Totally agree. This could be the future attraction to bringing investment into the city but not too quickly to upset the balance.

While I totally understand the sentiment of Ben’s article, I also know the next thing out of his mouth would be a complaint of rising taxes in the city of PG.

Face it, the costs of managing a city are going to go up. You need tax paying citizens to keep the tax rates at a reasonable level. If the population remains somewhat stagnant for a decade, and costs go up year after year… what do you think is going to happen?

I’m not brushing aside that the City needs to get it’s act together and handle the funds currently coming in more efficiently. That’s still priority number one.

Unlike the cities in this province who are required to manage for growth though such instruments as Official Community Plans, the Federal Government does not require the same of provinces. So, BC does not have any Official Provincial Plans.

When we have Cities, such as PG, forever diddling with the intent of the OCP and allowing sprawl against the policies of the OCP, and when we have one provincial government after another not have any vision of what the province will look like in each of its communities, then why would one wonder why things do not end up to meet the expectations of people?

We have no formal expectations to speak of and when we do, we ignore them.

So I am of the age where I say to myself, “who cares”. If the people we elect do not get it, there is nothing I can do to change it.

It is what it is. All the dreams we may have are subject to fate in this Province and in this City. Until we have accountability to a plan both locally and provincially, all talk is just political chattering and too many are mesmerized by it.

As far as standard of living being higher here than in the lower mainland, that really depends on personal preference. Each of us is the judge of that. Right now, I would have to say that is not the popular opinion since, if that were true, the population of PG and other remote small towns across this country would be skyrocketing. In fact, the opposite has been happening.

The worry about having a larger growth rate is tied to the fact that we can not ever currently fully pay FOR what we’ve done FROM what we done, but only from what we are doing or are going to have to do.

The new home mortgage, since the end of the Second World War, is the principal vehicle by which needed new money is introduced into the economy. When new home construction falls off, the rate of profit for businesses in general also falls off, and it is from those profits that existing bank loans will be amortised. When those loans cannot be amortised, the access to further credit needed by business is restricted, and we begin a downward economic spiral.

The difficulty we have today is that we, not just in this region, but in most others as well throughout North America, have not been able to find a different financial vehicle to do what the new home mortgage has previously been able to do.

“and while there may be pockets of problems such as Quesnel and district, we should be able to continue to make the forest industry one of our main stays long into the future.”

The prediction of the Provincial Chief Forester’s Report on the short, mid and long range impact of the MPB in the PG TSA still stand as far as I can tell. It is simple. The short term, that is till about 2020, will likely see AACs similar to those prior to the MPB. That depends very much on the ability to use dead stands as well as the short term relocation of the geographical centre of harvesting areas.

In the mid term, which I understand to be the 30 to 40 year period after 2020, the prediction is a downfall of some 40% in the AAC for that period of time.

So yes, Pat can say what he said and feel fairly confident about that. However, he has not addressed the mid term scenario. He has stated that it is not expectd to be as bad as the Chief Forester has predicted. At the same time, neither he nor the Chief Forester has been public on the correction one would expect to have come forward with by now. After all, unlike cities and provinces, investors do make plans on where to invest and they do need some good quality data on which to base their decisions.

If there is anyone out there who can share a different scenario of the mid term prediction, I would like to know where I can find it.

In case some want to see where I get my information from, read the discussion paper of January 2010 which is available through this link:
http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hts/tsa/tsa24/tsr4/24ts10pdp.pdf

If you want a quick look at what senario 2A looks like – that is the scenario which the Chief Forester has used to base the current AAC of 12.5 million on in the PG TSA – go to the graph on page 9.

Look at the blue line as well as the red broken line and in oparticular see the note of the shift to FS James as the geographic centre of the MPB salvage operation.

The year this was based on is 2008. The precipitous downfall is predicted to start about 13 years out from that year, so around 2020+.

Until then the line shows the AAC level which the Chief Forester has implemented in early 2011, 12.5 million m3/yr.

Within 3 or so years from then, the 12.5 will drop to around 6 million.

Whoever will stand in front of us in 2020 to predict the outlook for forestry in this region to 2030, will not be able to say what Pat Bell has said.

Again, if anyone in the government, the forest industry, etc. has a different understanding of the mid term outlook, please show me the data to disopute the Chief Forester’s scenario.

40 years from 2008, 2048, is the magical year when the prediction is for the AAC to be lifted in half a million increments per decade from around 6 million to end up by 2078 or so at the 9 million m3/yr level.

So, will anyone who is a big player in this industry be building a new billion dollar plant here? Unless a portion of that reduced AAC is secured, no way.

I have, however, expected to see someone invest in considerably less expensive bioenergy plants to get at the short term salvage. I do not see that. Is the market for that product falling? To use a term that City politicians like to use, is this province not open for business? What is it?

So, let’s watch Quesnel. Let’s not only watch Quesnel, but let’s help Quesnel because we need to learn from Quesnel to help us get ready for the post 2020 decades.

The time to start?

Now!!!!!

The person who can help with this?

In spite of all I have written here, Pat!!!

Oh …. then there is Bob Zimmer ….. LOL

“Should We Be Happy With Slow And Steady Growth”(?)

Slow and steady growth is better than stagnation or decline.

The city can decide to maintain and improve what it already has, or not.

The city can decide to act prudently and know the limits of what we can afford, or not.

It’s up to us to elect people who are in favour of acting prudently and responsibly.

If we don’t we have a problem.

Slow and steady growth would be great but when is that going to happen? PG’s population has been virtually stagnant for decades and the new jobs that have come to town have simply replaced those that had left.

Ben even throws the 7% to 10% growth out there as though it is possible . . . yeah right!!!!! The city can’t even seem to achieve 2% growth over a sustained period, why the heck would we think that higher growth rates are possible?

Look at the info that gus presented. 2020 is when the downfall in the AAC is set to begin. That is only 8 years away folks. How many 25-45 years olds are currently employed in forestry in PG? How many of those people are still going to have to be in the job market in 2020? Likely most if not all of them. How many of those will still have their forestry related jobs when the AAC cuts start to happen? How many are willing to risk it and roll the dice? More importantly, how many are even thinking about it?

But let’s take this a step further. The reduction in the AAC is expected to last until 2048 at which time it will start to recover to roughly 75% of what it is NOW by 2078. 2078 is 66 years from now!!!!!! Will we even need BC wood by then? Will it be replaced by composite materials? Will Russia have cornered the market as a result of the “dead decades” that BC endured from 2020 to 2050?

People are so proud to say that PG lives and dies on forestry. Many resist every attempt to change that. Well folks, unless things change and some REAL diversification does happen to the city, you won’t have to worry about slow and steady growth, you’ll have to worry about the population dropping off of a cliff along with everything else that goes along with that. I wonder what that would do the quality of life and housing prices?

Playing ostrich and not confronting this reality head on is pure lunacy. Heck, I’d even go far as to say that if you work in forestry in the PG area and you can’t leave the workforce within the next decade or so, you are foolish to buy into what Pat Bell keeps saying. I would tend to side with the science that says the trees will be dead and not the spin doctoring that comes out of Victoria. I’m sorry to be so blunt, but I think people need to pay serious serious attention to what is coming, especially when it is so apparent that there is no plan in place to deal with it. Heck, they don’t even want to acknowledge it.

Does anyone recall OBAC?
http://www.ominecacoalition.ca

We have been throwing money at that “think tank” and “planning” group for some time, yet when we look at long range planning (which is virtually never) those kind of initiatives are forgotten. Yet they keep on ticking like the eveready bunny and just beating its drums, though with much less noise these days.

Same with CCBAC http://c-cbac.com

According to the intro page of the web site:
———————————-
OBAC’s Capstone Objectives – the things that connect and strengthen our ability to succeed.

By having all sectors working together within the region, and in partnership with neighboring regions, senior governments and others, we can strengthen the framework upon which our future success will be built. Achievement of the following long-term goals will provide strength and resilience across all sectors and communities in the region.

1.By 2020 community members throughout the region will be connected to each other and to the global community in a manner that allows the exchange of information and ideas as effectively as anywhere in Canada

2.By 2020 the region will be served by an integrated infrastructure network that enables businesses and citizens to be competitive locally and in the broader marketplace.

3.By 2025 we will have the most highly educated and skilled citizenry of any rural region in Canada.

4.By 2025 we will be known as a model region for delivery of quality, equitable, coordinated, relevant and cost-effective services to small and rural communities.
———————————–

Where is the baseline of the measurable indicators of these objectives?

Who is responsible for implementing the programs which address those indicators?

Does anyone in government, such as the City, the Province and the Feds really care, or are they simply pumping in a million bucks here and there and the whole thing is just a make work project?

Who is coordinating all these efforts. Do we need a Ministry of Coordination? As Glen Clark stated on the Global special last night, governments and businesses can get too large to wok effectively. At least that is what I understaood him to say.

I have felt for some time that is one of our main problems.

I get the sense thsat a lot of people in government are happy to start fresh, like the current mayor and councillors. Problem is, for those who are not new, there is that early euphoria that they have a fresh start, can dump all their past pperwork, and do a better job this time around …… wait a couple of months, and all is back to normal. ;-)

I don’t understand why City management should have anyting to do with the growth of our city. We are paying from tax dollars for IPG. Why is that ? Because the mandarins at City hall don’t have the ability nor should they have to market our City.

The City is so engrossed with trying to drive the economy and increase their tax base when in fact they are not doing the things that would help to keep the growth on an even keel. They are spending our tax dollars on their airy fairy ideas like the Boundary Road project.

If they let the business community drive the economy and the City spent our tax dollars on improving the and managing the appearance of our City by enforcing bylaws, maintaining the infrastructure, enhancing the appearance in the layout of our subdivisions with lots that will accommodate the type of home that are being built.

The older subdivisions have a much better street appeal then those of today where all you have is concrete driveways for a front lawn . If a developer wants to build a 4000 sq ft homes on a 60X100 foot lot let him also pay for the property to suite. Provide some room for front yard landscaping with the old idea of a tree or two.

The City boasts about all the parks we have. Most are just green belts with weeds and scrub brush. Most of the public space along our streets look much the same. The boulevards are covered with weeds without any plan for maintenance. Prince George has a fabulous growing climate for many species of grass and shrubs so why not take advantage of it.

I’m mnot trying to compete with Gus these are just a coulpe of ideas that I want to share. I’m much to busy to go chasing the web.
Cheers

Funny you mention parks Retired 02. I always thought that the best parks were the ones that didn’t really have allot of “planning” to them. Examples would be Cottonwood, Forests for the World and stuff like that. Fort George is also very nice, but PG does have an abundance of greenbelt that could be utilized as prime “natural” park space if they wanted to, they just need to get creative and understand the benefits.

When I moved out here to Ottawa, one of the first things I noticed was the sheer number of “man made” parks in the neighbourhoods. They are generally REQUIRED to be built by the developers as part of an integrated green space when they put up a new subdivision. You can’t go 500 yards without seeing one.

The real gems though, are the “natural setting” parks. I live about a 5 minute jog from the Ottawa Greenbelt which is a huge area that stretches about 30-40KM from one end of Ottawa to the other. I run there in the summer and it is simply spectacular with all sorts of forest, wildlife, Canadian Shield rock, swamp land, etc. In the winter it doubles as a snow shoeing and cross country ski area. There are many other more “rustic” spots like this in the immediate area and it REALLY adds to the quality of life.

I think PG could learn allot about how to leverage what it has and turn it into an attraction. Sometimes the best things are those that don’t just jump out at you. Your idea about using grasses and shrubs isn’t a bad one. Why the heck not?

A bit of topic with the rest of the thread, but I think this does tie back to community growth and making the city a place that people want to live.

The population has been stagnant in PG for almost a generation. The number one reason people move here is work. Parks and other such things are nice, but people will generally move where the work is.

As long as we keep protesting mining, pipelines, etc. and stalling the job growth, nobody is going to move here.

“Parks and other such things are nice, but people will generally move where the work is”

That is very true. The point though is that if there is work in Community A and work in Community B (because let’s face it, there is work everywhere), those other things like parks and clean air start to make a very big difference.

Long gone are the days where people only look for dad’s job when it comes to where to work and live. More often than not there are lifestyle choices, a second career for a spouse, activities for the kids, etc. It’s tough to compromise when the community typically doesn’t cater to a diverse crowd.

“That is very true. The point though is that if there is work in Community A and work in Community B (because let’s face it, there is work everywhere)”

Really? Are you talking about career type jobs or minimum wage type? If you’re talking about minimum wage, I’ll agree with you.

I’m most certainly talking about career type jobs. In fact, if you browse online jobs sites, career ads in major newspapers, industry or professional periodicals and stuff like that, you’ll see that there are career type jobs all over this country.

Actually, if you want to take it even further, I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that there are many career type jobs that PG CAN’T offer, simply because it doesn’t have the type of growing economy that can support or produce them.

I’d even go so far as to say that in a decade or so, PG won’t even be able to offer the career type jobs that it used to be able to offer, simply because the forestry industry will be starting 40+ year period of significant decline. What industry is going to replace those jobs and even IF they do exist, why would people choose to live in PG as opposed to somewhere else?