During the return drive from Spectacle Lake to Huntsville through the park, Carl Corbett (AFA) pointed out some overmature old-growth areas by the west gate. He explained that with the overmature old-growth finally collapsing, the understory sapplings were starting to transform the area into a new young forest. I took advantage of this to express my concern that without protected younger areas of "candidate old-growth", the eventual collapse of all overmature old-growth would lead to the actual elimination of all old-growth. I expressed my belief that the combined natural succession of growth within protected areas and ongoing logging practices in the RU zone would eventually reduce protected old-growth to the incidental, transitional elements surviving in the contiguous Wilderness/Development/Natural Environment zones.

Under this process of natural attrition, any Nature Reserves within the Recreation/Utilization Zone would eventually loose their old-growth to decrepid "old-age". Without an intentional ongoing conservation of "old-growth candidate" areas, there will eventually be no meaningful areas of old-growth within the RU Zone.

During the actual meetings, I'd only been able to express this concern indirectly. However, the fact that Carl was "captive" behind the steering-wheel, did allow me to express my concern at length. His lack of response gave me the impression that the concept of "conservation of old-growth candidate areas" was either a new one or an unpopular one.

I'm hoping that Eco-Watch will incorporate this old-growth issue into their upcoming formal presentation(s), since they have the natural science credentials and are formally advising in that field.

The subject of "old growth forest" really fired-up the environmentalists present at the November meeting. The discussion over it was taken-up equally by the AFA foresters. As I mentioned elsewhere, the two "sides" tend to use the same term to label two quite different processes from two distinctly different perspectives.

While the environmentalists considered extensive, consistent and intact forest stands of at least 120 years of age as "old growth forest", at least one forester appeared to be representing shelterwood tracts in their last stage with 120 year old scattered canopy trees (providing seeds for regeneration and shelter for seedlings) to also comprise "old growth forest".

I confess that the majority of technical detail being argued between the environmentalists and foresters was going far over my head. However, I was certainly not prepared to consider isolated vestiges of "old growth" to be passed-off as "old growth forest". It was at this point I commented that I sensed the two "sides" were using the same term to label two different things and were then discussing "it" from two distinctly different perspectives.

The length of the misrepresentation left me with a sour disappointment that a forester could try to redefine the term "old growth forest" to include shelterwood tracts being harvested just short of their few remaining 120 year old "shelter trees". I was definitely not impressed with what struck me as an effort to "have-the-cake-and-eat-it-too".

Both the Forest Management Plan - Algonquin Park Forest Management Unit (2000-2020) and the Forest Management Plan Summary - Algonquin Park Forest Management Unit (2005-2025) were developed under the Conservation Strategy For Old Growth Red and White Pine Ecosystems in Ontario (1996) and the Forest Management Planning Manual (1996)

However, since then, a number of new policies and directives have been established ...