Minutes of Access Roundtable Meeting Dec. 18th, 2009

Access Roundtable Meeting
As Convened by the
Powell River Outdoor Recreational User Groups (ORUG)

Date: December 18th 2009
Location: Coast Town Centre Hotel
Meeting Chair: Colin Palmer
Minutes: Hugh Prichard, Terracentric Coastal Adventures Ltd. (hugh@terracentricadventures.com)

Attended by:

Name Agency
Alistair Howard Plutonic
Colin Palmer Facilitator, Regional District
Daniel Bouman Sunshine Coast Conservation Society
Dave Formosa, Chamber of Commerce, City of Powell River
Dave Hodgins, ATV Club of Powell River
Don Krompocker, Chamber of Commerce
Don Turner, Regional District
Donald McInnes, Plutonic
Eagle Walz, PR Parks and Wilderness Society
Elisha McCallum, Plutonic
Frank Ullmann, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and the Arts
George Ferreira, 4X4 club of Powell River
Hugh Prichard, Meeting secretary, Terracentric
Jessica Hulsman, Plutonic
Kim Miller, Chamber of Commerce
Lesley Fettes, Integrated Land Management Branch
Maggie Hathaway, City of Powell River, MLA
Mark Forsythe, Alpine Club
Mike Schulkowsky, PR horseback riders
Mark Anderson Ministry of Forests
Shirley Storey Office Manager, Plutonic
Nicholas Simons, MLA
Patrick Brabazon, Regional District
Randy Mitchell, Knuckleheads Recreation Area, SaR
Steven Gallagher, Sliammon First Nation
Stuart Glen, Western Forest Products


· Impact statements and emails collected from community members are available and will be made available on the SCT website

· Review of purposes in terms of finding common ground


Key Summary of Meeting

Area of Concern Potential Mitigation People Involved
1. Goat MainGoat Main from Diane Lake to D Branch or Squirrel Creek Main (North End) PPC will apply to ILMB to abandon this road, ILMB would agree that no tenure to exist. This would be subject to an assessment of ongoing maintenance costs might be, the ATV Club possibly interested in committing to taking this on, maybe PRRD? Subject to road being left in an acceptable fashion. (PPC) If this is the path to a solution it cannot cost PPC in excess of what it would have originally cost to deactivate.In hearing from ILMB at Goat Main, PPC could make an application to abandon it, but that is not something PPC is willing to do until they understand what it will cost them to leave the road in an agreeable state, since there is culverts there we have to know what the ongoing maintenance program is going to be. If someone is going to take that on to the satisfaction of ILMB, we would be willing to spend the money to leave it in good shape subject to someone agreeing to take on the ongoing maintenance and environmental liabilities to the satisfaction of ILMB.
2. S-Branch PPC is prepared to spend money for some kind of minor bridge crossing, PPC unsure if it is going to satisfy everybody. WFP will need to take tenure up the road up to and including the bridge.From WFP: Hoping for some access beyond the bridge in some manner. This is trickier. Initial hope was to take on the liability on the bridge and road leading up to it. WFP is not sure what the state of the road is beyond this so is unsure as to how to value its worth to them. PPC says it has been deactivated but would not take much to reopen. It is in ATV shape now. WFP is prepared to think about this one, need to decide on incurring the environmental cost. WFP, PPC
3. Goat 2 Non exclusive recreational trail designation applied to from MOTCA.In Goat 2, application could be made to MOTCA to turn it into a recreational trail and replace with recreational oriented bridge.WFP to apply for FIA money. PPC, MOTCA, WFP


Other Actions Discussed

Action Description People Involved
Re: Goat Main: (PPC to apply to abandon and thus have original conditions waived by ILMB). Create MOU with all levels of government present as well as ORUG. MOU will declare the position and outcomes of meeting and be a tool to “stand-down”, giving ILMB the indication of community support and giving PPC the direction it needs. MOF, MOTCA, ORUG, PRRD, City of PR, PPC, MLANeed someone to work on draft wording for MOU and get signed by all parties.
Re: Goat 2: determine a community outdoor group capable of taking on the liability under a tenure with ILMB, to also cover the cost of maintenance. ORUG, PRRD?
On site reconnaissance Eagle and George F. to coordinate























Transcript and Meeting Notes

1. EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST AROUND THE TABLE

1. Donald McInnes, Plutonic Power Corp.(PPC)
As PPC understands it the community is concerned most for the following three different specific areas, these are:

1. (In the south, in the Freda area) S branch road;
2. Goat 2
3. Goat Main (North End)

Eagle Walz, indicated here that there was also some concern raised through e-mail on D-Branch. McInnes clarified that D-Branch is included in what he is referring to as ‘Goat Main’.

McInnes reviewed the Environmental Assessment Process that PPC underwent to gain access to Road Use Permits from ILMB, BC Timber Sales, etc. In all McInnes estimates that PPC ended up with ~52 different tenures, allowed the licenses for the large components of the project, and subsequently all the required individual permits. Hold 1600 tenures, permits, authorizations and licenses, which was a tremendous undertaking. McInnes underscored the public’s opportunity to be involved at various stages of this processs to provide input into the project, (eg. Placement of the transmission line at Eldred climbing area). McInnes asserted that there was ‘conditionality’ around PPC’s ability to go and do certain things (eg. Marbled Murrelet conservation initiatives).

At end of day PPC does not have a road tenure anywhere in their name, instead PPC maintains a relationship with Western Forest Products (WFP), BC Timber Sales (BCTS) giving PPC the ability to use other peoples tenures along the way. At the end of the project, unlike an active forestry operation, PPC must give back their tenure for access and enter into a long-term license of occupation. This gives PPC the ability to go out and maintain the right-of-way for the power line. At this point PPC would not have an active Road Use Agreement with any of the other stakeholder groups.

Correction: PPC does hold 2 permits on forest service roads with MOF, works permits and licenses of occupation through ILMB Roads are either covered under direct permits with MOF, ILMB, or shared roads use agreements with the forestry companies.

McInnes reads from the Environmental Assessment Certificate (EAC), 2 master commitments (obligations) of PPC. Access Road Corridor Summary:

1.Project Design Criteria and Construction Plans and Mitigation for the access road must meet or exceed all standards and codes established by the relevant authorities for the project, including detailed design and construction. (as per legislation set out by the Ministry of Forests and Range) by MOF, DFO, and MOE. as per legislation set out,

2. Appropriate standards for road design: Design criteria plans and mitigation for stream and other water course crossings along access road corridor will meet or exceed all standards and codes as established by the relevant authorities for the project. This comes from MOF, DFO, MOE.

All this requires PPC to deactivate these roads for the tenures they have, where there are road use agreements with tenure holder (in this case WFP) Road Use Agreement requires PPC to put the tenures back to them in an acceptable form.

PPC reviewed the Toba-Montrose Partnership’s statuary obligations for the three areas on the large maps;

Goat Main: (area of concern) Diane Lake Main to D-Branch (tenured under ILMB), also S-Branch from Freda Lake upwards tenured to ILMB;

Goat Lake 2: PPC has agreement with WFP and several commitments with that when giving road back to WFP;

PPC’s Decommissioning Obligations:
1.S-Branch: Need to remove bridge at Freda Lake and fully deactivate the road to the top;
2. Goat Lake 2: 3 bridges removed and entire road deactivated;
3. Goat Lake Main: no bridges between Diane Lake main and D-Branch, however all other structure, culverts removed, access blocked etc.

If community is interested in having these as roads or trails then PPC is supportive of us having access to these areas, however PPC is under specific obligations as described. PPC is not in the financial position to take over a tenure from WFP if they are not interested in the tenure going forward, and maintaining these roads and accepting the liability for them on an ongoing basis. These areas are not part of the operating plans for the Toba-Montrose General Partnership.

2. Patrick Brabazon, Powell River Regional Board
Brabazon will report back to the Board on these proceedings. Director Brabazon reported on the regional boards Parks and Green space plan and a growing interest by the Regional Board in the areas of outdoor recreation. The Regional Board is very interested in hearing what the people gathered here today have to say and what they want from them in helping move process forward. Regional Board will have to consider what it is we can do in the future.

3. Dave Hodgins, ATV Club
Big issue is definition of liability and how we define this. When ATV club members register they are covered under the ATV BC parent organization’s liability insurance, so long as the club acts with due diligence. Due diligence and liability as terms are not well defined. The club is confident that all representatives will find a solution for Recreational access.



4.George Ferreira, 4x4 Club
The 4x4 Club is seeking free access to all roads, in the same or better condition as before PPC began working in the area. Other areas of concern brought forward by this group include a minimum 4wd access standard, avoiding ‘back room deals’ that benefit specific interest groups as roads are for all community users. Was a large supporter of Plutonic 4 years ago, at meeting then he was told verbally by PPC that access would not be altered and his club expects PPC to honor this commitment made.

5. Dave Formosa, Chamber of Commerce
A resolution to this issue is important for the PR Chamber of Commerce, and this is why they assisted in getting today’s meeting organized. Formosa sketched in some of the timeline of how the City and Chamber had heard of this contentious issue. Indicated didn’t like the tones and concerns at the meetings that he was hearing. Tourism is a big part of our economy, and the Chamber has historically supported outdoor recreational infrastructure (Thornton Bay, SCT, Inland Lake etc.) The back woods is for everyone to use and the chamber supports the concept that all need to find a way to coexist. The Chamber is also strong supporter of Plutonic and Formosa is a strong believer that meaningful dialogue is the answer, believing that PPC will listen to the community on this.

These roads need to be made available to the community. If Plutonic is punching in new roads we should be able to use them. If WFP or Plutonic no longer need these roads we must speak with our local government to find a way to make them a part of our public inventory of recreational and tourism infrastructure. The Chamber has a huge interest in seeing that a resolution occurs and that all parties find a way to get along.

Mark Forsythe, Powell River Alpine Club
Alpine Club is a loosely loose knit group of alpine enthusiasts that have contributed regularly to the maintenance of back country roads for more than 25 years (end of D Branch and South Powell Divide trails). In 1987 Powell River Alpine Club and Powell River Regional District co-sponsored a $250k grant to develop access to grant for end of Goat 2, Triple Peaks, Centre Lakes into D- Branch. Group is looking for continued 4x4 access to these areas for tourism and local use. Great destination with world-class glaciers and other areas, our access needs to be preserved as calling card for us in this area for revenue.

Mike Schulkowsky, Backcountry Horseman
Referred to the organization’s web site. Truck and trailer access is key for their members to be able to access these areas. Without open access it would be impossible for their membership to visit these areas as the weight of carrying enough food and other provisions would make it impossible. For more than 15 years the organization has been encouraging their membership to truck their horses up to the Powell River area on the ferry. Tourism will be definitely impacted if this happens. Through education we can eliminate ignorance and find a solution to work together.



Randy Mitchell, Knuckleheads Society
Knuckleheads Society has taken on the ongoing maintenance of the cabins at A-Branch, E-Branch and Emma Lake. At the A-Branch cabin alone the Society received 90 visits a month or more. The outdoors is very important for the residents of the PR area. It is one of the few options for things to do. Society is concerned that it appears that the general public is without any real legal representation to protect the public’s interest. Mitchell indicated that the public would be shocked to see the results of an inventory detailing the amount of volunteer time and money that has been invested into backcountry infrastructure in our region. Meanwhile the cross ditches are getting deeper, which is ironic considering the liability concerns of the big companies.

Steve Gallagher, Sliammon First Nation
Representing Chief Williams, here today to listen to the issues and report back to Chief and Council. Access to the backcountry has always been important to the Sliammon people for traditional and ceremonial use purposes. SFN supports the process today and maintains that access is important for the long-term. SFN supports the open dialogues manner of solving these issues.

Stuart Glen, Western Forest Products
In simple summary; WFP wants access in general across the area like most groups here today do. Recognizing however that there are certain environmental risks and specific deactivation work must be done. Will get into the details for specific areas of concern later in the meeting. Each year WFP picks one recreational infrastructure project to be involved with. Investing time and money in this area is important to the company.

Eagle Walz, Powell River Parks And Wilderness Society
When story broke through advert in newspaper PR people became alarmed, as for them access to the back country is there regular place of ‘escape’. For residents living in PR is like living on an island. In PR we have ~70 km of paved roads and 100’s of km’s of unpaved roads where people go to get away from it all. For that opportunity to disappear has raised many questions from the people ‘how is that possible?’- Many of these people had been staunch supporters of PPC. Walz is a supporter of ‘Green Energy’ as we will need new and more power in the future. Walz supported PPC on that basis initially. However, people are now saying “why are you ruining access that has existed for decades? You have improved it, and now need to under your obligations you are going to remove it. We need a working group that will look at all the opportunities that may exist to approach government together. The PR area needs this. We can’t not have access. We need to find a way to ensure that it continues as promised in this room 4 years ago. Walz closed with a quote from Winter 2009 edition of Monte Cristso Magazine, quoting McInnes’ belief that PPC is driven by more than just numbers, and that a ‘social license to exist’ is an important value for the company. Walz appealed to PPC to work together with the ORUG to arrive at a satisfactory solution.



Maggie Hathaway, City of Powell River, Tourism Board
From a Tourism perspective, it seems absurd to deactivate newly repaired and fixed up bridges. Not sure Plutonic is the bad guy in this issue as it appears that things are beyond their control.

Nicholas Simons, MLA
Simons sees his role as ensuring the public interest is protected, working towards a resolution through Legislative change, whatever that looks like. The rules have not changed in 5 yrs on how roads are built and deactivated. The time crunch is unfortunate, but we have work to do. Simons looks forward to receiving advice from the people and supporting however he can help.

Mark Anderson, Ministry Of Forests
Here to provide as much support as MOF can. Primarily on the technical issues, MOF feels that those gathered today have options and solutions. MOF and there Engineering Department spends a lot of time looking for funds for key access in the community. Unfortunately like others the dollars are decreasing. The Access MOF supports most are the ones that impact the most people in the community generally speaking. Keen to work through the legislative requirements, is a avid quadder and outdoor enthusiast. Anderson has 25 years experience in PR backcountry, we have a phenomenal backcountry that is in part due to development from PPC and other forestry companies. Things are not all bad.

Question (Chairman Palmer): Is there any legislation or regulations that MOF is involved with that could be contributing to or creating this issue?

Answer (Anderson):
PPC spoke to earlier in the meeting of the tenures PPC and spoke to 2 of the areas in this issue. Their (PPC’s) tenure is with ILMB (Lesley Fette’s group). This is kind of where PPC’s obligations come on those 2 areas. The 3rd area they spoke to is a sub relationship they have with WFP. The MOF has legislative requirements with WFP on that piece of road. Specifically then one of the roads in question we have legislative requirements to do the deactivation and work with WFP on managing that road system. [What road is that?]

Frank Ullmann, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and the Arts
Recognizes that this is a somewhat complex issue. It needs to be noted that the Tenures are written specifically for the need for environmental protection. We are not just talking about human liability towards others but also environmental liability. When we get into a situation when roads are no longer needed by a forestry company or whomever, then decisions need to be made with what to do with that road. This is required through legislation or through the tendering process. The way to get around that is to find a way of keeping the environmental protection aspect of that road in good shape. This always involves cost. There are a number of ways that this can be tenured; through legislation; the Forest and Range Practices Act. Either way someone has to step forward with the money to ensure that road remains environmentally sound, this is the crux of the issue right now more than anything else. MOTCA has spent some money and worked with volunteers in the backcountry, and would like to see ways found to protect that investment. Morally very supportive and MOTCA has priorities and limited budgets but is not sure what exactly they can do.

Lesley Fettes, ILMB
ILMB’s position is very similar to MOF and MOTCA, ILMB tries to stay out of the tenuring of roads as they feel it best managed by MOTCA, sometimes however they do get involved. There are a lot of options to handle the issues raised. The liability issue is the biggest question to resolve. Fettes’ work pertains to the Land Act and particularly how to tenure roadways, and she will be able to provide information on the Land Act tenures.

Question: (Chairman Palmer) There are options through the Land Act and Fettes can provide us with those options. All is not lost as far as ILMB is concerned?

Answer (Fettes): No, not at all.


2. DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUES
Corrections, clarifications of things said to this point.

PPC, Donald McInnes
Since hearing from the community on this issue PPC has spent considerable staff time speaking with with WFP, ILMB, MOF: about various things PPC could offer up. As an example in Sechelt where Regional District takes out an insurance policy which covers ongoing obligations for the tenure on roads in their area. So there may be a number of different things that could be done.

Looking at Goat Main McInnes thought that if in talking with MOTCA, if they were to request a non exclusive recreational trail designation, they are the appropriate agency to apply for this, that could be a solution up there. The bridge at Squirrel Creek will stay out, Kiewit has deactivated to ATV standards.

PPC would be willing to make a financial contribution that would allow for 4x4 access up to intersection of D branch and Goat main.

Goat 2: Again a non exclusive recreational trail designation could be applied for which lets recreational groups take on a formal permit up there and this would allow WFP to apply for FIA (Forest Investment Account) funding to build a recreational bridge which would allow for ongoing access. The biggest issue at Goat 2 is that there is a very steep road with the worst environmental risk, may not have potential 4x4 access, and moving it to trail designation would reduce the risks if deactivated to that level.

For both Goat 2 and Goat Main, PPC is committed to deactivating the road to remove any environmental liability on those sections. For Goat Main PPC believes they could leave 4x4 access if there was some funding and a group could take on the work for that.

For Goat 2: PPC just wants to leave it recreational trail access due to the steepness and instability of the slope above.

S- Branch: If WFP were to take out a permit including the bridge PPC would leave ATV access beyond the bridge. Again cost of building a bridge for ATV access which PPC would put in some money to fund that. This was the condition of the road pre PPC.

PPC concluded by stating that they were not sure if these are realistic strategies and if the agencies named would be willing to participate, or if the outcomes would be satisfactory for all the stakeholders. It is where they have been able to get to and is not cost prohibitive after exhaustive solutions based problem solving.

Frank Ullmann MOTCA- (replies) re Goat Main: do not generally have lots of funding options, as a matter of policy they do not establish new trails or rec sites without a clear partnership with someone who is willing to take it on as the main management group. Knuckleheads Society is a prime example of this as is SCT and PR PAWS. They are working on establishing some ATV trails as well. Clear partners need to step up to front the labour and some of the costs. In this way we could see moving forward on some of this. Unusual for MOTCA to have recreational trails on roads, we not be the first time though, it is a potential solution given these issues. Big concern are the bridges, particularly on Goat 2 where there are 3 bridges. At some point they will need attention. Either that or we take them out. (Clarification) Idea as presented by PPC could be take out the vehicle bridges and replace with a pedestrian or ATV bridges.

Stuart Glen, WFP:
Goat Main: Re: Applying for the MOTCA trail designation, is that really necessary? Or can that simply be that nothing is applied for and the road is deactivated to 4wd which was suggested and would be perfect.-And simply apply for permission to not have to baracade the road? MOF to answer.


Leslie Fettes, ILMB
In reference to requirements to deactivate: This section of road is tenured under ILMB. As it is under tenure from ILMB it is not under Forest And Ranges Practices Act. Because of this the only reference they have in their tenure document. Tenure states the requirement for tenure holders to return land to original condition. If they requested in writing to leave it in a better or different condition ILMB could authorize that. We would need to look at the environmental considerations and the liability issue, but we could authorize a different level of deactivation. PPC the tenure holder would request to ILMB that they waive the condition in their tenure stating that hey must return the land to its original condition. The approval of that process would involve consultation with other agencies.

Donald McInnes, PPC
If we (PPC) makes that application now, how long does that process take?

Leslie Fettes, ILMB
If my manager, MOF and MOTCA, FN and general public are onboard then it is a simple process. (MOF indicated that they are supportive), we would need to discuss to ensure comfort with the level of liability. Where there are no stream crossings this is very simple. When there are stream crossings then ILMB would be in contact with MOF to discuss liability issues.

Donald McInnes, PPC
Question: If PPC deactivates it to the state that the people agree upon, are we absolved of any ongoing exposure?

Leslie Fettes, ILMB
Answer: In this process ILMB would authorize in writing waiving the condition to return the land to its original condition that would authorize PPC to leave it in a certain condition. Once the tenure is cancelled then all obligations are over.

Mark Forsythe, Powell River Alpine Club
Can we please have clarification on what ‘original condition’ means? As far as PR Alpine Club is concerned PPC has already fulfilled their obligations to return it to original condition, as the road is much more stable now than it has ever been. Original condition; ‘pre PPC’ or ‘pre-human’?

Leslie Fettes, ILMB
Answer: Pre PPC

Mark Forsythe, Powell River Alpine Club
Has the definition changed in the last 5 years? Are there still ‘stages’ of deactivation?

Leslie Fettes, ILMB
Answer: There is nothing specific in the tenure as to ‘how’ the road must be deactivated, as the tenure is for the construction of the transmission line.

Don Krompocker, Chamber of Commerce
Since PPC has restored this road there is great access to the Alpine it seems like it would be a shame to take it out now. It is in better more stable condition than the previously existing road.

Mark Forsythe, Powell River Alpine Club
It is already deactivated and blocked to just past the bridge.


Lesley Fettes, ILMB
The idea is to leave the land in good condition, remember that if we have a road sitting there with stream crossing with no tenure on it, then from ILMB’s perspective they would like to see someone take responsibility for it. If there is a situation where there is a road that is going to continue on in perpetuity then ILMB does not want PPC to return the area to a condition that is in worse shape.

Donald McInnes, PPC
There are culverts on this road that need to be dealt with on Goat main.

Mark Forsythe, Powell River Alpine Club
For the club it is not just the 3 km’s of the Goat lake main, it is the access to the ~9kms of road past this to access the Alpine. (PPC has not had any interest and use of these roads…they are maintained by us). Forsythe understands that road deactivation policy changes states that structures cannot be trapped in a deactivation.

Patrick Brabazon, Powell Regional District
The interests of RD are changing, slowly becoming interested in things the Board has not been interested in before. We now have a Parks and Green space study underway, and this could be forestland, a trail, you name it. We have liability over the 4 parks we own, we should be more involved than we are. Nanaimo has established an Alpine club, and Brabozon thinks this is a great idea. The RB would not the first to establish liability over parts of the backcountry.

Donald McInnes, PPC
For Goat Main to get up to D-Branch, which has culverts, if RD wants to take on the tenure then we would be happy to leave the road in a state that allows those culverts to stay.

Patrick Brabazon, Powell Regional Board
Will take this back to the Regional Board.

George Fereira, Powell River 4x4 Club
Like to comment on 3 areas; rules have changed in the last 5 years- he has heard contrary to this. Clubs are maintaining the roads, ditches and culverts continuously. The roads are user maintained. Maybe making trails is a good suggestion will help with access, however the users who would use this type of access that would be 5-10% of population, PR is an aging community and needs , the club encourages no single-use road deals, it’s all or nothing access.

Donald McInnes, PPC
PPC is supportive of this, PPC is willing to put money on the table to pay for a bridge or whatever but once they have done their thing they need to be relieved of their obligations in finality.



Summary of Resolutions Proposed (for clarity)

Donald McInnes, PPC
1. Starting in the south S -Branch: at that place PPC prepared to spend money for some kind of minor bridge crossing, I don’t know if it is going to satisfy everybody. If WFP to take tenure up the road up to and including the bridge.

2. Goat Main: the application non-exclusive recreational trail be made to MOTCA. In hearing from ILMB at Goat Main PPC could make an application to abandon it, but that is not something PPC is willing to do until they understand what it will cost them to leave the road in an agreeable state, since there are culverts there. They have to know what the ongoing maintenance program is going to be. If someone is going to take that on to the satisfaction of ILMB, we would be willing to spend the money to leave it in good shape subject to someone agreeing to take on the ongoing maintenance and environmental liabilities to the satisfaction of ILMB.

3. In Goat 2, application could be made to MOTCA to turn it into a recreational trail and replace with recreational oriented bridge.

Stuart Glen, WFP
1. Goat Main: easy one, the better state that this road is left in the happier they are. The ILMB thing seems to provide some options there too.

Donald McInnes, PPC
I need to state that if it costs more than $300k to leave the road in that state then we couldn’t do that as our cost for decommissioning it is far less than that figure. If it is more than the cost of deactivating it then we are going to need to talk about how that is going to get done.

Stuart Glen, WFP
2. Goat 2: we have seen the deactivation plans, they look good, we recognize the known hazards. The work proposed makes sense. What are the options: bridge crossing, is there a way to maintain ATV or foot traffic across this. Maybe use existing stringers and FIA money we would need Frank’s support to make this solution to Goat 2 in this manner.

3. S-Branch: Hoping for some access beyond the bridge in some manner. This is trickier. Initial hope was to take on the liability on the bridge and road leading up to it. WFP is not sure what the state of the road is beyond this so is unsure as to how to value its worth to them. PPC says it has been deactivated but would not take much to reopen. It is in ATV shape now. WFP is prepared to think about this one, need to decide on incurring the environmental cost.

Dave Hodgins, ATV Club
Club is willing to sign paper work to get into Frank, his desire is that all user groups sign the same documents. They are willing to participate on volunteer labour. On Goat 2 the road existed for many years before PPC, much of the instability seems to be because of the hydro line being built above there. Section 65 EAO states that erosion control and sediment control measures both during and after construction, Dave thinks this applies to Goat 2. Dave does not think this cost should be put back on the recreational users or WFP.

Randy Mitchell, Knuckleheads, SAR
Alpine here is prime hiking spot, if you put foot traffic back where you are suggesting then we are doomed if this is the case, as it becomes next to impossible to access the Alpine in one day, as it is just too far to walk. This increased distance would create more liability not less.

Mark Forsythe, Powell River Alpine Club
Environmental Liability seems to just be related to power project as we have had more than 25 years with no concern for environmental liability previously. If a slide happens it is fixed on a case-by-case basis by volunteers. Community has taken care of these things historically. PR Alpine club have been dealing with these slides without bothering anyone etc. It is established historically, that there have not been any big time deactivations based on the fact that an area might slide. Access maintained and dealt with on case/case basis historically by the community user groups.

PPC: (responds) Goat 2 needs ongoing maintenance, or deactivation.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT??

Chairman Palmer: How to move forward from here?

Eagle Walz, PRPAWS- steps up to maps to get visual picture to ascertain what the companies are suggesting, not what ORUG is necessarily agreeing to.

S-Branch: WFP has concerns about this one, and will chat with PPC to resolve or not. Walz wants 4X4 access to end of road. WFP may have interest in opening beyond the bridge. The road has been deactivated to ATV access status by PPC, and the blockage is in place that keeps out 4X4 but allows ATVs.

Goat 2: PPC proposing to remove the bridge, replace with ATV access right from the bottom of the road. This is subject to WFP applying for using FIA funding and applying for recreational trail designation to MOTCA, WFP would build an ATV bridge. WFP would do best to make this happen, perhaps leaving stringers and adding new bridge deck.

Goat Main from Diane Lake Branch to D Branch or Squirrel Creek: PPC will apply to ILMB to abandon, ILMB agreeing for no tenure to exist. This would be subject to an assessment of what ongoing maintenance costs might be, the ATV Club possibly interested in committing to taking this on. Subject to road being left in an acceptable fashion. (PPC) If this is the road to a solution it cannot cost a lot more than what it would have originally cost to deactivate.

Chairman Palmer: Anyone Unhappy?

Mark Forsythe, Powell River Alpine Club
Yes, it feels like we are forsaking Goat 2 resulting in Alpine areas being cut off, not in favor of ATV access as single interest.

Donald McInnes, PPC
To clarify this is a WFP tenured bridge that PPC has a road use agreement on. WFP has said they would like PPC to deactivate it, it is a liability. If someone wants to take over WFP’s tenure then they would be happy to have that happen. PPC would be open to spending the deactivation money they have to spend doing something else, however someone has to step up for the tenure. This is the road at greatest risk of sloughing off the mountain into the creek.

Dave Hodgins, ATV Club
Takes exception and asserts that no back room deals are being made. Under Section 65: (Road deactivation standard read out) what has changed and how can it be mitigated? Road has pre-existed for decades. Now due to construction of pole line conditions have changed and gotten worse. Losing site of reality here, if yearly maintenance is needed, is it that large a sum that we cannot assume it? We need a figure of what it will cost to maintain 4wd access, need to figure out if we can fund it between the group of us?

Chairman Palmer: It’s a matter of funding to see how we can find the funds to keep that section of Goat 2 open, lets keep working on that.

Eagle Walz, PRPAWS
ATV Club has more provincial affiliations than the ORUG and it is hard prospect to assume liability without this power. Whatever transpires here should be written into the Outdoor Recreation Management Plan that PPC has in its Environmental Assessment Certificate, so that in the end it will reflect the commitment of what we agree to. Donald McInnes unaware whether they have one of these in the EA certificate. Elisha McCallum states that they don’t have one, but they are working on it right now. Apparently this condition was waived by the province to have included up front, rather than now when the public is becoming aware of diminishing recreational opportunities.

Patrick Brabazon, Powell River Regional Board
Urged all participants to not leave with false expectations. The PRRD is an agile government compared to some. If PRRD were to accept PPC’s offer on Goat 2 the first thing we need to do is get feedback from legal people and take this to the PRRD. Things will happen at their own speed. Personally Brabazon likes the idea, will take it to regional board. Things cannot happen very fast.

Dave Formossa, Chamber of Commerce
Proposes an on the ground reconnaissance mission with stakeholders to create an MOU on specific mitigation for each identified areas complete with photos and cost estimates. Something that this group can agree to as a positive way to work together. It is for everyone’s advantage to do this.

Chairman Palmer: Does PPC have any worries about the time needed for putting this together, are they in trouble if they have to wait?

Donald McInnes, PPC
PPC would be attempting to fulfill its obligations in spring. We have ~4-6weeks to consider a path and get a plan together. McInnes acknowledges that there are other players to consider each needing to provide input on their schedules. WFP has to consider some things as well. McInnes hears the issue regarding the top of the switch back on Goat 2, PPC has creative engineers who will look at it. McInnes recommends constraining this process to Goat 2, as this is the big one. The other 2 can be handled and do not need to be worried about.

Randy Mitchell, Knuckleheads Society
Need to go back to the ORUG group as access proposed is less than what it has been. Mitchell is concerned that an ATV-only solution will have serious impact in the volunteer base in the community as many who assist are not a part of the ATV community. He is worried that the ORUG will be unhappy with a single access solution.

Don Krompocker, Chamber of Commerce
There are many small groups who will step up, beyond the ATV club. If we want this open then we are going to have to share the work. Access is crucial to all groups. Krompocker likes Formosa’s idea of going to look at it. If volunteering then people need to see the solutions in the flesh. We will get this done, it’s Powell River after all. Lets go see some of the difficulties and solutions.

Chairman Palmer: Can we agree that no one is going to do anything on deactivation until we get our ducks in a row, given that PPC may be facing some pressure given by the province. Need the agreement for this. We want to assure ORUG that there is movement here, it is beneficial. We have identified the really difficult one and are going to work on this. Still think we need assurance, to back off, until we get the ORUG’s on side.

Donald McInnes, PPC
When snow starts melting PPC is then exposed if the roads are not deactivated properly and sediments washing into the creeks etc, PPC will make the applications to ILMB right away, lots of other moving parts in the process. PPC has the financial liability pressure if Goat 2 collapses into the creek.

Mark Forsythe, PR Alpine Club
Likes the reconnaissance idea but snow on the road until June, makes hard to see until that time.

(2:00:05) Chairman Palmer: Sense is the Goat 2 is the ‘one’. S Branch and Goat main seem to have a workable solution. PPC are going to protect themselves from legal issues. We must rely on ILMB and Lesley to steer things through.

Leslie Fettes, ILMB
I can steer it through.



Donald McInnes, PPC
Without evidence that the community is supportive of the proposed mitigation, ILMB will have a difficult time, Leslie needs something to go to her boss with.

Dave Formosa, Chamber of Commerce
What about creating a MOU between all the players (PPC, WFP, ILMB, City of PR, RB, MOTCA, MOF) and the ORUG. All of us would sign it and give to Lesley at ILMB, then she will have something to go to her boss with. MOU is a great idea to reduce pressure. We have everyone here, and this will help out PPC in doing what they need to do.

Stuart Glen, WFP (2:03:22)
Re: Goat 2: WFP has knowledge on this road and maintenance required on this road and in the area over a number of years. PPC has used professional engineers who understand these requirements. WFP agrees with PPC assessment and treatment planned. The assessment is appropriate.

Knowing the costs to maintain a road like that and the legal requirements, this is a realistic challenge. Anyone’s ability to keep it open is going to be very very challenging. For the PRRD or an Outdoor Group to take this on would be unlikely and Glen would not be surprised if they didn’t go for it. Going out there to look at it is fine, however, realistically it is a very challenging piece of ground to be dealing with. We need to remember this. Going forward it is not physically possible for WFP to keep this road open given legal and other costs. Ongoing stability issues on these slopes, key is getting water off the road and the deactivation plan currently addresses these issues.

Chairman Palmer: Assumptions:
· Assume an MOU can be created
· Assume PPC will assist with applications,
· Assume WFP and MOTCA will find FIA money,
· Assume S-Branch and Goat Main are okay Goat 2 is the main stumbling block still
· Assume reconnaissance mission to see areas on ground

Eagle Walz, PRPAWS
Lets start drafting a draft MOU now and plan on meeting in 6 weeks hence. Is there anything else we can do, or anyone else to be speaking with?

Leslie Fettes, ILMB
One issue to explore, is whether or not there is an entity capable of taking on liability? If in looking at maintenance requirements on Goat Main, it looks like there will be lots of maintenance work to be done regularly. ILMB will need someone to take over the liability through a tenure. This would be good pro-active work to do.



Jessica Hulsman, PPC
We need a deadline for the MOU for 2-3 weeks. Eagle and ORUG will start this. Goal is MOU within 2-3 weeks.

Nicholas Simons, MLA
Will work with supporting process by speaking with manager for ILMB. Simons will do what he can to represent that the community is behind finding a solution.

Chairman Palmer: Are we agreed that Eagle will be the point man? (Yes). Lets go back to our community groups with meeting notes in hand, and remember not to ‘gild the Lily’.

Eagle Walz, PRPAWS
Thanks for coming, the positive attitudes and having a solution focus that has allowed us to move forward as we have.

Meeting Adjourned at 2:11