Areas of Environmental Sensitivity Sample Clauses

Areas of Environmental Sensitivity. At the time of the fire, the Crown had established certain areas excluded from harvesting, where log- ging was prohibited. These included “steep, sensi- tive sites”. It was recognized that conventional log- ging on steep hillsides would disturb the ground, leading to potential erosion. There were also limita- tions on cutting in areas of immature trees and wild- life areas designed to protect flora and fauna. After the fire, but prior to trial, the Crown also established “riparian areas” in the forests where log- ging along rivers and creek banks was prohibited to protect watercourses, fish habitat, and other environ- mental values. Canfor’s expert took the view, valuing the loss as of the date of the fire in 1992, that riparian areas should be included in the valuation of the Crown’s loss because they were available for logging at that time. For purposes of this case, therefore, such timber was treated as harvestable and therefore pro- ductive of revenue. However, Canfor’s expert cal- culated that logging the steep, sensitive slopes in a way that was environmentally acceptable even in 1992 (i.e., by helicopter) would have been so une- conomic as to produce for the Crown, notionally, a negative stumpage rate. He therefore concluded that although logging the steep, sensitive slopes would have yielded a certain quantity of timber, it would not have financially advantaged the Crown. He cal- culated the Crown’s revenue loss on both harvest- able trees and non-harvestable or protected trees on steep, sensitive slopes at zero. argument a cependant été rejeté tant par le juge de première instance que par la Cour d’appel. Selon ces tribunaux, et je souscris à leur opinion, la Couronne n’a pas été en mesure de prouver quel- que manque à gagner ouvrant droit à indemnisa- tion.