Presidents Corner
The following is submitted on behalf of the President by Bryan Allan:
The provincial government is proposing a new Resource Road Act that could severely affect your ability to to take part in hunting, fishing and camping in our province.
Please take the time to review the Resource Road Act website http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/mof/nrra/.
On the right hand side of the webpage there is a yellow "Submit Feedback" link. After reviewing what the government intends to do to your ability to use existing resource roads PLEASE take the time to let them know that you value your right to travel freely in the backwoods.
Remember, if we let this slide through, you could be facing the same type of closures throughout the province that now exist on private land on Vancouver Island The following document written by Al Martin, is from the Access Committee of the BC Wildlife Federation. It is a good guide on what we as individual hunters, anglers and outdoor enthusiasts should be restating to government.
BCWF BRIEF TO THE MINISTER
Proposed Natural Resource Road Act
Discussion Paper October 2011
The Natural Resource Road Act Project (NRRA) Discussion Paper states that government is committed to:
1. Environmental stewardship
2. Industrial competiveness
3. Supporting rural sustainability and
4. Reducing administrative costs
The idea of a single Act with consistent conditions and approval processes is a good concept provided that the overarching principle of continued public access for the recreational [non-commercial] use of Crown Land and resources is included. With the absence of roads under the Mines Act it is assumed the NRRA to apply only to roads on the mine tenure that are part of the mine infrastructure and that roads to the mines across crown land will be administered under this legislation. (A separate issue is the size of mine tenure in which these roads exists.)
There is no business case presented for this legislation at this time nor are the main drivers including a shift to avoid countervailing duties in the US by moving from the stumpage system to a market based system in which road construction and maintenance costs are no longer deducted by industry. Earlier material from the January 2010 consultation included government estimates of $49 Million in resource roads, forest sector investment of $400 million in road construction and $140M in road maintenance. Clearly the funding of resource roads needs to be rationalized between government and industrial users while protecting the interests of the public to access crown land. The document opens the potential of tolls on resource roads for the recovery of costs but offers no approaches at this stage.
There is no strategy in the document on how objectives for roads will be established other than the Natural Resource Road Act (NRRA) decision maker will turn to existing plans in making the decision. Resource roads are a valuable asset for the public to access crown land. A clear process and objectives are required to define and balance between;
- recreation, tourism, fire suppression/public safety and other industrial objectives supported by access and,
- protecting wildlife fisheries habitat and other liabilities by limiting access.
The principles simply state the decision maker will make these decisions. Further The BCWF believes government has a responsibility to maintain no-longer-used resource roads to a minimal level subject to the above balance. The public has paid for the road construction and maintenance through taxation.
There will be „pressure from ministries agencies industrial and public users and First Nations to provide or restrict roads access to certain users or to specific uses. There is no objective process to balance these objectives other that trusting the NRRA statutory authority. This increases the potential for political interference at a local and provincial level with the statutory decision makers.
“Right of Access” indicates " a person, other than the government, must not restrict or impair another person's right to access or to use a resource road unless so authorized “. This would be strengthened if the policy stated that "free public access to industrial roads on Crown lands will not be restricted except for legitimate purposes of safety and environmental protection.”
The objectives established for the roads will drive the prescriptions for both maintenance and deactivation. The BCWF strongly suggests clear guidelines around road deactivation practices be adopted and included in the proposed legislation. Unacceptable environmental impact and safe deactivation are not defined. Lack of definition will result in different approaches driven by personalities rather than a consistent approach supported by the policy framework.
The Act speaks to industrial users with respect to maintenance costs, however there are many ambiguities about maintenance of existing roads that are not permitted by industry but are used by recreation users and other backcountry interests. With no designated "maintainer", the degree to which roads eventually be deactivated or gated to limit liability is unclear in the current discussion paper. However, the intent is clear, given the combinations cost of maintenance, liability and environmental concerns the proportion of roads that are deactivated will increase substantially.
Further there are issues of having public groups maintaining roads. As government represent the public interest the idea of groups partnering with government or other organizations to help achieve a goal is sustainable. However government letting groups take over their responsibility for maintaining access to Crown land that do not have the organizational, financial or technical ability to do so puts long term public access in jeopardy . We are opposed to this offloading of this government responsibility. We believe it is a short term fix that will result in a greater loss of access in the long term.
The BCWF fears the costs of regulatory compliance, particularly how it relates to maintenance under the Resource Road Act and the federal Fisheries Act sections related to habitat and fish passage will further tip the balance from maintenance to deactivation in the absence of thorough review of public use objectives and values.
There is no process to require consultation should the primary maintainer shut a road down under the guise of environmental or safety concerns to merely reduce use and thus maintenance costs and/or liability. De-activation could become very more prevalent that authorized without adequate monitoring and enforcement of agreements. In addition to monitoring and enforcement there should be a posting of approved road standards particularly road closures.
The decisions do not have a process of review or appeal to a body such as the Environmental Appeal Board. Any dispute resolution process is directed at mediating the costs of road maintenance between government and industrial users established by order. The need exists for a Public Watchdog for both objectives and practises so that the impacts on interests and value of the recreational public are considered.
The BC Wildlife Federation commends the government on the information sharing and reporting requirements.
This information will be valuable in the future for planning and will reduce the number of orphaned roads. The information is intended to show compliance with the Resource Road Act but has additional uses related to establishing objectives, and monitoring the consequences of implementation. This should be reviewed following a five year period to address any deficiencies.
The BCWF is encouraged that the document includes allowing some roads to remain open without a designated person/organization responsible for continued maintenance. We believe government has a responsibility to maintain no-longer-industrial used resource roads to a level consistent with the access objectives to allow public access. The gradual loss of these roads without due process is not good management of this provincial capital asset.
The concept of “Resource Roads” should be inclusive to all users of crown land. The value of this infrastructure to include the beneficial services provided to economy and social fabric of the British Columbia. These values must be served by the objectives of the proposed Natural Resource Road Act.
Respectfully submitted
Al Martin
Director, Strategic Initiatives
BCWildife Federation
Old Articles
| Submitted by | Article |
| Bryan Allan |
TIDAL WATER
FISHERIES COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT - 2010 |
| Ron Watanabe |
Standing
Committee on Finance and Government Services |