Evidence of meeting #112 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 provincial.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll be asking my questions in French.
First, Mr. Young, thank you for your presentation and the way you approach it. I don't know which riding you're from, but maybe you should consider running for politics in the next election. Good job.
Obviously, forests are under provincial jurisdiction. British Columbia, Alberta and Atlantic Canada are dealing with problems, and soon, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan will be as well. In a way, it can be said that the methods used by the government and the private sector in the past haven't worked so well.
Mr. Young, I'd like you to answer from your personal standpoint and not that of your association.
What could the provinces do better on this front? What tangible measures could the federal government take to make a real difference in the coming decades?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, National Aboriginal Forestry Association
Thank you for the question, Mr. Sauvé.
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, National Aboriginal Forestry Association
That's a good question. Thank you for the question, Mr. Serré. I'll answer it completely.
I'll start with the political. My grandfather, John Young, was a proud member of the Progressive Conservative Party in Manitoba and federally his whole life. My father, my uncles and my aunts are, to this day, diehard Liberals. My cousins and a lot of the other young people I went to university with are dippers. They're with the NDP.
Sir, I guess I'm surrounded by family. It doesn't matter what political stripe you might have on.
On forestry and provincial jurisdiction and what governments can do differently.... We have a set of tables in front of us, and you can clearly see the provincial tenure in Canada ranging from 0% all the way up to the mid-30%. There is variability in how provincial governments are working with indigenous groups to reconcile the forest tenure regime. There are differences there, but we're responsible enough now.... We actually have the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers, the first ministers' table, the forest ministers' table, and the environment ministers' table, where we have to take data like these and discuss them. What are the differences in policy here? What are the differences in outcome?
One thing we heard initially, in the early eighties, when we had indigenous groups.... Actually it was in B.C. that the first indigenous tenure was taken up. We heard from many other provinces, “Canada will end if indigenous groups have tenure. The economy will end in our regions.” Clearly, this is not the case. It is the exact opposite. When you have indigenous responsibility in collaboration with the provincial government, you get advanced manufacturing investment, job stabilization and market entry into other countries that are looking at the indigenous profile of manufactured Canadian products. They want it.
We have to discuss it, and we have to look at the real differences in policy and opinion. Guess what. Not everybody is going to agree on what to do, but let's run the experiment. Let's see whose approach works. Time is an ongoing story, sir. We'll all be here in another 5,000 years. We're just really starting this story.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Sadly, that's all the time we have. We greatly appreciate your taking the time to be here. Your contribution was tremendous. I think you do have a future as a politician, because I noticed you identified every member of your family's political stripe except your own. You know how to answer questions.
11:55 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, National Aboriginal Forestry Association
I'm indigenous, sir.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
On that note, we will suspend for two minutes and then start with our next witnesses.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
We're going to resume with our second panel of witnesses. We're doing something a little different this time. We have two witnesses in our second hour.
From the B.C. First Nations Forestry Council, we have Keith Atkinson, who's with us by video conference.
From the office of the chief forester in the B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development, we have Diane Nicholls, by audio only. The video isn't working.
Thank you, both, for joining us, in a manner of speaking.
Each of you will be given an opportunity to make opening remarks for up to 10 minutes. It doesn't have to be 10 minutes, of course. After both of you have done that, we'll open up the floor for questions from around the table.
Mr. Atkinson, since we can see and hear you, why don't we start with you, sir?
October 16th, 2018 / noon
Keith Atkinson Chief Executive Officer, BC First Nations Forestry Council
Great, thank you very much.
Good morning, members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me to contribute to your hearings regarding the study on forest pests. It's my pleasure to speak to you today on behalf of the B.C. First Nations Forestry Council. Our organization works to support first nations throughout western Canada, approximately 203 first nations, whose combined territories encompass all of British Columbia.
We are pleased to inform the committee that our organization is working with our communities on improving relationships and strengthening participation in the forest sector, both the business of forestry and the governance of forests and natural resources. As such, we're keenly interested to understand how governments are considering forest management topics such as forest pests.
The mandate that Canada has embraced on the rights of indigenous peoples has now been endorsed by the B.C. government as well. The framework for rights recognition created at the United Nations is a powerful expression and model for working relationships with aboriginal peoples. Our organization is very focused on supporting the implementation of this mandate, something that requires first nations' input and direction.
In addition, the recognition and mandates to implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's “Calls to Action” report are of great importance to how we move forward together.
Lastly, recent legal precedents are important for guidance within Canada and local jurisdictions on appropriate legal frameworks for the relationship and recognition of first nations peoples throughout Canada.
As a forest and land stewardship organization, we are excited to discuss forest pests and provide some advice and direction that we feel is in the best interests of the lands and resources, our communities and our businesses.
As you are likely aware, forest pest management falls under various jurisdictions. The most significant is the B.C. provincial ministry of forests, and I'm glad that the chief forester has joined us today for this discussion. Beyond that, there are private lands and, of course, federal lands, federal Indian reserve lands, where our nations deal with those issues as well.
The strong mandate to recognize and support aboriginal rights now requires that we move toward consent-based and shared decision-making at the traditional territory level. Forest management is an important element that requires engagement with first nations and quickened advancement toward collaborative decisions at the territory level. This context and mandate are a new regime that we're very excited to participate in and to support the work going forward.
The question of jurisdiction has now changed, or is in the process of changing, at least. First nations are now a component of the jurisdiction requiring strong engagement, shared decision-making, and resources to undertake the work and share in the benefits and prosperity that natural resources and industrial development offer.
First nations in our organization are very aware of forest pest issues and mitigation. In fact, our organization, the B.C. First Nations Forestry Council, was founded in 2006 as a direct response to the mountain pine beetle infestation in B.C. and the federal initiative to mitigate this infestation. At the time, we developed an agreement between the B.C. government and first nations leadership. The first nations would access 20% of the federal mountain pine beetle-committed funding. With these funds, the forestry council was created and we began working with our affected communities on priorities and strategies to mitigate the mountain pine beetle impacts.
I can summarize the work that was done by 103 of our communities in B.C. First, community safety was needed through fuel management, the reduction of forest fire risks created from dying pine trees. Second, there was wildlife and land-based restoration as a priority goal for strategic investments toward restoration of the impacted land base. Lastly, there were economic development solutions for first nations to participate in the changing economy based on the impacts of the mountain pine beetle.
Controlling the spread of the mountain pine beetle infestation was not possible. It travelled through the pine forests of British Columbia's interior and devastated the standing inventory, affecting even regenerated forests. After 15 years of pine tree losses due to the mountain pine beetle, we've now witnessed two years of severe forest fire conditions in B.C., unprecedented in their destruction of forests and lands.
The dialogue over the years has changed from pest management of the mountain pine beetle to how climate change has affected our natural resources and how forest management strategies and practices may require adaptation to best manage the condition of the forest.
The ongoing impacts of climate change are showing increased forest pest activity. Drought conditions of recent years have initiated much discussion and research on the impacts on the western red cedar, in particular, a highly valued commercial species and a culturally significant tree to first nations.
We are aware that forest pests are most typically an impact to the commercial timber industry, which brings so much wealth to the provinces and Canada. First nations prioritize economic benefits and healthy economies within their strategies as well. Our nations, too, wish to see and be part of the prosperity that our natural resources offer.
Unfortunately, all too often we conflict due to the strong sense of stewardship of the forest and the lack of recognition of indigenous rights. We haven't had that recognition and ability to influence forest management decisions over the years, but that seems to be changing in our political environment today.
Our communities have identified that governance of forest resources requires a balance of conserving non-timber products and other values in the forest, and they often speak to the need for restoration on the land due to the cumulative impacts of natural resource extraction. We propose that this vision of a balanced forest is one that supports resilience toward pests.
In our work, you can see strategic priorities over the years that include things such as social and cultural sustainability, economic opportunities and sustainable economies, recognition of rights, and restoration of the land base.
The current ongoing hazard created by mountain pine beetles leaves our communities at continued risk of forest fires, an unacceptable health and safety risk.
We see investments in restoration of the land, including fuel management treatments, as tremendous opportunities for the building of capacity and forestry-related business. We understand there are various levels of research that has been undertaken and continues. Now is a good time for investment in first nations research that can bring forward traditional knowledge and understanding of lands and resources, knowledge that's been carried for thousands of years by our communities.
In our early years of mountain pine beetle management with that investment, we undertook the beginnings of some research from a first nation or indigenous perspective. Unfortunately, that funding has deteriorated.
In addition, we are at a time of reconciliation with first nations in Canada. The land question and a new relationship are being discussed. There's an opportunity to build a healthy relationship between Canada, its provinces, and aboriginal people as mandated by the Government of Canada and B.C. A new narrative has emerged in society based on this perspective of reconciliation. It includes building awareness and understanding of issues such as the residential schools. It includes recognition of the beauty that can be found in an indigenous world view. It is a dramatic change from the old narrative, which might be phrased as “the government taking care of the first nations”.
Communication can be a powerful tool in regard to reconciliation. As such, consideration should be given to the committee's communication strategy and materials that assist in amplifying this new narrative.
We'd like to leave the committee with a number of recommendations.
We recommend that the committee strongly consider the purpose and goals of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action, and the recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions that affect lands and resources. The committee should consider how it will advance the purpose and goals of these instruments.
Second, engagement with first nations should be undertaken in the development of strategies and programs that affect lands and resources. Programs that we have supported and that should be considered include research, education and extension support relating to forest management—in this case, forest pests. There is a strong need for education and extension services on both forest management and understanding and awareness of the relationship that is envisioned through mandates such as the United Nations declaration and the calls to action.
As mentioned previously, health and safety risks for first nations communities due to forest fire hazard are a direct outcome of forest pest management. This situation should be considered and programs should be developed for the ongoing mountain pine beetle hazard and the future risks from climate change and new pest outbreaks.
The risk of the continued decrease in available red cedar in B.C. has a significant impact on the preservation of culture for first nations. Risk assessment requires a perspective from first nations communities and their businesses.
Consideration could be given to ensuring that all partners, proponents, staff and committee members are educated on the history of aboriginal peoples, including the history and legacy of residential schools, the United Nations declaration, treaties, aboriginal rights, indigenous law and aboriginal-Crown relations. We've noted in our work a distinct absence of awareness of aboriginal interests when it comes to natural resources, as well as the siloed impact of governments, and how natural resources stand separate from social issues like indigenous rights.
First nations governments require a share of the resources to allow participation in the governance and business of forest management and operations. An aboriginal forest trust, investment in first nations and their governments, and investment in organizations like ours in British Columbia or the National Aboriginal Forestry Association—I saw Brad Young speaking to you earlier—should be considered to enable this work to happen.
Although it may seem that this presentation is largely based on the context and framework created by recent mandates with regard to UNDRIP, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's work and the Supreme Court decisions, the baseline is that this new context requires first nations' consideration in the best management of natural resources in Canada.
This committee is the front line for consideration of this requirement, and we're excited to offer our thoughts and recommendations toward how this can move forward.
Thank you for hearing our thoughts at this time.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you very much, Mr. Atkinson.
Ms. Nicholls, I understand that you may want to make a brief opening statement. There's no obligation to use all the time, just so you know.
12:15 p.m.
Diane Nicholls Assistant Deputy Minister, Chief Forester, Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development of British Columbia
Thank you.
I would like to thank the committee for the invitation to present.
I am the chief forester for the Province of British Columbia within the B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. The office of the chief forester in the division encompasses most of forest management in British Columbia and the legislation, regulations, policy guidelines, etc. that govern that, of which forest health is a primary factor.
In British Columbia, a majority of our forest lands are publicly owned. As such, the ministry has a huge responsibility, along with partnering with our first nations, for management of the land base and the forests within it.
As you may or may not be aware, in the early 2000s we had a mountain pine beetle epidemic that swooped through the middle part of our province and ate up quite a bit of our lodgepole pine plantations and also natural stands.
As Keith alluded, we've also had, in the last two years.... In 2017, 1.2 million hectares burned up in wildfires, primarily in mountain pine beetle-affected mortality areas, and in 2018 we've had about 1.3 million hectares burned up around the province, not only isolated to mountain pine beetle stands, but, again, a good portion of it was impacted by the mountain pine beetle.
In addition to the mountain pine beetle, we now have an infestation almost at epidemic levels across our north area of spruce bark beetle, which is affecting our spruce, and balsam bark beetle. As an aftermath of the wildfires, the Douglas fir bark beetle is coming through in increasing numbers and is forecasted to do significant damage, again, to the central portion of our province with Douglas fir.
On the coast, as Keith said, key species are the western red cedar and the yellow cedar—key species in the sense of first nations' traditional cultural interests, but also because of their uniqueness to their zonation within British Columbia. We are seeing, through drought and climate change, some portions of the land base on the coast where the cedars are having a difficult time with drought-type areas, and we're seeing some dieback from tops and some mortality.
I'm not painting a very good picture for British Columbia. However, we do have robust forests. We are looking at many options on how to create better resiliency within our forests, which are showing significant changes primarily due, in my opinion, to climate change. It is to the point that some of our researchers are showing that a typical beetle life cycle of maybe two years is coming down to a one-year life cycle. There are significant changes in the life cycle of the critters that we're trying to manage, and that poses significant issues with regard to management techniques. It's almost like having a new creature that we don't know anything about and asking what the best management for that is.
Within British Columbia, how do we manage for forest health? We do aerial detection. We do overview flights for the whole province as best we can, depending on weather, of course. That is a very good tool, but it's also a very limited tool in the sense that, in burned areas, it's very difficult to differentiate from the air whether the tree is dead due to, say, a Douglas fir bark beetle infestation or whether it's just the fire impact that has turned the trees red. In addition, if you're looking at specific pests like the spruce beetle, you may not see the initial attack because the trees take a year to die from the spruce beetle. While there may be significant infestation, you may not pick it up until the following year, in which case they've flown away and moved somewhere else. It's a good tool, but it's a limited tool.
The other tool we have, of course, is ground surveys. Again, it's a very good tool, but it's very expensive. It takes a lot of training, and individuals who know what they're looking for can cover the ground in a systematic way so we get good information. It's very expensive and very difficult to do, so we focus only on key areas where we think we can do some kind of management techniques.
The rate of spread we're seeing in British Columbia is faster than we've seen in history, and that results in increasing damage for both economic and social aspects within the province. As you are probably aware, B.C. communities are very much forest-dependent communities, especially in the rural sectors, and our economy is based on forestry. When we have impacts to forest health, it obviously impacts our economic wealth, and it also impacts our social ability to deal with the outcomes.
When we have unhealthy forests, we run the risk of habitat loss and the inability of some wildlife to move into new areas that are impacted by forest health. We are seeing some elements of this, and Keith mentioned this as well. We see increased fire, and in British Columbia we really are in a mode of both management and land restoration at this point in time.
In British Columbia, we really see forest management as the tool to make a difference in our forest resilience going forward. It's important to make sure we're doing the right forest management in the right places, and that knowledge is there and available to practitioners. That can be through harvesting, through silviculture, through plantations, through different techniques across landscapes, etc.
British Columbia has researchers in forest health. We have pathologists, entomologists, climate change researchers and geneticists, and all are looking at the components of forest health and what the changes are. However, British Columbia has a limited number of these resources, and with the changes we're seeing due to climate change, much more research is required.
I'll follow up with recommendations that, as chief forester for the province, I would like to see this committee consider. One is definitely to support ongoing forest health research. That can be linked to forest management, results or impacts, and precautions that can happen with regard to the research and how we use forest management.
We definitely need to have better identification, tracking and monitoring tools, probably through technology. I'm not a technologist, but I'm sure there are different ways of incorporating new technologies with regard to lidar adaptation and visual imaging. They can be used for identification, tracking and monitoring. They just enable us to get better information from our aerial overviews and ground surveys, and they may incorporate new techniques we haven't thought of yet.
Education and communication are crucial, for sure. A lot of our rural communities look out their window and see dead trees, and they are wondering what that's about. It's obviously the job of our ministry to inform them. The more education and information we can supply, the better.
I also want to reaffirm that forest management can be a tool for developing and maintaining healthy, resilient forests. We need to ensure that we understand what those interactions are for wildlife, water and other values on the landscape.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you very much, Ms. Nicholls.
We're going to open the floor for questions. I've just been advised that our interpreters are having a bit of difficulty hearing both of you, so if you could speak slowly and clearly when answering the questions, they would be most grateful.
Mr. Serré, go ahead.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank the two witnesses for their presentations and the work they do in this sector.
My question is for both witnesses.
Ms. Nicholls, let me begin by congratulating you. Thanks to the work you're doing in your ministry, in British Columbia, you're a model for the provinces in forest management. You mentioned investing in research, something I'd like to talk about in a moment, but there's another issue I'd like to discuss with you first.
Forest management is an area of provincial jurisdiction, but the federal government plays a role, for instance, when it comes to pests. There seems to be, not a contradiction, but rather a lack of co-operation between the federal government and the provinces.
Do you have any specific recommendations for the committee from a jurisdictional standpoint? Are there things the provinces could do better? In terms of the division of powers, are there improvements the federal government could make?
Ms. Nicholls can answer first, followed by Mr. Atkinson.
12:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Chief Forester, Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development of British Columbia
Thank you for that question.
If I understand the question correctly, you're wondering how the federal and provincial governments can coordinate and co-operate better on forest management for forest health. Is that correct?
12:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Chief Forester, Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development of British Columbia
In my experience, when the mountain pine beetle came through British Columbia, what was most beneficial was the co-operation where federal funds came into play being used in a provincial context on the land base. That co-operative program defined clear results—what the funds could be used for and how they should be used—while letting the province implement them. As difficult as that was, because we were learning at the same time as implementing, that, to me, looking back, was very progressive, in the sense that we jointly came up with the priorities for the work and the funds that would be made available, both provincially and federally. Utilizing those funds and creating the knowledge base, we were able to implement the education and the communications that were required.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Mr. Atkinson, do you have any suggestions for your involvement with indigenous communities, as linked to the provincial jurisdictions or the federal jurisdiction?
12:25 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, BC First Nations Forestry Council
Yes, very much so. Our perspective, and the reason my opening comments weighed so heavily on these new mandates and contexts, is that we strongly believe that the standards developed by indigenous peoples and the United Nations in that declaration create a good framework for how we can collaborate across jurisdictions. We're excited to see both Canada and B.C. endorse that declaration. I think the time is now for resources so that first nations can actually participate in that implementation. It's up to first nations to show what their rights look like in implementation under the declaration's standards. We need some resources to do that. I think they're in a position to move forward.
I would also echo what the chief forester just said. It was the start of our organization when there were federal resources made available to mitigate the mountain pine beetle. We were able to partner with British Columbia and our leadership to implement our strategies with our communities at that time. It was really unfortunate that we lost those resources and the ability to work on that over the last 10 years. I see this as a strong component of the federal, provincial, and first nations' ability to collaborate on the jurisdictions.
I want to remind everybody that the real challenge for first nations is that we have not had any support for territory-based management work, no recognition as first nations governments on their territories. That's only just beginning. That conversation is just starting now. We're working very well with British Columbia toward partnership and how to do that. We will need a strategy and support from the federal government to contribute to that as well, so we have all levels.
Thank you.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Serré Liberal Nickel Belt, ON
Mr. Atkinson, you talked about red cedar research. How can the government help universities and indigenous communities do more research? Do you have any specific recommendations on how the government and private sector could co-operate to foster more research in the next 10 or 20 years?
12:30 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, BC First Nations Forestry Council
Yes. Thank you for that.
Establishing a research department or a program from an indigenous perspective has been on our mandate since our organization was created. Our community has provided a mandate to the First Nations Forestry Council. It really came from—and I mentioned it briefly in my opening comments—how do we translate our traditional knowledge into useful information, standards and policies that we can use today and talk about collaboratively for the best management of resources?
It remains a challenge in our communities. I am an indigenous person, but I studied western science in my forestry training. I work mostly in the western science model. It's a real struggle for me to reach to our knowledge keepers, our elders who are leaving this world, and capture that information and then translate it so we can use it in land and resource decisions. We continue to search for that kind of support for research departments from an indigenous perspective that can lead right in and collaborate with the western science model and lead toward decision-making.