Environment Committee on Aug. 30th, 2024

[Alain Branchaud]

Since 2016, when the draft document came out, when the idea was born to have a caribou protection strategy, CPAWS Quebec participated in every commission, every meeting possible to collaborate with the Government of Quebec. We are also working with the industry, including Chantiers Chibougamau, to introduce alternative approaches to protect the caribou and keep jobs. We are a good-faith player. For three years now we have been asking the federal government to intervene in a very targeted way to protect the populations that are on the brink because of what I would describe as procrastination by the Government of Quebec. It is not that the Government of Quebec is doing nothing, but as of today, August 30, 2024, there are still no measures in place. We are still in consultations and the Government of Quebec has not presented a clear timeline.

As I said in my speech, Quebec's proposals have great potential, but these measures are still being pushed back. We are in a situation where someone has to be serious and responsible and take action to protect the caribou habitat. These habitats are being targeted first because it is the scientific way of ensuring the recovery and survival of the species.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Lavoie, do you agree that the forestry industry needs certainty? There needs to be a plan. We need to know where we are going and that everyone is on board. We are partners in all this.

[Caroline Lavoie]

I fully agree with that, Mrs. Chatel.

Mr. Branchaud told us that his organization took part in several processes in good faith. The forestry industry is of the same view. We invested as soon as we were asked to, with regional operational groups and the independent commission on the caribou. We raised our hands and took part. We have always been there.

We are all on the same wavelength. We are calling for real collaboration. We do not want a strategy to be developed if all we can do is make comments. We want to develop the strategy with our partners, the environmental groups, the first nations, the department, and with the federal government. This needs to meet their criteria so that there is no other order. We must build this strategy together.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I fully agree with you.

Mrs. Simard, do you think there are any solutions? We obviously want to protect the economy, but we also want to ensure an economy for our young people. They too have the right to work in the forestry sector. We want to protect our biodiversity and the caribou. If the caribou and the environment collapse… We live in the same environment that they do and if there is a decline in the species, we could be next on the list. We are all concerned.

What are the solutions for protecting the jobs of today and tomorrow, for protecting the environment and for protecting the economy? Do you think there are any solutions, Mrs. Simard?

[Alice-Anne Simard]

Yes, of course.

Let me talk about the Charlevoix area specifically.

We are all on the same page when it comes to the concerns raised by Ms. Lavoie and her team. In the case of Charlevoix, the federal order proposes an entirely different territory than what is being proposed by the Government of Quebec's pilot project. At Nature Québec, we recommend bringing in the Government of Quebec's pilot project. Its scenario is quite similar to the one that was studied by the Commission indépendante sur les caribous forestiers et montagnards—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much, Mrs. Simard.

Sorry to interrupt you.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

You can send a response in writing, Mrs. Simard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Indeed, sending comments in writing is always possible.

I apologize for cutting you off, but I had no choice.

Mr. Simard, you have the floor.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Lavoie, some witnesses have talked about the order's domino effect on the entire forestry network, as well as the cumulative effect. When we remove forest potential, it becomes harder for all the players in the industry—we are all aware of the auction system in Quebec. In your testimony you indicated that the application of the order in Charlevoix's case would lead to the loss of one third of your cutover area.

I would like you to talk about the consequences this could have on planning.

[Caroline Lavoie]

I want to clarify that this third also includes the Pipmuacan sector, which is partially part of our supply area.

As for the consequences, there is no doubt that we will not be able to maintain our activities with a loss of a third of the area. As Mrs. Simard just said, the current federal order is completely different from the scenario that was proposed by the provincial government. During the implementation of the interim measures taken by the provincial government when a moratorium was imposed on the area, in 2019, we lost 3,000 hectares in our planning. The order would remove another 3,000 hectares, even 3,800 hectares, back home.

As you know, the Saguenay—Lac‑Saint‑Jean region has been affected by the spruce budworm epidemic. That is another challenge our industry is facing. We can harvest only 50% of our supply of what is referred to as green wood. The order applies to every sector of green wood. To us, that is the equivalent of four years of planned, harmonized and department-approved harvest that is being taken away. That is a lot. We always talk about predictability for the forestry industry and its partners; we are losing predictability for ensuring our industry's supply for the next five years.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I do not want to put words in your mouth, but if I understand correctly, executing the order would be an added threat to other threats the forestry sector is facing, such as the spruce budworm infestation and the tariffs. There is already insecurity in the sector. Add to that the lack of predictability in the availability of the fibre for the next four years.

In that context, are there still forestry companies that are willing to invest in their facilities?

[Caroline Lavoie]

For now, everyone has obviously taken a step back.

We were just acquired by the Coopérative forestière Ferland‑Boilleau, who truly has strategic visions and is envisaging interesting synergies. However, as far as orders for new equipment at the sawmills, such as kilns or planers, are concerned, everything has slowed down because no one knows what to expect in the future.

Earlier there was talk of alternatives, either wood from private forests, wood from auctions and unharvested wood. In the Saguenay—Lac‑Saint‑Jean region, these things are already taken into account. Extreme efforts are already being made to try to supply the plants, but our supply pledges, our volumes in private forests and our volumes at the auction house do not even meet our plant needs. The pressure is even greater on auctioned wood. For companies like the one I represent, in other words SMEs, that means we have to fight on markets with much larger sawmills. We are still having a hard time coming out ahead. That puts us at high risk, makes us very vulnerable. Bankers being bankers, they are not going to lend money to vulnerable companies.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

Do you know how many individuals there are in the herd in Charlevoix?

[Caroline Lavoie]

Currently 31 individuals are being temporarily enclosed.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Okay.

Mr. Branchaud, I am not sure if you have any information on how many individuals are needed for maintaining a herd.

[Alain Branchaud]

That depends on different populations, the dynamics of the populations and an ecosystem's support capacity.

In the case of the Charlevoix population, I do not remember what recovery target was set, but the number of individuals that we should be able to reach is around 200 at least to have a population that has a higher chance of survival, to prevent consanguinity problems and things like that. Protecting the habitat absolutely addresses this sort of situation.

I think that answers the question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have 15 seconds left, Mr. Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Okay.

I think the number 200 is interesting. I do not know what it is based on, but I suppose that the scientific data can clarify the number of individuals that should be in place to maintain a herd. If you could table documents on the matter to the committee, we would be grateful.

[Alain Branchaud]

It would be my pleasure. Again, there are nuances to take into account.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Boulerice, you have the floor.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Again, I thank the witnesses for coming here to share their expertise and knowledge with the committee as part of this very important study.

Mrs. Simard, earlier Mr. Branchaud talked about procrastination and the Government of Quebec. You talked about inaction, even incompetence, on a species that, in your view, is on the brink of extinction.

What do you think are the repercussions of continuing to wait and to put things off?

[Alice-Anne Simard]

Goals will simply not be met. The legal obligation to protect threatened species, species at risk, will not be fulfilled. Both the Government of Quebec and the federal government have this legal obligation, and they have an opportunity…

I would like to elaborate on what I was saying earlier. For Charlevoix specifically, it is possible to find solutions and prevent repercussions from snowballing on companies like the one Ms. Lavoie represents. For example, they could adopt the scenario proposed by Quebec, which is built on a consensus in the region and was recommended by the Commission indépendante sur les caribous forestiers et montagnards.

In that particular case, all the repercussions that are causing anxiety for Ms. Lavoie's company could be vastly mitigated. It is just a matter of turning to these solutions. Obviously, all the researchers working collectively are telling us that we need to act quickly. If not, we are going to completely miss the goals. The Government of Quebec has had more than enough time to act.

In August 2022, it signed a joint press release with the Government of Canada in which it said it had the will to move toward protecting all the herds in Quebec. In the meantime, no action has been taken since that announcement.

It is time for action.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I am pleased to hear that. In the NDP, we are truly concerned with protecting jobs, but also with the energy transition. That transition has to be fair to the workers, who need to have a place at the table during discussions. Charlie Angus, my NDP colleague from northern Ontario, worked on this sustainable jobs legislation.

What you are saying, Mrs. Simard, is that we do not need to reinvent the wheel. The independent commission has already done some of the work, and the different levels of government and the different stakeholders should build on that document and use it for coming up with measures to be taken.

[Alice-Anne Simard]

Exactly.

Many players, many witnesses have talked about the need for co‑operation and consultation. All of that work has already been done. An independent, expert-led commission toured Quebec for nearly a year and analyzed a great deal of documentation. It met with scientists, it met with industry, first nations communities, and so on. It made recommendations and presented a lengthy report that provides a bit of an action plan.

When the report came out, we at Nature Québec said that was the strategy that the Government of Quebec should use. The commission, which was given a mandate, presented a perfect strategy that needs to be implemented. We have the document. We know what to do. It is a matter of taking action.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mrs. Simard.

Mr. Branchaud, over the past few weeks, there has been a lot of talk about thresholds for the boreal caribou. So that everyone understands, I would like you to tell the committee what exactly these disturbance thresholds mean.