Responsibility for Flooding Damage

[Donald G]

I see that, according to an article in CASTANET by Melissa Ligertwood, the Mayor (Kevin Acton) of Lumby feels that those responsible for the Reservoir atop the Aberdeen Plateau should be held responsible for 100% the flooding that has and is taking place in Lumby d this spring. The Vernon and District Water Works who are apparently controlled by the North Okanagan Regional District are particularly mentioned by Mayor Acton. His contention seems to be that when a dam is put on a stream the people responsible for the dam should become 100% responsible for everything downstream from the dam. An engineer maintains that, since the dam is (apparently) not built to control such floods of water the higher than normal flow must (ostensibly) be viewed in the same light as if the dam was not there. The Mayor contends that if the water supply in the dam had been reduced before the rain and melting snow pack 'arrived' the amount of water reaching Lumby could have been significantly reduced. In my opinion It seems that this is another case of the lack of knowledge and desire for fiscal (political?) points on the part of another Okanagan Mayor may result in a similar groundless emotional response in place of the needed intellectual response as is going on at the behest of Lake Country and the legally leased lots on the lakes south of Lake country. Can anyone clarify the issue ... in laymans terms?

[Donald G]

If I use public money to build a reservoir on a stream that, once filled, can (by definition) no longer affect the hourly, daily, weekly, monthly or yearly flow of rain and melt water destined to flow through that stream ... how can I be blamed for any subsequent increase or decrease in the amount of water flowing down that stream?

Now if I use the same public money to build a reservoir with a flood control gate, capable of (and expected to be) safely raised and lowered on a moments notice have I changed my potential liability?

To me the difference between a reservoir with a flood control gate and a reservoir for the storage of water have significantly differing purposes ... and possible liabilities.

[chrisv]

Seeing how for about two decades now it has been recommended to Greater Vernon Water that the Aberdeen dam be raised to increase storage and help control flows on Duteau Creek and they have been dragging their feet on this project I say there is resposibility there. Now its part of the 2023 capital projects as part of the new master water plan .... maybe

[Donald G]

To Chrisv ... Your comment helps to add reason to the comments from the Mayor of Lumby. Unfortunately, as long as financially based decisions have to be made politicians and political appointees will invariably make choices that affect the largest number of people and thus potentially gain them the most votes. In the meantime smaller groups of people, generally living in more remote areas, will continue to be least considered when the money for projects does become available.

It seems to be the way of the world ... at least in a 'one person, one vote' democracy.

[Glacier]

The dam did not cause the flooding, nor was the dam built to prevent flooding. As a matter of a fact, there is no evidence that raising the dam level would have had any impact on the peak stream flows. Two reasons for this: 1) there are many sources to the creek besides the dam source, and 2) we have had so much rain this year that a raised dam (to the level proposed) would have been filled by now.

The Fraser River also doesn't have dams that could prevent flooding despite the fact that a massive dam was slated to be built in the 1950s. Even though the idea was nixed, no one is responsible or at fault for the massive flooding that will hit the Lower Mainland some day as a result of no flood controls up stream.

Back to our area, I think it would be a good idea to build a dam for flood control purposes on the Aberdeen Plateau, but this would require more financial resources than the regional district or the Village of Lumby can afford. The province should consider looking into this, but with government coffers stretched to the max these days, I doubt we will see anything for decades to come.

In the meantime, people should seriously reconsider the notion that buying a house on a known flood plain is a good idea.

[chrisv]

I think that the problem is, that if Aberdeen lake is not completely full at the end of spring runoff, there will not be enough water to supply farmers, commercial and residential customers. We basically use every bit of water in that lake every year. This causes the water utility to be over cautious when lowering the levels in the spring if its required, just in case the snowpack isn't quite enough to fill it. If the dam was higher, there would be more of a buffer so to speak and they could lower the lake level without worrying so much about not being able to meet consumer needs for the water. Plus we could bank the water to supplement a possible dry year. Vernon was the only city on stage three restrictions during the "drought" of 2010. Kal lake was in good shape then, only the upland lakes on the Duteau system were low, and having raised the dam 15 years ago when it was first recommended would have probably prevented this, as water could have been banked from previous years. Why were we the only ones on such severe restrictions? The other cities in the Okanagan had the foresight to keep supply up with population growth. There is plenty of water up there, and its been spilling for many weeks from all three dams. I agree though that raising Aberdeen alone would not solve the flooding issue on Duteau, as its just controlling the water on a few tributaries including Heart Creek, but it would certainly help out, and needs to be done regardless, not in 2022 when its being "proposed" again but soon, and before the next "below average" snowpack year.

[Donald G]

To chrisv ...

Thanks. Your comments make sense. It is unfortunate that more people like yourself did not have more direct say in the issue when such decisions were being made.