Text Size
The St. Lawrence Plan Turns 20
It took a giant of nature like the St. Lawrence River to mobilize so many people, so much money and such monumental effort. Over these first 20 years of the St. Lawrence Plan, two governments, a dozen different ministries, numerous partners in the private sector, and thousands of citizens have committed themselves, at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars, to restoring the mighty river to its ancient purity and giving the people of Canada... a river with a future.
"Things are by no means perfect with the St. Lawrence, but sure signs of progress began to manifest themselves once we stopped pouring toxic substances into the river during the early nineties," recalls Jean-Pierre Gauthier, who in that era was Environment Canada's regional director general for Quebec. The game is far from over. But the players are still in place, and they are determined to reach this goal of sustainable development to which the people of Quebec are now dedicated. "My hope is that soon I can go fishing with my grandson for the striped bass which they are now re-introducing to the St. Lawrence," says George Arsenault, the retired assistant deputy minister of Quebec's former Ministère du Loisir, de la Chasse et de la Pêche, and, with Mr. Gauthier, one of the first proponents of what was then called the St. Lawrence Action Plan.
Later renamed the St. Lawrence Vision 2000, and finally the St. Lawrence Plan for a Sustainable Development (SLP), this joint federal-provincial program celebrates its twentieth anniversary in June 2008. Born from an urgent desire to take action, to make sure the health of the river would not be ignored any longer, the St. Lawrence Plan has been renewed three times since 1988, through the extension of five-year agreements between the two governments and with the addition of valuable new ideas and components at every stage.
The urgent need to take action, such as everyone acknowledged 20 years ago, did not suddenly become clear from one morning to the next. The St. Lawrence -- a river which constituted one of the largest freshwater ecosystems in the world; whose shores accommodated 60% of the cities and towns of Quebec; whose waters nourished 45% of its population; and which acted as a basic driving force on the Quebec economy -- had been attacked on all sides for a very long time. The sustained assault on its waters by industrial waste and urban emissions, and on its banks by building encroachments, meant that the river no longer attracted anyone -- not to fish, not to swim, not even to relax. The general public had simply turned its back on one of its greatest natural resources. "Many people thought the situation was hopeless," notes Albin Tremblay, Environment Canada's regional director general for Quebec, and federal co-chairman of the St. Lawrence Plan. And there were serious concerns which had begun to spring up in the seventies.
Getting Down to Business
In 1973, in fact, a first joint initiative between the governments of Quebec and Canada created a study committee whose warning cries, issued in the form of twenty or so recommendations after five years of work, convinced the authorities that it was necessary to put an end to the degradation of the St. Lawrence. The chief elements to blame were municipal and industrial pollution, the contamination of sediments and the deterioration of the riverbanks.
The situation led the Government of Quebec, in 1978, to make a first attempt at combating the problem: a vast municipal wastewater cleaning program which, under many different names, 20 years and 7 billion dollars later, had equipped the province with some 600 water pollution control plants to reduce the bacteriological contamination of the river and its tributaries. "In 1978, hardly 2% of the population was serviced by a municipal water purification system, whereas 98% of Quebecers are serviced in 2000," says Bob van Oyen, assistant deputy minister in the Ministère du Développement durable, de l’Environnement et des Parcs (MDDEP) and co-chairman of the St. Lawrence Plan for Quebec.
Two other initiatives of the Quebec government helped to lay the groundwork for the future St. Lawrence Plan: a study group reporting to the Executive Council and responsible for drafting a management policy for all activities on the St. Lawrence (especially cargo transportation) from 1982 to 1985; and in 1987, a steering committee (the Dagenais Committee) charged with developing an action plan on the basis of this management policy. All was detailed in the 175 recommendations issued by the Dagenais Committee, which itemized objectives for improving water quality, controlling sediments, promoting fishing and tourism, protecting the banks and flood plains, and other essential tasks.
Well aware that it could not do everything on its own, the Government of Quebec declared that the clean-up of the St. Lawrence was its chief priority, and requested 100 million dollars from Ottawa to help in pushing the project forward aggressively. On the other side of the table, the federal minister for the environment revealed publicly the names of the 50 companies responsible for the worst polluting of the river, a dramatic gesture which left many of the stakeholders agog. At the same time, senior authorities in the federal government asked EC to draft a memo on the priorities to set for the St. Lawrence.
The Stars Align
Everything was falling into place for the rise of a first major Canada-Quebec agreement on the St. Lawrence. Or rather, as described by Jean-Pierre Gauthier, who was the first co-chairman of the agreement for the federal government, "All the stars were aligned in the right way -- the two governments were ready to step in and save the St. Lawrence River."
And so on the third of June,1988, the federal government announced that it would devote 110 million dollars for the protection, conservation and renewal of the St. Lawrence River over the ensuing five-year period. At the same ceremony, the environment ministers of the two governments signed a collaboration agreement entitled the St. Lawrence Action Plan (SLAP). Quebec would add nearly 30 million dollars to the money promised by Ottawa. Since it was above all industrial pollution that was targeted, these amounts were in addition to the budgets which the Quebec government already spent on the purification of municipal wastewater.
Four major areas of intervention were targeted by the efforts of the SLAP: protecting water quality against toxic substances, conserving habitats and species, evaluating the state of the environment and ecosystems, and restoring damaged areas. In support of all these activities, the two governments would force themselves to use compatible data, share information and pool their resources -- all to establish a complementary process that would make the most of their respective competencies.
"What really impressed people during this first phase of the St. Lawrence Plan," explains Albin Tremblay, "was the specific target we were given: reduce by 90% the toxic emissions of the 50 companies most responsible for polluting the St. Lawrence, and do it before the end of our mandate, in just four years!" This was the first time that public officials took on numbered commitments for which they would issue an annual report to the general public. Twenty years later, people still refer to the fact that it was not a 90% reduction but a 96% reduction that was actually achieved in that time span.
"It was not easy for industrial concerns to have the finger pointed at them and be asked to make improvements when they often had no idea how to implement them," admits George Arsenault, Quebec co-chairman of Phase III of SLV 2000 from 1998 to 2000. Simply put, the companies needed help. For a start, a federal-provincial intervention team of 30 industrial clean-up experts took on the task of negotiating a clean-up plan with each industry; the latter could no longer use the tactic of playing one government against the other. Next, the companies could benefit from a technological innovation program carried out for them and in concert with them by the new St. Lawrence Centre (SLC), an Environment Canada research body which was established at the same time as the SLAP.
During the same period, a Quebec court imposed a fine of four million dollars -- the highest ever issued in Canada for a case related to the environment -- against the Tioxide company in Sorel, which had long resisted government requirements. The effect on other recalcitrant parties was electric! But according to Jean-Pierre Gauthier, the most persuasive element for Industry, especially the pulp and paper mills, was definitely the opportunity afforded by the technological innovation program, which helped them to modernize their installations, improve their facilities and increase their productivity.
In addition to its success in reducing toxic liquid emissions by Industry, we should note, among the main achievements of this first phase of the St. Lawrence Plan, the creation of the Saguenay–St. Lawrence Marine Park, a new type of protected zone jointly administered by Canada and Quebec. There was also the protection of 5 000 hectares of habitat and 6 endangered species, such as the beluga whale; and the publication of a first comprehensive report, drafted by the St. Lawrence Centre, on the river's environmental status.
Most of the objectives set at the beginning were reached -- with the added satisfaction of successfully uniting such a large number of partners from many different sectors and getting them to work towards attaining specific outcomes. Such "management by results," which would remain the hallmark of the St. Lawrence Plan in every phase to come, was a key factor in the success of the program, argues George Arsenault. And it proved afterwards to be an inspiration for many other official departments and organizations.
St. Lawrence Vision 2000
With the renewal of the agreement for another period of five years, in 1993, the program became St. Lawrence Vision 2000 (SLV 2000). This second phase, fuelled by an investment of 191 million dollars from the two governments, naturally maintained a focus on the objectives of the first phase, such as improvements to water quality. But it was the new aspects that really caught people's imagination -- one new element in particular.
Inside the focus areas carried over from the first phase were 56 new industrial installations which were required to purify their liquid emissions. Also, 7 000 additional hectares of habitat were designated for protection as a priority, with concomitant plans for re-establishing many declining or endangered species. Lastly, the support program for technological development projects was extended, and the SLC agreed to produce 13 regional environmental reports as a follow-up to its first comprehensive report.
As for the new elements, they were highly ambitious. First, six new government partners were integrated into the program, including the departments responsible for health and agriculture in Canada and Quebec, since the scope of activity for SLV 2000 had expanded to a fair degree. The emphasis was now on an ecosystemic approach, by which the St. Lawrence River would be looked at holistically, with all its components taken into consideration. The intervention plan now included seven categories -- three more than in the first phase -- including agriculture, which, as a consistent presence alongside the river and its tributaries, plays an important role in the ecosystem dynamics. Seven smaller rivers and streams would be given especially close scrutiny by the researchers.
But the major new aspect of this second phase, according to Bob van Oyen, was community participation. At last, the health of the St. Lawrence River would no longer be the exclusive business of government players, scientific researchers and other experts. Riverside communities would be active participants in the project by way of the ZIP Committee Network (from zones d’intervention prioritaire) which was then being set up all along the river.
Coordinated by the non-profit organization Stratégies Saint-Laurent, a new partner in the St. Lawrence Plan, these committees were busy at the grassroots level -- implementing recovery projects, acquiring and leveraging their intimate knowledge of the riverside environments, making prodigious efforts to raise awareness, and, above all, promoting consensus among all the stakeholders involved. Thanks to these committees, environmental groups, local politicians, industrial concerns and average citizens sat together around the same tables to hammer out a solution to the problems affecting their section of the St. Lawrence River. On the strength of the environmental report prepared for their region by the SLC, each Zip Committee began by holding a public consultation that led to the drafting of an Ecological Rehabilitation Action Plan (ERAP). This action plan served as a roadmap to guide each committee in its subsequent actions.
"We are very proud to have the participation of these committees," affirms Mr. van Oyen. "It represents an enormous contribution to reaching the objectives of the St. Lawrence Plan."
Two Salient Facts
During the third period of five years, which was officially renewed in 1998, the number of ZIP committees rose from 10 to 14, and three new government partners were brought into the fold. Together, the two governments contributed nearly 240 million dollars to this new phase, which remained under the rubric of St. Lawrence Vision 2000.
As the commitment of the riverside communities became more and more stable, accessibility to the river became a priority for SLV 2000. But the two salient facts for phase 3, according to Albin Tremblay, were the setting up of a Navigation Committee and the initiation of the State of the St. Lawrence Monitoring Program.
For the first time, thanks to the Navigation Committee, environmentalists, community representatives and stakeholders in the marine industry met to discuss issues like dredging, harbour activities, invasive species and so on. After several years of work, the result was the Sustainable Navigation Strategy for the St. Lawrence, a guide document which the maritime world would later use as a model.
The State of the St. Lawrence Monitoring Program represents an essential, regularly updated tool for measuring how the St. Lawrence River is doing after all the effort devoted to improving its health and restoring its former uses to the population. There are six different government partners which take part in the program by monitoring 21 distinct indicators. "It was quite challenging to finalize these indicators," says George Arsenault. But "they really allow us to measure our progress," adds Albin Tremblay, who notes with satisfaction how the local communities have worked alongside scientific experts from the government departments.
This monitoring tool, which shows that the river is in better shape now than it was during the second half of the twentieth century, makes absolutely clear what a crucial role science plays in the St. Lawrence Plan. As stressed by Mr. Arsenault, "To my mind, this has always been perfectly clear. Before taking action for the St. Lawrence, you need to start by knowing exactly what the problems are -- something that science lets us do. And once you have implemented actions of one kind or another, you need to have a scientific way of measuring the impacts. In a huge project such as this, the science must always be there to justify the decisions made."
Towards a Sustainable Future
Renewed once again, in 2006, after a short float period, the Canada–Quebec agreement on the St. Lawrence has now been retitled "the St. Lawrence Plan for a Sustainable Development." This title recognizes the St. Lawrence Plan for what it really has become: a global project which includes, in interlocking fashion, the basic dimensions of environment, society and economy. The two governments have earmarked around 114 million dollars for this new phase.
The foundation for this fourth phase is Integrated Management of the St. Lawrence (IMSL), an ambitious project on which a great deal of energy has been spent in recent years. The goal is to set up nothing less than a new form of governance for the St. Lawrence, one by which all stakeholders connected with the management or use of the river and its resources -- government decision-makers, regular users, environmental groups, the First Nations, and so on -- will commit to protecting the ecosystem and ensuring its sustainable development.
We need to consider all the interests at stake and work in terms of the major challenges now facing us or coming in the future: water quality, introduction of exotic species, water level fluctuations, access to the waterfront, and so on. "It's a large-scale, highly complex project," emphasizes Bob van Oyen. "We need to move forward in a prudent fashion." Two years remain, until the end of the current phase of the St. Lawrence Plan in 2010, to implement this integrated management system.
In terms of the future of the St. Lawrence Plan itself, it is still too early to know whether a fifth phase will be launched. "One thing is certain," says Albin Tremblay, "the pressures on the St. Lawrence ecosystem are not going to diminish over time. The challenges are social and economic as much as environmental, and are sure to increase. We have to focus on consensus-building and collaboration between governments and with private organizations." According to Mr. Tremblay, it is also crucial that we target specific, measurable objectives; maintain transparent methods by issuing regular reports on any progress achieved or delayed; and continue to mobilize waterfront residents. All of these elements have helped to make the agreement a success up to now.
A great deal of work remains to be done. But in many respects, say the two co-chairmen, the St. Lawrence is in better shape now than 20 years ago. The general public no longer turns its back on the river. People are going there to fish once more (but not yet for striped bass!), to have fun, to relax, and soon, in many places, to swim -- something that will really show that the public has truly reclaimed the use of its marvelous, irreplaceable waterway.
Date modified: 2008/09/30 – Important Notices
