Inside the paradigm shift
Destination BC
What is it and what does it mean for recreation from the man who coined the term
In 2018, Garry Merkel and Al Gorley agreed to review the management of old-growth forests on behalf of the provincial government. As they set out to speak with 800 people and review thousands of more submissions, they expected to hear plenty of calls to maintain the status quo. That’s not what happened.
“Two people out of the thousands that we talked to said, ‘We’re doing fine,’” said Merkel. “Everybody else said we need to change this. We’re not doing this right.”
Merkel and Gorley summarized their findings and made 13 recommendations in the Old Growth Strategic Review, released in July 2019. It all boiled down to one phrase: the need for a paradigm shift.
But while the message is simple, the execution is anything but. Nearly five years after the review’s publication the provincial government is in the midst of making dramatic changes in how it manages forests, lands and waters. It involves a confusing array of different commitments, goals, pilots, programs and acts. While it doesn’t all trace back to the Old Growth Strategic Review, Merkel and Gorley’s work does a good job of encapsulating what’s going on and why. In fact, Merkel now works full time advising various levels of government, First Nations and other stakeholders on how to adopt the paradigm shift.
Merkel joined the Outdoor Recreation Council of BC’s February webinar to explain what the changes may mean for recreation. (You can view a recording of the webinar here.) His basic message: “This model that we’re working with is unsustainable in the long term and we’re leaving our kids a really ugly mess to clean up.”
In the review Merkel and Gorley wrote “that despite the good intentions and efforts of many people…the overall system of forest management has not supported the effective implementation or achievement of the stated and legislated public objectives for old forests. This has not come about because of any one group or decision, but through a pattern of many choices made over several decades, within an outdated paradigm.”
The thrust of the findings is that we have to stop thinking about ourselves and start thinking about what’s best for the land. That requires change at three levels. First is moving to a co-management model where Indigenous and provincial governments make collaborative decisions with input from local stakeholders. The second is to move management decisions from arbitrary provincial or regional level to an ecological or habitat scope. And the third is to shift the management goal posts from maximizing resource extraction to prioritizing ecological health.
“Every one of these changes requires a huge change in the way we think,” Merkel said.
For starters, B.C. was built on logging and the system is designed to produce the maximum amount of lumber possible.
“There’s a very deeply rooted bias towards timber in the province,” noted Merkel, who is a professional forester by trade. “It’s a lot like Alberta with oil and gas.”
But the even bigger barrier is educating everyone about what ecological health means, what an ecosystem is and how it works. Right now, Merkel said, we operate with the idea that it’s okay to destroy the ecological integrity of, say, the Alberni Valley on Vancouver Island, because we’ve protected the nearby alpine peaks in Strathcona Provincial Park.
“The land doesn’t work like that,” says Merkel. “We have to learn how to think like an ecosystem and plan like an ecosystem.”
Merkel says it will require sacrifices and compromises from everyone who uses the land and water. He anticipates a shift in management where resource extraction will occur at smaller scale in a watershed and then access will be shut off to allow the ecosystem to adapt and recover. It may be seasonal closures, like what is already happening in mountain caribou habitat. Or it may be more permanent.
It will likely mean more deactivation of resource roads, more gates and more restrictions on motorized access. As a hunter and ATVer, they are changes that Merkel is not looking forward to, but he knows it’s the right thing to do.
“In the bigger scheme of things, if we don’t [make these changes] we’re not going to be able to go up there and see anything anymore because [all the animals] will be gone,” he said.
Already there are dramatic declines in caribou and moose populations that most studies link to human disturbance. And when recreation access is restricted and controlled there are examples of those populations rebounding. But he also said to not freak out about the potential implications.
“I know there are people out there who are afraid,” he said. “The interesting thing that I’ve found through this is if you can learn about [ecological health] and you can understand it and you start to see some of the models that are being built, you go, ‘Holy crap! That’s not so bad. It’s really good in a lot of ways.’”
Bottom line: “It doesn’t shut everything down.”
That’s why he says it’s important for recreation groups to learn as much as they can about ecosystem thinking and how their actions may impact biodiversity and the health of the land. He also said it’s important to uncover bias and learn about First Nations thinking and stewardship.
“The world is run by those who showed up, so get involved,” he said.
His hope is that the recreation community will get on board with the paradigm shift. The more support from the public the more likely the recommendations of the Old Growth Strategic Review will be adopted.
“Maybe someday we will get to this place where we’ve achieved a level of land stewardship where we have restored ecosystem health and biodiversity right across the province,” he said. “And [at the same time] we get a stable flow of resources that can provide a solid, stable base for our economy.”