Editorial: Restoring the river: Cedar Creek residents can play a crucial role

Published: Wednesday, June 01, 2011, 6:57 AM

By Paula Holmes-Greeley | The Muskegon Chronicle

CHRONICLE FILE PHOTO The flooded Muskegon River put the majority of Terry Bayne’s 52-acre Cedar Creek Township farm under water in April. â??The problem is, there’s no place for it to go,â? Bayne said about the water.

Cedar Creek Township residents, especially those living along Maple Island and River roads, should do everything they can to assist with the survey of the Muskegon River in their neighborhood.

It’s their chance to help fix a long-standing problem and possibly improve the use of Muskegon County’s natural resources and the land they own. The survey may also result in suggestions that prevent the thousands of dollars in damage or losses created when extensive flooding occurs.

Mike Wiley, a professor in the University of Michigan’s School of Natural Resources and Environment, and doctoral student Mike Fainter are surveying the Muskegon River, particularly in the floodplain near Maple Island and River roads, to explore the effects of reopening the Maple River. The Maple River was blocked more than a century ago during the lumbering era to increase the flow in the Muskegon River and more quickly move logs to the lumber mills downstream.Wiley predicts the Muskegon River will change its course in Cedar Creek Township in the next 50 years because of the closing of the Maple River and partial damming of the Muskegon River under U.S. 31. He said sediment in the Muskegon River has raised the river channel, creating a delta prone to flooding.

He’s already held a community meeting to ask residents what they want the Muskegon River to look like in the future. The researchers are seeking photos of the river and past floods, especially those that show how high the water was. Photos can be dropped off at Maple Island Grocery, 3465 N. Maple Island, Twin Lake.

While the flooding is on a much larger scale, perhaps there are lessons for Muskegon County residents from the Netherlands, where two-thirds of the people live and 70 percent of the Dutch economy is generated in a floodplain.

In the past, the Dutch response has been to build up the dikes and install other manmade devices to further control the river. But since unprecedented flooding in 1993 and again in 1995 there’s been a change in strategy.

Beginning in 2006, the Dutch implemented 35 “Room for the River” projects that will restore natural floodplains and marshes that serve as water storage areas. They are focused on restoring natural floodplains in the places where it is least harmful in order to protect more heavily populated and developed areas.

Dutch water managers also are teaching communities to retain water where it falls, using cisterns, green roofs and floodable parks. This reduces the flow into the river as it washes off of large paved parking lots and roads with nowhere else to go.

The idea is to prevent the recurring hundreds of millions of dollars in flood damage by learning to live with the main rivers running through the Netherlands rather than trying to control them. A side benefit has been the creation of new recreational areas and improved animal and fish habitat.

Again, Muskegon County doesn’t face near the threat that the Netherlands does. But working with our natural resources instead of against them is a valuable concept.

As Cedar Creek Township farmer John Thiel told Chronicle reporter Megan Hart, “I would rather have water flow naturally (through my property) than have it overflow and have nowhere to go.”

In the end it all comes down to that well-known adage, you can’t fool Mother Nature.

Let’s find out if restoring the Maple River will improve the lives of those living on the former riverbed and improve the health and the use of both the Maple and Muskegon rivers.

See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the industry leader and only science based, man made and artificial fish habitat, proven to provide all fish with cover they prefer to prosper.

By Contributed Opinion – Gulf Islands Driftwood

By GEORGE EHRING

Over the May long weekend, I had the opportunity to go on a marine nature tour with Ian Gidney of Gulf Islands Safaris. As much as I really wanted to push thoughts of the Trust out of my mind and enjoy watching the orcas, sea lions, seals, eagles and other wildlife, the concept of the need to protect the riparian areas that support the marine environment kept interrupting me.

Riding in Ian’s zodiac and looking at what’s around you, you can’t help but feel that we live in a beautiful, special place. We say this so often that I think we lose sight of it. Special place, yeah, yeah. Sure.

Five years ago now, the province told local governments that they couldn’t issue permits to private landowners for development in areas along streams (“riparian” areas) unless an environmental professional assesses the proposal and provides development guidelines. The province wants to protect fish habitat. I think protecting fish habitat is a good idea.

But it isn’t just for the fish.

Protecting riparian areas also has the benefit of providing some protection for our drinking water supplies. By helping prevent sediment from washing into streams, it will also reduce unwanted and excessive nutrients from washing into the lakes. It will help prevent the dangerous algae blooms that now plague St. Mary Lake, as an example.

We at the Trust are frequently told we should promote tourism and enhance the economy.  Anyone take a walk down to the dock lately and see all the boats owned by commercial fishermen? Anyone think about all the recreational boaters who come here, not only because “it’s a beautiful place” but because they also go fishing? Anyone think that tourists might be dissuaded from visiting our island if they read that they can’t drink the water?

Protecting complex and fragile riparian ecosystems enhances the economy as well as our environment — not to mention our own health.

One of the things that the province was saying to landowners when they brought in the Riparian Areas Regulation was: try to plan your development more than 30 metres from a stream. It’s a very sensible idea. Not that you can’t develop there if you have to, but the easiest, simplest way to avoid regulation and expense is to try not to disturb that 30-metre buffer. If you can’t, you call in a professional and get some advice.

Now I fully realize that my little letter isn’t going to have much of an impact on the people who are waving the flag of “property rights.” That’s okay. They’re certainly entitled to their opinions.  In fact, you can bet that there will be letters next week with the predictable denunciations, denials and assertions that they want to protect the environment. Fine. I know they’re coming, and you can judge their merit for yourself.

But I also know that the Trust is required to implement the Riparian Areas Regulation, and we will, just as dozens and dozens of other local governments have already done. We’re trying to craft a bylaw that will respond to the concerns of homeowners and reduce delays, red tape and expense as much as possible.

As I said, this is a special place, and we like to think we’re special. But we’re not so special that we can ignore a regulation brought in by provincial legislation. On top of that, it’s the right thing to do, for many reasons. Look around.

The writer is a Salt Spring trustee on the local Trust committee.

See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the industry leader and only science based, man made and artificial fish habitat, proven to provide all fish with cover they prefer to prosper.

Ian McKenzie, with the Bilston Watershed Protection Society, is backing the Habitat Acquisition Trust’s program to have people living near Bilston Creek in Langford and Metchosin become stewards of the watershed.

Edward Hill/News staff

In Witty’s Lagoon park, Bilston creek offers a picture of what nature should be –- a clear meandering stream, home to native cutthroat trout and thick with streamside vegetation.

A small dam built before living memory almost looks like an organic part of the river. Crisscrossed with fallen trees, it creates ideal shade and shelter for trout. It’s also a reminder of the long history of human influence on the creek.

“The dam is part of the history of Bilston. It functions just fine,” says Ian McKenzie, with the Bilston Watershed Habitat Protection Association, overlooking the pool, which may have been used as a drinking hole for cattle in the past. “It’s one of those things that adds character to the stream.”

The Bilston group has worked for decades on projects to restore the health of the creek from damage done in the 1980s and 90s. Now with residential development ever expanding within the 7,900 acres of the Bilston watershed, the creek and its tributaries are weathering the influence of rapid urbanization, particularly in Langford.

To stem the tide of pollutants, the Habitat Acquisition Trust, a non-profit land trust, is rolling out another phase of its “Good Neighbours” project within Bilston and North Latoria watersheds.

HAT is spreading the message that homeowners and hobby farmers can take relatively simple actions to keep the creek and watershed healthy, and is offering education and advice to interested residents.

“We want to prevent pesticides and nutrients from getting into the creek,” says Todd Carnahan, HAT’s Good Neighbours project leader. “We can identify problems and things people can do to keep the trout population healthy in the stream. We want people to be part of a place they value.”

In urban areas, being a steward can mean not using chemical pesticides on gardens and lawns, removing invasive plant species and allowing native streamside vegetation to flourish. On hobby farms, it can mean keeping livestock out of the creek and siting manure piles away from drainage areas.

“If there is beautiful streamside vegetation, we like people to leave it alone. Plants hold the soil, prevent run off and slow the release of water into natural streams,” Carnahan says. “Often the best thing is about doing nothing.”

Bilston creek and its many tributaries flow out of the green hills of Mount Wells Park and drain in Witty’s Lagoon some seven kilometres east. Shorter North Latoria creek flows out of Triangle Mountain to Albert Head.

Both systems collect pollutants as they wind around homes, farms, failing septic systems and roadways – the threat to watersheds is damage by a thousand paper cuts.

Carnahan says fish kills in North Latoria creek in recent years highlighted the need for public stewardship programs in Colwood, Langford and Metchosin. McKenzie says residential development in Langford is continually washing dirt into the creek.

“(Witty’s) lagoon is gradually filling with silt and will eventually become a field,” McKenzie says. “Langford has development guidelines in place, but still, there’s a lot of silt going into the stream.”

Silt and mud hurt spawning trout, who are native to the creek system and never leave, and have never had their numbers boosted by hatchery fish. Most of the Bilston enhancement projects over the years have been focused on creating better fish habitat –- healthy trout are a good indicator of the overall health of the watershed.

See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the industry leader and only science based, man made and artificial fish habitat, proven to provide all fish with cover they prefer to prosper.

“There are a reasonable number of trout,” McKenzie says, “but they are at risk due to urban development.”

HAT is seeking homeowners to become stewards of Bilston and North Latoria watersheds. Call 250 995-2428 or drop by the HAT office at 827 Broughton St. See www.hat.bc.ca for more information.

For more information on the Bilston Watershed Protection Society, see www.bilstoncreek.org.

editor@goldstreamgazette.com