|
Table of Contents: Press Release - April 3, 2000 Saving the Golden Goose - April 1999 Goat Mountain Threatened - Febuary 1999 The members of the Goat Mountain Water Users Association oppose logging in consumptive use watersheds, and particularly on Goat Mountain. Although members unanimously hold this view, the association has held seven meetings with Slocan Forest Products and the Ministry of Forests in order to inform itself and the community about possible logging activity on the mountain. After 18 months of meetings, disagreements have not been resolved as to logging under the first permit issued by MOF for the New Denver face of the mountain. Logging activity under this permit is scheduled to begin in May or June of 2000. SFP's proposal to clearcut small patches in an area that has been previously selectively logged is not acceptable to GMWA. The association asked that, if SFP was determined to log, it at least do so by single tree selection which would retain a forest cover. Compared to clearcuts, this harvesting method better protects water and water sources, slows snow-melt and spring runoff, maintains the viewscape, and protects against rock fall in the spring. This request has not been met. The association also asked to see a twenty year Development Plan so that water licensees could assess the long term impact of logging on water, residences and economic activity around Goat Mtn and in New Denver. To date, GMWA has received only a rudimentary map inaccurately showing commercially loggable timber areas accessible in the next 20 years. This map indicates that 160 ha or 23% of Goat Mountain that faces and is visible from all of New Denver is available to be cut. A large percentage of this is above steep slopes and would be logged by helicopter. Residents living around the base of Goat Mountain witness periodic rock fall without any logging activity. We fear that any logging above these unstable slopes will increase the instability that is already present. In addition the noise of helicopter logging all day, magnified by the mountain face, would be grossly intrusive on the daily life of village residents. During meetings with SFP, the association asked for a protective treed border maintained along licenced creeks in the cut blocks of this first logging proposal. Instead, SFP used riparian management areas that allow logging right up to the creeks although they prohibit heavy equipment from being operated within 20 m of the creek. Currently cattle are ranging through the previously clearcut area of Dennis Creek. The construction of the new road and the clearcutting of the proposed patches will allow the cattle access to the creeks that supply our domestic water. We have asked that the access road be recontoured and that adequate cattle control devices (fencing and or gates) be installed; no concrete plan to deal with this issue has been formulated although Livestock Range Permits are the responsibility of MOF. We are concerned about the lack of clarity in SFP's future plans as we are unable to determine exactly what logging activity is going to occur on the highly sensitive slopes above our homes. For example, at our request SFP dropped plans to log a sensitive cut block on Cropps Creek in their current approved plan. However, this same area remains available for logging on their long range plan. After a year and a half of discussions with SFP, we have been given no evidence that SFP has sufficient plans in place to manage logging on Goat Mountain which will assure potable water, the safety of residents living around the base and the natural beauty of these mountain slopes. The degradation of any one of these qualities, including New Denver's lovely Goat Mountain view, will have serious future negative effects on the value of everyone's property and most possibly on the future economic development of the New Denver area. One benefit of logging should be to improve the economic well-being of a community. But what happens when poor harvesting practices hinder that well-being? That is the current situation facing the area surrounding the Village of New Denver. At one point in the not too distant past, forestry and mining brought substantial economic benefits to our community. Now mining is almost completely shut down and logging employs a smaller percentage of locals than before. (In 1998 only 5.5% of BC jobs were in the forest industry.) Our local forestry workers' jobs are threatened by the unsustainable harvesting practices demanded by one of BC's largest logging corporations (Slocan Forest Products) and a provincial government grasping for tax revenues. Appropriate harvesting techniques could ensure a future for them and our local economies. Instead we have corporate profits leaving the community to enrich owners and shareholders around the world. Added to this are substantial government subsidies given to the logging industry which are borne by all tax payers: a) Forest Renewal (FRBC) grants These spillover costs using taxed money create a situation in which logging is far less beneficial to the local economy than in previous years. At the same time our community is desperate to renew itself and fashion a fixture of economic well-being combined with quality of living. The major capital investments in the past ten years have primarily centred around: a) retirement (new homes built) A case in point: Plans are underway to create logging clearcuts on Goat Mountain, the beautiful backdrop for the Village of New Denver. Directly affected water licensees formed Goat Mountain Water- Users Association to express their concerns which include: 1) quality and timing of their domestic water supplies These concerns are deemed insignificant by the outside interests who determine where and how logging is done. After all, the logic goes, BC depends on the revenue brought in by logging so that must take precedence over a few discontented locals. But let's examine the impact of this logging on some of these locals and the community's economy. The Association includes many business people such as: an artist and gallery owner, two professional writers, recording studio owner, book publisher, two home builders, restaurant owner, and accountant. They have all chosen to live in this area for personal reasons including the benefits of its pristine natural bounties. Those bounties, which include water, wilderness, quiet, and inspiring views, are necessary elements for the creative processes of the writers and artists. They generate a direct economic benefit to local wealth as their works sell in comrnunity bookstores and galleries. The publisher and recording studio generate local wealth by utilizing local and outside talent, and selling their products here and away. The builders generate local wealth by building homes for newly arrived residents who invest here because of the area's beauty. The restaurant generates local wealth by catering to tourists who come here to enjoy our natural bounties. These business people offer direct cash flow to the local community through property taxes and retail purchases. Their investments in buildings and property alone are enormous. Most could make more money pursuing their entrepreneurial adventures in other communities. Their pay cheques are not from logging - in fact poor logging can actually hurt their personal incomes. The non business members in the Association (skilled labour, nurses, teachers, doctors) all have work skills exportable out of this community. Yet they too choose to live here, often suffering lowered economic standards, because of their love for the area's distinctive character. Other members of the Association include retired locals and retired newcomers. The general trend for Canada's growing senior population is to move to non-metropolitan areas to enjoy natural resource amenities. Using non-wage income (pensions and investments), their monetary contribution to our area is significant, adding wealth through taxes and purchases. Property values are based on quality of land including viewscapes. Buyers will pay 15 to 50% more for view property. For example, comparable houses in New Denver are valued about 1/3 higher than in the Village of Slocan. We jeopardize these real estate values by clear cutting our viewscapes. The economic future of this area is in small commercial and home based businesses, tourism, selective timber harvesting for local value-added mills, and retirement. It is time to re-think the current trend of clear cut timber extraction in our watersheds (New Denver Flats, Bonanza Creek, Goat Mountain) not only for the rational reasons of safety and water, but also because of the economic effects on our community's livelihood. DESTROYING ITS NEST WHO ARE WE? Goat Mountain provides licenced domestic and commercial water via numerous small creeks, springs and seepages into water boxes and wells for about forty families who live around its base. The Goat Mountain Water-Users Association (GMWA) was formed in 1998 by a group of water users and concerned local citizens who wish to maintain the quality of the water supply and the economic diversity of this area. WHERE IS GOAT MOUNTAIN? Goat Mountain is the local name for Mount Carpenter. It is the picturesque backdrop for the Village of New Denver, spreading from Wilson Creek in Rosebery, past the golf course, to the village, and along Highway 31A towards Kaslo. WHAT'S THE ISSUE? Slocan Forest Products (SFP), has recently proposed logging on the south and west faces of Goat Mountain, upon which these forty water using families live. It is also the visual face of the mountain most easily seen from New Denver, Slocan Lake, and Valhalla Provincial Park .PROBLEMS WE SEE: A. The proposed clear-cut logging could disrupt water quality and flow because of:
Trees help maintain a relatively stable flow of water. Road-building and the ensuing removal of trees create a situation of high water runoff in spring and drying conditions in summer. Erosion of soils is a common element of clear-cut logging practices, especially on steep slopes, such as SFP is proposing here. Despite the care that SFP may take, the relatively small sizes of the springs on Goat Mountain will require logging near and across water sources. Our major concern is that this proposed timber harvest will result in disrupted flow and loss of quality (sedimentation) to domestic water supplies during and after the logging. B. The local economy could be threatened by:
Goat Mountain is geologically unstable with large rock outcroppings which could very possibly slide. Homes and the highways are endangered by this risk. Property values would decrease. New entrepreneurs and retired people are attracted to our area because of its pristine nature - the largest unpolluted lake in southern BC, the many surrounding parks (Valhalla and Kokanee), and valley walls with few clear-cuts. Our community stands to lose value if Goat Mountain is logged. In these times of economic transition lets not chance spoiling what could be our economic salvation - clean water, magnificent views, prime recreational potentials. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ISSUE AND ACTION TAKEN WE DISCOVER THE LOGGING PLAN On September 22, 1998, several residents attended an open house held by Slocan Forest Products at which the company presented Development Plan 1999-2003. Proposal #163-2 of that plan is to log a series of "patch cuts" (small clear-cuts) on Goat Mountain, One "patch" abuts Cropps Creek, the licenced source for the domestic water supply of five residents. This patch also contains 350 year old trees. The deadline for public comment on the Development Plan was October 28, 1998, with SFP planning to begin logging at the beginning of January, 1999. WE FORM AN ASSOCIATION Goat Mountain Water-Users Association (GMWA) was quickly formed. Our first action was to open dialogue with SFP and the Ministry of Forests (MOF) by requesting a 90 day extension for the public comment and input period. This request was denied by MOF. WE CONTINlUE DIALOGUE WITH INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT After meeting with GMWA, both Alex Ferguson, Acting Woodlands Manager of SFP, and Jim Guido, Manager of Resource Development with MOF, agreed to review the situation. Alex Ferguson said "I am willing to make a commitment that we will not log until your concerns are addressed." WE INFORM NEW DENVER VILLAGE COUNCIL On October 20, we presented the issue and our concerns to the New Denver Village Council. They unanimously supported our request that the Village ask MOF to demonstrate how the proposed logging satisfies the Council's August 28, 1997 resolution regarding forestry practices. WE JOIN THE SLOCAN VALLEY WATERSHED ALLIANCE In November, we joined the SVWA to better understand the issues of watershed management and to act co-operatively with them to defend our water. WE MEET THE REGIONAL DISTRICT DIRECTOR In January, we met Eric Nygren and informed him of our concerns. We will ask the RDCK to do a Terrain Stability Study for Goat Mountain. THE THIN EDGE OF THE WEDGE? Our research using SFP maps and discussions with a local forester leads us to believe that large parts of the entire Goat Mountain are "economically desirable" to SFP and that the proposed "patch cuts" and road-building are only the thin edge of the wedge towards a goal of continued logging on the Mountain. GMWA questions the timber values of these initial five cuts. The profit margin from the proposed 40 to 45 truckloads after the expenses of road-building, wages, trucking, reclamation, and funds set aside for damaged water systems will be so minimal that we believe:A) any logging will have to be done by the most economical methods which offer the most risk to the domestic water sources WE FAIL TO CHANGE THE LOGGING INTERESTS' MIND-SET To this date, in communications, in meetings, and during walks of the proposed cuts with
SFP and MOF officials, the discussions by them are always on the `how' of clear-cut logging.
They never discuss `whether' to log, `how much' or `what' to log, or even alternative harvesting methods. OUR CURRENT POSITION 1. We support the responsible harvesting of trees and are mindful of the contribution of the industry workers to our community. SFP, however, is not just a local mill with local employees; it is a large corporation with 12 mills province-wide, wields a lot of power, and its management feels little obligation to listen to local concerns. 2. MOF should not approve Proposal #163-2. 3. If approved at all, then Proposal #163-2 should be approved by MOF as Category I "For Information Only." This is a technical term meaning that further studies and input must be taken by the logging company before final approvals for roads and harvesting are given. 4. If granted Category I "For Information Only", SFP should then be required to submit a long-range comprehensive plan for all of Goat Mountain so that the public can determine the impact of logging on local water-users, property values, recreation facilities (e.g. the Golf Course and Galena Trail corridor), view-scapes, and tourism before any further approvals are given. HOW CAN YOU HELP? Although the official Public Comment period was limited to 36 days from the date of the Open House, we have assurances from Alex Ferguson and Jim Guido that dialogue about this proposal will continue. If your views are sent by February 10, 1999 they may still be considered in the approval process of the next Development Plan, which MOF is requiring SFP to re-submit. Letters and communications in support of Goat Mountain water can be sent to the following:
SUPPORT THE GOAT MOUNTAIN WATER USERS ASSOCIATION The GMWA welcomes your support and membership. If you care to join or donate to this non profit
citizens' group, contact: Goat Mountain Water Users Association, Box 53, New Denver, BC, VOG ISO.
SPECIAL GMWA MEETING AT KNOX HALL IN NEW DENVER GMWA will host a special information meeting on Thursday, February 18, 1999 at 7pm in the Knox Hall in New Denver to further educate the public about this issue. Everyone is welcome to attend. Following the meeting, a slide presentation will show the results of landslides caused by recent logging in the West Kootenays. |