Connect with us

Alberta

Poor forest management causing record wildfires: Forest Products Association of Canada and the Indigenous Resource Network

Published

5 minute read

Wildfire EWF-031 located southeast of Edson, AB. Image provided by the Government of Alberta.

Article submitted by Derek Nighbor, President and CEO of the Forest Products Association of Canada (FPAC) and  John Desjarlais, Executive Director of Indigenous Resource Network (IRN)

Canada’s present and future wildfire threat demands more sustainable forest management

By Derek Nighbor and John Desjarlais
It may only be June, but Canada is facing one of its most extreme wildfire seasons in history. Already, over seven times the forested land base that Canada’s foresters sustainably harvest on an annual basis has been scorched by fire.

A 2021 study by the Canadian Forest Service, suggests the threat to communities is expected to increase in the future. It also highlights that remote First Nations communities made up almost one-third of all evacuees and evacuation events in recent decades and will be at the forefront of the impact in the future years.

To chart our path forward, it is important to recognize that 60% of the trees in Canada’s boreal forest are in the 61-140 year age range. As trees reach maturity, they lose their ability to sequester carbon and are at greater risk of succumbing to the effects of drought, windstorms, pests, and fire. And as our climate continues to change, the severity of these disturbances will continue to escalate.

Simply protecting forests across a natural fire-prone region like the boreal is not an effective climate strategy. Nor is it an effective public safety plan. This is further supported by findings of Parks Canada that show many of Canada’s parks are now net carbon sources due to worsening natural disturbances.

Indigenous leadership offers a deep understanding of how the forest evolves and how it can be managed in a way that is both environmentally and economically sustainable. For centuries, Indigenous communities have renewed and regenerated the forest, preserving biodiversity, and mitigating the impacts of wildfire by removing excess fuel (dead or decaying wood that can be kindling for the next fire) through cultural burns. These practices in turn make forests less prone to other disturbances like insects and disease.

In Finland, Norway and Sweden a January 2022 publication by the International Boreal Forest Researchers Association (IBFRA) shows how an active approach to forest management is paying dividends. Fire and natural disturbance levels are 50-60 times less than they are in Canada. Furthermore, Scandinavians are getting 5 to 7 times the amount of wood out of the same sized plot of land compared to Canada to produce low carbon products for domestic infrastructure, household, and bioenergy needs.

Much of the wood harvested to reduce fuel in the forest may be of insufficient quality for milling into lumber or other solid wood products. However, it presents an opportunity for bioenergy which is already Canada’s second largest source of renewable energy, provides five times the energy of wind and solar combined, and is the largest source of renewable energy in half the provinces. The CHAR Technologies-Lake Nipigon Forest Management Inc. partnership is a great example of what is possible. The proposed renewable natural gas (RNG) and biocoal plant in the Lake Nipigon Ontario area, will maximize the value of low-grade wood and help produce a steady, yearly revenue stream for Indigenous communities in the area.

There is a way to ensure our forests remain both productive and sustainable in Canada, and it’s not a choice between the environment and forest management. The two go together. We need to embrace more active management of our forests, collaboration with Indigenous communities, and look to lessons learned from the Nordic countries to help get us there. In the face of a changing climate, active management of our forests is more important than ever.

Derek Nighbor is the President and CEO of the Forest Products Association of Canada (FPAC).
John Desjarlais is the Executive Director of Indigenous Resource Network (IRN)

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Why the West’s separatists could be just as big a threat as Quebec’s

Published on

By Mark Milke

It is a mistake to dismiss the movement as too small

In light of the poor showing by separatist candidates in recent Alberta byelections, pundits and politicians will be tempted to again dismiss threats of western separatism as over-hyped, and too tiny to be taken seriously, just as they did before and after the April 28 federal election.

Much of the initial skepticism came after former Leader of the Opposition Preston Manning authored a column arguing that some in central Canada never see western populism coming. He cited separatist sympathies as the newest example.

In response, (non-central Canadian!) Jamie Sarkonak argued that, based upon Alberta’s landlocked reality and poll numbers (37 per cent Alberta support for the “idea” of separation with 25 per cent when asked if a referendum were held “today”), western separation was a “fantasy” that “shouldn’t be taken seriously.” The Globe and Mail’s Andrew Coyne, noting similar polling, opined that “Mr. Manning does not offer much evidence for his thesis that ‘support for Western secession is growing.’”

Prime Minister Mark Carney labelled Manning’s column “dramatic.” Toronto Star columnist David Olive was condescending. Alberta is “giving me a headache,” he wrote. He argued the federal government’s financing of “a $34.2-billion expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline (TMX)” as a reason Albertans should be grateful. If not, wrote Olive, perhaps it was time for Albertans to “wave goodbye” to Canada.

As a non-separatist, born-and-bred British Columbian, who has also spent a considerable part of his life in Alberta, I can offer this advice: Downplaying western frustrations — and the poll numbers — is a mistake.

One reason is because support for western separation in at least two provinces, Alberta and Saskatchewan, is nearing where separatist sentiment was in Quebec in the 1970s.

In our new study comparing recent poll numbers from four firms (Angus Reid InstituteInnovative Research GroupLeger, and Mainstreet Research), the range of support in recent months for separation from Canada in some fashion is as follows, from low to high: Manitoba (6 per cent to 12 per cent); B.C. (nine per cent to 20 per cent); Saskatchewan (20 per cent to 33 per cent) and Alberta (18 per cent to 36.5 per cent). Quebec support for separation was in a narrow band between 27 per cent and 30 per cent.

What such polling shows is that, at least at the high end, support for separating from Canada is now higher in Saskatchewan and Alberta than in Quebec.

Another, even more revealing comparison is how western separatist sentiment now is nearing actual Quebec votes for separatism or separatist parties back five decades ago. The separatist Parti Québécois won the 1976 Quebec election with just over 41 per cent of the vote. In the 1980 Quebec referendum on separation, “only” 40 per cent voted for sovereignty association with Canada (a form of separation, loosely defined). Those percentages were eclipsed by 1995, when separation/sovereignty association side came much closer to winning with 49.4 per cent of the vote.

Given that current western support for separation clocks in at as much as 33 per cent in Saskatchewan and 36.5 per cent in Alberta, it begs this question: What if the high-end polling numbers for western separatism are a floor and not a ceiling for potential separatist sentiment?

One reason why western support for separation may yet spike is because of the Quebec separatist dynamic itself and its impact on attitudes in other parts of Canada. It is instructive to recall in 1992 that British Columbians opposed a package of constitutional amendments, the Charlottetown Accord, in a referendum, in greater proportion (68.3 per cent) than did Albertans (60.2 per cent) or Quebecers (56.7 per cent).

Much of B.C.’s opposition (much like in other provinces) was driven by proposals for special status for Quebec. It’s exactly why I voted against that accord.

Today, with Prime Minister Carney promising a virtual veto to any province over pipelines — and with Quebec politicians already saying “non” — separatist support on the Prairies may become further inflamed. And I can almost guarantee that any whiff of new favours for Quebec will likely drive anti-Ottawa and perhaps pro-separatist sentiment in British Columbia.

There is one other difference between historic Quebec separatist sentiment and what exists now in a province like Alberta: Alberta is wealthy and a “have” province while Quebec is relatively poor and a have-not. Some Albertans will be tempted to vote for separation because they feel the province could leave and be even more prosperous; Quebec separatist voters have to ask who would pay their bills.

This dynamic again became obvious, pre-election, when I talked with one Alberta CEO who said that five years ago, separatist talk was all fringe. In contrast, he recounted how at a recent dinner with 20 CEOs, 18 were now willing to vote for separation. They were more than frustrated with how the federal government had been chasing away energy investment and killing projects since 2015, and had long memories that dated back to the National Energy Program.

(For the record, they view the federal purchase of TMX as a defensive move in response to its original owner, Kinder Morgan, who was about to kill the project because of federal and B.C. opposition. They also remember all the other pipelines opposed/killed by the Justin Trudeau government.)

Should Canadians outside the West dismiss western separatist sentiment? You could do that. But it’s akin to the famous Clint Eastwood question: Do you feel lucky?

Mark Milke is president and founder of the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy and co-author, along with Ven Venkatachalam, of Separatist Sentiment: Polling comparisons in the West and Quebec.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta Independence Seekers Take First Step: Citizen Initiative Application Approved, Notice of Initiative Petition Issued

Published on

Alberta’s Chief Electoral Officer, Gordon McClure, has issued a Notice of Initiative Petition.

This confirms a Citizen Initiative application has been received and the Chief Electoral Officer has determined the requirements of section 2(3) of the Citizen Initiative Act have been met.

Approved Initiative Petition Information

The approved citizen initiative application is for a policy proposal with the following proposed question:

Do you agree that Alberta should remain in Canada?

The Notice of Initiative Petition, application, and statement provided by the proponent are available on Elections Alberta’s website on the Current Initiatives Petition page.

As the application was received and approved prior to coming into force of Bill 54: Election Statutes Amendment Act, the Citizen Initiative process will follow requirements set out in the Citizen Initiative Act as of June 30, 2025.

Next Steps

  1. The proponent must appoint a chief financial officer within 30 days (by July 30, 2025).
  2. Once the 30-day publication period is complete and a chief financial officer has been appointed, Elections Alberta will:
  1. issue the citizen initiative petition,
  2. publish a notice on the Current Initiatives Petition page of our website indicating the petition has been issued, specifying the signing period dates, and the number of signatures required for a successful petition, and
  3. issue the citizen initiative petition signature sheets and witness affidavits. Signatures collected on other forms will not be accepted.

More information on the process, the status of the citizen initiative petition, financing rules, third party advertising rules, and frequently asked questions may be found on the Elections Alberta website.

Elections Alberta is an independent, non-partisan office of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta responsible for administering provincial elections, by-elections, and referendums.

Continue Reading

Trending

X