The Question No One Will Answer: Why Is the Gorge Water Quality Declining?
Freedom of information was never the objective. It became necessary because, after years of meetings, reports, telephone calls and emails, no government would give us a coherent answer.
It began again with a swim.
During the first week of August 2006, I returned to the Gorge Waterway after spending approximately five years away from it. I had needed a break from my fair lady. After years of organizing cleanups, working with volunteers, meeting with governments and fighting pollution, I was burned out.
The tide was slack near the end of a return. I had my goggles with me.
The change was immediately apparent.
The water felt warmer. Visibility was poor. The water had a thick green appearance—what I have always called green mung. Brown material coated the eelgrass, and the plants did not move as freely as I remembered.
Healthy eelgrass dances like a fine lady.
This eelgrass did not dance.
That observation was not a laboratory result. It did not identify a contaminant, prove a source or establish a long-term trend. But I had already spent years working in these waters. When you spend your life repairing machinery, reading systems and working on the water, you learn to notice when something has changed.
So I started asking questions.
The question was simple:
Why is the water quality declining?
Twenty years later, I am still asking.
This is not a debate about paperwork
Freedom of information is not the central issue.
FOI is what happened after the central environmental question went unanswered.
For more than 30 years, Veins of Life Watershed Society has worked throughout British Columbia, much of it directly on the water. We did not arrive with a predetermined theory and demand that governments agree with us.
We listened.
We learned from biologists, engineers, Indigenous knowledge holders, regulators, municipal workers, commercial operators, divers, boat owners and residents. We adopted new methods and new science when the evidence supported them. We helped introduce source-control approaches, stormwater treatment proposals, watershed planning, bioremediation concepts, eelgrass restoration and large-scale shoreline and underwater cleanups.
Our email record shows that this effort did not begin yesterday. The preserved ledger contains 421 core or related messages across 223 threads between March 2010 and July 2026, in addition to earlier paper files, organizational accounts and historical correspondence. It documents meetings, telephone calls, Council delegations, technical exchanges, report sharing and repeated requests for investigation.
In May 2018, after returning to the Harbour and Gorge regularly, I wrote directly to Victoria Mayor and Council that I had observed declining water quality and habitat loss.
That was eight years ago.
The underlying question remains unanswered.
The Gorge is the frog in the pot
The decline of an urban watershed rarely arrives as one dramatic event.
Sometimes it does: a fuel spill, a sewage overflow, a failed pipe, a large fish kill or a visible plume from an outfall.
More often, it happens by increments:
A stream becomes slightly warmer each summer.
Dry-season flows become lower.
A few more properties and roads shed heated runoff.
Another sanitary connection leaks into a storm drain.
Another dock shades eelgrass.
Another shoreline is hardened.
Another contaminated sediment deposit is disturbed.
Another algae bloom lasts longer.
Another engineering report is commissioned but never placed where the public can find it.
Another department answers only the small part within its jurisdiction.
Another year passes without an integrated assessment.
Each individual change may be explained away.
Together, they alter the ecosystem.
The Gorge is like the frog in the pot: the temperature rises gradually, the warning signs become familiar, and worsening conditions are normalized before anyone accepts responsibility for the whole.
What I am seeing now
Five days ago, I went swimming in the Gorge again.
The water was among the worst I have seen. It appeared dark green and heavily loaded with material. The smell of the water seemed sick—not the ordinary marine smell I have known for decades.
Similar green growth is increasingly apparent in freshwater areas throughout the connected watershed. Water arriving through the Colquitz and Craigflower systems appears warmer than it once did, and blue-green or cyanobacteria-like growth is being observed widely.
Those are field observations. They require investigation, not exaggeration.
Appearance alone cannot establish that a bloom is cyanobacteria, determine whether toxins are present or identify the source of the nutrients supporting it. The Province states that harmful cyanobacteria can look very similar to harmless algae and that definitive identification requires microscopic laboratory examination. (Government of British Columbia)
But the Province also confirms the environmental mechanism behind our concern: cyanobacteria and other algae can proliferate when warmer water, elevated nutrients, abundant light and stable conditions occur together. Wastewater, poorly functioning septic systems, development and urban stormwater runoff can contribute nutrients. Cyanobacteria gain a competitive advantage in particularly warm water. (Government of British Columbia)
B.C. further acknowledges that some blooms have become longer and more intense because of changing climate conditions and increased nutrients. (Government of British Columbia)
That does not prove the cause of what we are observing in the Gorge watershed.
It does prove that our observations are scientifically plausible warning signs deserving immediate measurement.
Warmer water changes everything
Water temperature is not a cosmetic measurement.
The Province recognizes that warmer water changes physical, chemical and biological processes, holds less dissolved gas, affects which organisms can survive and places cold-water fish such as salmon under stress. Roads, parking lots and other landscape changes can also increase water temperature. (Government of British Columbia)
That creates several interacting risks:
Lower dissolved oxygen. Warm water generally holds less oxygen, while decaying algae and organic matter consume more.
Greater biological stress. Salmonids and many aquatic invertebrates depend on suitable temperature and oxygen ranges.
Increased bloom potential. Warm, nutrient-rich and stable water can favour algae and cyanobacteria.
Changed contaminant behaviour. Temperature influences chemical reactions, degradation rates and biological uptake.
Food-web effects. Changes at the level of algae, eelgrass, aquatic insects and forage fish eventually affect juvenile salmon and the predators that depend upon them.
The correct response is not to assume that climate change explains everything.
Climate change acts upon a watershed already burdened by stormwater, impervious surfaces, leaking infrastructure, contaminated sediment, shoreline alteration and habitat loss. Warming can amplify failures that source control should already have addressed.
The official record already contains warning signs
No single government report proves that every part of the Gorge and Harbour is steadily deteriorating.
But the available evidence does establish continuing and unresolved pressures.
The CRD describes the Gorge as a shallow, urban tidal waterway receiving 84 stormwater discharges. It identifies urban runoff as a principal current concern and states that runoff can carry oils, grease, garden chemicals, litter and animal waste into the waterway, harming marine plants and wildlife and making water unhealthy for swimming. (CRD)
The CRD also identifies eelgrass as one of the Gorge’s most important biological features. It shelters juvenile Pacific salmon and cutthroat trout, supports invertebrates and contributes directly to the food web. (CRD)
The most recent complete Core Area Stormwater Quality Program report we located is the 2024 report, published in 2025. (CRD)
The underlying evidence dossier records that:
Of 195 discharges sampled twice during 2024, 40% had at least one E. coli result above 400 CFU/100 mL.
Twenty-eight discharges were rated high public-health concern.
Seventeen had remained high for at least five years.
Esquimalt had five high-concern discharges in 2024.
SW0744B, associated with the Gorge Creek and park area, remained a high-concern location.
Previous repairs did not eliminate the problem; another source reportedly remained.
Other nearby outfalls have documented concerns involving mercury, copper, zinc, PAHs, oil and sanitary contamination.
These results must be used carefully. Multi-year averages are not the same as present-day exposure measurements, and outfall samples do not by themselves describe the condition of the entire receiving water.
But they establish something important:
Known sources and contaminant pathways remain unresolved inside a waterway that governments increasingly promote for recreation.
The problem is cumulative
The question “Why is water quality declining?” will not be answered by testing for one thing at one beach.
The Gorge and Harbour receive the combined effects of:
1. Urban stormwater
Runoff carries road dust, tire and brake wear, petroleum residues, metals, pesticides, nutrients, animal waste, microplastics and other contaminants from thousands of individual properties and kilometers of roads.
B.C.’s current water-quality system recognizes emerging contaminants and now includes a freshwater aquatic-life guideline for 6PPD-quinone, a highly toxic transformation product associated with vehicle tires. (Government of British Columbia)
Yet most routine local stormwater programs continue to rely on a relatively narrow contaminant suite.
2. Sanitary leakage and cross-connections
The historical record includes cross-connections, direct catch-basin connections, wet-weather inflow and infiltration, sewage overflows and sources that remained after attempted repairs.
The Gorge Creek dossier documents a 2017 contamination incident that was initially attributed to dumping but was ultimately connected to a significant wastewater cross-connection. It also records continued high concern at SW0744B after repairs and relining.
That history demonstrates why preliminary explanations cannot replace complete source tracing.
3. Warmer freshwater inflows and low summer flows
The Colquitz, Craigflower and smaller urban tributaries influence temperature, nutrients, sediment and freshwater circulation in Portage Inlet and the Gorge.
What is missing is an accessible, continuous and publicly interpreted temperature record showing how these tributaries have changed over time and how those changes affect the receiving marine environment.
4. Nutrient enrichment and algae
Nitrogen and phosphorus can arrive through sanitary leakage, animal waste, fertilizers, organic debris, eroding soil and urban runoff.
Without routine measurements of nutrients, chlorophyll, phycocyanin, species composition and cyanotoxins, nobody can responsibly explain the green water—or dismiss it.
5. Historically contaminated sediments
The Harbour and Gorge contain a legacy of industrial activity, sewage and contaminated runoff.
Sediment is not merely old dirt lying harmlessly on the bottom. Contaminants can remain available to benthic organisms, be disturbed by construction, propeller wash, dredging, storms and recreational activity, and move through the food web.
Testing only the water column can miss much of that risk.
6. Habitat alteration
Eelgrass is affected by shading, sedimentation, turbidity, physical disturbance, poor water quality and changes to light and temperature.
Docks, shoreline armouring, dredging, cable work and other projects are usually assessed one at a time. The cumulative footprint across the waterway is rarely presented.
The ecological pathway is direct:
Eelgrass, benthic organisms and aquatic insects support forage fish and juvenile salmon; salmon support the larger Salish Sea food web, including Southern Resident killer whales.
7. Fragmented government responsibility
The watershed crosses several municipalities and engages the CRD, Island Health, provincial ministries, Transport Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada and other authorities.
Each organization collects a piece of the evidence.
No one is producing the complete diagnosis.
Recovery in the past does not prove protection in the present
The Gorge improved enormously from the condition it had reached by the middle of the twentieth century.
We know because we helped make that recovery happen.
Beginning in the 1990s, volunteers, businesses, governments and community organizations removed enormous amounts of debris, reduced obvious discharges, restored habitat and brought people back to the shoreline. The CRD itself recognizes that a father and son began cleaning the abused waterway and helped inspire the wider community effort. (CRD)
That recovery should be celebrated.
But it should not be used as evidence that present conditions are automatically improving.
The official CRD page says both that historical cleanup significantly improved water quality and that current non-point runoff remains the main pollution concern. It lists 84 stormwater discharges and describes extensive urbanization around the waterway. (CRD)
Both statements can be true:
The Gorge is cleaner than it was during its worst historical period.
Important parts of its water quality and habitat may again be deteriorating.
A recovered ecosystem can relapse when source control, infrastructure renewal and habitat protection fail to keep pace with urbanization and climate stress.
We asked before using FOI
We did not begin by filing formal requests.
We spoke with staff. We arranged telephone calls. We attended meetings. We presented to Councils. We shared reports. We worked with the University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre. We proposed stormwater utilities, source-control programs, treatment systems, daylighting, bioremediation and watershed governance.
The record includes many helpful individuals.
City engineers have located old reports, provided technical information, offered meetings and discussed possible improvements. CRD staff have repeatedly met with us and continue to treat our concerns with respect. BC Hydro shared sediment and habitat material and communicated directly about its project. Oak Bay and View Royal have provided information, Saanich has agreed to meet, and Esquimalt has released a substantial body of reports that we are still reviewing.
This story is not an accusation against every public employee.
It is about a system that has failed to combine the knowledge held by those employees into an accountable watershed answer.
The question disappeared inside departments
We would ask:
Why is the Gorge changing?
One department would answer about pipes.
Another would answer about parks.
Another would discuss bacterial beach sampling.
Another would say sediment was somebody else’s jurisdiction.
Another would refer us to the CRD.
The CRD could investigate and advise but did not own every municipal drain or control every repair and enforcement decision.
The federal government might examine one contaminant, one property or one statutory instrument.
The Province might publish guidelines but leave investigation and implementation divided among other bodies.
Island Health might consider bacterial recreation results without providing a complete assessment of chemical contamination or sediment disturbance.
Every answer addressed a fragment.
Nobody answered the question.
Then we were told to use FOI
When ordinary requests failed, we were repeatedly directed toward freedom-of-information legislation.
For a while, that worked.
FOI helped locate old studies, engineering records, stormwater data, correspondence and reports that should have informed the public discussion from the beginning.
Then the costs escalated.
In June 2026, Victoria estimated that one request would require:
160.5 hours to locate records;
207 hours to prepare them;
A gross fee of $10,935;
A remaining charge of $5,467.50 after a partial waiver.
The same file became entangled in narrowing disputes, outdated statutory wording, procedural confusion and dismissive correspondence. The City later treated the request as closed while fundamental questions remained unresolved.
The City’s public records also refer to or imply the existence of stormwater and sanitary master plans, hydraulic models, CCTV inspections, condition assessments, cross-connection records, source-control work, laboratory records and utility-accounting information that could not be readily found in the locations provided to us.
The absurdity is this:
We asked for the records because nobody would explain why the watershed appeared to be declining. We were then told it would cost thousands of dollars to locate the public records needed to investigate the failure to answer.
Our restoration money belongs in the water, on the shoreline and in habitat—not in a municipal toll booth for public environmental information.
What the evidence proves—and what it does not
We must remain precise.
The existing record supports these findings:
Long-standing sanitary and chemical contamination has entered the Gorge and Harbour through stormwater infrastructure.
Some high-concern outfalls have persisted for years.
Repairs have not always eliminated identified sources.
Metals, PAHs, bacteria and petroleum releases remain documented concerns.
The watershed is heavily urbanized and receives runoff through dozens of discharges.
The Gorge supports sensitive eelgrass, fish, bird and invertebrate habitat.
Government information is divided among multiple agencies and departments.
No accessible integrated assessment has been produced that explains the combined changes observed across freshwater inflows, marine water, sediment and habitat.
Years of correspondence have not produced a coherent public answer.
The existing record does not yet prove:
That every part of the Gorge and Harbour is declining at the same rate;
That the green material currently visible is cyanobacteria;
That cyanotoxins are present;
That one municipality or one discharge caused the observed conditions;
That warming, nutrients, contaminated sediments or sewage alone explain the change;
That officials deliberately concealed a known cause.
Those gaps are not reasons to stop asking.
They define the investigation that governments should already be conducting.
The report that is missing
What is missing is not another glossy description of the Gorge.
It is a watershed-wide condition and trend assessment that combines:
Continuous water-temperature and dissolved-oxygen monitoring in the Colquitz, Craigflower, Gorge and Cecelia systems and representative receiving-water stations;
Seasonal nutrient, turbidity, chlorophyll and algae monitoring;
Laboratory identification of suspected cyanobacteria and cyanotoxin testing when blooms occur;
Microbial source tracking capable of distinguishing human sewage from wildlife, pets and other sources;
Dry-weather, wet-weather and first-flush outfall sampling;
Metals, PAHs, PCBs, dioxins and furans, pesticides, tire-derived contaminants, PFAS, pharmaceuticals, alkylphenols and other endocrine-active compounds selected through a defensible pathway assessment;
A current sediment-contamination map with toxicity and bioavailability information;
Eelgrass, kelp, salt-marsh and intertidal habitat trends;
A cumulative inventory of docks, shoreline armouring, dredging, utility work and other physical disturbances;
A source-by-source corrective plan identifying the responsible municipality or agency, required action, budget, deadline and follow-up monitoring.
The Province already says water-quality monitoring should be used to understand current conditions and track change over time. Its guidelines are intended to protect aquatic life, wildlife and recreation, inform assessments, guide management and report on the state of water quality. (Government of British Columbia)
That is exactly what is required here.
Answer the question
After 32 years in conservation work, I do not expect every observation I make to be accepted without testing.
I expect it to be investigated.
I do not claim to know the complete cause of the green water, warmer tributaries, weakened eelgrass and habitat decline.
I am saying that the warning lights are on.
The available evidence points toward a cumulative interaction of urban stormwater, sanitary leakage, contaminated sediments, habitat alteration, nutrient enrichment, warming water and inadequate source control.
But the public still lacks the integrated evidence needed to determine the relative contribution of each pressure.
That is the real scandal.
Not that one volunteer has all the answers.
That after decades of monitoring, taxation, engineering, environmental regulation, Council decisions and public promotion of recreation, the responsible governments still cannot—or will not—present the answer as one coherent public record.
We are still willing to work together
We have not abandoned cooperation.
We will meet with Saanich in the fall. We continue to work with the CRD. We are reviewing the reports received from Esquimalt. We appreciate the assistance provided by Oak Bay and View Royal and the individual municipal, provincial and federal employees who continue to engage honestly.
But cooperation cannot mean endless meetings without conclusions.
It must now produce:
A named lead agency;
A complete public report register;
Immediate investigation of the current green-water observations;
Continuous temperature and oxygen monitoring;
Algae identification and toxin testing;
A cumulative water, sediment and habitat assessment;
Enforceable source-control action;
Public reporting of findings, uncertainties and corrective deadlines.
The Gorge and Harbour do not need another jurisdictional tour.
They need a diagnosis.
The question remains
In 2006, I returned to the Gorge and saw that something had changed.
In 2018, I formally told Victoria that I was seeing declining water quality and habitat.
In 2026, I entered the water again and found conditions worse than I remembered.
For twenty years, the question has remained the same:
Why is the water quality declining?
We are not asking because we enjoy filing FOIs.
We are filing FOIs because nobody has answered.
We are not making up the warming water, green growth, damaged habitat, contaminated outfalls, cross-connections or unresolved sources.
We have spent our lives on these waters—cleaning them, studying them, restoring them and learning from those who understand them.
The Gorge gave this community another chance once.
It should not have to die slowly before somebody decides the question was worth answering.
No comments:
Post a Comment