Fort St. John Results Based Pilot Project

Public Advisory Group Meeting #13

 

February 25, 2002

 

5:30pm to 9:15pm

Fort St John Leisure Center

 

APPROVED MEETING SUMMARY NOTES

 

Meeting Attendance:

 

Name

Interest

Phone

E-mail

Participants:

 

-

 

Roger St. Jean

Small Business Forest Enterprise Program (SBFEP)

787-5645

  

John Dymond

Slocan L.P OSB Corp

261-6464

  

Jeff Beale

Slocan L.P OSB Corp

261-6464

  

Dave Menzies

Canfor

   787-3613

  

Warren Jukes

Canfor

788-4355

  

 

 

 

  

PAG Interest Representatives and Alternates:

 

  

Mike Waberski       

Oil and Gas

787-0300

  

Ron Wagner

Labour

787-0172

  

Frank Schlichting

Range, Agric. & Private Woodlots

787-5383

  

Gary Rehmeier

Forest Workers

787-5214

  

Karen Goodings

Rural Communities

785-8084

  

 

 

 

  

Facilitator:

 

 

  

Gail Wallin

 

305-1003

  

 

 

 

  

Advisors:

 

 

  

Joelle Scheck

Ministry Water Land Air Protection

787-3283

  

Ron Rutledge

Ministry of Sus. Res. Mgt., FSJ

787-5632

  

Paul Wooding

Canfor

604-661-5423

  

Daryll Hebert

Consultant

428-3092

  

 

 

 

  

Observers:

 

 

  

Jake Staples

Staples Exploration (Independent Gas Contractor)

785-3210

  

 

 

 

Copies of the draft February 4 2002 Draft Meeting Summary, the proposed agenda for this evening, and the working matrix to date (containing a draft of the advisory groups’ input from last meeting), were distributed to each person in attendance.

 

1.      Welcome

·         The intent of this evenings’ meeting is to review the participant response to the PAGs proposed Values and Goals to date and to review proposed indicators.

2.      Review of Mtg. Agenda

·         PAG reviewed and accepted the proposed agenda for this meeting.

 

3.      Review of Previous Mtg.Summary

·         PAG reviewed draft meeting summary notes from February 4th 2002.

·         Clarification was provided by the PAG as to the recorded request (action item) for further information re: carbon cycling. Further background information will be provided on Carbon Cycling by the Participants and Advisors, vis a vis specific forestry practices, when the group begins dealing with the related element.

·         PAG accepted the draft meeting notes as an accurate record of meeting.

·         PAG read over the distributed Matrix, and agreed that it captured their input from the February 4th 2002 meeting.

 

4.      Action Item: Glossary

·         Participants reminded PAG of the Glossary in the Detailed Proposal, and that if there are additional terms that need clarification, the Glossary may be amended to include them. The PAG agreed to this suggestion.

·         The PAG agreed that the current definition in the Glossary for “Ecosystem” also adequately describes/defines “Ecological Diversity”.

 

5.      Working Group Response to PAG Input on Values, Goals and proposed Indicators for Criteria 1&2

Element 1.1Ecosystem Diversity

·         Value: is okay

·         Goal:

·          participants proposed change is a wording change only, intent remains the same

·         PAG member expressed concern that the current wording might prove too restrictive for forest operations, also that logging does not fully emulate natural process, thus in conflict with the stated intent of the goal.

·         Note: The revised goal was accepted for the time being but may need to be reviewed later on.

·         Indicator:

·         Participants provided an explanation of why Forest Types, Seral Stage and Patch Size are indicators of the stated goal.

·         Daryll Hebert provided clarification of how Patch Size ties in to natural disturbance

·         Group discussion of finding the balance between ecological and economic influences and constraints.

·         Participants provided a short explanation of the proposed Natural Disturbance Unit concept. The Fort St. John TSA will encompass three NDUs (Mountain, Foothill, and Boreal Plain)

·         CONCLUSION: PAG agreed to the direction of Goal and the Indicators for 1.1.

 

·         PAG requested that the Participants consider Coordinated Access Planning in this document. Move to “Parking Lot”.

 

 

Element 1.2 Species Diversity

·         Value:

·         Participants provided a background as to why the Value is Species Richness.

·         Meeting the habitat element requirements will also meet the needs for 95% of species genetic diversity requirements.

·         ACTION: add definition of species richness to the glossary.

·         Indicator:

·         A rationale for the Participants Indicator was provided. – because the 8 habitat elements will deal with most needs of most species.

·         A short explanation of each of the 8 elements was provided, and also the source of the list (Daryl Hebert explained that the list comes as a result of 800 scientific references).

·         ACTION: add ‘late successional’ to the glossary, and explain how it differs from what is meant by Old Growth.

·         ACTION: a description of the 8 elements should appear in the glossary, and what each one is meant to capture.

·         Conclusion:

·         PAG accepted the Values and Goals, and the direction for the Indicators provided by the participants.

 

Element 1.3 Genetic Diversity

·         Value and Goal: no change, agreed last meeting

·         Indicator:

·         A rationale that the 8 habitat elements serve as a coarse filter to the maintenance of ongoing genetic diversity, and are measurable (whereas genetic measurement would prove onerous).

·         PAG raised the question as to whether we can actually measure genetic variation. Daryll Hebert provided a response that was accepted. It was agreed that at this point in time it is important to look into the habitat elements and maintain them, and make the supported assumption that through their maintenance genetic variation will be permitted and maintained.

·         PAG raised a question regarding tree seed and stock and the need to ensure that only registered seed is used. – suggestion that this might be considered as an indicator.

·         Conclusion;

·         PAG agreed to the Values, Goals and Indicators for Element 1.3

·         PAG recommended that ‘tree stock’ be considered as an indicator.

 

Element 1.4 Protected Areas

·         Value:

·         A rationale was provided for the participants stated Value; purpose is to include areas in addition to provincially declared Parks, such as Special Management Zones (SMZ, a LRMP designation).

·         Goal:

·         PAG agreed that the participants’ goal captures the intent of the PAG input from last meeting.

·         Question was raised by PAG regarding using SMZ in the Value for Protected Area.

·         A discussion of what is meant by ‘Protected Areas ensued – Participants stated that it goes beyond the BC government definition of parks and protected areas. There are different practices and allowable uses between the two designations.

·         Paul Wooding, by reading the CSA definition, provided a clearer definition of what is meant by CCFMs Protected Areas.

·         A suggestion was made that the Participants divide the goal into two (Protected Areas and SMZs).

·         Of the three indicators proposed by participants, the PAG accepted Class A Parks and SMZ, but suggested that Non Contributing Land Base be placed elsewhere.

·         ACTION: define Non Contributing Land Base in glossary

·         NOTE: Other indicators to consider are ecological reserves and wildlife habitat areas.

·         Conclusion:

·         The goal was accepted by the PAG

·         Suggest 3 Values

1.       Protected Areas

2.       Ecological Areas

3.       Non-contributing landbase

·         The same indicators would also reflect these values.

 

Element 2.1 Forest Disturbance and Stress

·         The changes in Values and Goals in this element are as a result of the CSA changed element wording.

·         Value:

·         Ecosystem resilience suggested and accepted by PAG

·         Goal:

·         Function composition and structure are seen as the three primary components critical to ecosystem resilience.

·         Discussion of the role of fire, and maintaining a fire successional pathway as an indicator for this.

·         Advisor recommends changing the goal to read ‘Maintain ecosystem function, composition and structure within the range of natural variability by allowing the ecosystems to recover”. This change provides a clearer meaning to the existing goal without changing its intent.

·         Indicators

·         Change “permanent loss” to “permanent loss to landbase”.

·         Seral Stage, Snags, and CWD are okay.

·         NOTE: Suggestion of adding ‘# of hectares of natural successional pathways’ as an indicator; need to see if this is captured.

·         Conclusion:

·         Value accepted by PAG

·         Rewrite Goal to improve ‘readability’

·         Indicators as presented are accepted by PAG. Suggested also adding ‘# of hectares of natural successional pathways’.

 

 

Element 2.2 Ecosystem Productivity

·         The changes in Values and Goals in this element are as a result of the CSA changed element wording.

·         Value and Goal: accepted by PAG

·         Indicators: accepted by PAG

 

Element 2.3 Production Rates and Productive Capacity

·         Value and Goal;

·         A discussion was held regarding the term ‘landscape’ and a definition was provided from the pilot glossary.

·         PAG agrees that this element centers on timber. Other forest landbase resources are dealt with in 2.1 and 2.2.

·         Indicators:

·         PAG suggests ‘long term harvest levels’ could be an indicator.

 

·         Conclusion:

·         PAG agrees to Value and Goal

·         Proposed indicator accepted. Also suggested adding ‘long term harvest levels’.

·         NOTE: Participants should consider “Timber Quality” somewhere in the matrix. Move to ‘Parking Lot’

 

6.      Working Group Response to PAG Input to Values, Goals and Proposed Indicators for Criteria 3.

 

Element 3.1 Soil and Water

·         Discussion of what Site Index is and how it addresses soil productivity; how tree rate of growth is an indication of or relates to the relative health of the soil.

·         Suggestion from PAG that something about ‘loss of soil’ is added as an indicator

·         ACTION: Participants to provide additional information about Site Index.

·         Conclusion:

·         Values and Goals agreed to by PAG

·         PAG agreed with Site Index, but would like more info. Also suggested adding in Loss of Soil. Move to Parking Lot

 

Element 3.2 Water Quality and Quantity

·         Value:

·         Participants have separated quality and quantity as two distinct functions.

·         Goal:

·         Discussion of how the term ‘natural range of variation’ is understood as it refers to this goal.

·         ACTION: provide definition.

·         Indicators:

·         Discussed meaning of proposed indicators

·         Should consider whether stream crossing placement and strategy and measurement of water table can be included as indicators.

·         Conclusion:

·         PAG agreed to Value.

·         PAG agreed to the proposed indicators. Suggest also adding turbidity and erosion

 

7.      Other Business

·         No other business.

 

8.      Public Presentation

·         No presentation or questions

 

9.      Next Meeting

·         Next scheduled meeting for the PAG is March 11th, 2002, to discuss Criteria 4, 5 and 6

·         Meeting location to be determined.

 

PARKING LOT ITEMS

·         Suggest also adding turbidity and erosion

·         PAG agreed with Site Index, but would like more info. Also suggested adding in Loss of Soil

·         Participants should consider “Timber Quality” somewhere in the matrix

·         Suggested also adding ‘# of hectares of natural successional pathways’.

·         PAG suggests ‘long term harvest levels’ could be an indicator

·         PAG recommended that ‘tree stock’ be considered as an indicator

·         PAG requested that the Participants consider Coordinated Access Planning in this document