Upper Olesen Creek logging- results of July 22nd meeting

[smallman]

Hi All:
As many of you know SAS and several representatives of the hiking/climbing community met with BCTS representatives July 22 to discuss Olesen Creek logging plans (SW 144) and some additional forestry issues. SAS's viewpoint on this discussion is that this was a highly productive meeting with BCTS making some substantial concessions with regards to this block and in the drainage given the multiple user constraints and pressures (other recreational users, First Nations, BCTS' mandate as the determinant for stumpage etc.) BCTS is under in the Sea to Sky Forest District. The complexity of these pressures and constraints on BCTS indicated that the diversion to other areas or a complete moratorium on logging in the Olesen creek drainage by BCTS is unrealistic. Based on this realization, a strategy of impact mitigation seemed more realistic and based on this proceeded to negotiate for the following changes to SW144 which SAS believes will greatly mitigate recreational impacts (see attached map):

1. The Northern portion of the block directly adjacent to the park boundary is to removed from the block (green and yellow areas on map). This area is basically from the "Back door" (identified in Barley's Squamassif Guide) westward. The area removed includes the crag Winter Heat and the saddle trails between the Slhanny and the Chief and preserves the primary recreational resources at risk. The effect of this removal is to preserve the view from Tony's Bench and very substantially reduce visual impacts of this block from the 3rd peak of the chief (about 90%).
2. Southern block boundary is to be pulled approximately 75m away from the trail to The Longhouse to buffer impacts on this trail and to the forest in and around "the Chasm" slot canyon. An approximately 200m buffer is to be maintained on the Longhouse.
3. Additional group retention patches are going to be laid out in the remaining southern portion to further mitigate visual impacts from the 3rd peak. The main criteria for this layout is to be timber windfirmness and visual impact reduction. We suggested that a portion of the area of "Boulders" between GPS stations 39 -41 and streams K and N be a possible retention area due to reduced logging operability. A retention patch in this area would further reduce impacts to longhouse trail.
4. The potential of including the triangle area from the SE corner of the Chief park to the Southern boundary as a forest recreation area was also indicated to be a possibility. SAS is determining what the potential implications of this designation are.

BCTS is going to implement these changes on the ground in the next month and then provide maps for review and stakeholder comments.

Other issues discussed:

BCTS and the FLINRO agreed the current visual impact assessment points only being on the highway to determine visual impacts of harvest blocks is inadequate and that assessment points on the Chief and Gondola are going to be implemented. They also stated the Visual Quality Objectives which set out the allowed visible level of forest modification (ie harvesting) on the landscape in the Southern portion of their tenure areas are under review and are to changed to a higher retention level. They are awaiting analysis of impacts to timber supply before implementing these changes.

MA 109 - BCTS stated the chances MA109 was to be logged was virtually zero and that this block was brought up in a short deadline mapping exercise to determine potential harvest areas based on stand age and timber types. It is NOT considered to be a viable block.

Spatial data base of climbing resources: BCTS stated it needs to update and maintain its inventory of climbing resources. SAS agreed that this information is important to BCTS and the other licence holders in the District and that we are willing to supply that info. However, we are trying to determine what resources are developed out there too especially in terms of new bouldering areas. So, scrubbers we need to know what areas you are working in. We hope to have a google maps application up soon for you to identify the locations of new areas. map is https://www.dropbox.com/s/0mlvjkgs9e5mp ... 0.31-3.jpg

Sincerely

Chris Small
Board Member SAS

[Peter]

Thanx for the detailed report and for attending the meetings Chris. It's obvious BCTS is willing to work with the climbing community to protect our climbing assets. However, the broader issue is the visual impact, mainly from the Chief. This involves more than the climbing community and would need to be challenged higher up the food chain. If people are still against any logging in that area at all, then there are petitions and campaigns floating around that people can contribute to...

[natsdad]

Thanks, Chris and SAS:

I greatly appreciate you folks meeting with BCTS and speaking up for the climbing community. The concessions that they appear to be willing to make are important and will help a lot. Personally, I'd prefer not to see any more logging in the areas above and east of the Chief. The area is of tremendous recreation value (and not just to climbers).

Please do post up a google map or some other document when you can - I found the linked map a bit hard to decipher.

Many thanks,
Steve

[smallman]

Hello All: I am posting up a larger scale map https://www.dropbox.com/s/4y97qs6eiu8wt ... 283%29.pdf which better indicates the changes made that our discussions with BCTS have brought so far. This orthophoto map shows the park boundaries in green. They are completing additional changes to this block in the field over the next month and this is not a final block configuration. I will agree with Peter in stating that continued and increased pressure at the higher trophic levels of food chain (deputy minister, Ministerial , Premier levels) in the Ministry of Forest, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, Ministry of Tourism and the Premiers office may prevent logging in the area. If you feel strongly about this issue then I ask that you take the time beyond signing the change.org petition and write a personal email to the Deputy Ministers and Ministers in the above Ministries as it carries much more weight and influence.

Chris Small
SAS Board Member

[natsdad]

I will agree with Peter in stating that continued and increased pressure at the higher trophic levels of food chain (deputy minister, Ministerial , Premier levels) in the Ministry of Forest, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, Ministry of Tourism and the Premiers office may prevent logging in the area. If you feel strongly about this issue then I ask that you take the time beyond signing the change.org petition and write a personal email to the Deputy Ministers and Ministers in the above Ministries as it carries much more weight and influence.

Thanks, Chris. The new map is much easier to read and recognize the features affected by the proposed logging. I join you in urging fellow climbers (and hikers, etc.) to contact BC politicians to voice your opposition to this proposal.

cheers,
Steve

[Peter]

Honourable Steve Thomson
FORESTS, LANDS AND NATURAL RESOURCE OPERATIONS
FLNR.Minister@gov.bc.ca

Honourable Shirley Bond
JOBS, TOURISM AND SKILLS TRAINING
JTST.Minister@gov.bc.ca

Christy Clark
Premier
premier@gov.bc.ca

[natsdad]

Hi All:

The Squamish Chief has this article in it:

http://www.squamishchief.com/news/local ... -1.1331509

claiming that "B.C. Timber Sales have altered the boundaries of a proposed logging block to leave a popular climbing area untouched."

Does anyone - particularly from SAS or CASBC - know what the current status is, with this ongoing issue?

Thanks,
Steve

[hevyduty]

I was told this was the case earlier this week! but wasn't able to comment the people involved where real happy about the out come !the story in the chief is true , so the longhouse and the other crags will still be magic areas . Cheers hevy