Harvey Lake Found--ha ha

It's part of the Duteau system...actually. 
Yup.
Not some newly-discovered water source near Grizzly Swamp.
Not some indistinct Gold Paradise water bog.

Who knew?
Obviously not me.

Here's details, this from Technical Memorandum 3:

"The outlet at Haddo supplies the controlled releases to Lower Duteau Creek  ... further downstream at Harvey Lake."

"Harvey Lake is the headpond created on Lower Duteau Creek for the main pipeline diversion into the GVW distribution system.  The head pond and associated infrastructure were completed in the late 1960s..."...travelling intake screens, gas chlorination system, flow meter and telemetry.  AECOM (2006) identified Harvey Lake potential upgrades to the headgates as part of the Duteau WTP upgrades."

"Prior to construction of the Duteau WTP, GVW commissioned Earthtech (2005) to examine options...updating the Harvey Lake intake.  The intake pond requires dredging every five to ten years...frequently cleaning silt and debris from the infrastructure.  The study examined different forms...prevention and complete bypass.  The study summarized that the most economical option was to replace the infrastructure one day."

Source:  EarthTech 2005 Harvey Lake By-Pass Feasibility Study - Final Report Greater Vernon Water Utility.

See this document:  Headgates Dam Improvements (Ref #372-14-14.03)  regarding sediment removal and the protection of incubating Coho Salmon eggs. 

Harvey Lake found...it's basically Duteau "headgates"

"Sheesh...", exclaims Kia.

The plot thickens now with three water sources...yup, three (technically).
A whole new Vernon irrigation system is born?

At the expense of domestic customers...who will be paying for the entire system...always.

SAC meeting October 1, 2015

A layperson's view of what SAC members received.

Stakeholder Advisory Committee members at their first meeting received a summary of three technical memoranda at the first meeting:  TM1, TM2, and TM3 that form part of the Master Water Plan 2012.

The three memoranda summaries, accompanied by historical water data, are here. 

On page 30 of 32, this sentence piqued my interest:

"Okanagan Lake has been identified as the best water source to meet the long term growth within the service area of GVW once the water licenses of Kalamalka Lake and Duteau Creek watershed are fully used. Recommendations indicate that GVW should apply for a 50,000 ML/yr reserve for future use."

So why doesn't GVW apply for a water licence on Okanagan Lake???? 

It seems that GVW itself disqualifies its eligibility for an Okanagan Lake water licence.  And not only because Okanagan Lake water wouldn't be needed until long-term growth (2052) was required.

So how do they prevent being eligible?...consider the statement on TM3:  "storage is a key element to understanding how much water GVW has available for use."  

• GVW does not fully utilize the storage capacity on Duteau for which it has license (see TM3 for more details).
• Kalamalka Lake is fully allocated now...any further water requirements would be reserved for fisheries by the Ministry.
•  This year's Stage 1 water restrictions required a 10 per cent reduction in consumption, so there was below normal drawdown of water in storage.
•  TM 3 details "how much total storage licenses GVW holds, how much water GVW can currently store and examines opportunities to increase storage to support growth within the GVW service area."
• A comparison of current and future water demands was completed to assess if increasing storage is required.

So does GVW itself prevent eligibility for an Okanagan Lake water licence? 

It appears to me that the answwer is "probably, because they haven't maximized water storage."

In retrospect, could this indicate that GVW knows that Duteau should/should have remained for irrigation (non potable) customers only, with a larger Mission Hill Water Treatment Plant built.  GVW accepts that agricultural irrigation is not expected to increase noticeably in the future.   

The Master Water Plan's consultants recommended that GVW should apply for an Okanagan Lake licence for the future.  Not in the future, for the future.  Presumably to apply now!  Yet how can they apply for an Okanagan Lake water licence when they haven't maximized the existing licences?

"Not to apply in the future; rather, apply now for the future," suggests Kia.

 

Just a layperson's little bell ringing...