Water Stewardship Information Sources

Citation Tripp, D and Hogan, D. 1998. Focus on forestry-fisheries problems: Lessons learned from reviewing applications of the coastal fisheries-forestry guidelines. In: Hogan, D.L., P.J. Tschaplinski, and S. Chatwin (Editors). B.C. Min. For., Res. Br., Victoria, B.C. Land Manage. Handb. No. 41.
Organization FLNRO
URL https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/docs/Lmh/Lmh41.htm
Abstract/Description or Keywords A common complaint about research is that by the
time the studies are complete and the information
disseminated, the original problem that initiated the
work no longer exists. Studies to explore the
influence of different streamside management
practices on aquatic ecosystems began over 20 years
ago in Carnation Creek. Do we still have streamside
management concerns? Have we learned enough
already to enable forest harvesting activities while
retaining fish habitat integrity? Determination of the
influence of forestry on hillslope processes and
stream environments was the focus of work begun
on the Queen Charlotte Islands over 10 years ago.
Have these problems been solved such that forest
and fishery management coexist in complete
harmony? This presentation will attempt to answer
these types of questions, and thereby provide a
frame of reference for much of what will be
discussed in this workshop.
Recent findings of environmental audits to assess
the effectiveness of the 1988 Coastal FisheriesForestry
Guidelines (CFFG; see Tripp, this volume)
were used as a basis for the types of questions being
addressed by the Fish/Forestry Interaction Program.
The audits provided an opportunity for identifying
the type, nature and severity of common, and, very
importantly, contemporary stream impacts. This was
an opportune situation, because the usefulness of
past research has often been limited by the passage
of time. Once research results are finalized, the forest
industry has frequently found that the past
harvesting activities—as considered in the
research—are no longer practised. The next claim is
that the research findings are no longer applicable.
The environmental audits referred to here are
detailed in Tripp (this volume). The audit
population included only those cutblocks in coastal
British Columbia with fisheries concerns. These were
blocks that encompassed or impinged on Class I or II
streams, or blocks that included Class III or IV
streams that could affect Class I or II waters downstream.
Stream reach classification was based
primarily on fish use as defined in the 1988 CFFG.
Class I stream reaches included any reaches with
anadromous salmonids or better-than-low levels of
resident sport fish at any time of the year. Class II
streams were reaches with low levels of nonanadromous
sport fish. (Class I and Class II streams
are now referred to as Class A streams in the 1993
edition of the CFFG.) A Class III stream reach was a
reach with resident non-sport fish only; a Class IV
stream reach was a reach with no fish, nor any
likelihood of fish use in the future. (These streams
are now called Class B and C streams, respectively.)
The cause of any impacts was identified wherever
possible during stream inspections
Information Type Article
Regional Watershed Coast Region
Sub-watershed if known
Aquifer #
Project status complete
Contact Name
Contact Email