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.
The Board conducted a limited scope compliance audit of BC Hydro’s OLTCs L48655, L48700, L48750 and L48751, in which all fire protection activities carried out between January 1, 2011, and June 5, 2013, were included. These activities and associated planning were assessed for compliance with the Wildfire Act and related regulations.
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.
In 2005, when government established the original Revelstoke Higher Level Plan Order (RHLPO), it included a provision that it might review the order, should subsequent recovery efforts for caribou adversely affect timber supply. Hence, a 2011 amendment was intended to recover a volume of harvestable timber to compensate for that set aside in 2009 to protect caribou habitat. This investigation determined that the amendment, without altering the area reserved for caribou, reduced and re-arranged the amounts, location and security of old and mature forest required to be protected for biodiversity conservation. Ultimately, though less old and mature forest is now protected, the reduced amount is not substantive relative to the original RHLPO, provided forests that are currently considered inoperable remain unharvested.
