|
Errata
This page will contain information on changes
to the FPC Transition Training Materials published on this site.
Please note: all errata for the Primer dated
up to and including January 17, 2003 refer to Version 1.2 of the
Primer, which was distributed at the Orientation Sessions in December
2002.
Version 1.3 of the Primer is now available
for downloading from the Resources
page. Errata dated after January 17, 2003 will apply to Primer
V1.3 as well as Primer V1.2, but not to this website. The text
on this website is kept up-to-date with the necessary changes
from errata as they appear on this page.
Errata Table of Contents:
Planning, Site Plans
& Silviculture Errata
| Feb.
17/03 New! |
Planning Summary Presentation for Public Sessions
The recorded
presentation by Ian Miller summarizing the Planning
Changes says that the term of range use plans has been extended
to April 1, 2005.
THIS SHOULD CHANGE TO: The term of range
use plans has been extended to the later of the date
specified in the plan or April 1, 2005.
|
| Jan.
21/03 |
Visual Impact Assessments in a Known Scenic Area
The recorded presentation for "Site Plans and Silviculture"
states that "if you're in a known scenic area,
you have to do a visual impact assessment."
CHANGE TO:
If you're in a known scenic area with an Established
VQO, you have to do a visual impact assessment.
Reference: Operational
and Site Planning Regulation Sec. 36.1
This also affects page 16 of the Primer
(
278 Kb), versions 1.2 and 1.3.
|
|
Jan.
17/03
|
Performance Standards in Forest Development Plans
In the overhead presentation for the "Forest
Development Plans" presentation, slides #3 (Planning
Changes Summary) and #13 (Requirements Changes - FDP Content)
state that "FDPs can (or may) also contain Applicable
Performance Standards."
CHANGE TO: FDP
MUST contain stocking standards and MAY
contain standards for other performance standards
such as wildlife tree retention, regeneration date, permanent
access strucutres, soil disturbance.
|
|
Jan. 15/03
|
Terrain Stability Field Assessment Information
Page 16 of Version 1.2 of the Primer is incorrect. It says:
"The new THSPR and OSPR also require terrain stability
and riparian information to be collected and reflected in
the Site Plan."
CHANGE: Site plan content requires information from the
riparian assessment, but does not directly require
information from the Terrain Stability Field Assessment.
The text should read: "The new OSPR requires riparian
management areas and riparian classes to be included in
the Site Plan."
Term of Range Use Plans
The recorded presentation for Changes
to Planning says that the term of range use plans has
been extended to April 1, 2005.
CHANGE TO: The term of range use plans has been extended
to the later of the date specified in the plan or April
1, 2005. (This change also affects the first paragraph
on page 27 of Version 1.2 of the Primer).
|
|
Dec. 16/02
|
On page 14 of Version 1.2 of the Primer, under "Minor
Amendments to SPs," the text says there are three tests.
The Act has only two tests. Point #1 & #2 is one test
& bullet #3 is the second test. Note the "or"
at the end of 42.1 (a)(ii).
Operational plans -- minor changes not requiring approval
42.1 (1) Despite section 41, except in prescribed circumstances,
an approval is not required to amend a forest development
plan, a silviculture prescription or a site plan prepared
under a regulation made under section 217.1, if the holder
of the plan or prescription determines that
(a) the proposed amendment
(i) otherwise conforms to this Act, the regulations and
the standards, and
(ii) does not materially affect the likelihood of achieving
the objectives or the results specified in the plan or
prescription, or
(b) the proposed amendment meets prescribed requirements.
|
Harvesting
/ Practices Errata
Feb.
17/03
New!
|
In the "Changes in
Practices" presentation by Cindy Stern:
Maximum Time to Complete Reforestation
The recorded presentation says: "The maximum time
to complete rehabilitation of a site is two years
as measured from completion of harvest."
CHANGE TO: "The maximum time to complete reforestation
of a site is the number of years measured from commencement
of harvest as specified in the FDP"
Regeneration Date is the date by which the prescribed
stocking requirements must be met and then subsequently
maintained. It is specified in number of years for each
site series, as part of the stocking standards in the FDP.
The regeneration date is measured from the "commencement
date" which, for a site plan under FPC Act section
21.1 (1) to (5), is the date when timber harvesting, excluding
road and landing construction, begins on the area under
the plan.
For example, if a standards unit (SU) in a cutblock
under a site plan has an associated 3 year regeneration
delay in the FDP, and harvesting excluding road & landing
construction commences in February 2003, then the person
who is required to establish a free growing stand on an
area under a site plan has until the end of February 2006
to meet the regeneration date requirement for that SU.
|
|
Jan 15/03
|
In the "Changes in
Practices" presentation:
Variances to Applicable Performance Standards
The recorded presentation says that a district manager
may not grant a variance to applicable performance
standards contained in an FDP or silviculture prescription.
CHANGE TO: A district manager must not grant a variance
to applicable performance standards contained in an FDP
or silviculture prescription.
Variances to Requirements for Seed and Vegetative Material
The recorded presentation says that a district manager
may not grant a variance to a requirement for seed
and vegetative material.
CHANGE TO: Refer to the Dec.19/02 Errata regarding variances
for seed and vegetative material.
Rationale for Variances Included in Application
The recorded presentation says "Although not required
by regulation, the application for variance should
include a rationale so that the district manager can make
an informed decision."
CHANGE TO: "The application for variance must
include a rationale so that the district manager can make
an informed decision." THSPR Section 2(2)(d) specifically
requires a request for a variance to include a rationale.
|
|
Dec.19/02
|
The 'Changes in Practices'
recorded presentation states:
DM may not grant variance to:
- a
requirement for Seed and Vegetative Materials
This also affects the final bullet point on the slide titled
"Variances and Authorizations" in that presentation.
S. 2(4)(b) of the THSPR does preclude the DM from granting
variances to the use of seed registered and stored with
the ministry, and licensee record keeping requirements -
sections 38(2) (a), (c) and (d), respectively. This is also
described on p. 24 of the FPC Transition Primer.
DM variances are, however, still permitted for the use
of the best genetic quality seed (s.38 (2)(b)), use of pest
resistant seed sources (s. 38(3)), and seed transfer limits
(s. 38(4)).
The last bullet of the 'Changes in Practices' slide titled
"Variances and Authorizations" and the recorded
presentation should state:
DM must not grant a variance to:
- seed
registration, storage and record keeping requirements
|
Compliance
and Enforcement Errata
|
Jan.15/03
|
WLAP Involvement in C&E:
The recorded presentation on Compliance and Enforcement
says that the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection
(WLAP) will have no involvement in C&E in the new regime.
This is not the case: WLAP will have a key role in enforcing
the statutory and regulatory provisions in the FPC.
|
| |
|
Other
Errata
|
Jan.17/03
|
Correction to Page 6 of Version 1.2 of the Primer:
A public consultation process, facilitated in two parts,
one led by MLA Paul Visser and the other by Dr. George
Hoberg (Head of the Department of Forest Resources Management,
University of British Columbia), ran from May 1, 2002 until
June 30, 2002.
should read:
A public consultation process, facilitated in two parts,
one led by MLA Rod Visser and the other by Dr. George
Hoberg (Head of the Department of Forest Resources Management,
University of British Columbia), ran from May 1, 2002 until
June 30, 2002.
|
|
Dec.19/02
|
FPC Transition Primer, Version 1.2 (Appendix B) page 50
under 'Strategic Planning Regulation' states
" Part 2 Strategic Planning and Objectives
Sections 4(1), 5, 6(1), 7(1) Where the District Manager
once had responsibility the Minister of Forests now
has the responsibility for:
-
Establishing,
varying or canceling a landscape unit or objective for
a landscape unit and
-
Establishing,
varying or canceling of a sensitive area or objective
for a sensitive area."
Should read, "…once had responsibility, the Minister
of Sustainable Resource Management now has the responsibility
for: ...
These changes are in keeping with the provisions of Bill
22, April 10, 2002, which amended section 4 of the Forest
Practices Code of BC Act to transfer of responsibility for
landscape units and objectives under the Code to the Minister
of Sustainable Resource Management.
|
|
Dec.19/02
|
Case Study (Orientation
Session) Suggested Solution:
The suggested solution for 'Question F' of the case study
is incorrect.
F. What documentation needs to be supplied to C&E?
The suggested solution "Licensees are to submit a
checklist of risk factors with their Notice of Commencement,
Suspension and Completion of Harvest" is incorrect.
There currently is no requirement to submit a checklist
of risk factors.
|
This page
last revised:
February 26, 2003 1:20 PM
|
