Location, location, location.
That was the hottest issue during the District of Sechelt's public information meeting on its community forest licence application, held April 19 at the Seaside Centre in Sechelt.
The location for the proposed community forest includes large parts of the Chapman and Gray Creek watersheds, and for many at the meeting, that was a deal-killer, despite assurances from Sechelt mayor Cam Reid and his consultants that there would be no logging in the watershed in the short term.
"We're always fighting for our watershed here, for clean water," said Doreen Bartley. "We don't care if it's Weyerhaeuser or MacBlo or the community forest. We just don't want you in our watershed."
Louella Keates cited the 87 per cent "no" vote in an earlier regional referendum on a proposed integrated watershed management plan that included logging. "What don't you understand about 'no'? This is still our watershed," she said.
Others argued that the community forest could provide a way to protect the watershed.
Jamie Killackey, a forestry consultant, pointed out the substantial forest tenure in the Chapman watershed that is held by B.C. Timber Sales. He said he'd rather see those areas become part of the community forest.
"I'm surprised to see the area still held by BCTS. I'm a lot more concerned about their actions in the watershed," Killackey said.
About 100 people crowded into the Seaside Centre to hear details of the community forest plan and to question the panel, which included Reid, District of Sechelt planner Ray Parfitt and forestry consultants Kevin Davie and Brian Smart. Smart outlined the technical details of the community forest application. He said the Ministry of Forests initially offered a 20,000 metre annual allowable cut in a forest area east and north of Sechelt that included the watersheds of Chapman, Grey, Angus and Burnett Creeks. But that area was not large enough, he said, because of many factors including community concerns about logging in the drinking watersheds, root rot infesting trees in some areas and that much of the land had been logged recently or had low-quality timber. The location of the forest at the "urban interface" would determine the acceptable type of forestry, Smart said.
"Not many people would want a 40-acre clear cut right behind them."
The Ministry of Forests responded by offering more forest land in Wilson Creek and the Crowston Lake and Wormy Lake areas west of Sechelt, which Smart said is "definitely enough for five years" without having to log the watersheds.
"There is going to be a bit of a timber supply problem in the 10 to 30 year range that we will need to address in our management plans," Smart said.
The community forest proponents emphasized that the initial licence will be for a five-year probation. After that, the licence could be re-negotiated to include more forest area, or Sechelt Community Projects Inc. could buy tenure from other logging companies to increase the community forest to a more sustainable size.
The District of Sechelt agreed to the SCRD's request for a 60-day extension (to the end of May) to allow more public input on the community forest application. But in response to a request to postpone the application even further, Greg Hemphill, district forest manager for the Ministry of Forests, said the provincial government has a "sense of urgency" to complete the application process.
"We took volume back from major licensees [Canfor and Interfor] and compensated them. . . there's other proponents who would like to get their hands on this," said Hemphill. "The question is, are you better off to have some management control, or to leave it to the provincial authorities to chart it to other corporations?"
An audience member responded, "sounds like a threat."
Almost all of the speakers criticized Sechelt's community forest proposal, though many said they like the concept of a community forest.
One who supported the application was Burns Matkin, who urged Sechelt to follow the example of towns in the B.C. Interior that have working community forests.
"Some of those towns were saved by community forests," he said. The critics voiced objections including a lack of genuine public consultation and problems with the proposed structure of Sechelt Community Projects Inc. (SCPI).
Michael Davidson, of the newly formed Sechelt Electors Association, said it was undemocratic "tokenism" to have only two elected members on the seven-member board of SCPI. "We feel this ratio should be reversed. The majority of interim and of permanent board seats should always be held by members elected by the whole community of the Sunshine Coast," said Davidson.
Dan Bouman, executive director of the Sunshine Coast Conservation Association, questioned the lack of support from the Sunshine Coast Regional District and the Sechelt Indian Band for Sechelt's community forest application. Reid replied that discussions with the regional district and the band are ongoing.
"We would like agreement and we would like support. We are working on that," said Reid.
The Town of Gibsons is on record as supporting, in principle, "the concept of a community forest license application by the District of Sechelt."
John Marian, regional director for Halfmoon Bay, slammed Reid for acting unilaterally, disregarding the watershed accord between the SCRD and the Sechelt Indian Band, and being "disrespectful of the vast majority of people dependent on that watershed."
"You have no support from the SCRD, despite claiming on TV, Cam, that you did. . . Where's your credibility, Cam?" said Marian.
Reid replied, "I'm not asking you to trust me. We're setting up a corporation and we're setting up partnerships. The plans will not be done by me."
Reid was on the hot seat all night, but appeared unswayed by the criticism. He repeated the potential benefits of a community forest: local stewardship of local resources, economic benefits through direct job creation and by creating a supply of wood for small, value-added businesses, profits to be shared by the entire Sunshine Coast, education, and enhancement of tourism and wildcrafting.
"We cannot lose this opportunity," he said. "Ten, 20, 40 years from now we can look back and we'll be proud of what we've done."
And Hemphill suggested the public opposition to the community forest might not hurt Sechelt's chances of having its application approved.
"There was a direct invitation to the District of Sechelt. The minister has already tipped his hand that he would like the District of Sechelt to get a community forest," said Hemphill in an interview after the meeting. "They're well aware of the history down here. The divided opinions won't be a shock to anybody."
