Water security through community-directed monitoring in the Canadian Columbia Basin: democratizing watershed data

ABSTRACT

The Columbia Basin Water Monitoring Framework (CBWMF) aims to help quantify the impacts of climate change on freshwater sources in the Canadian Columbia Basin. By involving stakeholders and prioritizing monitoring based on scientific and community criteria, the CBWMF provides a localized solution to water management challenges. The framework’s approach enhances sustainability, promotes regional water protection, and enables informed decision-making at various scales. The CBWMF can serve as a model for similar networks in river basins across the globe.

KEYWORDS:

• Monitoring
• community engagement
• network
• framework
• climate
• Columbia Basin

Introduction

Climate change is a global issue, yet many challenges related to climate-impacted water sustainability are regionally specific and thus require localized solutions (Corkal et al., 2011). Moreover, community buy-in and improved data accessibility can increase capacity for source water protection (Timmer et al., 2007). In this context, Living Lakes Canada is implementing a community-informed regional water monitoring network in the Canadian Columbia Basin guided by the Columbia Basin Water Monitoring Framework (CBWMF; Living Lakes Canada, 2022b).

The transboundary Columbia River Basin (Figure 1) is a highly regulated, snow-dominated hydrological system, with glaciers contributing an average of 12% of annual water yield (Moore et al., 2020). Glacial ice in eastern British Columbia is expected to decline 90% by 2100, in all emission scenarios except RCP 2.6 (Clarke et al., 2015). Indeed, the 1 April snow-water equivalent has already declined significantly in the Canadian Rockies, the easternmost mountain range in the Canadian Columbia Basin (Hale et al., 2023). The timing of snowmelt contributions to streamflow has also changed, with a shift towards earlier snowmelt runoff peaks (Forbes et al., 2019).

Figure 1. Geography of the Columbia River in Canada and the United States. The purple line denotes the mainstem of the Columbia River.

Note: This is a map of the Columbia River watershed with the Columbia River highlighted [Image], by Kmusser (2008), https://bit.ly/3CQQXKG. 0.CC BY-SA 3.

These changes in the hydrological cycle directly impact communities and ecosystems within the Canadian Columbia Basin. The region’s human population is projected to increase by 7% by 2041 (Selkirk Innovates, 2022), and with it, the demand for domestic water and agricultural production. At the same time, seasonal water supply will change (Dalton et al., 2013) – summer water deficits associated with warmer and drier conditions are already occurring in eastern British Columbia. As a transboundary basin, water supply and peak flow timing changes in the Canadian Columbia Basin could have major impacts on the United States. The Canadian portion of the Columbia River system contributes approximately 50% of the river’s total summer runoff (Murdock et al., 2007), which feeds U.S. hydroelectric dams and fills critical reservoirs. For example, the Columbia River flows through Washington State (Figure 1), which produces nearly 30% of U.S. net electricity generation through hydroelectricity (Dalton et al., 2013). Along with the impacts to humans, changes in flow impact anadromous salmon through disruption of migration routes and spawning habitat, increased temperatures reduce the quality of habitat (Dalton et al., 2013), and impacts on other biota such as migratory waterbirds are also likely. Thus, a changing climate will challenge water security and require innovative management in attempts to satisfy conflicting needs for humans and ecosystems in the near future (Barnett et al., 2005). Understanding local water priorities can help water managers balance these needs.

Adequate data are required to quantify the impacts of climate change on Canadian Columbia Basin freshwater sources. As of 2017, the Canadian Columbia Basin had lost half of its government-run hydrometric stations (Carver, 2017). These reductions increase the uncertainty in understanding water availability, which could result in economic losses (Spence et al., 2007). Of the hydrometric stations operating in the Canadian Columbia Basin, many are on larger systems and used to monitor stream flow for hydropower and flood control (Carver et al., 2020; Moore et al., 2020), whereas many residential water licences are on smaller systems that are typically unmonitored (Carver, 2017). Any hope of implementing adaptive management of freshwater to cope with uncertainties of climate change requires reliable monitoring of water flows across the spectrum of stream sizes that characterize the Canadian Columbia Basin (Moore et al., 2020).

Here we present a case study on the development of a monitoring framework and open-source database to increase the sustainability and resiliency of the Canadian Columbia Basin’s freshwater systems and the communities and ecosystems they support.

Development of methods

A series of reports has identified the need for increased water monitoring amid climate impacts in the Canadian Columbia Basin (Carver, 2017; Murdock et al., 2007; Murdock & Sobie, 2013). In response, Living Lakes Canada convened a 2017 conference with over 120 water data experts and community members to discuss objectives for a water monitoring framework and accompanying open-source water database for the region. In 2020, Living Lakes Canada hosted a workshop where hydrologists from government, consulting agencies, and academia reached consensus on a proposed methodology for an expanded water monitoring network based on a water balance approach (Carver et al., 2020).

The water balance approach aims to measure water fluxes and storage in representative watersheds in the Canadian Columbia Basin (Carver et al., 2020). An implementation methodology (Carver & Utzig, 2022a) further refined the approach to account for community priorities within a scientific framework. The methodology combines (1) a quantitative process based on climatic stratification and analysis of watershed characteristics affecting runoff such as topography, hydrological features, and geology and (2) a qualitative process based on identified local priorities such as water use, water quality risks, and aquatic values. The result is a Priority Monitoring Matrix, used to rank and select monitoring sites (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Underlying basis and steps for the implementation of the monitoring strategy.

Note: Adapted from Underlying basis and steps for the implementation of the monitoring strategy, by M. Carver and G. Utzig (2022a).

The Canadian Columbia Basin was delineated into 33 regional landscapes based on ‘enduring features that control climatic variables and associated vegetation zonation’ (Utzig, 2019). These regional landscapes were further grouped into 10 hydrological regions, based on regional watershed boundaries (Carver & Utzig, 2022a). A phased implementation of the monitoring network according to Area of Interest was recommended, areas of interest being primarily defined by hydrological regions (Carver & Utzig, 2022a).

In 2022, this approach was piloted in three areas of interest that were identified as having a strong water-stewardship ethic based on presence of community monitoring groups: Mid-Columbia Kootenay (MCK) hydrological region; Columbia-Kootenay Headwaters (CKH) hydrological region; and Elk River Valley (ERV), a subset of the Upper Kootenay hydrological region (Figure 3). In 2023, Upper Kootenay (UK) and Lower Columbia-Kootenay (LCK) hydrological regions were selected as areas of interest (Figure 3).

Figure 3. The Canadian Columbia Basin with CBWMF 2022 pilot areas of interest shown in purple and 2023 expansion areas of interest shown in blue.

Watershed stratification and gap analysis

A geospatial analysis was undertaken to identify hydroclimatic data gaps in each Area of Interest. The geospatial analysis formed the bulk of the scientific component of monitoring site selection but was limited to hydrometric, climate, and snow monitoring (Lapp et al., 2022).

For the analysis, areas of interest were broken into watershed units based on BC Freshwater Atlas Assessment Watersheds. A cluster analysis was used to group watersheds into four to six groups based on hydroclimatological, topographic, morphometric, and terrain factors (Lapp et al., 2022). Similarities in these factors imply similarities in stream flow patterns, and allow for coarse stratification of hydrological characteristics (Lapp et al., 2022). In 2023, watershed units were grouped into Carver (2017) and Carver and Utzig’s (2022b) regional landscapes prior to the application of a cluster analysis, with two to three groups identified per landscape.

In both project years, existing provincial hydroclimatic monitoring stations were overlaid on the cluster groups to identify groups with a low density of hydroclimatic monitoring. This analysis identified a gap in the Environment and Climate Change Canada water monitoring carried out by the Water Survey of Canada. This gap was an overall underrepresentation of small watersheds, with only one watershed under 100 km² monitored in each of the three pilot areas of interest (Lapp et al., 2022), as well as four in the UK, and 14 in the LCK.

Community engagement

This novel approach to localizing this project as outlined in the Development of Methods section was achieved through comprehensive community engagement at all stages, from development to monitoring implementation. Living Lakes Canada sought community feedback in each Area of Interest to identify areas of local concern, gather local knowledge, and establish opportunities for collaboration.

In accordance with Carver and Utzig (2022a), a Local Reference Group was assembled for each Area of Interest to identify areas of local concern, gather local knowledge, and establish opportunities for collaboration. Participants included Indigenous governments and knowledge holders, municipal and regional government staff and elected officials, provincial government staff, environmental stewardship groups, industrial water users, tourism and recreation operators, owners of community drinking water systems, private sector consultants, academic researchers and interested community members. Recognizing Indigenous People as the rightful caretakers of their unceded territories, First Nations were invited to participate in direct consultations in addition to the broader engagement process.

Engagement was conducted using various formats including multi-sector community meetings, online surveys, interactive web maps, and one-to-one meetings with key contacts. In 2022, engagement was primarily virtual due to concerns related to COVID-19. Input was provided by 115 individuals during the pilot year. In 2023, a combination of in-person and virtual meetings increased participation to a total of 175 individuals.

Participants were asked to provide input that would guide site selection including specific water bodies or areas of concern, attributes of water bodies that should be prioritized for increased monitoring for each variable, generalized questions or concerns about climate change, local knowledge or watershed histories, and information related to collaboration or coordination with existing monitoring initiatives. Across all areas of interest drinking water sources and fish habitat were identified as primary concerns and priorities for monitoring. Other concerns and priorities varied in response to localized issues such as impacts of recreational boating, dam operations, and potential threats to water quality and seasonal flow regimes.

Priority monitoring matrix and site selection

Living Lakes Canada developed the Priority Monitoring Matrix (PMM) tool to integrate scientific and community-directed criteria into hydroclimatic site selection. A list of water bodies in each Area of Interest was developed using the BC Freshwater Atlas (BC Data Catalogue, 2023) and Local Reference Group input. Potential monitoring sites were then filtered for suitability through a preliminary review of logistics-related parameters including calculated watershed area as a proxy for annual peak water flow, the status of current monitoring efforts, and considerations around access. Information gathered through the gap analysis and Local Reference Group engagement was used to select sites, thereby reducing data gaps while addressing Local Reference Group concerns and values.

For the pilot, the PMM was primarily used for data storage, and site selection relied upon professional assessment. For 2023, the PMM was reworked to allow for more objective ranking of potential monitoring sites. Some sites were eliminated outright if they did not meet qualifying criteria, such as having a watershed area of less than 100 km², or safe access. Further ranking was done using a weighting scheme, varying between 1 and 5 for each parameter.

Parameters were classified in rounds, with the first-round rankings based on logistics, the second round based on the data gap analysis and Local Reference Group engagement, and a final round based on field reconnaissance to assess site suitability and feasibility. Parameters used for hydrometric site selection include winter access, availability of a historic record, suitability for assessing community priorities, and modelled water volume, among others. Similar parameters were used to assess sites for lake-level and climate stations. Rounds were assessed sequentially to create a shortlist of sites for each subsequent round, and a round ranking was calculated for each potential site. The shortlist of sites was reviewed and disseminated to Local Reference Group participants for feedback.

In 2022, the PMM aided in site selection for three climate, 27 hydrometric, and 8 lake-level stations across three pilot areas of interest. The PMM informed site selection for 2 climate and 15 hydrometric stations, installed in October 2023, as well as an additional 2 climate stations, 6 hydrometric stations and 6 lake-level stations, to be installed between 2023 and summer 2024. The number of sites selected was determined through target numbers established by Carver and Utzig (2022a) and budgetary constraints. Hydrometric and lake-level stations measure water pressure at depth and temperature. The water level at each hydrometric station is converted to discharge using rating curves developed in accordance with Resource Information Standards Committee [RISC], 2018) standards. Climate stations measure precipitation, wind speed and direction, barometric pressure, snow depth, solar radiation, and light levels.

Data storage

In addition to increased monitoring, the need was identified for an open-source database to aggregate current and historical water data from different sources. Guided by a steering committee, Living Lakes Canada developed the Columbia Basin Water Hub (CBWH), publicly launched in 2021.

The CBWH serves as the central repository for CBWMF data collected. Other contributors include environmental stewardship groups, municipal and regional governments, industry, and backcountry lodge operators. Much of this data was not previously available online (Living Lakes Canada, 2022a). Living Lakes Canada staff provide support and oversee data entry to ensure that, wherever possible, data and accompanying metadata adhere to the FAIR data principles (Wilkinson et al., 2016).

The database operates using the open-source Comprehensive Knowledge Archive Network (CKAN) platform. This platform is used by other partners and government entities, and was selected for its user-friendly interface and technical capabilities. Currently, the CBWH averages 400 user visits per month. The CKAN application program interface allows the data to be accessed for analysis and aggregation with other platforms.

Outcomes

In Canada, the federal and provincial governments are the major sources of hydrometric data (Déry et al., 2016). As such, the locations they choose to monitor reflect their broader interests (Carver et al., 2020; Moore et al., 2020). The CBWMF supports a paradigm shift in watershed governance. It offers an alternative to the prevalent top-down approach by increasing water sustainability and security through local engagement and community ownership of the monitoring network. This project places local concerns and community support as necessary components in solving water sustainability challenges. As the network addresses local concerns and broad regional data gaps, the data can inform decision making at multiple spatial scales from community to river basin levels. Innovative uses of the high-quality hydroclimatic data at the community level can include community water allocation studies, water availability studies for environmental flows, and flood forecasting, among other applications. Community involvement has been shown to increase local water management capacity, as well as increase the odds of success for water security initiatives (Timmer et al., 2007).

The project’s relevance and resiliency continues to grow through engagement and partnerships with Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, industry, and government. Local Reference Group members have received updates on site selection and other activities following initial engagement. Hydrometric monitoring workshops and volunteer opportunities have been offered to promote ongoing community involvement and support. Although all monitoring is overseen by qualified professionals, volunteers provide local updates on streamflow conditions and station maintenance needs, download data from loggers, and take manual staff gauge readings to verify automated measurements. This ensures continued community buy-in of the project and allows for dynamic and focused responses to issues within the monitoring network. Given the need to adhere to government water monitoring standards (Resource Information Standards Committee [RISC), 2018], this project is unable to draw directly upon citizen science platforms to supplement its monitoring network, and instead seeks to gather community contributions through the Local Reference Group process.

The intention is to incorporate all Canadian Columbia Basin hydrological regions into the project over time, adding new areas of interest to the monitoring network in future years and eventually integrating community concerns across the entire Canadian Columbia Basin. Additional monitoring stations can be added to existing areas of interest as new community priorities emerge.

It is significant to note that community interest and engagement in the project to date, including local government support, has surpassed initial expectations. The diversity and extent of concerns and priorities expressed thus far point to the complexity of managing climate-impacted watersheds and the need for involvement at the local level.

The story unfolding in the Canadian Columbia Basin is not dissimilar to the situation in many of Canada’s other major watersheds. Watersheds throughout the country have been shown to be undermonitored (Mishra & Coulibaly, 2010), and could benefit from community-driven water monitoring programmes to bolster monitoring density and generate community-focused data. As such, the CBMWF is intended to be a replicable model for other river basins where local concerns and regional hydrological variability are not represented by in-place monitoring networks. Through engagement with diverse stakeholders and rights holders and the collection of locally relevant hydrological and climatic data, the methods outlined in this case study offer the first step for organizations throughout Canada and elsewhere to pave the way for sustainable and adaptable community-led water management.

Acknowledgements

Living Lakes Canada would like to acknowledge the contributions of Daniel Schindler and Ian Sharpe.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Stronger BC, Watersheds BC, and the Real Estate Foundation of BC through the Healthy Watersheds Initiative; the Province of BC; the Royal Bank of Canada Tech for Nature; Canada’s Digital Technology Supercluster; Columbia Basin Trust; MakeWay; the Vancouver Foundation; the Sitka Foundation; the Slocan Valley Community Legacy Society; the Regional District of Central Kootenay under ReDi funding; the Regional District of East Kootenay ReDi funding; TELUS Friendly Future Foundation; the Columbia Valley Community Foundation; the Schein Foundation; the Ad Meliora Foundation; and ECO Canada Employment Programs Fund.