In reaching my determination of an AAC for the Fraser TSA, I have considered all of the factors presented above and have reasoned as follows.
The current AAC for the Fraser TSA is 1 765 000 m3. As outlined in 7 (3) (b) above, the BCFS timber supply analysis indicates that this AAC could be maintained for 10 years only if followed by a drop of 21 percent in the next decade to avoid subsequent acute timber shortages. Such a drop would be accompanied by proportional reductions in socio-economic activity with increased risk of mill closure and is thus not a desirable option, given that viable alternatives exist.
The base case of the BCFS timber supply analysis provides a projected initial harvest level of 1 550 000 m3/yr, about 12 percent below the current AAC, declining progressively at about 10 percent per decade without disruptions to a steady long-term harvest level of 1 180 000 m3/yr. This forecast conforms with the principles discussed in 7 (3) (b) above, regarding the transition from old- to second-growth harvesting, and may be considered to be within an acceptable range of harvest forecasts for the Fraser TSA at this time, to the extent that my considerations in this determination have verified the current appropriateness of the assumptions used in the BCFS analysis.
In this respect, as discussed in detail in the preceding sections, my examination of all the factors required to be considered under Section 7 of the Forest Act has identified no specific issue or factor in this TSA at this time—with one possible exception discussed immediately below—that would require significant adjustment of the assumptions used in the base case analysis.
The one possible exception is the fact that District staff suspect the mature volumes in existing stands to have been overestimated in the inventory data used in the analysis (discussed in 7 (3) (a) (i) above). As noted there, the timber supply forecast is highly sensitive to variation in existing volumes, and if these volumes were indeed overestimated, the initial timber supply forecast indicated in the base case would be too high and the initial harvest level would need to be reduced.
Preliminary results from an ongoing inventory audit indicate that there is a definite risk that the BCFS analysis may have overestimated these volumes. The evidence for overestimation is presently inconclusive, but because of the high sensitivity of the harvest level to variations in existing volumes, and the potentially serious consequences to the timber harvesting industry in the Fraser TSA, more sample plots are being established and studied to confirm or clarify the preliminary results. Reliable results are expected to be obtained later this year.
At this time I cannot predict with any certainty the outcome of this additional work, and it would be inappropriate to impose any harvest reduction based on preliminary results. Nevertheless as stated earlier, there is an urgent need to update our knowledge of timber supply province-wide, and all determinations will involve some degree of uncertainty with respect to some of the data. For this present determination I have therefore decided to rely on the inventory assumptions incorporated in the BCFS timber supply analysis for the Fraser TSA as the best information available at this time with respect to existing volumes, and to accept the initial harvest forecast in the BCFS analysis based on those volumes. However, if reliable results are obtained which indicate that the volumes were in fact overestimated to a degree that jeopardizes the validity of the short-term harvest level indicated in the base case, I will request an immediate review of the timber supply analysis, and if I consider it appropriate at that time, I will redetermine the AAC at a level consistent with the true mature wood volumes.
Aside from the uncertainty with respect to existing mature volumes, which was not suspected as an issue at the time of analysis, the reliability of the base case forecast is validated by the FTWG timber supply analysis. The FTWG analysis confirmed all major findings of the BCFS analysis, including the sensitivities, except for the identification by the FTWG analysis of a slightly higher long-term harvest level and an opportunity in the short term for commercial thinning. I have considered both of these factors above (under 7 (3) (a) (i) regenerated stand volumes and 7 (3) (a) (iii) "Non-clear-cut harvesting practices") and I am satisfied that they do not indicate any disagreement between the two analyses with respect to short-term harvest levels.
From my considerations of all of the foregoing, at this time I find no reason to reject the initial timber supply forecast indicated in the BCFS timber supply analysis base case as an acceptable harvest level to be determined under Section 7 for this TSA—with the following significant caution.
As discussed in 7 (3) (a) (vi) above, I am concerned by the difficulty of determining an appropriate AAC for the Fraser TSA while harvesting is being avoided in certain areas in the TSA due to the "informal" log-around strategy which does not have statutory or legal standing but depends solely on co-operation with licensees. As noted, by avoiding new harvesting in areas for which land-use decisions are pending, this strategy reduces the timber supply available to meet licence requirements and forces the concentration of potentially unacceptably high harvesting levels in the remaining areas of the TSA.
Due in large part to the log-around strategy, the SBFEP is already unable to find sufficient wood and one major licensee is projected to have difficulty in this respect in 1995-96. The log-around situation is also compounded by the historical focus of timber harvesting in the southern part of the TSA, such that very high levels of timber harvesting are now about to be concentrated on the Nahatlatch timber supply block area in the north, an area in which concern has been expressed for uses by aboriginal people.
Thus there is an urgent need to address the inconsistency between the land base which contributes to the AAC for the TSA and the land base from which the harvest is expected to be obtained.
Without further consideration it would appear that this inconsistency could be addressed, and the potential overharvesting of particular areas in the TSA avoided, if I as Chief Forester could determine an AAC for the TSA based on the contribution of the productive forest on only those lands which are unaffected by land-use questions. Such an AAC would assume the removal of that contribution to the productive forest land which is made by all or a part of the areas for which land-use decisions are pending and which are currently being avoided under the informal log-around strategy.
However, my interpretation of Section 7 of the Forest Act, read in conjunction with Section 53 and Part 15 of the Act, is that Section 7 does not provide the Chief Forester with the authority to consider any AAC implications of a reduction in the contributing land base for a TSA resulting from harvest deferrals in informal log-around areas. Such consideration would be premised on an assumed change in the overall land base of the TSA, which may only be properly effected under the Forest Act by the Minister of Forests under Section 53, or by Cabinet under Part 15.
Thus, the determination of an AAC based on a reduced land base would pre-empt a decision which properly belongs to the Minister or to Cabinet. Moreover, it would not even guarantee the interim protection of the areas in question, since a reduction of the AAC would not of itself define or limit the specific areas within the TSA in which licensees retain legal rights to harvest.
The determination of an AAC based on a reduced land base is thus not an acceptable option; in my opinion, the Forest Act requires me as Chief Forester to determine an AAC for the Fraser TSA that is based on consideration of the entire productive land base, including the log-around areas. An AAC based on a reduced land base could be determined by the Chief Forester only after the implementation of a formal land-use decision.
Therefore, since I am able to find no statutory support for determining an AAC for this TSA which reflects the limited area on which harvesting is expected to occur if the log-around strategy continues, in the interest of good forest management I have no alternative but to recommend that early consideration be given to the identification of appropriate parts of the Fraser TSA as designated areas under Part 15 of the Forest Act, in order that a temporary AAC reduction may be effected.
Such a reduction would be separate from this present AAC determination, and would be followed eventually by a further redetermination under Section 7 to reflect the true overall land base of the TSA, once these have been established. To this end I direct District staff to prepare the detailed information necessary to quantify the impacts on timber supply arising from planning deferrals associated with spotted owl management and PAS study areas.
Action by Cabinet under Part 15 will allow me as Chief Forester to reduce the AAC expediently to a level that is achievable without requiring District staff to approve cutting permits in areas under question or in possible contravention of integrated management objectives. This will also permit the subsequent restoration of the contribution to the AAC made by those lands not protected by the ensuing land-use decision.
To assist in the resolution of the pressing land-use questions in the Fraser TSA, I recommend early commencement of a Land and Resource Management Plan for the area, recognizing that this must be undertaken within the context of the provincial land-use planning priorities and objectives.
In summary, from the foregoing reasoning and with the cautions expressed, it is my determination that the assumptions incorporated in the BCFS timber supply analysis are reliable, that the analysis takes into account forest management practices as currently implemented, and that there are no other factors influencing the validity of the initial harvest level projected in the base case forecast. It is therefore my determination that this initial harvest level represents a suitable harvest level for the Fraser TSA at this time.
Finally, as noted above in 7 (3) (a) (i), the AAC determined for the Fraser TSA at this time must include a deciduous component. This will provide for the economic use of deciduous stands, facilitate their ongoing conversion to good-site Douglas-fir stands, and account for the obligation to the Crown in the existing deciduous licence. The former AAC included an allowance of 65 000 m3/yr of deciduous-leading forest stands. However, the base case forecast did not depend on the harvesting of this full annual amount to achieve the requisite conversion to good-site fir, and harvesting at this level was not achieved on the ground. I have therefore reduced the deciduous-leading component of the AAC by approximately 12 percent to 57 000 m3 in conformity with the reduction in the total AAC.
