In June 2004, MNR initiated management planning for five provincial parks and eight conservation reserves in the Temagami area. The planning process, termed the Temagami Integrated Planning project, also examined the recreational use of the surrounding Crown land. The planning process included only those Temagami provincial parks and conservation reserves that were adjacent to one another, since MNR felt that they shared similar patterns of access and use, as well as environ- mental issues. The planning process was initiated to meet commitments made in the Temagami Land Use Plan (1997).

In August 2007, MNR released three approved plans that resulted from this process: the Temagami Area Park Management Plan for five adjacent provincial parks in the Temagami area; the Re- source Management Plan for the eight conservation reserves that surround the parks; and the Crown Land Recreation Plan for Crown lands in the Temagami area.

The Temagami area encompasses roughly 650,000 hectares, 100 kilometres north of North Bay. It is a rugged, remote landscape rich in significant natural, cultural, and recreational resources. MNR states that there are 25 species at risk in the area, including the eastern wolf, the bald eagle, and the eastern cougar. The Temagami region is recognized for its stands of old growth red and white pine ecosystems and naturally significant features, such as Ishpatina Ridge, the highest point in Ontario. Many natural features of the Temagami area are sacred sites for local First Nation people; for over six thousand years, Aboriginal inhabitants have travelled by way of the Nastawgan, an interconnected system of winter and summer trails and portages.

ECO Comment

The ECO commends MNR for taking a comprehensive approach to planning the management of the Temagami area and encourages the ministry to apply a similar approach to future planning processes. Nonetheless, the ECO is puzzled by MNR’s exclusion of two Temagami provincial parks and nine conservation reserves from the Temagami plans. Although the ECO recognizes that MNR’s objective was to develop plans for adjacent areas with similar patterns of use, the ECO believes that the exclusion of some protected areas leaves some lands scattered throughout the Temagami area with either little or outdated management direction.

In developing the Temagami Area Park Management Plan, MNR tried to strike a balance between the needs of motorized and non-motorized users. MNR stated, “Managed access into the parks will balance the needs of existing authorized users with the protection of the wilderness and remote character of the parks.” Unfortunately, the ECO believes that in attempting to strike this balance, MNR gave only secondary consideration to what should have been its primary concern: ecological integrity.

The ECO believes that one of the most significant threats to ecological integrity in the Temagami area is ATV, snowmobile, and motorboat travel in Lady Evelyn-Smoothwater Provincial Park (that curiously does not encompass Lady Evelyn Lake itself which is in Obabika River Provincial Park).

Even limited motorized activity can have adverse ecological effects. Furthermore, the ECO believes that travel by these means is inconsistent with the intent of wilderness class parks. Therefore, the ECO believes that the Temagami Area Park Management Plan should recognize that motorboat, snowmobile, and ATV travel are non-conforming activities in a wilderness class park and should phase out such activities over time. Although most mechanized travel in Lady Evelyn-Smoothwater Provincial Park occurs in access zones, the ECO believes that the park management plan stretches the intended purpose of these zones: rather than acting as small staging areas that provide access to other zones, many of the access zones cut deep into the heart of the park.

The ECO believes that ecological integrity was also given secondary consideration in MNR’s decision to grant lifetime extensions to private recreation camps that hold land use permits in the Temagami parks. Although the preliminary park plan outlined a phase-out of these permits, MNR abandoned this option in its approved plan after complaints from stakeholders. As noted in our 2006-2007 Annual Report, despite a clear commitment in MNR policy to phase out land use permits in regulated parks, governments of the day have routinely given in to political pressure and granted extensions. The ECO disagrees with the lifetime extensions and urges MNR to stand firm in its commitment to phase out land use permits in protected areas, a commitment fulflled in its management plan for Woodland Caribou Provincial Park.

In our 2006-2007 Annual Report, the ECO commented that “Ontario’s provincial parks and conservation reserves are threatened by numerous stresses, some of which originate beyond their boundaries.” This concern is particularly relevant to the new Temagami management plans. First, the ECO believes that the boundaries of the waterway class parks — 200 metres from the water’s edge is the minimum suggested by MNR policy — are often inadequate to protect the ecological integrity of the rivers from adverse activities conducted along their borders. Second, the ECO is concerned with the potential impacts that adjacent mining leases could have on protected areas. For example, while most of Wakimika Lake is protected by Obabika Provincial Park, three mining leases extend into a small portion of the lake not protected by the park.

The ECO is also concerned that commercial timber harvesting on Crown land adjacent to the parks and conservation reserves may have detrimental impacts on the ecological integrity of these protected areas. The ECO encourages MNR to use a greater ecosystem approach and consider the potential impacts of external industrial activities on Temagami area parks and conservation reserves. In particular, the ECO hopes that the forthcoming Forest Management Plan for the Temagami Crown Management Unit will address the ecological impacts of timber harvesting on adjacent protected areas and include appropriate buffers zones to mitigate such effects. The ECO believes that the management and recreation plans lack specifics as to what will be done when and by whom. Given the history of access violations in the Temagami area, the ECO believes the plans should detail exactly how a prohibition against unauthorized motor access will be enforced and how decommissioned roads will be physically rehabilitated. Likewise, the ECO believes that the plans’ directives to develop research, inventory, and monitoring programs are vague and noncommittal. The ECO is disappointed that the plans do not more fully detail research and monitoring plans, particularly with regard to identifying old-growth forests and indicators of ecological integrity.

Furthermore, while supportive of MNR’s plans to develop partnerships with stakeholders, the ECO is concerned with statements in the conservation reserve resource management plan that the maintenance of recreation facilities will be delegated to a partnership “should the government’s financial support for the maintenance program change in the future.” Despite any changes in financial support, the ECO believes that MNR must remain accountable for the maintenance of campsites and canoe routes in the conservation reserves, as it is the ministry’s duty to maintain ecological integrity.

---

• Back to Protected Areas Planning: Managing for Ecological Integrity?
• 2007/08 Annual Report Table of Contents

This is an article from the 2007/08 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. Click here for more information on the official document and its release.Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act