Woodland caribou | The limits of the bipolar conception of forestry

The woodland caribou has been designated as a vulnerable species for 18 years. Its population has continued to decline for 18 years. In the meantime, there was the Sustainable Development Act, two woodland caribou recovery plans and a report from the caribou commission. How to explain, despite everything, that the economy remains the only protected issue? Dare I mention the terms of ecosystem management officially adopted in 2005?


My reflection will focus on our vision of the territory and forest management, taking the caribou file as an example. Being a large mammal and an umbrella species, the caribou is an excellent indicator of the health of ecosystems and has become the sad symbol of our failures. It is important to specify that my approach seeks to find solutions and not to destroy the forestry sector, because I believe in its success.

The causes of caribou decline as well as the solutions to remedy them have been widely studied and I will not return to this, because that is not the purpose of my remarks.

In view of the precarious situation of the caribou, it seems to me necessary to recall what ecosystem-based management is. The objective of this concept is to ensure the sustainability and integrity of ecosystems while meeting present societal and economic needs without compromising those of the future.

Where have we failed? We can see management that responds to economic needs. But what about the other two aspects?

The first mistake is to sum up societal needs to jobs and timber supply. This is today an archaic concept that no longer corresponds to the contemporary world. The Caribou Commission was an unprecedented demonstration of the sensitivity and attachment of citizens and First Nations to the caribou and their territory. This commission therefore shows that the current societal needs are certainly the supply of wood, but also the preservation of species and the territory.

The second error would be to neglect the paramount importance of maintaining the integrity of ecosystems. Our way of life depends directly on the health of the latter and it would be regrettable to destabilize them. However, this is what we are doing today knowingly. How to generate wealth if the territory is no longer able to provide it? How can we ensure our survival if, day after day, we make the living disappear?

Solutions abound, but inaction exposes the age of our way of thinking. The bipolar vision of regional planning which opposes the economy to the environment does not work, because it inevitably leads to favoring one of the two points while suppressing the other.

The caribou file is the tip of the iceberg. If we don’t change course, then we will be shipwrecked.

Instead, let’s adopt a holistic vision of development that considers the human species as belonging to ecosystems. In doing so, the response to human needs will directly depend on the health of ecosystems. This amounts to setting up an exchange where our role will be to ensure the sustainability of ecosystems. This is where ecosystem management comes in, which aims to imitate natural disturbances precisely in order to better integrate humans into these complex dynamics.

I would like to add, to close this reflection, that we should be largely inspired by the vision of the First Nations who consider the human species as an integral part of the territory. We will then be able to enjoy the countless socio-economic benefits that flow from it.


source site-58