I am in support of a boreal…

I am in support of a boreal caribou conservation agreement between Ontario and the federal government. However, the federal government needs to recognize that currently in Ontario there is a provincial Boreal Caribou Recovery Strategy and Boreal Caribou Conservation Plan already in place to conserve the species, based on the best available scientific information using a “Range Management Approach” under the Ontario Endangered Species Act. These strategies use disturbance, such as forestry as recognized in Conservation Measure 3.1, as a tool in the management of critical boreal caribou habitat (e.g. the Dynamic Caribou Habitat Schedule (DCHS)). Ontario’s Forest Management Guide for Boreal Landscapes provides the direction for how Forest Management Plans (FMP) must consider and maintain caribou habitat. Forest management planning in Ontario schedules harvest temporally and spatially to provide a continuous succession of the critical habitat (large areas of mature conifer forest) required by the boreal caribou, while providing socio-economic benefit to the region. The FMP must consider existing habitat, area that will become habitat over time, calving areas, nursery areas, wintering areas and travel corridors. The FMP uses science-based estimates of the amount of habitat that would naturally occur in an unmanaged landscape (where forest fire drives forest succession), this information is used to develop habitat targets with the objective to sustain caribou. The Forest Management Guide for Boreal Landscapes also provides best practices for regenerating the forest to conifer forests that will provide caribou habitat in the future and for decommissioning and regenerating roads. I disagree with Conservation Measure 2.2 to increase the number of protected areas in Ontario. Increasing protected areas may preserve the current amount of caribou habitat in the short term (i.e. not harvesting mature timber). However, without harvesting, these protected areas will be burned by forest fire (then not providing critical habitat), blown down from old age by wind, or boreal forest succession will continue and the conifer species will die out and likely be replaced by an uneven aged stand of balsam fir or mixedwood (not preferred habitat for caribou).
The most important part of this agreement is the funding and research for the boreal caribou ranges of Ontario, as suggested in Conservation Measures 1.1 & 1.2. The ranges should be scientifically determined by the local populations of caribou. According to the 2011 Environment Canada Scientific Assessment, there are 6 Ontario ranges that are improved conservation units (medium certainty of representing local population), 2 ranges that are conservation units (low certainty of representing local population) and only one range accurately representing a local population (high probability of representing local population). The agreement with the federal government should aim to facilitate and fund the scientific research needed to determine what the local populations (and population dynamics) of boreal caribou are in Ontario, and should lead to the refinement or enlargement of the current Ontario ranges to reflect the actual populations. In addition, gaps seem to exist in the current knowledge of external effects on Ontario’s boreal caribou population. As part of Conservation Measure 1.4 new research should identify whether a combination approach of managing critical boreal caribou habitat in conjunction with controlling the number of moose, deer or wolves would create self-sustaining local populations. Research should also identify whether climate change may be pushing boreal caribou, moose and deer north of their previous limits and how Ontario should account for this is the range refinement (e.g. should the southern line of the ranges be planned to move north over the next few decades due to climate change?).
More information is required when looking at Conservation Measure 2.1 to decrease cumulative disturbance of habitat. The referenced 65% undisturbed and maximum 35% disturbed in the proposal is a uniform federal approach and needs to be reviewed before being implemented in Ontario. There needs to be a research effort in Ontario under the agreement to look at range-specific thresholds based on the historical data of natural disturbances in the boreal forest in Ontario, as well as the new information on local population dynamics provided by this agreement. The total number of fires due to climate change is predicted to increase 15% by 2040 and 50% by 2100 (OMNR, 2005). Forest fire intensity and frequency is not something industries that cause anthropogenic landscape disturbance (e.g. forestry) can control, and forest fires (if not suppressed successfully) could potentially cause a large amount of disturbance within a caribou range. Forest fire contributes towards the maximum disturbance threshold in a range and therefore would instantly reduce the amount of disturbance allowable by anthropogenic sources (i.e. prohibit any new forestry, mining, transmission line, road building activities within the range). Socio-economic benefits of anthropogenic landscape disturbance should also be recognized, as Ontario needs a balance between managing a single species at risk and minimizing negative socio-economic impacts on communities and families that rely on industries such as mining and forestry for income, or communities that need to be connected to a provincial power source. The socio-economic impacts of the proposed maximum 35% disturbance needs to be quantitatively defined (i.e. what impact will the implied reduction in forest harvesting and mining have on northern communities, in number of jobs lost, power lines to communities, revenues to mills and mines etc.). According to the State of Ontario’s Natural Resources report, there are over 46,000 direct forest sector jobs in Ontario. This includes logging, manufacturing of wood products and forestry support activities. In 2019 Ontario’s forest sector GDP totaled $4.2 billion. In 2019 forestry economic development opportunities for Indigenous communities shared over $19.8 million in forestry revenue with 31 Ontario communities in 2019. As of 2020, 35 First Nation communities are now sharing in forestry revenue. Resource revenue sharing represents a commitment to advance reconciliation, improve socio-economic conditions and support economic development opportunities that create prosperous communities. Even a small change in forestry employment can shift the well-being of these rural northern Ontario communities that rely on Ontario’s forestry sector. Ontario needs an agreement that will balance socio-economic needs in the region with a scientifically based management approach to ensure boreal caribou populations are conserved for generations to come.