Your words "doing what you are currently doing" need further explanation.
If what you are "currently doing" has external costs—loss of biodiversity, loss of BC forests' ability to moderate climate, loss of hydrological function, for example—that aren't included in your definition of sustainability, then this definition of "sustainability" is deeply flawed.
If all you really care about is the flow of "fibre" to mills and log export facilities, then I suppose it's fine.
One common element to timber supply reviews is that they always, directly or indirectly, consider the socioec