8.0 What Next?
Clearly, no one "magic bullet" is going to provide the tools to
ensure that the Big Picture vision of ecological conservation and
restoration becomes a reality over the next several generations. Progress
may be incremental, uneven, and often frustratingly slow.
However, this study suggests that there is a wide range of potential
tools to choose among, and that many of them are already well-seasoned by
successful use elsewhere. As in many conservation endeavours, the keys to
success for Carolinian Canada may be a mix of persistence, creativity, and
opportunism.
The good news is that we don't need to wait for new tools before we can
get started. Carolinian Canada already has a substantial legacy of good
science, rising awareness, and significant conservation accomplishments.
And much can be done with the tools now at hand. Pushing to create new and
more effective conservation tools is vital to long-term success, but so is
continued progress on the ground now.
National Actions
Some of the tools suggested in this study have application well beyond
Carolinian Canada. Improvements to federal tax policy on conservation land
donations and sales, renewed financial support for Environmental Farm
Plans, and a new conservation cover program for rural land retirement
would help sustain conservation progress across the province or across the
country. For these kinds of mechanisms, it would seem most effective for
the Carolinian Canada Coalition to join with other groups of similar
interests to advocate their adoption.
Other national initiatives are more specific to this region.
Development of a marine conservation area for Lake Erie and continued
progress on the Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan are both important
federal actions. Adopting a multi-species approach to species at risk
would be particularly beneficial in this region.
Provincial Actions
In the short term, the Province could play a particularly important role
in developing or enhancing incentive programs and land use controls.
Improvements to coordinate and upgrade the three existing property tax
incentive programs should be a priority, along with renewed support for
rural water quality programs and associated benefits such as riparian
buffers. Much more could be done through the Planning Act
provisions, including improvements to the Provincial Policy Statement and
its implementation. Improved technical support to municipalities, a
reduced role for the OMB, and improvements to performance monitoring could
all play important roles. Strengthening regulatory powers under the
Conservation Authorities Act and increased emphasis on development of
watershed plans are also important initiatives. A revised Southcentral
Natural Heritage Strategy could form a coordinating mechanism for priority
Provincial actions.
In the longer term, a renewed Provincial commitment to investing in
protection and restoration of natural areas, equivalent to the effort put
forth in other jurisdictions, is essential.
Local Community Actions
Actions by innovative communities, municipal governments, conservation
authorities and environmental groups often lead the way on conservation
issues.
Completion of watershed plans and natural heritage strategies and
adoption of strong official plan policies would help implement
conservation and restoration across Carolinian Canada. Connecting these
natural heritage strategies across municipal and watershed boundaries is
also important to build a system for all of Carolinian Canada. Rural water
quality incentive programs could be developed by municipalities and
conservation authorities where these programs do not yet exist.
Naturalization of parkland and programs to build the "urban
forest" in towns and cities could be pursued by municipalities with
assistance from community groups. More municipalities could adopt
tree-cutting by-laws and regulation of forestry contractors.
Conservation authorities and land trusts could act to secure Big
Picture core areas and use Big Picture data to inform and inspire
their land securement efforts. Local farm organizations could work to
increase participation in the Environmental Farm Plan and integrate
Carolinian habitat restoration into those farm plans.
Local environmental and community groups including naturalists clubs,
ratepayer groups, and schools could take up the challenge of the Big
Picture vision and promote it in their communities.
Towards a Carolinian Canada Ecoregion
Conservation Strategy
Stemming the loss of species and ecosystems in Carolinian Canada and
reversing the decline of ecological health requires concerted action.
Certainly if all the national, provincial and local actions listed above
were taken most issues would be addressed. But a regional approach may
provide a better bet for early action.
One option which deserves particular consideration is the development
of a regional conservation and land use strategy for Carolinian Canada,
incorporating both stronger Provincial direction for land use planning and
special incentives and resources tailored to meet the special needs of
this region. This would be analogous to the provincial programs already in
place or being developed for the Niagara Escarpment, Oak Ridges Moraine
and Great Lakes Heritage Coast. All of these current programs are worthy,
but even a quick review of the natural values at severe risk in Carolinian
Canada demonstrates that this region is equally deserving of Provincial
attention.
What is needed is a package of "carrots and sticks" -
incentives and planning controls - that will gradually shift the way land
is used to restore the natural cores and connectors envisioned in the Big
Picture. Municipalities and conservation authorities could lead the
way in incorporating Big Picture concepts into Official Plans.
Eligibility for property tax incentive programs could be modified to
better fit the conditions in Carolinian Canada. A special focus on
Carolinian habitat securement, involving partnerships among governments
and private funders, could be established under the new Ecological Land
Acquisition Program. A Carolinian Canada Recovery Trust could assist in
the delivery of these programs, as the Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation is
proposed to do.
Putting together the details of such a package needs the involvement
and creativity of many partners. The process created by the Provincial
government for the Oak Ridges Moraine could provide a model for this
region as well - an advisory panel representing a broad range of
stakeholders, charged with the responsibility of developing a balanced
strategy to achieve conservation goals. With the backing of the technical
work already done to develop the Big Picture, and the support of
the relevant Provincial ministries, such a panel could provide a catalyst
for a great leap forward in conservation activity.
A vital role for the Carolinian Canada Coalition and its member groups
in the coming years will be identifying opportunities for progress and
making the case for special consideration for this region. The Big
Picture project has provided a sound basis for doing so, and should
provide a blueprint for progress for decades to come.
References Cited:
AAFC, 2001. Agriculture in Harmony with Nature II.
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Sustainable Development Strategy:
2001-2004.
Allen, G., P. Eagles and S. Price (eds.). 1990.
Conserving Carolinian Canada: Conservation Biology in the Deciduous Forest
Region. University of Waterloo Press.
Australia Natural Heritage Trust, 1999. A Guide to Tax
Incentives for Landcare. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and
Forestry.
Baker, David B., 1996. Nutrients and Nutrient
Management: A Lake Erie Basin Case Study. US Environmental Protection
Agency.
Brethour, Cher, Al Mussell and Kate Stiefelmeyer, 2001.
Retiring Marginally Profitable Sections of Agricultural Fields in Ontario
Economically Justified. George Morris Centre.
Burke, D.M. and E. Nol, 1998. Edge and fragment size
effects on vegetation of Eastern deciduous forests in Ontario. Natural
Areas Journal 18: 45-53.
Canadian Environmental Law Association. 2001.
Provincial Policy Statement Five-Year Review, Response by the Canadian
Environmental Law Association to the Request by the Ministry of Municipal
Affairs and Housing for Public Comments, Environmental Bill of Rights
Registry Number PF01E0002.
Carolinian Canada, 1994. Report on Site Protection
Status. Carolinian Canada Program, London, Ontario.
Conservation Ontario. 2001a. The Importance of
Watershed Management In Protecting Ontario's Drinking Water Supplies.
Submission to the Walkerton Inquiry.
Conservation Ontario. 2001b. Provincial Policy
Statement Five-Year Review, Response by Conservation Ontario to the
Request by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for Public
Comments.
Chudleigh, Ted, 2001. The Great Lakes Heritage Coast:
Charting the Course. Ontario's Living Legacy; Ministry of Natural
Resources.
Colavecchia, M., S. Ludsin, P. Bertram, R. Knight, S.
George, H. Biberhofer and P. Ryan, 2000. Identification of ecosystem
alternatives for Lake Erie to support development of ecosystem objectives.
Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) Technical Report Series.
Community Development Group Ltd., 1999. Natural
Heritage Planning Policy in Ontario: A Review of County and Regional
Official Plans. Prepared for the Best Policies Working Group of the
Ontario Professional Planners Institute.
DVGI Commission, 1998. Evaluation of Agri-Environment
Programmes. Working Document VI/7655/98.
Delta Waterfowl and Keystone Agricultural Producers,
2001. ALUS: Alternate Land Use Services: Broadening the base of
agricultural income. 20 pp.
Eagles, Paul F.J., and T.J. Beechey, 1985. Critical
Unprotected Natural Areas in the Carolinian Life Zone of Canada. The
Nature Conservancy of Canada, The Ontario Heritage Foundation, World
Wildlife Fund Canada.
England Rural Development Programme, 2000. Rural
Development Programme Outline. Nick Brown, Minister of Agriculture,
Fisheries & Food.
Environics International Ltd., 2001a. Survey of Rural
Landowners in Ontario, Phase 2: Attitudes and Behaviours Regarding Land
Stewardship. September 2001.
Environics International Ltd., 2001b. Attitudes of
Urban Residents toward Urban Forests and Woodlands Issues. August 2001.
Environics International Ltd., 2001c. Public Opinion on
Nature Issues, Food Safety, and Willingness to Contribute to Environmental
Initiatives. December 2001.
Environics International Ltd., 2000. Survey of Farmers,
Ranchers and Rural Landowners: Attitudes and Behaviours Regarding Land
Stewardship. September 2000.
Environment Canada, 2001. Ontario Ecogifts Handbook.
Ontario Region, Downsview.
Executive Resource Group, 2001. Managing the
Environment: A Review of Best Practices. Prepared for the Secretary of the
Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council, Government of Ontario.
Federation of Ontario Naturalists. 2001. Provincial
Policy Statement Five-Year Review, Response by the Federation of Ontario
Naturalists to the Request by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing for Public Comments Environmental Bill of Rights Registry Number
PF01E0002.
Fitzgibbon, John, and Sylvia Summers, 2001. Report on
Tree Conservation By-Laws in Southern Ontario. School of Rural Planning
and Development, University of Guelph.
International Institute for Sustainable Development,
2000. Economic Instruments for Environmental Policy Making in Ontario.
Background report for Managing the Environment (Gibbons) report, Executive
Resource Group.
Johns, Carolyn M., 2001. Effective Policy Regimes for
the Management of Non-point Source Water Pollution: Ontario and the U.S.
in Comparative Perspective. Background document for the Walkerton Inquiry.
Jalava, Jarmo V., Peter J. Sorrill, Jason Henson and
Kara Brodribb, 2000. The Big Picture Project: Developing a Natural
Heritage Vision for Canada's Southernmost Ecological Region. Natural
Heritage Information Centre, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. http://www.carolinian.org/technical_paper.htm
Kenney, Andy. 2001. Structure and Functions of Southern
Ontario's Urban Forests. Woods Talk. Federation of Ontario Naturalists.
Lake Erie LaMP, 2000 Report. The Lake Erie Lakewide
Management Plan. Prepared by the Lake Erie LaMP Work Group under the
direction of the Lake Erie LaMP Management Committee. [Julie Letterhos -
Ed.]. Environment Canada, Ontario Region and US Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5. http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lakeerie/lamp2000/index.html.
Lake Erie LaMP, 2002 (Draft). The Lake Erie Lakewide
Management Plan. Prepared by the Lake Erie LaMP Work Group under the
direction of the Lake Erie LaMP Management Committee. [Jennifer Vincent
and Julie Letterhos, Eds.]. Environment Canada, Ontario Region and US
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5.
Lake Ontario LaMP, 2000. The Lake Ontario Lakewide
Management Plan. Prepared by the Lake Ontario LaMP Work Group under the
direction of the Lake Ontario LaMP Management Committee. http://www.on.ec.gc.ca/glimr/lakes/ontario/lampupd2000-e.pdf
Lake Ontario LaMP, 2001. The Lake Ontario Lakewide
Management Plan. Prepared by the Lake Ontario LaMP Work Group under the
direction of the Lake Ontario LaMP Management Committee. http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lakeont/2001update/index.html
McEwen, Beth. 2001. Promoting Sustainability of Native
Forests in Toronto's Natural Areas. Woods Talk. Federation of Ontario
Naturalists.
Munt, Leonard. 2001. York Region Greening Strategy: A
Work in Progress. Woods Talk. Federation of Ontario Naturalists.
Normand, L. and K. Towle. 2001. Seeing the Forest for
the Landscape: The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Terrestrial
Natural Heritage Approach. Woods Talk. Federation of Ontario Naturalists.
North-South Environmental Inc., 2001. St. Clair River
RAP 2000 Progress Report. Final Draft. Volume 1 - Synthesis Report.
Prepared for Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario. 43 pp.
Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Energy and
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1993a Water Management on a
Watershed Basis.
Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Energy and
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1993b. Integrating Water Management
Objectives into Municipal Planning Documents.
Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Energy and
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1993c. Subwatershed Planning.
OMNR, 2001a. Natural Heritage Strategy: Southcentral
Region: Draft Version March 9, 2001. Peterborough, Ontario.
OMNR, 2001b. Critical Review of Historical and Current
Tree Planting Programs on Private Land in Ontario.
OMNR, 2001c. A Review of Current and Potential Seedling
Production in Ontario for Afforestation.
OMNR, 1999. Natural Heritage Reference Manual for
Policy 2.3 of the Provincial Policy Statement.
Oatway, John, Scott Davis and Silvia Strobl, 2000.
Introduction to Sustainable Forestry Certification. Eastern Ontario Model
Forest. Information Report No. 49.
Ontario, 2001a. Listening to Ontario; Ontario Smart
Growth; A summary of consultations. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing.
Ontario, 2001b. Ontario Smart Growth: Working Together
- Smart Growth Management Councils. Working Paper, Fall 2001. Smart Growth
Secretariat.
Ontario, 2001c. Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan;
Draft. November 2001.
Ontario, 1999. Provincial Policy Statement. Revised
February 1, 1997.
Ontario Farm Environment Coalition, 2000. The
Environmental Farm Plan. Progress report prepared by Ontario Soil and Crop
Improvement Association.
Reid, R., 2001. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Status and
Trends in the Canadian Watershed of Lake Ontario. Environment Canada;
Canadian Wildlife Service Technical Report Series No. 364.
Reid, Ron, and Ric Symmes, 1997. Conservation Strategy
for Carolinian Canada. Prepared for the Carolinian Canada Steering
Committee, London, Ontario.
Riley, J., and P. Mohr. 1994. The Natural Heritage of
Southern Ontario's Settled Landscapes. A Review of Conservation and
Restoration Ecology for Land Use and Landscape Planning. Ontario Ministry
of Natural Resources
Vysatova, Romana A., and Laurie S.Z. Greenberg, 2000. A
Guide to USDA and Other Federal Resources for Sustainable Agriculture and
Forestry Enterprises. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Watershed Planning Implementation Project Management
Committee. 1997. An Evaluation of Watershed Management in Ontario.
Province of Ontario.
Wilcox, B.A., and D.D. Murphy, 1985. Conservation
strategy: the effects of fragmentation on extinction. American Naturalist
128: 879-887.
Zammit, Anthony, 1996. The Herpetofauna of Ontario,
with Special Emphasis on Long Point and the North Shore of Lake Erie. Long
Point Environmental Folio, Chapter 11. J.G. Nelson and K.L. Wilcox, Ed.
Heritage Resources Centre, University of Waterloo.
Zinn, Jeffrey A., 2002. Soil and Water Conservation
Issues. CRS Issue Brief for Congress. Congressional Research Service, The
Library of Congress.
|
