In June 2014, the Forest Practices Board decided on three strategic priorities to help guide its work over the next 3-5 years.
In 1999, residents of the Upper Clearwater Valley and the local forest district agreed that the corridor of private and public land surrounding the road leading to Wells Gray Provincial Park had unique values. The values were documented in guidelines in a local resource use plan. The guidelines were endorsed by the district manager, who was pleased about the trust that had developed between business, government and individuals. Little harvesting occurred in the area until 13 years later, in 2012, when the licensee who operates in the area went to the referral group with harvest plans and explained how the plans followed the guidelines. The referral group disagreed. The licensee tried to get comments on the operational plans but the residents' concerns were more strategic than operational and the residents viewed government as breaking its agreement with them. They complained to the Board that the guidelines were not being followed.
The Forest Practices Board conducted a full scope compliance audit of NRFL A76553 held by Pacific Bioenergy Timber Corp. (PBE) and NRFL A76729 held by RPP Holdings Inc. in the Quesnel District. The audit included all harvesting, roads, silviculture and protection activities, and associated planning, carried out between June 1, 2013, and June 23, 2015.
PBE and RPP operations are located about 100 kilometres west of Quesnel near the village of Nazko. Both licensees target lodgepole pine stands that have been killed or damaged by mountain pine beetle. During the two-year audit period, PBE harvested approximately 94 479 cubic metres and RPP harvested approximately 540 828 cubic metres.
With the exception of one opportunity for improvement for PBE, the operational planning, timber harvesting, road construction, maintenance and deactivation and fire protection activities carried out by the licensees complied in all significant respects with the requirements of the Forest and Range Practices Act and the Wildfire Act.
In July 2015, the Forest Practices Board audited the activities of Teal Cedar Products Ltd.'s forest licence A19201 in the Chilliwack resource district. Harvesting activity is spread out across the district with operations at Pitt Lake, Norrish Creek, west Harrison Lake, Sowaqua Creek (north of Hope) and Boston Bar. The Norrish Creek operating area was of particular interest to auditors as it provides drinking water to Abbotsford and Mission, and it is critical that forest practices and roads do not negatively impact water quality.
The audit found that Teal Cedar Products Ltd.'s operational planning, timber harvesting, road construction and maintenance, silviculture, and fire protection activities complied in all significant respects with the requirements of the Forest and Range Practices Act, the Wildfire Act and related regulations.
In May 2015, the Forest Practices Board audited the activities of BC Timber Sales (BCTS) and timber sale licence holders in the Boundary timber supply area (TSA). The TSA covers approximately 659 000 hectares of the southern interior, north of the international border. The TSA includes the Kettle River and Granby River drainages and the communities of Grand Forks, Midway, Greenwood, Rock Creek, Beaverdell and Christina Lake.
The audit found that BCTS' planning and activities complied with legislated requirements. However, the audit found that a timber sale licence holder did not maintain natural surface drainage patterns on a road above unstable terrain. The Board considered that to be a significant non-compliance. The Board also found that all but one timber sale licensee need to improve their fire hazard assessment practices.
When the Forest and Range Practices Act became law over a decade ago, forest stewardship plans (FSPs) replaced forest development plans as the key operational planning document. Government stated its expectations for FSPs, saying they would, among other things, contribute to innovation, effectiveness in compliance and enforcement actions, and effectiveness in public consultation. In 2006 the Board examined the content of initial FSPs and concluded that they were not well-suited for public review, content was sparse and enforceability of results and strategies was limited due to the way they were written.
In 2014 the Board decided to undertake another investigation of FSPs in BC to determine if they have improved since 2006. Specifically, the Board investigated these questions:
This report contains the results of that examination and makes several recommendations to address key findings.
Ecosystem-based management (EBM) is a forest management approach intended to maintain ecosystem integrity while providing for societal needs in the Great Bear Rainforest of Coastal BC. Ecological (old growth forest) representation and protection of at-risk plant communities are two key elements of EBM to help maintain ecological integrity and promote fully functional ecosystems on the BC Coast. Government set out the legal objectives for implementation of EBM by enacting the South Central Coast Order and the Central and North Coast Order in 2007. In February 2014, concerned residents complained that TimberWest was harvesting old forest, harvesting in areas with at-risk plant communities, and not abiding by the spirit and intent of the South Central Coast Order.
This report explores compliance with the South Central Coast Order for EBM, the clarity of both the Order and associated government direction and, the importance of understanding and managing to the spirit and intent of EBM in the Great Bear Rainforest.
Between February 26 and March 31, 2015 the Forest Practices Board conducted a benchmark survey. The objective of this survey was to improve the Board’s understanding of its perceived value and performance in pursuing its mission, and to establish baseline metrics to ensure verifiable, meaningful progress can be made. This in turn will better position the Board to evaluate and improve upon its watchdog function and focus its outreach and communication activities with key stakeholder groups.
The Rocky Mountain Trench is rich in ecological diversity. It is the low-elevation grassland and open forest ecosystems that support the greatest biological diversity and the greatest concentration of forage use, and human settlement and development. Maintaining a healthy grassland ecosystem in the Rocky Mountain Trench is important, but challenging.
In 2008, the Board published the complaint investigation report Wildlife and Cattle Grazing in the East Kootenay. The report addressed concerns that: forest in-growth on grasslands had caused forage supply to decline; elk and deer numbers had been allowed to increase causing forage to be overgrazed; and individual ranchers had to reduce the number and duration of cattle grazing on Crown lands. The report recommended that the Ministry of Forests and Range and the Ministry of Environment direct reductions of forage use to achieve a positive and continuing trend in grassland ecosystem condition.
Government responded in March 2011 and outlined actions they had taken to address the recommendations from the 2008 report. This report examines progress by government to implement those actions.
A summary of findings of the 23 audits published in 2013 and 2014 that draws attention to the number of failures to follow Wildfire Act requirements. This trend is concerning to the Board, especially as we enter into a summer following historic low snow packs in many areas of the province, and are seeing an early start to the wildfire season.
Of the 23 audit reports, 11 had no concerns noted, and 12 had a total of 24 concerns reported. Of particular concern to the Board is that one third of the findings relate to the Wildfire Act. The Board encourages all licensees, big and small, to pay particular attention to fire protection activities this coming season.
