Management of Quebec’s public forests

…in these meetings, commented today on some of the principle ideas put forward by the Commission. Even though the draft document includes interesting ideas for improving the protection as well as the management of Quebec’s public forests, the five conservation groups are also concerned about some of the ideas presented.

Parks and Protected Areas
The groups are pleased that the document supports the idea of going beyond the Quebec Protected Areas Strategy of protecting 8% of Quebec by 2005, to achieve protection of 12% of all natural regions in the boreal forest by 2008. The groups also hope that the Commission’s final recommendations will further suggest the creation of large, interconnected protected areas. This is necessary to maintain ecological integrity and the protection of species like woodland caribou. They also hope that the Commission will recommend a process to increase the percentage of protected areas beyond 2008 to ensure a valid representation of Quebec’s biodiversity.

Independent Environmental Assessment
The five groups support the idea that the government should put in place an independent audit of forest management systems by the Auditor General, and that forest policy should be subjected to independent environmental assessment by a body like the Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement (BAPE). The groups would prefer the Commission recommend that the same independent assessment also be extended to forest general management plans (Plan général d’aménagement forestier).

Ecosystem-based Management
The groups applaud the fact that the Commission brings forward the idea of putting a system of ecosystem-based management in place. Nevertheless, the discussion document is missing key details: it is necessary that this management system includes the maintenance of old forests, tree retention in clearcuts and the protection of intact forests.

Intensive Forest Management
The idea put forward by the Commission that 15% of Quebec’s forests could be subject to intensive forest management is worrisome. The complexity of this subject necessitates a comprehensive assessment because this type of management could have significant impacts on biodiversity. Furthermore, it is not proven that this approach would yield the estimated economic benefits.

Forest Certification
After reading the document, the five groups are concerned that the Commission has not yet adequately considered all of Quebec’s regulatory obstacles to forest certification. Addressing these obstacles is important to companies who desire to certify their operations to become more competitive in an increasingly environmentally and socially conscious marketplace.

Forest Management Planning
In regards of the decentralisation of forest management, the five groups are prepared to analyse diverse scenarios and approaches to ensure the difficulties that were met in the past at the provincial level will be avoided at the regional level. The chosen avenue should maintain the government’s imputability towards the public good.

The five groups will use the round table sessions to address these points in-depth. They hope that the Commission will make judicious decisions in the interest of ensuring the long-term viability of Quebec’s public forests. CPAWS, Greenpeace, le RNCRE, l’UQCN and WWF-Canada encourage citizens to review the document on the Commission’s web site at www.commission-foret.qc.ca and to participate in the discussion planned for September 1 and 2 in Montréal.