City of Powell River Council has amended its tree protection bylaw but misunderstanding seems to have taken root in the process.
At the Thursday, April 2, council meeting, Councillor Russell Brewer said this was a bylaw amendment to recognize some existing timber licence reservations that are on certain properties in Powell River. He said these were in place before the Tree Protection Bylaw 2174 was adopted in 2008.
“The bylaw amendment does not affect trees on Millennium parklands that are being purchased by the city,” Brewer said. “While we are in agreement to purchase those trees, the contract has yet to be finalized.
“The bylaw amendment will clarify uncertainties. There are exclusions in the bylaw for certain lands—golf course, tree farm licences, timber licences and a couple of other circumstances for which the bylaw doesn’t apply.”
Brewer said the bylaw amendment would provide some clarification to the existing bylaw.
Amendment Bylaw 2403, 2015, is described as a bylaw to amend City of Powell River Tree Protection Bylaw 2174, 2008 regarding certain existing timber licence reservations. The recommendation before council at its April 2 meeting was that the City of Powell River Tree Protection Bylaw 2174, 2008 Amendment Bylaw 2403, 2015 be adopted.
Council carried the motion unanimously.
During question period after the council meeting, George Orchiston, a resident sitting in the gallery, said the bylaw was a complicated issue, but he had one basic question.
“It started when council enthusiastically announced that the trees in Millennium Park were safe,” Orchiston said. “What we didn’t hear was they would only be saved if council permitted, through the agreement that they intend to sign sometime in the future. Island Timberlands would in fact be permitted to harvest the trees on the PRSC lands outside of the Millennium Park.
“Isn’t it a fact that the amendment really isn’t about clarity? The specific reason for the bylaw is to permit Island Timberlands to harvest the timber outside of the Millennium Park.”
Brewer said the answer to the question was no and that Island Timberlands’ rights to those trees has not changed. The timber rights reservation has been there since 1998 and it has always been entitled to log those trees at some point, according to Brewer.
“I think what you heard me try to clarify was under one subsection, where it speaks to the production of cutting the trees under a valid existing licence,” he said. “That right to harvest those trees has always been there. Presumably, someone might be wanting clarity as to the interpretation of exactly what that means.”
Mac Fraser, the city’s chief administrative officer, said the city has expressed the belief in the past that the trees were protected by this bylaw and that in fact is not the case. He added that Island Timberlands, for a number of years, has argued that the trees were not covered by the bylaw and in fact this clarification confirms that.
In a news release handed out at the end of the council meeting, Fraser said the purpose of the bylaw is to regulate and prohibit cutting and removal of trees within the city. He confirmed the bylaw does not consider timber licences that were in place prior to the adoption of the bylaw.
He stated that council wishes to recognize the rights of timber licence reservations on two parcels of land within District Lot 450. The lands are owned by PRSC Land Developments Ltd. but Island Timberlands holds the timber licence. The bylaw amendment excludes the two parcels from the bylaw but does not affect the trees on the Millennium Park lands.
“The City of Powell River owns the Millennium Park lands, which at the time of purchase included an existing timber licence reservation also held by Island Timberlands,” he stated. “In 2014, council approved paying $1.125 million to Island Timberlands to ensure that the trees remain in the city’s control within the community’s Millennium Park.”
Orchiston said the bylaw was not clear and should be sent back.
“The key reason we need a bylaw amendment is to permit Island Timberlands to harvest the land outside of Millennium Park,” he said. “I’m not arguing whether it’s proper to cut down trees. The main message is that the public should know what is going on. I’ll tell you straight up that this bylaw is fogged.”
Readers wishing to view both the 2008 tree protection bylaw and the 2015 amendment can do so by accessing the agenda package for the council meeting March 19 section 9.2 and here for 2008 and 2015.
