Lakes Local Resource Use Plan

Lakeshore Management Guidelines

LAKES LOCAL RESOURCE USE PLAN

LAKESHORE MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES

B.C. FOREST SERVICE

2000/01/2001/12/2017

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

These management guidelines have been developed through the team workteamwork of all the participating members. All members deserve thanks for their dedication to making this process work.

The unnamed lake,

It sleeps among a thousand hills,

Where no man ever trods,

And only natures' music fill the silences of God.

i

SUMMARY

Conflicts between the forest industry and other forest user groups have been increasing as harvesting operations have moved closer to recreation lakes. In order to reduce these conflicts the Ministry of Forests decided to develop lakeshore harvesting guidelines in cooperation with user groups. General Guidelines were developed which provide direction to the forest industry regarding management practices to be used. These general guidelines are applicable to all lakes within the Kamloops Timber Supply Area (TSA). More specific guidelines were also produced for each of the five classes of lakes developed. A different management strategy is represented by each lake classification. These strategies incorporate Visual Quality Objectives (VQO), and range from preservation to maximum modification. Each lake is classified using a two stage procedure. The first step is to collect information regarding the lake, then use that data to determine the appropriate classification.

ii

LIST OF PARTICIPATING GROUPS AND AGENCIES

Ministry of Forests

Ministry of Environment

Kamloops Fish & Game Association

B.C. Wildlife Federation

Kamloops Naturalists Club

Tolko Industries Ltd.

Adams Lake Lumber (Interfor)

Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd.

B.C. Fishing Resorts & Outfitters Association

Ainsworth Lumber Co.

Kamloops Fly Fishers Association

LIST OF CONSULTATIVE GROUPS AND AGENCIES

B.C. Trappers Association

Duck's Unlimited

Slocan Timber Ltd.

Gilbert Smith Forest Products

Riverside Forest Products Limited.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF APPENDICES

1.0INTRODUCTION

2.0THE PLANNING PROCESS

2.1 Planning Methodology

2.2 Plan Goal

2.3 Plan Objectives

2.4 Public Involvement

3.0LAKESHORE HARVESTING GUIDELINES

3.1 Use of the Guidelines

3.2 General Guidelines

3.3 Harvesting Guidelines for Lake Classes

'A' Class Lakes

'B' Class Lakes

'C' Class Lakes

'D' Class Lakes

'E' Class Lakes

4.0CLASSIFICATION OF LAKES

4.1 Lake Classification Form

4.2 Lake Information Collection

4.3 Lake Classification

5.0MONITORING AND IMPLEMENTATION

5.1 Monitoring Process

5.2 Monitoring report May 2000

6.0KAMLOOPS LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

7.0ISSUES IDENTIFIED FOR FUTURE STUDY

7.1 Issues from 1991

7.2 Issues from May 2000

8.0RECOMMENDATIONS

9.0GLOSSARY

TABLE OF CONTENTS4

LIST OF APPENDICES6

1.0INTRODUCTION7

2.0THE PLANNING PROCESS7

2.1 Planning Methodology7

2.2 Plan Goal3

2.3 Plan Objectives3

2.4 Public Involvement4

3.0LAKESHORE HARVESTING GUIDELINES5

3.1 Use of the Guidelines5

3.2 General Guidelines6

3.3 Harvesting Guidelines for Lake Classes9

'A' Class Lakes9

'B' Class Lakes10

'C' Class Lakes12

'D' Class Lakes14

'E' Class Lakes15

4.0CLASSIFICATION OF LAKES16

4.1 Lake Classification Form16

4.2 Lake Information Collection16

4.3 Lake Classification17

5.0MONITORING AND IMPLEMENTATION19

5.1 Monitoring Process19

5.2 Monitoring report May 200020

6.0KAMLOOPS LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN21

7.0ISSUES IDENTIFIED FOR FUTURE STUDY22

7.1 Issues from 199122

7.2 Issues from May 200022

8.0RECOMMENDATIONS23

9.0GLOSSARY24

TABLE OF CONTENTS4

LIST OF APPENDICES5

1.0 INTRODUCTION6

2.0 THE PLANNING PROCESS6

2.1 Planning Methodology6

2.2 Plan Goal3

2.3 Plan Objectives

2.4 Public Involvement

3.0 LAKESHORE HARVESTING GUIDELINES

3.1 Use of the Guidelines

3.2 General Guidelines

3.3 Harvesting Guidelines for Lake Classes

'A' Class Lakes

'B' Class Lakes

'C' Class Lakes

'D' Class Lakes

'E' Class Lakes

4.0 CLASSIFICATION OF LAKES

4.1 Lake Classification Form

4.2 Lake Information Collection

4.3 Lake Classification

5.0 MONITORING AND IMPLEMENTATION

6.0 KAMLOOPS LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

7.0 ISSUES IDENTIFIED FOR FUTURE STUDY

8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

9.0 GLOSSARY

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix ITerms of Reference

Appendix IILake Classification Form General Guideline 19 Diagram

Appendix IIIClassification Rating Guide Lake Classification Form

Appendix IVLakeshore Management Zone Boundaries Classification Rating Guide

Appendix VLength of Opening Diagram Classification Key

Appendix VILake Shape ExamplesLake Classification Table

Appendix VIIExamples of Lake Visual Management Lakeshore Management Zone Boundaries

Appendix VIIIPercent Harvest of Lakeshore Management Zone Table Examples of Lake Visual Management Zone

Appendix IXLake Classification Table Percent Harvest of Lakeshore Management Zone Table

Appendix XLake Classification ChartSelection/Clearcut Combination Table

v

Lakes LRUP 2000

Lakeshore Management Guidelines

1.0INTRODUCTION

The Kamloops District contains world renowned lakes for recreation and tourism. . Timber harvesting has moved closer to these lakes in recent years. This has led to conflicts between forest companies and other user groups. In order to minimize future conflicts the Kamloops Forest District initiated a planning process in 1989 to develop lakeshore harvesting guidelines. It was decided to use the Local Resource Use Planning (LRUP) format and involve various user groups. This planning process led to the creation of the Lakes LRUP in 1991. Currently tThere are 1205 classified lakes in the Kamloops Forest District, many of which are prized for fishing and recreation. Timber harvesting has moved closer to these lakes in recent years. This has led to conflicts between forest companies and other user groups. In order to minimize future conflicts the Kamloops Forest District initiated a planning process to develop lakeshore harvesting guidelines. It was decided to use the Local Resource Use Planning (LRUP) format and involve various user groups.

The purpose of this plan is to develop lakeshore harvesting guidelines considering fisheries, timber, wildlife, recreational, tourism, aesthetics and other values. The planning process consisted of two phases. The first was the development of guidelines and the second is the classification of lakes. The process is now complete except for updatesupdates, as new information becomes available. The planning area encompasses the Kamloops Forest District excluding, private land, Parks and Indian Reserves.

The Forest Practices Code Act of BC includes a guidebook on Lake Management that is very close to the format designed in the original LRUP. This document has been updated to meet the new Forest Practices Code standards and has been endorsed by the Kamloops LRMP. The Kamloops District uses the Lakes LRUP rather than the FPC guidebook..

A glossary is available at the end of the document to assist in the explanation of terminology and concepts.

2.0THE PLANNING PROCESS

2.1 Planning Methodology

The Kamloops Forest District develops plans at three different levels. Strategic planning such as the Land and Resource Management Plan provides overall direction and land use objectives to local plans (LRUP) such as the Lakes LRUP, which in turn provide direction to operational plans such as Silviculture Prescriptions or Logging Plans. Local plans deal with specific geographic areas or in this case, a specific geographic feature. This plan will identify management strategies and objectives for lakeshore management within the Kamloops Forest District. The plan will provide stakeholders with a summary of values present at each lake and guidelines to ensure management maintains and/or enhances those values.

Each LRUP is unique and will use specific terms of reference to identify the scope and goals of the plan. The terms of reference for this plan are in appendix 1. The LRUP process uses the public and various government agencies to obtain input about the areas of concern and a consensus based decision makingdecision-making process to determine final direction. All stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide input and share in the final decision.

In 1995, the plan was revised to incorporate Forest Practices Code and LRMP requirements. Changes were also made to improve the direction provided in the original 1991 document and clear up some statements that were ambiguous. The method of measurement in the LMZ was unclear to some people at the table and a new method called the LMZ area was incorporated in the new document. The 1995 document was never finalized; the goal of the table in 2000 is to create a plan acceptable to the District Manager.

This document is the outcome of the year 2000 review process. The document has been updated to ensure it reflects current management practices.

2.2 Plan Goal

To develop lakeshore resource management guidelines considering fisheries, water, wildlife, recreational, tourism, aesthetic, timber and other values for lakes within the Kamloops Timber Supply Area (TSA).Forest District

2.3 Plan Objectives

To develop a lake classification system which that can be used towill categorize lakes with regards to their importance for fisheries, timber, (Timber was dropped in the new),(water was added) water, wildlife, recreation, (tourism was added in the new)tourism aesthetics and other resource values.

To develop lakeshore harvesting guidelines for each lake classification developed initially. Other lakeshore management guidelines are to be determined after lakeshore harvesting guidelines have been developed and implemented.

To determine appropriate management practices for each lake classification, focusing initially on timber harvesting.

To consider the views of resource users, government agencies and the public in the development of these guidelines;.
- by ensuring active management of the whole LMZ over the rotation of the forest.
- by scheduling activities outside the prime recreational periods.
- by reviewing factors such as forest health, windfirmness, visuals, water quality and access management during the development of operational plans.

To determine the affect of those guidelines on the allowable cut for the Kamloops Timber Supply Area and ensure these guidelines are incorporated into the Kamloops Timber Supply Plan.

To implement the LRUP providing for review and monitoring of the guidelines and to deal with issues as they are identified.

To implement the LRUP providing for review and monitoring of the guidelines and to deal with issues as they are identified.

To provide direction for Prospectors and the Mineral Exploration code.

To meet the visual quality objectives set for each lake.

To maintain habitat elements for wildlife and fish habitat.

To manage for healthy aquatic environments.

2.4 Public Involvement

This Local Resource Use Plan is somewhat unique in that a balanced planning team was assembled from government agencies, forest industry and other user groups in order to develop these lakeshore harvesting guidelines. Many other guidelines currently in use have been developed by either government or a government-industry committee. The four main participating groups from the public are the Kamloops Fish & Game Association, B.C. Fishing Resorts and Outfitters Association, Kamloops Naturalists Club and the B.C. Wildlife Federation. These groups were chosen due to their strong concern for management of lakeshore areas. Other groups and individuals have presented their views and participated in discussions.

The general public was informed about this planning process via newspaper advertisements and by discussions at other planning review meetings. The public was also given an opportunity to review the draft 1991guidelines at open house meetings in Kamloops and Clearwater. A questionnaire was used to obtain public input. The results of the questionnaires are contained on file. Future meetings are planned to present lake classifications and review the effectiveness of the guidelines. These meetings will be advertised and public input will be sought.This process led to the preparation of the 1991 Lakes LRUP.

A series of meetings were conducted in 1995 and 1996 to finalize the lake classification process and review and update the document to ensure compliance with Forest Practice Code requirements. These changes were presented to the LRMP table and LRUP meetings for review and feedback. Since these changes were made practices have changed and the document has been updated in May 2000 to reflect these changes. These changes will be presented to the LRMP table and LRUP tables for review and comment at the next meetings.

3.0LAKESHORE HARVESTING GUIDELINES

3.1 Use of the Guidelines

The intent of the Lakeshore Management Zone is to provide a transition zone between aquatic and timbered areas that will ensure protection of the Riparian Reserve Zone. Specific management objectives, such as VQO’s and access management are significantly different within the LMZ. All lakes greater than 1 ha have been classified. These lakes have either received a letter class (A - E) or have been classed as wetlands. Some lakes under a hectare are classified when specific values were identified.

These guidelines have been developed to provide the Ministry of Forests and the forest industry with a basis for planning harvesting operations around lakes. The reason they have been developed is to ensure recreation, tourism, aesthetic, fishery, wildlife, timber and other values are protectedmanaged for. They are not intended to replace operational plans such as Forest Development Plans and Silvicultural Prescriptions (SP's). However, they are intended to provide resource managers with direction in these planning processes. The details of how these guidelines are implemented will depend on cooperation between all user groups. Operational planning will require participation of both user groups, government and the public. The input received through these communication exchanges will help to determine the success of these guidelines.

Although the guidelines that follow are specific in nature, it must be recognized that they are only guidelines. The Ministry of Forests may consider alterations to applicable guidelines on a lake specific basis. In these cases it would be up to the proponent to identify and justify the reasons for deviation from the guidelines, while still meeting the Forest Practices Code and consistent with higher level plans. This means the changes would have to be publicized and highlighted in the proponent's Forest DevelopmentOperational Plans. This flexibility should not reduce the meaningful and practical use of these guidelines.

The Lakeshore guidelines must be applied with sound judgement recognizing the specific nature of each lake as well as the local terrain and surrounding forest values. The Lakeshore Management Area (LMA) is a site specific area which will vary according to the unique features of each lake, generally it will be +- 200 metres. The LMA includes the Riparian Reserve Zone (RRZ) of 10 metres, Riparian Management Zone of 20m(This was added from 1991 because of section 64 of the OPR)andand the Lakeshore Management Zone of +-190 (200-10RRZ) metres. These guidelines will apply only to the Lakeshore Management Zone (see Appendix VII). A lake visual management zone will normally apply beyond this zone (See Appendix VIII). Modifications to the guidelines must also recognize the impacts toinfluence on forest stand structure, sensitivity of resources to disturbances, as well as the high visibility and public profile that many lakes have inherited.

3.2 General Guidelines

These guidelines apply to all lakes within the Kamloops TSADistrict. It must be noted that these guidelines are not currently applicable to deeded property or Tree Farm Licenses within the Timber Supply AreaKamloops Forest District.

1. 1.The lakeshore will be subject to a 10 metre Riparian Reserve Zone as per Kamloops Forest District guideline and to machine buffers to the maximum distance necessary to protect sensitive soil types and other values. Machine buffers to be determined at the SP stage. Variances to this guideline will be considered on a site specific basis when supported by a written rationale. (see appendix IV)
2. 2.The LMZ will be determined on a site specific basis as information becomes available. The Licensee, MOE and MOF are responsible for determination of the LMZ. Determination of the LMZ will consider factors such as terrain, access management, visuals, hydrology, stream connections, cattle management and other factors specific to the lake.Where present, a canopy cover including deciduous, immature conifers and shrubs should be retained within the Riparian (Lake) Management Zone (LMZ). Where such canopy cover does not exist other site specific measures may be taken to preserve the value of the Riparian Area (See Appendix VI for diagram). These measures will be decided at the SP stage. The intent of the LMZ is to provide a buffer between aquatic and commercially timbered areas for wildlife and aesthetic purposes.(This old clause is part of the reason for the 20m RMZ in the 1995 rewrite)
3. The RRZ and the LMZ begin at the edge of the lakeshore or lakeshore and adjacent wetland in the case of wetlands contiguous to the lake. (see appendix IV)
4. Where the adjacent wetland is larger than the lake area or the wetland changes the shape complexity, the option to separate the two elements into a LMZ and a classified wetland exists. If utilized this distinction must be identified on the operational plans.
5. The percent cut given in the guidelines should be reduced if the ratio of perimeter of the lake to the area of the lake is significantly greater than that of a simply shaped lake with a similar area, ie. a lake that has an irregular shape with many bays and arms should have a perimeter cut similar to a simply shaped lake of similar size. (See Appendix VI.)
6. The guideline percentages for lakeshore harvesting should be reduced if the lakeshore is not fully timbered. Any reduction would be a factor of the amount of timbered area and site specific concerns.(Generally timbered or crown land available =100%)
7. 3.Within the LMZ, selection harvesting methods should be the first consideration where soil and stand conditions permit.
8. 4.Within the LMZ, roads and landings should be rehabilitiated unless required for future activities, these actions will be specified in the Silviculture Prescription and/or Range Plan.Operational Plans.
9. Access management strategies should be developed for each lake classified. Lakes designated "walk in" will have a specific access management strategy developed to control vehicle access. Access Management Planning will be done in accordance with the Forest Practices Code Section 58 (2) d, Section 26, Section 105,Forest Road Regulation section 6. Other associated guidebooks are tools that can be used for access management.

5. 5.The management of mixed wood (deciduous/conifer) stands is recognized as a desirable practice in some cases. Where these stands occur adjacent to a lakeshore, an attempt should be made to reproduce manage for a mixed wood stand after harvesting.6. Riparian boundaries will be marked as per the Forest Practices Code guidelines.(This used to include mapping of the LMZ boundary on the ground)