Okanagan TSA Steering Committee Minutes
Okanagan Shuswap Forest District Boardroom
9:00 am – 11:30 am, January 10, 2008
Chair: Luke Gubbels, Forsite
Scribe: Bob Annand, MFR
Attendees: WFN - Grant Thompson, Federated - Greg Hislop, Tolko - Peter Love, Harold Waters, BCTS - Brian Bedard, Jeff Fukumoto, Weyco - Brian Drobe, Gorman’s - Kerry Rouck, Splatsin - Steve Giesbrecht, LP - Mike Copperthwaite, Monte Lake - Ken Stowe, OIFS – Glen Dick, MFR SSSP - Katherine Ladyman, MFR First Nations Program - Mahrusa Sherstobitoff, MFR C&E Don Purdy, MFR Tenures - Kimm Magill-Hofmann, Bernie Kaplun, Bob Warner, Wolfgang Beck, Ray Crampton, Bob Annand, Forsite – Luke Gubbels.
Old Business
Topic / Discussion Lead / Description / Meeting NotesHousekeeping / Chair / · Action Bob: Add participants to email distribution list Mahrusa, Ray, Kimm, Wolfgang, Bob Warner
Professional reliance / All / Standing topic at meetings. / · Professional Reliance survey including district, region, branch MFR professionals initiated by Rick Smith aimed to understand opinions and level of alignment. Next step: Rick is to ask licensees to participate. If not aligned an option is to revive the climate culture working group. (Rich T)
· Second attempt at ABCFP Prof Reliance webcast Jan 17 – see Rich T.
I-Team / Rick Smith
Peter Love / Standing topic. Update on issues that I-team is dealing with. / · Last meeting cancelled. Nothing to report. Next meeting set for February – any topics? (Peter Love)
FSP’s, issues etc. / All / Standing Topic. Licensees to pick topics of concern for an open discussion / · FN Referrals requesting spatial information for bands. There are discrepancies in mapsheets. (Harold W) Action: Laverne is aware and will clarify mapsheet discrepancies.
· Natural Range Barriers (NRB) – Tolko approach is to ask Range Tenure Holders (RTH’s) to ID NRB’s and concerns in areas Tolko proposed development areas. However the experience is that RTH’s are not up to speed on NRB’s. (Harold W.) Action: Rich T to ask Vic Wright to include for upcoming RTH meetings.
· FSP OSLRMP Order deadline – FSP Amendment final must be submitted by February 28th, 2008. Also requires full FN Consultation including 60 day consult period which begins at time of final submission (info sharing begins earlier).
· Recent Tenures meeting addressed FSP amend review process, status etc. Some changes in lead reviewers.
· A request was made to seek a change/delay in the Order deadline date to help out licensees experiencing difficult times in the industry. Don’t want anything interfering with CP issuance after Feb 28th. (Greg H). Actual risk is believed to be low as licensees are already committing themselves to following LRMP. (Kerry R) Action: Request that Ron seek relief from Feb 28 deadline
· Action: Request that Mahrusa/Laverne look into consultation options. Also clarify if information sharing reduces consultation timeframe.
· Note: Mahrusa requests that if a licensee is having difficulties with the FSP amendment info sharing and consultation that they advise her of the situation.
· CP Issuance will not change – MFR will continue to issue CPs after Feb 28th deadline. What the licensee does with the CP is up to them (i.e. harvest with no FSP amend approval). However, MFR interpretation is that a contravention occurs with no FSP amendment approval.
Association Update / Paul Knowles / Standing Topic / · No report
FN NRFL update / Mahrusa Sherstobitoff / Standing Topic
Who has signed and what is the volume / · Adams Lake uplift NRFL in consultation (Kamloops)
· Little Shuswap is issued
· Neskonlith to be issued by end of January.
Road Safety / All / Standing Topic / · Nothing to report.
Community of Practice / Kerry Rouck / Discussion of topic for fall schedule. / · Nothing to report – Hold off until spring
OGMA replacement concerns / Rob Kennett / Concerns that ILMB will not be tracking OGMA replacement. / · Ongoing – Joint Forestry Committee reviewing. Requesting ILMB to manage the data. Action: Luke will also be seeking information and reporting back at next meeting.
New Business
Topic / Discussion Lead / Description / Meeting CommentsUpdates / Glen Dick / Update on Aerial photo coverage
LBIR FIA expenditures, majors, MOFR, MOE / · 1) Aerial photo coverage of district is complete (not TFL/Anarchist). 2 Funding sources North FIA/FFT OIFS contract and south is Fed MPB fund.
· Colour photos being distributed now. North Ortho image available by Jan 31, some issues with South ortho images.
· Available in LRDW for ARC Map? Yes and no - some conversion work required for north.
· Overview map and status sheet handouts
· 2) Provided a FIA /FFT Forecast - 2 handouts budget & rationale
· FIA 07/08 (OSTSA 1.3+VRI 0.70+Fert 0.0)=1.99 mill
· FIA 08/09 (OSTSA 1.3+VRI 0.75+Fert 0.5)=2.55 mill
· FFT 07/08 (ONA 0.25+T 0.69)=0.94
· FFT 08/09 (ONA 2.00+T 0.0)=2.00?? anticipate large silv program
· Silv program requires land based investment rationale input. Action: Glen Dick has initiated a conference call with all FIA account managers set for Mon January 21, 2008 @ 8:00-10:00 am
Lakeshore Management Areas / Rick Smith
Richard Toperczer / · Licensee plans for lakeshore management areas. Our desire to see fuel management near habitations.
· Lakeshore management areas in interface areas; What are Licensees plans for these areas. / · Seeking input from licensees on interest/plans to address fuel management in LMZs. (Rich T). Currently not much interest due to FSP R/Ss, Class A lakes, and OGMAs (replacement requirements), other constraints. Varies slightly by licensee and when area based tenures apply.
· If licensees not taking it on then MFR will explore options with small and intermediate scale salvage FLTCs.(Rich T)
TSA data / Katherine Ladyman / TSA inflow data that was previously requested and a discussion of the results. / · Looking at harvest plans for 2008.
· No changes stated since November numbers (although Federated’s picture may change).
NRFL update / Rick Smith
Richard Toperczer / Our plan to proceed with proactive NRFL and why. / · No plan to proceed with a NRFL – plan is to offer 300,000 to BCTS TSLs (150,000 outside operating area – purchase blocks or develop). Sell at 70% MPS. This may reduce volume being imported from other districts. (Rich T). Contracts already/still in place for some TSL import volume (Peter L).
· Major concern from Splatsin about ability to sell NRFL volume and compete with additional cheaper TSL wood. (Steve G) Action: Rich to share concern with Rick and include in Briefing Note to RED if not already included.
· Another way to look at this is it may keep a local mill open so NRFLs have a mill to sell to. (Jeff F).
WTP tracking / Question on how WTP’s are being tracked / · More than a Professional obligation to maintain. FPPR section 86(3)(a)(iv) requires licensees (FLTC holders exempted) to report into RESULTS all WTR’s by June 1 of each year. Automatically enters into LRDW for conflict assessment and/or adjudication. (From Brian Westgate)
· Note that C&E is looking into the reporting of information such as WTR’s) under Section 86. (Don P)
· Caution – pre-2004 WTR’s may not be entered. Also data is only as current as licensees update which is annually.
· Note CP issuance will not be disrupted if a WTR is conflicting with a CP block. That is an FSP issue not a cutting authourity issue.
· FPPR Sec 67 states you must not harvest in a WTR unless the block area that it relates to has developed mature seral condition attributes.
· LRDW file: whse_forest_vegetation_RSLT_forest_cover then look for reserve and reserve objective codes (try Tim Salkeld VRI Victoria).
Declared areas and what meets the test of FPPR 14(4) / Rob Kennett
Harold Waters / What are “all activities and evaluations…”; there are different requirements for assessments that were used under section 196 of FRPA. Ie. Gating / · Clarification requested on interpretation of fuzzy FPPR Sec 14(4) around what are “All Activities and Evaluations”. (Harold W) Action: Rich T, by end of week, will get Victoria interpretation. Note: Some would rather just use their own professional interpretation (i.e. meets tests of our FSP’s).
· Orders don’t apply on declared blocks
· Must FN info sharing be done before declaring an area (Mike C) – Answer is “FN info sharing is an option to avoid CP consultation. If you do not do it, then we must consult on a CP. But, it's not a requirement as an activity or evaluation in order to declare a block. Declared or not the block will have to be consulted or info shared on. There are no rights granted to declared areas, only protection from future events, (Greg H. Rich T/Larry Hanlon)
· Clarification on need to ‘declare’ Sec 196(1) blocks (Brian B) – Some suggest there is no need to declare because they are protected.
· Note: It must be made clear up front what is Sec 196 and what is not for when C&E reviews the results. Needs to be clear for later reviews if new Orders were to apply to each block (Don P).
2008/09 Fertilization program / Bernie Peschke / 2008 Fertilization program and possible next steps; (e-mail handout) / · Handout provided
Industry economics / Greg Hislop / Questions’ regarding provincial direction or initiatives being developed to assist licensees in light of the economic situation the forest industry is being faced with. / · Various initiative regarding MPB but have heard and seen nothing about how the provincial government might help the industry in tough economic times. Request for communication to the TSA steering committee on what is being done provincially. Oversupply with downturn is bad. As owners of the resource what is the province doing.(Greg H) Action: Rich to share information as it becomes available.
· We are all in this together – If there are things that can be done locally we must know about them. What are some local solutions? (Greg H, Kerry R) Action: Rich to talk to district Revenue Group and look at appraisals and advantages that might help – while considering confidentiality, MFR may have some, or be able to share some, information.
· Consider district actions carefully and evaluate risk to operators before proceeding. May just be an awareness issue. Example is Issue of adding NRFL or BCTS volume – it may be an advantage to some but a disadvantage to others. We need to start a dialogue on the local industry and effects. (Greg H) Action: Standing Agenda Topic or?
Empowerment Probe / Rich T / What is it and how will it affect you? / · To Gain operational efficiencies
· 5 Pilots – 3 involve licensees
· 1) DM delegate signing authourity to Rev Techs, 2) RED delegate CP extension Fee assessments to DM, 3) Look at BCTS model for timber pricing on “forest management and safety” initiatives, 4) FLTCs < 500m3 delegation, 5) ISS managing contracts.
Future meeting Schedule / · Next meeting: March 6, 2008 - OK and SH Rooms booked by Bob