Forest Practices Branch BC Forest Service January 19, 2010 November 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Service Providers Capacity Assessment Framework Presentation to the Service Delivery Advisory Group August 28, 2008.
Advertisements

Auditing, Assurance and Governance in Local Government
THE DIVERSITY OF INTERESTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE A CHALLENGE FOR THE RULE OF LAW By Professor D E Fisher.
Family Resource Center Association January 2015 Quarterly Meeting.
Small Scale Salvage Program Application Process. Purpose To establish an application and approval process for small scale timber salvage that is efficient,
FSP Extensions Delivered by: Paul Picard, Del Williams Forest Tenures Branch.
1 Forest and Range Practices Act: Forest Stewardship Plans.
Environmental Impact Assessment Myriam Raiche November 8, 2007.
Environmental Management Systems An Overview With Practical Applications.
What is the LBIS? Provides strategic guidance for land based investments and aligns the targets and outputs for eligible activities with government’s.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
1 Regulatory Impact Assessment: Methodology and Best Practices David Shortall INMETRO International Workshop on Conformity Assessment Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Forest Practices Code Transition Larry Pedersen Chief Forester, MOF.
SAFA- IFAC Regional SMP Forum
Purpose of the Standards
ZHRC/HTI Financial Management Training
Privileged and Confidential Strategic Approach to Asset Management Presented to October Urban Water Council Regional Seminar.
Urban-Nexus – Integrated Urban Management David Ludlow and Michael Buser UWE Sofia November 2011.
Internal Auditing and Outsourcing
GENERAL AWARENESS TRAINING BCTS SFM Commitments BC Timber Sales is committed to managing and administering forest management activities on our operations.
First Nations Interest and Influence in Land Use Planning in BC.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Overview
This project is funded by the European Union ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATION FOR THE BLACK SEA GEORGIA, MOLDOVA, RUSSIA and UKRAINE Euroconsult This project.
BC Injury Prevention Strategy Working Paper for Discussion.
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT
Organization and Implementation of a National Regulatory Program for the Control of Radiation Sources Staffing and Training.
NEXT Lessons Learned from Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) 22 nd and 23 rd January 2014, Brussels Fernando Franco, Spanish Nuclear.
Guidance for AONB Partnership Members Welsh Member Training January 26/
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Reviewing Management System and the Interface with Nuclear Security (IRRS Modules 4 and 12) BASIC IRRS TRAINING.
Screen | 1 EPA - Drivers for Regionalisation Max Harvey Director Operations Environment Protection Authority Presentation, reference, author, date.
O F F I C E O F T H E Auditor General of British Columbia 1 OAG Review of the Performance Agreements between MoHS and Health Authorities.
Alberta’s Cumulative Effects Management System Air & Waste Management Association Beverly Yee 05 November 2010.
Results of Implementation and Testing Soils and Riparian – What Did We Learn?
Module N° 8 – SSP implementation plan. SSP – A structured approach Module 2 Basic safety management concepts Module 2 Basic safety management concepts.
© 2011 Underwriters Laboratories Inc. All rights reserved. This document may not be reproduced or distributed without authorization. ASSET Safety Management.
Decision-making 2: Dilemmas in Designing Forest Practices Rules 1
Context for Objectives in FRPA Dave McBeth, RPF Land Use Specialist MFR, Operations Division HQ.
Range Planning 1 & Objectives & Objectives The Focus is on Results.
Item 5d Texas RE 2011 Budget Assumptions April 19, Texas RE Preliminary Budget Assumptions Board of Directors and Advisory Committee April 19,
Streamlining Project Final Version August 2005 Cutblock Integration Team Proposals Creating a streamlined forest information management model…
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT ON AREA 1, 2 AND 3 Prepared By: Nor Aizar Abu Bakar Quality Academic Assurance Department.
Staffing and training. Objectives To understand approaches to the development of strategies and policies for staffing of a Regulatory Authority including.
Environmental Assessment in British Columbia Forum of Federations Conference September 14, 2009.
BCTS Forestry Certification Experience Provincial Leadership Forum November 19, 2008.
Evaluate Phase Pertemuan Matakuliah: A0774/Information Technology Capital Budgeting Tahun: 2009.
Partnership Health: Evaluation and possibilities for an adapted structure Agenda item 11 Madhavi Bajekal, ONS (UK) PH coordinator Directors of Social Statistics.
Pilot Project on implementation of SEA for regional planning in Ukraine Prof. Dr. Michael Schmidt Dmitry Palekhov Brandenburg University of Technology.
Building Capacity for Sustainable and Responsible Development in the Bismarck Sea is a collaboration between Papua New Guinea’s Conservation and Environmental.
1 RESULTS BASED CODE. 2 Results Based Code Timeframes Introduce “package” this session –F&RPA –Amendments to FPC (streamlining) –Biologist’s Act –Amendments.
SEVESO II transposition and implementation: Possible approaches and lessons learned from member states and new member states SEVESO II transposition and.
California Department of Public Health / 1 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH Standards and Guidelines for Healthcare Surge during Emergencies How.
1 FRPA Overview Range Planning & Practices Workshop.
Company LOGO. Company LOGO PE, PMP, PgMP, PME, MCT, PRINCE2 Practitioner.
Page 1 Portfolio Committee on Water and Environmental Affairs 14 July 2009.
Economics of Policing Shared Forward Agenda Economics of Policing Shared Forward Agenda.
AUDIT STAFF TRAINING WORKSHOP 13 TH – 14 TH NOVEMBER 2014, HILTON HOTEL NAIROBI AUDIT PLANNING 1.
Development Permit System. Development Permit System 2 Disclaimer  The information presented is provided as background information to facilitate understanding.
Forest Management in BC
Framework for Shaping Our Future Forests
Audit & Risk Management
Our new quality framework and methodology:
Small Scale Salvage Program
A Snapshot in Time Prepared for: Prince George FREP Overview
Information Sharing and
CBP Biennial Strategy Review System
Karst Government Actions Regulation Project Initiation
Relationship between World Bank and Romanian EA requirements
for the GOVERNMENT ACTIONS REGULATION WORKSHOP
Portfolio Committee on Communications
Presentation transcript:

Forest Practices Branch BC Forest Service January 19, 2010 November 2009

ObjectivesObjectives ä To share the key findings from the Fort St. John Pilot Project (the Pilot Project) ä To identify some key lessons learned that may be useful for the evolution of the Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA) ä To identify the current next steps for the Pilot Project

BackgroundBackground ä The Ministry of Forests and Range developed enabling legislation in 1999 to permit pilot projects that would explore new ways to manage forest and range resources in British Columbia ä The legislation’s purpose was to enable pilot projects to examine different ways to create efficiency and reduce costs for both industry and government, while maintaining or enhancing forest management standards and involving the public ä The legislation was created to enable innovative forest practices, and required that protection of forest resources be at least equivalent to that provided under the Forest Practices Code of BC Act (the Code) ä In addition, pilot projects were required to be consistent with the Code's preamble, which defined sustainable use of forests and required the balancing of the many forest values, while meeting the economic, social, and cultural needs of peoples and communities, including First Nations

ContextContext ä Stemming from this legislation, the Pilot Project was established by Regulation on November 30, 2001 ä Of the six original Code pilot projects developed to explore different types of forest regulation, only the Fort St. John and Stillwater pilot projects are still active ä The Fort St. John Pilot Project area encompasses the 4.7 million- hectare Fort St. John Timber Supply Area in northeastern British Columbia ä It is located within the boreal forest and consists of a complex mosaic of coniferous, deciduous and mixedwood stands, with a wide range of age classes

The Team ä Staff from the Ministry of Forests and Range district, region and headquarters; Ministry of Environment; and Pilot Project Participants (forest licensees and BC Timber Sales), subject matter experts, and also members of the public undertook an extensive and collaborative review of the Fort St. John Pilot Project ä The results of this review are presented in Fort St. John Pilot Project Review Report (November 2009)

The report evaluated the Pilot Project’s relative success, and whether it meets the required tests listed in Section 53 (1) of the Fort St. John Pilot Project Regulation (the “Regulation”). ä This report assessed whether the Pilot Project: ä (a)provides equivalent protection to forest resources and resource features as are provided under the Forest Practices Code of BC Act and the regulations; ä (b)is consistent with the preamble to the Act; ä (c)provides for adequate management and conservation of forest resources; ä (d)adequately provides for public review and comment respecting forest practices; ä (e)adequately provides for monitoring of the pilot project; ä (f)provides adequate public access to ä (i)planning documents and assessments used in the pilot project, and ä (ii)records that this regulation requires to be prepared, and ä (g) is cost effective for one or more of the following: ä (i) holders of agreements under the Forest Act; ä (ii) the government for the small business forest enterprise program; ä (iii) the government for administering forest practices.

Evaluation Results ä The evaluation indicates that the Pilot Project successfully met the tests. It also found numerous examples of innovation, such as the multi-block silvicultural assessment. ä However, a full assessment of effectiveness may take longer, and the Pilot Project’s lifespan from inception to this review may not yet enable a confident verification of all of the Regulation’s tests ä For example, reforestation performance at a landscape level requires further analysis. The evaluation also found challenges, such as the increased time for district staff to administer two systems for tenures and reporting, and to effectively tackle compliance and enforcement processes ä Overall, the Fort St. John Pilot Project has produced some significant successes, but it has also presented some challenges to the ministry in dealing with the administrative and compliance differences

CostCost ä The overall economic contribution of the Regulation to the Participants’ cost structure is estimated as a reduction of 5 percent from 2001 costs, which equates to $2.75/m 3 of logged volume ä FRPA may also be providing similar savings but this was not part of the evaluation

The report compares the Fort St. John Pilot Project Regulation model and that of the Forest and Range Practices Act and the Forest Act. ä The six theme areas examined are: ä Strategic and operational planning; ä Public interest and involvement; ä Harvest authorization; ä Compliance & Enforcement, and monitoring; ä Forest practices; and, ä Costs.

Benefits of the Pilot Project include ä A comprehensive SFMP was developed and contains landscape level strategies for timber harvesting, road access management, patch size, seral stage distribution and adjacency, riparian management, visual quality management, forest health management, range and forest management and landscape level reforestation

Benefits of the Pilot Project include ä The use of a Forest Operations Schedule (approval not required) that identifies approximate location of cutblocks and roads that can be used: ä by the Participants to demonstrate cumulative impact of planned forestry activities on key landscape level objectives; ä by the Participants to provide a fair distribution of blocks; and, ä to improve the scope and effectiveness of public consultation.

Benefits of the Pilot Project include ä This pilot project involves a public advisory group (PAG). In addition to a public advisory group, a scientific advisory committee was used to provide input and recommendations in the development of the SFMP landscape level strategies and indicators ä Requiring additional forms of information such as periodic Participant-funded independent audits to enhance the ability of government to assess the risk to the Crown associated with particular forest operations

Benefits of the Pilot Project include ä The pilot project provides the Participants with greater efficiency by allowing them to include discretionary content in the SFMP by proposing a variance from any requirement of the regulation. The value of this is that it can be done without either establishing an objective or making a regulation that must be linked to a provision that will then be disapplied if the corresponding result of strategy is approved ä The pilot project integrates CSA certification processes with provincial regulatory processes

Benefits of the Pilot Project include ä The broad flexibility of the regulatory model, particularly at providing for innovation to address changing circumstances ä The use of a single coordinated, comprehensive sustainable forest management plan (including all higher level strategic plans) that applies to all licensees and BCTS to achieve significant strategic planning benefits, and social and economic benefits by: ä establishing one consistent set of performance standards for all licensees and BCTS based on local conditions; and, ä placing priority on setting and achieving landscape or multi-block targets, rather than individual block targets;

Areas of Concern with the Pilot Project ä The Regulation, was created under the Forest Practices Code of BC Act and subsequently moved to FRPA, this has created some legislative linkage issues with other relevant legislation (particularly the Forest Act) ä We need to consider migrating beneficial elements of the Regulation into FRPA and consolidating regulations

Issues with evaluating performance under the Regulation ä These include uncertainties about the following areas and the consequent need to develop tools for assessing: ä Overall achievement of landscape level strategies to provide adequate assurance to the government in respect of management of Crown forest resources before expanding the use of some of these types of landscape level strategies in other areas of the province; ä Reforestation performance on the Pilot Project area, particularly whether or not the new multi-block standards have been achieved; and ä Compliance with other landscape level objectives and standards. Participants report out on results in Annual Reports, and the ministry requires additional tools or technology to confirm whether performance requirements have been met.

Issues with administration of the Regulation ä Ministry Staffing and Engagement – The Pilot Project has required additional time and resources from district, region and headquarters staff. ä MFR staff believe they do not have sufficient time or resources to address and make modifications to provincial policy and procedures that apply only to one unique area ä Statutory Decision Making – The statutory decision-making structure under the Regulation requires that decision-making be executed by the Ministry of Forests and Range region and district, as well as by the Ministry of Environment ä As we move forward the Fort St. John Pilot Project and Innovative Forestry Practices Agreement (IFPA) requirements must be harmonized with FPRA

Information Systems and Business Processes ä The Pilot Project has created additional unique costs for the Ministry of Forests and Range due to the requirement for: ä Alternate business processes required to handle authorization and tenure issues; ä Changes to the FTA and RESULTS information systems required to accommodate the Pilot Project; and, ä Reviewing and analyzing the reforestation data compiler.

Compliance and Enforcement ä Under the Regulation, some ministry C&E staff in the Peace District must be familiar with two regulatory models ä In addition, the landscape level performance requirements necessitate the development and use of sophisticated assessment tools ä This requires additional staff training and capacity building

Next steps ä The goal is to continue the Fort St. John Pilot Project; ä During the next few years both MFR and MOE expect that there will be an opportunity to apply the lessons learned from the Pilot Project on a provincial basis ä Additionally, there will be a period for transitioning the Pilot Project to a single legislative model so that the benefits that have resulted from it will not be lost to the Participants

The goal is to continue the pilot project based on the assumption that staff representing MFR, MOE, and the Participants will work collaboratively to: ä Further evaluate existing landscape level strategies ä Develop landscape level strategies for forest health which consider the implications of landscape level strategies for climate ä Develop landscape level strategies for deciduous and mixedwood management

The goal is to continue the pilot project based on the assumption that staff representing MFR, MOE, and the Participants will work collaboratively to: ä Develop additional tools, technology and procedures to effectively monitor and measure achievement and compliance with landscape objectives and standards

The goal is to continue the pilot project based on the assumption that staff representing MFR, MOE, and the Participants will work collaboratively to: ä Explore opportunities for further streamlining CSA certification, detailed reporting and compliance and enforcement inspections ä Confirm that landscape level targets actually fulfill the stewardship objectives for which they were developed ä Integrate the key lessons learned and benefits derived from the Pilot Project and the Innovative Forestry Practices Agreement (IFPA) projects into FRPA

New Working Group ä To achieve this a Working Group has been created to address the preceding items

SummarySummary Consider incorporating the following elements from the Regulation into FRPA: ä The Sustainable Forest Management Plan (SFMP) ä The Forest Operations Schedule (FOS) ä The Public Advisory Group (PAG)