Introduction: Building Resilience in the Protection of Biodiversity and Resources
How does one protect biodiversity across a landscape as vast as Ontario? It is clearly a complex responsibility that cannot be laid at the feet of a single agency or level of government. At the provincial level, many ministries must collaborate to protect biodiversity: to adapt their legislation and practices as priorities and urgent needs arise, each acting within its own sphere of power and influence, but hopefully each also reinforcing and supporting the work of sister agencies. This past reporting year, the ECO asked ministries to outline their own plans and actions to protect biodiversity. The responses, summarized in the Protecting Biodiversity: Ministries Stake Out Roles, demonstrate that these ministries are at least beginning to grapple with their roles in this challenging and evolving assignment.
This section also describes and comments on two recent MOE initiatives that, each in its own way, should help enhance the resilience of Ontario’s biodiversity. One is landmark legislation banning the cosmetic use of pesticides province-wide, a step that some municipalities had already taken, and that should (among other things) reduce the stresses caused by pesticides on many species of pollinating insects, and on birds and other insect-eaters. The other is essentially a guidebook for those attempting to clean up waterbodies burdened by contaminated sediments. The guidebook, developed collaboratively with federal agencies, advocates a science-based site-specific evaluation of contaminant impacts on the local ecosystem. These evaluations will help proponents and communities weigh remediation options, as a prelude to allocating scarce clean-up dollars.
This section also discusses the biodiversity implications of burning forestry “wastes” for fuel – an approach that MNR is encouraging with a new biofibre policy. Transforming waste to energy and revenue certainly is attractive from a short-term efficiency standpoint. But there are long-term cycles in play too. An appreciation of resilience dynamics would encourage managers to think hard about the long-term ecosystem functions of these “wastes,” including their role as reserve capital, held in store for the next generation. If nutrient-rich branches, needles and leaves are increasingly harvested rather than left on the forest floor to decompose, what will be the consequences for nutrient cycling? What increased stresses may this place on forest soil fertility, on communities of soil micro-organisms and on future forests?
What might amphibians and farm soils have in common? They both tend to have low public profiles – they are hidden from view, not much considered in high level policy, and little monitored. In this section, the ECO has examined the status of both amphibians and agricultural soils as illustrative case studies of Ontario’s natural resources and biodiversity. We know from history and current headlines that both amphibian species and the integrity of agricultural soils can exhibit calamitous collapses, and that restoration can be extremely difficult. To what extent are our management approaches recognizing and responding to the often site-specific or time-specific vulnerabilities of these ecosystem components? What steps can we take to strengthen their resilience?
- Protecting Biodiversity: Ministries Stake Out Roles
- Amphibian Declines: Canaries in Our Global Coal Mine?
- Forest Biofibre: To Burn or Not To Burn?
- Protected Areas: Nature Must Come First
- Soil: Our Eroding Asset
- The Pesticide Ban
- Contaminated Sediment: A Better Assessment Approach
| This is an article from the 2008/09 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article:
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2009. "Introduction: Building Resilience in the Protection of Biodiversity and Resources." Building Resilience, ECO Annual Report, 2008-09. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 39.
