As part of its 2019 compliance audit program, the Board randomly selected forest licence A30171, held by Cooper Creek Cedar Ltd. in the Selkirk Natural Resource District for audit. This was a full scope compliance audit of activities carried out between September 1, 2017, and September 26, 2019.
Cooper Creek complied with most of the requirements of the Forest and Range Practices Act and the Wildfire Act. However, the audit did find a non-compliance involving an excavator that crossed a bridge that was not rated to handle the weight of the machine, and that Cooper Creek needs to prepare site plans for roads built outside of cutblocks.
As part of its 2018 compliance audit program, the Board randomly selected the Arrow Field Unit portion of BC Timber Sales’ (BCTS) Kootenay Business Area for audit. The Arrow Field Unit covers the Arrow Lakes and is approximately 1,350,000 hectares, starting at the US border and stretching north towards Revelstoke. BCTS has several operating areas dispersed throughout the field unit. The communities of Trail, Castlegar, Fruitvale, Nakusp and Rossland are within the field unit.
The audit found that BCTS and timber sale licensees’ practices complied with FRPA and the WA, but also found that several licensees’ fire hazard assessment practices require improvement. While licensees are abating the fire hazard as a standard practice, they cannot demonstrate that they have been diligent in assessing the hazard, which is a non-compliance with legislation.
In September 2018, the Forest Practices Board audited range planning and practices on five agreements for grazing in the Rocky Mountain Natural Resource District. The range tenures are located between Cranbrook and Golden, and near Fernie, BC. The audit involved assessing compliance with the Forest and Range Practices Act, including the required content of range use plans and whether agreement holders met practice requirements such as protection of riparian areas, upland areas, licensed waterworks and maintenance of range developments.
The audit identified two areas requiring improvement related to the grazing schedules.
This special investigation examined whether the roles and responsibilities of woodlot licensees, the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development, woodlot federation/association, and forest professionals in the Kootenay Lake Timber Supply Area (TSA) are clearly defined and understood, and are being carried out in a manner that ensures the woodlot licensees are complying with forest practices legislation.
Investigators assessed the activities of 15 woodlot licensees in the Kootenay Lake TSA portion of the Selkirk Natural Resource District for compliance with FRPA and the Wildfire Act.
A landowner complained that Interfor Corporation (Interfor) was not maintaining its roads and caused landslides into Little Cayuse Creek where he gets his water. He also asserted that government was not adequately enforcing Interfor’s maintenance requirements.
The Board’s investigation determined that Interfor had not conducted adequate inspections to ensure no material adverse effect on forest resources so did not comply with the Forest and Range Practices Act road maintenance requirements. The investigation also found that government was not doing enough to determine if Interfor had complied with its road maintenance requirements.
The Board investigated a complaint about proposed harvesting around recreation sites at Thone and Williamson Lakes. The complainants were concerned that the cutblocks were too close to the campsites and lakes. They thought the harvesting posed and unacceptable risk to: the recreational experience of campers and anglers, public safety due windthrow, riparian ecosystems and water levels of the lakes and streams. Harvesting in recreation sites had been authorized by a recreation officer.
This investigation examined whether the planned harvest would comply with the legal requirements, whether the harvest adequately managed the risk to the elements the complainants were concerned about, if the recreation officer’s authorization of harvest was reasonable and if public consultation was appropriate.
