Canadian SFM... or Canadian BS?

One would think that Canada, given its economical reliance on wood and wood products, would be on the cutting edge of sustainable forestry practices. After all, given our 300 million hectares of forests and 92 million hectares of wooded land, we apparently value our forests greatly, and should reasonably value the way they are managed, too.

Enter sustainable forestry management. Sustainable forestry is the practice of managing forests so that, while logging operations still may take place, conservation and renewal practices are also exercised in order to guarantee that future generations will also have this bounty of a resource we find in our sundry forests in our country. Lumber and timber are part of Canada’s most valuable and heavily exported resources in this $80 billion industry. Therefore, shouldn’t the management of this resource be top priority?

You’d think so. However, according to the policy, only half of all logged forests in Canada are actually subjected to sustainable forestry tactics. The website also uses ambiguous phrasing that fails to verify if anything is being done to remedy some of the problems that have evidently arisen. For example, the website claims, “The government reports and efforts indicate that there may be threats to forest sustainability and some localized areas of non-sustainable management, but overall the situation is positive.” However, there is no mention of what these threats are and whether or not there are any efforts to adapt Canada’s goals and figure these problems out.

The government’s claim that the situation is possible warrants a raised brow. While I can’t personally verify whether or not this claim is biased, there are many skeptics that contend that the situation is far from positive–and, unsurprisingly, these critics are non-governmental. This gives the impression that whether someone thinks that sustainable forestry management in Canada is meetings the goals differs on the actuality of whether or not that individual’s paycheck is paid by the government itself.

These critics include Global Forest Watch, which is especially critical of Canada’s role in sustainable forestry management. One line sticks out far past any others for me: “Current harvesting rates surpass regeneration.” How can the government possibly claim that sustainable forestry management is well on its way if forests are dying faster than they’re being replaced? If sustainable forestry management is designed to make sure forests don’t die out faster than they can regenerate, Canada’s progress is light-years away from the generic rubber stamp of approval the government has apparently and thoughtlessly given it. Other NGO’s, according to the policy, have given Canada a failing grade, which is anything but surprising.

In conclusion, it seems very apparent that Canada’s current stance towards sustainable forestry management is not up to scratch. However, all hope is not lost. While the current SFM practices might not be sufficient, there is consensus provided that Canada is moving towards meeting the goals. The independent panel of the NFSC claims that, though Canada has not yet reached its goals, there is some measurable progress. The GFW even makes the point that evidence points to the fact that Canada is moving towards harvesting timber with the environment in mind–not just profits. With hope, this trend can continue, as the potential consequences of not doing so are ones I wouldn’t soon like to imagine.