Algonquin Park Logging/Forestry Plan

[Northern Light]

Some of you may know that the province, under every political party, has continuously allowed logging in Algonquin Park since its inception.

This is the only Provincial Park for which this is true.

While the logging practices in Algonquin are among the most sustainable in the industry, rarely employing clearly cutting; they are still the antithesis of protected space.

To have a sense of why..............first, contemplate that this logging is facilitated by a whopping 6,000km of logging roads!

The presence of these roads obviously damages, interrupts and alters habitat above and beyond the logging itself.

***

Many here who have enjoyed visiting the park may also be aware that its campgrounds and trails near Highway 60 can fill and seem unreasonably busy for an escape from it all.

But when you see how little of the park is really reserved to nature and people's enjoyment thereof; you can come to realize, it needn't be this way.

To that end...........here is the proposed Forestry Operations Map for Algonquin for the next decade:

Note that Green is the proposed logging area; while Grey is the land reserved to nature/people.

All of that info is by way of saying that I would invite people to comment on the proposed Forestry Plan between now and mid-January and encourage a greater proportion of land be set aside for nature; and that logging be phased out over time.

The consultation page is here: https://nrip.mnr.gov.on.ca/s/consultation-notice?language=en_US&recordId=a0z3g000000oWBJAA2

For a quick overview of the issue, see this article from Mike Crawley of CBC:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/algonquin-park-logging-2021-1.5849770

 

[Towered]

Some of you may know that the province, under every political party, has continuously allowed logging in Algonquin Park since its inception.

This is the only Provincial Park for which this is true.

While the logging practices in Algonquin are among the most sustainable in the industry, rarely employing clearly cutting; they are still the antithesis of protected space.

To have a sense of why..............first, contemplate that this logging is facilitated by a whopping 6,000km of logging roads!

The presence of these roads obviously damages, interrupts and alters habitat above and beyond the logging itself.

***

Many here who have enjoyed visiting the park may also be aware that its campgrounds and trails near Highway 60 can fill and seem unreasonably busy for an escape from it all.

But when you see how little of the park is really reserved to nature and people's enjoyment thereof; you can come to realize, it needn't be this way.

To that end...........here is the proposed Forestry Operations Map for Algonquin for the next decade:

Note that Green is the proposed logging area; while Grey is the land reserved to nature/people.

View attachment 291760
All of that info is by way of saying that I would invite people to comment on the proposed Forestry Plan between now and mid-January and encourage a greater proportion of land be set aside for nature; and that logging be phased out over time.

The consultation page is here: https://nrip.mnr.gov.on.ca/s/consultation-notice?language=en_US&recordId=a0z3g000000oWBJAA2

For a quick overview of the issue, see this article from Mike Crawley of CBC:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/algonquin-park-logging-2021-1.5849770

How does the government justify allowance of logging in a provincial park?

 

[Northern Light]

How does the government justify allowance of logging in a provincial park?

Inertia.

Its been that way for over 100 years.

That along with lobbying from industry and small towns.

There's about 300 jobs doing the actual logging; but about 3,000 jobs in various mills that receive the lumber.

If you eliminate logging within the park, you cut the 300 jobs for sure; some of the mills would likely survive on other product; but its probable that a few would close, were the park's logging industry halted.

So you're talking maybe 600-2,000 jobs (a guess) that would be at risk from eliminating logging.

That's not counting a couple of small villages/towns that might disappear.

***

However, without the logging there would some additional tourism opportunities within the park, at least one of those towns could be repurposed as an access town for the Park.

I'm not unsympathetic to the jobs question; which is why I favour a phase-out, but I'd like to see the whole thing legislated so that logging is at zero within 20 years; and at that point we can offer any remaining staff
early retirement packages.

That also allows time for the province to compensate/invest in affected communities without anything being too drastic or quick.

The only thing is; I think all of that should have been done.............over 100 years ago.

 

[lenaitch]

I'm torn on this as I am sympathetic to employment and economic issues in the Park and Upper Ottawa Valley areas which are fairly depressed. As far as I know all of the logging is hardwood, which means it is fairly selective (i.e. not block or clear-cutting), although admittedly it does require a road network. If logging were to be eliminated from the Park, I would be in favour of having the areas return to nature, not people. Opening up areas for recreational development, beyond perhaps wilderness trekking, canoeing, etc. (which are likely already permitted in or through logging areas) seems like closing down one environmental evil in favour or another.

The concept of "early retirement packages" assumes that any of the forestry workers have any kind of benefits packages at all. I stand to be corrected but I would guess that most if not all of the workers are private contractors or ma-and-pa operators, many of which would not even be eligible for EI or WSIB.

Algonquin is rather unique in several areas. There are numerous private land leases and a few private resort operators within the Park.

 

[Northern Light]

I'm torn on this as I am sympathetic to employment and economic issues in the Park and Upper Ottawa Valley areas which are fairly depressed. As far as I know all of the logging is hardwood, which means it is fairly selective (i.e. not block or clear-cutting), although admittedly it does require a road network. If logging were to be eliminated from the Park, I would be in favour of having the areas return to nature, not people. Opening up areas for recreational development, beyond perhaps wilderness trekking, canoeing, etc. (which are likely already permitted in or through logging areas) seems like closing down one environmental evil in favour or another.

The concept of "early retirement packages" assumes that any of the forestry workers have any kind of benefits packages at all. I stand to be corrected but I would guess that most if not all of the workers are private contractors or ma-and-pa operators, many of which would not even be eligible for EI or WSIB.

Algonquin is rather unique in several areas. There are numerous private land leases and a few private resort operators within the Park.

The Algonquin Forestry Authority does have some staff of its own; but in addition, nothing precludes the government from providing some form of benefit or compensation to directly affected businesses or their staff. They names would known as they receive training from and contracts with the AFA.

Forest Management: Harvest Operations | Algonquin Forestry Authority

algonquinforestry.on.ca

 

[lenaitch]

The Algonquin Forestry Authority does have some staff of its own; but in addition, nothing precludes the government from providing some form of benefit or compensation to directly affected businesses or their staff. They names would known as they receive training from and contracts with the AFA.

Forest Management: Harvest Operations | Algonquin Forestry Authority

algonquinforestry.on.ca

They could also simply allocate harvesting rights on Crown land outside of Park boundaries. By way of precedence, it has long be claimed that Algonquin was the only provincial park where resource harvesting was permitted, which is untrue. Logging was permitted in Lake Superior PP up until roughly the mid-'90s. In that case, it did not result in expanded human facilities, which remain along the highway corridor. Inland use remains back country activities such as canoeing, hiking, etc. Obviously, there is more population pressure on Algonquin that would have to be cautioned against.

There might be other provincial parks where resource harvesting was previously, or even currently, permitted. I am not aware.

 

[SunriseChampion]

If logging were to be eliminated from the Park, I would be in favour of having the areas return to nature, not people.

This.

I'm also sympathetic to the socio-economic impact logging here may have on people in the area and it seems that the harvesting is indeed quite sustainable. It's the logging roads that are problematic but there's no way around that, so I guess it's one or the other.

I don't really frequent the area as I'm a Georgian Bay nerd so I have to ask those who may know: how is the logging here negatively impacting the local flora and fauna?

 

[lenaitch]

This.

I'm also sympathetic to the socio-economic impact logging here may have on people in the area and it seems that the harvesting is indeed quite sustainable. It's the logging roads that are problematic but there's no way around that, so I guess it's one or the other.

I don't really frequent the area as I'm a Georgian Bay nerd so I have to ask those who may know: how is the logging here negatively impacting the local flora and fauna?

I do not. There is a plethora of online sites from the government, industry and conservation groups. I'm not in a position (or so inclined) to assess their data or conclusions. Obviously, there are different starting positions and end goals. It is likely that roads have had an impact on wildlife movement and interaction but to what extent, who knows. There is some who claim that logging has changed/is changing the fibre footprint (mix of tree species). Given that hardwood logging is fairly selective, I'm a tad suspicious. If anything, climate change may be having a greater impact. Dunno.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Yeah, I don't think logging roads lead to the same fragmentation of species habitat that regular roads and especially highways do. I also don't suspect they have the same impact on wildlife as hydro corridors, which, for example, are known to be detrimental to woodland caribou due to their making perfect places for predators to lurk in waiting.

So I'm not sure logging roads have that much of an impact.

The logging itself, and the removal of very specific species of tree might, I imagine have much far-reaching consequences. Such as possible habitat loss for certain insects. Not my area of expertise or high interest. Ask me about neurotransmitters or metabolic enzymes.

 

[Northern Light]

Yeah, I don't think logging roads lead to the same fragmentation of species habitat that regular roads and especially highways do. I also don't suspect they have the same impact on wildlife as hydro corridors, which, for example, are known to be detrimental to woodland caribou due to their making perfect places for predators to lurk in waiting.

So I'm not sure logging roads have that much of an impact.

The logging itself, and the removal of very specific species of tree might, I imagine have much far-reaching consequences. Such as possible habitat loss for certain insects. Not my area of expertise or high interest. Ask me about neurotransmitters or metabolic enzymes.

I don't know if there's been a detailed study, but I will endeavour to look.

My instinctual response, sans evidence of direct linkage is that it is impacting moose populations which are way down.

Whether that is coincidence; in aid of non-human predators or in aid of human predators I can't say.

***

I'd add that the presence of humans in any number, does have the effect of soil compaction (as is clearly the case through roads, but also simply via walking); and there is undoubtedly trampling of herbaceous vegetation.

With all due respect to the loggers, most lack the requisite knowledge of what to walk around, rather than over.

 

[Northern Light]

Here's a paper that includes some useful info.

I would center in on p. 163

http://www.algonquin-eco-watch.com/Human%20Impact/Algonquin_Park_the_human_impact_web.pdf

 

[W. K. Lis]

Yeah, I don't think logging roads lead to the same fragmentation of species habitat that regular roads and especially highways do. I also don't suspect they have the same impact on wildlife as hydro corridors, which, for example, are known to be detrimental to woodland caribou due to their making perfect places for predators to lurk in waiting.

So I'm not sure logging roads have that much of an impact.

The logging itself, and the removal of very specific species of tree might, I imagine have much far-reaching consequences. Such as possible habitat loss for certain insects. Not my area of expertise or high interest. Ask me about neurotransmitters or metabolic enzymes.

The logging roads are used to portage canoes between streams and lakes.

 

[lenaitch]

A friend is a retired biologist who specialized in moose. Moose populations vary naturally and are currently low in many parts of the province, although up in others. There are all sorts of scholarly and non-scholarly articles on the topic, and factors include predation, forestry management (including fire) hunting, and parasites (a significant factor). Climate change is speculated to be part of the cause for some of the changes, either directly or indirectly. According to him, there is little evidence that corridors (roads, power lines, etc.) have an impact on moose movements but do affect the movement of predators such as bear and wolves and, in some cases, hunters. Interestingly, old or very mature forests do no favour moose; they need younger undergrowth for food and shelter.

Populations are estimated primarily by aerial counts, collar tracking and hunter tag processing. One hole in the data in many areas is aboriginal hunting, which is not part of the data collection.

 

[SunriseChampion]

So, apparently, the biggest detriment caused by these logging roads are their impact on aquatic ecosystems which can be very sensitive.