Success Stories:
Cutting Around
the Rules
By Lara Ellis
|
..... |
An example of a violation.
In this case
debris (logs) pushed into a stream. |
Wildlands League
401 Richmond St. West, Suite 380
Toronto, Ontario, M5V 3A
lara@wildlandsleague.org
tim@wildlandsleague.org
Before and during Ontario’s
land use planning process (Lands for Life), the forest
industry argued that parks are unnecessary because forest
management protects wildlife and wilderness values. Having
visited many logging areas in Ontario, we knew this wasn’t
the case, but simply stating so wouldn’t change anything
- but would just result in a 'war of words' that has come
to be expected between environmentalists and industry.
So we decided that it was important to quantify and collect
evidence to present to the government and public that
would be objective and show the result of forest management
(and therefore the need for parks).
We chose a high profile
area to audit--The Algoma Highlands. We had been campaigning
for its protection for many years. All the while, the
industry had claimed that the area didn’t need protection
because they were doing a good job managing it. The audit
was carefully done. We, and our partner, Sierra Legal
Defence Fund, hired and trained an auditor, who worked
with local volunteers. Their work resulted in the documentation
of many infractions of the few rules Ontario has to protect
streams, rivers, lakes, and wildlife habitat. Our campaign
to protect wild areas was able to use the information
to counter industry claims that there is no need for parks
in the province.
The audit was completed
in the summer of 1997 and the report released in 1998.
When we released the report we held simultaneous press
conferences in Toronto and Sault Ste. Marie. At the press
conferences we announced that the high level of non-compliance
justified a government investigation. The investigation
was carried out by the government and resulted in a series
of recommendations to improve compliance and the protection
of water bodies to be implemented across Ontario. The
report is still available on our internet site (entitled
"Cutting Around the Rules").
What do you consider
the key to your success?
The
key to the success of the project was that we put much
effort into all aspects of it, including the project design,
collecting of information, compilation of results, report
writing, media outreach, and government relations.
How would you outline
the steps in organizing your project to advise another
group on a similar project?
One must be meticulous in
the collection of audit information, especially if it
is to be used in an investigation or legal proceedings.
One thing we have done in more recent audits (the Algoma
audit was the first) is to use a GPS to mark problem areas.
That makes it easier for the government inspectors to
relocate the area.
What have been the affects
of this effort on your organization’s work?
The
success of the Algoma audit lead to later audits (Lower
Spanish Forest, Algonquin Park, Temagami). It also gave
us a good idea of what rules work and which ones don’t,
which has helped us be effective during a process to revisit
Ontario’s forest management guidelines and policies.
How has the project
affected your community?
The
audit helped to raise awareness of the need for protected
areas, and to streamline some of the existing forest management
guidelines. This will result in better forestry province-wide,
and also contributed to the Ontario Living Legacy decision,
which protected 2.4 million hectares of land, including
the Algoma Headwaters Park Signature Site located near
to the areas we audited.
What particular stumbling
blocks, challenges, or defeats did you encounter?
This was our first audit,
and so we had to be very careful while collecting information
and analyzing it. Raising funds for the whole project
was also difficult. We had several sums from different
sources.
How many people were
involved?
10
If possible, include
an estimate of people-hours spent on the various aspects
of the project.
Quite
impossible with many different facets of project.
How was public involvement
motivated and facilitated?
Volunteers were found who
wanted to help with the fieldwork.
How was public education
a component of your program?
We released the audit report,
and also a tabloid that summarized the results and why
it is important to protect water bodies and wildlife habitat.
What was the primary
means of communication?
The
primary methods of communication were the report and tabloid,
but also the media. We received excellent local and provincial
media coverage from our Toronto and Sault Ste. Marie press
conferences.
What resources were
available/acquired/tapped into?
Some government funding
to hire the auditor, and support from GLAHNF, Mountain
Equipment Coop, and the Local Action Fund - WWF Canada
for the publications.
What level of media
exposure were you able to obtain and how did it affect
your efforts?
Coverage
in the Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Sault Star,
and Northern Ontario TV and radio stations.
Wildlands League
401 Richmond St. West, Suite 380
Toronto, Ontario, M5V 3A
lara@wildlandsleague.org
tim@wildlandsleague.org
|
