Cortes Currents

Roy L Hales/Cortes Currents - When Campbell River was reeling from the onset on COVID last Spring, a task force was formed to study the economic impacts. They interviewed about 300 businesses over a two and a half month month period. The Campbell River Business Recovery Task Force concluded that the city’s economy primarily rests on three pillars: tourism, forestry and fish farms. This is where the first dollars enter, that support numerous other businesses. Now the Task Force warns about the economic consequences of phasing out fish farms.

“If you look at the interrelationships, you can see that so many things that we enjoy in this community, and on your own island to some extent, are a product of a successful forest industry, aquaculture industry, and, when it’s able to, the contribution made by tourism and hospitality,” said Task Force Co-Chair Brian Stamp.

“ ...We had a very clear message from the aquaculture business because they are all tied together with the BC Salmon Farmers Association.

Stamp cited statistics from the BC Salmon Farmer’s Association report, Raising Opportunity: How BC Salmon could lead BC’s Post COVID Recovery where it says there 572 people from Campbell River, Sayward and the Discovery islands employed in salmon farm operations. They receive $31 million in wages and another $132.6 million goes out to local venders.

“If you take the supply chain numbers from the aquaculture industry and forestry industry and add them up, that’s a significant amount of money. Then, if we are lucky enough to get the tourism component back on its feet, then you have the three pillars firing on all cylinders,” said Stamp.

“The retail opportunities that we have in Campbell River, the big box stores - the Walmarts, Home Depots, Home Hardware, Save on Foods, those large retail operations - are a product of Campbell River having a resilient economy. If all of a sudden the traffic in Home Depot was to suffer because the numbers of people shopping there are reduced, because their incomes are reduced, or the numbers of people available to shop are reduced because they haven’t got a job and they’ve moved on - guess what. If that store isn’t producing the results that they expect, it will close,” said Stamp.

“That goes for all the other things that we enjoy here and the residents of Quadra and Cortes Islands enjoy some of the same benefits. We have a very wonderful array of physicians, and surgeons in Campbell River. we have a new hospital in Campbell River. Those are all products of have a group of citizens that have the where withal because they have jobs and are well paid to live here.”

“You can see small communities that are not successful. They struggle to keep doctors in their communities. So we are fortunate that these industries [tourism, forestry and fish farms] have provided us with a very nice way of life.

Roy L Hales/Cortes Currents - When Campbell River was reeling from the onset on COVID last Spring, a task force was formed to study the economic impacts. They interviewed about 300 businesses over a two and a half month month period. The Campbell River Business Recovery Task Force concluded that the city’s economy primarily rests on three pillars: tourism, forestry and fish farms. This is where the first dollars enter, that support numerous other businesses. Now the Task Force warns about the economic consequences of phasing out fish farms.

“If you look at the interrelationships, you can see that so many things that we enjoy in this community, and on your own island to some extent, are a product of a successful forest industry, aquaculture industry, and, when it’s able to, the contribution made by tourism and hospitality,” said Task Force Co-Chair Brian Stamp.

“ ...We had a very clear message from the aquaculture business because they are all tied together with the BC Salmon Farmers Association.

Stamp cited statistics from the BC Salmon Farmer’s Association report, Raising Opportunity: How BC Salmon could lead BC’s Post COVID Recovery where it says there 572 people from Campbell River, Sayward and the Discovery islands employed in salmon farm operations. They receive $31 million in wages and another $132.6 million goes out to local venders.

“If you take the supply chain numbers from the aquaculture industry and forestry industry and add them up, that’s a significant amount of money. Then, if we are lucky enough to get the tourism component back on its feet, then you have the three pillars firing on all cylinders,” said Stamp.

“The retail opportunities that we have in Campbell River, the big box stores - the Walmarts, Home Depots, Home Hardware, Save on Foods, those large retail operations - are a product of Campbell River having a resilient economy. If all of a sudden the traffic in Home Depot was to suffer because the numbers of people shopping there are reduced, because their incomes are reduced, or the numbers of people available to shop are reduced because they haven’t got a job and they’ve moved on - guess what. If that store isn’t producing the results that they expect, it will close,” said Stamp.

“That goes for all the other things that we enjoy here and the residents of Quadra and Cortes Islands enjoy some of the same benefits. We have a very wonderful array of physicians, and surgeons in Campbell River. we have a new hospital in Campbell River. Those are all products of have a group of citizens that have the where withal because they have jobs and are well paid to live here.”

“You can see small communities that are not successful. They struggle to keep doctors in their communities. So we are fortunate that these industries [tourism, forestry and fish farms] have provided us with a very nice way of life.

Roy L Hales/Cortes Currents - When Campbell River was reeling from the onset on COVID last Spring, a task force was formed to study the economic impacts. They interviewed about 300 businesses over a two and a half month month period. The Campbell River Business Recovery Task Force concluded that the city’s economy primarily rests on three pillars: tourism, forestry and fish farms. This is where the first dollars enter, that support numerous other businesses. Now the Task Force warns about the economic consequences of phasing out fish farms.

“If you look at the interrelationships, you can see that so many things that we enjoy in this community, and on your own island to some extent, are a product of a successful forest industry, aquaculture industry, and, when it’s able to, the contribution made by tourism and hospitality,” said Task Force Co-Chair Brian Stamp.

“ ...We had a very clear message from the aquaculture business because they are all tied together with the BC Salmon Farmers Association.

Stamp cited statistics from the BC Salmon Farmer’s Association report, Raising Opportunity: How BC Salmon could lead BC’s Post COVID Recovery where it says there 572 people from Campbell River, Sayward and the Discovery islands employed in salmon farm operations. They receive $31 million in wages and another $132.6 million goes out to local venders.

“If you take the supply chain numbers from the aquaculture industry and forestry industry and add them up, that’s a significant amount of money. Then, if we are lucky enough to get the tourism component back on its feet, then you have the three pillars firing on all cylinders,” said Stamp.

“The retail opportunities that we have in Campbell River, the big box stores - the Walmarts, Home Depots, Home Hardware, Save on Foods, those large retail operations - are a product of Campbell River having a resilient economy. If all of a sudden the traffic in Home Depot was to suffer because the numbers of people shopping there are reduced, because their incomes are reduced, or the numbers of people available to shop are reduced because they haven’t got a job and they’ve moved on - guess what. If that store isn’t producing the results that they expect, it will close,” said Stamp.

“That goes for all the other things that we enjoy here and the residents of Quadra and Cortes Islands enjoy some of the same benefits. We have a very wonderful array of physicians, and surgeons in Campbell River. we have a new hospital in Campbell River. Those are all products of have a group of citizens that have the where withal because they have jobs and are well paid to live here.”

“You can see small communities that are not successful. They struggle to keep doctors in their communities. So we are fortunate that these industries [tourism, forestry and fish farms] have provided us with a very nice way of life.

Roy L Hales / Cortes Currents - In what at least one First Nation leader describes as a challenge to Aboriginal rights, Mowi Canada West and Cermaq Canada are seeking a judicial review to overturn the DFO’s decision to phase out fish farms in the Discovery Islands.

This is unceded territory, which has belonged to First Nations for countless generations.

When she announced the decision to phase out the fish farms by June 30th, 2022, Fisheries Minister Bernadette Jordan explained, “These facilities are some of the oldest sites on the West Coast and are located on the traditional territory of the Holmalco, Klahoose, K’omoks,  Kwiakah,  Tla’amin, We Wai Kai and Wei Wai Kum First Nations. Consultations with the seven First Nations in the Discovery Islands area provided important guidance to the Minister and heavily informed the decision. This approach also aligns with the Province of British Columbia’s land tenure commitment that all aquaculture licenses as of June 2022 require consent from local First Nations.”

David Kiemele, Managing Director for Cermaq Canada, issued a press release stating the judicial review focuses “on the conduct of DFO and the Minister of Fisheries …”

“We respect the opinions and the rights of the First Nations in the Discovery Islands region. As a supporter of United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and the reconciliation process, Cermaq recognizes the inherent Indigenous rights and title of the local First Nations in whose territories we operate. The judicial review brought by Cermaq is meant to allow time for Cermaq to engage with these local First Nations regarding our operations in their territories,” he wrote.

Chief Darren Blaney of the Homalco First Nation told the Campbell River Mirror that Cermaq’s statement is “hollow… just words, no action.”

“If they (aquaculture industry) want to reinstate the farms they will have to consult with First Nations going all the way up to the end of the Fraser and every other person who gets impacted on the B.C. coast,” he said.

Roy L Hales / Cortes Currents - In what at least one First Nation leader describes as a challenge to Aboriginal rights, Mowi Canada West and Cermaq Canada are seeking a judicial review to overturn the DFO’s decision to phase out fish farms in the Discovery Islands.

This is unceded territory, which has belonged to First Nations for countless generations.

When she announced the decision to phase out the fish farms by June 30th, 2022, Fisheries Minister Bernadette Jordan explained, “These facilities are some of the oldest sites on the West Coast and are located on the traditional territory of the Holmalco, Klahoose, K’omoks,  Kwiakah,  Tla’amin, We Wai Kai and Wei Wai Kum First Nations. Consultations with the seven First Nations in the Discovery Islands area provided important guidance to the Minister and heavily informed the decision. This approach also aligns with the Province of British Columbia’s land tenure commitment that all aquaculture licenses as of June 2022 require consent from local First Nations.”

David Kiemele, Managing Director for Cermaq Canada, issued a press release stating the judicial review focuses “on the conduct of DFO and the Minister of Fisheries …”

“We respect the opinions and the rights of the First Nations in the Discovery Islands region. As a supporter of United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and the reconciliation process, Cermaq recognizes the inherent Indigenous rights and title of the local First Nations in whose territories we operate. The judicial review brought by Cermaq is meant to allow time for Cermaq to engage with these local First Nations regarding our operations in their territories,” he wrote.

Chief Darren Blaney of the Homalco First Nation told the Campbell River Mirror that Cermaq’s statement is “hollow… just words, no action.”

“If they (aquaculture industry) want to reinstate the farms they will have to consult with First Nations going all the way up to the end of the Fraser and every other person who gets impacted on the B.C. coast,” he said.

Roy L Hales / Cortes Currents - In what at least one First Nation leader describes as a challenge to Aboriginal rights, Mowi Canada West and Cermaq Canada are seeking a judicial review to overturn the DFO’s decision to phase out fish farms in the Discovery Islands.

This is unceded territory, which has belonged to First Nations for countless generations.

When she announced the decision to phase out the fish farms by June 30th, 2022, Fisheries Minister Bernadette Jordan explained, “These facilities are some of the oldest sites on the West Coast and are located on the traditional territory of the Holmalco, Klahoose, K’omoks,  Kwiakah,  Tla’amin, We Wai Kai and Wei Wai Kum First Nations. Consultations with the seven First Nations in the Discovery Islands area provided important guidance to the Minister and heavily informed the decision. This approach also aligns with the Province of British Columbia’s land tenure commitment that all aquaculture licenses as of June 2022 require consent from local First Nations.”

David Kiemele, Managing Director for Cermaq Canada, issued a press release stating the judicial review focuses “on the conduct of DFO and the Minister of Fisheries …”

“We respect the opinions and the rights of the First Nations in the Discovery Islands region. As a supporter of United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and the reconciliation process, Cermaq recognizes the inherent Indigenous rights and title of the local First Nations in whose territories we operate. The judicial review brought by Cermaq is meant to allow time for Cermaq to engage with these local First Nations regarding our operations in their territories,” he wrote.

Chief Darren Blaney of the Homalco First Nation told the Campbell River Mirror that Cermaq’s statement is “hollow… just words, no action.”

“If they (aquaculture industry) want to reinstate the farms they will have to consult with First Nations going all the way up to the end of the Fraser and every other person who gets impacted on the B.C. coast,” he said.

De Clarke/Cortes Currents - On January 12th and 13th 2021, the first hearing of BC Supreme Court case S15097, Anderson vs Strathcona Regional District, was held in Campbell River before Justice Geoffrey Gaul.

Counsel for the Respondent (SRD) was James Goulden assisted by Sarah McCalla. Counsel for the Petitioner (Anderson) was Paul Hildebrand assisted by Matt Voell. Both senior counsels are distinguished professionals.

The Judge apparently found the case of sufficient importance to hear it in person rather than by phone (as most cases are now heard, due to the pandemic). After two days of argument, the hearing was adjourned for continuation as soon as another court date is available.

Case S15097 is a petition for judicial review of certain decisions and actions taken by the Strathcona Regional District Board of Directors during 2019 and 2020. The fundamental question Justice Gaul is to decide is whether elected officials are entitled to independent legal counsel in matters touching on in camera business.

The right to independent legal counsel (which was not guaranteed to indigenous Canadians until 1977!) is considered “quasi-Constitutional,” which means that limiting it or setting it aside is a fairly serious matter. Whether in camera privilege as exercised by e.g. municipal bodies and regional districts can supersede such a quasi-Constitutional right is the question on which opposing arguments are being presented to Justice Gaul.

In the specific case of Anderson vs SRD, certain actions of SRD — a motion of censure passed against Anderson, and possibly a never-explained refusal to indemnify Anderson for legal expenses incurred in 2018-19 — appear to hinge on their contention that Anderson’s consultations with independent legal counsel constituted an illegitimate revelation of in camera information. Anderson’s counsel disagrees.

Petitioner’s (Anderson’s) counsel have presented their initial argument in full, but Respondent’s (SRD’s) counsel did not complete their presentation by the end of Day 2. When the hearing reconvenes, Respondent’s argument will be completed and the Judge may then hear rebuttals, or further argument or explanation. Petitioner’s argument is a public document as of the adjournment on January 13th, but Respondent’s argument is not yet available. Cortes Currents will refrain from discussing Petitioner’s argument until both arguments can be covered in the same article.

Judgment in the case (which could potentially set a precedent affecting all BC local governments) will almost certainly not be pronounced until some time after the hearing is complete. We expect to publish a second installment of this story after the second session of the hearing, and a third installment after judgment is rendered. Stay tuned…

Note: Some Cortes Islanders mistakenly interpret this case as a continuation of litigation launched in January 2019 against Director Anderson by 13 residents of Cortes Island, i.e. think that she is still defending herself against those charges. That litigation, however, is resolved. The original petition was dismissed in court in June 2020, after Petitioner’s and Respondent’s counsels agreed that it was without merit. However, some actions taken by SRD in 2019 and 2020 (and presently being challenged by the current litigation) were consequences of the 2019 petition; so the two are historically connected.

De Clarke/Cortes Currents - On January 12th and 13th 2021, the first hearing of BC Supreme Court case S15097, Anderson vs Strathcona Regional District, was held in Campbell River before Justice Geoffrey Gaul.

Counsel for the Respondent (SRD) was James Goulden assisted by Sarah McCalla. Counsel for the Petitioner (Anderson) was Paul Hildebrand assisted by Matt Voell. Both senior counsels are distinguished professionals.

The Judge apparently found the case of sufficient importance to hear it in person rather than by phone (as most cases are now heard, due to the pandemic). After two days of argument, the hearing was adjourned for continuation as soon as another court date is available.

Case S15097 is a petition for judicial review of certain decisions and actions taken by the Strathcona Regional District Board of Directors during 2019 and 2020. The fundamental question Justice Gaul is to decide is whether elected officials are entitled to independent legal counsel in matters touching on in camera business.

The right to independent legal counsel (which was not guaranteed to indigenous Canadians until 1977!) is considered “quasi-Constitutional,” which means that limiting it or setting it aside is a fairly serious matter. Whether in camera privilege as exercised by e.g. municipal bodies and regional districts can supersede such a quasi-Constitutional right is the question on which opposing arguments are being presented to Justice Gaul.

In the specific case of Anderson vs SRD, certain actions of SRD — a motion of censure passed against Anderson, and possibly a never-explained refusal to indemnify Anderson for legal expenses incurred in 2018-19 — appear to hinge on their contention that Anderson’s consultations with independent legal counsel constituted an illegitimate revelation of in camera information. Anderson’s counsel disagrees.

Petitioner’s (Anderson’s) counsel have presented their initial argument in full, but Respondent’s (SRD’s) counsel did not complete their presentation by the end of Day 2. When the hearing reconvenes, Respondent’s argument will be completed and the Judge may then hear rebuttals, or further argument or explanation. Petitioner’s argument is a public document as of the adjournment on January 13th, but Respondent’s argument is not yet available. Cortes Currents will refrain from discussing Petitioner’s argument until both arguments can be covered in the same article.

Judgment in the case (which could potentially set a precedent affecting all BC local governments) will almost certainly not be pronounced until some time after the hearing is complete. We expect to publish a second installment of this story after the second session of the hearing, and a third installment after judgment is rendered. Stay tuned…

Note: Some Cortes Islanders mistakenly interpret this case as a continuation of litigation launched in January 2019 against Director Anderson by 13 residents of Cortes Island, i.e. think that she is still defending herself against those charges. That litigation, however, is resolved. The original petition was dismissed in court in June 2020, after Petitioner’s and Respondent’s counsels agreed that it was without merit. However, some actions taken by SRD in 2019 and 2020 (and presently being challenged by the current litigation) were consequences of the 2019 petition; so the two are historically connected.

De Clarke/Cortes Currents - On January 12th and 13th 2021, the first hearing of BC Supreme Court case S15097, Anderson vs Strathcona Regional District, was held in Campbell River before Justice Geoffrey Gaul.

Counsel for the Respondent (SRD) was James Goulden assisted by Sarah McCalla. Counsel for the Petitioner (Anderson) was Paul Hildebrand assisted by Matt Voell. Both senior counsels are distinguished professionals.

The Judge apparently found the case of sufficient importance to hear it in person rather than by phone (as most cases are now heard, due to the pandemic). After two days of argument, the hearing was adjourned for continuation as soon as another court date is available.

Case S15097 is a petition for judicial review of certain decisions and actions taken by the Strathcona Regional District Board of Directors during 2019 and 2020. The fundamental question Justice Gaul is to decide is whether elected officials are entitled to independent legal counsel in matters touching on in camera business.

The right to independent legal counsel (which was not guaranteed to indigenous Canadians until 1977!) is considered “quasi-Constitutional,” which means that limiting it or setting it aside is a fairly serious matter. Whether in camera privilege as exercised by e.g. municipal bodies and regional districts can supersede such a quasi-Constitutional right is the question on which opposing arguments are being presented to Justice Gaul.

In the specific case of Anderson vs SRD, certain actions of SRD — a motion of censure passed against Anderson, and possibly a never-explained refusal to indemnify Anderson for legal expenses incurred in 2018-19 — appear to hinge on their contention that Anderson’s consultations with independent legal counsel constituted an illegitimate revelation of in camera information. Anderson’s counsel disagrees.

Petitioner’s (Anderson’s) counsel have presented their initial argument in full, but Respondent’s (SRD’s) counsel did not complete their presentation by the end of Day 2. When the hearing reconvenes, Respondent’s argument will be completed and the Judge may then hear rebuttals, or further argument or explanation. Petitioner’s argument is a public document as of the adjournment on January 13th, but Respondent’s argument is not yet available. Cortes Currents will refrain from discussing Petitioner’s argument until both arguments can be covered in the same article.

Judgment in the case (which could potentially set a precedent affecting all BC local governments) will almost certainly not be pronounced until some time after the hearing is complete. We expect to publish a second installment of this story after the second session of the hearing, and a third installment after judgment is rendered. Stay tuned…

Note: Some Cortes Islanders mistakenly interpret this case as a continuation of litigation launched in January 2019 against Director Anderson by 13 residents of Cortes Island, i.e. think that she is still defending herself against those charges. That litigation, however, is resolved. The original petition was dismissed in court in June 2020, after Petitioner’s and Respondent’s counsels agreed that it was without merit. However, some actions taken by SRD in 2019 and 2020 (and presently being challenged by the current litigation) were consequences of the 2019 petition; so the two are historically connected.

Roy L Hales/ Cortes Currents - BC Hydro’s 2020 Annual report provides insight, but local knowledge is needed to understand the Cortes Island electric grid.

Vancouver Island has more trees per kilometre of utility power line than any place else in North America and this can translate into power outages.

The average Campbell River resident experienced 1.86 power outages, averaging 2.55 hours in 2020. This seems high when compared to cities like Victoria and Nanaimo, but is better than Duncan or Port Hardy.

Cortes Island does not appear in the graph, but a Squirrel Cove resident recorded 6 outages lasting between 2 and 12 hours (each) in her calendar. While the numbers are rounded off, this suggests Cortes is one of the worst areas in the Vancouver Island area for outages.

The average lifespan of a wooden power pole is 40 to 50 years, and BC Hydro is currently replacing more than 8,000 poles across BC.

As electricity reached Cortes Island in the early 1970s, many of the poles are presumably near their end of use.

Vancouver Island produces about 40% of its electricity. The remainder is supplied by two transmission submarine cable systems crossing the Strait of Georgia. The older of the two systems, built in the 1980s, crosses from the Sunshine Coast, over Texada Island and emerges at Qualicum Bay. A second cable, laid in 2008, connects Tsawwassen and Duncan.

Transmission cables cross from Campbell River to Quadra Island, but Cortes’ electricity comes from a different direction. A submarine cable connects the Cortes Island electric grid to the Malaspina peninsula.