The Forest Practices Board received a complaint that alleged forestry activities by A&A Trading, Taan Forest, and BC Timber Sales in the Skidegate Landscape Unit (LU) on Haida Gwaii resulted in landslides, road failures and siltation of fish-bearing streams. In addition, the complainant believes that ecological representation targets for old forest in the Skidegate LU are not being met.
Board investigators field reviewed areas of concern and did not find any evidence that primary forest activities caused a landslide that had a material adverse effect, or that cutblocks and roads contributed sediment to fish bearing streams. The investigators observed that roads were well constructed and maintained.
The ecological representation targets for old forest are in a deficit, but licensees are implementing a recruitment strategy consistent with the legally binding Haida Gwaii Land Use Objectives Order. Not all recruitment areas have been spatially defined, and the Board encourages the licensees and government to finalize the spatial identification of all recruitment polygons as soon as possible.
The Forest Practices Board received a complaint that asserts that Sunshine Coast Community Forest (SCCF) did not adequately consider the impacts of forestry activities on a landslide into Wilson Creek. The complainant is concerned that SCCF did not conduct a geotechnical assessment of the landslide and that fine sediments from it will continue to be transported into Wilson Creek until the slope eventually stabilizes.
The Board found that the landslide was a natural event that occurred before any forestry activities took place. In addition, the licensee had completed a geotechnical assessment that identified the landslide, and also conducted several other hydrologic related assessments. It followed the recommendations in the assessments which are designed to mitigate the risk of sediment entering Wilson Creek. The Board also observed that the toe of the landslide is beginning to revegetate, which will further reduce the amount of sediment from the landslide deposited into Wilson Creek.
Two trappers in the Nazko Area, near Quesnel complained to the Board that logging practices to salvage mountain pine beetle killed pine trees have removed fisher habitat on their trapline. They claim habitat loss will affect their livelihood and were concerned that salvage operations were not being managed to maintain fisher and other wildlife habitats.
The Board investigated planning and management by both government and licensees operating in the Nazko Area . The Board conducted site visits and analyzed logging activities. During the investigation the area also experienced widespread forest mortality from forest fires.
The Board found the complainants' concerns were justified, government did not use the legal tools available to protect fisher habitat and did not monitor or follow up to check if guidance had been followed. Some licensees made attempts to retain habitat for fisher habitat, but the efforts were uncoordinated and ultimately insufficient given the extent of salvage harvesting.
A landowner complained that Interfor Corporation (Interfor) was not maintaining its roads and caused landslides into Little Cayuse Creek where he gets his water. He also asserted that government was not adequately enforcing Interfor’s maintenance requirements.
The Board’s investigation determined that Interfor had not conducted adequate inspections to ensure no material adverse effect on forest resources so did not comply with the Forest and Range Practices Act road maintenance requirements. The investigation also found that government was not doing enough to determine if Interfor had complied with its road maintenance requirements.
The Board investigated a complaint about proposed harvesting around recreation sites at Thone and Williamson Lakes. The complainants were concerned that the cutblocks were too close to the campsites and lakes. They thought the harvesting posed and unacceptable risk to: the recreational experience of campers and anglers, public safety due windthrow, riparian ecosystems and water levels of the lakes and streams. Harvesting in recreation sites had been authorized by a recreation officer.
This investigation examined whether the planned harvest would comply with the legal requirements, whether the harvest adequately managed the risk to the elements the complainants were concerned about, if the recreation officer’s authorization of harvest was reasonable and if public consultation was appropriate.
