Blue & Green & Gold: The Colours of Summer Double Vision

Competing Perspectives Are Impacting How We Determine the Okanagan's Destiny

What will planners have to reflect on as they discover troubling trends that surprise our existing community strategies? The trends that will change our lives and our landscape, impact our investments, question our safety and our faith.

There really are two Okanagan Valleys. One has a future driven by prosperity and the other a future slowed by the comfort of the landscape. One is economic, the other seeded
in ecology ­ both claim an ideal of livability and sustainability ­ and both present risks of degradation and social collapse.

The phenomenon of a booming economy experienced in an expanding desert is being played out in real time here in the Okanagan, as it is in Las Vegas, Maricopa County, Arizona and Albuquerque, New Mexico. We are, in fact, unfolding our own history of the science fiction planet Dune, only the treasured spice is a mix of sun, wine, peaches and beaches, all gift-wrapped within a heated economy with its own unique bubble some of us hope will never burst.

And we do hope.

Living in the Okanagan is sweet, provides a bit of a buzz, is very fun and to the rest of
Canada it's cool, at least a hot commodity worthy of investment. All of these ingredients create "a place to be." But for all of us who are here, we wonder about the Valley's future and our own. There is a common belief that regardless of our playful and naïve optimism, someone or something is in charge to ensure that the Valley stays on course with a plan that will keep optimism alive and well and retain our good quality of life.

Conflicting Motivations

Our community planning mechanisms attempt to consider much of what we call the character of a community. However, more often than not, it falls short, and becomes more about a set of regulations than about a set of community plans.

The greatest obstacle today remains our avoidance of seeking answers to the questions we fear the most. Looking down the rabbit hole can be scary, indeed, as it can expose the many issues that we collectively chose to ignore as we played only on the surface of things.

Conflicting motivations in the Okanagan Valley tend to emerge in pairs: rural vs. urban, development vs. ecology, private vs. public and so on. Each time, the two sides to each conflict will seek to adjust planning. But at the core of all these conflicts are two underlying positions that drive the way individuals perceive the present and the future of the region: one of the naïve optimist, and the other that is grounded within the landscape and stewardship that I call the conservative ecologist.

These opposing points of view are philosophies that allow individuals to explain their motivations, and actually represent communities of people, almost tribal in nature and behaviour, with their own respective cultures, interests and moral values.

Values that these two communities of thinking contribute to the Okanagan will shape the social order of the Okanagan far into the future. But today, both factions are struggling for elements of control so that they may determine who will play the dominant role in the Valley's destiny.

As a cultural ecologist, I'm certainly in favour of one over the other, but the reality is that both pose risks and offer attributes. Regardless, in order to overcome planning process barriers, we would be wise to understand just what makes these two communities tick.

Naive Optimism

The tribe of naïve optimism is by far the largest of the two communities in the Okanagan and mostly urban-based. I estimate that two-thirds of Valley taxpayers would belong here because the economy is a primary key to their interest.

Unbridled and often illogical optimism is
Valley population, and holds up the banner of "quality of life" as being a key priority, while distrusting traditional economic motivators.

These individuals could be describe as the new people of the land or neo-indigenous. Their approach is different from the ancient ways of aboriginal people but similar in their need to be in the landscape as stewards as opposed to being outside of it and detached from personal responsibility. The values they have placed on public access, recreation and protection of the landscape and habitat are of almost equal importance to that of their own prosperity or personal well-being.

Within this group with a neo-indigenous outlook are also those who are staunch advocates of conservation and environmental protection. As activists, these people navigate through the underpinnings of the risks that begin to emerge as life in the Valley evolves and changes. They are like the canaries in the coal mine of public opinion, and who will see development as a risk if it moves too fast and without proper planning that considers real costs.

While naïve optimism prevents the hard questions from being asked or heard, ecological conservatism is slow on delivering solutions that make economic sense. Both communities of thinking seem to function haphazardly from issue to issue, or project to project, without enlisting independent planning initiatives that are all inclusive of both tribes.

Manifest Destiny

Michael M'Gonigle, a founding member of Greenpeace, described it well when he said, "In the Western world, sovereignty, by its very definition, emanates from the top. Politically, our national constitutions simply assumes that power is to be centralized, and then they seek to 'balance' centralized powers by keeping them apart."

Premier Gordon Campbell suggests that the Okanagan will become "British Columbia's third great urban centre." Those words were stated with very little disagreement due to the fact that in a population of 300,000, there was
what frequently drives Western economies. It's a belief that personal wealth will grow, as will corporate profits and then the over-all economy. This growth will in turn secure further growth and opportunities as a result of a multiplier effect. Much planning can prove that this optimism is a real possibility, but for the most part, optimism drives results within a veiled hope that efforts and goals will be achieved, including sustainability.

There is no guarantee the hidden events and costs will surface to bring about failure in this economic system, which could be described as a bubble. In the Okanagan, the economy is driven by the finance, insurance and real estate sector (FIRE); its power will continue to grow in the wake of more retirees locating to the Valley who rely on income from their investment portfolios. Present tax and retirement incentives that encourage most taxpayers to own such portfolios place a great deal of political capital on keeping the regional, provincial and the national economies in a pro-development and consumptive rate of growth so that investments produce profitable rates of return.

This entire structure relies on a culture of positive opportunity that is often naïve to the facts that there are real expenses that end up being paid by the environment and the social safety net which are not appearing in pro-development expense columns.

The chosen future of this optimistic community is one that would see greener options of investment and development so that we can buy our way into sustainability. Globally, the FIRE sector, which was responsible for the dot-com and housing bubbles, has created economic architecture for new and greener goals as it begins to prime the investment pump to create the new alternative energy bubble.

Ecological Conservatism

The tribe of conservative ecologists represent a mix of different interests that has community activism at its core and is most often, but not exclusively, rural in nature. This community I would estimate as being one third of the no advocate who could claim the authority to disagree with the premier.

If we are, in fact, confident and content to create an urban centre the size of Metro Vancouver and the Lower Fraser Valley here in the Okanagan, then clearly the present state of growth and political intentions should be considered as being adequate, or so we might think.

However, certain issues such as waste disposal and water consumption require planning that will require us to ship our garbage out of the Okanagan and divert new water sources into it. We will also require investment plans for affordable housing zones as well as a long-term transit plan that includes a rail system and HMO lanes on our highways. There are more issues, of course, but for the most part, we will be accepting a Metro Vancouver style of planning and infrastructure development that accommodates a large human population.

If, however, we see a different vision of the Valley one that seeks a smaller population with a smaller footprint then we are clearly running out of time to embrace such a vision.

The present speed that the Okanagan is changing is much faster than present planning considers. In fact, developers and the idea of development have taken root in our culture and the body politic of the Valley, which depends on the traditional consumer spending habits to keep the development economy primed.

This set of attitudes makes ecological sustainability almost impossible to achieve but creates huge economic opportunities and ongoing revenue streams which are often described as building blocks for a sustainable economy; however, they clearly are not.

The core problem is that Okanagan residents have not made a clear and definitive choice as to whether they want a valley with a population of 400,000 people or 2.5 or 5 million people.

Do we want our communities to have a small ecological footprint, or a large one?

Do we want local food self-sufficiency or not?

The questions are many, but they are questions that will remain unanswered due to the fact that Valley-wide, we are not fully engaged in a planning process that gives decision makers clear objectives.Instead, we are allowing a few people to make choices for us.

Careful What We Wish For

Our greatest risk today is not having a grasp of the magnitudes associated with the present speed of growth. This is accompanied by the way we choose to govern ourselves, or more accurately, the way we allow others to govern us.

The decision-making process in the Okanagan is becoming narrower and more centralized while the issues are becoming so many that the system is perpetuating a culture of isolated decision-making. This will have long-term impacts on community and neighbourhood empowerment.

It also continues a curve where residents are being served up something very different than what they ordered.

While the gaps widen, the species at risk list grows longer and habitat disappears. Few would have predicted that Ponderosa pines might become extinct in the Okanagan as a result of the Mountain Pine Beetle. As the climate changes, our desert will expand and our communities will become larger. It will not be long before we have this in common with the rest of the planet.

Eating Becomes An Issue

We are without a food production or food security plan in the Okanagan.

We will always need to eat; therefore, we will continue to need to secure a food supply. Presently, we depend on food from other parts of Canada and the world. The global supply is at risk as a result of a lack of water, climate change and the downhill curve of peak oil. Our need for food should be added to a few other basic realities like population and industrial growth that shape our decision-making about how we will use our finite land base in the future.

The Okanagan is a primary fruit growing area capable of sustaining a vast range of food crops but arable land is being lost to urban develop
ment and expanding non-food related crops such as vineyards. Also, the agriculture business climate continues to offer marginal profits, even losses, causing fewer producers to stay in the business.

The issue compounds as Okanagan consumers desiring safer, locally grown, chemical-free foods become concerned that they may not be available in the long-term. A spike in food costs and lack of access to safe food could make the Okanagan a less desirable place to live in the future. Chemical use and the spraying of herbicides and pesticides could also negatively impact the value of certain neighbourhoods. In addition, the decommissioning of farmland and urban sprawl will negatively impact livability and the landscape.

There exists a rough knowledge of how many hectares of land are presently dedicated to food production in British Columbia. We also know generally what level of food self-sufficiency we are experiencing province-wide. However, no such knowledge exists that is localized to the Okanagan Valley.

While we seek to protect farmland, we have no benchmarking as to why we do, or how much farmland we should be protecting. We have no knowledge as to the state of the food supply in the Okanagan, or what we would do in the event of global food shortages.

Not knowing our local food production expectations means that we cannot accurately forecast, target or plan land or water use issues.

How Dry Might We Be?

We are running out of water. The agriculture sector is most at risk since irrigation and other agriculture uses represent the largest share of water use. With a growing population, landscaping and other demands will continue to increase pressure on the water supply. There are also uncertainties regarding its dependability in the wake of inevitable climate change.

A water crisis or even ongoing threats of one will bring about legislative actions that may see extreme water rationing. It may require homeowners and businesses to remove certain types of landscaping, resulting in the transformation of Okanagan communities into a less green environment.

Golf courses and other recreational facilities that require large amounts of water for maintenance may be decommissioned. Conversely, if we abandoned our agriculture sector and its needs, we could keep the development of golf courses and green lawns at a constant rate of growth.

Setting the Stage for Navigation

Addressing the trends and the risks that will impact the state of the Okanagan Valley can be daunting, but like any turbulence, there is a beginning and an end. Ultimately, success will be measured according to how well we navigate through the tasks at hand.

While this story describes only the surface of two perspectives as they exist in the field of community development, it does give a taste of what planners will have to reflect on as they discover trends that surprise our existing community strategies. These trends will change our lives and our landscape, impact our investments, question our safety and our faith.

Fundamentally, the greatest challenge exists in real time, today for the two tribes of thought. Guided by a pristine myth, the conservative ecologists continue to fail in their attempts to slow or halt unbridled growth because they cannot prove that an alternative economy can be created here that can truly replace an ongoing construction boom.

The naïve optimists still avoid addressing the true costs of unbridled growth. These are costs that if placed in their expense column, could never be covered within our existing idea of the economy.

The ultimate challenge is achieving sustainability, and it will be up to Valley residents to decide their preferred destiny for the Okanagan.

Copyright © 2008 Wheat King Publishing and the authors. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be copied or reprinted without the written consent of the publisher. The opinions expressed in Okanagan Home are those of the writers and editors, and do not represent the official position of the Canadian Home Builders' Association, Central Okanagan, or of its members.