Environment Committee on Sept. 16th, 2024

[Luc Vachon]

When I talked about the mine, I was referring to the situation, the lack of clarity and insecurity that are hanging in the air and lingering right now.

When people see this happening, they have no consistent understanding of what's coming in the forestry sector, which is a whole industry. We're wondering what will happen when it appears that some projects will get preferential treatment, and we're right to wonder.

In a number of regions, people have been making a living in the forest industry for hundreds of years. We tell ourselves that we'll no longer be able to use the resource. However, a mine could have the same or even greater impact, and it would be entitled to a waiver. There's an inconsistency in that position.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I'm going to stop you there, Mr. Vachon. Thank you.

You're addressing the impact on the forestry sector, and that's where we're going to talk about a just transition. We talked about it a lot with the other panel, but I think it's important to come back to it.

Moving forward, I will give the floor to my colleague Mario Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Cloutier, you may have seen the results of the socio-economic analysis that was submitted to the committee and released by the journalist Thomas Gerbet.

The document refers to the possible closure of 53 businesses connected to the forestry sector. As we know, the forestry sector is a chain. A cut link produces a domino effect: The impact is felt by the entire chain.

Do you have any data on the impact this could have on Unifor workers?

[Daniel Cloutier]

When it comes to Unifor workers, it will affect nearly 1,000 workers in Abitibi-Témiscamingue, 800 workers in Quebec City, just over 1,000 workers in Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean and about 800 workers on the north shore. To be clear, I'm only talking about direct jobs; I'm not talking about indirect jobs related to plant operations. I should also point out that these figures apply only to Unifor workers.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Witnesses have told us that the order was in fact far from the ideal solution. Like everyone else, they want to protect the species, but they feel there should be a concerted effort with Quebec. According to them, the order should be set aside for a time so consultations can be held with Quebec and all the stakeholders.

Mr. Vachon and Mr. Cloutier, would the labour federations see any value in that?

[Daniel Cloutier]

Absolutely.

Although we regret the measures taken by the Government of Quebec and its recent lack of vision, particularly since the latest work was done, we feel that the federal government acted much too quickly in drafting an emergency order, especially since the major flaw in the order is that it does not see the big picture, that is to say all the socio-economic repercussions, and it provides no support in that regard.

At the federal level, the departments responsible for employment, investment, employment insurance and education should be involved and should support Quebec in its areas of jurisdiction, particularly through strong financial assistance.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Vachon, would you like to comment?

[Luc Vachon]

Right now it feels like it's all or nothing. The question seems to be “Who's going to make the first move?” That can give the impression that the one who makes the first move will lose out. However, politically speaking, there are no winners or losers in this situation.

We're grappling with this order, which is an ultimatum. I think we need to leave it be and eliminate that threat. We need to bring everyone to the table and reopen the debates and discussions, not to determine whether we're going to win or lose, but to see how we can successfully meet the challenges together.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much, Mr. Vachon.

Mr. Boulerice, you now have the floor.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My first questions are for Mr. St‑Laurent.

Mr. St‑Laurent, I really liked what you said about the key role of science in decision-making. For everyone's benefit, I'd like you to explain the causal link between deforestation, the increase in roadways and the risk of extinction for the boreal caribou.

[Prof. Martin-Hugues St-Laurent]

I mentioned it in my opening remarks, but I can summarize.

If the forest is rejuvenated, abundant and physically accessible food resources will suddenly become available to all herbivores, since they will be at a height that's easy to access. These resources are easily digestible because they are low in tannins and lignins. Individuals are therefore able to be in better physical condition and to invest more in reproduction and survival.

White-tailed deer can produce up to three offspring a year, moose can produce up to two offspring a year, and, due to biological constraints, caribou can produce zero to one offspring a year. Population growth therefore won't be the same. Population growth will also lead to an increase in predator abundance, because they also have more food available. Those predators, which are more abundant as a result of logging, will also be more efficient because of the forest roads. My work and that of several other researchers in Canada show that they use low-grade forest roads to more effectively patrol the territory. It's easier for them and us both to walk on a forest road than in the forest. They're going to harvest more caribou, because they are a more vulnerable prey than moose. For that reason, they will cause the adult population to decline, but there will also be fewer young caribou, since the black bear, which is very abundant on young harvest blocks, will be able to feed on caribou more easily. The Government of Quebec has documented this. In areas where caribou are forced to relocate from their home range, caribou become less loyal to their home range, thus increasing the risk of predation for young caribou.

It's as if we were asking someone to quickly find the refrigerator in someone else's house or apartment. That's quite normal. We know the environment, the resources and the risks. This entire cascade of events is amplified in a territory that is subject to highly sustained development or a high regime of natural disturbances.

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

Thank you.

We've heard a lot from members of the official opposition that much of the solution lies in controlling boreal caribou predators, particularly the wolf.

What do you think of that suggestion or proposal?

[Prof. Martin-Hugues St-Laurent]

I admit that it's an interesting interim measure, but it's important to understand the cascade of events.

Let me put it another way that's easy to understand. Imagine you and I are fishing in a small boat. The boat takes on some water. I hand you a bailer. You bail the water out of the boat, and imagine that in doing so, you are removing predators. If I plug the hole at the bottom of the boat, I'll keep predators from getting in. If I enlarge the hole or make new holes, I'm creating the conditions for more predators to get in.

Therefore, if we don't slow the pace of forest rejuvenation and forest road deployment, it's like we're trying to solve the problem in the boat before it happens by enlarging the hole. You will keep on bailing. You will be bailing for the rest of your life.

We have a good example of this in Canada. A predator control measure has been in place for 30 years around Gaspésie National Park. It only worked for the first five years. Since then, 60% of the old forest around the park has been harvested.

So predator control is an effective interim measure, but it has to be very intensive; it has to remove over 80% of predators, which raises some ethical questions.

Be that as it may, growth in predator numbers is fuelled by forest rejuvenation and the road network.

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

Thank you.

The Government of Quebec introduced measures a few years ago. In your opinion, have those measures been effective, insufficient, or both?

[Prof. Martin-Hugues St-Laurent]

It's actually very simple. In the recovery plans that have been published since 2013, there have been changes to governance structures and excellent caribou inventories that are among the best in Canada. They have set up a large number of committees, looked at the literature on the subject and monitored the situation, among other things. During that time, however, there was a drastic increase in logging in some caribou-friendly areas as well as an increase in the proportion of disturbances in the environment.

To give you a quick idea, the brief I submitted concerning the order states that the level of disturbance increased by 49% in the Pipmuacan region, 64% in Val‑d'Or and 80% in Charlevoix between 1995 and 2020. Meanwhile, in the same period, all kinds of committees, rounds of mediation and so on were rolled out.

The Government of Quebec recently promised to establish some protected areas. That's excellent. It's a good start. They are looking at habitat restoration projects that, by the way, can employ people in the regions. That is important, because people in the regions who have forest expertise can also get involved in the process. All that can be consolidated.

To go back to my comparison, Mr. Boulerice, if I continue putting holes in the bottom of the boat, we will definitely sink, no matter how fast you can bail out the water.

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

Thank you.

I have one last question for you, Mr. St‑Laurent.

I find the work around habitat change and arrangement and the new jobs that could be created to be very interesting. I would like you to take the remaining 30 seconds to talk about that.

[Prof. Martin-Hugues St-Laurent]

I'm not a forestry economist, but I can tell you that, by setting up a caribou research consortium made up of economists, engineers, technicians and other people, we would be able to create a habitat repair economy. We could get people working on decompacting some roads, reforesting others and guiding the composition of the forest to make it more favourable to caribou than to predators. For that, we need people who live in the regions and who have the expertise to do so. It's not the same monetary route, but—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We are moving on to the second round and, once again, I'm going to have to reduce speaking time by 40%. Each member will have three minutes.

Mr. Godin, I know that you wanted to share your time with Mr. Leslie, but I have time for a second question from the Conservatives. Mr. Leslie could have the floor at that point.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Do you want to talk about the third round of questions?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

No. There are two Conservative members, but I don't have the name of the second one.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

I will take the first part.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

He will take the second part.

You have the floor for three minutes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Mr. St‑Laurent.

I find this debate interesting, and I think science is a big part of it. I also think that you, Mr. St‑Laurent, are an authority in the field.

My question may seem simplistic to you. In Charlevoix, an experiment was conducted to save the caribou that were reintegrated in the 1970s by creating enclosures.

Could expanding, even doubling, the size of the enclosures be a solution?

[Prof. Martin-Hugues St-Laurent]

Yes, until there are too many caribou in them.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Now, if we take a gradual approach, should that solution be considered in the short or medium term? I understand that it is not long term, but it would help rebuild the species.