Context for Objectives in FRPA

Dave McBeth, RPFLand Use Specialist

MFR, Operations Division HQ

FRPA Goals

1. Reduce the transactional and operational costs to industry.2. Reduce the current Code’s administrative complexity.3. Provide industry “freedom to manage” in delivery of defined

results.4. Maintain the current Code’s high environmental standards.5. Continue to balance social, environmental and economic

interests.6. Maintain and enhance the level of public acceptance of forest

and range management.7. Be within the resource capacity of government.8. Strengthen the compliance and enforcement regime.9. Enhance industry’s global competitiveness by improving its ability

to exercise government granted timber-harvesting rights on a timely, economic and environmentally sound basis.

10.Maintain and sustainably enhance the province’s timber supply.

FRPA Construct

Objectives help drive and determine FSP content ~results or strategies~ but are not FSP content

FSP results and strategies are required to be achieved or carried out

Authority for legal objectives

FRPA s.1 "objectives set by government" (OSBG) means   (a) objectives prescribed under section 149 (1), or   (b) objectives established under section 93.4 of the

Land Act by the minister responsible for the administration of the Land Act

FRPA Government Actions Regulation (GAR) objectives (FRPA s.150…)

FRPA s.181 grandparented objectives (from FPC)

Land Act s.93.4 ~ Land Use Objectives Regulation: may deal with many forest and range matters may conflict with, (over-ride) FRPA objectives

FRPA ~ Government Actions Regulation deals with specific matters, e.g. lakeshore mgmt zones,

visual quality,  community watersheds, wildife habitat areas, ungulate winter range, fisheries sensitive watersheds.

cannot over-ride OSBG, and must follow TS impact policy

Both statutes have approval “tests” for establishment of objectives

Authority for legal objectives

Hierarchy of Objectives

May “conflict” with

Land Use Objectives(LA)

Objectives set in Regulation (eg. FPPR)

ObjectivesEnabled in Regulation

(GAR)

Must be consistent with

FSP Approval Test

FSP approval test includes that results or strategies must be consistent to the extent practicable with each and all legal objectives that pertain to the area

How many legal objectives are there? As of Aug/06, RLUP/LRMPs: 16, mostly FPC - HLPs

As of Oct/06, SRMPs: 69, mostly biodiversity

One provincial old growth order (2004)

FPPR: 10; soils, water, riparian, timber, biodiversity, wildlife, community watershed, cultural heritage resources (others: range, woodlots)

GAR: VQOs, LMZs, community watershed, WHA, UWR, FSW

Grandparented objectives __?

Land Use Planning Picture

85% crown land base covered by SLUPs

26 regional, LRMPs

195 SRMPs Others…LRUPs,

CLPs… Only some plan

areas have legal orders/objectives

Approved SLUPs as factors

FPPR schedule 1-5. Information in government approved Land

Use Plans may be used as “factors” for preparing results or strategies for land use objectives

Example FRPA objectives

FPPR s.5

The objective set by government for soils is, without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British Columbia's forests, to conserve the productivity and the hydrologic function of soils.

FPPR s.9.1 “The objective set by government for wildlife and

biodiversity at the stand level is, without unduly reducing the supply of timber from British Columbia's forests, to retain wildlife trees. “

Example FRPA objective

FPPR s.10 The objective set by government for cultural heritage

resources is to conserve, or, if necessary, protect cultural heritage resources that are 

(a) the focus of a traditional use by an aboriginal people that is of continuing importance to that people, and 

(b) not regulated under the Heritage Conservation Act.

Observation

It should normally be implicit in objectives as to the “Why” they exist or otherwise identify their purpose.

FRPA defines what a result and strategy are

"result" means a description of(a) measurable or verifiable outcomes in respect of a particular established objective(b) the situations or circumstances that determine where in a forest development unit the outcomes will be applied;

“strategy” means a description of (a) measurable or verifiable steps or practices

that will be carried out in respect of a particular established objective, and

(b) similar to above

Example FRPA “result or strategy” (practice reqm’t FPPR s.66,67) (1) If an agreement holder completes harvesting in one or more

cutblocks during any 12 month period beginning on April 1 of any calendar year, the holder must ensure that, at the end of that 12 month period, the total area covered by wildlife tree retention areas that relate to the cutblocks is a minimum of 7% of the total area of the cutblocks  

(2) An agreement holder who harvests timber in a cutblock must ensure that, at the completion of harvesting, the total amount of wildlife tree retention areas that relates to the cutblock is a minimum of 3.5% of the cutblock.  

(3) For the purposes of subsection (1) and (2), a wildlife tree retention area may relate to more than one cutblock if all of the cutblocks that relate to the wildlife tree retention area collectively meet the applicable requirements of this section.   

An agreement holder must not harvest timber from a wildlife tree retention area unless the trees on the net area to be reforested of the cutblock to which the wildlife tree retention area relates have developed attributes that are consistent with a mature seral condition

Observation

The Who, What, Where, When should be in the FSP result or strategy to meet the definition of a result or strategy.

FPPR s.25.1 (2)

If an established objective is comprised of measurable or verifiable steps, processes or outcomes…

…and the FSP restates that objective as a result or strategy

Then that R/S is to be considered to be consistent with the objective (i.e. meet the approval test)

Therefore “descriptive” objectives may be used as a licensee’s result or strategy

Observations

More strategic objectives work like “hooks” leaving it to licensee’s and their professionals to determine results or strategies

A compelling “trail” that leads to the place of best information that supports the strategic objective will assist in the development of good R/S’s

Higher risk issues may need more detailed objectives or “measures”

More specific objectives leave licensees and MFR DDM’s less flexibility

More detailed “SMART” objectives can work in FRPA but bypass at least some of the FRPA model

What does the FRPA model “expect” from legal objectives?

To be set where and when needed based on “risk” To provide clear strategic direction To give due consideration to FRPA goals To ensure high level of stewardship “liability” is in hands of

tenure holder and their professionals To add value (responsible governance) To enable future more specific actions To allow for new improved information to enter the picture To be supported by strong and compelling information Allow for good results or strategies to be written

Anecdotes…

http://www.resultsbasedcode.ca/

“Without clear, higher level goals and objectives, professionals often have to substitute their own opinions for value judgements that should be more properly established by public process.” (ABCFP 2002)

RBC must: “avoid specifying methods and rules except in the case of poor performers, where government should have wide flexibility to specify activities” (COFI, 2002)

…“it is essential that we have in place the necessary objectives at the landscape level and that they be clear, measurable and reflective of public choices.” (FPB 2002)

“We will not tell companies how to do their job; we will tell them what we expect them to achieve. Residents of this province and people around the world expect us to protect environmental values, and we will meet that expectation.” (Ministers MIchael deJong (MOFR), Joyce Murray (WLAP) 2002)

“Perhaps the greatest challenge presented by the FRPA is its reliance on:

the willingness of major tenure holders to assume many of the stewardship responsibilities traditionally shouldered by government officials; and

the ability of the resource management professions commonly relied upon by tenure holders to gain and maintain the confidence not only of tenure holders, but also of the public and the government ” (Roberta Reader, 2006)