Additional comments noted by respondents are summarized here to indicate general perspectives on timber supply related issues.
A number of respondents comment on the Kamloops Timber Supply Review process. A submission from BC Environment states the Kamloops process was one of the most forthright and balanced in the BC Environment sub-region. A forest industry submission describes the Kamloops Timber Supply Review as a conservative reflection of current management practices. A public submission expresses satisfaction with the Kamloops Timber Supply Review process.
Another submission criticizes the timber supply analysis as being difficult to understand and impossible to assess for accuracy. The submission maintains there are a number of uncertainties in the review and contends that, without a concise inventory, the review is based upon "pseudo-economic" factors.
Another submission states it is difficult for the general public to assess the information presented in the review. The public has no choice but to trust the figures.
One submission declares that, in determining a sustainable harvest level, deductions should be made to account for the effects of the Protected Areas Strategy and Forest Practices Code.
Two respondents recommend that a greater proportion of the existing allowable annual cut be allocated to value-added manufacturers.
Two submissions comment on the size of the Kamloops Timber Supply Area. One questions how it is possible to manage such a vast area effectively. The timber supply area should be divided into smaller units with separate allowable annual cuts established for each unit.
