Woodland Protection Policy in Ontario

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
The policy of woodland protection in Ontario
Issues
Recommendations
Reference List

Introduction

The natural resources in Ontario are to be protected to ensure their prudent use across the province as well as sustain the needs of future generations. The management of the ecological, societal, and economic welfare of the city of Ontario is dependant on the combined efforts put by the various key players in meeting this goal (Ministry of Natural Resources, 2009, para.1) The Ontario government passed legislation in 2001 that instituted a plan on land use and management of resources for the conservation efforts of the 190,000 hectares of land situated inside the Moraine. This is in line with the provincial land-use arrangement criteria within which municipalities are in charge of putting into operation provincial policy throughout their official arrangements and in times of making decisions on issues of development. This endorsed planning takes priority over the plans that the municipalities may have.

The policy of woodland protection in Ontario

The initial significant woodland (SW) Criteria lacked the definition of woodland. At this time, the definition is very important as the basis of defining the significance. Section 15.4.5 of the official Plan defines it as Woodlands are complex ecosystems of different tree species, shrubs, ground vegetation and soil complexes that provide habitats for many plants and animals. The significance of woodlands is determined in terms of natural features and ecological functions, provision of important ecological functions that are uncommon to the planning area, the woodland provides distribution of open space amenities and recreational activities, it provides habitat for endangered species, and it contains unusual natural communities or landforms.(Hussey, 2008, p.3).

The proposed amendment considered woodland to be Significant it achieves a minimum of one high or five medium criteria scores as determined by application of the Guideline Document for the Evaluation of the Ecologically Significant Woodlands (Hussey, 2008, p.4)

The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) gives additional defines woodland as a means treed area, woodlot or forested area, other than a cultivated fruit or nut orchard or a plantation established for Christmas trees.(ORM Significant Woodlands, 2004, p.2)

The identification of woodland is based on various factors. The area must have a tree cover of over 60% but it is considered a forest in the Ecological Land Classification (ELC) for Southern Ontario. If it has a tree cover of 10%, it is considered a tread area in the ELC for Southern Ontario. It, therefore, must have 1,000 trees of any size per hectare, or 750 trees measuring over five centimeters in diameter, per hectare, or 500 trees measuring over 12 centimeters in diameter, per hectare, or 250 trees measuring over 20 centimeters in diameter, per hectare. The diameter of the tree is measured at a breast height of 1.37 meters from the ground in fields that are regenerating and are only counted after reaching that height (Hussey, 2008, p.3).

For woodland to be considered for delineation, the following criteria are applied. To start with, if the compatible openings do not exceed 40 meters across is present amidst two or more woodlands, then the woodlands is considered as a woodland area. Nevertheless, where two woodlands that exceed 40 meters separately are wholly or incompletely connected by a band of trees with a standard width of not exceeding 40 meters, then the woodland would be regarded as two separate woodlands and the connecting band of trees will be excluded in the computation of either woodland area. Secondly, if the compatible openings inside a woodland area are not exceeding 0.5 hectares in area and do not exceed 25% of the qualifying treed portion, then they are to be recognized as part of the woodland. In addition, where roads cross the woodlands, having a path of 21 meters or less, in the possession and maintenance of a road authority, then only the separated treed parts are to be put together and calculated as single woodland. Lastly, woodland areas situated out of the Plan Area are to be incorporated in the area calculations for computing significance. This takes care of the truth that the ORMCP policies apply only to parts of the woodland within the Plan Area (ORM Significant Woodlands, 2004, p.4-5).

Issues

The Oak Ridges Moraine is an important landform feature situated in southern Ontario. It comprises an uneven ridge that expands for about 140 kilometers, amidst the Niagara Escarpment towards the west and the County of Northumberland towards the east. It is believed to have formed due to the recent retreating of ice glaciers. It possesses complicated geology that is made up of porous materials that accumulate, keep, and discharge water. Numerous streams that flow to the north and the south of Lake Ontario start from here. The Moraine is vital on the local and international scale since its a habitat for wildlife and diverse plant life. Hydrologic and hydrogeologic features are highly concentrated in this area. This national heritage has been the source of development pressures in recent years since its an important source of drinking water and flood control. The region is vulnerable to outcomes of development (Diamond et al, 2002, p.8).

The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan clearly distinguishes four land designations as Natural Linkage Areas, Countryside Areas, and Settlement Areas. New developments are strictly prohibited in the Natural Core Areas and only inadequate developments are allowed in Natural Linkage Areas, by varied different specific criteria. In the countryside areas, some prescribed activities are allowed in places that are left for Rural Development in a local Official Plan (Meridian, 2002, 10).

The city of Ontario has well-laid plans put in place to conserve its environment for future generations. The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan is supreme over any official plans, a zoning by-law, or policy statements laid down under the Planning Act. The act mandates various municipalities to modify their Official Plan to apply the Conservation Plan for a period of one and half years after enforcing the Plan.

The city of London adopted the Official Plan Amendment 403 (OPA 403), on September 18, 2006, to institute, in the Official Plan, a standard for recognizing significant woodlands. The suggested standard is connected to an assessment procedure established in a guideline document that was endorsed by the City one month earlier and was not appealed. The appellants oppose attempts to pass the guideline document as it is a technical manual that lacks transparency and is immune to appeal. The 2006 guideline document has rules for assessing significant woodlands which the Appellants argued to be short of meeting their intended purposes.

To foster conservation efforts, eighteen issues were presented in the Ontarios Board Procedural Order. Issue number 18 was deleted upon consent by the board members. The remaining 17 issues are therefore considered under 5 broad headings: consistency with Provincial Policy Statement, municipal approaches, community values, appropriateness, and conformity with the official plan (Ontario Municipal Board, 2008).

The first issue deals with the consistency of the OPA 403 with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). If in any case the guideline is adopted, is it possible for section 15.4.5 of the Official Plan as suggested to be amended by OPA 403, be consistent with the PPS (2005)? The PPS clearly defines the purpose for recognizing significant woodlands. Will the adoption of OPA 403 be able to achieve this same purpose?

The second issue deals with municipal approaches. The citys policies in engaging in the preservation of significant woodlands based on sound research and in line with acceptable norms in the region are to be critically evaluated. In cases whence a municipality utilizes its official plan from a municipal approach to the assessment of woodlands, the issue of the applicability of the provincial criteria, which depicts a dissimilar approach, is to be considered. But, if in any case the municipal approach is adopted, is it a show of the harmony between the provincial and the municipal approaches? If this is not the case, does it suggest that the OPA 403 supports an approach that can achieve or surpass the laid provincial objectives? In situations whereby the council has adopted the OPA 403, are considerations made for the proper valuation of significant woodlands for the city of London?

The third issue entails community values. The character of the existing community ought to be protected at all costs. The communitys nature has a say in the good quality of life that is now deemed as beneficial by the many inhabitants of the community. All new improvements must take care of this susceptible character. The enactment of the woodland protection act should reflect ethical community values. The issue of incorporating community values in the municipalitys official plan is to be carefully considered.

The fourth issue revolves around the matter of appropriateness. Is OPA 403 suitable in the real sense to be incorporated in the Official Plan? Critical considerations are to be made if the policy and the procedure for naming and preservation of significant woodlands form reliable and environmentally friendly land use planning. The attempt of OPA 403 to hand over the Official Plan policy roles to a mere guideline document which is not a component of the City of London is to be questioned. Rather, is OPA 403 competent enough to be adopted? For some time now, different lands have been assessed by the use of different policies. Would OPA be applied too in evaluating these lands? Is OPA 403 capable of being applied to pieces of land within and outside the urban growth frontier? More so, is it appropriate to apply the documented guidelines contained in OPA 403 to evaluate lands that are within the urban growth frontier? The public interest has to be adhered to in implementing the changes. The key stakeholders had deemed the One High Approach as appropriate. Adopting OPA 403 to incorporate the prevailing Three High Approach will constitute a down designation of the lands that are not justified in the public interest.

The last category of issues entails conformity with the Official Plan. Are the standard guidelines consistent with the Official Plan policies that esteem other guideline documents, particularly, Policy 19.2.2? Considerations are to be made if the OPA 403 brings in a policy that disregards the other policies of the Official Plan or the norm illustrated in Section 15.4.5 of the Official Plan. If in any case OPA 403 is to be adopted, will it offer a reliable planning procedure for planning different land uses?

Recommendations

The proposed OPA 403 is consistent with the PPS, corresponds to the City of Londons Official Plan, and replicates the values of the community and the aims of the city in preserving woodlands (Ontario Municipal Board, 2008, p.16). The guidelines used in the assessment to agree on significance are objective, applicable, and a product of sound research. Furthermore, the suggestion at issue is in the interest of the public, and it keeps with different approaches applied in other municipalities. It is in line with provincial directives for the excellent utilization and management of Natural Heritage Resources and preservation of the nations woodlands. It comprises apt and environmentally friendly ways to engage in land-use planning.

The methodology and standards illustrated in the 2006 guideline were not conceived in isolation. The city-based its guidance on the recommendations in the NHRM and widely made adequate consultations with various stakeholders, such as planners of the environment, scientists, and other organizations and municipalities. The Province did all these under the latest policy guidelines. All this evidence proves that the 2006 guideline is founded on best practices and is rooted in sound scientific principles.

The 2006 Guideline, the Official Plan, and the PPS both have a common thread that cuts across all of them. The procedure that was used to assess by the City of London is in line with those employed by other municipalities. The suggested threshold proposal is in line with the threshold employed in other municipalities situated in the Thames watershed.

Different stakeholders, private individuals, and public corporations, adequately scrutinized the policy to bring down the threshold. The public was promptly notified and given an adequate chance to engage in the process. Those who raised the issues formed part of those invited to contribute to the process.

Evidence, to imply that the City has not been practical in its approach to establishing the kinds of woodlands that are significant, is lacking. In any case that the land has not been designated properly, the landowner will now be endowed with the responsibility of challenging such a verdict since the threshold will be included in the Official Plan.

It is a standard practice universally that guideline documents be used to accomplish official plan policies. In using the 2006 Guideline a protocol for assessment, the City identification of significant woodlands is deemed consistent with the Official Plan Policies that esteems guideline documents, particularly, Policy 19.2.2. This system has been used without complaints for many years and has been a great benefit to the public. The policy functions and the worth of the community are therefore not appropriately allotted to the guiding document.

Therefore the suggested application is exemplary as it conforms to the Provincial Planning Statement and is consistent with the Official Plan and fulfills the obligations of the Planning Act in signifying elaborate planning.

Reference List

Diamond et al. (2002). Natural Heritage Systems in Urbanizing Settings: Sustainable Practices for the Oak Ridges Moraine. Web.

Hussey, K (2008). Decision Delivered by K.J. Hussey and Order of the Board. Ontario: Ontario Municipal Board.

Meridian (2002). Executive summary. Web.

Ministry of National Resources (2009). About the Ministry of Natural Resources. Web.

ORM Significant Woodlands (2004). Identification and Protection of Significant Woodlands on the Oak Ridges Moraine. Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP).

Click Here To Order Now!