Parks Committee Archives

Introduction

The Manitoba Naturalists Society Parks Committee pursued matters of concern to our environment. This archive of the Parks Committee contains articles dated between 1996 and 1999 and offer some data and information which is still pertinent and useful. Current activities are being addressed by the MNS Environmental Action Committee.

The Pine Falls Paper Company—Tembec Saga Continues!

Alice Chambers' Last Communication to us from the December 1999 MNS Bulletin

The Manitoba Naturalists Society extends its condolences to the family and friends of Alice Chambers in respect of her passing away on Monday, December 13, 1999. In memorium donations may be made to Taiga Biological Station by sending your donation to Fort Whyte Foundation - Taiga Station Trust, c/o Fort Whyte Foundation, 1961 McCreary Rd, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3P 2K9. The Taiga fund donation information can be found at the Taiga Biological Station web site.

For more information on Alice Chambers, refer to the Alice Chambers Tribute.

Pine Falls Paper Company/Tembec's greatly expanded Forest Management Licence Area (FMLA) has yet to receive approval from government, so there is still time to influence the outcome of the negotiations. Good news for those who care about wilderness, protected areas, magnificent river systems, ecological integrity, roadless areas, protection of cultural/heritage sites, traditional land uses and promotion of a diversified economy that has a smaller footprint on the landscape than a massive sell-out to a low value newsprint and lumber industry!

Earlier this year, PFPC/Tembec released a Discussion Paper on their Sustainable Forest Management Plan for 2000-2009, which outlined their current expansion plans and hinted at future expansion. Their proposed expanded Forest Management Licence Area (FMLA) covers almost 6 million hectares along the East Side of Manitoba, and extends both north and south of their current FMLA. It absorbs their former "Integrated Wood Supply Areas" (areas outside their current FMLA where they have logging rights), and overlaps Atikaki Provincial Park, ignoring the fact that this is a Wilderness Park! Their wood requirements would increase from 360,000 cubic metres per year to 850,000 cubic metres per year in order to feed a new Thermo Mechanical Pulp mill and a large sawmill.

PFPC's future plans also include a 780 km all-weather logging road that goes considerably further north than the proposed FMLA. In fact, earlier this year, former Minister of Highways Darren Praznik issued a Request for Proposal for an economic assessment of an all-weather road along the east-side of Lake Winnipeg from Hollow Water to God's Lake.

In August, PFPC/Tembec submitted an application to Manitoba Environment for their ten-year plan, basing it on the expanded FMLA, even though it has not yet been approved. The application was accepted despite this misrepresentation. Draft environmental impact assessment guidelines are available for public comment until the end of December.

An NGO and First Nation coalition for sustainable land-use planning on the East Side has formed to ensure that land use planning is in place before any further forestry allocations are made. Not only is this the last area in southern Manitoba that is primarily roadless, it has great ecological significance, traditional importance to First Nations, and tremendous wilderness recreation potential.

The new NDP government has committed itself to implementing sustainable land-use planning for the East Side. This has created a degree of optimism among environmental and First Nation groups that was missing during the reign of the former government.

Letters to the new Minister of Conservation, Oscar Lathlin c/o Legislative Bldg., R3C 0V8, asking that the planning process begin as soon as possible would be helpful. Some of the details concerning PFPC/Tembec's plans can be seen on their website at www.pinefallspaper.com.

by Alice Chambers

Alice Chambers Memorial

Alice K. Chambers. June 11, 1937 to December 13, 1999. Photo by Roger Turenne © 1998.

April, 2000 A lake in Whiteshell Provincial Park is now officially named Alice Lake in memory of Alice Chambers.

A Tribute to Alice

I first met Alice in church. Elizabeth May from the Sierra Club was on a speaking tour relating to protection of the boreal forest. After her talk, at Westminster United Church I believe, there was a time for discussion, and a gentle voice rose from the back pew asking some very weighty questions. The kind that show a deep understanding of an issue and a desire to learn more. Curious, I introduced myself after the meeting, being always on the lookout for possible new volunteers to help out on conservation issues. That was the start of one of the most rewarding, inspiring, and wonderful friendships in my life.

At the time, Alice was not yet involved in the main conservation groups in Manitoba, so I invited her to attend the next Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society Chapter meeting. "I'm not sure that I would be able to contribute anything", she said, in her usual self-effacing manner. That comment is my candidate for understatement of the century. In very short order, Alice became our most active volunteer, a one-woman research institute, and most important of all, our inspiration and our motivator.

She also took on a similar profile in most volunteer organizations in Manitoba devoted to conservation and the protection of our environment, such as the Manitoba Naturalists Society, the Sierra Club, Resource Conservation Manitoba, the Manitoba Eco-Network, T.R.E.E., and others. Each one of these groups would have stories to tell about how her research gave them credibility in achieving their missions, and how she motivated them to persevere in face of the often overwhelming odds that conservationists have to face in Manitoba.

Alice was as thorough as she was persistent. And she could be in many places at once. While she was at a conference in Halifax, she was also scheduled to make a presentation to the Clean Environment Commission in Winnipeg, so she asked me to fill in for her. She also instructed me to present the Commission with the attachments to her main presentation: all 75 of them, stacked 18 inches high! I also presented a brief at those hearings, in my capacity as president of the Manitoba chapter of CPAWS. I did not tell the Commission, however, that my brief had also been written by Alice.

One of my favorite Alice stories, told to me by her friend Peter Miller, concerns her involvement in the Louisiana Pacific hearings. The Environmental Impact Assessment document presented by that company contained an apparently innocuous listing of favorable comments made by citizens in Dawson Creek, British Columbia, where Louisiana Pacific had established a mill similar to the one they wanted to put up in Swan River. Who but Alice would have thought of tracking down these citizens in Dawson Creek, BC, to check out LP's story? Well, she did! Turned out the comments were two years old and some of the people were no longer so enthusiastic.

Her persistence often paid off. At a time when some of us had actually given up on the Clean Environment Commission as being little more than a rubber stamp for development projects, Alice sometimes succeeded in getting some very positive recommendations out of the CEC, which eventually found their way into forest management licenses. Ten, twenty, thirty years from now things will be happening—or not happening—in a part of the province far from here, thanks to Alice's efforts.

When Alice informed us of her cancer several years ago, our first reaction was one of deep compassion and sadness, and even anger at the unfairness of it all. But our second reaction was more selfish: our common cause would be losing its most effective advocate. She would have less time to help us, her thoughts would be elsewhere. How wrong we were! Far from slowing down, she re-doubled her efforts; her emails increased in number and focus. Meetings were scheduled around her bouts of therapy. On those rare occasions when she could not attend the meeting she would send a multi-page memorandum outlining those issues that we needed to deal with, and practical suggestions as to how we should proceed. Even in her absence, Alice turned out to be the most important, informative, and appreciated member of a meeting.

There are no emails from Alice anymore. But her work will carry on, and her legacy continue to grow. The government will very likely soon undertake a process of land-use planning for the east side of Manitoba, a process which Alice was instrumental in launching. This coming spring, thanks to Alice's efforts and funding, a new Whiteshell River Trail will be established, which will provide a recreational opportunity for Manitobans, as well as educate them about conservation needs. She also left us some tools: a two-inch-thick red binder containing all there is to know about boreal forest issues on the east side. So, a warning to politicians: we have our own Red Book!

But the most important way in which Alice will continue to make her presence felt, in spite of her untimely departure, is through the love and loyalty that she evokes among Manitoba's environmental community. Her courage, selflessness and integrity inspire us and energize us into carrying on her work. On behalf of all the groups that Alice has been associated with, I pledge that we will follow her vision of a country where its citizens live in harmony with their natural environment. It is our way of saying: "Thank you Alice, for what you have done and what you have been."

In closing, I would like to add that we in the environmental community are so profoundly grateful to Alice's family for having shared her with us all these years. Alice simply could not have accomplished all that she has, especially in the last few years, without the overwhelming support of her family. Without wishing to single anyone out, I have to give a special mention to Paul, who often waited for hours outside one of our homes for a meeting, in which Alice was participating, to end. I might be tempted to apologize for the length of those meetings, except that when we got to the last item of an agenda, entitled "other business", it was Alice who would add six more items because, as she would say, these things are important. And she was right, they are important.

So thank you Paul, and Anna, and Andrew, and Grace, and others in the family. And above all, thank you, Alice.

by Roger Turenne

In memorium donations may be made to Taiga Biological Station by sending your donation to Fort Whyte Foundation - Taiga Station Trust, c/o Fort Whyte Foundation, 1961 McCreary Rd, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3P 2K9. The Taiga fund donation information can be found at the Taiga Biological Station web site.

Parks Committee Notes

February 1999

by Melanie Wood

During the last few months the Parks Committee has been busy with a number of issues. Ken Schykulski of Manitoba Natural Resources Park Branch gave us a presentation on developing Provincial Parks Management Plans. Management Plans are a requirement under the new Parks Act and all existing management plans have been set aside until new ones, conforming to the new land-use categories described in the legislation, can be developed. Plans are currently underway for St. Ambroise Beach, Lundar Beach, Portage Spillway and Atikaki Provincial Parks. The Parks Branch is asking for public input into the development of the management plans and you can make your comments by contacting the Parks Branch. An open-house consultation is planned for Atikaki, the details of which will be announced later.

Nick Carter continues to represent the MNS on the Riding Mountain National Park Round Table. A hot issue this fall has been the Parks Canada proposal to remove a stand of trees planted near Lake Audy in the 1920¹s and 30¹s. The area was originally fescue grassland and Parks Canada would like to restore the natural vegetation. However, the trees are mature now, and many people disagree with the policy of removing what they consider to be an integral part of the Park's heritage.

Clayton Turnbull represents the MNS on the Riding Mountain National Park Recreation Committee. Priorities for action are improving the main pier and beach, but funding is not yet certain.

Alice Chambers continues to follow developments on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. Bridges built by the Pine Falls Paper Company to access new forests for logging operations were built without proper licences required under the Navigable Waters Protection Act. The Company was allowed to apply retroactively for the licences. The bridges, especially the one that crosses the Manigotogan, are hazardous to canoeists. The Parks Committee lobbied to have proper environmental impact assessments on the bridges, and on the road in its entirety.

Pine Falls Paper Company yard, Pine Falls, Manitoba.

Ian Greaves has been active in starting a Pesticide Reduction Group which is actively lobbying politicians and others to reduce or eliminate the use of pesticides, especially on public lands.

Comments were made to the Canadian Nature Federation regarding the C grade Manitoba received on the Endangered Species Report Card. Parks Committee members felt this grade was too generous, considering the lack of real progress in our Province last year.

A letter was sent to the Minister of Natural Resources requesting that fishing be banned on Black and Flintstone Lakes in Nopiming Provincial Park since an increase in human activity there is threatening a known woodland caribou calving area.

July 1998

The Parks Committee has been following several issues of concern the past few months.

The Pine Falls Paper Company has submitted to the Manitoba Provincial Environmental Branch a 2 year operating plan and Environmental impact statement. Alice Chambers drafted a letter detailing MNS concerns about the proposal. Firstly of concern is the limited scope of the plan two years rather than a more encompassing ten year plan. The company seems to be planning new cutting areas, to be used beyond the two year limit, but these are not included in the plan. Specifically, work is progressing on an all weather road going up the east side of Lake Winnipeg. Many rivers are being bridged without prior approval from the Federal Agency monitoring navigable waters. Also, very little of the research conducted and experience gained in the nearby Manitoba Model Forest has been well used in the planning document. View the more detailed article and photos below of the bridge on the Manigotagan River.

Canmine Resources Corporation is proposing to mine nickel and copper, process the ore and deposit the tailings near the Bird River in Nopiming Provincial Park. This poses a high risk for contamination of nearby wetlands and the Bird River. There is currently a licence that allows for a 100 tonne per day processing operation, but the new proposal calls for 1365 tonnes per day. It is not clear in the proposal whether the proponents are prepared to take the necessary steps to ensure that proper pollution prevention measures are in place. The Projected lifetime of this project is 7.5 years. The Parks Committee sent a letter to Larry Strachan at the Environmental Approvals Branch strongly urging the government to deny this Provincial Park resource extraction proposal or at the very least, give the public the opportunity to fully assess and comment on the proposal.

Committee members continue to follow the construction of the road in Whiteshell Provincial Park to access cottages on Nora and Florence Lakes. Construction started this spring but stopped in late spring to accommodate nesting season. We understand that financing to complete the road is still not fully available The trail will cross the Mantario Hiking Trail twice and parallel it for several kilometers. MNS has a representative on the Advisory Committee ensuring that the environmental licence is followed. We will have input into how the trail can be rerouted to minimize impact of the road. View the more detailed article and photos below.

Committee members have participated in focus groups run by the Angus Reid Group discussing Sustainable Development. Also committee members participate in the Provincial Sustainable Development Committee, which includes representatives from business, industry, citizen groups as well as environmental groups such as ourselves. This group will develop proposals for provincial strategies towards sustainable development, but there is no assurance that the proposals will be used to affect government policy.

Other articles of ecological significance are included below in this web page including an article submitted by Harvey Williams printed in a 1996 issue of the MNS Bulletin.

Of interest is a new web page for the Taiga Biological Station, a University of Manitoba institute, dedicated to biological research in the Boreal forest of Manitoba.

Florence-Nora Lakes Private Road Proceeds In Whiteshell Provincial Park

A photo tour of Nora Lake Road logging and road building activities. Spring 1998

Photos by Alice Chambers, Spring 1998

The Friends Of Mantario Trail is a new group interested in preserving the wilderness character of Mantario Trail and may be of interest to trail users.

The following update was submitted on January 2, 1999 by Alice Chambers.

Despite all of the efforts of conservationists, Mantario Trail supporters, and a portion of the Florence-Nora Lakes cottagers between 1993 and 1995, plus the recent court challenges of the Caddy Lake Cottagers Association, the Florence-Nora Access Road Inc. have succeeded in driving their private road through public lands in Whiteshell Provincial Park.

Because the road crosses the Mantario Trail twice and runs along side it for a stretch, the Licence issued by MB Environment included an Advisory Committee, with membership to include a representative of the MNS. As someone who had participated in the environmental review of the private road and who is available during the day to attend meetings, I was asked, through the MNS Parks Committee, to represent the MNS on the Advisory Committee. Ian Greaves had attended a preliminary meeting on behalf of the MNS in December, 1997.

Despite the fact that the results of the appeal by the Caddy Lake cottagers had not been released, Florence-Nora Access Road Inc. was determined to get the road cleared this spring. They progressed rapidly and had cleared most of the route by the end of April. They will hand clear the second Mantario Trail crossing and a crossing through private land. Bryan Blunt, the person overseeing the Licence for MB Environment, arranged an inspection of the route on April 17, 1998, to try to determine the least obtrusive crossing of the Mantario Trail just north of Caribou Lake, and to inspect the route overall. For the conservation community, the road was of concern, not only because it is a threat to the Mantario Hiking Trail, but also because it is another opening in the forest, with a number of wet areas to be crossed, and possibilities of disturbing habitat for rare orchids and other species.

Indeed, the road does cross a number of wet areas, with even the MNR quads getting stuck on occasion. Sitting on the back of one of these machines and trying to remain on it rather than flying into the mud, bog or rock is the kind of outing few people could enjoy! Adventure tourism would be the best description of our day. The Natural Resource Officers (NROs) have tried hard to keep the road away from the Trail so it has been relocated further west than on the original plan. It does come close to the Trail in the vicinity of the old airfield. After spending about 3/4 of an hour looking for a suitable site for the 1st crossing, there was agreement that it would cross an area of flat rock with few trees needing to be removed and little need for fill/grade. A review of the 2nd crossing in the Florence-Nora area was scheduled for a later trip.

The report of a site trip on October 28, 1998, which included representatives from MNR, Florence Nora Access Road Inc. and Bryan Blunt from MB Environment, states that the locked gate is now in place at the entrance to the road, with warning signs about the road being narrow and private. A rerouting of the road just before the tunnel will be constructed next year with the existing roadbed to be abandoned! Another concern is the relocation of a private dock area to an area that may be visible from Caddy Lake. The gate at the tunnel should be in place now and the crossing now has a metal railing on both sides for safety. Concerns were expressed about the restrictions and resultant safety concerns presented by the gate to pedestrians and bikers who wished to cross the bridge. Locked gates are also in place on both sides of the CPR crossing. Several of the stream crossings have now been completed. Stockpiled timber, from clearing for the road and right of way, is to be removed this winter.

The 1st crossing of the Mantario Trail is completed, at the site chosen on April 17, 1998, and signs to warn motorists of the crossing have been erected on both approaches to the trail. The road between the 1st and 2nd crossings had been cleared, with grading and gravelling occurring, and the trees felled into the existing bush to be removed this fall—a no-no but a common occurrence in such road building. Signage has been placed at the 2nd crossing of the Mantario Trail. There is a fork in the road at this spot, with one extension going to a parking lot at Nora Lake (with a capacity for about 30-40 vehicles), the other crossing the CNR line and continuing to the parking lot at Florence Lake. This lot is apparently not visible from the lake but there is a trail from the parking lot to the lake with a new dock to be used to ferry provisions across to the cottages located on the opposite shore. Since both extensions of the road cross the Mantario Trail, the impact is considerable, especially added to the proximity of the CNR line crossing. The road crossing of the CNR line is also very close to the Mantario Trail crossing and because of limited sight distance east of the crossing, the CNR now requires westbound trains to whistle well in advance of the road crossing! Given how well train whistles carry , this should add to the enjoyment and aesthetic aspects of "wilderness".

Debbie Voth and the MNS Outdoor Committee deserve much credit for putting in many hours trying to build public awareness and support for the Mantario Trail, as well as for establishing the Friends Of Mantario Trail during the past summer and fall. They have also researched and slogged through rerouting alternatives to the present trail north east of Caribou Lake. There appears to be strong support from Parks personnel for rerouting the trail away from the sights and sounds of the road, as well as for establishing a new, remote Marion Lake campsite, well away from the present rather obviously non-wilderness site.

Although, I am familiar with the ugliness of road building, it is still sad to see the devastation wrought by such activities. The ecological effects of roads have been well documented with habitat fragmentation, edge effects, loss of habitat, hydrological effects (this road crosses a number of wet areas and streams), deaths from collisions, introduction of exotic species, increased access leading to increased hunting and poaching pressures, being only a few. A number of other concerns remain: the road is very close to Caddy Lake at the bridge crossing with possibilities for long term soil erosion, visibility/noise effects not just at the tunnel but in several areas along the Trail, gates present no more than a challenge to 4x4s and other motorized vehicles, and from a safety aspect, both railway crossings are almost blind crossings. One of the primary concerns of the Caddy Lake cottagers was for the effects on the tunnel. There is still the concern about what happens if the proponents go broke trying to pay for the building and maintenance of this road and whether the road will then provide a reason for further cottage development, or provide logging access for South East Forest Products. At the moment, the latter does not appear to be a threat. Kurian Resources was hired to build the road and when I asked where the wood from clearing the road was going (mostly jack pine and aspen), the response was that it most likely would go to Avenor (Bowater) in Kenora.

There is a lesson in this road for all of us who participate in environmental assessments. At the time, we were in contact with a number of the Florence-Nora Lakes people who did not want the road (only those who have paid will get keys to the gates!). We felt that other cottagers within the Park were unaware that the road proposal had been submitted and did try (unsuccessfully) to get a letter published in the Whiteshell Echo. However, we never thought to contact the Caddy Lake cottagers directly. We will never know whether the outcome would have been different if we had done so. They cared enough to sink considerable amounts of money into the unsuccessful court challenges. As well, this road demonstrates the ecological effects of roads, presents an unhealthy precedent for other such private roads in our provincial parks, as well as the fact that what appears to be a fairly simple proposal for a 13 km private road can result in a number of other anticipated and unanticipated side effects, which add to the overall impacts of the "development". Over time, this section of the Mantario Trail may actually be improved but the ecological effects of the road will remain forever.

Alice Chambers

Threat to Woodland Caribou Herd Near Flintstone Lake Nopiming Provincial Park

Manitoba's woodland caribou are a threatened species. Province-wide, there are less than 2500 woodland caribou scattered in some 14 herds. They used to roam through the entire eastern part of the province south to Minnesota but now the Owl-Flintstone herd in Nopiming Provincial Park is the most southerly of the herds. It consists only of about 50-60 animals. The herd has survived enormous odds over the years, with incursions into its habitat by logging activities of the Pine Falls Paper Company, mining exploration and recreational activities. Research has shown that human development and woodland caribou do not co-exist well. Habitat incursion brings predators and disease, as well as increased opportunities for poaching and vehicular collisions. Woodland caribou have low reproduction rates so that it is important that calves be given every chance of survival and that rutting areas be protected. Traditionally, if habitat is compromised, caribou will retreat to more remote areas. Unfortunately, there are fewer and fewer areas for this herd to retreat to, so habitat loss really means loss of animals.

Currently, increased pressure is being put on the Owl-Flintstone herd by sport fishermen. The herd has been the subject of studies using radio-collars and GPS collars, so there is much knowledge regarding the travel patterns of several females. The rutting areas are largely unknown but it is known that the islands in Black and Flintstone Lakes in Nopiming Provincial Park are important calving areas. These lakes, especially Flintstone Lake, are being increasingly utilized by sport fishermen.

There is an established campground at Black Lake, which means motor boats, water-skiers and fishermen have been using this lake routinely.

Flintstone Lake is more remote, north and east of Black Lake. Unfortunately, it was stocked with walleye a number of years ago and the walleye have done very well. News of a good fishing lake seems to travel quickly and there have been large numbers of individuals and groups traveling to Flintstone to fish. There is no official road down to the lake from Highway 314, however 4x4s are able to drive down a rocky route to the lake. Trucks and vans seem to be continually parked on the road or up on the rocks. Last year a busload of Americans got stuck trying to get down to the lake. Signs have been posted to warn people of the ecological sensitivity of the area, and to warn against overnight camping.

Recently, the fishing/boating pressures have been increasing on Flintstone Lake. Some 30 or more fishing boats have been on the lake at one time, and some are stopping off at islands and even building fires. In hindsight, the lake should never have been stocked with walleye. Now it will take significant Provincial action to stop this incursion into the caribou habitat. Unfortunately, there are not nearly enough Natural Resources personnel to police all areas and activities, even if regulations are being broken.

It is truly unfortunate that this situation has been allowed to develop, particularly in a Provincial Park. Woodland caribou have been listed as "Vulnerable" by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) since 1984. In 1994, the Manitoba Endangered species Advisory Committee recommended that woodland caribou be designated "Endangered". However, our Provincial government has not acted on this recommendation, nor has it developed any type of conservation plan that would include protection of woodland caribou habitat, particularly calving areas, rutting areas, travel corridors and wintering areas.

Individuals can take action on this matter by writing to the Minister of Natural Resources, the Honourable Glen Cummings. Letters should ask for an immediate closure to fishing on Flintstone Lake. He should also be asked to implement the recommendation of his Endangered Species Advisory Committee and designate woodland caribou as "Endangered" in Manitoba and develop a comprehensive province-wide caribou conservation plan.

From an original report from Alice Chambers

Pine Falls Paper Company (PFPC) Applications for Navigable Waters Permits for Existing and Prospective Bridges

1. Existing Bridges

After discovering last fall that PFPC had not applied for Navigable Waters permits for bridges built over navigable waters on forestry access roads within their Forest Management Licence Area (FMLA), a process was begun to bring PFPC into compliance with the Navigable Waters Protection Act by having them apply for permits after the fact. It was finding out that PFPC had not applied for a navigable waters permit for the controversial bridge over the Manigotagan River that alerted Coast Guard to the lack of permits. Although a drawing of this bridge has not been registered in the Wpg Land Titles Office yet, it is one of the 14 bridges presently under review by Coast Guard. They must all go through an environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA).

This bridge on the Manigotagan River has inadequate clearance. Photo taken by canoeist in 1994.

The Manigotagan River was the centre of much discussion and controversy during the environmental review and licencing of the present PFPC forest management plan, due to run out the end of 1998. It is recognized for its importance as an accessible wilderness river which is highly valued by recreational canoeists, as well as for its significant ecological and cultural values. A number of letters went back and forth about this bridge earlier this year. The bridge is an old railway bridge, as are many of their bridges. As well as constantly releasing sediment/debris into the river through the large spaces between the timbers of the bridge, the bridge is dangerous to canoeists and kayakers. It is very low and a huge steel support underneath it may not be visible until the traveller is into the fast water flowing under the bridge. A wordless sign has been upgraded to a sign that says: Caution, temporary bridge ahead. This does not signify the inherent danger. The bridge is referred to as temporary only because in their environmental licence, they were not allowed to build a permanent bridge over the Manigotagan. All the definitions I have found of "temporary" bridges refer to those that have less than 2-year lifetimes. This bridge was built in 1993 and will be there probably until at least 2003. Under their licence they were not allowed to build a hazard to canoeists either! Nor did the required consultation with MB Environment occur.

Bridge examination in winter, early 1998. Photo by Alice Chambers.

The required ads for the bridges applications were placed in the Pine Falls Community Voice, the Lac du Bonnet Leader, and the Interlake Spectator but no ads were placed in the Winnipeg Free Press so it is likely that 99% of Manitobans have no knowledge that these applications have been made or that public comment is requested by Coast Guard, whichis now under Fisheries and Oceans. The company must use the required form for the ads but can place them wherever they want. Most of the ads were placed about the 22 of July -with a one month response period. I do not believe Coast Guard will be too strict about the response time, since there were no ads in the Free Press. They are requesting public comments on the effects of these bridges on navigation and the environment, including dependent undertakings, decommissioning, etc. The Navigable Waters Protection Act is basically about protecting the navigability of Canadian waterways, including anything that is canoeable.

The Winnipeg Land Titles office in the Woodsworth building has a "file" on each of these bridges, but it consists only of a PFPC "in-house" drawing of the bridge/culvert, with many dimensions missing, not even a covering letter. It is not necessary to review these drawings as they tell you very little anyway. What is needed is just short letters to either Ken Brant or John Woodward at Coast Guard, identifying any concerns re loss of navigability, loss of wilderness values, concerns re portages or their maintenance, environmental concerns, for any of these bridges that are listed below. There likely will be other bridge applications to come later. Under the CEAA, the feds are obliged to look at cumulative effects of more than one bridge on the same waterway or in the same watershed.

The bridges for which an application has been made are as follows:

• Wanipigow River - SW 17-25-10E - single span bridge, bridge to be removed, built in 1980?
• English Brook (Wanipigow River system) - SW 20-25-10E - single span bridge, built in 1981, to be replaced
• Wanipigow River (Pointer Lake) - SW 30-24-13E - single span bridge, built in 1985
• Beaver Creek - NW 14-25-11E - single span bridge, road built in 1983?
• Manigotagan River - 22-21-16E - single span bridge, built in 1993
• Black River - NW 5-22-11E - single span bridge, built in 1992
• Black River - NW 15-21-13E - arch culvert, built in 1992
• Sandy River - SE 23-23-10E - arch culvert and bridge, built in 1975?
• Moose River - SW 26-21-14E - single span bridge, built in 1994
• Maskwa River (Bear River)- NE 33-18-10E - double bridge (the lower is to be removed), built in 1981?
• Rice River - NW 34-27-8E - single span bridge, built in 1988
• North Etomami River - SE 33-39-6E - single span bridge, built in 1992
• Etomami River - NE 16-39-6E - single span bridge, built in 1991
• Seventeen Mile Lake - SW 6-40-7E - single span bridge, built in 1993

The Etomami and North Etomami are both north of Berens River and run into Berens River. This area is near the top of the Integrated Wood Supply Area E, an area where PFPC has first right of refusal for wood but does not have management rights. Thus it was a great surprise to find that PFPC has been building bridges in this area. The bridge over the N Etomami washed downstream and the road and bridge over the Etomami is impassable because the road at the edge of the bridge washed out last fall! No one knows the condition of the Seventeen Mile Lake bridge but the clearance was little on it also so it may also have been washed out. PFPC submitted drawings and photographs of these bridges as though they were still intact! Coast Guard and Fisheries are now aware that these bridges are no longer as submitted. There was no provincial environmental assessment of these northern bridges or roads. The environmental licence only covers activities on the FMLA.

If any one has any information about any of the PFPC bridges, particularly if they affect navigation and the environment, I would be pleased to know about it and to share what information I have collected. I have a copy of each of the drawings that were submitted. I believe there are navigability concerns over the Black River bridge and that the bridge and the arch culvert detract from the wilderness experience.

The recent Federal Court Sunpine forestry road bridges judgement, in which the court declared void the navigable waters permits that had been granted by Coast Guard to build 2 bridges on a forestry road because the feds had not taken into consideration the cumulative effects or the dependent undertakings means that the feds no longer can just look at the bridge site without taking into consideration the road or the purpose of the road. This review of these existing bridge applications and the proposed bridges should be interesting!

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency has a small liaison office in Winnipeg so if you want to know more about the review process, you can contact Dan McNaughton at 984 2457. He also has the "generic" environmental information supplied by PFPC for each of these bridges. The information is pretty scant or non-existent. For example, each application states that either the FMLA or the IWSA "has a rich wildlife diversity which includes, bear, moose, woodland caribou, deer and a variety of birds"!! That is it but of course there is also a statement to say that mitigation has occurred. The generic fisheries review is to list the 8 major species listed by Synthen Resources in their 1991 review of PFPCs forestry plan—a listing that was found deficient at that time, and has now been used to describe the northern fisheries as well.

Any comments to Coast Guard should be submitted to:

Ken Brant, Regional Superintendent
Navigable Waters Protection Act
Canadian Coast Guard, Fisheries & Oceans
703 - 201 N Front Street
Sarnia, ON N7T 8B1
Fax 519 383 1989
Ph 519 383 1862
or John Woodward, Impact Assessment Officer,
Ph 519 383 1868,
at the same address or he can be e-mailed at WoodwardJ@DFO-MPO.GC.CA

2. Prospective Bridges

PFPC's 2-year plan includes extending the east side all-weather forestry road up to one km past the Bradbury River, about another 30 km. Their long term plan is to go to Gods Lake with side roads off to each community. This would result in bridges over all of the east side rivers, Bloodvein, Pigeon (2 bridges), Poplar and Berens Rivers, plus roads and culverts over all of the wetlands, creeks and streams along the way. This road would change the character of the east side of Lake Winnipeg forever, with unknown impacts on First Nation communities, wildlife, hydrology, fisheries, archaeological and cultural resources, present and future economic opportunities for tourism, outfitting and recreation, as well as for the diversification of the use of our forests for resource extraction. In essence, it would create land use planing by default.

A map showing the new roads on the east side of Lake Winnipeg. Use your web browser's Back button to return to this page. This map is a 136 kilobit JPEG image.

Coast Guard has identified 6 navigable waters crossings in the present 2-year road plan: Bloodvein River (a Canadian Heritage River, nominated for its wilderness, cultural and ecological values), Long Body Creek, Bradbury River, Ross Creek, unnamed Creek and Spencer Creek Feeder stream. PFPC has been required to submit an addendum to their 2-year plan and environmental impact statement to address numerous outstanding concerns. Coast Guard and the other federal departments will be reviewing this information. It is expected that Clean Environment Commission hearings will be held this fall. Governments at both levels are mandated to review cumulative effects and this piecemeal approach to environmental assessment is not acceptable. Although it is the federal government that is doing the bridges review, it is the provincial government that reviews the forestry plan. The decision on expanding PFPC's harvesting areas and increasing their volumes rests with Glen Cummings, Minister of Natural Resources. The decision on the 2-year environmental licence rests with Jim McCrae, Minister of Environment, Manitoba Legislature. PFPC has been negotiating an increase behind closed doors for the past 2 years—these are all public lands! A doubling or tripling of their volumes would be at the expense of wilderness, wildlife and fisheries, with a minimal return to the public purse. Despite the huge areas involved, forestry in MB contributes 0.2% to the provincial GDP!

If wilderness canoeing and kayaking or wildlife is important to you, please let the appropriate authorities know of your concerns.

Alice Chambers

Top of page

The Wapusk National Park Management Board

by Harvey Williams, Member of the Wapusk Management Board

Wapusk National Park with an area of 11,475 square kilometres is the newest of Manitoba's two national parks. Wapusk, largely consisting of a low swampy plain along the shore of Hudson Bay between York Factory and Churchill Manitoba, protects a major polar bear denning area. The Federal-Provincial Memorandum of Agreement that resulted in Wapusk National Park was signed on April 24th, 1996 following seven years of negotiations between Parks Canada and the Province of Manitoba. The Agreement broke new ground in national park management by establishing a ten-member management board that includes only two Parks Canada representatives.

Structure of the Wapusk Management Board

Parks Canada went one step further than required by the agreement, it opened its only voting position on the Management Board to nomination by the Manitoba chapter of Canadian Parks And Wilderness Society (CPAWS). I was nominated by the Chapter to fill that position. The remaining Parks Canada position is held by Wapusk's Superintendent, who is ex officio and non-voting.

The other eight Management Board members consist of two representatives each from the provincial government, the Local Government District of Churchill, and two First Nations Communities, Fox Lake and York Factory. Wapusk was excised from the Cape Churchill Wildlife Management Area. One of the two provincial representatives must be the "officer of Manitoba" responsible for the Wildlife Management Area.

The Memorandum of Agreement requires that the Management Board meet a minimum of twice each year, and at its discretion more frequently if need be. During Wapusk's start-up and management planning phase meetings have been held three or four times per year. Parks Canada provides for and pays the cost of Board secretariat services.

Powers and Responsibilities of the Wapusk Management Board

The Wapusk Management Board is a true management board with a powerful voice in all aspects of Wapusk's management. Activities which may impact on ecosystems, wildlife habitat, populations, or cultural resources are specifically identified. It may also work with other boards that manage lands and resources outside Wapusk. Management Board recommendations to the Park Superintendent are not merely advisory. If he rejects them, the Board has a chain of appeal all the way up to the Minister.

The Management Board has operational and procedural autonomy including the election of its chairperson. The present acting chairperson happens to be a representative of the provincial government. In the development of management plans, the Board may request Parks Canada to arrange for and pay the costs of the assistance of other agencies or persons including the Government of Manitoba, the Local Government District of Churchill, and First Nations. And it has the final authority to recommend the Park Management Plan and subsequent reviews of the Plan to the Minister. However, the authority of the Board is constrained by the National Parks Act and Parks Canada's Guiding Principles and Operational Policies.

While initial board appointments were for three year terms, the Board may set subsequent term lengths. Although the Board makes recommendations regarding eligibility for reappointment and conflicts of interest, the represented organizations have full autonomy in recommending their nominees to the Board. Dissolution or alteration of the Board requires an amendment to the Agreement with mutual consent of Canada and Manitoba and prior consultation with the Local Government District of Churchill and the First Nations of Fox Lake and York Factory.

The Board's responsibilities include:

1. Preparation of interim management guidelines and management plans, recommending them to the Federal Minister and monitoring of their implementation.
2. Considering "other matters relating to the planning, management and operation of the Park Land, including matters relating to":
   1. management and protection of lands and natural resources, including the development of policies and regulations related to conservation objectives and enforcement measures;
   2. local uses including criteria and procedures;
   3. facility and program development;
   4. annual work plans and budget allocations;
   5. annual staffing action plans, including recommended statements of qualification;
   6. training strategy;
   7. research, including procedures, criteria and priorities;
   8. management and protection of cultural resources;
   9. development of partnerships;
   10. formation of cooperating associations;
   11. relationship of the Churchill Rocket Range;
   12. any other matter relating to the management of the Park Lands; and
3. land-use planning and resource management of the Wildlife Management Area including any proposed changes to its boundaries or legal status.

The Management Board participates in the appointment of Park Superintendents. When a new superintendent is appointed, two members of the Management Board and two representatives of Parks Canada will comprise the committee that recommends the appointment. Clearly, Parks Canada has shared what may be unprecedented management powers to a board over which it has little control.

The Wapusk Management Board in Action

The knee jerk reaction to a park management board with so much power that is dominated by local interests is likely to be, "There goes the park! It'll be nothing but a play ground for local users and commercial interests." But this has not been the case with Wapusk. Quite the contrary. The Wapusk Management Board supports Parks Canada's policies and has embraced true stewardship responsibilities for Wapusk.

The management model exemplified by the Wapusk Management Board may not be appropriate everywhere. The Wapusk situation is unique in that Wapusk is remote, free from commercial development, lacking in mineral resources, and the lands around the park are undeveloped crown lands. The local communities stand to derive considerable economic and other benefits from the park so long as it remains in a relatively pristine condition.

In the late spring, as the pack ice on Hudson Bay melts, polar bears come ashore in the region of York Factory on the Hayes River. During the summer, they migrate northward along the shore of Hudson Bay. By October they have congregated in large numbers near Churchill to await the freeze up of Hudson Bay so they can return to life on the pack ice. The congregated polar bears have become a major tourist attraction. In October and November, Churchill's tourist facilities are booked solid by thousands of ecotourists from all over the world. The economic benefits that Churchill derives from this ecotourism are a powerful incentive for protecting Wapusk's ecological integrity.

The local First Nations communities also have an interest in protecting Wapusk as a land base for their traditional life style. The Memorandum of Agreement protects their right to continue "aboriginal and treaty rights to hunt, trap and fish" as well as "gathering of berries, medicinal herbs and firewood." They also have aspirations for the development of their own tourist industry.

CPAWS members might raise a collective eyebrow at one of the compromises made in order to achieve the consensus required to in create Wapusk National Park. Hunting of caribou and trapping have always been important features in the life style of Churchill's residents. Indeed, a life style that includes hunting, fishing, and trapping has attracted many people to the remoteness of Churchill. The Memorandum of Agreement grants local nonnative residents to hunt and trap in the park for a period of 35 years from the date of signing of the Agreement. At the end of that period, however, that privilege expires. These activities will be governed by applicable provincial game laws and regulations.

The delegation of so much power to an independent Board was a high risk venture for Parks Canada, but it seems to be paying off. Most of the contentious issues were resolved in the negotiations that led up to the establishment of the park, smoothing the way for the operation of the Management Board. The Board seems to have "bought into" national park principles. Consistent with Parks Canada's policies, the protection of Wapusk's ecological integrity has been the overriding concern of everyone on the board and a guiding principle in its deliberations. In contrast to Riding Mountain National Park, Manitoba's other national park, where cooperation and between park management and provincial authorities has been minimal, at Wapusk, the relationship between the two is characterized by a strong spirit of cooperation.

Unconstrained by the bureaucratic culture of Parks Canada and impatient to get things done, the Management Board has accelerated the planning process for Wapusk by at least a year. An ruling by finance officials that limiting budget carry-over was quickly reversed in response to a strong letter of protest from the Board. Rules and regulations handed down by a management board comprised largely of community representatives are far more palatable to local people than rules and regulations emanating from "bureaucrats." Conversely, the Management Board acting as an appeal body, buffers local park officials from pressure groups.

Wapusk's management board has had a positive effect on public participation in management planning. Because of support from its local board members, 33% of the York Landing community turned out for the public consultation held there. In Gillam, a very small local community, six high school classes hosted presentations, people dropped in at an open-house all day, and 50 local citizens attended an evening presentation. One hundred and ten members of the Community of Churchill attended an open house. These were exceptionally high rates of participation in such events.

The Wapusk Park administration reports that the effect of the Management Board has been contrary to their expectations. Their initial expectation was that the board would be cumbersome and an impediment to day to day operations in the park. Instead, by serving as two-way sounding board between local communities and park administration, it has smoothed and facilitated operations.

Because of its success a management board modeled after the Wapusk Management Board is to be established for the recently announced Manitoba Lowlands National Park. Different conditions prevail there, however. There is no established ecotourism industry nor does the region offer a major wildlife attraction comparable to Wapusk's polar bears. Moreover, the major economic interests in the region, forestry and mining, are opposed to preservation. Much of the land base that should have been included in the park is under Forest Management License and Manitoba's powerful mining interests successfully resisted the inclusion of areas with mineral potential. A Wapusk-type park management board may not succeed in the absence of a significant vested economic interest in protection.

In conclusion, while the model exemplified by the Wapusk Management Board seems to work well for Wapusk, only time can tell whether it is transferable to other national parks.

Harvey Williams