How To Use The Port Renfrew Public Data Audit Map

Date prepared: 2026-06-02

What This Map Is For

This map is not trying to prove that a specific company broke the law.

It answers a simpler question:

What can the public see from official data before old forest or high-risk forest is logged?

The useful pattern is overlap. If recorded cutblocks, old-growth priority areas, streams, roads, fish-passage records, and recreation places all stack up in the same area, that does not prove harm by itself. It does show where the public should be able to see the site plan, stream prescriptions, road/culvert records, fuel hazard records, sale economics, and old-growth rationale.

If those records are not public, that is the accountability gap.

5-Minute Walkthrough

If you only have five minutes, do this:

Open the map.
Read the panel on the left. It says what the map is and what it is not.
Look at the map with only the default layers on: watersheds, past logging shaded by age, the old growth flagged to pause logging, recreation sites, and landmarks.
Find San Juan River and Gordon River. The landmark points help you orient.
Under "Water and roads", turn on Streams and Forest roads. Watch how often roads cross water near San Juan River.
Under "Old forest", turn on Forest age: young vs very old. Red is young forest, green is 250 and older. See where old forest still remains and where young forest dominates.
Click one orange cutblock. The popup shows its recorded harvest year and area.
Open data/public-data-audit/watershed-harvest-stand-age-summary.csv and find the San Juan River row. That number is the same harvest footprint you just saw on the map, counted in hectares.

That is the whole idea: the map shows the pattern, the tables count it, and both point at the records the public still cannot see.

What To Click First

Leave the default layers on. They are the clearest.
The first two layers worth adding are Streams and Forest roads (under "Water and roads"). Together they show crossing pressure, which is where culvert, bridge, sediment, and fish-passage records should exist.
After that, add Forest age: young vs very old to compare old forest against harvest.
Add the other old-growth layers (Ancient forest, Old forest, Big-tree old growth, Protected old growth) only when you want to compare government old-growth mapping against recorded harvest. They make the map busy.

Worked Examples

Example 1: Streams + roads at San Juan River

Turn on streams and roads, then zoom to San Juan River.

What you see: a dense road network crossing many stream lines, inside a watershed that also has recorded cutblocks and TAP old-growth priority areas.

What it suggests: there are likely many road-stream crossings here, and each crossing is a place where a culvert, bridge, sediment-control, or fish-passage record should exist. The watershed table estimates 622 road-stream intersections for San Juan River.

What it does not mean: it does not prove any crossing is failing, that fish are blocked, or that sediment is entering the stream. It is a reason to ask for the crossing and maintenance records, not a finding of harm.

Example 2: Old forest vs harvest at Gordon River and Fairy Creek

Turn on Old forest and Big-tree old growth (past logging is already on by default), then look at Gordon River and Fairy Creek.

What you see: old-growth priority polygons sitting close to recorded harvest, with high-age VRI stands mixed through both watersheds.

What it suggests: harvest decisions here are being made near mapped old forest, so the public should be able to see the old-growth retention rationale and the site plan before more is approved.

What it does not mean: it does not prove any specific old-growth polygon was logged, or that any harvest was illegal. Overlap on a screening map is the start of a records question, not the answer.

What An Overlap Means And Does Not Mean

An overlap means	An overlap does not mean
Several official datasets describe the same place	That any harm happened
There is a reason to ask for the site-level records	That any law was broken
The decision deserves a visible rationale	That logging caused a fish or fire problem
This is a good FOI or disclosure target	That the screening data is field-confirmed

Overlap is a question generator. It tells you where to look, not what happened.

Four Kinds Of Statements In This Project

When you read the map, tables, or report, notice which kind of statement you are looking at. They carry different weight.

Fact. Something the official data directly records. Example: official data shows about 32,800 ha of recorded consolidated-cutblock area in the broad study area.
Screening fact. A pattern from inventory or GIS that is real but not a legal or field-confirmed result. Example: VRI screening shows about 6,136.9 ha of 250+ high-age forest in San Juan River. This is an inventory age signal, not a legal old-growth determination.
Missing-record finding. A specific record the public cannot see. Example: the public cannot see the site plan or fuel hazard assessment for SJsj5P8 from the current public package.
Question. What the gap should make the public ask. Example: where are the local culvert, bridge, and inspection records held, given the road-stream crossing estimates?

The strongest public argument stays inside these four. It does not jump to "corruption" or "logging killed the salmon" without records that prove it.

What The Layers Mean

Official Named Watersheds

Black outlines.

These are the real watershed/drainage areas used for the audit summaries. They replace the earlier rough boxes. This matters because water, sediment, roads, fish passage, and cumulative effects should be discussed by watershed, not just by one cutblock.

Look for:

San Juan River
Gordon River
Fairy Creek
Walbran Creek
Renfrew Creek
Harris Creek
Lens Creek
Caycuse River
Sombrio River

Old Growth Flagged To Pause Logging (TAP priority deferral)

Green polygons, on by default.

These are old-growth priority deferral areas from the Old Growth Technical Advisory Panel dataset. They identify areas that public old-growth analysis treated as priority context.

This does not mean every polygon is permanently protected. It means the area has enough old-growth importance that the public should expect a clear decision record before harvest.

Old Forest, Big-Tree Old Growth, And Ancient Forest

Optional green layers.

These show different old-growth priority concepts:

Old forest: old forest identified by the TAP analysis.
Big-tree old growth: old forest with large-tree characteristics.
Ancient forest (over 400 years): very old forest identified by TAP.

These are important because they let us compare government old-growth mapping against recorded harvest, VRI high-age stands, OGMAs, and missing public decision records.

Protected Old Growth (legal OGMAs)

Purple polygons.

OGMA means Old Growth Management Area. Legal OGMAs are areas officially set aside for old-growth management.

This matters because if old forest exists outside OGMAs, the public needs to know how retention decisions are made. If harvest is near or around OGMAs, road, edge, sediment, and cumulative-effects questions become more important.

Forest Age: Young Vs Very Old (VRI)

Red and green polygons.

VRI is forest inventory. In this map:

red means young/regrowth, age 0-59
green means 250+ high-age forest

This is a screening layer, not a legal old-growth definition. It helps show the broad pattern: where young forest dominates, and where high-age forest remains.

Past Logging, Shaded By Age (recorded cutblocks)

Orange polygons, on by default.

These are official recorded harvest polygons from the Consolidated Cutblocks layer.

This is one of the most important layers. It shows the recorded harvest footprint. It may miss private-land logging, older harvest, or recent activity, so the correct claim is:

Official data alone shows a major recorded harvest footprint. The full footprint may be larger.

Streams (Freshwater Atlas)

Blue lines.

These are official stream lines. Turn this on when looking at roads, cutblocks, and old-growth priority areas.

This matters because forest decisions near streams should have public records for stream classification, riparian prescriptions, sediment control, crossings, culverts, and deactivation.

Forest Roads (road segment tenure)

Grey lines.

These are official forest road tenure lines.

Roads matter because they can create long-term public costs: bridges, culverts, sediment, maintenance, deactivation, access, fuel breaks, and fish-passage issues.

Fish-Crossing Checks (PSCIS assessments)

Purple points.

PSCIS is the provincial fish-passage assessment system. These points show where crossings or fish-passage structures have been assessed.

This does not prove logging caused a fish problem. It shows where road/fish-passage records already exist and where planning should account for fish movement.

Recreation Sites And Landmarks

Pink and yellow points.

These show public recreation sites and project landmarks such as Port Renfrew, San Juan River Rec Site, Avatar Grove, Red Creek Fir, Fairy Creek, Botanical Beach, and Sombrio Beach.

This matters because forestry decisions can affect tourism, camping, access, scenery, and the public experience of old forest. Those costs are usually harder to see than timber value.

How To Read The Tables

The tables are not random numbers. Each one answers a public accountability question.

`old-growth-overlap-by-watershed.csv`

Question:

Where do official old-growth priority layers overlap each watershed?

Important columns:

tap_old_forests_ha: hectares of TAP old forest in that watershed.
tap_big_trees_ha: hectares of TAP big-tree old growth.
tap_priority_deferral_ha: hectares in priority deferral areas.
legal_ogma_ha: hectares in legal Old Growth Management Areas.

Why it matters:

If a watershed has lots of old-growth priority overlap, the public should be able to see the rationale for any harvest, retention, road building, or sale decision there.

`watershed-harvest-stand-age-summary.csv`

Question:

How much recorded harvest and current stand-age pattern is visible by watershed?

Important columns:

recorded_consolidated_cutblock_overlap_ha: recorded harvest footprint.
recorded_cutblock_share_pct: share of the watershed overlapping recorded cutblocks.
vri_0_59_young_regrowth_ha: young/regrowth forest.
vri_250_plus_high_age_ha: very old/high-age forest signal.

Why it matters:

This shows cumulative change. It also helps identify where young forest dominates and where high-age forest remains.

`road-stream-crossing-density-official-watersheds.csv`

Question:

Where do public road and stream layers suggest crossing pressure?

Important columns:

forest_road_km: road length in the watershed.
stream_km: stream length in the watershed.
estimated_road_stream_intersections: GIS estimate of road-stream crossings.

Why it matters:

Road-stream crossings are where culverts, bridges, sediment, and fish-passage records should exist. These are GIS estimates, not field-confirmed culvert counts.

`bcts-sale-record-visibility.csv`

Question:

What can the public see about BCTS old-growth-labelled sales?

Important columns:

tsl_ids_found: Timber Sale Licence IDs found in public schedules.
sale_result_visible_in_current_package: whether sale result is visible here.
sale_package_visible_in_current_package: whether sale package is visible here.
full_cost_accounting_visible: whether public cost accounting is visible.

Why it matters:

The public can see old-growth-labelled sale scheduling, but not the full ledger behind the decision. That gap becomes a targeted disclosure request.

The Main Takeaway

The map and tables are meant to support one public argument:

Before old-growth or high-risk forest is approved, sold, or cut near water, fish, recreation, and remaining high-age forest, the public should be able to see the full-cost accounting and site-level risk records.

The strongest next use is not to say "this proves corruption." It is to say:

Official public data shows enough overlap to ask serious questions. The missing records are exactly what the public needs to judge net public value.