Transcript Forestry Issues CAPP Environmental Seminar January 20, 2005

Integrated Landscape Management
An Overview
Bob Demulder, ILM Program Manager,
Alberta Chamber of Resources
Alberta Environment Conference
April 20, 2005
Intro ACR & ILM Program

ACR - Resource industry organization focused on
strategic cross sectoral issues
– Land management (ILM), Aboriginal relations / issues,
Watershed management, Workforce development,
Climate Change.



ILM Program, 2001 – Cumulative Effects – Green
Area (Public Lands)
Business, Policy & Science components
ACR, U of A ILM Industrial Research Chair
– Dr. Stan Boutin - Science

ACR ILM Program Manager
– Bob Demulder – Business & Policy
The Green Area







51% of province and finite
Forests, wildlife & water
priorities
No true land manager – SRD
primary agency but energy,
environment, EUB agriculture
and others allocate and
regulate.
Multiple use principles
Minimal planning
Industry and public use growth
mandates!
Increasingly Busy Place!
Multiple Land Use Policy & Resource Allocation
Cattle
Fur
Trees
Peat Moss
Gravel
Surface &
Ground Water
Natural Gas
Conventional & Heavy
Oil
Coal
Oil Sands/Bitumen
Minerals
Agriculture: Grazing Leases. Licenses, permits
Water: Surface Water License
Fur: Traplines (RFMAs) Cabins
Trees: FMA’s & Timber Quotas
Peat Moss: Surface Material License
Infrastructure: Roads, power lines, pipelines
Recreation: Parks, trails, OHV’s, hunting, lodges
Municipalities: Communities
Gravel: Surface Material License
Gas: Lease, license
Oil: Lease, license
Coal & CBM: Lease
Bitumen: Lease
Minerals: precious metals, diamonds
Ground Water: License
Surface
Subsurface
seismic
Disturbing Signals – Habitat Challenges
The System Challenge & Cumulative Effects

Uncoordinated incremental development (industrial &
societal) & multiple use policies

Ecological – threats to other values that require
management or protection
– Increased number of endangered species (caribou, grizzly etc.)
– Increased risk to biodiversity, environmental integrity, water, etc.

Social – erosion of public confidence
– Reduced confidence in government and regulatory systems
– Increased ENGO advocacy (i.e.- Boreal Campaign, provinces
reputation in international markets)
– Erosion social license to operate

Economic – resource access, increased business costs
– Increase in the regulatory burden to deal with social and ecological
issues
– More conditions, restrictions, delays or longer approvals, or
potential for loss of investment after the allocation has been made
ILM Program Strategy Phase I – “Mechanics”



“Raise the Profile of ILM” focus on
“Low Hanging Fruit”
Build cross sectoral relationships
(energy & forestry – largest users)
Remove traditional barriers to
cooperate
Identify & promote business
solutions that save time & money
by:
• Reduce Size – e.g., Narrow Seismic
Programs etc.
• Reduce Duration – e.g., Reclamation to
trees etc.
• Reduce Intensity – e.g., Coordinated
Access etc.
• Improve Stewardship – e.g., Stream
crossings association etc.
ILM vs BAU
Footprint

100
75
50
25
0
BAU
ILM
0 10 20 30 40
Time
Do ILM Mechanics Work ?


4 years of operational ILM at Al-Pac
Area impact reduction (coordinated
access, integrated harvest, reclamation,
narrow seismic)
– 10,000 ha (1 yr harvest area or 25%
improvement)

$ saved (joint road, TDA rebates,
information sharing etc.)
– Energy - $40 million
– Forestry - $15 million (plus fibre)



1/3 of Al-Pac’s harvest volume (or
800,000 m3 /yr. – or 3500 ha) for the
next 3 years is planned through
integrated harvest plans
Better stewardship for all sectors
ILM Profile raised!
However

The Science shows that the
“Triple E” Approach to land use
is running into limitations
– Everything
– Everywhere
– Every time



Science clearly shows that
“ILM Best Practices or
Mechanics” can only be part of
a solution
Trade-offs are inevitable
The Land Management System
is the challenge
Convergence


The science and business components of ILM are
both pointing to the need to improve the current
short comings of the current land governance
systems as .
Through the ILM Program and other related
initiatives the land governance challenge or the
need for “A New Land Strategy for Alberta” is
also on the governments radar screen
– Federal interest
– Alberta Throne speech
– Department business plans
– Various Reports
So where and when do we start
on this better system or strategy?
I would suggest we have already
started!
Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Program








The variety of life in all its forms
An indicator of how well our land and
water systems are functioning –
(Ecosystem health)
Conserving biodiversity is the most
practical way to ensure that ecosystems
function effectively
An increasingly important consideration
for resource management policy and
practice
Supports international commitments, land
management & business needs
World leading, credible, efficient data
collection system
Operational May 2007
www.abmp.arc.ab.ca
Foothills Stream Crossing Association
Before
After
Foothills Stream Crossing Association


Existing crossings, Watershed
level, cross sectoral & gov.
Standardized assessment protocols
–
–
–
–

Water flow / passage
Deleterious Substances
Fish passage
Safety (public / employee)
Economies of scale
– Assessments and maintenance



Better stewardship of an issue
based on risk, something not very
well managed in the past
Consistent with the Water Strategy
Pilot for a the rest of the province.
a
%
C99119 C99090
T
$
a C99092
%
C99096 X(
C99098
C99121
(
X
C99112 %
T
$
a
T
$
C99114$T
(
C99104 $T$T
X
(
X
C99086
C99082
C99080
Legend
Probability of fish capture
High
Medium
Low
Crossing status
Passable
T
$
Potential partial barrier
(
X
Not passable
a
%
Not assessed
ö
Erith roads
Railways
Watershed boundary
C99106 $T
T
$
C99110
C99108
C20238
T
$
C20236
C99125 a%X(
T
$
C20253
(
X
a C20140
C99127 %
a
%
C99129
a
%
C20235
a
%
C20233
C99131
T
$
(
X
N
C20237
W
E
S
4
0
4
8
12 Kilometers
So how might this all fit together
to make a better land
management systems?
Possible Components of a Better System
Yellow – being worked on
Vision
Adjust
•Science & Research
•Desired outcomes
•Objectives provincial, regional
Land Information
•Standardized, biophysical, dispositions
•Real time, spatial, internal or externally managed
Measure (filters & scale)
•Environment – ABMP
•Social – Quality of Life?
•Economic – GDP?
Enforcement of Plans
Regulations, Incentives, Staff, FSCA
Land Planning *
•Primary use concepts, zoning
•Economic, social, environmental advocates
•Tools –
NES / SES Pilots
Operational Plans
Allocations Decisions
•Industrial , public use, access
•Spatial, temporal allocation, New Tenures?
•Trade offs, thresholds, cumulative effects
•City Council Model? Value decisions
•ILM mechanics
Systems Based
The critical point is that this is a systems
based process / concept.
 Sections or components can be developed
separately – But it is critical that they know
and clearly understand how they relate to
one another.
 Consistent with Sustainable Resource &
Environmental Framework presentation

Let’s take a closer look at one of the
components of this theoretical
system.
Dominate Land Use Zoning
Water, Recreation,
Protection
Residence, Commerce
Energy, Oilsands
Caribou, protection
Consider This…
We’ve tackled Air and Water - Is it any wonder why we’ve left
land to last - let alone try to bring them all together?
Standard
Measurement
Metrics
Air
Water
Land
Yes
Yes
No
Particulates,
Nox, Sox etc.
TSS, AOX, etc
Public Resource Yes
Yes
Not always
Relation to
Public Health
Direct
Direct
Indirect at best
Clean Air
Clean Water
Governance
Yes –
Yes –
Environment
Environment
No
So what’s in the future for the
ILM Program?
ILM Future – Business / Mechanics





Result in efficiencies (money, time and better
land stewardship) and are still part of the
solution
Build cross sectoral business understanding
(energy / forestry business 101)
Build cross sector business relations (stump &
pump)
Address and remove traditional barriers between
sectors
Encourage policy that promotes cooperation and
maintains business advantages
ILM Future - The System Challenge


Get involved with the “Land Use Strategy”
discussions that will (are) taking place.
Scoping a better system (CWF)
– what might be a better system,
– what are the components, how do they fit together to
support the system
– what is doable politically, practically and financially
– who does it and when
– manage expectations!

There is and will be lots to work on – thus the
ILM program will likely focus on a few areas
where we can add value e.g., Land Information
system
Take Home Messages
• “The Land Supports Us All” – to coin a phrase from the
Agriculture sector.
• The resource sectors that use land are the backbone of the
economy and provide for our quality of life.
• If we don’t look at land management systems and the
cumulative effects challenge proactively it will likely be
forced (e.g., caribou and SARA legal challenge)
• ILM promotes better practices, mechanisms and systems
thinking regarding land use / management. Everyone has a
role
• The “better system” will likely never be perfect, but that
shouldn’t stop us from trying to improve it.
• It’s a complex and long term challenge.
Thank You
Questions & discussion
Bob Demulder
ILM program Manager
(403) 233-3050
Bob.Demulder@ConocoPhillips,com