I support this proposal. My…

I support this proposal.

My support for these changes is contingent on the finalized language containing no additional conditions, restrictions, or requirements, beyond what is already contained within the CFSA or O. Reg. 242/08 under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). While removing this duplication is a critical and essential first step, species at risk prescriptions contained within existing forest management guidance continues to limit access to a renewable and sustainable supply of timber.

The CFSA already provides landscape, stand, and site-level direction for managing, conserving, and protecting species at risk. Having two acts attempting to accomplish the same outcome represents the single greatest piece of red tape and duplication to this sector. While a permanent, legislative change to the CFSA is an essential and important first step; in order to unleash the full potential of the sector, improvements need to be made to forest management guidance (e.g. landscape guides and the Forest Management Guide for Conserving Biodiversity at the Stand and Site Scales) delivered under the CFSA.

I understand that MNRF is currently undertaking a review of forest management guidance and manuals and expect the finalized products to:
1. Consider the impacts of climate change on species at risk habitat.
2. Evaluate the cumulative impacts of species at risk policy on a healthy economy.
3. Contribute to functioning ecosystems and working landscapes.
4. Undertake, share, and consider socio-economic impact analysis.

This change to the CFSA has the potential to significantly reduce administrative burden, costs, and business uncertainty while ensuring a continued commitment to the highest standards of sustainable forest management.