Search

We celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Canadian Journal of Forest Research by reflecting on the considerable progress accomplished in select areas of Canadian wildland fire science over the past half century. Specifically, we discuss key developments and contributions in the creation of the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System; the relationships between wildland fire and weather, climate, and climate change; fire ecology; operational decision support; and wildland fire management. We also discuss the evolution of wildland fire management in Banff National Park as a case study. We conclude by discussing some possible directions in future Canadian wildland fire research including the further evaluation of fire severity measurements and effects; the efficacy of fuel management treatments; climate change effects and mitigation; further refinement of models pertaining to fire risk analysis, fire behaviour, and fire weather; and the integration of forest management and ecological restoration with wildland fire risk reduction. Throughout the paper, we reference many contributions published in the Canadian Journal of Forest Research, which has been at the forefront of international wildland fire science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers and advocates have long argued that on-going engagement by broad segments of the public can help make forests and forest-based communities more sustainable and decisions more enduring. In Canada, public engagement in sustainable forest management has primarily taken one of two approaches: advisory forums through forest-sector advisory committees (FACs) and direct decision-making authority through community forest boards (CFBs). The purpose of this paper is to compare these two approaches by focusing on who participates and the values that participants bring to their deliberations. We conducted a national survey of FACs and CFBs involving 402 participants. Results showed that both models favoured well-educated, Caucasian men and fell short on the representation of women and Indigenous peoples. Additionally, despite different levels of authority in relation to forest management decisions, participants in CFBs and FACs shared similar forest values. Hence, we conclude that neither model of forest governance encourages participation from a diverse public. Our findings suggest the need to find new ways of recruiting diverse participants and to investigate more deeply whether local and extra-local pressures and power dynamics shape these processes. Such information can inform the establishment of more robust institutions for decision-making in support of sustainable forest management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public advisory committees (PACs) are a dominant form of public participation in Canada's Crown forests, providing a venue in which members of the local public can engage and influence sustainable forest management decision-making. In this paper, we examine the experiences of Indigenous participants (relative to non-Indigenous participants) concerning the success of PAC processes. We focus on issues of fairness, equity, and inclusion of Indigenous voices along with an assessment of forest values diversity. Findings from surveys in 2004 and 2016 indicate statistically significant differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous PAC members regarding their forest values and their evaluation of the success of PAC processes. This work draws attention to the relative experiences of survey participants and the identification of persistent challenges associated with public engagement over the last two decades. Policy recommendations include substantial changes to how we define and measure sustainable forest management in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]