PART 2
HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

A "higher level plan" is a legal term used by the Forest Practices Code Act. It is not a new type of land use plan. Not all higher level plans are strategic land use plans, and not all strategic land use plans necessarily become higher level plans.

The establishment of higher level plans is a very important aspect of the implementation of strategic land use plans at any level. It is the establishment of higher level plans which makes the outcome of planning exercises legally binding on operational planning and forest practices on the ground.

The legal definition of a higher level plan is found in section 1 of the Forest Practices Code Act. It states that higher level plan means "an objective (a) for a resource management zone, (b) for a landscape unit or sensitive area, (c) for a recreation site, recreation trail or interpretive forest site."

This section of the Guide focuses on resource management zones, landscape units and sensitive areas because they are the three strategic planning designations that may be used to legally implement land use plans.

Resource management zones. Established by the Ministers responsible for the Code (the Minister of Forests, the Minister of Environment, Lands and Parks and the Minister of Energy and Mines). Part 2.2 of the Guide discusses resource management zones.

Landscape units. Established by district managers of the Ministry of Forests. Part 2.3 of the Guide discusses landscape units.

Sensitive areas. Established by district managers of the Ministry of Forests. Part 2.4 of the Guide discusses sensitive areas.

Under the Forest Practices Code, certain steps must be taken before a land use plan becomes legally binding as a higher level plan. The practice to date has been to implement regional land use plans and land and resource management plans primarily through the designation of resource management zones. Landscape units and sensitive areas can also be used, although they are generally for a smaller scale of planning than most regional land use plans and LRMPs.

2.1 GOVERNMENT POLICY ON HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

Land use plans become government policy when they are approved by the provincial Cabinet. Often, further action by Cabinet or the legislature is required to actually create the land use designations approved in the plan. For example, if a land use plan recommends the designation of provincial parks, the designation must be made by the legislature under the Park Act, or by Order-in-Council.

For the portion of the land base dedicated to resource extraction, it is often the case that much of this land has been already designated as provincial forest, which allows for the broad mix of land uses described in the Provincial Forest Use Regulation under the Forest Practices Code. The competing interests among those various uses of public land has led to the need for the "zonation" of this land base, according to a mix of priority uses.

Prior to the introduction of the Forest Practices Code, strategic land use plans only had the status of government policy. Many were not endorsed by Cabinet, but were local efforts. There was no legal mechanism to require day-to-day "operational" decisions to comply with them. It was expected that resource managers would not permit extraction activities that were inconsistent with the plans. However, no recourse was available to those concerned if operations were approved contrary to the plan.

To increase government’s commitment to strategic land use plans, and to make compliance with them mandatory, the Forest Practices Code introduced the concept of higher level plans. Operational plans for forest practices under the Code by law must be consistent with higher level plans. Higher level plans are therefore an important linkage between strategic land use plans and on-the-ground forest practices.

To understand how higher level plans work requires an understanding of operational planning under the Code, and what forest practices are regulated by the Code.

Operational plans warrant a lengthy discussion, which is found in Part 3 of the Guide. The types of operational plans are:

forest development plans;

silviculture prescriptions;

stand management prescriptions;

logging plans (in limited circumstances); and,

range use plans.

2.1.1 WHAT ARE FOREST PRACTICES

Forest practices are defined in the Code as "timber harvesting, road construction, road maintenance, road use, road deactivation, silviculture treatments, botanical forest product collecting, grazing, hay cutting, fire use, control and suppression" and any other activity carried out on public forest land or range land, or private land in a tree farm, community forest agreement or woodlot, by persons holding agreements under the Forest Act and Range Act, the government, or any person for a commercial purpose under the Code or its regulations (or to rehabilitate forest resources after such activities).

Land use activities that are not forest practices governed by the Code are not legally subject to compliance with higher level plans, because they are regulated under other legislation which does not have provisions for higher level plans. Compliance with plans for these activities remains a matter of government policy, and it may be expected that the relevant agencies will honour the commitments in land use plans in their day-to-day administration.

2.1.2 WHERE TO FIND GOVERNMENT POLICY ON HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

The main source of information on government policy for higher level plans is the June 1996 manual entitled Higher Level Plans: Policy and Procedures (hereafter referred to as the Higher Level Plans Manual). This reference manual describes, in detail, the steps necessary for land use plans to become designated as higher level plans. Chapter 5 of the manual, dealing with landscape units, was revised in December 1996. Subsequent amendments to the Forest Practices Code, such as a new definition of higher level plan and procedural changes regarding the establishment of resource management zones, have rendered certain portions of the Higher Level Plans Manual out of date. Although there is an intention to update the manual, this had not yet occurred.

For Further Reference

Policy: Higher Level Plans: Policy and Procedures. June 1996.

Website: The manual may be found on the Ministry of Forests website at: www.gov.bc.ca/for/.

2.1.3 OBJECTIVES FOR HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

It is important to recognize that what becomes legally binding under the Forest Practices Code is not normally the entire regional land use plan or LRMP document itself. Rather, the higher level plan sets out the "objectives" for the resource management zone, landscape unit or sensitive area which is formally established after the plan is approved. (There are some exceptions to this for plans that were declared as higher level plans prior to recent changes to the definition of higher level plan in the Code. These are the three plans declared by ministerial order prior to June 15, 1997; namely, the Cariboo-Chilcotin Regional Land Use Plan, the Kamloops LRMP, and the Kispiox LRMP).

After a land use plan is approved, the three Ministers responsible for the Code may establish resource management zones, and in so doing also specify the objectives for each zone. Presumably, these objectives will address all of the key recommendations of the land use planning table that developed the regional land use plan or LRMP, so long as they are capable of being implemented through operational plans. However, it is important to recognize that developing the objectives for resource management zones is to some extent an interpretive exercise which is critical to the legal enforceability of a land use plan. An opportunity for public review and comment on draft objectives is normally required, which will be discussed below.

There are no legal constraints on what may or may not become an "objective," so long as it pertains to forest practices. The Higher Level Plans Manual states that management objectives must be "technically sound and achievable." The provincial government recently conducted an "Objectives Project," consulting over sixty planners about the process of developing objectives for higher level plans for effective resource management plans. In December 1998 the government published A Guide to Writing Resource Objectives and Strategies — a set of guidelines on effective drafting of objectives for resource management plans. The guide is intended to "promote the writing of objectives and strategies that are easy to interpret and thus implement."

There are procedural rules in the Code legislation and Strategic Planning Regulation which must be followed in establishing objectives for resource management zones, landscape units and sensitive areas; these will be discussed below.

2.1.4 WHAT IF NO HIGHER LEVEL PLAN "OBJECTIVES" ARE ESTABLISHED

If no objectives are legally established following the approval of a land use plan, there is no higher level plan. A land use plan may nevertheless be expected to be followed if it has been approved, but it would lack the express legal authority of the Forest Practices Code. The extent to which a statutory decision-maker can consider a land use plan, which has not been implemented through a higher level plan, in approving operational plans has been the source of some controversy. Based upon a bulletin dated July 14, 2000 it appears that the current position of the Ministry of Forests is that such land use plans may be considered by a statutory decision-maker in evaluating whether a proposed operational plan “adequately manages and conserves forest resources” but that compliance with the land use plan cannot be made a condition of approval of an operational plan. The presence of a higher level plan clearly makes enforcement of a land use plan clearer and more straightforward. Nonetheless, if operational plans authorizing activities contrary to strategic level plans are approved, there may be other legal enforcement issues that arise under the principles of administrative law, depending on the circumstances.

For Further Reference

Memos: Roberta Reader, Director, Compliance and Enforcement Branch, Ministry of Forests, “Application of Section 41(1)(b) of the Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act,” July 14, 2000.

2.1.5 IS THERE A HIERARCHY AMONG HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

Under the Forest Practices Code, the objectives for resource management zones prevail over objectives for landscape units and sensitive areas in the event of conflict (see subsections 4(9) and 5(9) of the Code). Otherwise, the legislation does not set out any other hierarchy among higher level plans.

However, under policy direction of the Chief Forester, there is an expectation that higher level plans will have the following hierarchy::

Higher Level Plans
Plans or Agreements Declared to be Higher Level Plans Prior to June 15, 1997 . .

Resource Management
Zone Objectives . .

Landscape Unit
Objectives . .

Sensitive Area
Objectives . .

Interpretive Forest Sites, Recreation Sites, and Recreation Trail Objectives . .

Operational
Plans . .

On-the-Ground
Operations . .

Despite this hierarchy in planning policy, there is no requirement for plans at the upper level in the hierarchy to be completed in order to conduct planning at a lower level. For example, landscape unit objectives could be established in the absence of resource management zone objectives, and vice-versa.

2.1.6 WHAT CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

There are no legal restrictions on what can be incorporated into higher level plans, just as there are no restrictions on what can become a higher level plan "objective." In theory, any matter that is relevant to operational plans could be established as an objective for a resource management zone, landscape unit or sensitive area. Objectives could give direction both for substantive matters affecting forestry operations and procedural matters relating to operational planning. Under the structure of the Forest Practices Code, there are several situations in which it would be appropriate to incorporate forest practices requirements into higher level plan objectives.

One situation is where it is determined that forest practices for an area should depart from what might be called default provisions of the Forest Practices Code. These are forest practice standards that apply in the absence of any higher level plan objective to the contrary. The most common example of a default provision is the maximum cutblock size requirement. In the Vancouver, Nelson and Kamloops Forest Regions, the maximum cutblock size is 40 hectares, unless otherwise provided in a higher level plan (or unless certain exceptions apply). A higher level plan could require smaller or larger maximum cutblock sizes. A related default provision is the adjacency, or green-up, requirements of the Code, which generally require three metres growth following logging of a site before the adjacent area may be harvested, unless otherwise provided in a higher level plan.

Another situation which higher level plans may address is where the Code sets out certain minimum standards to be met by forest practices. For example, the Operational Planning Regulation sets out minimum widths for riparian "reserve zones" and "management zones." A higher level plan could require larger riparian reserve and management zones in specific circumstances, affording greater streamside protection where appropriate. In this situation, a higher level plan could not provide for a riparian reserve or management zone that was smaller than the minimum provided for in the regulation.

There are other situations in which some forest resources are simply not provided for by the Forest Practices Code. For example, as the Code has evolved, it has become apparent that the habitat needs of some wildlife species will not be addressed because it would require reductions in logging levels beyond what government policy will allow. The provincial government policy is that the rate of logging may not be reduced more than four percent for biodiversity measures, and one percent for measures taken for threatened and endangered species. Species whose habitat needs exceed this impact level are considered to be "higher level plan species." Their habitat needs must be addressed through higher level plan objectives in order to become Code requirements. One example of a higher level plan species is the northern spotted owl, which is the subject of a management plan that provides for the designation of "special resource management zones." In February 1999, the provincial government announced its policy for threatened and endangered species, known as the Identified Wildlife Management Strategy (IWMS). Under the IWMS, fisher, bull trout and grizzly bear are considered higher level plan species.

In addition to these situations, various Code regulations make specific reference to matters which higher level plans may address. Higher level plans may:

determine if joint approval (Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks) is required for forest development plans or amendments;

identify ungulate winter range areas, i.e. areas necessary for the winter survival of wildlife species such as deer, elk, caribou and moose;

establish forest ecosystem networks;

identify features and objectives as "known" information requirements for operational plans;

establish visual quality objectives;

provide direction for maintaining biodiversity;

identify "old growth management areas;"

provide management direction for "identified wildlife" (species at risk);

guide determination of silvicultural systems and stand structure;

guide treatment of forest health factors;

specify cutblock size, shape and pattern;

specify requirements for species composition;

guide tree selection during spacing and commercial thinning;

specify green-up height, such as for visual quality or wildlife cover;

specify site conditions that must be maintained after harvest or site treatment;

identify forest resources that a soil rehabilitation plan must address; and,

guide selection and location of optimum road locations.

2.2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ZONES

The main difference between resource management zones, landscape units and sensitive areas is the geographic scale at which each is intended to be utilized. This intention is not apparent from the legislation, but from Ministry of Forests’ policy set out in the Higher Level Plans Manual.

Resource management zones are intended to be designated at the broadest level or scale of higher level planning. Landscape units form the next level of scale, generally comprising watersheds, or clusters of watersheds, between 50 000 and 100 000 hectares in size. At the smallest scale of higher level planning are sensitive areas, generally expected to be less than 1 000 hectares in size.

2.2.1 PURPOSE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ZONES

The development of resource management zones in British Columbia is closely tied with the concept of priority use zoning in land use planning literature, and the sense that the integrated resource management approach of the past was not delivering results consistent with public expectations. If there ever was a notion that the full spectrum of forest resource values could be maintained on every hectare of land through an integrated resource management approach, it has become widely discredited.

Resource management zones were developed to acknowledge that different management approaches are required on different portions of the forest land base. Areas that are highly valued for their wildlife habitat, or scenic qualities that attract outdoor recreation and tourism, for example, warrant a special management approach that gives priority to these values. Areas which are highly productive from a timber perspective but which do not have significant non-timber values might be suitable for more intensive management where timber production has a higher priority. This is the basis for land use zonation through regional land use plans and LRMPs.

In theory, there could be any number of resource management zones designated around different resource values. In practice, the outcomes of regional land use plans and LRMPs has seen resource management zones tending to fall into one of three categories:

special management zones (sometimes referred to as special resource development zones or low intensity areas);

enhanced resource development zones (sometimes referred to as high intensity areas); and,

general forestry zones (sometimes referred to as integrated resource management zones).

2.2.2 AUTHORITY FOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ZONES

Resource management zones are designations under section 3 of the Forest Practices Code. They may be established for any areas of Crown land, and private land in a tree farm licence or woodlot licence. Resource management zones are permissive designations, which means that it is not legally required that they be established, but as a matter of public policy they may be.

The procedure for establishing resource management zones and objectives is set out in sections 2 and 3 of the Strategic Planning Regulation.

2.2.3 HOW RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ZONES ARE ESTABLISHED

Resource management zones and their objectives are established by written order of the Ministers responsible for the Forest Practices Code (the Ministers of Forests, of Environment, Lands and Parks, and of Energy and Mines).

Once established, the boundaries and objectives of the resource management zone may be varied, or cancelled altogether, by written order of the Ministers. Details on the procedures followed by government officials in establishing resource management zones are set out in the Higher Level Plans Manual.

The Ministers may delegate in writing the authority to jointly establish, vary or cancel resource management zones or objectives to a regional manager of the Ministry of Forests and a regional director of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks

2.2.4 TRANSITION AND PHASE-IN ISSUES

Resource management zones and their objectives normally take effect when the Ministers’ order is made and filed with the regional manager. However, they may take effect “at a later date” if the Ministers are satisfied that doing so will adequately manage and conserve the forest resources of the zone.

Until November 2000, there was a six-month delay between when the Ministers’ order was made and when the order took effect. For those seeking to have a Resource Management Zone established this was often a source of some frustration.

Although the new provisions of the Code remove this delay in the implementation of Resource Management Plans, they do not change the basic rule that a Forest Development Plan need only be consistent with a higher level plan which was in effect four months before the date that the Forest Development Plan was submitted to the District Manager for approval.

The Higher Level Plans Manual contains the following Chief Forester’s policy on the phase-in of resource management zones:

… it is recommended standard practice to design the establishment of resource management zone objectives so that work, such as cutting authorities, logging plans, road permits or silviculture prescriptions previously approved by the district manager and having had public review, should not normally have to be amended for consistency with a newly approved higher level plan when the forest development plan is next approved. This should be the case unless the higher level plan specifically requires such an amendment. Furthermore, and unless specified in the higher level plan, landscape level assessments or stand level assessments conducted in cooperation with an operational plan and submitted within four months after the declaration of the higher level plan should be approved based on approval criteria in place prior to the higher level plan.

2.2.5 PUBLIC INPUT

Most often, representatives of groups with interest in the area will have been consulted and involved in discussions over the boundaries and objectives of resource management zones through regional land use plans or LRMPs. While there are no laws requiring public input for these planning processes, the policy of public participation is firmly established and set out in the LUCO document entitled Land and Resource Management Planning Public Participation Guidelines.

In addition to the planning process itself, public input is also normally sought when it comes time to formally establish the zone and its objectives. This is because there is a potential for issues to arise, such as the exact boundaries of the zone and whether the wording of the objectives meets the intent of the parties at the land use planning table which proposed the resource management zone.

Under the Strategic Planning Regulation, the process of establishing resource management zones requires an opportunity for public review and comment if it "significantly affects the public." There is no definition or policy addressing what should be considered significant or insignificant in relation to the public. The regulation requires that regional managers publish a notice in the BC Gazette and a newspaper circulating in the area of the resource management zone stating that the zone is proposed to be established (or varied or cancelled), its location, and that copies of the proposed order, objectives for the zone, and a map showing its location are available for viewing at regional and district offices.

Comments are normally to be received up to sixty days following the date of the last advertisement. However, this time period may be shortened if the resource management zone is to take effect prior to the expiry of the sixty day period. If the order is to take effect in less than fifteen days, no advertisement soliciting public review and comment is required.

After public input has been received, and the resource management zone is ready to be established, the regional manager must publish a notice in the BC Gazette and a newspaper concerning pertinent details, including a summary of revisions made as a result of public comments. However, this notice is not required if the Ministers are of the opinion that establishing, varying or cancelling the resource management zone or objective "does not significantly affect the public."

2.2.6 PROGRESS TO DATE

Resource management zones have been established as the result of some of the Land Use Plans and Land and Resource Management Plans discussed in Part 1 of this Guide. Specifically, resource management zones are in place in areas covered by the Cariboo-Chilcotin, Vancouver Island, and Kootenay-Boundary Land Use Plans and the Kamloops, Kispiox, Lakes District and Bulkley LRMPs. In addition, the Muskwa-Kechika special management zone was established through the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area Act.

Although many more resource management zones have been approved by the provincial government, both through regional land use plans and LRMPs, formal establishment of resource management zones and objectives as higher level plans has not followed yet for many areas of the province. Refer to the table in Part 1.6 of this Guide for further details on which areas have approved plans.

For Further Reference

Legislation: Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act. ss. 3, 105.

Regulations: Strategic Planning Regulation. BC Reg. 180/95, ss. 2, 3.

Policy: Higher Level Plans: Policy and Procedures. June 1996.

A Guide to Writing Resource Objectives and Strategies. Ministry of Forests. December 1998.

Species and Plant Community Accounts for Identified Wildlife. Ministry of Forests. February 1999.

Managing Identified Wildlife: Procedures and Measures. Ministry of Forests. February 1999.

2.3 LANDSCAPE UNITS

Landscape units are the second type of strategic planning designation under the Code. As with resource management zones and sensitive areas, landscape unit objectives are higher level plans that are binding on all operational plans. Landscape units are subject to objectives for resource management zones. One key difference between landscape unit objectives and those for resource management zones is that the former require the approval of a “designated environment official” from the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, in addition to approval from a district manager of the Ministry of Forests. In March 1999, the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks released the Landscape Unit Planning Guide, which provides direction on the process of landscape unit planning.

2.3.1 PURPOSE OF LANDSCAPE UNITS

Landscape units are an important planning tool for designing management strategies for all forest resources. While the agencies have indicated that their first priority is addressing biodiversity objectives, landscape units are an ideal unit for identifying management strategies for all forest values.

One of the key purposes of landscape units is to guide operational plans on matters relating to the conservation of biological diversity. When the Forest Practices Code was being developed, the team of government personnel developing a biodiversity conservation strategy recognized the need to have both a "landscape" approach and a "stand" level approach.

A stand level approach focuses on what attributes, such as wildlife trees and coarse woody debris, should remain in a forest stand after logging. A landscape approach focuses on issues over a larger area, such as how much old growth forest habitat will remain in a watershed over time, how it will be distributed compared to forest in other "seral stages," the size of old growth "patches," and how connected the patches of habitat will be through "forest ecosystem networks." In terms of operational planning, landscape level issues are particularly pertinent to forest development plans, which identify all of the areas where a logging operation intends to build roads and log over a five-year timeframe.

These landscape level planning concepts were under discussion within the government agencies at the same time that regional land use plans and LRMPs were being discussed at planning tables. As land use plans came to conclusion, it became apparent that the resource management zones were often much larger in size than watersheds, and that they were being designated for many different purposes. Even after these land use planning exercises were completed and approved, there remained a need to deal at a smaller scale with issues relating to biodiversity and other forest values. The emerging view of landscape units, therefore, was that they would be for smaller units of land, in a range of about 50 000 to 100 000 hectares, generally on a watershed basis.

In some parts of the province, especially those areas with a lengthy history of timber harvesting, conservation of remaining old growth forest is the most important issue for maintaining biological diversity. For this reason, one of the key priorities of landscape unit planning in the short term is to identify the areas that will be designated as "old growth management areas." The Ministry of Environment, Land and Parks is particularly concerned that if this is not done quickly, options for conserving habitat for species associated with old growth forests will be lost as the remaining forest is harvested. The other priority is to establish objectives for wildlife tree retention. The Landscape Unit Planning Guide refers to these two elements: retention of old growth forest, and of stand structure through wildlife tree retention, as "priority biodiversity planning." The primary focus of landscape unit planning at the present time is priority biodiversity planning.

The Biodiversity Guidebook addresses conservation of biological diversity primarily through recommended targets for different aged forests, known as seral stages. Targets have been set, according to the natural levels of disturbance in ecosystems around the province, for minimum levels of old growth forests to be maintained at all times, minimum levels of mature forests, and maximum levels of early seral forests. Within areas with the same level of natural disturbance, these targets also vary according to the "biodiversity emphasis option" assigned to a landscape unit. Biodiversity emphasis options are designed to "provide a different level of natural biodiversity and a different risk of losing elements of natural biodiversity." There are three biodiversity emphasis options: low, intermediate and high.

The Biodiversity Guidebook envisions that the lower biodiversity emphasis option may be appropriate where timber supply is the primary management objective. In the areas with lower biodiversity emphasis, the pattern of natural biodiversity will be significantly altered and the risk of some native species being unable to survive is relatively high. The intermediate option represents a "trade-off between biodiversity conservation and timber production." The higher option is for areas where biodiversity conservation is a high management priority.

By direction of the Chief Forester these biodiversity emphasis options will be allocated over the timber harvesting land base, within each planning area, as follows: lower: 30% to 55% (average 45%), intermediate: 35% to 60% (average 45%) and higher: 10 percent.

Since the Biodiversity Guidebook was released, senior level direction restricting its implementation has been given to resource managers by deputy ministers and the Chief Forester. For example, direction has been given not to implement the early seral and mature forest targets unless there is no impact on the overall rate of logging. A directive has also been given that, overall, the impact of the Biodiversity Guidebook on logging levels (the allowable annual cut), must not exceed 4.1% provincially in the short term and 4.3% over the long term.

The Landscape Unit Planning Guide indicates that the intent in high or intermediate biodiversity emphasis landscape units is to capture the entire target for old growth immediately. However, in landscape units with a low biodiversity emphasis, the Landscape Unit Planning Guide states that the old growth target can be reduced by up to two-thirds, and that it is only acceptable to meet more than one-third of the old growth target for these areas if there won’t be additional timber supply impacts. Furthermore, old growth forests identified to meet the targets must first come from areas which are in parks, areas not technologically or economically accessible to the forest industry, or areas which are otherwise constrained due to management policies for values such as riparian reserves and deer winter range.

Current government policy is that legal landscape unit objectives for biodiversity components other than old growth and wildlife tree retention, and for forest resources other than biodiversity, may only be established where higher level plan resource management zone objectives deal with these values. Otherwise the policy is that objectives for biodiversity components other than old growth and wildlife trees, and for other forest resource values, will only be tested in draft form where doing so does not impede delivery of priority objectives, where there is cooperation with all affected licensees, and where the objectives do not create additional timber supply impacts.

In theory, however, landscape units may be established for any of the broad purposes set out in section two of the Code. The Strategic Planning Regulation provides guidance to district managers establishing landscape unit objectives for biodiversity by suggesting that they address retention of old growth, seral stage distribution, landscape connectivity, stand structure, species composition, and temporal and spatial distribution of cutblocks. The Landscape Unit Planning Guide refers to addressing these elements as "full biodiversity" planning.

While implementing portions of the Biodiversity Guidebook is the first priority of landscape unit planning, it is also clear that landscape units are a suitable scale for addressing other forest values. Basically, anything that would be appropriate to address in a local resource use plan could be addressed in landscape unit planning. In regions of the province that have local resource use plans, Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks staff are to review the plans and integrate their objectives and strategies into landscape unit plans where appropriate.

There are many issues which lend themselves well to landscape unit planning due to its scale. These include visual quality objectives, recreation objectives, wildlife habitat areas, forest ecosystem networks, riparian management of streams, lakes and wetlands, cultural heritage values, community watershed management, botanical forest products, access management, and range management and forage issues. The Landscape Unit Planning Guide refers to planning that addresses issues like these as "forest resources" planning. This type of landscape level planning will be addressed in future additions to the Landscape Unit Planning Guide.

2.3.2 AUTHORITY FOR LANDSCAPE UNITS

Landscape units are established under section 4 of the Forest Practices Code. Landscape units may be established for any area of land within a forest district. The procedures for designating landscape units and objectives are set out in sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Strategic Planning Regulation. There is no legal requirement to establish landscape units, but as a matter of public policy, they may be.

2.3.3 HOW LANDSCAPE UNITS ARE ESTABLISHED

Landscape units are established by the district managers of the Ministry of Forests. Objectives must be established by written order of the district manager, in accordance with sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Strategic Planning Regulation and directions provided by the Chief Forester in the Higher Level Plans Manual.

Due to the overlapping mandate of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, and the Ministry of Forests respecting matters pertaining to biodiversity, the objectives for landscape units which pertain to forest resources other than recreation must also be approved by a “designated environment official.” For these purposes, the approval officials are the Regional Manager, Wildlife Act and Regional Water Manager, Water Act, of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (as set out in the Forest Practices Code Delegated Authority Matrix for the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks as amended to March 2001). Appendix 5 of the Guide contains a copy of this matrix.

Once established, landscape units and their objectives may be varied or cancelled by written order of the district manager, with the approval of a designated environment official. Details on the procedures followed by government officials in establishing landscape units are set out in chapter 5 of the Higher Level Plans Manual.

2.3.4 TRANSITION AND PHASE-IN ISSUES

Landscape units and their objectives normally do not take effect until Landscape units and their objectives normally take immediately after a district manager’s order has been filed with the regional manager. However, they may take effect “at a later date” if the district manager is satisfied that doing so will adequately manage and conserve the forest resources of the landscape unit.

Until November, 2000 there was a six month delay between the time that a landscape order was made and the date that it took effect. The new requirements remove that automatic delay. However, where there is a need for a transition time to allow a licensee a reasonable amount of time to amend plans for consistency with the objectives for landscape units the District Manager still has such a discretion. However, in many cases the licensee is aware of upcoming lanscape unit designations in advance; moreover, amendments may be relatively simple.

The following Chief Forester policy direction regarding the phase-in of landscape units was set out in the Higher Level Plans Manual:

… an operational plan in effect when landscape unit objectives are established is not affected by the higher level plan. The operational plan continues to guide operations on the ground and does not have to be amended. However, after landscape unit objectives are established, the next operational plan or amendment to the operational plan must be consistent with the objectives before the new operational plan can be approved.

To ensure that operational plan activity continues, staff must ensure that the landscape unit and objectives proposed for establishment as a higher level plan include phase-in provisions. These provisions should allow a smooth transition from existing operational plans to new operational plans that reflect the higher level plan. These phase-in provisions could set target dates for implementing individual objectives.

2.3.5 PUBLIC INPUT

As with resource management zones, there are two aspects of public input to consider for landscape unit designation: one aspect is public input into the landscape level planning process prior to establishment; the second aspect is the formal legal establishment under the Code.

The degree of public input prior to designation is a discretionary matter for district managers, providing certain minimum requirements are met. The minimum legal requirement for public input is set out in the Higher Level Plans Manual:

The provisions for public review and comment in the Strategic Planning Regulation section 4 and in this section of this manual represent the minimum requirements as stated in legislation. Public and First Nations involvement, in addition to these requirements, may be approved by the district manager in some instances, if he or she wants additional information for consideration in making a decision. The regional landscape unit planning strategy is the primary means to determine areas where a greater emphasis on public participation is required.

The level of public input for landscape unit planning will likely vary according to the issues addressed in the proposed landscape unit objectives. For example, a greater degree of public input may be offered or expected where landscape unit objectives will address a number of forest resources, such as visual quality objectives, water quality, recreation and tourism values. In these cases, landscape unit planning may be akin to local resource use planning, which typically would involve broad consultation with representative users of the area.

The Landscape Unit Planning Guide sets out policy about the criteria that should be considered in determining the nature and extent of public involvement in the preparation and establishment of landscape unit objectives and strategies. These critieria are:

the frequency of the individual or groups activity in the landscape unit;

the extent and nature of tenured interests;

the complexity and significance of resource values;

history of resource use conflicts in the landscape unit;

existing land and resource use agreements (e.g., LRMPs, zoning);

direction in Regional Landscape Unit Planning Strategies or detailed district
landscape unit planning strategies;

the degree of urgency for preparing and establishing unit objectives and strategies; and,

the quantity and quality of information that the district has and its analytical capacity.

However, as the resource agencies are focusing initially on developing biodiversity objectives for landscape units, rather than the broader range of resource values, the intention of the agencies is to treat developing the biodiversity objectives as a primarily technical exercise, and not normally to invite public input beyond the minimum legal requirements. Most landscape unit planning that is underway is being considered an in-house exercise, even though it is highly relevant to issues of public interest.

The minimum level of public consultation required when landscape units are formally established, varied or cancelled is found in subsection 4(6) of the Forest Practices Code and sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Strategic Planning Regulation. According to the Code, the process of establishing landscape units and their objectives requires an opportunity for public review and comment if it significantly affects the public. There is no definition of these terms, nor is there policy addressing what should be considered significant or insignificant.

The Strategic Planning Regulation requires that district managers publish a notice in a newspaper circulating in the area of the landscape unit stating that the zone is proposed to be established (or varied or cancelled), its location, and that copies of the proposed order, objectives for the landscape unit, and a map showing its location are available for viewing at regional and district offices of the Ministry of Forests.

Comments are normally to be received up to sixty days following the date of publication in the newspaper. However, this time period may be shortened if the district manager is satisfied that doing so will "adequately manage and conserve the forest resources of the landscape unit." Presently, there is no policy that addresses when it is appropriate for district managers to shorten the public review and comment period for these purposes.

If the order designating a landscape unit and its objectives is to take effect in less than fifteen days, no advertisement soliciting public review and comment is required.

After public input has been received, and the landscape unit is ready to be established (or varied or cancelled), the district manager must publish a notice in a locally circulating newspaper outlining pertinent details, including a summary of revisions made based on the input received. However, this notice is not required if the district manager is of the opinion that establishing, varying or canceling the landscape unit or objective "does not significantly affect the public."

2.3.6 PROGRESS TO DATE

The initial phase of landscape unit planning is now complete. This phase involved the development of Regional Landscape Unit Planning Strategies, drawing the draft boundaries of landscape units, determining the biodiversity emphasis emphasis options for each unit and the finalization of the Landscape Unit Planning Guide. The Landscape Unit Planning Guide, released in March 1999, states:

It is now appropriate and recommended that each district manager (DM), pursuant to section 4 of the Forest Practices of British Columbia Act, establish landscape units, and with the approval of the designated environmental official (DEO), establish objectives for old growth retention and wildlife tree retention (WTR) for each unit.

Since the Forest Practices Code came into effect in 1995, landscape units have been legally designated in four out of forty forest districts. Twelve are established in Bulkley Forest District, one in Sunshine Coast Forest District, 31 in Kootenay Lake Forest District and 24 in Arrow Forest District, for a total of 68 landscape units. A further 1179, in a number of forest districts, have had boundaries delineated, but have not yet been legally designated.

The priority tasks in the short term for landscape unit planning are the development of biodiversity objectives relating to the old growth targets set out in the Biodiversity Guidebook (with the significant exception that only one-third of the old growth targets will be met in the "low emphasis" biodiversity areas, expected to comprise about 45% of the province), and objectives for wildlife tree retention. Old growth targets are first to be met through parks and other areas that are not part of the timber harvesting land base.

Where old growth management areas must be established to meet the targets, they are supposed to be located so as to maximize their value to biodiversity conservation. Criteria for maximizing biodiversity conservation include: protecting rare old growth, creating old growth management areas large enough to provide interior conditions, and to locate these management areas so as to maximize their connectivity value. Protection of rare old growth is one of the limited circumstances in which government policy provides that already approved cut blocks may be affected by the establishment of old growth management areas.

At the present time, there is no comprehensive strategy or timeframe to develop landscape unit objectives for all forest resources (such as recreation or fisheries) as broadly defined in the Forest Practices Code.

As part of the development of the Regional Landscape Unit Planning Strategies, priorities were set for developing landscape unit objectives. High priority was to be given to the following types of areas:

areas with few remaining options for old growth retention;

areas where there are high conservation values at risk from forest and range practices;

areas with multiple development plans that need coordination; and,

areas where proposed plans will significantly reduce options for biodiversity and other non-timber forest resources.

The expectation is that Regional Landscape Unit Strategies were developed and will be implemented in consultation with strategic land use planning tables, follow-up committees or community resource boards. Where resource management zone objectives have been declared a higher level plan by the ministers, these prevail over landscape unit objectives and augment the direction given in government policy. However, district managers may assign a biodiversity emphasis option with the approval of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks where higher level plans do not exist, or where plans do not provide direction.

Once landscape units have been delineated and an initial biodiversity emphasis option assigned, chapter 5 of the Higher Level Plans Manual calls for a review process to ensure that the proposed plans "do not obviously impact severely on short-term timber supply, existing or proposed operations, biodiversity, other resource and environmental values or land use plan objectives." While these reviews are not to be full scale analyses, efforts are to be made to identify units that have potential for high conflict or impact. In March 1999, regional and district Ministry of Forest and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks staff were directed to review and revise their Regional Landscape Unit Planning Strategies to ensure consistency with the Landscape Unit Planning Guide and chapter five of the Higher Level Plans Manual. This review provided an opportunity to examine proposed planning schedules, landscape unit boundaries and biodiversity emphasis options with licensees and affected stakeholders. These reviews have now been completed.

When the Landscape Unit Planning Guide was released, regional staff were instructed to delay finalizing and approving landscape unit objectives until the review of the Regional Landscape Unit Planning Strategies was complete and training was received. Training delivery commenced in October 1999.

Establishment of landscape unit objectives for old growth and wildlife tree retention for the entire province (all landscape units) is scheduled to be completed by July 31, 2002.

For Further Reference

Legislation: Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act. RSBC 1996, c. 159, ss. 4, 105.

Regulations: Strategic Planning Regulation. BC Reg. 180/95, ss. 4-6.

Guidebooks: Biodiversity Guidebook. September 1995.

Policy: Higher Level Plans: Policy and Procedures Chapter 5 Revision. December 1996.

A Guide to Writing Resource Objectives and Strategies. Ministry of Forests, December 1998.

Landscape Unit Planning Guide. March 1999.

Memos: Letter from Cassie Doyle, Deputy Minister for Environment, Lands and Parks, and John Allan, Deputy Minister for Forests, to Field Operations, dated August 25, 1997, "Re: Achieving Acceptable Biodiversity Timber Impacts."

Letter from Larry Pederson, Chief Forester, to District Managers, dated May 25, 1998, "Re: Chief Forester Direction on Landscape Unit Objectives."

Letter from Larry Pederson, Chief Forester and others, dated March 17, 1999, "Re: Release and Implementation fo the Landscape Unit Planning Guide."

Letter from Larry Pederson, Chief Forester and others, dated June 3, 1999, "Re: Strategic Land Use Planning and Landscape Unit Planning."

Memo from John Allan, Deputy Minister of Forests, September 1999, "Re: Managing Timber Supply and Operational Cost Impacts from the Identified Wildlife Management Strategy and the Landscape Unit Planning Guide."

2.4 SENSITIVE AREAS

Sensitive areas are a third type of strategic planning designation under the Code. As with resource management zones and landscape units, the objectives for sensitive areas are higher level plans that are binding on all operational plans. Sensitive areas must be consistent with the objectives for resource management zones.

Policy approved by the Chief Forester defines sensitive areas as "small areas of land and water that have unique or locally significant forest resources that are frequently sensitive to resource development activities."

2.4.1 PURPOSE OF SENSITIVE AREAS

Sensitive areas are seen as a useful "spot zoning" tool for areas with important values that are perhaps too small to be adequately provided for through landscape units or resource management zones. The Higher Level Plans Manual suggests they "may be established to manage or conserve small areas of unique or locally significant forest resources." A general rule is that sensitive areas are intended to be about 1 000 hectares in size.

Examples of areas that could be designated as sensitive areas include:

rare plant communities;

hotsprings and the surrounding forest;

unique or important riparian and lakeshore areas;

areas of unique wildlife habitat;

important recreation destinations or corridors; and,

areas important for botanical forest products.

There are no limitations on what could become a sensitive area, so long as the area contains forest resources as broadly defined in the Code, and special circumstances require that it be treated differently than the surrounding area. All operational plans must be consistent with the objectives for sensitive areas.

Forest cover maps often include areas called environmentally sensitive areas. Some environmentally sensitive areas have been identified for areas of unstable terrain, sensitive soils, recreation values, and wildlife habitat. These are administrative notations only, and do not have any legal effect on management decisions. District managers are to review these environmentally sensitive areas to determine whether any are suitable for establishment as sensitive areas.

2.4.2 AUTHORITY FOR SENSITIVE AREAS

Sensitive areas are designations under section 5 of the Forest Practices Code. The procedure for designating sensitive areas and objectives is set out in section 7 of the Strategic Planning Regulation. It is not legally required that sensitive areas be designated, but as a matter of public policy they may be.

2.4.3 WHERE CAN SENSITIVE AREAS BE DESIGNATED

Sensitive areas may be established anywhere the district manager of the Ministry of Forests, or a designated environment official from the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, is of the opinion that special circumstances justify a different management approach.

The Chief Forester’s policy, as set out in the Higher Level Plans Manual, is that: "Sensitive areas will not be used where landscape unit objectives are effective in accomplishing the desired result. In a landscape unit, sensitive areas will be used only where the uniqueness or degree of sensitivity of the forest resource warrants special attention." There may be many circumstances in which sensitive area designation is required for greater precision and specificity in providing higher level management objectives for certain forest resources.

Sensitive areas may be designated not just for provincial forests, but for any Crown land. They also may be established on private land in a tree farm licence or woodlot licence.

When considering the need for sensitive area designation, district managers and designated environment officials will look to:

the nature and significance of the forest resource;

the degree of sensitivity to resource development;

the location of the forest resource;

the proximity of the resource to other forest resources that have been identified for special management;

the compatibility of adjacent forest practices;

the adequacy of existing management provisions; and,

any public, First Nations or resource agency concerns about the resource.

2.4.4 HOW SENSITIVE AREAS ARE ESTABLISHED

Sensitive areas are established by written order of the district manager, who must obtain the approval of the designated environment official. Orders must be filed with the regional manager of the Ministry of Forests. The same rules apply to varying and cancelling sensitive areas and their objectives.

The order establishing a sensitive area takes effect when it is filed with the regional manager, unless the district manager is satisfied that a later date will adequately manage and conserve the forest resources of the sensitive area.

2.4.5 PUBLIC INPUT

Unlike landscape units, there is no systematic planning effort to identify potential sensitive areas, so their designation will likely be on a somewhat ad hoc basis. The need for sensitive areas might be identified in land use planning exercises that include the public, or through agency initiative by the Forest Service or Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. The most likely exercises to identify sensitive areas are probably those at a local scale, such as local resource use plans, or landscape unit planning. It is also possible that operational planning by licensees, or public review of operational plans, could identify the need for sensitive areas.

Unlike resource management zones and landscape units, there is no requirement for district managers to solicit public review and comment in advance for proposed sensitive areas. However, once a sensitive area is about to be designated, the Strategic Planning Regulation does require advertisement in a local newspaper of the intent to establish, vary or cancel a sensitive area or its objective. The advertisement must indicate the location of the proposed sensitive area, and the availability of the draft order, objectives and location map at the regional and district office of the Ministry of Forests.

2.4.6 PROGRESS TO DATE

Three sensitive areas have been established in the province. The first is the Rose-Swanson sensitive area (effective April 1997), designated by the Vernon Forest District to better manage its high recreational values. This 712-hectare area contains numerous hiking, mountain biking and horseback riding trails, and is used by local schools for environmental studies. The objectives for the area include maintaining the trails and protecting the visual quality. A 100-metre buffer has been established around the existing hiking trails and, for the rest of the area, logging is limited to low impact silviculture systems such as horse logging, helicopter logging and selection systems. A monitoring group has also been established that includes community representatives, agency staff and a representative from the local forest company.

The second is the Mill Creek sensitive area (effective June 15, 1999) in the Kispiox Forest District. The area is a 112-hectare watershed. Three zones were established within the sensitive area: a cedar stand zone; a reserve zone; and, a management zone. Commercial harvesting is prohibited in the cedar stand zone and limited to non-clearcut systems in the management zone.

The third sensitive area is located in the Elaho valley and is designed to protect a large and ancient Douglas fir known as the “Elaho giant”. The area covered is 50 hectares in size.

In 1996, the Victoria-based Forest Practices Code Sensitive Areas Working Group drafted a discussion guide for establishing sensitive areas, which outlines opportunities for higher level planning under the Code to protect and maintain sensitive environmental and social values. Released in January 1997, this draft guide provides clarification as to where and for what purposes sensitive areas can be designated. There has been little further activity in relation to the guide or sensitive areas establishment, as Ministry of Forests planning staff are prioritizing landscape unit planning at this time.
For Further Reference

Legislation: Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act. RSBC 1996, c. 159, ss. 5, 105.

Regulations: Strategic Planning Regulation. BC Reg. 180/95, s. 7.

Policy: Higher Level Plans: Policy and Procedures, c. 6.

2.5 PRE-CODE LAND USE PLANS

Forest land use planning has been conducted throughout British Columbia over several decades. Prior to the 1990s, land use planning was conducted on a more ad hoc basis, according to local needs or demands. Most often, the planning was conducted in response to localized concerns over the possible impact of industrial development activities on resource values such as fisheries, community water supplies, wildlife, outdoor recreation, etc. In most cases the planning was not as comprehensive as regional land use plans or LRMPs are today, and it occurred on a smaller geographic scale than these plans. The planning efforts and outcomes were widely varied, as was the degree of public involvement in their preparation. Planning processes were known by many different names according to the focus of the plan, such as integrated watershed management plans, integrated resource management plans, coordinated access management plans, coordinated resource management plans, total chance plans, total resource plans, timber supply area plans, resource folio plans, and local resource use plans. These types of plans are discussed in Part 1.7 of the Guide.

There is no simple answer to the question of the status of these plans, such as whether forestry and range operations will be managed in accordance with them. In some cases, where more recent planning exercises have been conducted, the new plans may be considered to supercede pre-Code plans. In other cases, depending on the content of the plans, it may be that provisions of the Code have superceded the management practices set out in the plans. Where the plans are more stringent than the Code, they may nevertheless be implemented, even though there might be no legal requirement to do so.

The legal status of these plans has changed through amendments to the Forest Practices Code since its inception. When the Code was first passed, the definition of higher level plan included any plans that were formulated pursuant to subsection 4(c) of the Ministry of Forests Act. This subsection is set out in Part 5.1.13 of this Guide, and provides that the purposes and functions of the Ministry of Forests include conducting planning for all resource values, including non-timber values such as fisheries, wildlife, water and outdoor recreation. Initially, these pre-Code plans would have automatically fallen within the definition of a higher level plan, and therefore be binding on operational plans.

An early amendment to the Code changed this definition to provide that the only pre-Code plans which would become higher level plans are those which were specifically designated as such by a district manager of the Ministry of Forests.

More recent amendments in 1997 (effective October 16, 1998) took away this ability to declare pre-Code plans to be higher level plans. Now, the only higher level plans are the objectives for resource management zones, landscape units, sensitive areas, recreation sites and trails, and interpretive forest sites. In order for pre-Code plans to become legally binding on operational plans, elements of the plan would have to be formally declared as objectives for resource management zones, landscape units, or sensitive areas.

With respect to local resource use plans, the Landscape Unit Planning Guide directs Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks staff to:

… review existing integrated plans at the local level (such as integrated watershed management plans, coordinated access management plans, coordinated range use plans, local resource use plans) when undertaking landscape unit planning. If these existing plans have had the benefit of substantive public review and are being implemented, their objectives and strategies should be integrated into landscape unit plans where appropriate.

Further Chief Forester policy suggests that district managers may consider these past strategic planning efforts appropriate to incorporate into higher level plans where:

the plan’s proposed use and management of land within the provincial forest is in accordance with section 2 of the Code legislation (i.e. it is being used for timber production and utilization, forage production and grazing by livestock or wildlife, recreation, scenery, wilderness, water, fisheries, wildlife, biological diversity, or cultural heritage purposes);

the requirements of the plan do not "contradict" requirements of the Code;

the plan considers the full range of forest resources;

an appropriate assessment of all forest values has been made;

appropriate government agencies have been consulted;

the private sector has been consulted;

the public and First Nations have had an opportunity for review and comment;

the term of the plan is identified; and,

the location of the plan area is identified on a map and accompanied by text that describes the resource management objectives for the area and the strategies for achieving those objectives.

2.6 SUMMARY OF HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

Higher level plans were introduced with the Forest Practices Code as a means of increasing government’s commitment to strategic land use plans and providing a legal link between strategic plans and the operational plans that guide on the ground forest practices. Higher level plans are defined in the Code as "an objective (a) for a resource management zone, (b) for a landscape unit or sensitive area, (c) for a recreation site, recreation trail or interpretive forest site."

After a land use plan is approved, the three Ministers responsible for the Code may establish resource management zones, and in so doing, may also specify the objectives for each zone. These objectives should address all of the key recommendations of the land use planning table that developed the regional land use plan or LRMP, so long as they are capable of being implemented through operational plans. It is these objectives that constitute the higher level plan and become legally binding on all subsequent plans. There are no legal constraints on what may be incorporated into a higher level plan, or on what may be an "objective" so long as it pertains to forest practices.

Landscape units and sensitive areas are for a smaller scale of planning than most regional plans or LRMPs. It is expected that where regional land use plans and LRMPs have developed resource objectives that vary from normal Code management, these objectives will be given legal status through resource management zone objectives. Although landscape units and sensitive areas could also be used in some cases, at the present time landscape unit objectives for elements of biodiversity other than old growth and wildlife tree retention, and for other forest resources, will only be developed for areas where there are approved higher level plan resource management zone objectives for these values. In turn, sensitive area development is "on hold" while the Ministry of Forests completes priority biodiversity planning at the landscape level.

Higher level plans provide a framework for the development of site specific operational plans. Operational planning is the most site specific type of planning within the provincial hierarchy of forest land use planning; these plans provide detailed information regarding proposed road building, timber harvesting and other operational activities on specific sites. The next section of the Guide, Part 3, provides a comprehensive discussion of the various types of operational plans required under provincial legislation, detailing the content, scope and intent of each.

09.29.06

PART 2 HIGHER LEVEL PLANS

PART 2
HIGHER LEVEL PLANS