Land & Resources 2

2.3 Salmon Resources

Salmon continue to be one of the most important food sources for the Hupacasath people. While salmon are obviously a fisheries resource they rely on spawning rivers and creeks, lakes for juvenile sockeye and riparian areas and estuaries for the juveniles. The Hupacasath lands contain spawning and rearing areas for all five species of salmon as well as steelhead and trout.

Table 1 shows that while sockeye and Chinook escapements have generally improved since the 1950s, chum have remained steady and coho and pinks have declined. One of the main objectives of the Hupacasath Land Use Plan is to protect and enhance fish habitat and rebuild salmon runs to historic levels.

Table 1: Salmon Escapement in Hupacasath Rivers

Nahmint River
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 719 188 6 42,895 319
1980's 326 167 8 23,528 209
1970's 65 385 150 24,600 645
1960's unknown 228 100 25,000 725
1950's unknown 379 400 36,571 1,936

 

Somass River
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 340,767 24,484 5 2,400 72,720
1980's 337,642 29,828 1 1,150 30,567
1970's 171,866 66,320 283 2,540 11,400
1960's 57,400 43,500 1,043 2,125 10,050
1950's 47,500 32,143 238 5,500 9,643

 

Franklin River
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 174 59 unknown 216 29
1980's 40 45 0 28 3
1970's unknown 115 43 109 46
1960's unknown 148 25 383 25
1950's unknown 114 unknown 139 25

 

China Creek
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 300 100 unknown 15 50
1980's 0 90 10 unknown 10
1970's unknown 95 unknown 49 16
1960's unknown 238 unknown 65 42
1950's unknown 50 unknown 96 unknown

 

Cous Creek
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 315 260 unknown 5,473 2
1980's 50 65 0 445 13
1970's unknown 100 unknown 510 23
1960's unknown 245 unknown 528 25
1950's unknown 58 unknown 383 unknown

 

Coleman Creek
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 70 81 unknown 135 unknown
1980's 0 36 0 10 0
1970's unknown 91 unknown 301 unknown
1960's unknown 53 unknown 110 25
1950's unknown 25 unknown 25 unknown

 

Coleman Creek
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 1,800 unknown      
1980's unknown unknown      
1970's unknown unknown      
1960's unknown unknown      
1950's unknown unknown      

 

Coleman Creek
  Sockeye Coho Pink Chum Chinook
1990's 50 28 unknown 32 2
1980's 0 unknown 0 unknown 0
1970's unknown 56 unknown 25 unknown
1960's unknown 65 unknown 86 25
1950's unknown 25 unknown 154 unknown


2.4 Forest Resources

The Hupacasath territory has supplied approximately 62 million cubic meters of timber, which is close to one year harvest from the entire province. This was worth approximately $13.3 billion to the Canadian economy in 1990 and $24.6 billion in 2002. However, the Hupacasath received very little if any benefit from this wealth. The major forest tenure holders in the Hupacasath territory are Weyerhaeuser and Timber West.

Table 2 shows the area, volume and value of timber harvested in Hupacasath traditional territory by decade. The value of timber harvested is based on a per cubic meter value of $215.00 to the Canadian economy in the early 1990s. More recent data indicates a value of $381.00 per cubic meter (from Domestic and Foreign – Statistics Canada). This includes all taxes, employment generated, costs of production, profits, etc.

Table 2: Total Areas Logged and Approximate Volume and Value

Years Area (ha) Volume (m3) Value (2002 $)
1980’s 13,407 9,331,272 $3.5 billion
1970’s 14,386 10,012,656 $3.8 billion
1960’s 11,208 7,800,768 $2.9 billion
1950’s 11,434 7,958,064 $3.1 billion
1940’s and prior 38,701 26,935,896 $10.3 billion
Total 89,136 62,038,656 $23.6 billion

*note: The reason the area logged is so high for the 1940s is because these figures include all the areas logged up to 1950.

Table 3 shows that over 50% of the Hupacasath forests in Tree Farm License 44 and the Timber Supply Area are in good and medium sites for growing trees. This is why the area is one of the earliest logged in the province and why the timber has such a high value. This area grows very large trees in a relatively short period of time.

Table 3: Forest Site Growing Quality

Growing Quality Area (ha) %
Good 178,582.2 9.6
Medium 75,081.2 40.8
Poor 43,299.5 23.5
Low 10,070.4 5.5
Non forest 32,538.3 17.7
No data 5,481.5 3.0
Total 184,053.1 100.0

Table 4 shows that almost one half (46%) of the forests are young forests under 80 years of age and 32% is over 141 years or mature forest. While there appears to be a large volume of mature forest much of this is in protected areas, is on unstable slopes, or is inaccessible for timber harvest.

Table 4: Age Class

Age (years) Area (ha) %
0 to 20 21,905.4 11.9
21 to 40 24,310.2 13.2
41 to 60 33,194.8 18.0
61 to 80 5,394.8 2.9
81 to 100 2,010.9 1.1
101 to 120 406.5 0.2
121 to 140 141.1 0.1
141 to 250 13,503.2 7.3
> 251 45,673.2 24.8
Non Forest 32,538.3 17.7
No data 5,036.0 2.7

Table 5 shows that almost 40% of Hupacasath are primarily Douglas fir forests , which is considered one of the most valuable species in the province for commercial timber harvest. The fact that there are relatively few forests that are predominantly red and yellow cedar indicates the need to protect these species for Hupacasath use.

Table 5: Leading Species

Species Area (ha) %
Balsam 19,269.5 10.4
Douglas Fir 73,614.8 39.8
Hemlock 44,349.0 24.0
Pine 435.7 0.2
Spruce 45.4 0.0
Western red cedar 3,645.2 2.0
Yellow cedar 2,207.3 1.2
Deciduous 3,000.0 1.6
Non forest 32,538.3 17.6
No data 6,008.1 3.2
Total 185,113.3 100.0

Area within TFL 44 and TSA.