Natural Resources Committee on Sept. 27th, 2018

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Then it's really left to each. Depending where you are, in Quebec it's provincial and in Ontario it's municipal. There's no standard across the country to deal with these invasive species.

The recovery from this is generational. This isn't something we'll get over in a short amount of time. Is that right?

[Peter Henry]

Yes. If you've lost your 80-year-old trees, it's 80 years before you have another 80-year-old tree.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Unfortunately, we never have enough time, but I want to thank you both for taking the time to join us today. It has been very helpful.

We will suspend briefly and then start the next hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

We're going to get under way. We have two witnesses joining us in the second hour.

We have Mr. Bélanger from Forest Products Association of Canada and Mr. Briand from West Fraser by video conference.

I understand Mr. Briand has a PowerPoint presentation that he's provided. At this point it's in English only. It's going to be translated, but if we have consent from everybody around the table, we can proceed with the English only for now on the understanding that the French will come later. It was a last-minute thing. Otherwise we wouldn't do it. All right, that's fine. Thank you.

The process is that each of you will be given the floor for a presentation of up to 10 minutes. You're welcome to do it in either official language. You may be asked questions in French and English. You have translation devices available to you.

Mr. Bélanger, you're here. Why don't we start with you?

[Étienne Bélanger, Director, Forestry, Forest Products Association of Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me to appear on behalf of the members of the Forest Products Association of Canada, or FPAC.

In short, FPAC provides a voice for Canada's wood, pulp and paper producers nationally and internationally. Canada's forest products industry is a $69 billion a year industry that contributes over $21 billion to Canada's GDP.

The forestry industry is one of the largest employers in Canada. It is active in 600 communities in Canada and directly employees 230,000 Canadians across the country.

I will now talk about forest pests, starting by giving you some background information.

Insects obviously play an essential ecological role in Canadian forests, but in the event of an infestation or serious outbreak, they can destroy important commercial areas. They are then considered pests.

The mountain pine beetle and spruce budworm are long-established pests—more recently in the case of the beetle—that have caused and continue to cause significant economic losses. These impacts have been felt for several decades. It is therefore imperative to take all reasonable measures to mitigate these impacts.

The responsibility for implementing forest pest control measures in Canada depends on where the infestations or outbreaks occur; this responsibility can be provincial, federal or municipal. Eighty-five percent of wood volumes are harvested in public forests. It is therefore primarily the responsibility of provincial governments to implement pest control measures.

However, provincial managers rely on available scientific information and control techniques. The Canadian Forest Service, or CFS, is the country's primary source of scientific and technological support for forest pest control.

The decision-making process based on economic, social and ecological risk assessment is the foundation of the National Forest Pest Management Strategy.

In summary, provincial governments have the primary responsibility for implementing forest pest control measures, while the main roles of the federal government are to conduct research on pest ecology; provide risk assessment expertise; and provide advice to forest managers and develop decision support tools.

FPAC has two recommendations regarding forest pests.

First, the Canadian government should continue to support research on forest pest control strategies to stabilize forest supplies.

Current projections indicate that the risk of disturbance from forest pests will increase significantly over time. Add to this the drought projections and the prediction is that conditions could double the area of fires by the end of the century. All these natural disturbances will put most Canadian forests at high risk.

Informed decision-making on forest management issues must be based on a thorough risk assessment to better assess and compare the likely impacts and cost-effectiveness of the various measures being considered.

As a result, one of the main objectives of any forest pest control strategy should be to stabilize forest supplies in the short, medium and long term.

To this end, research on forest pest control strategies is of fundamental importance and should be further supported very seriously by the federal government.

This research should include the following elements: the risks posed by all forest pests from a systemic perspective, taking into account other elements and disturbances in the ecosystem; response costs, particularly their profitability; the stability of forest supplies in quantity and quality; and they should be part of a long-term perspective, meaning for the duration of the epidemic, from the beginning and during its projected duration.

The second recommendation is that the Canadian government support and participate in a national dialogue on new approaches to sustainable forest management in the context of increasing the severity of natural disturbances and climate change.

Given its origin and magnitude, the mountain pine beetle epidemic is one of the most frequently cited examples of climate change impacts in the world.

Similarly, we are currently experiencing record years for forest fires, and these seem to be part of a “new normal” rather than exceptions.

It is therefore expected that these changes will become more pronounced, and it will be essential for the forest sector to face these challenges, to reinvent itself, in short, to adapt.

However, if we begin to rethink sustainable forest management, it will be crucial to assess the consequences of these changes on key values, such as the recovery of species at risk and the management of our forests in light of natural disturbances.

FPAC is seeking to establish a national dialogue that would bring together a group of high-level decision-makers from industry, governments, indigenous groups, environmental groups, unions, universities and research organizations. The objective of the “Forest Forward” initiative is to build a national consensus on new approaches to sustainable forest management in the context of increasing severity of natural disturbances and climate change.

With regard more specifically to forest pests, such a national dialogue could help to deepen some important issues such as the following.

Would it be appropriate to encourage the intensification of forest management in order to obtain better yields, in quantity and quality, on smaller areas, closer to the mills?

This approach is advocated by Quebec's chief forester, Louis Pelletier, in his recent opinion piece entitled: “Prévisibilité, stabilité et augmentation des possibilités forestières”. With regard to pests, on the one hand, focusing silvicultural investments would also allow make it possible to focus the necessary interventions in order to protect forest supplies. On the other hand, these pest intervention strategies, in this context, should be adapted. For example, we know that trees that grow faster are more vulnerable to pests.

Another national dialogue would be relevant to determine how the forest regime can be changed. The question arises as follows: is it still appropriate to regenerate forests harvested with the same species as those present on the site before harvesting? This is currently a legal requirement in most situations. Climatic conditions have already changed and are already affecting the distribution of some tree species in Canada. The trees that are being regenerated today will most likely experience very different climatic conditions when they reach maturity in 40, 50 and 80 years.

So, on the one hand, it would be possible to regenerate the sites with seeds from warmer regions, with different species or a variety of species. But, on the other hand, such changes in forest composition would undoubtedly have significant impacts on the habitats of the animal species that live there, and could make forests more or less vulnerable to pests.

In short, sustainable forest management in the coming decades is likely to be very different from that targeted by existing forest regimes. It seems essential to create more space for dialogue on these issues, so that we can cope with the changes under way.

To find innovative solutions to the problem of forest pests, it will be important to take a holistic approach and reflect on the links between these natural disturbances and the forest ecosystem as a whole, in a changing context.

The forest products sector is a key driver of the Canadian economy. It is imperative that the government put in place measures to promote its stability.

I will be pleased to answer your questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you very much, sir.

Mr. Briand, now it's over to you.

[Richard Briand, Chief Forester, West Fraser Mills Ltd.]

Good afternoon.

My name is Richard Briand. I am the Chief Forester for West Fraser's Alberta operations. I'm a registered professional forester in Alberta, with 27 years of experience working in Alberta's forests. I thank you for the opportunity to be here today.

West Fraser is a diversified North American wood products company, with 45 manufacturing facilities in western Canada and the southern United States. Our primary products include lumber, plywood, medium-density fibreboard, laminated veneer lumber, pulp, green energy, newsprint and wood chips.

We've been operating continuously in western Canada since 1955. We invested over $1 billion in our Canadian operations between 2013 and 2017, and continue to invest in 2018. We currently operate 25 mills across 10 communities in Alberta and eight communities in British Columbia. We have over 5,000 direct employees in Canada.

Due to the nature of our business, we operate in smaller communities and are often the primary employer in those communities. Communities such as Fraser Lake, B.C., with a population of 988, and Manning, Alberta, with a population of 1,183, depend on our company for employment, and we take great pride in being a stable, long-term employer.

The primary feedstock for our facilities is coniferous timber, predominantly lodgepole pine trees and white spruce trees. We are committed to sustainable forest management principles and manage for timber and non-timber values in our operating areas.

The current mountain pine beetle infestation in western Canada is having a significant negative impact on our operations. It is killing valuable timber—valuable not just from an economic perspective but also for a wide range of ecological goods and services such as water, wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities and carbon sequestration.

The current mountain pine beetle infestation started in B.C. in 1999 and its effects are still being felt today. The two years of record-breaking wildfires in B.C. in 2017 and 2018 are, in part, a result of this infestation. The trees killed by mountain pine beetles contributed to volatile fire hazard conditions, and those fires threatened thousands of homes and impacted the lives and livelihoods of many residents of B.C.

The salvage of economically viable beetle-killed timber in B.C. is essentially complete, and reductions in timber harvest levels are imminent. This will result in mill closures and job losses.

In 2006 and 2009, significant in-flights of mountain pine beetles into Alberta occurred, resulting in the mountain pine beetle infesting parts of northern Alberta that had never seen the insect before. Prior to 2006, most experts believed that spreading of mountain pine beetles from B.C. into Alberta over the Rocky Mountains would never happen. They also believed that Alberta's colder climate would not be suitable for mountain pine beetle survival. They were wrong.

Immediately upon learning of the mountain pine beetle's spread into Alberta, the Alberta government initiated an aggressive control program and requested that companies alter their harvest plans to focus on susceptible pine. Recognizing the wisdom in this concept, in 2006 West Fraser embraced this new approach to forest management, called the “healthy pine strategy”. As a result, the vast majority of our timber harvest in the foothills since 2006 has been in pine-dominated stands, but we have also invested significant resources into direct control of infested stands through single-tree and stand-level operations. In recent years, all of our timber harvest in the west-central region of Alberta has been in stands infested by the mountain pine beetle.

Between 2007 and 2010, the federal government contributed just over $18 million towards control efforts in Alberta. To date, the Alberta government alone has invested over $487 million in direct control efforts. Interestingly, the Saskatchewan government has recognized the potential for spread of the beetle from Alberta into their province, and they have contributed over $5 million to Alberta's control efforts to stop the spread of the beetle into their province.

In terms of pine volume, if the mountain pine beetle breaks through Alberta into Saskatchewan, there are continuous pine types that will allow it to spread across the country to eastern Canada. Pine runs all the way to the east coast. It would be decimating vast tracts of pine forest along its way.

Research is showing that the mountain pine beetle can persist in Jack pine, which means that it can get through the Jack pine and lodgepole pine hybridization zone in northern Alberta and spread east. It is truly a national threat.

As recently as 2013, Jasper National Park had very low levels of mountain pine beetle infestation. However, limited action was taken to control that infestation, and it is now feeding mountain pine beetle into Alberta. The Hinton and Edson region of west-central Alberta was inundated by mountain pine beetle raining in from Jasper National Park at record-breaking levels for over two months. Typically, this would only happen over a two-week period.

The spread of the mountain pine beetle into our operating areas is putting our businesses at risk and will eventually put the very communities we operate in at economical and physical risk from wildfire. Without aggressive control, the mountain pine beetle will spread north and south along the critical watersheds of the east slopes of the Rocky Mountains, and it will also continue its steady march east into Saskatchewan and beyond.

Some of the impacts the outbreak will have on West Fraser include increased fire risk to the forests we depend on. Significant wildfires will reduce the available timber for our forestry operations and, again, put the communities we operate in at risk.

It will also result in the production of lower-value products by feeding dry, beetle-killed logs into our mills rather than fresh, green timber. This reduces the viability of our operations.

There will be increased costs and reduced production at our facilities due to limited forest resource availability. There will be fewer trees available for harvest if the mountain pine beetle has overrun our operating areas. Increased costs for logging and hauling dead timber will also be a result. There will likely be watershed impacts, which can damage our road infrastructure. As well, we will have to invest more into our facilities to be able to handle the dry logs that will be provided to our sawmills.

The situation in B.C. is very troubling but beyond our ability to do much, other than reconcile the remaining forest inventory, consolidate businesses and close some mills.

Due to the proactive and aggressive program in Alberta, we are not in the same situation as B.C. The program is well coordinated with industry and municipalities to ensure that control treatments are aligned, which we certainly appreciate. Resources for this program, however, appear to be tight. We believe that continued support of Alberta's program would be very beneficial.

We believe we need to continue with the aggressive control efforts, and we will also need some help from Mother Nature. Control efforts will slow the spread of the mountain pine beetle and allow government and industry to work together to manage the forests and mitigate the impacts of this pest. Slower spread rates will help maintain the economic viability of the timber resource, which means that we can harvest and then reforest pine beetle-infested stands, which will then support the many values they provide. Left unharvested, many of these areas will not regenerate until a wildfire burns through them.

It is a challenging situation, but through co-operative, coordinated actions we can have a significant impact on the spread of the mountain pine beetle.

Thank you again for the opportunity to present and provide our perspective on the mountain pine beetle.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you very much, both of you.

Mr. Serré, you're going to start us off.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the two witnesses for their presentations and the work they are doing in the field.

My first question is for both witnesses, but I will address Mr. Bélanger first.

Your association has members in every province, but the number varies from one to the next.

Has the “cap and trade” system in Quebec helped producers in terms of research and education?

Do you have any examples of the assistance provided under the existing system?

[Étienne Bélanger]

I'm sorry. Are you talking about the carbon system?

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

In other words, aren't there research funds that have been given to companies to help them?

[Étienne Bélanger]

There is currently a situation in Quebec that is posing a few problems. A lot of research money comes from the federal government through the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, or NSERC.

Unfortunately, under the new forestry regime in place, the province is responsible for forest management. Since 2014, it is no longer the companies that are responsible for making management plans, but the province, which has also taken over responsibility for funding the Société de protection des forêts contre les insectes et maladies, or SOPFIM. SOPFIM is no longer funded by industrial contributions, but by government money in the form of royalties that SOPFIM receives directly, which prevents NSERC from doubling its funds.

This greatly reduces the potential for research on insects and their diseases. The fault lies in this new accounting mechanism. Discussions are under way to rectify the situation, but I know that many financial contributions for insect and disease research are coming to an end in Quebec soon and are difficult to renew because of this accounting mechanism that has been modified in the new forestry regime.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Briand, has the system in Alberta and B.C., with the price on pollution, helped you as a private sector company in terms of research and development to help support the tackling of invasive species in general, not just the mountain beetle?

[Richard Briand]

Yes, there's been a lot of funding provided to mountain pine beetle research. Most of that has come from the Alberta government. The Canadian Forest Service has been doing a lot of research as well. I'm not familiar with any linkages back to the carbon taxes or anything related to that.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

The witnesses talked to us about eastern and western Canada.

Mr. Eglinski explained earlier that the mountain pine beetle was getting closer to Ontario. We were also talking about the whole issue of Toronto's Pearson Airport and the urban environment. A crisis seems to be looming on the horizon, but that's not what I'm hearing from you.

Mr. Bélanger, you are talking about recommendations to the federal government. The first recommendation is to invest in research and development, which means more money. It is always difficult to seek money, but it is important. The second recalls the importance of nation-wide education on climate change.

Some witnesses spoke about native species and invasive species. When it comes to jurisdictional issues, it seems that the entire system needs to be disrupted. Municipalities have responsibilities, so does the province, and even the federal government has a small role to play. There doesn't really seem to be a national system. However, an infestation is looming in Canada that will affect the entire country, Ontario, Quebec and cities. However, the recommendations seem to be telling us to continue as before and be optimistic.

I won't be here as a member of Parliament in 2023 to talk about national issues in an industry as important as forestry. I would therefore like to know if it is possible to recommend a more national debate. The provinces are responsible for forest management, but I don't think they seem to want us to be sufficiently involved in this management.

[Étienne Bélanger]

Let's not underestimate the importance of a national dialogue. This crisis will require us to look at our forest regimes and the species to be preferred for reforestation, given the increase in these infestations. The discussions will be very upsetting, and will also be difficult in many ways.

Holding these discussions with each province separately is very complicated, which explains the Forest Products Association of Canada's strong interest in establishing a national discussion forum. FPAC is negotiating with many officials and representatives of the Canadian Forest Service to see if it is possible to broaden the scope of some of the national dialogues that primarily affect research and the new vision of the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers.

We anticipate that further, much more intense discussions on these changes will be required. In our view, many of the legal foundations of existing forest regimes do not allow for the necessary changes, particularly in terms of rethinking forest composition. Indeed, the law currently requires reforestation with the same species, and the parameters governing the recovery of species at risk are static. These two constraints force us to claim that we will succeed in restoring forests to their former state, knowing that this will not happen.

So we will have to face a major conflict if we continue to invest in one direction, while the forest has to go in a completely different one, and we will be up against the wall. This change will be very upsetting, and we will wonder how sure we will be of our approach, how ready we will be and on what scale we will be able to implement these political changes. These are big questions. It is indeed difficult to discuss it with each of the provinces separately, just as it would be equally irrelevant—

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

I'm going to have to stop you there. We have to move on. Thank you, Mr. Serré.

Mr. Eglinski, go ahead.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both witnesses for appearing here today.

I was listening to your last reply here, Mr. Bélanger, and you mentioned a national strategy four or five times during your answers. I imagine that's what your association is looking for.

Do you believe we are past a dialogue and now require more direct action by the federal government in the way of financial assistance to provinces?

If you look at the presentation by West Fraser, they cited $487 million that the Province of Alberta put in to attack the pine beetle, and $5 million invested by the Province of Saskatchewan, which hasn't really found any yet, whereas the federal government put in $18.37 million. I think that came under our government, towards the end of it, and it was definitely not enough.

Do you think we're at the dialogue stage, or do you think we're at the action stage? Do you think the government needs to be more involved federally? The provinces are already.

[Étienne Bélanger]

I would say both. The federal intervention is welcome in terms of creating a capacity to do these rapid interventions in crises, and notably to either help avoid the spread from one province to another, or level the playing field, although that might be a bit of addressing the short-term issue and the rapid crisis. That's great, but if we also maintain a forest management regime that continues to move towards more crises without rethinking itself, that's also something that needs to take place.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you.

Mr. Briand, it's good to hear from you again. Your company, West Fraser, has been very active in my riding of Yellowhead, especially the Hinton area, in the last several years, watching the pine beetle come through the park. In the last four to five years in particular, you have been very actively working with the provincial and federal governments in trying to cull the beetles as they came out and into the eastern slopes.

Can you give us an example of the kind of job you have done or the kind of work you're doing? You're working with the communities. You have a pine beetle task force there. Can you update us on what type of...? You're the front line. You're attacking them. Give us an idea of what you're doing as a group.

[Richard Briand]

There are a number of different approaches or activities we're involved in, the most obvious being our direct control efforts. That's really been a combination of redirecting all of our timber-harvesting operations into beetle-infested stands today, as well as participating in the Government of Alberta's program on controlling individual trees that are in small pockets, scattered across the landscape.

As far back as 2006, we redirected all our efforts into harvesting stands where the beetle would do well if it got established. There's also been a lot of activity in working with the local communities, helping them to understand what is going on, what spread rates we're looking at and where we expect to see the beetle.

A lot of concern from the communities is about whether there's enough coordination happening, for example. There's been a lot of dialogue at every level of government that is interested and that we can spend a few minutes talking to, which is most of them. The municipalities and provincial governments in particular, in this region, have been very active in that regard. We spend a lot of effort there.

There are a lot of costs involved in redirecting, replanning, abandoning current harvest plans and focusing on new areas as the beetle spread progresses.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

What do you think governments—the provinces and the federal government—can do at the present time to assist forest companies like yours, when entire regions are being attacked by the pine beetle? What do you think they can do more of than they are doing now?

[Richard Briand]

The control strategy they have in Alberta is a very good one. It just needs as many resources as we can put into it. That's where it will be the most effective. It needs to be funded to its maximum potential. The impression we're getting now is that the resources available provincially are becoming more difficult to find, so anything that can support Alberta's program would be the best step forward. We're not at a point where we—

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I have one quick question, Richard.

You've been on the front lines. Your company has been very active, and I have to compliment West Fraser.

Do you think you were holding them, for a while? Do you think we can hold them? Do you think we can beat them, from your experience?