The rewriting of the By- Law to Regulate the Destruction or Injury of Trees in Woodlands in the County of Dufferin appears to be in need of a new approach. As Mulmur Township woodlot owner, I have followed the revisions with considerable interest .It is obvious County Council members are still far from agreement on its contents.

suggest the Museum Archive and Natural Heritage Committee which has responsibility for a new by-law consider a new approach.

The approach to date has been to revise the existing 2006 by-law which follows an approach which appears to have been developed by the provincial government. The provincial government, under the Municipal Act 2001 empowers but does not require upper-tier municipalities to pass tree cutting by-laws. These may prohibit or regulate the destruction or injury of trees; allow the appointment of enforcement officers; require permits; and impose conditions within the permits.

To begin, the new by-law should be given a positive name such as the Forest Management By-Law. The idea that trees are destroyed or injured is a very negative concept likely devised by an urban environmentalist with a limited knowledge of forest management and rural reality. Many of these people appear to think rural Ontario is a big public park where nature should be left as it existed 200 years ago.

The objectives are now presented in two “where as statements” bylaw won’t which might be more explicit if identified as objectives. Rather than replicating previous regulations, it is suggested the following principles be used in modifying the various sections. The following six principles are recommended:

1. All regulations, where possible, be stated in terms of positive actions to encourage the planting, proper managing and harvesting of trees. Education should be the priority rather than prohibitions.

2. All woodlot owners will be treated fairly and equally. This would mean farmers and non-farmers would now have the same rules and no distinction would be made as to whether trees were cut for own use or for sale. The emphasis should be on why the trees may cut, not what happens to after cutting. In either case, good sylviculture management is the priority concern.

3. Encourage landowners to plant more trees, properly manage their woodlots and utilize proper harvesting procedures. Encourage that the land tax assessment benefits now afforded farmers be provided to all woodlot owners. Encourage woodlot owners to participate in woodlot management programs and associations and to utilize woodlot consultants in managing their forests.

4. Minimize the need for and cost of permits. Permits should only be required when major timber sales or clear cutting is to take place. Regular annual maintenance involving the cutting of dead, diseased, damaged or competing trees may be reported to the Forestry manager in advance but not require a permit. Regular timber harvests should occur about every 10 to 15 years would require marking by a professional tree marker and review by the Forestry manager. Clear cutting as proposed in the latest revision, should require justification and approval by an appropriate committee of Council. Note that the provincial government legislation specifies where clear cutting is allowed

5. Provide required permits on a cost recovery basis at a level which does not discourage their use. Revise the fines and penalties to more reasonable levels. The present fines of $500 per tree with no upper limits are excessive and may discourage conviction by a hearing officer.

6. Retain those regulations which exempt individuals and activities specified in provincial legislation. To try to do otherwise will lead to conflict with the provincial government. These exemptions are those specified in Section 3 must be retained. The items (j) referring to owners use, (m) time period, (n) regular management and (o) farm clearing are not in the provincial legislation and can be eliminated.

We believe this approach will result in simpler, more consistent and over time a more beneficial by-law than the present revisions. We all want to improve forest management but woodlot owners should be encouraged to do so rather than being restricted by unnecessary government regulation.

Jim White via e-mail