New posts

Whistler to start logging WORCA trails...

Sept. 16, 2010, 4:30 p.m.
Posts: 11
Joined: Aug. 4, 2009

Yep, you heard it right. Whistler to begin logging, in many spots that will make things suck. Here's what's going down, first good, then the bad:

1. Whistler/Squamish/Pemby + First Nations now have control over their forests. This means local politicos can at least try to make better decisions than those made in the past, when the entire area was cut to ground, and which took about 75 years to recover. Since the logging heydays, the entire Sea-to-Sky corridor is now nearly entirely tourism based or related to it, meaning that logging has very little economic value.

2. However, under the Community Forest tenure agreement our local governments have to log a certain amount per year - "about 40 hectares of forest" [new info: 20,000 m3 per year. At an average of 500 m3/ha, that harvest volume equals around 40 ha]. That's a lot of trees. For that, they get a measly $30, 000 - $50,000. Yep, that's it, small change in this town or any town for that matter. This logging includes old growth in the fragile sub and high alpine because the second-growth won't be ready to log for a few more years. It includes logging of existing bike trails, ski touring areas, heli- and snowmobile terrain, and hiking terrain.

Where exactly will logging take place?

Well I went to an info session last week to find out. Pictures here.

a) Logging is currently slated to take place among established WORCA x-country mountain bike trails Comfortably Numb/Young Lust/Green Lake Loop above Green Lake; Trainwreck south of Function Junction; and Runaway Train and the Sea-to-Sky Trail in the Calcheak/Chek areas. Proposed logging cuts will disrupt and possibly destroy sections of these trails and call for their rerouting and rebuilding. Enduro events such as the BC Bike Race, Cheakamus Challenge, Comfortably Numb run etc. will be adversely affected by these logging operations.

b) Logging is slated to take place in the Callaghan Valley close to the established Nordic Centre trail network, and close to if not in the area of Khyber Pass on Whistler mountain above Cheakamus, where lots of us love to go ripping down in winter…

Obviously this leaves a lot of "huh? wtf?" questions which is what mostly everyone in the Sea-to-Sky and the media is saying (see below). This isn't bullshit hippy "I love trees" opposition (I like them in my fireplace too). This is "I love our local economy based on natural tourism" opposition that has us all wondering why we don't pause logging for a few years, slow down, and wait for more advantageous second growth. This is opposition that YouTube - 2010 Whistler opposition to oldgrowth logging TV News Story (ski touring, heli-skiing, biking, snowmobiling, etc). Tourism Whistler has also expressed guarded concern over the adverse impact of logging.

Get the info below, but here's the quick of it:

SO, you are an avid outdoor maggot, you like Whistler, write in to our local papers and Mayor telling us how much you'd prefer it that the next time you visit Whistler, bike trails weren't closed/destroyed thanks to logging and that old growth remained in and around the areas you recreate in:

Write the Pique

Write the Question

Write the Mayor: whistlermayor [at] whistler.ca

Articles / info:

The real value of B.C.'s old-growth forests (Vancouver Sun) // great piece that discusses economic value of old growth for carbon offset sales

Logging the Sea-to-Sky: Cutting the Economy? // my own research into impact upon WORCA bike trails [HTML_REMOVED] local recreation tourism

Logging protesters

Sept. 16, 2010, 4:53 p.m.
Posts: 133
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

FYI, WORCA has, or is close to, signing a letter or agreement with the CCF about working together in areas where trails exists and working together to ensure they are not negatively impacted.

Sept. 16, 2010, 6:31 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Nov. 16, 2005

They can feel free to come in and clear cut Alpine again. Most folks would be happy. Seems retarded to cut old growth for a mere $30k. Thats like owning an old gold watch handed down over generations and pawning it for a few bucks to buy a case of beer. Goes to show what a bunch of stupid assholes there are running the show.

Sept. 16, 2010, 6:36 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: March 29, 2005

You should go back and check your numbers. Not that it isn't an important subject, but you are spreading some misinformation there.

The license is for 20,000 m3 per year. At an average of 500 m3/ha, that harvest volume equals around 40 ha.

To calculate the value of the logs, using the average log price for the last three months of 68.36$/m3 (http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/hva/ext...0/3m_Jul10.pdf) * 20,000 m3 per year = 1,367,200 $ / yr. Costs would come off of that.

I don't know what they are selling the logs for actually, but that should give some scale to it.

there is a lot of information about what the plan is and what community forests are all about here:

http://www.whistler.ca/index.php?Ite...tent[HTML_REMOVED]task=view

Some information from their FAQ document.
Q: Why does Whistler want to operate a community forest?
A: The RMOW has long recognized the primary importance of sound land management on the viewscapes and watersheds of the area to support the long-term economic, social and ecological viability of the resort community and to the regional economy. The community forest clearly recognizes that the natural beauty of the area is a strong draw for tourism and has those values at the top of mind when planning community forest operations.
The primary benefit of a community forest is that the RMOW and its partners will have management control of forest harvesting surrounding Whistler and not a private forestry company

The Cheakamus Community Forest successfully negotiated with the Ministry of Forests and Range to reduce the amount of timber to be cut in the area from 33 [HTML_REMOVED]#8211; 36,000 m3 to 20,000 m3. If the community forest did not exist, private companies would be harvesting up to that amount each year with extremely limited input from Whistler.

Q: Is old growth forest being logged?
A: Approximately 50 per cent of the Community Forest land is old growth forest, particularly in the upper elevations. To minimize the impacts of harvesting and place priority on community values, the community forest is developing an ecosystem-based management plan with EcoTrust Canada, a non-profit organization dedicated to creating a conservation economy, based on small-scale, sustainable harvesting that Richmond Plywood has committed to carrying out. The partners are particularly interested in small
2
group selection and shelterwood silviculture systems, and managing for visual quality, watersheds, recreation and cultural values.

As the tenure holder, the RMOW and its partners will set the standards for harvesting in line with their sustainability and cultural goals: an opportunity that does not exist for the RMOW outside of a community forest tenure. The actual harvesting will be done by local contractors in accordance with the ecosystem-based management plan and Forest Stewardship Plan guidelines.
Based on this foundation, a silviculture plan was developed that complements these goals. It employs small openings of 2 to 5 hectares using selective and shelterwood harvesting methods, meaning that trees will be left throughout each cut block site. Harvesting of some old growth trees will occur, but there will not be large clear cut openings as has been done in the past.

Q. How much land will be affected by harvesting 20,000 cubic metres?
A typical 40' utility pole contains about 0.7 m3. A logging truck carries about 40 m3. A rough estimate of the land harvested through the community forest Annual Allowable Cut of 20,000 m3 is 40 hectares at 500m3/hectare. The community forest landbase is approximately 30,000 hectares.

Sept. 16, 2010, 6:55 p.m.
Posts: 3634
Joined: Feb. 22, 2003

Posted via Mobile Device

Same battle we're fighting on the Island. But we don't have much of a chance against the private forest landowners.

Play : Comox Valley Mountain Biking - www.cvmtb.com

Sept. 16, 2010, 7:09 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: March 29, 2005

Posted via Mobile Device

Same battle we're fighting on the Island. But we don't have much of a chance against the private forest landowners.

the situation with private land on the island is very different from a Community Forest.

Sept. 16, 2010, 7:19 p.m.
Posts: 2794
Joined: Feb. 29, 2004

I think its pretty awesome that the Muni spent money on trails like Comfortably Numb and Train Wreck Etc. then is gonna spend more money to destroy and reroute some of for a little bit of coin that would not even come close to the money the spent building the trails in the first place…with the whole Ashphalt Plant bullshit plus other little things this council has been doing I am shocked there hasn't been a recall in the works….all these bums will be out come next election I think…and I thought Melamed would be a good mayor with all his enviromental standings in the past, what a hypocrite!!

mtbskierdad

Sept. 16, 2010, 7:49 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 9, 2003

You should go back and check your numbers. Not that it isn't an important subject, but you are spreading some misinformation there.

This…

Posted via Mobile Device

Same battle we're fighting on the Island. But we don't have much of a chance against the private forest landowners.

I think you would be stoked to deal with a Community Forest in comparison….

River City Cycle Club - www.rivercitycycle.ca

Comox Valley Mountain Biking - www.cvmtb.com

Sept. 16, 2010, 8:21 p.m.
Posts: 8935
Joined: Dec. 23, 2005

I think its pretty awesome that the Muni spent money on trails like Comfortably Numb and Train Wreck Etc. then is gonna spend more money to destroy and reroute some of for a little bit of coin that would not even come close to the money the spent building the trails in the first place…with the whole Ashphalt Plant bullshit plus other little things this council has been doing I am shocked there hasn't been a recall in the works….all these bums will be out come next election I think…and I thought Melamed would be a good mayor with all his enviromental standings in the past, what a hypocrite!!

Go back and re-read forests post (he may have edited to add the correct data after you posted)

1.3 million a year in revenue a year. Easy to pull from that to go back in a fix a couple trails. Or if they manage to pre-negotiate (as Flip has indicated) that they will log around the trails makes it a non issue.

I bet they do some choice selective cutting and nobody really notices other than a few logging trucks on the road.

Sept. 16, 2010, 8:46 p.m.
Posts: 2794
Joined: Feb. 29, 2004

Go back and re-read forests post (he may have edited to add the correct data after you posted)

1.3 million a year in revenue a year. Easy to pull from that to go back in a fix a couple trails. Or if they manage to pre-negotiate (as Flip has indicated) that they will log around the trails makes it a non issue.

I bet they do some choice selective cutting and nobody really notices other than a few logging trucks on the road.

I still think this council is all gonna disappear this next election, a lot of bungling and mismanagment of key issues in Whistler…still think Melamed is a hypocrite…I love his logic behind the pay parking and that he thinks all the lots should have to be pay parking, and everyone should use transit and/or walk ride their bikes, but he forgets that a ton of people live in Pemby and Squamish and those communities have shit transit options to get to and from Whistler….

mtbskierdad

Sept. 16, 2010, 8:58 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 12, 2006

Community forests should stick to second growth and serally regenerated stands. Old growth should be left alone. The intriinsic value of old growht is such that it is needed to maintain a carbon balance and biodiversity.
Do you actually think that the revenue will be 1.3 million a year. More realistically is 1/3 or less than that by the time all costs are factored in. By the time logging costs, waste, road, silviculture costs are factored in, the revenue to the municpality will be minimal. How many jobs? 10? Where is the sawmill? These logs will all be exported.

Sept. 16, 2010, 10:35 p.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: Aug. 9, 2003

serally regenerated stands.

What is a 'serally regenerated stand'?

Old growth should be left alone. The intriinsic value of old growht is such that it is needed to maintain a carbon balance and biodiversity.

I won't argue biodiverisity with you… yet, but carbon? an old growth stand sequesters very little carbon compared to a second growth stand. Old growth stands are slow growing and decay as much volume as they sequester. Fast growing second growth stands sequester a lot of carbon, plus the harvested wood (carbon) volume can be "locked up" in buildings etc.

These logs will all be exported.

if the timber were to be exported (once the timber had been offered for sale in canada and no one bid on the wood), explain to me why it is better to sell our timber for less money to under performing canadian mills that only produce dimensional lumber, than to sell the timber for what the global market will give us (= more money). Why should we lose money on the timber and the manufacturing? Oh that's right, lets keep some inefficient mills with over paid workers working.

I'm not supporting logging in Whistler, but lets keep the misinformation in check.

River City Cycle Club - www.rivercitycycle.ca

Comox Valley Mountain Biking - www.cvmtb.com

Sept. 17, 2010, 5:39 a.m.
Posts: 15479
Joined: May 29, 2004

To the OP,thanks for the misinformation…..and thanks to the foresters in this thread for clearing it up.

Sept. 17, 2010, 6:02 a.m.
Posts: 160
Joined: Jan. 4, 2006

keep squamish out of this one.

we do not yet have a community forest but are chomping at the bit to have one. especially after it has been talked about for 20 years.

there is going to be logging going on here over some of the trails on diamondhead in the next year or 2 but there has been tons of notice and lots of consultation with sorca.

this notice and consultation between sorca and bcts is a complete 180 from 10 years ago when the "save the plunge" battles took place.

Sept. 17, 2010, 6:59 a.m.
Posts: 0
Joined: March 29, 2005

Do you actually think that the revenue will be 1.3 million a year. More realistically is 1/3 or less than that by the time all costs are factored in. By the time logging costs, waste, road, silviculture costs are factored in, the revenue to the municpality will be minimal.

You're right, I should have written value of the logs. I don't know what their selling prices or costs are but I'd guess the muni will make more than 30,000$

Forum jump: