This report profiles the Invermere Timber Supply Area (TSA) and discusses the potential socio-economic and environmental implications associated with three harvest scenarios chosen to present a range of possible impacts.
The Invermere TSA is located in the south-east corner of B.C. The TSA covers just over one million hectares and is administered by the Invermere Forest District office located in Invermere.
The TSA's main physical features include the southern portion of the Rocky Mountain Trench, the Continental Ranges of the Rocky Mountains, and the eastern Purcell Mountains portion of the Columbia Mountains.
The area has some of the highest wildlife values in North America, supported by internationally significant wildlife winter range and wetlands.
Environmental concerns include issues regarding ungulate winter range, caribou, riparian habitats, watershed protection and fish habitat, connectivity, access development, and forage protection issues.
The 1991 Invermere TSA population was 7185, this represents a 9.7 percent increase since 1981. The area is experiencing rapid growth, with migrants attracted by the natural attributes and high quality of life the area has to offer.
Due to in-migration and an increase in the labour force participation rate, the size of the labour force has been increasing. Between 1981 and 1991, both the TSA unemployment rate and average real personal income level have been below the provincial average.
The Invermere TSA is located within the traditional territory of the Ktunaxa Kinbasket Tribal Council, which represents five bands. The Columbia Lake and Shuswap bands have communities within the TSA.
First Nation concerns revolve around environmental, socio-economic, heritage and treaty negotiation-related issues.
The Invermere TSA has a growing, diversified economy, with tourism, forestry, the public sector, construction, mining, and agriculture serving as the primary generators of employment.
Forestry, the public sector and tourism also provide the majority of employment income in the TSA.
Non-employment sources of income such as pensions, unemployment insurance, investments and social assistance, also make significant contributions to the economy.
Under current management practices, the long-term timber harvesting land base is 215 985 hectares. Approximately 53 percent of this area has special resource management emphases to account for wildlife habitat, water conservation, and aesthetics. The remaining area is managed for integrated resource management.
The Invermere TSA AAC of 650 564 cubic metres supports a total of 572 direct PY and generates $17.7 million in annual direct employment income. Indirect and induced employment is estimated to contribute 859 PY and $21.0 million in employment income annually.
Harvesting and processing timber in the Invermere TSA is estimated to generate approximately $19.3 million in annual provincial government revenue. These estimates include the increased stumpage revenues generated to fund the Forest Renewal Plan.
Three harvest scenarios, chosen to illustrate a range of possible socio-economic impacts were analyzed in this report. These scenarios are not AAC recommendations, but are meant to provide a focus for discussion of timber supply issues. Further, all three scenarios involve a decline from the current AAC to the same long-term harvest level (360 000 cubic metres). The only difference between the scenarios is the timing of the decline to the long-term level.
Scenario One - Scenario One is the base harvest forecast from the Invermere TSA Timber Supply Analysis report. This harvest forecast begins with an immediate 12.7 percent or 75 864 cubic metre drop in harvest to 568 000 cubic metres per year. To avoid major harvest shortfalls, the harvest forecast declines from this reduced initial harvest level by about 12 percent per decade over the next five decades to a low of 315 000 cubic metres per year. In approximately 90-100 years, the harvest level increases to the long-term harvest level of 360 000 cubic metres per year.
Scenario Two - Scenario Two maintains the current harvest level for one decade before dropping at a rate of 20 percent per decade to a low of 315 000 cubic metres per year after four decades. In approximately 90-100 years, this harvest level also increases to the long-term harvest level of 360 000 cubic metres per year.
Scenario Three - The harvest level in Scenario Three drops immediately by 40 percent to the highest non-declining rate achievable over the next 12 decades (389 000 cubic metres per year). After 120 years, the harvest then drops to the long run harvest level rate of 360 000 cubic metres per year.
TSA and Provincial Socio-Economic and Environmental
Impacts
Community Implications
Population
Employment
Income
Forest worker/family
First Nations Implications
Heritage values
Economic development
Table E-2 Summary of Invermere Provincial Impacts.
Environmental Implications
Old-age forest
Wildlife
Over the first decade, total TSA employment impacts would range between zero for Scenario Two, to 222 PY for Scenario Three. Under Scenario One 70 PY are estimated lost. This total represents 1.8 percent of the total 1991 Invermere TSA labour force.
Over the first decade, total provincial employment impacts would range between zero for Scenario Two, to 575 PY for Scenario Three. Under Scenario One 182 PY are forecast lost.
Under Scenario One, TSA employment income would decline by $2.0 million annually. Scenario Three would lead to the loss of $6.4 million. As with employment, impacts would be postponed for a decade under Scenario Two.
Under Scenario One, annual provincial employment income would drop by $4.9 million. An estimated $15.5 million would be foregone under Scenario Three.
First decade provincial government revenue impacts would range between zero for Scenario Two to a loss of $7.8 million under Scenario Three. Scenario One would lead to a $2.5 million drop in annual revenue.
Under Scenario Two, after three decades, decreases in harvest levels and associated impacts would surpass those incurred under Scenario One. After four decades, the total decrease in harvest and associated impacts would surpass those incurred under Scenario Three.
As all scenarios share the same long-term harvest level, provincial impacts associated with this reduction will be the same: 256 PY direct and 384 PY indirect and induced employment and $7.9 million direct and $9.4 million indirect and induced annual income lost. An estimated $8.5 million in annual government revenue would also be foregone with a movement to the long-term level.
The analysis does not consider various income support and income replacement measures which could alleviate some of the induced employment and income impacts.
The analysis assumes processing employment impacts are proportional to changes in the harvest level. Processing impacts are more likely to occur in a step-wise manner where, at some quantity of fibre supply (a threshold), the number of shifts may be reduced or as a worst case, the mill may shut down.
As mills in the area rely on significant amounts of extra-TSA fibre, actual impacts would depend on changes in these other sources of fibre.
The short-term economic impacts of harvest level changes on other basic sectors, such as tourism, mining, and agriculture would be relatively minor. In general, these industries, along with outdoor recreation are more sensitive to location of harvesting and specific management practices.
Community implications relate to the level and timing of job losses.
Factors such as the degree of diversification, the growth in other basic sectors of the economy, the growth in population, the educational and training support infrastructure and presence of economic development organizations, suggests that aggregate employment and population levels could be maintained in the face of Scenario One harvest reductions. Aggregate income, the third measure of successful community adjustment, would however likely fall.
Scenario Three harvest reductions would have more serious implications for communities in the TSA, with a higher probability of threshold effects occurring. Smaller, marginally economic mills in the TSA would be particularly sensitive to any harvest reductions.
The potential impacts of harvest reductions would likely be higher in communities with greater economic dependence on the forest sector. Impacts of employment losses on communities will depend on alternative economic strategies developed.
The main difference between scenarios from an environmental perspective results from the timing of harvest reductions. Harvesting of older age forest would proceed most rapidly under Scenario Two, followed by Scenario One and then Scenario Three.
The three harvest scenarios would ultimately result in a 45 percent drop in harvest levels. Scenario Three may be the most compatible with environmental values.
First Nations people are concerned about the effect of timber harvesting on cultural, medicinal and food values. Reduced harvest levels, such as those proposed under Scenarios One and Three, are more consistent with these values.
First Nations people recognize the economic opportunities associated with timber harvesting. The higher initial harvest level under Scenario One, relative to the other scenarios, would be more consistent with the economic development objectives of the Ktunaxa and Kinbasket people.
Scenarios One, Two, and Three project a reduction in harvest levels from the current AAC of 650 564 cubic metres to a long-term harvest level of 360 000, a 45 percent decrease. This study estimates the economic, social and environmental implications associated with these scenarios. The harvest reductions illustrated by each of the scenarios would involve significant employment and employment income impacts. However, as all scenarios share the same long-term harvest level, the main difference between them is the distribution of the impacts over time.
The findings of this report are based only on changes
in the TSA harvest level and assume no change in variables such
as land base, management, harvesting and processing technology,
and timber and product prices. A change in any of these factors
would require a re-examination of the impacts.