Employment impacts
Economic forecasting in this report was criticized because trees harvested were simplistically equated to jobs and a strong economy. A linear relationship between cubic metres harvested and employment was rejected in some submissions.
The analysis was also criticized because a lack of information on historical employment trends prevented:
• incorporation of the effects of technological change on employment
• tracking or projection of the overall economic base of the Bulkley Timber Supply Area
• adequate consideration of the economic contribution of non-forestry workers, and the extent to which their livelihood depends on a high quality environment
More information is needed, however, before employment projections can be made. Past employment trends in this area need to be given more attention to see if they can be tied to changes in the forest sector. That in turn will make more accurate forecasting possible.
One respondent pointed out the socio-economic analysis does not address probable job losses in the tourist industry if present harvest levels are maintained.
Community impacts
The technical critique maintains that the rules or assumptions inherent in the timber supply analysis mean British Columbians forgo the opportunity to maintain stable social and economic benefits from the forest in the short term in order to stabilize social and economic conditions in the distant future. A relative and certain cost is borne in the present, in return for a distant and uncertain benefit. The critique suggests shifting some costs to the future would create more time for orderly amortization of capital assets and for planning individual and community adjustments.
Non-timber values
A few individuals noted that the non-timber values in local forests could exceed timber values in the future. In a global context, the Bulkley Timber Supply Area is relatively undisturbed and will have increasing tourism value, particularly for adventure tourism. Timber harvesting conflicts with this industry as it compromises the aesthetics of untouched wilderness.
The Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks noted that the analysis accounts for volume of timber only, and that timber management focused on product quality and diversification would result in beneficial habitat spin-offs.
Environmental concerns
Many comments indicated concern for the maintenance of biodiversity given current timber supply projections. Of specific concern to the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks were:
• the effect on wildlife of road development and subsequent access
• the removal of old-growth forests in caribou ranges where the rate of forest maturation and lichen development is considered insufficient for caribou range
• the pressure on specific caribou populations as harvesting shifts to higher elevation forests
The Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and other submissions pointed out that approximately 10 per cent of the timber harvesting land base has been deferred from harvesting pending future land use decisions, resulting in the concentration of harvesting in undeferred areas. This was seen as a threat to maintaining biodiversity within the areas where harvesting is occurring.
Some noted the impact of deferred harvesting on timber supply is compounded because mature timber adjacent to previously harvested areas is unavailable for harvest until current green-up standards are achieved.
Some submissions suggested current practices, as assumed in the analysis, do not allow sufficient flexibility to improve harvesting and silviculture practices to meet forest and landscape level biodiversity objectives. It was pointed out that actual practices have become more stringent since the data for the analysis were compiled and the trend -- reflected in the Forest Practices Code and Land and Resource Management Planning guidelines -- is towards increasingly stringent requirements.
Another submission indicated the analysis limited its consideration for wildlife to big game species rather than to biodiversity as a whole.
Local sawmill capacity
Several respondents commented that local mills have been built to process unrealistic volumes of timber and that downsizing is inevitable; there were varying opinions on how this should take place. It was noted that sawmills have likely recovered their capital costs by now and are not owed anything by the community.
A respondent also questioned the ability of the mills to profitably process large volumes of marginal wood during economic downturns.
