Ancient Forest Alliance campaigner and photographer TJ Watt stands amongst giant trees along a trail in Cathedral Grove.

Earth Day Inspires Environmental Actions Around the World

Many Earth Day events throughout the world are focused on trees and forests.

In Western Canada, conservationists are calling on the British Columbia government to expand protection around MacMillan Provincial Park to fully encompass the forests above and adjacent to the world-famous Cathedral Grove.
Cathedral Grove

Cathedral Grove is Canada’s most popular old-growth forest on Vancouver Island, visited by millions of tourists each year, but the company Island Timberlands has built a road through old-growth forests on Mt. Horne, the mountainside above Cathedral Grove, and could potentially begin logging of a new cutblock that could come as close as 300 meters from the park boundary.

“After the redwoods of California, Cathedral Grove is the best known old-growth forest on Earth,” said Ken Wu, Ancient Forest Alliance executive director. “It should be a first rate priority for the BC government to stop any logging plans that threaten the park’s ecological integrity and ancient forest that millions of people visit.”

“The BC government deregulated the environmental protections on this land in 2004 and failed to follow-through on an agreement that was supposed to protect the old-growth forests on those lands. They broke it, now they have a responsibility to fix it,” said Wu. “The expansion of protected areas around Cathedral Grove, the scenic highway, Cameron Lake, and the Cathedral Grove Canyon will make this a world-class protected area, both ecologically and for tourism.”

[Environment News Service article no longer available]

Earth Day: AFA Booths, Events & Fundraisers in VICTORIA & VANCOUVER

EARTH DAY: AFA Booths, Events & Fundraisers in VICTORIA & VANCOUVER

See below for details on some upcoming events where the Ancient Forest Alliance (AFA) will be tabling, and fundraisers hosted by local businesses to support the AFA. Great thanks to all local businesses and event organizers for their support!

*****

Mon April 21, VANCOUVER – Earth Day Parade & Celebration

Free annual festival organized by the Youth for Climate Justice Now, featuring a lively costume-filled parade and a celebration with speakers, musicians, display and fun activities. Join the parade at 11am (starting at Commercial Drive & 8th Ave, Vancouver) and come visit the AFA's table at the celebration at Grandview Park (Commercial Drive & Charles St.) between 12 and 3pm! Join and invite others at: https://www.facebook.com/events/383697285105110/

*****

Tuesday April 22, VICTORIA – Earth Day AFA Fundraisers Organized by Local Businesses

Café 932 (932 Johnson St., Victoria): A dollar will be donated to the AFA for every 16 oz. coffee or tea bought using a reusable mug as well as for every West Coast panini purchased.

North Park Bike Shop (1725 Quadra St., Victoria): 10% of their day’s net sales will be donated to the AFA, with a goal of $150!

Grassroots Eco Salon “Haircuts not Clearcuts” (1284 C2 Gladstone Ave., Fernwood Square, around the back): This new local eco friendly salon will be hosting a “Haircuts not Clearcuts” fundraiser, donating 50% of the day’s earnings to the AFA!

*****

Fri & Sat April 25 & 26, VICTORIA – Creatively United for the Planet

A free family event at St. Ann’s Academy (835 Humboldt St., Victoria) featuring live music, displays, talks, workshops, food, art, dance, and more! See https://creativelyunitedfortheplanet.org/ for schedule and special events tickets. Come visit the AFA’s booth on SATURDAY APRIL 26th from 1:00-6:30pm to buy posters and cards, and to speak to our friendly staff! Thanks to the hard work of Victoria photographer and writer Frances Litman for organizing this event! Join and invite others on facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/events/260454867450021/

*****

Mon –Sun Apr 21-27, VANCOUVER – AFA Booth at Granville Island Public Market

Visit our AFA booth at the Granville Island Public Market this week, Mon Apr 21 – Sun Apr 27 from 9am-5pm to purchase AFA posters, cards and stickers and more, and speak to our friendly staff! (**from Tues-Sun, our booth will be located between Longliners Seafood and Benton Brothers Cheese in the market.)
 

Forum urges residents to Stand Up for forests

The Stand Up for the North Committee hosted a forum on Saturday to voice concerns about the current state of forest management in B.C., and proposed changes to the forest tenure system.

Approximately 200 people came out to hear from First Nations, labour leaders, forestry policy analyst Anthony Britneff and noted environmentalist Vicky Husband.

Britneff is a former senior forester with the B.C. Ministry of Forests and Range. He retired in 2010 after 40 years with the agency, and has been speaking out about what he calls “a perfect storm of mismanagement.”

Britneff said the provincial government slashed funding for the B.C. Forest Service -reducing the number of district offices from 42 to 21 and eliminating over 1,000 jobs – between 2001 and 2010.

“Most programs were cut so badly departments are now dysfunctional,” Britneff said.

And on Jan. 31, 2004 the Forests and Range Practices Act came into effect, he which further cut legal oversight of forestry companies in favour of relying on forestry professionals employed by forestry companies.

On March 24, NDP forestry critic Norm Macdonald questioned the why Canfor and West Fraser were able to over harvest almost a million cubic metres of healthy trees not effected by the mountain pine beetle in the Morice Timber Supply Area between 2008 and 2013.

Britneff said the companies are still operating in the Morice area and have basically gotten away with a slap on the wrist.

“In 2012 185 per cent of the partition [in the Morice TSA] was harvested – the spruce, balsam… that's your midterm timber supply. How can forest professionals hold companies accountable if over harvesting is lawful?” he said. “The Forest Practices Board is only mandated to audit based on provincial law. Let me assure you, your forests are not sustainably managed- the law does not allow it.”

These changes happened at the same time the province was dealing with the single largest impact of climate change the province has felt: the mountain pine beetle epidemic, he said.

“In 2008, the chief forester asked for a report on climate change. It was done in March, 2009,” he said.

The report, which was not widely distributed, concluded that timber supply would be significantly impacted by tree deaths caused by diseases, competition from foreign species moving in and climatic factors, he said. Little action was taken on the plan, Britneff added.

“The forestry ministry now uses the science of convenience,” he said.

On April 1, Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Minister Steven Thomson announced a public consultation on a proposal to increase area-based tenures and tree farm licences. The consultation runs until May 30.

“This process is not a public consultation at all. It's the government asking for feedback on what it plans to do,” he said.

The goal of switching to an area-based system or tree farm system is that companies would have more incentive to invest in sylviculture and management of areas that they have exclusive harvesting rights too. Under the current system, the majority of forest tenures are volume-based -meaning companies have the right to harvest a certain amount of wood from a particular Timber Supply Area.

“I must be fair on the quality of management of tree farms, the quality varies,” Britneff said.

However, tree farms have the highest rate of waste of any of the management categories in the province, he said.

“Tree farm licences are not the way to go. The [tree farm licence] rollover is about privatizing profits, but socializing the costs,” he said.

The province subsidizes tree farm operators' costs of fire management – if the fire starts in adjacent public forest – road construction and other costs, he said.

Husband, who has received the Order of Canada and Order of B.C. for her environmental advocacy, said B.C.'s forests should be managed as ecosystems -not just as trees to be harvested for profit.

“Really we haven't managed our public ecosystems well. I've done some work on the [Atlantic] cod fishery. The cod fishery was the most productive in the world, and we killed it,” she said. “I'm afraid we're doing the same to our forests.”

Even though tree farm licensees are supposed to allow recreational access through their areas, there is plenty of gates and lack of access when tree farm licenses are issued, she said.

“We have a lot of experiences with tree farms on the coast, and it's not good. It is the privatization of our forests,” she said. “The timber comes first and nothing else matters.”

Keeping public forests public is a start, she said, and then enforcement of the current rules needs to be enhanced until stronger regulations can be drafted.

“We have an unenforceable forest act… none of the ecological values are being protected either,” she said. “There is nobody looking after the public interest.”

The number of field inspections conducted by forestry staff dropped from more than 25,000 in 2002 to less than 8,200 in 2012, she said- and a special report by the Forest Practices Board last year said field inspections have continued to decline since then.

Peter Ewert, spokesperson for the Stand Up for the North committee, said the long-term health of the forest is critical to communities in the North reliant on the forestry industry.

“We are here today because we are concerned,” Ewert said. “There are many problems facing the forest and the forestry industry. Problems that are not being addressed by the powers that be. There is a growing sentiment out there in B.C. that we want more control at the local level on what is happening to our forests.”

Read more: https://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/news/local/forum-urges-residents-to-stand-up-for-forests-1.954718

Playing with words regarding Tree Farm Licences

When Alice met Humpty Dumpty, in Lewis Carroll’s famous book “Alice in Wonderland,” Humpty informed her rather scornfully that “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean.” And so goes the Ministry of Forests with its repeated use of the term “Area-based Forest Tenures” in its Discussion Paper and on its public consultation website.

Again and again, it is highlighted on the Ministry website that the issue is all about converting volume-based tenure into area-based tenure to address the timber supply problem in the province. Now, there are a number of types of area-based tenure in British Columbia, including Community Forest Agreements, Woodlot Licences, and First Nations Woodland Licences, all of which have some popular support throughout the province. But it is a mistake to think the Ministry is actually referring to these when it is talking about rolling over existing forest licences into Area-based Forest Tenures.

When you drill down past all the headings and references to Area-based Forest Tenures on the Ministry’s website and in its Discussion Paper, it becomes clear that what the Ministry is proposing is a rollover of volume-based licences into one particular – and highly controversial – type of area-based tenure, i.e. Tree Farm Licences (TFLs).

So, rather than a Discussion Paper on Area-based Forest Tenures, the Discussion Paper could be more accurately described as a Discussion Paper promoting the benefits of Tree Farm Licences and defining the criteria for rollover to these TFLs. However, in this case, the Ministry appears to have followed Humpty Dumpty’s lead by claiming that words only mean whatever it chooses them to mean.

Why go to all this trouble? Why confound the terms and cause confusion? Why not make it crystal clear, with no ambiguity, that this whole exercise is about TFLs alone? Well, Tree Farm Licences have always been controversial in BC. Just last year, the Minister of Forests tried to push through legislation allowing for large-scale conversion of existing timber licenses into TFLs. Many in the province felt that this move would be a giveaway to the investors and shareholders of a few big companies at the expense of other sectors of the forest industry, First Nations and the population as a whole. In the face of widespread opposition, the Forest Minister was forced to withdraw the legislation.

But what you can’t push through under one label, try another. Thus we have the phrase “area-based forest tenures” peppered throughout the Ministry press release, website and Discussion Paper. In so doing, it appears to want to shift the debate away from a focus on TFLs to the more general (and less controversial) topic of volume-based tenures versus area-based tenures.

But, as revealed in a leaked confidential cabinet document in April of 2013 (after the initial TFL legislation was withdrawn), the Ministry’s intentions have remained the same – convert at least some of the existing forest licences in the province into TFLs. The only thing that has changed from last year has been the method of selling that conversion and the terminology.

The Ministry also wants to shift the debate away from the much more pressing issue of public oversight and proper forest management. No matter whether it is volume-based or area-based tenures, we need rigorous and professional public oversight of our forests. Yet the provincial government has slashed hundreds of jobs in forestry inspection and science. As a result, our forests are in terrible shape with lack of reforestation, overharvesting, incomplete inventory and environmental degradation rampant.

These are facts that all the Humpty Dumpty wordplay in the world cannot hide. And more TFLs will not provide a remedy.

[250 News article no longer available]

Tree Farm Licence 44

BC Liberal Government Revives Proposed “Forest Giveaway Scheme” for Major Logging Companies on Public Forest Lands

For Immediate Release

April 2, 2014

BC Liberal Government Revives Proposed “Forest Giveaway Scheme” for Major Logging Companies on Public Forest Lands

Revived proposal would entrench the status quo of unsustainable overcutting by granting exclusive logging rights to major timber companies over vast areas of public forest lands by expanding Tree Farm Licences.

“Despite being killed by widespread public opposition just a year ago, the BC Liberals never stop trying to revive their ‘Corporate Timber Zombie’ that is always reaching out to grab our public forests. But this time they’re strengthening and boosting it with a massive injection of PR. No doubt this will make it harder to kill. But kill it we must, as this forest giveaway scheme will further entrench the unsustainable status quo of massive overcutting on public lands, ultimately resulting in the collapse of human communities and ecosystems,” stated Ken Wu, Ancient Forest Alliance executive director. “We’ve seen this familiar pattern of resource depletion, ecosystem collapse, and massive job loss played out time and time again throughout history, and forestry in BC is no exception – the process is well advanced on BC’s coast, and is now underway in BC’s Interior.”

Yesterday, the BC Liberal government revived their proposal to allow major logging companies to gain exclusive logging rights over vast areas of public forest lands through the expansion of Tree Farm Licences. See the BC government’s media release at: https://www.newsroom.gov.bc.ca/2014/04/public-input-invited-on-expansion-of-area-based-tenures.html and their “Discussion Paper: Area-Based Forest Tenures”: https://engage.gov.bc.ca/foresttenures/files/2014/03/Forest_Tenure_Discuss_Paper.pdf

A massive public outcry a year ago resulted in the BC Liberal government rescinding the same proposal prior to the provincial election. See: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-backs-off-forest-land-volume-area-trade-plan-1.1386946

A Tree Farm Licence (TFL) is a defined geographic area that is tens or hundreds of thousands of hectares in size that confers exclusive logging rights to one logging company on public (Crown) land. TFL’s currently constitute a small fraction of BC, about 15% of the province’s cut. Most of the province’s forests are found in Timber Supply Areas (TSA’s) where no specific geographic area is granted to companies for exclusive logging rights – instead they are given a volume of wood (in cubic meters) through a Forest Licence (FL) that they are allowed to cut within each TSA.

While now gently billed as a “consultation process” regarding “area-based tenures” – which evokes images of Community Forests and family-run Woodlots – in reality the government’s proposal aims to allow companies that already have a guaranteed cut through replaceable, “volume-based licences” – that is, mainly Forest Licences held by the major logging companies – to convert them into Tree Farm Licences: “The Province is looking at options to convert some or a portion of some volume-based forest licences to new or expanded area-based tree farm licences (page 11, Discussion Paper: Area-Based Forest Tenures). In BC, five major companies have been allocated two-thirds of the allowable cut under replaceable Forest Licences: [Original article no longer available]

The scope of the new consultation is a rigged process that doesn’t ask “whether” or not Tree Farm Licences should be expanded, but instead asks “how” they should be implemented. The BC government’s Discussion Paper only lists “Potential Benefits” (page 9) but no “Potential Problems”. Its starting assumption is that companies with volume-based licences should and will be allowed to convert them into Tree Farm Licences in areas of the province. Their media release states:

“The scope of the public consultation will focus on how best to achieve government’s objectives within any conversion process on volume-based to area-based tenures, and specifically on the following:

-the social, economic and environmental benefits that should be sought from proponents through conversions, and

– the criteria for evaluating applications and the process for implementing conversions, including specific application requirements and target locations for conversion opportunities.”

In addition, despite the government’s press release that attempts to downplay the extent of the proposal as if it will be limited to pine-beetle affected regions (which is still an enormous part of the province), that “Conversions are not being considered on a province wide basis. They are one ‘tool in the toolbox’ that may help with mid-term timber supply issues in parts of the Interior that have been impacted by the mountain pine beetle,” in contrast their comprehensive Discussion Paper states the government’s wider ambitions: “Initially, these opportunities would be limited in number and would only be available in areas impacted by the mountain pine beetle. Over time, they could be offered in other parts of the province. (page 11, Discussion Paper: Area-Based Forest Tenures)

Perhaps the main crux of the drive for Tree Farm Licence expansion is to enhance the major logging companies’ claims to compensation and to undermine potential forest conservation measures (for fish and wildlife habitat, recreation, old-growth forests, endangered species, scenery, tourism, etc.) and First Nations treaties, which pose the main sources of “uncertainty” to the companies’ unfettered access to the remaining timber supply. The BC government’s Discussion Paper states:

“The major benefit of such a change is the increased certainty of timber supply that an area-based tenure would apply to the licence holder.” (page 10, Discussion Paper: Area-Based Forest Tenures )

and

“The licence holder is compensated if the allowable annual cut of the licence is reduced by more than 5 per cent as a result of Crown land deletions.” (page 8, Discussion Paper: Area-Based Forest Tenures)

“This is a dangerous proposal that will give increased rights to the major logging corporations on public lands at the expense of the sustainability of local communities and ecosystems. Greater corporate certainty by granting them exclusive logging rights over huge areas of public lands will make it harder to protect forests for wildlife, recreation, scenery, and tourism, and could make First Nations treaties more expensive, lengthy and difficult to resolve. It will entrench the massive, short-sighted overcutting taking place that has already driven the crisis in BC’s woods this far,” stated TJ Watt, Ancient Forest Alliance campaigner.

The BC government propagates the myth that increased corporate control on public lands fosters better stewardship and greater sustainability in their Discussion Paper: “With area-based forest tenures, it is in the best interests of the licence holder to ensure the long-term sustainability of the area to secure future harvests.” (page 8, Discussion Paper: Area-Based Forest Tenures). In reality, BC’s Tree Farm Licences are bought and sold frequently by highly mobile companies that themselves frequently change ownership – these major companies are not tied to the land like communities and living creatures are. Some of the province’s most notorious, internationally famous examples of massive clearcutting, overcutting, landslides, destruction of salmon streams, annihilation of old-growth forests, locked gates, and ruined scenery and recreational opportunities are in the province’s Tree Farm Licences.

See an opinion piece by former BC Forest Service forester Anthony Britneff regarding many of these issues at: https://www.vancouversun.com/news/Tree+licence+rollover+public+benefit/8059516/story.html#ixzz2MvKFwm3s

In the Globe and Mail, it was reported recently that two of the BC Interior’s major companies, Canfor and West Fraser, recently overcut almost a million cubic meters of live green timber where they were supposed to be only taking beetle-killed wood. Incredibly, the companies were let off the hook by Forest Minister Steve Thomson without penalties:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/timber-companies-cant-see-the-consequences-for-the-trees/article17732435/

“Instead of penalizing companies that are overcutting our forests, this government is now looking to potentially reward them by further entrenching their unfettered access to vast tracts of public forest lands through new Tree Farm Licences,” stated Wu. “This is the BC Liberal government’s attempt to facilitate the last great timber grab by the major companies to log until the end of the resource – at the expense of communities and ecosystems.”

PHOTO CAPTION: Tree Farm Licence 44, Klanawa Valley, Vancouver Island, November 2013, south of Bamfield and Port Alberni. Large-scale clearcut logging in Tree Farm Licences has depleted and fragmented the once vast old-growth forests of Vancouver Island, causing the collapse of forestry employment in once-wealthy resource towns like Port Alberni and of whole ecosystems. The BC Liberal government stated yesterday that the creation of new Tree Farm Licences across BC will benefit the environment because “it is in the best interests of the licence holder to ensure the long-term sustainability of the area.”

B.C. government reopens timber rights talks

Forests Minister Steve Thomson has reopened talks on giving forest companies exclusive access to timber rights on some public lands.

A year ago, widespread opposition forced Thomson to withdraw related legislation after critics warned that it would give companies too much control.

This time, Thomson is launching a two-month consultation process led by retired civil servant and former chief forester Jim Snetsinger.

Thomson said the government wants to get the public’s input on its plan to convert some volume-based licences to new or expanded area-based licences.

Volume-based licences allow multiple companies to cut trees in a specific timber supply area. Area-based tenures, also known as tree farm licences, give companies exclusive access to the trees in an area.

The government argues that TFLs provide licence-holders with “increased certainty” of timber supply and encourage them to make long-term investments in sawmills and silviculture.

“This, in turn, can provide stability for workers and the community,” states a government discussion paper.

Thomson said the government is considering the change as way to deal with a declining timber supply in the Interior caused by the mountain pine beetle epidemic.

But critics argue that giving forest companies increased control over Crown land spells disaster for the environment and makes it more difficult to settle First Nations treaties.

“When companies say they want greater certainty over the land base, what they mean is greater certainty against conservation measures and treaty settlement,” said Ken Wu, executive director of the Ancient Forest Alliance. “There’s a lot of other users and a lot of other values on those lands besides large-scale logging.”

NDP forests critic Norm Macdonald said there is no evidence that allowing exclusive rights in a timber area benefits anyone other than the big forest companies, many of whom are major donors to the B.C. Liberal Party.

“I get why the private companies want it and I don’t begrudge them at all,” he said. “But why the public would buy into this is beyond me. They have not made the case that it’s for the public good.”

Macdonald said the public, in fact, will lose some of the control it has to protect wildlife and the environment on lands where companies have exclusive access to the timber. “It’s not a total privatization, that’s true,” he said. “But there’s no question you’ve given up greater property rights and, therefore, you’ve given up complete control of that land.”

Thomson said the government’s vision is that companies would be given exclusive access only in areas where there is support and a strong case for doing so. “We’re not contemplating conversions on a provincewide basis, but rather on a case-by-case basis,” he said.

Thomson said he wants to hear from the public what types of benefits the companies should provide in exchange, and what criteria should be used to evaluate applications.

“Before any company would be invited to an application, they would have to be able to demonstrate the public interest and the values under which they’re doing that,” he said.

The public consultation process concludes on May 30. Snetsinger will submit a final report at the end of June.

Thomson declined to provide a timeline for potential legislation.

“I think that would be pre-judging the outcome of the process and pre-judging the recommendations that [Snetsinger] will bring forward,” he said.

Read more: https://www.timescolonist.com/business/b-c-government-reopens-timber-rights-talks-1.939094

B.C. announces plans to revamp its timber supply system for forestry firms

VICTORIA — Forests Minister Steve Thomson says the Liberal government is taking another shot at giving forest companies more rights to control British Columbia's public forest lands, but he rejects criticism that the plan would privatize provincial forests.

The move could dramatically change the way public forests are managed by granting lumber companies tenure rights, or logging rights, to large pieces of land. Companies are currently allotted timber harvest rights on a specified numbers of trees.

The proposed changes prompted immediate scorn from an environmental group and skepticism from the Opposition New Democrats.

“We're going to go totally to the wall over this one,” said Ancient Forest Alliance spokesman Ken Wu. “The large forest companies have too long been special interest groups over our public forest lands.”

Plans to amend the Forest Act last year to move towards area-based tenures were dumped after a public outcry.

Thomson announced a consultation program Tuesday that will consider public and industry opinion over converting forest land management to area-based tenures from its current volume-based tenure system.

The minister said area-based tenures will not be provincewide, moving only to areas where there is public approval.

He appointed Jim Snetsinger, a former B.C. chief forester, to oversee a two-month consultation process, with a report and recommendations due June 30. Snetsinger will hold public hearings in 10 communities.

Forest tenures or licences are agreements between the government and a person or company to provide logging rights on Crown land. Tenure holders must make payments to the government for timber harvested on Crown land.

Thomson said moving to area-based tenures will give forest companies more certainty over the land on which they harvest timber. He said the government still owns the land, but the companies would have long-term management rights.

“This only gives them timber-harvesting rights to the area as they currently have with volume-based licences,” he said. “This is not privatization and not transferring rights to that area to the land holder other than those harvesting rights.”

Thomson said last March when the Liberals shelved the changes that they require broader public consultation.

Wu said the only certainty British Columbians can expect from land-based tenures for forest companies is environmental destruction.

Opposition NDP forests critic Norm Macdonald said he understands why companies want to control forest land, but the government will have a tough time convincing the public to support the changes.

“Why the public would buy into this is beyond me,” he said. “They have not made the case that this is for the public good. If this is a sales job, that's a problem.”

Read more: https://www.theprovince.com/business/announces+plans+revamp+timber+supply+system+forestry+firms/9687518/story.html