Forest panel needs to embrace crucial reforms
It’s time to adapt to changing climate, says Anthony Britneff.
For the second year running, British Columbians are getting a taste of what the “new normal” means—air so choked with the smoke of burning forest fires that it drives us to stay indoors.
But what many of us may fail to appreciate is what the new normal means for our forests and the management challenges lying ahead.
How have ferocious fires, increased insect attacks, anomalous disease outbreaks and all the heightened logging activities in response to such events diminished our forests? How do we responsibly manage our forests moving forward, keeping in mind that we need them for clean water, grizzly bears and spawning salmon alike, and as a source of timber?
Months before this summer’s conflagration, B.C.’s forests minister, Doug Donaldson, announced that the province’s “forest-inventory” program would be reviewed by a panel of outside professionals, a process that now nears completion.
“We’ve seen significant changes to our forests, most notably from the mountain pine-beetle epidemic and wildfires,” Donaldson said in announcing the review, adding, “having a reliable inventory is important to garner public trust in how we manage our forests.”
As someone who worked for Donaldson’s predecessors for 40 years, I couldn’t agree more. I also know that if public trust is to be restored it requires reforms from within Donaldson’s ministry. That’s because there are clear signs that senior staff reporting to the minister have ignored evidence that our forest inventories do not properly account for losses due to fires and other disturbances, while those same staff cling blindly to misplaced beliefs that new generations of genetically selected and planted trees will somehow avoid the calamities that have fallen their predecessors.
My sincere hope is that the panel Donaldson appointed will embrace four key reforms.
First, a truthful and honest assessment of what our forests contain is fundamental to making Allowable Annual Cut, or AAC determinations, which essentially set how much forest can be sustainably logged in a given area over time. We need to mandate that good forest inventories that accurately address the uncertainties that lie ahead are required under the Forest Act. This is essential, given the crucial role that AAC determinations play in the health of our forests.
An independent auditor should review all AAC decisions. The auditor would check for errors, omissions and mis representations as they relate to the forest inventory. The auditor would also assess the uncertainty associated with computer models used to forecast the growth of forests as there is mounting evidence that such models do not accurately capture how the forest inventory changes over time, a problem that will worsen with climate change.
Third, the ministry should establish clear, unambiguous performance benchmarks for the seedlings that tree planters tamp into the ground at logging sites. Two to three decades after such trees are planted, the provincial government must adequately fund field staff to look at those trees and to determine whether sufficient numbers of them have survived and grown enough to meet or exceed the benchmarks. Only when that information is in hand should AACs be set, preferably at conservatively low rates that reflect the uncertainties that will continue to prevail with climate change.
Fourth, in light of how rapidly things are changing, we need to dramatically shorten the time frame during which “timber supplies” are reviewed and AAC decisions are updated to reflect the changes. Two years for a review is far too long. Two months would be more like it.
The effects of climate change are clearly upon us. The speed at which things are changing is humbling. We need to be just as speedy in our response, but measured as well.
Today’s hazy skies are a stark reminder of the consequences of not taking action.
Failure to reform our approach to forest inventories simply invites more trouble.