Forest Conservation: An Analysis of Crown Forest Sustainability Act and Endangered Species Act for Ontario

This report analyses the Crown Forest Sustainability Act and Endangered Species Act for Ontario, their key elements, outcomes after 20 years, and main aspects of the laws. The Crown Forest Sustainability Act aims to manage the Crown forest to satisfy the economic, social and environmental requirements for the present and future generations. The Endangered Species Act aims to identify the species based on their risk of getting endangered on the basis of present scientific information obtained from community knowledge and other traditional knowledge of aboriginal.

0Running head: FOREST CONSERVATION
Forest Conservation
Name of the Student
Name of University
Author’s note

1
FOREST CONSERVATION
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2
1994 Crown Forest Sustainability Act.............................................................................................2
Key elements of CFSA................................................................................................................3
Outcome after 20 years................................................................................................................6
2007 Endangered Species Act for Ontario......................................................................................8
Main aspect of this law................................................................................................................8
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................12
References......................................................................................................................................13

2
FOREST CONSERVATION
Introduction
The great treasure of our planet is biological diversity that is a comprehensive collection
of social, economic, ecological, cultural and intrinsic value. Some of the essential contribution of
biological diversity towards human life is foods, clothing, and medicines thus overall it acts in
favour of sustainable economic and social development. Unfortunately throughout the world,
species of plants, animals and other organisms are getting critically endangered or extinct. The
extinction of this species is majorly due to the human activities like damage of habitat and hence
in order to conserve the biological diversity, global actions are required1. In regards to the
conservation of the biological diversity and global acts, the following report aims to analyse
some of the major aspects of two of the notable environment conservation acts of Ontario.
1994 Crown Forest Sustainability Act
Crown Forest Sustainability Act (CFSA) 1994 was laid out by Ontario Cabinet and is
considered as a bold vision for a new approach to forestry. It lays out the most sophisticated
vision for the public forests of Ontario. The core pillar of this law is sustainability which not only
ensures sustainable utilization of the natural resources but also lays a concrete plan to strengthen
the economy of the community via proper utilization for the forest resources2. Ontario was at the
center stage of the said policy when this law was passed in the year of 1994. The main goal was
to ensure long-tern health to the ecosystem of forest that will be beneficial for both the local and
national environments and thereby enabling current and upcoming generations to satisfy their
social and material needs3. The importance of the act is, it produced a balanced between the
1 Canhos, Dora AL, et al. "The importance of biodiversity e-infrastructures for megadiverse countries." PLoS
biology 13.7 (2015): e1002204.
2 Robson, Mark, and Troy Davis. "Evaluating the transition to sustainable forest management in Ontario’s Crown
Forest Sustainability Act and forest management planning manuals from 1994 to 2009." Canadian Journal of Forest
Research45.4 (2014): 436-443.
3 Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/94c25.

3
FOREST CONSERVATION
requirement for the wooden products along with the protection of old forests, wildlife diversity
and other associated recreation. Thus it stressed on the necessity of satisfying the requirement for
proper wood supply as well promoting diversification of the employment in the forestry sector
via providing renewable goods from the forests4.
Key elements of CFSA
Increasing the responsibility of MNRF towards sustainable management of forestry products
The responsibility to satisfy the objectives of CFSA lies within the Ministry of Natural
Resources and Forestry (MNRF). In order to make sure the sustainability of the forest, it is the
job of MNRF to bestow proper leadership and provide detailed oversight to the forest industry
through special developmental programs and policy. It is also falls under the duty of MNRF to
scientifically monitor the sustainable management of forestry while enforcing proper
conservation rules5. CFSA envisages one of the main roles for MNRF to support the forest
industry of Ontario, and primary responsibility of MNRF to protect the requirement of forest
development communities of Ontario along with long-term sustainability of forest ecosystems.
Theoretically it can be stated that CFSA shifted the role of MNRF from a narrow focus to a wide
focus with “triple bottom line”.
Proper Management Planning
Under this Act, MNRF divides forests in Ontario into different forest management units.
These units are geographic areas of manageable-size that are designed to be governed via
4 The Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994: 20 Years Later. 1st ed., Environmental Commissioner Of Ontario,
2014, http://docs.assets.eco.on.ca/reports/environmental-protection/2013-2014/2013-14-AR-CFSA.pdf
5 Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/94c25.

4
FOREST CONSERVATION
implementing individual “forest management plans”. Forest management plan entails specific
strategies along with objectives for managing the allocated area of the forest in a sustainable
manner. The scale of these units is vital to make sure that the forest management plan adequately
meets the specific requirement of the communities, the economic status of the locality and
equilibrium of the environment6.
Licensing and Allocation
The key premise of the CRSA, 1994 deals with the authorization of the private
companies. According to it, the privately owned companies will generate forest management
plans pursuant to licenses generated by the MNRF. Different types of licenses are issued by
MNRF to different types of organisations in regards to harvesting of trees within the pre-defined
management units. Sustainable Forest Licences (SFL) are long term licences. It enables a
particular organisation the authority of harvest forest resources in a specific management unit for
up to 20 years7. These license holders are an integral part of forest management plans. These
forest management plans govern everything starting from harvest operations to proper access
towards construction of roads and monitoring and renewal of forest resources. However, these
plans are subject to approval coming from NRF. The approval of only given after proper
considerations of the facts like animal life, plant life and other resources of forests like social,
water and air8.
Independent Forest audits
6 The Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994: 20 Years Later. 1st ed., Environmental Commissioner Of Ontario,
2014, http://docs.assets.eco.on.ca/reports/environmental-protection/2013-2014/2013-14-AR-CFSA.pdf
7 Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/94c25
8 Teitelbaum, Sara, and Stephen Wyatt. "Is forest certification delivering on First Nation issues? The effectiveness of
the FSC standard in advancing First Nations' rights in the boreal forests of Ontario and Quebec, Canada." Forest
policy and economics 27 (2013): 23-33.

5
FOREST CONSERVATION
One of the principal elements of CFSA’s framework is a system of independent forest
audits after every 5 years for each unit of management. The factors scrutinized in these audits
include effectiveness in meeting planned objectives, proper compliance of licence and other
sustainable forest management plans. According to MNRF, this independent forest audits
showed an average of 95% rate of compliance with the CFSA and ministry policies. This audit
along with further recommendations helps in the improvement of overall forest conservation9.
Investment for the Future of the Forest
A strategic objective of CFSA is to ensure that the revenues obtained from the forest
products should be optimally used to maintain the forest sustainability. In order to adequately
implement this investment plan, CFSA established two separate trusts financed by the fees paid
by the license holders. The fees of the licence holders also vary depending upon the regional
differences in forest and the species of the trees10. All this funding is intended to be in line with
the benefits licensees received from employing Crown forests. The Forestry Future Trust helped
in silviculture activities where the resources of Crowns forest have been damaged either via fire
or via other natural calamities. The trust also provided funding for intensive management of the
stand, insect/pest control and independent forest audit. This laid the foundation of the recycling
of the revenues obtained from the forest resources for the betterment of the resources and
sustainable use.
9 The Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994: 20 Years Later. 1st ed., Environmental Commissioner Of Ontario,
2014, http://docs.assets.eco.on.ca/reports/environmental-protection/2013-2014/2013-14-AR-CFSA.pdf
10 Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/94c25.

6
FOREST CONSERVATION
Outcome after 20 years
De-evolution of the Vision
As the year passed, MNRF has incrementally consolidated and decreased the total
number of forest management units. At present there are 41 forest management units in
comparison to 90 units which were present before. This is arguably a cost-effective solution for
the long-term as creation of forest management unit in the large scale may have given rise to
challenges in managerial grounds, reduction in the relevance to local forest dependent
communities and generation of inadequate information on ecology of local forest. This reduction
all lead to the foundation of healthy market competition while enabling greater local population
and aboriginal community involvement11.
The blooming and busting of commercial logging
After the SFSA was passed there was a period of growth and success. However, this
initial growth was soon followed by reduction in harvest volumes and revenues coming from
forest in the next 10 years. This reduction resulted in sudden closure of mills along with the
decreased in the direct forestry jobs in Ontario according to Natural Resources Canada (2013).
Since then there is no significant increase in the harvest volumes. This downturn of industry is
attributed to typical boom-bust commodity cycle. This was exacerbated under the action of
economic recession at the global scale12.
Lag in paying dues
11 The Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994: 20 Years Later. 1st ed., Environmental Commissioner Of Ontario,
2014, http://docs.assets.eco.on.ca/reports/environmental-protection/2013-2014/2013-14-AR-CFSA.pdf
12 The Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994: 20 Years Later. 1st ed., Environmental Commissioner Of Ontario,
2014, http://docs.assets.eco.on.ca/reports/environmental-protection/2013-2014/2013-14-AR-CFSA.pdf

7
FOREST CONSERVATION
According to the reports published by the Auditor General of Ontario (2011-2013),
numerous SFL holders failed to maintain the minimum balance requirement for funding the
Forest Renewal Trust. The reports of the audits also stated that MNRF lacked proper measures to
ensure that the revenue of Crown Forest was accurately calculated and simultaneously submitted.
Moreover, MNRF has itself acknowledged their lack of proper indexation towards inflation of
Forest Futures Trust13.
Thus it the concluding summary, it can be stated that the purpose of the CFSA is to
properly manage the Crown forest to satisfy the economic, social and environmental
requirements for the present and future generations. It main two science based principal is
healthy large and productive Crown forests along with proper conservation of ecological and
biological diversity and emulation of natural disturbances while minimizing the adverse effects
on the wild-life, plant life, and the surrounding microbiota like water, soil and air. However, the
critical analysis of the act showed that after 20 years of implementation, act though helped to
preserve the ecological diversity of crown forest but failed to increase its production in terms of
harvesting and increasing new job opportunities. Further audits are required to be undertaken in
order to ensure that the natural resources of forest are managed properly with best possible
information and practices.
2007 Endangered Species Act for Ontario
Ontario’s Endangered Species Act (ESA), 2007 was passed into law in the year 2007 and
it came into enforcement in the year 2008. The main purpose of this law is to identify the species
13 The Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994: 20 Years Later. 1st ed., Environmental Commissioner Of Ontario,
2014, http://docs.assets.eco.on.ca/reports/environmental-protection/2013-2014/2013-14-AR-CFSA.pdf

8
FOREST CONSERVATION
based on their risk of getting endangered on the basis of present scientific information obtained
from community knowledge and other traditional knowledge of aboriginal. The law also aims to
protect species that are at a high risk of habitat loss via promoting recovery of such species. The
law also aims to promote stewardship activities in order to aid the recovery and protection of the
species14.
Main aspect of this law
Protection and recovery
ESA condemns any harm to the endangered species of Ontario. According to this act, no
person can harm, kill or capture any member of the species which are listed under the Species at
Risk in Ontario List. The law also strictly prohibits transportation, buying, selling, and taking
lease and possession of species in exchange of money. However, this law is not applicable to
species that have originated outside Ontario. Moreover, this law also does not take into
consideration of possession by Crown. Not only species under the banner of protection and
recovery, ESA also aims to protect the habitat of the endangered species as habitat loss is one of
the prime reason behind the loss of biodiversity and species richness. When specie is listed as
threatened or endangered, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry will propose a habitat
regulation for the endangered species who falling under the threat of 2 years of being endanger
or 3 years of being endangered. However, this objective lacks precision along with transparency.
What kind of information that is being utilized to categorize a species under the endangered list
is not stated clearly.
Stringent Classification of Species
14 2007 Endangered Species Act For Ontario. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06

9
FOREST CONSERVATION
Under this law, The Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario, an
independent body takes initiatives to classify native plants and animals based on their risk status
this leads to the evolution of 4 different categories of species15.
Name of the category Classification
Extirpated Lived Ontario at some span of span but at
present lives at some other part of the world
Endangered Lives in wild Ontario but is experiencing
urgent risk of getting extinction of extirpation
Threatened Lives in Ontario but is not endangered but is
likely to get endangered
Special concern Lives in wild Ontario, but is either endangered
or threatened but can become threatened in
near future 16
According to Guisan et al. (2013), classification to species on the basis of threat towards
extinction helps in the establishment of the species distribution model which further helps on
conservation decision making. Thus the ESA 2007 of Ontario and its initiatives to classify the
species based on their threats of getting extinct is indeed impact full. However, the ESA 2007
does not give a clear definition regarding how this classification of species is been done or what
kind of data is being referred towards the prices of classification. According to Guisan et al.
(2013), global bioinformatics data is the best assured reference to examine the species
occurrence data in support of the conservation efforts.
15 2007 Endangered Species Act For Ontario. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06
16 2007 Endangered Species Act For Ontario. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06

10
FOREST CONSERVATION
Clear definition of habitat and its regulation
ESA also provides a detailed insight towards habitat regulation that replaces the general
concept of habitat protection. The importance of habitat regulation is, it provides more accurate
definition of species habitat via critically defining each and every feature, geographic boundaries
and other special characteristics. This regulated habitat may be either larger or smaller than
general habitat and any encompass areas where the specie are not currently found or may be
either occupied by other species. The act also helps in defining the activities which pose a threat
towards destruction of a habitat. These stringent regulation of habitat helps in determining the
total area of the habitat that is being occupied by any species or might get occupied by other
species along with a rough estimation of the available habitat that can be further distributed
among the endangered species. This detailed examination of habitat will them promote further
classification of species habitat17.
Category 1: Red Here the species will be least tolerant to sudden
changes (hibernation sites)
Category 2: Orange Species will be moderately tolerant (areas used
regularly to find food)
Category 3: Yellow Species are considered to be more tolerant
(areas occasionally used to find food)
According to Nagendra et al. (2013), monitoring of protected areas and thir surroundings
is essential in order to judge the vulnerability of a specie towards getting extinct. However, the
17 Millar, Catherine S., and Gabriel Blouin-Demers. "Habitat suitability modelling for species at risk is sensitive to
algorithm and scale: A case study of Blanding's turtle, Emydoidea blandingii, in Ontario, Canada." Journal for
nature conservation 20.1 (2012): 18-29

11
FOREST CONSERVATION
ESA does not provide any insight towards remote sensing. Whilst monitoring has encompass
field data, remote sensing can play an important role in erecting baselines of the extent along
with the conditions of habitats and its associated species diversity along with quantifying losses
and degradation or recoveryof specific events18.
Classification of human Activity that may cause harm
Not every activity that occurs in front of the protected species is likely to kill, harass or
harm that member of that species. In order to determine any of the proposed activity that is likely
to kill, harass or harm the members of any threatened or endangered community of species is
determined on the basis of several biological factors like site fidelity, concentration of
individuals, mobility, ecological sensitivities, present condition of the species, life stages of the
species and response to disturbance19.
Scope of Compliance
ESA is remarkable in the domain of its implicit assumptions regarding compliance. The
onus here is on the landowners and the managers of the land to ensure that they are in
compliance. This is not extraordinary as ignorance of law is not considered as an excuse for
breach the law. However, under ESA, the following assumptions are being made: land owners or
uses are aware of the list of species which are at risk, land owners or user can clearly identify the
species which are at risk, land owners are required to update the monitoring and awareness
regarding whether these species exist on land under their stewardship and finally land owners are
18 Nagendra, Harini, et al. "Remote sensing for conservation monitoring: Assessing protected areas, habitat extent,
habitat condition, species diversity, and threats." Ecological Indicators33 (2013): 45-59.
19 2007 Endangered Species Act For Ontario. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06

12
FOREST CONSERVATION
aware of the penalties of non-compliance. This approach of the law is in contrast with other
types of regulations20.
Stewardship agreements
The minister may indulge into the agreements for the purpose of assisting the recovery of
species specified in the agreement. However, before entering into an agreement under this
section, the minister is required to consider the any form of statement published under the
subsection of law in regards to species recovery strategy21. The ESA act also may choose to
authorize a party to the agreement of species protection22.
Conclusion
Thus from the above discussion in regards to the major aspects of the ESA it can be said
that in spite of developing highly prescriptive rules in advance, rules and the guidelines of ESA
should be less prescriptive and must be allowed to evolve as interaction with the land owners and
managers. In abiding such principles, the regulations can deliver more transparency towards best
practices while accommodating different parcels of habitat and land.
20 2007 Endangered Species Act For Ontario. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06
21 Olive, Andrea. "Endangered species policy in Canada and the US: A tale of two islands." American Review of
Canadian Studies 42.1 (2012): 84-101.
22 2007 Endangered Species Act For Ontario. Ontario.Ca, 2017, https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06

13
FOREST CONSERVATION
References
2007 Endangered Species Act For Ontario. Ontario.Ca, 2017,
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/07e06.
Canhos, Dora AL, et al. "The importance of biodiversity e-infrastructures for megadiverse
countries." PLoS biology 13.7 (2015): e1002204.
Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994. Ontario.Ca, 2017,
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/94c25.
Guisan, Antoine, et al. "Predicting species distributions for conservation decisions." Ecology
letters 16.12 (2013): 1424-1435.
Millar, Catherine S., and Gabriel Blouin-Demers. "Habitat suitability modelling for species at
risk is sensitive to algorithm and scale: A case study of Blanding's turtle, Emydoidea blandingii,
in Ontario, Canada." Journal for nature conservation 20.1 (2012): 18-29.
Nagendra, Harini, et al. "Remote sensing for conservation monitoring: Assessing protected areas,
habitat extent, habitat condition, species diversity, and threats." Ecological Indicators33 (2013):
45-59. Nagendra, Harini, et al. "Remote sensing for conservation monitoring: Assessing
protected areas, habitat extent, habitat condition, species diversity, and threats." Ecological
Indicators33 (2013): 45-59.
Olive, Andrea. "Endangered species policy in Canada and the US: A tale of two
islands." American Review of Canadian Studies 42.1 (2012): 84-101.

14
FOREST CONSERVATION
Robson, Mark, and Troy Davis. "Evaluating the transition to sustainable forest management in
Ontario’s Crown Forest Sustainability Act and forest management planning manuals from 1994
to 2009." Canadian Journal of Forest Research45.4 (2014): 436-443.
Teitelbaum, Sara, and Stephen Wyatt. "Is forest certification delivering on First Nation issues?
The effectiveness of the FSC standard in advancing First Nations' rights in the boreal forests of
Ontario and Quebec, Canada." Forest policy and economics 27 (2013): 23-33.
The Crown Forest Sustainability Act, 1994: 20 Years Later. 1st ed., Environmental
Commissioner Of Ontario, 2014,
http://docs.assets.eco.on.ca/reports/environmental-protection/2013-2014/2013-14-AR-CFSA.pdf.