Water Drainage/Sask Water Security Board

[TOM4CWB]

JD3007
Have you worked with your MD on this problem?
I would be surprised if a compromise couldn"t be reached if proper channels were followed. What does your local MD Councilor have to say about the problem?
Working with your MLA could also further your legitimate flood control problems.
Towns and Cities work through these problems all the time.

[oneoff]

Tom ...you live in a different world.

Towns hire a consuting engineer for new subdivisions; and the end result is they haul in hundreds of load of fill and add culverts to drain all surface runoff out into the countryside.
Apparently storm drains and catch basins are foreign terms.
As for MD councillors. First tell Sask who they are and what functions they have. Never heard of the term used in this province.

Don't suggest going to the local council. They are loaded with a wildlife agenda and a system that OK's selected projects; whilst making sure that needed road allowance culverts won't be put in and projects engineered by Watershed authority engineers can't ever be started.

The system is so dysfunctional and designed not to be workable.

I'd be suprised if anything can be done.

[mbdog]

If water is to be removed from ag land, local permits should be administered through local government, who have a clear set of provincial guidelines with which to work with. Tom...seeking higher political/beurocratic arbitration is where a lot of the problem is. Provincial oversight should be responsive to out of scope works/permits but way too wishy washy the higher you go.
Municipalities should be best prepared to discuss/develop long term infrastructure renewal and upgrades, and once again, "non-political" provincial oversight should be engaging with these councils. My experience is this is not the case. There are producers/land owners who drain but also would and do offer up retention areas, be it for a long or short term strategy. My experience is political vanity gets in the way, and these options are not considered. Dunno why, but its happening. The three clearly should be in the same room to discuss long term infrastructure ideas if a large capital project is brought forward for review by the commoners. Not happening.
Compensation for private lands being used for retention purposes is a good idea. In my and many cases, we have incorporated/accepted some retention areas because we drain, but seems clear municipalities and the province are content to repair again and again...such a waste it seems to be. Local government needs predictable long term funding to address long term retention strategies/infrastructure upgrades. It has been my experience unless they're protecting a large urban center, provincial funds and attention at the source of the problem are ignored.
Trouble is "having control of water" is something the province is addicted to and they get very political with it.
Funnelling inadequate provincial dollars to committees of elected officials who know little about local drainage issues...making them judge/jury of works....another political waste.
The system doesn't work.

[stubblejumper]

https://www.wsask.ca/Global/Permits%20and%20Approvals/Apply%20for%20a%20Permit%20or%20License/Application%20for%20Approval%20to%20Construct%20an d%20Operate%20Drainage%20Works.pdf

Any drainage project must have a permit from Sask Water Security Board

[mbdog]

had a small grass waterway that I applied for over a span of 10 years. Had given up on it already....increased water was being drained on me, cutting my fields. Would have done work myself....I offered up a retention option but in the end was studied by committee, resource depts....no go and wouldn't give out permit. Beurocratic decision was to allow scrub willows. Gave up till election and new batch of "experts" were in. Application went thru...but now field damage nearly irrepairable. Its this kind of BS I speak of.

[oneoff]

"Any drainage project must have a permit from Sask Water Security Board"

Such a statement is a lot like saying salt water spills by oil companies must be reported.

There are things that can and have been done without permits and reporting. In fact it has been the exception to do otherwise. But things are changing; and when the regulators do grow the teeth; there had better be accompanyed by the will to take things back to "historical" conditions; whatever in hell that really means.
Not until human nature changes will any harmony ever start to be shown. That too bad; because absolutely everyone and the environment could benefit through sensible and mitigated projects.

And I would say there is more chance of local persons at large to be better choices than the government appointed officials and buerocrats who have failed so miserably so far.

[sumdumguy]

The Lewvan, Riceton, Lajord lowlands commonly called the Wascana lowlands were drained through water projects where local ratepayers pay a per acre each year to drain into the ditches. A series of large ditches allow farmers to drain thousands of acres of low land. It took visionaries and cooperation to make the projects fly. This may be a idea that other farming areas may want to consider.

[Oliver88]

Where does the water end up that is being drained out of the Wascana lowlands and into ditches?
Does it make it to a major river?
Does it eventually get to an ocean?

That is a success if an area can be dried out and especially if all farmers downstream aren't adversely affected.
On the other hand if the water is relocated to southeastern SK/SW Manitoba that is not a success story.

[fjlip]

stubble, "Current law states if any water leaves your land a permit is required no matter the outlet/river/stream." You can drain into a captive water body on your land all you want. I am on local CAA, and permits are needed even if your ditch goes into CAA works. As I said nearly Zero permits, other than mine, in our works, the law needs teeth. And oneoff, us local guys would rather NOT start a war with draining land owners, remember... "whiskey is for drinking, WATER is for fighting over." We have to live here, with neighbors of all kinds.
WSA agents with the power to approve a drainage project on site, recommend corrective measures in disputes is the only way. As I understand Manitoba is far ahead of us in Sk.

[oneoff]

I fully realize there are success stories. I could also point you to one or two.

And for every one of above; I don't know what the ratio of failure is/would be; but it isn't impressive.

And yes those success stories do transfer water that someone all the way to an ocean could complain about. The "yellowgrass" and area ditches dump directly into the Souris and are a part of flood problems especially in times of very high runofff.

Don't ever forget that if you are keeping track of flooding impacts.

And with rising sea levels that statement might as well include another third of the worlds population that will be impacted by someone else's water.