“You can’t condemn that…

“You can’t condemn that which you understand.” (Goethe)

Let’s suppose that we could take Premier Ford and John Yakabuski, Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry, and place them into a few representative Ontario forest stands. Let’s first have them standing within 2 metres of each of three pairings of mature native Ontario trees.

Now, solely by viewing the bark texture, colour, and any other particular characteristics, could either one of them on his own accurately identify and distinguish red pine from white pine, balsam fir from white spruce, or balsam poplar from sugar maple? If not, let’s move these two men far enough back to view the same trees in their entirety with the deciduous pair in full summer foliage. How about now?

An unfair challenge you say? Maybe so, but these two men have introduced and promoted the draft Ontario Forest Sector Strategy, which is designed to further deregulate the operations of Ontario’s forest industries.

At the core of any such strategy must be a commitment to protect biodiversity. Unfortunately, the proposed Ontario Forest Sector Strategy does not implement limits on habitat loss to protect and recover species at risk.

Let's take a look at the 'Key principles' and the 'Four pillars of action'. It is interesting to note that following the Minister’s message, 'Promoting stewardship and sustainability' appears as the fourth pillar afterthought. Conversely it is given first place when you enter the ‘Registry’ site, possibly suggesting to the environmentally aware public that ‘the tail may actually wag the dog’! Remember, “when something appears too good to be true ... “.

Some final thoughts:

Nature designed a forest as an experiment in unpredictability.
We are trying to design a regulated forest.

Nature designed a forest of long term trends.
We are trying to design a forest of short-term absolutes.

Nature designed a forest of diversity.
We are designing a forest with simplistic uniformity.

Nature designed a forest with interrelated processes.
We are trying to design a forest based on isolated products.

Nature designed a forest in which all elements are neutral.
We are designing a forest in which we perceive some elements as good, others bad.

Nature designed a forest to be a flexible, timeless continuum of species.
We are designing forests of rigid, time-constrained monocultures.

Nature designed a forest over a landscape.
We are trying to design a forest on each acre.

Nature designed a forest to be self-sustaining and self-repairing.
We are designing forests requiring increasing external subsidies – herbicides and pesticides.

(Chris Maser, The Redesigned Forest)

With the forest industry already exempt from the Endangered Species Act’s recovery requirements, habitat disturbance is proceeding at a pace that is harming species at-risk. The new proposal puts Ontario’s plants and animals at even greater risk.

Clearly, this proposal will lead to further industry self-regulation coupled with Ministry budget cuts.

Should our Crown forests be further sacrificed to the altar of corporate shareholder’s short term profit agendas?

Absolutely not!

Our Crown forests, and the watersheds they support and thus are nourished by in return, are to be protected under the doctrine of public trust. This short-sited Proposal, biased towards environmental exploitation and destruction must not be adopted.

All those involved in this decision process are bound by a moral imperative to apply the precautionary principle, on behalf of future generations, and reject this ill advised Proposal.