Fellow Lake Lovers,
We just received the official notification from the MNRF that Stage 3 that their planning process is completed and they are proceeding with Stage 4 over the next 90 days before entering the final phase and the commencement of the logging operations. It would seem an appropriate time to give everyone an update on what the Foundation volunteers have been up to.
MNRF
We just concluded the last of the meetings with the local areas and the MNRF respecting the Forestry Management Plan 2022-2032 (FMP). The new FMP will be released on July 5th to the public, and the public will have 60 days following this release within which to review the new FMP and provide comments.
As previously noted, the MNRF needs to find 700 to 800 ‘forest blocks’ to be cut for the FMP. Our areas of challenge represent a small fraction of those blocks. For the first time in all our discussions with the MNRF, they have stated, the reason the CWB area is now being targeted, is to meet their diminished forest inventory and to spread the cutting throughout the various areas. If this is accurate, it is even more troubling than our earlier understanding that the rationale for targeting CWB was the favourable economics of using our cottage roads. It seems hard to believe with all the forests to the far north of Highway 17, the MNRF must now look to a small number of blocks (11) situate within immediate proximity to the lake to meet their cutting needs. This means there will be even greater pressure in the future to harvest the forests around the cottages. This isn’t the end, but only the beginning. I’m attaching the 2022 Long Term Direction Plan put forward by the MNRF, which shows the future inventory of available forests for harvest. Zoom in to 400% and look for anything in pink in the CWB area – which means its fair game for future logging. I have also attached an excerpt of this map below, that shows this.
All our presentations to the MNRF have identified the FMP’s potential for significant environmental harm to the CWB water quality and its aquatic ecology, based on numerous scientific studies and analogous environmental situations. In response to this concern, the MNRF’s emphatic position is that the government regulations and their own ‘policy framework’, which they state takes into account environmental issues, do not require the MNRF to undertake an environmental impact assessment of the planned logging and they will not do one.
The MNRF also states that the special Restricted Area Order (RAO) for CWB, created over 30 years ago to protect the water quality for the lake trout habitat, which was deteriorating due to polluted water in CWB, does not apply to the MNRF. They take the position the Order only applies to privately held lands – that is the cottagers’ properties, and it does not regulate activities on crown land in the Restricted Area, such as logging. They seem to have overlooked the reason for the RAO (deteriorating water quality) and have only focused on the target (the cottagers). The MNRF is willing to risk the future lake ecology on the strength of their internal policy framework. Having an environment impact assessment done before the forests are logged is the only appropriate approach. Determining that irreparable environmental harm has occurred after the logging has been done, is shutting the barn door after the horse got out.
Foundation Activity
We have dozens of volunteers who have been putting in long hours to advance the work of the Foundation in the areas of website development, membership, communications, finance, fundraising and legal. We are moving quickly to put the pieces together to challenge the FMP. Please see the details on the Foundation activity below.
We are convinced the impact of the FMP will be devasting and will change the ecology of the lake for generations to come. Only a significant MNRF policy change or a legal challenge is likely to alter this outcome. The world has learned that we can no longer disregard the environment. Everywhere we look, we see a new attitude to what has been previous insensitivity to the harm to the environment. It’s about time the MNRF caught up.
Unfortunately, all this comes at a cost. We will only get one shot at this and we don’t have very much time. We need to raise funds as quickly as possible, especially to support the environmental consulting, legal and communications services we require to mount this challenge. The costs of these services will be several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Our fundraising efforts have started. Please provide the support you can.
We also need you to become members of the Foundation, to demonstrate we have a strong unified voice in all our communications and to support a legal challenge, if that becomes necessary. Memberships will initially be $50 annually, and the proceeds will be used to support ongoing Foundation operating costs. We will send out an email advising how to join the Foundation, once our website is equipped to take online memberships. Expect to hear from us in the next 10 days.
Please note that our fundraising is being undertaken in addition to the membership fees. Membership fees have been set at a rate which we hope will encourage as many cottagers as possible to join. Membership fees will not generate enough revenue to fund our opposition to the MNRF’s position.
Thanks to everyone who donated so far and a special thanks to those who volunteered their time and/or their corporate resources, your contributions are so valuable and so appreciated. I would remind everyone that while we are only currently talking about a small number of forest blocks that are areas of concern, there are other areas close to the lake that are identified as ‘contingency’ and ‘optional’ and can be used instead of or in addition to the blocks that are slated for clear cutting.
At the last area meeting, one of our fellow cottagers made the statement that the MNRF seems willing to trade off the potential ecological harm to the CWB Restricted Area (which they have rigorously policed for 30 years) in favour of the economics of the timber to be harvested. There was no response by the MNRF to that statement. I think we know their answer.
Regards,
James Ferguson Q.C.