The background information that will be used to develop an amendment to the park management plan is now available for review. This amendment will address "lightening the ecological footprint of logging in Algonquin Park". The background information consists of ..

Algonquin Park Management Plan - PDF
High Resolution map from the Joint Proposal - PDF (13 mb)
Background Information for a Proposed Amendment to the Algonquin Management Plan - PDF
Joint Proposal for Lightening the Ecological Footprint of Logging in Algonquin Park - PDF

To access the downloads of these documents, go to ..http://www.ontarioparks.com/english/algo_planning.html

Following are four extracted samplings of the high resolution map ...

I've made red-ink comments on the "legends". I have concerns over the reference to some setbacks being noted as "less-than-or-equal-to 60 meters". That means they could opt to maintain setbacks anywhere from 0 to 60 meters from the indicated lakes. These lakes already have 30 meter setbacks. Why should we accept anything less than 60 meters? Also, why should the lesser portages have anything less than their current 30 meter setbacks on either side, thereby a full width of no less than 60 meters free of logging?









Barry Bridgeford
Executive Committee
Algonquin Backcountry Recreationalists
http://www.ABRweb.ca

I know this technical logging stuff can be a bit boring. But, give it a serious read, please!

While there are proposed extended logging setbacks of the larger lakes, isn't anyone concerned that the lesser lakes and even some portages are proposed to have their setbacks changed from 30 meters to "less than or equal to 60 meters". That's a weasel-word-way of saying they can be stripped of any setback! Just because the AFA lost extra set-backs on larger lakes, shouldn't mean they get to log the others right up to the shorelines! Saying "< = 60 meters" doesn't mean they old setback of 30 meters is being extended to 60 meters. That pesky little "<" sign means that the setback can be anywhere from "0 to 60 meters". In other words, a setback is effectively optional! Whoa! Shouldn't that be setting off some alarm bells!

Barry Bridgeford
Executive Committee
Algonquin Backcountry Recreationalists
http://www.ABRweb.ca

At first I thought that they simply wanted to show buffers for all canoe routes and that the labelling was just sloppy..

But I noticed something interesting; whoever decided on the buffers explicitly set some for lakes off of canoe routes (Notably Behan Lake and Burt Lake just south of Birchcliffe in the Northwest). Curiously these setbacks seem to match the thinnest ones found elsewhere on the map. If the smallest setback was say, 30m (What already exists) then why show those on the map?

Thinking about it.. don't some lakes already have modified setbacks exceeding 30m if they host Brook Trout and have a steep grade nearby? Hmmm

In the bottom right corner of Barry's bottom screenshot you'll also notice no buffer on Birchcliffe Cr between Birchcliffe L and Raven Cr. A mistake??


Jeff

--

Algonquin Backcountry Recreationalists - Caring for Algonquin's Backcountry - abrweb.ca

My Algonquin Park Map - Accurate, Detailed, Free - Version 2.0!

An additional list of lakes missing protection:

Acanthus (Just a bit NE of Cedar L)
Francis (Near Traverse on the road to the access point)
Little Norway (On the rod leading to the hydro lines paralleling the Bonnechere River)
Foy (On the rod leading to the hydro lines paralleling the Bonnechere River)

An interesting observation; Big Bissett Lake is half in Algonquin park and half outside. The outside portion is in a new provincial waterway park created in 2006. Outside of Algonquin there is a 200m setback. Inside there is 30m.

It's also quite interesting to look at the Kingscote area in the south. I know it's quite heavily used but wow the proposed setbacks are low.

Also.... in terms of the proposed setbacks... never mind 30m, some lakes already have greater setbacks. Brook trout lakes have the following setbacks based on the slope beside the lake:

10-15% - 30m
16-30% - 30m+20m (Modified)
31-45% - 30m+40m (Modified)
46+% - 45m+45m (Modified)

Finially.... they use the word 'modified' when defining the setbacks for brook trout lakes, other AoCs _as well as for the 200m buffers (Marked as 120m + 80m in the legend) on the above map_ (Marked as 120m + 80m in the legend). What is a 'modified' setback? The 'modified' distance is logged, but just not by shelterwood or clearcutting (except selectively). There is also no 'mechanical site preparation'. The whole point is that the 200m figure is deceiving. It's really 120m in disguise.

Jeff

--

Algonquin Backcountry Recreationalists - Caring for Algonquin's Backcountry - abrweb.ca

My Algonquin Park Map - Accurate, Detailed, Free - Version 2.0!

Why do I get the distinct feeling someone is telling us to watch the right hand so that we don't see what the left hand is doing?




Sean (of Ajax)

http://www.ABRweb.ca .. Algonquin Backcountry Recreationalists - Caring for Algonquin's Backcountry

Very nice job on the nine page submission. Kudos to all involved. -Tom

Thanks to Jeffrey for the 9-page compilation which I just reviewed.

It seems that you have effectively captured the concerns discussed in previous threads. Thanks for that