Pollution in Burrard Inlet not improving

Pollution in Burrard Inlet not improving
By Dan Hilborn, Burnaby Now assistant editor
Published June 11,203


Despite more than 45 years of collecting data and issuing permits, the B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection has done very little to actually reduce the amount of pollution entering Burrard Inlet.

That was the key conclusion from a review of every effluent discharge permit granted to companies and individuals around Burrard Inlet since such permits were first issued in 1957.

"Basically, what we found here is that we simply don't know what is going in there (the inlet)," said Ivan Bulic, co-ordinator for the Society Promoting Environmental Conservation, one of three environmental groups that conducted the study. "All we know is that we have too much of the stuff."

According to the 30-page report, a total 769 million cubic metres of industrial effluent is allowed to enter Burrard Inlet each year - the equivalent of 223,014 Olympic-size swimming pools.

As of 2002, there were 25 active discharge permits for the inlet, allowing industries and others to discharge a total of 14 different kinds of substances into the water.

And the one agency charged with developing a plan to reduce the total amount of pollution entering the water was hit by a 50 per cent reduction in staffing last April, says the report.

Bulic is careful to point out that the study does not conclusively prove that pollution is getting worse around Burrard Inlet and, in fact, several factors indicate there have been some improvements in water quality in certain areas.

However, interpreting the data is difficult because of the lack of specific information on the permits, said the document.

"One of the problems our researchers found was that these permits and this data is not collated or tabulated," Bulic said. "It's simply in raw form in boxes in the storage rooms of the waste management branch in Surrey.

"So, if you were to ask the ministry exactly how much arsenic is in the inlet, they simply can't tell you. They only have two or three staff people out there, and they can't keep up."

One aspect of the report looked at water sampling tests conducted for the ministry by the firm BWP Consulting in December 2001. Those tests found regular exceedances above the desired levels for four different kinds of toxic substances. The testing was done at six different sites, including the Chevron property in Burnaby and near the former Ioco refinery across the inlet in Port Moody.

For instance, the target maximum zinc concentrations in the inlet are supposed to be 150 micrograms per gram of dry weight. But 19 of the 27 samples taken exceeded that desired maximum, with the highest concentration of 575 micrograms per gram found at the Vancouver Wharves site.

Another key problem is that each of the 25 existing effluent discharge permit holders reports their findings in a different manner, Bulic said.

The report, which was released to the media last Friday, was conducted by SPEC; the waste, health and toxics caucus of the B.C. Environmental Network; and the Georgia Strait Alliance. And while the report makes seven recommendations to improve the water quality in the inlet, Bulic does not expect the situation to get any better until the provincial government restores funding to the responsible agencies.

"The group responsible for this, the Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Plan, just had a budget cut of 50 per cent, so I'm not holding my breath there's any capacity here to actually undertake this plan," Bulic said. "They say they intend to do it, but they laid off all their staff.

"If this is the level of commitment our agencies are at, where they lay off staff at the one agency set up to deal with this problem, then it certainly raises some concern for me."

Liz Bicknell, spokesperson for the ministry of water land and air protection, said she needs to review the document to make sure the accusations are accurate.

"I just think we need to hold some of these organizations to account when they put out these kinds of releases," Bicknell said. "Is there something there, or is it just a sensational headline?

"When we review these types of releases, we often find the information is inaccurate."

For instance, she noted that some statistics that point to increased emissions may in fact simply be the result of "more comprehensive reporting."

"We're doing things smarter and we've introduced legislation to modernize and strengthen the environmental protection in this province," she said. "Go to the Web site and read for yourself the changes that we've introduced. We're going to better address the cumulative impacts (of pollution), penalize violators more swiftly, and encourage environmentally responsible behaviour."

When asked how this could happen when the agency charged with responsibility for the inlet has seen a 50 pe cent reduction in funding, Bicknell repeated her first comment. "As i said, I think we have to hold some of these organizations to account. The ministry needs to take the time to review these findings and, in particular, the methodology used with respect to this report."