Some individuals and local government emphasize that timber harvesting and silvicultural activity in the timber supply area should benefit local communities. It is mentioned that local mills sometimes have difficulty finding wood supply and that strategies are needed to support local manufacturing.
Industry submissions reflect skepticism about the ability of communities dependent on harvesting jobs to adjust to reductions in the allowable annual cut.
One submission criticizes the Socio-Economic Analysis for:
•4 overly optimistic estimates of potential non-timber harvesting activities
• estimating potential growth in tourism sector employment inconsistently with other recent reports
• estimating the effects of indirect and induced employment associated with harvesting levels using a multiplier with no supporting documentation
• implying the actual number of jobs lost in the timber supply area because of reduced harvest levels could be partially offset by drawing on alternate sources of wood. This idea is contradicted by other studies indicating timber supply from all sources will be scarce and therefore subject to intense competition.
One submission affirms that the intent of economic transition strategies is to offset short-term job losses associated with reduced harvest levels. This respondent questions the
ability of replacement jobs to provide an equivalent income to high paying forest industry jobs. Furthermore, a significant reduction in the harvest level could affect a large portion of the community and strain the ability of government to provide adequate social programs. One respondent questions the effectiveness of developing strategies to address job losses and encourages government to better outline means of allocating resources to address expected unemployment.
Non-timber values
Some submissions suggest benefits from non-timber values such as mushrooms, botanical forest products (greens, boughs, etc.), forest recreation and tourism have not been adequately accounted for in the Socio-Economic Analysis.
One industry submission suggests revenue generated from wildcrafts, specifically the harvest of pine mushrooms, was overstated.
Another industry submission suggests recent public land-use forums have resulted in significant accommodation of non-timber values. The respondent was encouraged by the agreement of a diverse group of participants -- government, industry and special interest. However, concern is expressed that demands for further protection of non-timber values would have an extreme impact on employment and the social fabric of communities. It is stated that further recognition of non-timber values requires careful consideration in light of the uncertainty of available biological information and the ability of local communities to adjust.
One respondent expresses concern because the relationship between forestry activity and the tourism/recreation sector is complex and requires more thorough study.
Another respondent indicates the Forest Service Socio-Economic analysis fails to address the impacts of current management practices and future options on non-timber resource values such as recreation, fish and wildlife.
First Nations
The Ktunaxa/ Kinbasket Tribal Council submission suggests consideration be given to the cumulative effects of developments within the Columbia River basin. This submission also suggests the Socio-Economic Analysis does not address the issue of First Nations employment and contracting opportunities. The submission recommends that development halt until assessments and 'traditional use studies' are complete. Any development without consent is perceived to be a potential infringement of aboriginal rights.
