Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...
Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ... Federal Court - Christian Aboriginal Infrastructure Developments ...
Page: 126 [504] In July 2000, DIAND again approached Timberline to do a follow-up analysis to the Timberline Report #1. On August 8 th , Timberline completed the “Timber Supply Areas To Be Considered for Candidate Timber Harvest Areas (THAs) in Southeast Yukon” (the “Timberline Report #2”). It was entered as Exhibit P-48. This report was prepared for DIAND. The purpose was “to perform a follow-up analysis to refine the potential THA configurations and Timber Supply Analysis (TSA) assumptions outlined in the [Timberline Report #1]”. 2010 FC 495 (CanLII) [505] This report provided the recommendations and conclusions of a workshop held in Edmonton from July 27-28, 2000. The workshop participants were three representatives from Timberline, four representatives from DIAND and one representative from YTG. [506] The discussions focused on long-term allocation issues such as access constraints, land base exclusions, and strategic forest management issues. It was agreed at this workshop “to avoid being overly conservative and focus on developing THAs with realistic AAC estimates using the best information available”. As such, the access constraint, even-flow policy and the 30 percent nonspecific reserves were removed. Instead, a non-declining harvest flow policy and additional specific exclusions to account for caribou habitat and future protected areas were added. [507] The design focused on one THA to sustain all current permit commitments and two THAs that had a potential AAC of approximately 100,000 m 3 of timber per year.
Page: 127 [508] SYFC had announced that it would lay off its employees as of June 30, 2000. I find that it is no coincidence that DIAND approached Timberline in July to attempt to find solutions to the longterm timber supply, since the closure of the largest private employer in southeast Yukon was surely a serious matter. [509] On August 8 th , Ms. Clark wrote to Mr. Beaubier in Ottawa, reporting upon the 2010 FC 495 (CanLII) circumstances that led to the closure of the mill. The mill closed due to a lack of wood. She advised that investors were not willing to advance further money without long-term tenure or sufficient short-term supply of wood. This letter is Exhibit P-79, Tab 312. [510] On August 9, 2000, Mr. Kennedy sent an email to Ms. Guscott, again addressing forest management planning and noting that the Timberline Report #2 had been received. [511] Mr. Kennedy had participated in the workshop in Edmonton. In his email he stated that there were “[s]ome major number changes once we removed some hidden constraints to management that were in previous.” [512] The official opposition in the Yukon Legislative Assembly wrote to Prime Minister Chretien on August 23 rd , requesting an inquiry into the management of the Yukon forest resources by DIAND. The letter noted that “[t]he department, under three successive Ministers, has failed to honour the commitments made by Minister Irwin…” The official opposition asserted that the closure of the SYFC mill was a direct result of the failure to “ensure long-term access to timber”.
- Page 75 and 76: Page: 75 [294] Mr. Ivanksi testifie
- Page 77 and 78: Page: 77 [303] This proposed invest
- Page 79 and 80: Page: 79 C. 1997 [311] In late 1996
- Page 81 and 82: Page: 81 Watson Lake area. I unders
- Page 83 and 84: Page: 83 [326] This report, prepare
- Page 85 and 86: Page: 85 [332] As previously noted,
- Page 87 and 88: Page: 87 D. 1998 [341] The first jo
- Page 89 and 90: Page: 89 [349] Mr. Henry explained,
- Page 91 and 92: Page: 91 It seems the goal of havin
- Page 93 and 94: Page: 93 [365] The Plaintiffs were
- Page 95 and 96: Page: 95 remained on the site for s
- Page 97 and 98: Page: 97 evidence, which is consist
- Page 99 and 100: Page: 99 [389] A meeting was held o
- Page 101 and 102: Page: 101 [396] These documents wer
- Page 103 and 104: Page: 103 location under a future C
- Page 105 and 106: Page: 105 [414] A briefing note, da
- Page 107 and 108: Page: 107 to shut down operations i
- Page 109 and 110: Page: 109 continuing delays by DIAN
- Page 111 and 112: Page: 111 [439] On October 1, 1999,
- Page 113 and 114: Page: 113 [447] In October 1999, DI
- Page 115 and 116: Page: 115 regulations would impleme
- Page 117 and 118: Page: 117 [464] There was another m
- Page 119 and 120: Page: 119 [472] Mr. Ballantyne, the
- Page 121 and 122: Page: 121 [482] However, there is a
- Page 123 and 124: Page: 123 [488] I note that on the
- Page 125: Page: 125 [498] Mr. Ballantyne said
- Page 129 and 130: Page: 129 [516] The closure of the
- Page 131 and 132: Page: 131 [523] The Hyland-Coal THA
- Page 133 and 134: Page: 133 [531] As mentioned earlie
- Page 135 and 136: Page: 135 explained to YCS that the
- Page 137 and 138: Page: 137 [543] At this time the jo
- Page 139 and 140: Page: 139 without the promised timb
- Page 141 and 142: Page: 141 479 In some respects coun
- Page 143 and 144: Page: 143 B. Preliminary Issues [56
- Page 145 and 146: Page: 145 of action arising in that
- Page 147 and 148: Page: 147 [577] In responding to th
- Page 149 and 150: Page: 149 The plaintiff shall serve
- Page 151 and 152: Page: 151 20 For the reasons expres
- Page 153 and 154: Page: 153 [598] Both the Plaintiffs
- Page 155 and 156: Page: 155 … Liability for acts of
- Page 157 and 158: Page: 157 from the evidence, and if
- Page 159 and 160: Page: 159 [616] Mr. Gurney is an un
- Page 161 and 162: Page: 161 Q. Did you understand the
- Page 163 and 164: Page: 163 [633] Mr. Madill was anot
- Page 165 and 166: Page: 165 [643] Having regard to th
- Page 167 and 168: Page: 167 [653] In Design Services
- Page 169 and 170: Page: 169 [660] In Childs v. Desorm
- Page 171 and 172: Page: 171 [668] This reliance by th
- Page 173 and 174: Page: 173 [674] Similarly, the Defe
- Page 175 and 176: Page: 175 we would be interested in
Page: 126<br />
[504] In July 2000, DIAND again approached Timberline to do a follow-up analysis to the<br />
Timberline Report #1. On August 8 th , Timberline completed the “Timber Supply Areas To Be<br />
Considered for Candidate Timber Harvest Areas (THAs) in Southeast Yukon” (the “Timberline<br />
Report #2”). It was entered as Exhibit P-48. This report was prepared for DIAND. The purpose was<br />
“to perform a follow-up analysis to refine the potential THA configurations and Timber Supply<br />
Analysis (TSA) assumptions outlined in the [Timberline Report #1]”.<br />
2010 FC 495 (CanLII)<br />
[505] This report provided the recommendations and conclusions of a workshop held in<br />
Edmonton from July 27-28, 2000. The workshop participants were three representatives from<br />
Timberline, four representatives from DIAND and one representative from YTG.<br />
[506] The discussions focused on long-term allocation issues such as access constraints, land base<br />
exclusions, and strategic forest management issues. It was agreed at this workshop “to avoid being<br />
overly conservative and focus on developing THAs with realistic AAC estimates using the best<br />
information available”. As such, the access constraint, even-flow policy and the 30 percent nonspecific<br />
reserves were removed. Instead, a non-declining harvest flow policy and additional specific<br />
exclusions to account for caribou habitat and future protected areas were added.<br />
[507] The design focused on one THA to sustain all current permit commitments and two THAs<br />
that had a potential AAC of approximately 100,000 m 3 of timber per year.
Change language