Start Über mich Fotogalerie Buch Texte & News Karten Links Datenschutzerklärung Impressum	2. November 2012 Borkenkäferplage in BC führt zu grotesken Vorschlägen: Jetzt sollen auch bislang noch geschützte Waldgebiete abgeholzt werden   Die immer schlimmer grassierende und bislang noch nie in diesem Ausmaß aufgetretene Borkenkäferplage in den Wäldern im Inland von BC führt zu immer groteskeren und irrsinnigeren Vorschlägen: Jetzt sollen Abholzungen auch in bisher geschützten und vom Holzeinschlag generell ausgenommenen ökologisch wertvollen Gebieten erlaubt werden, um den Holznachschub für die unter Holzmangel leidenden Sägewerke sicherzustellen. Jahrzehntelange Misswirtschaft, mancherorts unverantwortlich hohe Holzeinschlagsraten, die Pflanzung riesiger schädlingsanfälliger Monokulturen – bloße Holzäcker –, der sich bemerkbar machende Klimawandel mit milden Wintern sowie heißen und trockenen Sommern und die seit 2000 sich abzeichnende Borkenkäferepidemie haben die Krise der Forstindustrie in BC heraufbeschworen. Sie kam nicht plötzlich, sondern war seit langem absehbar. Kritiker hatten seit vielen Jahren davor gewarnt. Zwischenzeitlich sind 18,1 Millionen Hektar Wald im Inland von BC vom Borkenkäfer (Mountain Pine Beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae) befallen, das ist eine Fläche, die fünf Mal so groß ist wie Vancouver Island. Nach Schätzungen des Ministeriums wurden bereits 710 Millionen m³ Holz durch die Käfer vernichtet. Fast alle Bestände der Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) im Inland sind betroffen. Bis 2021 werden nach neuesten Computermodellen etwa 58 % der Kiefernbestände abgestorben und für die Forstindustrie verloren sein. Im Mountain Pine Beetle Action Plan 2006 – 2011 des Forstministeriums hieß es noch, dass bis 2013 80 % der für die Forstindustrie verwertbaren Kiefern abgestorben sein werden. Der ökologische Schaden ist noch kaum abzusehen. Der wirtschaftliche Schaden der durch eine jahrelang fehlgeleitete Forstpolitik und den Klimawandel verursachten Borkenkäferplage ist schon jetzt gewaltig. Seit 2001 musste BC 884 Millionen CAD in die Bekämpfung der Borkenkäferplage investieren, von der kanadischen Regierung kamen seit 2002 340 Millionen CAD, weitere 800 Millionen CAD wurden zugesagt.   Mountain Pine Beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) © Ministry of Forests, Lands and Resource Operations, BC   Im August hatte das Special Committee of Timber Supply seinen Bericht „Growing Fibre, Growing Value“ vorgelegt mit Vorschlägen an die Regierung, wie dem dramatischen Verlust an Holzvorrat im zentralen Landesteil von BC begegnet werden soll. Noch kurzsichtiger hätten diese Vorschläge kaum ausfallen können: Das gegenwärtige Verbot des Holzeinschlags in für den Umweltschutz besonders sensiblen Gebieten, sogenannten Forest Reserves, soll offensichtlich aufgehoben werden. Unter „reviewing the management of sensitive areas“ heißt es auf Seite 19/20 in dem Bericht noch: „Very clearly, certain areas are sensitive for a variety of social, economic and environmental considerations. As noted earlier, the consultations conducted by the Committee reveal that there is not a strong desire to revisit the value or importance of the concept of managing sensitive areas – whether they are old growth management areas; wildlife habitat areas and ungulate winter ranges; wildlife tree patches; visually sensitive landscapes; riparian areas, or other important non-timber forest management objectives and considerations. However, given the significant impacts of the mountain pine beetle (MPB), it is important to review the management of sensitive areas on a site-by-site basis to determine whether they are meeting their original objectives in the post-MPB era, and to consider if there are better or different ways of meeting their intent at the time of their initial establishment.“ Danach folgt der Vorschlag des Komitees: „The Committee recommends to the Legislative Assembly that the Ministry: Design a science-based review process for local use by monitoring committees, as referenced in Recommendation 1.2 above, in the assessment of existing sensitive-area designations to ascertain if they are still defensible or whether they need to be modified; and give due consideration to any changes in technology that might help to achieve the objectives for these areas. Only consider harvesting sensitive areas within the timber harvesting land base (THLB) if the decision is based on the science-based review process referenced in Recommendation 2.2a above. Ensure that the review process is cost effective and justifiable, and that no changes are implemented in the management of sensitive areas in any area where there is a lack of general consensus. Conduct this review process with a view to improving overall forest management in the beetleimpacted timber supply areas. While potential changes may augment the timber supply, this is not a predictable outcome.“ Im Klartext heißt dies, es soll geprüft werden, ob im Zeitalter der Borkenkäferplage Forest Reserves überhaupt noch vertretbar (defensible) sind. Eine wissenschaftlich begründete Überprüfung der Existenzberechtigung von Forest Reserves soll zudem kosteneffektiv sein, d. h. sie soll am besten gar nichts kosten und vom Schreibtisch aus erfolgen. Ein pseudowissenschaftliches Gremium von Lobbyvertretern der Forstindustrie wird dann herausfinden dürfen, was ohnehin schon vorab feststeht: Die Forest Reserves dürfen abgeholzt werden, weil die Sägewerke dringend Holznachschub benötigen. In den von Arbeitslosigkeit stark bedrohten Gemeinden im Inland von BC dürfte leicht Einigkeit darüber herzustellen sein (general consensus), die Forest Reserves aufzugeben und auch dort das letzte verwertbare Holz einzuschlagen. Übergeordnete Interessen oder Einwände des Umweltschutzes dürften bei der allgemeinen Meinungsbildung vor Ort ignoriert werden.   Luftaufnahme von Wäldern im Inland von BC mit massivem Borkenkäferbefall © Ministry of Forests, Lands and Resource Operations, BC   Die Vorschläge zielen darauf ab „to allow logging of forests set aside to protect old-growth, wildlife habitat, riparian areas, visual and recreational values in B.C.’s interior“, heißt es in einer Pressemitteilung des Sierra Club BC vom 18. Oktober 2012 (Interior Forest Reserves Threatened by Logging). „To put these values at risk for a short-term win is unbelievable“, sagte Jens Wieting, Forest Campaigner von Sierra Club BC. „It is a level of ignorance that is hard to digest.“ Im Brief an die Zeitung „The Province“ schreibt Jens Wieting: „Sierra Club BC and many other concerned stakeholders told the committee to not touch forests set aside to protect old-growth, wildlife and other important environmental functions. However, the Committee report includes a recommendation for a time-limited review of land use plans that could be used as a back door to allow logging of reserves. We would agree with a science-based approach to review land use plans because forests need increased conservation to maintain species habitat and environmental services in light of global warming’s impacts. But the Timber Supply Committee has its eyes on volume to feed mills and in its report avoids acknowledging the inconvenient truth that, after decades of poor forest management and climate change impacts like the Mountain Pine Beetle outbreak, there is simply not enough wood left to feed the existing number of mills. In a clear sign of denial, the committee instead recommends logging ‚marginal‘ stands, i. e. forests with fewer and smaller trees, using fertilization and reviewing land use designations. The BC government has not yet moved from denial to acceptance: there can be no business as usual in BC’s forests for decades to come and in the light of climate change we need to protect more forest not less. Continuing with the discredited forest liquidation practices of the past will not change that reality.“ Anthony Brittneff, der 40 Jahre lang beim BC Forest Service arbeitete und Ben Parfitt, Forstpolitik-Kritiker des Canadian Centre of Policy Alternatives, äußersten sich ebenfalls zu den Vorschlägen des Special Committee of Timber Supply: „We are on the cusp of a monumental shift in our Interior forests. After a decade-plus attack by mountain pine beetles and other pests, a spate of intense wildfires and years of unsustainable logging, our forests are largely depleted of commercially desirable trees. … Yet having acknowledged that existing sawmills have an appetite for wood that exceeds what our forests can provide, committee members turned around and suggested we should build another mill first and find the timber later. To entice the owner of the destroyed Burns Lake mill to rebuild, the committee chose to go down the same tired road that gave rise to the timber supply crisis: push the boundaries of what can be harvested to the extreme. This was essentially the approach applied in the East Coast cod fishery, and we all know how that worked out. The committee astonishingly suggested that there are actually twice as many trees to log in the forests around Burns Lake than what senior forest professionals in government estimated just last year – one million cubic metres of wood a year instead of 500,000. How did the committee magically double timber supply? With three key recommendations. First, that more ‚marginally economic‘ forests be logged. Second, that the government underwrite a massive fertilization program to boost tree growth. And third – and here committee members use weasel words to mask the true intent of their proposition – to increase the logging of remnant old-growth forests that were previously ruled off-limits to logging. It is far from clear that this will produce enough wood to supply a rebuilt mill. First ‚marginal‘ forests are marginal for a reason. They are generally of inferior quality, further from mills and more costly to log. And they are often found in places where trees grow less vigorously, for example at higher elevations. Hence, they are risky to log, both economically and environmentally. Second, with government having drastically curtailed its investments in growing trees, no one should assume there is appetite for big spending increases on fertilization. Never mind the ecological impacts of repeated applications of tree fertilizers on shallow soils and on our waterways, fish populations and other plant life in our forests. Third, perceived increases in old-growth logging could prove a nightmare in international markets where the B.C. government and forest companies alike have worked judiciously to have forestry operations independently certified as sustainably managed. If the government embraces the committee’s recommendations for Burns Lake [das dortige Sägewerk ist im Januar niedergebrannt und soll nach Vorschlägen des Komitees wieder aufgebaut werden], expect the same unsustainable logging practices to be applied provincewide, and with devastating consequences. The real tragedy in the committee members’ recommendations is that they are well aware of where the real challenges lie. The committee acknowledges the essential importance of improved forest inventories – looking at how many healthy trees we have. Why isn’t this the first order of business? B.C. needs an expedited, thorough assessment now, before we have committed to even more unsustainable logging rates. To proceed with logging increases before such work is done is irresponsible and an insult to forest-dependent communities across the province“ (MLAs aren’t facing the truth: B.C. forests are tapped out. The Province, 21. August 2012).   Luftaufnahme von Wäldern im Inland von BC mit massivem Borkenkäferbefall © Ministry of Forests, Lands and Resource Operations, BC   Im Oktober 2012 stellte das Ministry of Forests, Lands and Resource Operations einen Aktions-Plan „Beyond the Beetle. A Mid-term Timber Supply Action Plan“ vor, nachdem es die Vorschläge des Committee of Timber Supply geprüft hatte. Die Resonanz der Forstindustrie war vorsichtig positive, obwohl sie die fehlenden Finanzmittel anprangerte für eine Waldinventur, d. h. um erfassen zu können, wie groß der verbleibende Holzvorrat überhaupt noch ist. Die Resonanz in der Presse, im Umweltschutzbereich, von Forstindustriekritikern und unabhängigen Abgeordneten war vernichtend. Der Abgeordnete Bob Simpson nannte den Plan „a recipe for disaster“. Die Schlagzeile von Gordon Hamilton in der Vancouver Sun vom 9. Oktober 2012 beinhaltete den Ausdruck „bleeding the forests for sawlogs“. Er zitiert Simpson, Abgeordneter des Cariboo North-Bezirks, des sogenannten Ground Zero der Borkenkäferepidemie: „We are going down the same path as we did with the East Coast cod fishery. We are going to play with the rules, the regulations and change the tenure and access, to go and bleed the forests dry in order to keep the status quo.“ Der Forstpolitik-Kritiker Norm Macdonald bemängelte die vagen bzw. fehlenden Finanzmittel für eine überfällige Waldinventur: „It was clear there had to be serious investments in inventory. Over 72 per cent of the land has base data over 30 years old. You can’t expect proper forestry to be done with that sort of data.“ Eine Waldinventur soll erst 2013 beginnen, Geld hierfür ist jedoch nicht vorgesehen. In einem offenen Brief von 10 Umweltschutzorganisationen (u. a. Sierra Club BC, Greenpeace, David Suzuki Foundation) an die Regierung von BC heißt es zum beabsichtigten Holzeinschlag in Forest Reserves: „Opening up reserves and view corridors for logging to fill timber supply shortfalls will have a long term effect on the environment without a long term benefit to communities. While the action might extend the life of a mill for a relatively short time it would undermine, for the better part of a century or more, the benefits these areas were set aside for, whether for tourism or for habitat, soil retention or water flow regulation. These designations continue to be at least equally important in areas hard hit by the Mountain Pine Beetle and with already significantly increased rates of logging over the past few years, to ensure at least partial environmental services provided by forests. There are five key dangers to moving precipitously to fill timber supply shortfalls in this way: Undermines an already inadequate level of conservation for species, habitat and maintenance of ecosystem services in an era of climate change Reinforces a culture and expectation that supports unsustainable activities for the provision of short term economic benefit Undermines the decades of scientific input and public process that went into establishing the reserves Negatively impacts existing business who rely on visual and recreational values of these areas and leaves communities with even less resources within which to diversify their economy after the timber supply from the reserves has been exhausted Sets an alarming precedent with respect to other provincial commitments to lasting legal protection for environmental values following land use planning processes.“ Kiefernwald aus Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) nach Borkenkäferbefall (Tweedsmuir-Gebiet). Es dauert Jahre, bis sich der Wald regeneriert hat © Ministry of Forests, Lands and Resource Operations, BC     zurück