Good afternoon, Honourable Mr. Chair and members of Parliament. Thank you for inviting me to speak to your committee on urban conservation as it relates to Bear Creek Park in particular.
My name is Ken Bennett. I have lived in the Lower Mainland all my life. I've worked for three different municipalities across the Lower Mainland, spanning 35 years as a professional biologist. I live next to Bear Creek Park. I visit that park daily in the summer time and very frequently all year long.
I will address the committee’s terms of reference, specifically, the issues and challenges of urban conservation as well as the economic, health, and biodiversity benefits of urban conservation.
I will give you just a little background on the park. In 1938, Bear Creek Park was a field of stumps and mud. It had been logged over the decades, as most of the Lower Mainland was, from the late 1800s through the 1920s. However, the citizens at the time had a vision. In a letter written to the Reeve of Surrey in June of 1938, they said:
This park has wonderful possibilities, being a natural beauty spot, and possessing two fine creeks which traverse its whole length. It is ideally located to accommodate the people of the North end of the municipality. ...Let us build a community park worthy of Surrey and second to none in the lower mainland. It can be done.
With that vision and determination, Bear Creek Park was created and has indeed become one of the finest parks in an urban setting in the Lower Mainland.
Urban conservation is an attempt to retain natural areas and associated habitats in urbanized, developed communities in order to maintain the last remnants of ecological systems for the benefit of people and nature in an urban setting, but there are issues and challenges.
Local governments have very limited ability and powers to protect and acquire natural areas in an urban setting. As most land in the urban setting is privately owned and therefore subject to senior and local government regulations that might apply, mostly this can be done only through voluntary stewardship. Acquisition during the development process is possible, but usually results only in small parcels, as Ms. Baron has explained. It's very expensive.
Councils unfortunately look upon city land as “development in waiting”, will cash in on sales to increase the tax base, and, in turn, often devalue the natural attributes. Protection of the upland areas beyond the minimal setbacks required for riparian areas due to the Fisheries Act, for example, is very difficult and often not possible. Federal and provincial regulations are silent on this issue. Upland protection is almost non-existent.
Fragmentation of habitat in the urban setting and the lack of connectivity across the urban landscape are very significant impediments to urban conservation. In the urban setting, transportation corridors often circle or bisect parks. Indeed, we have our own controversial issue in Bear Creek Park given the city's repeated proposal to extend 84th Avenue through the south end
Local governments do not have the resources or expertise to map and evaluate their communities for conservation opportunities in a strategic way. As a result, conservation is often piecemeal, fragmented, and not coordinated into an overall strategic plan. Municipalities and cities such as Surrey—the big ones—often have that capability, but many municipalities throughout Canada do not.
One of the areas I want to talk about is the health benefits. This is an area that has a tremendous lack of understanding with regard to health. This is an overlooked component in the urban setting. Dr. Faisal Moola mentioned this in his previous dissertation.
Since 80% of Canadians live in or near urban centres and 95% of their time is spent indoors, the urban environment—the built environment—is pretty much their only experience. However, there is a direct relationship between improved human health and preserving, protecting, and accessing natural areas, and science is proving this.
In the scientific literature, physicians, psychologists, and medical researchers from around the world have documented numerous health benefits from simply being in a natural setting, and this is an often overlooked component. I'm going to run through a few of these. I have a list here of some of the research that I have done.
Nature moderates the effects of stress hormones and reduces the production of these hormones.
Children near parks, versus those who live without access to parks, showed a weight differential of five kilograms in boys and six kilograms in girls, respectively, at the age of 16. Obesity and diabetes are reduced in people with access to parks and natural areas.
Physical activity is as effective as drugs in treating depression. Attention deficit disorders are reduced, and calming effects are enhanced while in a natural setting.
Children have better learning outcomes.
Studies show that there's an improved immune function that lasts for 30 days after just a three-day weekend in the forest.
After just 10 minutes' exposure in a natural setting, mood, learning, emotions, blood pressure, and heart rates are all improved. Japan uses a technique called “shinrin-yoku” or “forest bathing” in their medical treatments.
It has been stated that declining ecological health and biodiversity is the greatest threat to human health. The role of natural areas in urban conservation should be promoted in the national conservation plan, and in national and provincial health programs. This is a missing component.
On the economic value and the ecological services, as I will call them, Dr. Faisal Moola has much documentation through the David Suzuki Foundation. I'll quickly relate this specifically to Bear Creek Park.
Referencing the natural capital in B.C.'s Lower Mainland, the top three benefits provided were: climate regulation from carbon storage, valued at $1.7 billion; water supply due to water filtration, valued at $1.6 billion; flood protection and water regulation provided by forest land cover, valued at $1.2 billion per year. Relating this to the urban setting, that equates to about $4,000 per hectare. Therefore, using this figure as a guide, it's estimated that the 46 hectares of the natural areas alone in Bear Creek Park are providing $184,000 of free ecological services every year.
Urban conservation for protection of biodiversity is critical. Habitat loss, disturbance, alteration, and fragmentation are the primary causes for severe decline in biodiversity across the globe and, indeed, in the urban setting. Preservation of biodiversity is best achieved when an area is as big as you can get. Bigger is better applies, and there's certainly a very good example with the Rouge national urban park initiative, but now we're talking at the very local community urban park level. It nonetheless has the same extreme value to the community.
Bear Creek Park is a very good example of this. It has mixed deciduous-coniferous forests, riparian corridors, old field habitat, and a wet meadow, all connected in one area. By the way, I'll report that, as of yesterday, the coho and chum salmon have returned to Bear Creek Park and its tributaries and are now spawning in the spawning beds.
I'll jump ahead now, as I'd like to talk a little about the federal role.
The national conservation plan should ensure that the stated principles and actions are scaled to the local urban level. Support is needed to secure and protect natural areas at our urban scale. Programs are needed that educate and connect residents with nature. This will provide a greater understanding and appreciation of the benefits of nature that will engage residents in—with a commitment to—urban conservation.
Under the national biodiversity strategy, it would be helpful for the federal government to provide support to local governments with expertise and funding to conduct ecological mapping to facilitate the identification of key habitats for protection, connectivity, and acquisition in a strategic way. There's concern with the Fisheries Act, which has now been amended to include only streams of commercial importance.
I will conclude there, Mr. Chair. I will take gladly take any questions on the remainder of my program. Thank you for the opportunity.