Blog Archive Layout

Ben Parfitt and Anthony Britneff: B.C. MLAs take wrong approach to timber supply crisis

Aug 27 2012/in News Coverage

Ever since mid May, when a special committee of the provincial legislature was appointed to address a looming “timber supply” crisis, questions have arisen about what the committee would say about one community in particular.

That community is Burns Lake where, in January, a violent explosion and fire leveled the local sawmill—the village’s major employer—killing two mill workers and doing another 250 out of their jobs.

Well the wait is over, and if the unanimous recommendations of the committee’s Liberal and NDP MLAs are an indication, our forests and many rural communities are headed for even harder times than previously thought.

Here’s why. Rather than focusing on the core issue (how many trees are left, and what the future holds for our forests) committee members allowed themselves to be swayed by dramatic yet unrelated events.

The evidence is overwhelmingly clear. We are on the cusp of a monumental shift in our interior forests. After a decade-plus attack by mountain pine beetles and other pests, a spate of intense wildfires and years of unsustainable logging, our forests are largely depleted of commercially desirable trees.

To their credit, members of the Special Committee on Timber Supply acknowledge this. They conclude that the projected drop in logging rates places eight sawmills in danger. This is probably an underestimate. Either way, when mill capacity outstrips what our forests can provide, mills must close. There are only so many trees to go around.

Yet having acknowledged that existing sawmills have an appetite for wood that grossly exceeds what our forests can provide, committee members then turn around and suggest that we should build another mill first and find the timber later.

To entice the owner of the destroyed Burns Lake mill to do so, the committee chooses to go down the same tired road that gave rise to the present timber supply crisis: push the boundaries of what can be harvested to the extreme. This is essentially the approach applied in the East Coast cod fishery and we all know how that worked out.

The committee astonishingly suggested that there are actually twice as many trees to log in the forests around Burns Lake than what senior forest professionals in government estimated just last year (one million instead of 500,000 cubic metres of wood a year).

How did the committee magically double timber supply? With three key recommendations. First, that more “marginally economic” forests be logged. Second, that the government underwrite a massive fertilization program to boost tree growth. And third—here committee members use weasel words to mask the true intent of what they propose—to increase the logging of remnant old-growth forests that were previously ruled off-limits to logging.

It is far from clear that this will produce enough wood to supply a rebuilt mill.

First, “marginal” forests are marginal for a reason. They are generally of inferior quality, further from mills, and more costly to log. And they are often found in places where trees grow less vigorously, for example at higher elevations. Hence, they are risky to log, both economically and environmentally.

Second, with government having drastically curtailed its investments in growing trees, no one should assume there is appetite for big spending increases on fertilization. Never mind the ecological impacts of repeated applications of tree fertilizers on shallow soils and on our waterways, fish populations and other plant life in our forests.

And third, perceived increases in old-growth logging could prove a nightmare in international markets where the B.C. government and forest companies alike have worked judiciously to have forestry operations independently certified as sustainably managed.

But if the government embraces the committee’s recommendations for Burns Lake, expect the same unsustainable logging practices to be applied provincewide, and with devastating consequences.

The real tragedy in the committee members’ recommendations is that they are well aware of where the real challenges lie. The committee acknowledges the essential importance of improved forest inventories—looking at how many healthy trees we have. Why isn’t this the first order of business? B.C. needs an expedited, thorough assessment now, before we have committed to even more unsustainable logging rates.

To proceed with logging increases before such work is done is irresponsible and an insult to forest-dependent communities across the province.

Anthony Britneff recently retired from a 40-year career as a professional forester with the B.C. Forest Service where he held senior positions in inventory, silviculture and forest health. Ben Parfitt is a resource policy analyst with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

Environmentalist bristles over report urging more logging

Aug 16 2012/in News Coverage

A government report looking at the pine beetle’s impact in B.C.’s central interior has taken the wrong approach in urging more logging, says the executive director of Ancient Forest Alliance.

Ken Wu says the report’s recommendation to increase the timber supply and value of pine-beetle wood could allow for logging in protected forests.

“There’s different ways to do more with less, to be more efficient. Instead they’re looking at opening up our last protected areas and that’s totally the wrong approach. Rewarding unsustainable behaviour with more unsustainable behaviour is what has pushed this whole planet to the ecological brink.”

Wu says these protected areas include old growth forest, wildlife habitats, scenery, and recreational spots. Grants For College

Link to article: https://www.cknw.com/news/vancouver/story.aspx/Story.aspx?ID=1757152

Today the Special Committee on Timber Supply released its report on how to deal with a timber shortfall in BC’s Central Interior in relation to the forest industry’s regional overcapacity. See article for link to PDF.

Media Release: Timber Committee Opens Back Door for Potential Logging of Protected Forests

Aug 15 2012/in Media Release

For Immediate Release
August 15, 2012

Timber Committee Opens Back Door for Potential Logging of Protected Forest Reserves in BC’s Central Interior

Committee also recommends continued overcutting, logging of “marginal” stands (ie. slow growing subalpine forests) and creating more “area-based tenures” ie. increasing private property-like rights on public forest lands.

Today the Special Committee on Timber Supply released its report on how to deal with a timber shortfall in BC’s Central Interior in relation to the forest industry’s regional overcapacity. See the report here: https://www.leg.bc.ca/cmt/39thparl/session-4/timber/reports/PDF/Rpt-TIMBER-39-4-GrowingFibreGrowingValue-2012-08-15.pdf

Of greatest environmental concern was the committee’s recommendation to create local committees to review the possibility of opening up protected forest reserves for logging. These forest reserves include:

– Old-Growth Management Areas that currently protect old forests
– Wildlife Habitat Areas that protect species at risk
– Visual Quality Objectives that protect scenery for tourism
– Riparian Management Areas that protect water quality and fish habitat
– Ungulate Winter Range that protects the winter habitat of large herbivores like mountain caribou
– Recreation Areas for camping, hiking, outdoor activities

Recommendation 2.2 calls for the BC government to:

“Design a science-based review process for local use by monitoring committees in the assessment of existing sensitive-area designations to ascertain if they are still defensible or whether they need to be modified.”

“Instead of opening up protected forest reserves directly, which they know is highly unpopular with the public, they’re recommending a back door entry point for the logging industry into these currently protected forests. It’s based on the false notion that because there are many beetle-killed trees, that the entire ecosystem is not ‘living’ and therefore clearcutting and punching roads into vast swaths of protected forests – which are a mix of living and dead trees that are part of very vibrant, alive, and continually growing ecosystems – does little incremental damage. That’s just plain false and any ecosystem-based science review will show that,” stated Ken Wu, executive director of the Ancient Forest Alliance. “In particular, it looks like they’re recommending an expedited process for logging sensitive areas in the Burns Lake region, with other regions to follow.”

Pine beetle-affected forests include living, unaffected trees of various species, younger regenerating trees, and intact understory vegetation and soil structures, while the dead trees and woody debris provide homes for much wildlife. The extent of the pine beetle infestation is unnatural, caused by anthropogenic climate change and decades of wildfire suppression by the forest industry – however, further clearcutting of these living, dynamic forest ecosystems by removing all the living and dead trees and punching road networks throughout them, leading to soil erosion, vastly increases the environmental damage.

The potential environmental deregulation would take place in four Timber Supply Areas (TSA’s): the Prince George, Quesnel, Williams Lake, and Lakes (Burns Lake area) TSA’s.

“However, I should also point out that if the government does follow up on this recommendation, then it does open the door for the potential expansion of protected forest reserves if it is guided by a true ecosystem-based science framework. Such a science framework, particularly with the advancement of landscape ecology and conservation biology over the past two decades, would clearly reveal the inadequacy of the existing land-use plans and their system of protected forest reserves to stem the decline of species at risk, to sustain old-growth ecosystems, to support scenery for tourism, and to protect fish habitat. If anything, a true science-based review process would lead to an expansion of forest protections in the old land-use plan areas. But I wouldn’t count on the BC Liberal government, given the pressure by the massive timber lobby, to not create a rigged-game in the terms of reference and constraints placed on such a process,” notes Wu.

The Special Committee on Timber Supply, consisting of four BC Liberal MLA’s and three NDP MLA’s, held public hearings in rural communities in July in the Cariboo-Chilcotin region and met with stakeholders in Vancouver to gather input. Prior to the tour, Committee Chair John Rustad, BC Liberal MLA for Nechako Lakes, had spoken in the media several times with a heavy bias towards justifying logging in forest reserves and even suggested opening up Tweedsmuir Provincial Park for logging.

The rationale for opening up forest reserves is that an impending shortfall of available timber to support local sawmills will soon take effect, known as the “falldown effect”. This shortfall in timber in relation to an overcapacity in the forest industry is the result of the loss of mature forests from the pine beetle infestation (caused by climate change and forest fire suppression) and a massive industry expansion in the Interior in recent years to take advantage of the infestation.

Other destructive recommendations by the committee include:

– Expanded harvesting of “marginal” forest types (Recommendation 2.1), that is, in high elevation subalpine regions with slower growth rates and where regeneration after logging is slower. This will not only damage sensitive ecosystems, but will result in an expansion of Not Sufficiently Restocked (NSR) sites in the province.

– Expanding area-based tenures (Recommendation 5.1), as opposed to volume-based tenures and timber sales. Area-based tenures, ie. Tree Farm Licenses, ultimately limit the diversity of firms in the industry. Over time typically larger entities will acquire area-based tenures in areas with higher timber values, as the history of the province shows. While Community Forest Tenures can be progressive additions to BC’s system of forestry, most area-based tenures are a means towards corporate concentration in the industry. They also diminish the public’s ability to regulate such lands and to create new protected areas, as they confer more private-property type rights on technically public lands.

Instead of opening up protected forest reserves and ensuring more overcutting that will only exacerbate the future falldown, the AFA is calling for a forest and jobs transition strategy involving ending massive wood waste in clearcuts, incentives for value-added wood manufacturing industries, support and training for unemployed forestry workers, expanded protection of forests to sustain ecosystems and communities, and economic diversification of rural communities.

“More overcutting and opening up protected forest reserves to try to prop-up an unsustainable industry a bit longer is like burning parts of your house for firewood after depleting all other wood sources. In the end, you’re a lot worse off,” stated Wu. “Rewarding unsustainable behaviour with more unsustainable behavior is completely the wrong approach. The Interior timber industry’s unsustainable expansion and overcutting of beetle-affected wood and vast areas of living trees should not be rewarded with more of the same inside of our protected forest reserves – that’s the worst, most myopic course of action possible and it’s precisely the type of mindset that has brought this planet to the ecological brink.”

2025 Activity Report & Financials

Apr 30 2026

2025 was a milestone year for the Ancient Forest Alliance and the old-growth campaign. Despite the BC government's backsliding on many of its old-growth commitments, there was still much work to be proud of, including celebrating our 15th year working to protect ancient forests. Check out our 2025 Activity Report & Financials to see the impact YOU made on 2025, plus, find out what we have in store for 2026!

Announcements