Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Avatar Grove - Part 2. Logging? What logging?






Shayn  McAskin at the Avatar Grove. 
Photo Tom Jaugelis.

After we finished inspecting the bizarre red cedar known as the 'knotty tree', most of us assumed that our job at the Avatar Grove was done for the day, and so we started our slow descent back to the logging road.

But Shayn McAskin, the Environmental Technology student of our group, was not moving. Instead, he was focusing his attention uphill. He was looking for something in the dense vegetation. There, he said after a moment, pointing to a grayish patch in the trees about 200 meters above our heads. I’m going to check that cliff to see what it's made of. You guys go ahead, I won't be long. What are you looking for? I asked. Limestone karst, he answered. I shrugged. Did we really need to embark on a nerdy geological expedition so late in the day and in this lousy weather?

Searching for limestone

But then Shayn explained. Limestone karst is potentially critical for our purpose of protecting the Avatar Grove, because logging companies are usually not permitted to clearcut a forest which lies on a limestone bedrock. Limestone reacts to water and so it weathers away very quickly once it's exposed. This can result in catastrophic soil erosion which may prevent the forest from ever growing back. It recently happened near Campbell River in an area called the Tahsish River Valley. After the forest was clearcut 10 years ago, the soil gradually washed away, and last July a wild fire turned the entire zone into a moonscape. That area is wasted, Shayn said, it will take hundreds of years for the forest to reclaim it. He added: I recently checked a geological map which indicates that a limestone karst deposit could be located right under our feet, so I hope we can find evidence of it.

Moonscape caused by limestone erosion, Tahsish River Valley.  
Photo Carol Ramsey, Canwest News Service.

After a few minutes, our little group reached the cliff. It was made of granite, not limestone. But around us, there were several yellowish boulders which Shayn immediately identified as limestone and he proceeded to take pictures of them as evidence. Well that’s cool, you've found the limestone, it's game over for the logging company, eh? I asked in excitement. I wish it were that simple, he said. Yes, there's definitely limestone here but it could have been brought down by the glacier. We'll have to establish that the bedrock itself is made of limestone. We may have to go to the top of that hill, he pointed out with his extended arm, and inspect the cutblock that’s already been harvested up there, maybe the bedrock is exposed enough for us to see the limestone. And so off we went. But the vegetation was getting increasingly dense as we climbed, and time was running out. The forest was resisting our intrusion. After an hour or so of hardcore bushwhacking, we finally spotted a more accessible area that we could use as a pathway to the top of the hill. We noted its location and planned to return in a couple weekends to continue our inspection.

'Local kids just fooling around'

Back in Port Renfrew, we stopped at a local coffee shop to warm ourselves a little. On its wall, there was an anonymous home-made leaflet which stated “Avatar Grove = Ecofraud”. The leaflet claimed that the grove had no environmental value, that many other sections of rainforest in the region were far more worthy of salvation, and that environmentalist Ken Wu (the guy who had initially brought the Avatar Grove into the media spotlight) had done nothing in the past to stop logging in the region. The leaflet then descended into profanity and personal attacks against Wu which I cannot reprint here and called upon local residents to “save your money” by not supporting Wu’s group.

What caught my attention about this pretty incoherent rant on the wall was not so much what was written in it, but rather over it – a hand-written inscription which had probably been added by someone else than its anonymous author and which read: “No Cutting Permit even Applied for, Save Avatar From?” The implication here was that there was no identifiable logging threat against the Avatar Grove and that environmentalists had therefore manufactured a nonexistent crisis. That same opinion was voiced by a local old man who went by the name of Lonesome Dave and was sitting at a table in the coffee shop. Those environmentalists are roaming around looking for causes and they have found one at the Avatar Grove, he commented. But the problem, he added, is that there is absolutely nothing happening here, this is a typical case of a Mouse that Roared.

I told him about the flagging tape which I had seen all over the Grove, and I pointed out that people don’t usually flag an area of old growth forest without a purpose. But Lonesome Dave responded: How do you even know that a logging company did that? The tape may have been placed by hiking enthusiasts opening a new trail, or local kids just fooling around. A few yards of tape don’t prove anything, he concluded.

But the flagging tape that I had seen up there had clearly been placed in a deliberate fashion, so I did not buy old Dave’s 'random act' theory. Later, Shayn explained to me that whoever did that had followed to the letter the guidelines provided by the BC Ministry of Forests, such as axe blazes exactly 10 cm wide by 30 cm long, delimitation of riparian zones, etc. Definitely a professional job, he concluded. Which left me scratching my head over why the locals would be in such denial about a rather self-evident act.

Cutting permit

So, logging or no logging? Back home, I decided to get to the bottom of it and I called the logging company which owns the tree farming license around Port Renfrew. Yes our people recently flagged and surveyed the Avatar Grove, John Pichugin, Manager of Engineering at Teal-Jones, told me. So are you planning to log it? I asked. We are looking at it, but at this point I cannot tell you if we're going to harvest or not, he responded. Have you applied for a cutting permit with the Ministry of Forests? No we have not. Do you know if and when you plan to apply? No I do not. So does it mean that the area is safe for now, say at least until the end of 2010? No I cannot tell you that.

Clearly, I was not getting anywhere with that line of questioning. So I tried something else. Are you aware that there is a possibility of limestone karst deposits in this area? Silence. I almost heard the gulp on the other side. Then after a brief moment, he responded: Personally I am not aware of that, but karst is definitely something that in general we have to take into account in our logging operations. How do you go about performing karst studies? I asked. We have engineers trained to look for karst, it's a very formal process. Have studies begun yet at this specific site? I don't know, I cannot say. Okay then, I asked, is there someone else in your company that would be able to answer that for me?

 Potential limestone karst bedrock at Avatar Grove (in orange). Source: FORREX

At that point, John Pichugin changed his tactic. I need to be careful about the information that I release to the public, he said, so I need to know more about who you are and what are your motivations. After I finished telling him all he cared to know about me, he proceeded to lecture me. We want to engage the public, he said, but we are also running a business. Society has determined that logging needs to take place here. As a society, we all benefit from a high standard of living. Where do we get the tax dollars to pay for our hospital beds? Did you know that 40,000 hectares of old growth forest are protected in the area surrounding our tree farming license? etc.

I swiftly got him back on topic. How do I stay informed about future logging developments at the Avatar Grove? I asked. Well, you can call me, he said. That’s it? Just call you? Do you mean to say that there are no processes in place to keep the public informed? No, was the flat answer. Teal-Jones already went through the Forest Stewardship process in 2006. Back then, the public had an opportunity to voice any concerns. At this stage of the game, we are no longer required to consult with the public. Look, he said, we just follow the legislation here. Perhaps you want to take this up with the government.

So I did. I called Vivian Thomas, the media spokesperson for the BC Ministry of Forests. But before I did that, I took some time to study the documentation posted on the Teal-Jones website regarding the 2006 Forest Stewardship Plan that they signed with the Ministry. And I stumbled upon a map which indicated that, back then, some portions of the Avatar Grove had been marked as “draft old growth forest management areas”.

Old growth forest management areas

Vivian Thomas confirmed to me that cutting permits are granted by the Ministry to the logging company without any input from the public. Essentially, the Forest Stewardship Plan is a blanket agreement for an entire tree farm license, which includes a 60-day public comment period. After that, implementation details take place behind closed doors. In particular, there is no process to keep the public informed about this or that specific cutting permit.

What about old growth forest management areas? I asked. Oh, those areas have been set aside for protection, they cannot be logged, she said. But, I interjected, some sections of the Avatar Grove were marked in the 2006 Forest Stewardship Plan as “draft old growth forest management areas”. How, then, can that particular grove even be considered for logging? “Draft” sometimes means that one area can be subsequently substituted for another, she explained. So for example, for each area that will receive actual protection, you may decide to have 3 or more areas marked as “draft” in the initial Plan, allowing for flexibility when you get to the actual cutting stage. Maybe that’s what’s happening in this specific circumstance, she ventured.

But doesn't that change everything? I asked. It could mean that when people got an opportunity to comment on the Forest Stewardship Plan back in 2006, they did not really know what they were commenting upon. For example, someone may have agreed to the Plan based on the assumption that the Avatar Grove would be untouched. Also, if this is true, then the map gives the false impression that more forest is being protected than there really is. I understand the need for some amount of flexibility, I added. But if an area initially marked as protected is later being considered for logging through a cutting permit application, shouldn't the public be involved in the decision-making process involved in such a sweeping change to the initial Plan?

I’m going to have to get back to you on that one, Vivian responded.

Unanswered questions

Obviously with my two lonesome phone calls and casual research, I've barely scratched the surface in this matter. But already, I have harvested an unexpected amount of rats. Let’s summarize:
  • Shayn McAskin has discovered a geological map which uses Ministry of Forests data to locate a potential limestone karst bedrock right under the Avatar Grove. A superficial survey of the area confirmed the presence of limestone rocks. When I addressed that concern with a representative of the logging company, he did not confirm nor deny.
  • When asked about the recent flagging at the Avatar Grove, the company representative acknowledged that indeed his company did that, but he did not confirm or deny that the area has indeed been slated for logging.
  • Maps provided by the logging company indicate that some sections of the Avatar Grove have been marked as “draft old growth forest management areas”, an appellation which, according to a representative of the Ministry of Forests, provides full protection to those particular sections.
  • When asked whether a logging company should be allowed to clearcut a “draft old growth forest management area” without any further public consultation, the Ministry of Forests representative requested a time out, so she could consult with her hierarchy on what response to provide.
Many unanswered questions here! I am no expert, just an average joe doe from the public asking dumb questions to smart people, but my instinct tells me that well organized environmental groups bent on saving this area of old growth forest - and a few others while they're at it - may potentially have some very good cards to play.

Obviously, to be continued.

 .

8 comments:

  1. Your commitment to the cause and how you write amazes me man, awesome job, as usual.
    I would like to see a link to your blog on the WC's website!

    Best
    Jocelyn

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nice digging.

    Trying to get information from the guilty and greedy
    + is like trying to dig tunnels in sand.

    Hard work. Good job.

    Bruce Dean

    ReplyDelete
  3. Another great example of the lost art of journalism! Great article and investigation as always. Now if only some of those people who make a living writing news will take some hints.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You're a modern day Sleuth Ivan!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks Ivan for bringing this to our attention. The value of old forest growth is unmeasurable. The problem we face is that some people only see the wood and not the trees or the ecosystems. The biodiversity of an old growth forest is what protects the rain forest from monocropping which is the means by which forest companies grow trees in large wood lots. Monocropping is a known problem in agriculture. Preserving old growth means we avoid monocropping and keep biodiversity. If I'm right in the map and area then there is a salmon river nearby. Can we appeal to fisheries to protect the area?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Re Anonymous's comment "If I'm right in the map and area then there is a salmon river nearby. Can we appeal to fisheries to protect the area? " --

    I have forwarded your question to Zoe Blunt from the Forest Action Network and here is her response:

    "Baird Creek is too steep to support salmon and steelhead, but Gordon River has both. [Note: those are the two rivers at the Avatar Grove]. Can we appeal to Fisheries Canada? Yes and no. They won't interfere with logging as long as there is a buffer zone left unlogged on the fish-bearing streams. Above the Avatar Grove, Baird Creek has been logged to its banks and erosion has washed the soil away, leaving bare rock. The question of clearcuts harming water quality has been argued in BC Supreme Court several times, but the judges have accepted the loggers' arguments that there is no evidence clearcutting damages water quality. If this seems contrary to common sense, that's because it is.

    Cheers,
    Zoe"

    ReplyDelete
  7. Maureen Raymond,ambassador/Naturescape B.C.September 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM

    What Avatar grove is going through, is what the Elk Creek old growth forest went through not long ago. It was one of the last stands of ancient trees in the Fraser Valley, just south east of Chilliwack. We tried everything to save it. but alas, it was helli-logged and though some of the ancient trees were left, they couldn't survive standing alone. It is truly heartbreaking to see such destruction.

    ReplyDelete
  8. First I would like to say I am thankful for people like you and greatful for what you do. Even for the greedy, wouldnt the sound of perpetual profit{eco tourism of the last virgin forest} sound better than a one time profit from a foolish clear cut that destroys an irreplacable example of creation that took millenia to manifest lost to all generations forever. So why not advertise to intelligent eco minded entities to purchase the remaining virgin forest and secure a perpetual revenue {eco tourism} while preserving the best examples of life in its original natural state{our source} for future generations.Its a win win for the greedy and the green.

    ReplyDelete