In June 2012, the Board received a complaint about Kalesnikoff Lumber Co. Ltd.’s (the licensee) planned road building and harvesting for cutting permit 40 (three cutblocks) in the Duhamel Creek community watershed. The complainant was concerned that harvesting and road building would increase the risk of flooding and debris flows, which could potentially damage property, reduce water quality and endanger the lives of residents of the Duhamel Creek alluvial fan.

Duhamel Creek frequently experiences natural disturbances. The presence and influence of historical landslides and other erosion events are evident throughout the length of Duhamel Creek. The valley sidewalls and streambeds have been eroded over time by events like avalanches, landslides and debris slides. Some of the eroded material was transported downstream, particularly in extreme run-off events, where it settled and created the Duhamel alluvial fan.

On December 20, 2012, a Director of the Regional District of Columbia Shuswap complained to the Forest Practices Board about proposed harvesting in an area covered by the Begbie Falls Integrated Resources Plan (BFIRP).

The director was concerned that forestry activities of Stella-Jones (the licensee) were not consistent with the BFIRP; that residents of Revelstoke and the area adjacent to the proposed development did not have adequate opportunity to comment on the harvest proposal; and that the harvesting was proposed within a FireSmart demonstration area, which had just been treated to reduce wildfire risk.

This investigation looked at a landslide into Laird Creek that caused damage to the water supply of about 100 homes. The slide was caused by a combination of factors, including logging by the BC Timber Sales program that occurred in the area prior to 2007.

The Board investigation found that BCTS’s operational and technical practices were sound. Overall the Board finds that BCTS acted in a responsible manner after the slide event, though there was no legislated requirement for it to do so. BCTS conducted appropriate assessments; implemented the recommendations; stabilized the road and slide path; helped water users get their systems running; and, ensured water users had access to potable water.

This case brings to light broader issues regarding public policy and decision making, including potential gaps in regulation that go well beyond this specific instance, and the Board will examine those concerns separately, drawing on the results of this and other recent audits and investigations.

Closing Letter from Laird Creek Investigation in 2005