting the groundwater resource.

This letter is a compilation of opinions expressed by the directors and executive members of the BCGWA. This submission can be made public and the BCGWA is pleased to be identified as a contributor.

The BCGWA will be pleased to further discuss any questions with the Council of Canadian Academies in relation to our submission. Please communicate with Dr. Gilles Wendling, P.Eng., BCGWA Managing Director (gwsolutions@shaw.ca – (250) 756-4538) or David Slade, President of the BCGWA (david@drillwell.com – (250) 746-5268).

According to the Ministry of Energy Mines and Resources, the average amount of water removed from a CBM well, before the well starts producing, is on average 8.5 million litres (1.89 million gallons).

VICTORIA – The Aug. 15, 2007 sale of oil and gas rights in British Columbia generated $149 million in bonus bids and had an average price per hectare of $1,122, Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources Minister Richard Neufeld announced. “This high level of land activity shows industry’s enormous confidence in B.C.,” said Neufeld. “New projects are being undertaken because we have created a competitive investment climate here and worked hard to attract interest in underdeveloped areas and unconventional resources.” One hundred and seventy-seven parcels, covering 141,784 hectares, were offered, with bids accepted on 160. The Aug. 15 sale was the third largest overall in British Columbia’s history. ( http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2005-2009/2007EMPR0036-001037.htm)