North Coast Land and Resource Management Plan
NEWSLETTER - Number 1 - March 2001
New North Coast LRMP gearing up for start
Extensive mapping and special reports form significant legacy for businesses and residents in plan area
EXTENSIVE background work is nearing completion for the upcoming North Coast Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). This material will form the basis for sound planning recommendations and will also be an important public legacy for North Coast businesses and residents. The plan will deal primarily with land based resources and directly-linked nearshore areas.
An LRMP provides the vision for how land will be managed, and sets the balance for the land base available to support forestry jobs, mining, tourism and environmental protection. For example, coastal rainforests have been in the news a lot lately. It will be up to the LRMP to decide the role of forestry in North Coast forests.
All information will be available to the general public. Maps and reports will be posted on the North Coast LRMP web site at <http:\\www.RMD.gov.bc.ca\LRMP\ncoast>, or may be reviewed in hard copy at the LRMP office in the Skeena-Queen Charlotte Regional District office at the corner of First Avenue and McBride Street in Prince Rupert.
Mapping Project
Finishing touches are being placed on a collection of 48 detailed resource maps covering eight categories. The maps illustrate coastal information: topography; biodiversity; aquatic resources; tourism, recreational and cultural values; timber and mineral resources; and other human land uses including existing and proposed tenures.
This work has occupied two full-time GIS personnel in Smithers for the past year. They have inventoried and collected existing maps scattered throughout a number of ministries, updated information and filled in gaps with new maps, where necessary.
The maps will be used at the LRMP Table to help identify where key resource values are found, and will also be used to supplement local information.
They can be viewed or down-loaded from the web site or viewed in hard copy at the Prince Rupert LRMP office.
Current Conditions Report
The North Coast LRMP Current Conditions Reportwas released March 26th, 2001 and is the first in a series of background reports which are being prepared.
The ‘Conditions’ report presents a ‘snapshot’ of the plan area. Running nearly 200 pages, the report is filled with interesting and useful information on subjects ranging from a history of the area through habitat, to rare and endangered plant and animal life found in the plan area.
Prepared by consultants Greg C. Tamblyn and Hanna Horn, the report is an easy-read, illustrated with 37 tables and 17 maps.
Computer Modelling
To provide faster answers to questions raised during LRMP planning discussions, a computer modelling team will be on hand for analysis support. Using sophisticated computer software, the team will be able to conduct computer simulation of the future impacts of a range of management scenarios. One example of a question which might be modelled is, ‘How much old growth forest will there be in 500 years and how will it be distributed across the plan area?’ The intent of the modelling is to provide fast, accurate information to assist in complex decision-making and speed the decision-making process.
These models will be built using a ‘collaborative’ process that includes technical experts and local people who know the area. It is not just a ‘black box’ run by distant experts, but a tool to help everyone better understand how resources function in the plan area.
What three seasoned veterans have to say about the LRMP process
Wayne
Sawchuk
Chetwynd, B.C.
Trapper, logger, wilderness tourism operator, and photographer
Over the course of more than five years, Wayne Sawchuk sat as the environment and conservation representative on four LRMPs in Northern BC. “It was quite a ride,” he says. “This is basic local democracy in action. Nobody can ever predict the outcomes. For the most part it incorporates the local perspective, and you often come up with innovative solutions.”
Was it worthwhile? “Absolutely! You come up with local solutions to vexing problems.” Sawchuk admits it can be challenging, but says he can’t think of a better way. “When the process is locally based you can’t ignore your neighbours and you have to live with the decisions you make.”
In commenting on the process, he points out that it is useful for government agencies to put aside their individual ministry perspectives when they come to the Table, and that the consensus-based bargaining process is critical because it ensures that legitimate concerns get into the plan. Over time, all participants begin to understand this, and as a result learn to trust the process, he says.
Sawchuk points out that there must be commitment by government to accept the results of the Table. “They can’t adjust or change the plan once it leaves the Table. No tweaking. Otherwise, the Table would have to build in safeguards to counter interference. In general, [government] has been consistent in its hands-off approach once consensus is reached. In its deliberations, the Table should have found and addressed any problems before the plan was finalized.”
Sawchuk sees the certainty that comes with consensus among all sectors as a positive outcome. “All sectors will have general rules for operating on any piece of the land base.” The cross-sectoral discussions that take place at the Table results in a knowledgeable group of people in the community who can work together in the future which is an additional benefit of the process. These people are an on-going resource because they know the ropes and know how to come to solutions.
He says all Tables feel strongly that various sectors working together result in a better plan than any that could be devised separately. Members of the Table move from being adversaries to becoming allies in supporting the plan. “The benefits far outweigh the time and stress, and it’s enormously gratifying to see the results out on the land base.”
In addition to his sub-committee activities, Sawchuk devoted some eight days a month for five years to LRMP work.
Phil HallinanKamloops, B.C.Past-president and Director-at-large, BC Wildlife Federation
“The BC Wildlife Federation has always supported land use management planning,” says Phil Hallinan, who has personal experience with three LRMPs. He explains that while the Federation is generally supportive of the process, as with any endeavour of this magnitude “…it is not without warts.”
He expresses two areas of concern. The first is that planning is often based on Timber Supply Areas, sometimes bisecting rivers. “We prefer to plan for an entire watershed,” he explains. His second concern is that Table participants must be able to think globally. “We are at the Table to decide the best use of the land across the board.”
As a participant in the province’s first LRMP (Kamloops), an involvement that spanned seven years and to which he devoted nearly one full month each year, Hallinan is unhesitating in stating he’d do it again. “Besides the fact it’s the only game in town, the LRMP process presents a forum where people sit down and really listen to one another. From a purely educational perspective, it’s worth it because you begin to understand all the uses on the land base.”
Hallinan points out that the Kamloops LRMP concluded with no economic loss; and in fact there was an economic gain to the forest industry. “We wound up with only 4% in parklands, but no one at the Table was dissatisfied because they understood how we got there.” He said the Table was also responsible for new innovation, resulting from revelations at the Table, which resulted in the Wildlife Federation purchase of part of a hatchery, which the Ministry of Environment now operates.
He admits the process can be stressful because people are called upon to make difficult decisions. “You’re sometimes unsure if the decision is the right one, but through the process you build confidence in the people you’re working with and gain the confidence to make the decision.”
LRMPs are only the beginning. Hallinan explains that people have a tendency to believe that once a strategic plan is in place, the job is done. “This isn’t the case. This is your plan, so you have to watch it. In Kamloops, former members of the Table have stayed on to monitor the plan, and we meet quarterly.” If changes are needed, he says there are mechanisms in place to handle it. The integrity of the plan is assured because everyone on the committee was at the Table and recalls the basis on which the decisions were reached, so the basic intent of the plan remains unaltered.
Phil Hallinan is a former sawmill superintendent and Past President of the BC Wildlife Federation.
Damian KeatingTerrace, B.C.
Administrator, Silviculture Forester, West Fraser Timber
Though he has participated in only one LRMP, over the past 12 years Damian Keating has devoted considerable time to the public planning process.
Most recently he represented his employer, West Fraser Timber, in his capacity as silviculture forester, at the Kalum LRMP Table. He also participated in the Thunderbird Resource Plan for the Lakelse area, and along with others from the company took part in planning processes associated with the Timber Supply Area (TSA).
Keating feels that LRMP’s are worthwhile because they provide for a great deal of local input. He is emphatic about the importance of local participation, stating, “We’d rather have locals tell us what to do in the local area.”
In addition to company participation as a stakeholder, Keating says that West Fraser was also able to contribute resource information and knowledge to the process, citing as examples discussions on ungulate winter range and grizzly bear habitat.
Keating says work on the LRMP involved about four days a month for five years. He would like to see a shorter, more streamlined process. “I would like to see consultants gather the inventory, come up with a draft and options and then convene an LRMP Table to review and discuss the options.” He predicts this approach could trim the process down to six months or a year.
He emphasizes that no one should be excluded, and reasons a shorter time span would allow people to see the process through. He says over the five-year Kalum process some people couldn’t finish and others came in at the middle. While supportive of the results, he remembers time spent backtracking to bring new participants up-to-speed.
“It was tough negotiating at times, and questionable whether the Table would reach consensus,” Keating recalls. With the advantage of hindsight, he says that difficult issues should have been tackled early in the process. “We should have jumped into the fire sooner and gotten into the negotiations. We would have been less pressured at the end.” Nonetheless, agreement was reached and the plan has gone to Cabinet for approval.
Keating says the most significant outcome of the LRMP was that consensus was reached; “otherwise it would have been a tremendous waste of effort.” He explains, “You always feel like you lose something, and the new plan will have impacts on the allowable Annual Cut (AAC) and operating costs.” Despite this, the industry is reasonably happy with the overall result. Industry members feel the plan will bring certainty and help to avoid protests, ‘wars-in-the-woods’ and approval delays.
Looking back, it was a long haul.While the company covered his costs
and is happy with the outcome, Keating says he is definitely glad
the process is concluded. After 12 years, he says he’s ready
for a break. As an individual citizen, would he do it again? “Yes,
but not for that long.”
How the public selection process for LRMP participants works
PROBABLY the most frequently asked question in the early stages of the LRMP process is, 'How does government choose which members of the public will participate in the LRMP?' In fact, government does not make that selection; the community does. In what is described by participants as "a highly democratic process," LRMP planning emphasizes public collaboration on local land planning decisions. There are tremendous differences between planning areas throughout the province, so unique planning solutions are designed for each one.
Plans
are developed based on input from individuals who are knowledgeable
about each plan area. Personnel from both the provincial and federal
governments answer questions and provide technical and scientific support
for the Table and information on their agencies’ mandates.
How local citizens are chosen to take part depends on the planning process. Kevin Kriese, project manager for the upcoming North Coast LRMP, says that anyone who cares about, is affected by, or needs to implement an LRMP is considered to be a 'stakeholder'. Since January he and his staff have been working to identify North Coast stakeholders.
Now in the second round of talks with some 30 individuals and groups who will be affected by the North Coast LRMP, Kriese reports on the feedback. "Most people are leaning toward a 'sector-based' model where representatives speak for and are accountable to the sector they represent. They also favour a small planning table with 15 to 25 members."
Kriese says 'Sector' categories under consideration for the North Coast include: community economic development; conservation and the environment; commercial fishing; forestry; hunting, fishing, trapping; labour; mining and exploration; recreation; and tourism. He cautions adjustments may be necessary to ensure that all sectors are covered and that the planning group is balanced.
After groups decide which category is most suitable for them, they collectively select one or two representative. Based on recommendations from past LRMPs, Kriese and his team will suggest a list of skills and abilities that each participant should possess. These include good listening skills, a demonstrated ability to work collaboratively and a strong knowledge of the plan area. In addition, representatives should have support and respect from the sector they represent.
Talks are ongoing about the role that First Nations will play in the North Coast LRMP. The province is dealing with them on a government-to-government basis. Kriese says that stakeholders consider First Nations participation to be very important.
There is still much to do before the Table convenes. Kriese explains that some North Coast sectors regularly work together, such as economic development and commercial fisheries. Others are loose-knit and will be coming together for the first time to prepare for participation in the LRMP. This process may take time, and he emphasizes that the ability of stakeholders to work together will determine the speed of the process.
The North Coast Table is not expected to be ready to convene its first meeting until late spring. He notes that public meetings will be suspended during the provincial election.
Regional District hosts LRMP office
For easy access to the LRMP process, the Skeena-Queen Charlotte Regional District is hosting a North Coast LRMP office. Members of the public are invited to visit the office. It is located adjacent to the reception area. Visitors can use the LRMP computer to visit the North Coast LRMP web site, or other related sites.
Copies of maps compiled for the process are also available, along with copies of all reports and information prepared for the planning Table.
LRMP OFFICE
Open weekdays
8:30 AM to 4:30 PM
(except statutory holidays)
100 First Avenue East
Prince Rupert, BC
(at the corner of First Avenue and McBride Street)
