Most of the respondents expressed strong concern about impacts on local communities if forestry employment declined significantly due to an allowable annual cut reduction. It was suggested that any reduction be taken first from the Forest Service Reserve, and not from the timber allocated to forest companies. One respondent suggested the timber allocated to the recently cancelled forest licence for Kootenay Valley Sawmills could also be used. Another respondent suggested that mills which had upgraded to maximize recovery and minimize waste should be the last to receive allowable annual cut reductions. The City of Cranbrook and the Town of Creston advocated an allowable annual cut reduction of no more than 10 per cent, with this reduction to be taken from the Forest Service Reserve.
A number of respondents expressed concern about the community impacts of excessive harvesting. Future timber supply reductions, degradation of visual quality, loss of biodiversity, and impacts on other values are seen as consequences if the new allowable annual cut is set too high. One respondent suggested the necessary reductions should be gradual but they should start immediately, that a significant Forest Service Reserve should remain to provide flexibility, and communities would benefit from moving to a more diverse economy. The City of Nelson advocated an allowable annual cut of 544,000 cubic metres per year, consistent with Scenario III in the Socio-Economic Assessment.
There is a wide range of opinion concerning the ability of communities within the timber supply area to adapt to a reduction in the allowable annual cut. Some pointed out Nelson's successful resolution of the local economic problems caused by a major mill closure in the past. Others were not optimistic about the ability of their communities to absorb additional change.
