The Discussion Paper states that the results of decisions from the Cariboo-Chilcotin Land Use Plan and from implementation of the Forest Practices Code are not included in this Timber Supply Review. However, both the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and the Quesnel River Watershed Alliance say it is imperative these factors be considered in the current determination of the allowable annual cut. They say this would protect both future timber supply and other resources from being compromised by harvesting decisions made during the next five years. This approach would also provide some allowance for the effects of climate change and soil degradation.
An individual submission expresses concern about a clash that may arise through implementation of the Land Use Plan. This clash is described as occurring between advocates for a sub-regional, "bottom-up," landscape planning approach and those who support a "top-down" approach to managing entire timber supply areas.
The Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks states they were not brought into the Timber Supply Review process and that decisions may have been made in the analyses that do not reflect this agency’s resource management objectives.
An individual submission says the Timber Supply Review process was inadequate and suggests notifying affected property-owners (especially non-residents) through a mailing rather than just through newspaper advertising.
