Evidence of meeting #110 for Natural Resources in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fire.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Partnership and Science Manager, Invasive Species Centre
The mountain pine beetle population is really widespread. I don't think the fire would burn all the area infested. Cutting and burning trees is one of the approaches, although generally the beetles have already left the standing dead trees.
If those trees are burning, it's not going to control the population. The green trees where the beetles are first attacking that are on the leading edge of the infestation you'd want to cut and burn. If the tree is already dead, it's too late.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
You think right.
I'll go to Mr. Tan, but I want to ask a question first.
Is there a document available that shows who has what jurisdiction where and on what issues? Provinces have a certain jurisdiction over themselves, and the federal government has certain jurisdictions. I'm sure municipalities are involved at some level as well.
In answer to Mr. Falk's question, you just said that when you find the emerald ash borer, you don't deal with it but you call your partners on the ground. Is there a document that can explain to us who all the players are, what their responsibilities are, and what they can and can't do?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Invasive Species Centre
I think it depends on the species. That document does exist for some species. I don't know that it exists in general for invasive species as a whole. We can certainly get you what we are aware of.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Okay.
Is there a map somewhere that shows where the invasive species are in Canada and where they're going?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Invasive Species Centre
In Ontario, for sure, we have EDDMapS, which provides an interactive map of where the invasive species are. In EDDMapS, you can also see the regulated areas under CFIA's control. That will show you where that species has spread and which areas have been regulated.
Depending on the species, I think some of the modelling that has been done by CFS would be able to give a good picture of where it's going.
October 2nd, 2018 / 11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Geng Tan Liberal Don Valley North, ON
Thank you, Chair.
As a scientist myself, I'm very much fascinated by your concept of engaging more citizen scientists on the ground.
I want to ask a question about the definition of “pest species”. I realize that Richard asked a similar question, but I want to go at it from a different angle.
I realize that the terms “alien” and “invasive” refer to the shift from one ecosystem to another, but once a pest species or a disease has moved into the new ecosystem within Canada, at what point is it no longer considered alien or invasive, and rather, becomes native?
In other words, once it has extended beyond its usual geographic range and has occupied some area steadily, does it ever become native or does it remain forever alien or invasive?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Invasive Species Centre
I would think that it would still remain invasive until such point as it doesn't have significant impact on the ecosystem and the economy there. That is the type of criterion we have: the significant impact.
If there ever comes a time where the EAB doesn't have a significant impact, or mountain pine beetle going to the east wouldn't have a significant impact, it may be that the range could be extended. Until such time, I don't know that we would not consider them invasive.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Geng Tan Liberal Don Valley North, ON
You're saying the native species will cause less impact on the economy than the invasive or alien species.
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Invasive Species Centre
I guess there are examples of where that's not the case, but for our definition, if it goes outside its regular range and it meets the criteria for the impacts, then we consider it to be invasive. If it's already native to the area and it also has a significant impact, such as spruce budworm, we wouldn't consider that to be invasive, because it's within its natural area.
Noon
Liberal
Geng Tan Liberal Don Valley North, ON
You talked about studying the risk pathways—in other words, focusing on how the species are getting in. That is what you said. To me, that sounds very important.
Can you tell us more about that and what resources are needed to better study risk pathways?
Noon
Executive Director, Invasive Species Centre
David can talk to you about the risk analysis we did for the firewood pathway.
What did you look at?
Noon
Partnership and Science Manager, Invasive Species Centre
For pathways for invasive species spread, you first have to look at the pathway into Canada, how it's getting here in the first place, and then once it's in Canada, the pathway of how it spreads through the country.
For the firewood pathway analysis we did, we were looking at spread within Canada—assuming that an invasive species is already established in one part, how it may spread to other parts of Canada through the human-facilitated transport of firewood.
We basically looked at firewood producers in Canada and firewood vendors. It's a big network of stores, from Canadian Tire and big box stores to the roadside sellers who might not be regulated. It's hard to capture where people might be obtaining this firewood and then where they might be bringing it.
We looked at networks of infrastructure, where campgrounds are located, what species' firewood they might be bringing, what regulations are currently in place.
Noon
Executive Director, Invasive Species Centre
We also looked at things such as what existing policies govern the criteria. We looked at public information, whether people are even aware that moving firewood is a bad thing. We're involved in partnerships that are doing just that.
How far do people bring firewood, and what's the reason they bring their own firewood? For example, they bring their own firewood because they don't think what they're going to get at the park is good quality. What types of outreach campaigns resonate with people? How can we reach people to let them know that moving firewood is a bad thing?
We have a model in place to do that, so we could do that for any pathway that we want to examine.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
We're going to have to stop there. Unfortunately, we've run out of time.
Thank you both very much for joining us today and providing very valuable information.
We're going to suspend for a few minutes to get our next witness ready and set up.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Welcome back, everybody. We'll get our second hour of witnesses under way.
Joining us from Parks Canada, we have Darlene Upton, who is the vice-president of protected areas establishment and conservation, and Gilles Seutin.
Thanks to both of you for joining us.
You will have up to 10 minutes between the two of you to make a presentation, and then you will be given an opportunity to answer questions from people around the table. You can speak in French and/or English. The translation device is available.
The floor is yours.
12:10 p.m.
Darlene Upton Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
Thank you very much for the opportunity to be here today. I will make opening remarks and we will both be available for questions.
The protected areas establishment and conservation branch oversees important national programs, including the establishment of new national parks and reserves, ecological integrity monitoring, species-at-risk recovery, ecological restoration and fire management.
Parks Canada's mandate is to protect and present nationally significant examples of Canada's natural and cultural heritage and to foster public understanding, appreciation and enjoyment in ways that ensure their ecological and commemorative integrity for future and present generations.
The area of land currently protected in Canada's 46 national parks and reserves stands at about 328,000 square kilometres, covering representative samples of the wide variety of natural landscapes that characterize Canada, including many types of forests.
Parks Canada's priority in managing national parks is clearly stated in the Canada National Parks Act, as follows:
Maintenance or restoration of ecological integrity, through the protection of natural resources and natural processes, shall be the first priority...when considering all aspects of the management of parks.
Forest ecosystem management in national parks aims to maintain ecological services and processes while mitigating major risks from natural catastrophes, such as wildfire, to park visitors, staff, infrastructure and surrounding communities. For instance, many parks use prescribed burns to reduce fuel load and promote forest diversity.
Forest pests, both native and exotic to Canada, are occurring in national parks and reserves throughout the country. Native pests include the mountain pine beetle and the eastern spruce budworm, while exotic pests include the emerald ash borer and the white pine blister rust. Forest health and pests are monitored in national parks by partnering with the Canadian Forest Service, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and provincial agencies. The Canadian Forest Service has the national lead for providing expertise in forest pests.
Our agency's general approach to native forest pests is premised on the fact that native insect outbreaks are part of the natural cycle of forests and contribute to forest renewal and diversity, especially in boreal regions. By managing to maintain a forest cover made of various species and age classes, we think parks will be resilient to insect outbreaks and slow their speed. Parks Canada's approach to native forest pests in national parks and reserves is guided by three policies contained in our guiding principles and operating policies.
The first states:
National park ecosystems will be managed with minimal interference to natural processes. However, active management may be allowed when the structure or function of an ecosystem has been seriously altered and manipulation is the only possible alternative to restore ecological integrity.
The second states:
Provided that park ecosystems will not be impaired, the manipulation of naturally occurring processes such as fire, insects and disease may take place when no reasonable alternative exists and when monitoring has demonstrated, that without limited intervention: i) there will be serious adverse effects on neighbouring lands; or ii) major park facilities, public health or safety will be threatened; or iii) the objectives of a park management plan prescribing how certain natural features or cultural resources are to be maintained cannot be achieved.
The third policy statement says:
Where manipulation is necessary it will be based on scientific research, use techniques that duplicate natural processes as closely as possible, and be carefully monitored.
Speaking specifically about the mountain pine beetle, it's a naturally occurring forest insect in western Canada that attacks mainly lodgepole pine. The outbreak has spread to the Banff, Kootenay and Yoho national parks, where the beetle population is now stabilized, and to Jasper National Park, where the population is still growing.
Parks Canada has worked with governmental and industry partners to slow the spread of the insect and mitigate its impacts on parklands and beyond. In Jasper National Park—1.1 million hectares—the outbreak is part of the beetle migration into northwest Alberta from British Columbia that began in 2006. The infestation migrated across the Rocky Mountains, reaching into the Grande Prairie-Peace River area in 2005, north of Jasper, and made its way east and south. About 93,000 hectares of the park's 200,000-hectare pine forests are affected.
The beetle infestation has continued to move on and is now into forests near Hinton, Edson and the Lac La Biche area of northern Alberta. It is a regional challenge, and Jasper National Park is just one of the many jurisdictions impacted by it.
The presence of a large number of dead and dying trees is thought to increase the risk of wildfire in the national park and surrounding area, and this has been partially supported by the observation that in 2017 in British Columbia about one-third of the forest fires were occurring in the dead stands. A mountain pine beetle working group was formed in 2015 by Parks Canada, NRCan, the Canadian Forest Service and the Government of Alberta, through Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, to work together on surveillance and action planning.
With help from the Canadian Forest Service and Alberta, Parks Canada completed and approved a mountain pine beetle management plan for Jasper National Park in 2016. The plan outlines goals and measures to be taken to maintain the park's ecological integrity; slow or limit the spread of the mountain pine beetle, both through the park and into adjacent lands; ensure the safety of visitors and residents of Jasper; and educate visitors on mountain pine beetle occurrence and issues related to national park conservation.
Implementing the plan involves prescribed burns, single and multi-tree removal, and patch removal using mechanical harvesting equipment, which then supports prescribed burns in the community for protection.
Parks Canada has been managing wildfires in Jasper for more than 100 years, and continually improves and refines its approach. For the last 30 years it's been working to put fire back on the landscape to improve ecological integrity and to help manage the frequency and severity of wildfire.
For the past 15 years, Jasper National Park has been a leader in the application of fire-smart practices and fuel reduction around townsites and other high-use areas. It's also mitigating the impact of mountain pine beetle on whitebark pine, an endangered species. In that case we're using pheromones to protect individual trees from the beetle, prescribed fire and thinning are done to reduce competition and wildfire risk, and many thousands of seedlings have been planted or successfully established since 2013.
In terms of other forest pests, outbreaks are also affecting national parks elsewhere in the country. For instance, eastern spruce budworm outbreaks occur regularly in the boreal, Great Lakes and Acadian forests of Canada. A natural disturbance, they're an integral part of the forest ecosystem.
Since 2006, the populations of spruce budworm in Quebec have increased steadily, reaching about seven million hectares in 2017. The outbreak in the lower St. Lawrence in Quebec spread to nearby northern New Brunswick in 2016 through massive moth migration events, and reached the Miramichi in 2017. We believe it's just a matter of time before the outbreak reaches Kouchibouguac National Park and possibly Fundy National Park.
The Government of New Brunswick is using early-control strategies consisting of a spray program combining insecticide, insect growth regulators and sex pheromones for mating disruption, and a representative of the New Brunswick Department of Energy and Resources consulted with the park on manners related to Kouchibouguac. The spruce budworm population will be monitored in the park, and management options will be examined if it becomes a source of infestation.
Many national parks are also confronted with non-native, exotic forest pests such as the emerald ash borer. This wood-boring beetle, native to Asia, feeds on and kills all emerald ash species native to Canada. Infestations now exist in much of southern Quebec and southern Ontario. The beetles have also reached Winnipeg to the west and Edmundston to the east.
The current area of the emerald ash borer infestation includes national parks in Ontario, as well as national historic sites and canals and waterways in Ontario and Quebec. In those cases, individual parks are working with partners to slow the spread and manage its impact through education, outreach and monitoring, as well as by treating individual trees with systemic insecticides and removing hazard trees.
In conclusion, Parks Canada's approach will be guided by our mandate policies and procedures, and we'll continue to work with all other relevant jurisdictions in our management of forest pests in national parks.
Thank you.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you very much, Ms. Upton.
Mr. Whalen, you're going to start us off.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Upton, we've heard a lot of high-level discussion about pest management, but I'm hoping you can provide some specifics, just so we can have a better mental picture of what's happening on the ground with respect to, initially, mountain pine beetle detection and management within Jasper National Park.
I'd like you to walk me through how you determine which areas to treat, and what you do.
12:20 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
I'll start and allow Gilles to add.
We work in co-operation with several partners who really are leading some of the monitoring on that. As was stated, we have developed a mountain pine beetle management plan for the park that involves several specific objectives related to the mountain pine beetle.
First, we're using prescribed fire. Where we have looked at and analyzed the forest stand structure and we know there's a more diverse forest stand—not all mature and old, but a more natural distribution of forest age—we're using fire as our number one tool to increase ecological integrity and manage the stand.
Prescribed burns are planned in several areas. To give you a few examples of those, one big area is the Fiddle five complex. The aim there is that it's a multi-year program to use prescribed burn in order to bring the stand age to a more normal distribution, which would then give the forest more resilience and enable it to withstand the bug infestation. That's one tool. It's really focused in the Athabasca Valley.
We're also doing what we call “level 1” treatments, which are single-stand removals of infected trees. Again, we're looking specifically at leading edges of certain zones. The analysis that's being done is really looking at where the minimum effort can achieve the greatest result for managing the species. Using mapping and various tools, those interventions are being made in specific areas.
The third is a broader patch removal using mechanized equipment. The use of that particular method is somewhat limited by the geography of the area. Where we can do that, often adjacent to towns and things like that, we are taking those actions.
One of the challenges we face now is that with the past practice of forest suppression, using fire as a natural way to manage does challenge us, because forest fuels are quite high. We're often employing a two-stage effect, where we're doing some mechanical removal to reduce the risk of fire so that we can then move in and use fire on the landscape. Sometimes it's a single treatment, and sometimes it will be multiple.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
When you talk about a stand, how many hectares are we talking about for a typical stand?
12:20 p.m.
Vice-President, Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation, Parks Canada Agency
I do not have the answer to that question.
