Some rural residents who live along the Ghost River, west of Cochrane, are asking for a moratorium to be placed on the planned ‘B-9 Quota’ harvesting plan for portions of the Ghost watershed, slated to begin later this month.
“We’re not anti-logging,” explained Gord MacMahon, a part-time resident for eight years on a 40-acre parcel that borders the Stoney First Nation land on the Ghost River. “We’re opposed to clear-cutting and some of the practices that seem to be standard practices of the Spray Lake Sawmills (SLS).”
MacMahon — along with Bill Motherwell, who lives on a 12-acre parcel of land up the Ghost estuary that has been in his family since the 1930s and Lori Haywood, who lives on a quarter section south of the Ghost River that has been in her family since the 1940s — met with the Eagle to express some of his concerns.
The residents expressed concerns that included the potential of hauling loaded logging trucks on dirt roads not built to a road standard (originally proposed along Jameson Road, the SLS is now ‘exploring other options’); that a harvesting plan that was originally proposed to take place over 25 years is being condensed into three years (according to SLS this isn’t exactly the case); that there is a lack of buffer zones throughout the areas slated to be logged (there are varying opinions on the blow-down resulting from buffer zones versus biologist-recommended 200-300-foot buffer zones around wetlands).
The residents are also concerned that there has been a lack of public consultation; that the province is taking a ‘hands-off’ approach in the regulation of area logging practices, and what they consider poor planning with a lack of scientific assessments to ensure that logging won’t have a negative impact on the Ghost watershed — upstream of the Ghost Reservoir and Bow River, where Cochrane residents receive their drinking water from.
“This area historically behaves as a big sponge…if you strip off all that timbre in one fell swoop, it’s going to lose its ability to absorb water,” said MacMahon.
“In light of the sensitivity around flooding, how much sense does it make to do all this in the upper watershed?” questioned Motherwell.
“The answer to the harvest sequencing is complex,” explained Ed Kulcsar, woodlands manager for SLS. “As a provincial requirement, SLS annually reconciles and reports its actual harvest level compared to the spatial harvest sequence outlined in the strategic plan. The harvest plan for the B9 Quota compartment is well within the modeled levels of the strategic plan. Only approximately 24 per cent of the spatial harvest sequence for the B9 Quota compartment has been included in a forest harvest plan.”
Kulcsar added that all plans for harvesting must be approved by Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (AESRD) — through the ‘Forest Management Planning Standard’.
Duncan MacDonnell, AESRD spokesperson, said the notion that the province is taking a ‘hands-off approach’ is not the case.
“The Forest Management Planning Standard is the (provincial) standard we put forward. That standard, in turn, is based on the Canadian Standard Association,” said MacDonnell.
MacDonnell explained that it’s key for people to understand that this overarching provincial standard is completely different than forest certification — international standards of what is determined standard forestry practice, grown out of consumer concerns.
SLS received Forestry Stewardship Certification in 2013 and recently went through its annual assessment for this year; this certification has nothing to do with provincial regulations.
MacDonnell said that AESRD conducts monitoring, inspections and conducts audits to ensure that logging companies are adhering to provincial guidelines.
He also said that the notion of ‘25 years of logging condensed into three years’ is a bit of a misconception and that SLS has not been cutting up to its allotted amount over the last several years, based on poor market values.
Kulcsar said that SLS held an open house at Beaupre Hall April 16 and a collaborative planning meeting May 1.
The three area residents interviewed by the Eagle said they have not been contacted by SLS and were not made aware of any public consults held.
Haywood said she found out about the harvesting of the B9 Quota by attending a road-use consult last spring.
She also expressed concern over the removal of old growth forests (habitats for species in the watershed) and that the method of clear-cutting would not allow for staggered re-growth and biodiversity in the area.
McDonnell said that AESRD is not directly involved with the public consults and that it is up to the logging company to satisfy these requirements; should people feel that SLS is not addressing public concerns they could contact the Calgary regional AESRD branch at 403-297-7602.
McDonnell stressed that the public consultation process is not whether SLS could or could not log in the area, as this is already determined in the land-use agreement for that area, rather on receiving public input on the operational methods.
Doug Richards is a long-time bucking stock rancher, whose homestead is located at the west end of Richards Road.
Richards holds the grazing lease for some 2,200 acres of crown land in the area; some 1,600 acres of his lease would be impacted by SLS harvesting of the B9 Quota.
“I’m not anti-logging, but I do believe in some instances there are better methods of harvesting than clear-cutting,” said Richards, noting that the government has give a ‘carte blanche’ to the logging industry.
Richards, who pays the lease fees and taxes on the land, said he is concerned that SLS will leave a mess behind when logging is completed and that his livestock won’t be able to access parts of the land.
It is the practice of SLS to not clean up debris resulting from clear-cutting, as they ascertain that ‘there are many ecological benefits to stump side processing’ (including protection of the scattered cones and seedlings).
Richards said he is also seeking compensation in exchange for the 12 access roads that SLS would be building to haul logs out, as this would likely open up the gates for recreational users in the area — potentially plaguing Richards with clipped fences, garbage and quad tracks.
“I get nothing out of it but the mess and headaches,” said Richards.
He is in the midst of working out a ‘grazing-timbre agreement’ with the logging company and said he is also concerned about the possibility of an infestation of weeds resulting from the disturbance of the area and does not want to be stuck with a bill for this down the road.
Kulcsar asserts that pre-harvest assessments (detailed field assessments) were conducted prior to finalizing an operating plan; that they have followed buffer requirements specified in the ‘science-based Provincial Operating Ground Rules’; and that water quantity modeling by a qualified forest hydrologist was part of the strategic plan.
Some concerned residents and advocates for the Ghost watershed have created a Facebook group, ‘Stop Ghost Clearcut’ — demanding accountability and transparency on the part of SLS and the province, as well as ecological responsibility for logging practices.
