The licensee analysis asserts that forestry employment is underestimated, due to the use of person-years. It states that the use of person-years assumes many forest sector jobs are part-time or seasonal and therefore provide lower annual wages. In fact, the higher wages paid by the forest sector more than offset the seasonality of these jobs. The submission recommends actual "jobs" as a more suitable unit for this analysis. Further, the use of 1993 dollars throughout the Socio-Economic Analysis underestimates the importance of the forest sector.
Another submission claims that employment figures in person-years are misleading.
The licensee analysis provides additional information on the timber supply area employment profile. Based on records at Ainsworth Lumber Co. Ltd., Lytton Lumber Ltd. and JS Jones Ltd., it states that a large portion of company employees are of a "younger age" and 27 per cent are of aboriginal ancestry.
The Lillooet Select Economic Development Committee suggests that the effect of a reduction in allowable annual cut on timber supply area employment is not fully recognized in the Socio-Economic Analysis. It also criticizes the assumption that a reduction in cut would have no effect on local Ministry of Forests employment. Rail transportation, hydroelectric generation, school districts, police, health services and many small businesses would also be impacted by a reduction in harvest levels.
The committee claims some of the opportunities to offset job loss considered in the analysis are not viable because:
• the future of Melvin Creek Ski Resort is uncertain
• tourism and outdoor recreation provide only seasonal employment
• unless more fibre can be secured, expansion of remanufacturing industries is unlikely
In contrast, other submissions criticize the relationship assumed in the Socio-Economic Analysis between a decrease in the allowable annual cut and job losses. These submissions claim that job losses will occur regardless of whether the allowable annual cut is reduced, due to technological change and the transport of timber outside of the district for processing.
Submissions from the Goldbridge area stress the importance of tourism and outdoor recreation to their economy. A number of submissions raise concerns about the impact of harvesting on tourism, and one suggests the Socio-Economic Analysis should have examined the effect of forestry activities on communities with tourism-based economies. Other submissions claim that although forest-related employment exists in the Goldbridge area, most jobs are filled by residents from outside the community.
