Eastern Ontario Model Forest Strategic Plan Annex A – Strategic Plan for Implementing Forest Communities Program (2007-2012)
Submitted to: Forest Communities Program Secretariat Natural Resources Canada - Canadian Forest Service
Submitted on: September 17, 2007
Table of Contents Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. i
1. Summary/Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 2. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2.1 Challenges and Opportunities ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2.1.1 A Forest and Rural Sector in Transition …………………………………………………………….. 2.1.2 Energy, the Economy and the Environment ……………………………………………………….. 2.1.3 Society’s Need for Ecological Goods and Services ……………………………………………….. 2.1.4 Widening Rift Between Urban and Rural ………………………………………………………….. 2.1.5 Addressing Cross-sector Issues ………………………………………………………………………….. 2.1.6 Forest Health, Dynamic Ecosystems and Species at Risk ……………………………………….
1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3
3. Site Description …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3.1 Background and Context …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3.1.1 Physical Geography ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 3.1.2 History and People …………………………………………………………………………………………… 3.1.3 Economics and Land Use ………………………………………………………………………………….
3 3 3 4 5
4. Purpose, Guiding Philosophy, Vision and Objectives …………………………………………………………. 6 4.1 Purpose and Guiding Philosophy ……………………………………………………………………………………… 6 4.2 Five-Year Goal and Objectives for the Forest Communities Program ……………………………………. 7 5. Activities, Outputs & Outcomes: Delivering on Our Five-Year Plan (2007-2012) ……………………… 9 5.1 Working with communities (including industry, government, First Nations) and other stakeholders to develop new—and advance existing—forest-based opportunities (Objective 1) ………. 9 5.1.1 Exploring and facilitating the transition to a bio-based community (Activity Area 1) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 5.1.1.1 Municipal bioproducts strategy, business case, design concept and promotion of an eco-industrial site for bioproducts (Output 1) ………………………. 9 5.1.2 Advancing innovative adoption of forest certification by communities, with particular reference to market access (Activity Area 2) ………………………………………………….. 10 5.1.2.1 A community-directed framework for forest management and chain of custody certification for private woodlots, community-based forests, public lands and forest product manufacturers throughout the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence forest region (Output 1) ……………………………………………………………………………… 10 5.2 Working with communities to pilot ideas, conduct research and develop integrated, multi-sector approaches—based on science and innovation—that enable them to respond to a forest sector in transition and to build community capacity (Objective 2) ……………………………………………. 11 5.2.1 Creating and transferring new knowledge (and associated frameworks) capable of describing, analyzing and forecasting aspects of forest sector dependencies and related implications for communities (Activity Area 3) …………………………………………………………… 5.2.1.1 Tools and processes for understanding and capitalizing on the contribution of forests as assets to communities (Output 1) ……………………………. 5.2.1.2 Science needs program (Output 2) ……………………………………………………. 5.2.1.3 Broad-spectrum forest risk assessment tools (Output 3) …………………………
i
11 11 11 12
5.2.2 Assessing and evaluating existing knowledge, incorporating naturalized knowledge, and formulating new concepts (Activity Area 4) …………………………………………………………. 12 5.2.2.1 Pilot study of mechanisms capturing economic returns for the provision of EG&S (Output 1) …………………………………………………………………………………. 12 5.3 Developing and sharing sustainable forest management knowledge, practices, tools, and experiences with international forest-dependent communities in keeping with Canada’s international forest agenda (Objective 3) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 5.3.1 Building partnerships and generating equity (Activity Area 5) …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13 5.3.1.1 Funding strategy and proposals (Output 1) ………………………………………. 13 5.3.1.2 Community mentoring program (Output 2) ……………………………………… 14 5.3.2 Maintaining and enhancing the capacity to communicate effectively with a diverse array of communities (Activity Area 6) ……………………………………………………………………… 5.3.2.1 Marketing strategy (Output 1) …………………………………………………………. 5.3.2.2 Community outreach and partnership-based events and training sessions (Output 2) ……………………………………………………………………………………. 5.3.2.3 Publications catalog containing technical reports, maps, information and data (Output 3) ……………………………………………………………………………………
14 14 14 15
5.3.3 Serving as an ambassador for the Forest Communities Program (Activity Area 7) ….. 15 5.3.3.1 Ambassador program (Output 1) ………………………………………………………. 15
6. Stakeholders/Beneficiaries and Impacts...…………………………………………………………………………. 16 7. Participating Organizations and Governance: A Capacity to Deliver.…………………………………….. 7.1 Role of Participating Organizations …………………………………………………………………………………… 7.1.1 Spheres of Influence: A Framework for Involvement …………………………………………… 7.1.2 Process for Engagement ……………………………………………………………………………………. 7.1.3 Levels of Involvement ……………………………………………………………………………………….
18 18 19 19 20
7.2 Governance and Organizational Structure …………………………………………………………………………. 7.2.1 Structure and Role of the Board of Directors ……………………………………………………… 7.2.2 Role of Committees and Working Groups …………………………………………………………. 7.2.3 Approach to Networking, Information Sharing and Technology Transfer ……………… 7.2.4 Links to Existing Expertise and Research Capacity ………………………………………………. 7.2.5 Key Priority Involvement: The Canadian Model Forest Network ………………………….
20 20 21 21 21 22
8. Communications, Outreach and Networking ………………………………………………………………………. 23 8.1 Communications and Outreach Strategy ……………………………………………………………………………. 23 8.1.1 Communications and Outreach Objectives ………………………………………………………… 23 8.1.2 Key Messages ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 24 8.1.3 Reach and Target Audiences ……………………………………………………………………………… 24 8.1.4 Communications Capacity ………………………………………………………………………………… 25 8.1.5 Transfer Mechanisms ………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 8.2 Contributions to Forest Communities Program and Canadian Model Forest Network Communications and Outreach Efforts ……………………………………………………………………………………. 26
9. Administration.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26
ii
9.1 From Strategic Management to Implementation ………………………………………………………………… 26 9.2 Infrastructure, Capacity and Assets ……………………………………………………………………………………. 27
10. Finances ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 28 10.1 Five-Year Financial Plan (2007-2012) ………………………………………………………………………………. 28 Figures Figure 1: The geographic location of the Eastern Ontario Model Forest …………………………………………………. 3 Figure 2: Spheres of influence …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19 Tables Table 1: Naturalized Knowledge System principles and associated tools ………………………………………………….. 6 Table 2: A comparison of EOMF and FCP objectives …………………………………………………………………………….. 8 Table 3: Target audience by sphere of influence ……………………………………………………………………………………. 24 Table 4: Five-year financial plan for the Forest Communities Program ($ 000s) ……………………………………….. 28 Table 5: Revenue estimates and in-kind contributions for 2007-2012 ($ 000s) …………………………………………… 29 Table 6: Planned expenditures for 2007-2012 ($ 000s) ……………………………………………………………………………. 29 Appendices Appendix A – Logic Model Appendix B – Performance Measurement Strategy Appendix C – Site Maps Appendix D – Application for Incorporation Appendix E – Business Registration Appendix F – Notification of Registration (Charitable Status) Appendix G – Partners and Supporters of the Eastern Ontario Model Forest
iii
1. Summary/Abstract This strategic plan represents the key guiding document for the Eastern Ontario Model Forest under the Forest Communities Program (2007-2012). It describes in detail how the Eastern Ontario Model Forest will meet Forest Communities Program objectives through a suite of three objectives, and seven associated activity areas. Outcomes are elaborated across three time frames in the context of a results-based management framework. A detailed five-year financial plan outlines planned expenditures and revenues over the course of the Forest Communities Program. The approaches of the Haudenosaunee peoples as embodied in the Naturalized Knowledge System (NKS) serve as the foundation for our vision and governance structure, and will continue to strongly guide our work with communities.
2. Introduction The Eastern Ontario Model Forest (EOMF) as a balanced organization is broader than the Forest Communities Program (FCP). Partner commitment and engagement is based upon the perceived balance of economic, environmental and social values over the long term. Core activities beyond the scope of the FCP which help to maintain this balance and ensure a comprehensive approach will be defined as separate – but linked – annexes to the EOMF’s overall five-year strategic plan. This annex (Annex A) defines the EOMF’s strategic program of activities under the FCP (2007-2012).
2.1 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES With the increased awareness of important forest values, and the understanding that it is possible to balance these values through collaborative efforts, more and more communities are seeing themselves as forest-dependent. While the traditional dependency on a primary forest processing facility may be less prominent, the reliance on forests for many other benefits such as clean air, clean water, and habitat is increasing. There is also a perception of new opportunities, as efforts are made to begin the shift of the economy away from fossil fuels and toward bio-based feedstocks for energy and manufacturing. Discussions with partners over the past year identified six thematic challenges which have been considered as we’ve set out our activities for the Forest Communities Program. The challenges are captured in some detail below, while the opportunities are elaborated in our plan of activities (Section 5 of this strategy).
2.1.1 A Forest and Rural Sector in Transition Transformation of the forest sector due to global influences is affecting local rural economies – the suppliers of raw resource materials and associated services. For example, 40% of farms typically report some form of income from farm woodlots. A loss of markets means a loss of one more revenue opportunity; and, with overall downward pressures on farm incomes, this can lead to highgrading or liquidation of woodlots for any marketable values regardless of the environmental impact. The recent closure of Domtar pulp and paper facilities in the core area of the EOMF represents a loss of 490,000 tonnes of pulp and paper in annual products, the loss of more than 1,500 jobs and a reduction in tax revenue, to all levels of government, of more than $52 million annually (Making Lemonade from Trees: How the Domtar Pulp Mill Shut Down is Creating New Opportunities for Eastern Ontario, 2005). The closure of a large pulp mill, coupled with reduced demand for fibre by the remaining facilities, has placed significant pressure on many of the smaller sawmills that depended upon the pulp industry as a market for their residual chips. With many of these smaller mills facing closure, the potential is great for further loss of markets for woodlot products, not to mention jobs that are truly rural. It is important to recognize that there are strong forest industry and wood supply linkages that tie together eastern Ontario and adjacent areas in western Quebec and northern New York State.
-1-
2.1.2 Energy, the Economy and the Environment There are serious concerns over the security and cost of our energy supply. Ontario has some of the highest energy costs in Canada, which places further pressure on the economy. The Ontario Power Authority has identified the need for alternate sources, which would likely come from rural areas—and preferably in close proximity to end users. The energy market may be an opportunity, but it will require time to develop and may not happen soon enough to benefit the remaining pulp mills (which, with a retrofit, could provide energy from biomass residues). The best balance between forest and agricultural sources of energy is presently undefined. Current policy calls for mandatory ethanolgasoline fuel blends which, at the present time, would depend on corn as a feedstock. Large-scale demand for corn could trigger significant changes on the landscape, and there is a fear that many important values could be adversely affected if not pursued in a sustainable fashion. Despite the recently introduced Clean Air Act, a clear and consistent policy on the Kyoto Protocol and global warming is still lacking. As well, we feel that the use of forests and greenspace as carbon sinks, as a means to offset carbon emissions, and as a way to abate air pollution needs to be given due consideration. Most scenarios of using forest biomass for energy tend to assume very low payments to owners/producers and fail to consider other options for higher-value products that could be produced simultaneously.
2.1.3 Society’s Need for Ecological Goods and Services There is a growing need for ecological goods and services (clean water, clean air, productive land, and habitat) from a landbase that is expected to produce many things for a growing population. Landowners and land managers are expected to meet increased standards of environmental protection and provision of other forest values, yet no mechanism is in place to realize a payment for these enhanced services (which often come at a cost in terms of reduced yields of other products). At the same time, society often invests in recovery efforts for selected values after they are lost, when proactive management and market mechanisms to retain what we already have could have been more cost effective. An increasing component of the rural population is “non-farm”, and focusing or restricting the delivery of programs to the agricultural sector leaves significant segments of rural communities excluded from important programs. Overall, it is clear that there is a need to establish market values and returns for efforts that provide ecological goods and services in the rural sector.
2.1.4 A Widening Rift Between Urban and Rural There is a gap in shared values, and in understanding between urban and rural communities. Rural resentment is rising because of a perception of increasing reliance on regulation and enforcement—as opposed to stewardship and positive incentives—to achieve the rural landscape goals that are important to all of society. There is a perception of urban indifference to the issues, pressures, and realities affecting rural communities, and a feeling that, to the urbanite, rural is no longer important. The emergence of “landowner associations” and a tendency to more adversarial means to communicate the rural perspective are symptoms. Rural communities are suffering from a loss of job opportunities as resource and agriculture sectors decline and the migration of youth to urban centres continues. Rural areas that are near to urban centres face a further pressure to become more urbanized, bringing on a landscape with reduced agricultural land and working forests. Restructuring of municipalities has led to significant areas of rural land being incorporated within new city boundaries in places such as Ottawa and Kingston. This is a challenge to municipal governments who must develop effective programs and regulatory structures appropriate for both urban and rural areas.
2.1.5 Addressing Cross-sector Issues There is a need for a broad, cross-sector perspective which looks at the rural landscape as a whole. Too many efforts are seen to be operating in their own separate silos, causing frustration, waste and inefficiency. Focusing on one sector
-2-
at a time misses important synergies and inadvertently causes overlap and duplication, which can further lead to conflict. Cross-sector approaches go against traditional practice and there is a lack of experience, functional tools, and working examples to show how this can work. The linkages between local activities and national frameworks (such as the National Forest Strategy or the Agricultural Policy Framework), as well as between international undertakings (such as the Convention on Biological Diversity), are complex and are not readily understood.
2.1.6 Forest Health, Dynamic Ecosystems and Species at Risk  Forests in settled landscapes, such as those in southern Ontario, face unique pressures. The highly fragmented nature of many remaining forest areas reduces their ability to support disturbance-sensitive species. Human activities have led to the introduction and spread of invasive exotic species which are having profound effects on ecosystem health. The introduction of serious insect pests such as the Asian long-horned beetle, the emerald ash borer, and the sirex wood wasp directly threaten the health of several tree species and butternut canker is progressively eliminating butternut from the landscape. The results are direct additions to the species at risk lists, in addition to the negative impacts on other species of concern as ecosystems are altered. There is also growing consensus that climate change will have significant adverse impacts on the forest base important to forest-dependent communities. With a high level of perceived risk, communities may be less confident in investing in forest management, or in developing forest-based business opportunities or even implementing policies and strategies to protect the integrity of the forest base. Investigation is needed into the potential impacts of the threat and management responses for mitigation and recovery.
3. Site Description This section of the strategy provides background and context relating to the physical geography, history, people, economics, and land use characteristics of the EOMF.
3.1 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT The EOMF is one of the largest model forests in the Canadian Model Forest Network, stretching over 15,000 square kilometres or 1.5 million hectares. The EOMF is separated from New York State to the south by the St. Lawrence River, and from the province of Quebec to the north by the Ottawa River. The extents of Lanark County and the United Counties of Leeds and Grenville establish the western limits while the provincial boundary with Quebec establishes the eastern boundary (Figure 1). It also includes the territories of the Mohawk Community of Akwesasne. The EOMF is a mosaic of agricultural land (55%), upland forest (25%), wetland (10%), open water (7%) and intensively developed land (3%). Additional contextual site maps are included in Appendix C. Figure 1: The geographic location of the Eastern Ontario Model Forest. The EOMF borders New York State and Quebec in southeastern Ontario.
3.1.1 Physical Geography Shaped by glaciers 10,000 years ago, eastern Ontario is a lowland region surrounded by the Laurentian Highlands to the north, the Madawaska
-3-
Highlands to the west, and the Adirondack Mountains to the south. The region’s geomorphology and topography are quite variable ranging from flat to rolling expanses of till and organic soils in the east to rugged exposed granite outcrops and thin soils in the west. Extending into New York State via the Frontenac Axis from Lanark County, the rugged Canadian Shield acts as an important north-south migration pathway for wildlife. Human intervention such as tile drainage and the application of fertilizer have made close to 50% of eastern Ontario suitable for agriculture. Mineral exploration and extraction is mostly limited to small limestone quarry operations. The Ottawa River and St. Lawrence River are the two major drainage basins in eastern Ontario. Primarily in the west where the soils are thin or the Shield is exposed, there are over 12,000 lakes, ponds, rivers and reservoirs, and in poorly drained areas with little topography there are close to 19,000 wetlands. With some townships having lost up to 80% of their wetlands to land use change, 60% of the region’s remaining wetlands are deciduous swamps. Also present are marshes, fens and bogs – most notably, Mer Bleue Bog and Alfred Bog. Eastern Ontario also has an extensive natural and constructed drainage network with over 21,500 kilometres of drains, ditches, creeks and streams; many of which occur in the agricultural region in the east. The mixed-wood forest blanketed the area until around two hundred years ago, when Europeans began to settle. Most of the original forest was used in the lumber trade or for manufacturing potash, and the land was then converted into agricultural production. As a result, there is very little old-growth forest in the region. Today, the forests of eastern Ontario are extremely fragmented—making up approximately 34% of the landscape. These relatively young, unevenaged forests are part of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence (GLSL) forest region—a transitional area between the southern, hardwood-dominated Carolinian forest region and the predominantly coniferous Boreal forest region to the north. Many of the forests in eastern Ontario are dominated by sugar maple and beech, along with a wide number of other associated species such as birch, basswood, ash and poplar. Wetter sites often support stands with red maple, black ash, white spruce, tamarack and eastern white cedar. Stands of hemlock, white pine and white spruce are also common. White pine, red pine, and red oak are common on drier soils. Large plantations, slowly evolving into hardwood forests, exist in the region: a testament to afforestation activities started in the 1920’s to reclaim cleared lands. Characteristic wildlife includes deer, black bear, moose, hare, chipmunk, waterfowl and other birds. The EOMF encompasses five provincial parks, one national park, the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve, as well as a multitude of conservation areas, community forests and nature reserves.
3.1.2 History and People Traditionally, the Algonquins and the Haudenosaunee peoples have inhabited eastern Ontario as well as other parts of Ontario, Quebec and northern New York State. Today, the largest First Nations community in eastern Ontario is the Mohawk Community of Akwesasne, located across the intersection of the New York-Ontario-Quebec borders on the south bank of the St. Lawrence River near Cornwall. The First Nations population in eastern Ontario is approximately 1.3% of the total population today. French explorers and fur traders were the first Europeans to pass through eastern Ontario in the early 1600’s. Permanent settlements were established as early as 1790; however, more intense immigration occurred following the War of 1812 by many people of different nationalities including American, British, French, Scottish, German, and Irish. Language in eastern Ontario very closely parallels the original settlement pattern of these pioneers. French settlement migrated along the Ottawa River from Quebec City, resulting in the largest French speaking population in Ontario. Irish and American immigrants populated areas along the St. Lawrence and to the north, resulting in the Anglo-Saxon communities remaining to this day. Ottawa is the exception due to recent immigration, with 20% of the population speaking languages other than French or English. In the last quarter century, the population of eastern Ontario has grown at a rate of over 10% per decade to over 1.2 million people; three quarters of whom now live in the largest city in the region, Ottawa. Brockville and Cornwall are the next largest cities respectively. Rural eastern Ontario is comprised of over 600 small towns, villages, hamlets, and settlements – many with long histories dating back to original settlers. There are close to 400,000 parcels of land, 90% of which are under private ownership. The road infrastructure necessary to support the region’s growing population
-4-
totals over 18,000 kilometres of roads (70% of which are paved). The dichotomy between urban and rural is most evident in population density: Ottawa’s urban core has a population density of over 3,000 people per square kilometre, while surrounding counties have values closer to 30! Despite lower density, house construction in rural eastern Ontario is very strong; primarily due to the expansion of urban areas and the establishment of rural estate lots. In the last five years, the rural part of Ottawa has seen the combined footprint of the growing rural villages, towns, and hamlets exceed the area of new growth within the urban boundary. According to the Ontario Ministry of Finance, the population of eastern Ontario is expected to grow to over 1.5 million by 2031. Trends in regional demographics based on survey results indicate that local young people are leaving rural areas to undertake educational or career opportunities in urban centres. Conversely, the large baby boom generation, now retiring, is moving into the area, specifically onto rural properties or into small villages. In fact, the average age of rural, non-farm landowners in southern Ontario is 59, raising concerns about the long-term stewardship of the rural landscape. Other urban dwellers, particularly in Ottawa, are purchasing rural properties to use as weekend cottages or as a longer-term retirement strategy. These urbanites tend to be sensitive to environmental issues; as a result, they exhibit a hesitation for traditional rural, land-based activities like forestry, mining and hunting. Traditional rural non-farm landowners are concerned about the environment and rank woodlot management as a top area of interest for further education, while admitting that naturalization and income opportunities from resource management are areas in which they are least knowledgeable.
3.1.3 Economics and Land Use Eastern Ontario’s economic history is rooted in primary industries like forestry and agriculture. In the late 1700’s through to the middle of the 1800’s, much of eastern Ontario’s pine and oak forests were exploited for ship building and export to Europe. Agriculture took hold on the cleared lands and exists today in much of the region. With the advent of electricity and mechanized transportation came a new skilled workforce populating eastern Ontario’s urban centres. With the Nation’s Capital in eastern Ontario, the government quickly became the region’s largest employer, providing over 100,000 jobs today. Cultural and civic attractions, natural heritage and history, entertainment and dining venues all contribute to the strong tourism sector in eastern Ontario. In 2004, more than 18 million people visited the region and spent approximately $2.1 billion. Approximately half of these tourists visited the City of Ottawa, while the remainder took in the surrounding counties. Tourism creates close to 30,000 full-time, part-time, or seasonal jobs in the region annually. Forestry and agriculture are much smaller sectors in today’s economy now driven by advanced technology and professional services in urban areas. The City of Ottawa is now home to over 70% of the experienced labour force, and is the largest economic centre between Montreal and Toronto. Again reinforcing a rural-urban divide, eastern Ontario’s rural areas are engaged in primary and secondary industries, collecting and processing raw materials. There are close to 700 manufacturers in eastern Ontario and western Quebec, employing approximately 41,000 people in creating a variety of products. The top four manufacturing clusters are computer and electronics, metals and fabricated metal products, chemicals and plastics, and wood-based products. These manufacturing and processing firms support eastern Ontario’s rural economy. Due to fragmented forests and parcelization of woodlots, the scale of forest operations is smaller and less intensive than in northern Ontario, and is comprised of small-scale harvesting and value-added wood product manufacturing. There are over 200 facilities adding value to primary wood products in the form of millwork, cabinetry, and furniture, among other products. They support over 6,000 rural jobs and generate $358 million in gross revenue. With over $35 million of mostly primary wood products in the form of lumber transported through eastern Ontario each year, coupled with significant imports of millwork for construction, the value-added wood product sector has great potential for growth. There are two forest management units (crown land under license for sustainable harvest) within the region: the Mazinaw-Lanark Forest in Lanark County, and the Ottawa Valley Forest in Renfrew County. There are 10 registered sawmills in the broader region producing over 20 million board feet of lumber each year and more than 55,000 cubic metres of wood by-products in the form of chips, bark, sawdust, and shavings.
-5-
Agriculture is a strong part of eastern Ontario’s history, culture and economy. The region accounts for 15.6% of the farms in the province of Ontario. While there are approximately 8,000 farms in the region, their number is decreasing while their size is increasing, due to both amalgamation and loss of farmland to other land uses. Roughly 70% of the farms are privately owned and operated, with major farm types being dairy, beef cattle, grain and field crops. Gross farm revenue for eastern Ontario has doubled in the last 20 years with annual farm sales generating in the order of $800 million.
The Eastern Ontario Model Forest: An Important Community Asset • • •
• •
The forest is part of a larger ecosystem and economic region that is interconnected across provincial and international boundaries. With recent mill closures and shifts in demand, this region has a significant volume of available wood fibre that could support new forest-based economic opportunities. Non-timber forest products are important. For example, the region provides one quarter (about $2.5 million dollars worth) of Ontario’s maple syrup. There are over 400 species of plants used medicinally in the province, and 37 forest species serve as a source of pollen and nectar to bees in the production of honey. The potential for mushroom production in Renfrew County is estimated at over $30 million per year, while the value of tree-nut production in Ontario is estimated to be $300,000 per year. One million people in and around the area pose a diverse range of expectations for the forest, including forest products, recreational activities, and the aesthetic improvement of the communities in which they live. The many social and environmental values provided by the forest have economic worth.
4. Purpose, Guiding Philosophy, Vision and Objectives 4. 1 PURPOSE AND GUIDING PHILOSOPHY Building upon our achievements over the last fifteen years as a contributing member of the Canadian Model Forest Network (CMFN), and through the engagement of local partners, the EOMF will continue to promote sustainable forest communities in eastern Ontario and beyond. The EOMF’s purpose is:
To provide a platform for collaborative community efforts to promote and ensure sustainable forest communities. The EOMF is founded on the concept of forests for seven generations. The guiding philosophy underpinning this concept, shared with us by our First Nations partners at Akwesasne, is the Naturalized Knowledge System (NKS) which embraces the principles of respect, equity, and empowerment (see Table 1). Table 1: Naturalized Knowledge System principles and associated tools.
-6-
Setting the stage for our vision, our guiding philosophy supports our desire to balance the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainability within a mosaic of rural and urban-built and natural features. The rural and urban areas that comprise the overall landscape are fundamentally linked, and therefore cannot be treated in isolation when responding to issues of forest sustainability and community well-being. We also recognize that the landscape which supports our forest-dependent communities is characterized by both market-based economic value as well as natural capital in the form of ecological goods and services.
Our vision of forests for seven generations is a sustainable landscape valued by all communities.
4.2 FIVE-YEAR GOAL AND OBJECTIVES FOR THE FOREST COMMUNITIES PROGRAM Over the next five years our goal will be to foster community efforts that promote and support sustainable forest communities in the lower Great Lakes-St. Lawrence basin. We will achieve this through a renewed social and economic focus on forest community stability. Although our efforts will be focused locally, the sharing and transfer of knowledge across the broader Canadian and global landscapes is also viewed as fundamentally important.
Objective 1 To work with communities (including industry, government, First Nations) and other stakeholders to develop new— and advance existing—forest-based opportunities. Achieved by: • Exploring and facilitating the transition to a bio-based community (Activity Area 1) • Advancing innovative adoption of forest certification by communities, with particular reference to market access (Activity Area 2)
Objective 2 To work with communities to pilot ideas, conduct research and develop integrated, multi-sector approaches—based on science and innovation—that enable them to respond to a forest sector in transition and to build community capacity. Achieved by: • Creating and transferring new knowledge (and associated frameworks) capable of describing, analyzing and forecasting aspects of forest sector dependencies and related implications for communities (Activity Area 3) • Assessing and evaluating existing knowledge, incorporating naturalized knowledge, and formulating new concepts (Activity Area 4)
Objective 3 To develop and share sustainable forest management knowledge, practices, tools, and experiences with international forest-dependent communities in keeping with Canada’s international forest agenda. Achieved by: • Building partnerships and generating equity (Activity Area 5) • Maintaining and enhancing the capacity to communicate effectively with a diverse array of communities (Activity Area 6) • Being an ambassador for the Forest Communities Program (Activity Area 7) These objectives are closely aligned with those of the Forest Communities Program, as illustrated in Table 2.
-7-
The objectives of the Forest Communities Program aim . . .
Over the next five years, the EOMF will . . .
In more detail, the EOMF will be . . .
This activity will foster strong forest-dependent communities by . . .
To pilot ideas, conduct experiments and develop models that assist forest-based communities to build capacity and meet the opportunities and challenges of a forest sector in transition.
Work with communities to pilot ideas, conduct research and develop integrated, multisector approaches—based on science and innovation—that enable them to respond to a forest sector in transition and to build community capacity (Objective 2)
Creating and transferring new knowledge (and associated frameworks) capable of describing, analyzing and forecasting aspects of forest sector dependencies and related implications for communities (Activity Area 3)
Enhancing community engagement in the development, refinement and implementation of innovative, science-based frameworks and mechanisms which enable them to capitalize on the contribution of forests as assets to communities
To develop and share integrated, multi-sector approaches, based on science and innovation, to address community transition that involves new and existing natural resource stakeholders.
Assessing and evaluating existing knowledge, incorporating naturalized knowledge, and formulating new concepts (Activity Area 4)
To work with industry and other community-level stakeholders to develop new forest-based opportunities for rural Canada.
Work with communities (including industry, government, First Nations) and other stakeholders to develop new—and advance existing—forest-based opportunities (Objective 1)
Exploring and facilitating the transition to a bio-based community (Activity Area 1)
To develop and share sustainable forest management knowledge, practices, tools and experiences with international forest-based communities and their Model Forests, in keeping with Canada’s international forest agenda.
Develop and share sustainable forest management knowledge, practices, tools, and experiences with international forest-dependent communities in keeping with Canada’s international forest agenda (Objective 3)
Building partnerships and generating equity (Activity Area 5)
Advancing innovative adoption of forest certification by communities, with particular reference to market access (Activity Area 2)
Maintaining and enhancing the capacity to communicate effectively with a diverse array of communities (Activity Area 6) Being an ambassador for the Forest Communities Program (Activity Area 7)
Table 2: A comparison of EOMF and FCP objectives.
-8-
Developing and demonstrating new, locally relevant, forest-based opportunities to promote a healthy forest sector through sustainable processing and procurement projects.
Empowering them with knowledge, training, and equity through a variety of proven partnership-based transfer mechanisms to both overcome challenges and take advantage of opportunities in the changing forest sector.
5. Activities, Outputs & Outcomes: Delivering on Our Five-Year Plan (2007-2012) Activity areas, outputs and outcomes are described in this section of the strategy. Activity areas are best described as a suite of activities (or a program) that moves us towards achieving our objective; this strategy consists of a total of seven activity areas. Outputs refer to products that are concrete and tangible, arising from activity areas. Outcomes refer to a key result, change or impact (e.g., a change in attitude or adoption of a new technique) stemming from specific activity areas and deliverables, and can be described as immediate (1-2 years), intermediate (3-5 years) or long-term (5 years and beyond). An adaptive management approach will be employed in the delivery of the program, enabling the EOMF to respond to emerging opportunities and changing circumstances.
5.1 WORKING WITH COMMUNITIES (INCLUDING INDUSTRY, GOVERNMENT, FIRST NATIONS) AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS TO DEVELOP NEW—AND ADVANCE EXISTING— FOREST-BASED OPPORTUNITIES (OBJECTIVE 1)
5.1.1 Exploring and facilitating the transition to a bio-based community (Activity Area 1) 5.1.1.1 Municipal bioproducts strategy, business case, design concept and promotion of an eco-industrial site for bioproducts (Output 1) Not since the 1970’s oil crisis has there been such a strong interest in using the forest as feedstock beyond traditional paper and solid wood products. An intensive search is on to find climate change-friendly energy sources. Ongoing research and development in the realm of bioenergy, and more recently bioproducts, shows potential for commercialization and is providing the knowledge needed to move ahead. An apparently available supply of forest biomass is seen as real opportunity for the forest-dependent communities in eastern Ontario. The EOMF is wellpositioned to respond to this opportunity given recent work investigating the potential transformation of the Domtar mill at Cornwall (closed in 2005) to produce bioproducts, and given the strong local support for pursuing the concept of a “wood centre” for eastern Ontario. The development of a business case leading to the establishment of an eastern Ontario-based eco-industrial site will be led by the EOMF in concert with partners including Eastern Ontario Development Program, Grenville Community Futures Development Corporation, the Township of Edwardsburgh/Cardinal, the University of Toronto, BIOCAP Canada Foundation, the Eastern Lake Ontario Regional Innovation Network (ELORIN), the Canadian Fibre Centre, the State University of New York-College of Environmental Science and Forestry (SUNY-ESF), the Ferguson Forest Centre, the Municipality of North Grenville and others. The EOMF will work with communities including Cloyne, Trenton, Eganville and Pembroke to establish reliable information on supply and costs for biomass for new bio-based enterprises. OUTCOMES: • Buy-in of partners dedicated to a bio-based future (immediate) • Increased perception of forests as being a valuable component of a bio-based economy (immediate) • Community leadership in transitioning to a bio-based future (intermediate) • Stimulation of public and private sector investment in bio-based enterprises (intermediate) • The establishment of an eco-industrial site in eastern Ontario (long term) • The establishment of a collaborative approach to community economic development (long term)
-9-
5.1.2 Advancing innovative adoption of forest certification by communities, with particular reference to market access (Activity Area 2) 5.1.2.1 A community-directed framework for forest management and chain of custody certification for private woodlots, community-based forests, public lands and forest product manufacturers throughout the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence forest region (Output 1) The advancement of forest certification in eastern Ontario holds great potential for the communities of eastern Ontario and adjacent regions. Some examples include the potential for carving out a niche as a FSC-certified wood source, the creation of new and unique markets, and adding value to existing forest product manufacturers. Building on its highly successful private land forest certification program launched under the Canadian Model Forest Program, the EOMF will focus on innovative aspects of certification that will allow communities to grow a large base of certified forests and related enterprises, with the intent of increasing the capacity of communities to meet emerging market opportunities. There is an increasing demand for certified forest materials, which represents an emerging opportunity; it at the same time could limit market access and economic enterprises if suitable certified material cannot be accessed. Additionally, there is a need to overcome barriers through a transition to community-based clusters of certified forests which would include publicly owned forest areas. There is also a need to explore mechanisms to extend cost-effective forest certification to Crown land and Sustainable Forest Licence areas (SFLs) not currently covered by certification. The EOMF, alongside partners, will build community capacity to deliver forestry-focused workshops to woodlot owners, forest managers and forest practitioners, and will mentor groups in the application of certification principles, procedures and practices. The EOMF will also assemble a network of value-added, forest-based businesses committed to using and promoting certified forest products. These efforts will engage the full complement of ‘communities’ in the chain of custody – from woodlot owners through to the consumers of forest products. The potential exists for this region to differentiate itself as a leader in the comprehensive implementation of forest certification for private woodlots, community forests, and chain of custody enterprises. Certification accesses forests that otherwise would not be contributing to the local economy due to fears of landowners over harvesting activities relative to their ownership objectives. Certification provides an assurance to landowners that all forest values are being respected, and instills a confidence and willingness to participate in the local economy. The certification effort complements the wood centre initiative in that is a source of supply of certified materials. In turn, the wood centre initiative plays a role in closing the gaps in the value chain between the forest and the consumer. Certification could also prove to be an effective delivery mechanism for other program initiatives such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, and non-timber forest products. Examples of partners include the United Counties of Prescott-Russell, South Nation Conservation, the Ontario Woodlot Association, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (including the strong participation of local stewardship councils), the Nature Conservancy of Canada, the County of Lanark, the Township of Edwardsburgh/Cardinal, the Upper Canada Woods Cooperative and the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve. OUTCOMES: • An enhanced and available network of certified forests and value-added, forest-based businesses using and promoting certified products (immediate) • A community-driven initiative leading to enhanced market access (intermediate) • Rural eastern Ontario recognized as a leader in the implementation of forest certification (long-term)
- 10 -
5.2 WORKING WITH COMMUNITIES TO PILOT IDEAS, CONDUCT RESEARCH AND DEVELOP INTEGRATED, MULTI-SECTOR APPROACHES—BASED ON SCIENCE AND INNOVATION—THAT ENABLE THEM TO RESPOND TO A FOREST SECTOR IN TRANSITION AND TO BUILD COMMUNITY CAPACITY (OBJECTIVE 2)
5.2.1 Creating and transferring new knowledge (and associated frameworks) capable of describing, analyzing and forecasting aspects of forest sector dependencies and related implications for communities (Activity Area 3) 5.2.1.1 Tools and processes for understanding and capitalizing on the contribution of forests as assets to communities (Output 1) The EOMF will determine and encourage adoption of mechanisms for describing community assets the forest represents, including tools for understanding the socio-economic contribution of forests and their impact on forestdependent communities. There is also a need to explore the impact on communities of changing demographics, societal attitudes, and the relationship between rural and urban communities. The City of Ottawa, with its significant area of rural communities embedded within an urban framework, presents an ideal “subject” for pursuing these areas of interest. Consideration needs to extend to the interaction amongst different elements of the rural economy such as agriculture, manufacturing and housing. We will also continue to evolve this approach through collaboration and pilot projects with leading community partners such as the United Counties of Prescott-Russell and the Frontenac Arch Biosphere Reserve. Further, the EOMF will work alongside the Mohawk community of Akwesasne as it develops its community-wide forest strategy that will employ practices and approaches which could be of value when shared with other communities (black ash basket making industry, community health, and bioenergy are among elements that would be addressed in this community forest strategy). OUTCOMES: • Enhanced understandings within communities of their assets (immediate) • Enhanced engagement of communities in the development of tools/processes to respond to changing forest sector (immediate) • Improved decision making in communities (intermediate) • Effective community strategies for responding to a forest sector in change formulated on the basis of sound information (long-term)
5.2.1.2 Science needs program (Output 2) There is a recognized disconnect between the forest science being generated by researchers and its effective transfer to—and subsequent application by—communities. For example, in eastern Ontario, partners have stated an explicit need for better science to address issues affecting community (county) forests such as root rots, and various disease and insect problems. The sound application of credible science will be vital in ensuring that these valuable forest areas sustain an ongoing flow of benefits – economic, social and environmental. Partners have also identified some emerging science needs in the realm of bio-based industries, with particular reference to feedstocks. The EOMF will work closely with community (county) forest managers, forest scientists, and researchers in complimentary disciplines (e.g., University of Toronto, Carleton University, University of Ottawa, State University
- 11 -
of New York-College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Queen’s University, University of Guelph) to determine forest science needs and identify means of empowering communities to respond to related science issues. This work will be facilitated by already-established linkages with science-based agencies and organizations and centres of scientific expertise such as the Great Lakes Forestry Centre (Canadian Forest Service, Canadian Fibre Centre), the St. Lawrence River Institute of Environmental Sciences, the Forest Gene Conservation Association, the Ontario Forest Research Institute, the Carleton University Landscape Ecology Lab, and the Petawawa National Research Forest. It will also strengthen efforts underway as part of our memorandum of understanding with the State University of New York-College of Environmental Science and Forestry to address science issues of mutual interest. OUTCOMES: • An understanding of the forest science needs of communities and an enhanced capacity to answer those needs (immediate) • Strategic mechanisms established for ongoing engagement of partners in efforts to address the forest science needs of communities (intermediate) • New community initiatives which are based on the sound application of credible science (long-term)
5.2.1.3 Broad-spectrum forest risk assessment tools (Output 3) Threats to forest health have seemingly escalated in recent times. From our first-hand experience with the large-scale ice storm that struck in 1998, to our more recent involvement in helping others to respond to the appearance of both Asian long-horned beetle and emerald ash borer in southern Ontario, the threats are very real and the consequences potentially devastating for communities (e.g., losses to the maple industry in eastern Ontario and elsewhere were significant in the wake of the ice storm; a migration of the emerald ash borer into eastern Ontario could obliterate the black ash basket making industry so important to the Mohawk Community of Akwesasne and other First Nations communities). The EOMF, well-recognized as a neutral testing ground, will act as the catalyst in developing broad-spectrum forest risk assessment tools – with an emphasis on disturbance, stress and institutional barriers – that position communities to better respond to forest health challenges (real and anticipated) that pose a threat to long-term community stability. Given the strong urban linkage in this body of work (e.g., invasive species often emanating outwards across the landscape following arrival in major cities and ports), it will involve communities large and small—from the City of Ottawa through to the many smaller cities, towns and villages in eastern Ontario—and will strengthen efforts underway by a host of partners including the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and the Canadian Forest Service. OUTCOMES: • A strategic approach to addressing forest health and associated risks to communities (immediate) • Communities are well equipped to anticipate and respond to forest health challenges that pose a threat to longterm community stability (intermediate) • Enhanced community stability (long-term)
5.2.2 Assessing and evaluating existing knowledge, incorporating naturalized knowledge, and formulating new concepts (Activity Area 4) 5.2.2.1 Pilot study of mechanisms capturing economic returns for the provision of EG&S (Output 1) Canada’s history of settlement tells a compelling tale of how forests were appraised in times past. Forests were timber, an economic boon to progress. Today, there is recognition of a more complete range of values that forests afford, from
- 12 -
the ecological functions they serve such as water and air purification, to the habitat they provide and the medicinal plants they support. Questions of appraising (costing) forest values remain more challenging. Natural capital accounting, and especially the valuation of ecological goods and services (EG&S), continues to be an area of interest to partners (e.g., Natural Resources Canada, Environment Canada). At the recent Global Forum sponsored by the International Model Forest Network Secretariat, dialogue was initiated relative to some of the work underway in Costa Rica involving payment for ecological goods and services. The EOMF has continued this dialogue with the Latin American and Caribbean Model Forest Network (LAC-Net), and is positioned to explore opportunities for eastern Ontario building on the Costa Rican model and experiences from elsewhere. Working closely with the Canadian Model Forest Network, Canadian Federation of Woodlot Owners, Fundy Model Forest, Lake Abitibi Model Forest and others such as the University of Guelph, the University of New Brunswick and the proposed Kristianstads model forest in southern Sweden, the EOMF will conduct a pilot study of mechanisms capturing economic returns for the provision of EG&S – the results of which can then be applied by communities in their decision-making. This will be valuable work from a number of perspectives. It will assist community decision-making by framing the importance of forests to community health. It will also serve to focus attention on some of the issues associated with the growing disconnect between rural and urban communities like the growing animosity among landowners who justifiably feel as though they bear the full responsibility and costs of managing the resources upon which all of society depends. In many ways this work represents an opportunity to re-establish a new social contract between rural and urban areas, opening up new possibilities for pursuing collective forest-based opportunities. Given the expressed interest in EG&S in various regions across Canada, we foresee working closely alongside the Canadian Model Forest Network in taking a strategic approach to this work. OUTCOMES: • Enhanced understanding and consensus around EG&S (immediate) • Enhanced community engagement in the development of EG&S mechanisms (intermediate) • Application of appropriate EG&S mechanisms by communities (long-term)
5.3 DEVELOPING AND SHARING SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT KNOWLEDGE, PRACTICES, TOOLS, AND EXPERIENCES WITH INTERNATIONAL FOREST-DEPENDENT COMMUNITIES IN KEEPING WITH CANADA’S INTERNATIONAL FOREST AGENDA (OBJECTIVE 3)
5.3.1 Building partnerships and generating equity (Activity Area 5) 5.3.1.1 Funding strategy and proposals (Output 1) Pursuing new opportunities in support of sustainable forest communities will require resources. The EOMF has become known for its competency in acquiring and managing resources through effective proposal creation and subsequent project coordination by engaging all partners from concept to implementation. The EOMF will continue to play a facilitating role in generating equity that is subsequently put to best use in furthering the objectives of the collective forest/conservation community. An equity task team will play a lead role in overseeing the development of the associated funding strategy and resulting proposals. OUTCOMES: • More strategic direction for generating equity (immediate)
- 13 -
• •
Increased self-sufficiency through partnerships (intermediate) Increased capacity within the natural resource-based community (long-term)
5.3.1.2 Community mentoring program (Output 2) The application of the many lessons shared with us by the Haudenosaunee people and embodied in the Naturalized Knowledge System (NKS) remains a novel and intriguing concept to many (as expressed recently by several international model forest communities including Russia, Chile and LAC-Net). Our current capacity-building exercise with the Swedish model forests represents another example of the continuing strong interest in the NKS. Fusing naturalized knowledge with conventional western science is a very powerful capacity-building tool for communities trying to respond to the challenges associated with a changing (in some cases rapidly changing) forest sector. The Mohawk Council of Akwesasne remains a devoted EOMF partner, and has expressed its willingness to assist in the transfer of NKS principles in the form of a community mentoring program to forest communities globally. OUTCOMES: • Familiarity with best governance and partnering practices by other organizations and communities (immediate) • Adoption of best governance and partnering practices by other organizations and communities (intermediate) • Evolution to more sophisticated and effective techniques to be applied in more complex situations (long-term)
5.3.2 Maintaining and enhancing the capacity to communicate effectively with a diverse array of communities (Activity Area 6) 5.3.2.1 Marketing strategy (Output 1) Efforts to ensure that the EOMF has a strong presence in eastern Ontario and is recognized as a trusted community leader will rely on an effective marketing strategy. A comprehensive marketing strategy will be developed as part of the EOMF Communications and Outreach Plan. Effective marketing will ensure that we retain existing partners, and attract new ones, resulting in a greater capacity to respond to community needs. It will also ensure good recognition of the Forest Communities Program. As a guiding principle, the EOMF, as part of its corporate image, will recognize partners for their essential contributions (e.g., by abiding by the guidelines set out under the Contribution Agreement). OUTCOMES: • Increased awareness of the EOMF and the importance of sustainable forest communities (immediate) • Increased number of collaborations (immediate) • Increased equity generation leading to greater financial sustainability beyond FCP (intermediate) • Broader awareness geographically across ‘spheres of influence’ (long-term)
5.3.2.2 Community outreach and partnership-based events and training sessions (Output 2) Partners and communities deliver a number of outreach events and training sessions in eastern Ontario (e.g., Forest Fair of Eastern Ontario, Winter Woodlot Conference). These events represent an important opportunity for the EOMF to introduce new concepts, ideas, processes and products relative to the Forest Communities Program to a broad audience, and continue to help in meeting the local community’s stated desire for interaction with knowledgeable experts.
- 14 -
The EOMF will contribute to a number of established events (e.g., Winter Woodlot Conference) and develop new platforms for outreach that reflect community interests and needs, and empower them in addressing ongoing changes and challenges in the forest sector (e.g., bioenergy/bioproduct opportunities, climate change impacts in communities). OUTCOMES: • Increased awareness in the community of the importance of sustainable forest communities (immediate) • Meeting the needs of the community for information and for direct interaction (immediate) • Increased interaction with the community between events (intermediate) • Greater community capacity to address changes and challenges in the forest sector (long-term)
5.3.2.3 Publications catalog containing technical reports, maps, information and data (Output 3) The publications catalogue represents the core technical content stemming from programs and partnership activities. It is the collective set of technical reports, documents, maps, information and data that is assembled by the EOMF for transfer to partners and communities. The EOMF will continue to expand the content of its publications catalogue and see that it is effectively and broadly transferred to communities (e.g., via the Web, outreach events). Efforts will ensure that the content of the publications catalogue is entered into and made available through Library and Archives Canada, which collects and preserves Canada’s documentary heritage, and also works closely with other archives and libraries to share materials as widely as possible. Efforts will also be made to translate key FCP information of benefit to the Francophone community. The EOMF Web site will be looked to as a key transfer mechanism, but not to the exclusion of more traditional transfer mechanisms. The Web site will be enhanced to improve the availability of—and access to—information generated through various EOMF FCP programs and partnership activities. The site will employ advanced Web technologies such as Web services and online mapping and will also conform to internationally-recognized standards. Possible synergies with the Canadian Model Forest Network Web site will be explored. OUTCOMES: • Partners and communities have access to EOMF information and tools (immediate) • Expanded publications catalogue inventory with partner and community input to content and revisions (intermediate) • Better informed communities employing more effective and appropriate on-the-ground activities in support of sustainable forest communities (long-term)
5.3.3 Serving as an ambassador for the Forest Communities Program (Activity Area 7) 5.3.3.1 Ambassador program (Output 1) The EOMF has considerable past experience in hosting international exchanges on behalf of the Canadian Model Forest Network and the International Model Forest Network Secretariat. Examples of exchanges range from site visits from various international communities establishing model forests, to the training of CUSO co-operands in the international community practice of model forests, and the hosting of study tours such as TRANSFOR, field courses. Given this experience and our close proximity to Ottawa, the EOMF has a unique opportunity to serve as an ambassador for the Forest Communities Program. In cooperation with and on behalf of other FCP sites, the EOMF will work to foster networking and the building of relationships with communities around the globe, introducing them to the concepts of what constitutes a model forest, and how these principles are contributing to sustainable forest communities. An important part of this effort will include coordinating closely with the Canadian Forest Service, the International Model Forest Network Secretariat, along with other Federal government departments and
- 15 -
agencies. By showcasing Canadian examples of how we are improving sustainable forest management practices, we can assist Canada in meeting its international forest agenda. The EOMF will also work collaboratively with the Canadian Model Forest Network and the International Model Forest Network Secretariat to develop effective networking, outreach, and transfer mechanisms in support of sustainable forest communities. Critical to this is the building and strengthening of a network of communities serving as examples to international forest-dependent communities. The EOMF will look to its many partners and community leaders in bolstering this effort. OUTCOMES: • Establishment of an effective protocol for responding to interests or requests for site visits and exchanges (immediate) • Strengthening of a network of communities serving as examples to international forest-dependent communities (intermediate) • An increased understanding and awareness of the Forest Communities Program in communities around the globe and advancement of Canada’s international forest agenda (long-term)
6. Stakeholders/Beneficiaries and Impacts The following matrix outlines expected impacts on various stakeholders resulting from program activities and outcomes. The measurement of desired impacts on stakeholders is also intimately linked with the Performance Measurement Strategy outlined in Appendix B. A list of partners is included in Appendix G. Stakeholder
Impact
Measurement
NRCan - CFS
Improved information for policy making, programming and decision processes; efficient program delivery; leveraged funding; enhanced intergovernmental cooperation Increased effectiveness and efficiency as a network Reinforcement of Canadian leadership; strengthening of model forest sites from improved training; enhanced credibility by showcasing successful domestic site Improved information for policy making, programming and decision processes; leveraged funding Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions Trial opportunities for provincial policy making, programming and decision processes; delivery capacity for programs; increased community participation; leveraged funding Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions; opportunities to participate in and benefit from diversification projects; avenue to address unique needs and opportunities; increased positive image perceived in surrounding communities
Reports and plans submitted under the Contribution Agreement
CMFN / FCP sites IMFNS
Other Federal departments National and local associations Non-government organizations Provincial governments
First Nations governments
- 16 -
CMFN annual report Reports from IMNFS and feedback from other regional networks
Solicited feedback and reporting under MOU’s Solicited feedback from national associations and site-level reporting Solicited feedback from provincial organizations and site-level reporting Solicited feedback and value measured through financial contributions, formal collaborations, agreements Solicited feedback from national organizations and site-level reporting
Stakeholder
Impact
Measurement
Municipal governments
Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions; an avenue for working with and influencing provincial and national policy; a platform for economic diversification projects Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions; retention/positive transformation of forest-based businesses
Solicited feedback from national organizations and site-level reporting; review of economic plans; participation in projects or project funding Solicited feedback from provincial organizations, site-level reporting and financial participation
Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions
Solicited feedback from national and provincial organizations, site-level reporting and financial participation; Statistics Canada Participation at site level and; feedback from other stakeholders
Traditional and transformational forest industry and associations Other rural sectors (e.g., agriculture)
Research organizations and academic institutions Forest-dependent communities Forest entrepreneurs
Forest practitioners
Individual landowners
Consumers /beneficiaries of forest goods and services
Increased relevance of product and extension opportunities Enhanced role in decision making and improved adaptation capacity; opportunities to participate in and benefit from diversification projects New business start-ups; successful transformation of existing businesses in response to changing forest sector Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions; more effective service to the community Access to better information, tools and collaborative solutions; improved quality of assets and/or income Increased understanding of importance of sustainable forest communities; enhanced role in contributing to sustainable forest communities
- 17 -
Solicited feedback from national organizations and site-level reporting Reports and feedback from Community Futures Development Corporations Site-level performance reports and feedback from national and regional partners Site-level performance reports
Site-level performance reports
7. Participating Organizations and Governance: A Capacity to Deliver The EOMF has proven successful in managing complex partnership-based initiatives. Partnerships are dynamic and require effective processes and structures to engage existing participants, involve new players and renew longstanding relationships. The approaches of the Haudenosaunee peoples as embodied in the Naturalized Knowledge System (NKS) provide many tools important in these processes. The principles of the NKS guide decision making, conflict resolution and, more importantly, conflict avoidance since emphasis is placed on partners working together. It entails a balance of equity, respect and empowerment to ensure successful consensus-based decision making. In the past number of years we have assisted and advised a number of other organizations in adopting these approaches into their decision-making structures. The EOMF participates in the Canadian Society of Association Executives which is a valuable source for information and best practices used by other high performance associations in the volunteer sector. EOMF governance is characterized by transparency, broad involvement and open participation. The result is an organization that is able to deliver on key program areas while being able to remain open and responsive to new challenges. Participants range from government and large organizations through to less formally structured community groups and individual members. They also cover the range of EOMF ‘spheres of influence’, described fully in Section 7.1.1. With a greater number of partners come additional perspectives and resources. The letters of support included in our October 2006 proposal submission are evidence of the broad base of interest and commitment to continued participation with the EOMF in the Forest Communities Program.
7.1 ROLE OF PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS A broad base of partners allows the EOMF to: • tackle issues from a holistic perspective, and include a diversity of perspectives • have a larger voice geographically and to be more visible on the landscape • build upon initiatives and identify synergies between partners easily • verify the importance and relevance of issues, opportunities and proposed activities by monitoring the degree of partner support and involvement • move forward with the confidence that we are producing the right products to meet needs • access specific expertise and critical mass not found at the EOMF • be empowered to act Our partners are involved by: • sharing what they know and have • learning from one another • informing their own networks and their audiences • directing through governance • carrying out tasks and activities • advising from their perspectives and experience • supporting with equity (including resources, expertise and complimentary efforts) Our partners are motivated to be involved for a number of reasons: • They see the value in being part of a trusted and respected partnership process that works. • The EOMF affords the opportunity to quickly and efficiently discover, link and collaborate with partners with similar interests. • The EOMF provides a mechanism to effectively generate and share additional equity and collectively define complimentary roles that minimize duplication of effort. • They are confident in “getting the job done right”. • The EOMF offers the means to build a shared asset and pool of expertise, benefiting from economies of scale. • They value the social aspect of working together and “having fun”.
- 18 -
7.1.1 Spheres of Influence: A Framework for Involvement Our framework for involving partners includes five ‘spheres of influence’ (see Figure 2) as follows:
Sphere of concentration: This core area, delineated by the existing EOMF boundary, will serve as the site of the focused effort to develop, test and apply processes, products and tools on the ground. Sphere of adoption/extension: Extending from the core area described above, this sphere will focus primarily on the adoption and the direct application of products, processes and tools most appropriate to local community needs and driven by partner interest. It includes, but is not limited to, adjacent jurisdictions (e.g., western Quebec and northern New York State). Sphere of adaptation: This sphere is considered to include the lower Great Lakes-St. Lawrence basin. Products, processes and tools will serve as useful templates for adapting to specific conditions in local areas. Sphere of collaboration: At the national level, collaboration will be focused principally through the Canadian Model Forest Network and the Forest Communities Program. Themes and activities of mutual interest will be pursued cooperatively, with efficiencies gained through the pooling of resources (equity). Sphere of exchange: Interaction at this level, directed through the International Model Forest Network Secretariat (IMFNS), will focus principally on exchange, with the aim of enhancing the global community of practice associated with model forests.
Figure 2: Spheres of influence. (a) Sphere of concentration; (b) Sphere of adoption/extension; (c) Sphere of adaptation; (d) Sphere of collaboration; (e) Sphere of exchange.
7.1.2 Process for Engagement The EOMF maintains an open and accessible structure that allows engagement of any potential partners who express interest. One of the most effective means of engaging new participants is by extending the invitation through our many partner networks (e.g., Stewardship Network of Ontario, Frontanac Arch Biosphere Reserve). We will continue to build on this approach under the FCP. We will also deliberately seek out potential contributors/beneficiaries to the program.
- 19 -
Given the high density of national-level organizations in the Ottawa area, the EOMF is uniquely positioned to strengthen their engagement in both the FCP and the CMFN.
7.1.3 Levels of Involvement There are many levels of involvement in the EOMF and oftentimes there is a step-wise progression that leads to organizations and individuals becoming more active in a wider range of activities over time. A hierarchy emerges as follows: • Interested observer • User of deliverables, participant at an event • Project team member/partner • Member of the EOMF • Member of an EOMF working group • Member of an EOMF committee • Member of the EOMF board of directors • Advisor • Staff member • Involvement in CMFN/IMFNS activities • EOMF representation on governance structures in other partner organizations Experience has shown that this is a very loose hierarchy with participants able to enter at almost any level and move between levels depending upon the circumstances. The critical mass of the organization is provided by more than 400 volunteers who contribute at various levels of the hierarchy (representing a volunteer-to-staff ratio of approximately forty to one).
7.2 GOVERNANCE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE The formal name of the organization is the “Eastern Ontario Forest Group” (EOFG) as incorporated in October 1992 under Ontario legislation as a not-for-profit corporation. The name is a reflection of the desire and foresight of the founding board of directors to evolve from—and build upon—the Canadian Model Forest Program as a starting point for long-term collaboration. However, with its selection as a model forest site the name “Eastern Ontario Model Forest” came into common usage by partners and is recognized by the public. The name Eastern Ontario Model Forest has legal status, having been officially registered as a business name for use by the EOFG. The organization also achieved charitable status several years later under the BN/registration number 134820927RR0001.
7.2.1 Structure and Role of the Board of Directors The board of directors is responsible for shaping and overseeing the strategic direction of the EOMF and ensuring accountability to members and partners. The board periodically reviews the structure and governance of the organization and identifies areas for change and improvement. It is anticipated that such a review will occur in the first year of the Forest Communities Program. The structure of the board of directors is as follows: • Comprised of 10 directors (officers are selected by the board from its members) • Six directors are elected from the EOMF membership (which represents a diverse range of interests) for staggered 3-year terms – providing for continuity and renewal • Four founding sectors are invited to appoint directors annually Ö Forest industry Ö Provincial government - 20 -
Federal government (CFS will appoint an observer, rather than a director) First Nations A number of advisors with specific expertise are also appointed by the board Ö Ö
•
Board members play a number of important roles which include: • Guiding and making decisions • Providing a broad forest perspective that considers those interested in—or affected by—activities in the forest and forest sector • Participating in events and various sessions • Representing the EOMF and the Canadian Model Forest Network (as may be appropriate)
7.2.2 Role of Committees and Working Groups Committees work under the direction of the board to provide an important knowledge base and a source of advice for the EOMF. Nested within these committees are various ad-hoc working groups focused on more specific tasks. The detailed mandates of these groups are periodically reviewed and documented in the governance procedure. The committees and working groups will be part of the overall governance review in year one of the Forest Communities Program, and will be streamlined to reflect the new program. The proposed committee structure is as follows: • Communications Committee Core focus is to provide advice on all communications and outreach matters and oversee the development and implementation of the Communications and Outreach Strategy
•
Forest Science Committee Core focus is to provide advice on all science related matters and undertake or direct selected activities that involve a high degree of science
•
Strengthening Community Networks Committee Core focus is the on-the-ground implementation of activities (and the pursuit of new opportunities) covering all spheres of influence
•
Governance Committee Core focus is to oversee overall governance processes required to sustain the organization such as equity generation, nomination and awards, and administration
7.2.3 Approach to Networking, Information Sharing and Technology Transfer A sound governance structure that involves participating organizations working closely together provides for efficiencies in networking, information sharing and technology transfer efforts. This is further supported by: • Our stated Objective 3 under this five-year strategy – To develop and share sustainable forest management knowledge, practices, tools, and experiences broadly, with particular reference to international forest-dependent communities and Canada’s international forest agenda. • Our set of associated activities for Objective 3, as described in Section 5.3, and • Our Communications and Outreach Strategy (outlined in Section 8.1)
7.2.4 Links to Existing Expertise and Research Capacity The EOMF, through its existing relationships and positive reputation, is able to draw upon considerable expertise to execute its programs. For example, the EOMF was able to rapidly draw together a pool of expertise from business, industry, academia and local community government to provide an in-depth assessment of the impacts of the recent
- 21 -
Domtar (Cornwall) mill closure and identify possible responses to that challenge (documented in the report entitled Making Lemonade from Trees: How the Domtar Pulp Mill Shut Down is Creating New Opportunities for Eastern Ontario). In partnership with the Lake Abitibi Model Forest (LAMF), there has been ongoing strong collaboration with University of Toronto and Lakehead University. Together, as the ‘Ontario Model Forest Network’, the EOMF and LAMF have also had annual sessions with the Canadian Forest Service and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources to discuss science priorities and areas of mutual interest and potential collaboration. The Ontario Network will be expanded to include the Northeast Superior Forest Community program site. The EOMF is housed on the Kemptville Campus of the University of Guelph, providing a further strong linkage to specialized expertise and research capacity. These relationships are longstanding and continue to evolve to meet current interests. Queen’s University was a founding member of the EOMF in 1992 and continues to be involved. A recent initiative involving Queen’s University, the University of Toronto, the College of Environmental Science and Forestry of the State University of New York (SUNY-ESF), BIOCAP and the Eastern Lake Ontario Regional Innovation Network (ELORIN) has been focused on developing an innovative regional approach to bioproducts and bioenergy. This effort will directly contribute to our first objective under the FCP. A memorandum of understanding has been signed between the EOMF and SUNY-ESF to acknowledge and lend support to the ongoing collaboration across the international boundary. A recently formed partnership with les Amis de la Forêt La Blanche in western Quebec will increase awareness of this unique protected area and provide for enhanced research and education opportunities. The EOMF has provided internships, work placements and cooperative support for university students from Canada, the U.S., the European Union and Japan. Many of these relationships contribute useful products and can lead to additional research work. In addition to these strong research community linkages, the EOMF has access to a number of national-level networks with considerable operational expertise. As very active partner in—and strong supporter of—the Private Woodlot Strategic Initiative of the Canadian Model Forest Network, the EOMF has formed important linkages with the Canadian Federation of Woodlot Owners and other woodlot groups across the country particularly in Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. These linkages have been further strengthened as a result of our close working relationship with the Ontario Woodlot Association. This represents valuable support as we work with forest communities where significant forest areas are in private ownership and landowners are important community members directly impacted by changes in the forest sector. It provides an important opportunity for engaging community members in the development, testing and transfer of new approaches such as payment for ecological goods and services.
7.2.5 Key Priority Involvement: The Canadian Model Forest Network The EOMF was a network participant from the initiation of the Canadian Model Forest Program in 1992 and was an active founding member of the newly incorporated Canadian Model Forest Network (CMFN) organization in 2006. As a supporter of the new organization we have: • participated in the formative strategy discussions • served on the founding board and various transition teams • provided administrative support and financial accounting • led the Marketing and Alliances Transition Team and participated on the Governance Team • assisted with various communications tasks of the Marketing and Alliances Transition Team • served as an ambassador for the CMFN by hosting Canadian visitors to the National Capital Region • collaborated on strategic initiatives such as the Private Woodlot Strategic Initiative and the Climate Change Strategic Initiative We are committed to maintaining a high level of involvement with the CMFN, as consistent with the approved FCP strategy of the CMFN. The National Capital Region is included in the core area of the EOMF and close proximity to
- 22 -
the headquarters of numerous national organizations and relevant federal government departments (e.g., National Capital Commission) gives the EOMF a special responsibility and opportunity to help advance the efforts of the CMFN. In a similar fashion, the EOMF will continue to be strongly involved with the International Model Forest Network Secretariat (IMFNS) and play an active role in: • facilitating tours • serving as an ambassador for the CMFN by hosting international visitors to the National Capital Region • providing training and workshops • facilitating technical exchanges (e.g., with CUSO and the Regional Model Forest Network for Latin American and the Caribbean) • collaboration on common initiatives • facilitating partner interaction The EOMF has established a process of working closely with the IMFNS in its networking with international sites and would continue with this successful approach. The IMFNS is a valuable partner in assessing these opportunities and understanding the value that they may hold. As the originator of the model forest concept, Canada continues to be seen as a leader respected by other participating countries. The EOMF has also assisted the Canadian Forest Service in furthering its international forest agenda by hosting various field visits (e.g., the recent field visit by the North American Forestry Commission). We remain committed to assisting both the IMFNS and CFS in fostering these efforts involving the global community.
8. Communications, Outreach and Networking Fostering community efforts that support sustainable forest communities will rely heavily on effective communications, outreach and networking activities. The EOMF is committed to working with those closest to the issues affecting our forest-dependent communities. The EOMF is uniquely positioned to reach a diverse audience ranging from local to global. At the local community level, the EOMF is well-recognized for its respectful approach to addressing issues, and has gained the reputation of a trusted and credible enabler in seeing ideas through to action. The EOMF has also gained considerable experience and know-how in working with communities far beyond its geographic boundaries – a reflection, in part, of its close working relationship with both the CMFN and the IMFNS. While opportunities of national scope will be pursued in concert with Canadian model forest counterparts, the IMFNS is envisioned as the primary conduit for pursuing opportunities with international communities.
8.1 COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH STRATEGY The following section of the proposal highlights key components of the overall EOMF Communications and Outreach Strategy. A comprehensive Communications and Outreach Plan will be completed within 4 months of operation under the Forest Communities Program. The EOMF Communications Committee will hold primary responsibility for guiding the development—and subsequent delivery—of the plan. Partner and community participation will be sought in the development and implementation of the plan.
8.1.1 Communications and Outreach Objectives Reflective of our overall vision, our Communications and Outreach objectives are as follows: 1.
To inspire action and constructive responses to forest sector transition by engaging forest-dependent communities in EOMF partnership activities.
- 23 -
2. 3. 4.
To provide ready access to—and encourage the application of—information products and tools generated by the EOMF partnership. To project an image of credibility, competency and currency. To be accountable to members, partners, funders and the public.
8.1.2 Key Messages Key messages in support of our Communications and Outreach objectives are as follows: • The EOMF is a meeting place for ideas to come to fruition – it’s “Where the forest community’s ideas and actions take shape”. • The EOMF is working closely with partners and communities to ensure forests for seven generations. • The EOMF is a source of inspiration, creativity, and innovation for communities. • The EOMF, with its partners, is producing credible information products and tools in support of sustainable forest communities.
8.1.3 Reach and Target Audiences Our reach is best described as encompassing the ‘spheres of influence’ defined earlier in Section 8.1.1, ranging from the sphere of concentration (the core area involving local communities) through to the sphere of exchange (the global community). Target audiences have been identified on the basis of these defined spheres of influence (see Table 3). As we move outwards from the sphere of concentration, our focus and messaging become more strategic. This approach builds on our history of working creatively and effectively with diverse communities and partners both within and far beyond the geographic boundaries of the EOMF.
Table 3: Target audience by sphere of influence. - 24 -
8.1.4 Communications Capacity The EOMF is well-positioned—both from the point of view of capacity and locale—to respond to communications challenges and opportunities vis-à-vis forest-dependent communities. In terms of language capacity, the EOMF has consistently made its services available in both official languages. The Francophone population forms an important part of the community in eastern Ontario, and these efforts continue to be viewed as critical. Working in collaboration with partners (e.g., Hautes Laurentides, Northeast Superior Forest Community, Boisés Est) also increases our capacity to deal effectively with language tasks such as translation, where priority needs are established through dialogue and interaction. Given its close proximity to Ottawa, the EOMF has often been called upon to host international exchanges. It has done so ably and successfully, sometimes looking to partners (e.g., IMFNS) to respond to the broader complement of languages (e.g., Spanish, German, Russian, Japanese) spoken by visiting delegations. As a result of its close bond with the Mohawk Community of Akwesasne, the EOMF has gained a particular respect for, and sensitivity to, issues of cultural diversity. Strategic considerations will take into account not only questions of language, but also the philosophies, traditions, and other values of the many diverse cultures represented locally. From the point of view of demographics, several projections have potential implications for the EOMF. For example, the projected overall increase in population, and the associated shift in age class demographics, will necessitate strategies to maintain an effective voice (e.g., as numbers grow, efforts to communicate will have to respond accordingly). Some demographic trends may take the form of opportunities. For example, the projected increase in seniors over the next 30 years in eastern Ontario (with reference to both urban and rural areas) may result in an expanded volunteer pool and knowledge base.
8.1.5 Transfer Mechanisms Needs and priorities established through collaboration with partners and communities will strongly shape transfer efforts. Transfer activities will be governed by the following guiding principles: • The EOMF will strive to reach a range of audiences, from local to global, by employing our diverse people/knowledge networks. • Community members will be intimately involved in the initial development of activities and programs, as well as their subsequent delivery. • Events and activities will be developed and delivered through partnerships. • The EOMF will strive to identify and use innovative techniques like “discovery sessions”* which have proven to be highly effective in acting as a platform for networking and sharing information. * Discovery sessions are designed to encourage the sharing, unearthing and pooling of information and ideas by partners, with a view to exploring whether there is an interest and enthusiasm in working collectively towards a particular objective. Mechanisms through which the sharing and transfer of skills, knowledge and experience will occur include: • The EOMF Web site • Our calendar/program of partnership events • People/knowledge networks • Conferences, workshops and training sessions • Forums and discovery sessions • Demonstration sites • Publications • Tours (e.g., by visiting delegations) • Media relations
- 25 -
While respecting and still employing more traditional transfer mechanisms (e.g., workshops, demonstration sites), we see great value in using the EOMF Web site as a key transfer mechanism – from the point of view of cost-effectiveness and efficiency, but also accessibility and flexibility.
8.2 CONTRIBUTIONS TO FOREST COMMUNITIES PROGRAM AND CANADIAN MODEL FOREST NETWORK COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH EFFORTS As an active participant in the Forest Communities Program and the Canadian Model Forest Network the EOMF is dedicated to working with other model forests to help deliver network-level programs and activities. In the past, assistance has ranged from delivering presentations on behalf of the network at events of strategic importance and staffing exhibits, to contributing EOMF information to various communications products (e.g., posters, reports, interactive publications CD’s) and playing a supportive role on various committees and working groups (e.g., Web Re-design Committee, National Forest Congress working group). The EOMF is prepared to assist in the development, implementation and, if appropriate, the leadership of new network-level initiatives. The EOMF is similarly devoted to assisting communications and outreach efforts of the IMNFS.
9. Administration Section 7.1 “Role of Participating Organizations” discussed roles and the involvement by partners. This is complemented by an administrative capacity to carry out important business processes expected of an incorporated not-for-profit organization and to ensure that adequate resources are allocated effectively. The EOMF’s overall five-year strategy consists of this FCP annex, along with several other annexes, which together serve to enhance program delivery and achievement of FCP objectives.
9.1 FROM STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT TO IMPLEMENTATION The EOMF has established the necessary processes and procedures to ensure that sound business practices are in place (including appropriate accounting, independent auditing, contracting, progress reporting, and evaluation) and that all regulatory requirements are met. A formal constitution and associated governance document guide the operation of the EOMF. The EOMF five-year strategic plan, with associated annexes for significant program components, is developed and approved (and reviewed and revised as necessary) by the board, providing long-term direction to the organization. A major comprehensive review or “The Advance” is scheduled for the mid-point of the five-year period to ensure that progress continues towards the vision through a meaningful set of objectives. Given the significant transition to the current program, it is anticipated that an early review and potential adjustment may be desirable. The EOMF uses a results-based management and accountability framework as an important tool for planning, monitoring, implementation, program evaluation and reporting purposes (refer to Appendices A and B). Our annual work planning process begins with a review of progress and confirmation of priorities for the coming year relative to our strategic document, annexes and contribution agreements. A work plan is prepared under the direction of, and with the approval of, the board of directors. Key documentation will include that defined under the guidelines for planning and reporting for the FCP. The board meets, at a minimum, on a bi-monthly basis to monitor performance and provide direction. An annual general meeting of members and partners receives and reviews reports, selects directors and ensures accountability. The EOMF has experience in meeting Government of Canada accountability standards as well as the requirements of Province of Ontario, international agencies such as the International Development Research Centre, major charitable foundations and other organizations. The EOMF has managed funds associated with strategic initiatives of the
- 26 -
Canadian Model Forest Program on behalf of the other participating model forests in the network. It has assisted in the formation of new organizations and often provided critical administrative support during start-up phases. For example, the EOMF has provided financial management and reporting for the newly-incorporated Canadian Model Forest Network. Membership in the Canadian Society of Association Executives provides ready access to best practices, forums for the exchange of ideas and training opportunities for staff and directors that contribute to a progressive and effective operation.
9.2 INFRASTRUCTURE, CAPACITY AND ASSETS The EOMF takes advantage of shared facilities and services, and gains some economy of scale by co-locating with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources in an office located on the Kemptville Campus of the University of Guelph. This arrangement originated in 1992 and has continued to evolve, facilitating staff collaboration and providing ready access to a full range of services including meeting facilities able to accommodate several hundred people at one time. The University of Guelph and its partners, including the EOMF, have increased the capacity of the Agroforestry Centre on campus as a community resource for research, teaching and convening meetings. Other partners in the area, such as the Township of Edwardsburgh/Cardinal and the Mohawk Community of Akwesasne, provide access to facilities as needed, representing significant in-kind contributions to the EOMF. Kemptville has been acknowledged as central location for partner meetings, and is adjacent to major transportation systems and an international airport which facilitates connections at the national and global level. The EOMF will provide initial support for establishing the CMFN office and will jointly explore with the CMFN potential benefits and efficiencies from sharing services over the longer term. Reporting to the board of directors, the general manager serves as chief staff officer for the organization responsible for implementation, strategy and policy. The following staff positions report to the general manager: • Finance and administrative coordinator responsible for businesses processes • Program planning and analysis coordinator responsible for planning, reporting, analysis and evaluation of programs • Forest communities outreach specialist responsible for operational project delivery and community engagement • Communications coordinator responsible for overseeing the development and implementation of the communications strategy, including communications products and information flows and community outreach and event coordination • Geographic information specialist (part-time) responsible for development of community capacity in asset and impact understanding and analysis. The EOMF has bilingual capacity within the staff group and at the board level. Contract staff and consultants are retained as required to carry out specific functions. Internships provide important learning experiences while helping to complete important tasks. Partners regularly contribute staff time to assist with defined tasks and activities. The average length of service is more than five years, representing considerable expertise, continuity and well-established networking connections to partners. The EOMF has a rich volume of relevant information in terms of reports, guidelines, methodologies and syntheses, securely stored and well-organized in digital format, and shared via the Internet without restrictions. We have, arguably, eastern Ontario’s largest data archive, including geospatial and tabular information at a variety of scales describing the lower Great Lakes-St. Lawrence basin area. The hardware capacity of the EOMF is comprised of state of the art computers, multi-media equipment, GPS, and peripherals (including a large-format plotter). Software packages used at the EOMF include GIS, remote sensing, modeling, graphic design, word processing, and Web development.
- 27 -
10. Finances 10.1 FIVE-YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN (2007-2012) The EOMF is requesting an annual level of support from the Forest Communities Program of $325,000 per year. These funds are important in providing a stable core and critical mass for the organization. With sufficient core equity we are able to attract partners with additional funds, to leverage additional sources of support and to ultimately have a more positive impact throughout our spheres of influence. Based upon our past performance, our established capacity and strong partner commitments (as evidenced in the letters of support included in our October 2006 proposal to the FCP), we are confident that we will meet and exceed the requirement for matching the CFS core funding. As a case in point, in Phase III of the Canadian Model Forest Program, with core funding of $500,000 per year, we successfully achieved a four-fold leveraging of more than $10 million, including direct contributions. Table 4 outlines our proposed allocation of FCP funds. Estimated revenues and in-kind contributions under the FCP) are elaborated in Table 5. In-kind assistance has been estimated at a conservative level, as partners generally under-report the actual value of their contributions. The FCP funds will provide important catalyst funding to secure partner involvement and necessary equity contributions for three objectives consisting of seven activity areas. Planned expenditures by activity area (see Section 5) are presented in Table 6. Administration is shown as a separate line item. Outside funding sources are highly variable in their support for administration and overhead, and in some situations none can be requested. Thus, as part of our strategy, the EOMF will negotiate administrative support as a cost item (of approximately 13%) to the extent possible when securing additional funding support. An equity task team will have ongoing responsibility to assist in matching program needs to available funding opportunities, and in building long-term relationships with key, stable funders. This effort will help in ensuring that other funding sources make a reasonable contribution toward sharing the costs of overhead and administration. At the same time, it is our principle to allow for the broadest possible range of partners, regardless of their ability to contribute, or the form of the equity that they are able to share (whether financial, or with materials, time, or ideas and social support). The flexibility of the program to allow this will be an important factor in empowering forest-dependent communities, and in making progress toward our vision of forests for seven generations.
Table 4: Five-year financial plan for the Forest Communities Program ($ 000s) 2007-08 (6 months)
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Total NRCan funding
175
325
325
325
325
Funds for administration (in $ and %) Funds for projects (in $ and %)
105 (60%) 70 (40%)
195 (60%) 130 (40%)
162 (50%) 163 (50%)
162 (50%) 163 (50%)
130 (40%) 195 (60%)
- 28 -
Table 5: Revenue estimates and in-kind contributions for 2007-2012($ 000s) Source of Funds* Members NRCan Other Federal
Provincial Other Sub-total non-FCP
Revenue Estimates and In-kind Contributions ($ 000s) 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
2007-08 (6 months)
Five-Year Total
Cash
In-kind
Cash
In-kind
Cash
In-kind
Cash
In-kind
Cash
In-kind
Cash
In-kind
7 59 116 213
100 30 20 110
7 269 46 245
100 95 16 260
8 89 40 110
120 55 10 30
8 89 90 110
120 55 20 30
8 89 90 110
120 55 20 30
38 595 382 788
560 290 86 460
276
210
256
290
230
495
212
485
297
475
1271
1955
671
470
823
761
477
710
509
710
594
700
3074
3351
FCP
175
Total revenues
846
325 470
325
1148
761
325
802
710
834
325 710
919
1475 700
4549
3351
Table 6: Planned expenditures for 2007-2012 ($ 000s) 2008-09
Planned Expenditures ($ 000s) 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
Activity/program area
2007-08 (6 months)
1 Transition to bio-based community 2 Advance innovative certification 3 Build knowledge/frameworks on forest sector dependencies 4 Assess knowledge/explore new concepts/application of naturalized knowledge 5 Partnerships and equity 6 Capacity to communicate 7 Ambassador for FCP Sub-total for Activity Areas Admin
20 20 5
30 30 10
30 30 20
30 30 20
35 25 30
145 135 85
5
10
20
20
27
82
5 10 5 70 105
15 25 10 130 195
15 38 10 163 162
15 38 10 163 162
15 48 15 195 130
65 159 50 721 754
Total expenditures
175
325
325
325
325
1475
- 29 -
Total