Transcript Forestry Issues CAPP Environmental Seminar January 20, 2005

Integrated Landscape Management Program
“Beyond the Mechanics”
Bob Demulder, ILM Program Manager,
Alberta Chamber of Resources
Outline


The Business Challenge - Summary
The ILM Strategy
– Phase I or the “mechanics”
– The results of the “mechanics”
– Phase II or longer term “beyond the mechanics”


Signals encouraging strategic engagement in
emerging Land Governance & Policy discussions
Summary and thoughts for the ACR members to
consider
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
Municipalities: Communities
Gravel: Surface Material License
Gas: Lease
Oil: Lease
Coal & CBM: Lease
Bitumen: Lease
Minerals: Lease
Ground Water: License
Surface
Subsurface
seismic
Cumulative Effects & the System challenge

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”



“Low Hanging Fruit” – “Raise the
Profile of ILM”
Build cross sectoral relationships
(energy & forestry)
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
CE

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)
– 10,000 ha (1 yr harvest area )

$ 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!
ILM Program Strategy Phase II – Long Term




While we are saving money and being better
stewards learning the mechanics…
Gradually building broad resource industry
understanding & knowledge of cumulative effects
and the route cause – the current land governance
system and policies that guide them.
Collectively (resource industry) engage in policy
development using ILM and business supportive
options
Question? – When do we begin to engage in this
longer term challenge?
ILM “Signals” are on the Radar Screen

Government
– Federal interest in ILM – Env. Canada, NRCan
– Provincial
• 20 Year business plan – comprehensive land policy
• Vance Mc Nicole Report
• SDCC, department business plans & strategies

Other
– Canada West Foundation – Second Century Initiative
– Other Associations – becoming more “strategic” on resource
access

Timing - New provincial government mandate

Broad convergence of interest and acknowledgement !
Summary / Considerations




The mechanics of ILM work - they result in
efficiencies (money, time and stewardship)
The “signals” and “science” strongly suggest that we
need to begin to tackle the larger issue or the land
management system if we are to be truly sustainable
and get at the route of our business, social and
ecological challenges.
It’s a significant and complex long term issue
The ACR is well positioned with its ILM program but
it will take significant long term effort and support
from the membership as their will be many components
to a comprehensive strategy to address changes to the
land management system in Alberta.
In summary - We need to “to move beyond
the mechanics of ILM”
Bob Demulder, RPF
ILM Program Manager