Amazon of the North

It’s the world’s largest storehouse of carbon and unfrozen fresh water. Why Canada must give the boreal forest room to breathe
Photograph by Eamon Mac Mahon

My parents and I arrived in Grande Cache, Alberta, in 1976, the year I was born. The town had been recently carved out of the dense wilderness to service the new coal mine where my father had found a job. From the back window of our bungalow, the boreal forest stretched north, largely unbroken, for hundreds of kilometres to the tundra, a dark tangle of trees, mysterious and forbidding. One neighbour found that a wolverine had eaten through his cabin’s roof and ripped open cans of food. Grizzly bears, wolves, and lynx roamed the woods around our town.

Canadian Boreal InstituteDear Walrus reader,

The Canadian Boreal Initiative is proud to sponsor the publication of “Amazon of the North,” a photo essay by Eamon Mac Mahon, in The Walrus. We chose to do so for two important reasons.

We believe it provides a powerful insight into the majesty of Canada’s immense northern boreal region and the challenges facing one of largest intact areas of forest and freshwater remaining on our planet.

We also hope that it will inspire Canada’s thinkers, policymakers, and decision-makers from Aboriginal communities, other governments, industry, and conservation groups to work together to protect and sustainably manage this vital natural resource.

Canada’s Boreal Forest is our last and best chance to get it right. We have the opportunity to develop a balanced approach that will not only serve Canadians well, but also offer a model to a world struggling to sustainably manage the planet’s resources.

We thank The Walrus for publishing this excellent photo essay. We hope that you will find it as inspiring as we did.

Best regards,

Canadian Boreal Institute
Larry Innes
Executive Director
Canadian Boreal Initiative
As dark as it appeared from my kitchen door, the forest became something very different when I entered it: an endless web of soft-floored rooms, each one unique, connected by narrow trails rising, falling, and weaving throughout the pine and spruce. It gave me a deep feeling of well-being and excitement. These hidden places, the mottled sun on the forest floor, the fresh smell of so many plants and trees, formed my strongest childhood memories in the Alberta foothills. We left when I was six.

Stretching from Newfoundland to the Yukon, the boreal forest is our Amazon. It acts as the lungs of the world, our largest terrestrial carbon storehouse. Thousands of species, some of them endangered, make their home there. The first great human threat was the fur trade, which led to the beaver’s decline. Human settlement, agriculture, and forestry followed. Today the greatest menace is mining activity, including oil and gas exploration and extraction. In Alberta, the amount of land cleared each year for seismic lines, a vast network of exploratory roads, already compares with that cleared for logging; unlike logged areas, seismic lines rarely recover. There is no economic incentive for rehabilitation. Natural gas extracted via these roads fuels one of the largest industrial projects in history, the Alberta oil sands.

It’s a complicated story — hopeful or depressing, depending on where you look. In New Brunswick, 81 percent of the forest has been accessed by industry. Southwest of James Bay in Manitoba and Ontario, the Ring of Fire houses a motherlode of mineral deposits beneath the world’s third-largest stretch of intact forest, over 500,000 square kilometres. It is on the brink of a massive development that is already drawing comparisons to the dawn of Alberta’s oil sands production in the 1960s. Each seismic line that penetrates the forest opens up further access, and fragmentation continues to degrade the health of the entire ecosystem. Planning is likewise fragmented among government bodies with competing goals of protection versus development. In 2010, the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement created a tentative partnership among logging companies and environmental groups to protect critical woodland caribou habitat, but the long-term goal of preserving 50 percent of the boreal forest remains in the nascent stage. Only 8.5 percent of Canada’s land mass is under permanent protection, well below the global average.

Recently, I drove into Grande Cache from the north, on a road that didn’t exist when I lived there. The coal mine that once supported my family had closed and reopened. It had also paved the way for extensive industrial development. Old-growth coniferous forest is now interspersed with second-growth deciduous. The local woodland caribou, a sensitive species and a good indicator of the ecosystem’s health, is in precipitous decline. Yet the feeling of freedom and well-being that the forest has always given me remained. It was, and still is, enough to know that such a large wild expanse exists, and that billions of birds will breed there again next spring. The boreal forest will take care of itself — if we allow it enough room to breathe.
Home · Page 1 of 3 · Next

8 comment(s)

AnonymousOctober 11, 2011 11:13 EST

Amazing!

Patrick CameronOctober 11, 2011 16:02 EST

Fantastic work!

RobinOctober 16, 2011 22:42 EST

Actually the boreal is circumpolar we would need to invade Russia, alaska Japan, finland etc to claim it is entirely ours... But I like the heart in the essay.

PatriciaOctober 17, 2011 16:05 EST

Stunningly beautiful!

RyanOctober 19, 2011 14:21 EST

As an "aboriginal decision-maker", it's increasingly indiscernible whether the idea of "sustainably managing a forest" is an environmentalist's catch phrase or a developer's.

To preface this, I'm a teammate of any Canadian who loves the land. I don't mean to introduce cynicism, I merely mean to describe the battlefield at a more in-depth level.

In my experience, an environmentalist's idea of sustainable management is a moratorium: in common language, we leave it alone. We do nothing at all with it, and we call it a "park", we call it "protected". Politicians love it, they don't have to do anything. That caribou pictured on the Slate Islands has more power on the has more power to stop a project than a First Nations or any other local person does, which, for better or worse, is true.

A developer's idea of sustainable management is well-documented. They can mimic the path of a forest fire instead of "clearcutting" (progressive), they can study pine cones in ovens on the government's dime, and they do call it "overburden" as though it's telling that it's a "burden" that they must "over"come. Reclamation projects can often be called successful: if you've ever been sledding on a Toronto "hill", you have to at least admit that, but wilderness is in and of itself a value.

A First Nation perspective is that you can't just take people out of the equation and call it "stewardship of the land". True harmony exists with everything in balance, people included.

Why do environmentalists tend to come from cities? Why is the dialogue always about the harm that the Ring of Fire does to the environment, or the Tar Sands, but never about the industrial glow above Thunder Bay or the smog above Toronto. They don't exist as unsustainably as they do without these projects, even a Toronto-based magazine has neither the hydroelectric nor paper without the very subject matter you're using against the economic forecast of the people who live nearest and closest with it. Regionalism isn't where I want to go with this, but:

In Northern Ontario communities, ask around: what do people want the most? Nobody ever asks the locals, the whole of Northern Ontario is represented by about 10 among 100 others who couldn't tell the Albany River from the Nipigon. Some of these pictures of a boreal forest may as well be a ghost town, and where do you suppose all those people went? Are they creating less of a carbon footprint in a major metropolis? Aiming to shut down the economic engine of a small town, past, present or future, is nothing more than urbanization painted green.

Do you have an idea to create other jobs in the area? Would you invest towards it? People are here to stay in Northern Ontario: what would you prefer us to do? Are the winds of the economy going to slow to a standstill based on the strength of a weak metaphor about the "lungs of the earth"? I'm genuinely interested in finding a balance in all of this.

The idea of a moratorium on development (such as the Far North Act) is and is increasingly seen by First Nations people as, frankly, quitting while you're ahead. Intellectually, can you see how it's easy for a developer to think with tunnel vision, with one green focus? This article does just that: it doesn't bring poverty rates in First Nations communities into the equation, in fact it goes on to say that Canadians own 94% of the world's boreal forest.

If 94% of the world's boreal forest is in the hands of urban Canadians, that's the most bleak and depressing part about the article. It only takes a few simple pictures to see what they did with their land, and it isn't so pretty, it does not display a track record of sustainability.

Your angle seems to be that you're the Lorax with a donation box, and I'd rather see one more tree among billions than read a wannabe-Atlantic and wannabe-Canadian magazine from Toronto. Should've just let the mountain pine beetle eat it.

Just some food for thought: thank you for your time.

AnonymousOctober 20, 2011 10:54 EST

So.... How do we erase our mistakes and prevent more?

AnonymousOctober 25, 2011 10:05 EST

points taken ryan. what\'s your proposed solution?

Onni MilneNovember 01, 2011 16:24 EST

In response to Ryan, the Boreal Forest Agreement was negotiated to create win/win scenarios for forestry companies and those who want to preserve and protect our natural environment. I believe that deals with some of his "what about the people in the picture" issue. Further to the "people" comment, if all the trees are cut or all the minerals mined, there will be no employment either. A good example of that is the collapse of cod stocks in Atlantic Canada.

When I saw a National Geographic article about the Alberta Tar Sands, I felt sickened and outraged by how the land was destroyed. I believe no amount of employment is worth the damage and poisons generated by this project. I believe we would have a different scenario if people who made decisions to approve or enlarge it lived in the area, They walk away with their salary or share money while workers and area residents get sick and die by being there.

Former Prime Minister Paul Martin's interview on "The Current" outlines the value that Nature provides and why it should be included as an economic value. I believe this will help change our attitude to what "the economy" means so that people in the area can profit from their natural capital. The interview link is: http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2011/10/28/paul-martin-on-natural-capital/

Add a comment

  
I agree to walrusmagazine.com’s comments policy.

Canada & its place in the world. Published by
the non-profit charitable Walrus Foundation
TwitterFacebookRSS
On newsstands now
New Issue on Sale
June 2012
Subscribe online for as little as $2.49 an issue. Visit The Walrus Store
to buy prints of our covers
The Walrus Foundation National Event Guide

The Walrus HOOPP Pension Debate
Be It Resolved That Canadians Are Incapable
of Saving for Their Retirement Needs Alone

12 pm, Wednesday, May 30 at
Hart House Debate Room, Toronto

The Walrus Glenbow Debate
Calgary’s Cowboy Culture:
Living Legacy or Just History?

6:30 pm, Thursday, June 7 at
Epcor Centre: Max Bell Theatre, Calgary

The Walrus Laughs
The Walrus SoapBox