Some of B.C.’s rarest and most irreplaceable old-growth trees are being cut down despite the land having been set aside for protection, according to a leaked letter to the premier from a panel of experts.
“We are causing extinction,” ecologist and panel member Rachel Holt said in an interview. “We are causing significant global impact with the logging of some of these forests. And we need to do something about that.”
Holt is one of five experts who were appointed to a panel five years ago to advise on the creation of deferral zones for old-growth forests.
Old-growth deferrals were designed as a temporary measure on the recommendation of the 2020 Old Growth Strategic Review. The idea was to set aside the most endangered and important forest ecosystems while developing long-term management plans.
The Old Growth Technical Advisory Panel was formed the following year to determine what areas deserved protection. The B.C. government adopted some, though not all, of the recommended deferrals and says 2.4 million hectares have been protected since 2021, with long-term plans in development.
But the letter, from all five members of the panel, says deferrals are not achieving their original intent even in agreed-upon areas because some are now being planned for harvest or have already been harvested, with “no visible plan on how to integrate them into ecologically based plans.”
Premier David Eby and Forests Minister Ravi Parmar emphasize the need to maintain a sustainable forestry industry and allow First Nations to have a say and a share of the profits.
“We work with First Nations, we come up with shared priorities, and work to deliver benefits that actually lift up the whole community,” Eby said at an unrelated news conference on Tuesday (March 17) in response to questions about the letter.
Often, the choice to log is made by a local First Nation.
Parmar and Eby argue that this is as it should be: First Nations must be allowed to make stewardship decisions in line with constitutionally guaranteed rights and title.
The panellists also emphasize the importance of involving nations in decision-making, but they argue that all relevant local First Nations should be involved in each harvesting decision.
According to the two panellists who spoke to Black Press Media, it is often the case that when one nation wants to protect old growth in a deferral area but another wishes to log, the government sides with the nation that wants to harvest.
“Nations who want to do conservation are ignored, and nations who want to log are held up as the blame for logging the last of the old forest,” Holt said.
The panellists also said that in many areas, a First Nation’s only profitable path is to harvest the rarest and largest trees, with no option to earn money from conservation.
In these places, the only economically viable timber left is the best of the remaining old growth.
Panel member Karen Price said all the nations are being left with is “guts and feathers,” with no alternative income source.
“There are very few trees left,” she said. “If they want to make money, they’re essentially logging the last old growth on their territory.”
The panellists want the government to incentivize conservation through measures such as carbon credits that enable local nations to profit from conservation, and to take responsibility for implementing deferrals rather than placing the burden of harvesting decisions entirely on First Nations.
Currently, the province provides no compensation for nations that decline to harvest.
Parmar defended his ministry’s approach to First Nations consultation, arguing that until a few years ago, nations were not engaged in a meaningful way. He also points out that many never agreed to the deferrals suggested by the panel.
“I think it’s important for those panellists to recognize that they are not at the table in conversation with First Nations,” he said in a Monday interview.
Parmar said his goal is to include conservationists, foresters, First Nations and industry in these discussions in an effort at “striking a balance.”
In addition to Holt and Price, the other three panellists are Dave Daust, a forester; Lisa Matthaus, an economist; and Garry Merkel, a forester, academic, and one of the authors of the 2020 strategic review. The letter, first reported by the Canadian Press and later obtained by Black Press Media, was not intended to be made public. Merkel declined to comment.
Shock at discovering the extent of harvesting activity
At stake are some of the world’s largest trees, which, once cut down, could take hundreds, or even thousands, of years to grow back — if that is even possible. Price says that because of a changing climate, it is unlikely this type of forest will ever return to its natural state.
“Trees grow back, but primary forests do not,” she said.
And these types of forests are particularly prized as carbon sinks and sources of clean water. Losing them could create a cascade of ecosystem loss and species extinction.
The deferral program was meant to be a reprieve while local conservation plans were created. This is also how the program is defined on government websites.
But the panellists say that is not happening.
Instead, they contend that the government is shrinking protected areas and allowing B.C. Timber Sales, a ministry unit, to downplay the importance of big-treed old-growth and become the primary harvester in deferral zones.
According to the Ministry of Forests, 20 per cent of B.C.’s old growth is open to logging, with 80 per cent protected in some way. Where local First Nations do not agree with defined deferrals, B.C. Timber Sales uses pre-existing agreements to govern forest management.
The panel had initially recommended 2.6 million hectares for protection in 2025. First Nations declined to support 1.3 million but identified an additional 0.9 million hectares for protection outside of the panel-recommended deferrals. Of those additional areas, 0.4 million hectares are now protected.
Holt was alerted to some of the logging activity in northern Vancouver Island after sitting down to check the B.C. Timber Sales tenures in the area. When she pulled up a map of a particular cut block she was interested in, she was shocked.
“And I went, ‘Holy cow! Look at all those plan BCTS cut blocks over the technical advisory deferral polygons,” she said. “Why is that happening?”
Holt and Price say B.C. Timber Sales ought to take a leadership role in promoting deferrals, but it is doing the opposite.
“B.C. Timber Sales is the government’s logging brand,” Price said. “It’s up to them whether they put things out to bid.”
On top of this, Holt discovered a policy shift that temporarily reduces export taxes on raw logs from Vancouver Island, making timber profitable even if it isn’t processed locally and doesn’t have the same downstream benefits.
“That allows those lesser economic stands to be harvested just for the sake of harvesting them when there’s nowhere for them to go in B.C.,” Holt said.
According to the ministry, the changes will not apply to cedar, cypress or Douglas-fir logs, which are highly sought after by B.C.’s manufacturers. Local producers will also get first right of refusal on logs, meaning if a local mill submits a fair offer, the logs are ineligible for export.
But Holt says this system leads to ancient forest being cut down with little community economic benefit.
Price blames this approach on the NDP’s near loss in the 2024 election and the economic strain caused by global trade uncertainty stemming from U.S. tariff decisions.
“So what we’re seeing is that the government is again re-establishing their focus strongly on short-term economic gain at the cost of ecosystems, communities, floods, and wildfires,” she said. “But these forests are super important for us to adapt to all the disruptions with the climate.”
Eby emphasized the importance of a “sustainable, long-term, renewable industry.”
“All voices are welcome at the table, but the core here is the sustainable forest industry, going forward, and to be able to support communities for the long term,” he said.
But Price sees Eby as signalling in those comments that his priority is economic.
“It’s the word ‘industry’ that’s in there that is problematic because that is showing the bias towards corporate profit,” she said.
Holt and Price both say they sympathize with local communities and understand that the current government is not fully responsible for this situation. Decades of profit-driven clear-cutting decimated B.C.’s viable timber and left local communities — and local ecosystems — clinging to the side of a cliff.
The deferrals were designed to create a soft landing, preserving the most important parts of what is left.
“What deferrals are doing is giving us the parachute if we jump off the cliff — we can have a parachute and still maintain some ecosystem functioning, maybe have moose and salmon in the province, maybe have some flood protection,” she said.
“If we don’t do anything to protect old forest, we’ll just go off the cliff with no parachute.”