Archive for year: 2014

Big Lonely Doug, perhaps the loneliest tree in Canada, stands in the middle of a clear-cut on the west coast of Vancouver Island, surrounded by a field of huge stumps.

The giant red cedars and Douglas firs that once surrounded it were cut down and hauled away by loggers two years ago.

Big Lonely Doug was left standing alone, Ken Wu of the Forest Alliance says, because it was either designated as a wildlife tree, or it was left to provide cones for the reseeding of the forest.

Either way, it makes a rather sad sight sticking up out of a raw landscape of logging debris – and it serves as a reminder of just how inadequate British Columbia’s forest regulations are at protecting old, giant trees.

Recently, Mr. Wu’s group, which for years has been campaigning to save old trees like this, teamed up on a climbing expedition with Matthew Beatty of the Arboreal Collective, another organization that works to save trees.

They wanted to get to the top of Big Lonely Doug to see how tall it really was. It had been estimated at 70 metres. And they wanted to get some photographs to highlight the need to protect B.C.’s rapidly disappearing old growth.

Mr. Wu says 99 per cent of the old-growth Douglas fir trees in B.C. have been logged and 75 per cent of the original old growth forests on B.C.’s southern coast have been cut down.

Mr. Wu’s group has been frantically searching out the biggest trees and lobbying to protect them. A few years ago, they found the Avatar Grove near Port Renfrew, which the government did set aside, and which is now a tourism attraction. In the same area, they also identified what they named Lower Christy Clark Grove, in the hope the Premier would set it aside. Parts of that area were later protected, not to honour Ms. Clark, but as wildlife habitat because of the presence of endangered Queen Charlotte goshawks.

But Mr. Wu and his colleague, T.J. Watt, didn’t see Big Lonely Doug when they were hiking through the thick forest in the area, and the grove of giants it stood in didn’t get flagged for protection. When they returned in March, it was impossible to miss, however, sticking up all alone like that.

Members of the Arboreal Collective put climbing ropes up the tree and Mr. Watt, a photographer clambered up. Way up. From the top, they dropped a line – Big Lonely Doug is 66 metres tall, not quite as big as first estimated, but still the second largest Douglas fir in Canada.

“It was incredibly humbling,” said Mr. Watt of what it felt like up there in the tree. “It’s like climbing a living skyscraper. You only get a true sense of its mass once you are up there in the canopy and you see the trunk is still 6-, 7-, 8-feet wide. It’s almost unfathomable how large it is.”

From near the top, swaying in the wind, Mr. Watt looked out over the valley and felt a sense of wonder at how long the tree has been there. Ring counts of nearby stumps showed many of the neighbouring trees were 500 years old. Big Lonely Doug is estimated to be 1,000 years old.

From his vantage point atop the tree, Mr. Watt’s colleagues seemed tiny on the ground below. Across the valley, he could hear chainsaws and see trees falling as logging continued in the area.

“It was odd to be standing in this giant, record-size tree in the middle of a clear-cut and watching stuff fall not too far away,” he said.

Mr. Watt said it was “kind of sad” too, because he suspected there were more trees like Big Lonely Doug that might be stumps by the time his crew finds them.

“It shows the need to have legislation in place as quickly as possible to protect remaining old-growth forest so we don’t have to keep coming across these things too late,” said Mr. Watt.

Three years ago, the provincial government promised it would bring in regulations to protect the best and biggest groves of B.C.’s dwindling stock of giant old-growth trees.

Mr. Watt, Mr. Wu, and Big Lonely Doug are still waiting.

Read more: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/canadas-loneliest-tree-around-1000-years-old-still-waiting-on-help/article19064507/

For a few hours last month Big Lonely Doug was a little less lonely.

On may 25, a group of climbers and environmentalists scaled the giant tree, which was confirmed as Canada’s second-largest Douglas Fir earlier this year.

“It’s a humbling experience exploring the tops of centuries-old trees and in a place no human has been before. I hope the novel images that come from this initiative to climb and document the largest trees and grandest groves in B.C. will help to raise awareness… about these highly endangered ecosystems,” said T.J. Watt of the Ancient Forest Alliance.

While atop the tree, the climbers conducted additional measurements, pegging Doug’s height at 66 metres. That’s four metres less than the original estimate.

“However, Big Lonely Doug still remains as the second-largest Douglas Fir tree in Canada in total size,” the group said in a statement.

Soil and moss samples from the fir’s canopy were also taken, and will be tested for new species of insects.

https://metronews.ca/news/victoria/1058117/video-climbers-scale-canadas-big-lonely-doug/

View gallery at: https://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/gallery-tree-climbers-scale-big-lonely-doug-1.1118808

British Columbia’s forests are 93-per cent owned by commoners and comprise a part of what has been known for centuries as The Commons.

As such, it is incumbent on policy-makers to ensure the common interest prevails over self-interest and government interest in the governance of these forestlands.

Unfortunately, misguided thinking is undermining the common interest as the government struggles to deal with the aftermath of the mountain-pine-beetle infestation in Interior B.C.

For over half a century, the forests ministry allowed vast areas of aging pine forests in the B.C. Interior to become increasingly susceptible to infestation by the mountain pine beetle.

Although scientists and forest insect specialists did not foretell the magnitude of the beetle infestation, they are in general agreement that climate change caused it and poor government forest policies exacerbated it.

The government’s initial response to the beetle infestation was to deal with the symptom (dead pine trees) and implicitly deny the cause (global warming).

The government immediately raised the rates of logging and the limits placed on allowable cuts to unsustainable levels in the mountain-pine-beetle zone with little regard for the cumulative affects it would have on the soil, water and animals, not to mention the people of Interior B.C.

The recession of the last decade allowed senior forest officials to deceive themselves into thinking that over-harvesting and unsustainable logging rates are in the best interests of forest-dependent communities for at least a couple of political election cycles, but not beyond. Yet, the government, while claiming to have spent a billion dollars on mitigating the affects of the beetle infestation, appears to have completely neglected to do any strategic planning needed to deal with the inevitable social and economic consequences of the predicted crash in available timber.

The only evident plan is to keep the rates of timber harvesting unsustainably high, thereby making the eventual collapse of available timber even more painful for forest-dependent communities, a policy based on the premise that it is better to have more jobs today and none tomorrow rather than fewer jobs today and some tomorrow.

Instead of focusing on the common good, on getting a reliable forest inventory and on defining a long-term vision for forestry in British Columbia with attendant strategies, goals and objectives, the government is preoccupied with rewarding an oligopoly of companies with exclusive timber rights over public forests within quasi-private timber farms (Tree Farm Licences)

In its zeal to justify further enclosure of The Commons and increased corporate control over the commoners’ timber, the government’s twisted thinking becomes so bent that it defines mountebank politics.

The false argument, or syllogism, goes like this. Area-based forest management is preferable to volume-based management. Tree-farm licences are a type of area-based tenure. Therefore, forest management on tree-farm Licences must be better than it is on volume-based tenures.

The government then takes that syllogism to the people and pretends to consult publicly by inviting selected stakeholders to a meeting with the consultation leader and by arranging an Internet blog on which the public can post comments and send written submissions by email.

The declared purpose of the consultation is to obtain input on the criteria to be considered in evaluating proposals for converting some or a portion of some volume-based forest licences to new or expanded area-based tree-farm licences. More tree-farm licences are a foregone conclusion. The public has no say.

The whole consultation process is a sham. The language used is a complete turnoff for any member of the public unversed in forestry jargon. To participate meaningfully, the public would need clear evidence of whether public benefits from previously awarded tree-farm licences have materialized as background to an open question as to whether more timber farms are desirable and in the common interest.

History shows forest tenure under tree-farm licences is a singular failure resulting in British Columbians being robbed of control of their forests and denied the promised benefits from them.

British Columbians need a full, public and provincewide discussion — not a phoney consultation — on what type of forest governance might best address the concerns and needs of forest-dependant communities during this century of rapid climate change.

Today, common sense is the cement needed to unite British Columbians to re-establish control over their forest commons. Until noon on May 30, use your common sense to say no to more Tree Farm Licences by sending an email to: forest.tenures@gov.bc.ca

Anthony Britneff recently retired from a 40-year career with the B.C. Forest Service during which he held senior professional positions in inventory, silviculture and forest health.

Read more: https://www.vancouversun.com/Opinion+Tree+farm+licences+failure+forest+management/9879112/story.html