***********************************************

WORLDWIDE FOREST/BIODIVERSITY CAMPAIGN NEWS

Ontario, Canada's Boreal Forests-Fading Fast

***********************************************

Forest Networking a Project of Ecological Enterprises

     http://forests.org/ -- Forest Conservation Archives

     http://forests.org/web/ -- Discuss Forest Conservation

 

12/4/98

OVERVIEW & COMMENTARY by EE

Virtually the entire forested land base of Ontario is to be turned over to

rapacious industrial resource development.  This is an incredible forest

ecosystem with significant remaining late-successional areas.  As the

attached backgrounder details:

 

"THE ISSUE: An Ontario government land use planning process called

"Lands For Life" is about to make a decision on how much land to

permanently protect across a landbase spanning 45 MILLION hectares (an

area larger than California or twice the size of Britain), 40 million

hectares of which is PUBLIC land. ALL LAND not protected will be

tenured to the forestry and mining industries... ... A final

consolidated report... ...recommends that only 1.6% of this land base

be added to the protected areas system (6.6% is currently protected).

The remaining 92% of this massive area will be made available to the

forestry and mining industries..."

 

This came to me relatively late-the appeal is for signatures and letters

for a presentation in early December.  However, as a backgrounder, it is a

good representation of the Lands for Life forest campaign which is

ratcheting up the pressure for a conservation biology based planning

process in Canada's critical boreal forests (for carbon storage, future

development potential, wildlife habitat, biodiversity-just generally

holding the planetary ecological system together).  I am sure that though

past the deadline, offers to get involved in the continuing campaign would

be appreciated. 

 

Hot stuff!  I feel particularly drawn to this campaign as I work on

biosphere reserve and wilderness identification (as biodiversity reserves

and ecological core areas) in the North Forests of Wisconsin, Minnesota

and Michigan-part of the same forest complex.

g.b.

 

*******************************

RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:

 

Title:    Help Protect the Boreal Forests of Ontario

Source:   Econet Conservation Biology (list.consbio) conference

Status:   Distribute freely with credit given to source

Date:     November 25, 1998

Byline:   Kevin Kavanagh

 

/** list.consbio: 79.0 **/

** Topic: Help protect the boreal forests of Ontario **

** Written 10:38 AM  Nov 25, 1998 by sepope@ccs.carleton.ca in

cdp:list.consbio **

PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE WIDELY TO THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.

 

In the message that follows you will find an urgent STATEMENT OF

CONSERVATION CONCERN that has been prepared by a group of conservation

biologists in Ontario, Canada.

 

THE ISSUE: An Ontario government land use planning process called

"Lands For Life" is about to make a decision on how much land to

permanently protect across a landbase spanning 45 MILLION hectares (an

area larger than California or twice the size of Britain), 40 million

hectares of which is PUBLIC land. ALL LAND not protected will be

tenured to the forestry and mining industries.

 

A final consolidated report prepared by public roundtables dominated

by industry representatives was released on October 30, 1998. The

government has now given the public only 30 DAYS to respond before it

makes its final decision!! The report recommends that only 1.6% of

this land base be added to the protected areas system (6.6% is

currently protected). The remaining 92% of this massive area will be

made available to the forestry and mining industries who are currently

seeking legal tenure agreements that will last in perpetuity.

 

Despite the fact that a primary goal of Lands For Life was the

completion of a representative protected areas system, the Round Table

report fails to do this.

 

***What is Needed From the International Scientific and Academic

Communities***

 

We are requesting that scientists who share our conservation concerns

in this urgent situation sign on to and help circulate the attached

STATEMENT OF CONSERVATION CONCERN to the Government of Ontario. To

assist you in deciding whether to sign the Statement, we have provided

a Summary and Backgrounder that provides you with greater detail on

this issue (located in this message after the statement).

 

To sign on, please e-mail or FAX your NAME and INSTITUTIONAL

AFFILIATION to Kevin Kavanagh at World Wildlife Fund Canada. A

response by November 30th would be most helpful.

 

We URGE you to forward this statement to other colleagues and request

that they, too, add their names to this statement.

 

e-mail address: kkavanagh@wwfcanada.org

FAX: (416) 489-3611

 

*What we plan to do with the statement and signatures.*

 

We will coordinate and facilitate the presentation of the statement to

the Ontario government and the media at a briefing to be held in early

December, 1998. We will also use the list of names to advise the

Ontario public of the strong support from the scientific and academic

communities for increasing the amount of protected lands in Ontario.

 

******************************************************

          XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

******************************************************

 

A COLLECTIVE STATEMENT OF CONSERVATION CONCERN FROM THE SCIENTIFIC

AND ACADEMIC COMMUNITIES REGARDING LANDS FOR LIFE

                           ONTARIO, CANADA

 

Whereas conserving biodiversity is of importance to maintaining the

natural state of the Earth's biosphere and in turn the quality of life

for humankind;

 

Whereas establishing protected areas systems is fundamentally

important to society in providing humankind with a source of natural

capital upon which to build a greater diversity of environmental

options for future generations;

 

Whereas the principal cause of wildlife extinction and population

decline are loss and fragmentation of wild habitat by widespread

industrial development;

 

Whereas industrial mining, forestry and hydroelectric development are

incompatible with maintaining the natural integrity of a significant

portion of wild habitats;

 

Whereas a representative, permanent protected areas system is

necessary to help maintain diverse genetic resources and for the

ongoing function of providing benchmark sites for the evaluation and

improvement of surrounding industrial management practices:

 

Whereas current forest management practices in Ontario, Canada

are still experimental with respect to the maintenance of

biodiversity, and in court have recently (October 1998) been shown to

be in non-compliance with Ontario's own Crown Forest Sustainability

Act;

 

Whereas the Lands for Life Consolidated Report from the Round

Tables only recommends protection of an additional 1.6% of the land

base within the Lands For Life planning area, bringing the total

protected land base to 8.2%, a figure inadequate to sustain ecological

integrity and the long term health of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife

populations and ecosystem types:

 

Resolved:

 

We, the undersigned, wish to convey our collective dismay that

Ontario's Lands for Life Round Tables have been unable to bring

modern science to bear on the urgent issue of ecosystem protection and

failed to recommend completion of a permanent protected areas system

representing Ontario's landscape diversity. 

 

Accordingly, we call on the Government of Ontario to reject the

Round Tables' recommendation to permanently protect only an

additional 1.6% of the planning area.  Rather, we urge the Government

of Ontario to complete, as promised, a protected areas system that is

fully representative of Ontario's diverse ecosystem types. Such a

system must utilize accepted scientific principles of protected areas

design and accepted precautionary principles which, we believe, will

require that at least 20% of the planning area be permanently

protected.

 

It is our opinion that to do anything less will lead to the further

decline and loss of native habitats, wildlife species, and genetic

resources that underpin the ecological integrity of a significant part

of the Ontario and Canadian landscape, and forecloses opportunities

for recreational, cultural, spiritual and economic development on a

truly sustainable basis.

 

--end of public statement--

 

******************************************************

          XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

******************************************************

 

 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

ONTARIO'S LANDS FOR LIFE PROCESS

 

Summary

 

The Ontario government launched a massive land-use planning exercise

called Lands For Life in February, 1997. Covering a land area of

nearly 40 million hectares (an area twice the size of Britain or equal

in size to the entire state of California), this process was mandated

to achieve three primary goals: (1) complete Ontario's system of parks

and protected areas, (2) recognize the land use needs of

resource-based tourism and (3) provide greater certainty on the

intervening landscape for the forest industry. Later, other resource

goals were added to explore enhanced opportunities for outdoor

recreation, including hunting and fishing, and consider the land-use

needs of the mining industry.

 

On October 30, 1998, the Ontario government publicly released a

consolidated report from three Advisory Round Tables concerning

allocation of public lands in this large area. In addition to proposed

land use designations, this report includes 242 recommendations to the

Ontario government. Currently, 6.6% of the planning area is protected

from major industrial activity through national and provincial parks

and conservation reserves. The report recommends that an additional

1.6% be added to the protected areas system for a total of 8.2%,

leaving many natural regions without significant protected areas. The

provincial round tables themselves admitted failure to achieve parks

targets.

 

Among the 242 recommendations to the provincial government, are

recommendations to:

 

- Permit mineral exploration and mining in conservation reserves;

- Permit logging in conservation reserves;

- Consider deregulation of  areas protected for natural heritage

  values if there is found to be existing mineral potential

- Consider completing the parks and protected areas system using

 "floating reserves"

 

The forest industry is seeking long-term tenure for those public lands

not permanently protected as provincial parks or conservation

reserves. The forest industry is on record as requesting that it be

granted compensable tenure in perpetuity across a majority of the land

base. Draft reports by industry and the provincial government have

advocated tenure in perpetuity.

 

The joint conservation science team of the Partnership For Public

Lands (World Wildlife Fund Canada, Federation of Ontario Naturalists

and the Wildlands League, a chapter of the Canadian Parks and

Wilderness Society) believe that these recommendations fall far short

of long-standing commitments to move towards completing a protected

areas system in Ontario, and threaten biodiversity conservation in

Ontario and Canada. Further, this set of protected areas decisions

will likely be the last that can be made before all remaining lands

are handed over to the forest and mining industries.

 

A coordinated public response is needed from the scientific community

that rejects the Round Table recommendations and encourages the

Ontario government to permanently protect at least 20% of these public

lands to better meet the Lands For Life goals related to biodiversity

conservation and maintaining the ecological integrity of the

landscape.

 

ECOSYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PLANNING AREA

 

General Description of the Study Area

 

The Lands For Life Planning area covers approximately 46 million

hectares of Ontario stretching from the Quebec border westward nearly

1,500 km to the Manitoba border. Nearly 40 million hectares are

publicly owned "Crown" lands and represents the area directly impacted

by the Lands For Life decision-making process.

 

Much of the planning area consists of hilly topography characteristic

of the Canadian Shield. Towards the northeast, the topography becomes

much gentler in the ancient lake-bed clay belts and the James Bay

lowlands. The entire area was glaciated and soils are often thinly

deposited over acidic bedrock, although their are large areas of

deeper alluvial, fluvio-glacial and lacustrine deposits.

 

Mixed hardwood forests stretch from southern Georgian Bay east to the

Ottawa valley and west to the eastern shores of Lake Superior.  Here

are found some of the most extensive old-growth white and red pine

stands remaining in the world. Places such as the Lower Spanish River,

Temagami and the Algoma Highlands contain significant stands.  As one

moves northwards through the planning area, forests transition into

mixed hardwood-boreal forests and finally, boreal forests and northern

wetlands that extend from the James Bay lowlands along the Quebec

border westward to the Ontario-Manitoba border. Wild fire was

historically the dominant force of forest renewal in the boreal

forests of the area. Fire suppression is now practiced throughout the

planning area, even in most protected areas. Fortunately, in some of

the larger protected areas, discussion of fire management is now

beginning to occur.

 

A diversity of wetland types, including fens, bogs, marshes and

forested swamps are distributed throughout the planning area. Aquatic

systems are also well represented, and extensive and diverse shoreline

communities are present along the north shore of Georgian Bay and Lake

Superior.

 

Current Status of the Landbase

 

The majority of this land base has already been accessed for

industrial development, principally forestry. Of the 46 million

hectares, only 40 roadless areas are larger than 20,000 hectares. A

few of these are protected in existing national and provincial parks

but most are vulnerable to the rapid encroachment of industry.

 

The widespread nature of human impact across Ontario's landscape was

referenced in the most recent annual report (April 1998) from the

environmental commissioners office, where it was stated that the

Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) should use the "precautionary

principle" when it establishes the extent and size of land designated

to protect Ontario's natural heritage features (recommendation #9). In

other words, protected areas should tend towards larger rather than

smaller sizes. The ecological integrity of the intervening industrial

landscape across the planning area is a major concern of conservation

biologists in Ontario. The methods used by the MNR to select large,

representative protected areas assume that large sizes are not

required in the planning area since the good forest industry

management practices in the surrounding landscape can support and

conserve Ontario's biodiversity. The above notation by Ontario's

environmental commissioner and additional evidence presented below

regarding industrial land management suggests that this a dangerous

assumption.

 

Wildlife Issues

 

Most of Ontario's wildlife species are still present, but significant

contraction and fragmentation of  the ranges of several large-bodied

animals are well documented. Eastern cougar and wolverine are believed

to be virtually extirpated from this entire planning area. Gray wolf

populations have contracted across the southern portions of the

planning area. Within the past year, genetic studies of wolves in the

eastern portions of the planning area have shown that these are, in

fact, red wolf populations that were thought to be extirpated in the

North American wild. The range of woodland caribou has retracted

significantly northwards with remaining populations are centered

primarily within and around existing protected areas.

 

Populations of most wildlife species are not consistently monitored by

the Ontario or Canadian  governments. This is evident from the report

of the Auditor General for Ontario that was issued in early November,

1998. With respect to the MNR, which has a mandate to manage wildlife,

the report stated that "the Ministry had not developed proper

effectiveness measures to assess success in achieving sustained

development of the province's fish and wildlife resources and lacked

the information necessary for identifying areas requiring corrective

actions." The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario's Annual Report

for 1997/98 assessed the Quality of Reporting - Wildlife Inventory

Databases as "poor". For example, the report stated that "MNR manages

a [black] bear hunt which harvests about 7,000 bears annually.

Although MNR has put out news releases estimating the Ontario bear

population at 75,000 to 100,000 individuals, the ministry has not

publicly released any reports on bear population numbers."

 

A lack of enforcement of sustainable industrial activities.

 

It has been clearly documented that the Ontario government is not

effectively monitoring or enforcing sustainable use of the province's

forest resources by industry. In October, 1998, the Ontario court of

appeal upheld a February, 1998 decision brought forward by

environmental groups against the government of Ontario that it was in

violation of its own Crown Forest Sustainability Act. The judges

condemned the government for failing to abide by its own requirements

to provide for the habitat needs for sensitive wildlife species such

as American marten and pileated woodpeckers (both of which succeed

best in areas with mature forests.)  The government was also found in

violation of planning requirements necessary for the long-term

sustainability of the forest.

 

Recent reports prepared with the participation of the forest industry

and senior MNR management have  advocated long-term tenure on public

lands for industry, in fact suggesting that compensable tenure in

perpetuity would be desirable.

 

Where we are at today?

 

Contrary to the precautionary principle, the Lands For Life Round

Tables have suggested only slight increases to Ontario's protected

areas system, and have used points consistently raised by industry

representatives to support their position. Present forest management

and Round Table recommendations suggest the following erroneous

assumptions about conservation biology:

 

X Ecologically representative protected areas that are off-limits to

commercial forestry and mining are not necessary to conserve

biodiversity. The only protected areas that are necessary are very

small sites to protect unique or rare values (such as heronries, eagle

nests, shorelines of coldwater streams etc.)

 

X Industrial manipulation of forest cover under increasingly intensive

harvest regimes will mimic natural disturbance patterns over the

entire forest landscape.

 

X Modern/current industrial harvest methods duplicate fire, insect

outbreak, wind throw and disease.

 

X Industrial clearcutting will perpetuate high quality wildlife

habitat.

 

X Landscape, species, genetic and stand structural diversity will be

maintained through large area clearcutting, (the harvest method used

in 95% of forest harvesting in Ontario (MNR Annual Report, '94-'95)

 

X Secondary impacts of logging such as a permanent road access

network, over fishing, over hunting and erosion are not thought to be

significant negative impacts on biodiversity.

 

X Industrial uses such as mining and large scale hydo-electric

development have insignificant impacts on biodiversity.

 

X It was recommended that the total landbase be available to industry

and that the concept of floating (or rotating) reserves be used to

complete the protected areas system. This designation involves

creating a park, and then removing it if industry requires it for

logging or mining operations.

 

In keeping with these opportunistic, unsubstantiated claims, the Round

Tables recommended the following new protected areas as a percentage

of the total planning area:

 

Proposed new Provincial  Parks                    272,385 ha. (0.6%)

Proposed new Conservation Reserves                430,506 ha. (1.0%)

Total: All areas                                  702,891 ha. (1.6%)

 

This includes 72 Provincial Parks and 199 Conservation Reserves

for a total of 271 areas with an average area of 2,257 ha. More than a

dozen proposed parks in one of the planning regions are smaller than

100 hectares.

 

Other Disturbing Aspects of the Round Table Recommendations

 

Five members of the Round tables refused to sign the

recommendations. Their letters and reasons for not signing were

excluded from the consolidated report released on October 30th. The

only reference to their concerns is found at the end of Section 2.5

where they are referenced as "exceptions to consensus". Although it is

not stated, the reason that several of the members did not sign is

because the Round Tables did not keep to their mandate to complete a

protected areas system.

 

There are no recommendations to increase the level of protection

standards for provincial parks or conservation reserves, only to

weaken them.

 

The Round Tables admit that they failed to achieve the goal of

completing the parks and protected areas system (Section 6.1) as

required by the Provincial government.

 

The Round Tables admit that they failed to identify areas that will

be used for intensive or enhanced forestry.

 

Included in the 242 recommendations to government are the following

additional issues of conservation concern:

 

It is recommended that protected conservation reserves (like the

Ranger North old growth pine area in the Algoma Highlands and the

Kaladar Jack Pine Barrens on Highway #7) be made available for mining.

 

It has been recommended that commercial trapping be used to "control

populations and combat disease" in provincial park wilderness zones

and nature reserves.

 

It is recommended that the lakes in parks be intensively managed to

produce more fish for anglers. 

 

It is recommended that hunting be "enhanced" in conservation

reserves through "proactive habitat and game population management."

 

We hope that this brief summary has provided you with sufficient

background information to add your signature to the Statement of

Conservation Concern.  For more information, please contact:

 

The Partnership For Public Lands

Phone: 1-888-371-LAND

Website: www.web.net/wild

 

The consolidated Round Table report is available from the

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources website:

www.mnr.gov.on.ca/MNR/lfl

 

Sincerely,

Kevin Kavanagh

Senior Manager, Conservation Science

Endangered Spaces Campaign

World Wildlife Fund Canada

90 Eglinton Ave. East, Suite 504

Toronto, Ontario 

M4P 2Z7   CANADA

(416) 489-4567 ext. 262 (Tel)

(416) 489-3611 (FAX)

kkavanagh@wwfcanada.org

 

 

Shealagh Pope

 

sepope@consecol.org

 

Project Coordinator

Conservation Ecology

Algonquin to Adirondacks

Biology Department

Carleton University

1125 Colonel By Drive

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada  K1S 5B6

Phone (613) 520-3657

Fax (613) 520-4497

 

###RELAYED TEXT ENDS###  

This document is for general distribution.  All efforts are made to

provide accurate, timely pieces; though ultimate responsibility for

verifying all information rests with the reader.  Check out our Gaia

Forest Conservation Archives at URL= http://forests.org/  

Networked by Ecological Enterprises, gbarry@forests.org