Editorial cartoon of a Campbell River forestry worker lost in a dark forest maze while a distant government figure holds an empty calendar
Cartoon: a forestry town is handed a maze before it is handed a timetable.
Bottom line: B.C. has named the Campbell River area as the first candidate for a new three-zone Working Forest Landscape Model, while current reporting says no date has been given for specific plans.

Campbell River is now the test site for another major NDP forestry experiment. The province announced Tuesday that areas north of and adjacent to Campbell River will be the first candidate area for the proposed Working Forest Landscape Model, developed with Na̲nwak̲olas Council and four member First Nations: Tlowitsis, We Wai Kai, Wei Wai Kum and K’ómoks.

The model is not a small administrative tweak. Government says public forests would be explored through three linked zones: a Working-Forest Zone prioritizing commercial timber production, a Multiple-Use Zone focused on restoration, biodiversity, wildfire mitigation and other uses, and a Conservation and Protection Zone for long-term ecosystem function and biodiversity. CityNews, carrying Canadian Press, summarized the practical effect plainly: the zones would dictate how and where trees can be logged.

Forests Minister Ravi Parmar is pitching the change as a move away from “cut-block-by-cut-block permitting” toward “operational plan forestry.” The government’s broader program page says the existing system can create complexity, costs and uncertainty, and says the new approach is intended to improve predictability for industry, workers, First Nations, communities, conservation values and wildlife.

That promise is exactly why the missing details matter. Forestry workers, contractors, mills, local governments and conservation advocates are being told this model can bring certainty. Yet Canadian Press reported that no details have been provided on when specific plans will be released. A process advertised as predictability cannot begin with an open-ended calendar.

The public-interest test is straightforward. If the Working-Forest Zone is meant to stabilize timber supply and support jobs, British Columbians should see the expected harvest, mill-supply and employment implications. If the Conservation and Protection Zone is meant to protect biodiversity, they should see the ecological basis for the boundaries. If the Multiple-Use Zone is meant to balance restoration, wildfire risk reduction and economic activity, they should see how conflicts will be decided and who has final authority.

Environmental groups have already pushed back, according to Canadian Press, warning the plan could create guaranteed logging zones and obstruct the public’s ability to protect and conserve forests. The province says engagement will involve First Nations, local government, industry and environmental groups. Those commitments should be documented in a public schedule, with clear milestones and records of what decisions are being made before boundaries harden.

Campbell River families have lived through years of forestry uncertainty. They do not need another glossy “modernization” label followed by months of waiting. If the Eby government wants this model judged as reform instead of process management, it should publish the timetable, the candidate-area map, the decision rules and the economic ledger now. Certainty is not created by naming a test area. It is created by showing the plan.

Sources and records