golder associates ltd. - managed forest...

Golder Associates Ltd.

#202 - 2790 Gladwin Road Abbotsford, B. C., Canada V2T 4S8 Telephone (604) 850-8786 Fax (604) 850-8756

OFFICES ACROSS NORTH AMERICA, SOUTH AMERICA, EUROPE, AFRICA, ASIA AND AUSTRALIA

E/06/345 November 3, 2006 061-450064

TimberWest Forest Corporation #3 – 4890 Rutherford Road Nanaimo, B.C. V9T 4Z4

Attention: John Phillips, R.P.F., C.E.A. (S.F.M.), Manager, Forestry Programs

RE: ROAD DEACTIVATION REVIEW BEAUFORT RANGE BLOCK T141 PORT ALBERNI, B.C.

Dear Sir:

As requested, Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has carried out a follow-up field review of road deactivation activities carried out in 2006 along roads and at stream crossings within the Beaufort Range Block T141 near Port Alberni, B.C. (see Golder 01 June 2006). The purpose of this follow-up field review was to determine if TimberWest Forest Corporation (TimberWest) has carried out remedial measures to minimize the potential for erosion along roads and at stream crossing sites within Block T141 in accordance with Golder’s earlier recommendations. These recommendations are outlined in our letter of 01 June 2006, which reports the results of a field review conducted 30 May 2006.

This report summarizes the observations of a follow-up, post-deactivation site review on 01 November 2006 and, based on these observations, provides our professional opinion on the effectiveness of the completed remedial works. The situation that triggered these road deactivation activities is outlined in reports prepared for and a determination made by the Private Managed Forest Land Council (PMFLC) earlier this year (see PMFLC, 2006a and 2006b, and Shawn Hamilton and Associates, 2006).

TimberWest Forest Corporation November 3, 2006 Mr. John Phillips - 2 - 061-450064

Golder Associates

This letter shall be read in conjunction with “Important Information and Limitations of This Report”, which is appended following the text of this letter report. The reader’s attention is specifically drawn to this information, as it is essential that it is followed for the proper use and interpretation of this letter.

1.0 FIELD REVIEW OF COMPLETED REMEDIAL WORKS

Mr. Terry Rollerson, P.Geo of Golder carried out a field review of the roads and stream crossings within Block T141 on 01 November 2006 accompanied by Mr. Domenico Iannidinardo, RPF, P.Eng., of TimberWest. The time spent on site was about 6.5 hours. The weather during the field review was sunny with light cloud in the morning; high cloud was present in the afternoon. Visibility on the ground was good.

The field review focused on completed deactivation work along the roads and at stream crossings within the block including remedial works along the backspar trail on the lower slopes of the block. A number of digital site photographs were taken by Golder and are on file in Golder’s Abbotsford office, selected photographs are attached to this letter.

2.0 BACKGROUND

Four stream crossing sites were identified by the PMFLC as in need of remedial work to address soil erosion and sediment transport. These sites included three culvert installations on Stream 4 (culverts C-1, C-18 and C-11) and one culvert installation on Stream 6 (culvert C-27). These crossings were adversely affected by an early January 2006 rain-on-snow event.

Remedial works completed in the spring of 2006 consisted of cleaning the culverts and re-establishment of inlet sumps, pullback of the road fill adjacent to culvert outlets, armouring of the culvert inlets and outlets with large riprap, and seeding of exposed soils where necessary. At culvert C-11, the existing 600 mm CMP was replaced with a 1000 mm CMP. TimberWest seasonally deactivated the road system to summer standards. These sites were reviewed at the time of Golder’s 30 May 2006 site visit and are described in our 01 June 2006 letter.

3.0 LOCATION AND GENERAL TERRAIN CONDITIONS

The T141 block is located on a generally southwest-facing slope in the Beaufort Range of the Vancouver Island Mountains. Eight small streams drain the section of hillside encompassed by this block (stream numbers 2 to 9). The majority of these streams are seasonal or ephemeral and streamflow in most becomes subsurface before reaching the


Golder Associates

valley floor. One of the streams in the block (Stream 6) is tributary to the Stamp River. The T141 block is located about 11 kilometers north-northwest of the town of Port Alberni, B.C.

Moderate to moderately steep slopes dominate the block, but steeply sloping areas occur locally. Well-drained colluvial materials occur on the mid and upper portions of the block, but morainal and glaciofluvial materials are present locally on moderate slopes on the lower slopes of the block. The slope morphology ranges from uniform to gullied and benched. Several streams are locally confined within narrow, steep gradient gullies and others flow within broad, shallow swales. The gully sides are generally mantled with well-drained, rubbly colluvial veneers but bedrock outcrops dominate in some reaches. A terrain stability assessment conducted prior to the second growth harvest found no visible indication of post-logging landslide activity associated with the original old growth harvest on this slope (TimberWest, 2002).

4.0 REMEDIAL WORKS FOR LONG-TERM ROAD STABILITY

We understand that TimberWest wishes to maintain access along the main road (Tod Mainline) within the T141 block for fire protection and other forest management purposes. Four-wheel drive access will allow for periodic road inspections. Spur roads SP2 and SP3 were proposed for permanent deactivation with no or only limited vehicle access.

The remedial actions recommended by Golder at the time of our 30 May 2006 site inspection for the Tod Mainline included:

• Assessment of small woody debris hazard above culvert inlets and hand cleaning of small woody debris accumulations where present to reduce the potential for culvert blockage. One stream noted by Golder as requiring hand cleaning was Stream 5 above culvert C-2.

• Deepening and armouring of the channel of Stream 9 upstream of culvert site C-24 to mitigate the potential for stream avulsion and subsequent road surface erosion.

• Replacement of culvert C-1 on Stream 4 with a Squamish rock ford with a low flow pipe. This action was recommended to reduce the potential for an additional blockage of the culvert site by transport of erodible sediment that extends for approximately 75 metres downstream from a crossing of Stream 4 on the McLean Main upslope of the T141 block boundary.

• Removal of road edge berms (windrows) along the road shoulder.


Golder Associates

• Assessment of sidecast material where the native slope below the road was >60 percent and full fill slope pullback if evidence of instability was noted (e.g. tension cracks, slumping).

For the spur roads to be permanently deactivated within the block, the following actions were recommended by Golder:

• Removal of culverts and replacement with cross-ditches. • Additional cross-ditches installed where required. • Removal of road edge berms and outsloping of road surfaces. • Assessment of sidecast material where the native slope below the road was

>60 percent and full fill slope pullback if there was evidence of instability. The backspar trail on the lower slopes of the block was considered adequately deactivated to falling corner 50. From falling corner 47 to 50, the backspar trail was not deactivated, but was considered a low erosion risk. However, if this portion of the backspar trail was utilized for yarding of remaining felled and bucked timber, then it was suggested that this portion of the trail could be deactivated, primarily to increase site productivity through decompaction and scattering of woody debris.

5.0 RESULTS OF THE FOLLOW UP FIELD INSPECTION

The following sections outline the results of our 01 November 2006 field inspection of the remedial actions recommended in our letter of 01 June 2006.

5.1 Hand cleaning of small woody debris above culvert inlets

Small woody debris was cleaned from a short section of Stream 5 above culvert C-2 (Plate 1). We inspected the stream channels above the other culverts within the block and do not consider that cleaning of small woody debris is warranted. The majority of streams observed showed no evidence of movement of small woody debris (Plate 2). In two or three larger channels there may have been limited movement of small scattered woody debris, but the small size of the woody debris that may be mobile does not appear to threaten culvert capacity. Cleaning of slash from small streams can lead to excessive channel erosion and downstream sediment transport. Movement of woody debris is usually quite limited in stream channels less than two to three metres wide (Rollerson, et. al., 1998). We recommend grass/legume seeding of the cleaned section of Stream 5 above culvert C-2.

It is our understanding that TimberWest will conduct periodic field reviews of the drainage structures along the Tod Mainline as part of their normal monitoring program.


Golder Associates

If there is visible movement of woody debris in any of these stream channels that is of sufficient quantity or size to potentially reduce the flow capacity of any culverts, then this material should be removed during these field reviews. In any case, all culverts have been backed up with cross ditches (see discussion below) so in the unlikely event that culvert flow is restricted significantly by mobile woody debris, any overflow will be contained and controlled by the cross ditch. In our opinion, backing up the culverts with cross ditches is more effective than stream cleaning to resolve concerns over culvert blockage from the movement of woody debris in these small streams.

5.2 Deepening and armouring of the stream channel upstream of culvert C-24

The channel of Stream 9 upstream of culvert C-24 has been deepened and the channel armoured with large cobbles and some angular rock (Plate 3). TimberWest excavated a broad swale to carry seasonal streamflow across the road. The river rock armour extends across the swale and down over the edge of the fill slope to create a Squamish ford with an armoured outfall. Excess fill slope materials were removed and the slope angle on the fill slope reduced to facilitate placement of the river rock armour. In addition to deepening and armouring the stream channel, an armoured ditch block was placed across the road ditch to ensure that stream flow remains in the stream channel and flows across the armoured swale. TimberWest plans to seed the exposed soil slopes along the edge of the rock armour within the next few days. This work is considered in accordance with Golder’s original road deactivation recommendations.

5.3 Replacement of culvert C-1 on Stream 4 with a Squamish rock ford

The culvert at location C-1 on Stream 4 has been removed and replaced with a Squamish rock ford (Plate 4). Golder originally suggested that this Squamish ford include a low flow pipe. A low flow pipe was not installed. Based on our inspection of the installed structure and given the seasonal nature of this stream and the limited winter season traffic that might result in sediment release at the crossing we do not consider that a low flow pipe is necessary. There is a thin layer of finer sediment (silt and sand sized material) covering the coarse rock in the ford, so there may be some entrainment of this material during high flows. The stream will distribute this material along stream channel on the hillside downstream of the crossing. In our opinion, this material does not constitute a significant sediment source.


Golder Associates

5.4 Removal of berms along roads

All road edge berms of any significance along the Tod Mainline, the hookup road northwest of the top of the opening and along the short section of the McLean Main above the T141 block have been removed.

5.5 Assessment and removal of fill on native slopes >60 percent

Fill materials on slopes greater than 60 percent or where tension cracks were visible along the Tod Mainline have been removed (Plate 5). These materials have been placed either against the road cut slopes or in old borrow pits (Plate 7) and other level or gently sloping sites. This pullback included locations where fill materials occur along steeper slopes above stream channels. Some pullback of fill material has also occurred along the hookup road northwest of the top north corner of the T141 block and along the McLean Main above the block. In our opinion, some of this pullback went well beyond what would typically be prescribed to minimize future soil erosion. Gently sloping benches are present immediately below the toes of some of the pulled back fill slopes so the consequences of fill slope failure would have been minimal. Small debris slides that might have resulted from the failure the fill slopes at these locations would have stopped within a few metres of the toe of the fills. Seeding of these slopes where appropriate is planned for the next few days.

5.6 Cross ditches along the Tod Mainline

Every culvert (≅20) along the Tod Mainline, and an additional nine culverts along the hookup road northwest of the upper corner of the block and the section of the McLean Main directly above the T141 block have been backed up with large cross ditches or in some cases broad swales. These backup drainage control structures are located either directly above or beside the culverts (Plate 6). TimberWest has installed approximately 20 cross ditches and a number of short diagonal ditch/berms (“water wings”) between the existing culverts along the Tod Mainline. An additional 16 cross ditches have been installed along the hookup road and the McLean Main above the block. The cross ditch outlets are well flared and excess road fill has been removed to reduce the slope gradients on the fill slopes below the cross ditch outlets. These cross-ditches will provide additional runoff control (Plates 7 and 8).

Culvert inlets have been cleaned where necessary and substantial ditch blocks placed in all appropriate locations to prevent water flow down road ditches past the cross ditches and culverts. A damaged culvert at location C-13 was removed and the culvert replaced with a cross ditch. There has been localized outsloping of the road surface to help control


Golder Associates

road surface runoff. Seeding of freshly exposed soil slopes at the culvert and cross ditch locations, where necessary, is planned for the next few days.

5.7 Removal of culverts and replacement with cross ditches along spur roads

All existing culverts along the spur roads within the T141 block have been removed and replaced with cross ditches. All the cross ditches have large ditch blocks (Plate 9).

5.8 Additional cross ditches installed where required along spur roads

A limited number of additional cross ditches have been installed along spur roads SP2 and SP3 in addition to the cross-ditches at the culvert removal sites. A cross ditch was also installed on the very short spur (SP1) that runs northwest from the lower switchback on the Tod Mainline.

5.9 Removal of berms and outsloping of spur road surfaces

Roadside berms have been removed along all spur roads and the spur roads outsloped where appropriate.

5.10 Assessment and removal of fill on native slopes >60 percent - spur roads

Most of the fill slopes along the spur roads did not require remedial action as these roads are generally located on gentle to moderate slopes. A short section of road fill at the southeast end of Spur 2 was pulled back and the slope re-contoured (Plate 10).

5.11 Assessment of the backspar trail

The existing rehabilitation along the backspar trail on the lower slopes of the block from the Tod Mainline to falling corner 50 is performing well. There are no visible indications of surface soil erosion. The trail was scarified, re-sloped and slash scattered across the rehabilitated surface to reduce the potential for surface erosion. Part of the temporary hay bale check dam and the black plastic drainpipe in the stream at the location where Stream 4 crosses the backspar trail has been removed (Plate 11). The buried section of the check dam has been retained to control movement of accumulated sediment (see Shawn Hamilton and Associates, 2006, photo plate 42, for a photograph of the original check dam). It is our opinion that the residual portion of the check dam should be left in place as it retains a small wedge of sediment and is having no obvious adverse effect on the stream channel. The section of the backspar trail between falling corners 47 and 50 was not used for yarding and was considered a low erosion risk at the time of our original


Golder Associates

8.0 REFERENCES

Golder Associates Ltd. 2006. Road Review – Beaufort Block T141 – Port Alberni, B.C. Letter prepared by R. Wong, P.Geo., dated 01 June 2006. Golder Associates Ltd. #202 – 2790 Gladwin Road. Abbotsford, B.C. V2T 4SB.

Private Managed Forest Land Council. 2006a. Investigation: Road Construction Practices on Block T141 Managed Forest #7 Beaufort Range Port Alberni. Investigation IN05019 Beaufort Block T141. Report by S. J. Macpherson RPF, CEA., dated 28 February 2006. PO Box 31059, 301-3980 Shelbourne Street, Victoria, BC V8N 6J3.

Private Managed Forest Land Council. 2006b. Backgrounder – Private Managed Forest Land Council Fines TimberWest $30,000. PO Box 31059, 301-3980 Shelbourne Street, Victoria, BC V8N 6J3. http://www.pmflc.ca.

Shawn Hamilton and Associates. 2006. Block T141 Assessment – TimberWest. Report by Shawn Hamilton R.P.Bio. dated March 2006. Report prepared for the Private Managed Forest Land Council.

Rollerson, T., B. Craven, T. Watson, P. Scharf, and A. Highmoor. 1998. Effects of Slash Retention and Removal in Small Streams near Zeballos and Gold River on Vancouver Island. Coastal Forest Site Rehabilitation Workshop, December 2-4, 1998, Nanaimo, BC.

TimberWest Ltd. 2002. Beauforts – Block T141 Terrain Stability Assessment. Report prepared by A. Chatterton, R.P.F., P.Geo. dated November 20, 2002.

http://www.pmflc.ca/

Golder Associates

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT

Standard of Care: Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has prepared this report in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and science professions currently practising under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided, subject to the time limits and physical constraints applicable to this report. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made. Basis and Use of the Report: This report has been prepared for the specific site, design objective, development and purpose described to Golder by the Client. The factual data, interpretations and recommendations pertain to a specific project as described in this report and are not applicable to any other project or site location. Any change of site conditions, purpose, development plans or if the project is not initiated within eighteen months of the date of the report may alter the validity of the report. Golder can not be responsible for use of this report, or portions thereof, unless Golder is requested to review and, if necessary, revise the report. The information, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are for the sole benefit of the Client. No other party may use or rely on this report or any portion thereof without Golder’s express written consent. If the report was prepared to be included for a specific permit application process, then upon the reasonable request of the client, Golder may authorize in writing the use of this report by the regulatory agency as an Approved User for the specific and identified purpose of the applicable permit review process. Any other use of this report by others is prohibited and is without responsibility to Golder. The report, all plans, data, drawings and other documents as well as all electronic media prepared by Golder are considered its professional work product and shall remain the copyright property of Golder, who authorizes only the Client and Approved Users to make copies of the report, but only in such quantities as are reasonably necessary for the use of the report by those parties. The Client and Approved Users may not give, lend, sell, or otherwise make available the report or any portion thereof to any other party without the express written permission of Golder. The Client acknowledges that electronic media is susceptible to unauthorized modification, deterioration and incompatibility and therefore the Client can not rely upon the electronic media versions of Golder’s report or other work products. The report is of a summary nature and is not intended to stand alone without reference to the instructions given to Golder by the Client, communications between Golder and the Client, and to any other reports prepared by Golder for the Client relative to the specific site described in the report. In order to properly understand the suggestions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report, reference must be made to the whole of the report. Golder can not be responsible for use of portions of the report without reference to the entire report. Unless otherwise stated, the suggestions, recommendations and opinions given in this report are intended only for the guidance of the Client in the design of the specific project. The extent and detail of investigations, including the number of test holes, necessary to determine all of the relevant conditions which may affect construction costs would normally be greater than has been carried out for design purposes. Contractors bidding on, or undertaking the work, should rely on their own investigations, as well as their own interpretations of the factual data presented in the report, as to how subsurface conditions may affect their work, including but not limited to proposed construction techniques, schedule, safety and equipment capabilities. Soil, Rock and Groundwater Conditions: Classification and identification of soils, rocks, and geologic units have been based on commonly accepted methods employed in the practice of geotechnical engineering and related disciplines. Classification and identification of the type and condition of these materials or units involves judgment, and boundaries between different soil, rock or geologic types or units may be transitional rather than abrupt. Accordingly, Golder does not warrant or guarantee the exactness of the descriptions.

Golder Associates

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT (cont’d)

Special risks occur whenever engineering or related disciplines are applied to identify subsurface conditions and even a comprehensive investigation, sampling and testing program may fail to detect all or certain subsurface conditions. The environmental, geologic, geotechnical, geochemical and hydrogeologic conditions that Golder interprets to exist between and beyond sampling points may differ from those that actually exist. In addition to soil variability, fill of variable physical and chemical composition can be present over portions of the site or on adjacent properties. The professional services retained for this project include only the geotechnical aspects of the subsurface conditions at the site, unless otherwise specifically stated and identified in the report. The presence or implication(s) of possible surface and/or subsurface contamination resulting from previous activities or uses of the site and/or resulting from the introduction onto the site of materials from off-site sources are outside the terms of reference for this project and have not been investigated or addressed. Soil and groundwater conditions shown in the factual data and described in the report are the observed conditions at the time of their determination or measurement. Unless otherwise noted, those conditions form the basis of the recommendations in the report. Groundwater conditions may vary between and beyond reported locations and can be affected by annual, seasonal and meteorological conditions. The condition of the soil, rock and groundwater may be significantly altered by construction activities (traffic, excavation, groundwater level lowering, pile driving, blasting, etc.) on the site or on adjacent sites. Excavation may expose the soils to changes due to wetting, drying or frost. Unless otherwise indicated the soil must be protected from these changes during construction. Sample Disposal: Golder will dispose of all uncontaminated soil and/or rock samples 90 days following issue of this report or, upon written request of the Client, will store uncontaminated samples and materials at the Client’s expense. In the event that actual contaminated soils, fills or groundwater are encountered or are inferred to be present, all contaminated samples shall remain the property and responsibility of the Client for proper disposal. Follow-Up and Construction Services: All details of the design were not known at the time of submission of Golder’s report. Golder should be retained to review the final design, project plans and documents prior to construction, to confirm that they are consistent with the intent of Golder’s report. During construction, Golder should be retained to perform sufficient and timely observations of encountered conditions to confirm and document that the subsurface conditions do not materially differ from those interpreted conditions considered in the preparation of Golder’s report and to confirm and document that construction activities do not adversely affect the suggestions, recommendations and opinions contained in Golder’s report. Adequate field review, observation and testing during construction are necessary for Golder to be able to provide letters of assurance, in accordance with the requirements of many regulatory authorities. In cases where this recommendation is not followed, Golder’s responsibility is limited to interpreting accurately the information encountered at the borehole locations, at the time of their initial determination or measurement during the preparation of the Report. Changed Conditions and Drainage: Where conditions encountered at the site differ significantly from those anticipated in this report, either due to natural variability of subsurface conditions or construction activities, it is a condition of this report that Golder be notified of any changes and be provided with an opportunity to review or revise the recommendations within this report. Recognition of changed soil and rock conditions requires experience and it is recommended that Golder be employed to visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect if conditions have changed significantly. Drainage of subsurface water is commonly required either for temporary or permanent installations for the project. Improper design or construction of drainage or dewatering can have serious consequences. Golder takes no responsibility for the effects of drainage unless specifically involved in the detailed design and construction monitoring of the system.

PHOTO APPENDIX

November 2006 061-450064

Golder Associates

PLATE 1

Short section of Stream 5 above C-2 cleared of small woody debris.

PLATE 2

Stream 7 with stable small woody debris. Retain the small woody debris.

November 2006 061-450064

Golder Associates

PLATE 3

Armouring of stream channel and swale near C-24, Stream 9.

PLATE 4

Squamish rock ford on Stream 4.

November 2006 061-450064

Golder Associates

PLATE 5

Fill slope pullback on >60% slopes. Excess fill placed against road cut.

PLATE 6

Backup cross ditch and ditch block – Tod Mainline.

November 2006 061-450064

Golder Associates

PLATE 7

Cross ditches and pullback along the Tod Mainline.

PLATE 8

Short diagonal water bars (“water wings”) for runoff control.

November 2006 061-450064

Golder Associates

PLATE 9

Cross ditch spur SP2 with ditch block, flared outlet - excess fill removed.

PLATE 10

Pull back of fill, recontouring and spreading of slash, Spur SP2.

November 2006 061-450064

Golder Associates

PLATE 11

Residual check dam in Stream 4.

golder associates ltd. - managed forest...

Documents