Lets Talk about Road Acces

[Wild one]

A road density cap I agree would be a positive but old roads need to be more then deactivated but instead obliterated so atv and lifted trucks can’t use them. The present methods do nothing to slow even a guy with a chainsaw and a lifted truck. Even plant a little poplar( not that poplar needs help) in the old roads to add some mixed timber and it grows like a weed. The road density in some areas is insane but so is the sea of chocked together young pine

Kept within reason it would be a positive for wildlife and little impact on hunters. Reaching an agreement with the logging industry is one hurdle but that is likely only going to accomplish results on new spurs. Do to the density in some areas dealing with present spurs is an issue

This is still just a piece of the puzzle and even though it is important in some areas it is not an answer to all of BCs issues. There is many areas in decline that road density is not an issue

[willyqbc]

The problems described here seem to me to be more about the extent of the logging, rather than the road densities. Pre pine beetle there was much stricter limits on block sizes and how close together the blocks could be. There was MUCH more timber left between blocks, when the beetle came, those limits were loosened to the point of almost non-existant in an effort to contain the beetle and extract the resource before it became unmarketable. As we are coming out the other end of the beetle epidemic, as far as I know the old limits have not been re-instated. Back in the day, there were many of these spur roads that went on for miles, to get to 4 blocks at the back, or at least you only encountered a block every km or so.....now those same roads are solid cut block from start to finish, eliminating all cover for the critters.
As far as them de-activating the roads....sorry, by in large, its not gonna happen. After a block is logged, there is a 7-8 year window that the roads remain open so that the forestry departments can do their re-forestation work...planting, thinning, study etc until the block is deemed to be "free growing". at some point in those 7-8 years if they go back into a road and take another block...the clock resets and the road needs to be open for another 7-8 years. But maybe 8 years go by and no new blocks are done....BUT, what if there is a new block slated to be done 2 years later....they are not gonna destroy a road, just to have to rebuild it a couple years later.....just not gonna happen.
The amount of new logging however is going to be drastically reduced going forward as the annual allowable cut is being slashed drastically going forward, the numbers I have heard are that 8-10 sawmills will shut down in the next few years due to the cutbacks. Have allready seen it here in quesnel, with 2 mills down, and West Frasers "flagship" mill dropping a shift.
It may be that the problem will "correct" itself over the next couple decades as nature reclaims some of these old roads and blocks. time will tell I guess.
All of that doesn't even take into account the oil and gas industry, where roads need to remain open in perpetuity to allow the daily checks on all stations and access to the lines for as long as the pipeline is active.
So as I see it....theres a choice to be made.....jobs, and the health of the provincial economy....or habitat quality for wildlife. Granted, its a shitty choice to be made, but the reality is every road and cutblock represents someones job, and its all well and good to be idealistic about it...as long as its the other guy who loses his job.....different story when its you who can't keep a roof over your kids head.....that reality is really going to start hitting home in the lumber industry in the next ten years. So its all well and good to rail against industry....but at the end of the day,in the real world...would YOU willingly give up your livelyhood in the name of habitat? Thats the REAL choice here.........

JMO
Chris

[Island Idiots]

Thanks Willyqbc. You make complete sense. and thankfully those zealots who would keep me and my ORV out of the woods will not get their wish. Changes need to be made to somehow control road density and improve habitat. It would be great if the province set a side enough money to hire students to do habitat restoration using these very roads, and then if removing the roads is not doable, implement complete closures to everyone so wildlife can recover.
This would not have to be everywhere, but used to rehabilitate area by area so as to still provide ample opportunity for all to access the back country. Once the area has recovered it can be opened again.

For those that think a road in an area removes its status as wilderness there are plenty of preserves and Parks to hike in.
Access roads aren't going anywhere they just need to be controlled.

[j270wsm]

In reference to predators......The roads are an extension of the massive super highways that we call cut blocks and until these cut blocks grow up and provide cover, it won't matter how many roads we deactivate.
For hunters......I feel its not the roads as much as the endless sight lines and loss of safe travel corridors. Modern optics allow us to glass km's and shoot 300-1000yds. Shooting long distance in cutblocks wouldn't be possible if forrestry practices mandated that all cut blocks have strips/pockets of timber every 150-200yds for travel corridors and to block endless sigh lines. That alone would help with hunters and predators.
For poachers......they are going to break the laws any way possible, but yes I agree that it could/would be harder for them if there were less roads to drive.
For FN.......less roads would reduce their harvest but so would not being allowed to hunt every where/any where, for anything and night hunting.......but those are traditional ways so, other than road reduction, we're screwed when it comes to FN.

[Wild one]

The problems described here seem to me to be more about the extent of the logging, rather than the road densities. Pre pine beetle there was much stricter limits on block sizes and how close together the blocks could be. There was MUCH more timber left between blocks, when the beetle came, those limits were loosened to the point of almost non-existant in an effort to contain the beetle and extract the resource before it became unmarketable. As we are coming out the other end of the beetle epidemic, as far as I know the old limits have not been re-instated. Back in the day, there were many of these spur roads that went on for miles, to get to 4 blocks at the back, or at least you only encountered a block every km or so.....now those same roads are solid cut block from start to finish, eliminating all cover for the critters.
As far as them de-activating the roads....sorry, by in large, its not gonna happen. After a block is logged, there is a 7-8 year window that the roads remain open so that the forestry departments can do their re-forestation work...planting, thinning, study etc until the block is deemed to be "free growing". at some point in those 7-8 years if they go back into a road and take another block...the clock resets and the road needs to be open for another 7-8 years. But maybe 8 years go by and no new blocks are done....BUT, what if there is a new block slated to be done 2 years later....they are not gonna destroy a road, just to have to rebuild it a couple years later.....just not gonna happen.
The amount of new logging however is going to be drastically reduced going forward as the annual allowable cut is being slashed drastically going forward, the numbers I have heard are that 8-10 sawmills will shut down in the next few years due to the cutbacks. Have allready seen it here in quesnel, with 2 mills down, and West Frasers "flagship" mill dropping a shift.
It may be that the problem will "correct" itself over the next couple decades as nature reclaims some of these old roads and blocks. time will tell I guess.
All of that doesn't even take into account the oil and gas industry, where roads need to remain open in perpetuity to allow the daily checks on all stations and access to the lines for as long as the pipeline is active.
So as I see it....theres a choice to be made.....jobs, and the health of the provincial economy....or habitat quality for wildlife. Granted, its a shitty choice to be made, but the reality is every road and cutblock represents someones job, and its all well and good to be idealistic about it...as long as its the other guy who loses his job.....different story when its you who can't keep a roof over your kids head.....that reality is really going to start hitting home in the lumber industry in the next ten years. So its all well and good to rail against industry....but at the end of the day,in the real world...would YOU willingly give up your livelyhood in the name of habitat? Thats the REAL choice here.........

JMO
Chris

Everything you say is correct and for that reason it would would not be a large scale change. There would be spurs that could qualify for being reclaimed without much resistance at some stage but likely not the number of roads people are hoping for

There will likely be an increase in roads salvaging burnt timber in areas as well

[boxhitch]

Hunters and trappers have a friend in Govt on the access issue in Mike Morris.
He gave a presentation a few years ago at the BCTA convention with several maps like Bugle's showing th increase in road density over time
Logging and road building have a great impact on more than just hunting in BC
Talking with him at the time he had some good ideas on how to approach the problem

[Bugle M In]

Lets not just blame roads here for access.
If all it takes is a road to "no longer make the area wild"???
Then what do we describe an area where no roads exists, so everyone takes a "Jet Boat"??
(or a Plane to Gain Access)
Does wild only mean a "National Park"???
(Seems to me there is a lot of human movement in them as well).

Yes, the majority of roads in the Province are from resource extraction.
And just because a sign goes up, does not stop "everyone" from accessing the area.
Yes, a lot of Roads will stay in place.
Yes Beetle has played a big role, but a lot started to happen before beetle.

So, how do we "really describe access".
Do sight lines belong in the discussion?, when you drive these roads and see endlessly in all directions.
Again, probably more of a Resource Extraction Topic, but a lot of byproduct comes from it.

I am still going to post a few more pics from Google Time Lapse from different parts of the province.
It's quite the eye opener.
Pick your favorite spot, and let time lapse roll.

[boxhitch]

"If all it takes is a road to "no longer make the area wild"???
Then what do we describe an area where no roads exists, so everyone takes a "Jet Boat"??
(or a Plane to Gain Access)
Does wild only mean a "National Park"???
(Seems to me there is a lot of human movement in them as well)."

How extreme do you want the definition to be?
Does true wilderness have any human footprint?
Muskwa Ketchika comes to mind, no industry, limited road access, but very active horse/atv/plane/boat traffic. Is it 'protected' enough?

[303savage]

There seems to be 2 types of ORV users. those that use ORVs to get some place in the bush and those that rip up the landscape for fun. when I lived on V.I. there was a road overgrown with alder trees up to about inch or so in diameter we use to walk up to hunt the hill above. we got there one afternoon and see somebody had drove up it but didn't come down. We had a pretty good idea what we would find. About half way down there was a 4x4 with the radiator push out from all the trees he push over driving up.

[RobU]

In reference to predators......The roads are an extension of the massive super highways that we call cut blocks and until these cut blocks grow up and provide cover, it won't matter how many roads we deactivate.
For hunters......I feel its not the roads as much as the endless sight lines and loss of safe travel corridors. Modern optics allow us to glass km's and shoot 300-1000yds. Shooting long distance in cutblocks wouldn't be possible if forrestry practices mandated that all cut blocks have strips/pockets of timber every 150-200yds for travel corridors and to block endless sigh lines. That alone would help with hunters and predators.
For poachers......they are going to break the laws any way possible, but yes I agree that it could/would be harder for them if there were less roads to drive.
For FN.......less roads would reduce their harvest but so would not being allowed to hunt every where/any where, for anything and night hunting.......but those are traditional ways so, other than road reduction, we're screwed when it comes to FN.

I believe you are right. Putting a sign on a resource road kindly asking everyone to keep out would be like putting a sign in a high school asking for no gum chewing and cellphone use. This has been interesting. I’m quite suprised by some showing their own personal access to backcountry has a higher priority than our F & W. someone mentioned jet boats and access. Yes rivers are just water roads.... so far the river doesn’t bring heavy industry capable of exucuting habitat loss.