Rollover Legislation: Claims and Facts

/in /by

The government and the Minister of Forests continue to spread disinformation about the forestry rollover legislation that was introduced this month. You can read the proposed law for yourself here, in Section 24.

During a February 28th interview, Minister Thomson made the following claims:

“Clearly in that legislation we’ve talked about the process. We’ve talked about the need for public consultation that’s embedded in the legislation. We’ve talked about that this would only occur when it is in the public interest. It would be by invitation, so it’s not a de facto privatization. And it responds to the recommendations of the mid-term timber supply committee report that have clearly said we need to look at increasing the diversity of area-based management. There are significant benefits to area-based management in terms of investments in forest management, increasing fibre supply, and we think this is one of the tools that will assist in addressing the mid-term timber supply needs.”

I’ve responded to the government and minister’s statements below.

1. Claim: This legislation comes as a direct result of a recommendation by the Special Committee on Timber Supply.

Fact: There was no such recommendation. The Timber Supply Committee gave cautionary recommendations “if conversion to more area-based tenures is desirable.”[1]

2. Claim: This legislation is about increasing the diversity of area-based tenures, like community forests, woodlots and First Nations tenures.

Fact: It’s about conversion of one specific type of volume-based license, called a replaceable forest license, to a specific type of area-based tenure, a Tree Farm License (TFL). The majority of the volume held under these licenses is in the control of five major forest products companies.

The government already has the ability to create more community forests, First Nations area-based tenures, and woodlots. It still hasn’t met its stated 2003 objective of having these types of tenures comprise 10 per cent of the province-wide annual allowable cut.

3. Claim: Area-based tenures result in better forest management.

Fact: Area-based tenures may result in better forest management, but it’s not necessarily the case, because area-based tenure holders only have to meet the minimum requirements of the Forest Act. There are no legal requirements for companies to manage their forests to a higher standard.

There has not been a definitive assessment of whether the public forest land base is actually better managed under a TFL. In fact, the worst managed public forest in BC has historically been TFL #1, on the north coast.

4. Claim: Area-based tenures will increase mid-term timber supply.

Fact: There is no evidence to support this claim. Some TFLs have improved their silviculture investments enough to warrant an increase in their AAC. However, many TFLs have seen their AACs reduced, and those that are able to demonstrate an improvement in timber volume get to cut that volume today based on their projected results for future improvements in forest growth. These projections do not account for climate change, fire, pests, and disease, which could wipe out any incremental gains.

5. Claim: There will be public consultation.

Fact: There is no public consultation required by law at any point in the rollover process. The only requirement is to make an accepted proposal “available” for public comment for a period of not less than 60 days. This is a passive process that does not compel the applicant to actively notify and engage First Nations, local governments, other licensees, and community stakeholders.

6. Claim: First Nations will be consulted.

Fact: The maps for new TFLs will be drawn by the applicants and negotiated in secret with the Minister. There is no legal requirement for direct pre- or post-consultation with First Nations. This omission will likely trigger “duty to consult” litigation against both the legislation and any applications made under the legislation

7. Claim: The public interest will be protected.

Fact: There is no “public interest” definition in the legislation. No requirements for investment, job creation, mills to be built, or incremental forest management. The government press release promises the public will be consulted this summer before the legislation is used in order to “refine” the policy around public interest. However, as the Auditor General’s report on the release of private lands from existing TFLs clearly points out, the government did not protect the public interest in that case, and public interest policy can be adapted without any public consultation.

8. Claim: This legislation simply enables the minister to invite replaceable license holders to apply for an area-based tenure. There is no government policy to rollover replaceable forest licenses to TFLs.

Fact: This same rationalization was used when the government changed the Forest Act to allow the removal of private lands from TFLs. After the first application to remove private lands form a TFL was approved, successive applications resulted in the removal of virtually all of the private lands in TFLs province-wide. The Auditor General’s report on private land removals concluded that the public interest was not protected in this process.

9. Claim: The invitation to apply will be publicly advertised according to a prescribed process and will lay out the criteria for a successful application.

Fact: The prescribed process and criteria are not in law. In most TSAs, only one or two major companies hold most of the available volume in their replaceable forest licenses, and only they would be eligible to submit a proposal in the first place.

10. Claim: This legislation is not “privatization” of our public forests.

Fact: TFLs give exclusive rights to private companies over a defined area (or areas) of our public forest land. Once awarded, the minister has virtually no oversight or input into the sale of TFLs, and there are no public consultation requirements or First Nation consultation requirements when TFLs change hands. Foreign state-owned entities are able to buy TFLs without notice to the public or any public input. In fact, a Chinese business person who purchased TFL #1 is under scrutiny in China for defrauding the Chinese government when he purchased Skeena Cellulose and the licenses associated with that mill.

TFLs are no longer taken back if processing facilities are sold, and they can be managed to minimum standards without penalty. TFL #47 formerly fed mills in the Campbell River area, but those mills are closed. The TFL is now primarily logged for log exports, and the TFL is owned by a pension fund.

If government wants to take back areas of a TFL in order to protect other values, create parks, settle land claims, or attract investment for other timber or non-timber economic activity, compensation to TFL holders is significantly higher because of the exclusive territorial rights awarded to the license holder. In short, we have to buy back our public forests from TFL licensees, just as if we were purchasing private land.

11. Claim: This legislation is about mid-term timber supply and community stability.

Fact: This legislation is about Burns Lake and Hampton Affiliates. Hampton Affiliates is an Oregon-based company that was a member of the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports in the US, which received money from the $1 billion the US Government took from Canadian companies when the Harper government signed the 2006 Softwood Lumber Agreement.[2] Hampton is potentially facing charges under the Workers’ Compensation Act for the events leading up to the explosion of the Babine Forest Products Mill. The government started promising Hampton Affiliates a TFL as early as April 2012, long before the Timber Supply Committee was struck.

The Minister promised to introduce this legislation for Hampton in a letter of intent he wrote to the company in September 2012:

“We will bring legislation to the House at the next session. Conversion of Babine Forest Products licenses will be one of the first priorities for implementation under any resultant legislation. Babine has submitted a proposal for an area based tenure in historic Babine operating areas and we would expect a portion or portions of this area to be included in the area based licence that would be offered to Babine. The total area that would be offered will be commensurate with the proportion of cut held by Hampton.”

This legislation was created for the wrong reasons, without proper consultation, and the law itself does not provide the protections the government and minister say it does. There are only two weeks in which the law could be debated and passed. If it comes before the House again, I will stand up and fight this bill.

Please also see Bob’s media release on this subject.
Read More: https://www.bobsimpsonmla.ca/rollover-legislation-claims-and-facts/

Some of the trees in the Ancient Forest are 1

Unique Prince George area-forest should be World Heritage Site, says study

/in /by

An area of rainforest near Prince George is so unique that it should be designated as a provincial park and protected as a United Nations World Heritage Site, says a new study by the University of Northern B.C.

The area, called the Ancient Forest, contains massive stands of giant red cedars usually associated with wet coastal forests, as well as rare plants and lichens.

“It’s a very unique wet temperate rainforest,” said the study’s lead author, UNBC ecosystem science and management Prof. Darwyn Coxson.

“Usually, they (rainforests) are beside the ocean or within 10 or 20 kilometres from the ocean.

“But this is a small zone about 800 kilometres east of Prince Rupert. It’s wet, cool and allows cedar stands to reach amazing age and sizes. They rival anything on (Haida Gwaii) or Vancouver Island.”

Coxson said the proposed park and UNESCO site would consist of 6,000 to 10,000 hectares of largely unlogged forest about one hour’s drive east of Prince George along 20 kilometres of Highway 16.

It’s being recommended that the boundary of nearby Slim Creek provincial park be extended to include the new area.

“There is much precedence to point to of ancient coastal rainforests being named World Heritage Sites, such as Haida Gwaii in B.C., and Olympic National Park in Washington State, but in many scientific and cultural respects, the Ancient Forest is of even more value due to its extremely rare location so far north and so far inland,” said Coxson.

The UNBC study, published in the BC Journal of Ecosystems and Management, said the Ancient Forest is accessible by trail and features some cedars more than 1,000 years old.

The area was flagged for logging in 2006, but later declared off limits after UNBC students and researchers informed the public of its cultural and scientific value.

Since then, UNBC researchers and classes have visited the trail site to study the area’s biodiversity.

“Becoming a provincial park and then a World Heritage Site will ensure the long-term protection of the ancient cedar stands, which to date, have been cared for by local community groups,” said Coxson.

According to the study, to be named a UNESCO World Heritage Site, the site must first be named a provincial park. The government of Canada must then recommend the site to UNESCO.

Coxson co-wrote the study with UNBC environmental planning Prof. David Connell and Trevor Goward of the University of B.C.

Read More: https://www.vancouversun.com/travel/Unique+Prince+George+area+forest+should+World+Heritage+Site+says+study/8038492/story.html

Photo attached (media are free to reprint): From left to right - AFA Executive Director Ken Wu; Campaigner and Photographer TJ Watt; Admin Director Joan Varley; Researcher and Writer Hannah Carpendale. Taken at hollow old-growth cedar at Goldstream.

Ancient Forest Alliance (AFA) Celebrates its Three Year Anniversary

/in /by
February 28, 2013
Ancient Forest Alliance (AFA) Celebrates its Three Year Anniversary
Conservation organization aims to spotlight old-growth forests and raw log exports as central BC election issues, urges BC Liberals and NDP to break from the unsustainable status quo.
The Ancient Forest Alliance (www.AncientForestAlliance.org) , a BC environmental organization founded in early 2010, is celebrating its three year anniversary this week as a registered not-for-profit society. Yesterday, February 27, was the organization’s anniversary.
To celebrate, this coming Sunday, March 3, the organization will hold an “Ancient Forest Biodiversity Hike” for the public to see a magnificent old-growth Douglas fir grove in Goldstream Provincial Park, on the campground side of the park (Meet at 1:00 pm at the top parking lot by Sooke Lake Rd. and Humpback Rd. near the pub, hike finishes by 3:00 pm – easy to moderate difficulty) with Ken Wu ,TJ Watt, and Joan Varley from the AFA and naturalists Darren and Claudia Copley of the Victoria Natural History Society. The organization will also have a “Meet and Greet” afterwards with snacks, drinks, and a fun slideshow with staff from 4:30 to 6:00 pm on Sunday at its office at 827 Broughton St. in Victoria.
“We’re grateful for the huge support we’ve received from thousands British Columbians to build a major environmental organization from scratch,” stated Ken Wu, AFA co-founder and executive director. “Our size and strength has grown tremendously over three years, and we’ve had some specific successes. However, our main task – of getting the BC Liberal government and the NDP opposition to commit to a plan to protect BC’s endangered old-growth forests and to ensure a sustainable, value-added second-growth forest industry – is now more urgent than ever. During these last 3 months before a BC election we’ll be going all-out to push both the BC Lib’s and NDP for a seismic shift from the unsustainable status quo of massive overcutting, old-growth logging and raw log exports.”
So far the BC Liberal government has been defending major old-growth logging and raw log exports, while often citing highly misleading statistics to convey the false message that old-growth forests are not endangered. They’ve also introduced a bill that would empower the Minister of Forests to expand Tree Farm Licences (ie. to give exclusive logging rights to huge areas of Crown forest lands to major timber companies) through policy fiat instead of through a democratic legislative vote, which is bound to become a major election issue.  See:  www.ancientforestalliance.org/news-item.php?ID=564
The NDP opposition has so far stayed silent on a previous commitment by leader Adrian Dix in 2011 during his leadership bid that he would, “Develop a long term strategy for old growth forests in the Province, including protection of specific areas that are facing immediate logging plans” if elected. See: conservationvoters.ca/past-endorsements/leadership-race-2011/ndp-candidates/adrian-dix [Original article no longer available]
The Ancient Forest Alliance has been noted for its approach towards building broad-based movements involving local tourism and small businesses (including the Port Renfrew Chamber of Commerce who helped to protect the Avatar Grove), forestry workers, First Nations, and other diverse people. The organization is planning a major “Pre-Election Rally for Ancient Forests and BC Forestry Jobs” on Saturday, March 16 at 12 noon at the Legislative Buildings. Already over 500 people have pre-confirmed their attendance for the rally on the website and 200 more via Facebook.  See www.BCForestMovement.com
A major strength of the organization has been the photography of its campaigner and co-founder TJ Watt, whose stunning, award-winning photos of old-growth trees and giant stumps on Vancouver Island have circulated around the world through the news and social media. See the Ancient Forest Alliance’s photogallery of Watt’s photos at: https://16.52.162.165/photos-media/
“While we’ve taken thousands of people on public hikes to see ancient forests, we also know it’s impossible to bring millions of people out, and that the clearcutting of our endangered old-growth forests also goes unseen by most. So through professional photography we’ve been able to bring the beauty and destruction of our ancient forests into the homes of millions of people to raise public awareness,” stated Watt.
The AFA is best known for its successful campaign that culminated last year to protect the “Avatar Grove”, a stand of centuries old giant redcedars near Port Renfrew, some with fantastic shapes. See:  www.ancientforestalliance.org/news-item.php?ID=378  and a spectacular photogallery at: www.ancientforestalliance.org/photos.php?gID=6
The organization’s other successes include:
– Getting NDP leader Adrian Dix to commit to, “Develop a long term strategy for old growth forests in the Province, including protection of specific areas that are facing immediate logging plans” during his NDP leadership bid (a promise which he has not mentioned since, however). See: [Original article no longer available]
– Ensuring a reprieve from logging for the “Castle Grove” last November, Canada’s finest ancient cedar grove in the Upper Walbran Valley. See:  www.timescolonist.com/news/local/province-has-no-plans-to-cut-old-growth-stand-in-walbran-near-port-alberni-1.17753
– Convincing the BC government to develop a legal designation, still in the works, to protect the province’s biggest trees and potentially monumental groves. See above link.
– In general, raising the level of public awareness on the need to protect the province’s endangered ancient forests through countless public hikes, slideshows, rallies, petition drives (see ancientforestalliance.org/ways-to-take-action-for-forests/petition/), and through garnering local, provincial, national, and international media coverage on its campaigns.
The organization has grown from 400 to 900 to 2000 donors by the end of its first, second, and third years of existence, respectively, and raised $59,000, $80,000, and $137,000 in revenues each successive year.  The organization also has 23,000 people on its supporters lists (email and Facebook), mainly within British Columbia.
“With our regular door canvasses now in Victoria and Vancouver, plus the support we get from small and independent businesses, we’re firmly entrenched in the BC conservation community. As such I’m confident that the Ancient Forest Alliance will be here to stay until our endangered old-growth forests are protected and we see a sustainable forest industry in this province,” stated Wu.
Ken Wu is the AFA’s Executive Director, TJ Watt is the Campaigner and Photographer, Joan Varley is the Admin Director, Hannah Carpendale is the Researcher and Writer, Amanda Evans is the Victoria Canvass Director, and Noah Schillo is the Vancouver Canvass Director.
Old-growth forests are vital to sustain endangered species, the climate, tourism, clean water, wild salmon, and many First Nations cultures.  On Vancouver Island about 75% of the original, productive old-growth forests have been logged, including 90% of the valley bottoms where the largest trees grow. About 10% of the original, productive old-growth forests have been protected in parks and in Old-Growth Management Areas on Vancouver Island. Of 2.3 million hectares of original, productive old-growth forests on Vancouver Island, about 1.7 million hectares have now been logged.
Forests Minister Steve Thomson

Eco-groups regard new forest tenure legislation as ‘land grab’

/in /by

The B.C. government is being accused of giving forest companies new, sweeping powers over the land base through legislation it introduced last week to amend the Forest Act.

“This appears to be essentially a giveaway to big companies,” said Jessica Clogg, a lawyer with West Coast Environmental Law who specializes in forestry issues. She was referring to a tenure rollover plan given first reading last week that would give forest companies the ability to convert their volume-based forest tenures to area-based tenures called tree farm licences.

West Coast Environmental Law is one of numerous environmental groups opposing the legislation, which they see as generally extending corporate rights at a time when more diverse issues, from First Nations to community interests and biodiversity, are also on the public agenda.

“We have seen a lot of consolidation in the industry and this is setting us up for that last grab by those that are left standing to lock down their rights,” she said Thursday. “I see a clash of the titans over the B.C. land base.”

The legislation was introduced through Bill 8, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, on Feb. 20. Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Minister Steve Thomson called it a “milestone” that will help the B.C. Interior weather the effects of the mountain pine beetle infestation. The government expects forest companies to make more investments on the land if they have more private property-like rights.

The forest industry is supportive of the changes, which it expects will encourage private investment on the land. But the changes will not erode existing environmental protections or other non-timber values, said Doug Routledge, vice-president of the Council of Forest Industries. He said it makes sense to manage diverse values, as well as timber, on an area-based model.

Most Interior forest lands are managed on a volume-based tenure system through forest licences. Licensees have allowable annual cuts that allocate timber within a provincial supply area. The initiative to create area-based tenures — where the area containing the timber supply allocated to the company is licensed — was driven largely by last year’s explosion and fire at the Burns Lake sawmill, which precipitated a regional economic crisis when the mill owner claimed there was not enough timber in the timber supply area available to the company to justify building a new mill.

Routledge said it makes sense to introduce the legislation now, which is enabling legislation only, as it will enable whoever forms the next government to move forward with it.

However, NDP forests critic Norm Macdonald, referred to the changes as an amendment “that is best left to fall off the table.”

“This is coming just before an election from a government that has clearly lost the public trust,” he said.

The province announced it intended to proceed with establishing area-based tenures when it released its Mid-term Timber Supply Action Plan last October. That plan was based on recommendations from a special committee on the timber supply that toured the province last summer. Area-based tenures were raised during the hearings, said Macdonald, who sat on the committee, but what members heard from the public, he said, was to proceed slowly and with caution.

He said the NDP is not opposed to the creation of more tree-farm licences; the model has been in place on the Coast for decades. It’s the way the government is going about it, by introducing legislation that does not spell out the specifics on how it will proceed, that the party opposes.

“This is legislation specifically to create tree-farm licences held by private industry. What we heard in the committee is that it should be part of the conversation. But we should be extremely careful.”

Routledge said he expects the industry to move cautiously. First, he said, the process is controlled by the government. Tree farm licences will be considered at the minister’s invitation only. He said he does not expect a flood of applications when those invitations are extended.

“This is simply a different form of tenure that grants harvesting rights over a certain volume of timber. It is not a giveaway of timber. The timber has already been allocated in tenure. It is not a giveaway of land because the land remains vested in the Crown and the public interest. It is not different than a forest licence except that it is spacially explicit. The same rights and responsibilities apply.”

 

Read more: https://www.vancouversun.com/technology/groups+regard+forest+tenure+legislation+land+grab/8032059/story.html#ixzz2MLXOpHrb 

Documents show government is already breaking proposed forestry law

/in /by

Independent MLA Bob Simpson says documents show that the BC Liberals have no intention of following their proposed law to enable the conversion of volume-based forest licenses to area-based tenures.

“The Liberal cabinet is writing yet another ugly chapter in the long and sordid history of forestry legislation in this province,” said Simpson. He points to a leaked cabinet document from April 2012 and a letter written by the Minister of Forests to Hampton Affiliates on September 11, 2012, as proof that they will not follow their proposed law.

“It’s clear from the leaked cabinet document and Minister Thomson’s letter that Hampton Affiliates has already been promised the first Tree Farm License under the Liberals’ proposed legislation,” said the MLA for Cariboo North. “The government doesn’t have the right to make this offer because there is no legal way they can fulfill it unless Bill 8 passes. At the same time, Bill 8 would require that the minister start this process with a public advertisement of the criteria that would be used to judge these proposals from all replaceable licensees in a Timber Supply Area [TSA].”

The history of Tree Farm Licenses (TFLs) in BC has been fraught with controversy. In the 1940s, the first two TFLs issued were directly linked to political donations to the Liberal government. In the 1970s, W.A.C. Bennett’s Minister of Forests, “Honest” Bob Sommers, went to jail for receiving kickbacks when he issued a TFL. In 1988, Bill Vander Zalm’s Forest Minister, Dave Parker, tried to enact legislation similar to Bill 8 and delayed consultation until after the law was passed. Both Parker and his deputy minister lost their jobs when the public rejected the creation of additional TFLs during the consultation process, and the legislation was repealed.

“There are four replaceable licensees in the Lakes TSA where Hampton has been promised preferential treatment,” said Simpson. “The three other licensees — Canfor, West Fraser and L&M Lumber, all BC-based companies — all need timber from the Lakes TSA to keep their Highway 16 mills operating.”

“It puzzles me why the Liberals have decided that Hampton should be the winner in the fight for timber,” said Simpson. “They are a U.S.-based firm and a member of the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports. They received money from the $1 billion that was stolen from Canadian companies in the 2006 softwood lumber settlement, and they could still face charges under the Workers Compensation Act for their role in the events leading up to the explosion at the Burns Lake sawmill.”

Both the leaked cabinet document and the Minister’s letter to Hampton state that other license holders in the Lakes TSA would have to have their licenses transferred to adjacent TSAs.

“The admission that the other companies in the Lakes TSA would need to move their licenses is clear proof that there isn’t enough timber in the Highway 16 corridor to sustain all the mills that are currently operating there,” said Simpson. “By turning forest policy on its head to favour Hampton, the government is putting other jobs and Highway 16 communities at risk.”

Simpson has been calling on the government to work with the community of Burns Lake to find alternative economic models instead of rebuilding a traditional lumber mill that will employ less than 40 per cent of the original workforce.

“Breaking the law by promising Hampton Affiliates a TFL without due process will absolutely guarantee the public rejects this form of tenure once again,” said Simpson. “The government should not bring Bill 8 up for debate. They need to work with the community of Burns Lake on more creative and forward-looking solutions and inform Hampton that it will not be getting a TFL.”
https://www.bobsimpsonmla.ca/documents-show-government-is-already-breaking-proposed-forestry-law/