Table of Contents - p · PDF fileTSR: Timber Supply Review UWR: Ungulate Winter Range VIA: Visual Impact Assessment ... Nancy Greene South (NGS) 9053 Pend

Atco Wood Products Ltd. pg. 1 Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP)

Table of Contents1. Signatures 42. Interpretation 5

2.1 Definitions under Acts and Regulations .......................................................................................................... 5

2.2. Definitions Specific to this FSP ....................................................................................................................... 5

2.3. Objectives, Results, Strategies and Measures................................................................................................ 5

2.4. Common Acronyms Used in forestry and occasionally within this FSP.......................................................... 6

3. Application of the FSP 73.1 Term of the FSP ............................................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Content Requirements .................................................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Forest Development Units (FDU’s) .................................................................................................................. 7

3.3.1 Forest Development Units in Effect on Date of Submission......................................................... 7

3.3.2 New FDUs & Rationale .......................................................................................................... 8

4. Public Review and Comment 95. Results and Strategies for Objectives Set by Government 10

5.1 Land Use Objectives ...................................................................................................................................... 10

5.1.1 Biodiversity Emphasis.............................................................................................................. 10

5.1.2 Old and Mature Forest ............................................................................................................ 10

5.1.3 Caribou ................................................................................................................................... 13

5.1.4 Green-up ................................................................................................................................ 13

5.1.5 Grizzly Bear Habitat and Connectivity Corridor......................................................................... 13

5.1.6 Consumptive Use Streams ....................................................................................................... 14

5.1.7 Enhanced Resource Development Zones (ERDZ)....................................................................... 14

5.1.8 Fire Maintained Ecosystems .................................................................................................... 15

5.1.1.9 Visuals ................................................................................................................................. 15

5.2 Objectives prescribed under FRPA sec. 149(1).............................................................................................. 15

5.2.1 Soils........................................................................................................................................ 15

5.2.2 Timber .................................................................................................................................... 16

5.2.3 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................... 16

5.2.3.1 Species at Risk...................................................................................................................... 17

5.2.3.2 Ungulate Winter Range ........................................................................................................ 18

5.2.4 Water, Fish, Wildlife and Biodiversity within Riparian Areas..................................................... 18

5.2.5 Fish Habitat in Fisheries Sensitive Watersheds ......................................................................... 20

5.2.6 Water in Community Watersheds ............................................................................................ 20

5.2.7 Wildlife and Biodiversity – Landscape Level ............................................................................. 23

5.2.8 Wildlife and Biodiversity – Stand Level..................................................................................... 23


5.2.9 Visual Quality.......................................................................................................................... 24

5.2.10 Cultural Heritage Resources................................................................................................... 24

5.3 Objectives Prescribed Under the Government Actions Regulation (GAR).................................................... 25

5.3.1 Visuals .................................................................................................................................... 26

5.3.2 Ungulate Winter Range ........................................................................................................... 26

5.3.3 Wildlife Habitat Areas ............................................................................................................. 26

5.3.4 Caribou ................................................................................................................................... 27

5.3.5 Grizzly Bear............................................................................................................................. 27

5.4 Objective for Items Listed in Section 181 of FRPA ........................................................................................ 28

5.4.1 Interpretive Forest Sites, Recreation Sites or Recreation Trails ................................................. 28

5.4.2 Visual Quality Objectives......................................................................................................... 28

6. Measures 296.1 Measures for Preventing the Introduction or Spread of Invasive Plants ...................................................... 29

6.2 Mitigating the Loss of Natural Range Barriers............................................................................................... 30

7. Additional FSP Information 307.1 Stocking Standards ........................................................................................................................................ 30

7.2 Cumulative Effect of Multiple FSP’s .............................................................................................................. 31

8. References 319. Appendices 34

I. Arrow and Kootenay Lake FDU Maps............................................................................................................... 34

II. Arrow and Kootenay Lake FDU’s Stocking Standards – See the following pages. .......................................... 35

III. Referral List..................................................................................................................................................... 49

IV. First Nation / Stakeholder Referral Letters .................................................................................................... 50

V. Public Review and Comment........................................................................................................................... 52

VI. FSP Amendment Ledger…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...58


Forest Stewardship Plan

June 28, 2017 – June 27, 2022

Forest Licences: A20193 and A20218

Box 460

Fruitvale, B.C. V0G 1Y0

Phone: (250) 367-9441 Fax: (250) 367-6210


2. Interpretation

2.1 Definitions under Acts and Regulations

Unless specifically indicated otherwise, terms used in this Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP) have the same meaning

as they are defined in relevant British Columbia acts and regulations.

2.2. Definitions Specific to this FSP“FRPA Value” means one or more of the following:

a) Soils

b) Visual quality

c) Timber

d) Forage and associated plant communities

e) Water

f) Fish

g) Wildlife

h) Biodiversity

i) Recreation resources

j) Resource features

k) Cultural heritage resources

“Qualified Professional” means a person deemed by Atco Wood Products Ltd (AWP) to be qualified, in terms of

appropriate levels of education, training, and experience (skill sets), to conduct the activities described. Where

the activities fall within the scope of practice of members of a professional regulatory body this person will be a

Qualified Registered Professional.

"Qualified Registered Professional" means a person who:

(a) in the opinion of AWP, has the appropriate education, training and experience to carry out the activity;

and

(b) is a member of, or licensed by, a regulatory body in British Columbia that has the legislated authority to

regulate its members' performance of the activity.

“Reasonable opportunity for review and comment” means a written referral letter (either mailed or sent

electronically), provided by AWP with a specified time (generally either 30 or 60 days) allowed for providing

comments in order for the comments to be considered.

2.3. Objectives, Results, Strategies and Measures

The Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA) requires that a FSP specify results or strategies in relation to

objectives set by government and to specify measures related to invasive plants and natural range barriers.

With regard to these requirements, the following interpretations have been used in the preparation of this FSP:

“Objective” means an objective that is set by government, in legally established land use plans, in regulation, or

enabled through regulation, for managing and protecting forest and range values.


“Result” means a description of measureable or verifiable outcomes for a particular established objective and

the situations or circumstances that determine where the outcomes will be applied.

“Strategy” means a description of measureable or verifiable steps or practices that will be carried out to meet a

particular established objective, and the situations or circumstances that determine where the steps or

practices will be applied.

“Measure” means a course of action taken or planned to achieve a particular purpose. With regard to FSPs,

measures must be specified to (1) prevent the introduction or spread of invasive plants and (2) mitigate the

effect of removing or rendering ineffective natural range barriers. Measures are intended to be reasonable and

appropriate when considering what is likely to be effective and what is practicable.

“Measurable” means with respect to Results and Strategies to be able to be measured, qualified or calculated.

“Verifiable” means with respect to Results and Strategies to be able to be verified, proven, authenticated or

demonstrated.

2.4. Common Acronyms Used in forestry and occasionally within this FSP.

ATW: Atco Wood Products Ltd.BCTS: British Columbia Timber SalesBEC: Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem ClassificationCHR: Cultural Heritage ResourceCP: Cutting PermitCRA: Controlled Recreation AreaDDM: Delegated Decision MakerFDU: Forest Development UnitFL: Forestry LicenceFPC: Forest Practices Code of BC ActFPPR: Forest Planning and Practices RegulationFRPA: Forest and Range Practices ActFRR: Forest Recreation RegulationFSP: Forest Stewardship PlanGAR: Government Actions RegulationGWM: General Wildlife MeasureILMB: Integrated Land Management BureauKBHLPO: Kootenay-Boundary Higher Level Plan OrderKLC: Kalesnikoff Lumber Co. LtdLU: Landscape UnitMFLNRO: Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource OperationsNDT: Natural Disturbance TypeOGMA: Old Growth Management AreaQP: Qualified ProfessionalQRP: Qualified Registered ProfessionalRMZ: Riparian Management ZoneRP: Road PermitRPF: Registered Professional ForesterRRZ: Riparian Reserve ZoneSAR: Species at RiskSU: Standards UnitTSA: Timber Supply Area


TSR: Timber Supply Review

UWR: Ungulate Winter Range

VIA: Visual Impact Assessment

VQO: Visual Quality Objective

WHA: Wildlife Habitat Area

WTP: Wildlife Tree Patch

WTRA: Wildlife Tree Retention Area

3. Application of the FSP

3.1 Term of the FSP

Legal Reference: FRPA s 6(1)(a), 6(2), & 14

The term of this FSP is five years, commencing from the date of approval by the Delegated Decision Maker

(DDM) for the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations or another date as specified by the

DDM. The existing FSP expires on June 20, 2017.

3.2 Content Requirements

Content requirements of a FSP are described in the Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA) and its associatedForest Planning and Practices Regulation (FPPR).

A separate document, Atco Wood Products Ltd Forest Stewardship Plan Supporting Document, providessupporting (non-legal) information for this plan. The supporting document is prepared to ensure a consistentapproach to planning is undertaken within Atco’s operations

3.3 Forest Development Units (FDU’s)

3.3.1 Forest Development Units in Effect on Date of Submission

These FDU’s were defined by existing chart areas (designated locations where Atco Wood Products (AWP) has

been assigned to operate under the authority of Forest Licences (FL’s) A20193 (Arrow TSA) and A20218

(Kootenay Lake TSA).


Table 1: Existing Forest Development Units

TSA Forest Development Unit(FDU)

Gross AreaHectares (Ha)

Arrow / Boundary – FLA20193

Boulder Creek 1018

Champion 7439

Divide 5971

Erie 5884

Huckleberry 444

Jordan 6575

Ladybird 14100

Mackie 7045

Murphy 11777

Nancy Greene Highland (NGH) 4523

Nancy Greene North (NGN) 10758

Nancy Greene South (NGS) 9053

Pend-d’Oreille 7373

Sheppard 6300

Siwash 5131

Total 105067

Kootenay Lake – FLA20218 Kootenay Lake 14349

Total 14349

3.3.2 New FDUs & Rationale

Legal Reference: FPPR, s14

New FDUs: The overview map in Figure 1 shows the 2 FDUs comprising this FSP.

Table 2: Landscape Units contained within the Arrow and Kootenay Lake FDU’s.

FDU Landscape Unit (LU)

Arrow (Arrow TSA) N501-N509, N511 & N512

Kootenay Lake (Kootenay Lake

TSA)

K9, K11

Rationale:

The above 2 FDUs, one in the Arrow TSA and the other in Kootenay Lake TSA, have been created to encompass

LUs where Atco’s existing Chart areas lie plus some adjacent LUs. Entire LUs have been used as KBHLPO

objectives are largely based on these units. In addition, LUs are often defined by heights of land, watershed

boundaries, major rivers, Lakes and other topographically significant features which are the same common units

used for planning purposes. All crownland area based tenures (ie. woodlots, Community Forest Licences, etc.)

are excluded from these FDU’s.

With regard to covering area outside Atco’s operating (Chart) area, the intent is to avoid FSP amendments made

to allow road access, topographic breaks, licensee operating area switching and other logistical measures.


Where Atco is going to propose forest development within another licensee’s operating area, the company will

consult with the other licensee to establish a mutually acceptable agreement. It is anticipated this will reduce

the cases that necessitate amendments to this FSP.

Appendix I contains a map of the Arrow and Kootenay Lake FDU’s identifying the features required as per FPPR,

Section 14; with the exception of the Cutting Permits and Road Permits, which can be viewed on iMapBC

following the instructions below:

iMapBC link: http://maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/imapbc/

Note: iMapBC may not work in all browsers. Currently, it will not work using Microsoft Edge. Google Chrome

and Internet Explorer both work at this point.

Instructions to add cut block and road permit roads:

• Once in iMapBC, zoom into area of interest.

• Click on Zoom in and draw a box in area of interest

• Click the Map & Data Sources tab

• Click Add Provincial Layers

• To the left of Licenses and Permits, hit the ‘plus’ sign to expand that category

• Check the boxes beside Forest Cut Blocks and Forest Road Sections layers

• Click Apply, then OK

• If layers do not appear, you may have to zoom in more.

4. Public Review and Comment

Legal reference: Forest Planning and Practices Regulation section 20, 21 and 22

Forest Stewardship Plan Notification and Stakeholder Referral:

The general public was made aware the Forest Stewardship Plan was available for review and comment through

notices placed in local newspapers and through referral notices that were emailed or mailed out to potentially

affected stakeholders. Atco is committed to meeting with any stakeholder who wants further information, or

has concerns or further questions. A copy of the public notice and referral list of stakeholders (including First

Nations) who received letters or emails are included in Appendix III.

The Forest Stewardship Plan was made available for public review and comment at the licence holder’s office

during regular business hours 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday for a period of 60 days (Aug 15, 2016 to

Oct 14, 2016). In these referral notices Atco has encouraged any affected stakeholders and First Nations

representatives to meet to discuss the Forest Stewardship Plan. A copy of the First Nations and Stakeholders

referral letters is provided in Appendix IV.

Public and Stakeholder’s Comment:

Appendix V contains a summary of the public/ stakeholder referrals sent, comments received and associated

response.

Written comments specific to the Forest Stewardship Plan have been recorded and kept on record to ensure

that concerns are considered at the development stage.

CASTLEGAR

TRAIL

ROSSLAND

FRUITVALE

NELSON

SALMO

L O W E R A R R O W L A K E

K09

N505

N512

N506

N503

N501

N508

K11

N511

N502

N509N507

N504

Arrow FDU

Kootenay Lake FDU

K O O T E N A Y L A K E

FOREST STEWARDSHIP PLANOverview Map

Date: August 2, 2016Datum: NAD 83

Projection: UTM Zone 11Scale: 1:400,000

Landscape Unit (LU)

Private Land

Major Rivers/LakesForest Development Unit (FDU)

TownshipParks

OWNERSHIP:

OTHER FEATURES:

Highway/ Main RoadN508

Atco Chart


Operational-Forest Development Referrals:

The licence holder is committed to continual information sharing and will refer all forest development- site level

plans (i.e.: roads and cut-blocks) to potentially affected stakeholders whose rights may be affected by a

proposed development with an opportunity to review the proposed development in a manner that is

commensurate with the nature and extent to which the stakeholders’ rights may be affected. A written

notification of planned forest development will be referred to potentially affected stakeholders. The written

notice will provide stakeholders with a minimum 30 day review and comment period prior to cutting permit

application. The notice may be reduced to 10 days if timber is dead, infested with pests or otherwise damaged;

and must be harvested expeditiously to prevent spread of pests or declining timber value due to deterioration

of quality.

5. Results and Strategies for Objectives Set by Government

5.1 Land Use Objectives

The area under this Forest Stewardship Plan is within the scope of the Kootenay Boundary Higher Level Plan

Order effective October 26, 2002, and all approved variances to it. Where there is a conflict between the

Kootenay Boundary Higher Level Plan Order and objectives set by Forest and Range Practices Act and its

regulations, the Kootenay Boundary Higher Level Plan Order objectives and strategies will prevail to the extent

of the discrepancy.

Unless specified under each objective, it is assumed the Results and Strategies apply to both the Arrow and

Kootenay Lake FDU’s.

5.1.1 Biodiversity Emphasis

Objective: To contribute to the conservation of biodiversity, through the assignment of

biodiversity emphasis to each landscape unit.

Legal Reference: KBHLPO – Objective I

Relates to: s 5.1.2 of this document.

Results and Strategies

The licence holder will undertake to comply with Objective 1 of Kootenay Boundary Higher

Level Plan Order (KBHLPO).

5.1.2 Old and Mature Forest

Objective: To maintain mature forests and old forests to levels indicated in the Kootenay

Boundary Higher Level Plan.

Legal Reference: KBHLPO, Objective 2




The licence holder will undertake to comply with Objective 2 of Kootenay Boundary Higher

Level Plan Order.

Old Forest:

Old Forest requirements, applying to all FDU’s, are currently fulfilled and managed with non-

legal spatialized Old Growth Management Areas (OGMAs) that were established to provide

representative examples of Old Forest values, and to support the conservation of other

important values, such as wildlife habitat, connectivity, rare ecosystems, recreation and

cultural-heritage.

The Old Growth Management Strategy allows the licence holder to manage the Old Forest

distribution based on current information. Modifications to the boundaries of established

OGMA’s can be implemented as long as the modification is replaced by a commensurable area

with similar forest attributes, or where a Qualified Registered Professional (QRP) determines

that a forest stand has sufficient biological value to be an Old Forest (as per superscript “k” of

Table 2.6 of the KBHLPO).

The prescribing QRP will identify replacement OGMAs that maintain either similar forest

attributes as found in the original OGMA or enhance old forest attributes; while also focusing

on other important values, such as wildlife habitat, rare ecosystems, recreation, First Nations

cultural values and cultural values of communities within the Kootenays. In addition, there is a

preference to locate replacement OGMA’s where harvesting constraints provide the best long

term potential for stands to develop old forest attributes associated with advanced age.

OGMA modifications will be field assessed and approved by a QRP, where a written rationale

and accompanying map denoting the modifications will be prepared and kept on record in the

license holder’s office. These modifications will be made to Atco’s digital mapping at the time

the rationale is drafted. These changes to OGMAs will be sent to the MFLNRO upon request.

When considering potential OGMA replacements the key old growth attributes that are

evaluated are: age, large branches, dead tops, scars/conks, cavity nesting bird holes,

proximity to riparian or unique old features, wildlife value, size (diameter & height) and

contiguity with adjacent OG.


There are circumstances where very minor tree removal is required within OGMAs to facilitate

harvesting and or safety. These are danger tree hazards adjacent forest activities and where

tail holds or guy line tiebacks are required for cable harvesting. The QRP will write a rationale

for these situations and extra effort will be made to minimize these circumstances.

Mature Forest:

The mature requirements only apply to the Arrow FDU within the Landscape Units (LU) and

BEC subzones / variants as shown below:

LU BEC subzone/ variant BEO

N501-Sheep Creek ICHdw intermediate

N504-Pend’Oreille ICHdw intermediate

N505-Stagleap ICHdw intermediate

N508-Blueberry ICHdw intermediate

N509-Dog ICHdw intermediate

N511-Cayuse ICHdw intermediate

It is the responsibility of the licence holder to determine existing seral stage distribution and

levels of Old plus Mature Forest in which Landscape Unit they operate. The licence holder is a

subscriber to the Higher Level Plan Objectives Reporting Suite application that allows users to

produce reports reflecting the rules embodied in the KBHLPO for meeting Old plus Mature

Forest requirements. GeoData BC provides source planning data for the application; the

reporting suite application models the source data and produces summary tables the licence

holder will use to determine existing seral stage distribution and levels of Old plus Mature

Forest.

The Higher Level Plan Objectives Reporting Suite application can be found at:

http://www.kootenayspatial.ca/pg_hlpo/login.jsp


5.1.3 Caribou

Objective: To retain seasonal habitats for Mountain Caribou in order to contribute to maintaining

viability of the existing subpopulations according to forest cover requirements in the

Kootenay Boundary Higher Level Plan.

Legal Reference: KBHLPO, Objective 3 (replaced by variance Order KBHLP-04) and the addition of

Variance 6, GAR’s 9(2) and 12(1).


Applies to: Kootenay Lake FDU and LU 505 in Arrow FDU.

Portions of FDU applicable:

• Arrow FDU: LU: N505

• Kootenay Lake FDU: LU’s: K9 & K11


KBHLPO Objective 3 was cancelled and replaced with GAR ORDER – Ungulate Winter Range #U-

4-012 Mountain Caribou – Southwest Kootenay Planning Unit, under the authority of GAR

section 9(2) and 12(1) February 12, 2009. ORDER – Ungulate Winter Range #U-4-012 was

subsequently replaced December 9, 2009.

The holder will undertake to comply with these GAR Orders.

5.1.4 Green-up

Objective: To establish a Green-up under the stipulations of KBHLPO, Objective 4.

Legal Reference: KBHLPO, Objective 4.


The licence holder will undertake to comply with Objective 4 of KBHLPO.

5.1.5 Grizzly Bear Habitat and Connectivity Corridor

Objective: To maintain mature and/ or old forests adjacent to important grizzly bear

habitat and within connectivity.

Legal Reference: KBHLPO – Objective 5

Grizzly Bear

Relates to: s 5.3.5 of this document for FDU’s and LU’s covered by Grizzly GAR.



The licence holder will undertake to comply with Objective 5 of KBHLPO.

5.1.6 Consumptive Use Streams

Objective: To reduce the impacts of forest development on streams licensed for human

consumption.


Relates to: s 5.2.4 and 5.2.6 of this document


Definitions for the purpose of this section:

• “Activities” in objective 6(1)(a)(i) of the KHLPO means primary forest activities.

The holder will undertake to comply with Objective 6 of the KBHLPO.

For each S5 and S6 stream where the streamside management zone applies, the holder willplan and implement primary forest activities only if, in the opinion of a QRP, implementing theplan;

a. Will not cause material that is harmful to human health to be deposited in, ortransported to, water that is diverted for human consumption by a licensedwaterworks, and

b. Will not damage a licensed waterworks.c. Will not result in locating stream crossings within 50m (slope distance) upslope of

known intakes unless there is no practicable option.d. Will result in re-vegetating of cut banks and fill slopes within one growing season

following disturbance (as soil and weather conditions allow). See the grass seedingmeasures portion of Section 6.1 of this document for details.

5.1.7 Enhanced Resource Development Zones (ERDZ)

Objective: To support forest management for the purpose of increasing volumes of

merchantable timber and to reduce industry costs while maintaining adequate

environmental stewardship.

Legal Reference: KBHLPO – Objective 7; FPPR s 65(3)(a) & 65(3)(b)ii


The licence holder will undertake to comply with Objective 7 of KBHLPO. The minimum green-

up height will be as per section 5.2.7 of this FSP


5.1.8 Fire Maintained Ecosystems

Objective: To restore and maintain the ecological integrity of fire-maintained ecosystem

components in Natural Disturbance Type (NDT) 4.


Applicable FDU: None


The map has not been established for this objective and therefore the fire maintained

ecosystem objective is not in effect.

5.1.1.9 Visuals

Objective: To conserve the quality of views from communities, major waterways, and

major highways by establishing areas known as scenic areas.


Relates to: s 5.2.9, 5.3.1, and 5.4.2 of this document


See Section 5.3.1 of this document

5.2 Objectives prescribed under FRPA sec. 149(1)

5.2.1 Soils

Objective: The objective set by government for soils is, without unduly reducing the supply

of timber from British Columbia’s forests, to conserve the productivity and the

hydrologic function of soils.

Legal Reference: FRPA section 5 and 12.1(1)


The license holder will undertake to comply with Forest Planning and Practices Regulation

section 35 and 36.

In a situation where a block contains existing road and the 7% PAS is exceeded (at the

planning/pre-harvest stage), then a QRP will identify this in a rationale, which will be kept in

the holder’s files.

If the Permanent Access Structures (PAS) built by the holder exceeds 7%, then a QRP will write

a rationale at the development layout stage which identifies why this disturbance level is

exceeded. This limit will be set in accordance with Section 36(1) or (2) of the FPPR. Where the

PAS exceeds 7% (typically smaller blocks with roads which access further cut blocks), this will


be specified in the Site Plan and this document, along with the rationale will be kept on record

in the holder’s office

5.2.2 Timber

Objective: To maintain or enhance an economically valuable supply of commercial timber

while

ensuring that delivered wood is competitive in relation to equivalent costs in

relation to regulated primary forest activities in other jurisdictions.

Legal Reference: FPPR, s. 6

Relates to: s 7.2 and Appendix II of this document

5.2.3 Wildlife

Objective: The objective set by government for wildlife is, without unduly reducing the

supply of timber from British Columbia’s forests, to conserve sufficient wildlife

habitat in terms of amounts of area, distribution of areas and attributes of

those areas, for the survival of species at risk, the survival of regionally

important wildlife, and the winter survival of specified ungulate species.

Legal Reference: FPPR sec. 7 and GAR’s 9-13

Relates to: s 5.3.2, 5.3.3, 5.3.4, and 5.3.5 of this document


The stocking standards shown in section 7.2 and Appendix 2 of this document show the rules

for the establishment of managed forests. These managed forests will provide an enhanced

supply of commercial timber, as opposed to the prior natural established forests.

The holder will work in conjunction with the Ministry to maintain or enhance the Timber

Supply (ie. Timber Supply Review - Annual Allowable Cut). This will involve using

technologically improved harvest machines, harvesting existing non-merchantable tree species

and better utilization. AWP will assist in providing the best/ most current information used in

Timber Supply Reviews.

Annually, the MFLNRO carries out an overview flight to assess the damage done by Forest

Health agents. With the resulting map, the holder will establish salvage plans and implement

control measures if applicable. In addition, the holder is committed to working with the various

Forest Health strategies established by the Ministry.


5.2.3.1 Species at Risk

Pursuant to section 7(3) of the FPPR, the license holder is exempt from the obligation to prepare results or

strategies in relation to the objective set out in section 7(1) of the FPPR given the established Wildlife Habitat

Areas address the amount of area required to meet habitat requirements and specify general wildlife measures

to maintain the identified wildlife within those areas. Requirements are met with respect to WHA for Interior

Western Screech Owl and Grizzly Bear. The Coeur d’ Alene Salamander and Flammulated Owl are the exception,

where the required amount and distribution of Wildlife Habitat Areas have not been satisfied.

FPPR section 7 notices are tracked through the following website:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/frpa/notices/sar.html

Species at risk, for which the license holder will provide special management, are for the most part limited to

vertebrate species designated as Red or Blue by the Ministry of Environment, or as Endangered, Threatened or

Special Concern (listed on Species at Risk Public Registry schedule 1) by the Committee on the Status of

Endangered Wildlife in Canada. The Schedule 1 can be found at the following website:

http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/species/schedules_e.cfm?id=1

SAR Accounts and Measures documents for identified wildlife can be found at:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/frpa/iwwms/accounts.html


Annual training will be conducted by the license holder to support the license holder’s staff and

contractors in identifying species at risk and wildlife habitat. Training will involve the

identification of species at risk, habitat attributes, habitat suitability, reporting and best

management practices.

The British Columbia Species and Ecosystem Explorer Tool will be incorporated into the training

and utilized to generate information on species and ecological communities, including

conservation or legal status, and spatial distribution.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/toolintro.html

Reporting:

Should any of the species at risk be observed outside of known occurrence sites, the license

holder will notify the Conservation Data Center and inform them of the occurrence. This

reporting will be done within 6 months from the time at which the species is observed.


The British Columbia Conservation Data Centre: Data Submissions website will be utilized to

submit observations of species at risk.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/cdc/contribute.html

Practice:

In an effort to reduce the impact of forest development on species at risk, during the planning

process, the license holder will review known species at risk occurrences and their proximity to

development areas. Where there are known species at risk in proximity to development areas,

best management practices as found within the British Columbia Species and Ecosystem

Explorer Tool will be used to ensure that proposed development activities are planned and

carried out in compliance with various legislation, regulation and policies.

If a species at risk is encountered during operations, activities will be halted immediately and

will not resume until a QRP has assessed and provided recommendation. Continuance of

operational activities is to be consistent with the recommendations of the QRP.

The license holder will ensure, where there may be a conflict with a species at risk, the

following best management practices will be used:

•The license holder will only conduct primary forestry activities consistent with the

requirements in Wildlife Habitat Area orders.

•License holder’s staff and contractors will be trained to identify potential wildlife habitat.

•Where possible, retain existing, natural habitats suitable for the species at risk.

•Strive to retain, restore, or enhance key habitat features.

•Seek the advice of a QRP if attempting to restore or enhance habitat.

5.2.3.2 Ungulate Winter RangeSee section 5.3.2 and 5.3.4 of this document.

5.2.4 Water, Fish, Wildlife and Biodiversity within Riparian Areas

Objective: The objective set by government for water, fish, wildlife and biodiversity within

riparian areas is, without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British

Columbia’s forests, to conserve, at the landscape level, the water quality, fish

habitat, wildlife habitat and biodiversity associated with those riparian areas.

Legal Reference: FPPR s. 8, 12.1(2), 12(3), 47-51, 52(2) and 55-58


Section 53 of the FPPR applies to designated Temperature Sensitive Streams. There are no designated

Temperature Sensitive Streams in the FDU areas at present.


The holder will undertake to comply with FPPR s. 47-51, 52(2), 53 and 55-58.

The following result satisfies the requirement of FPPR 12(3):

a) When the holder harvests cut blocks or constructs roads, tree retention levels forthe riparian management zone are as follows:

Table 3: Riparian Class and Riparian Management Zone Retention On a Landscape Level

Stream Class Riparian Management Zone Retention

All

Streams,

Wetlands &

Lakes

Retain a minimum of 100 stems per hectare (SPH). Trees

selected to be retained in the RMZ will include the

following if present:

• non merchantable conifer trees / understory(greater than 1.3 m in height)

• wind-firm deciduous trees

• wind-firm trees with roots embedded in thebanks

• wind-firm wildlife treesThe role of these trees and understory vegetation are for

aiding in the conservation of water quality, fish habitat (if

present), wildlife habitat and biodiversity.

All S4, S5 streams;

Wetlands; Lakes;

& S6 within 200 meters

of a S1, S2 or S3 (with

the exception of

cable/aerial based

harvesting and

significant blowdown

risk)

As part of the minimum 100 SPH above; retain a

minimum of 50SPH of trees (deciduous or coniferous) of

merchantable size within 10 meters of the stream,

wetland or lake.

.

To clarify, all riparian management/reserve zones are slope distance.

The location, dispersement and tree selection for retention within the RMZ will be determined

on a site-specific basis by a QRP, considering local conditions (safety, windfirmness, prevailing

winds, stream channel – integrity/ stability/erosion potential, forest health factors, fish and

wildlife habitat, water quality, licensed consumptive water use and intake locations, vegetation


management and post-harvest silviculture treatments, coarse woody debris requirements,

hydrologic/ terrain stability concerns, visual quality, and timber/operational constraints).

In situations where 100% retention of part or all of the RMZ is prescribed (where Wildlife tree

attributes exist), this will contribute to wildlife tree retention at the stand and landscape level.

If a situation arises, where adequate stand and understory does not exist (at the pre-harvest

stage) to meet the requirements in Table 3, a QRP will be used to provide rationale and

recommendations.

To maintain stream bank and stream channel integrity on all streams, wetlands and lakes that

do not have a riparian reserve zone a minimum 5 m machine free zone will be established with

the exception of designated crossings. Deep rooted shrubs and brush will be retained within

this 5 meter zone to assist with stream integrity and shading. Logging slash accumulations

which potentially could affect streamflow will be removed. Large natural woody debris already

in the channel will not be removed. Construction of the designated crossings will be done in a

manner that waste and overburden is disposed of outside the 5m zone. Trees within the RMZ

will be felled and yarded away from streams where practicable unless a safety hazard dictates

otherwise.

5.2.5 Fish Habitat in Fisheries Sensitive Watersheds

Objective: To conserve, at the landscape level, the water quality, fish habitat, and

biodiversity associated with those riparian areas, without unduly reducing the

supply of timber.

Legal Reference: FPPR sec. 8.1

Applicable FDU: None

This objective is not applicable as there are no fisheries sensitive watersheds within the holder’s forestdevelopment units.

5.2.6 Water in Community Watersheds

Objective: The objective set by government for water being diverted for humanconsumption through a licensed waterworks in a community watershed is toprevent the cumulative hydrological effects of primary forest activities withinthe community watershed from resulting in a material adverse impact on thequantity of water or the timing of the flow of the water from the waterworks, orthe water from the waterworks having a material adverse impact on humanhealth that cannot be addressed by water treatment required under anenactment, or the license pertaining to the waterworks.

Legal Reference: FPPR sec. 8.2, 59-63 & 84

Applies to: All FDU’s except within the Arrow FDU in LU’s N501 and N504 (ie. Where CW’s

do not exist)


The table below lists the names of Community Watersheds within the Arrow and Kootenay lake FDUs,

along with the associated Landscape Unit:


The holder will undertake to comply with FPPR sec. 59-63 & 84 and the following:

1. If within those community watersheds, the holder intends to proceed with harvesting and

building roads, a QRP will assess the risk of those activities causing:

Community Watershed FDU (LU) Landscape Unit (LU)

Anderson Creek Kootenay Lake K09

Barret Creek Arrow N505

Bath Creek Arrow N503

Bird Creek Kootenay Lake K11

China Creek Arrow N508

Deer Creek Arrow N511

Eagle Creek Kootenay Lake K11

Elgood Creek Arrow N508

Five Mile Creek Kootenay Lake K09

Fruitvale Creek Arrow N503

Gander Creek Arrow N512

Glade Creek Arrow N507

Hanna Creek Arrow N502

Kelly Creek Arrow N503

Ladybird Creek Arrow N512

McNally Creek Arrow N508

Rover Creek Kootenay Lake K11

Sandy Creek Kootenay Lake K11

Selous Creek Kootenay Lake K09

South Murphy Arrow N508

Topping Creek Arrow N502

West Little Sheep Creek Arrow N502


a. Material that is known to be harmful to human health to be deposited in or

transported to water diverted for human consumption by a licensed waterworks, or

b. An increase in sediment delivery to the intake or causing sediment that is harmful to

human health to enter a stream, lake or wetland from which the water is being

diverted for human consumption.

2. If risk is low based on a QRP review of the relevant and available site specific hydrologic

information, the commitments below are not required.

3. If the risk is moderate or high based on the same criteria as in the low based above, the holder

will:

a. Before the commencement of harvesting or road construction, ensure that a

‘hydrologic assessment**’, including cumulative effects of all past and proposed

activities, be carried out by a QRP.

b. Evaluate the recommendations of the hydrologic assessment**,

c. Recommendations from QRPs are incorporated into harvest/site plans which are

established for all roads and cut blocks. Monitoring of these practices is done as part

of a mandatory established inspection program performed by company QRPs. At the

completion of harvesting a block or building a road the company QRP will fill out and

keep on record a post- harvest inspection to verify that the hydrological assessment

recommendations have been completed.

** For the purpose of the Strategy in this section ‘Hydrologic Assessment’ is a professional level

analysis, completed by a QRP, of existing and/or potential forest and other resources

development related effects on water and water related resources conducted at the site or

watershed level which will include one or more of the following:

• Overview of the watershed

• Watershed Report Card (GIS Analysis)

• Known cumulative effects of past and proposed activities

• Hydrologic risks of proposed development

• Specific recommendations or established thresholds for hazard mitigation

• Drainage Plan for roads

Climate change is now considered in hydrologic assessments to the extent of impact on

extreme events affecting peak and low flows (bridge/ culvert size determination) and other measures.

4. Results of Hydrologic Assessments will be shared with water user groups, upon request. In

cases where a meeting is held with water users; the details and recommendations are


explained. In watersheds which are shared with other forest licensees; these assessments are

shared.

5.2.7 Wildlife and Biodiversity – Landscape Level

Objective: The objective set by government for wildlife and biodiversity at the landscape level is,

without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British Columbia's forests and to the extent

practicable, to design areas on which timber harvesting is to be carried out that resemble, both spatially

and temporally, the patterns of natural disturbance that occur within the landscape.

Legal Reference: FPPR sec. 9

Relates to: s 5.1.4 of this document


Pursuant to objective 4 of the KBHLPO, when the holder plans and designs harvesting, the

holder will undertake to comply with sections 64 and 65 of the FPPR, except the 3m minimum

height will be changed to 2.5m in s. 65(3)(a) and s. 65(3)(b)(ii).

This reduced ‘green-up’ height will not apply to community watersheds and visually sensitive

areas.

5.2.8 Wildlife and Biodiversity – Stand Level

Objective: The objective set by government for wildlife and biodiversity at the stand level

is, without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British Columbia's forests,

to retain wildlife trees.

Legal Reference: FPPR sec. 9.1


The holder will undertake to comply with FPPR sec. 66 and 68.

The holder will undertake to comply with FPPR sec. 67 with the following exceptions:

• The holder may use trees in the wildlife tree retention area to facilitate harvesting

(i.e. for a ‘tail hold’)

• Felling and removal of a tree that is a safety hazard.

• In the opinion of a QRP:

o Felling and removal of a tree(s) that has been windthrown or damaged by

fire/insect/disease, unless that tree has significant wildlife habitat value.

o Where timber is highly susceptible to insect damage. Highly susceptible is defined

as a high or very high susceptible hazard class as indicated by a field assessment or

on MFLNRO susceptibility mapping and/or as defined within a MFLNRO Forest


Health Strategy and where the timber is within 200 meters of a current infested

(>30%stems per hectare of the stand) area.

o If a wildlife tree retention area is removed an alternate area of equal size within or

adjacent to the block will be located with similar wildlife attributes.

Trees of all species occurring within FDU’s may be selected as wildlife trees. Selection may

favor trees that provide valuable wildlife tree attributes including signs of internal decay, trees

with forks, large rotten branches, loose or cracked bark, recent scars, active wildlife use,

existing cavities, nest trees, veteran trees and other large wind firm trees with poor form for

sawlogs.

Forest Cover and Wildlife Habitat Attributes:

Preference will be given to locating wildlife tree retention area in stands that contain or have a

good likelihood of developing valuable wildlife tree attributes as described above. To maintain

biodiversity, an attempt will be made to preserve representation of all tree species found

throughout forest development units and focus on riparian management area, ungulate winter

range, old growth management area and other areas where harvesting constraints provide the

best long term potential for stands to develop wildlife tree attributes associated with advanced

age. Root disease centers may also be selected to provide a continuing supply of dead and

dying trees to maintain coarse woody debris and biodiversity associated with stand openings.

Sites with habitat features such as nesting, roosting, denning, spawning and squirrel middens

may also be selected to provide protection of habitat critical to wildlife survival.

5.2.9 Visual Quality

Objective: This objective set by government does not contain specific text within the FPPR

as specified in other objectives set by government. This objective set by

government has been established under GARs for the Arrow and Kootenay Lake

TSAs.

Legal Reference: FPPR s. 9.2

Relates to: Sec. 5.1.9, 5.3.1 and 5.4.2 of this document.



5.2.10 Cultural Heritage Resources

Objective: To conserve, or, if necessary, protect cultural heritage resources that are the

focus of a traditional use by an aboriginal people that is of continuing

importance to that people, and not regulated under the Heritage Conservation

Act.

Legal Reference: FRPA, sec. 10.



The license holder is committed to continual information sharing and will refer all forest

development plans with the appropriate First Nations. A written notification with a map,

illustrating the location of planned forest development will be referred to the First Nation as

indicated in the Consultative Areas Database. This referral will provide a 60 day timeframe for

First Nations groups to respond. The objective of this notice is to provide First Nations with an

opportunity to identify areas of concern to ensure that concerns are addressed to the extent

practicable prior to development of an area of crown land allocated for the license holder’s

forest development activities. The license holder will document and keep on record any

cultural heritage resource information provided by the First Nations, this will include how

planned activities will or will not accommodate identified heritage resources. Any cultural

heritage resource information received will be kept confidential.

If any evidence of cultural heritage resources are observed, becomes known, or is brought to

the license holder’s attention, the appropriate archaeological / heritage authority and First

Nations, if appropriate, will be consulted. An effort, to the extent practicable, will be made to

conserve or protect the cultural heritage resource before forest development proceeds.

The current Archeology Overview Assessment model illustrates polygons with moderate,

moderate-high and high potential in both the FDU’s. These potentially archaeological sensitive

polygons will be assessed by a QRP with an AIA, PFR or another archaeological assessment

method. The recommendations of these assessments will be incorporate in Harvest/ Site plans.

It is understood that there is always a limited possibility that unknown archaeological sites exist

in the FDU’s. The Heritage Conservation Act protects both known and unknown archaeological

sites. If an archaeological site is encountered during operations, activities will be halted

immediately, and attempts will be made within 5 business-days to contact the appropriate

archaeological/heritage authority and First Nations, if appropriate.

The license holder is not in a position to decide which of the First Nations with asserted

traditional territory have greater strength of claim and will not endorse one First Nation over

the others. There are multiple First Nations asserting traditional territory over the Arrow and

Kootenay Lake Timber Supply Area as listed on the government Consultative Areas Database.

The license holder respects all of the First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests equally, and will work

towards fostering productive long-term relationships.

5.3 Objectives Prescribed Under the Government Actions Regulation (GAR)In relation to FPPR sec. 10 and GAR’s 5 and 11, the Minister has not identified any resource features or wildlife

habitat features.


5.3.1 Visuals

Legal Reference: GAR’s 7 and 17

Relates to: s. 5.1.9, 5.2.9 and 5.4.2 of this document


In the Arrow FDU, subject to when the holder plans and designs harvesting and road construction,

the holder will comply with the scenic areas and visual quality objectives (VQO’s) set by GAR

Section 7 notice dated Dec. 31, 2005.

In the Kootenay Lake FDU, subject to when the holder plans and designs harvesting and road

construction, the holder will comply with the scenic areas and visual quality objectives (VQO’s) set

by GAR Section 7 notice dated March 7, 2014 that establishes the VQO’s for scenic areas.

If the visual disturbance objectives are not expected to be met for forest health or other reasons

then the holder will apply to the DDM for an exemption under Section 12(7) of the FPPR.

The holder will conduct a Visual Impact Assessment for planned developments that are located in

an area with a Visual Quality Objective prior to applying for a cutting permit. Visual modification

on a perspective scale will follow the guidance and strategies described in the Visual Impact

Assessment Guidebook (2nd. Ed., January 2001) for those areas that are deemed to be located

within a Visual Quality Objective of Preservation (P), Retention (R), Partial Retention (PR), or

Modification (M). Management of visual quality will combine recommended percent alteration

thresholds and legal definitions as per FPPR section 1.1 with cut block design and in-block

retention of standing timber to achieve the established Visual Quality Objective.

5.3.2 Ungulate Winter Range

Legal Reference: GAR‘s 9(2) & 12(1)

Relates To: s 5.2.3.2 of this documentResults and Strategies

The holder will undertake to comply with the most current Order – Ungulate Winter Range #U-4-

001. Information to demonstrate compliance to UWR requirements will be retained in the

holder’s office.

5.3.3 Wildlife Habitat Areas

Objective: The minister responsible for the Wildlife Act by order may establish an area as awildlife habitat area if satisfied that special management has not otherwise


been provided for under Government Actions Regulations or anotherenactment, and the area is necessary to meet the habitat requirements of acategory of species at risk or regionally important wildlife.


Applicable to: Arrow FDU: LU N508 – Grizzly Bear; and LU’s N503 and N507 – Western ScreechOwl


The holder will undertake to comply with practices consistent with the most current ORDER –

Grizzly Wildlife habitat Areas #4-093 and 4-094 and Western Screech Owl Wildlife Habitat Areas

#4-113, 4-114 and 4-115.

5.3.4 Caribou


Relates To: s 5.1.3 of this document

Applicable to: Kootenay Lake FDU and Arrow FDU; LU N505.


The holder will undertake to comply with the most current ORDER – Ungulate Winter Range #U-

4-012 Mountain Caribou – Southwest Kootenay Planning Unit.

5.3.5 Grizzly BearLegal Reference: GAR‘s 9(2) & 12(1)

Relates To: s 5.1.3 of this document

Applicable to: Within the Arrow FDU in LU’s N501, N502, N508 and N509(i.e. West of the Columbia River)


The holder will undertake to comply with the most current ORDER – General Wildlife Measure

Order #8-373 Grizzly Bear.

The holder will collect field data to identify site characteristics of Grizzly Bear habitat. This

information is collected in each block where the BEC variant site series is applicable to the Grizzly

GAR. The key site data that is collected is the vegetation, bear forage and coarse woody debris

with respect to distribution, quantity and distribution. Utilizing this information a QRP will write

a Grizzly Bear Rationale to show compliance with the General Wildlife Measures.


5.4 Objective for Items Listed in Section 181 of FRPA

5.4.1 Interpretive Forest Sites, Recreation Sites or Recreation Trails

Objective: All objectives in respect to an interpretive forest site, a recreation site, and arecreation trail that were in effect immediately before the effective date arecontinued as objectives under Forest and Range Practices Act.

Legal Reference: FRPA s. 180 & 181

Results & Strategies

In an effort to minimize impacts to interpretive forest sites, recreation sites orrecreation trails, the licence holder will develop operational plans consistent with themanagement strategies established for the sites or trails. Where the establishedmanagement strategies are not practicable given the circumstances or conditions to aparticular area, an exemption under section 16 of the Forest Recreation Regulation,from the requirement of section 56 of the Forest Range and Practices Act (FRPA), will beapplied for in relation to that area.

The licence holder will provide a written or emailed referral to a recreation groupwhenever there is proposed development (blocks or roads) within or immediatelyadjacent to a recreation site or trail. Atco will work closely with the local RecreationOfficer and/or recreational group to establish best management practices that willmitigate potential impacts. Including such measures as listed below:

• Signage will be erected notifying trail users of the industrial activity.

• Any direct impacts to access roads, sites or trails will be rehabilitated as close totheir original state as possible, within a 2 year timeframe.

• If feasible, harvesting is to occur during periods of low use.

• Primary forest activities will be carried out, to the extent practicable, byavoiding damage to vegetation other than commercial timber and the removalof safety hazards.

5.4.2 Visual Quality Objectives

Legal Reference: FRPA s. 180 & 181

Relates to: s. 5.1.9, 5.2.9 and 5.3.1 of this document.

FDU: Kootenay Lake




6. Measures

6.1 Measures for Preventing the Introduction or Spread of Invasive Plants

Legal Reference: FPPR s. 17, FRPA s. 47 and Invasive Plant Regulation

FDU: All

Measures

The following measures will be implemented to reduce the introduction and spread ofinvasive plants that may result from the license holder forest practices:

Training:Annual invasive plant species training will be conducted to help field staff and contractorsidentify the priority invasive plants, as listed in the ‘Best Practices for Preventing theSpread of Invasive Plants during Forest Management Activities, 2013 Edition’:

https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/plants/publications/Forestry-BP-09-11-2013-WEB.pdf

Training will involve the identification of invasive plants, awareness of the location ofknown infestations currently in the Invasive Alien Plant Program, reporting requirementsand best management practices.Records of these annual training sessions are kept in the license holder’s office.

ATCO participates in the Central Kootenay Invasive Plant committee and utilizes thecommittee to provide guidance on management strategies for targeted invasive plants.

Reporting:Should any of the priority invasive plants be observed outside of known infestation areas,the license holder will use the Report-A-Weed website to inform the Ministry of Forest,Lands and Natural Resource Operations (within 1 year) of the occurrence:

https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/HRA/plants/raw.htm

In an effort to reduce the introduction and spread of invasive plants, during the planningprocess, the license holder will review the Invasive Alien Plant Program data for knowninfestations and their proximity to development areas. This information will be used toplan activities, whereby, operational plans will be developed and used to communicatewith staff and contractors the location of known infestations. Where there are knowninfestations in proximity to development areas, best management practices will beoutlined in operational plans (ie Harvest Plans) to reduce the risk of creating new orspreading existing infestations. The license holder will ensure, where the introduction orspread of invasive plants is likely, the following best management practices will be used:

• If feasible avoid infested areas, otherwise, work non-infested areas first andinfested areas last.

• If feasible, work infested areas during conditions of frozen soil or level of snowpackto limit scalping/ seedbed creation.

• Contractors will be directed to clean equipment before moving to a new site.

• Minimize soil disturbance.


• Within a year following disturbance on new permanent roads (cuts and fills), butnot exceeding two years on other new Cutting/ Road Permit sections (where thereis adequate mineral soil exposure), to reduce the available seedbed for invasiveplants by grass seeding.

• Establish well stocked stands of trees that will eventually suppress invasive plants.

Grass seeding measures:

• Assure there is a minimum 30% germination success of grass seeding.

• Grass seeding will be done in the spring and or fall when climatic conditions arebest for seed catch.

• Obtain certified grass seed (Canada Common #1 or better) from reputablesuppliers to ensure premium quality free of invasive plant seed.

6.2 Mitigating the Loss of Natural Range Barriers

Legal Reference: FPPR s. 18, FRPA s. 48

Measures

There are no range tenures located within either the Arrow or Kootenay Lake FDUs. If a range

tenure is awarded in either FDU, then the FSP will be amended to deal with the appropriate

results, strategies and measures.

7. Additional FSP Information

7.1 Stocking Standards

Legal Reference: FPPR s. 16, 44, and 197


The holder will reforest in accordance with the new BEC (South Central Columbia Mountains-

as defined under Land Management handbook 70 and Temporary Supplemental Area) stocking

standards for both the Arrow and Kootenay Lake Forest Development Units. These standards

are currently in a state of refinement; consequently these adopted stocking standards may be

amended from time to time.

Stocking standards are itemized in Appendix II. Note that only the stocking standards for the

BECs found in the Arrow and Kootenay Lake FDUs are included (ie. ESSFdc1, ESSFmh , ESSFwh3,

ESSFwm3, ICHdw1, ICHmw4, ICHmw5, ICHxw and ICHxwa).


FRPA section 197 elections for stocking standards has been enabled to allow for any forest

development plan or former FSP cut block stocking standards to be amended to the applicable

FSP stocking standards.

In the extraordinary case where these stocking standards can’t be achieved on a specific block

or site; then a QRP will write and submit (for approval) a rationale for an amendment to the

Delegated Decision Maker. It should be noted that this situation is expected to occur on a rare

basis (i.e. less than 5 times over the term of this plan).

7.2 Cumulative Effect of Multiple FSP’s

Legal Reference: FPPR s 19

The FSP must address the cumulative effect of having multiple FSP’s in the same area


The license holder will establish a reciprocal arrangement to communicate its intentions to

other licensees who operate in the same Landscape Units (LUs) ; to proactively address and resolve

the following issues (if applicable) prior to cutting permit application:

• In shared biodiversity Landscape Units; the holder will determine numbers to show

compliance of old, and mature +old as per the results and strategies outlined in Section

5.1.2 of this document.

• On shared Ungulate Winter Range units; the numbers to show compliance with snow

interception coverage and forage area requirements will be determined as per

Sections 5.3.2 and 5.3.4 of this document.

• With shared watersheds, licensees will compare Equivalent Clearcut Calculations or

Hydrologic Assessments (within CWs) to rationalize accordance with legal objectives.

• In shared viewscapes; the holder will share visual data with the other licensee(s) to

demonstrate compliance with visual objectives.

• Records of biodiversity, UWR and watershed information will be kept on record at the

Atco Forestry office.

• If the holders of a FSP, within an area with multiple FSP’s, are unable to reach an

agreement for sharing the responsibility to obtain results consistent with objectives set

by government then request would be made to the minister to act under section 9 of

the FRPA.

8. References

Approved Wildlife Habitat Areas. Ministry of Environment. November 26, 2015. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/cgi-

bin/apps/faw/wharesult.cgi?search=show_approved

BC Conservation Data Centre: Data Submissions. Ministry of Environment. November 28, 2015.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/cdc/contribute.html


Best Practices for Preventing the Spread of Invasive Plants during Forest Management Activities 2013 Edition.

Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/plants/publications/Forestry-BP-09-11-2013-WEB.pdf

Biodiversity Guidebook. Forest Practices Code Guidebook. Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resource

Operations. September, 1995.

Bunnell, F.L., G. Dunsworth, D.J. Huggard, and L.L. Kremsater. 2003. Learning to sustain biological diversity on

Weyerhaeuser’s coastal tenure. Nanamio, BC: Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd.

Chief Forester: Reference Guide for FDP Stocking Standards. Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resource

Operations. February 2014. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/silviculture/stocking_stds.htm

Daniels, L.D., Z. Gedalof, M.F.J. Pisaric, C.J. Courtney Mustaphi, E. Da Silva, H. Marcoux, V.Mather, J. Nesbitt, E.

Paul-Limoges, J. Perrault, C.L. Steele. 2011. June 2011. Historic climate-fire vegetation interactions of the West

versus East Kootenays: Implications of climate change and fire suppression. Final Report to NSERC-Strategic

Research Partners.

Forest Act. http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/96157_00

Forest and Range Practices Act. British Columbia Government. November 27, 2014

Forest Planning and Practices Regulation. British Columbia Government. September 22, 2014

Forest Recreation Regulation (FRR). http://bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/16_2004

Fish-stream Crossing Guidebook (Revised Edition). Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

September 2012.

Government Action Regulation (GAR). http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/582_2004

HLPO Reporting Suite Application. Selkirk Geospatial Research Centre. November 1, 2015

http://www.kootenayspatial.ca/pg_hlpo/login.jsp

Kittredge, Joseph. 1948. Forest Influences: the effects of woody vegetation on climate, water and soil with

applications to the conservation of water and the control of floods and erosion. McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.

Kootenay Boundary Higher Level Plan Order. Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

October 26, 2002. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/SLRP/plan50.html

Kootenay Lake Default Stocking Standards. Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

December 4, 2007. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/DKL/Stewardship/StockingStandardsDec2007.pdf

Report-A-Weed. Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resource Operations. 2013.

https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/HRA/plants/raw.htm

Silviculture Systems Program, Notes to the Field, Volume 7. John Harkema and Mel Scott. Ministry of Forests

Lands and Natural Resource Operations. Forest Practices Branch. March 2002.

Species at Risk Public Registry. Government of Canada. November 28, 2015.http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/species/schedules_e.cfm?id=1

Stuart-Smith, A.K. 2001. Songbird communities in burned and logged stands with variable tree retention in the

Canadian Rocky Mountains [Ph.D.]: Oregon State University, Department of Forest Science. 140pg.


Stuart-Smith, A.K., and R. Hendry. 1998. Residual trees left by fire: final report. Invermere, BC: Ministry of

Forests Lands and Natural Resource Operations. Invermere Forest District. Report nr 7.

Visual Impact Assessment Guidebook (2nd edition). Forest Practices Code of British Columbia. Ministry of

Forests Lands and Natural Resource Operations. January 2001.

Water Sustainability Act.

Wildlife Act.


9. AppendicesI. Arrow and Kootenay Lake FDU Maps


II. Arrow and Kootenay Lake FDU’s Stocking Standards – See the following page


BGC Regeneration Guide Free Growing GuideClassification Stocking(i) Regen Assessment Min. Height(ii)

Target MIN pa MIN p Delay Latest Species Ht

Zone/SZ Series Standards ID Preferred (p) Acceptable (a) (w ell-spaced/ha) (Max yrs) (yrs) (m)

ESSFdc1 101 1050217 Bl201,202

Se Pl 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl

Others

1.6

0.8

102 1050218 Se Pl Pa13,201

Bl202 1000 500 400 7 20 Pl 1.2

Others 0.6

103 1050219 Se Pl Pa13,201

Bl202 1200 700 600 7 20 Pl

Others

1.6

0.8

104 1050220 Pl Se Bl202 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl 1.6

Others 0.8

110 1050221 Bl202

Se 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl 1.6

Others 0.8

111 1050222 Bl32,202

Se32 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl 1.6

Others 0.8

112 1050223 Bl1,32,202

Se1,32 1000 500 400 4 20 Pl 1.2

Others 0.6

ESSFmh 101 1050228 Cw14,34,203

Bl202

Lw9,14,34

Se

Pl34

Hw9,14

Fd9,14

Pw9,14,31

1200 700 600 4 20 Lw,

Pw, Pl

2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

102 1050229 Fd9

Lw9

Pl Se Bl202

Pa13 1000 500 400 7 20 Lw, Pl 1.6

Fdi 1.2

Others 0.8

103 1050230 Fd Lw Pl34

Se Cw Bl

Pw14,31

1200 700 600 7 20 Lw,

Pw, Pl

2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

104 1050231 Se Pl34

Bl202 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl 2.0

Others 1.0

105 1050232 Fd9

Lw9

Pl34

Se

Cw9

Bl202

Pw31

1200 700 600 4 20 Lw,

Pw, Pl

2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

110 1050233 Bl202

Se Hw14,32

Cw14,32

1200 700 600 4 20 All 1.0

111 1050234 Bl202

Se Cw14,32

Hw14,32

1200 700 600 4 20 All 1.0

112 1050235 Bl1,32,202

Se1,32

1000 500 400 4 20 All 0.8





ESSFwh3 101 1050260 Bl201,202

Cw14,34,203

Hw14,201

Se

Pl34

Fd9,14

Lw9,14

Pw9,14,31

1200 700 600 4 20 Lw,Pw,

Pl

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

102 1050261 Fd9,14

Lw9,14

Pl34

Se Bl202

Pa13 1000 500 400 7 20 Lw, Pl

Fd

1.6

1.2

Others 0.8

103 1050262 Se

Fd9,14

Lw9,14

Bl202

Hw9,14

Pw9,14,31

Pa13

Pl34,200

1200 700 600 7 20 Lw,

Pw, Pl

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

104 1050263 Se Cw14,201

Fd9,14,201

Lw9,14,201

Bl202

Hw9,14

Pl34

Pw9,14,31

1200 700 600 4 20 Lw,

Pw, Pl

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

110 1050264 Bl202

Se

Cw32,14

Hw14,32

Pl34 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl

Others

2.0

1.0

111 1050265 Bl202

Se Cw32,14

Hw14,32

1200 700 600 4 20 All 1.0

112 1060266 Bl1,32,202

Se1,32

Hw1,32 1000 500 400 4 20 All 0.8

ESSFwm3 101 1050274 Bl201,202

Se Pl34 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl 1.6

Others 0.8

102 1050275 Pa201

Se Bl202 1000 500 400 7 20 Pl 1.2

Others 0.6

103 1050276 Se Pa201

Pl200

Bl202 1200 700 600 7 20 Pl 1.6

Others 0.8

104 1050277 Bl202

Se Pl34 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl 1.6

Others 0.8

105 1050278 Bl202

Se Pl34 1200 700 600 4 20 Pl 1.6

Others 0.8

110 1050279 Bl202

Se 1200 700 600 4 20 All 0.8

111 1050280 Bl32,202

Se32 1200 700 600 4 20 All 0.8

112 1050281 Bl1,32,202

Se1,32 1000 500 400 4 20 All 0.6





ICHdw1 101 1050297 Cw10

Fd58

Lw

Pw31

Pl13

Bg Hw

Py9,14

1200 700 600 7 15 Lw,Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

102 1050298 Fd58

Py Lw Pl13 600 400 400 7 15 Pl, Lw 1.4

Fd 1.0

Others 0.8

103 1050299 Fd58

Lw Py Pl13

Pw31 1000 500 400 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

1.4

Fd 1.0

Others 0.8

104 1050300 Fd58

Lw

Py9,203

Pw31

Bg Pl

Cw10,204

1200 700 600 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

110 1050301 Cw Fd1,32,58

Lw1,32,201

Pw31

Hw Bg Sx 1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

111 1050302 Cw Pw1,31

Sx Bg Fd1,32

Hw Lw1,32

1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

112 1050303 Sx1

Cw1,32

Hw1,32

Pw31 1000 500 400 4 15 Pw 1.4

Others 0.8

113 1050304 Sx1

Cw1,32

Hw1,32 1000 500 400 4 15 Pw 1.4

Others 0.8





ICHmw4 101 1050333 Cw Fd58

Hw201

Lw

Pw31

Pl Sx10,13

Bg14

1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

102 1050334 Fd58

Pl Lw

Py9,14,203

1000 500 400 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

1.4

Fd 1.0

Others 0.8

103 1050335 Fd58

Lw Pl200

Py9,14,203

Cw13,10

Pw31

1000 500 400 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

104 1050336 Cw10,201

Fd58

Lw Pw31

Pl Cw Hw

Sx10,13,204

Bg14

1200 700 600 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

Fd

2.0

2.0

1.4

Others 1.0

110 1050337 Cw

Fd1,14,32,58

Hw201

Lw1,14,32

Pw31

Bg14

Sx 1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pw 2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

111 1050338 Bl202

Sx Cw1,32

Hw1,32

1200 700 600 4 15 All 0.8

112 1050339 Cw32

Pw1,31,32

Sx

Lw1,32

Fd1,32

Bl202

Hw32

1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pw 2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

113 1050357 Bl202

Sx Cw1,32

Hw1,32

1200 700 600 4 15 All 1.0

114 1050358 Cw1,32

Sx1

Bl202

Hw1,32 1000 500 400 4 15 All 0.8





ICHmw5 101 1050359 Cw Fd58

Hw201

Lw

Pw31

Sx10,13

Bg14,16

Pl 1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

102 1050360 Fd58

Pl Py9,14,16,203

Lw

1000 500 400 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

1.4

Fd 1.0

Others 0.8

103 1050361 Fd58

Lw Pl200

Pw31

Py9,14,16,203

1000 500 400 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

104 1050362 Fd58

Lw Pw31

Bg14,16

Cw

Hw Pl200

Py9,14,16

Sx10,13

1200 700 600 7 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

110 1050363 Cw Hw

Fd1,14,32,58

Lw1,14,32

Sx

Bl202

Pw31 1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

111 1050364 Cw32

Sx Bl202

Fd1,32

Hw32

Lw1,32

Pw31

1200 700 600 4 15 Lw, Pw 2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

112 1050365 Bl1,202

Sx1

Bl1,202

Hw1,32

Cw1,32

1200 700 600 4 15 All 1.0

113 1050366 Cw1,32

Sx1

Bl1,202

Hw1,32

1000 500 400 4 15 All 0.8





ICHxw 101 1050367 Fd58

Lw Pw31 Bg Cw Pl

Py9,203

1200 700 600 7 20 Lw, Pli,

Pw

2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

102 1050368 Fd58

Py 600 400 400 7 20 Fdi 1.0

Others 0.8

103 1050369 Fd58

Py Lw 600 400 400 7 20 Lw 1.4

Fdi 1.0

Others 0.8

104 1050370 Fd58

Lw

Py203

Bg Pl Pw31 1000 500 400 7 20 Lw, Pli,

Pw

2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

110 1050371 Cw Fd1,58

Lw1

Pw1,31

Hw Bg Sx12 1200 700 600 7 20 Lw 2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

111 1050372 Cw Fd1,58

Lw1

Pw1,31

Hw Bg Sx12 1200 700 600 4 20 Lw, Pw 2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

112 1050373 Sx1

Cw1,32

Hw1,32

Pw31 1000 500 400 4 20 Pw 1.4

Others 0.8

113 1050374 Sx1

Cw1,32

Hw1,32

Pw31 1000 500 400 4 15 All 0.8

ICHxwa 101 1050375 Fd58

Lw

Py9,203

Bg Cw Pw31 1200 700 600 7 20 Lw, Pl,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

102 1050377 Fd58

Py 600 400 400 7 20 Fd 1.0

Others 0.8

103 1050378 Fd58

Py Lw 600 400 400 7 20 Lw 1.4

Fd 1.0

Others 0.8

104 1050379 Fd58

Lw Py Bg Pl Pw31 1000 500 400 7 20 Lw, Pli,

Pw

2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0

110 1050380 Cw Fd1,58

Lw1

Pw1,31

Hw Bg Sx12 1200 700 600 7 20 Lw, Pw 2.0

Fd 1.4

Others 1.0





ICHxwa

(cont.)

111 1050381 Cw Fd1,58

Lw1

Pw1,31

Hw Bg Sx12 1200 700 600 4 20 Lw, Pw 2.0

Fdi 1.4

Others 1.0

112 1050382 Sx1

Cw1,32

Hw1, 32

Pw31 1000 500 400 4 20 Pw

Others

1.4

0.8

113 1050383 Sx1

Cw1,32

Hw1, 32

Pw31 1000 500 400 4 15 All 0.8

Trees must be equal to or greater than the approved minimum inter-tree distance apart in order to be well spaced:

Minimum inter-tree distance (m) Location/condition

1.7 planting on hygric, sub-hydric or mechanically site prepared areas

2.0 all other areas

Height of Trees Above Brush

In addition to being at least the required minimum height, trees must be greater than the approved minimum %height

% Ht above brush Location/condition125% ESSF BGC zones150% ICH BGC zones

Maximum Density: 10,000 stems/ha.25,000 stems/ha. for Pli (per Zacharatos letter, March 8, 2006

Post Density: Minimum 700 stems/ha.Maximum 1,800 stems/ha. and 2,500 stems/ha. for Pli

Minimum Leave Tree Characteristics: Advanced Regeneration:

To be considered acceptable, advanced regeneration must meet the requirements of Appendix 10 of the"Establishment to Free Growing Guidebook", Nelson Forest Region, May 2000.


Stocking Requirements for Multi-Layered Stands

Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3 Col. 4 Col. 5 Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3 Col. 4 Col. 5

Target from Layer** Stocking*** Target from Layer** Stocking***

Table A standards Target pa MIN pa MIN p Table A standards Target pa MIN pa MIN p

(stems/ha) (stems/ha)

1200 1 600 300 250 800 1 300 150 150

ID 86000 (all layers) 2 800 400 300 ID 86003 (all layers) 2 400 200 200

3 1000 500 400 3 600 300 300

4 1200 700 600 4 800 400 400

1000 1 400 200 200 600 1 300 150 150


3 800 400 300 3 500 300 300

4 1000 500 400 4 600 400 400

900 1 400 200 200 400 1 200 100 100


3 700 400 300 3 300 150 150

4 900 500 400 4 400 200 200

MIN - minimum

**Stand Layer Definition

Layer 1 Mature trees >= 12.5 cm dbh

Layer 2 Pole trees 7.5 cm to 12.4 cm dbh

Layer 3 Sapling trees >= 1.3 m height to 7.4 cm dbh

Layer 4 Regeneration trees < 1.3 m height

(w ell-spaced/ha) (w ell-spaced/ha)

* Maximum regeneration delay is seven years. For a seven-year regeneration delay, the early free growing is 12 years andthe late free growing is 15 years. Regeneration delay can be met immediately following harvest if the residual stand has nosignificant damage or pest problems and meets minimum stocking standards. If regeneration is achieved immediatelyfollowing harvest, earliest free growing date is 12 months after completion of harvest and the latest date is 24 months aftercompletion of harvest.

*** pa - preferred and acceptable species p - preferred species

Preferred and acceptable species and "Target" from the table of stocking standards by the BEC site series


Reference Guide for FSP Stocking Standards

Footnote# Footnote

Conifer Tree Species 1 elevated microsites are preferred

"Ba" means amabilis fir; 2 suitable on thick forest floors

"Bg" means grand fir; 3 restricted to coarse-textured soils

"Bl" means subalpine fir; 4 restricted to medium-textured soils

"Bp" means noble fir; 5 footnote retired"Cw" means western redcedar; 6 restricted to nutrient-very-poor sites

"Fd" means Douglas-fir; 7 restricted to nutrient-medium sites"Hm" means mountainhemlock; 8 restricted to steep slopes"Hw" means westernhemlock; 9 restricted to southerly aspects

“Lt” means tamarack; 10 restricted to northerly aspects

"Lw" means western larch; 11 restricted to crest slope positions

“Pa” means whitebark pine; 12 suitable on cold air drainage sites

"Pl" means lodgepole pine; 13 restricted to upper elevations of biogeoclimatic unit

"Pw" means white pine; 14 restricted to lower elevations of biogeoclimatic unit

"Py" means ponderosa pine; 15 restricted to northern portion of biogeoclimatic unit in region

“Sb” means black spruce; 16 restricted to southern portion of biogeoclimatic unit in region“Se” means Engelmannspruce; 17 restricted to western portion of biogeoclimatic unit in region

"Ss" means Sitka spruce; 18 restricted to eastern portion of biogeoclimatic unit in region

“Sw” means white spruce; 19 restricted, not in Queen Charlotte Islands"Sx" means hybrid spruce orinterior spruce; 20 restricted, not near outer coast"Sxs" means hybrid Sitkaspruce; 21 restricted to mainland“Sxw” means hybrid whitespruce; 22 restricted to southern Gardner Canal-Kitlope area

"Yc" means yellow cedar. 23 restricted to trial use

Broadleaf Tree Species

24 suitable (as a major species) in wetter portion of biogeoclimatic unit

“Acb” means balsam poplar; 25 suitable on sites lacking salal“Act” means blackcottonwood; 26 suitable minor species on salal-dominated sites

“At” means trembling aspen; 27 partial canopy cover required for successful establishment

“Dr” means red alder; 28 limited by moisture deficit“Ep” means common paperbirch; 29 risk of heavy browsing by moose

“Mb” means bigleaf maple; 30 retired November 2010

“Qg” means garry oak;

31use of resistant stock mitigates risk of white pine blister rust. Do not usenon-resistant stock for reforestation. See BC Journal of Ecosystems andManagement 10(1): 97-100.

“Ra” means arbutus; 32 limited by growing-season frosts

33 footnote retired and replaced with footnote 'a'

34 risk of snow damage


“Biogeoclimatic unit” or“BGC classification”means the zone, subzone,variant and site seriesdescribed in the most recentfield guide published by theMinistry of Forests for theidentiication andinterpretation of ecosystems,as applicable to a harvestedarea.

35 use of resistant stock mitigates risk of spruce weevil damage. Use stockwith the highest resistance rating for your area. See Ss Weevil DecisionTool (http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hre/forgen/projects/spruceweevil) and BCJournal of Ecosystems and Management 7(3): 45-49.

36 suitable major species on salal-dominated sites“MIN or “Min” meansminimum. 37 retired November 2010

38 footnote retired

39 avoid exposed and windy sites

40 risk of redheart

41 limited by poorly drained soils

42 restricted to fresh soil moisture regimes

43 suitable on mainland coast only (QCI only)

44 suitable in areas with stronger maritime influence

45 suitable in areas with stronger continental influence


Footnote # Footnote

46 restricted to area north of the Dean Channel47

risk of balsam wooly adelgid – applies to all Abies species in subzoneswithin the regulated quarantine area(http://www.al.gov.bc.ca/cropprot/balsamwa.htm )

48 risk of heavy browsing by deer

49 retired November 2010

50 restricted to sites where the species occurs as a

major species in a pre-harvest, natural stand

51 restricted to areas with proven Pl performance

52 restricted to sheltered microsites with deep soil

53 minor component

54 risk of unsuccessful release of advance regeneration

55 acceptable in sx-sm portion of site series

# Broadleaf Management Constraints

a productive, reliable, and feasible regeneration option

b limited in productivity, reliability and/or feasibility

# Localized Footnotes

56 Kalum forest district - see footnote 35

57 retired November 2010 see footnote 3158 South Area - Fd limited to a max 50% of preferred and acceptable well-

spaced stems in the IDFmw and all subzones of the ICH due to root rotin areas where stump removal has not been performed. See BCJournal of Ecosystems and Management 9(2): 60-65.

59 Prince George region - max 1,400 total sph of aspen and cottonwood.

Treat as 'ghost' trees in surveys.

60 Squamish forest district - species is acceptable in Squamish forest district only.

61 Squamish forest district only - acceptable on cold air drainage sites only.

62 retired November 2010 see footnote 4763

Queen Charlotte Islands forest district - must meet district managerspecified minimum well-spaced preferred stems per hectare andminimum height requirements for Cw and/or Yc

66 Mackenzie forest district - may be preferred where risk of snow damageis low or where risk of frost damage is excessive on spruce

67 Chilliwack forest district - species is acceptable in Chilliwack forest district only.

68 Chilliwack forest district - species is preferred in Chilliwack forest district only.69

Species is restricted to upper elevations when used in the southernportion of the biogeoclimatic unit.

70 Pr Rupert region - Hw is restricted to a maximum of 50% of the well spaced stems at free growing


200Pl200 allows Pl to be moved from acceptable to preferred if Pl wasdominant in the pre-harvest stand, using detailed criteria - see attachedfootnotes for details

201 Maximum 50% of preferred and acceptable well-spaced trees

202 No advance regeneration in even aged stand management

203 Recommended on sites for climate change adaptation

204 Not recommended due to climate change concerns


Pl200 Footnote

In order to move Pli from “acceptable” to “preferred”, the following criteria shallapply:

For areas with greater than 25% Pli in the mature overstory;Pli can only be moved to preferred on sites where all of the following criteria aremet:

1) Pli consisted of >25% of the mature overstory,

2) Extensive, historically proven stands of Pli existed pre-harvest*,

3) the harvested Pli is generally of good form and quality,

4) the site series is drier than mesic and there is no humidity build-up (e.g. slopingsites,

off valley floor bottoms, away from lakes), and

5) there is minimal evidence of snow damage in the mature stand(s).

If the 5 criteria are met and there is;

>50% Pli in the pre-harvest stand (based on merchantable volume), then Pli cancount

towards up to 100% of total well spaced stems.

25-50% Pli in the pre-harvest stand, then Pl can count towards a maximum of 50%of

total well spaced stems.

For Areas with less than 25% Pli in the mature stand

Where criteria #2, 3, 4, and 5, are met and there is 10-25% Pli in the pre-harveststand,

then Pli can count towards a maximum of 25% of total well spaced stems.

For Areas with less than 10% Pli in the mature stand

Where there is <10% Pli in the pre-harvest stand, Pli shall remain as acceptableand shall

not be moved to preferred unless either of the following instances exist immediately

adjacent in stands situated on similar site series, slope, aspect , and elevation;

mature stands of >25 % Pli that meet criteria 2 through 5 , or

Pli plantations (Pli >25%) that have survived and are healthy at age 25

Then,

Pli can be moved to preferred to a maximum of 25% of total well spaced stems.

General: applies to all instances

Generally, these sites will be limited to south facing aspects with slopes greaterthan 25%

*The test for meeting these criteria shall be evidence that stands either existed onthe

same site as the proposed block, or a stand immediately adjacent that fits the 5criteria

and has the same site series, slope, aspect, and topography as the proposed block.Cruise

compilations and rationale should be kept on file to demonstrate the above.


III. Referral List

BC HydroColumbia Basin Fish & Wildlife Compensation ProgramColumbia Power CorporationFortis BC Ltd.Big Red CatsKootenay ExperienceRed Mountain ResortSnowwater Heli SkiingWhitewater Ski and Winter ResortKtunaxa Nation CouncilOkanagan Nation AllianceLower Similkameen Indian BandOkanagan Indian BandOsoyoos Indian BandPenticton Indian BandShuswap Indian BandSplatsin First NationUpper Nicola Indian BandNeskonlith Indian BandAdams Lake Indian BandLower Kootenay Band

BCTS – Selkirk Forest DistrictInterforKalesnikoff Lumber Ltd.

Ministry of Energy and MinesMinistry of EnvironmentMinistry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource OperationsMinistry of Transportation – Avalanche and Weather ProgramsMinistry of Transportation and Infrastructure

City of CastlegarCity of NelsonCity of RosslandCity of TrailVillage of FruitvaleVillage of MontroseVillage of SalmoVillage of Warfield

Beaver Valley Cross Country Ski ClubBlackjack Cross Country Ski ClubCastlegar Nordic Ski ClubCastlegar Snowmobile AssociationChamber of MinesFriends of the Rossland RangeKootenay Columbia Trail SocietyNelson Cycling ClubNelson Nordic Ski ClubNelson Sno-GoersSalmo Snow DriftersTrail Wildlife AssociationWest Kootenay Snow-Goers

Regional District Kootenay Boundary (RDKB)Regional District of the Central Kootenays (RDCK)

Beaver Falls Waterworks District (Bath Cr.)Blewett Watershed Committee (Eagle/Sandy Cr.)Taghill Water User CommitteeGeorama Road Water UsersSandy Granite Water Users CommitteeGlade Irrigation DistrictRobson Raspberry Improvement District (Ladybird Cr.)Oasis Rivervale Improvement District

1Note: Watershed Groups that have been referred this plans are groups that Atco Wood Products Ltd. hasestablished and maintained a long-standing working relationship with respect to forest development in theirwatersheds. Due to the lack of specific proposed developments shown in each FDU, individual water license holderswill not be provided with a direct referral letter during the public advertisement of this FSP. They will be notified ofproposed development activities as the stand level developments are proposed within the larger FDU’s.


IV. First Nation / Stakeholder Referral Letters

August 15, 2016

«Company»

«Address1»

«City», «Province»

«PostalCode»

Attn: To Whom It May Concern:

Re: Atco Wood Products Ltd. – 2016-2021 draft Forest Stewardship Plan

Atco Wood Products Ltd. (Atco) is currently drafting a Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP) that will encompass the southern

portions of the Arrow and Kootenay Lake Timber Supply Areas (FL A20193 & FLA20218 respectively) under one plan.

The plan is comprised of 2 Forest Development Units (FDU’s), one in the Arrow and the other in Kootenay Lake; both

within the Selkirk Forest District.

The FSP is a landscape-level plan that identifies how the holder of the plan will be consistent with government

objectives for managing and protecting forest and range values through the results, strategies and measures proposed

in the plan. Once approved, the FSP will guide future forest development, including road construction, timber

harvesting and silviculture activities.

It is important to note that the FSP is a management document and does not show actual locations of specific proposed

cut blocks or roads. A separate referral will be sent once this development layout is known.

The draft Atco FSP will be available for public review and written comments from August 15, 2016 to October 14, 2016,

during regular business hours (7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday) at the office address noted below. An

electronic copy of the draft FSP has been attached with the email sent to you with this letter.

If you have questions or would like to arrange a meeting, do not hesitate to contact me at 250-367-2525.

In order for comments to be considered prior to submission of the FSP for approval they must be received on or before

October 14, 2016. Written comments may be mailed, delivered in person or sent by email.

Sincerely,

Ron OzanneForestry ManagerEmail: [email protected]

RO/nh

Encl.


Referral Letter to Stakeholders

August 15, 2016

«AddressBlock»

«GreetingLine»

Re: Atco Wood Products Ltd. – 2016-2021 draft Forest Stewardship Plan

Atco Wood Products Ltd. (Atco) is currently drafting a Forest Stewardship Plan (FSP) that willencompass the southern portions of the Arrow and Kootenay Lake Timber Supply Areas (FLA20193 & FLA20218 respectively) under one plan. The plan is comprised of 2 Forest DevelopmentUnits (FDU’s), one in the Arrow and the other in Kootenay Lake; both within the Selkirk ForestDistrict.

The FSP is a landscape-level plan that identifies how the holder of the plan will be consistent withgovernment objectives for managing and protecting forest and range values through the results,strategies and measures proposed in the plan. Once approved, the FSP will guide future forestdevelopment, including road construction, timber harvesting and silviculture activities.

It is important to note that the FSP is a management document and does not show actual locationsof specific proposed cut blocks or roads. A separate referral will be sent once this developmentlayout is known.

The draft Atco FSP will be available for public review and written comments from August 15, 2016to October 14, 2016, during regular business hours (7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday) atthe office address noted below.

If you have questions or would like to arrange a meeting, do not hesitate to contact me at 250-367-2525.In order for comments to be considered prior to submission of the FSP for approval they must bereceived on or before October 14, 2016. Written comments may be mailed, delivered in person orsent by email.

Sincerely,

Ron OzanneForestry ManagerEmail: [email protected]

RO/nh


V. Public Review and Comment

Date Name Affiliation Type Comment Received and Atco's Response("— "dash)

Replyletter&/ormap

Aug-16

Robb Anderson

Ministry ofTransportationandInfrastructure

Email Sent digital copy of FSP Text upon request

Yes -email

Ken Scown /Ingrid Russell

BCTS

Carly Rimmell

RegionalDistrict ofKootenayBoundary

Kristin Aasen

RegionalDistrict ofCentralKootenay

Al SkakunCastlegarNordic Ski Club

Ron Palmer Interfor

Patric MaloneySnowwaterHeli Skiing

Mike KnapikMinistry ofFLNRO

Les Carter

Friends ofRosslandRange

HeatherMcSwan

GladeWatershedProtectionCommittee

TylerHodgekinson

Kalesnikoff

16-Aug-16 Lavolda NelsonPentictonIndian Band

Letter

Letter requesting KMZ file and shape files.— Ron Babcock emailed these files onSeptember 9, 2016. See copy of email.

Yes

22-Sep-16 Al SkakunCastlegarNordic Ski Club

Letter(emailed)

A reply to initial letter by email onSeptember 22, 2016. See copy of email.Generally in agreement R/S for recreation.Requested a commitment to a referral ofproposed development (blocks and roads)to the recreation group where rec site ortrail may be infringed.— sec #5.4.1 R/S were revised with thiscommitment.

Yes


27-Sep-16 Carly Rimell

RegionalDistrictKootenayBoundary

Letter

A reply to initial letter sent October 6, 2016.See a copy of reply letter. Clarification oninterpretation of how Atco deals with 4concerns:1. Health of CW's— Atco standardly uses a hydrologicassessment to get specificrecommendations regarding block and roadlayout. In addition, Atco is well known for itsrelationships with CW groups.2. OG forests managed by an independententity— Audit mechanisms (i.e. 3rd party's) whichAtco has assure OG management are:(1) Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) -KPMGauditor (2) the provincial forestwatchdog - the Forest Practice Board3. All logs left on block to be cut to drop onforest floor— Atco leaves some logs deliberatelysuspended after logging for biodiversitypurpose (this delays decomposition of whatlater will add nutritional value to the site).Maintain coarse woody debris on site is animportant biodiversity component.4. Use of term "undertake to comply"rather than simply comply— "undertake to comply" with rather thansimply "comply with" is languagerecommended by lawyers regarding R/S toachieve objectives.

Yes

15-Oct-16



Letter

A reply to initial letter sent October 31,2016. See a copy of reply letter. GladeWatershed Protection raised concerns,some of which relate to FSP and otherswhich are specific to operational levelreferral. Response was given to thefollowing FSP related concerns1. FPB concerns about public review in FSP's— Mentioned CF and DDM have provided

guidance on their expectations.2. Climate change— Atco refers to the most current climatechange information3. Grizzly habitat— Atco has dealt with Grizzly bear as part ofits FSP

Yes

07-Oct-16 Yvonne WeinertOsoyoosIndian Band

Letter

A reply to initial letter sent November 8,2016. See a copy of reply letter. OIBrequested payment of a $500 processing feefor the FSP referral.— Atco's response quoted a clause in theFCRSA which OIB is already receivingcompensation for this work.

Yes


15-Sep-1621-Oct-16

Lavolda NelsonPentictonIndian Band

Letter

A reply to initial letter sent November 8,2016. See a copy of reply letter. PIB alsorequested payment of a $500 processing feefor the FSP referral. —Again, Atco's response quoted a clause inthe FCRSA which OIB is already receivingcompensation for this work.

Yes

12-Jan-17 James OlsonGuideOutfitters Assnof BC

Letter(emailed)

A reply email was seen March 17, 2017. Seea copy of reply email. Although the GuideOutfitters had not actually reviewed thewording of Atco's FSP, they emailed a letterexpressing concerns about:1. Important ungulate habitat may notcurrently be legislated UWR or WHA.— Mentioned GAR's for UWR, Caribou andGrizzly Bear and Atco's long history ofworking with Trail Wildlife Association.2. Greater Assessment of important wildlifehabitat features (WHF's)— Atco's commitment to WTP's an OGMA'scovering WHF's and currently a pilot GARproject is occurring to protect significantWHF's.3. Key corridors and linkage between

forage/cover.— KBHLPO currently manages forconnectivity corridors. These were largelybased on FEN's identified by biologists andforesters.4. Management of ungulate and bear forageas part of forest development.— Atco has 2 WHA's covering Grizzly andsignificant UWR. Atco employs QRP'sincluding professional biologists specializingin fish, wildlife and birds; whereappropriate.5. Access Management planning to limitboth human predator pressure on ungulateresources.— Atco works closely with MFLNRO and

MOE on access management issues.Unfortunately denying public access is avery sensitive issue and ministries are veryreluctant to deny access without enormousjustification.

Yes


04-May-17 Larry Walker Trapper

Letter

Larry Walker (Trapper in Ladybird) sent aresponse to Atco's FSP via Grant Walton(MFLNRO) with concerns as summarizedbelow: See a copy of reply letter.1. Important furbearer habitatrequirements are not shown in the FSP.— These are not a legislated part of the FSP.During development these habitat featuresare recognized. The commitment to addresshabitat requirements is handled under theblock/road layout referral stage, which isstated in the FSP.2. Important Wildlife Habitat Features needto be identified and protected as part of theFSP.— WHFs are identified and strategies toprotect these features by OGMAs, WTPs,Riparian Reserves and management zonesare covered off under the developmentphase. Again there is an opportunity todiscuss these items at the layout referralstage.3. Key Connectivity Corridors and limitingharvest to ensure a percentage of forestcover should be part of the FSP.— Connectivity corridors are recognized aspart of the KBHLPO, which the FSP covers. Inaddition, the Ladybird CommunityWatershed has an overriding hydrologic caplimiting the Equivalent Clear cut Area (ECA)to 30%. This protects the level of forestcover to a level above the 65% as stated inyour request.4. Access should be limited to reduce humanpressure on furbearers.— Only the District Manager (MFLNRO) hasthe authority to restrict public access. Thisaction is only applied in extremecircumstances.5. Habitat goals should be included in theFSP.—The FSP states measures that must beaccomplished 100% of the time. With theconflicting measures to manage for all forestvalues (recreation, timber, biodiversity,visuals, fish, etc) it is not possible toguarantee target goals 100% of the time.Again, this is a matter that can be discussedat the block layout referral stage.6. Timing of harvesting and silviculture --activities will be discussed at the layoutreferral stage as described above.7. Incorporating slash piling and

windrowing to assist small mammal preyand denning

Yes


— Legal slash abatement laws and publicrecreation concerns override the company’sability to do this.8. Mutual discussions about operational

matters and trap-line issues— Again the company is committed todiscussing and working out these types ofconcerns at the layout stage referral time.9. Trap site damage ----this can be discussedat the layout referral.

30-May-17 Rieva McCuaig Ktunaxa FN

email

Rieva McCuaig (MFLNRO) received a letterfrom the Ktunaxa FN regarding concernswith Atco’s FSP. Below are the concerns,with the dashed prefix of Atco’s response:See a copy of reply letter.1. The Ktunaxa FN would like to be advisedof any proposed OGMA swap.— The KBHLPO requires a RPF to verify thata replacement OGMA must containequivalent or better old value attributes.Atco keeps the OGMA swap rationale onrecord, along with a map. In general theseOGMA swaps involve small areas. OriginalOGMA placement was done primarily as anoffice exercise. Field checking usually leadsto new OGMAs with better old values.2. Species at Risk (Whitebark Pine andWestern White Pine) should be protected.— Whitebark Pine is protected under SARlegislation. Whenever it is encountered allWhitebark Pine is retained. As this speciesgenerally occurs at high elevations abovethe operability line, thus it is rare that it isever encountered within proposed blocks.Over the last 30 yrs White Pine is managedas part of operations throughout Atco's


area. The company is committed toreforesting with genetically proven blisterrust resistant seed.3. Ktunaxa prefers to retain Riparianmanagement trees, with less considerationof windfirmness and pathogens— Atco is committed to the use ofexperienced professionals for theassessment of riparian retention to protectthe riparian values of the site specificstream.4. Ktunaxa FN would like to see anyalteration to a WTP before it is finalized.— Alterations to WTPs are prescribed andrationalized by an RPF prior to any changebeing made. As with the OGMAs therationale is kept on record.5. Involvement with Ktunaxa FNrepresentatives as part of the developmentprocess.— Atco submits development referrals to allassociated First Nations groups. If anyconcerns are raised the company iscommitted to working together onalterations to accommodate and protectcultural heritage features.


Appendix VI - FSP Amendment Log

Tab Reference Sheet

TabFSP

Tracker #FSP

Amend #Comment/Description

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

P.O. Box 460 Fruitvale, BC V0G 1L0Main Office: P 250 / 367.9441 F 250/367.6210

Forestry Office: P 250 / 367.9441 F 250/367.6210

June 15, 2017

Larry Walker1664 Pass Creek Road,Castlegar, B.C.Trapline # CB14-164700

Re: Atco Wood Product’s replacement FSP: 2017-2022.

Dear Larry;

Thank you for the letter that was addressed to Grant Walton and Leo DeGroot regarding comments onAtco’s replacement FSP.

Below, in the same bulleted order are responses to the concerns raised:

• The legislated requirements of FSPs do not include a great many factors (ie key habitat requirementsof arboreal furbearers) that are beyond the intended scope of the plan, Most often these factors dealtwith on development plans covering proposed Blocks and Roads (ie at a site specific) basis. Thecompany is committed to sending out referrals at this stage to stakeholders. Atco will assure that youreceive development plan referrals for your trapline in the future.

• Important wildlife habitat features (WHFs) like dens, mineral licks, etc are identified as part of theblock / road layout. Often the Wildlife Tree Patches (WTPs) that are placed on each block (generallya minimum of 7% of the block area) cover and protect these significant WHFs.

• Key connectivity corridors are dealt with in a number of ways: OGMAs, WTPs, Riparian Reservesand management Zones, other reserves and modified cutting prescriptions (selective cuts). TheLadybird/ Norns drainage is a Community Watershed. As such the hydrological principle that is usedto minimize effects on water quality and quantity is to operate with a maximum Equivalent ClearcutArea of 30%. This stipulation addresses your comment regarding maintaining a 65% forested cover.

• Access management is a very difficult issue that the governmentstruggles with to make the broad array of forest users happy.Establishing gates and limiting access is only done where it is approvedby the District Manager of MFLNRO. To illustrate just howcontroversial this matter is the government; an attempt to establish anAccess Management Area (AMA) in the northern portions of the Pend’Oreille (high value ungulate winter range and many species at risk) ,yetwith public pressure from recreation groups, ATV club, miners, etc.simply too overwhelming, so an AMA has not been designated.

• Habitat goals and targets are not something that can be measurable and verifiable to the extent thatthe FSP states objectives or practices that must be obtained 100% of the time. This presentssignificant difficulty in drafting wording that will be met at all times. As an example, it could be seenas a target is to retain a certain number of trees in a forested area. Unfortunately there are windstorms, natural landslides, forest pest epidemics and other factors that all occur and consequently theFSP commitment would not be achieved. In addition, the intent of an FSP is not to state goals for allfactors that exist in a forest. It would be idealist to think this could be done, but one would findnumerous conflicts between the resource values of:recreation, visual aesthetics, riparian protection,domestic water use, range, biodiversity, cultural heritage, etc.

• As mentioned earlier the company is committed to sending a referral to you at the development stage.During this stage it is the appropriate time to mutually discuss a cooperative approach for advancesnotice and timing of our operations (harvesting, road building, silviculture).

• Piling of slash and windrowing of woody debris is something that strongly conflicts with legal slashabatement laws. In addition the recreating public often has an issue with these slash piles. Atco verymuch understands the value of retention of these woody debris piles for managing the production ofsmall mammal prey and denning habitat.

• Again the mutual discussion of operational matters, such as trap sites and surrounding forested areashould be dealt with at the development referral stage.

• Again the damage to trap sites, is an item to be discussed at the development referral stage. I mustemphasize that forest management is a difficult task that rarely, if ever, makes all resource usershappy.

On May 10th evening, on the phone, you and I discussed a number of your concerns. As stated at that time itwould be good to meet at a mutually convenient time to discuss matters further.

Yours truly;

Ron K. Ozanne, RPFForestry Manager250-367-2525

1

Ron Ozanne

From: Holoboff, Warren FLNR:EX <[email protected]>

Sent: May-30-17 10:24 AM

To: Ozanne, Ron FOR:IN

Cc: Wiles, Ian G FLNR:EX

Subject: FW: Evaluation of referral: 3500-10/17-0108 FSP Replacement - Atco Wood Products

Ltd. - Trail / Nelson .

Attachments: 3500-10_17-0108-finalReport-2017-05-26_15-55-54.pdf

Hello Ron

Can you please respond to the attached FN consultation concerns If you need clarification on any item, it might be more

efficient to contact Ms McCuaig directly

Warren Holoboff, RPF

Stewardship Forester

Castlegar Office, Selkirk Resource District Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations

250-365-8625

-----Original Message-----

From: McCuaig, Rieva FLNR:EX

Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 9:43 AM

To: Holoboff, Warren FLNR:EX

Subject: FW: Evaluation of referral: 3500-10/17-0108 FSP Replacement - Atco Wood Products Ltd. - Trail / Nelson .

Good morning Warren,

I've received the attached response from Ktunaxa. Could you please share the questions/concerns that I've extracted

below with the proponent and ask that they respond to questions and address concerns as possible for us? I would like

to then share response with Ktunaxa and move to concluding consultation.

Thanks very much, Rieva

***

5.1.2 Old and Mature Forest

The Ktunaxa Nation considers old growth forest to be extremely important - both culturally and spiritually. As

important elements on the landscape which are becoming increasingly scarce, the KNC supports efforts to ensure

recruitment strategies which result in achieving old and mature targets. KNC also recommends that consultation occurs

prior to modification of an OGMA boundary or location for any reason.

5.2.3.1 Species at Risk

Please be aware that the CDC's Species and Ecosystem Explorer Tool often does not have up to date information on the

location or observations of species at risk. Consultation with local provincial biologists, or other QRP may be necessary

at times to determine habitat suitability and/or possible risk to species without designated WHA's. Whitebark and

Western white pine trees are culturally important to the Ktunaxa, and are Provincially blue-listed species. Although not

2

legally protected species, KNC recommends specific strategies/measures (below, section 5. 2.10) that will minimize

unnecessary harvest of these species of importance.

5.2.4 Water, Fish, Wildlife and Biodiversity in Riparian Areas

What methodology is used to determine wind-firmness of leave trees? If timber is in imminent danger of loss due to

forest pathogens, it is preferable to KNC that those trees in a potential or designated RMZ are retained regardless of

imminent loss, damage, or destruction from pathogens, thus retaining important aspects of a functional riparian zone -

with large diameter trees retained along streams regardless of the tree health status.

5.2.8 Wildlife and Biodiversity - Stand Level

If a wildlife tree retention area requires replacement, similar to 5.1.2 above, KNC requests that a clear rationale for the

decision with supporting documentation be shared with KNC representatives prior to harvesting of the original wildlife

tree area to be replaced.

5.2.10 Cultural Heritage Resources

The KNC recommends the following strategies, which are similar to the proposed FSP, but provide a clearer

commitment to conduct inventory, to include FN in the inventory activities when possible, then report on efforts made

to identify, and mitigate important cultural heritage resources not regulated under the Heritage Conservation Act.

1. Working with designated representatives of the KNC (or other First Nations), conserve and where necessary protect

cultural heritage resources (e.g. old growth forest, medicinal, ceremonial, or food plants, Western and Whitebark pine,

specific wildlife habitat and/or features, etc.) by undertaking the following activities:

a. Before declaring area or submitting cutting permits, review proposed forest development activities to:

i. Determine the nature and potential extent of cultural heritage resources that may be impacted by the

proposed operations;

ii. Assess potential conflicts between proposed forest development activities and KNC land use activities.

b. If necessary, undertake inventories to more accurately identify and assess cultural heritage resources identified in 3

(a). Work with applicable First Nations when possible to complete inventories.

c. Describe forest management activities that will address the impacts or conflicts identified in 3 (a).

d. Modify proposed forest development activities to address the impacts or conflicts identified in 3 (a); and

e. Make best efforts to resolve issues through consensus.

2. Prepare a summary of the process in b) and c) above, including a description of identified issues and how they were

resolved. If issues were not resolved, the summary will describe how the parties have attempted to address the issues.

In the unlikely event that meetings have not occurred, the efforts made to meet and/or review information with KNC

will be documented in the summary. The summary will be provided to

a. District Manager of applicable Forest Region,

b. The designated KNC (or other FN) representative.

If you have any questions, or for more information regarding these comments, please contact:

Cathy Conroy, BSc.

3

Terrestrial Biologist

Ktunaxa Nation Lands & Resources

ph: 250-489-2464 extension 4033

[email protected]

-----Original Message-----

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 3:56 PM

To: McCuaig, Rieva FLNR:EX

Subject: Evaluation of referral: 3500-10/17-0108 FSP Replacement - Atco Wood Products Ltd. - Trail / Nelson .

Referral 3500-10/17-0108 FSP Replacement - Atco Wood Products Ltd. - Trail / Nelson 19500-40/ A20193 & A20218

Our evaluation of this referral is attached.

Kind regards,

Ktunaxa Nation Council

Table of Contents - p · PDF fileTSR: Timber Supply Review UWR: Ungulate Winter Range VIA: Visual Impact Assessment ... Nancy Greene South (NGS) 9053 Pend

Documents