Williams Lake city council was split down the middle and a motion for council to sell the city's lake harvester to recoup some of the costs to the city was defeated.
At the regular council meeting on April 1, staff had presented a report providing some options for the council on how to proceed with the lake harvester: sell it, pay for further study and a report and potential limited operation of the machine or defer action until something changes, leaving the harvester parked.
The city purchased the machine in the fall of 2020 from Tabor Lake for $30,000, hoping to use it to clear aquatic vegetation from the nutrient-rich waters of Williams Lake. Three staff were sent for training in Vancouver at a cost of $13,773. Maintenance on the machine cost the city $38,000 in 2020 and $16,000 in 2021. These are just part of the cost involved in the harvester so far.
City council at the time, including Coun. Scott Nelson, who lives on the north side of the lake, hoped the lake harvester could improve boating, swimming and float plane use of the lake.
Since the machine was purchased, a trial permit was issued by the province for a period of two years, a report was done by a consulting environmental company indicating the removal of native vegetation for aesthetic purposes potentially puts species at risk in harm's way, and two successive councils have continued to push for the province to allow the city to use the harvester. So far, 50 kg of vegetation has been removed from Williams Lake at a cost to the city of more than $123,242 as of December 2024.
In order to obtain another permit to allow the city to use the lake harvester again, staff estimate the cost to the city will be $23,502, for a study, monitoring biologist, and transport of the harvester to and from the lake (which involves the use of a crane each time).
Staff had initially applied for the regulatory permits to remove vegetation in small sections of the lake at the Scout Island boat launch, Dutch Point boat launch, the public beach at Scout Island and an area on the north side of the lake identified as the Aerodrome. In these specific locations, where the lake is deeper than 2 metres, the harvester would remove vegetation in a 30 metre-wide section at the Aerodrome site and a 10 metre wide section at the two boat launches and swimming beach.
Council present at the meeting were divided on whether or not to cut their losses and look at other possible options to improve the boat launch area for recreational access or keep the machine and continue to lobby senior levels of government and hold on to the harvester in the hopes it might one day be put to its intended use.
Coun. Jazmyn Lyons put forward a motion for council to adopt option one of the staff report by Rob Warnock, Director of Municipal Service, to cancel the lake harvester program and sell the lake harvester "given its limited success and unknown future abilities." Warnock stated this is the most financially conservative option and could allow the city to recoup some costs.
"It's time to cut our losses and see if we can get something out of it," said Lyons, noting her suggestion might be unpopular but noting the longer the city keeps the machine, the less they will be able to resell it for.
Coun. Angie Delaney and Coun. Joan Flaspohler agreed, with Flaspohler suggesting a friendly amendment by adding a request for staff to look at other options to improve boat launches to lessen the vegetation growth in those locations for boat access.
"I think we can refocus our energy and our funds in fixing that system," said Flaspohler, pointing out the science is behind the regulators.
But support for the harvester was still strong, as Coun. Nelson came out in favour of keeping the machine and continuing to work on getting the province on side to the harvester's use.
Coun. Sheila Boehm and Mayor Surinderpal Rathor also both were in favour of keeping the costly program. Boehm argued the city should try again with new ministers in place.
Gary Muraca, chief administrative officer, said the city had the support of provincial ministers at last year's Union of BC Municipalities conference, but still could not get the permissions needed.
"We don't have a lake, we have a swamp," he said, noting the city will be on the hook for the additional reporting if they hope to go ahead with using the harvester. The report alone will cost the city $12,543 before tax.
Permits were approved on a two-year basis to collect data to show if the harvesting might impact water quality. The harvester was allowed to operate between Oct. 15 and Oct. 30. Staff reported they were only able to put the harvester in the lake for a total of five hours in Oct. 2021, picking up 50 kg of vegetation.
A report done in June of 2022 by Western Water Associates Ltd. identified the vegetation collected as native and important habitat for native wildlife species, including species at risk. The report stated removal of the vegetation for aesthetic purposes is not supported by provincial or federal agencies.
"Past experience has demonstrated that the existing area is potentially too small and would not offer the ability to collect enough data to show any impacts to the water quality to allow the city to expand the harvesting scope," wrote Warnock in his report.
But Warnock did not make a recommendation of which of the options provided in the report council should take, as he also noted there is now a potential path forward because the province, through the city's advocacy, has said it may be possible to go ahead with harvesting those areas, but ecological concerns would have to be addressed prior to permitting approval.
Lyons' amended motion was defeated at council, with Lyons, Delaney and Flaspohler voting in favour and Nelson, Boehm and Rathor voting against.
Coun. Michael Moses was not at the meeting.
Nelson then moved for the council to discuss the issue again at a committee of the whole meeting and bring it back to the table.
Staff said they had no other options for the city to address vegetation growth in the lake.
No discussion took place on other ways to address the lake's plant growth by looking at runoff, riparian zone health, or potential sources of additional nutrients from tributaries and lakeshore properties, all of which can contribute to increased vegetation and algal growth.
