Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Agriculture and Forestry
Issue 3 - Evidence, November 28, 2002
OTTAWA, Thursday, November 28, 2002
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met this day at 8:30 a.m. to examine the impact of climate change on Canada's agriculture, forests and rural communities and the potential adaptation options focusing on primary production, practices, technologies, ecosystems and other related areas.
Senator Donald H. Oliver (Chairman) in the Chair
[English]
The Chairman: Honourable senators, I call to order this third meeting of the committee on the impact of climate change on Canada's agriculture, forests and rural communities and the potential adaptation options.
[Translation]
Honourable senators, today we will continue our examination of the impact of climate change. First, I would like to welcome my dear colleagues as well as the observers who are here with us. I also want to welcome all Canadian men and women who are listening to us on the Internet.
On October 31, our committee was specifically mandated by the Senate to examine the impact of climate change on agriculture, forests and rural communities. For several years now, we have been witnessing obvious and sometimes troubling signs of change in our climate. Unfortunately, climate change is a reality which will stay with us for a long time.
[English]
This committee is now undertaking an intensive study on how our farming and forestry practices across the country must adapt to potential effects such as less rainfall, longer growing periods, and much hotter temperatures. We will examine the potential adaptation options, focusing on primary production practices, technologies and ecosystems. As we continue our examination under our mandate, other issues may also require a closer look. The committee is to table its final report at the end of December 2003.
We will be inviting experts, practitioners, community leaders and other interested parties to hear their views. Honourable senators, today we will hear from officials from Natural Resources Canada, Mr. Gordon Miller, Mr. Paul Egginton, who we heard from briefly on Tuesday, and Ms. Darcie Booth. Mr. Miller, please proceed.
Mr. Gordon E. Miller, Director General, Science Branch, Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada: Honourable senators, thank you and good morning.
[Translation]
It is a pleasure to have this opportunity to give you a brief overview of the potential impact of climate change on forests, including adaptation options.
[English]
I think all honourable senators have a hard copy of the presentation. I would ask you to turn to the second page. Natural Resources Canada is very much engaged in the climate change issue. In fact, we have taken the lead on impacts and adaptation.
[Translation]
Climate change and accelerated global warming are presently creating the most challenging environmental, social and economic problems that Canada has to face. Natural Resources Canada plays a decisive role in engaging this challenge under its mandate to sustainably develop Canada's vast natural resources.
[English]
The department benefits from a wide variety of scientific, technical and policy expertise in natural resources. This combination of skills and competencies allows us to provide the Government of Canada and the Canadian population with sound policy advice based on credible and authoritative scientific knowledge. These functions are applied both at the domestic and international levels. NRCan has the lead domestically on climate change and adaptation.
To use the example of climate change, NRCan can count on many world-class scientists who provide us with relevant information and knowledge on the multiple facets of the issue. Our field of expertise covers earth sciences, energy, forests, minerals and metals. With an issue such as climate change that is horizontal by nature, it is important that there is collaboration across those sectors and areas of endeavour.
Turning to Canada's forests specifically, there are two main points. Certainly, Canada's forests will be impacted by climate change and, by the same token, it offers opportunities to partially mitigate climate change. As well, forests are dynamic systems that respond to the changing climate. The forest ecosystems will likely experience a variety of impacts, both positive and negative, as the climate changes occur. Forests have the ability to take up greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, out of the atmosphere, making them an effective tool in addressing climate change as well.
[Translation]
Forest ecosystems are the source of a wide range of products and services. These benefits cover environmental, social and economic aspects.
[English]
From an environmental perspective, forests play a role in moderating the weather and helping to stabilize the climate, filtering out wastes and thus providing clean air and water; protecting watersheds from erosion; helping to maintain groundwater levels; generating and preserving soils; cycling and moving nutrients; providing wildlife habitat; and maintaining biodiversity.
On the social and economic fronts, forests comprise an important factor of the social fabric across Canada. Hundreds of thousands of people draw their livelihood from the forest. This represents about one out of 17 jobs across the country. Governments at all levels are important beneficiaries of the economic activity related to forests through taxes and infrastructure.
A main reason for reviewing the litany of services and benefits we receive from our forests is to point out that, when we talk about climate change, we are talking about something that will affect all of these services and benefits; we are not just talking about trees. Certainly, we are concerned with climate change and the effect it will have on the forests. Climate change will result in an increased intensity of natural disturbances such as fires, insects and disease. We can also expect more extreme weather events such as ice storms and droughts.
Additional aspects are the changes in forest composition that can be the result of natural disturbances such as fire, insects and climactic conditions, such as the length of the growing season and the precipitation regime. In both cases, this will likely translate into changes in forest composition, species composition and availability of goods and services. There will undoubtedly be impacts on tree growth, although that is a complicated subject because, certainly, there is more to tree growth than temperature and precipitation. There are other factors such as nutrients in the soil and particular conditions for some species to regenerate. Those will all have an impact as the climate continues to change. Those, in turn, can have an impact on how the industry is able to manage the forests for our benefit.
As to potential impacts on communities, we must consider aspects such as quality and availability of drinking water; damages to infrastructure; and finite natural causes related to insurance coverage of assets. Such changes have the potential to result in serious pressures on our existing social system.
Given the important role that forests play in our society in addition to the role that they can play in addressing some of the climate change issues, it is essential that the federal government and all members of the Canadian forest community continue to have access to factual and credible information. The climate change research, supported by the Canadian Forest Service, CFS, and Natural Resources Canada, NRCan, more generally, provides tools that, in the context of sound forest management practices, will contribute to the ultimate goal of promoting the sustainable development of Canadian forests. The research will help us to find ways to take advantage of climate change, when possible, and to reduce its effects, when necessary.
In the context of climate change and forests, I have four examples for you of work led by NRCan. The titles indicate that they cover a wide spectrum of aspects, calling on both field-level activities and the integration of remote sensing applications. I would draw your attention to slide No. 6.
Our current activities include a number of programs and projects that provide a factual description of Canadian forests. If we examine the potential regional impacts of climate change across the country, we will note that they vary. They are predicted to be strongest at the higher latitudes, to result in an increase in severe storms, rises in sea level and water temperature in coastal areas, to increase the occurrence of droughts in the Prairies, and to reduce water run-off in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence basin. The impacts will vary across the country, reflecting the regional differences in local environment, economies and the degree of climate change. Many uncertainties regarding the character, magnitude and pace of future climate change remain, in spite of our efforts.
To provide you with a few specific examples of anticipated effects, we foresee, along the coast, an increased growing season and warmer winters. We also foresee increased incidents of insects and fire in our forests. In the Prairies, we anticipate that some species will disappear at the edges of the current range and that grasslands and temperate deciduous species may migrate northward. Currently, in the Prairies, we are seeing a decline in the Aspen trees in the parklands, and that is largely driven by a combination of drought and insects.
In the North, Canada's forest is expected to shift northward about 100 kilometres for every degree of warming. That has some caveats around it such as soil nutrients, which can have a major impact on whether that migration happens. As a general comment, we do expect that the boreal forest will probably decrease in size as the climate continues to warm.
Certainly, in Western Canada, we see an increased incidence and intensity in wild land fire, whereas in the east, the frequency of fire is likely to decrease. Again, this is largely reflective of the regional climate models and what they are predicting.
Looking at adaptation measures, Canada's ability to minimize both climate change and the impacts of climate change on Canada's forest ecosystems and ecosystem processes also ultimately depends on the rate, magnitude and location of climate change. Adapting to these impacts will require careful forest management and adjustments by industry and forest-dependent communities. To capitalize on the effects of climate change, the forest industry may be able to adopt new technologies, utilize different tree species and implement long-range planning.
Changes in forest sector management and practices include things like an increased planting season, so there will be a longer time to plant trees, and a decreased period of frozen ground during the winters, which will impact on harvesting. For instance, in the boreal, most of the harvesting is done in the winter when the ground is frozen because that has lesser environmental impact than doing it in the summer when the ground is softer. We will also see changes to how, when or where forests are harvested. It may be necessary in the future to consider what species you are planting. We may be looking at utilizing drought-resistant species or insect-resistant species more frequently than we do now.
Forest management practices, such as harvesting, protection from insects, diseases and fire, and silvicultural techniques can affect how fast carbon is absorbed by the forest, how long it is stored and how much of it is emitted back into the atmosphere. Sustainable forest management practices can result in reduced emissions and increased carbon stored in the forest, for example, through reduced soil disturbance and enhanced regrowth after harvest. Creating new forests, that is, afforestation, and reducing the permanent loss of forests also reduce concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Scientific research funded by the Government of Canada is improving our understanding of Canada's forest carbon and how management can increase the carbon. The government is also assessing how best to support large-scale creation of new forests in Canada to help reduce global warming. In fact, an example of that is an initiative called Forest 2020, which is a Canadian Council of Forest Ministers initiative. It has been very much tied to climate change and carbon sequestration.
Looking at possible mitigation measures, certainly plantations are increasingly becoming a feature of forest management around the globe. Currently, about 35 per cent of the world's fibre supply comes from plantations, and that is expected to increase to 44 per cent. That is particularly pertinent because plantations are very heavily managed. It is farming the trees, as it were, and it puts us in a much better position to manage things closely.
In Canada, we have the possibility of a combination of intensive forestry and high-yield plantations, as well as our use of virgin forests. There is flexibility for increasing the conservation of some of our forest resources as a result of moving more towards plantation forestry. We do have the direct ability to sequester carbon quite readily in plantations.
Looking at biotechnology as an aspect of climate change, the Canadian Forest Service and its research partners are exploring biotechnology applications to improve forest regeneration and protection methods, while ensuring that the environmental impacts are addressed. We do see that there is a role for biotechnology in climate change. It is possible, for example, to develop trees that are more drought-resistant or more insect-resistant.
Looking at fire management, we do anticipate an increase in both the frequency and intensity of forest fires. Increased fire suppression is both economically impossible and ecologically undesirable. Fire certainly does have a natural ecological role in regenerating forests. We have to, where we can, allow those systems to proceed naturally.
We do have some initiatives that relate, for instance, to community protection. One program is called Fire Smart. It encourages people to plan for how they would respond to a forest fire. On a regional scale, we have projects in partnership with others, that is, industry, universities and so on, looking at things like fuel breaks and how they can be used in large scale fire management. On a national scale, we have ways of monitoring how fires are proceeding when they are burning in the summer. We also do studies looking at values at risk when we deal with forest fire.
Moving on to what the Government of Canada's impacts and adaptation research program managed by NRCan is about, certainly it is focused on raising awareness of Canada's vulnerability to climate change through several activities. That has been in place over the last five years. Some examples include creation and coordination of the Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Research Network, C-CIARN, and I believe you will hear from them later in your meetings.
Certainly there has been the development of communications products like the regional impacts of climate change poster series, as well as through funding of new impacts and adaptation research. The research projects have been dispersed across the country, as you can see in the map depicted on slide 11, and cover many sectors, including forestry and agriculture. The results of this work form, in part, the basis for the publication entitled ``Climate Change, Impacts and Adaptation: A Canadian Perspective.'' That report was developed by Mr. Egginton and his team, and three of the thirteen chapters have been released, including those on forestry and agriculture. They have, I believe, already been distributed to you. We hope you will find them useful in your deliberations.
In summary, certainly some degree of climate change is unavoidable at this point. It will impact Canada's forests and many other sectors. Adaptation will be required, along with mitigation, and we think the forests will play a key role on both sides of the climate change issue.
Adaptation must be managed horizontally. That is the sense of departments working together inside the federal government. There must be federal, provincial and municipal cooperation, cooperation with industry, and cooperation in the formulation of science and policy. This is, by its nature, a very technical issue, as well as one that has significant policy consequences.
We also think that Canada is well positioned. As I said, we have many world-class scientists working on the issue. NRCan has a key role to play in both the science and policy aspects of climate change, impacts and adaptation. We are having lots of discussions about how we focus our efforts to the betterment of Canadians in the context of that issue.
We would be prepared to answer your questions.
The Chairman: Mr. Miller, you have opened many doors, and I know honourable senators will have many questions to ask you. Your presentation was most interesting and it touched on many of the issues that we wish to canvass over the next few months.
You talked about a decline in the aspen out west caused by drought and insects. You said that the trend seems to be, however, for plantations or the farming of trees.
I am somewhat surprised. I would have thought that if you plant just one species of tree in a plantation and get it ready for harvest, you would be changing what would occur naturally. In other words, there will be no shrubs, no hardwoods, no softwoods or other species that would occur naturally. Will tree farming not increase the pace of climate change in the long run?
Mr. Miller: I do not believe so. Many of the plantations are being established on marginal agriculture lands or in areas, such as in Southern Ontario, where there has already been a fair amount of deforestation. Therefore, this is in fact reforesting parts of the country that at one time were forested but have not been, in some cases, for hundreds of years.
We anticipate that, if we augment the land base we are using for forests and sequester carbon intentionally on a portion of that land base, it will help offset some of the greenhouse gas emissions that we currently emit.
The Chairman: I was in New Zealand a while ago. After some sheep farmers were told that they could no longer farm sheep, some of them planted 100 or 200 acres in trees. They found a species of pine tree from California that would grow to maturity in 25 years. They planted those and they will harvest them in time for their retirement. Do you think that we might find new species of trees to plant in some of these areas?
Mr. Miller: Yes. The majority of plantations around the world use exotic species in the situation you are describing, rather than native species, although in some cases countries will use native species as well. Again using Forest 2020 as an example, we are talking about using fast-growing species of different types, conifers as well as deciduous, but there is a particular emphasis on hybrid poplars and willows that are not, at this point, a significant part of our commercial forestry practices. Hybrid poplars reach maturity at 18 or 20 years of age. Since they are fast-growing and do sequester carbon quickly, it is possible to use those species to deal with an issue like climate change.
Senator Wiebe: My first few questions will be from a Prairie perspective rather than from a national or a forest one, although more than half of Saskatchewan is forest, a fact that people throughout Canada do not realize. However, the kind of tree we grow in the North is a rather unattractive spruce tree.
When Saskatchewan became a province in 1905, the new Lieutenant Governor decided that he wanted to plant some spruce trees around his properties. He leased a car from Canadian National Railways to transport trees from Banff, Alberta to plant in Regina. He did that for three years, with four boxcars of trees, but only three trees are still standing as a result of that exercise. However, over the years, his gardener was able to adapt those trees to grow very well in the southern part of Saskatchewan, but that research and technology takes time to develop. Our human activities are dramatically increasing the normal climate change that takes place.
Have we put enough money into research to allow us to keep pace with the rapid changes that are taking place within our climate? Twenty-five years ago, climate change was occurring naturally and we could adapt much more easily. However, because of increased human activity, especially in relation to energy, the pace of climate change is rapidly increasing.
Are we spending enough dollars to be able to keep up to the rapid change and develop the products, trees, fisheries and ecosystems to enable us to adapt quickly enough?
Mr. Miller: As the head of a science program, I should begin by saying that we never have enough. A lot of research funding is available for climate change. We are, however, running into some other limitations. For example, we have been talking to the deans of forestry across the country about the need for more collaboration in forest research. They have been indicating more and more that, not only on climate change but more generally, it is not a lack of research funding that is limiting activity but rather the availability of facilities and, more pointedly, good quality graduate students to do the research.
In terms of funding for the climate change issue, there are many research funding sources out there, both government and otherwise. To some degree, it is a question of how quickly we want to get the results. If you want very quick turnaround, having more resources helps to a degree, but there is also the need for recognition that it takes time, as you have mentioned, to develop some of the results, regardless of how many resources are available.
From our perspective, there are a lot of research dollars out there, but we are starting to run into other limitations, the most notable being people and expertise.
Senator Wiebe: In the West, especially in Saskatchewan and Alberta, we have developed trees that do quite well throughout the wintertime. It takes a long time to develop a shelterbelt around a farm or a city. However, we have experienced winters that have been very mild. We have had snow and moisture, but we have had what we would call extreme heat for the wintertime. The temperature rises to above zero and, if it remains there too long, the tree is triggered to start its growth cycle. A few days later, we could again experience temperatures of 35 degrees below zero. We have lost many trees in that way. We can adapt to insects and disease in trees with the use of chemicals, but we have not yet found a way to adapt to these severe changes in temperature.
This fall and this winter we have seen a prime example of that problem. It is 13 degrees above zero in Saskatchewan this morning, and the snow is all gone. What will happen if trees start to grow?
Are you doing research to develop a tree that can handle that kind of adjustment?
Mr. Miller: I agree that winter die-back has been a common feature of trees on the Prairies for virtually forever, I suspect, certainly since we have been around. I am not aware of any research within the Canadian Forest Service that has focused on that, but Agriculture Canada has programs focused on shelterbelts and those types of things.
Mr. Paul Egginton, Executive Director, Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Directorate, Natural Resources Canada: Honourable senators, I am not aware of any particular research on that topic, but you are right about the potential impacts.
I would like to make a more general comment about your question. You raise an interesting point. The required research is not only climate system science, but also broader research. What happens to the system is quite important, and we need to know more about systems, whether they are trees, insects or communities. Therefore, a variety of research is needed, not simply climate system science.
The Chairman: I have a supplementary to Senator Wiebe's question about research. In your presentation, Mr. Miller, you told us about climate change impacts and adaptation programming. Could you tell us about the funding for that program? What is the budget for the entire program and how much has been spent?
Mr. Miller: I defer to Mr. Egginton because he is the director of that particular program.
Mr. Egginton: Since its initiation in 1998, there have been approximately $48 million associated with the program.
The Chairman: Has that been spent?
Mr. Egginton: That will take the program to the year 2006.
The Chairman: Has half of it been spent?
Mr. Egginton: Probably in the order of $8 million has been put into research, to date.
Senator Day: May I have some clarification, Mr. Chairman, on the last point? Has $48 million been spent?
Mr. Egginton: No. That is the total program budget to 2006.
Senator Day: $8 million is for research.
The Chairman: That goes to 2006.
Senator Day: This is a tremendously important part of the Canadian economy and the rural communities that are dependent on the forest industry.
Could you put in perspective the size of the forest industry in Canada, its direct and indirect job creation, and its impact in terms of dollars?
Mr. Miller: In a gross sense, it fluctuates. However, the industry's contribution to Canada varies between $50 billion and $70 billion per year. It is the largest contributor to our balance of trade. In fact, it is larger than the next four or five items combined.
Senator Day: Is it larger than the auto industry?
Mr. Miller: Yes. It is the largest industry in terms of the balance of trade.
Senator Day: Have you seen any statistics? We deal with agriculture and forestry. Could we put those two in perspective in terms of revenue generated, so that we have an understanding of what we are dealing with?
Mr. Miller: I honestly cannot do that off the top of my head.
Senator Day: Could you obtain that information for us and give it to our clerk of the committee?
Mr. Miller: Definitely, yes.
Senator Day: I would like to compare the forest industry in Canada to some of our other industries, such as, if possible, the agriculture industry excluding forestry, in terms of the number of people involved and the number of dollars generated.
Mr. Miller: Yes.
Senator Day: Thank you.
Mr. Miller: We can provide that quickly.
Senator Day: From your point of view and the Canadian Forest Service's point of view, what is more important: Mitigation of the effects from the activities that are causing global warming or adaptation of the industry to the inevitable?
Mr. Miller: I believe that both are extremely important.
Obviously, mitigation can help with the overall issue. If we are actually able to sequester a portion of Canada's Kyoto commitment, for example, that will certainly help.
However, the reality is that climate change is happening and it will continue to happen. We have to adapt. We already have forestry companies telling us that we are planting the right trees, given what is coming. They are aware and they are also interested in mitigation because, if we put a kind of carbon credit trading system in place, there could be some potential economic benefits to them. The industry is interested in both sides. I do not know that one is more important than the other. Obviously, we will have to take attaining our Kyoto target seriously, assuming that we do ratify, so that Canada is able to meet its international commitment. However, the reality is that, if you are managing your forests, you will have to do that in a way that continues to support whatever Canadians expect out of their forests — jobs through the mills, clean water, clean air or all of the environmental services that we have, as well.
Mr. Egginton: One of the issues in respect of adaptation is that we really need to slow down the rate of change so that we can adapt. The two go hand-in-hand. We need the mitigation and the adaptation.
Senator Day: I am getting the sense, and maybe unfairly, that we are being driven by the international politics of the Kyoto Protocol and the meeting of obligations. We are putting much of our money into mitigation as opposed to adaptation because of potential commitments. Industry is starting to be driven by the likes of carbon credits that only come about because of the international structure of the Kyoto Protocol. Instead we should be thinking in terms of production and adaptation to the inevitable changes of climate and the ecosystem evolution.
Am I right in my thinking?
Mr. Miller: I can certainly comment on the CFS's research program. We began our involvement with climate change research back in the late 1980s, before it ever became the political issue that it is now. That largely reflected the fact that we were already beginning to see some of those changes. We mostly wondered what it meant to the forests. Kyoto was not even a dream at that point; it was something in the distant future. We were already largely focused on such things as drier, warmer weather in the future, and wondering what that would mean in terms of forest fires and some of our major pests. For our own program, most of the emphasis historically, over the last decade-and-a-half or so, has primarily been on the adaptation side and understanding what the impacts are likely to be.
Senator Day: How have your budget and your emphasis changed within your department since the Rio Earth Summit and the Kyoto Protocol?
Mr. Miller: We are certainly allocating a much larger proportion of our research resources to climate change. Most of those dollars are going to the adaptation side, but we are also paying attention to mitigation. However, much of it is going to adaptation and impacts.
Senator Day: You said that back in the late 1980s, you were talking about predictions and adaptation issues.
Mr. Miller: Yes.
Senator Day: Your answer to my last question was that you had put more research dollars into climate change. Are those dollars for the mitigation aspects or for the adaptation aspects?
Mr. Miller: The dollars have gone into both areas but probably more into the mitigation than into the adaptation. However, we already had a stronger base on the adaptation side.
Senator Day: Have you had a significant increase in your budget that will be slated for climate change issues over that time frame?
Mr. Miller: Yes. Our scientists have been actively pursuing funding through the Climate Change Action Fund and through the Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptations Research Network program. We have been quite successful at bringing new dollars into the program to address climate change.
Senator Day: What kind of percentage change has there been from 1992 to date?
Mr. Miller: In terms of our core funding, we have pretty much doubled the effort since 1992. In fact, it is probably more than that. We probably doubled it in the last five years.
Senator Day: Is that all relevant to climate change?
Mr. Miller: Yes.
Senator Day: Of that full budget on climate change issues, what percentage would be for mitigation and what percentage would be for adaptation issues?
Mr. Miller: That is hard to answer but only in a particular sense. Much of our other research, such as work on more intensive forest management to produce commercial trees, produces information that, even though it is not specifically being done for climate change, has implications for climate change because you can estimate how much carbon is in that new wood. We have a research network focused on climate change in our in-house program. I would guess that probably two-thirds of that is for mitigation, right now — maybe a third, in rough figures.
The Chairman: He also asked about the amount you spend on adaptation. How much is for adaptation? Could we have a figure for that?
Mr. Miller: I could obtain that for you but I do not know the figures off the top of my head.
Senator Day: That would be helpful.
I know that many of the larger forest management companies are involved with modelling and that you are also doing that.
In your modelling to predict what will happen in the forest industry over the next 20, 50, or 80 years, are you working with some sort of accuracy on what will happen as a result of climate change, or is the modelling still based on non-climate change issues?
Mr. Miller: No. Our modelling is very much focused on climate change, including impacts and adaptation. A lot of scientific uncertainty remains around those models. Our models use regional climate models, for example, as one of the baselines, so if the climate is going to change in a certain way, we expect certain things to happen to the forests. There is a fair amount of uncertainty starting with those base models.
In the case of our own models, again, there is uncertainty. We have a carbon budget model where we can actually estimate how carbon is being stored in the forests and soils. The boreal forest is a major sink for carbon, which is quite different from tropical forests, for example. We do not have an accurate handle on how much carbon is actually being stored in the soils now. We are putting a fair amount of emphasis on that area in our research.
Senator Day: Is the modelling sophisticated enough in a region so that a company operating in the forestry industry in New Brunswick, for example, could use that modelling to determine what trees should be planted after they harvest a particular area?
Mr. Miller: Yes.
Senator Day: Is that being done now?
Mr. Miller: Yes.
Senator Day: Is it too simplistic for me to think that, as the temperature warms up, the boreal forest will move further north and that it will keep pushing further north? Are there other factors involved here as well?
Mr. Miller: We do expect a northern movement of temperate forests and of the boreal forest. However, there are other factors to be considered. Soil nutrients are not evenly distributed across the landscape, so there will be limits as to how far certain species will move. Other factors such as quantity and quality of light are also important. You may have boreal tree species further north, but they may be very scrubby forests as opposed to the southern boreal that would move northward. You will have very short trees. That has nothing to do with temperature; it will have everything to do with the quantity and quality of light, nutrients and various other factors.
Senator Day: My final question is in relation to certification and model forests. Is there a particular forest, or two or three model forests that we might want to visit that are more advanced in this modelling and predictability than others that you could tell us about?
Mr. Miller: I believe that most of them, although not all of them, have been subject to various degrees of modelling. Probably two or three are a bit more obvious than others. In that respect, the Foothills Model Forest in Alberta is one that comes to mind.
Senator Day: Would you check with your department, and if there is a particular model forest that you think would be a good one for us to visit so we could get a feeling for what they are doing, and see it hands-on, perhaps you could let us know that?
Mr. Miller: I would be pleased to do that.
Senator Day: The other side of that question related to the movement towards certification of good forest practices. From the point of view of the sale of the product to the United States in particular, and worldwide, we have talked about how important the forest industry is and therefore how important it is for us to be able to maintain our business and to sell the product. Many larger retailing companies in the United States sell forest products now and are requiring certification of good forest practices. Have any of those certification organizations now started to work climate change or global warming issues into their certification program for forest management?
Mr. Miller: I do not believe so. They are certainly aware that climate change will impact on how one views forest management, that is, whether it is good or not. There is a general recognition, but I am not aware that anyone has actually started to include it specifically in certification schemes.
Senator Wiebe: Going back to the question on the project in the foothills, on page 11 of your slides on climate change impacts and adaptation program, you indicate that you are undertaking six national projects. They are not located anywhere on the map. Could you tell us where those six projects are located and whether it might be worth our while to visit some of those projects?
Mr. Miller: I am not sure which six projects you are referring to.
Senator Wiebe: On page 11 of the slide presentation, in the top corner you have, ``National Projects.'' You list one water project, two economic projects, two agriculture projects, and one forestry project, but I cannot see those symbols anywhere on your map. Can you tell us where those projects are being undertaken?
Mr. Egginton: I can give you a list of the complete projects that are listed here. I am just not clear which project in particular you are asking about. We can give you details on those particular projects and the types of things that are being done.
I have a list here to which I could refer. We certainly have some success stories. For example, assessing the impact of climate change on landscape flammability and the effectiveness of forest management being undertaken out of CFS in Edmonton is one of the projects that is listed there. A framework for determining the ability of the forest sector to adapt to climate change is being undertaken by the Saskatchewan Research Council and others. If you would like the names of the players on these particular items, we can certainly provide them.
The Chairman: We want more than just the names. Could we have the complete document that you have outlining the names, the program, when they began, what their objective is and so on?
Mr. Egginton: Yes. You actually have a handout that was given to you which will cover forestry. It is kind of a glossy looking document. It is green. It has highlights. They are the listed projects by title. You have it in your hands now. If you flip to the page, you will see the title, the name of the players on the particular project, and you will also have a website address. If you would like to pursue any of those with the particular researchers, they are certainly available to you.
Senator Wiebe: If I could just add to that, when I saw national projects listed on this page I thought they were being held out as projects that your department is undertaking to lead us to believe that something is being done. Six projects are listed. I would think that those would be the six that we would want to visit. If you have six projects that you feel are important enough to mark on this page as being national projects, all we want to know is what those six are.
Mr. Egginton: I understand.
Senator Wiebe: If they are important enough projects for you to identify, I would think those would be worthwhile for us to see. I would hope that you have the names of those. I thought they might be located on the map, because you do have a separate symbol beside each one as to where it is located. Is that just wishful thinking?
Mr. Egginton: No, these are actual projects. I have the man here who actually produced the document, so perhaps he could comment.
Senator Day: May I ask a supplementary while he is coming to the table? We have brochures for forestry, agriculture, and water resources, but we do not have one for economic. Is there another brochure called ``Economic''?
Mr. Miller: No.
Mr. Donald S. Lemmen, Research Manager, Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Directorate, Earth Sciences Sector, Natural Resources Canada: I would clarify that the six projects identified as national projects are in fact a synthesis of material from across all regions of the country, so that they cannot be identified as a physical location other than that the principal researcher would be based at a university. It is largely drawing together and analyzing data that exists within a particular topic across the country. That is why they are not represented by symbols. They are important for trying to identify both similarities and differences that exist across the country.
Senator Wiebe: Could you, at your convenience, give us the name of the scientists who are collecting that data? It might be worthwhile to invite them to appear before the committee in order that we have an opportunity to find out the exact situation.
Mr. Lemmon: We can certainly do that. I know for sure that in agriculture Barry Smit at the University of Guelph is involved in one of those two projects. I would strongly recommend that the committee interview him.
Senator Hubley: Thank you for your presentation. Could you give us a sketch of the global conditions of our forests and of some of the countries that are making progress? How does Canada stack up against those countries as far as research and development are concerned and in respect of introducing practices and coping with what is happening?
Mr. Miller: Canada does have a strong complement of world-class scientists doing research. You can see that in the fact that there are many Canadians involved with the IPCC, which is the international body of scientists that has been advising on climate change. That is one indicator that we are active and have international experts working on the issue inside our borders.
In general terms, it really depends on which country we compare ourselves to. There is a full spectrum of activity out there. In terms of much of the modelling work, we are probably as advanced as any other country when it comes to understanding what climate change means to our forests and how we might use forests to mitigate climate change. We certainly do not resource our research to the same degree as the Americans, but one could make that statement about almost any form of research.
I think Canada is in the vanguard, and that is reflected in the fact that our scientists are regularly asked to speak at international conferences. They also have their own network. Not only do we have strength in our own cadre of people, but also they are well networked with experts from other parts of the world. Science, by its nature, is international. It always has been. The best scientists always have large networks. When talking to one scientist, you are probably bringing the knowledge of many people to the table.
Senator Hubley: You say that forest fires are more severe and more prevalent. Forest fires cost Canada $400 million per year. On page 10 of your presentation, you show a forested area that has been cut in a specific way. Is that accidental or does that picture have something to do with methods of fighting forest fires?
Mr. Miller: I am not sure where that image came from. There are research projects that look at fuel breaks. This is, potentially, an example of fuel breaks, which are gaps that would, hopefully, at least slow down fires.
Senator Hubley: That is obviously what that is. I was not sure because it looked as if there had been some burn on the front corner. I come from the East, so am not familiar with forest fires. Have any new methods been developed for planting forests, especially in reforestation, that take into account the possibility of forest fires?
Mr. Miller: Yes, there definitely have been, although the severity of fires has largely been determined by the amount of fuel load. If there is a lot of dead wood on the ground, or lots of dead standing trees, and a forest fire starts, it is very difficult to stop it unless you stop it early. With a sizeable fire, nature has to help us in the form of precipitation, because there is just no other way to stop it. There have been many of examples of that. A notable one was in Yellowstone in the U.S. There was so much fuel load that, once it got going, no one could do much of anything except try to protect people and houses.
The Chairman: They also do controlled burns, and those put a lot of carbon in the atmosphere and affect climate change.
Mr. Miller: Yes. Forest fires are a major source of CO2, amongst many other things, particularly when you have thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of hectares being burned by fire.
Senator Hubley: As the forest is moving north, because northern areas are becoming warmer, is the whole ecosystem — the wildlife, the flora and the fauna — expanding and moving north?
Mr. Miller: That is an interesting question. It is a tough question in the sense that different species have different requirements. Whether the whole system moves remains to be seen. For instance, if the conditions for a lichen that is used by some wildlife for winter feed are not right in the boreal forest and it moves north, the ungulates — the moose and the caribou — will not be able to move with it. It will depend on how each individual species reacts to the changing conditions.
The Chairman: Does a greater degree of warming in higher latitudes mean that Canadian forests will experience increased or decreased productivity as a result of climate change?
Mr. Miller: It depends on which part of the country you are talking about.
The Chairman: I am talking about northwestern Canada, that is, Alberta and northern Saskatchewan where they have a lot of trees.
Mr. Miller: I am not sure that we know, to be honest. Certainly, with warmer climates and a longer growing season there should be more growth, but the flip side is, if you have more fires and more insects, those will impact on growth. We are not sure where the new balance will be.
The Chairman: If we do have decreased productivity as a result of climate change, it will affect our competitiveness in the export of forest products.
Mr. Miller: From that point of view, yes, I agree.
Senator Fraser: I am from Montreal, and one of the defining events of our recent history was, of course, the ice storm. Since then, I have spent a lot of time driving back and forth between Montreal and Ottawa, and also south from Montreal toward Lake Champlain. Along both of those roads there is not what you would call a forest industry, although there are many trees. The devastation that you can see from the road continues to catch my attention every time I drive by, particularly when there are no leaves on the trees. I find myself asking several questions to which I have never received answers. I am hoping you can help.
First, what was the economic impact of the devastation to the non-urban trees in our regions? Second, what is the increased forest fire risk from that deadwood? As an extension of that, do we have to start planning for much more maintenance — clearing up — to remove this fuel load that you were talking about? Can it be done? Is it even imaginable? I ask this because they tell us that what was a 1,000-year event, may occur more often, now that we have global warming.
Mr. Miller: As to the commercial impact of the ice storm, in cooperation with the provincial governments of Quebec and Ontario we have done surveys of what happened in the forest. We measured what happened to the forest. Perhaps Ms. Booth has some reference to this. Many of the severely damaged trees are secondary species, if I may call them that, from an industrial perspective. The conifers were not badly damaged. The deciduous trees took the brunt of the damage. There have been no huge industrial or commercial impacts of the ice storm. The effects have been more on aesthetics and homeowner losses in the urban centres.
There is a need to clean up the forests in terms of fire hazard, and that is possible, although deciduous forests are less fire-prone than conifer forests. Deciduous trees are only susceptible to fire in more stringent conditions, such as a drought in the spring green-up period. Dry conditions create a danger period for deciduous forests rather than for coniferous forests, for which the danger period spans the growing season, if it is dry.
According to the model projections and our thinking of what will happen, we envision fire increasing in the West but decreasing in the East. That reflects the difference in the kinds of forests. There are largely coniferous forests in the Prairies and B.C. versus the deciduous forests of southern and eastern parts of Canada.
The Chairman: We have cut too much and sold too much. The forest is growing back as mostly a deciduous forest. We have overcut for pulpwood.
Mr. Miller: We have also overcut for urban development, et cetera. The forest through the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Basin is not in the pristine state that it once was, and it is not necessarily in its healthiest state either.
On a national level there will be pressures in the West. In B.C., the mountain pine beetle and the resultant hundreds of thousands of dead hectares have created a real fire threat.
Senator Fraser: As we adapt, we will have to start looking at that clean up process.
Mr. Miller: Yes, we will have to look at such things as fuel loading.
Senator Fraser: Are there any cost estimates?
Mr. Miller: I do not think anyone has come that far in the analysis.
Senator Fraser: If the wood is dead, then there is not much commercial use for it.
Mr. Miller: You can salvage log for a period of three to five years, depending on the species and the environmental conditions. Certainly, in B.C., where there has been massive kill, the reality is such that you will never be able to utilize more than a small portion of that.
The Chairman: From the policy-makers' view, we are studying this issue because we want to look at new policies that the Government of Canada might want to pursue related to adaptation. What do policy-makers need to know to minimize the cost of climate change for the forest sector? In planning the adaptation strategy, how do we deal with the uncertainty in respect of climate change? You and other witnesses have said that we do not know about the effects. How do we deal with that when trying to come up with new public policies to deal with it?
Mr. Miller: The fact that you know that there are uncertainties and risks is good. Normally, we can tell you what the risks mean so that you can build that into planning. Obviously, if we strengthen the effort when it comes to research related to climate change, you could reduce those uncertainties. That is one thing that will help. The science community, for example, could tell you what we know, what we do not know, and about the risks of taking certain actions so that you may take better-informed decisions relevant to the consequences of potential actions.
The Chairman: How long will it be before the forest sector will have a plan from you that outlines some of the ``dos and do nots'' that you must carry out carefully, month-to-month, week-to-week and day-to-day in order to reduce the effects of erosion and climate change?
Mr. Miller: If they actually had those kinds of guidelines, they would probably come from the provincial governments because they will be directing how the forested lands are to be managed. Based on research, we would be telling both the industry and the provincial governments what we have learned and what it might mean.
We probably have pieces of the plan that you describe. We have certainly been looking at how we might use the forest to mitigate climate change. We have been looking at what climate change might mean to different species. The problem is that it is incomplete. We could not put together a plan that would encompass all of the things that we probably need to worry about if we were to put a serious plan before the people. I suspect that we are several years away from being able to do that.
Senator Wiebe: It is my understanding that there are some different species being used in reforestation and afforestation to ensures that future forests are better able to cope with some of the expected climate changes. Is there much of that happening? I ask that question because, in Western Canada, hybrid poplars have been introduced because they seem to cope better with stress. What will be the implications of bringing in a new hybrid on our ecosystems, when we are basically changing the types of forests that we have?
Mr. Miller: That depends on which species you want to choose. For instance, as I mentioned, many plantations around the world are based on exotic species relative to the species that were naturally occurring in a given country. That does not have serious consequences to our natural forests, because they are separate and new species.
If you are talking about trees like the poplar, even those that have been the product of biotechnology, it depends on what you want to achieve. For instance, it is possible, and we have done research on this, to prevent trees from breeding. If you were to release trees that have been engineered through biotechnology, it is possible to prevent them from flowering or producing pollen, which will prevent them from contaminating the natural gene pool.
If you are talking about more classically bred trees, and most of the hybrids that we have did come through classical tree breeding, then we are dealing largely with the natural genes. They are part of the natural pool. Hybridization occurs all the time in nature; it is not something that humans have concocted. There is some risk of gene contamination, if you are concerned about that, if you are planting these species. Some of that is possible. You will see a slight increase in the occurrences of a particular trait. However, as a general comment, with native species and the natural gene pool, our modifications are relatively minor.
Senator Wiebe: A major advantage of poplars is that they grow and mature quickly. Would that have any affect on the wildlife or on bugs and insects? Can the spruce budworm feel at home in a forest of hybrid poplars, for example?
Mr. Miller: Probably not the spruce budworm, but there are many other insects that would be happy to have lunch there.
Senator Wiebe: Perhaps in B.C. we should be planting the hybrid poplar, then we would not have to worry about the spruce budworm.
Mr. Miller: We have many other things to worry about.
With some of these hybrids, I probably should add that they often require much more intensive management, the hybrid poplar being a notable example. It requires a lot more intensive management on our part to have them grow well relative to some of the natural species.
The Chairman: Do you mean it requires special fertilization?
Mr. Miller: Yes, that sort of thing, and irrigation. The pest issue was is a concern. There are all sorts of insects and diseases that like hybrid poplar.
Senator Wiebe: I do not imagine that the lumber is as valuable either. That is probably a consideration.
Mr. Miller: Certainly with the shorter growing species, the fibres typically are not as strong as a slow-growing tree that has been around for a few decades.
Senator Wiebe: This may sound like a frivolous question, but it is based on Senator Hubley's remarks about warmer climates moving north. In your estimation, how long will it be before I can sit on the shores of Lake Superior under a palm tree?
Mr. Miller: You will probably have to find the fountain of youth. We all would.
Senator Day: Over the last hundred years, the mean temperature has changed approximately 1.6 degrees Celsius. Is that the right figure?
Mr. Egginton: It is 0.6 degrees.
Senator Day: It will be a long time.
Mr. Egginton: For clarity, that refers to global temperatures.
Senator Day: Following up on a question asked earlier about adaptation, do we have any idea how competitive Canada will be in the forest industry if all of these changes come about the way we are now predicting they will? Relative to other countries, will Canada have a forest industry if global change continues? Will we be a forest industry country as we are right now?
Mr. Miller: Certainly the opportunities will be there. We do anticipate, for instance, in Eastern Canada that there could actually be significant increases in tree growth. Climate change will not be the main driver of that; it will be other issues like softwood and some of the trade barriers that will determine whether we are competitive or not, but the forests will be there.
Senator Day: To you, does ``Eastern Canada'' mean Ontario and Quebec, or does it mean the Maritimes?
Mr. Miller: We go right across the country.
Senator Day: I am happy to hear that. Earlier, when you were talking about the nature of the forest in Eastern Canada I thought that you did not seem to be describing New Brunswick or Nova Scotia. Did you have New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in mind when you were talking about the nature of the forests?
Mr. Miller: Yes, we expect more deciduous species to move northward right across the east.
Senator Day: With a predicted temperature increase?
Mr. Miller: Yes, that is correct.
Senator Day: What impact does the policy in the United States and Canada of not going in and cleaning out any of the fallen trees or the trees that are destroyed by disease in the reserve areas and, therefore, the increased forest fires, have on global warming? You talked about a major fire in the U.S. recently. Are we able to factor details such as that into the equation?
Mr. Miller: We have models that predict fire intensity, frequency and so forth. We are a world leader on that score. We know what different fuel loadings might mean in the way of risk of fire and so forth. We can do a lot of that now.
Senator Day: There is a trend of setting more and more forested land aside so that it will not be touched. In all likelihood, it will be left natural. Therefore, it is likely that there will be significantly more forest fires. Am I correct in that statement?
Mr. Miller: Yes.
Senator Day: Will that have an impact on global warming?
Mr. Miller: That is difficult to say. It is not that different from now. Roughly half of Canada's forest is considered commercial or is managed in that sense. The other half is pretty much a wild forest. Putting aside more reserves is relatively modest in terms of what already exists. When you have several million hectares of wild forest and you add to that relatively small numbers in the forms of parks or ecological reserves, it does not shift the system a whole lot from where we are now.
Senator Day: Is the modelling as precise as to say that you have a fire that releases a lot of carbon in the atmosphere, but then you will have much more rapid growth than you would have had previously with the new growth, which would take carbon dioxide out the air? Does the modelling get into that type of balance?
Mr. Miller: People have looked at those sorts of things both in the sense of how much has gone into the atmosphere as a result of fires and what happens to the site after the disturbance in terms of carbon uptake. Yes, there is very definitely research, and there has been for a few years, that looks at those sorts of issues.
Senator Day: I read in one of your publications that many studies vary greatly depending on the factors that are considered and the assumptions that are made. This, from a modelling point of view, could result in all kinds of predictions about what might happen 20, 40 or 80 years from now — the life of growing a tree being 80 years. In that time frame, all sorts of things could happen, from a modelling point of view, depending on what you assume and what factors you take into consideration.
If we want to plan an adaptation strategy for global warming, do we have enough information now that we can predict with some degree of certainty what might happen? What more do you need in order for us to develop a good adaptation strategy, and how regional does that have to be?
Mr. Miller: For some forest types, we have a fair amount of information and er could give a reasonable estimate. That is not true of all forest types. Our knowledge of mixed forests is not as good as it is, for instance, for some of the pine forests or Douglas fir forests in B.C., or the fir and spruce forests in the east. To a degree, it would depend on which forest type we are assessing. In some cases, we could probably give a reasonable estimate of what will happen. We could always improve it, of course, but we could give a reasonable first approximation of what will happen. In other situations, we would find it more difficult.
Senator Day: Are you at the level of sophistication in predicting outcomes and adaptation strategies to be able to say that, if the temperature goes up one degree over the next hundred years, certain things are likely to happen, and, if it goes up two degrees, certain other things are likely to happen?
Mr. Miller: Yes, we are capable of doing that, recognizing that, with some of the data that those models are based on, as you have mentioned, the assumptions can cause models to go in very different directions in terms of the estimations.
Some of the data is quite reasonably based. In other cases, it might be a little more of a guess in terms of what we actually know. We are already doing analyses of different scenarios to determine what a one-degree or two-degrees increase means.
Senator Wiebe: I have always been led to believe that Mother Nature is one of the greatest regenerators of forests and grasslands and that it is not a bad thing to have the occasional forest fire to stir up the seeds.
This summer I had the opportunity to spend a day with the superintendent and some of her staff at Grasslands National Park in southwest Saskatchewan. The reason for the visit was that, because of the drought, a lot of wonderful grass that was not being utilized in the park system. There just were not enough buffalo and antelope to keep the grass under control. It was thought that it may be necessary to introduce some commercial cattle into the park. They have done research there and they advised me that it is not necessary to keep that grass cut or eaten, that Mother Nature need not burn it. Their studies show that it can be left natural and will still regenerate itself.
Is this something you are seeing within the forest industry as well? I was most intrigued by that about grasslands.
Mr. Miller: Many tree species are very adept at regenerating themselves. Often, when we reforest with a particular species it is either because we want that species or we are trying to get the trees back on the land before weeds take over, because there is natural succession. If you are prepared to wait for hundreds of years after a disturbance, you can get back to the more mature forests that we see. Nature does cope quite well and species do respond very well to whatever conditions come along.
Senator Wiebe: Is it not true that if a section of forest is never cut, or burnt as a result of a forest fire, that forest will eventually die?
Mr. Miller: That is true. There are many agents out there. In the boreal, fire is certainly one. Spruce budworm is another one. In B.C., the lodge pole pine is very fire resistant in the sense that it needs a lot of heat to open its cones to allow its seeds to fall and regenerate. It is a fire system; the trees burn.
In B.C., we have been very adept at controlling fires. The result of that is that we have lots of pine trees there that the mountain pine beetle loves. We have displaced one recycling agent with another. I am sure that if we dealt with mountain pine beetle to the extent that we have with fire, root disease or some other agent would come along and recycle the forest.
Senator Wiebe: Maybe that is what we should be finding, rather than forest fires, because forest fires produce a tremendous amount of carbon.
Mr. Miller: They do.
Senator Day: However, all the new trees chew up the carbon dioxide.
Senator Wiebe: Do they do it fast enough?
Senator Day: That is the question.
The Chairman: Earlier I asked public policy questions to assist us as public policy-makers. One of the tools that we can use in the forest sector is research to learn what new species will grow best and so on. Are there any other tools for helping the forest sector adapt that you would recommend that we as a committee should keep in mind as we continue this study?
Mr. Miller: We already know a significant amount about how to manage forests. We are increasingly using adaptive forest management techniques, that is, knowing where you are practising forestry and understanding how the forest is functioning and how, with human intervention, the forest might change. If we continue to apply what we already know, as well as the significant amount of knowledge that we already have that we are not yet applying, that will go a long way as well. Research is not the only answer. We must apply what we already know and make good decisions, and we are quite capable of doing that.
Senator Hubley: I wish to return to the subject of research and development, which is very important to agriculture and forestry.
How far along is the work that is being done on drought-resistant and insect-resistant trees, and what are the possibilities in that area? At our last committee meeting, the three senators from the East Coast learned that not only will global warming cause the tides to rise, but also that that part of Canada is actually sinking.
On Prince Edward Island we deal with soil erosion on an ongoing basis. We have encouraged the replacement of hedgerows, better farming practices and so on.
Do you see the opportunity for trees to be used on a scale that would modify the effects of global warming in an area that is becoming dry? Are certain trees capable of that?
Mr. Miller: To start at a more general level, certainly there are interactions between vegetation and the atmosphere, and those interactions vary. For instance, there is more transpiration from aspen forests than from conifer forests, and that has local impacts on the moisture content in the atmosphere and where it may rain as a result of convection cells, so there is a direct relation between the two. It is not just the case that weather affects vegetation; vegetation also has an influence on local weather, at least.
In the more general sense, there are possibilities that we can manage vegetation to influence weather, and presumably climate at some point as well.
Mr. Egginton: Trees have been replanted in certain areas and, as a result, springs that were completely dry have come back to life. Therefore, you can certainly modify ground water availability, for example.
Mr. Miller: We have seen proof from ancient times that deforestation on a large scale can increase desertification with disastrous ecological consequences.
Senator Hubley: Are we looking at the trees we already have to learn what advantages they may have over other trees in a drought situation, or are we developing new trees?
Mr. Miller: We are doing both. Through classical tree breeding as well as biotechnology, we have been looking at how you can modify a species toward more drought tolerance. In some species, white pine being one, we have even identified the gene that is responsible for drought tolerance.
Senator Day: I have a brief follow-up question on research. Given that our emphasis in this committee at this time is looking at adaptation strategies, and having in mind that there is industry research, university research, Canadian Forest Service research, and research being done by provincial governments, have you done an analysis on where the gaps exist, if any, in relation to research to help us with adaptation over the short term and the longer term?
Mr. Miller: The Canadian Forest Service has already done that and is doing it again. We do it on a regular basis to see what scientific advances have taken place and where gaps continue to exist.
Mr. Egginton: We have done exactly the same thing, which is why the Canadian perspective was undertaken. It was to bring us up to date on what new research has been done and what it shows.
Senator Day: Do we have the results of your research?
Mr. Egginton: You have part of it in terms of the research that has been done. We used that to focus our calls. We can give you information on that.
The Chairman: You will supply that to the committee?
Mr. Egginton: Yes.
The Chairman: That is excellent.
We would thank you all very much for a most exciting and informative day. Should we, as our study continues, have other questions, we would hope to be able to write to you or come to see you to get more information to fill any gaps that may arise.
Mr. Miller: We would be pleased to provide you with any information we can.
The Chairman: Thank you.
The committee adjourned.