Public Presentation Open House Jan 2015

8/10/2019 Public Presentation Open House Jan 2015

1/53

FACILITATOR

Ken GibsonRecreation Specialist Columba Shuswap

36 years with Forest Service

12 years Recreation Officer Columbia Shuswap


2/53

Marcy Bennett-Your new

Recreation Officer

Marcy completed her MSc in 2009 with a focus on the role of

outdoor recreation in sustainable communities.

She comes with past work experience with Recreation Sites

and Trails BC , national, and provincial parks.

She is keen, an avid Mountain Bike rider, and excited about

working with the many recreation groups to help facilitate

their visions.

I am impressed in the short while I have worked with Marcy. I

can now retire knowing the district is in good hands.

During the open house session be sure to make her welcome


3/53

WHY THE MEETING

The meeting was initiated as a result of discussions with Licenseesand the Revelstoke Nordic Club and Revelstoke Cycling Associationover harvesting proposed on Mount Macpherson and Frisby Ridge.

The meeting has 2 components.

The first part of the meeting will contain presentation meant tohelp educate the public on significance and workings of ForestManagement.

The second part of the meeting has an open house formatwhereyou can review the harvesting proposals one on one with the

licensee making the proposal (If you have questions for the sake of time management we ask

that you hold them to the open house session)


4/53

THE AGENDA

I will talk about the Recreation Program and Role of a

Recreation Officer.

Angus Woodman will talk about the makeup and

significance of your local Forest Sector. Pat McMechan will discuss the legislation policy and

planning initiatives that guide the Forest Industry .

Robert Mohr will answer questions the executive of the

Revelstoke Cycling Association has submitted. Open house with each of the forest licensees

Opportunity to ask questions.


5/53

RECREATION SITES & TRAILS

Recreation Sites & Trails are areas of

crown land that have a public

recreation focus under the context of

integrated resource management.

They are in the WORKING FOREST and

not protected or Parks A Recreation Site and Trail designation

means integrated resource

management must take place on the

landbase.

Basically everyone must work together

in efforts to cooperatively achieve each

others objectives.

There are no harvesting constraints put

on a Recreation Site or Trail

designation.


6/53

BENEFITS OF A RECREATION SITE AND

TRAIL DESIGNATION

The Rec. Officer can enter into partnership agreementswith clubs / groups / individuals which provides them astewardship role on the Recreation Site or trail.

The Rec Officer can spend money or do work on theseareas to facilitate the visions of the recreation public.

Trails and sites must be referred before beingauthorized and established. Because of the integratedresource management concept, many of these

authorizations/establishments go uncontested byothers who have interests on the landbase.


7/53

PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS

All our major clubs and groups who use recreationtrails have partnership agreements with RecreationSites and Trails BC

This gives these groups a stewardship role on the site

or trail. Agreement holders are expected to complete annual

reports and operating plans under these agreementsand abide by the Forest Recreation Regulations.

RSTBC provides liability insurance for these agreementsand will try to facilitate the visions of the agreementholders by providing support / authorizations /resources and funding.


8/53

RECREATION OFFICER=FACILITATOR

The first objective of the Rec Officer is to make sure everyone isplaying by the rules given by upper government. (legislation /regulations)

Rules are just common sense i.e. respecting wildlife /environmental concerns, and the rights of other stakeholders on

the landbase. Recreation officer facilitates good communication and

understanding between agreement holder and stake holders(Licensees and commercial operators)This is done thru a letter ofunderstanding.

Good communication is paramount

With respect / good understanding / friendly relationships developand approvals can be given resources / funds allocated to create thegreat visions of our agreement holders.


9/53

TRAIL AUTHORIZATION

Before a trail can be built a Section 57 application must be made

The application is submitted to the Recreation officer who has itreferred to all the stake holders who have rights on the area of theapplication-ex forest licensees , commercial operators, miningcompanies, grazing holders, first nations.

After the referral period the Rec Officer must evaluate and try tomitigate any concerns identified before giving approval.

Most trails are on areas that have potential for harvestingopportunities-licensees do not take exception to these section 57applications given the integrated resource management concept.

To date in Revelstoke, licensees have helped restore trails afterharvesting-there is no legal obligation to do so. If licensees cannotfind the funding to help out, then RSTBC will step up to the plate.


10/53

EXAMPLES OF WORK A RECREATION

OFFICER MAY DO TO FACILITATE VISIONS Provide authorization for trail / infrastructure construction

Provide authorization for Special events

Provide contractors for trail construction

Support funding applications through letters of support and leveraging RSTBC $with those of other agencies.

Go after funding on behalf of agreement holder

Provide Kiosk and Trail Signs

Provide Brochures

Provide materials and supplies, ex wood for bridges and boardwalks

Lend tools for trail construction

Help out with maintenance of access with district engineer i.e. road grading /brushing/ bridge repair, parking lot construction

Put rules in place to help manage public Recreation ex (Non motorized on biketrials)

Ensure sites and trails are safe and sanitary ex -Fall danger treesPump out houses

Foster good understandings and friendly relationships (WinWin)


11/53

HOW FOREST LICENCEES HELP

Generally it is the Forest Licensees that have provide theaccess to most of our Recreation Sites and Trails. (Puttingroads and bridges in place and maintaining them are huge $)

Many snowmobile trails and Nordic trail utilize the roads thelicensees have put in.

On an annual basis the Rec Officer receives money under theLand Base Investment Account (from stumpage paid by thelicensees). This money often goes directly into trail building.

From time to time licensees have helped out with trail re-

construction and parking lot construction specifically for therecreating public.


12/53

QUESTIONS

Please see me during the open house session


13/53

The Revelstoke Forest IndustryPublic Presentation to the Community of Revelstoke, Revelstoke

Cycling Association, and Revelstoke Nordic Ski Club by the localForest Licensees on January 13th2015


14/53

Background

Province Government is the landlord of 93% of the province Provincial Government manages Crown land for the benefit of

the province as a whole

Management done through a legislative framework

Forest Actgoverns tenure administration Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA)came into

effect in 2003. Deals with practices on the landbase.


15/53

FRPA Elements Five Key Elements are:

Government objectives in regulations or orders Plans and practice requirements (ie: Forest Stewardship

Plans)

Compliance and Enforcement

Professional Reliance Effectiveness evaluations


16/53

Phases of forest operations

Planning

Road Construction

Harvesting

Reforestation


17/53

Planning

Government sets the forest land objectives of the Crown basedon strategic land use plans, then amended over time.

Overarching plan is Revelstoke Higher Level Plan

Timber harvesting

Wildlife

Recreation Visuals

Biodiversity

Water


18/53

Landscape Unit R14

Total Crown Land: 43,082 ha

Resultant

Inoperable Land base: 28,747 ha 14,335 ha

Non-Productive; Alpine: 15,405 haNon-Productive; Other: 3,732 haTotal Non-Productive: 19,137 ha 13,493 ha

Unstable Terrain: 5,412 ha 12,785 ha

Riparian Reserve &Wildlife Tree Patches: 334 ha 12,451 ha

Caribou Habitat (GAR): 15,485ha 5,100ha


19/53

Chief Forester determines the Allowable Annual Cut for

given areas and the Minister of FLNRO allocates a

portion of that volume to each of the forest licensees.

~1% of the Timber Harvesting Landbase (THLB) is

harvested annually

Revelstoke TSA THLB is ~24% of the productive forest

landbase and 10% of the total TSA Crown landbase

Therefore ~0.24% of the productive forest landbase

around Revelstoke is harvested annually (~600ha) Considerable amount of THLB is around the city.

Planning


20/53

Forest Licensees

Downie Timber Ltd. Louisiana Pacific Corporation

Revelstoke Community Forest Corporation

Stella-Jones

BC Timber Sales (Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural

Resource Operations)

4 local woodlots

- Positive relationship between the local licensees


21/53

Local Forest Tenure Holders


22/53

Planning Forest Stewardship Plans (FSP)

Developed by each forest licensee for their

operating area(s) and approved by government

Must be consistent with higher level plans, laws

& regulations

Results and strategies detailing how

government objectives will be achieved Opportunity for public comment and First

Nations consultation prior to approval

Renewed at least every 5 years


23/53

Planning

Site Plans

Cutblock specific plan identifies how the intended

results or strategies described in the forest

stewardship FSP apply to the site

Ecology

Water Soils

Recreation

Roads

Silviculture system


24/53

Silvicultural SystemsThere are a number of options with pros and cons for each. The

best option depends on the current stand and the desired futurestand. Things to consider are:

- Site conditions (species, blowdown potential, age,

feasibility, economics)

- Silviculture slum

Even-aged

Clearcuta single harvesting entry

Seedtreea single harvest entry with trees remaining

Shelterwoodmultiple entries over time to shelter the new

standUneven-aged

Selection systemmultiple entries repeated indefinately

maintaining an uneven-aged stand.


25/53

Planning Factors taken into consideration when determining where /

when to harvest: Forest Health

Operational feasibility

Stand Characteristics

Age, volume, species, economics

Markets

Non-Timber values

Long term plan / opportunities

Site disturbance (winter vs. summer)

Safety Government issues cutting permit if the District confirms

that the application is in order and First Nations concerns have

been adequately addressed


26/53

Road Construction

Safe, well designed roads are critical Potential to cause environmental damage and safety

issues if not properly constructed

May require expertise from geotechnical experts or

engineers Road construction costs range from ~$10,000 / km to ~1

million / km

Some roads are government responsibility and others are

industry responsibility


27/53

Timber Harvesting

3 general timber harvesting techniques

Conventional flat / gentle terrain

Cable steep terrain

Helicopter challenging areas

Conventional Harvesting (~35% of area)

More flexibility in harvesting methods / silviculturalsystems

Typical skidder, cat, feller buncher harvesting

operation


28/53

Timber Harvesting

Cable Harvesting (~60% of area)

Yarding tower pulls trees to the road with cables in the airthat span the cutblock

Low ground disturbance

Helicopter Harvesting (~ 5% of area) Special helicopters fly a few logs at a time from the cutblock

to a landing


29/53

Reforestation

Licensees are responsible to reforest all harvested areas toa standard acceptable to government

Reforestation may include:

Site preparation

Mounding

Piling / burning

De-stumping

Planting

Appropriate species, densities, etc.

Brushing competing vegetation

Many monitoring surveys

Legal obligation to meet free growing status


30/53

Environmental Certification

All the local major forest licensees have 3

rd

partyenvironmental certification

Requires an annual external audit of forest management

practices to ensure compliance with the certification

standard

Often has requirements above and beyond the

requirements of provincial forest legislation


31/53

Local Forest Sector

Wood product producers Silviculture & Firefighting contractors

Logging & Road construction contractors

Forest management consulting contractors

Forest licensees Ministry of Forests, Range, Natural Resource Operations

employees

Operations

BC Timber Sales

Wildfire Management


32/53

Revelstoke has a Unique Forest Industry

Diverse Forest Industry Forest tenure type and ownership

Species profile

Products produced

Revelstoke manufacturers produce high valueproducts, not the standard 2x4

High quality dimensional lumber

Poles

Laminated Veneer Lumber (LVL)

Shakes and shingles

For these reasons, the Revelstoke Forest Industry has

continued to operate through the recent market downturns

and has a bright future


33/53

Downie Timber Most modern cedar mill in North America

Re-Manufacturing facility on site (Selkirk Specialty) Mills the kootenay mix (spruce, cedar, fir, pine,

hemlock)

Not aware of another mill that cuts this diversity

of species

Wood sourced from:

PrimaryInterior

SecondaryBC Coast

Products sold to:

North America, Asia, Europe, Australia

Louisiana Pacific Operates an LVL / plywood plant in Golden

Products sold around the world


34/53

Stella-JonesLargest supplier of cedar, fir, and lodgepole pine poles in North

America Revelstoke yard primarily produces cedar poles

Wood sourced from:

Everywhere in BC except the Coast (coastal poles go

to facilities on the coast)

Revelstoke poles sold to:

Canada, USA (including Hawaii and Alaska), some

overseas

StellaJones / Bell Pole yard in Revelstoke has operated

uninterrupted since 1962

RCFC City owned TFL (1993) Portion of wood to local licensees, portion sold on open market

Revenues benefit the citizens of Revelstoke

Mandate to hire local contractors


35/53

Other Local Wood Products Producers Joe Kozek Sawmills

Take to Heart Tom Scott Custom Wood Products

Cascade Cedar Shake & Shingle

R. Lang Cedar

Graham Farms


36/53

Total Community Income = $250 million (2011 est.)

Direct Forestry Contribution to community

Resource Extraction and Processing = $45 - $50 million

(est.)

350-375 people directly employed in Forest Sector (2011 est.)

approx. 12% of total labour force ~$46 million/year revenue to the Crown from timber harvested

in the Revelstoke area

Revelstoke Economy


37/53


38/53

Largest Employers in Revelstoke

(updated July 2011)

Downie/Selkirk 275

(sawmill/value added plant)

CP Rail 265

Revelstoke Mountain Resort 130 FTES(seasonal/mostly winter - computes to 240 approx.)

School District #19 100

City of Revelstoke 98

Parks Canada 95

BC Hydro 93


39/53

Future of the Revelstoke Forest

Industry

Revelstoke has a bright forestry future

Downie has further diversified their operations

Purchase of Federated Co-op in Canoe

Revelstokesclimate grows trees well!

Will continue to be a vital part of Revelstokes

diversified economy for the long term


40/53

Challenges facing the Revelstoke

Forest Industry

Shortage of local forestry workers, particularly loggers

and logging truck drivers

Maintaining the social, economic, and environmental

balance sought by society


41/53

Questions from the RCA

1. What is the difference between licencees and woodlot owners?

Licensees and woodlot owners are essentially the same.

The land base is divided into different management units with their own annual

allowable cut (AAC). The management units are: Timber Supply Areas (TSAs), Tree

Farm Licences (TFLs), and Woodlots.

For a Timber Supply Area (TSA) the total cut is apportioned to different privatecompanies by volume (cubic metres of wood) in the form of Forest Licences and Timber

Sale Licences (TSLs).

Tree Farm Licences are autonomous land bases outside of the TSA with their own AAC,

hence TFL holders are licencees that have a land base outside of the TSA.

Woodlots are a smaller version of TFLs with their own AAC.

2. How big is the operable land base for a licensee/wood lot owner?


42/53

g p /

For the Revelstoke TSA, the Timber Harvesting Land Base (THLB) is approximately

58,000 hectares, which is subdivided by licencee.

TFL 55 and 56 both have approximately 23,000 hectares of THLB each.

Cascadia TSA is approximately 25,000 hectares of THLB.

Woodlots are very small- around 600 hectares gross area.


43/53

3. What is the AAC?

Annual Allowable Cut= AAC

It is the annual harvest level for each of the following management units: Timber

Supply Areas (TSAs), Tree Farm Licences (TFLs) and Woodlots.

The calculation and associated determination assumes that all operable forest outsideof parks and reserves and other constraints are available for harvest (known as the

Timber Harvesting Land Base or THLB).

Re-determined every 5-10 years by Chief Forester.

Cascadia TSA = 66,566m3 / yr

TFL 55 = 78,325m3 / yr + BCTS portion = 11,675m3 / yrTFL 56 = 78,520m3 / yr + BCTS portion = 11,480m3 / yr

Revelstoke TSA = 225,000m3 / yr total

- Stella-Jones = 48,753m3 / yr

- Downie = 130,600m3 / yr

- BCTS = 43,997m3 / yr

WL 461 = ~2500m3 / yrWL 460 = ~1800m3 / yr

WL 1834 = ~900m3 / yr

WL 322 = ~2200m3 / yr

Licencees are expected to harvest these levels within a five year term.


44/53

5 What are the longer term plans for harvesting on Macpherson Boulder and Frisby?


45/53

5. What are the longer term plans for harvesting on Macpherson, Boulder and Frisby?

Will depend on the many factors listed in the previous slide

In general, the mature timber within the THLB will be harvested over time, subject to

constraints.

More detailed information available at individual licencee tables.

6 Wh l l tti ?


46/53

6. Why only clear cutting?

Licencees have employed other cutting techniques around Revelstoke, but a large

portion of the cutting around Macpherson and Boulder has been in response to

windthrow events.

Operational issues (stand age, safety, terrain, species) often constrain partial cutting

options. In general, partial cutting systems work better in younger stands.

Silvics- Regenerating desired species for site . Partial cutting can limit regeneration

options to less desirable species for a given site.

Concentrated cutting (ie clearcut) over a smaller areas vs partial cutting over a larger

area, and more often. Licencees still obligated to meet their AAC commitments.

Economics. Partial cutting obtains less volume for given area.


47/53

7. What other types of harvest prescriptions can be employed instead of clear cuts?

Other silviculture systems are possible, but given the age and structure of the mature

stands, they carry inherent risks- mainly windthrow, but also insects and disease.

There are also additional operational constraints.

Safety and terrain

Desired species to regenerate

Windthrow, insect, and disease risks

Forest age, structure, and species composition

Economics

8 What kind of coordination between multiple licencees/ woodlots can or do exist?


48/53

8. What kind of coordination between multiple licencees/ woodlots can or do exist?

Licencees co-ordinate and share info to manage for visuals, ungulate winter range,

and biodiversity.

Licencees often co-operate when operating in the same area or off the same road

systems.

However, they are independent business entities with their own business plans and

philosophies, so timing of harvesting is driven by business needs.

The higher level plan and provincial legislation establishes the ground rules by which

all licencees must operate. As long as licencees adhere to the plan, they are meeting

the objectives of the Provincial government.

9. How can the cumulative impacts to a recreational area and/or specific activity be


49/53

evaluated? Specifically when considering multiple licensees.

How are single-licencee impacts calculated?

Government regularly monitors compliance to licencee Forest Stewardship Plans and

to legislation, but there are no specific process to evaluate impacts to recreationresources.

It is presumed that as long as licencees meet the objectives established in these plans

and in the legislation, they are meeting government objectives for managing public

forest land.

f


50/53

10. What obligations do harvesting companies have to re-instate recreational facilities?

There are no legal obligations for licencees to re-establish recreational facilities.

Around Revelstoke , licencees have voluntarily re-established recreational facilities, or

have donated money to enable re-establishment.

A portion of stumpage fees also contributes to a special fund called the Forest

Investment Account. This money contributes to the budget of Sites and Trails BC which

has also been used to establish as well as re-establish recreational facilities.

Some Forest Licencees have MOUs with tenured recreation groups that outlines how

to co-operatively re-establish recreation facilities. This was unique to Revelstoke, but is

now being used as a model for other jurisdictions.


51/53

11. How are visual aesthetics of a harvest plan developed - for both recreationalists

located in the harvest area and from town or other viewpoints?

Visual quality objectives have been developed for areas visible from the Hwy 1 andHwy 23 corridors as well as any areas visible from viewpoints within the city.

Cutblocks are evaluated using modelling techniques to ensure they meet the visual

quality objectives for these areas.

Visual quality objectives may be over ridden for other objectives (for example, forest

health issues on Boulder Mountain).

No standards currently exist for visual quality assessed for recreationists within a

harvest area.


52/53

12. Is it possible to enter into another kind of joint-use committee (CSRD, recreation

groups, City, etc) with licensees and woodlot owners at MacP? at Boulder? at Frisby?

The Revelstoke Higher Level Plan and Provincial legislation have already been formulated

with input from all stakeholders (including the City and the CSRD) to identify theobjectives for the land base (which includes these areas). Since these objectives have

been established in law, it is unclear what purpose a joint use committee would serve.

Any new approach should be led by government and evaluated against the current

system. The current system allows for meaningful discussion and input when user groups

are proposing an activity, and it is an efficient use of time and resources to addressplanning issues as they arise vs. the time and resource commitment that a standing

committee would require.

Memorandums of Understanding also provide additional venues for discussion and

dialogue.

Forest professionals are members of the community with recreational interests as well.

They understand the importance of all the forest users and do their best to balance these

for the benefit of the community as a whole.


53/53

Conclusion

Communication is important Shared landbase

The forest and tourism sectors are both important to

Revelstoke

If you have questions please see individual forest licensee in

the open house session

Thank you

Documents

Public Presentation Open House Jan 2015