I do not agree with the MNR…

I do not agree with the MNR&F’s proposed Forest Sector Strategy as currently proposed.

How can Ontario’s Forest Sector Strategy support existing businesses & help create more opportunities and prosperity in Northern Ontario while making a mere footnote of Northern Ontario’s Resource Based Tourism Industry. Northern Ontario’s most renewable and sustainable industry, one that contributes billions to the Northern Ontario economy.

In 1997, a then Conservative Government, made a commitment to recognize the vital importance of the RB tourism industry to Northern Ontario’s economy- in fact advocating not only protecting but committing to encourage the industry’s growth. Realizing the need for shared crown land use and planning, natural aesthetics, wildlife and their requisite habitats, lakes, water quality and fishery protections required to support and maintain the values needed to sustain the RBTourism Industry. What has changed?

There must be a formal mechanism for Regional Land Use Planning actively supporting and engaging all three primary industries- Forestry, Tourism and Mining.

NW Ontario in particular has a quality, well established tourism industry consisting of over 500 RBT lodges, resorts and outpost businesses. Crown Land/Forest stewardship and sustainability needs to meet the needs of all industries and cannot be solely determined by wood supply outputs. In the past 20 years the industry has sustained continual resource allocation reductions in Moose and Bear, nonexistent management direction for Whitetail deer, stymied at every opportunity by the MNR&F for any opportunities for growth or diversification. In part these loses can be attributed to poor habitat management, forest fragmentation including predator corridors etc, while broader access and road management is relegated within individual FMP processes. The FMP process has left the RB Tourism Industry as a whole unrecognized, unsupported, and lacking tools to evaluate and mitigate impacts of shared usage, while leaving individual tourism business operators to attempt to negotiate and reconcile needs and protections on their own.

Ontario government investment in Forest Access Roads needs to be considered through broader land use planning. The tourism industry recognizes a certain level of access for crown land usage is beneficial, however at some point a benefit also can be detriment. There appears to be no balancing of needs, advantages, negative affects as road/access planning on a regional basis.

Certainly within the Dryden Forest, road density and fragmentation is extremely high. Primary and Branch roads are appearing to be designated to meet total available funding not based on true need or broader usage benefits. There are important studies showing the negative affects of roads and habitat fragmentation yet this remains unaddressed and in reality getting progressively worse- with negative effects on tourism. In 2014 and all subsequent years, 17 of 19 tourism businesses- having Moose Tag Allocation within WMU8(comprised of the Dryden Forest)have lost all Big Game Moose outfitting opportunities. Losing 30 tourism industry tags- potentially 60 based on archery conversion rates each and every year. The loss of these tourism industry moose allocation tags alone easily represents well over $100,000/year in loss to just the WMU8 Tourism Industry. Where is the balancing of industry needs?

As a taxpayer I find it unbelievable that the Ontario government continues to subsidize the forest industry through the Forest Access Road funding. Many of these roads having minimal usage but built and maintained far better than the local roads boards and municipal roads we must travel daily. We have a Trans Canada Highway across Northern Ontario desperately in need of twinning. The number of lives lost, the travel and economy stopped almost daily yet the Ontario government subsidizes Forest Access Roads!!!