False Creek Field Trip Reflection

Unfortunately, I was not able to join fellow classmates on the field trip due to sickness. However, I was still inspired by False creek’s development plan after reviewing the available resources.

The first thing that caught my attention was pictures that compare present shore to the past. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. In the document “then & now” and “historical photos”, there are photos of false creek and its surrounding areas from as early as 1792. The timelines in these documents record significant events that impacted the ecosystem of false creek as well as industrial projects that took place in surrounding areas. Without a doubt, the tall buildings, large docks and fancy boats all show technology advancement in our society. It is something to be proud of as Metro Vancouver is a rapidly expanding area with large population and great developments. However, the changes in ecosystem are not showing a positive trend compared to our society development. Around 150 years ago, false creek district was a temperate rainforest, traversed by numerous creeks that passed through rich tidal flats on their ways to the ocean. When Europeans came to this area and settled, there was a conflicting worldview in which expanding industrial economy was more valued. Therefore, they wanted to tame nature and extracted most of the abundant natural resources along the shores over a few decades.

When I first read these documents, my feelings towards the European settlement are mixed. On one hand, their action of extracting and exhausting the natural resources posed a drastic negative impact. The consequences are large enough to the point that we are certain false creek can never return to its original condition. On the other hand, my current lifestyle is related greatly to technology advancement and industrial expansion. I cannot neglect the convenience in my life that is only possible because of technology. Therefore, it is a complicated situation as most people are unlikely to give up all components of their lifestyle for the environment. I think it is valuable that reviewing these resources have led me to this discovery. While I might not be able to give up technology and convenience entirely, I will be giving my attention to the false creek project and contributing my part to restore the shoreline. This is also related to what we are learning in class, which consists of ways we can contribute to ocean conservation. For instance, I now know the negative impacts of prawn fishing, destructive power of bottom trawling and how to read different labels on fresh products.

The changes observed in false creek and surrounding areas take me to the next finding. From Adam et al (2012) and Wenick et al (2012), I learned about the planning process and results of the redevelopment plan of the Southeast False Creek (SEFC) lands. Adam et al raised a good point about the definition of ecological restoration and argues that it shouldn’t be used in this situation. His point it that the redevelopment plan can never return the shoreline to its original condition so it will never be a true restoration. Instead, reclamation should be used as the plan is helping the ecosystem of False Creek to return to a better state. This evaluation of the plan really got me thinking. Of course, the redevelopment plan and establishment of habitat island have some great outcomes. However, there is so little that can be done after the ecosystem is destroyed. From this perspective, we should definitely put more effort into preventative method of habitat loss. Instead of trying to restore a habitat after destruction, why don’t we prevent them from being damaged in the first place? This being said, the plan to redevelop False Creek is significant and have done a lot of good for the ecosystem as well as the community living around. Even though the plan originally had a narrow focus on preserving fish species, positive impacts on the marine bird population and plant biomass were observed throughout time. Therefore, preventative methods and restoration plan both have their values in combating habitat loss. The exact method to use should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Perhaps a combination of both methods would be beneficial based on the target area.

Another theme that I related with from Adam et al (2010)’s paper is that shoreline development is beneficial to people living around the area too. I have always believed that our happiness is interconnected with nature. Especially in British Columbia, an area blessed with so much natural resources and breathtaking sceneries. People here love outdoor activities that help them connect with nature. False Creek is located right in the center of Metro Vancouver, so it is accessible to many people. A shore where you can see various marine species located in the middle of a highly modernized city will expose people to the dynamics of the ecosystem and therefore, help more people appreciate nature. Improvements on the ecosystem of False Creek could also help raise awareness for other conservation projects.

Last but not least, I am so curious about Fraser’s perspective on local fishing market in BC. From reading the news articles, I find myself agreeing with a lot of his points. Supporting local fisheries not only allow customers to have the freshest food, but also will help BC fisherman make a reputation. I agree with Fraser when he said carbon emission would decrease if less fish is shipped from other countries. Moreover, local fisheries are easier to monitor and regulate from a government’s standpoint. This could ensure that unsustainable methods of fishing are limited. Sustainable fishing could also be a marketing strategy as more and more people care about where their food comes from.

It sure sounded like an amazing field trip and I am really looking forward to joining everyone on the next trip to Steveston Harbour.