Jump to content

Taryn Skalbania

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Gallery

Blogs

Events

Journalism: The over-exploitation of BC forests

Library: Destruction of wildlife habitat and loss of biodiversity

Journalism: Loss of forest-related employment

Journalism: The need to expedite final treaties with First Nations

Journalism: Loss of primary forest

Journalism: Loss of carbon sequestration capacity

Other notable forest-related writing and reports

Noteworthy writing and reports from the forest-industrial complex

Forest News

Library: The over-exploitation of BC forests

Library: Loss of primary forest

Library: Loss of the hydrological functions of forests

Make conservation of the hydrological function of forests a higher priority than timber extraction

Library: Loss of forest-related employment

Library: The need to expedite final treaties with First Nations

Transition from clearcut logging to selection logging

Library: Increase in forest fire hazard

Journalism: End public subsidization of BC's forest industry

Library: End public subsidization of BC's forest industry

Library: The need to reform BC forest legislation

Journalism: The need to reform BC forest legislation

Library: Creating a new vision for BC forests

Forest industry public subsidy calculator

Manufacturing and processing facilities

Forest Trends

Investigations

Community Forest Mapping Projects

Area-based calculations of carbon released from clearcut logging

Journalism: The increase in forest carbon emissions

Library: Increase in forest carbon emissions

To protect biodiversity, transition away from clearcut logging

Peachland Watershed Protection Alliance

Library: Loss of future employment resulting from exporting raw logs

Mapping old forest on Vancouver Island

Mapping old forest in Omineca Natural Resource Region

Mapping old forest in Skeena Natural Resource Region

Mapping old forest in Northeastern Natural Resource Region

Mapping old forest in Cariboo Natural Resource Region

Mapping old forest in South Coast Natural Resource Region

Mapping old forest in Thompson-Okanagan Natural Resource Region

Mapping old forest in Kootenay-Boundary Natural Resource Region

Forest Conservation Organizations

Mapping old forest on Haida Gwaii

Mapping old forest on the central coast

Library: Ecologically damaging practices

Journalism: Ecologically damaging practices

Critical Issues

Analysis

Comment

Listed species: Cascades Natural Resource District

Listed species: 100 Mile House Natural Resource District

Listed species: Campbell River Natural Resource District

Listed species: Cariboo-Chilcotin Natural Resource District

Listed species: Chilliwack River Natural Resource District

Listed species: Fort Nelson Natural Resource District

Listed species: Haida Gwaii Natural Resource District

Listed species: Mackenzie Natural Resource District

Listed species: Nadina Natural Resource District

Listed species: North Island Natural Resource District

Listed species: Peace Natural Resource District

Listed species: Prince George Natural Resource District

Listed species: Quesnel Natural Resource District

Listed species: Rocky Mountain Natural Resource District

Listed species: Sea-to-Sky Natural Resource District

Listed species: Selkirk Natural Resource District

Listed species: Skeena Natural Resource District

Listed species: South Island Natural Resource District

Listed species: Stuart-Nechako Natural Resource District

Listed species: Sunshine Coast Natural Resource District

Listed species: Thompson Rivers Natural Resource District

Listed species: Coast Mountains Natural Resource District

Action Group: Divestment from forest-removal companies

Fact-checking mindustry myths

First Nations Agreements

Monitor: BC Timber Sales Auctions

BC Timber Sales auction of old-growth forests on Vancouver Island

Monitoring of forest fires in clearcuts and plantations: 2021

Library: End public subsidization of forest industry

Examples of engaging the mindustry:

Portal: The over-exploitation of BC forests

Portal: The need to reform BC forest legislation

Portal: The need to expedite treaties with First Nations

Portal: The need to get more organized, informed and inspired for change

Portal: Develop a new relationship with forests

Portal: Destruction of wildlife habitat and loss of biodiversity

Portal: Loss of the hydrological functions of forests

Portal: Increase in forest fire hazard

Portal: Loss of carbon sequestration capacity

Portal: Increase in forest carbon emissions

Portal: Ecologically damaging forestry practices

Portal: Loss of forest-related employment

Portal: Loss of future employment resulting from raw log exports

Portal: Costs of floods, fires and clearcutting of watersheds

Portal: The economic impact on communities of boom and bust cycles

Portal: Loss of economic development by other forest-based sectors

Portal: The true cost of subsidies provided to the logging industry

Help

Loss of trust in institutions

Portal: The instability of communities dependent on forest extraction

Portal: The psychological unease caused by forest destruction

Portal: Loss of trust in institutions caused by over-exploitation of BC forests

Portal: Social division caused by over-exploitation of BC forests

Journalism: The instability of communities dependent on forest extraction

Journalism: Psychological unease caused by forest destruction

Journalism: Loss in trust of institutions as a result of over-exploitation of BC forests

Journalism: Social division caused by over-exploitation of BC forests

Library: The instability of communities dependent on forest extraction

Library: Psychological unease caused by forest destruction

Library: Loss of trust in institutions as a result of over-exploitation of BC forests

Library: Social division caused by over-exploitation of BC forests

Resources: Psychological unease caused by forest destruction

Resources: The economic impact on communities of boom-and-bust cycles

Resources: Loss of economic development potential in other forest-based sectors

Journalism: Cost of floods, fires and clearcutting of community watersheds

Journalism: The economic impact on communities of boom-and-bust cycles

Journalism: Loss of economic development potential in other forest-based sectors

Library: Cost of floods, fires and clearcutting of community watersheds

Library: The economic impact on communities of boom-and-bust cycles

Library: Loss of economic development potential in other forest-based sectors

Portal: Permanent loss of forests to logging roads

Portal: The economic costs of converting forests into sawdust and wood chips

Journalism: Permanent loss of forests to logging roads

Library: Permanent loss of forests to logging roads

Journalism: The economic costs of converting forests into sawdust and wood chips

Library: The economic costs of converting forests into sawdust and wood chips

Resources: The economic costs of converting forests into sawdust and wood chips

Resources: Ecologically damaging forestry practices

Resources: Conversion of forests to permanent logging roads

Library: Getting organized

Journalism: Getting organized

Forest politics

Forest Stewards

Portal: Plantation failure

Library: Plantation failure

Journalism: Plantation failure

Library: Loss of carbon sequestration capacity

Portal: Soil loss and damage

Journalism: Soil loss and damage

Library: Soil loss and damage

Resources: Soil loss and damage

Journalism: Loss of employment resulting from export of raw logs

Journalism: Destruction of wildlife habitat and loss of biodiversity

Journalism: Loss of the hydrological functions of forests

Journalism: Increase in forest fire hazard

Action Group: Sunlighting professional reliance

Making the case for much greater conservation of BC forests

Science Alliance for Forestry Transformation

Bearing witness:

Economic State of the BC Forest Sector

Big tree mapping and monitoring

Reported Elsewhere

Protect more

Start a forest conservation project

Get involved

Article reference pages

Physical impacts created by logging industry

Nature Directed Stewardship at Glade and Laird watersheds

References for: How did 22 TFLs in BC evade legal old-growth management areas?

References for: BC's triangle of fire: More than just climate change

References for: Teal Cedar goes after Fairy Creek leaders

References for: Is the draft framework on biodiversity and ecosystem health something new? Or just more talk and log?

IWTF events, articles and videos

Store

Downloads

Everything posted by Taryn Skalbania

  1. Taryn Skalbania
    Dr. Alila spoke in April 2024 to the Future of Our Forests conference in Kelowna. Dr. Alila graduated from the University of Ottawa with a Bachelor degree in civil engineering in 1985, a Master degree in water resources engineering in 1987, and a Doctorate in engineering hydrology in 1994. Dr. Alila teaches and conducts research on climate and land use change effects on water resources. Dr. Alila’s work over the last 20 years on forests effects on floods challenged century-old conventional hydrologic wisdom about how forests affect large floods. His work on this topic has been the subject of much peer reviewed discussion among academics in the field and generated press releases by the American Geophysical Union. Dr. Alila served as an expert witness in three court cases: Randy Saugstad vs. Tolko Industries Ltd. (logging effects on hydrology, 2015); Waterway Houseboats Ltd vs British Columbia (flood hydrology unrelated to logging, 2018); and Ray Chipeniuk and Sonia Sawchuk vs BCTS & Triantha (logging effects on hydrology, 2022). Professor Alila’s research confirms the negative impact clearcutting has on forested watersheds and the long-overdue need for forest-related legislation to catch up with science. Dr. Alila includes a dire warning to governments who ignore the call for improved forest management practices. He says they are risking taxpayers’ money, which will be needed to pay for costly lawsuits which he says will become inevitable as the improving science continues to make the case. “Time is running out on us,” Alila said. He adds that the rest of the world—Europe and Asia in general, and China in particular—has long recognized how clearcutting in upstream watersheds exacerbates both the frequency and intensity of flooding. Here in western Canada and the US, that scientific understanding has not been applied. “Here, we’re logging like there’s no tomorrow,” he says.
  2. Taryn Skalbania
    Presentations, conversations, panel Q&A, call to action! Saturday April 13, 1-5:30 at UBC Okanagan, Arts and Science Building, ASC 140 Theatre.
  3. Taryn Skalbania
    The Interior Watershed Task Force is a coalition of more than twenty NGOs, Community Organizations, and Professionals that was initiated in 2023. The IWTF advocates for the legal protection and preservation of water, primary and natural forests, wildlife and critical habitats in the BC interior. We are based in the Okanagan region of BC and respectfully live and work on ancestral territories of several First Nations. View our articles and videos
  4. Taryn Skalbania
    “We’re undervaluing it so much that it’s not creating that incentive to protect it,” says local grad student From PIQUE News Magazine, by Megan Lalonde TREES ARE POWERFUL PLAYERS in the fight against climate change, serving as “carbon sinks” that pull greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions out of the atmosphere and improve air quality—but with lumber prices on the rise in recent years, that doesn’t mean they’re priceless. In terms of dollars, just how valuable is Whistler’s temperate rainforest standing? That’s one question Whistler-based graduate student Jared Areshenkoff sought to answer through his recent master’s research for Royal Roads University. As part of his research, Areshenkoff evaluated how much carbon the Resort Municipality of Whistler's (RMOW) trees can effectively store, based on the pollutant’s current and future market price. His research focused on above-ground biomass—so branches, stems, foliage and bark—located within the resort’s boundaries. “Nearly everything that is considered in today’s world is typically viewed from an economic lens, including the steps needed for climate change mitigation. I wanted to use that same argument in order to put a value on trees within the RMOW that doesn’t include lumber value,” he explained in an email. “Essentially, what this research is about is providing another argument for protection,” he added in a follow-up conversation. As Areshenkoff discovered, Whistler’s trees are significantly undervalued. Read more...
  5. Taryn Skalbania
    James, you must add investigative journalist to your credentials. Had this information been released a few months ago, it could have resulted in the CF's dismissal from Govt. Now we can say good riddance to her. Now that she is off to Drax, we fully understand what we are dealing with—a company that will hire "professionals" that happily abuse the system and easily withhold info that could benefit public good. If this last paragraph of James's piece IS true, is it not enough info to lodge a complaint with the ABCFP? Looks to me like there's plenty of data to back up claims or concern and launch an investigation. "There is little doubt that in the writing and re-writing of this report the power of a critical institution—the Chief Forester’s Office—was intentionally abused. The public interest was undermined. The report was designed to allow a key practice of modern forestry to continue: The maximization of coniferous timber supply by eliminating deciduous species. The risks that glyphosate spraying and conifer-dominated monocrop plantations pose to the future resilience of the landscape, the timber supply, and to public health and safety don’t—evidently—measure up to what’s most important to the current Chief Forester’s Office: the health of forestry company profits." If the CF is alleged to have broken this following ABCFP condition alone, it is grounds for a complaint: ''undermines the principle of holding paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public, including the protection of the environment and the promotion of health and safety in the workplace in the manner that reflects the stewardship of a given profession by each regulatory body'' ABCFP also says any other RPFs must report her if they believe she harmed he environment by dumbing down the study. "ABCFP registrants also have a duty to report any instance where the continued practice of professional forestry by another registrant may pose a risk of significant harm to the environment or to the health and safety of the public." I have read that many complaints against RPFs get thrown out; can someone comment? Do you believe filing a complaint against the CF is do-able, a possibility? By law the ABCFP MUST investigate every complaint, whether from a group, another RPF or an individual. Wouldn't it be something if the ABCFP opened up their emails Monday April 25th morning and had 150+ separate complaints on CF Nichols during her last week in the TOP RPF position in the province? She leaves government April 30th. Wonder if her new post at DRAX requires RPF certifications? What if they are suspended for the investigations, hmmm! While we are at it, we may as well mention her henchman, project lead Shawn Hedges, former Director of Sustainability and Forestry in the Chief Forester’s Office for his the behind-the-scenes direction being a little less objective, in a briefing note to Forests’ Minister Doug Donaldson. Is he not complicit? Should he be allowed to stay with BCTS? I suppose the greatest fear is the magnitude of what we are facing. If James has uncovered so much deceit in just one small report by so many levels of government and industry, what ELSE is going on around us today and for the past 50 years? We can trust no one, nor anything government shares as research or data. Makes you wonder how much of the Gorley and Merkle report was erased for the public GOOD before the public saw it? Looking forward to more damming evidence in part 2 James.
  6. Taryn Skalbania
    James, you must add investigative journalist to your credentials. Had this information been released a few months ago, it could have resulted in the CF's dismissal from Govt. Now we can say good riddance to her. Now that she is off to Drax, we fully understand what we are dealing with—a company that will hire "professionals" that happily abuse the system and easily withhold info that could benefit public good. If this last paragraph of James's piece IS true, is it not enough info to lodge a complaint with the ABCFP? Looks to me like there's plenty of data to back up claims or concern and launch an investigation. "There is little doubt that in the writing and re-writing of this report the power of a critical institution—the Chief Forester’s Office—was intentionally abused. The public interest was undermined. The report was designed to allow a key practice of modern forestry to continue: The maximization of coniferous timber supply by eliminating deciduous species. The risks that glyphosate spraying and conifer-dominated monocrop plantations pose to the future resilience of the landscape, the timber supply, and to public health and safety don’t—evidently—measure up to what’s most important to the current Chief Forester’s Office: the health of forestry company profits." If the CF is alleged to have broken this following ABCFP condition alone, it is grounds for a complaint: ''undermines the principle of holding paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public, including the protection of the environment and the promotion of health and safety in the workplace in the manner that reflects the stewardship of a given profession by each regulatory body'' ABCFP also says any other RPFs must report her if they believe she harmed he environment by dumbing down the study. "ABCFP registrants also have a duty to report any instance where the continued practice of professional forestry by another registrant may pose a risk of significant harm to the environment or to the health and safety of the public." I have read that many complaints against RPFs get thrown out; can someone comment? Do you believe filing a complaint against the CF is do-able, a possibility? By law the ABCFP MUST investigate every complaint, whether from a group, another RPF or an individual. Wouldn't it be something if the ABCFP opened up their emails Monday April 25th morning and had 150+ separate complaints on CF Nichols during her last week in the TOP RPF position in the province? She leaves government April 30th. Wonder if her new post at DRAX requires RPF certifications? What if they are suspended for the investigations, hmmm! While we are at it, we may as well mention her henchman, project lead Shawn Hedges, former Director of Sustainability and Forestry in the Chief Forester’s Office for his the behind-the-scenes direction being a little less objective, in a briefing note to Forests’ Minister Doug Donaldson. Is he not complicit? Should he be allowed to stay with BCTS? I suppose the greatest fear is the magnitude of what we are facing. If James has uncovered so much deceit in just one small report by so many levels of government and industry, what ELSE is going on around us today and for the past 50 years? We can trust no one, nor anything government shares as research or data. Makes you wonder how much of the Gorley and Merkle report was erased for the public GOOD before the public saw it? Looking forward to more damming evidence in part 2 James.
  7. Taryn Skalbania
    This guy makes forestry facts and figures fun, while clearing up industry and government deception, another NERDY ABOUR NATURE brief video . A few months back, the BC Government announced new data revealing that there are only 11.1 million hectares of oldgrowth forest remaining in BC, which is a tough figure to visualize and kind of sounds like a lot, right?! Yet when we break down the numbers of the type, size and quality of these varying forest ecosystems, we can easily see that it’s actually not that much compared to the rest of the forestland across the province…so I thought I’d clear it all up here! First off, the term ‘old growth’ here is defined by industry standards of 250yrs old on the coast and 140 yrs old in the interior, so it’s not exclusively primary forest that has never been logged. There are also varying types of old growth forest ranging from high-productivity to low-productivity forest types - LPOG tends to be short, scraggly old trees without a lot of market value or demand for being logged, whereas HPOG is the tall, rich, biodiverse forests made famous here in BC with quality wood that is still being logged right now. New docs from the government have tried to simplify these definitions into not at risk forest (LPOG) and at risk forest (HPOG). Of the remaining 11.1mh of oldgrowth left, only 3.5mh are currently protected, leaving 7.6mh unprotected. 3.6mh of that is considered to be not at risk forest, leaving 5mh of at risk forest, or just over 8% of all the forests in BC. Current deferrals only look at POTENTIALLY sparing 2.6mh of those 5mh for two years while the remaining 2.4mh continue to be logged. Of the highest productivity forest left in BC, much of which still remains unprotected, there is only 400,000 hectares left, or .8% of all the forestland in BC. For perspective, the Canadian government has committed to preserving 30% of biodiversity by 2030 as part of climate action agreements, yet even at this point in time we only have 8% of our healthiest forests remaining, which continue to be cut down as you read this. Many industry-backed organizations have jumped on this 11.1mh figure in an effort to mislead and confuse you in various posts and ad campaigns, but it’s important to remember that this figure is only one cherry picked piece of data, and when we look at the reality of the situation we’re in, we see a different picture than the one they’re trying to paint. So next time you see or hear of someone spouting this nonsense, feel free to drop the real numbers on them, because the sooner we can all acknowledge the reality of the state we’re in, then the more we’ll all be able to act to create a better future for us all, here in the real world. *sources can be found via my website
  8. Taryn Skalbania
    I find former Premier Harcourt's interview statements bewildering, does NDP alliance with industry take precedence over fact? He clearly has not been into the Peachland watershed recently? I used to hold him up as a ''good guy'' and told him as much in person at the UVIC Forest Summit he, Bob Peart and John Innes organized. Has Harcourt become an apologist for industry too! Shame! I think I will send him some photos of recent clear-cuts. Very strange comments. We only CLEARCUT , I think selection logging counts for less that 10% of trees harvested. Can someone confirm that %? While Harcourt's claim that clear cutting died in the 90s is brutal, what is most disturbing is the silence of John Innes, he sat by as the former Dean of the Faculty of Forestry and stayed silent, the guy who taught clear cut loggers their art for 11 years (how to cut the most trees, in the shortest time using the least labour to get to the closest mill for the cheapest price and make the greatest profit) sat silent. Bewildering Its all in the language: Wildfire mitigation Clear cuts with retention Old Growth Management Areas Wildlife Tree Retention Areas Partial cuts, Small block harvesting A clear cut is a clear cut is a clear cut... even if government reps. and forestry publicists insist on using use industry jargon, fancy terms and other misleading lingo. It is all clear-cut logging in disguise. View 7 minutes of video from Will Koop, BC Tap Water Alliance, documenting the clear cuts as they hammer our watershed year after year from 1984 until present day.
  9. Taryn Skalbania
    BCTS SAYS IT IS SAFER TO CLEAR CUT LOG IN A HIGH RISK AREA THAN LEAVE PROFITS ON THE TABLE! https://www.saobserver.net/news/province-likely-to-proceed-with-salvage-logging-in-high-geohazard-risk-areas-near-sicamous/ BCTS planning forester, Chomitz goes on to explain how the proposed salvage operation will “make the Wiseman and Sicamous Creek watershed more resilient.” This includes the deactivating and rehabilitation of historic trails and roads in the vicinity and the replanting of trees as quickly as possible. “The fire has created an abundance of trees that are susceptible to the Douglas Fir bark beetle, which is likely to cause an increase in the beetle population in the area,” said Chomitz, noting this will add to the hydrologic issues in the watershed. “I acknowledge the importance of protecting the safety of those in your community,” said Chomitz, adding BCTS values input from the CSRD to ensure management of the watersheds “is done with the best interest of the community safety and forest ecosystem in mind.” Will Hydrologists argree with this RPFs interpretation?
  10. Taryn Skalbania
    The Truck Loggers' Association (TLA) is paying for billboards across BC to share their version of forestry facts in BC Each one starts with "TRUTH", as if it is trying to convince its members. So diluted and confusing are its messages and data, i hope someone can take the time and make sense of this: can we post the real numbers? https://www.tla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/TLA-Old-Growth-Forests-Facts-FAQs-2022.pdf https://www.tla.ca/forestry-truth/?fbclid=IwAR0WvyMAjmeVbbqMrztT9kuT4T6bXmNljw85AHuGZNWv83HcZETZUCJvDdo#:~:text=British Columbia leads the world,Columbia's total area is harvested TLA could be ''sued'' for false advertisement ! This sign on Pat bay highway being a good example of false advertising. Don't advertisements have to be true? We could launch complaints...I suppose the TLA is including parks as OG protected areas. Someone suggested a complaint to Ad Standards as a first step Then an email to Coast Outdoor, with an image of the sign, letting them know it is an unverifiable statement, and Ad Standards have been contacted . https://adstandards.ca/complaints/how-to-submit-a-complaint/
  11. Taryn Skalbania
    Aren't we all getting a little fed up with media just printing government press releases, quoting industry facts, regurgitation instead of investigation, why not question their sources? I am- so wrote a letter to journalists about it. https://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_3d36557c-94f6-11ec-b5d7-d333b4fe7404.html?utm_source=kelownadailycourier.ca&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletters%2Fheadlines%2F%3F-dc%3D1645711204&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline Timber supply cut may not be what it seems Dear Editor: Re: Interfor takes haircut on Boundary harvesting rights (Feb. 12) Journalists reporting on recent announcements by the chief forester on new allowable annual cuts (AAC) for Interfor’s tree farm licence (TFL) 48, for the Okanagan timber supply area (TSA) and for Canoe Forest Products merely parrot what the chief forester says in a press release without question. Has the logging actually been reduced in the Kettle River basin as a result of a reduction in the cut for TFL 8 and the Okanagan TSA? The chief forester provides two reasons for a reduction of the cut in TFL 8: (1) management measures that address Indigenous interests; and (2) the accumulation of unharvested timber volume in the TFL amounting to an undercut of 115,987 cubic metres. But why the undercut in TFL 8? The likely reason is that Interfor has been high-grading the timber and has run out of high-quality timber. Is the undercut merely a measure of how plantations — the driver of timber supply — are failing as the Forest Practices Board pointed out for the Okanagan TSA? “Indigenous interests” likely means the government intends to transfer cut from Interfor to local First Nations. This does not lower the overall cut or rate of logging in the Kettle River basin; it just moves it around on paper. But does the undercut actually exist on the ground? For decades, scientific studies have shown that industrial forestry through clearcutting and an unsustainable rate of logging in B.C. is: — Destroying terrestrial and aquatic habitats, extirpating species and driving others to extinction; — Fouling drinking water for communities; — Ravaging soil and the fungal life necessary for forest health; — Releasing vast amounts of carbon from below and above ground into the atmosphere – more than any other economic sector in B.C.; — Disturbing large and small watersheds both of which are highly sensitive to clearcut logging resulting in flooding and landslides; and, — Causing in part the large, rapidly moving and intense wildfires of recent years. Why haven’t journalists asked the chief forester how all the preceding harms have been considered in determining an AAC? To mitigate against these harms, the chief forester and the provincial government will need first to deal with the biggest culprit in B.C., which is the logging industry. With public safety at serious risk from the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, a concerned and alarmed public needs the assistance of journalists in asking the right questions and in seeking informed answers. Taryn Skalbania, Peachland TS Letter Daily-Courier Feb21-22 Final.docx
  12. Taryn Skalbania
    Aren't we all getting a little fed up with media just printing government press releases, quoting industry facts, regurgitation instead of investigation, why not question their sources? I am- so wrote a letter to journalists about it. https://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_3d36557c-94f6-11ec-b5d7-d333b4fe7404.html?utm_source=kelownadailycourier.ca&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletters%2Fheadlines%2F%3F-dc%3D1645711204&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline Timber supply cut may not be what it seems Dear Editor: Re: Interfor takes haircut on Boundary harvesting rights (Feb. 12) Journalists reporting on recent announcements by the chief forester on new allowable annual cuts (AAC) for Interfor’s tree farm licence (TFL) 48, for the Okanagan timber supply area (TSA) and for Canoe Forest Products merely parrot what the chief forester says in a press release without question. Has the logging actually been reduced in the Kettle River basin as a result of a reduction in the cut for TFL 8 and the Okanagan TSA? The chief forester provides two reasons for a reduction of the cut in TFL 8: (1) management measures that address Indigenous interests; and (2) the accumulation of unharvested timber volume in the TFL amounting to an undercut of 115,987 cubic metres. But why the undercut in TFL 8? The likely reason is that Interfor has been high-grading the timber and has run out of high-quality timber. Is the undercut merely a measure of how plantations — the driver of timber supply — are failing as the Forest Practices Board pointed out for the Okanagan TSA? “Indigenous interests” likely means the government intends to transfer cut from Interfor to local First Nations. This does not lower the overall cut or rate of logging in the Kettle River basin; it just moves it around on paper. But does the undercut actually exist on the ground? For decades, scientific studies have shown that industrial forestry through clearcutting and an unsustainable rate of logging in B.C. is: — Destroying terrestrial and aquatic habitats, extirpating species and driving others to extinction; — Fouling drinking water for communities; — Ravaging soil and the fungal life necessary for forest health; — Releasing vast amounts of carbon from below and above ground into the atmosphere – more than any other economic sector in B.C.; — Disturbing large and small watersheds both of which are highly sensitive to clearcut logging resulting in flooding and landslides; and, — Causing in part the large, rapidly moving and intense wildfires of recent years. Why haven’t journalists asked the chief forester how all the preceding harms have been considered in determining an AAC? To mitigate against these harms, the chief forester and the provincial government will need first to deal with the biggest culprit in B.C., which is the logging industry. With public safety at serious risk from the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, a concerned and alarmed public needs the assistance of journalists in asking the right questions and in seeking informed answers. Taryn Skalbania, Peachland TS Letter Daily-Courier Feb21-22 Final.docx
  13. Taryn Skalbania
    Aren't we all getting a little fed up with media just printing government press releases, quoting industry facts, regurgitation instead of investigation, why not question their sources? I am- so wrote a letter to journalists about it. https://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_3d36557c-94f6-11ec-b5d7-d333b4fe7404.html?utm_source=kelownadailycourier.ca&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletters%2Fheadlines%2F%3F-dc%3D1645711204&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline Timber supply cut may not be what it seems Dear Editor: Re: Interfor takes haircut on Boundary harvesting rights (Feb. 12) Journalists reporting on recent announcements by the chief forester on new allowable annual cuts (AAC) for Interfor’s tree farm licence (TFL) 48, for the Okanagan timber supply area (TSA) and for Canoe Forest Products merely parrot what the chief forester says in a press release without question. Has the logging actually been reduced in the Kettle River basin as a result of a reduction in the cut for TFL 8 and the Okanagan TSA? The chief forester provides two reasons for a reduction of the cut in TFL 8: (1) management measures that address Indigenous interests; and (2) the accumulation of unharvested timber volume in the TFL amounting to an undercut of 115,987 cubic metres. But why the undercut in TFL 8? The likely reason is that Interfor has been high-grading the timber and has run out of high-quality timber. Is the undercut merely a measure of how plantations — the driver of timber supply — are failing as the Forest Practices Board pointed out for the Okanagan TSA? “Indigenous interests” likely means the government intends to transfer cut from Interfor to local First Nations. This does not lower the overall cut or rate of logging in the Kettle River basin; it just moves it around on paper. But does the undercut actually exist on the ground? For decades, scientific studies have shown that industrial forestry through clearcutting and an unsustainable rate of logging in B.C. is: — Destroying terrestrial and aquatic habitats, extirpating species and driving others to extinction; — Fouling drinking water for communities; — Ravaging soil and the fungal life necessary for forest health; — Releasing vast amounts of carbon from below and above ground into the atmosphere – more than any other economic sector in B.C.; — Disturbing large and small watersheds both of which are highly sensitive to clearcut logging resulting in flooding and landslides; and, — Causing in part the large, rapidly moving and intense wildfires of recent years. Why haven’t journalists asked the chief forester how all the preceding harms have been considered in determining an AAC? To mitigate against these harms, the chief forester and the provincial government will need first to deal with the biggest culprit in B.C., which is the logging industry. With public safety at serious risk from the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss, a concerned and alarmed public needs the assistance of journalists in asking the right questions and in seeking informed answers. Taryn Skalbania, Peachland TS Letter Daily-Courier Feb21-22 Final.docx
  14. Taryn Skalbania
    Hi All, I agree with what Trevor said here, I to tried explain the same thing happens to me, I used that lame travel analogy with you all the other night: If I visit to a town and there is no 'town centre', 'clock tower', 'map', 'YOU are HERE" sign and directions of highlights to visit, I am lost and sometimes do not want to even explore, I have Fear FO MISSING OUT , so unless I kwon all of what there is I do not even want to start, or I do not know where to go 1st , where to start, SO...the home page must be an all inclusive 'map', simple enough for non techy community grass roots folks who barley use a computer and who have been directed to EA as a place to start to save their OG or community watersheds, caribou or recreation trails, or mid of the road folks who just heard of FRPA, FSPs, FES, AAC, TSA, CSI, CSA, IDF, WUI and now NEED and want to start to take the deeper dive towards forestry reforms, and finally those already entrenched, wanting to dig deeper, blow whistles, share stories and science or learn new tools. IF site is too simple we lose those, if site is too complex we lose everyone else, I guess a govt site is a typical example of simple enough for a moron, meaty enough for an academic. EA must cater to all This will make the EA site HUGE though , to cover all the bases, it must be accessible for every single person in bc
  15. Taryn Skalbania
    Hi All, I agree with what Trevor said here, I to tried explain the same thing happens to me, I used that lame travel analogy with you all the other night: If I visit to a town and there is no 'town centre', 'clock tower', 'map', 'YOU are HERE" sign and directions of highlights to visit, I am lost and sometimes do not want to even explore, I have Fear FO MISSING OUT , so unless I kwon all of what there is I do not even want to start, or I do not know where to go 1st , where to start, SO...the home page must be an all inclusive 'map', simple enough for non techy community grass roots folks who barley use a computer and who have been directed to EA as a place to start to save their OG or community watersheds, caribou or recreation trails, or mid of the road folks who just heard of FRPA, FSPs, FES, AAC, TSA, CSI, CSA, IDF, WUI and now NEED and want to start to take the deeper dive towards forestry reforms, and finally those already entrenched, wanting to dig deeper, blow whistles, share stories and science or learn new tools. IF site is too simple we lose those, if site is too complex we lose everyone else, I guess a govt site is a typical example of simple enough for a moron, meaty enough for an academic. EA must cater to all This will make the EA site HUGE though , to cover all the bases, it must be accessible for every single person in bc
  16. Taryn Skalbania
    Hi All, I agree with what Trevor said here, I to tried explain the same thing happens to me, I used that lame travel analogy with you all the other night: If I visit to a town and there is no 'town centre', 'clock tower', 'map', 'YOU are HERE" sign and directions of highlights to visit, I am lost and sometimes do not want to even explore, I have Fear FO MISSING OUT , so unless I kwon all of what there is I do not even want to start, or I do not know where to go 1st , where to start, SO...the home page must be an all inclusive 'map', simple enough for non techy community grass roots folks who barley use a computer and who have been directed to EA as a place to start to save their OG or community watersheds, caribou or recreation trails, or mid of the road folks who just heard of FRPA, FSPs, FES, AAC, TSA, CSI, CSA, IDF, WUI and now NEED and want to start to take the deeper dive towards forestry reforms, and finally those already entrenched, wanting to dig deeper, blow whistles, share stories and science or learn new tools. IF site is too simple we lose those, if site is too complex we lose everyone else, I guess a govt site is a typical example of simple enough for a moron, meaty enough for an academic. EA must cater to all This will make the EA site HUGE though , to cover all the bases, it must be accessible for every single person in bc
  17. Taryn Skalbania
    Hi All, I agree with what Trevor said here, I to tried explain the same thing happens to me, I used that lame travel analogy with you all the other night: If I visit to a town and there is no 'town centre', 'clock tower', 'map', 'YOU are HERE" sign and directions of highlights to visit, I am lost and sometimes do not want to even explore, I have Fear FO MISSING OUT , so unless I kwon all of what there is I do not even want to start, or I do not know where to go 1st , where to start, SO...the home page must be an all inclusive 'map', simple enough for non techy community grass roots folks who barley use a computer and who have been directed to EA as a place to start to save their OG or community watersheds, caribou or recreation trails, or mid of the road folks who just heard of FRPA, FSPs, FES, AAC, TSA, CSI, CSA, IDF, WUI and now NEED and want to start to take the deeper dive towards forestry reforms, and finally those already entrenched, wanting to dig deeper, blow whistles, share stories and science or learn new tools. IF site is too simple we lose those, if site is too complex we lose everyone else, I guess a govt site is a typical example of simple enough for a moron, meaty enough for an academic. EA must cater to all This will make the EA site HUGE though , to cover all the bases, it must be accessible for every single person in bc
  18. Taryn Skalbania
    Hi All, I agree with what Trevor said here, I to tried explain the same thing happens to me, I used that lame travel analogy with you all the other night: If I visit to a town and there is no 'town centre', 'clock tower', 'map', 'YOU are HERE" sign and directions of highlights to visit, I am lost and sometimes do not want to even explore, I have Fear FO MISSING OUT , so unless I kwon all of what there is I do not even want to start, or I do not know where to go 1st , where to start, SO...the home page must be an all inclusive 'map', simple enough for non techy community grass roots folks who barley use a computer and who have been directed to EA as a place to start to save their OG or community watersheds, caribou or recreation trails, or mid of the road folks who just heard of FRPA, FSPs, FES, AAC, TSA, CSI, CSA, IDF, WUI and now NEED and want to start to take the deeper dive towards forestry reforms, and finally those already entrenched, wanting to dig deeper, blow whistles, share stories and science or learn new tools. IF site is too simple we lose those, if site is too complex we lose everyone else, I guess a govt site is a typical example of simple enough for a moron, meaty enough for an academic. EA must cater to all This will make the EA site HUGE though , to cover all the bases, it must be accessible for every single person in bc
  19. Taryn Skalbania
    Are NDP climate change deniers? Looks like it Van, you have pointed out many of the actions lacking in Bill 23 , the government and logging industry continue to not be precautionary with BC's crown land management. They have had 4 years to step up to the plate and reform forestry for all British Columbians and the landscape, instead they have wasted our time and dollars, the heavily INDUSTRY-biased FRPA Advisory Committee must be proud of themselves for this shameful tweaking of the status quo. Thank you Minister’s Practices Advisory Council (PAC), seems your greatest contribution is increasing the policing and privatizing of logging roads so you don't end up with more out of Control Fairy Creek blockades. Diane Nicholls PAC Co-chair, Assistant Deputy Minister and BC Provincial Chief Forester Garry Merkel PAC Co-chair, Appointee of the First Nations Leadership Council Sally Aitken Academic adviser, UBC Stirling Angus Logging contractors Shannon Janzen Major Licensees, Coast Brian Frenkel Union of BC Municipalities Jennifer Gunter BC Community Forest Association Brad Harrison Wilderness tourism and recreation Mike McConnell BC Cattlemen’s Association Brian McNaughton Federation of BC Woodlot Associations Lisa Matthaus Unaffiliated Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations Jeff Mycock Major Licensees, Interior John Betts Forestry workers Jeff Bromley Mill workers Ministry Staff and PAC Affiliates: Shane Berg, Alternate Co-Chair, Executive Director, Deputy Chief Forester Norah White, Secretariat and Staff Advisor (Forestry), Resource Practices Branch Jodie Kekula, Staff Advisor (Range), Range Branch Julie MacDougall, Director, Resource Practices Branch PAC member list_Jan2020.pdf
  20. Taryn Skalbania
    Are NDP climate change deniers? Looks like it Van, you have pointed out many of the actions lacking in Bill 23 , the government and logging industry continue to not be precautionary with BC's crown land management. They have had 4 years to step up to the plate and reform forestry for all British Columbians and the landscape, instead they have wasted our time and dollars, the heavily INDUSTRY-biased FRPA Advisory Committee must be proud of themselves for this shameful tweaking of the status quo. Thank you Minister’s Practices Advisory Council (PAC), seems your greatest contribution is increasing the policing and privatizing of logging roads so you don't end up with more out of Control Fairy Creek blockades. Diane Nicholls PAC Co-chair, Assistant Deputy Minister and BC Provincial Chief Forester Garry Merkel PAC Co-chair, Appointee of the First Nations Leadership Council Sally Aitken Academic adviser, UBC Stirling Angus Logging contractors Shannon Janzen Major Licensees, Coast Brian Frenkel Union of BC Municipalities Jennifer Gunter BC Community Forest Association Brad Harrison Wilderness tourism and recreation Mike McConnell BC Cattlemen’s Association Brian McNaughton Federation of BC Woodlot Associations Lisa Matthaus Unaffiliated Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations Jeff Mycock Major Licensees, Interior John Betts Forestry workers Jeff Bromley Mill workers Ministry Staff and PAC Affiliates: Shane Berg, Alternate Co-Chair, Executive Director, Deputy Chief Forester Norah White, Secretariat and Staff Advisor (Forestry), Resource Practices Branch Jodie Kekula, Staff Advisor (Range), Range Branch Julie MacDougall, Director, Resource Practices Branch PAC member list_Jan2020.pdf
  21. Taryn Skalbania
    This 300+ page document, authored by former forests ministry legal counsel Roberta Reader, has been posted for historical context. Executive Summary With the enactment of the Forest and Range Practices Act (the FRPA), the roles played by government officials in the Ministry of Forests and Range (the MOFR) and the Ministry of Environment (the MOE), as well as the roles played by forest and range tenure holders, have changed in a number of ways. In turn, this has also affected the professionals who advise and assist government officials and tenure holders. Many of the regulatory constraints formerly imposed on tenure holders under the Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act (the FPC) have not been carried forward into the FRPA. As a result, government officials no longer control many of the decisions that tenure holders make – decisions that can have a profound effect on public forest and range lands. Coming to term with what this means is a challenge shared by government officials, tenure holders, professionals and the public alike. The FPC reinforced a common misconception about the powers of government officials. Many have come to believe that, simply by virtue of their office, government officials in the MOFR and the MOE can “dictate” what does (or does not) happen on public forest and range lands. In turn, this has fostered a belief that the expectations of government officials are the most important expectations affecting the management of public lands. However, this is not in fact the case. It was not even the case under the FPC, and it is certainly not the case under the FRPA. Within any statutory regime, the most important expectations are those of the Legislature – as set out in the applicable legislation. The next most important expectations are those of the Courts, who are the arbiters of the legislation’s meaning and the legality and fairness of the actions and decisions of government officials. In short, government officials serve the Legislature, under the supervision of the Courts. In this regard, it is important to remember that government officials have no “inherent” powers simply because they work for the government. They can only do what they have been given the legal authority to do. As it happens, the FPC gave government officials in the MOFR and the MOE a great deal of power. It authorized – and even required – them to involve themselves in almost every aspect of the management of public forest and range lands. So much so, in fact, that tenure holders were left with almost no decision- making responsibilities of their own. The FRPA has changed this paradigm. Many of the responsibilities associated with the role of “steward” – a role traditionally fulfilled by government officials – now fall to tenure holders. This means that tenure holders will have to come to terms with what it means to be a steward. A steward is someone who manages property belonging to another person with due regard for the owner’s interests. In the case of public lands, the nominal owner is the government, but the government’s ownership is “burdened” by the duty that it owes to the public. In this regard, the government’s role is akin to that of a trustee, since it holds public lands on behalf of the public. This makes the public the true “beneficial” owners of public lands. In turn, this means that government officials and tenure holders alike are accountable to the public for the decisions they make with respect to the management of public forest and range lands. This was true under the FPC and continues to be true under the FRPA. The difference is that, under the FRPA, many more of the decisions that affect these public lands now fall to tenure holders to make, rather than government officials. Notwithstanding the larger management role played by tenure holders, the importance of the responsibilities borne by government officials should not be discounted. As the trustee of public forest and range lands, the government – and hence government officials – continue to play an important oversight role, which manifests itself in a number of ways, including: The approval of certain plans required by the FRPA, such as the new forest stewardship plan (the FSP), which entails the application of statutory tests governing the preparation and approval of these plans; The establishment of objectives, general wildlife measures and other orders governing the management of public forest and range lands, as provided for under the Government Actions Regulation; and The enforcement of the statutory obligations that the FRPA imposes on tenure holders. This oversight role is an integral part of the FRPA. However, it does not have the same scope that it did under the FPC. Which means that one of the biggest challenges for government officials will be coming to terms with the limitations, as well as the nature, of their new role. Even tenure holders may have difficulty accepting that government officials are not the final arbiters of what should – or should not – happen on public lands. Indeed, it may come as something of a shock to realize that there are other forces at work, outside the control of government officials, that have a direct bearing on the management of these lands. Which brings us to another way in which the FPC may have distorted our perceptions regarding the management of public forest and range lands. In addition to fostering the notion that government officials can and should dictate to tenure holders, the FPC also shifted attention away from a broad range of expectations that arise outside statutory regimes administered by government officials. Within the legal realm, of which the FRPA is but one small part, there are other expectations that matter – expectations that owe nothing whatever to legislation, like the FRPA, that creates statutory regimes administered by government officials. The expectations that govern the professionals who advise and assist tenure holders and government officials are a case in point. Professionals who are members of one of the self-regulating profession – including professional foresters, biologists, agrologists, engineers and geoscientists – are subject to their own statutory regimes, which are not administered by government officials. The regimes that apply to these professionals are administered by their professional associations, which are charged with imposing and enforcing strict standards of conduct and competence. These standards shape the nature and scope of the advice and assistance that professionals can (or cannot) provide. For this reason, professional standards are, in many respects, as important as, if not more important than, the requirements imposed on tenure holders under the FRPA. There are also other expectations arising in the legal realm that exist outside any statutory regime, i.e. they are independent of any kind of legislation. Our legal system consists of two equally important parts: (1) legislation or statute law, and (2) the common law. The latter also has a direct bearing on the management of public forest and range lands. Take, for example, the common law principles that govern civil liability. These have evolved – and continue to evolve – through the disputes that the Courts are called upon to arbitrate. Recently, the principles governing civil liability evolved in a rather unexpected way. In 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized a new form of liability, namely liability for environmental damage to public lands. The upshot is that compliance with the requirements of the FRPA – or with any other legislation – may not be sufficient to protect tenure holders – or even the government – from liability for failing to adequately protect public lands or resources. Which brings us to the expectations that arise outside the legal realm of statute law and common law. In this paper, the world outside the legal realm is referred to as the “non- legal realm.” Expectations arising in the non-legal realm can also have a profound effect on the management of public forest and range lands. In our day-to-day lives, societal expectations, which arise in the non-legal realm, are usually the most powerful influences on our actions and decisions. What our neighbours, clients or customers think of us is generally of greater concern to us than anything the law may require of us in our roles as members of society, public servants, professionals, business-people, landowners, stewards, etc. With respect to the management of public forest and range lands, the importance of societal expectations easily rivals that of anything found within the legal realm. The pivotal role played by the environmental movement in B.C. illustrates this point, as do environmentally-conscious marketplace initiatives, such as the certification of forest products. Equally important, insofar as forest and range management decisions are concerned, are the expectations created by scientific/technical knowledge. Not only does this knowledge shape societal expectations, it also has a direct bearing on important concepts arising in the legal realm, such as the due diligence defence that applies under the FRPA and the standard of care that applies in the context of a common law negligence suit. All of which means that, even though forest and range tenure holders are no longer subject to the tight controls that were formerly exerted by government officials under the FPC, they are by no means free to do whatever they wish. Greater freedom generally leads to greater responsibility, and this is likely to prove true with respect to the actions and decisions of tenure holders. In an attempt to “manage” these outside forces, as well to help themselves come to terms with the new statutory regime created by the FRPA, tenure holders and government officials alike may look to guidance documents for “direction.” Unfortunately, guidance and direction are very different concepts. Which does not mean that guidance documents are not useful. Quite the contrary. However, it does mean that these documents can only influence actions and decisions; they cannot control them. No one has a monopoly on the development or dissemination of guidance documents. Guidance documents developed by or on behalf of the government are not fundamentally different from guidance documents developed outside of government. In short, anyone – including government officials, tenure holders, professional associations and public interest groups – can provide guidance, as long as they understand its limitations. The most important limitation is that no one can be compelled to follow guidance. Compulsion is the defining characteristic of direction. Government officials can only give direction if they have been given the legal authority to do so. The same holds true for tenure holders, professional associations and public interest groups. Which means that guidance documents will only be effective if they are useful to – and used by – their intended audience. To that end, it is necessary for guidance documents to be compelling and persuasive. Which brings us back to the importance of scientific/technical knowledge. Guidance in the forest and range management context draws much of its power from this knowledge. This paper discusses two important ways in which scientific/technical knowledge can be brought to bear on forest and range management decisions: Through the effective use of well-qualified, dedicated professionals; and Through the effective use of well-crafted, thoughtful guidance documents. The concept of “professional reliance” is predicated on professionals being able to demonstrate their adherence to the highest professional standards. In turn, these standards need to accurately reflect what it means to be a truly competent professional. Professional reliance does not mean “blind reliance.” Reliance is only justified if professionals are true experts in their fields. Tenure holders and government officials alike cannot simply accept “on faith” what a professional says. In this context, the process followed by the Courts when considering expert testimony may provide a useful model for the kind of scrutiny that can and should be brought to bear on the advice or opinions proffered by professionals. This is the focus of Chapter 8 of this paper. The development of effective guidance documents is also discussed at length in this paper. Appendix 4 focuses specifically on this issue. Readers who are intimidated by the length of the paper, but want to learn more about the development of guidance documents, may find it easier to go directly to Appendix 4, after which they may want to look at the following chapters: Chapter 2, which provides an overview of the expectations, arising in the legal and non-legal realms, that affect the management of public forest and range lands; Chapter 3, which provides a more detailed discussion of expectations arising inside statutory regimes administered by government officials; and The second, third and fourth sections of Chapter 9, which provide an overview of the kinds of guidance documents that may be developed inside and outside of government. Finally, a caution for the reader. This paper is very lengthy. The topics it discusses are wide-ranging, just as the expectations that affect the management of public forest and range lands are wide-ranging. Rather than trying to read everything in the paper, you may prefer to focus on those issues that are of particular interest to you. Take a look at the table of contents. If you find a heading that interests you, feel free to “enter” the paper at that point, rather than starting from the beginning. There is sufficient cross- referencing to make this a practicable approach. —Roberta Reader (2006) The Expectations that Affect the Management of Public Forest and Range Lands in British Columbia: looking_outside_the_legislation.pdf
  22. Taryn Skalbania
    Dave Maloney-Forest Water Management Officer (Kamloops) This MFLNRORD staffer could be considered a candidate for the Hall of Shame, for not taking the 2007 report and the 2012 warning from UBC hydrologist, Dr. Younes Alila seriously, Alila foretold of the devastating floods to hit the Fraser Valley due to interior clear cut logging, in this article below, after the floods of Nov 15-17 20201, I would say Maloney weighed the risks of flooding from industry operations wrong...and he is still making these decisions for our crown land. "Dave Maloney, a forest water management officer for the province, said Alila’s findings were reviewed by the forests ministry. He did not disagree with the research – noting hydrologists have previously said runoff in beetle-infested areas is a concern – but added Alila focused on Baker Creek, a particularly flat watershed in the Quesnel area that may have amplified his results. Maloney said forest companies are responsible for weighing the risks of flooding from their operations and taking steps to mitigate it. “The chief forester came out and provided guidance to the licensees regarding hydrologic risk and where they should focus their harvesting in areas with high densities of pine.” https://www.abbynews.com/news/salvage-logging-raises-risk-of-big-fraser-flood-expert/?fbclid=IwAR0Atj3WV3hGBF87orgcefQ9B53c4trO8XQaZEkBJq0mOo_KdewQpm7LNhk
  23. Taryn Skalbania
    Dave Maloney-Forest Water Management Officer (Kamloops) This MFLNRORD staffer could be considered a candidate for the Hall of Shame, for not taking the 2007 report and the 2012 warning from UBC hydrologist, Dr. Younes Alila seriously, Alila foretold of the devastating floods to hit the Fraser Valley due to interior clear cut logging, in this article below, after the floods of Nov 15-17 20201, I would say Maloney weighed the risks of flooding from industry operations wrong...and he is still making these decisions for our crown land. "Dave Maloney, a forest water management officer for the province, said Alila’s findings were reviewed by the forests ministry. He did not disagree with the research – noting hydrologists have previously said runoff in beetle-infested areas is a concern – but added Alila focused on Baker Creek, a particularly flat watershed in the Quesnel area that may have amplified his results. Maloney said forest companies are responsible for weighing the risks of flooding from their operations and taking steps to mitigate it. “The chief forester came out and provided guidance to the licensees regarding hydrologic risk and where they should focus their harvesting in areas with high densities of pine.” https://www.abbynews.com/news/salvage-logging-raises-risk-of-big-fraser-flood-expert/?fbclid=IwAR0Atj3WV3hGBF87orgcefQ9B53c4trO8XQaZEkBJq0mOo_KdewQpm7LNhk
  24. Taryn Skalbania
    Dave Maloney-Forest Water Management Officer (Kamloops) This MFLNRORD staffer could be considered a candidate for the Hall of Shame, for not taking the 2007 report and the 2012 warning from UBC hydrologist, Dr. Younes Alila seriously, Alila foretold of the devastating floods to hit the Fraser Valley due to interior clear cut logging, in this article below, after the floods of Nov 15-17 20201, I would say Maloney weighed the risks of flooding from industry operations wrong...and he is still making these decisions for our crown land. "Dave Maloney, a forest water management officer for the province, said Alila’s findings were reviewed by the forests ministry. He did not disagree with the research – noting hydrologists have previously said runoff in beetle-infested areas is a concern – but added Alila focused on Baker Creek, a particularly flat watershed in the Quesnel area that may have amplified his results. Maloney said forest companies are responsible for weighing the risks of flooding from their operations and taking steps to mitigate it. “The chief forester came out and provided guidance to the licensees regarding hydrologic risk and where they should focus their harvesting in areas with high densities of pine.” https://www.abbynews.com/news/salvage-logging-raises-risk-of-big-fraser-flood-expert/?fbclid=IwAR0Atj3WV3hGBF87orgcefQ9B53c4trO8XQaZEkBJq0mOo_KdewQpm7LNhk
  25. Taryn Skalbania
    Dave Maloney-Forest Water Management Officer (Kamloops) This MFLNRORD staffer could be considered a candidate for the Hall of Shame, for not taking the 2007 report and the 2012 warning from UBC hydrologist, Dr. Younes Alila seriously, Alila foretold of the devastating floods to hit the Fraser Valley due to interior clear cut logging, in this article below, after the floods of Nov 15-17 20201, I would say Maloney weighed the risks of flooding from industry operations wrong...and he is still making these decisions for our crown land. "Dave Maloney, a forest water management officer for the province, said Alila’s findings were reviewed by the forests ministry. He did not disagree with the research – noting hydrologists have previously said runoff in beetle-infested areas is a concern – but added Alila focused on Baker Creek, a particularly flat watershed in the Quesnel area that may have amplified his results. Maloney said forest companies are responsible for weighing the risks of flooding from their operations and taking steps to mitigate it. “The chief forester came out and provided guidance to the licensees regarding hydrologic risk and where they should focus their harvesting in areas with high densities of pine.” https://www.abbynews.com/news/salvage-logging-raises-risk-of-big-fraser-flood-expert/?fbclid=IwAR0Atj3WV3hGBF87orgcefQ9B53c4trO8XQaZEkBJq0mOo_KdewQpm7LNhk
×
×
  • Create New...