The voice for grasslands in British Columbia

BC GRASSLANDS
MAGAZINE OF THE GRASSLANDS CONSERVATION COUNCIL OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

FRAGMENTATION
AND DEVELOPMENT
OF BCS GRASSLANDS

Spring 2006

Message from the Chair

Michael Pitt

The Dream
I recently received an e-mail message from Bruno Delesalle,
regarding charitable donations, in which Eleanor Roosevelt was
quoted as saying,The future belongs to those who believe in the
beauty of their dreams.
It seems that everyone is having those dreams. In the May
2005 issue of this magazine, our previous Chair, Maurice Hansen,
wondered if he were just a dreamer to hope for a wide-spread
land conservation ethic for motor-powered recreationists born
from the energy that flows from and through the soils, plants and
animals. Maurice obviously believes that the purifying influence
of natural landscapes and pristine grasslands eventually speaks
to all users of our grasslands. He further challenged all GCC
members to introduce this dream until it bears fruit.
Personally, I am convinced that the GCC dream is bearing
fruit. In only a short time since our inception (germination,
Maurice?) we have achieved a great deal of success at bringing
people together to achieve significant grassland conservation and
stewardship goals:

We have completed a Provincial inventory of grasslands;

We have prepared an analysis to mitigate the subdivision,
fragmentation and development of BCs grasslands;
We have contributed to the Best Management Practices for
Commercial Recreation;
We have partnered and helped to lead the coalition for licensing and registration of off-road vehicles; and,
We have contributed to the stewardship and sustainability of
working ranches, including the production of an easy-to-use
Grassland Assessment Manual for BC ranchers.
I believe that we have achieved this success primarily because
we are dreamers. Although most of us when awake are managers,
or scientists, or bureaucrats, or technicians, or consultants, we all
dream of a better and more secure future for our grasslands. This
is why we belong to the GCC, and this is why we contribute our
energy and our passion. Thad Box, in his Listening to the Land
feature in the February 2006 of Rangelands, suggested that how
we treat the land is largely determined by our understanding of
continued on page 33

Message from the Executive Director

Bruno Delesalle

Planning for the Future

The issues resulting from growth, development and fragmentation are complex. The solutions are far from simple. The GCC is
trying to ensure that BCs most rare and endangered grassland
habitats are not fragmented, degraded or altogether lost due to
incremental subdivision and development. The already dwindling native forage base is being erodeda forage base critical
to sustaining wildlife species and the ranching industry. Both the
GCC and the BC Government are wrestling with these problems.
In the absence of a detailed inventory and classification system, grassland habitats throughout BC are being fragmented,
degraded and lost. There is no full understanding of what has
been lost or what the long-term implications might be. Many of
the provinces rare grassland communities are not represented in
BCs protected area system. As an example, only 2.6 percent of
the North Okanagan basin grasslands are represented in protected areas or parks. Within the same basin, 58 percent of the grasslands are privately owned presenting a very significant challenge
for conservation and stewardship.
Much of BCs grassland is being lost to urban development
and intensive agriculture. Acreage development and golf courses
are second and third respectively.
Without appropriate information, effective planning, partnerships and collaboration between provincial, regional, local, and
First Nations governments, grasslands will continue to be lost at
an unsustainable rate.
As an example, I was recently informed of a proposal in the
Kootenays for development of a mine or quarry on crown land.
The proposal was approved against professional and ministry
advice that suggested the proposal would negatively affect valued
grassland, forage land and wildlife habitat. Not to mention that
BC GRASSLANDS

With 50 percent of BCs grasslands privately owned and land

values of over $100,000 per acre, grasslands are under
pressure

the land was within the Agricultural Land Reserve. It is my

understanding that concerns raised by agrologists and government staff over the potential loss of grasslands fell on deaf ears.
Ironically, over the past five years various groups have lobbied
government to secure resources to restore grassland and rangeland in the Columbia valley. A significant portion of the forage
base in the Kootenays has been lost to forest in-growth and
encroachment, creating a significant problem for the ranching
industry and for wildlife populations. Grasslands and forage are
continued on page 28

BC GRASSLANDS
MAGAZINE OF THE GRASSLANDS CONSERVATION COUNCIL OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

The Grasslands Conservation Council

of British Columbia
Established as a society in August
1999 and subsequently as a
registered charity on December 21,
2001, the Grasslands Conservation
Council of British Columbia (GCC) is
a strategic alliance of organizations
and individuals, including
government, range management
specialists, ranchers, agrologists,
grassland ecologists, First Nations,
environmental groups, recreationists
and grassland enthusiasts. This
diverse group shares a common
commitment to education,
conservation and stewardship of
British Columbias grasslands.
The GCC Mission is to:
Foster greater understanding and
appreciation for the ecological,
social, economic and cultural importance of grasslands throughout BC;
Promote stewardship and
sustainable management practices
that will ensure the long-term health
of BCs grasslands;
Promote the conservation of
representative grassland ecosystems,
species at risk and their habitats.

Spring 2006

In This Issue
FEATURES
4 Getting From A to B A Study in Fragmentation Ecology Cameron Carlyle
9 Sizing Up the Suburbs Don Gayton
14 The Agricultural Land Reserve: Sacred Cow or Cash Cow? Larry Pynn

PERSPECTIVES
7 The Real Price of Growth Darrell Smith

GCC Board of Directors

EXECUTIVE

13 The Cost of Urban Sprawl George Will

Michael Pitt, Pender Island

CHAIR

18 Protecting Our Natural Heritage for Future Generations Sheila Harrington

Michael Kennedy, Lillooet

VICE CHAIR

Maurice Hansen, Kimberley

PAST CHAIR

21 A New Look at Conservation Planning Tools:

The Green Infrastructure Model Bylaws Package Jan Kirkby

Cindy Haddow, Victoria

INTERIM SECRETARY

Bill Henwood

26 The South Okanagan Similkameen Conservation Program Rick McKelvey

TREASURER

Wendy Gardner, Kamloops

Dennis Lloyd, Kamloops
Mark Quaedvlieg, Keremeos
Ordell Steen, Williams Lake
Dave Zirnhelt, Big Lake Ranch
BOARD

Art Anthony, Chase

Brad Arner, Kamloops
Barry Booth, Prince George
Leanne Colombo, Cranbrook
Mike Duffy, 108 Mile Ranch
Lauchlan Fraser, Kamloops
Kristi Iverson, Lac la Hache
Ken MacKenzie, Lac la Hache
Francis Njenga, Kamloops
Bob Peart, Sidney
Greg Tegart, Vernon
Dave Whiting, Kamloops
HONORARY BOARD MEMBER

OTHER
2 GCC Project Updates
11 Fauna: Western Rattlers + Development Sadie Cox
17 Flora: Big Sagebrush Wendy Gardner
20 Conservation Partner Profile: The South Okanagan Similkameen
Conservation Program Rick McKelvey
23 Going, going... GCC Staff
25 Fauna: Yellow-Breasted Chat Dick Cannings
30 Members Corner: TRU Range Club Terri France and Morgan Rankin

Bob Peart, Sidney

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Bruno Delesalle, Kamloops

BC GRASSLANDS

GCC Project Updates

Education and Outreach Program

BC Grasslands Website
Our website, www.bcgrasslands.org, is a great
place to learn about the threatened grassland
landscapes of British Columbia and the species
that depend upon them.You can find information on all GCC programs and projects, as well as
updates on other grassland conservation initiatives around the province. The website also
includes Understanding Grasslands, an educa-

tional site focusing on grassland ecology.Where

Are BCs Grasslands, is an interactive mapping
component that was developed during the BC
Grasslands Mapping Project. During the coming
years, the GCC will continue to build and
improve the site and incorporate new information, including regional grassland maps for the
entire Province. The Priority Grasslands
Initiative including maps, data and associated
planning tools is now on-line.
Fragmentation and
Development of BC
Grasslands and a new page,
ORV Management Strategy
focused on responsible recreation in BCs grasslands with
best management practices
for motorized and nonmotorized recreation is also
available.

BC Grasslands Magazine
After a hiatus, BC Grasslands magazine is back.
BC Grasslands is a bi-annual publication intended to provide a forum for discussion on grassland ecology, range management, grassland conservation, and grassland stewardship, while serving as a platform for informing readers about
GCC activities and other grassland programs
from across BC, Canada, and the world. The
Spring 2006 issue is focused on the fragmentation and development of BCs grasslands.
Grasslands are under increasing pressure from
urban sprawl and the fragmentation of rural
landscapes. The subdivision of large tracts of
rangeland, along with the intensive altering of
native grasslands through development, has led
to unprecedented losses. Complex factors ranging from environmental issues to socio-economic pressures to entangled land use policies and
regulations are driving this process, and this
issue of BC Grasslands will examine these driving forces and begin to look for solutions.
continued on page 33

Grassland Stewardship and Sustainable Ranching Program

BC GRASSLANDS

Range; Ministry of Transportation; Ministry of

Small Business and Revenue; Ministry of
Attorney General; Ministry of Public Safety and
Solicitor General; Insurance Corporation of BC;
Conservation Officer Service; and the Integrated
Land Management Bureau. The Final
Recommendations encompass legislation, registration, development of a trust fund, education,
safety, trails, enforcement and conservation.
These recommendations are available online at
www.orvcoalitionbc.org/8428.html. The governments ORV Committee is currently reviewing
the recommendations, and plans to respond by
June 2006.
The deal, however, is not
done yet. The ORV Coalition
will continue to work proactively with the government to
ensure the success of this
important initiative, but it
needs support from local
organizations and individuals
to help these recommendations become a reality. If you
would like to support the
coalitions recommendations,
please download a

Memorandum of Support from the ORV website

(www.orvcoalitionbc.org/36301.html), sign it,
and fax or mail it back to the location provided
on the form. This is a tremendous step towards
better ORV management in BC, and benefits
both society and the environment in many ways.
Mitigating the Fragmentation and
Development of BCs Grasslands
The GCC produced an extraordinary document
in 2005 that will set the path for grassland stewardship for the next several years. The
Mitigating Fragmentation and Development of
continued on page 32

BOB SCHEER

Coalition for Licensing and

Registration of Off-Road Vehicles
After three years of incredible hard work, dedication and collaboration, the Coalition for
Licensing and Registration of Off-Road Vehicles
has reached the significant milestone of producing 47 recommendations for the licensing, registration and management of off-road vehicles
(ORVs) in British Columbia. Working together
with the help of consultants Terje Vold and
George Sranko, the Coalition drafted the recommendations at a workshop in the fall of 2005,
then fine-tuned the recommendations over the
next few months. Ultimately, ten of the eleven
groups that form the ORV Coalition approved the
recommendations, and all groups involved
endorsed the principle. The final document,
Solutions for a Sustainable Future: Final
Recommendations for the Licensing, Registration
and Management of Off-Road Vehicles in British
Columbia, was presented in January 2006 to a
specially formed provincial government ORV
Committee, which has representatives from
eleven ministries and agencies, including:
Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts;
Ministry of Environment; Ministry of
Agriculture and Lands; Ministry of Forest and

Conservation of Grassland Ecosystems Program

Priority Grassland Initiative
Over the last year the Grassland Conservation
Council of BC (GCC) has made great strides in
developing an analytical and scientific assessment of grasslands in the province. This project
is known as the Priority Grassland Initiative. The
main objective of the initiative has been to develop a GIS analysis and techniques to identify priority grasslands for conservation and stewardship, as well as extension of this information to
appropriate land use planners.
Working with a provincial technical advisory
committee the GCC has developed a preliminary
Pilot analysis over the Kamloops region. The goal
of the Pilot is to develop methodologies that
identify ecological significance of grasslands in
relation to threats they are facing and subsequently use this information to determine priority grasslands. This important pilot analysis step
has helped the initiative produce a process which
has achievable results as well as developed a
methodology that accomplishes the objectives
for the project.
Pilot Results Many important results have been
produced to assess and map both ecological significance and threats to grasslands. More specifically, ecological results include mapping of
species at risk habitat, locations of rare grassland
ecosystems, regions where grasslands conservation is not sufficient and critical habitat for
ungulates or waterfowl. On the opposing end of
the spectrum, threats identified and spatially
mapped include risk of grasslands being used
for acreage or urban development, risk of areas
being converted to intensive agriculture, amount
of grasslands lost to development over the last 15
years and identification of recreation activities
occurring on grasslands.
Future Steps As these methodologies are further developed and more analysis results become
available, the pieces of the priority grassland
puzzle continue to fall into place. Two key areas
for future refinement and improvement in this
process are species at risk locations and identification of their critical habitat, as well as determining what constitutes a rare, scarce or good
condition grassland ecosystem and where these
important grasslands are located.
With the experiences and methodologies
developed from the pilot analysis, the Priority
Grassland Initiative is going to be in an excellent
position to keep moving forward. The Pilot
analysis is scheduled for completion in spring of
2006 and will provide a final methodology that

Grasslands in British Columbia

can be used elsewhere in the province to determine priority grasslands. Analysis and field work
for North Okanagan and the remaining
Thompson-Nicola region is scheduled for completion in winter 2006.
The need for the priority grassland analysis
has never been greater as more grassland is converted to housing developments, hobby farms or
golf courses every year. Some of these grasslands

envisioned for development in coming years

could be priority grasslands. Having the information in place from this initiative will allow for
better planning, conservation, stewardship and
long-term sustainability of grasslands in British
Columbia.
For more information on the Priority
Grassland Initiative, contact Graham MacGregor,
GIS Co-ordinator at (250) 371-5296

Call for Artists
As the GCC continues to grow, there is an ever-present need for
grassland artwork for our publications and communications
projects. Images can be drawings, photos or paintings of your
favourite grassland landscapes or species. For all you ranchers
out there, wed love to see some of your artwork portraying
working grassland landscapes. Please contact the GCC with your
offerings, ideas and inspiration at 250-374-5787 or
gcc@bcgrasslands.org.

BC GRASSLANDS

Getting From A to B

A Study in
Fragmentation
Ecology

Cameron Carlyle, Ph.D candidate in the Botany Department at UBC

Pick a line between two points on a map of your

neighbourhood, the first point A, being your front
door and the second B, being some place outside of
town. Now, see if you can walk from A to B in a
straight line. If you live in a town or city this might
prove difficult. In my case, the line crosses a road, a
yard, a fence, a house, another road, more houses,
parking lots, buildings, the
Thompson River, more roads,
a mobile home park before
eventually reaching forest
and grassland. Ill bet that
your path is similar to mine
anything but straight.
Now, imagine the same path
from as seen from above. The
line will cross a patchwork of
sites dedicated to human use,
most of which are now
unavailable to native plant and animal populations
but some pockets remain. Movement from point to
point is difficult for us but possible. But for natural
plant and animal populations the distances have
become insurmountable. Pockets of plants and animals are isolated from each other. We have fragmented the landscapedestroying some parts, converting some to other uses and bisecting the rest
with roads and fences.
Fragmentation of habitat has been identified as
one of the major contributors to species extinction,

the other three being overkill, introduction of invasive species and chains-of-extinction (when one or
more species was dependent on one that has
become extinct). The relation of fragmentation to
species loss has been well-studied in European
grasslands where there is a long history of habitat
destruction through agricultural conversion.
Estonian grasslands, called
alvars, exhibit a pattern called
extinction debt. Fragmentation
of the alvars has been severe
but due to the long life cycles of
alvar plants it will take decades
for the full decline in plant
species diversity to be apparent. This lag time has implications for conservation planning
and impacts our current
understanding of the detrimental effects of fragmentation. In Finland, plant
species diversity declined by 25% in grasslands over
25 years when many rangelands were converted to
agricultural crops. As the area of grazed grasslands
decreased, the pastures became more isolated from
each other. However, a program initiated by the
European Union in 1995 to recover natural grassland by restoring cultivated land to rangeland
reversed the trend of species loss in some Finish
grasslands.
The ultimate problem associated with fragmenta-

Fragmentation of
habitat has been
identified as one
of the major
contributors to
species extinction

BC GRASSLANDS

Feature
PHOTO GEORGE WILL

Conserving and restoring habitat is a good first step

but alone it is not enough. There needs to be a
thoughtful process that incorporates our knowledge
of how species interact with the landscape.

BC GRASSLANDS

As land is converted to
human use, the resources
which were available to the
plants and animals living
on it are reduced or lost

The endangered
Burrowing Owl
GCC FILE PHOTO

BC GRASSLANDS

tion is that it makes

populations smaller.
This means that there
are fewer individuals
capable of reproducing, and to act as
either predator or
prey. Also, as a population gets smaller it becomes more susceptible to random events and loss of genetic variation. If a random event, such as a flood or fire kills ten individuals of a population of ten thousand it is unlikely to have a long term negative impact on the population. However, if ten individuals of a
population of one hundred are killed, the result can be catastrophic.
As land is converted to human use, the resources which were
available to the plants and animals living on it are reduced or
lost. For predators this may mean be a reduction in the amount
of food available. For birds, there may be fewer suitable nesting
locations. For plants it could be the direct loss of suitable habitat and their disappearance. Loss of any resource can reduce a
populations ability to survive. For example, in a 70 year study of
shrub-dependent sparrow and lark species in Idaho the birds
were more likely to be found in larger patches of shrub and
were rarely observed in smaller shrub patches. The lack of
resources, in this case suitable nesting sites, contributed to the
decline of a variety of bird species.
As natural pockets become smaller, populations become proportionally more susceptible to edge effects. Disturbances, such
as noise or predatory species that live on the edge of habitats,
will only travel so far into a patch. This means that a single 100
hectare area will have more suitable habitat than four 25 hectare
areas. By reducing the size of the habitat a larger portion of the
overall habitat is potentially accessible and the area suitable for
some species is reduced. For example, an edge predator, such as
the domestic cat can have a serious impact on a small natural
pocket. Cats may be reluctant to venture more than 100 metres
into grasslands but if they have access to all sides of the 100
hectare parcel that means that at least the interior 64 hectares of
the grasslands are relatively safe for nesting birds. But, if that
same grassland is divided into 4 smaller sections by roads or
right-of-ways, the cats have greater access and only 20 hectares
will be safe for birds.
Edge effects have been observed for many species. Many
insects show low populations numbers at the edges of grasslands but have increasing numbers the deeper in one goes. The
Florida Grasshopper Sparrow, requires at least 400 metres of
buffer between nesting sites and edges to maintain a healthy
population.
A meta-population is a group of smaller populations which
together make a larger one. Some of the groups in the larger
meta-population may be sources which produce more individuals than they can support and individuals emigrate from this
population. On the other hand, some of the populations might
be sinks which means that on their own they cannot sustain a

population over time, they are dependent on outside sources. In

a fragmented landscape it is more difficult for source populations to supply sink populations with emigrants because connectivity between populations is reduced. The consequence for
meta-populations in a fragmented landscape is that sink populations may be lost causing extirpation at a local scale which
jeopardizes the species and hinders conservation efforts.
Fragmentation has been recognized as an important consideration in the conservation of many endangered species.
However, it has led to one of the largest ecological debates
SLOSS (Single Large Or Several Small). Is it better to create a
large reserve or many smaller reserves when trying to conserve
species diversity or even a single species? Conservation funding
is limited so it is a critical question to address when planning
reserves. Larger areas generally contain more species than
smaller areas. Of course, a reserve needs to be large enough to
maintain viable species populations; however, many smaller
reserves may be able to protect more species that an equivalent
single reserve if the smaller reserves contain non-overlapping
species. So, despite the problems associated with fragmentation,
smaller reserves may be beneficial.Yet, the critical problem is
one of connectivity. Wildlife corridors, strips of vegetation
between reserves (or fragments) can allow populations to move.
However, the appropriate size of corridors for most animals is
unknown and their utility for plant species is questionable
because their usefulness is dependent on the type of habitat
selected for the corridor.
Although the implications of fragmentation are generally
accepted by ecologists the solution to the problem is not as
clear. Conserving and restoring habitat is a good first step but
alone it is not enough. There needs to be a thoughtful process
that incorporates our knowledge of how species interact with
the landscape. Unfortunately, for many species we lack this
information. Baseline studies on many species are needed
before we can come up with a strategy to counteract the effects
of fragmentation. That journey from A to B is getting harder
and harder.

Perspectives

The Real Price

of Growth
GCC FILE PHOTO

Darrell Smith, Program Manager, East Kootenay Conservation Program

We are always told by various levels of government that growth

and development are needed to keep the economy going. If
growth is so good why do property taxes always keep rising?
Perhaps we should be considering the capital value of so-called
undeveloped land? Such land may have more value left as is
than we have been led to believe.
Research in the last few years is starting to reveal some interesting numbersmany residential developments cost more
to service than the taxes they generate. For example, in Skagit
County, Washington, an hour north of Seattle, researchers found
that for every dollar residential property owners paid in taxes,
$1.47 was required in services. It was further found that agricultural land and open spaces only required 51 cents for every
dollar paid in taxes. The same was found to be true in Bandera
County west of San Antonio, Texas. Researchers found residential service costs were $1.10 while agriculture was only 26 cents.
Canadian research found the same trend. In Halifax, Nova
Scotia, the actual costs of servicing two-acre lots was over
$5,000 per year and suburban areas was in excess of $3500 per
year, whereas in an area of mixed residential and commercial
with a variety of densities, service came in at $1,400 per year.
Undeniably, we need houses to live in. However, can communities afford to sprawl outwards and continue to eat up a landscape that generates less in tax revenue than is required to service it? Many places in North America are finding that land use
patterns of the last 40 years are no longer practicalsocially,
environmentally or economically. A new philosophy towards
development is beginning to emerge.Keeping the city in the

city and country in the country is catching on in many regions.

Compact communities with a smaller footprint on the land,
fewer roads and less infrastructure are cost-effective in the long
term. They also respect the value of the landscape surrounding
them because thats where the clean air, drinkable water, open
spaces and food they consume come from.
The East Kootenay Conservation Program (a partnership of
40 organizations working to increase private land conservation
and stewardship) is facilitating dialogue with local municipalities and regional districts to look at the various tools that might
be implemented to assist in long-term planning that would see
a more sustainable approach taken. Tools such as Community
Viz, Metro Quest and Smart Growth principles have been showcased that engage the greater public to look at how to best balance social, environmental and economic values at the local and
regional level.
Residential sprawl is a drain on the social, environmental
and economic bottom line. Changing our thinking regarding
future development is essential. With only 0.8% of the land base
in BC as grasslands, can society afford to continue to subsidize
subdivision development on these precious assets?

The EKCP supports environmental stewardship on private land

with the goal of maintaining the rich biological, economic, and
social heritage of the East Kootenay. For more information on the
EKCP, its initiatives and its partners, please contact Darrell Smith
at 250-342-3655 or ekcp@cyberlink.bc.ca

BC GRASSLANDS

Kamloops, BC
PHOTO GEORGE WILL

BC GRASSLANDS

Feature

Sizing Up
the Suburbs
Don Gayton, M.Sc, P.Ag., FORREX

To gain a deeper understanding of the grasslands, one might

delve into soil science, plant physiology, or even climatology.
I, on the other hand, have been immersing myself in urban
planning. In the great circle of consciousness, grasslands and
urban planning are two subjects so far removed from each
other that they have met on the back side. What is the connection? I suspect you have guessed already; it is the suburb.
Suburbanization, a potent and driving force in contemporary
society, largely takes place on our grasslands, meadows and
open forests. In fact, one wag defined suburbia as the place
where developers bulldoze the local flora and fauna, and then
name the streets after them. Suburbia is the consumptive,
grassland-gobbling lifestyle that we all love to hate.
So I did put aside ecology for a time, and looked deep into
the heart of suburbia, that politely derogatory term that
describes where most of us live, because it has such an impact
on grasslands. The roots of suburbia harken all the way back to
the 1870s, when the American landscape architect Frederick
Law Olmsted (1822-1903) articulated the importance of reconnecting the urban industrial worker with nature. So he proposed suburban garden cities for workers, who could come
home to green and pastoral settings after a long day in the factory. The notion of suburbia percolated for some time, but then
absolutely exploded during the affluent postwar 1950s.
Suburbanization has been the dominant North American
growth pattern ever since, and it shows no signs of slowing
down.
My newly adopted home in the South Okanagan is in the
powerful grip of suburbanization, so my studies are no longer
academic. I can see active suburbanization happening on the
bunchgrass and pine-clad hillsides as I look out the windows of
my house (which, I hasten to add, is in an urban neighbourhood).

Our suburban lifestyle has been built on the backs of cheap

oil, and grasslands. Cheap oil allowed us to widely disperse our
work, play, shopping and living places, and then reconnect them
by means of the private automobile. Grasslands have generously
provided us with the low elevation, easily developable ground
on which to put our roads, parking lots, strip malls, subdivisions and gas stations. Cheap oil also meant that we could get
our beef from Brazil and our carrots from Mexico, so there was
no point in maintaining those problematic small farms and
ranches on the outskirts of our cities. The highest and best
use of their land has gradually shifted from food production to
parking lots. There has been little to stand in the way of grassland conversions, other than a few cranky ranchers and naturalists. And indeed, many of the suburban grasslands in question
were in such poor condition that there was little there to save.
As I drive through the suburban grasslands of the Southern
Interior, I often see these orphaned grassland parcels.
Surrounded on two or three sides by development, they have a
forlorn look about them. The fences are down, the vegetation is
mostly knapweed, and someone has dumped an old refrigerator. Dirt bike trails crisscross the land, and plastic grocery bags
flutter, like flags of abandonment. Real estate signs trumpet
prime retail or residential potential. Who would want to defend
a grassland like this? It is like a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is,
until you dig up a shovelful of soil, and see the magnificent
black, brown or chestnut chernozemic A horizon, the patient
product of ten thousand years of bunchgrasses.
We all know what suburbia is, but it is hard to define. Author
James Kunstler had a caustic definition for it in his book The
Geography of Nowhere. Originally conceived as a return to
nature, suburbia and its constant companions, the shopping
mall and the golf course, have unwittingly become destroyers of
grassland nature. Frederick Law Olmsted, who should be a hero

BC GRASSLANDS

Kamloops, BC
PHOTO GEORGE WILL

of mine since he championed the need for humans to connect

regularly with nature, is actually in my bad books because he
invented the suburb.
The classic definition of suburbia is the bedroom for an adjacent city, but even that notion is changing. Suburbia is evolving
into what is now called the edge city, where in addition to residences, you have suburban banking, shopping, entertainment
and, increasingly, work. Anyone who has approached Vancouver
on Highway One between 3pm and 6pm has experienced the
phenomenon known as the reverse rush hour, the evening
traffic jam going into the city. This is composed of commuters
who live in the downtown core and commute out to the suburbs
to work. This reverse commute trend will continue, and continue to put pressure on suburban grasslands, as businesses flee
the high rents, taxes and social problems of downtown cores.
It is tempting for us British Columbians to say that suburbanization is someone elses problem. The Crown holds a huge
percentage of the provinces land base on our behalf, so its
(mostly) safe from suburban development, right? But we need
to remind ourselves that much of our southern grasslands fall
in the private slice of British Columbias land pie.
Where does the suburbanization process end? Im honestly

10

BC GRASSLANDS

not sure. Some suggest that weve hit peak oil, and as energy
prices begin their inevitable climb, suburban development will
begin to lose its appeal. But the suburban engine has been running at full throttle for six decades now; it will take a lot to shut
it off, or even get it to idle.
Is sprawl inevitable? Is it in our genes? I dont think so. In
fact, much of western culture and innovation has originated
from dense, vibrant cities surrounded by narrow belts of intensive agriculture. Hopefully the era of suburban sprawl will be a
minor blip in our cultural history.
Sociologists say the suburban movement has been accompanied by an unhealthy shift in our social lives, from a public orientation based around community, church, and civic politics, to
a private orientation of atomistic families and individual pursuits. Even though the suburban trend is going to continue,
perhaps we can build a new sense of community, one based on
the local ecology. A larger community in which the hillside of
bunchgrass and pine, the wetland full of cattails, or even the
degraded field full of knapweed, have some standing.
Don Gayton is an ecologist with FORREX. He can be reached at
d.gayton@forrex.org

Fauna

GCC FILE PHOTO

Western
Rattlers vs.
Development
Sadie Cox, Student, Thompson Rivers University

Western rattlesnakes are being seriously threatened by increasing

development in the Souther Interior of BC. These grassland dependent
snakes are already listed by the provincial government as a threatened
species. One rattlesnake den in North Kamloops is protected as it is
inside the Lac du Bois Provincial Park boundaries. But other den sites
are not so lucky.
According to Ministry of Environment wildlife biologist Doug Juryif the
den site is on Crown land then anyone wanting to develop in that area
would not be able to damage it. The Canadian Species At Risk Act (SARA)
protects such features.
Rattlesnakes are protected under the Canadian Species At Risk Act, but
on private land it is really unclear what the federal government can do,
said Jury. He said in a situation when an area is of made up different land
tenures, each one must be treated differently. Plus, there are no municipal
bylaws that effectively protect snake habitat, only rezoning.
Jury said that the first step towards determining whether an area should
be rezoned as an ecological reserve is a species assessment by the Ministry
of Environment.We wouldnt undertake that research unless we were
working towards some sort of wildlife management or ecological reserve
designation, mainly because we are so short-staffed.
Jury said that assessment would involve making comparisons with the
overall habitat value of other adjacent sites.If it turned out that the site
was highly valuable or unique, then we would pursue protecting it, but if it
turned out to have almost the same value of other numerous sites then we
would just rely on the current protection provided under the Wildlife Act.
There is new residential development slated for the northern Batchelor
Heights area in the near future. That development would lead to the
destruction of a known rattlesnake den. The current zoning will permit the
construction of single-family dwellings and gravel extraction. According to
Andrew Swetlishoff, planning and development manager with the City of
Kamloops, the area would have to be identified as ecologically sensitive
under the official community plan to be excluded from development. So
far, that hasnt happened.

Lita Gomez, a University of Victoria Masters student in biology is studying the effect of urban development on rattlesnake populations.I would
say that the biggest threat to those snakes is that humans are getting closer
and closer to their habitat.
Snakes and humans generally dont mix well, said Falsetta. He said
people are scared of them and perceive them as a threat, especially when
they find them in their yards. The snakes lose.
Its not very hard for developers to get rezoning approval to build big
subdivisions. They do it before people are paying attention and then people
dont know whats going on until the construction starts, said Falsetta, who
has been a Batchelor Heights resident for 15 years.
John Surgenor, a provincial Ministry of Environment wildlife biologist
who works mostly with species at risk said that Kamloops is growing and
the city needs to accommodate the growth. According to Venture Kamloops
the growth rate was 1.2 per cent in 20032004 and the projected growth
rate for 2005 is 3.8 per cent.What can you do to stop it? asks Surgenor.
The Ministry of Environment is trying to keep the city informed about
suitable den sites and has hopes that those areas will be maintained.
Theres not really any legislation that we can use, city bylaws dictate what
happens on that land base.
The city deals with each conservation or environmental situation as it
arises, but will not take steps to protect an area unless there is an environmental assessment that recommends it. This assessment has to be initiated
by a private party, interested developers, independent organizations or the
Ministry of Environment.
The low elevation grasslands that rattlesnakes depend on are also often
the flattest, thus making them desirable from a development perspective.
BC GRASSLANDS

11

There are quite a few den sites at low elevation in areas that the city will
be looking to develop, said Surgenor.Its challenging because theres not a
lot of flat ground in Kamloops.
Another rattlesnake den by Ord road is close to a site where there is an
application to the provincial Ministry of Energy and Mines for a gravel
quarry. Residents of a nearby trailer park are protesting this application on
the basis that that type of activity will increase noise and traffic in the area.
The den is on private land and theres no legislation that lets us dictate
what can happen on private land, said Surgenor.The viability of that den
is pretty low. Surgenor said that the landowner has tentatively agreed to
not have any activity in that area until the snakes emerge from the den.
The Ministry of Environment says there is no other way to protect the den
site and the rattlesnake population there.We are looking at the potential
of moving them or the slight potential of creating an artificial den for
them, said Surgenor.
Lac du Bois Provincial Park is one of only three parks in British
Columbia to protect a substantial area of grasslands. The total park area is
15,207 hectares and encompasses low-, mid- and high elevation grasslands
as well as forests.Most people dont even realize that the grassland is an
ecosystem and that it all needs protecting, said Tasha Sargent, stewardship
program co-ordinator with the Grasslands Conservation Council of BC.
They just see dirt and grass and sage. But grasslands are vital and are one
of the most threatened and fragile ecosystems.
The lower grassland area outside of provincial park boundaries was
designated as an environmentally sensitive area in Kamplan 2004.
Kamplan 2004 is the City of Kamloops official community plan from
20042036. There is recognition in Kamplan 2004 that the designation of
an area as environmentally sensitive provides no real protection from the
effects of urban development in the area. The designation is only recognition of the areas ecological significance.
Included in the plan are provisions to extend Grasslands Boulevard in
Batchelor Heights with McQueen Drive in Westsyde and the connection of
Singh Street to north Batchelor Heights. Both of these extensions would
increase road traffic, which is already a main threat to rattlesnakes.The
area needs to be made into an ecological reserve to be protected, said
Falsetta,the public needs to put pressure on the city to change the zoning
and protect this area from development.
Falsetta said that developers just come into the area and do whatever
they want.They dont care about anything else. The city is definitely
pro-development. If someone comes in and wants to rezone, it probably
wouldnt be that hard, not as hard as it would be if it was identified as an
ecologically sensitive area.
The only way to protect municipal grasslands is through rezoning, said
Sargent. She said that one of the goals of the Grasslands Conservation
Council is to make local governments more aware of grassland value, to

12

BC GRASSLANDS

provide them with the administrative and planning tools to plan around
areas.Public awareness about issues is the best tool, especially at schools
in communities within grassland areas, said Sargent.
Falsetta and Gomez echo these sentimentsthat if there is understanding, then the public will feel a greater need to protect the snakes habitat.
Educating residents about snakes would help them appreciate their value
instead of perceiving the snakes as a threat.
The need to be aware that every development request ultimately reduces
and fragments grassland ecosystems is acknowledged in the Kamplan.
Expansion of natural areas is listed in the plan as being a planning priority.
This includes acquiring unique areas and a proposed addition to the Lac
du Bois Grasslands Provincial Park.
The Grasslands Conservation Council is just completing a qualitative
assessment of the grasslands.We are trying to grapple with whats occurring out there and the conditions of the grasslands, said MacGregor, who is
heading the assessment. The assessment is an attempt to determine where
the threat to grasslands is the greatest, and where the ecological and socioeconomic values are. He said that maintaining a connection between habitats is important to the overall survival of a species. Habitat requirements
change with the seasons and species require the ability to access different
resources found in these different habitats.
The Kamplan contains a commitment by the city to work with various
institutions and organizations, including the Thompson Nicola Regional
District, to minimize development in the grasslands. The intent is to provide transition from developed city lands to the park boundary. Part of this
area is designated as a future park and will be managed as passive open
space. This means that no facilities would be built on this land..No baseball diamonds or arenas, it would just basically be left as open space. If you
wanted to go hike there you are welcome to, but there would be no formalized recreational activity there, said Swetlishoff.
Getting back to the North Kamloops den sites, Surgenor is optimistic
that city planning officials will be willing to consider what it takes to maintain them but when asked if the city would be willing to take the steps necessary to maintain these den sites Swetlishoff said,good question, I really
dont know. The Ministry of Environment is the designated authority for
threatened species and we have the policy in Kamplan that says we are
going to honour and respect grassland areas, but we havent gotten as far as
planning for the management of those areas, said Swetlishoff.
Ultimately the fate of many rattlesnakes in the district lies with the
Ministry of Environment. Unfortunately, by the time they undertake the
necessary studies and make their recommendations it will probably be too
late.
Originally published in Nature West, April 2006.

Perspectives

The Cost of Urban Sprawl

George Will, GCC Education and Outreach Co-ordinator

Here are some of the real costs of development:

1. Loss of Rangeland Were chewing up farms
and ranches at an alarming rate to create new
highways, fringe industrial parks and sprawled
housing developments. This loss reduces our ability to grow food, fiber and timber. In many areas,
urban development pressure and increased property taxes are forcing ranchers and farmers out of
business. They often sell their spreads for housing developments to provide financial security for
their retirement. When we no longer can produce
our own food, we will be dependent on foreign
producers.
2. Loss of Wildlife Habitat Wild forests, grasslands, and wetlands are also disappearing,
replaced by pavement, buildings and sterile
urban landscaping. The remaining habitat is
smaller, degraded and more fragmented, making
survival of certain wildlife species very difficult
as they try to reach breeding ponds, hibernation
sites, feeding locations, or to establish viable nesting areas. As for grasslands, BC has only about a
third of its original grassland ecosystem remaining in a relatively intact condition, but much of
this remnant acreage has been degraded to some
degree. Remember, we only started with less than
1% of the total land base as grassland in the first
place.
3. Increased Tax Burden The costs of providing
community services have skyrocketed as homes
and businesses spread further and further apart,
and local governments are forced to provide for
widely spaced services. Owners of these dispersed developments seldom pay the full government costs of serving them, forcing the rest of us
to subsidize them with higher taxes at the local,
provincial and federal levels.
4. Increased Air Pollution Sprawl increases car
and truck traffic, leading to major increases in air
pollution and smog.Vehicles are the number one
cause of air pollution in many urban areas, and a
threat to public and wildlife health
5. Increased Water Use and Pollution Sprawl
increases air pollution, which falls out to become
water pollution. In addition, urban activities cre-

BRIAN WIKEEM

Im going to come right out and say it when everything is considered, suburban
development can cost more than it is worth. The only reason that it is happening
is that land in the hinterland is still relatively cheap and when sprawl started in the
1950s, transportation was cheap as well. That was then...

ate water pollution directly through land run-off

from construction sites, fuel spills, oil leaks, paint
spills, lawn chemicals, pet wastes, etc. Sprawled,
low-density development produces more than its
share of this runoff. In addition, more water is
consumed for lawn watering and other landscape
activities, straining local water supply systems.
6. Increased Energy Consumption At a time
when we desperately need to reduce our energy
use, sprawled developments increase our energy
consumption per person, for gasoline, home heating, and electricity.
7. Social Fragmentation Old-fashioned neighbourhoods with compact housing, front porches,
a corner store, and a school two blocks away were
much more conducive to social interaction. It was
possible to feel a sense of belonging and community. Now, in sprawled generic housing tracts,
many people never meet their neighbours as they
pass them in their cars. Its rare for neighbourhood events to occur. Families are more isolated
and those living alone are marooned in a hostile
environment.
8. Loss of Time People are forced to spend more
time commuting longer distances to reach their
jobs, homes, schools and shopping areas. In a
compact, efficient city these travel times are often

minimal, but sprawled cities take time to navigate. Suburban tract and country dwellers also
spend more time maintaining large, empty residential properties: mowing the grass, plowing
long driveways, raking leaves, weeding, etc.
9. Increased Private Costs and Risks Sprawling
business and home owners often fail to realize
the long-term personal costs and risks of maintaining distant properties. As property taxes rise
to cover service costs, and fuel costs increase for
travel and heating large buildings, the owners
budgets may have trouble keeping up. Transportation costs for children and handicapped
family members are much greater. As sprawled
homeowners age, their large properties become a
greater burden to maintain. When they can no
longer drive their car, they are stranded. As babyboomers age, large numbers of people will be
forced to sell their suburban or country homes to
move into the city, creating displacements and
possibly lowering the value of expensive homes.
10. Loss of Exercise Sprawled communities
force people to drive their cars to get groceries, go
to school, or get to work. In the past, cities were
structured so many of these destinations were
within walking distance. Now, many neighbourcontinued on page 28
BC GRASSLANDS

13

Feature

The Agricultural Land Reserve

Sacred Cow
or Cash Cow?
Larry Pynn, Environmental reporter, Vancouver Sun

There are growing concerns in British Columbia that the

Agricultural Land Reserve has gone from a protector of agriculture for future generations to a source of relatively cheap land
for municipalities seeking immediate revenue and developers
seeking to turn a tidy profit.
Introduced by Dave Barretts New Democratic Party government in 1973 as a way to arrest the loss of farmlandthen at
the rate of up to 6,000 hectares per yearthe land reserve is
coming under increasing public scrutiny as it attempts to balance the opposing forces of preservation versus development
around the province.
Farmers initially howled with protest at the introduction of
the land reserve, arguing the province had undercut their greatest financial asset, their land. Today, attitudes have dramatically
changed.
The 12,000-member BC Agriculture Councils official position is that the land reserve provides food security, helps the
environment, and provides economic benefit. The council also
cautions that not all land in the reserve is economic to farm,
and emphasizes there is no point protecting the land unless you
protect the farmers ability to make a living.
Judging by farm-gate receipts, BC agriculture is booming.
The industry generates direct annual farm sales of $2.4 billion
dollars and 35,200 jobs.
The food-processing industry is worth another $6.1 billion
and 31,000 jobs, with food wholesaling adding a whopping $8.6
billion and 15,000-plus jobs.
Yet it remains a fragile industry. Only about one per cent of

14

BC GRASSLANDS

BCs 944,735 square kilometres is prime farmlandclass one

to class three, capable of growing the widest range of crops.
And the places most suitable for farming are also fertile
ground for humanity. Two geographic trianglesthe Fraser
Valley and southeastern Vancouver Island, and KamloopsShuswap south to Osoyooscomprise just 2.7 per cent of the
provincial land base, but four-fifths of both the provincial population and annual gross farm receipts.
These are the areas at greatest risk. In the Regional District of
Okanagan-Similkameen, the land commission released 1,289.3
hectares from the reserve in the past four years, refusing exclusion applications for just 145.7 hectares. Thats a ratio of almost
nine-to-one in favor of land removal.
Grasslands are particularly at risk, representing only one per
cent of the provincial landscape, yet containing more than 30
per cent of all threatened and endangered species in the
province.
A 2004 report by the Grasslands Conservation Council of BC
found that almost 40,000 hectares of grassland have been lost to
agricultural crops such as vineyards, orchards and cultivation in
the Okanaganthree times the amount lost to urban and
industrial development in the region.
Only one-third of the approximate 23,000 hectares of grassland in the Okanagan today are within the land reserve.
BCs booming economy and growing population make the
situation all the more critical, generating calls for the province
to reform the land-exclusion application process.
The New Democrats in 2000 scrapped the system by which

Six Mile Ranch subdivision

development
PHOTO GEORGE WILL

one provincial commission ruled on all exclusion applications

and established three regional panels comprised of commissioners who did not live in the regions in which they ruled on
applications. Gordon Campbells Liberals fractured the system
further in 2002, introducing six panelsSouth Coast, North,
Interior, Okanagan, Kootenay, and Islandeach with three
commissioners residing in the regions in which they make
decisions.
There are two main views of the panel system: one, of a small
group of all-powerful individuals at risk of falling victim to
local influence or political partisanship, the other a group that
is much more knowledgeable about local issues than under the
old provincial commission system.
The Greater Vancouver Regional District has urged the
province to at least refer regionally significant exclusion applications to a full land commission.
The GVRDs agriculture committee chair is Harold Steves, a
veteran Richmond councillor who runs 100 cows and calves on
128 hectares of his own land and another 6,800 hectares of
Crown rangeland in the grasslands near the Deadman River
Valley, west of Kamloops.
Steves argues the land reserve was established to protect farmland from development, not to provide municipalities with bargain-basement land for purposes such as industrial development.
Despite mounting concerns with the panel systemthe BC
Agriculture Council has launched its own review of the
processAgriculture and Lands Minister Pat Bell says it makes
sense to have local people addressing local issues.Do you want

someone from Prince George making decisions in the Fraser

Valley? asks the Prince George North MLA and the owner of
two Wendys fast-food restaurants.
Bell argued in the House that the rate of farmland exclusion
has slowed, from 17,433 hectares between 1996 and 2000 under
the NDP to 6,963 hectares in the past five years under the
Liberals. He adds that the size of the Agricultural Land Reserve
has actually increased over the years to more than 4.76 million
hectares, up from 4.72 million hectares in 1973.
The counter-argument is that with every year of additional
exclusions, the need to protect what remains grows more acute.
The David Suzuki Foundation also noted in a report released
in April 2006 that 90 percent of the land added to the land
reserve since its inception has been in the north, while 72 percent of the land lost has been in the fertile south. The foundation urged, in part, that the province give clear direction to the
land commission to focus on the long term, while developing
policies that support the viability of farming. Panel members
should also be appointed by an independent agency, at arms
length from politicians.
Fact is, politics have gone hand-and-hand with the commission almost since the beginning.
Gary Runka, a professional agrologist, served as chairman of
the commission between 1973 and 1978, when he resigned to
protest a decision by Bill Bennetts Social Credit government to
exclude 250 hectares of farmland in north Aldergrove for the
Gloucester Industrial Park.
Two decades later, in 1998, Glen Clarks NDP government

BC GRASSLANDS

15

Gilpin grasslands
PHOTO BRIAN WIKEEM

invoked for the first time a provincial interest

clause allowing a 400-hectare resort with housing,
hotels, marina and heritage theme park at Six Mile
Ranch on Kamloops Lake. Despite assertions at the
time that Six Mile was vital to Kamloops economy,
the site sat idle for almost eight years. Only now is
development underway on a golf course and sales
office, long after Kamloops fortunes improved on
their own.
Today, the sense of political meddling extends
not just to the panel system or the commissions
conflicted mandateprotect farmland, while considering community needsbut on the individuals
who get appointed to the six regional panels.
The Opposition had a field day in May with the
appointment of John Tomlinson, an insurance agent
and ex-president of the Fort Langley-Aldergrove BC
Liberals riding association, to the land commissions
South Panel. One day later, Bell was forced to rescind
the appointment of a second South Coast panel
member, Bill Jones, a director on the Richmond
Farmers Institute, because he had spoken publicly in
favor of the removal of the Garden City lands in
Richmond from the land reserve at a land commis-

16

BC GRASSLANDS

sion meeting in Richmondtwo days after he was

appointed to the South Coast panel. (Panel members
biographies can be viewed at: www.alc.gov.bc.ca/
commission/commissioners.htm)
Cheryle Huscroft is a Creston-area resident and
former cattle rancher who served on the full land
commission in the mid-1990s under the NDP and
who is just wrapping up three years on the Kootenay
Panel under the Liberals. The biggest benefit of the
panel system, she says, is it allows commissioners to
get out and see properties that are the subject of
exclusion applications.
We can stand on the land, really get a feel for it.
The downside is that the province routinely
appoints panel members who are not farmers.You
need people who completely understand agriculture, Huscroft argues.If theyre not there, those
panel systems arent going to work.
Is the province listening? Bell is open to considering the idea of larger panels and a better definition
of community need, but isnt making any promises,
saying hes generally happy with the land reserve
system.We think its worked very well. I dont think
theres an appetite to make significant changes.

Flora

Big Sagebrush
Dr. Wendy Gardner, Professor of Range Ecology, Thompson Rivers University

North of Savona

PHOTO GEORGE WILL

ILLUSTRATION PEGGY JO BRAND

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt.) is a

native, evergreen, perennial, aromatic shrub with
a short branched, woody trunk that averages
around two meters in height but can grow as
large as six meters on favourable sites (2,5). Big
sagebrush leaves are wedge shaped and generally
are three-lobed at the tips, hence the name tridentata (2,3,5). This plant is strongly aromatic
and in late summer has small, yellow flowers
(2,3,5). Big sagebrush propagates by seed and is
considered a good seed producer however
seedling vigour is rated as low (5). Plants can
produce up to 500,000 seeds and the seeds are
mainly wind dispersed (7) but can also be
spread by water and animals (1).
A member of the Aster (Asteraceae) family,
big sagebrush has three subspecies: basin big
sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp. tridentata),
Wyoming big sagebrush (A. tridentata ssp.
wyomingensis) and mountain big sagebrush (A.
tridentata ssp. vaseyana). These subspecies are
adapted to different climate and moisture
regimes giving big sagebrush a wide ecological
amplitude (1).
In the Southern Interior of BC, big sagebrush
is widespread at low to mid elevations of the
Fraser, Thompson and Okanagan basins and
southern Rocky Mountain Trench, and in arid
grasslands (2). In North America it is found in
BC and mainly throughout the western United
States (3,5). It is drought tolerant and is found
predominately on well drained, gravely or rocky
soils but does not grow well on alkaline soils
(2,3,5).
Big sagebrush leaves are high in protein but

also contain volatile oils that make them

unpalatable to cattle and can cause problems in
the rumen (3,5). However, domestic sheep will
graze big sagebrush but prefer young plants and
new growth (5). Big sagebrush is considered to
have good value for wildlife on winter range (3).
Antelope will use this plant year long while mule
deer will limit use to late fall, winter and spring
(5). In the U.S. sagebrush is the key species for
sage grouse and acts as their main food source,
providing up to 70 to 75% of their diet, as well as
providing nesting cover and escape cover (5).
Heavy wildlife use has been shown to reduce big
sagebrush numbers and in areas such as
Yellowstone Park in the U.S. this decrease is evident in many of the winter range sites frequented by antelope, elk and mule deer (6).
However, when it comes to livestock, big sagebrush is considered an increaser, meaning that it
increases with moderate overuse but will
decrease with continued heavy overuse. Because
of this it is considered weedy or invasive in some
areas (5). An abundance of big sagebrush can
indicate overgrazing or lack of regular fire disturbance. In the Southern Interior big sagebrush
has increased from pre-European settlement levels due to overgrazing by domestic livestock (2).
Fire can lead to a decrease in big sagebrush in
a community as big sagebrush is easily killed
when above ground parts are charred and it does
not resprout after fire (4). Therefore, it must reestablish on a site from seed. As seed is generally
damaged by fire, this new seed source must
come from off site seed or seed remaining in
unburned patches (4).

In general most studies have looked at methods to decrease big sagebrush, but in some areas
re-establishment is becoming a priority (1,6).
For example, the Wyoming Department of
Environmental Quality is now requiring reestablishment of big sagebrush on disturbed mine
sites due to its ability to prevent erosion, provide
wildlife habitat and forage and improve rangeland aesthetics (1).
Big sagebrush also has many historical and
medicinal uses. Native people in the southern
interior made teas for colds from its leaves and
branches and used the leaves for a fumigant and
as a smudge (2). The wood was also used for
thatch and firewood (3) and the bark was woven
into mats, bags and clothing (2).
References
1 Maier, A.M., Perryman, B.L., Olson, R.A. and Hild, A. 2001.
Climatic influences on recruitment of 3 subspecies of
Artemesia tridentata. Journal of Range Management
54(6), pg. 699-702.
2 Parish, R., Coupe, R. and Lloyd, D. 1996. Plants of
Southern Interior British Columbia. Lone Pine Publishing.
Vancouver, BC. Pp. 67.
3 Stubbendieck, J., Hatch, S.L. and Landholt, L.M. 2003.
North American Wildland Plants: a field guide. University
of Nebraska Press. Nebraska, USA. Pp. 241.
4 US Federal Fire Database. Fire effects on Artemisia tridentata. Federal fire database
http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/shrub/arttrit/fir
e_effects.html
5 USDA, NRDS. 2004. The Plants Database, Version 3.5
(http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton
Rouge, USA.
6 Wambolt, C.L. and Sherwood, H.W. 1999. Sagebrush
response to ungulate browsing in Yellowstone. Journal of
Range Management 52(4) pg. 363-369.
7 Welch, B. 2004. Artemisia tridentata Nutt. [Article, US
Federal Database, accessed online 17 March 2006]
http://www.fs.fed.us

BC GRASSLANDS

17

Perspectives

Protecting Our Natural Heritage for

Sheila Harrington, Executive Director, Land Trust Alliance of BC

18

BC GRASSLANDS

tlesnake, pallid bat, mule deer, grizzly bear and

cougar. The backdrop of towering hoodoos, limestone sinkholes and imposing canyons increases
the allure of the area. This ranch serves as an
example of how ranching and conservation are
not the mutually exclusive activities that many
perceive them to be.
Outright purchase, however, is an expensive
way to protect land, so land trusts use other
tools. A land owner can willingly work with a
land trust to have a conservation covenant registered on title to their land. This will be trans-

A covenant example from one of the earliest

periods when the Land Title Act was changed to
allow non-government organizations to hold
covenants is from the Silva Forest Foundation.
They hold a covenant near Grand Forks on a 121
hectare property located along the Kettle River.
Approximately half of the property is in the agricultural land reserve and is for agricultural use
under organic certification. The remainder of the
property is zoned for forestry and buildings. The
forested part of the property has been logged at
various times over the past 80 years and there
are few old trees. The purpose of
the covenant is to protect water
quantity and quality, preserve and
enhance wildlife habitat, and
within the forested area, the goal
is restoration.
Another example of a covenant
is a 24 hectare site registered in
2001. The covenants main purpose is to protect Species and
Risk and some grassland areas.
The property is situated on the
Toby Benches a rolling 35
square km plateau which lies at
the foot of the Purcell Mountains,
near Invermere, BC. Since fire
suppression has been in general
practice for the last half of the
century, there has been a general trend toward
forest in-growth on sites that were formerly
grassland, grass-shrublands and open forest.
Two unconnected ponds lie within the covenant
area and together with the forested areas, provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species. This
property provides an important corridor for
wildlife and refuge for wild plant species. It has
been protected by the owner because of her love
for elk.
There is one limitation to having conservation
covenants registered on ALR lands. These
covenants must receive approval from the
Agricultural Land Commission. In some cases,
the Commission has turned down covenants on
ALR lands, due to their strict agricultural focus.
However, the Land Trust Alliance of British
Columbia (LTABC) and some of our member
land trusts are currently working to ensure that
the process of approval is more transparent, and
BRUNO DELESALLE

Streams, farms and ranches, parks, forests,

grasslandsfor more than twenty years, land
trusts have been working with their communities to protect areas with significant natural and
cultural features.
Many people are unfamiliar with the work of
land trusts and conservancies. Some may be
confused because the phrase land trust is
occasionally also used to refer to a number of
different forms of collective land ownership.
Arrangements similar to housing co-ops,
co-housing, or ecovillages can sometimes be
referred to as land trusts.
Most land trusts in British
Columbia are focused on the longterm protection of habitats or heritage sites for future generations,
thus the words land trust and conservancy are synonymous. Land
trusts usually work on lands that
are privately held, as opposed to
advocating on larger Crown land
issues and policies. They are independent charities that work in
partnership with landowners,
other organizations, governments
and business. The oldest land trust
in BC is Ducks Unlimited (DU)
founded in 1938. Like DU, The
Nature Conservancy of Canada,
The Land Conservancy of BC (TLC), and The
Nature Trust of BC work province-wide. Another
thirty local land trusts have been formed in the
last fifteen years that work within distinct communities, including such groups as the North
Okanagan Parks and Wildlife Trust, the Kootenay
Land Trust Society, the Fraser Valley Land Trust,
and many more.
The most visible activity of land trusts is the
direct acquisition of land, such as The Land
Conservancys purchase of Talking Mountain
ranch near Clinton. This 1000 acre cattle ranch,
next to 7500 acres of Crown rangeland, is leased
to a ranching family. As a majority of grassland
areas in this province are privately held (especially low elevation and riparian sites) the
opportunity for public access to research or
inventory these areas is rare. Associated species
on the ranch include the common poorwill,
Lewis woodpecker, prairie falcon, western rat-

ferred to future owners, and it may protect all or

part of the land. The conservation covenant
allows continued human use of the land, and it
also provides perpetual legal protection for some
of the ecological or heritage features. Before
1994, conservation covenants were only held by
government agencies. However, due to financial
and staff requirements, many of these agencies
found it difficult if not impossible to bear the
costs of annual monitoring or ultimate enforcement should the terms of the covenant be
breached.
As with regulation, covenants and easements
require the holder to make a substantial commitment to monitoring and enforcement. An
advantage of covenants over regulation is that
covenants can include positive restorative
actions and they can be designed for the unique
features of each piece of land rather than the one
size fits all quality of regulation.

Future Generations
that the benefits of conservation covenants can
be understood and accepted more generally.
Land trusts also encourage voluntary land
stewardship and sometimes engage in restoration or educational projects in co-operation with
other stewardship organizations. These programs can be as simple as offering public presentations or workshops, or meeting with
landowners and developing plans for restoration
or invasive species control.
Land trusts preserve or restore habitat,
species, and streamside areas within existing
farms, ranches or forests. Often these land uses
require extensive areas that are difficult for a single landowner to buy, manage or maintain.
Consequently, Land Trusts can help preserve sustainable range, food and forest lands by working

in partnership with the land owners to protect

habitat values at the same time as restricting
development or practices which would damage
the natural or cultural features of the land.
Much of the important wildlife habitat in
British Columbia is on private property so the
work of land trusts is vital in protecting our natural heritage. Land owners, farmers and ranchers, and other organizations can become familiar
with the work of their local land trust so that
when an ecologically important property comes
on the market or is threatened with development, these community land trusts are familiar
and available to help.
The LTABC is a province-wide association of
all of BCs land trusts. Formed in 1997. It currently has 82 members. We provide training pro-

grams, resources, research and networking

among the many land trusts, and with the wider
Canadian Land Trust Alliance now in formation.
The best single source of information about the
work of land trusts and protected lands in
British Columbia is the Land Trust Alliance
resource centre at 250-538-0112,
info@landtrustalliance.bc.ca or the Land Trust
Alliance website at www.landtrustalliance.bc.ca.
We also have an on-line Registry of Protected
Lands at www.landtrustalliance.bc.ca/registry.
British Columbians are fortunate to live in an
area containing incredible beauty, significant
habitat, and the countrys highest level of biodiversity. Working with Land Trusts, we still have
time to preserve and restore this heritage for the
benefit of our children and all other creatures.

Call for Members

The GCC has enjoyed a busy and productive year.
It is to you, the members, we owe much of our
success in 2005-2006, and for that we thank you!
A great number of memberships are due for
renewal in the coming months, and we are
confident that we can rely on your continued
assistance in our mission to conserve BCs
precious grassland ecosystems.
Our membership is growing, and we hope to
continue our relations with our loyal members even
as we welcome many new grassland enthusiasts to
our growing base of support. Please use the
enclosed membership form to support the GCC
and do your part to promote the stewardship of
BCs grasslands.

BC GRASSLANDS

19

A NEW LOOK AT CONSERVATION PLANNING TOOLS

The Green Infrastructure Model

Jan Kirkby, Landscape Ecologist, Canadian Wildlife Service

BCs grasslands are disappearing at an alarming rate. Why? We

are better informed than ever before about the natural values of
grasslands, the critical habitat and ecosystem services they provide, the current status of, threats to, and need to conserve these
ecosystems.Yet fragmentation, degradation, and loss of these
fragile ecosystems continue despite heroic efforts by groups,
individuals, and all levels of government to protect the little that
remains of BCs once rich and diverse grasslands.
Mapping currently underway by the Grasslands Conservation
Council will show the location and extent of remaining priority
grassland areas. Another mapping project just being completed
by the BC Ministry of Environment shows the change in extent
of interior grassland ecosystems from the 1800s to 1938 to
2001. The extensive losses shown on the maps are disturbing,
but provide a compelling argument for protection of remaining
grasslands.
What can we do to protect and restore our grasslands and
other at-risk ecosystems? Development pressure on remaining
natural ecosystems is intense and increasing. The majority of
land use decisions in areas of human settlement are made at the
local government level, and local governments have been
empowered in recent years to enact legislation to protect sensitive ecosystems within their jurisdictions. However, local governments are struggling to find a balance between managing
growth and protecting natural values. Official Community
Plans, growth strategies, and associated bylaws often do not
effectively utilize the full suite of existing legislative tools to
ensure protection of remaining natural ecosystems.
The Green Infrastructure Model Bylaws Package
How can we help? One thing we can do is to make sure that
were making optimum use of existing tools, legislation and
incentives that promote the conservation of remaining grasslands. To that end, the multi-agency Wetland Stewardship
Partnership has partnered with the University of Victoria
Environmental Law Centre Clinic (lawyers Deborah Curran,
Calvin Sandborn and UVic law students) to develop The Green
Infrastructure Model Bylaws Package, a set of model local government bylaws that can provide comprehensive protection for
grasslands, wetlands and other sensitive ecosystems.

20

BC GRASSLANDS

The Green Infrastructure Model Bylaws Package

provides:
Integrated bylaw provisions that maintain the green infrastructure and protect ecologically sensitive areas;
Materials that include model provisions for Regional Growth
Strategies, Official Community Plans, Development Permit
Areas, Zoning, Tax Exemptions, Environmental Assessment,
Stormwater Management and other regulatory tools;
Provisions designed so that local governments can either
develop a comprehensive bylaw package, or choose applicable
portions when considering revisions to a particular type of
bylaw.
Each local government can tailor the sample wording provided
in the Model Bylaws Package to its own administrative and sitespecific context.
The bylaw examples in the package are not theoretical. Most
have already been implemented by at least one BC jurisdiction.
Different local governments are doing different things well, and
the Model Bylaws Package picks out the best provisions and
puts them all together as examples of the variety of ways local
governments are protecting their green infrastructure. In addition, the team developed two publications designed for local
governments that explain why they should move quickly to protect wetlands and grasslandsWetlands Protection: A Primer
for Local Governments and Grasslands Protection: A Primer for
Local Governments.
Advantages to Local Governments
The key benefit of the Model Bylaws Package is its comprehensive, integrated approach. Much of the work done in planning
offices is by necessity site-specific and reactive, for example,
responding to development applications. Many local governments enact conservation bylaws either because of provincial
regulations or in response to a specific local issue, such as the
cost of providing services to new development. However, most
municipal and regional governments acknowledge the need for
strategic, landscape-level land use planning. The Model Bylaws
Package demonstrates the possibility of developing integrated
conservation tools.
Local governments can move beyond reacting to specific
issues, regulatory or other, by ensuring that the systems are in
place that enable a proactive approach to managing the entire
green infrastructure. This integrated approach will also assist
municipalities to put into place systems and best practices that
will anticipate future senior government regulatory requirements. Finally, this proactive approach will help communities
protect their valuable natural areasand realize the multitude
of economic, social and environmental benefits that a community enjoys when it does so.

Bylaws Package
The Species at Risk Act
The Model Bylaws Package will assist local governments to
comply with the provisions of the Species at Risk Act. Protection
of wetlands, grasslands and other sensitive ecosystems is a necessary component of any strategy to protect species at risk,
because the majority of species at risk depend on sensitive
ecosystems for all or part of their life cycle. Proactive local
action to protect these areas will reduce the need for less effectiveand more costlyrecovery plans for such species. Local
communities can avoid being caught unaware by potential new
species at risk legal requirements by taking the initiative now.
Consultation to Refine the Green Infrastructure
Model Bylaws Package
The Model Bylaws Package was well-received at the Union of BC
Municipalities (UBCM) 2005 annual meeting, and the stage has
now been set for the reform of bylaws across the province. The
next step in the development of the model bylaw document is
consultation with an expert focus group of local government
staff and political leaders. An invitation will be extended to
selected local government staff and officials who have worked
on protective and related bylaws to assist in refining and elaborating the bylaw package. Participants will be asked to suggest
changes to improve both the bylaw package and its presentation. Perhaps most importantly, they will be asked to describe
their own governments experiences with the legal tools that
have been proposed.
The focus group will add their experiences in working with
particular legal provisions that are recommended in the Model
Bylaws Package. This will demonstrate the scope of each tool,
and relevant issues about its utility, administration and enforcement. The intention is to include case studies of local government experiences as sidebars in the final document to provide
other local governments with information on the advantages
and difficulties of using each of the major bylaw provisions.
The format of the document will be refined to make it easier
to navigate, and a matrix will be added at the beginning that
outlines what each tool can and cannot do. A final version of the
Model Bylaws Package will then be produced and distributed to
all local governments.

Building Capacity with Local Government to

Begin Bylaw Changes
The next step will be to provide outreach and information
sessions, and to create partnerships that will facilitate implementation of the Green Infrastructure Model Bylaws Package.
This will include presentations at regional local government
annual meetings, tailored workshops for interested local governments, and responsive strategic legal advice.
Regional Biodiversity Conservation Strategies
In order to successfully promote strategic, landscape-level,
conservation-based land use planning, regional biodiversity
conservation strategies are being developed and implemented
in the Greater Vancouver Region, the Islands Trust Area, and in
the Comox Valley on Vancouver Island. It is hoped that these
biodiversity conservation strategies and tools such as the Green
Infrastructure Model Bylaws Package will provide models for
use in other regions, and will promote a more strategic, proactive approach to biodiversity conservation. Time is of the
essencewe owe our grandchildren much more than just
stories about what used to be.
Thanks to Deborah Curran and Calvin Sandborn for contributions to this article.

Grasslands in BC
PHOTO TERRY JACKSON

BC GRASSLANDS

21

In the absence of a detailed inventory and

classification system, grassland habitats
throughout BC are being fragmented,
degraded and lost. Bruno Delesalle

Going,
Over the past 10 years alone, an
alarming number of grasslands
have been lost or degraded by
development and fragmentation.
Local and regional planners have
not had the information and
expertise necessary to plan for
sensitive ecosystems, such as
grasslands. Subsequently, they
have been unable to develop
community plans that consider
grassland values.

Above left is a photo of the

future site of the Valleyview truck
stop taken in 1994.
Below left, the same site in
2004. The area was once
grassland.

SOUTH THOMPSON RIVER EAST OF KAMLOOPS

22

BC GRASSLANDS

going...
The GCC is tackling this
problem head on with an
initiative: Planning for Change:
Preventing the Fragmentation and
Development of Priority
Grasslands in BC.
Working with the data collected
within the Priority Grasslands
Initiative, the GCC and its
partners will collaborate to work
with planners in local, regional
and First Nations governments to
recognize and protect grasslands
and other sensitive ecosystems
when planning for development.

Above right, Osoyoos grasslands

in 1994.
Below right, the same site in
2004. The area was once
grassland.

OSOYOOS GRASSLANDS
BC GRASSLANDS

23

Fauna

Yellow-Breasted Chat
(Icteria virens auricollis)
Dick Cannings, Consulting Biologist

Description

Threats

The Yellow-breasted Chat is a large warbler that is about the

same size as an oriole. It is bright yellow on the throat and
breast, white on the belly and olive green on the back. The bird
has white markings or spectacles on the side of its blue-grey
head. Its song is a loud series of clear whistles and harsher
notes.

Habitat availability is the primary limiting factor for the Yellowbreasted Chat in British Columbia. Removal of riparian (riverside) forest along the Okanagan River channel, and conversion
of this land to agriculture, has severely reduced the amount of
suitable breeding habitat for the species

Distribution and Population

The Yellow-breasted Chat auricollis subspecies British Columbia

population is protected under the federal Species at Risk Act
(SARA).
The British Columbia population of the Yellow-breasted Chat
auricollis subspecies is protected by the federal Migratory Birds
Convention Act. Under this Act, it is prohibited to kill, harm, or
collect adults, young, and eggs. It is also protected under the
British Columbia Wildlife Act, which additionally prevents
destruction of active nest sites.
Riparian habitat used by the British Columbia population of
the Yellow-breasted Chat auricollis subspecies is being restored
and protected through a variety of projects, but it is also being
lost in places to new development. With only about 50 pairs in
British Columbia, this population remains vulnerable to extirpation.
Most of the Yellow-breasted Chats population in the south
Okanagan and Similkameen valleys is monitored by government and First Nations researchers.
Ongoing research projects have continually fine-tuned our
understanding of what constitutes suitable habitat for this population of Yellow-breasted Chat. This knowledge has been used
to identify all potentially suitable breeding habitat remaining in
the south Okanagan and Similkameen valleys. An improved
understanding of habitat requirements has also helped the
recovery team prioritize sites for habitat restoration.
More than half of Yellow-breasted Chat habitat in British
Columbia is on Indian Reserves and the rest is on private,
provincial Crown and conservation lands. Suitable protected
areas and Crown land in the south Okanagan include the
VaseuxBighorn National Wildlife Area, South Okanagan
Wildlife Management Area and Inkaneep Provincial Park.
The South Okanagan Wildlife Management Area was designated in 1993 by the provincial government to protect riparian
habitat that is important to Yellow-breasted Chats and many

The Yellow-breasted Chat breeds from southern Canada south

to central Mexico and winters from southern Texas and Florida
south to western Panama. In Canada, the species in found in
three areas. One subspecies (I .v. auricollis) occurs in both
British Columbia and the southern parts of Alberta and
Saskatchewan. These two populations are referred to as the
British Columbia population and the prairie population respectively. They are treated separately for the purposes of assigning
status because they inhabit separate geographic areas. The
other subspecies of Yellow-breasted Chat (I. v. virens) occurs in
Canada in southwestern Ontario (eastern population). The
estimate available in 2001 for the British Columbia population
counted fewer than 50 pairs of the species.
Habitat

The Yellow-breasted Chat breeds in dense thickets around wood

edges, riparian areas, and in overgrown clearings. Western populations are more or less confined to riparian environments,
particularly thickets of wild rose and willow along streams and
river oxbows. Although the species breeding habitat in British
Columbia has been affected by development in the last 50 years,
very little has been lost in the last decade.
Biology

This species is a neotropical migrant that is territorial and

forms monogamous pairs. It leaves Canada in early fall and
returns in the spring (mid-May in British Columbia). Females
lay three to five eggs per clutch, and both males and females
feed the young. In British Columbia, some birds attempt two
broods per season.Very little is known about nesting success.
The species primary diet during the breeding season consists
of insects, but it feeds on large numbers of berries in the late
summer.

24

BC GRASSLANDS

Protection

The Yellow-breasted Chat is an

endangered species.
GCC FILE PHOTO

other species at risk while allowing cattle grazing and hay cropping to continue.
Habitat restoration projects have been conducted on private
lands, Indian Reserves and conservation lands in the South
Okanagan and Similkameen valleys. Riparian habitat has been
restored by fencing some riparian woodlands to exclude livestock and by re-flooding to restore some water flow to the
marshes and oxbows. Fence maintenance is ongoing, as is control of invasive plants. The effectiveness of fencing at improving
habitat quality for Yellow-breasted Chats has been confirmed by
monitoring all fenced sites since 2001.
In 2002, the Osoyoos Indian Band began implementation of a
range restoration plan in which riparian areas on reserve land
will be protected and forage quality should improve through
range rotations for cattle. This range plan benefits Yellowbreasted Chats by reducing grazing in a riparian zone where
chats have been known to establish breeding territories.
In 2003 a significant riparian habitat restoration project was
initiated in VaseuxBighorn National Wildlife Area. The goal is
to restore the north end meadow (16 hectares) to riparian lowland forest by breaching the Okanagan River dike and restoring
water flow to the area, creating habitat for up to 30 new chat
territories.
In 2004, the provincial government created 11 Yellow-breasted Chat wildlife habitat areas, each one between 1.1 and 1.5
hectares. These sites were identified as having high quality
nesting habitat and are protected through limiting livestock
within the wildlife habitat area.
The Land Conservancy of BC (TLC), in partnership with the
EnOwkin Centre (a non-profit First Nations educational organization), is attempting to acquire a long-term lease over 72 acres
along the Okanagan River channel, a property that is home to
the Yellow-breasted Chat. The lands are currently held by First
Nations families in a form of land tenure called Locatee. TLC
aims to protect and restore the habitat on this important property, as well as provide an interpretive and educational program
that teaches about the areas ecology, provides opportunities for
involvement in habitat restoration, and also focuses on aboriginal use of the lands resources.
Stewardship by private landowners is also necessary for the
long-term recovery of the species. Outreach initiatives, such as

the production of the Chats in your neighbourhood information booklet, have raised landowner knowledge of chat habitat
requirements and techniques they might use to provide habitat.
Many ranchers have supported riparian habitat restoration by
providing alternate watering facilities for livestock and by
allowing researchers access to their properties so that vegetation and bird community responses to the new habitats can be
monitored.
Dick Cannings is a Consulting Biologist, He has many years consulting experience with respect to wildlife in BC and has published extensively.

GCC Website Update

The very popular
and informative
GCC website
is currently
undergoing a
redesign. This
change is intended
to make the site
more attractive
and more user
friendly. Changes
in the structure
and site navigation
tools will allow users to mover more easily from section to
section and be able to retrace their steps. Information will be
updated and material that is no longer relevant deleted. As the
result, we think that you will find that visiting the GCC website
will be an even more valuable experience.

BC GRASSLANDS

25

Partner Profile

The South Okanagan Similkameen

R. McKelvey, South Okanagan Similkameen Conservation Program

The badger is a
threatened species.
GCC FILE PHOTO

Importance of the
South Okanagan
The South Okanagan area is an
important area for biodiversity
because it has many different habitats in close proximity and because
it connects similar habitats to the
north and the south. When the
continental ice sheets receded at
the end of the last ice age some
10,000 years ago they left a wide
valley lined with fertile bench-land
terraces. Depressions in the in the
land were filled by melt-water from
the glaciers, forming the present
day Okanagan lakes system. The
rain shadow of the Coast
Mountains gives the South
Okanagan a dry climate, but the
open waters of the large lakes
moderate the climate, cooling the
air in summer and warming it in
winter, allowing grasslands to flourish at lower elevations and
thick forests at higher elevations. All this has combined to produce diverse habitats in relatively confined space: wetlands,
grasslands, rocky outcrops, forests, and other landscape features
supporting a unique assemblage of plants and animals.
The Okanagan River watershed forms a north-south corridor
connecting the Cariboo-Chilcotin area in central British
Columbia with the Great Basin in Washington and other dry
lands to the south. This corridor is important annually for
many species of birds as they migrate north and south. It is also
important over longer periods of time. After the last ice-age
many species of plants and animals expanded their ranges
northward into new, vacant habitats. This continues today as
organisms adapt to changing climates, locating optimum conditions for their particular ways of life.
Human Development of the Landscape
The human species has also found the Okanagan valley to be a
productive environment. The valley has been occupied by aboriginal peoples for thousands of years, and in the last 150 years
has been settled very heavily by immigrants from Europe and
elsewhere. Today, human use of the valley is reducing the
amount of habitat remaining for other species, putting some of
those at risk of becoming extirpated. The north-south link is in
jeopardy of being severed due to this intensive land use, and the
loss of habitat and biodiversity threatens vital natural values
and quality of life.

26

BC GRASSLANDS

Genesis of the Program

Efforts to protect and manage the biodiversity and important
natural features of the South Okanagan date back to at least the
early 1900s, with the creation of the Vaseux Lake Migratory Bird
Sanctuary around 1920. There have been many efforts since,
and today the South Okanagan is recognized throughout
Canada as one of the most unique areas in the country, and one
of the ecosystems most at risk. It is a heavily modified landscape, with intensive forms of farming such as tree fruits, vegetable production and grape-growing occupying most of the
productive valley bottom lands. Not only has this resulted in
diminution of the habitat once available, but it has caused many
species to become at-risk or endangered.
The Conservation Program
The South Okanagan Similkameen Conservation Program
builds on existing conservation efforts in the South Okanagan.
Its overall aim is to maintain the rich biodiversity of the area,
including species at risk, to maintain a viable link between the
habitats to the north and the south, and to promote sustainable
land use. The Programs vision is A healthy environment that
sustains the diversity of indigenous plants and animals while
enriching peoples lives. The Program also supports economic
and social values. Effective stewardship will conserve important
habitats and key ecological values that have always attracted
people to this area. So that agriculture and other industries can
continue to prosper, landscape conservation must be conducted
as part of over-all community planning.

Conservation Program
Priority Habitats
There are many different habitat types in the
South Okanagan but the key habitats identified
are wetland/riparian, grassland/shrub-steppe,
coniferous forest, and rugged terrain. Wetland
and riparian habitats are the most productive,
generally are found in the valley bottom, and
have suffered the greatest losses. Grasslandshrub-steppe has also been heavily impacted by
human settlement. More than half the species at
risk in the area depend on these desert-like
habitats. Conservation efforts on this habitat are
crucial if the north-south corridor is to be
maintained. Coniferous forest is relatively abundant at higher elevations, but patches of oldgrowth in the valley bottoms have become very
scarce. In addition, fire suppression has allowed
an ingrowth of young trees, resulting in a reduction of the grassland savannah once widespread
and also important to the north-south corridor.
Rugged terrain, though less diminished than
other habitats, is a crucial habitat for many
species of animals, and is at risk from residential development
and recreational activities.
Ownership of Habitats and Conservation Goals
To set conservation goals it is important to know first who owns
the important habitats and this is shown in Table 1. An indicator of the effectiveness of the Program is the amount of land
affected. The Program Partners are attempting to influence the
landscape as shown in Table 2.
Partnership
The South Okanagan Similkameen Conservation Program is a
partnership of government, non-government, First Nations, universities, and industry with shared interests in conserving the
unique biodiversity of this area. It acts primarily to focus the
energy of the partners and the community at large to make
most efficient use of the limited resources available to the government and non-government agencies responsible for resource
management and conservation in the area. Currently there are
35 partners.

Strategies for Implementation of the Program

Six teams co-ordinate development of the programs and projects of the South Okanagan Similkameen Conservation
Program. These teams are: Science, Traditional Ecological
Knowledge, Outreach, Stewardship, Securement, and Land Use
Planning. Their duties are as follows:
The Science Team. The Science Team undertakes to establish
short and longer term goals for conservation, primarily at the
habitat level. These goals are strongly influenced by the needs of
species at risk, where there are Recovery Strategies or Action
Plans in place for those species.
The Outreach Team. The Outreach Team fosters increased conservation awareness, involvement and commitment of residents
and visitors to the South Okanagan Similkameen area.
The Stewardship Team. The Stewardship Team promotes and
enhances management of privately owned land of high value to
priority habitats and regional biodiversity.
The Land Use Planning Team. The Land Use Planning Team
influences local, regional and provincial government land use
decisions consistent with the attainment of the landscape goals
of the SOSCP.
The Habitat Securement Team. The Habitat Securement Team
acquires and manages properties of high conservation value.
The Traditional Ecological Knowledge Team. The Traditional
Ecological Knowledge Team promotes the understanding and
use of aboriginal peoples knowledge and respect for the land.

Table 1. Ownership (percentage) of lands in the South Okanagan Similkameen

area.
CONSERVATION LANDS

Grasslands
Riparian
Rugged Terrain
Coniferous Forest

5
15
15
15

FIRST NATIONS

PRIVATE

25
25
20
25

45
35
15
20

CROWN LAND

25
25
50
40

Table 2. Amount of habitat (ha) to be affected by stewardship of Crown land,

acquisition, and stewardship of private land in the South Okanagan
Similkameen Conservation Program area.
CROWN LAND
CONSERVATION

Grasslands
13,000
Riparian
1,500
Rugged Terrain
5,800
Coniferous Forest 13,000
Total
33,300

PRIVATE LAND
ACQUISITION

STEWARDSHIP

9,500
700
800
500
11,500

9,000
3,000
3,200
10,000
25,200

TOTAL

31,500
5,200
9,800
23,500
70,000

BC GRASSLANDS

27

Message from the Executive Director

from inside front cover
in short supply. Why then is development
approved on grassland and agricultural forage
lands? These are threatened resources. The usual
rationale given for this proposal is that development is inevitable and mining is an important
economic engine for the province.
Unfortunately, this scenario is all too common. The GCC recognizes that growth and
development are a reality and perhaps even
inevitable but we can plan for and manage
them. To achieve effective conservation and
stewardship of grasslands and range resources,
governments, at all levels, will need to implement
effective planning; deliver good process; and
guarantee meaningful dialogue and consultation
to achieve informed decision-making. The above
example illustrates a significant breakdown in
planning, good process, and communication.
This scenario also illustrates how important a
strategic and co-ordinated approach to land use
planning and decision making can be, particularly when dealing with habitats at risk and
valued forage resources that are dwindling and
under extreme threat. Forage values, species at
risk, and other ecological values cannot compete
against strong economic interests, such as
mining, urban development and intensive agriculture, especially when the playing field is not
level.
After two years of hard work completing an
analytical and strategic plan to mitigate fragmentation and development of BCs grasslands,
the GCC has launched its new flagship initiative,
Planning for Change: Preventing fragmentation
and development of BCs grasslands. This new
initiative is in response to growing pressures
from urban expansion and other forms of development. It is built on the scientific foundation of
the priority grasslands process which is identify-

Without appropriate
information, effective
planning, partnerships and
collaboration between
provincial, regional, local,
and First Nations
governments, grasslands will
continue to be lost at an
unsustainable rate.

28

BC GRASSLANDS

GRASSLAND AREA LOST WITHIN THE LAST 15 YEARS (IN HECTARES)

City and surrounding area

ing and ranking high priority grasslands for

conservation and stewardship. The Planning for
Change initiative will provide governments with
good data and a valid justification for conserving
priority grasslands.
Over the next two years, the GCC will conduct
a series of workshops and meetings within each
region. Regional, municipal and First Nations
governments will participate. The workshops are
intended to increase awareness about priority
grasslands; to provide stakeholders with data,
maps, grassland portfolios and conservation targets. The result will be recommendations and
strategies for conservation and stewardship.
Although these initiatives are not in themselves the answer, they are an important part of
the overall solution. The problem is clearwithout a strategic and co-ordinated approach to
land use planning and decision-making, the fate
of our grasslands will be left to market forces
and the laws of supply and demand. Economic
considerations will win every time. To influence
effective and sustainable planning, sound
process, and meaningful dialogue, the GCC will:
increase awareness of priority grasslands and
their ecological and economic values,
present local and regional inventories of priority grasslands,
provide a scientific base and rationalization
for conservation planning and associated land
use decisions, and
collaborate with a wide range of organizations
both inside and outside of government to
resolve problems and develop viable solutions.
Last but not least, the GCC will work with its
partners to raise public awareness of BCs threatened grasslands. Without public support, change
and effective land use planning at all levels will
be difficult.

The Cost of Urban Sprawl

from page 13
hoods lack even sidewalks for pedestrians, forcing
residents to walk in the street next to the traffic
whizzing by. In the past it was normal for kids to
walk to school, but now their parents often drive
them or they take their own cars. Is it any wonder
that an epidemic of obesity is plaguing our country? Walking is the best form of life-long exercise,
yet our development patterns actively discourage
walking. Obesity and joint related diseases are
epidemicI wonder why?
11. Degraded, Noisy Surroundings Helter-skelter sprawl is not attractive, yet many of our transportation corridors are now edged with jumbles
of residential, commercial, and industrial developments (and their enormous parking lots),
which have no sense of beauty or order. This adds
to the stressful, disconnected feelings which
urban residents often express. Were losing the
green space we need as part of our natural heritage. Large areas of noisy, speeding traffic are
also not conducive to peaceful communities.
Many people want to live in the country to escape
this stress, but urban escapees are helping to create these problems instead, as they commute back
to the city for work, school and shopping.
12. Tourism Industry Damage As human developments sprawl into the countryside and wildlife
habitat shrinks, were rapidly losing the scenic
qualities that attract tourists to our region. Our
rural roads are being straightened and widened,
or worse yet, converted into freeways. Outdoor
enthusiasts are having to travel further and further to find uncrowded campgrounds or pristine
surroundings. Anglers are left with crowded,
noisy lakes. This will have direct economic
impacts in BC, where the tourism industry is
currently worth around $9 billion a year.

Across the Province

Fraser Basin Council
Text to come? ????????????

Invasive Plant Council

The Invasive Plant Council of British Columbia (IPCBC)
emerged from the Invasive Plant Strategy for British
Columbia, a document produced by a diverse group of
partners lead by the Fraser Basin Council. The IPCBCs
goal is to work toward the implementation of the strategy so that through
co-operation and co-ordination, negative ecological, social and economic
impacts caused by invasive plants can be minimized. The IPCBC Board of
Directors is a varied group and has representation from the agriculture,
tourism, mining, forestry, transportation and utilities industries, as well as
First Nations, federal, provincial and municipal governments. News about
IPCBC events and initiatives can be found on the IPCBCs new website at
www.invasiveplantcouncilbc.ca

Society for Range Management

This has been an exciting year
for the Society for Range
Management as the BC Chapter
hosted the 59th Annual
Meeting and Trade Show held
in Vancouver, BC. The
Rangelands to Rainforests convention was a great success
with over 1200 delegates from
around North America.
Danielle Toperczer (GCC Development
Opening comments were given
Officer) and Maurice Hansen (Past
by The Honourable Iona
GCC Chair) in front of GCC display at
Campagnolo, Lieutenant
SRM Conference in Vancouver in
Governor of British Columbia,
January.
I am mindful that as professional stewards of rangelands, you are obliged to balance fluctuating
imperatives toward sustainability, including the vagaries of climate
change, exponential domestic growth, altered international marketing
policies and other intangibles. Michael Pitt, GCC Chair, presented on climate change and impacts to grasslandsGlobal Climate Change:
Whither the Grasslands?

National Park Reserve Feasibility Study

South Okanagan Lower Similkameen
On October 2, 2003, the federal and provincial governments signed a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that paves the way to assess feasibility for the creation of a new national park reserve in the South
Okanagan and Lower Similkameen area. The MOU supports the
Government of Canadas action plan to create 10 new national parks and
five new national marine conservation areas by 2008. Under the MOU,
Canada and British Columbia have agreed to work co-operatively in the
feasibility study. The feasibility study is set to conclude in late 2007, following extensive studies and consultations. For more information on the
feasibility study, please visit the parks Canada website.

Smart Growth
Smart Growth BC is a provincial non-governmental organization devoted
to fiscally, socially and environmentally responsible land use and development. Working with community groups, businesses, municipalities and
the public, they advocate for the creation of more livable communities in
British Columbia. Smart Growth BC was created as a joint project of the
University of Victoria Eco-Research Chair of Environmental Law and
Policy and the West Coast Environmental Law Association. The Smart
Growth project aims to nurture and mobilize a growing citizen movement
addressing growth and sprawl issues around the province, and to provide
sound alternative policy solutions to these issues. Smart Growth BC was
incorporated as an independent non-profit society in December 1999, and
received federal charitable status in January 2002.

BC Institute of Agrologists (BCIA)

The BCIA held its Annual General Meeting in Osoyoos, BC. The AGM
included a professional development workshop as well as feature presentations on the history of land use planning and resource management, the
South OkanaganSimilkameen Conservation Program, ecoregional planning and the Nature Conservancy of Canada, and a presentation by the
GCC on land use planning: Current Realities and Future Challenges. The
event was very well attended. The BCIA is a self-regulating professional
body formed by an Order in Council of the provincial government in
1947. The purpose of the Institute is to ensure the competency of its
members and to uphold the public interest in the practice of agrology.
There are approximately 1000 members. For more information go to
www.bcia.com

North Okanagan Conservation Initiative

The North Okanagan has started down the path to creating a regional
conservation initiative to address the alarming rate at which grasslands
and other important ecosystems are being lost. To date, two meetings have
been conducted by various groups to develop a vision of what the initiative will accomplish, and develop partnerships that will improve land use
planning and conservation for the areas natural spaces. Included in this
partnership are the provincial and federal government, First Nations, local
and regional governments, non-government organizations and, most
importantly, local interest groups. Stay tuned for updates on this exciting
initiative.

KamloopsSouth Thompson
Sustainable Community Atlas
The KamloopsSouth Thompson Sustainable Community Atlas is a web
based mapping tool whose goal is to provide a wide range of cultural,
socio-economic, ecological and land use information within a highly
accessible atlas format. The atlas is being collaboratively developed
through a partnership to foster the sharing of information and the develcontinued on page 31
BC GRASSLANDS

29

Members Corner

TRU Range Club

Terri France and Morgan Rankin

Thompson Rivers University Range Club

represented the university at the 59th
International Society for Range
Management (SRM) Conference in
Vancouver from February 12 to 17. Coached
by Wendy Gardner and Darren Bruhjell, six
students from TRUs Natural Resource
Science (NRS) program, Clayton Bradley,
Terri France, Amber Greenall, Nick
Hamilton, Morgan Rankin, and Robin
Routledge, attended and competed in this
years Rangelands to Rainforests themed
conference.
NRS is a unique degree which covers the
ecology and management of water, forests,
rangeland, soil, minerals, fisheries and
wildlife. Students learn about rangelands in
classes such as Range Ecology and Range
Management. The Range Club was formed
to give students with a strong interest in
range an opportunity to gain more experience and insight into the field. These students are dedicated to range management
and are therefore very interested in the
annual SRM conferences.
Thompson Rivers University Range Club
has been competing in the International
SRM Conference for four years. Of the 100
students who participated in the Plant
Identification Contest, only 38 students

placed above the 60 percentile cut-off. Two

of our students, Terri France and Morgan
Rankin, placed 32nd and 34th respectively.
The Undergraduate Range Management
Exam is a comprehensive exam consisting of
multiple choice and problem solving questions that covers all aspects of range ecology
and range management. The exam covers
grazing management, range improvement,
animal nutrition, range ecology, herbicide
and fertilizer application, and fire ecology.
One hundred and forty-eight students competed in the URME. TRU Range Club member, Clayton Bradley, did exceptionally well
placing 21st overall.
This years Range Club would like to
thank past Range Club members, sponsors,
and range coaches whose efforts and support have led to the clubs success. In addition, the TRU Range Club would like to
thank the following sponsors for their valuable input: BC Cattlemens Association (Beef
Industry Development Fund), Thompson
Rivers University, Society of Range
Management (BC Chapter and the PNW
Section), and the Grasslands Conservation
Council.

The GCC
Needs
Your Help!
BC Grasslands magazine is always
looking for articles of interest to
our members. If you are part of
an organization or initiative
working towards grassland
conservation and stewardship in
BC, please let us know!
Is there an issue important to
grasslands conservation in the
province that you would like to
see covered in an upcoming issue
of BC grasslands?
Please contact the GCC at
250-374-5787 or
gcc@bcgrasslands.org

Terri France and Morgan Rankin are students in the Range Management Program at

to share your ideas!

Welcome to New GCC Staff

Tasha Sargent
The GCC is pleased to welcome Tasha Sargent to
the GCC team as our Stewardship Program Coordinator, replacing Taylor Zeeg, who is now
attending grad school in Vancouver. Tasha
received her Bachelor of Science degree in
Natural Resource Management, Wildlife from the
University of Northern BC, and has spent the last
six years in BC and Alberta working as a biologist on everything from salmon to moose to
waterfowl. Tasha returned to BC in August to
take on the challenges that the GCC has to offer,
and is greatly enjoying Kamloops and the surrounding area for its beauty, hospitality excellent
wilderness opportunities, and, of course, its
30

BC GRASSLANDS

majestic grasslands. She is very excited to be

joining our team and expanding her skills and
will be delivering the Grasslands Stewardship
and Sustainable Ranching Program, including
finalizing the Off-Road Vehicle Coalition and
implementing actions from the Mitigating
Fragmentation and Development of BCs
Grasslands strategic plan.You can contact Tasha
at tasha.sargent@bcgrasslands.org
Allison Sharp
Allison graduated from the University College of
the Cariboo (now TRU) with an Accounting
Technician Diploma. She then continued her
studies through the Certified General
Accountants (CGA), graduating in 2004. Allison

is a highly experienced accountant having

worked for BC Lotteries and various local business and institutions. She is married with two
daughters and is an avid sewer and reader.
George Will
George grew up in Winnipeg and attended the
University of Manitoba where he received a
Masters Degree in Anthropology. Later he moved
to Vancouver to pursue post-graduate studies in
Archaeology and taught Anthropology and
Archaeology at UBC and Capilano College.
Following his academic phase, he did an eight
year stint as editor of BC Outdoors magazine,
then left publishing to start a small communications company. In the late 90s he became

Across the Province

(continued from page 29)

Development and Capacity

Building
GCC Membership Growing
The GCC membership base grew by 68% over the past year. Our goal is to reach
600 members. Help us reach this goal. Tell a family member or a friend about
the GCC and the work we are doing. With a strong membership base, the GCC will
be able to continue delivering on its mission conservation of BCs endangered
grasslands.
Fall Fundraising Campaign 2006
Building on the lessons learned from last years fundraising event, the GCC is planning an exciting fundraising campaign this Fall. We need help from volunteers,
GCC directors and community members to make this our best campaign ever.
Planned Giving
The GCC is developing a planned giving information package as well as a website
to assist members and donors with giving programs and options. Leave a legacy
for our children and future generations by helping to protect the natural and cultural heritage of our grasslands. A planned gift may be a one-time cash donation,
a series of donations over a set period, bequests under a will, donations of publicly traded securities, RRSP, RRIF, or life insurance policies, and an endowment.
Planned gifts can be made available immediately or they can be made available
for the future.

Thanks to Heather Hunter

Heather joined us in January this year as the Executive Assistant to the Executive
Director. She has been of immeasurable help in that capacity but also found time
to help out with such things as registration for the upcoming workshop, update
membership lists, help with fundraising, work on the GCC website and help the
Financial Officer complete her year end reports. As much as all of us have pleaded
with her to stay, Heather is leaving at the end of June to pursue studies in Environmental Engineering at UNBC. Thank you Heather and best of luck in the future.

opment of new local map products to support decisionmaking within the community. The GCC continues to represent grassland interests for the atlas and further supports
the initiative by participating on the technical advisory
committee and attending meetings or workshops that
promote the atlas. For more information regarding the atlas
project, contact Dave Whiting at dave.whiting@telus.net or
visit the partnership website at
http://research.tru.ca/kstcmp

Canadian Intermountain
Joint Venture
The Canadian Intermountain Joint Venture (CIJV) represents a formal, co-ordinated effort by multiple partners to
conserve habitat for waterfowl and other birds in the
Canadian Intermountain region, which roughly corresponds
to the southern half of the BC Interior. CIJV partners have
agreed upon a common vision for the intermountain: a
landscape that supports healthy populations of birds, maintains biodiversity, and fosters sustainable resource use. GCC
activities with the CIJV include representation on the Board
of Directors as well as participation on the technical
advisory committee. Conservation projects currently being
conducted by the GCC are of great interest to the CIJV to
attain sustainable land use practices in the interior of
British Columbia and maintain healthy bird populations.
For more information regarding the CIJV please contact
Saul Schneider at Saul.Schneider@ec.gc.ca or visit the website ????

involved in the development of digital imaging software in Alaska and then the Lower 48.
When he moved to Kamloops in 2001, he
continued doing communications work and
research. He is an ardent (some would say
rabid) fly fisherman. In his role as Education
and Outreach Co-ordinator for the GCC, he
will use his experience and training to produce an outstanding BC Grasslands magazine;
help to organize meaningful symposiums;
maintain our exceptional website and provide
a new level of awareness and understanding
about grasslands using every medium at his
disposal. Contact George at
george.will@bcgrasslands.org
BC GRASSLANDS

31

BC Grasslands Magazine
ISSN 1496-7839
Grasslands Conservation Council
of British Columbia
BC Grasslands is a bi-annual
publication of the Grasslands
Conservation Council of British
Columbia (GCC). BC Grasslands
is intended to serve as a
platform for informing readers
about GCC activities and other
grassland programs across BC
and Canada, as well as
providing a forum on grassland
ecology, range management,
grassland conservation and
stewardship.
BC Grasslands and the GCC
welcome submissions of letters,
articles, story ideas, artwork and
photographs for each issue.
Articles should be no longer
than 600 words (300 words for
letters to the editor) and
submitted as electronic files
(preferably MS Word 95 or
newer).
BC Grasslands reserves the
right to edit submissions for
clarity and length. However,
every effort will be made to
work with contributors to ensure
content remains unchanged.
Deadline for submissions for the
next issue of BC Grasslands is
August 31, 2006.
Contributions, comments
and inquiries can be made to:
BC Grasslands
Grasslands Conservation Council
of British Columbia
954A Laval Crescent
Kamloops, BC V2C 5P5
Tel: (250) 374-5787
Fax: (250) 374-6287
E-mail: gcc@bcgrasslands.org

Magazine Production
Bruno Delesalle
PUBLISHER/WRITER
George Will
MANAGING EDITOR

PUBLICATIONS MAIL
AGREEMENT NO. 40672540
RETURN UNDELIVERABLE
CANADIAN ADDRESSES TO:
Grasslands Conservation Council
of British Columbia
954 A Laval Crescent
Kamloops, BC V2C 5P5

Grassland Stewardship & Sustainable Ranching

from page 2
BCs Grasslands: Problem Analysis and Strategic Plan outlines six strategic priorities for grassland conservation and
the objectives and actions required to achieve those priorities. Given the extraordinary number of actions, the GCC
needed to determine which were priority for implementation. A workshop was held in September with the GCC
Board of Directors to identify the key actions, and another
workshop was held with various representatives from our
partners, including government, the ranching community
and First Nations. The outcome of these two workshops
gave us the direction of our next two years: the Planning for
Change: Preventing the Fragmentation and Development of
Priority Grasslands in BC initiative, which is a dovetailing of
the Mitigating Fragmentation and Development project and
the Priority Grasslands Initiative. This project will entail
working with municipal, regional and provincial governments to increase awareness of BCs grasslands and the
threats facing them, and work with their planners to provide tools and information necessary for planning around
these sensitive ecosystems. We will also be providing governments with our newest planning tool, the Green
Infrastructure Model Bylaw Package, which was created in
partnership with Ducks Unlimited Canada, the Province of
BC and the federal government and will provide municipal
and regional governments with the tools necessary to plan
around sensitive ecosystems.
Best Management Practices for Motorized
Recreation Pocketbook
The GCC has produced one of the best motorized recreation
educational tools available: an attractive, pocket-sized guide
to motorized recreation on grasslands in British Columbia.
The BMP Pocketbook provides riders with information on
how to reduce or eliminate impacts on grasslands from offroad vehicle use, and provides tips for educating other riders on their impacts. The BMP Pocketbook was printed during the winter, and the GCC is currently working with a
team on a distribution strategy. The goal is to provide all
members of off-road vehicle clubs and associations with a
copy of this educational manual to reduce the negative
impacts that ORVs can have on our grasslands and still
allow riders to enjoy their sport. The Pocketbook is also
available on-line at www.bcgrasslands.org/bmppocketbook.htm. We sincerely thank The Real Estate Foundation of
British Columbia and the Canadian All-Terrain Vehicle
Distributors Council for their generous support on this
important project, and the Pacific Northwest Motorcycle
Association, the Quad Riders Association of BC, the BC
Snowmobile Federation and the Invasive Plant Society for
their assistance in developing this pocketbook.
Provincial Mountain Bike Strategy
Last July, the GCC brought to light the impacts of the
exploding mountain biking industry on grasslands at its
2005 Symposium. This well attended and extremely successful series of workshops and presentations made it clear
there were some pressing issues, particularly in the
Kamloops and South Okanagan regions. The main ecologi-

32

BC GRASSLANDS

cal concerns were soil erosion, the spread of invasive plants,

range degradation through disturbance to vegetation and
cattle disturbance, and habitat degradation to grassland
species at risk and other wildlife. In the fall of 2005, a committee was formed with the Ministry of Tourism, Sport and
the Arts (MTSA), members of the local riding clubs, local
mountain bike tourism operators and business owners, and
environmental non-government organizations to discuss
possible solutions. MTSA also established an initiative to
create a strategy for mountain biking on Crown land, and
the two processes dovetailed together, with the GCC
Mountain Bike Committee commenting on the process as it
unfolded. The GCC sat on a panel of interests with MTSA to
develop the provincial Mountain Bike Strategy, which is due
to be unveiled by June 2006.
First Nations Relationship-building Committee
The GCCs First Nations relationship building process has
proven fruitful, and commitments have been made with
both the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council and the Kamloops
Indian Band to include them in future steps of the new
Planning for Change initiative. We will continue to build
strategic relationships with other First Nations throughout
BC; because a large proportion of BCs endangered grasslands are within Indian Reserves, these relationships are
particularly important to achieving grassland conservation
and stewardship.
Grassland Assessment Manual Ready for Testing
The ultimate goal of this project is develop, in collaboration
with the ranching community, a Grassland Assessment
Manual for British Columbia that will be an effective tool for
ranchers to assess grassland condition and trend.
Developing a grassland assessment manual for British
Columbia is not an easy task. Although the GCC had completed a prototype for the fescue grasslands of the Nicola
valley, further work and testing was required to evaluate its
efficacy in other grassland communities and geographic
regions of the province. For three years, Solterra Resources
Inc., in conjunction with a Technical Advisory Committee,
has collected data to adopt and test a methodology (the
Alberta protocol) for assessing grassland condition and
trend. Currently, this methodology is being tested for the
sagebrush grasslands in the Okanagan, Thompson, and
South Cariboo, as well as the upper grasslands in the
Cariboo-Chilcotin region. For each region new benchmark
information is collected to adjust and refine the methodology for the specific grassland communities. On May 17, 2006
the GCC conducted its second in a series of workshops
planned for ranchers and resource management practitioners to further test the protocol in specific ecosystems types;
revise benchmark information; adjust the scoring sheets;
and revise the Grassland Assessment Manual. Within two
years, the GCC will have a completed assessment manual for
use in the Thompson-Nicola, Okanagan, Cariboo, East
Kootenay and Peace River grasslands, covering a variety of
grassland communities. The manual will be practical, user
friendly and relevant to the ranchers monitoring needs.

Thank You

Message from the Chair

from inside front cover
the interconnectedness of our job to the land.
What we do with that understanding is based on
our training, but what we do with our training
is an ethical decision based on morals. Thads
additional observations regarding members of
the Society for Range Management certainly also
apply to members of the GCCwe are not grassland managers because of a job, or a pay cheque,
but because we have dedicated our lives to making the land better. We are pursuing a dream.
I am convinced that we have achieved some
of our dreams primarily because of our nonpartisan, broadly-based composition. All of us in
society are part of the problem. All of us in society, therefore, must be part of the solution. The
GCC mission To foster understanding and
appreciation, to promote stewardship and sustainable management, and to promote the conservation of representative grassland ecosystems involves much more than concern for the
environment or a desire for well-managed grassland ecosystems. Our success has also required
respect for and co-operation with all other grassland users. This is the dream upon which the
GCC was founded, and the foundation upon
which we will succeed.
To achieve our mission we truly need to work

together, and to refrain from prejudice that categorizes any grassland users as good guys or
bad guys. Aldo Leopold wrote in 1933, Most
of what needs doing must be done by the farmer
himself. There is no conceivable way by which
the general public can legislate crabapples, or
grape tangles, or plum thickets to grow on these
barren fencerows, roadsides and slopes, nor will
the resolutions or prayers of the city change the
depth of next winters snow nor cause cornshocks to be left in the fields to feed the birds.
All the non-farming public can do is to provide
information and build incentives on which
farmers may act.
As far back as 1933 Leopold fully recognized
that his personal dream for a land ethic required
co-operation and a common vision. Or, as Bob
Dylan once sang,you can be in my dream if I
can be in yours.
During the coming year I invite all of you to
let me know about your dreams for the GCC.
Help your dreams come true by recruiting a
friend to join the GCC, by speaking out on behalf
of grassland conservation and stewardship, and
by promoting GCC projects. Finally, I ask all of
you to live your dream by attending the Healthy
Grasslands Symposium in June in Grand Forks.

Education & Outreach Program

from page 2
Lac du Bois Interpretive Site
The Lac du Bois Interpretive Site is a series of
three educational signs. These signs are located
in a new pullout near the first cattle guard on
Lac du Bois road. Each sign has a different
educational theme; the first panel educates park
users about the geological history and historical
land uses of the park, panel two features a
Lac du Bois Grasslands cross section and
descriptions of wildlife species such as the
Western Rattlesnake and their habitats found in
the park; and panel three provides users with a
map of the Lac du Bois Grasslands (including
road and trail access). Unfortunately, the third
sign was destroyed by a thoughtless act of vandalism and had to be reconstructed at considerable expense. Our thanks to BC Parks for their
help in restoring the sign.

BC Grasslands Public Service

Announcements
The first in a series of dynamic public service
announcements (PSAs) for television is currently
in production. Through this PSA series, the GCC
will reach out to members of the public not
familiar with BCs grasslands. Using a combination of animation and live action footage, viewers will be introduced to two charactersthe
cow and the curlewand discover the grasslands through their eyes. Throughout the series,
the cow and the curlew will meet a variety of
other grassland species which will be included as
animated characters. The series will showcase a
variety of threats to grasslands and encourage
viewers to take a proactive role in grasslands
conservation and stewardship. The cow and the
curlew will also be used for other GCC Education
and Outreach initiatives and projects, such as
activity sheets for children and posters. The BC
Grasslands Public Service Announcement project
is funded by the BC Gaming Commission,
Habitat Conservation Trust Fund, and the
Grazing Enhancement Fund.

The GCC would like to thank the following

funders for the generous support for the
2005 2006 fiscal year.
PROGRAM FUNDERS *
Agriculture Environment Initiative
BC Gaming Commission
Beef Cattle Industry Development Fund
The Bullitt Foundation
Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Ministry of Forests
The Law Foundation of British Columbia
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands
Ministry of Environment
Public Conservation Assistance Fund
The Nature Trust of British Columbia
The Real Estate Foundation of BC
Vancouver Foundation
Western Economic Diversification Canada
Nature Conservancy of Canada

AND SPECIAL THANKS TO

All GCC members and donors, whose continued support has helped make our program a
success;
Ducks Unlimited Canada for providing office
space and giving the GCC an opportunity to
continue its growth and development;
Our many dedicated and hardworking volunteers who have donated their time and energy
to help the GCC grow and prosper; and
The Ministry of Agriculture and Lands and the
Integrated Land Management Bureau for providing the GCC office space, infrastructure for
the Priority Grasslands Initiative, and the GCC
Development Officer.

Thank you to the following organizations for

funding this issue of BC Grasslands:
Bullitt Foundation
BC Gaming Commission
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands
Ministry of Forests and Range
Ministry of Environment
The Real Estate Foundation
Habitat Conservation Trust Fund

An aerial view of Vernon showing virtually

every type of fragmentation and development
that grasslands can experience.

Publication Agreement #40672540

In our next issue

The September 2006 issue will focus on the effect
of climate change on grasslands. We encourage the
submission of articles, photos and other artwork.
The submission deadline is September 15, 2005.
For more information, please the GCC at
250-374-5787 or gcc@bcgrasslands.org.
Please send your submissions to: BC Grasslands,
954 A Laval Crescent, Kamloops, BC V2C 5P5
Fax: 250 374-6287