Alberta Wetland Policy:
A Shift in Values
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development 2013
Outline
• What is a wetland?
– Definition
– Importance of wetlands on the landscape
• Wetland Policy:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Challenges and limitations of the interim policy
A new wetland policy for Alberta
“Relative Wetland Value”
Wetland Mitigation System
The Management Framework
Supporting Tools and Points of Interest
Next Steps
What is a Wetland?
• “A wetland is land saturated with water long enough to promote
formation of water altered soils, growth of water tolerant vegetation,
and various kinds of biological activity that are adapted to the wet
environment.”
• Highly diverse, productive ecosystems that provide a host of
ecological services.
• Play an important role in sustaining healthy watersheds by:
– protecting water quality
– providing water storage and infiltration
– providing habitat for wildlife, fish and plants, and sustaining biodiversity.
• A unique transitional phase between aquatic and terrestrial
ecosystems
• Amongst the most biologically diverse habitats on earth.
What is a Wetland?
Bog
Marsh
Fen
Swamp
Shallow Open Water
The Role of Wetlands
• To date, Alberta has lost between 60 and 70% of wetlands within the
White (settled) Area of the province. Losses are ongoing.
• Water Quality:
– Sedimentation – removal of particulates
– Nutrient removal/retention – phosphorus and nitrogen
– Contaminant removal – pesticides, herbicides, pharmaceuticals, metals
• Hydrology:
– Water retention – moisture from precipitation and snowmelt is retained on
the landscape.
– Groundwater recharge – water from precipitation and overland flow is
filtered and reintroduced into shallow aquifers.
– Flood mitigation – During spring melt and episodic rainfall events, water is
retained and released gradually, reducing stream flow and likelihood of
downstream flooding.
The Role of Wetlands
• Biodiversity:
–
–
–
–
Rare, threatened, and endangered species
Waterfowl habitat (flyways, breeding)
Wildlife corridors
Vital amphibian, songbird, and
invertebrate habitat
– Fish nurseries
• Human Uses:
–
–
–
–
Hunting
Bird Watching
Traditional Uses (bog cranberry, labrador tea, cattail root, etc.)
Stock Grazing (drought)
Current System Gaps
• Decision Makers:
– Approach to wetland management is not clearly defined
– Inconsistency in regulatory requirements/decisions
– Lack a coherent set of provincial guidelines for regulators
• Developers:
– Lack clarity, predictability, consistency in approvals processes
– Growing uncertainty over future direction
– Potential implications for future investment decisions
• Social License:
– Perceived level of commitment to informed environmental
management and responsible stewardship
– Outstanding commitment under LARP
– Perceived failure to address development pressures in the boreal
Existing Policy – Challenges
• The interim policy promotes avoidance and minimization:
– Where avoid and minimize are not practicable, a 3:1
compensation of wetland area in the same general vicinity is
required. Ratio intended to increase with distance from impact.
– Compensation typically in the form of wetland restoration.
• Water Act applications for development in a wetland often
proceed straight to the compensation stage:
– The quality or value of a wetland is generally not considered or
fully known.
– Burden of proof to enable avoid/minimize lies with the approval
writer (avoidance not necessarily captured/recorded).
• Risk losing higher value, highly functioning wetlands and
replacing them with lower value, less functional wetlands.
New Policy Context
• Outstanding commitment for delivery of a provincial-scale
wetland policy (W4L Strategy, 2003)
• Context and direction set under the Land Use Framework
• Expectations for an integrated, comprehensive, consistent
approach to wetland management (IRMS).
• To be effective from the date of implementation:
– Will not apply to activities previously approved, projects in application
at the time of policy approval, or to project renewals.
• To enable a balanced and informed approach to wetland
management.
– Environmental performance (provincial scale), based on an adaptive
management system.
Stakeholder Engagement
• Alberta Water Council recommendations for a new provincial wetland
policy (2008).
• “Wetlands – Policy Intent” (2010)
– High level strategic policy document, based primarily on the Water
Council Recommendations.
– Stakeholders agreed with policy direction. Expressed need for clarity on:
• Relative Wetland Value
• Wetland Mitigation
• Relative Wetland Value Working Group (May – July, 2011)
– Group of ~20 external stakeholder organizations that helped establish
principles and criteria to guide development of a relative wetland value
assessment system.
• Mitigation Working Group (September – November, 2012)
– Principles and criteria to aid development of the wetland mitigation
system.
Alberta Wetland Policy
•
Policy Goal:
– To conserve, restore, protect, and manage Alberta’s wetlands to
sustain the benefits they provide to the environment, society,
and the economy.
•
Policy Outcomes:
1. Wetlands of the highest value are protected for the long-term
benefit of all Albertans.
2. Wetlands and their benefits are conserved and restored in areas
where losses have been high.
3. Wetlands are managed by avoiding and minimizing negative
impacts, and, where necessary, replacing lost wetland value.
4. Wetland management considers regional context.
Relative Wetland Value
• Alberta’s wetlands are highly diverse in form, function, use, and
distribution across the province – they are not all of equal value.
• Relative wetland value – comprising wetland area, functions, benefits,
and abundance – will be used to inform wetland management.
• Examples of wetland functions:
– Biodiversity (#/diversity of species, rare/endangered species/critical
habitat)
– Water Quality Improvement (e.g., sediment, phosphorus, nitrogen
retention)
– Flood Mitigation
• Wetland benefits (human uses)
– Education, recreation, cultural significance
• Potential to shift toward an ES-based approach in the future.
Relative Wetland Value
Wetlands will be assessed against the indicated criteria and assigned a relative
wetland value of A (high), B (moderate), C (moderately low), or D (low).
Biodiversity
Flood Reduction
Human Value
Abundance
Water Quality Improvement
Wetland Value Categories
Increasing Wetland Value
Wetland Value Criteria
High (A)
Moderate (B)
Moderately Low (C)
Low (D)
Relative Value Assessment Units
• Spatial constraint supports
meaningful comparison of
wetlands at the Class
(bog, fen, marsh, etc.)
level.
• Allows adjustment of
individual metrics to reflect
significance/priorities
within a given area.
• In situations where
replacement opportunities
are limited, RWVAU
support restoration
opportunities or needs in
other priority areas.
From Area to Value
• An area-based system fails to consider:
– Significance of a wetland, in terms of functions and benefits provided.
– The quality of replacement wetlands.
– Substitution of high value wetlands with those of lower value over time.
• A value-based system:
– Helps ensure informed wetland management, taking into account both the
significance of the lost wetland and the quality of the replacement
wetland.
– Supports the ‘avoid’ and ‘minimize’ components of the mitigation
hierarchy (burden of proof transferred to proponent).
– Supports a cumulative effects management system, by considering the
broader landscape context and taking into account regional priorities.
– Encourages continuous improvement in the wetland mitigation system by
acknowledging efforts to improve the quality of replacement wetlands.
Mitigation System
Avoid
Minimize
Replace
Avoidance – The preferred
response is to avoid impacts on
wetlands.
Minimization – Where avoidance is
not possible, proponents will be
expected to minimize impacts on
wetlands.
Replacement – As a last resort,
and where avoidance and
minimization efforts are not feasible
or prove ineffective, wetland
replacement will be required.
Wetland Replacement
• Replacement costs reflect relative wetland value – A
(High) to D (Low).
• Majority of proponents will pay in-lieu fee, rather than
engage in restoration (decoupled).
– Risks associated with restoration reflected in cost
• Replacement requirements focused on wetland
restoration, but enable support for wetland research,
education, securement:
– System promotes wetland outcomes and continuous
improvement.
• Ephemeral water bodies (Class I, S&K) will not be subject
to wetland replacement requirements.
Wetland Replacement
• All permanent wetland losses (excepting Class I), will be
considered in the context of an informed and flexible
replacement system.
• Wetland reclamation commitments, as established
through reclamation plans, will help inform the
determination of replacement requirements.
• Replacement will consider both restorative and nonrestorative options, based on defined criteria.
• Replacement requirements enable and encourage
innovation.
• Wetland replacement will be spatially prioritized.
The Replacement System
• Replacement will be enabled in one of two ways:
1. In-lieu fee payment:
• Proponent pays a replacement fee to a coordinating body.
• Funds are allocated based on defined priorities, including
restorative and non-restorative measures.
• Proponent is relieved of liability.
2. Permittee-responsible replacement:
• Proponent assumes responsibility for an agreed/approved
replacement program.
Deriving Replacement
• Considerations
– Reference point of 3:1, based on current area-based approach for
the settled area.
– Intent to shift from an area-based system to a value-based
system.
– Abundance is a key factor for some parts of the province
• Core Assumptions
–
–
–
–
Relative value will range from D (Low) to A (High).
Basal ratios expressed in terms of D-value wetlands.
Ratio construct will encourage/facilitate continuous improvement.
Flexibility in ratios, to facilitate evolution over time (reflecting
advances in science and technology).
Replacement Ratios
The Wetland Replacement Matrix Value of Lost Wetland Value of Replacement Wetland D
C
B
A
A
8:1
4:1
2:1
1:1
B
4:1
2:1
1:1
0.5:1
C
2:1
1:1
0.5:1
0.25:1
D
1:1
0.5:1
0.25:1
0.125:1
*Ratios are expressed as hectares of wetland
Cost of Replacement
In-lieu fees may be derived on the basis of:
• The average cost of wetland restoration work
(established provincially).
• The cost of monitoring restoration success over the
long term (established provincially).
• An administrative fee (established provincially).
• The average value of land within the area of original
wetland loss (established locally).
• The cost of securing restored wetlands.
• Liability cost.
Management Framework
• Mitigation System
– Principles, criteria, and guidance documents to support project planning
and activity-based management requirements, SOPs, COP
– Opportunities for a Mitigation Bank
• Operational Components
– Site-specific wetland assessment tool (minimize subjectivity, maximize
consistency)
– Explicit regulatory processes: guidelines, criteria, and standards to guide
decision-making, development, and management
• Knowledge Systems
– Alberta Wetland Classification System (common standard)
– Provincial Wetland Inventory (complete, subject to continuous
improvement)
– GIS-Level Value Map (foundation for planning & management)
– Databases, Web Portal
Of Interest…
• Constructed wetlands/storm water retention ponds
– Not currently recognized as wetland replacement
– To be recognized as partial replacement under the AWP, pending
development of criteria and guidelines
• Qualified Wetland Aquatic Environment Specialists
– Criteria, qualifications, and a certification system to support
establishment of a community of QWSPs
• Certified Mitigation Agents
– Development of criteria, qualifications, certification system, and
registry for mitigation agents in the province
– Municipalities, consultants, ENGO
Next Steps
• Working groups to develop operational components.
–
–
–
–
–
Technical
Governance/Economics
Regulatory Systems
Education/Outreach
Knowledge Systems
• Targeted engagement of appropriate stakeholders
(external and cross-ministry).
• White Area implementation (August 2014)
• Green Area implementation (August 2015)
Questions?
Photo Credit: Clayton Spytz