Every Tree in B.C. cut to be replaced - New Legislation

[Gabe]

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2010/03/2 ... duced.html

I wonder what kind of impact this will have on the actual planting. Is this just a feel good bill, because don't we already more or less replace any tree that has been cut?

[salbrecher]

Maybe this is more about replanting the large amount of Non Sufficiently Restocked (NSR) ground that already exists throughout BC? Areas that were not fully restocked due to poor silvicultural practices, lack of monitoring, disease, etc.

[mel_eff]

To be honest I really thought this legislation was already in place. Apparently not so I do think it is just a feel good bill.

As far as the effect on planting, I doubt it'll change anything, for better or worse.

[Duncan]

nice optical illusion, the BC Liberals are good at saying one thing then a few years down the road the story changes, last year i dug up a 2007 report that had seedlings going from 270 million in 2006 and rising for the foreseeable future by gov't projections on reforesting pine beetle devastated areas but 2010 there will be what like 160 million? This is only media fodder, most people still think planting is booming

This also goes back to the thread I started on cuts to the Forest Service and this PG Citizen article

http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/arti ... lp-39-list

"Up to now, the ministry has reported annually on such things as its success in containing wildfires; whether it is doing enough to reforest the lands denuded by harvesting, fires and disease; and whether forest companies are maintaining a high level of compliance (95 per cent or thereabouts) with the forest practices code.

In the most recent year for which the ministry reported results (2008-09), it failed to achieve most of the targets. Most notably, it had to admit that it was reforesting only about three hectares of timberlands for every four that were lost.

The Liberals have eliminated the possibility of any further embarrassment over that record of underachievement by abandoning most of the performance measures."



They will meet their standards which will NOT be independent

[RPF]

Don't quote me on this, but the intent of this legislation is to be applied to areas that are outside of existing managed forestland (TFL's, Forest Licences, etc). Within the managed forestlands there are already regulations in place around reforestation obligations (ie. if you cut an area that area is required to be reforested within a certain time period).

This new regulation is designed to be implemented on forest lands not covered by the above. For example, if a private land owner decides to cut down trees to make room for a housing development or a parking lot, that owner must find another non-managed forest land (such as an abandoned lot or some such thing) to plant trees. The amount to plant will be comparable to the amount of land being deforested.

In theory this sounds good, however, practically, I’m not sure how this will be played out. I think that once land has been cleared for a specific purpose, developers won’t be too keen on having someone else plant trees on their land. I see this as another “shell” game being played by the Liberal government…

[Gabe]

@rpf, interesting thanks for the insight and re: land development that does make some kinda sense.

Actually, a friend of mine in data storage was bugging me about planting trees to offset his datafarm's carbon emmisions. I had this strange idea in my head of these heralded new 'green companies' that just buy up piles of farmland and plant trees on portions they lease to fortune 500s...

[Duncan]

another “shell” game being played by the Liberal government…

I agree

that just buy up piles of farmland and plant trees

many europeans are already doing this in BC
I hope someone can compile data of how much and then put it beside the FFT program just so we can all have a good chuckle

[boonedj]

The trees legally have to go in the ground? if ever there was a time for a union to happen this would be it, You can say they wouldnt work etc due to the piece work nature of the business, but its liek a vegetarian convincing themselves a nutburger is better then a hamburger,

the bottom line is the USW wants money, and if a company were to join them, USW companies would get contracts before non USW companies. means bidding higher and basic union lodging and wages. travel time, benefits, 24$/ hour minimum.

pipe dream maybe. but if some company were to get on, that alot of work they would get priority bidding on.

[Duncan]

i've looked into this legislation a bit more.

It is mostly for housing developments and other industries that cut down trees that are now being forced to replace those trees. Of course, the large forestry firms who do almost all of the cutting are excluded from the legislation. Surprise surprise.

[Richianity]

Obvious conclusion Duncsy: Politicians are corrupt and incompetent. YOU are the ONLY person with integrity and competence. You should run. Afterall, the only way of changing the system is from within (not by bitching on the replant.ca forum...surprise surprise).

Look forward to your rant rationalizing why this would never be possible. I'm sure it will include discussion on the international banking cartel, military-industrial complex, evil corporations, the 'little guy', selling out, Gordo etc etc.

[Duncan]

Obvious conclusion Duncsy: Politicians are corrupt and incompetent. YOU are the ONLY person with integrity and competence. You should run. Afterall, the only way of changing the system is from within (not by bitching on the replant.ca forum...surprise surprise).

Look forward to your rant rationalizing why this would never be possible. I'm sure it will include discussion on the international banking cartel, military-industrial complex, evil corporations, the 'little guy', selling out, Gordo etc etc.

All politicians aren't corrupt or incompetent, but according to some who know way more than either of us, some are corrupt, traitorous and/or really dumb and easily influenced

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/06/ ... -csis.html

ps. if you've ever watched a group of MLA's in public you will realize just how easy it could be to get one's foot in the door or ear or mind of a politician.
edit: to much info. lol

[Richianity]

Do I know you???...lol

Ya its true. For a long time I had a serious axe to grind but now I'm actually kinda interested in keeping up to date on silviculture and then there's the obvious entertainment value of these existential debates we have. I'm also kinda shocked at the general lack of education around here on how the world works so I try and chip in there when I can, but I'm slowly making my exit. I mean, looking at my posts for the past little while, I've just been talking to you!

EDIT: I genuinely swear to God that I didn't mean this as an insult.

[Duncan]

ya, its easy to take some of posts here the wrong way,
it is after all not a very personal way of communication
most of my posts, even the really bad ones are not meant in any other way that than to poke fun at people using the same tactics they employ... or i am actually making fun of myself

as for taking up politics, i'm not to good at winning popularity contests but I am brushing up on my hypocrisy skills, especially after reading some of my older posts of this site

[ekim]

I have worked in the logging industry for a long time, what this tells me is that there will be less trees planted, tree's harvested only fill up 500-800 stems a hectre, so no more 1400-1800 stems per hectre.

[Duncan]

I have worked in the logging industry for a long time, what this tells me is that there will be less trees planted, tree's harvested only fill up 500-800 stems a hectre, so no more 1400-1800 stems per hectre.

large forestry firms who do almost all of the cutting are excluded from the legislation.

Nope, some logging will have 0 trees planted per hectare, but the areas where there seems to be a real problem reforesting the clear cut will probably still have 1400 or more stems a hectare if the forester can see past tomorrow or its a problem block from years past. 1400 or more trees a ha. isn't the problem, its the natural regen that leaves one species (ie. 100% pine or hemlock on the coast) as the only species because it wasn't replanted after logging.... we all know how that worked out in BC

http://www.wsca.ca/index.php?Page=225.0&Key=783

Hmm, I think it says something about wide densities in there too, well I wonder what else...
let me guess what else????
so you worked in logging for a long time, where, around PG? Then what?
What else would you like to share? Is the HST a good thing for BC too? lol