WATERSHED UPDATE – April 12^th,2008

It has been several weeks since the blockade went up protesting the tree spacing program initiated by the Sechelt Community Forest in the Chapman Creek watershed.

The final outcome was that the CF provided a letter confirming in writing that the spacing project had been cancelled permanently. However, the request by the Concerned Citizens for written confirmation by the CF, providing a “heads up” prior to the start of any industrial activity in the watersheds in the future, was initially agreed to by the President of the Board of Directors of the CF, but this commitment was not followed through in the CF letter received by the residents.

When contacted by phone, the President stated that “this heads up was a given” but proceeded to say that “he would not put this in writing”. The Concerned Citizens feel this is not acceptable and this issue will be addressed at a meeting with the CF advisory committee scheduled for May 6^th,2008

At this meeting, it is the intention of the Concerned Citizens, to “spell out” what they believe to be a “real community forest” that would operate to the benefit of the Community in general. Some preliminary ideas are listed below, along with some suggested “principles” that the residents would like to see the CF adopt with respect to their operating licence and tenure area.

While the focus of Concerned Citizens recently has been on protecting our drinking watersheds - we are very much interested in the overall well being of our community. We feel that a Community Forest, if truly based in the community, could be an important component of a healthy local economy.

Concerned Citizens are prepared to take part in discussions of how we can turn the Community Forest into an environmentally sound and economically viable asset for the Sunshine Coast based on the following basic principles:

PRINCIPLES

1. No part of the Community Forest License area can be located in Community Watershed Reserves such as Chapman and Grey creek.

2. Community Forest areas removed out of Chapman and Grey creek watersheds cannot be replaced with areas of Old Growth Forest or other sensitive sites such as those identified in the report on "Environmentally important sites and streams on the Sunshine Coast". ** See list of sensitive areas below that we hope will form part of the “heads up” process by the CF.

3. The primary purpose of the Community Forest is to supply wood, selectively logged, for local construction, woodworking and value added industry. To encourage the manufacture of local wood based finished products, it may be necessary for the Community Forest to start its own custom sawmill and community kiln.

4. Authentic involvement in the management and operation of the Community Forest by all sectors of the Sunshine Coast.

** LIST of SENSITIVE areas on the Sunshine Coast

Land for Nature

ENVIRONMENTALLY IMPORTANT SITES AND STREAMS ON THE SUNSHINE COAST - list

Map Ref. #	Site Name	Map Ref. #	Site Name
1	Sechelt Heritage Forest and wildlife corridor 32		Waugh Lake Watershed Reserve
2	Elphinstone Forest	33	Carlson Lake and Creek
3	Elphinstone Summit	34	Sechelt Bluff
4	Chapman Plateau Wetlands	35	Stalashen Marsh
5	Roberts Creek Grand Fir Grove	36	Sechelt Waterfront
6	Wilson Creek Estuary	37	Lower Roberts Creek
7	White Islets	38	Camp Byng
8	Mission Point	39	Porpoise Bay
9	Coopers Green Lagoon	40	Cliff Gilker Park
10	Chapman Falls	41	Merry Island
11	Brooks Rd. Wetland	42	Islands off Frenchman's Cove and
			Jeddah Point
12	Ruby Lake Lagoon	43	Katherine Lake
13	Oyster Bay and adjacent wetlands	44	Lower Gray Creek
14	Ocean Beach Esplanade	45	Wormy Lake Wetlands
15	"Trail Bay Park" Property	46	Grant Island
16	Mixal Lake Wetlands	47	Soames Hill
17	Sargeant Bay Rock	48	Truman Road Nature Trails Forest
18	Triangle Lake and Trail	49	Camp Olave
19	Gospel Rock Property	50	Gibsons Heritage Trail System
20	Lower Chapman Flood Plain	51	Mt. Hallowell Recreation Area
21	Mt. Richardson	52	Nature Endowment Lands - Block X
22	Kokomo Lake and Creek	53	Davis Brook
23	Big Fir Veterans east of Trout Lake	54	Homesite Creek Forest
24	Mt. Daniel	55	Bonniebrook Wetland
25	Cecil Hill	56	Lot 48 - Sechelt Marsh Extension
26	Home Island	57	Jeddah Peninsula
27	Hwy. 101 Old Growth - Secret Cove to	58	Block 7 - Parcel A Sechelt
	Sutherland Rd.
28	Caren Range		White Tower Park
29	McQuarrie Property		Hillside Industrial Park - Green Spaces
30	Mixal Creek		Caren Range Extension
31	Wetland southeast of McNeill Lake

Land for Nature an initiative by the Federation of B C Naturalists Environmentally Important Sites and Streams on the Sunshine Coast

PROVINCE’S CHANGES TO THE HEALTH ACT

The other item to report on is the fact that after last summer’s attempts by the SC Regional District using the Health Act to turn itself into a “local board of health” to try to restrict WFP logging the steep slopes in the Chapman Creek watershed, it seems the Province is worried about this loophole in the legislation.

Since the “voice” of the people could be heard under the Health Act, it seems that the Province wants to “close this loophole” and effectively squelch the voice of the community. See copy of e-mails below from Dan Bouman describing the actions of the Provincial Government and the comments from West Coast Environmental Law (Andrew Gage, Staff Counsel)

DAN BOUMAN’S e-mail’s

Hi Everyone, Pasted in below is WCEL's media release about the new Health Act. There's a lot we don't know about the Act yet because the regulations haven't been published. I believe WCEL's take is probably pretty close to reality.

Thanks for your attention

West Coast Environmental Law

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday, April 11, 2008

New Public Health Act shuts the public out

Vancouver. The province’s new Public Health Act, unveiled on Wednesday, has eliminated the public’s rights to demand an investigation of threats to their health, says West Coast Environmental Law. Its preliminary analysis of the province’s new Public Health Act reveals some positive changes in the legislation. However, it has at the same time the new law has stripped away public input and transparency from the process. West Coast calls on the government to amend the Act to involve the public in addressing threats to public health.

“One of the hallmarks of good public law legislation is whether or not the public – where possible – has opportunities to express their concerns and to be involved in the decision-making. The Public Health Act shuts the public out at every turn,” said staff lawyer, Andrew Gage.

“In the summer of 2007, aided by West Coast, environmentalists used the Health Act to require the Sunshine Coast Regional District to hold a public investigation into threats posed by logging in the Chapman Creek watershed. ” said Gage. “ “The Public Health Act removes the public’s ability to demand such an investigation. It has medical health officers doing investigations, when they choose to do them, behind closed doors.”

The Public Health Act also creates a new public health planning process which will address the health needs of a community. Gage said: “While powers to require comprehensive public health planning is good, the Act does not give the public any chance to review those plans and make their own comments.”

For over 30 years West Coast Environmental Law has advocated for strong environmental laws for British Columbians.

- 30 -

For more information contact:

Andrew Gage, Staff Counsel at 604-601-2506 or 1 800 330-WCEL, ext. 206, toll-free.

DAN BOUMAN’S e-mail to the SCRD

Dear SCRD Directors and Staff

Major revisions to the Health Act have been introduced in the legislature. I've pasted in below a section related to local government. I hope the SCRD will carefully review these changes to see what the impacts on the role of local governments will be. We are studying the draft legislation now and would be very interested in the SCRD's point of view on the proposed changes.

Thank you,

Daniel Bouman, SCCA

The following is an “excerpt” of the proposed changes to the Health Act that would affect the “voices” of the residents and remove any direct public involvement in a health issue involving their drinking water.

EXCERPT FROM PROPOSED LEGISLATION CHANGES – HEALTH ACT

http://www.leg.bc.ca/38th4th/1st_read/gov23-1.htm

Division 6 — Local Governments

Role of local government

83 (1) A local government must do all of the following:

(a) if the local government becomes aware of a health hazard or health impediment within its jurisdiction, take an action required by a regulation made under section 120 (1) (a) [regulations respecting local governments], or, if no regulation applies, either

(i) report the health hazard or health impediment to a health officer, or

(ii) take an action the local government has authority to take under this or another enactment to respond to the health hazard or health impediment;

(b) provide health officers with information the health officers require to exercise their powers and perform their duties under this Act;

(2) A local government must

(a) designate one of its members, or an officer or employee of the local government, as the local government liaison for the purposes of this section, and

(b) send notice of the designation to the regional health board having authority over the geographic area in which the local government is located.

(3) A local government may

(a) request a medical health officer to issue an order, under this Act, in respect of a health hazard, and

(b) if the medical health officer refuses to issue the order or to issue the order as requested, request the provincial health officer to review the decision of the medical health officer.

(4) Following a review under subsection (3), the provincial health officer may

(a) refer the matter back to the medical health officer, with or without directions, or

(b) make any order that, in the opinion of the provincial health officer, is appropriate in the circumstances.

It seems that our combined efforts last year did not go unnoticed by the Province and it looks like we may have struck a “raw nerve” and the Province doesn’t really want its citizens speaking out in this manner and using the Provincial laws on the books to address problems in the forest.

So much for the “democratic right” to register a “complaint” against private companies who wish to perform industrial activites in our drinking watersheds. The Governments response is to change the rules to prevent this from happening again in the future and across the Province where necessary.

Regards

John Bebbington