BACKGROUNDER

Recovery of Species at Risk

Case Study 1

The previous Endangered Species Act (1971) set the stage for forest management to
effectively manage Species at Risk (and all species) habitat in Ontario. This was more
clearly defined by the Crown Forest Sustainability Act (CFSA), which mandates the
conservation of all biological diversity, and the Environmental Assessment declaration
Order (2003).

Example - Caribou

Habitat management practices in place using the most progressive guidelines in the
country have been practiced in Northwestern Ontario since 1994. Management practices
were put in place:
o before MNR’s caribou habitat guidelines were officially approved
o before caribou were listed as “at risk” federally or provincially
o despite the fact that the guidelines reduce the supply of Spruce/Pine/Fir
(SPF) and result in the deferral (postponement) of harvesting over large
areas (e.g., Trout Lake Forest - 29% reduction of SPF supply; 66% of the
forest deferred from harvest until at least 2019)

The evidence of effectiveness:

o over the last 50 years, which includes the period of active forest
management, continuous caribou range in NW Ontario where the
guidelines have been applied has moved south, and areas formerly
unoccupied by caribou have become occupied, contrary to some ENGO
claims
o in the Trout Lake Forest, MNR estimated 150 caribou based on a 2003
survey, but a 2008 survey suggests 170-190 (i.e., caribou have not
declined under the 2004-2009 FMP)

The application of the current Forest Management Guidelines for caribou has resulted in
a reduction in wood supply of 29%.

Current guidelines will result in improved caribou habitat over the next 50 years (+4%
during first ten years – increasing to +20% in years 40 to 50)

If forest management operations (harvesting) were to be curtailed / prohibited within

areas not currently accessed or disturbed, this would result in a reduction of an
additional 43% in available harvest volume.

A “no harvest in undisturbed areas” strategy would have a slight impact on caribou
habitat as compared to current practice over the next 50 years – initially a slight decline
in habitat in the first term (-4%) and a slight increase in habitat in term 3 to 5 (+7 -10%).

The slight increase over time must be tempered with our current understanding that
caribou do not prefer older stands dominated by blow-down and balsam fir – conditions
which can be expected to develop in the absence of harvest and which are not reflected
in the model.

Recovery of Species at Risk

Case Study 2

Example – Red-Shouldered Hawk

In Canada, the red-shouldered hawk is a bird of the Great Lakes forest region.
Historically (in the 1940s and 1950s) the bird was described as the most common hawk
in Southern Ontario – more abundant that the red tailed hawk. However, by the 1980s,
migration counts and other evidence suggested it had declined significantly in Ontario
and elsewhere in its North American Range.

The cause was list as urban expansion lakeshore development, conversion of forest to
farmland, forest fragmentation, past forest management practices on Crown land and
private land, and drainage of wetlands.”

In the early 1980s, the red-shouldered hawk was listed by MNR as a vulnerable species,
and was listed by COSEWIC as of “special concern” across Canada. Forest
management guidelines already existed to protect red-shouldered hawk nests, but few
nests were known and MNR was uncertain about whether the expert opinion-based
guidelines were effective.

Inspired by the status of the bird and uncertainty about guideline effectiveness, MNR
initiated habitat studies (e.g., Szuba et al. 1991), awareness programs (courses), and
materials for District and industry staff (e.g., Szuba and Bell 1991, Szuba and Naylor
1998), and launched new surveys to count birds and discover nests in the late 1980s
and early 1990s.

As a result of that habitat work (e.g., Szuba et al. 1991), MNR suspected that the James
(1984) guidelines might not be stringent enough. Consequently, MNR developed new
draft guidelines (Szuba and Bell 1991) which were immediately applied around every
known nest by MNR and the forest industry. These guidelines were incorporated into the
GLSL Silviculture Guide (OMNR 1998). Identification features and protection measures
were also described in Tree Marking courses since 1990 and have been incorporated
into the Tree Marking Manual.

With the co-operation of MNR District staff, tree markers, and other members of the
forest industry, a database of > 80 nests with associated usage and forest management
statistics was developed and used to test the guidelines for effectiveness in a large
retrospective study (Naylor et al. 2004).

In addition, MNR developed a spatial habitat supply analysis model which was used in
Forest Management Plans within red-shouldered hawk range to help planning teams
and the public understand how forest management scenarios would affect the long term
habitat supply for the red-shouldered hawk and to assist in the decision-making process.

The success:
COSEWIC has removed the red-shouldered hawk from the Species at Risk list, and it
will be removed from COSSARO’s list as well under the new Endangered Species Act.

Recovery of Species at Risk

Case Study 3

Example – Bald Eagle

Regulations in place to assist in recovery of the bald eagle

 Bald Eagle Habitat Management Guidelines – Ontario

Ministry of Natural Resources (1987)

 Habitat Management Guideliens for Ontario’s Forests

Nesting Accipiters, Buteos and Eagles - Ontario Ministry of
Natural Resources (1984) (addressed bald eagle)

Previous Status: Endangered 1971

Current Status: Endangered in Southern Ontario, Special Concern in Northern Ontario,

Not at Risk Nationally (2006)

The bald eagle was previously on brink of extinction in Ontario, but in less than 20 years
from implementation of the 1987 guideline the bird has recovered in Northern Ontario to
point where it is no longer considered threatened. Recovery has occurred as a result of
forest management guidelines/direction applied while forest operations continued.

Forest management is a tool that can be utilized to not only protect but create and
ensure long-term provision of habitat.