Evolution of Forestry in Ontario
This is a far cry from European forestry. Historically land was owned by the aristocracy and was managed primarily for their pleasure. The lord of the estate usually had a manager (referred to as a forester) whose responsibility it was to see that the property was well looked after, often mainly to ensure good hunting conditions. The ‘forester’ was prestigious and the state of the property, including forests, a source of pride for the estate owner. Surfs did well to seek his advice and decision making.
On this side of the ocean, settlers encountered forests which inhibited their ability to grow food. Upper Canada (Ontario) was settled largely by United Empire Loyalists, refugees from the American revolution who chose to remain under British authority. The forests of southern Ontario proved to be a hindrance to the production of food, hence an enemy to be demolished as quickly as possible. The forests stood in the way of progress.
Much of the land, particularly moraine areas, was poorly suited for agriculture. The government of Ontario embarked on rehabilitation of marginal lands in the ‘30s through development of the county forest program in cooperation with municipalities. These are now admirably serving society, one of the real success stories in forestry. But the field of natural resources is administrated by Queen’s Park, made up mainly of representatives more closely associated with cities. The process of rehabilitation ground to a halt to all intents as government became more and more oriented to commercial needs of urban society.
Forestry in northern Ontario developed largely through harvesting raw materials for industry. The need now is for greater emphasis on the contributions which our forest lands can make towards global purposes. Commercialization of the boreal forest must be redesigned toward development while maintaining a vegetation cover to minimize organic deterioration in the soil and the radiation of heat into the atmosphere. The forest lands of the north are a reservoir for water supplying hydroelectric energy, protected by continuous tree cover.
Unfortunately urban thinking pervades our education system. Recently a questionnaire was circulated pertaining to the future of the Faculty of Forestry at the University of Toronto. About 20 years ago the administration decided to close the undergraduate Forestry course, converting the school to conservation education. Now apparently there is a need to further emasculate the school by changing its mandate to comply with what is seen as more pressing educational needs.
Despite university policy the greatest of those needs includes the environment and the vegetative cover on which we depend. The provincial government is starting to recognize the important contribution of our resource base at least economically. School curricula are placing increased emphasis on knowledge of elements essential to quality of life on this planet, i.e. ecological factors, air, water, energy and land. Articles on energy and the climate often note deforestation as being a primary cause of deterioration of our surroundings. Maybe this isn’t adequately seen as a serious matter at a major, city-oriented university. Luckily our school systems, as well as society in general, are placing a higher priority on the environment.
Our educational system is fundamental to quality of life as are our forests. In making decisions about future forestry education, society must keep in mind the importance of ecology and particularly forest cover in the environment, contributing toward the world of the next century. Our universities not only produce a ‘product’ to better the world for Canadians but also professionals working to improve society globally. We have a world class university in Toronto within which the Faculty of Forestry must play a significant part, contributing its valuable role, enhancing forest cover as a major factor in the future state of the world.
Post new comment