Common use of Visual Quality Clause in Contracts

Visual Quality. Because of the way the GIS personnel were directed to do their analysis, it is difficult to compare the managment of visually sensitive areas in the Framework Agreement vs. the Base Case. This is because, while the Base Case zones include existing Preservation, Retention, and Partial Retention VQOs which 32 The OIC states that “The purpose of this order is to establish the study area to replace the Hakai Recreation Area in order to expedite public discussions on the development and establishment of a protected area in and around the study area with boundaries and management structures acceptable to the Heiltsuk Nation and the Province.” As for continuation of existing commercial permits, it also states that “Resource Use Permits issued in the Hakai Recreation Area before the coming into force of this order are conclusively deemed to have been validly issued in compliance with the Park Act as it read on the respective dates on which the permits were issued.” overlaid the visually sensitive areas, due to lack of direction in the Agreement, these “Base Case VQOs” were not inserted into the GIS overlays for that scenario. However, it is assumed that visual management under the Agreement will, if anything, be more constraining to timber harvesting than in the Base Case. This is due not only to the additional PPAs, but also due to the language in the Framework Agreement (in Appendix III of the documentation) that recommends extensive future public process in setting VQOs in not only the SMZ #1 and #2 areas, but also throughout the remainder of the Plan Area.‌‌ Therefore, using the Base Case as a minimum, it is assumed that on the THLB, the Framework Agreement would eventually result in more than 34.1% of MSBTC Priority #1 areas, 51.8% of Community areas, and 65.8% of MoF Scenic areas being designated under partial retention or more constraining regimes, including PPAs [see Map 5(b)] For example, while there is some overlap with the Base Case VQOs, it is noteworthy that the Framework Agreement places a combination of 46.3% of Priority #1 Areas in PPAs and SMZs #1 & #2, including Cape Caution and significant parts of Princess Royal Island, the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇/▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Islands, and Knight Inlet, and the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇/Sonora Island areas. Also, with additional visually sensitive lands contained in Option and First Nation Lead areas, as well as anticipated future ecosystem-based management practices to cover most of the Plan Area, future erosion of visual values in the Plan Area is expected to be far less pronounced than in the Base Case.