"Andrews says the fires cover approximately 40-thousand-hectares -- land that had been part of West Fraser's long-range plans."

Well, I could say something here, so I will.

It is THEIR plan, not Mother Natures's. If they did not include a percentage contingency for an unknown but on a probability basis a likely event over ALL their plans, well, then their plans were pretty darn thin in my opinion.

What exactly is considered a "long range" plan as opposed to a "short range" plan?

I suggest that part now go back into the real "LONG" range plan with the activities of replanting and more intensive stand tending taking over till there is something to harvest for the next generation.

Welcome to the world of thinking about the forests as a wood fibre extraction resource. You have entered the world that a farmer is quite familiar with.

"Well, I could say something here, so I will"

We wish you wouldn't.

I see you used the "royal" we again. :-)

Pretty easy for you to say all that Gus, but if its not your money, talk is cheap.

I would venture to say, West Fraser lost over a million dollars putting the proposal together.

While the workers for West Fraser Mill in the area will likely be unemployed. Thus your commentary of jokingly claiming "LONG", may be humourous to you, but will impact families.

Did any of these logging contractors cause any of the fires now burning in B.C.,all we ever hear is the fire was human caused,or sometimes when an individual is implicated we'll hear about it.I know years ago the company I was working for at the time,was responsible for starting a fire in the Lilloet area.Some of us got pulled off of our regular jobs to help battle the blaze, along with the fire fighters,and managed to get the fire out in a day.I think sometimes we get caught up in the severity of the fires,that we forget to look into the cause.You can't do a thing about a lightening strike,but we've had enough fires over the last two years where some have to be human caused,and no penalties applied to anyone.

I should also add that I think if any fires were started by the logging contractor,it should be the corporations such as Canfor or West Fraser that receive the fines,as they are the ones dictating to the logging contractors of when to work and when to get out.

"Pretty easy for you to say all that Gus"

As it is for you to write the above "he spoke".

No, I have no money in it. BUT, it is a public forest, and I am part of the public. Interesting isn't it, "he spoke"? Betch'a you never would'a thought about that. Be honest now!!!!!

The reason why it is easy for me to say that is because I am familiar with a number of different planning processes. I can easily tell you that a good plan takes care of reasonable "contingencies" that relate to the nature of the thing planned for.

In the case of forest management planning, be they five year plans or longer term planning than that, one should consider what should happen should there be a fire.

In the present situation, there have been enough people who have taken a look at the realities of the dead pine stands and the risks of leaving them stand rather than harvesting them, or possibly leaving them stand without good quality firebreaks in place.

There is nothing new in what is happening. We have known about this for close to a decade now. "We", as in the MoF and licensees such as West Fraser in this case, cannot plead ignorance. Even "we" as the general public living in forest dependent communities cannot even plead ignorance.

It seems though, that a few of the posters so far are just that, ignorant of the situation we find ourselves in, even to the point of understanding exactly what the responsibility of a forest licensee is with respect to forest planning.

Two simple words with some very important responsibilities attached: "due diligence".

Maybe it is just Karma. Remember the forest companies are the big voice behind trying to squash the HST petition.

gus is right. Most everyone and their dog (including people not even connected to forestry) have had enough common sense to realize that a large scale fire or fires was a virtual certainty at some point in time, given the MPB epidemic and related factors.

I say "most everyone", because it seems obvious that some people weren't aware of it, or they would've accounted for it in their contingency plans. Contingency plans like maybe budgeting more money to fight fires and training more fire fighters (governmental oops), considering the impacts to the business case of losing access to timber because of fires (corporate oops), etc.

Don't worry, these big firms are full of smart people. They'll figure out a strategy to keep operating. That said, it will likely mean some sort of corporate bailout (auto sector repeat?) or a reduction in their taxes (HST for example). Either way, the average joe will wind up paying for it.

Well Gus, Im getting to be a big fan of yours. You herd the one about “the best laid plans of mice and men’ That’s about all I know about planning a forestry operation.

A few years back in the days of Wacky Bennet he had the idea of long term forest management were a forest licence was given to a corporation and they had to manage it. That included little projects like replanting after they harvested the timber, building their own roads and what ever it took to manage the licence.

There was a lot of controversity over these licences that the practice was abandoned.

To day the licence goes to the biggest contributor to our political parties or so it seems. The licencee cuts the timber and the tax payer pays for the replanting and builds the roads. The licencee dos not have to do any planning the government does it for them. So much for planning
Cheers

As per "Retired" comments.

There is a big difference between a "licensee" and a contractor who bids on and wins a block through the BCTS. I won't bore you with the details but the long and short of it is:
A licensee is someone who "must" submit a five year plan to the ministry for evaluation and approval. He is responsible for every step that takes place in the logging process. Including de-activation, replanting, spacing ect. ect.
Only when a qualified bidder wins the opportunity to log a block that he then buys through the BCTS that some of those resposibilities are left in the hands of the BCTS.
The "licensee" has a long term investment in their yearly annual cut whereas the short term investors in the small business side of the BC Timber Sales have paid the government to look after some of the long term responsibilities.

There is always the charcoal business.....

regardless people, the fires burning are and will cause longterm issues, be it, West Fraser's loss of timber, health issues due to smoke, loss of habitat for game animals (which will result in less dollars to the business's that look forward to those people who so desire them) as well as the almighty tourist dollar. To me, the problem "could" have been prevented to a point if one of our previous governments would have said "o.k. you lumber manufacturers, get out there and clean out all the standing dead timber so there is no fuel if this senario was to ever happen" The fault lies with the government for not giving the O.K and also to the government for giving in to the tree huggers, as now we all loose! But I will say, those burnt down forests will bring in much more tourist dollars than what we had standing before!!