I write to oppose the proposed People, Pets, and Parks strategy. My main opposition is to the amount of public funds proposed to be spent on this project, as well as to the restrictive nature of the bylaw, which does not address the main threats to natural areas in Saanich parks (invasive species, braiding of trails by people (not just dogs) and the need for more concerted efforts in ecosystem restoration. Following are some alternative ways in which this $5-7 million could be spent.
The PPP proposed strategy proves that money is available for greater attention to ecosystem restoration. Put this money where it will actually do some good.
Invasive species like Scotch broom, gorse, English Ivy, Himalyan blackberry, yellow flag iris, shiny-leafed geranium, invasive grasses, periwinkle are huge problems in Saanich. Japanese knotweed is present in small areas and will present a growing problem if funds for invasive species are not increased. Streams in Saanich are also suffering from degradation due to increased urbanization, pollution from leaking oil tanks, lower water levels, and sedimentation.
If Saanich truly wishes to protect the environment, which is what the PPP strategy claims to address, it needs to put these funds towards more capital projects and a significant increase in staff time to tackle invasive species, stream restoration, and ecosystem protection. Here’s what could be achieved with these funds instead of supporting the PPP strategy, according to my research and interviews with local experts:
It cost $1,000 a metre to restore the Colquitz. Restoration of the entire 6-km reach would cost $5-6 million, depending on how much has already been restored.
Saanich could tenfold the Pulling Together program for $1.4 million and rid Colquitz River, Mount Doug, or Cuthbert Holmes Park of invasives species.
Saanich could conduct capital projects in 18 parks for $7 million, which would include every Saanich signature park and every Saanich trail, plus two additional choices. Saanich could tenfold the invasive species management for $1 million and conduct management activities in 500 sites rather than just 50.
Saanich could choose to put the funds towards expansion of the Saanich Naturescape program to create and manage a nature-in-the-city rewilding program, including a native seed bank, boulevard rewilding, provision of native plants, and installation of native hedgerows in parks across Saanich.
Saanich could plant 7,000 boulevard trees at a cost of $1,000 a tree, meeting this year’s 10,000 proposed urban forest canopy planting goal.
Saanich could identify and purchase significant parcels of wild lands for protection. The entire south side of Maltby Lake, which contains one of the last untouched riparian and old-growth coastal Douglas-fir ecosystems in the municipality, for somewhere in the neighbourhood of $7 million.
I urge you to consider these projects in place of the PPP proposed strategy. As a geographer and ecosystem restorationist, I understand well the complexity of Saanich’s ecosystems; they need protection through means more comprehensive and sensible than this politically-driven and ineffective strategy.
Maleea Acker
Critical Geographies Research Lab
University of Victoria
