March 6, 2024 • 59 mins
We return to the second part of our conversation on caribou policy with Wildlands’ own, Anna Baggio. If the Ontario government won’t protect caribou ranges from the looming encroachment of industry, who will? What’s the role of the federal government, and what has been done so far? All this, and more.
We each play a crucial role in shaping a future where Caribou, and the forests they call home, continue to thrive for generations. Tell your Member of Parliament to protect habitat in Ontario here.
Make sure to check out the show notes on the podcast webpage for more links and helpful resources.
You can help this community grow by sharing the podcast with your friends.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Janet Sumner (00:00):
Welcome to the ClearCut.
Hi, I'm Janet Sumner, ExecutiveDirector at Wildlands League.
Kaya Adleman (00:08):
And I'm Kaia Adelman, Carbon Manager at
Wildlands League.
Janet Sumner (00:14):
Wildlands League is a Canadian conservation
organization working onprotecting the natural world.
Kaya Adleman (00:21):
The ClearCut is bringing to you the much-needed
conversation on Canadian forestmanagement and how we can better
protect one of Canada's mostimportant ecosystems, as our
forests are reaching a tippingpoint.
Janet Sumner (00:41):
All right, Kaia.
This is Episode 4 on Caribou.
Kaya Adleman (00:45):
Wow, that's a lot, Don't you?
Janet Sumner (00:47):
Yeah, no, really Two with just Dean Aray from WCS
on the science of Caribou.
And then we've had two episodeswith Anabazio, the Conservation
Director for Wildlands League,and this is the second of those
two episodes talking aboutpolicy and how regulations and
policy sort of work with federallaws and provincial laws, and
(01:11):
how they should work and how yousort of put the science into
the regulatory and thelegislation frameworks to
actually hopefully make sense ofthem and make them do something
real in the real world.
It's not just enough to havethe science.
Kaya Adleman (01:26):
That makes sense.
Janet Sumner (01:27):
I just got confused there.
Kaya Adleman (01:29):
No, that makes sense to me.
You're saying that we have thescience and then we're applying
policy to it in order to addressthe issues and the questions
that are being raised from thescience.
And then we're seeing as weheard in our episode with Anna
last week we're seeing howsometimes the policy frame can
(01:54):
kind of get jarbled up in thehands of regulators.
Janet Sumner (02:00):
That's a great word jarbled up.
So do you know anybody in yourworld that actually would want
to do like policy stuff likethis, kaia?
Kaya Adleman (02:11):
Oh yeah, so funny that you should ask, janet.
I think policy work is veryinteresting.
I actually went to universitywith some people who are
currently working onenvironmental policy issues at
the government level and Ireally like these caribou
(02:32):
conversations as well, because Ithink we're seeing how science
in an environmental context isbeing applied at the regulatory
level and that's somethingthat's very interesting to me.
And, as someone who's kind ofstarting out in my career, I see
myself being more and moredrawn to that world of things
because I don't know, you know,as a young person, you feel like
(02:56):
you have the weight of theresponsibility in some aspects
of being the change that youwant to see in the world.
So, yeah, hopefully, hopefullymy generation will, when we take
the reins, we'll step up andkind of start hopefully moving
the needle on some of theseissues.
Janet Sumner (03:17):
Yeah, I hope so and hopefully my generation can
keep trying to do some of thestuff that we need to do,
because we need to hurry up andcatch up.
But that was a kind of aleading question.
I know that Kaia is veryinterested in the regulations
and policies and how they aresupposed to give life to the
science or help the light thescience be implemented.
(03:38):
So we're going to dive in nowwith Anna in our second episode
and actually you know I might beremiss we might have done more
than four episodes, and thereason I say that is because if
you look back to the HonorableHarvest or how David Flood talks
about things, he really speaksfrom an indigenous perspective,
and so you not only have ourfederal and provincial laws, but
(04:02):
you also have indigenous lawsand how indigenous people are
harvesting or not harvesting andhow they interact with the
natural world.
So we have the science, we haveindigenous worldview and
indigenous laws and, in fact,indigenous science or indigenous
knowledge, and we also have thepolicy framework.
(04:23):
So there's probably at leastsix episodes of material if you
want to learn a lot aboutcaribou, and you can check all
of that out on our podcast page.
But Anna's going to dive intothe role of the federal
government and how section 63'sunder the Species at Risk Act
could work to encourageprovinces to act.
(04:44):
And the reason that I say itcould work is because if they
were used as they should be, topoint out where caribou habitat
is not protected or noteffectively protected in each of
the provinces, giving every sixmonths it's supposed to sort of
publish a report that says that.
And that's kind of a way tosort of push provinces to take
(05:06):
action, Because after all, thefederal government doesn't want
to be taking action onprovincial land.
They'd really like it if theprovinces stepped up and did it.
So that's what a section 63report's supposed to do.
Anna's going to talk a lot moreabout that.
We're going to dive into it andyou'll get to hear how these
policy frameworks are sort ofrolling out across the country.
Kaya Adleman (05:27):
Yeah, I'm excited for listeners to hear the last
part of this conversation thatwe had with Anna, so let's get
into it.
Janet Sumner (05:40):
Yeah.
So I want to take Anna back tobefore you join us Again.
I did this little project onthe federal Species at Risk Act
and I'm going to just lay outsome broad strokes and then,
anna, you can put more detail toit, but essentially under the
(06:00):
Species at Risk Act, as Annasaid, everybody was excited
because when it came out it waslike going to be this game
changer, and one of thegame-changing things was going
to be is it was actually goingto create these reports.
You've decided a species isn'tendangered and so governments
across Canada, you're requiredto put plans in place on how to
protect them and protect theirhabitat.
(06:22):
So the idea was you wouldrelease this information and it
would be put out there and thefederal government would have to
assess whether or not they wereadequately protected after a
certain amount of time.
And in that juncture Canada wassupposed to be putting out these
reports saying, hey, it'sprotected in a species I don't
(06:43):
know, whatever species in Quebecis adequately protected but not
in Manitoba.
Or the species in BritishColumbia is fully protected but
it's not in New Brunswick, orsomething like that.
So they would put out thesereports and they were supposed
to do them every six months andgive you kind of a heads up.
Hey, heads up Province X, y andZ.
(07:03):
You got to pick up your gamehere because these three
provinces are doing a good joband you haven't stepped up to
the table.
And it was meant to sort ofkind of push them all to do a
better job.
And then, at the end of likethree or four reports of saying
hey, you didn't do a good enoughjob, they were meant to come
out and say, okay, well thenit's time for the federal
(07:24):
government to step in with itspowers and say we now have to
protect the habitat becauseyou're not doing it.
And so that was how it wassupposed to be done.
Again, big fanfare, everybodycheered, the new species at risk
act, and we heard crickets,crickets.
There were no reports.
No, was it?
(07:44):
Section 61?
Reports Three.
Anna Baggio (07:46):
Section 63,.
Section 63, critical habitatreports, yep.
Janet Sumner (07:49):
So those did not come out for more than 10 years
and when we approached them theanswer was it would cost too
much money.
Janet, do you know how muchthis would cost?
This would cost us millions ofdollars and so many people
talking.
You know it.
Just, it would be impossiblefor us to do Section 63 report
(08:12):
across the country.
It would break the bureaucracy,it would break the public
service.
We wouldn't be able to do it.
So Anna could you pick up fromthat frame and just talk a
little bit about what youdecided to do?
This little side project thatyou had, that we had pretty much
(08:33):
no funding for.
But you decided on a littleside project.
Anna Baggio (08:38):
And just to clarify for your listeners.
So species at risk is a sharedresponsibility in Canada, so we
have the federal government andthe provincial governments and
the territorial governments haveto work together, and they all
committed in 1996 to havecomplementary legislation so
there would be effectiveprotection for species across
the whole country.
So even if the provinces wereto take action first under their
(09:01):
jurisdiction, they would havecomplementary legislation with
the federal act, and so that'sthe underlying approach, the
philosophy Built into theSpecies at Risk Act federally,
once the recovery strategy isdone for a species and it
identifies critical habitat,there was this incredible and
(09:22):
really important reportingmechanisms that were supposed to
be about accountability andtransparency, and you would
produce a report on whether ornot critical habitat is
protected.
And so the recovery strategyfor boreal caribou came out in
2012, and it's now been fiveyears and we still don't even
(09:42):
have a critical habitat report,progress report.
And so I worked with twofabulous lawyers, laura Tassaro
and Anastasia Littner, and a lawstudent, this great law student
from Osgoode, and the four ofus were going to pump one out,
these critical habitat reports.
We were going to sit down andwe said you know what?
(10:04):
Canada keeps telling us?
They can't do it, we're goingto pump one out and show them
that we can do it on ashoestring budget, and so I'm
grateful to Osgoode for givingus an internship with the
student, and these two lawyerslent their expertise.
And then Wild Lands Leaguepublished the first critical
progress report on criticalhabitat protection for boreal
(10:25):
caribou in Canada, and we lookedat all the jurisdictions and we
assessed by jurisdictionwhether or not their laws
provided mandatory andenforceable protection for
caribou critical habitat.
And then we published it and weput it and we went into the
federal government and we said,okay, here you go, federal
(10:45):
government.
You said it couldn't be doneand it was going to cost
millions of dollars and it wasgoing to break you.
Here you go.
We just wrote one for you andit took us six months.
How do you like them, apples?
Janet Sumner (10:55):
I'm a student and three people.
Anna Baggio (10:58):
And you know what?
And that report still stands uptoday.
I mean, if you want to know howyour jurisdiction is doing on
boreal caribou, you can read it.
We've laid it out.
It's very clear.
And so those accountabilitymechanisms were built in.
And, of course, our colleaguesat CPOS did a lawsuit against
Canada for failing to do thesereports and eventually won, and
we provided supporting evidence.
And so those reports aresupposed to be like reporting
(11:22):
back to Canadians about whetheror not habitats protected and
reporting and giving you anobjective look about whether or
not your jurisdiction isactually doing the job it's
supposed to be.
And they're kind of meh, thereports now that Canada does
these reports, and they're kindof like, they're not very good
and I think they're a little bittoo differential to the
provinces, and so we're stillfailing to kind of alert
(11:42):
Canadians to the fact that theseprovinces and territories
aren't getting the job done andthey've been failing for so long
that now it's 2024.
You know, the recovery strategyfirst came out in 2012.
Habitat needed to be protectedwithin six months.
It's now been more than adecade and the provinces are
failing.
And so now we need Canada to dosomething extraordinary and
(12:03):
actually use its laws and stepin and protect habitat in
Ontario using the Species atRisk Act, because Ontario has
pretty much said we're not doingit and that's how it's supposed
to be.
Canada's supposed to step inand so we need them to step in,
and so this federal cabinet.
I hope that they reallystrongly consider that in this
(12:25):
coming spring because hopefullythere'll be another
recommendation go to cabinetthat says you know what?
They're failing to protecthabitat, and this is the third
time we've come to you.
I think I'm hoping the cabinetwill step in and say yep, it's
time we do something.
Our reputation as a country ison the line here.
Like, how long are we going tolet our biodiversity get
hammered for logging and miningand roads and all this other
(12:49):
stuff?
Kaya Adleman (12:49):
So hey, are you liking the clear cut as much as
we like making it?
Your donation helps us bringmore of these important stories
to life.
You can actually support ourwork by going to our website,
wwwwildlandsleagueorg.
(13:10):
Slash the clear cut, or you canclick the link in the episode
description below.
Your support means the world tous.
I was going to ask if you couldmaybe, I guess, flush that out
further.
We talked about when theenvironment minister released
those statements saying that hewas going to make a
(13:31):
recommendation to cabinet.
Right, that was a while ago.
I think we'd mentioned itbriefly on our podcast in one of
the episodes at the end of oneof our episodes, but maybe you
could flush that out a littlebit more.
Anna Baggio (13:45):
Yeah, so the federal minister, minister Gibo,
you know, to his credit, he hada.
He has a responsibility and anobligation to make a
recommendation to cabinet whenhabitat remains unprotected.
And so he looked at Ontario andQuebec and pretty much
concluded that, yep, the habitatremains unprotected and then
(14:07):
said made this recommendation tocabinet.
There's been that's the secondrecommendation.
There was another one in 2020.
Obviously, cabinet then canhave all their deliberations and
then decide what to do.
But that recommendation isreally important that it happens
.
And so there's, you know,cabinet has stepped in to take
action in cases of an emergencywith the chorus frog, and so
(14:31):
there are times it does it, butit's been rare.
It needs to be normalized sothat the provinces know that if
they're not going to get the jobdone, that Canada's going to
step in, and then hopefully,it'll just give an incentive for
the provinces to be like, oh,we don't want Canada stepping in
, we're just going to do itourselves.
And so that's where I'm hopingwe get to.
And yeah, so, minister, youboth made a recommendation last
(14:54):
year.
The cabinet didn't act on it.
Obviously, we disagreed withthat cabinet and that cabinet
should have acted, but hopefullywe get a different outcome this
year.
Janet Sumner (15:08):
Yeah, and it's the way it's supposed to work right
.
Again, you have these earlywarning signals.
They come out supposedly on aregular basis, these section 623
reports that tell you how aprovince is doing and really
it's just supposed to measure isit effectively protective and
adequately protected, yes or no?
When they produce these reportsnow it's kind of like, well,
(15:30):
they've got this process andthey're really working hard on
this and they're doing.
There's a lot of flowery stuffin there, ingredients around all
the processes that provincesare doing, and it kind of buries
the lead on whether or notthey're protected or not.
So kudos to Minister Gilbo forstanding up and basically making
the recommendation, despite allthe flowery language in these
(15:53):
reports.
But he took his job seriouslyand his duty seriously and he
made that recommendation.
Now he made the recommendationon Boreal Woodland Caraboo.
Has he made it more than once,or was it a previous minister
who did that?
Previous minister Right.
So it was, I think, ministerWilkinson, when he was in
Minister Gilbo's seat, and sowe've seen two successive
(16:14):
ministers now make arecommendation to cabinet that
Boreal Woodland Caraboo are notadequately protected in Ontario,
certainly in Quebec.
Now they've also made that.
So we're waiting to see.
That's where we are right now.
We're waiting to see what theycould do.
Anna Baggio (16:32):
Yeah, and I think maybe just to kind of for your
listeners.
So I go into like a lot ofthese stakeholder committees,
been into a lot of them, and werun into a lot of opposition and
I'll be honest, like there is alot of denial out there,
(16:53):
there's a lot of industry, a lotof industry.
Certainly the regressive onesthey'll be like Caraboo aren't
in trouble, or they'll say thatthey're not the source of the
problem.
And then there's also theargument of, well, it's too
expensive, it's gonna cost toomuch.
And then after a while theyargue well, it's too late, you
know what, they're gone, wecan't bring them back.
(17:14):
And so all of these argumentsare thrown at us and I've now
heard them for more than 20years and this is the problem I
keep hearing them over and overagain.
Then the other part of it thathappens is that they often
vilify us.
Right, they often attack uslike we are, and not just me.
I have other colleagues too fromother organizations, but a lot
of us we have been on thereceiving end like we are
(17:35):
vilified, and that's part oftheir strategy is if you don't
like the message, you attack themessenger, and so this is all
part of a denial campaign toprevent the government from
actually taking steps to recoverthe species, and so kudos to
the climate colleagues foridentifying this first, and now,
unfortunately, it's migrated towildlife and species at risk,
(17:57):
because they are using the samestrategies here to prevent
governments and to sow enoughdoubt and uncertainty that
nothing will ever change, and sothat's also something we're up
against, and so we're gonna needour governments to figure out
what they're there for, and ifthey're just gonna be echoing
the industry interest, that'snot acting on behalf of all
(18:19):
their citizens, that's justadvocating for a very small
sector, and so this is part ofthe reason why we also need
groups like Wildlands League tocontinue to kind of raise the
alarm and sound the alarm,because we're being outnumbered.
They have the voice ofgovernment right now.
Janet Sumner (18:37):
Yeah, I just wanna break what you were saying down
a little bit because, well, ourinterest is in having healthy
ecosystems that support life, solife can thrive and that's all
life.
And that's just a very sort ofgeneral description of what we
do.
But a healthy forest, a forestthat is vibrant and is robust,
(19:04):
is good, not just because wewant it, but is good because
there are local communities whodepend on it, there are First
Nations and there are otherindustrial sectors.
So we know for a fact that whenwe've gone in to do forest
management planning, sometimesyou're in there having a
conversation about forestmanagement planning but it's
(19:25):
actually going to really impactthe remote tourism operator or
it's really going to impact thepeople who are doing fishing in
the area or people who rely ongetting country foods from the
forest and all of thoseingredients are not part of the
(19:46):
equation when you're having aconversation about forestry,
because the license to take hasbeen handed over to these
companies on a large scale andthe other interests are kind of
treated as not important orsidelined.
So it is for us about thehealth of the forest, but for
(20:08):
many others who are invisible inthis process, it is also about
their livelihoods.
Anna Baggio (20:15):
Yeah, I mean we get calls, as you know, from remote
tourism operators that are likeplease help me, they're about
to clear cut all the way up toour backyards.
And we get calls from remotetourism operators, we get calls
from indigenous peoples.
They really do feel like theyhave nowhere else to go and that
they and this is why I take thecalls I take all the calls and
(20:37):
sometimes I can help andsometimes I can't.
But that's partly what we offerand we've developed enough an
expertise over many, many yearson that process that at least we
can give them some advice if wecan't do more.
Janet Sumner (20:51):
Can we?
I don't know if you can make acomparison between that and
mining tenure, right?
So it's basically thepresumption of the tenure and it
probably comes back from a veryold time.
This way that tenure is handedout, and it's handed out with
disregard for First Nations,it's handed out with disregard
(21:11):
for other land users and they'regiven priority and preference
on the landscape.
So, whether it's forestry ormining or what have you, there
is this way that tenure ishanded out, and these are
actually our forests, theyactually belong to Canadians and
First Nations, right Like theand so yeah, that's just a bit
(21:35):
shocking of a realization.
Anna Baggio (21:37):
Well, you know, and I don't know how many people.
So, part of when I was doing mymasters, I was in Costa Rica
looking at land use, and part ofit was to look at why certain
forests, these tropicalrainforests, had disappeared
over a very short period of time.
And as I was doing thatresearch, not only did I
interview local farmers andscientists and community groups,
(21:58):
but I also looked at a bit ofthe history of deforestation in
Costa Rica.
And when you look back on itand you know, more than a
hundred years ago, the policywas you could only prove
ownership if you cleared theland.
And so you know, for so therewas these policies that were
driving people to clear thosetropical forests, because that
was the way you could proveownership.
(22:19):
And you kind of, I looked atthat and you kind of go, oh my
God, that just seems crazy.
Why would they have such acrazy policy?
And you know, and now, ofcourse, costa Rica is not one of
the leaders in the world whenit comes to fighting
deforestation and protectinglands, and so they've really
turned it around.
But in some ways I feel likethat 1920s Costa Rica situation
(22:42):
is like right here in Canada.
I'm like people could belooking at us going.
Why on earth are you like?
Why on earth are you allowingyour forest to be cleared so
much and destroyed and justhanded over to industry?
Like what is that?
And in some ways, we're nobetter we have been.
Our system has been set up tobasically prioritize industrial
use first, so it's been handedover to logging first.
(23:05):
It's mining is prioritizedeverywhere.
So they definitely want toprioritize mining, which means
you can leave it open formineral claimstaking, drilling,
blasting, and so those certainlythe mining pieces of the
hangover of the free entrysystem, and that that was from a
couple of hundred years agothat they used to just give away
the lands for development, andso we have not shifted our frame
(23:28):
to be more aligned with ourmodern values, which is clean
water, clean air, climate,reconciliation with indigenous
peoples.
We're just not.
We're not there yet and it is.
I mean, I hate to say thisbecause it's my country and I
love this country and I love thepeople here.
Okay, maybe not all the people,but I love the people here Most
of the time, except when theysend me hate mail.
(23:51):
But you know like we could doso much better if we just
thought a little bit more aboutsharing the land, bringing in
science, bringing in space forindigenous peoples to have more
of a say than just giving it allover to industry.
And that is really what we do,and so it is shocking, and so
I'm going to move on to the nextquestion.
SpeakPipe Question (24:10):
I'm going to ask you what is the best way to
grow plants?
How do you take care of them?
And I'm going to go ahead andtake a look at the next question
.
Hi, clear cut.
My question is about the placesthat have already been logged
and I want to know if it'sbetter to let them grow back on
(24:30):
their own, with whatever plantspecies do best, or to try and
plant trees.
We have a lot of temperatureand rainfall.
Thanks so much.
Dave Pearce (24:41):
Hello, clear cut, it's Dave Pierce, Senior Forest
Conservation Management,wildlands League and my….
Personal assessment of thesituation is and I think it's a
fruitful area for conversation,given climate change is that it
should be regenerated in thequickest way to get forests back
(25:03):
on the site, and we should relyon natural regeneration if
possible.
If the species that is wellsuited to that site are coming
back in a healthy way, then letthat natural regeneration happen
.
If things aren't beingregenerated properly, for
(25:25):
whatever reason, I think someform of artificial regeneration
is appropriate to get treesstarted.
Now some people are of theopinion that planted forests
isn't a natural forest and youhave to wait for the next
generation for it to be a trulynatural forest.
But I think in an era ofclimate change and biodiversity
(25:48):
challenges, I think gettingtrees back on the site as quick
as possible is probably a goodmove, and it's tricky to try to
predict what's going to happenwith climate change and the idea
that maybe we should beplanting more southern species
or sort of edge of range speciesand I think having a good
(26:08):
variety of trees to kind ofhedge your bets on climate
change is a good strategy, aslong as within sort of the
natural range of variation forthe site.
We don't want to get too crazyabout bringing trees that are
currently outside their naturalrange because there's quite a
bit of, I think, resiliencewithin species I mean white pine
(26:30):
and there's genetic differences, but the species white pine
grows all the way down to Mexico, admittedly in high elevations,
so it's quite plastic and quiteresilient.
And even jack pine you know,you get jack pine growing quite
far south in Michigan, forexample, on dry sites, and black
(26:50):
spruce in very wet sites wherenothing else will grow, will
grow as far as southern Michigan.
So there's quite a bit ofelastid city and within species,
I think, to adapt and changeclimate change.
Now, of course it depends onwhat you do with those trees
(27:10):
after.
It depends on the purpose ofthe site.
If there to be remain as auntouched forest in perpetuity,
it'd go one way.
But if this forest is meant tocompensate and stay in the
commercial forest realm and sortof compensate for areas that we
(27:34):
shouldn't go into, that arealready intact, then you might
do some thinning to try toencourage the trees to grow to
maturity and to be amerchantable size ahead of time.
But I think any strategy to gettrees back on the site quickly
is probably a good one.
The trees that are well suitedto that site.
(27:55):
You know, if it's a coniferdominated site, then it should
be planted mostly conifer,regenerated to mostly conifer.
If it's a naturally hardwoodgood hardwood site, then it
should be regenerated to theappropriate species.
Kaya Adleman (28:17):
So the policies that are guiding these
industry-first attitudes towardsdevelopment, those are
holdovers, I guess.
So the free entry system was inCanada like anyone could come
and develop a resource with thegovernment's permission,
basically.
Anna Baggio (28:38):
Yeah, and encouraged by the government,
and so we have that kind ofvestige still there.
And when you want to makechanges, god bless the industry,
because the sky falls everytime somebody wants to make a
change.
Anytime you want to improvesomething, the sky is gonna fall
.
I can't tell you how manymeetings I've been in where
(28:59):
we're talking about puttingforward thoughtful solutions
that could make a difference forpeople, make a difference for
the environment, and they'relike the sky is gonna fall,
you're ruining my industry.
And I'm like, oh my God, I'veheard this now for 20 years.
I'm like people, the sky did notfall, we can do this, but we
can't do it if the governmentdoesn't have a backbone.
The government needs to be ableto say it's gonna govern on
(29:21):
behalf of all of us If it's onlygonna govern on behalf of the
industrial interests.
That's what it feels like rightnow is that we have a
government that's rewriting lawsto drive through development,
to consider the environment asred tape that needs to be cut
and to speed everything up, andso that's kind of our challenge
is that we've like things havejust really been, things have
been really tilted.
Right now that we have thislike government stepping on the
(29:45):
scales to really align withwhether it's a commercial
interest or an industry interest.
Janet Sumner (29:50):
And when you say government, which government Are
you talking provincially?
Are you talking federal?
Anna Baggio (29:54):
Provincial right now, provincially just is.
The weight of everything thatthis Doug Ford government has
done in the last number of yearsis just heavy, heavy, heavy.
And you know, kudos to thepeople that fought for the
Greenbelt, including some peoplein our office, and got the, got
that reversed, but theyobviously haven't learned their
lesson.
We're still there's full steamahead on other crazy ideas, and
(30:19):
so we just have to keep standingup and we have to keep saying
these things over and over again, because they want to outlast
us, they want us to geteventually get exhausted and
they want us to be quiet, but wecan't.
We have to keep sounding thealarm.
Janet Sumner (30:37):
So, so let's, let's take this forward.
So we know that the currentsystem is not working.
What, if any, hope do we have?
I know that we've got some I'mtrying to think of caribbean
policies that could go the rightway, and if they did go the
right way, they might producesome kind of a result.
So if you were looking forsomething that could go the
(31:00):
right way, what would that be?
Anna Baggio (31:03):
So I see hope.
I allow myself to wallow justfor a couple of days, that's it.
Then I pull up my bootstrapsand I go and I keep on fighting
again.
So you have to do that.
But what I where I see hope isnumber one.
There are progressiveindustries that want to do the
right thing and they need to becertified under some type of
(31:25):
certification system, like likea forest stewardship council
system, so that they can selltheir product and get a premium
for it and unless theirconsumers know that that that
product came from a responsiblysourced operation.
So I see hope there.
I mean, could that system beimproved?
Yes, but there is hope therewhen you have an industry that
wants to do the right thing.
(31:46):
I see hope coming fromIndigenous peoples who are
declaring Indigenous protectedareas, and a lot of these
Indigenous protected areasoverlap with the Habitat of
Endangered Species and so if wecan just give room for that and
encourage our governments tostart implementing those and
respecting those Indigenousprotected areas, we could go a
long way.
And I get hope from scientistsand I get hope from regular
(32:11):
people and I get hope fromregular people who stop me on
the street and they just say, ohAnna, thank you for what you do
.
You really.
You know you're helping us, youknow you make a difference and
they just keep going.
And so anytime someone says,anytime someone calls me, and
they just care, they energize meand hopefully I can give them
something back.
But that's where I get hopefrom the people care Scientists
(32:33):
keep going, indigenousleadership and progressive
industry, and I think we have topersevere on this one.
This one's, this one's hard.
We have to keep persevering butit can be overcome.
We just can't predict when, butit will.
It will change.
Janet Sumner (32:50):
It's kind of like people said the green belt
wouldn't change but it did, andso it's maybe a longer campaign.
As you said, we've been at thissince 2002, trying to get well,
2012, trying to get the CareRehab Attack protected.
But there is a decision pointcoming up and if you're
listening to this, we'rerecording this in just beginning
(33:10):
of February 2024.
And that decision point is lastyear.
Minister Gubble took arecommendation to cabinet that,
or recommendation that he donean assessment on whether or not
Care Rehab was effectivelyprotected in Ontario and Quebec
and he said no, it's not and Irecommend you do some protection
, and cabinet decided to.
(33:32):
I think at the time I was quotedas saying Canada blinked and
and they allowed Ontario tocontinue and they gave them some
funding and said, okay, we'regoing to trust that you can do
this because you're telling usyou've got a process, you're
going to try and get this done,and so they were supposed to be
working on this process to getit done and they've had a year
(33:52):
to do that.
I haven't seen there's been noannouncements that have crossed
my desk sort of saying, hey,Care Rehab Attack is protected.
So I'm assuming we stillhaven't seen Care Rehab Attack
protected, because the defaultfrom our position has been that
Ontario is saying we've got adynamic Care Rehab Attack
schedule and we're going to movehabitat around and we're going
(34:14):
to figure something else out andwe're going to manage or
mitigate, or the other thing is,our Care Rehab don't require
65%, even though the scienceclearly says that they're doing
everything but protectinghabitat.
So Minister Gubba was facedwith another challenge.
Is that correct, Anna?
Anna Baggio (34:33):
Yes, and I would just say and this is me,
Anabagio, reaching across theairwaves to all those cabinet
ministers that are sitting onthat table Minister Wilkinson,
Minister Freeland, MinisterLeblanc, all of you there, you
know working so hard.
You're the most powerful peoplein the country.
Care Rebo need you.
Please step up this spring.
(34:54):
It's now been four years sinceyou've had recommendations
across your desks.
Please step up this spring andprotect some habitat in Ontario.
We need you.
It's time and Ontario's notdoing it and, in fact, they're
going to keep promoting loggingand mining.
Janet Sumner (35:11):
So please do it.
It's been more than 12 years.
So, yeah, let's get somethingdone and not just watch
extinction happen.
That would be really great.
And again, it's not just abouta single species.
It's about taking care of theforest and the boreal woodland.
Care, rebo, give us a proxy, ifyou will, or help us choose how
(35:34):
to better manage.
And yeah, and I'm just going tomaybe just riff a little bit,
one of the reasons that we wantthis to happen is not just
because we want the federalgovernment to issue this, call
out or this protection, but wehope what it does is energize
the system to go.
Like Anna said, at best, youknow, provinces will wake up and
(35:58):
go oh, I don't want the federalgovernment to come in here and
do this.
So if they do that, then all ofa sudden it creates a much more
dynamic and creative space forcompanies and governments to say
OK.
So then what's the solution?
How do we put a solutiontogether so that Canada doesn't
need to step in here and stopfooling ourselves and papering
(36:18):
over the problem?
And Anna and I have sat at many, many, many tables with
industry and we have beenshocked and surprised and
delighted that in many of thosesituations we've been able to
walk away where our industry isgoing.
You know what I think I can do300,000 hectares here.
I think we can keep 700,000hectares off the logging block.
(36:43):
So and I know personally that Iworked on a caribou plan in
Northeast Alberta that's stillbeing upheld.
So, industry, if they'rechallenged and they want to work
on this and they want to avoidsome superimposition by a
federal government, then thingscan get done.
And we need to stop looking atthe lowest common denominator
(37:07):
and say how do we start to reachfor those and be there with
those who want to actuallycontribute and make plans so
that we can protect.
And again, it's not aboutshutting down industry, it's
about actually finding thesolutions.
And that, to me, is what isadvanced by creating this space.
And it has to come like youhave to have some hard rules,
(37:30):
you know, otherwise everybodydrives it over 150 kilometers an
hour on the highway.
So you have to have some hardrules that make people go oh, I
got to slow down, right, notjust their own personal safety.
Kaya Adleman (37:42):
I mean, why have laws if they don't have any
teeth right?
Janet Sumner (37:46):
Well, yeah that's society.
If you like listening to theclear cut and want to keep the
content coming, support the show.
It would mean a lot to Kai andI.
The link to do so will be inthe episode description below.
Kaya Adleman (38:03):
You can also become a supporter by going to
our website atwwwwildlandsleagueorg.
Slash the clear cut and alsomake sure to leave us a review
on your favorite podcaststreaming platform.
It would really help thepodcast.
Anna Baggio (38:21):
And that's where we are right now.
We have an endangered speciesact that isn't actually saving
endangered species and you knowwhat?
And may I just give a quickshout out to?
There are some civil servantswithin the government right now
that are trying really hard toput forward solutions that might
make a difference for caribouand at least that are based on
(38:43):
science, not like what's comingforward in the policy, like
they're.
They're putting forward thingsthat are based on science and
that might work, and they'reobviously being shot down.
But please keep going.
We need those voices to beheard, and so so, for example,
the Otter Generals report thatcame out, I think, a couple
years ago, on species at riskCivil servants identified when
(39:06):
this government brought in thepermanent exemption from logging
from the Endangered Species Act, the civil servants said it
will have a significant adverseeffect on at least 12 species,
including boreal caribou.
So their own advice, their ownscientists, are warning them
that their actions are harmful.
The Auditor General has alsosaid you're facilitating
(39:28):
development, you're facilitatingharm to species.
So we have enough of the, the,the.
The evidence is there now.
We know we're off track, weknow we've gone.
Well, we're not even on thetracks anymore.
I'm not sure we can see thetracks, but we can fix this and
but somebody.
We need those voices to keepcoming and then, hopefully,
(39:48):
combined with our voices andothers, we will have something
different.
And then we can kind of tellCanadians that boreal caribou
didn't wink out on our watch.
Janet Sumner (39:59):
Lovely.
When you say auditor general,you mean the federal auditor
general, but no, the provincialone.
The provincial one.
Anna Baggio (40:07):
She unveiled a lot.
It was very, very really, I youknow, illuminating.
But those kudos to those peopleon the inside that are
obviously being muzzled and shotdown, but keep going.
We need you and and hopefullywe can turn this around.
Janet Sumner (40:25):
Yeah, we see you and we applaud you.
That's, that's a hard job to beinside the machine and have the
machine be antagonistic to yourpoints of view or to your
science.
So, yeah, big shout out.
So we're going to be watchingthat this spring to see if
cabinet does take that seriously.
We think that that will producea more productive conversation
(40:50):
table that we can actually getto some outcomes.
And again, as we've pointed out, it's not monolithic.
We don't have industry just allbeing bad.
We don't have civil servantsall being, you know, one sided
or whatever We've got.
We've got the good brains outthere that can work on these
solutions.
And I speak from experiencebecause I have developed
solutions in so many differentparts of this country where we
(41:13):
had willing people who wanted todo great things, and so we just
need to actually be given thespace to get those done, and
then I think we can turn thetide on care.
But that's that's where I getmy hope, because I still think
the solutions are out there.
Kaya Adleman (41:27):
I have another question for Anna.
Janet Sumner (41:29):
What can?
Kaya Adleman (41:30):
what can listeners of the podcast who aren't
federal ministers or civilservants due to maybe move the
needle on care policy?
Anna Baggio (41:42):
So, if you're listening, thank you, thank you
for listening.
You're listening to some of themost original and interesting
innovative content in thecountry right now when it comes
to forests.
So just learn a bit more.
If you are so desired, pleasepick up the phone and call your
MPP and just let them know youwant to see caribou habitat
(42:05):
protected.
So if you're in a particularprovince, pick up the phone.
Every, every jurisdiction needshelp, every single one.
If you want to, you know.
If you want to support, if youwant to support the science, you
know, read a little bit of thereports.
Read those Cosewic or thecommittee on the status of
(42:27):
endangered wildlife in Canada.
There's these reports put out.
You can read what the sciencesays.
This is.
It is a fact that caribou aredeclining.
It is a fact that they needhabitat.
This is not in dispute.
And so tell your friends, youknow, get involved, follow us
(42:49):
and and just get theconversation rolling that that
things can be done and we expectour governments to take action.
Janet Sumner (42:56):
Yeah, definitely speak to your members of
Parliament, speak to yourprovincial members as well,
because we have an Ontariospecies Endangered Species Act
that should not have these broadbased industrial exemptions, so
they could fix that too.
And I think you know there'sjust educating other people and
(43:19):
sharing the podcast and we willhave a lot of information in the
show notes and informationabout all the different
campaigns.
And there are many groups andthis is I would not.
I don't think that there's anenvironmental group out there
that doesn't think caribouprotection is a high priority.
There are all the groups thatare working on forestry, are
thinking about our forests andthe health of our forests, are
(43:40):
committed to this and trying tosee this through, and we
certainly are and are pushingfor this.
So we'll keep you updated.
We've actually had some goodconversations around this.
In terms of forestry, fsc is theonly forest certification
system that actually requiresyou actually plan for caribou,
etc.
So it's a big reason.
(44:00):
And then if you're out shoppingand you see that you have a
choice between an FSC product ora non FSC product, please
choose FSC.
Or if you don't see FSCproducts, ask the store manager
hey, when are you going to startgetting some FSC products and
if you're a buyer, ask for FSCproducts.
So I would say that that's theonly certification system that
(44:23):
has free, prior and informedconsent and that's respecting
the rights of indigenous people,and the only certification that
actually requires you do acaribou plan and do it better
than what the government like,more than meet the government
standard.
So this is actually all reallyimportant things that you can do
and, as Anna said, there's lotsof ways that you can follow the
issue and find out more, andwe'll have more information on
(44:46):
our show notes, etc.
Yeah, and if you're out of, thecountry, which I know.
Anna Baggio (44:49):
You have a lot of listeners that are outside of
Canada.
Please send us a note and sendour government a note.
Feel free to like lambaste thegovernments over here.
We're happy to let them knowthat you're upset by what you're
hearing and then let yourwallet do the talking.
So don't buy those productsthat are going to be sourcing
(45:09):
from caribou habitat.
Find alternatives, whetheryou're getting recycled content
like fully recycled content,that would be helpful.
Fsc, like Jenna talked about,and demand better.
That you can like.
We can demand better asconsumers too.
I mean, I do it in my life as apolicy expert, but we can also
do it through our website,Through our wallets and our
(45:33):
purchasing.
So, yeah, but thank you, andthank you for caring.
That's the other thing.
Thank you for caring.
Janet Sumner (45:39):
Yeah, yeah, we really appreciate you coming on
the ride with us and listeningto this.
Obviously, caribou conservationis a big issue for us and
something we care deeply about.
Kai, do you want to weigh in onany of this or do you have any
concluding remarks?
SpeakPipe Question (45:55):
Or it was hard to see and it's passion
today it was really.
Janet Sumner (45:58):
you know, it's kind of covered up.
She was so muted.
Kaya Adleman (46:00):
Yeah, she's just.
You know, she didn't bring theenergy at all, you know.
Janet Sumner (46:04):
I know it was kind of sad really.
That's just gonna channelmomabashio, you know it's gonna
be a little bit more, you knowyeah.
Kaya Adleman (46:12):
Dynamic?
Yeah, no, but I it does.
I think it does frustrate me.
Well, I guess I knew about thisbefore, but it's frustrating to
see yet again another examplewhere we have the regulation and
the ingredients in place whichis something that we've talked
(46:33):
about on this podcast before andthen there's just no follow
through.
So I think it is very importantthat we're keeping the work
going, keeping people informedand, you know, spreading the
message.
We have this legislation for areason and we need to
continually improve it and makesure that it's enforced, right.
Janet Sumner (46:57):
Yeah, I think actually you bring up a good
point is that for environmentalgroups, we kind of get all the
way to having the legislation.
We celebrate it, we tell thegovernment they did a good job
and Anna highlighted it at thebeginning and then
implementation happens and thatis where things go to die,
because there's a lot ofinternal forces or inertia that
(47:19):
just starts to kill it off.
And what we rely on is thewhite light of public scrutiny
and that ability for the publicto look at things and go hang on
a second.
You said you were going to dothis and you turned around and
did this.
So everybody, yeah, we want adangerous species legislation.
(47:40):
Few years goes by and the newprovincial government comes in
and slips in exemptions, broadindustrial scale exemptions.
So we need to fire up thepublic and get them engaged on
this, and that's why it's reallyimportant for all of you, even
if it's individuals and we don'thave a big campaign on it or a
sustained campaign it's reallyimportant for you to be telling
(48:01):
your politicians what you think,because that light that you
shine, that ability to seethrough all of the lies and
obfuscation, allows governmentsto kind of go oh, hang on a
second, we need to actuallymaybe do something here.
This is not good.
Kaya Adleman (48:19):
We don't like where this is trending, so yeah,
thanks for saying that A littlecall to action is.
I think it's insidious that thelack of government effort on
these things is kind of based onthe expectation that it's just
going to float through the newscycle right, because we are
being in our current day and age, like constantly inundated with
(48:41):
different news items and newsarticles and the fact that it's
it's kind of an expectation, ohyeah, like we've done this, but
we don't actually have to followthrough on it, because then the
next thing is going to comethrough and the next thing.
Don't let that happen.
Keep paying attention, becausethese things slip by.
Janet Sumner (49:05):
And I'm going to let you finish off with
something that you're reallylooking forward to, and it
doesn't have to be caribou, andit could be something you know
in the ocean.
So you know, you go ahead.
Anna Baggio (49:15):
What I'm looking forward to.
Yeah, yeah, so well.
One thing I am working on whenI'm not fighting.
I'm not fighting industry toget caribou plans.
I am working on a project toprotect the ocean and it's being
led by Indigenous peoples andin James Bay and Southern Hudson
Bay in the proposed MeshgegawekNational Marine Conservation
(49:40):
Area, and it's a massive areaand it supports beluga whales,
polar bears, fish, birds,hemispheric importance for birds
.
Birds of the hemisphere rely onthis area either for breeding
or refueling.
And the Indigenous peoples havedecided that they want to move
(50:02):
forward and they will benegotiating something with
Canada and hopefully in the nextyear we'll have something more
to point to.
But, taking the next step,hopefully in the next month
we'll have a good announcementthere that people are ready to
take the next step.
And, yeah, the world's mostsouthernmost year round
population of polar bears that'sin our area.
(50:24):
So this gives me hope and it'sone of my happy projects and you
need happy projects to sustainyou when you do this work.
And yeah, so congratulations tothose Indigenous leaders and to
all those Indigenous, all theMeshgegawek on the coast, and
hopefully we can get somethingpublic with Parks Canada in the
next few weeks and that'll be abit of a boost.
(50:45):
And you heard it here the ocean, this ocean protected area,
also will protect migratorycaribou, because the migratory
caribou walk on the ocean floorin the summer and we saw them.
We saw 3,000 of them walk onthe ocean floor two years ago in
the summer.
So, and that's a differentcaribou and that's for another
(51:06):
day, but they walked on theocean floor.
They're going to get hopefullyget some habitat protection and
give something for Canadians tobe proud of.
Janet Sumner (51:17):
Yeah, we're pretty excited about it at all.
That's like, yeah, thanks, anna, I really appreciate it having
this conversation with you and atime to just reflect on some of
the work that you've been doing.
And, yeah, it's a true pleasureto be working with you in
partnership on conservation.
Kaya Adleman (51:33):
Thanks, anna, for being on the podcast.
Thank you.
Anna Baggio (51:36):
Kaya.
Thank you, janet, and this is alot of fun.
Janet Sumner (51:41):
And we are in six continents now, just so you know
.
The only one we're not on isAntarctica.
I put that down to the factthey don't have any forests, but
I still have some hope there.
Anna Baggio (51:52):
Hey, there's got to be a research station in
Antarctica with internet.
Come on people.
Janet Sumner (51:56):
Can somebody send it there, so we can at least
have a data point in it.
Anna Baggio (52:02):
Log on, join the internet, check out the ClearCup
podcast, get on all continents.
So thank you, thank you guys.
You guys are doing a great job.
Keep going, and I look forwardto hearing more about all the
different facets of the forestin the next few weeks and months
.
Janet Sumner (52:15):
So yeah, thanks very much.
Kaya Adleman (52:18):
Yeah, liquids.
Well, janet, I'm sure you foundthe last part of this
conversation with Anna asinsightful as I did.
I really enjoyed having Anna onthe podcast because she is
(52:39):
clearly very passionate aboutthe issues that she works on and
she really has a sense forpeople and how to communicate
these important issues to people.
And, yeah, I think, on thecontent side of things, I think
it is again really interestingthat we're seeing a disconnect
(52:59):
between what the legislationsays it's going to do and then
what the actual actions ofgovernment are doing, and I
think that's something thatpeople should be keeping in mind
when we vote, when we write toour representatives.
(53:19):
I think this is again just thetheme that we see in the podcast
so frequently is that there aretools in place to be able to
enact more meaningful change.
The federal cabinet can step inand do more to protect caribou
in Ontario, and it's somethingthat needs to be done.
(53:42):
We've seen from the scienceit's something that needs to be
done and Ontario is clearly notdoing it.
So, yeah, I'm glad to have thisframe for the issue of caribou
conservation and I hope otherpeople find it as informative
and will be inspired to learnmore and be angry, you know, be
(54:03):
angry that this isn't happening.
Janet Sumner (54:06):
Yeah, I think it's a good point.
I mean, we heard on the sciencethat action needs to be taken,
that there are many rangesacross the country that are
collapsing.
And again, going back to that,it's not just like OneLensLeague
does not exist because we are aanimal rights group or anything
like that, but rather caribouare this emblem of ecosystem
(54:27):
health.
If caribou are doing well inthe boreal, then the boreal is
doing well, and right nowthere's a number of the ranges,
a good number of them, that are,you know, over the threshold of
35% disturbance or less thanthe 65% of intact areas and are
undisturbed.
And yet we've been watchingthis for more than a decade.
(54:52):
And thanks to Anna for doing abig shout out and asking people
to speak to their MLAs, theirmembers of parliament.
Wherever you are in the country,I would be hard pressed to say
there wasn't a caribou rangethat was in trouble.
And these politicians representyou.
Have a conversation with them,ask them to take action, because
(55:13):
my personal belief is, as moreaction is taken, then more
government start to try to getahead of this and try to do the
right thing.
And, frankly, again, it's notjust about the health of the
ecosystem, it's also about allthe jobs that rely on a robust
and thriving boreal ecosystem.
And forestry is not the onlyjob in the bush.
(55:34):
There's jobs on remote tourism,there's jobs in people wanting
to be out being active in nature, and so, and even the forestry
jobs depend on having the fiberthat we say is there is going to
be there.
So all of this is tied up intocaribou, and I'd really like to
see the federal governmenttaking more action and all the
(55:55):
provincial governments, becauseit is incumbent upon them to
actually do caribou plans, andwe haven't seen that.
And then the other piece thatAnna mentions is it's been a
year since Minister Gubbo took avery gladly took a
recommendation to cabinet totake action in Ontario.
Ontario's been given anotheryear and that year is up, and I
(56:17):
still haven't seen any caribouhabitat protected.
I know that they've beenlaunching studies, etc.
But studying is not enough.
We're over 12 years past thedeadline and we need to start
protecting caribou habitat.
So, thanks to Anna, anothergreat podcast.
Kaya and I know you and I'vebeen doing some interviews.
They're not the can, as theysay, but they are recorded and
(56:40):
Kaya's going to be working hermagic over the next week and
we've got a couple of reallygood podcasts coming up for you.
Both of them centered aroundBritish Columbia and forestry
there, and talking about biomass, talking about old growth.
So stay tuned for those,because those are going to be
really good ones too.
Kaya Adleman (56:59):
Yeah, we're going to the West Coast, buckle up.
Janet Sumner (57:03):
Yeah, exactly.
Kaya Adleman (57:05):
Yeah, and I guess I just also want to add, if you
are inspired by this episode, asI was to take action on caribou
conservation, wild Lands Leaguehas made it very easy for you
to send a letter to your memberof parliament, so we are
including a link in the episodedescription for you to do that.
(57:26):
And if you're listening outsideof Canada, please feel free to
email us directly with yourthoughts on this issue.
We'll compile all of themessages and send them to the
governments of Canada andOntario.
Yeah, so you know.
If you don't live in Canada weknow that many listeners don't
please feel free to write inwith your thoughts.
Janet Sumner (57:48):
Yeah, thanks very much.
And if you're thinking aboutbuying merchandise, we had
another couple of lucky buyerson the weekend, some pretty cool
swag that we got Twosweatshirts that Kai and I were
modeling.
I think it was on a couple ofthe social media platforms.
Anyway, feel free to purchasethose.
I really like mine.
Kaya Adleman (58:07):
Yeah, I'd like to think that that photo of us on
socials is what inspired peopleto go out and buy them.
Janet Sumner (58:16):
So oh, absolutely.
Kaya Adleman (58:18):
I understand yeah.
Janet Sumner (58:23):
If you like listening to the clear cut and
want to keep the content coming,support the show.
It would mean a lot to Kai andI.
The link to do so will be inthe episode description below.
Kaya Adleman (58:34):
You can also become a supporter by going to
our website atwwwwildlandsleagueorg.
Slash the clear cut and alsomake sure to leave us a review
on your favorite podcaststreaming platform.
It would really help thepodcast and stay tuned for new
episodes by following us onsocial media.
Janet Sumner (58:55):
That's at Wildlands League on Instagram,
Twitter and Facebook or LinkedIn, of course.
Kaya Adleman (59:01):
See you next time.
Janet Sumner (59:05):
Yeah, so so, um, I mean partly while we at
Wildlands League, you're stillleaning forward.
I'm just going to get you, somaybe what you need to do is
move the mic forward away fromyou, like this forward Okay.
Your natural position is to sitlike this when you're getting
very engaged in the subject.
SpeakPipe Question (59:23):
So I'm going to let you keep doing that.
How does this sound?
Janet Sumner (59:27):
You can now lean forward if you move the mic away
from you.
Anna Baggio (59:30):
Okay, I'll do that, okay Go.
Welcome to the ClearCut.
Hi, I'm Janet Sumner, ExecutiveDirector at Wildlands League.
Kaya Adleman (00:08):
And I'm Kaia Adelman, Carbon Manager at
Wildlands League.
Janet Sumner (00:14):
Wildlands League is a Canadian conservation
organization working onprotecting the natural world.
Kaya Adleman (00:21):
The ClearCut is bringing to you the much-needed
conversation on Canadian forestmanagement and how we can better
protect one of Canada's mostimportant ecosystems, as our
forests are reaching a tippingpoint.
Janet Sumner (00:41):
All right, Kaia.
This is Episode 4 on Caribou.
Kaya Adleman (00:45):
Wow, that's a lot, Don't you?
Janet Sumner (00:47):
Yeah, no, really Two with just Dean Aray from WCS
on the science of Caribou.
And then we've had two episodeswith Anabazio, the Conservation
Director for Wildlands League,and this is the second of those
two episodes talking aboutpolicy and how regulations and
policy sort of work with federallaws and provincial laws, and
(01:11):
how they should work and how yousort of put the science into
the regulatory and thelegislation frameworks to
actually hopefully make sense ofthem and make them do something
real in the real world.
It's not just enough to havethe science.
Kaya Adleman (01:26):
That makes sense.
Janet Sumner (01:27):
I just got confused there.
Kaya Adleman (01:29):
No, that makes sense to me.
You're saying that we have thescience and then we're applying
policy to it in order to addressthe issues and the questions
that are being raised from thescience.
And then we're seeing as weheard in our episode with Anna
last week we're seeing howsometimes the policy frame can
(01:54):
kind of get jarbled up in thehands of regulators.
Janet Sumner (02:00):
That's a great word jarbled up.
So do you know anybody in yourworld that actually would want
to do like policy stuff likethis, kaia?
Kaya Adleman (02:11):
Oh yeah, so funny that you should ask, janet.
I think policy work is veryinteresting.
I actually went to universitywith some people who are
currently working onenvironmental policy issues at
the government level and Ireally like these caribou
(02:32):
conversations as well, because Ithink we're seeing how science
in an environmental context isbeing applied at the regulatory
level and that's somethingthat's very interesting to me.
And, as someone who's kind ofstarting out in my career, I see
myself being more and moredrawn to that world of things
because I don't know, you know,as a young person, you feel like
(02:56):
you have the weight of theresponsibility in some aspects
of being the change that youwant to see in the world.
So, yeah, hopefully, hopefullymy generation will, when we take
the reins, we'll step up andkind of start hopefully moving
the needle on some of theseissues.
Janet Sumner (03:17):
Yeah, I hope so and hopefully my generation can
keep trying to do some of thestuff that we need to do,
because we need to hurry up andcatch up.
But that was a kind of aleading question.
I know that Kaia is veryinterested in the regulations
and policies and how they aresupposed to give life to the
science or help the light thescience be implemented.
(03:38):
So we're going to dive in nowwith Anna in our second episode
and actually you know I might beremiss we might have done more
than four episodes, and thereason I say that is because if
you look back to the HonorableHarvest or how David Flood talks
about things, he really speaksfrom an indigenous perspective,
and so you not only have ourfederal and provincial laws, but
(04:02):
you also have indigenous lawsand how indigenous people are
harvesting or not harvesting andhow they interact with the
natural world.
So we have the science, we haveindigenous worldview and
indigenous laws and, in fact,indigenous science or indigenous
knowledge, and we also have thepolicy framework.
(04:23):
So there's probably at leastsix episodes of material if you
want to learn a lot aboutcaribou, and you can check all
of that out on our podcast page.
But Anna's going to dive intothe role of the federal
government and how section 63'sunder the Species at Risk Act
could work to encourageprovinces to act.
(04:44):
And the reason that I say itcould work is because if they
were used as they should be, topoint out where caribou habitat
is not protected or noteffectively protected in each of
the provinces, giving every sixmonths it's supposed to sort of
publish a report that says that.
And that's kind of a way tosort of push provinces to take
(05:06):
action, Because after all, thefederal government doesn't want
to be taking action onprovincial land.
They'd really like it if theprovinces stepped up and did it.
So that's what a section 63report's supposed to do.
Anna's going to talk a lot moreabout that.
We're going to dive into it andyou'll get to hear how these
policy frameworks are sort ofrolling out across the country.
Kaya Adleman (05:27):
Yeah, I'm excited for listeners to hear the last
part of this conversation thatwe had with Anna, so let's get
into it.
Janet Sumner (05:40):
Yeah.
So I want to take Anna back tobefore you join us Again.
I did this little project onthe federal Species at Risk Act
and I'm going to just lay outsome broad strokes and then,
anna, you can put more detail toit, but essentially under the
(06:00):
Species at Risk Act, as Annasaid, everybody was excited
because when it came out it waslike going to be this game
changer, and one of thegame-changing things was going
to be is it was actually goingto create these reports.
You've decided a species isn'tendangered and so governments
across Canada, you're requiredto put plans in place on how to
protect them and protect theirhabitat.
(06:22):
So the idea was you wouldrelease this information and it
would be put out there and thefederal government would have to
assess whether or not they wereadequately protected after a
certain amount of time.
And in that juncture Canada wassupposed to be putting out these
reports saying, hey, it'sprotected in a species I don't
(06:43):
know, whatever species in Quebecis adequately protected but not
in Manitoba.
Or the species in BritishColumbia is fully protected but
it's not in New Brunswick, orsomething like that.
So they would put out thesereports and they were supposed
to do them every six months andgive you kind of a heads up.
Hey, heads up Province X, y andZ.
(07:03):
You got to pick up your gamehere because these three
provinces are doing a good joband you haven't stepped up to
the table.
And it was meant to sort ofkind of push them all to do a
better job.
And then, at the end of likethree or four reports of saying
hey, you didn't do a good enoughjob, they were meant to come
out and say, okay, well thenit's time for the federal
(07:24):
government to step in with itspowers and say we now have to
protect the habitat becauseyou're not doing it.
And so that was how it wassupposed to be done.
Again, big fanfare, everybodycheered, the new species at risk
act, and we heard crickets,crickets.
There were no reports.
No, was it?
(07:44):
Section 61?
Reports Three.
Anna Baggio (07:46):
Section 63,.
Section 63, critical habitatreports, yep.
Janet Sumner (07:49):
So those did not come out for more than 10 years
and when we approached them theanswer was it would cost too
much money.
Janet, do you know how muchthis would cost?
This would cost us millions ofdollars and so many people
talking.
You know it.
Just, it would be impossiblefor us to do Section 63 report
(08:12):
across the country.
It would break the bureaucracy,it would break the public
service.
We wouldn't be able to do it.
So Anna could you pick up fromthat frame and just talk a
little bit about what youdecided to do?
This little side project thatyou had, that we had pretty much
(08:33):
no funding for.
But you decided on a littleside project.
Anna Baggio (08:38):
And just to clarify for your listeners.
So species at risk is a sharedresponsibility in Canada, so we
have the federal government andthe provincial governments and
the territorial governments haveto work together, and they all
committed in 1996 to havecomplementary legislation so
there would be effectiveprotection for species across
the whole country.
So even if the provinces wereto take action first under their
(09:01):
jurisdiction, they would havecomplementary legislation with
the federal act, and so that'sthe underlying approach, the
philosophy Built into theSpecies at Risk Act federally,
once the recovery strategy isdone for a species and it
identifies critical habitat,there was this incredible and
(09:22):
really important reportingmechanisms that were supposed to
be about accountability andtransparency, and you would
produce a report on whether ornot critical habitat is
protected.
And so the recovery strategyfor boreal caribou came out in
2012, and it's now been fiveyears and we still don't even
(09:42):
have a critical habitat report,progress report.
And so I worked with twofabulous lawyers, laura Tassaro
and Anastasia Littner, and a lawstudent, this great law student
from Osgoode, and the four ofus were going to pump one out,
these critical habitat reports.
We were going to sit down andwe said you know what?
(10:04):
Canada keeps telling us?
They can't do it, we're goingto pump one out and show them
that we can do it on ashoestring budget, and so I'm
grateful to Osgoode for givingus an internship with the
student, and these two lawyerslent their expertise.
And then Wild Lands Leaguepublished the first critical
progress report on criticalhabitat protection for boreal
(10:25):
caribou in Canada, and we lookedat all the jurisdictions and we
assessed by jurisdictionwhether or not their laws
provided mandatory andenforceable protection for
caribou critical habitat.
And then we published it and weput it and we went into the
federal government and we said,okay, here you go, federal
(10:45):
government.
You said it couldn't be doneand it was going to cost
millions of dollars and it wasgoing to break you.
Here you go.
We just wrote one for you andit took us six months.
How do you like them, apples?
Janet Sumner (10:55):
I'm a student and three people.
Anna Baggio (10:58):
And you know what?
And that report still stands uptoday.
I mean, if you want to know howyour jurisdiction is doing on
boreal caribou, you can read it.
We've laid it out.
It's very clear.
And so those accountabilitymechanisms were built in.
And, of course, our colleaguesat CPOS did a lawsuit against
Canada for failing to do thesereports and eventually won, and
we provided supporting evidence.
And so those reports aresupposed to be like reporting
(11:22):
back to Canadians about whetheror not habitats protected and
reporting and giving you anobjective look about whether or
not your jurisdiction isactually doing the job it's
supposed to be.
And they're kind of meh, thereports now that Canada does
these reports, and they're kindof like, they're not very good
and I think they're a little bittoo differential to the
provinces, and so we're stillfailing to kind of alert
(11:42):
Canadians to the fact that theseprovinces and territories
aren't getting the job done andthey've been failing for so long
that now it's 2024.
You know, the recovery strategyfirst came out in 2012.
Habitat needed to be protectedwithin six months.
It's now been more than adecade and the provinces are
failing.
And so now we need Canada to dosomething extraordinary and
(12:03):
actually use its laws and stepin and protect habitat in
Ontario using the Species atRisk Act, because Ontario has
pretty much said we're not doingit and that's how it's supposed
to be.
Canada's supposed to step inand so we need them to step in,
and so this federal cabinet.
I hope that they reallystrongly consider that in this
(12:25):
coming spring because hopefullythere'll be another
recommendation go to cabinetthat says you know what?
They're failing to protecthabitat, and this is the third
time we've come to you.
I think I'm hoping the cabinetwill step in and say yep, it's
time we do something.
Our reputation as a country ison the line here.
Like, how long are we going tolet our biodiversity get
hammered for logging and miningand roads and all this other
(12:49):
stuff?
Kaya Adleman (12:49):
So hey, are you liking the clear cut as much as
we like making it?
Your donation helps us bringmore of these important stories
to life.
You can actually support ourwork by going to our website,
wwwwildlandsleagueorg.
(13:10):
Slash the clear cut, or you canclick the link in the episode
description below.
Your support means the world tous.
I was going to ask if you couldmaybe, I guess, flush that out
further.
We talked about when theenvironment minister released
those statements saying that hewas going to make a
(13:31):
recommendation to cabinet.
Right, that was a while ago.
I think we'd mentioned itbriefly on our podcast in one of
the episodes at the end of oneof our episodes, but maybe you
could flush that out a littlebit more.
Anna Baggio (13:45):
Yeah, so the federal minister, minister Gibo,
you know, to his credit, he hada.
He has a responsibility and anobligation to make a
recommendation to cabinet whenhabitat remains unprotected.
And so he looked at Ontario andQuebec and pretty much
concluded that, yep, the habitatremains unprotected and then
(14:07):
said made this recommendation tocabinet.
There's been that's the secondrecommendation.
There was another one in 2020.
Obviously, cabinet then canhave all their deliberations and
then decide what to do.
But that recommendation isreally important that it happens
.
And so there's, you know,cabinet has stepped in to take
action in cases of an emergencywith the chorus frog, and so
(14:31):
there are times it does it, butit's been rare.
It needs to be normalized sothat the provinces know that if
they're not going to get the jobdone, that Canada's going to
step in, and then hopefully,it'll just give an incentive for
the provinces to be like, oh,we don't want Canada stepping in
, we're just going to do itourselves.
And so that's where I'm hopingwe get to.
And yeah, so, minister, youboth made a recommendation last
(14:54):
year.
The cabinet didn't act on it.
Obviously, we disagreed withthat cabinet and that cabinet
should have acted, but hopefullywe get a different outcome this
year.
Janet Sumner (15:08):
Yeah, and it's the way it's supposed to work right
.
Again, you have these earlywarning signals.
They come out supposedly on aregular basis, these section 623
reports that tell you how aprovince is doing and really
it's just supposed to measure isit effectively protective and
adequately protected, yes or no?
When they produce these reportsnow it's kind of like, well,
(15:30):
they've got this process andthey're really working hard on
this and they're doing.
There's a lot of flowery stuffin there, ingredients around all
the processes that provincesare doing, and it kind of buries
the lead on whether or notthey're protected or not.
So kudos to Minister Gilbo forstanding up and basically making
the recommendation, despite allthe flowery language in these
(15:53):
reports.
But he took his job seriouslyand his duty seriously and he
made that recommendation.
Now he made the recommendationon Boreal Woodland Caraboo.
Has he made it more than once,or was it a previous minister
who did that?
Previous minister Right.
So it was, I think, ministerWilkinson, when he was in
Minister Gilbo's seat, and sowe've seen two successive
(16:14):
ministers now make arecommendation to cabinet that
Boreal Woodland Caraboo are notadequately protected in Ontario,
certainly in Quebec.
Now they've also made that.
So we're waiting to see.
That's where we are right now.
We're waiting to see what theycould do.
Anna Baggio (16:32):
Yeah, and I think maybe just to kind of for your
listeners.
So I go into like a lot ofthese stakeholder committees,
been into a lot of them, and werun into a lot of opposition and
I'll be honest, like there is alot of denial out there,
(16:53):
there's a lot of industry, a lotof industry.
Certainly the regressive onesthey'll be like Caraboo aren't
in trouble, or they'll say thatthey're not the source of the
problem.
And then there's also theargument of, well, it's too
expensive, it's gonna cost toomuch.
And then after a while theyargue well, it's too late, you
know what, they're gone, wecan't bring them back.
(17:14):
And so all of these argumentsare thrown at us and I've now
heard them for more than 20years and this is the problem I
keep hearing them over and overagain.
Then the other part of it thathappens is that they often
vilify us.
Right, they often attack uslike we are, and not just me.
I have other colleagues too fromother organizations, but a lot
of us we have been on thereceiving end like we are
(17:35):
vilified, and that's part oftheir strategy is if you don't
like the message, you attack themessenger, and so this is all
part of a denial campaign toprevent the government from
actually taking steps to recoverthe species, and so kudos to
the climate colleagues foridentifying this first, and now,
unfortunately, it's migrated towildlife and species at risk,
(17:57):
because they are using the samestrategies here to prevent
governments and to sow enoughdoubt and uncertainty that
nothing will ever change, and sothat's also something we're up
against, and so we're gonna needour governments to figure out
what they're there for, and ifthey're just gonna be echoing
the industry interest, that'snot acting on behalf of all
(18:19):
their citizens, that's justadvocating for a very small
sector, and so this is part ofthe reason why we also need
groups like Wildlands League tocontinue to kind of raise the
alarm and sound the alarm,because we're being outnumbered.
They have the voice ofgovernment right now.
Janet Sumner (18:37):
Yeah, I just wanna break what you were saying down
a little bit because, well, ourinterest is in having healthy
ecosystems that support life, solife can thrive and that's all
life.
And that's just a very sort ofgeneral description of what we
do.
But a healthy forest, a forestthat is vibrant and is robust,
(19:04):
is good, not just because wewant it, but is good because
there are local communities whodepend on it, there are First
Nations and there are otherindustrial sectors.
So we know for a fact that whenwe've gone in to do forest
management planning, sometimesyou're in there having a
conversation about forestmanagement planning but it's
(19:25):
actually going to really impactthe remote tourism operator or
it's really going to impact thepeople who are doing fishing in
the area or people who rely ongetting country foods from the
forest and all of thoseingredients are not part of the
(19:46):
equation when you're having aconversation about forestry,
because the license to take hasbeen handed over to these
companies on a large scale andthe other interests are kind of
treated as not important orsidelined.
So it is for us about thehealth of the forest, but for
(20:08):
many others who are invisible inthis process, it is also about
their livelihoods.
Anna Baggio (20:15):
Yeah, I mean we get calls, as you know, from remote
tourism operators that are likeplease help me, they're about
to clear cut all the way up toour backyards.
And we get calls from remotetourism operators, we get calls
from indigenous peoples.
They really do feel like theyhave nowhere else to go and that
they and this is why I take thecalls I take all the calls and
(20:37):
sometimes I can help andsometimes I can't.
But that's partly what we offerand we've developed enough an
expertise over many, many yearson that process that at least we
can give them some advice if wecan't do more.
Janet Sumner (20:51):
Can we?
I don't know if you can make acomparison between that and
mining tenure, right?
So it's basically thepresumption of the tenure and it
probably comes back from a veryold time.
This way that tenure is handedout, and it's handed out with
disregard for First Nations,it's handed out with disregard
(21:11):
for other land users and they'regiven priority and preference
on the landscape.
So, whether it's forestry ormining or what have you, there
is this way that tenure ishanded out, and these are
actually our forests, theyactually belong to Canadians and
First Nations, right Like theand so yeah, that's just a bit
(21:35):
shocking of a realization.
Anna Baggio (21:37):
Well, you know, and I don't know how many people.
So, part of when I was doing mymasters, I was in Costa Rica
looking at land use, and part ofit was to look at why certain
forests, these tropicalrainforests, had disappeared
over a very short period of time.
And as I was doing thatresearch, not only did I
interview local farmers andscientists and community groups,
(21:58):
but I also looked at a bit ofthe history of deforestation in
Costa Rica.
And when you look back on itand you know, more than a
hundred years ago, the policywas you could only prove
ownership if you cleared theland.
And so you know, for so therewas these policies that were
driving people to clear thosetropical forests, because that
was the way you could proveownership.
(22:19):
And you kind of, I looked atthat and you kind of go, oh my
God, that just seems crazy.
Why would they have such acrazy policy?
And you know, and now, ofcourse, costa Rica is not one of
the leaders in the world whenit comes to fighting
deforestation and protectinglands, and so they've really
turned it around.
But in some ways I feel likethat 1920s Costa Rica situation
(22:42):
is like right here in Canada.
I'm like people could belooking at us going.
Why on earth are you like?
Why on earth are you allowingyour forest to be cleared so
much and destroyed and justhanded over to industry?
Like what is that?
And in some ways, we're nobetter we have been.
Our system has been set up tobasically prioritize industrial
use first, so it's been handedover to logging first.
(23:05):
It's mining is prioritizedeverywhere.
So they definitely want toprioritize mining, which means
you can leave it open formineral claimstaking, drilling,
blasting, and so those certainlythe mining pieces of the
hangover of the free entrysystem, and that that was from a
couple of hundred years agothat they used to just give away
the lands for development, andso we have not shifted our frame
(23:28):
to be more aligned with ourmodern values, which is clean
water, clean air, climate,reconciliation with indigenous
peoples.
We're just not.
We're not there yet and it is.
I mean, I hate to say thisbecause it's my country and I
love this country and I love thepeople here.
Okay, maybe not all the people,but I love the people here Most
of the time, except when theysend me hate mail.
(23:51):
But you know like we could doso much better if we just
thought a little bit more aboutsharing the land, bringing in
science, bringing in space forindigenous peoples to have more
of a say than just giving it allover to industry.
And that is really what we do,and so it is shocking, and so
I'm going to move on to the nextquestion.
SpeakPipe Question (24:10):
I'm going to ask you what is the best way to
grow plants?
How do you take care of them?
And I'm going to go ahead andtake a look at the next question
.
Hi, clear cut.
My question is about the placesthat have already been logged
and I want to know if it'sbetter to let them grow back on
(24:30):
their own, with whatever plantspecies do best, or to try and
plant trees.
We have a lot of temperatureand rainfall.
Thanks so much.
Dave Pearce (24:41):
Hello, clear cut, it's Dave Pierce, Senior Forest
Conservation Management,wildlands League and my….
Personal assessment of thesituation is and I think it's a
fruitful area for conversation,given climate change is that it
should be regenerated in thequickest way to get forests back
(25:03):
on the site, and we should relyon natural regeneration if
possible.
If the species that is wellsuited to that site are coming
back in a healthy way, then letthat natural regeneration happen
.
If things aren't beingregenerated properly, for
(25:25):
whatever reason, I think someform of artificial regeneration
is appropriate to get treesstarted.
Now some people are of theopinion that planted forests
isn't a natural forest and youhave to wait for the next
generation for it to be a trulynatural forest.
But I think in an era ofclimate change and biodiversity
(25:48):
challenges, I think gettingtrees back on the site as quick
as possible is probably a goodmove, and it's tricky to try to
predict what's going to happenwith climate change and the idea
that maybe we should beplanting more southern species
or sort of edge of range speciesand I think having a good
(26:08):
variety of trees to kind ofhedge your bets on climate
change is a good strategy, aslong as within sort of the
natural range of variation forthe site.
We don't want to get too crazyabout bringing trees that are
currently outside their naturalrange because there's quite a
bit of, I think, resiliencewithin species I mean white pine
(26:30):
and there's genetic differences, but the species white pine
grows all the way down to Mexico, admittedly in high elevations,
so it's quite plastic and quiteresilient.
And even jack pine you know,you get jack pine growing quite
far south in Michigan, forexample, on dry sites, and black
(26:50):
spruce in very wet sites wherenothing else will grow, will
grow as far as southern Michigan.
So there's quite a bit ofelastid city and within species,
I think, to adapt and changeclimate change.
Now, of course it depends onwhat you do with those trees
(27:10):
after.
It depends on the purpose ofthe site.
If there to be remain as auntouched forest in perpetuity,
it'd go one way.
But if this forest is meant tocompensate and stay in the
commercial forest realm and sortof compensate for areas that we
(27:34):
shouldn't go into, that arealready intact, then you might
do some thinning to try toencourage the trees to grow to
maturity and to be amerchantable size ahead of time.
But I think any strategy to gettrees back on the site quickly
is probably a good one.
The trees that are well suitedto that site.
(27:55):
You know, if it's a coniferdominated site, then it should
be planted mostly conifer,regenerated to mostly conifer.
If it's a naturally hardwoodgood hardwood site, then it
should be regenerated to theappropriate species.
Kaya Adleman (28:17):
So the policies that are guiding these
industry-first attitudes towardsdevelopment, those are
holdovers, I guess.
So the free entry system was inCanada like anyone could come
and develop a resource with thegovernment's permission,
basically.
Anna Baggio (28:38):
Yeah, and encouraged by the government,
and so we have that kind ofvestige still there.
And when you want to makechanges, god bless the industry,
because the sky falls everytime somebody wants to make a
change.
Anytime you want to improvesomething, the sky is gonna fall
.
I can't tell you how manymeetings I've been in where
(28:59):
we're talking about puttingforward thoughtful solutions
that could make a difference forpeople, make a difference for
the environment, and they'relike the sky is gonna fall,
you're ruining my industry.
And I'm like, oh my God, I'veheard this now for 20 years.
I'm like people, the sky did notfall, we can do this, but we
can't do it if the governmentdoesn't have a backbone.
The government needs to be ableto say it's gonna govern on
(29:21):
behalf of all of us If it's onlygonna govern on behalf of the
industrial interests.
That's what it feels like rightnow is that we have a
government that's rewriting lawsto drive through development,
to consider the environment asred tape that needs to be cut
and to speed everything up, andso that's kind of our challenge
is that we've like things havejust really been, things have
been really tilted.
Right now that we have thislike government stepping on the
(29:45):
scales to really align withwhether it's a commercial
interest or an industry interest.
Janet Sumner (29:50):
And when you say government, which government Are
you talking provincially?
Are you talking federal?
Anna Baggio (29:54):
Provincial right now, provincially just is.
The weight of everything thatthis Doug Ford government has
done in the last number of yearsis just heavy, heavy, heavy.
And you know, kudos to thepeople that fought for the
Greenbelt, including some peoplein our office, and got the, got
that reversed, but theyobviously haven't learned their
lesson.
We're still there's full steamahead on other crazy ideas, and
(30:19):
so we just have to keep standingup and we have to keep saying
these things over and over again, because they want to outlast
us, they want us to geteventually get exhausted and
they want us to be quiet, but wecan't.
We have to keep sounding thealarm.
Janet Sumner (30:37):
So, so let's, let's take this forward.
So we know that the currentsystem is not working.
What, if any, hope do we have?
I know that we've got some I'mtrying to think of caribbean
policies that could go the rightway, and if they did go the
right way, they might producesome kind of a result.
So if you were looking forsomething that could go the
(31:00):
right way, what would that be?
Anna Baggio (31:03):
So I see hope.
I allow myself to wallow justfor a couple of days, that's it.
Then I pull up my bootstrapsand I go and I keep on fighting
again.
So you have to do that.
But what I where I see hope isnumber one.
There are progressiveindustries that want to do the
right thing and they need to becertified under some type of
(31:25):
certification system, like likea forest stewardship council
system, so that they can selltheir product and get a premium
for it and unless theirconsumers know that that that
product came from a responsiblysourced operation.
So I see hope there.
I mean, could that system beimproved?
Yes, but there is hope therewhen you have an industry that
wants to do the right thing.
(31:46):
I see hope coming fromIndigenous peoples who are
declaring Indigenous protectedareas, and a lot of these
Indigenous protected areasoverlap with the Habitat of
Endangered Species and so if wecan just give room for that and
encourage our governments tostart implementing those and
respecting those Indigenousprotected areas, we could go a
long way.
And I get hope from scientistsand I get hope from regular
(32:11):
people and I get hope fromregular people who stop me on
the street and they just say, ohAnna, thank you for what you do
.
You really.
You know you're helping us, youknow you make a difference and
they just keep going.
And so anytime someone says,anytime someone calls me, and
they just care, they energize meand hopefully I can give them
something back.
But that's where I get hopefrom the people care Scientists
(32:33):
keep going, indigenousleadership and progressive
industry, and I think we have topersevere on this one.
This one's, this one's hard.
We have to keep persevering butit can be overcome.
We just can't predict when, butit will.
It will change.
Janet Sumner (32:50):
It's kind of like people said the green belt
wouldn't change but it did, andso it's maybe a longer campaign.
As you said, we've been at thissince 2002, trying to get well,
2012, trying to get the CareRehab Attack protected.
But there is a decision pointcoming up and if you're
listening to this, we'rerecording this in just beginning
(33:10):
of February 2024.
And that decision point is lastyear.
Minister Gubble took arecommendation to cabinet that,
or recommendation that he donean assessment on whether or not
Care Rehab was effectivelyprotected in Ontario and Quebec
and he said no, it's not and Irecommend you do some protection
, and cabinet decided to.
(33:32):
I think at the time I was quotedas saying Canada blinked and
and they allowed Ontario tocontinue and they gave them some
funding and said, okay, we'regoing to trust that you can do
this because you're telling usyou've got a process, you're
going to try and get this done,and so they were supposed to be
working on this process to getit done and they've had a year
(33:52):
to do that.
I haven't seen there's been noannouncements that have crossed
my desk sort of saying, hey,Care Rehab Attack is protected.
So I'm assuming we stillhaven't seen Care Rehab Attack
protected, because the defaultfrom our position has been that
Ontario is saying we've got adynamic Care Rehab Attack
schedule and we're going to movehabitat around and we're going
(34:14):
to figure something else out andwe're going to manage or
mitigate, or the other thing is,our Care Rehab don't require
65%, even though the scienceclearly says that they're doing
everything but protectinghabitat.
So Minister Gubba was facedwith another challenge.
Is that correct, Anna?
Anna Baggio (34:33):
Yes, and I would just say and this is me,
Anabagio, reaching across theairwaves to all those cabinet
ministers that are sitting onthat table Minister Wilkinson,
Minister Freeland, MinisterLeblanc, all of you there, you
know working so hard.
You're the most powerful peoplein the country.
Care Rebo need you.
Please step up this spring.
(34:54):
It's now been four years sinceyou've had recommendations
across your desks.
Please step up this spring andprotect some habitat in Ontario.
We need you.
It's time and Ontario's notdoing it and, in fact, they're
going to keep promoting loggingand mining.
Janet Sumner (35:11):
So please do it.
It's been more than 12 years.
So, yeah, let's get somethingdone and not just watch
extinction happen.
That would be really great.
And again, it's not just abouta single species.
It's about taking care of theforest and the boreal woodland.
Care, rebo, give us a proxy, ifyou will, or help us choose how
(35:34):
to better manage.
And yeah, and I'm just going tomaybe just riff a little bit,
one of the reasons that we wantthis to happen is not just
because we want the federalgovernment to issue this, call
out or this protection, but wehope what it does is energize
the system to go.
Like Anna said, at best, youknow, provinces will wake up and
(35:58):
go oh, I don't want the federalgovernment to come in here and
do this.
So if they do that, then all ofa sudden it creates a much more
dynamic and creative space forcompanies and governments to say
OK.
So then what's the solution?
How do we put a solutiontogether so that Canada doesn't
need to step in here and stopfooling ourselves and papering
(36:18):
over the problem?
And Anna and I have sat at many, many, many tables with
industry and we have beenshocked and surprised and
delighted that in many of thosesituations we've been able to
walk away where our industry isgoing.
You know what I think I can do300,000 hectares here.
I think we can keep 700,000hectares off the logging block.
(36:43):
So and I know personally that Iworked on a caribou plan in
Northeast Alberta that's stillbeing upheld.
So, industry, if they'rechallenged and they want to work
on this and they want to avoidsome superimposition by a
federal government, then thingscan get done.
And we need to stop looking atthe lowest common denominator
(37:07):
and say how do we start to reachfor those and be there with
those who want to actuallycontribute and make plans so
that we can protect.
And again, it's not aboutshutting down industry, it's
about actually finding thesolutions.
And that, to me, is what isadvanced by creating this space.
And it has to come like youhave to have some hard rules,
(37:30):
you know, otherwise everybodydrives it over 150 kilometers an
hour on the highway.
So you have to have some hardrules that make people go oh, I
got to slow down, right, notjust their own personal safety.
Kaya Adleman (37:42):
I mean, why have laws if they don't have any
teeth right?
Janet Sumner (37:46):
Well, yeah that's society.
If you like listening to theclear cut and want to keep the
content coming, support the show.
It would mean a lot to Kai andI.
The link to do so will be inthe episode description below.
Kaya Adleman (38:03):
You can also become a supporter by going to
our website atwwwwildlandsleagueorg.
Slash the clear cut and alsomake sure to leave us a review
on your favorite podcaststreaming platform.
It would really help thepodcast.
Anna Baggio (38:21):
And that's where we are right now.
We have an endangered speciesact that isn't actually saving
endangered species and you knowwhat?
And may I just give a quickshout out to?
There are some civil servantswithin the government right now
that are trying really hard toput forward solutions that might
make a difference for caribouand at least that are based on
(38:43):
science, not like what's comingforward in the policy, like
they're.
They're putting forward thingsthat are based on science and
that might work, and they'reobviously being shot down.
But please keep going.
We need those voices to beheard, and so so, for example,
the Otter Generals report thatcame out, I think, a couple
years ago, on species at riskCivil servants identified when
(39:06):
this government brought in thepermanent exemption from logging
from the Endangered Species Act, the civil servants said it
will have a significant adverseeffect on at least 12 species,
including boreal caribou.
So their own advice, their ownscientists, are warning them
that their actions are harmful.
The Auditor General has alsosaid you're facilitating
(39:28):
development, you're facilitatingharm to species.
So we have enough of the, the,the.
The evidence is there now.
We know we're off track, weknow we've gone.
Well, we're not even on thetracks anymore.
I'm not sure we can see thetracks, but we can fix this and
but somebody.
We need those voices to keepcoming and then, hopefully,
(39:48):
combined with our voices andothers, we will have something
different.
And then we can kind of tellCanadians that boreal caribou
didn't wink out on our watch.
Janet Sumner (39:59):
Lovely.
When you say auditor general,you mean the federal auditor
general, but no, the provincialone.
The provincial one.
Anna Baggio (40:07):
She unveiled a lot.
It was very, very really, I youknow, illuminating.
But those kudos to those peopleon the inside that are
obviously being muzzled and shotdown, but keep going.
We need you and and hopefullywe can turn this around.
Janet Sumner (40:25):
Yeah, we see you and we applaud you.
That's, that's a hard job to beinside the machine and have the
machine be antagonistic to yourpoints of view or to your
science.
So, yeah, big shout out.
So we're going to be watchingthat this spring to see if
cabinet does take that seriously.
We think that that will producea more productive conversation
(40:50):
table that we can actually getto some outcomes.
And again, as we've pointed out, it's not monolithic.
We don't have industry just allbeing bad.
We don't have civil servantsall being, you know, one sided
or whatever We've got.
We've got the good brains outthere that can work on these
solutions.
And I speak from experiencebecause I have developed
solutions in so many differentparts of this country where we
(41:13):
had willing people who wanted todo great things, and so we just
need to actually be given thespace to get those done, and
then I think we can turn thetide on care.
But that's that's where I getmy hope, because I still think
the solutions are out there.
Kaya Adleman (41:27):
I have another question for Anna.
Janet Sumner (41:29):
What can?
Kaya Adleman (41:30):
what can listeners of the podcast who aren't
federal ministers or civilservants due to maybe move the
needle on care policy?
Anna Baggio (41:42):
So, if you're listening, thank you, thank you
for listening.
You're listening to some of themost original and interesting
innovative content in thecountry right now when it comes
to forests.
So just learn a bit more.
If you are so desired, pleasepick up the phone and call your
MPP and just let them know youwant to see caribou habitat
(42:05):
protected.
So if you're in a particularprovince, pick up the phone.
Every, every jurisdiction needshelp, every single one.
If you want to, you know.
If you want to support, if youwant to support the science, you
know, read a little bit of thereports.
Read those Cosewic or thecommittee on the status of
(42:27):
endangered wildlife in Canada.
There's these reports put out.
You can read what the sciencesays.
This is.
It is a fact that caribou aredeclining.
It is a fact that they needhabitat.
This is not in dispute.
And so tell your friends, youknow, get involved, follow us
(42:49):
and and just get theconversation rolling that that
things can be done and we expectour governments to take action.
Janet Sumner (42:56):
Yeah, definitely speak to your members of
Parliament, speak to yourprovincial members as well,
because we have an Ontariospecies Endangered Species Act
that should not have these broadbased industrial exemptions, so
they could fix that too.
And I think you know there'sjust educating other people and
(43:19):
sharing the podcast and we willhave a lot of information in the
show notes and informationabout all the different
campaigns.
And there are many groups andthis is I would not.
I don't think that there's anenvironmental group out there
that doesn't think caribouprotection is a high priority.
There are all the groups thatare working on forestry, are
thinking about our forests andthe health of our forests, are
(43:40):
committed to this and trying tosee this through, and we
certainly are and are pushingfor this.
So we'll keep you updated.
We've actually had some goodconversations around this.
In terms of forestry, fsc is theonly forest certification
system that actually requiresyou actually plan for caribou,
etc.
So it's a big reason.
(44:00):
And then if you're out shoppingand you see that you have a
choice between an FSC product ora non FSC product, please
choose FSC.
Or if you don't see FSCproducts, ask the store manager
hey, when are you going to startgetting some FSC products and
if you're a buyer, ask for FSCproducts.
So I would say that that's theonly certification system that
(44:23):
has free, prior and informedconsent and that's respecting
the rights of indigenous people,and the only certification that
actually requires you do acaribou plan and do it better
than what the government like,more than meet the government
standard.
So this is actually all reallyimportant things that you can do
and, as Anna said, there's lotsof ways that you can follow the
issue and find out more, andwe'll have more information on
(44:46):
our show notes, etc.
Yeah, and if you're out of, thecountry, which I know.
Anna Baggio (44:49):
You have a lot of listeners that are outside of
Canada.
Please send us a note and sendour government a note.
Feel free to like lambaste thegovernments over here.
We're happy to let them knowthat you're upset by what you're
hearing and then let yourwallet do the talking.
So don't buy those productsthat are going to be sourcing
(45:09):
from caribou habitat.
Find alternatives, whetheryou're getting recycled content
like fully recycled content,that would be helpful.
Fsc, like Jenna talked about,and demand better.
That you can like.
We can demand better asconsumers too.
I mean, I do it in my life as apolicy expert, but we can also
do it through our website,Through our wallets and our
(45:33):
purchasing.
So, yeah, but thank you, andthank you for caring.
That's the other thing.
Thank you for caring.
Janet Sumner (45:39):
Yeah, yeah, we really appreciate you coming on
the ride with us and listeningto this.
Obviously, caribou conservationis a big issue for us and
something we care deeply about.
Kai, do you want to weigh in onany of this or do you have any
concluding remarks?
SpeakPipe Question (45:55):
Or it was hard to see and it's passion
today it was really.
Janet Sumner (45:58):
you know, it's kind of covered up.
She was so muted.
Kaya Adleman (46:00):
Yeah, she's just.
You know, she didn't bring theenergy at all, you know.
Janet Sumner (46:04):
I know it was kind of sad really.
That's just gonna channelmomabashio, you know it's gonna
be a little bit more, you knowyeah.
Kaya Adleman (46:12):
Dynamic?
Yeah, no, but I it does.
I think it does frustrate me.
Well, I guess I knew about thisbefore, but it's frustrating to
see yet again another examplewhere we have the regulation and
the ingredients in place whichis something that we've talked
(46:33):
about on this podcast before andthen there's just no follow
through.
So I think it is very importantthat we're keeping the work
going, keeping people informedand, you know, spreading the
message.
We have this legislation for areason and we need to
continually improve it and makesure that it's enforced, right.
Janet Sumner (46:57):
Yeah, I think actually you bring up a good
point is that for environmentalgroups, we kind of get all the
way to having the legislation.
We celebrate it, we tell thegovernment they did a good job
and Anna highlighted it at thebeginning and then
implementation happens and thatis where things go to die,
because there's a lot ofinternal forces or inertia that
(47:19):
just starts to kill it off.
And what we rely on is thewhite light of public scrutiny
and that ability for the publicto look at things and go hang on
a second.
You said you were going to dothis and you turned around and
did this.
So everybody, yeah, we want adangerous species legislation.
(47:40):
Few years goes by and the newprovincial government comes in
and slips in exemptions, broadindustrial scale exemptions.
So we need to fire up thepublic and get them engaged on
this, and that's why it's reallyimportant for all of you, even
if it's individuals and we don'thave a big campaign on it or a
sustained campaign it's reallyimportant for you to be telling
(48:01):
your politicians what you think,because that light that you
shine, that ability to seethrough all of the lies and
obfuscation, allows governmentsto kind of go oh, hang on a
second, we need to actuallymaybe do something here.
This is not good.
Kaya Adleman (48:19):
We don't like where this is trending, so yeah,
thanks for saying that A littlecall to action is.
I think it's insidious that thelack of government effort on
these things is kind of based onthe expectation that it's just
going to float through the newscycle right, because we are
being in our current day and age, like constantly inundated with
(48:41):
different news items and newsarticles and the fact that it's
it's kind of an expectation, ohyeah, like we've done this, but
we don't actually have to followthrough on it, because then the
next thing is going to comethrough and the next thing.
Don't let that happen.
Keep paying attention, becausethese things slip by.
Janet Sumner (49:05):
And I'm going to let you finish off with
something that you're reallylooking forward to, and it
doesn't have to be caribou, andit could be something you know
in the ocean.
So you know, you go ahead.
Anna Baggio (49:15):
What I'm looking forward to.
Yeah, yeah, so well.
One thing I am working on whenI'm not fighting.
I'm not fighting industry toget caribou plans.
I am working on a project toprotect the ocean and it's being
led by Indigenous peoples andin James Bay and Southern Hudson
Bay in the proposed MeshgegawekNational Marine Conservation
(49:40):
Area, and it's a massive areaand it supports beluga whales,
polar bears, fish, birds,hemispheric importance for birds
.
Birds of the hemisphere rely onthis area either for breeding
or refueling.
And the Indigenous peoples havedecided that they want to move
(50:02):
forward and they will benegotiating something with
Canada and hopefully in the nextyear we'll have something more
to point to.
But, taking the next step,hopefully in the next month
we'll have a good announcementthere that people are ready to
take the next step.
And, yeah, the world's mostsouthernmost year round
population of polar bears that'sin our area.
(50:24):
So this gives me hope and it'sone of my happy projects and you
need happy projects to sustainyou when you do this work.
And yeah, so congratulations tothose Indigenous leaders and to
all those Indigenous, all theMeshgegawek on the coast, and
hopefully we can get somethingpublic with Parks Canada in the
next few weeks and that'll be abit of a boost.
(50:45):
And you heard it here the ocean, this ocean protected area,
also will protect migratorycaribou, because the migratory
caribou walk on the ocean floorin the summer and we saw them.
We saw 3,000 of them walk onthe ocean floor two years ago in
the summer.
So, and that's a differentcaribou and that's for another
(51:06):
day, but they walked on theocean floor.
They're going to get hopefullyget some habitat protection and
give something for Canadians tobe proud of.
Janet Sumner (51:17):
Yeah, we're pretty excited about it at all.
That's like, yeah, thanks, anna, I really appreciate it having
this conversation with you and atime to just reflect on some of
the work that you've been doing.
And, yeah, it's a true pleasureto be working with you in
partnership on conservation.
Kaya Adleman (51:33):
Thanks, anna, for being on the podcast.
Thank you.
Anna Baggio (51:36):
Kaya.
Thank you, janet, and this is alot of fun.
Janet Sumner (51:41):
And we are in six continents now, just so you know
.
The only one we're not on isAntarctica.
I put that down to the factthey don't have any forests, but
I still have some hope there.
Anna Baggio (51:52):
Hey, there's got to be a research station in
Antarctica with internet.
Come on people.
Janet Sumner (51:56):
Can somebody send it there, so we can at least
have a data point in it.
Anna Baggio (52:02):
Log on, join the internet, check out the ClearCup
podcast, get on all continents.
So thank you, thank you guys.
You guys are doing a great job.
Keep going, and I look forwardto hearing more about all the
different facets of the forestin the next few weeks and months
.
Janet Sumner (52:15):
So yeah, thanks very much.
Kaya Adleman (52:18):
Yeah, liquids.
Well, janet, I'm sure you foundthe last part of this
conversation with Anna asinsightful as I did.
I really enjoyed having Anna onthe podcast because she is
(52:39):
clearly very passionate aboutthe issues that she works on and
she really has a sense forpeople and how to communicate
these important issues to people.
And, yeah, I think, on thecontent side of things, I think
it is again really interestingthat we're seeing a disconnect
(52:59):
between what the legislationsays it's going to do and then
what the actual actions ofgovernment are doing, and I
think that's something thatpeople should be keeping in mind
when we vote, when we write toour representatives.
(53:19):
I think this is again just thetheme that we see in the podcast
so frequently is that there aretools in place to be able to
enact more meaningful change.
The federal cabinet can step inand do more to protect caribou
in Ontario, and it's somethingthat needs to be done.
(53:42):
We've seen from the scienceit's something that needs to be
done and Ontario is clearly notdoing it.
So, yeah, I'm glad to have thisframe for the issue of caribou
conservation and I hope otherpeople find it as informative
and will be inspired to learnmore and be angry, you know, be
(54:03):
angry that this isn't happening.
Janet Sumner (54:06):
Yeah, I think it's a good point.
I mean, we heard on the sciencethat action needs to be taken,
that there are many rangesacross the country that are
collapsing.
And again, going back to that,it's not just like OneLensLeague
does not exist because we are aanimal rights group or anything
like that, but rather caribouare this emblem of ecosystem
(54:27):
health.
If caribou are doing well inthe boreal, then the boreal is
doing well, and right nowthere's a number of the ranges,
a good number of them, that are,you know, over the threshold of
35% disturbance or less thanthe 65% of intact areas and are
undisturbed.
And yet we've been watchingthis for more than a decade.
(54:52):
And thanks to Anna for doing abig shout out and asking people
to speak to their MLAs, theirmembers of parliament.
Wherever you are in the country,I would be hard pressed to say
there wasn't a caribou rangethat was in trouble.
And these politicians representyou.
Have a conversation with them,ask them to take action, because
(55:13):
my personal belief is, as moreaction is taken, then more
government start to try to getahead of this and try to do the
right thing.
And, frankly, again, it's notjust about the health of the
ecosystem, it's also about allthe jobs that rely on a robust
and thriving boreal ecosystem.
And forestry is not the onlyjob in the bush.
(55:34):
There's jobs on remote tourism,there's jobs in people wanting
to be out being active in nature, and so, and even the forestry
jobs depend on having the fiberthat we say is there is going to
be there.
So all of this is tied up intocaribou, and I'd really like to
see the federal governmenttaking more action and all the
(55:55):
provincial governments, becauseit is incumbent upon them to
actually do caribou plans, andwe haven't seen that.
And then the other piece thatAnna mentions is it's been a
year since Minister Gubbo took avery gladly took a
recommendation to cabinet totake action in Ontario.
Ontario's been given anotheryear and that year is up, and I
(56:17):
still haven't seen any caribouhabitat protected.
I know that they've beenlaunching studies, etc.
But studying is not enough.
We're over 12 years past thedeadline and we need to start
protecting caribou habitat.
So, thanks to Anna, anothergreat podcast.
Kaya and I know you and I'vebeen doing some interviews.
They're not the can, as theysay, but they are recorded and
(56:40):
Kaya's going to be working hermagic over the next week and
we've got a couple of reallygood podcasts coming up for you.
Both of them centered aroundBritish Columbia and forestry
there, and talking about biomass, talking about old growth.
So stay tuned for those,because those are going to be
really good ones too.
Kaya Adleman (56:59):
Yeah, we're going to the West Coast, buckle up.
Janet Sumner (57:03):
Yeah, exactly.
Kaya Adleman (57:05):
Yeah, and I guess I just also want to add, if you
are inspired by this episode, asI was to take action on caribou
conservation, wild Lands Leaguehas made it very easy for you
to send a letter to your memberof parliament, so we are
including a link in the episodedescription for you to do that.
(57:26):
And if you're listening outsideof Canada, please feel free to
email us directly with yourthoughts on this issue.
We'll compile all of themessages and send them to the
governments of Canada andOntario.
Yeah, so you know.
If you don't live in Canada weknow that many listeners don't
please feel free to write inwith your thoughts.
Janet Sumner (57:48):
Yeah, thanks very much.
And if you're thinking aboutbuying merchandise, we had
another couple of lucky buyerson the weekend, some pretty cool
swag that we got Twosweatshirts that Kai and I were
modeling.
I think it was on a couple ofthe social media platforms.
Anyway, feel free to purchasethose.
I really like mine.
Kaya Adleman (58:07):
Yeah, I'd like to think that that photo of us on
socials is what inspired peopleto go out and buy them.
Janet Sumner (58:16):
So oh, absolutely.
Kaya Adleman (58:18):
I understand yeah.
Janet Sumner (58:23):
If you like listening to the clear cut and
want to keep the content coming,support the show.
It would mean a lot to Kai andI.
The link to do so will be inthe episode description below.
Kaya Adleman (58:34):
You can also become a supporter by going to
our website atwwwwildlandsleagueorg.
Slash the clear cut and alsomake sure to leave us a review
on your favorite podcaststreaming platform.
It would really help thepodcast and stay tuned for new
episodes by following us onsocial media.
Janet Sumner (58:55):
That's at Wildlands League on Instagram,
Twitter and Facebook or LinkedIn, of course.
Kaya Adleman (59:01):
See you next time.
Janet Sumner (59:05):
Yeah, so so, um, I mean partly while we at
Wildlands League, you're stillleaning forward.
I'm just going to get you, somaybe what you need to do is
move the mic forward away fromyou, like this forward Okay.
Your natural position is to sitlike this when you're getting
very engaged in the subject.
SpeakPipe Question (59:23):
So I'm going to let you keep doing that.
How does this sound?
Janet Sumner (59:27):
You can now lean forward if you move the mic away
from you.
Anna Baggio (59:30):
Okay, I'll do that, okay Go.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.