LOST AND FOUND?
Vancouver park board looks at turning Lost Lagoon into a saltwater marsh by reconnecting it with Coal Harbour
Lost Lagoon has been a freshwater lake for 100 years, a long time in human memory, but just the single beat of a hummingbird’s wings in terms of natural history.
Today, otter Susie and otter Sam frolic to the amusement of tourists, carp splash the surface as they slurp food from the bottom, turtles sun themselves on rocks and logs, the beavers are busy. Yet none are native to the lake, which was an intertidal salt marsh until the Stanley Park causeway was completed in 1917.
The Vancouver park board is taking the first wee steps to examine whether it would be feasible to one day reconnect Lost Lagoon with Coal Harbour.
“The question is, on a technical level, could we do it?” Nick Page, park board biologist, said. “It’s not, should we?”
Since the park board is restoring the 1936 50th-jubilee fountain in Lost Lagoon, it felt it’s a good time to call for tenders for a survey of the lake bottom and surrounding shoreline, with an eye toward perhaps someday reconnecting the lagoon to the saltwater ecosystem to recreate a salt marsh.
“What’s driving this is two things,” Page said. “One, we need better information. The second thing is at least to consider whether Lost Lagoon could be reconnected to Coal Harbour.”
Tourists who were approached seemed mildly surprised anyone would want to tinker with what is unarguably an idyllic setting. But a small sampling of West End residents, out walking their dogs, said they’d welcome a return to the way it once was.
“That would be nice,” Sharon Pretty said. “Anything to bring it to its natural state would be welcome.”
“I think it would be wonderful,” added Natasha Gook.
Climate change and rising sea levels may make the exercise moot, Celina Starnes of the Stanley Park Ecology Society said.
“We may not even have a choice,” she said.
“But what’s crucial now, as a freshwater body of water, is the animals that access it, especially migratory birds. Tiny little songbirds, they fly through here from far away while migrating, they need this food stopover. There aren’t many places species can find food and water.”
The elected board members haven’t reviewed the project, which if ever carried out would probably take at least a decade, Page said. There would be lots of public consultation, the park board promises. And any move would involve the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations. Indeed, there is an old midden that indicates a seasonal village once occupied the shore and that shellfish were harvested.
Does anything need to be done to Lost Lagoon as it is?
“No, of course not,” Page said. “Nothing has to be done. There are a lot of valuable things about Lost Lagoon being a freshwater habitat within the city.”
On the other hand, Burrard Inlet’s shoreline is chock-a-block with the port, development and the seawall between the two bridges.
“It’s really inhospitable to fish,” Page said. “This site really could be important habitat for fish and wildlife using Burrard Inlet. To support this idea, you’d have to consider the larger benefit to Burrard Inlet’s ecosystems — migrating salmon, shorebirds, water fowl, other marine species.”
He pointed to the recent rehabilitation of a salt-marsh habitat at New Brighton Park, part of the park board’s biodiversity strategy to recreate historical ecosystems throughout the city.
“The salt-marsh habitat at New Brighton is 1.5 hectares, Lost Lagoon is 10 times bigger. At 15 hectares it would be one of the largest habitat restoration projects in Burrard Inlet. Even if there were to be a substantial impact (to the existing freshwater lagoon), it would be a major opportunity to restore the habitat of Burrard Inlet,” Page said.