Jordan River Project Water Use Plan

Jordan River Project Water Use Plan Monitoring Surfing Quality below the Jordan River Generating Station Implementation Year 5 Reference: JORMON-5 Study Period: March 5 to April 1, RRL Recreation Resources Ltd. August

Water License Requirements Jordan Water Licence Requirement Reporting Ref Study: JOR-WUP-SURF Monitoring Surfing Quality Below the Jordan River Generating Station Study Period: March 5 April 1, Vers. 1.1 Revised August

Table of Contents Executive Summary... 3 Surf Monitoring Background... 4 The Survey... 4 Results Summary... 5 1.0 Survey Objective and Scope... 6 2.0 Survey Methodology... 7 3.0 Survey Results... 8 3.1 User Group Profile - User Activities... 8 3.2 Surf User Experiences... 9 3.2.1 Catching a Wave... 9 3.2.2 Wave Height... 9 3.2.3 Wave Break... 10 3.2.4 Length Of Ride... 10 3.2.5 Quality of Experience... 11 3.3 Influence of River Flow... 12 3.4 Summary of surf user comments who noticed River Flow... 12 3.5 Surf User Numbers... 13 3.6 User Experience... 14 3.7 Number of Surfing Days... 14 3.8 User Residency... 14 3.9 Amount Spent... 14 3.9.1 Surfing Location... 15 3.9.2 Length of Board... 15 4.0 Analysis... 16 4.1 Introduction... 16 4.2 Cumulative Analysis... 17 4.3 Surf User Experiences Summary Tables -2006... 18 4.4 Flow Conditions and Surf User Experiences... 19 4.5 Conditions and Locations Where Issues Are Prevalent... 21 4.6 Operation Affect on Surf Conditions... 21 4.7 Economic Impact of Surf Users at Jordan River... 22 5.0 Recommendations... 23 5.1 On-site Observations:... 23 5.2. Data Collection:... 23 5.3. Key Metrics... 23 Appendix A Surf Survey... 24 Appendix B - Tidal Data... 26 Appendix C Jordan River Dam FlowsAppendix D Weather Conditions 27 Appendix D Weather Conditions... 28 Notes... 30 BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 2

Executive Summary Jordan River is located on the west coast of southern Vancouver Island, approximately 70 km north of Victoria via Highway 14. Every March from 2006-2011, surf user surveys are being collected at Jordan River to help to define the relationships between flows from the Jordan River and surf user experiences. The surf user survey was conducted between March 5 and April 1st. A total of 40 surf user surveys were collected. This compares with 32 surveys collected in 2009, 71 surveys collected in 2008, 31 surveys collected in 2007 and 40 collected in 2006. A total of 213 surveys have been collected over the past five years. In addition to the formal survey, surf users are asked informally for information that may add to our understanding of the factors influencing their experiences. In the surf user survey we continued to gain more understanding of the variables that can influence surf conditions at Jordan River, while also increasing our understanding of the factors that contribute to the surf users experiences. During the surf user survey periods each March, flows from the Jordan River Generating Station are varied so as to provide a mix of constrained and unconstrained flow conditions. This enables collection of data under different flow conditions, and enables comparisons with other environmental factors such as tide and wind direction. The surf at Jordan River continues to attract a mix of new and long-term users. In, as in the previous four years, the majority of surf users are from Sooke and Victoria. Jordan River continues to attract surfers because of its accessibility and proximity to Victoria, and the quality of surf can be excellent. The rustic campsite continues to operate, and a number of surf users stay overnight. The majority of surf users are day visitors. The site is located at the mouth of the Jordan River and faces west onto Juan de Fuca Strait. Surf conditions at Jordan River vary considerably during the course of a day, primarily in relation to tide and wind conditions. The surf can change at very short notice, as a result of strong winds or heavy rains for example. Many surf users review on-line web sites to obtain forecasts for surf conditions before deciding to go to Jordan River. Four primary surf use areas, Points Left, Points Right, Outside the River Mouth and Shakies Beach, are surveyed, as these sites are considered most likely locations where flows from the Jordan River may influence the surf conditions. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 3

Surf Monitoring Background In 2001 the first surf user survey was completed as part of the BC Hydro Water Use Plan (WUP) for Jordan River. The survey was conducted between December 17 th, 2000 and March 16 th 2001. Analysis of the data collected indicated that surf conditions could be affected by Jordan River Generating Station discharge. In certain conditions high discharges may flatten waves, particularly at Points Left 1, making it more difficult for surfers to catch waves against the current. Based on the observations from the 2001 study, data has continued to be gathered in order to gain a fuller understanding of the relationship between discharge flows from the river, ocean conditions and surf users. Through the WUP process, the final alternative agreed to by the consultative committee includes provision for a minimum of four (4) weekend days during the month of March when maximum discharge will be limited to 30m 3 s -1 during the day. The potential benefit of this flow will be evaluated during this monitoring program, which is scheduled to occur over a six-year period, 2006 2011. The focus of the surfing survey is to determine the benefits to the surfing quality at Jordan River as a result of constraints on generation. The Survey The survey was conducted on March 5,6,7,13,14 and April 1. The survey has 18 questions and includes a map on which to record surf use locations. The survey was conducted using in-person interviews. 1 Refer to Appendix A for a map of the surf locations at Jordan River BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 4

Results Summary Key observations from the Surf User Monitoring Program are summarized below: The maximum number of users in the water during the on-site survey times was 12. 97.5% of surf users at Jordan River are board users, 82% of board users are male, and overall, 82.5% of surf users are male, 17.5% are female. 45% of surfers rated their experience as poor to fair, and 55% rated the experience as good to excellent, indicating that for the majority of surf users, surf conditions provided a positive experience. Taking a view across all flow conditions, 60% of surf users indicated their surf activity was not affected by river flow, while 40% indicated that the flow did affect their activity. 42.5% of the surf users surveyed at Jordan River had been surfing between 0-4 years at Jordan River. Points Right was again the most popular surfing area this season. An equal number of short and medium length boards were used this season. 40% of users surfed 0-9 days per year at Jordan River. 17.5% of users have 20+ years experience surfing at Jordan River 53% of surf users spent $10 - $25 for each surf day. 44% of surf users lived within 50 km of Jordan River. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 5

1.0 Survey Objective and Scope The objective of the surfmonitoring program is to assess the performance of the Water Use Plan decision to constrain maximum discharge opportunistically during the surfing season, using surf quality as the performance measure. The monitoring program assessments are undertaken near the mouth of the Jordan River in the inter-tidal zone where surfing is prevalent. The program evaluates the surf quality of waves that are particularly vulnerable to Jordan River Generating Station operations, based on the response of experienced surfers. Surf quality is evaluated under two conditions: constrained and unconstrained generation discharge, alternating over the review period of six years. The objectives of the Jordan River surf users monitoring program 2 are to: 1. Develop baseline information on daily surf use for high use weekends. 2. Determine user residency and activity preferences. 3. Define how often individuals surf at Jordan River on an annual basis. 4. Assess the correlation between discharge from the generating station and surf quality. 5. Record weather and tide information during the periods of surf survey administration. 6. Establish a monetary value for a surfer s day. 2 Jordan River Water Use Plan Monitoring program Terms of Reference. June 21 2004 BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 6

2.0 Survey Methodology Date # of Surveys March 5 5 March 6 4 March 7 6 March 13 10 March 14 3 April 1 12 Totals 40 The survey of Jordan River surf users commenced March 5, and was delivered on site through in-person interviews. The surf user survey was explained to the user and was completed by either Jeremy Webb or by Erin Prescott (March 7 th ). Survey monitoring was conducted on March 5, 6,7,13,14 and on April 1,. A total of 40 surveys were collected in. The surf user survey is designed to measure the factors contributing to the surf users experience at Jordan River so as to determine how constraints on power generation affected surfing quality. There is a short window of opportunity where the surf user can be interviewed, after they come out of the water, before they wish to get changed and warm up. The length of time it took to complete each survey continued to be appropriate, with no users objecting to the survey being too long. The survey questions were straightforward and generated only normal requests for clarification. Refer to Appendix A to view the Surf Users Survey template. In addition to the surf user survey, the number of surf users in the water and their locations were observed and recorded at approximately half hour intervals. Weather observations were also made and recorded at approximately one-hour intervals. On-line weather information was used to help determine the surf conditions at Jordan River. Particularly useful was the on-line weather stations located at Gordon s Beach in Sooke: http://bigwavedave.ca/gordonswsrt2.htm. Also used were Environment Canada s Marine Weather forecasts and stations for Juan de Fuca Strait: http://www.weatheroffice.gc.ca/marine/forecast_e.html?mapid=03&siteid=07010 and a popular site: http://www.bigwavedave.ca/latest.php?dir=tides2&file=tidal used by windsurfers and surfers. Also useful is the US-NOAA coastal waters forecasts: http://weather.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/fmtbltn.pl?file=forecasts/marine/coastal/pz/pzz131.txt. which provides weather information for Juan de Fuca Strait. New for the survey were two sites that were used and which provided additional information on surf conditions at Jordan River, Surf Forecast.Com, http://www.surfforecast.com/breaks/jordanriver/forecasts/latest and CoastalBC.com http://coastalbc.com/weather/southisland.htm BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 7

3.0 Survey Results A total of 40 surveys were completed during the monitoring period. This section of the report summarizes the data collected from the surf user surveys collected between March 5 and April 1,. 3.1 User Group Profile - User Activities The survey records five different types of surf use. #4 Type of surf use activity Board Body Boogie Windsurf Kayak Surf Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female # of Date Surveys 1 4 - - - - - - - - 5 March 5 4 - - - - - 3 - - - 4 March 6 5 - - - - - - - - - 6 March 7 7 3 - - - - - - - - 10 March 13 2 - - - - - - - - 3 March 14 9 - - - - - - 1-12 April 1 32 7 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 40 Totals This season, 97.5% of surf users at Jordan River are board users. 82% of the board users are male, and overall, 82.5% of surf users are male, 17.5% are female. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 8

3.2 Surf User Experiences A series of four questions are used to differentiate the elements contributing to surf users experiences. 3.2.1 Catching a Wave Getting on to a wave in order to ride it is one of the fundamental challenges of surfing, and is a skill that develops with knowledge and experience. #5 - How would you rate the conditions for catching the waves? Poor Fair Good Excellent Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female # of Date Surveys - 1 - - 1 3 - - 5 March 5 2-1 - 1 - - - 4 March 6 1-3 - 1 1 - - 6 March 7 - - 1-6 3 - - 10 March 13 - - - 1 2 - - - 3 March 14 3-4 1 3 1 - - 12 April 1 6 1 9 2 14 8 0 0 40 Totals This season, 82.5% of surf users felt conditions for catching waves were fair to good. 17.5% of surfers rated conditions as poor, 27.5 as fair, 55% as good and 0% as excellent. 3.2.2 Wave Height The higher the wave, generally the better the ride. #6 - How would you rate the wave height? Poor Fair Good Excellent Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female # of Date Surveys - 1 1 - - 3 - - 5 March 5 1-3 - - - - - 4 March 6 2-1 1 2 - - - 6 March 7 - - 2 2 5 1 - - 10 March 13 2 - - 1 - - - - 3 March 14 6-2 2 2 - - - 12 April 1 11 1 9 6 9 4 0 0 40 Totals This season, 30% of surf users rated wave height as poor, 37.5% as fair, 32.5% as good and 0% as excellent. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 9

3.2.3 Wave Break The way waves break affects the surfer s ride in several ways and a good wave break is much sought after. There are four surf breaks at Jordan River where surf user data is gathered: Shakies Beach, Outside River Mouth, Points Left and Points Right. #7 - How would you rate the wave break? Poor Fair Good Excellent Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female # of Date Surveys - - - 1 1 3 - - 5 March 5 1 - - - 3 - - - 4 March 6 1-3 - 2 - - - 6 March 7 - - 1-4 3 1 1 10 March 13 - - 1 1 - - 1-3 March 14 2-3 1 4 1 1-12 April 1 4 0 8 3 14 7 3 1 40 Totals This season, 10% of surf users rated the wave break as poor, 27.5% rated the wave break as fair, 52.5% rated it as good, and 10% rated it as excellent. 3.2.4 Length Of Ride Once on a wave, the surfer rides it and generally the longer the ride the better. #8 - How would you rate the length of ride? Poor Fair Good Excellent Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female # of Date Surveys - 1 1 3 - - - - 5 March 5 1-2 - 1 - - - 4 March 6 2-1 - 2-1 - 6 March 7 - - 1 1 6 1-1 10 March 13 - - 1 1 - - 1-3 March 14 2-6 1 2 1 - - 12 April 1 5 1 12 6 11 2 2 1 40 Totals This season, 15% of surfers rated the ride length as poor, 45% as fair, 32.5% as good and 7.5% as excellent. The majority, 77.5% rating the ride length as fair to good is consistent with the surf conditions present during the survey period. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 10

3.2.5 Quality of Experience In order to obtain a rating from surf users that focused less on specific elements and more on the combination of elements contributing to their experience, surf users were asked to rate their overall experience while out on the water. #9 - How would you rate the quality of your surfing experience today while you were in the water? Poor Fair Good Excellent Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female # of Surveys Date - 1 - - 1 3 - - 5 March 5 2 - - - 2 - - - 4 March 6 1-2 1 2 - - - 6 March 7 - - 1 2 4 1 2-10 March 13 - - - 1 2 - - - 3 March 14 2-3 3 5 - - - 12 April 1 5 1 6 6 16 4 2 0 40 Totals This season, 45% of surfers rated their experience as poor to fair, and 55% rated the experience as good to excellent, indicating that for the majority of surf users, surf conditions provided a positive experience. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 11

3.3 Influence of River Flow #10 - Did you notice if the water discharge from the Jordan River affected your water activity? Yes No Male Female Male Female Date Flow Range - 1 1 3 March 5 +/- 0.39 23.29m 3 s -1 - - 4 - March 6 +/- 0.38 0.38m 3 s -1 1-4 1 March 7 +/- 0.38 0.38m 3 s -1 5 1 2 2 March 13 +/- 0.41 50.77m 3 s -1 - - 2 1 March 14 +/- 0.40 0.40m 3 s -1 6 2 4 - April 1 +/- 50.99 50.51 3 s -1 12 4 17 7 Totals - This season, 60% of surf users overall indicated their surf activity was not affected by river flow, while 40% overall indicated that the flow did affect their activity. 3.4 Summary of surf user comments who noticed River Flow The comments of individuals who indicated the flow of water from the Jordan River affected their activity, or who noticed qualities about the river flow even though they observed it did not affect their activities, made the following observations: Date Affected activity BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 Comment Surf user type Years surfing at Jordan River Total years surfing Quality of surfing experience Specific flow Levels during surfing activities Mar. 5 Yes Noticed current pushing out Board 15 21 Poor +/- 0.39 1.26m 3 s -1 Mar. 7 Yes Was being pushed out Board 3 8 Good +/-0.386 0.386m 3 s -1 Mar. 7 No Can t tell if dam is letting out when waves are big. The dam has no effect when surf is big Board 44 44 Good +/-0.386 0.386m 3 s -1 Mar. 13 Yes Extra flow not good, kills surf and choppy Board 12 15 Good +/- 43.83 50.79 3 s -1 Mar. 13 Yes Temp. drop, see current line, feel fresh/salt water interface. Much colder Board 36 51 Good +/-0.421 50.79m 3 s -1 Mar. 13 Yes Super fresh, could taste it, strong current to the left board 4 4 Excellent +/-0.421 50.79m 3 s -1 Mar. 13 Yes Paddling was difficult board 8 16 Fair +/-0.421 50.79m 3 s -1 Mar. 13 Yes Fresh water coming around the point board 18 26 Good +/- 43.83 50.79m 3 s -1 Mar. 13 Yes Rip tide board 1 9 Fair +/-.42 43.83m 3 s -1 Positive some times, flow from dam is good at Apr. 1 No high tide board 16 20 Good +/- 51.46 51.42m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 Yes Very cold. Bigger surf yesterday, not as cold Board 4 4 Fair +/- 51.46 51.42m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 Yes Not enough water flowing, but did make waves stand up Board 15-20 15-20 Fair +/- 51.44 51.85m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 Yes Too much rip current Board 26 40 Good +/- 51.46 51.44m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 No Noticed the water was cloudy Board 1 7 Fair +/- 51.42 51.44m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 No In past have seen the current shut down waves in the river mouth area Board 15 15 Good +/- 51.42 51.44m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 Yes Current pushed me down Board 15 15 Fair +/- 51.46 51.42m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 Yes Quality of wave, it was breaking along the line, more sections Board 20 20 Good +/- 51.85 51.85m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 Yes Good ride out Kayak 5 5 Good +/- 51.44 66.66m 3 s -1 Apr. 1 Yes Easy to paddle out Board 3 18 Poor +/- 66.66 51.29m 3 s -1 This season, most comments came from when flows were in the range of +/- 50m 3 s -1 and suggest that the low flow conditions had limited or less impact on the quality of surfers experiences than did high flows. When viewed in combination with years of experience, the data continues to suggest that more experienced surf users notice the flow of the river most often. 12

3.5 Surf User Numbers During the survey, the maximum number of surfers in the water at any one time was 12. This compares with 15 in 2009, 18 in 2008, 13 in 2007 and 18 in 2006. Number of surf users in the water: March 5,6,7,13,14, April 1 0800-0900 0900-1000 1000-1100 1100-1200 1200-1300 1300-1400 1400-1500 1500-1600 1600-1700 1700-1800 1800-1900 1900-2000 Mar 5 Pts R 4 - - - - - - - - - - - Pts L - 1 - - - - - - - - - - Out {1} 3 3 - - - - - - - - - Shake 3 - - - - - - - - - - - Total 8 4 3 - - - - - - - - - 0800-0900 0900-1000 1000-1100 1100-1200 1200-1300 1300-1400 1400-1500 1500-1600 1600-1700 1700-1800 1800-1900 1900-2000 Mar 6 Pts R 5 - - - - - - - - - - - Pts L 2 1 - - - - - - - - - - Out 1 - - - - - - - - - - Shake 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - Total 8 3 - - - - - - - - - 0800-0900 0900-1000 1000-1100 1100-1200 1200-1300 1300-1400 1400-1500 1500-1600 1600-1700 1700-1800 1800-1900 1900-2000 Mar 7 Pts R - 8 [1] 4 4 [1] 2 - - - - - - - Pts L - 3 3 - - - - - - - - - Out - 3 5 3 - - - - - - - - Shake - - - - - - - - - - - - Total - 15 12 8 2 - - - - - - - 0800-0900 0900-1000 1000-1100 1100-1200 1200-1300 1300-1400 1400-1500 1500-1600 1600-1700 1700-1800 1800-1900 1900-2000 Mar 13 Pts R - - - - - - - - 3 5 10 - Pts L - - - - - - - - 15 1 6 - Out - - - - - - - - 4 4 3 - Shake - - - - - - - - - 2 - - Total - - - - - - - - 22 12 19-0800- 0900 0900-1000 1000-1100 1100-1200 1200-1300 1300-1400 1400-1500 1500-1600 1600-1700 1700-1800 1800-1900 1900-2000 Mar 14 Pts R - - - - - - - - - 3 2 - Pts L - - - - - - - - - - - - Out - - - - - - - - - - - - Shake - - - - - - - - - - - - Total - - - - - - - - - 2 2-0800- 0900 0900-1000 1000-1100 1100-1200 1200-1300 1300-1400 1400-1500 1500-1600 1600-1700 1700-1800 1800-1900 1900-2000 April 1 Pts R 1 11 8 2 4 5 Pts L 1 1 Out Shake (1) 2 Total 1 12 9 2 5 7 1. Pts R = Points Right/Pts L = Points Left/Out = Outside/Shake = Shakies Beach 2. Numbers in ( ) are kayak surfers, numbers in [ ] are boogie board surfers, { } are jet skiers, and the numbers outside of the brackets are board surfers. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 13

3.6 User Experience In, 42.5% of surfers have been surfing at Jordan River for 0-4 years. This is similar to 2009, when 45% of the surf users had been surfing between 0-4 years at Jordan River. At the other end of the experience scale are those users who have 20+ years experience at Jordan River; they make up 17.5% of the users surveyed in. Years Surfing at Jordan River Total Years Surfing Figure 1 Surf User Experience 0 5 10 15 20 Responses 20+ yrs 15-19 yrs 10-14 yrs 5-9 yrs 0-4 yrs 3.7 Number of Surfing Days The number of days individuals surf at Jordan River each year varied from once per year, to over 100 times per year. The majority (40%) of users surfed 0-9 days per year at Jordan River in. Number of days surfing at Jordan River per year 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-59 60+ 16 4 0 2 7 10 40% 10% 0% 5% 18 25% 3.8 User Residency Surf users were asked where they lived. Residency of surfers users at Jordan River Within 50 km 50-100 km 100+ km Other Canadian Area Non Canadian 19 15 6 4 0 48% 37% 15% 10% 0% 48% of surf users lived within 50 km of Jordan River, 37% lived 50-100 km, 15% live 100 km or greater from Jordan River. 3.9 Amount Spent The majority of surf users, (53%), spent $10-$25 on each surf day at Jordan River, including transportation, meals and accommodation. Number of Respondents Figure 2 Amount Spent for Each Surf Day 25 20 15 10 5 0 $0-$9 $10-$25$26-$39$40-$60 Over Amount spent $100 No Respons e S1 $0-$9 $10-$25 $26-$39 $40-$60 Over $100 No Response Series1 12 21 5 2 0 0 BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 14

3.9.1 Surfing Location Surfers were asked where they surfed during their time at Jordan River. Some surfers used two locations during their time in the water. The most used area for surfing was Points Right. The map below shows the number of surfers using each area over the survey period. Surfers also use the area highlighted in yellow but it is not influenced by the discharge from the river and data is not collected from this area. 3 Surf Area but not influenced by river flow Shakies Beach 6 27 POINTS RIGHT 8 POINTS LEFT OUTSIDE RIVER MOUTH 61% of those surveyed used the Points Right location in. 18% used the Outside River Mouth location, 14% used Points Left and 7% used Shakies Beach. 3.9.2 Length of Board There were an equal number of short and medium length board users at Jordan River in. Length of Board Kayak Short Medium Long 1 16 16 7 2.5% 40% 40% 17.5% BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 15

4.0 Analysis 4.1 Introduction The surf user survey is designed to record surf user experiences at Jordan River and to capture data on factors contributing to surf user experiences. The environmental influences on surf quality include the cyclical changes in tidal direction and tidal currents, the varying depth of water as the tide ebbs and floods, changes in the direction of swell, changes in wave height and wave period, and the influence of wind. The assessment of the quality of surf user experience is complicated by factors such as the length of time a surfer may be in the water, whether the tide changed from ebb to flood, or if their placement in the surf changed, or if the wind increased or decreased. It is challenging to determine whether the change in tide affected the quality of experience, whether it was the change in surfing location, or whether the length of time in the water impacted the quality of the experience, or a combination of these factors. Also influencing surf users experience is the surfers skill level. Board surfers with low levels of experience overall, but with all of it being at Jordan River, may have a greater understanding of the flows and may respond to Jordan River current differently than a surfer with the same number of surf experience days, but at a different location. For example, this season, a surf kayaker repeatedly used the current while Jordan River was generating at between 51.44m 3 s -1 and 66.66m 3 s -1 to speed his return back out to the surf after he rode it in each time. We also know that some experienced board surfers use river flows to take them out to the surf area, and we are learning about conditions where river flows meet flood tides in such a way as to create a steeper wave face and longer left break. This isn t a regular occurrence, as several conditions need to coincide for the break to be established. Through informal survey we are learning how the shoreline substrate is considered to influence the surf. Being large cobble, it is relatively stable and surf breaks tend to be more predictable and move less than they might if the beach were sand for example. We are also aware that some wave intervals create better conditions than others at Jordan River. This is typical of most surf locations, where the wave interval, which in part is a reflection of the waves power, sets up and breaks when the angle of the wave, and the interval intersect the shoreline at a particular angle. At Jordan River, waves above a certain size, deflect, and travel east, toward Sooke. As we have not been collecting this specific information over the survey period, our observations are limited to this season. 16 BC Hydro Vers. 1.1

4.2 Cumulative Analysis Over the past 5 years 213 surf user surveys have been completed. This enables fairly detailed examination of the relationship between constrained (max 30 cms) flows and unconstrained (70 cms) flows on surf user experiences at Jordan River. A further year years of data is still to be collected (2011) with a projected total of 250 surveys completed over the six-year survey period. Although there are many factors that influence surfer experiences, we can start with the observation that the majority of surf users, (55% in, 64% in 2009), continue to report that they have good to excellent surfing experiences at Jordan River under a full range of flow levels and weather conditions. The purpose of the cumulative analysis is not to establish with absolute certainty the specific flow levels where surf experience is highest there are too many variables influencing the experience. We are interested, however, in understanding where and under what conditions flows are an issue, so that we can understand what flows, in combination with what other factors, impact the quality of surfing experience in either a negative or a positive manner. As data is collected trends in use and user experience are emerging. We observe the key surfer ratings of conditions for catching waves, of wave height, wave break, length of ride and quality of experience show increasing consistency, and over the past five years, most surf users rate their experience at Jordan River as good to excellent. We are also recording informal input. From this we are learning that under certain conditions, when larger volumes of water from the Jordan River intersect with an incoming (flood) tide, there is a point where the wave faces are steeper and broader and where the left break lengthens, creating improved conditions that may be used to advantage by more experienced surf users. However, this season it was further suggested that while this condition does occur, it is infrequent, and not a major factor in influencing surf conditions at Jordan River because of its infrequent occurrence. We continue to observe that the more experienced the surf user, the more likely they are to make observations regarding the regarding flows from the river. We also are learning more about how wave intervals and angles influence the surf conditions at Jordan River, and how the sea floor, being cobble and fairly stable, is thought to contribute to greater predictability of surf from season to season, as it remains in place unlike some surf locations having significant movement of the sea floor and shoreline. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 17

4.3 Surf User Experiences Summary Tables -2006 The following tables summarize key surfer ratings for the period -2006. Surf User Profiles Board Users Male Number of Surveys Collected 97% 80% 40 2009 87% 84% 32 2008 86% 76% 71 2007 97% 71% 31 2006 95% 68% 40 Average 92% 76% 214 Surf users are predominantly male and are board surfers. How surfers rated conditions for catching the Waves Poor Fair Good Excellent 17% 27% 55% 0% 2009 19% 34% 44% 3% 2008 14% 35% 41% 10% 2007 29% 52% 19% 0% 2006 24% 47% 26% 3% Average 21% 39% 37% 3% 40% of surf users rate conditions for catching waves as good to excellent. How surfers rated the wave height Poor Fair Good Excellent 30% 38% 33% 0% 2009 19% 31% 44% 6% 2008 15% 48% 31% 6% 2007 29% 58% 13% 0% 2006 42% 29% 29% 0% Total 27% 41% 30% 2% 62% of surf users rate wave height as poor to fair, 32% rate the height as good to excellent. How surfers rated the wave break Poor Fair Good Excellent 10% 27% 52% 10% 2009 9% 38% 53% 0% 2008 7% 37% 49% 7% 2007 19% 42% 32% 7% 2006 21% 37% 36% 6% Total 13% 36% 44% 6% 49% of surf users rate the wave break as poor to fair, 50% rate the break as good to excellent How surfers rated their quality of experience Poor Fair Good Excellent 15% 30% 50% 5% 2009 3% 25% 47% 25% 2008 9% 27% 39% 25% 2007 13% 29% 35% 23% 2006 5% 31% 40% 21% Total 9% 28% 42% 20% 36% rate their experience as poor to fair, 62% rate their experience good to excellent. 18 BC Hydro Vers. 1.1

4.4 Flow Conditions and Surf User Experiences During the survey period, flows from the Jordan River dam were at times varied and surf users were asked if they noticed the flow from the Jordan River. When the Jordan River dam is fully constrained, there is only a low flow in the river coming from local inflows. In the Years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and, data has been collected for 0 cms flows, 30 cms flows, and 50 cms flow levels. While flows at the 50 cms level (2008, 2009 and only) can be considered unconstrained, data for fully unconstrained flow conditions (70 cms) is limited and an effort will be to gather data for 70cms conditions in the remaining survey season (2011). 2006- Response by Year Did you notice if the water discharge from the Jordan River affected your water activity? Year Yes No Flow 7 31 No flow 2006 NA NA Constrained Flow NA NA Unconstrained Flow 12 7 No Flow 2007 4 8 Constrained Flow NA NA Unconstrained Flow 1 40 No flow 2008 4 4 Constrained Flow 10 9 Unconstrained Flow* 1 9 No Flow 2009 NA NA Constrained Flow 8 15 Unconstrained Flow* 1 12 No Flow 1 4 Constrained Flow 8 4 Unconstrained Flow* *2008, 2009 & unconstrained flows were +/-50m 3 s -1 2006 In 2006 the majority, 82% of surf users, did not notice river discharge affecting their experience. Although there was no river discharge in 2006 during the survey period, 18% of surfers on March 11 th indicated they did notice river discharge. Of this 18%, most had limited surf experience (for some it was their first or second time surfing) which may partially explain the rating as these users would be expected to have less ability to interpret the various sea current and tide actions than more experienced users. 2007 For the period March 1 14, 2007, flows from the Jordan River dam were 100% constrained i.e. no water was released. For the period March 15-30, 2007, flows from the Jordan River dam were constrained to approximately 33m 3 s -1. On March 10 & 11, when flows were fully constrained, 63% of surf users indicated they did notice river discharge affecting their experience while 36% of surf users indicated they did not notice river discharge affecting their experience while. On March 24, when constrained flow was present, 33% indicated they did notice the river discharge, while 66% did not notice the discharge affecting their experience. 19 BC Hydro Vers. 1.1

The 2007 results appear inconsistent with 2001 results (when surfers were correct 57% of the time in identifying whether or not there is discharge) and with 2006, when flows were fully constrained (no flow) during the survey period and 82% of surf users observed that the water discharge from the Jordan River did not affect their surf experience. The 2007 sample size is small and user experience is lower than in 2001 and 2006, which may partially explain the inconsistency. 2008 77% of surf users indicated their surf activity was not affected by river flow, while 22% indicated that the flow did affect their activity. Of those surf users who did notice the flow of the river, the majority were experienced surfers who had surfed at Jordan River for 10 years or more. The majority of these, despite commenting on the river flow, recorded that they had a good to excellent quality surfing experience, suggesting that the impact of the flow has limited negative impact on surf user experiences, particularly for those with more experience and perhaps particularly experience at Jordan River. 2009 75% of surf users indicated their surf activity was not affected by river flow, while 25% indicated the flow did affect their activity. The majority of users indicating the flow did affect their activity were again more experienced users. Although the sample size was small this season, what is unusual is almost double the number of surf users noticing the river discharge as those that did not (15 observing no impact while 8 observing an impact) when the river was flowing at +/-50m 3 s -1. This season, taking an aggregate of all flow conditions, 66% of users did not notice the river flow, 33% did notice the flow. When the river was flowing at unconstrained volume, 66% of users noticed the flow, 33% did not, the reverse of the no flow volume observations reported. 2006 - Combined Responses Did you notice if the water discharge from the Jordan River affected your water activity? Year Yes % No % Flow 37 25% 111 75% No flow 2006-8 29% 20 71% Constrained Flow 30 51% 29 49% Unconstrained Flow Totals 75 32% 160 68% All Flow Conditions Under No-Flow conditions, 25% of users noticed the flow, 75% not notice the flow. Under Constrained Flow conditions, 29% noticed the flow, 71% did not, and under Unconstrained Flow conditions, 51% noticed the flow, 49% did not. Over the five-year data collection period, on average, 32% noticed the water discharge, 68% did not. As the flow increases, more surf users notice it. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 20

4.5 Conditions and Locations Where Issues Are Prevalent There are four main areas used by surfers at Jordan River (refer to the map on 2 nd page of the surf user survey in Appendix A), which are influenced by flows from the Jordan River. 3 Shakies Beach # of Users % Points Left # of Users Surf Locations % Points Right # of Users % Outside # of Users % Total # of Users 2006-2006 17 37 16 35 11 24 2 4 46 2007 17 49 1 3 14 40 3 8 35 2008 25 30 12 14 39 46 7 8 71 2009 6 35 11 34 13 41 2 6 32 19 20 34 35 41 43 2 2 96 84 Users 31% 74 Users 24% 118 Users 39% 16 Users 6% 280 Users Surf favour Points Right, followed by Shakies Beach and Points Left. The Outside surf area has significantly lower use with 16 users, compared with between 74 and 118 users at the other three locations. Survey results don t indicate any significant variance in quality of experience at either of these locations. 4.6 Operation Affect on Surf Conditions Over the past five years the majority of experienced users consistently report having favourable surf experiences under 0 cms flows, 30 cms flows, and 50 cms flow levels. Flow levels have been below the fully unconstrained flow levels (70 cms) for a majority of these past five years. This year () flow levels were maintained in the 50-67 cms range on April 1 st for a brief period. Surveys collected from users who were in the water during this higher volume period suggest the high volume was noticed, but that overall it did not have a negative impact. Complicating interpretation of the impact of the higher flow was the fact that during the higher flow period, the weather changed, and high winds developed and significantly reduced the quality of the surf, and also reduced the number of surfers in the water. The high volume of water could be observed visually as a distinct line in the ocean, and interestingly, it appeared that the flow from the river carried out past where surfers were located, waiting for the surf. One of the expected impacts of the higher volume of water was that surfers would have to paddle to maintain their positions, particularly at Points Left, but this was observed not be the case. In 2011 it will be important to try to collect additional surveys during fully unconstrained (70cms) flow periods and to further assess whether or how these higher flow levels may impact on surf experiences. 3 Another surf area is located south of Jordan River. However its distance from the Jordan River means the river does not influence it significantly. BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 21

4.7 Economic Impact of Surf Users at Jordan River Over the past five years, the surf user survey has collected a limited amount of data on the economic impact of surf users using Jordan River. The majority of surf users, 56%, spend $10-$25 per surf day. This amount is fairly consistent over the past 5 years. Amount Spend/day by Jordan River Surf Users $0-$9 % $10-$25 % $26-$39 % $40-$60 % $100+ % 2006 6 15% 21 54% 5 13% 6 15% 1 3% 2007 4 13% 16 52% 7 23% 3 10% 0 0% 2008 2 3% 39 56% 14 20% 8 11% 7 10% 2009 4 13% 21 66% 3 9% 3 9 1 3% 12 30% 21 53% 5 12% 2 5% 0 0% Average 15% 56% 15% 10% 3% BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 22

5.0 Recommendations BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 The survey methodology and report format used in 2006 through continues to be satisfactory. Surf users are familiar with the survey, and generally respect its intent and are interested in the data results. However, this season some resistance or fatigue was noted, so it may be helpful in 2011 to emphasise that it is the last year, and that data collection is focused on experience during higher volume flows. 5.1 On-site Observations: In, RRL staff conducted both the surf surveys and the on-site observations to ensure thorough collection of on-site observations (i.e. # of surfers in the water and weather conditions at time of survey) so as to meet project requirements. 5.2. Data Collection: In high (70cms) flow periods occur only for a short period on one of the survey days, so data for high flow periods remains limited. It will be important in 2011, to gather surf user data during 70cms flow periods. Ideally, for 2011, the last survey season, unconstrained, +/-70cms flow conditions should be requested for at least one day on each weekend in March so as to assess the impact of river flow under a range of flow conditions. 5.3. Key Metrics The surf user added to the analysis of the most important metrics (conditions, experience and influence of river flow) and has enabled further comparisons between surf user experiences under constrained flow and unconstrained flow conditions. In 2011, effort should be placed on gathering further informal information that may add to our understanding of the relationships between river flows and the quality of surf users experiences. While we are increasingly clear on some of the relationships, further informal information, particularly from experienced surf users, will assist in solidifying our understanding of some of the key relationships. Also in 2011, we will look to better understand the relationship between wave angles and wave intervals so as to fully understand the factors that contribute to optimum surf conditions at Jordan River. We will present in (2011) the final year, a consolidation of the survey data and an examination of the relationship between various river flows and surf conditions, based on what we have recorded and observed over the six-year survey period. 23

Appendix A Surf Survey Attention Jordan River Surf Users! As part of BC Hydro s Jordan River Water Use Plan Monitoring Program, a survey of Jordan River surf users is being undertaken. A hydroelectric dam controls the amount of water that flows in the Jordan River. Of particular interest is how the amount of water discharge from the hydroelectric dam may affect surfing conditions. BC Hydro has contracted an independent consulting company, RRL Recreation Resources Ltd. (RRL) to undertake the surf user survey. If you have any questions regarding the survey, you can call them, toll free at 1-800-761-5737. Thank you for participating! Jordan River Water Use Plan - Ocean Surf Recreation User Survey 1. Date/time: (Month/Day/Year/time) / / / am/pm 2. Time in Water: Time in am/pm - Time out am/pm 3. Male Female 4. Activity Undertaken: Board Surf Body surf Boogie Board Wind Surf Kayak Surf Other (describe) 5. How would you rate the conditions for catching the waves? Poor Fair Good Excellent 6. How would you rate the wave height? Poor Fair Good Excellent 7. How would you rate the wave break? Poor Fair Good Excellent 8. How would you rate the length of ride? Poor Fair Good Excellent 9. How would you rate the quality of your surfing experience today while you were in the water? Poor Fair Good Excellent 10. Did you notice if the water discharge from the Jordan River affected your water activity? Yes No If answering yes to Question 10, please describe how your activity was affected. 11. Have you been interviewed before? Yes No 12. How many years have you been surfing at Jordan River? 13. How many years have you been surfing? 14. On average, how many days do you surf at Jordan River each year? 15. Where do you live? Within 50 km 50-100 km 100+km Other Canadian area Non-Canadian BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 24

16. How much do you spend in total for each surf day, including transportation, meals and accommodation (including taxes)? $0-$9 $10-$25 $26-$39 $40 - $60 over $100 17. What length of board did you use today? NA Short Medium Long On the map below, please circle the location where you surfed: (Point Rights, Point Lefts, Shakies Beach, Outside Jordan River Mouth) Shakies Beach POINTS RIGHT OUTSIDE RIVER MOUTH POINTS LEFT BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 25

Appendix B - Tidal Data Tides at Port Renfrew British Columbia for March 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, April 1, Date High Time/metres/feet Low Time/metres/feet High Time/metres/feet Low Time/metres/feet March 5, 03:18 3.2 10.5 10:29 0.9 3.0 16:28 2.3 7.5 21:20 1.6 5.2 March 6, 04:00 3.1 10.2 11:30 1.0 3.3 17:43 2.2 7.2 21:58 1.8 5.9 March 7, 04:50 3.0 9.8 12:40 1.1 3.6 19:28 2.1 6.9 22:49 1.9 6.2 March 13, 04:59 1.6 5.2 10:54 2.8 9.2 17:39 1.0 3.3 - March 14, 00:03 2.6 8.5 05:41 1.5 4.9 11:35 2.8 9.2 18:05 1.0 3.3 April 1, 02:21 3.3 10.8 09:26 0.5 1.6 15:33 2.6 8.5 20:39 1.5 4.9 BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 26

Appendix C Jordan River Dam Flows Jordan River Dam Flows March 5 Jordan River Dam Flows March 6 25 0.3885 20 0.388 15 10 Series1 0.3875 0.387 0.3865 Series1 5 0.386 0 0.3855 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 0.385 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time - 24 hours Time 24 Hours Jordan River Dam Flows March 7 Jordan River Dam Flows March 13 0.3905 0.39 0.3895 60 50 0.389 0.3885 Series1 40 30 Series1 0.388 20 0.3875 10 0.387 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time 24 Hours Time 24 Hours Jordan River Dam Flows March 14 Jordan River Dam Flows April 1 0.415 70 0.41 60 0.405 50 0.4 0.395 Series1 40 30 Series1 0.39 20 0.385 10 0.38 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time 24 Hours Time 24 Hours BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 27

Appendix D Weather Conditions BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 28

BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 29

Notes BC Hydro Vers. 1.1 30