Forest Stewardship Council®
FSC® Canada

THE FSC® NATIONAL FOREST
STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF
CANADAFSC-STD-CAN-01-2018 V 1-0 EN

FSC Canada · ca.fsc.org · FSC® F000205

TitleFSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of
CanadaDocument reference code:

FSC-STD-CAN-01-2018 EN

Status:Approved

Geographical scope:

CanadaForest scope

All forest types, except small-scale forests*,
low intensity forests* and community forests*.

Approval body

FSC Policy and Standards Committee

Submission date (to Performance andStandards Unit (PSU))

27.02.2018

Approval date

19.10.2018

Effective date

01.01.2020

Validity Period

Five (5) years as of the effective date

Country contact:

Vivian Peachey
Director of Standards
FSC Canada
240 Richmond Street West
Toronto, ON M5V 1V6
CanadaTel: +1(647) 528-0140
Email: v.peachey@ca.fsc.org

FSC Performance and Standards Unit contact

FSC International Center
Performance and Standard Unit
Adenauerallee 134
53113 Bonn, Germany
Tel : +49-(0) 228 367 66-917
Fax : +49-(0) 228 367 66-30
Email : psu@fsc.org

A.C. All rights reserved.
No part of this work covered by the publisher’s copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form orby any means, such as graphic, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, recording
taping, or information retrieval systems) without the written permission of the publisher.
The Forest Stewardship Council ® (FSC) is an independent, not-for-profit, non-governmental organization
established to support environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable
management of the world's forests.
FSC’s vision is that the world’s forests meet the social, ecological, and economic rights and needs of thepresent generation without compromising those of future generations.
Printed copies are for reference only. Please refer to the electronic copy on the FSC website (ic.fsc.org)
to ensure you are referring to the latest version.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 2 of 159 –Notes on Applicability
This Standard does not apply to small-scale forests*, low intensity forests* and community forests*.
Refer to Preamble section II - Scope and Application of the Standard (Scale, Intensity & Risk*. For
these types of forests*, the Maritimes SLIMF Standard (2008), the British Columbia Small
Operations Standards (2005) or the draft Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Standard (2010) will continue
to apply until the new Canadian SIR Standard has been approved.
This version of the Standard does not address the requirements related to Motion 65 on Intact
Forest Landscapes*. In the interim, refer to the Motion 65 Advice Note ADVICE-20-007-018 and to
FSC Canada’s Interim Guidance for the Delineation of Intact Forest Landscapes (May 25, 2017).
The management and certification of non-timber forest products* (NTFPs*) is optional and may
be applicable if a certification body has developed additional NTFP*-specific interim standard
requirements that meet ADVICE-20-007-05. FSC Canada plans to develop Indicators* specificallyfor maple syrup.
Please note that some adjustments may occur to the Indicators* of Criterion 10.7 following theapproval of the version 3 of the FSC Pesticides Policy. Also, other Indicators* may be altered infuture as determined by FSC International changes to policies and/or because of theimplementation of General Assembly Motions.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 3 of 159 –TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREAMBLE ......................................................................................................................... 5
PRINCIPLE 1: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS .................................................................. 14
PRINCIPLE 2: WORKERS’* RIGHTS AND EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS ................ 18
PRINCIPLE 3: INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’* RIGHTS ....................................................... 21
PRINCIPLE 4: COMMUNITY RELATIONS .................................................................... 28
PRINCIPLE 5: BENEFITS FROM THE FOREST* ............................................................ 33
PRINCIPLE 6: ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES* AND IMPACTS .................................... 37
PRINCIPLE 7: MANAGEMENT PLANNING ................................................................ 63
PRINCIPLE 8: MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT...................................................... 67
PRINCIPLE 9: HIGH CONSERVATION VALUES* ....................................................... 72
PRINCIPLE 10: IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES* .................... 77
Annex A: Minimum list of applicable laws*, regulations and nationally ratified*international treaties, conventions and agreements ........................................ 84
Annex B: Training Requirements for Workers*...................................................... 85
Annex C: Worker's* Health & Safety Program...................................................... 86
Annex D: High Conservation Value* (HCV*) Framework ................................. 87
Annex E: Dispute Resolution ................................................................................... 104
Annex F: Culturally Appropriate* Engagement* .............................................. 108
Annex G: Caribou in the Standard ....................................................................... 110
Annex H: Interim Indicators .................................................................................... 115
Annex I: List of Contributors..................................................................................... 125
GLOSSARY .................................................................................................................... 131
REFERENCE LIST ............................................................................................................ 156

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 4 of 159 –PREAMBLE
I. Introduction
The Forest Stewardship Council ® (FSC®) is an international non-profit organization founded in
1993 to support environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable
management of the world's forests*. FSC does this by setting standards for responsible forest
management, which are then used by accredited certification bodies to assess theperformance of participating organizations. Forest operations that meet these standards are
permitted to use the FSC label on their products in the marketplace, thereby enabling
consumers to choose and purchase products that come from forests* managed according to
FSC standards.
FSC ensures the credibility of its certification systems for the responsible management of theworld’s forest* through oversight by Assurance Services International (ASI), which is an assurance
partner for leading voluntary sustainability standards and initiatives around the world(http://www. http://www.asi-assurance.org/s/) and a member of the ISEAL Alliance(https://www.isealalliance.org/).
This FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of Canada represents the Canadian adaptationof FSC’s global Principles*, Criteria* (FSC-STD-01-001 V5-2) and International Generic Indicators(IGIs) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0). The national adaptation of this international framework ensures thatthe specific standard requirements are locally relevant, applicable and workable, as well as
guaranteeing its integrity across the broader FSC system.
Development of the FSC Canada Standard
In January 2013, FSC Canada membership voted in favour of developing one national standard
for Canada, thus replacing Canada’s four existing regional FSC Forest Management standards(i.e. National Boreal, Maritimes, British Columbia Standards and interim Great Lakes-St. LawrenceStandards) with a single standard that would apply to the whole country.
The FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of Canada (hereafter referred to as the‘Standard’) was developed by FSC Canada’s Standard Development Group (SDG) andcollaborators who worked to achieve consensus* among a wide range of people, organizations
and interests.
The early stages of development formed six Technical Expert Panels (TEPs) to assist with scientificand cultural expertise, and recommendations related to several critical concepts within thisStandard. Topics were identified through early public outreach efforts and surveys, andaddressed the following: Scale, Intensity & Risk* (SIR), Species-at-risk*, pesticides* and conversion,
ecological and operational considerations, as well as community, stakeholder* and Aboriginalrights.
The drafting of individual Indicators* was guided by two FSC International documents:• FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0 EN International Generic Indicators; and• FSC-PRO-60-006 V1-0 EN Development and Transfer of NFSS to FSC P&C V5
These documents outlined how the SDG were to use the International Generic Indicators (IGIs)
as a baseline for drafting the new Standard. Also known as the ‘transfer process,’ the SDG had
four options for interpreting each IGI.
1. Adopt: The SDG copies an International Generic Indicator into the new FSC National
Forest Stewardship Standard.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 5 of 159 –2. Adapt: The SDG reviews and revises an International Generic Indicator in order toaddress terminology, scope or effectiveness in measuring conformance to a Criterion*.
3. Drop: The SDG may omit an International Generic Indicator where it is determined to beinapplicable or otherwise non-contributing in measuring conformance to a Criterion*.
4. Add: The SDG may suggest additional Indicators* in order to better establish
conformance to a Criterion* as appropriate in a Canadian context.
Two draft versions of the Standard were submitted for public consultation and comment. In
addition, a rigorous testing program evaluated the auditability and implementability of Draft 2 of
the Standard, as well as several key topics and Indicators*. Under the direction and thediscretion of the SDG, members reached out to sample chamber perspectives on the final
version of the Standard.
The final draft Standard was submitted to the FSC Canada Board of Directors, who endorsed thesubmission of the Standard to FSC’s Policy and Standards Committee for final approval.
Structure of the Standard
The FSC Canada Standard maintains the internationally established hierarchical structure where:•••

Principles* are at the highest organizational level. These are the essential rules orelements of forest stewardship. FSC’s Standard includes 10 Principles* as prescribed by
FSC International. Each Principle* contains a series of Criteria*, which subdivide thePrinciple*.
Criteria* provide the means of judging if a Principle* has been fulfilled. Each Criterion*
contains one or more Indicators*.
Indicators* are the components of the Standard that are directly applicable to The
Organizations*. Indicators* contain the performance direction that The Organizations*must meet or to which they must adhere.

Together, the Principles* and Criteria* are the foundation of FSC certification, and are notsubject to revision at the national or regional levels. Indicators* have been specificallycustomized and approved for application in the Canadian context. All Principles*, Criteria* andIndicators* share equal status, validity and authority, and apply at the level of the Management
Unit*.
All Principles*, Criteria* and Indicators*, as well as the Glossary contained in this document, areconsidered normative* requirements. Terms for which a definition is provided in the Glossary areitalicized and are marked with an asterisk (*).
Throughout this Standard, Intent Boxes appear under some Criteria* and Indicators*. An Intent
Box is meant to provide guidance and context for users, and is not considered normative*.
Annexes included in the Standard may or may not be normative*, depending on thecompulsory language by which the Annex is referenced within the Indicator* and/or within the
Annex itself.
The compulsory nature of instructions found in the Principles*, Criteria* and Indicators* is defined
as follows:•••“Shall” indicates instructions that are to be strictly followed.
“Should” indicates that among several possibilities, one is recommended as particularly
suitable, without mentioning or excluding others.
“May” indicates a course of action permissible within the limits of the Standard.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 6 of 159 –••“Can” is used for statements of possibility and capability, whether material, physical or
causal.
“Includes” implies that all elements in the list must be addressed.

While the objectives*, thresholds or requirements for conformance are outlined within each
Indicator*, the specific collection of documentation and other evidence to demonstrate
conformance is up to The Organization*.

II. Scope and Application of the Standard
FSC forest management certification is designed to provide a credible guarantee that all
Forest Management Units* (FMUs) included in the scope of the certificate conform with therequirements of the Forest Stewardship Standard specified on the certificate. FSC certification
therefore applies to the FMU and all activities related to forest management that occurs within
its boundaries.
The Organization* is the entity holding or applying for certification that has control and authority
over the management of the Forest Management Unit*. FSC certification does not apply solely
to The Organization’s* activities, but to all activities within the FMU. The Organization* may be theforest owner, forest manager, or both. It is the responsibility of The Organization* to demonstratethat the Standard’s requirements have been met within the FMU. In several instances, The
Organization* may rely on the efforts of other parties who play a role in meeting certain
requirements (e.g. government entities, Indigenous Peoples* and stakeholders*). However,where gaps in performance exist, it is the responsibility of The Organization* to address thesegaps, within their sphere of influence*.
In cases where discrete portions of the forest* are beyond the management control of The
Organization*, The Organization* may excise these areas from the scope of the certificate. Refer
to FSC policies and procedures regarding excision (FSC-POL-20-003).
Scale, Intensity and Risk*
FSC recognizes that there exists a continuum of risk* from forest management activities*
depending on the scale*, intensity* and context of those activities. This Standard is designed tobe applied to all size and types of forests* in Canada except for those identified as:•••

Small-scale forests*: Forests* that are less than or equal to 1000 ha in size.
Low intensity forests*: Forests* with a harvesting rate of less than 20% of the mean annual
growth in timber, and either an annual harvest or an annual average harvest of less than
5,000 m 3 (averaged over the 5-year certificate lifetime).
Community Forests*: Any forestry operation managed by a local government,
community group, First Nation or community-held corporation for the benefit of the entire
community, in which profits are cycled back into the community, and has a total arealess than or equal to 80,000 ha in size.

For these forests*, a separate scale, intensity and risk* (SIR) Standard for Canada is underdevelopment to provide the specific requirements that apply in these cases.
However, this Standard does include requirements that take operational scale, intensity and risk*of impacts into account. These considerations are embedded within specific Indicators* andIntent Boxes throughout the Standard.
Interpretation and Use of the Standard
Forest managers, Indigenous Peoples*, local communities* and other stakeholders* are working
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 7 of 159 –in a dynamic system where the social, political, economic and environmental context canchange. This can bring a level of uncertainty in how forest managers adapt practices and how
certification bodies evaluate Standard requirements.
In a balance between clarity and brevity, the Indicators* are written so that their intent is clear
enough to avoid misinterpretation by certification bodies and The Organization* working
towards certification. In many instances, Intent Boxes are included for individual Indicators* toprovide guidance on the appropriate interpretation of that Indicator’s* requirements. However,in creating one national Standard that applies over a wide geographic, social and ecologicalrange, there may be cases where local or regional considerations have not been fully
accounted for in the Standard, or where circumstances unique to The Organization's* context
are specifically relevant.
Varying degrees of technical direction is provided in the Indicators*, and all efforts should betaken to meet the technical requirements. However, in addressing the requirements ofIndicators*, The Organization* and certification body must keep in mind that technicalrequirements are in place to achieve the overall intent of Criteria* and Indicators*. While it may
be tempting to analyze individual words and phrases, an overly bureaucratic or legalistic
approach to implementing Indicator* requirements may in some cases lead to actions notentirely consistent with achieving the intent. Application and evaluation of the Standard will
require judicious and logical interpretation of the requirements by auditors and assessors, taking
the context of specific forests*, ecological regions and social environments into account.
A Precautionary Approach*
FSC recognizes that there are circumstances where The Organization* is required to act withincomplete knowledge of cause and effect relationships. In such cases, the Standard
advocates the use of a precautionary approach*, whereby The Organization* avoid actions
that may lead to irreversible damage to the environment or a threat* to human welfare, andinstead consider alternative management strategies. By placing primacy on prudence andcaution in dealing with uncertainty, management actions should only proceed when The
Organization* is confident that severe negative effects will not occur.
Sphere of Influence*
The phrase ‘sphere of influence*’ is used throughout the Standard in recognition that there may
be circumstances where The Organization* does not have direct control or authority over theachievement of an outcome, and a collaborative effort is required. Sphere of influence*
requirements are commonly related to the actions of external parties, and/or landscape-scaleissues.
The expectation for working within The Organization’s* sphere of influence* is that The
Organization* demonstrates meaningful and sincere attempts, often over a sustained period, towork in a professional manner with colleagues and associates outside of The Organization* toachieve the intent of the Indicator*.
These expectations align with FSC’s goals to address increasingly complex challenges throughcollaboration with certified and non-certified parties to achieve longer term solutions to how
people utilize and benefit from the forest*.

III. Canadian Context
i. Land Ownership and Tenure*

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 8 of 159 –The vast majority of Canada’s forest* land, about 94%, is publicly owned and managed byprovincial, territorial and federal governments 1. These public forest lands are commonly referred
to as Crown land*, and generally include very large forest* tracts, ranging from thousands tomillions of hectares.
Only 6% of Canada’s forest* lands are privately owned1. These private forest lands include large
forests* owned by forest companies, notably in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Québec
and British Columbia. The remaining private forest lands include small family-owned forests* andwoodlots1.
Community forests* are not limited to a particular type of property. They can be consideredpublic or private land, depending on the particular tenure* arrangement3. However, the two
common elements of community forests* are that control and management decisions are
made by the community, for the benefit of the entire community3. Examples of community
forests* include municipal forests, county forests, demonstration forests, and Conservation
Authority lands.
Rights to harvest timber on Crown land* is granted by provincial and territorial governments.
These tenure* arrangements include the responsibilities and provisions tied to the right to harvest.
Overlapping Tenure*
Crown land* is a shared space which aims to meet the interests and activities of various parties.
Often on Crown land*, tenure* rights granted to an organization are not exclusive, but rather,are shared with other parties also operating on the land. These can be other forestry operations
with rights to harvest a component of the forest resource, or non-forestry operations who haverights to alter forests* while extracting or managing other resources (e.g. mining, oil and gas, andhydroelectric operations).
Where there is overlap by tenure* holders in the forest sector, forest planning is often
coordinated among all those who share tenure*. Most often, a primary forest tenure* holder is
responsible for organizing and developing the overall forest management plan* that all
overlapping forest tenure* holders must follow. In these cases, forest certification of theManagement Unit* is often permissible, assuming The Organization* has sufficient influence andcontrol over the forest management plan* and its implementation throughout the Management
Unit*.
However, non-forest tenure* holders (e.g. mining, or oil and gas operations) are not bound by aforest management plan*. This creates challenges because The Organization* may not have theauthority or leverage to constrain the activities of non-forest tenure* holders. In essence, The
Organization* may lack sufficient control of the activities occurring on the Management Unit* tobe certifiable.
The approach for handling overlapping tenure holders* adopted by this Standard follows thesebasic tenets established by international FSC policies and directives:••••

FSC certification applies to the forest*, not The Organization*;
The cumulative impacts of all activities on the forest* are to be considered duringcertification;
The Organization* must demonstrate sufficient management control over activities
occurring in the forest*;
Where forest use rights* are shared with other tenure* holders, The Organization* must beable to demonstrate that sharing these rights does not preclude meeting the FSC
Principles* and Criteria* in the forest*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 9 of 159 –While it is not mandated that all overlapping tenure holders* participate in the FSC certification
process and/or meet the same FSC requirements as The Organization*, their activities must not
negate the impact of The Organization’s* ability to demonstrate that the forest* and activities
within it meet the conditions of this Standard. Overlapping forest tenure* holders who chose notto participate in the certification process may not make claims regarding the FSC-certified statusof the wood harvested from the forest*.
ii. Regulatory Context
The federal and provincial/territorial governments have specific roles in the management ofpublic forest lands. The federal government is responsible for issues related to the national
economy, trade, international relations, federal lands and national parks, and has constitutional,
treaty and legal* responsibilities related to Indigenous Peoples*. The provincial and territorial
governments have legislative authority over the conservation* and management of the forest
resources on Crown lands*2, and are responsible for developing and enforcing forest-relatedlaws, regulations and policies. Annex A of this Standard refers to documents outlining theminimum laws and regulations related to forest activities that apply federally and those that
apply at the provincial and territorial levels.
Some provinces have laws and norms for forest management practices on private lands.
However, in most cases, private land forestry is governed by municipal regulations andsupported by provincial guidelines or voluntary programs 4. Landowners address illegal activities
on private land through Canadian laws governing property rights4.
FSC Requirements vs. Legal* and Regulatory Processes
The Organization* is required to comply with all applicable forest laws and regulations. Efforts
have been made to avoid known circumstances where the Standard’s requirements are notconsistent with legal* and regulatory requirements. Where a conflict is identified between arequirement of this Standard and an applicable law* or regulation, The Organization* is notexpected to violate the legal* requirement, and must promptly notify FSC Canada of theconflict so that FSC may take steps to evaluate the related circumstances.
Alternatively, there may be circumstances where the Standard’s requirements go beyond legal*
and regulatory requirements. Forest certification, as a voluntary system, expects The
Organization* to complement or even exceed legal* and regulatory requirements to achieve
the Standard’s requirements and remain consistent with FSC’s values and mission.
iii. Indigenous Context
In Canada, the term most commonly used to represent the diversity of Indigenous Peoples* is“Aboriginal peoples”, as per the Constitution Act, 1982. For FSC, Indigenous Peoples* includes
many diverse First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, each whom possess unique histories,
languages, cultural practices and spiritual beliefs.
Most First Nations and Inuit peoples, as well as their representative institutions, are recognized byboth federal and provincial levels of government. Databases related to their governance,
reserve land-base and traditional territories are publicly available*. The same cannot be said for
Métis, as the legal* framework to recognize Métis status is in development.
Existing Aboriginal and Treaty Rights
Aboriginal rights are collective rights* which flow from Aboriginal peoples (i.e. Indigenous
Peoples*) continued use and occupation of certain areas 5. They are inherent rights that have

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 10 of 159 –been practiced and enjoyed since before European settlement, for example, the right to hunt,fish and trap, self-government and/or a right to the land itself, i.e. Aboriginal title to land5. Treaty
rights are Aboriginal rights set out in a treaty.
Section 35 of Canada's Constitution Act, 1982, provides constitutional protection to existing
Aboriginal and treaty rights (First Nation, Inuit and Métis) in Canada. Extensive case law has
documented efforts to explicitly define what these rights are and how they are to be protected.
Progress has been made on defining obligations of governments in relation to consultation andaccommodation requirements, but it is difficult to definitively list specific existing Aboriginal andtreaty rights to an area without first conducting case-by-case assessments.
Section 35 also establishes that the Crown has a duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal
peoples when the Crown contemplates actions or decisions that may affect Aboriginal or treaty
rights. This duty arises most often in the context of natural resource extraction, including forestry.
This fiduciary duty cannot be delegated to third parties, including forest companies. However,
the Crown may delegate certain aspects of consultation to a proponent (e.g. collection of
information regarding a proposal, impact of a proposed project on potential or established
Aboriginal or treaty rights, etc.) when it is in the best interest of all parties to do so. However, itremains the legal* responsibility of the Crown to retain oversight of this delegated authority.
Despite this tripartite relationship, there exists a space in which third parties engage andcollaborate with Indigenous Peoples* to ensure Aboriginal and treaty rights are recognized andupheld*. This Standard provides room for this engagement mainly through Principle 3, but
through other Indicators* as well. FSC recognizes that unresolved issues, such as how Aboriginal
title and private ownership will be reconciled where they overlap, poses important challenges6
and will require innovative and flexible approaches as the Canadian legal* framework evolves.
Customary Rights*
In Canada, the term “customary right” is not commonly used in Indigenous rights discourse. It ismuch more common to come across references to customary law*, traditional law, Natural Law
or legal* traditions that are codified in written (e.g. wampum belts or sacred scrolls) andunwritten forms (e.g. songs, dances) and passed on through the generations. More importantly,
the values, beliefs, and understanding of law are conveyed through the continuing practices,
customs and traditions of the society. These practices, as defined in the Glossary, make up thecustomary rights* of Indigenous Peoples*. For more information on customary rights*, refer to the
FSC Canada Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) Guidance document.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent*
A core concept of international agreements recognizing the rights of Indigenous Peoples* is theright of Indigenous Peoples* to Free, Prior and Informed Consent* (FPIC)*, and is embedded
within FSC’s Principles* and Criteria* (version 5). FPIC* requirements are valid for Canada, andhave been adapted in this Standard to recognize the modern-day context of Aboriginal rights
discourse. To assist in the understanding of how FPIC* is to be applied in a Canadian context,
FSC Canada has developed a country-specific guideline for the implementation of FPIC*. Referto the FSC Canada Guidance on Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).
iv. Ecological Context
While Canada encompasses a wide range of forest* types and ecological communities, thisStandard is designed to apply to each of Canada’s eight forest regions where forest
management activities* take place.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 11 of 159 –Source: Natural Resources Canada, Government of Canada. Accessed 2017.
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/measuring-reporting/classification/13179

v. Social Context
Canada’s forests* are an important source of culture, recreation and economic opportunities forthe people living in and around forests*. Direct economic dependence on the forest* is mostheavily realized in northern and remote communities, where in many cases the forest industry is asignificant employer. Harmonizing socio-economic needs with the other societal values of theforest* requires balancing the interests of local and affected indigenous and non-indigenous
communities with other stakeholders* and interested parties. FSC attempts to take an inclusive
approach to the input of stakeholders* and interested parties in forest management and theStandard identifies specific opportunities for their involvement.
Disputes* Between Parties
Invariably there are cases where people disagree on management objectives*. This Standard
includes various dispute* resolution pathways, depending on the nature of the dispute*.
However, all dispute* resolution pathways address the same general framework:••••

identification of complaints*;
escalation to dispute*;
development and implementation of a dispute resolution process; andmaintaining records of process and outcome.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 12 of 159 –Annex E describes the dispute resolution process and its application in greater detail.

IV. Supporting Documentation to the Standard
While this Standard forms the backbone of the normative* requirements of the FSC National
Forest Stewardship Standard of Canada, additional normative* and non-normative*
documentation exists (both national and international), which is meant to provide direction andguidance regarding the implementation of the Standard. Refer to the Reference List (at the endof the Standard) for a list of the relevant FSC Standards, policies, directives and guidance that
apply as of the effective date of this Standard. Additional normative* and non-normative*
documents, as well as adaptions or modifications of this Standard may become available overtime.

V. Going Forward
FSC Canada aims to foster stability, clarity and support to certificate holders, certification
bodies, Indigenous Peoples* and stakeholders*. There are areas of work that remain outstanding,including developing requirements and guidance for smallholders and community forests* aswell as Intact Forest Landscapes* and Indigenous Cultural Landscapes. FSC Canada iscommitted to carefully plan, communicate and deliver on outstanding work, and how changes
or new material will be incorporated into the Standard.
FSC’s normative* requirements allow for targeted revisions that can be initiated within the fiveyear lifecycle of the Standard. Working closely with the Performance & Standards Unit and with
Canadian stakeholders*, FSC Canada will identify a modification window if modifications are
anticipated.
The Organizations*, certification bodies, practitioners, Indigenous Peoples* and stakeholders*
may refer to the FSC Canada website or contact FSC Canada to confirm which documents andversions are current and applicable to the implementation of this Standard.
References:
1 Natural Resources Canada (2017-11-20) Forest land ownership.
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/canada/ownership/17495 (accessed April 18, 2019).
2 Canadian Council of Forest Ministers (2017) Sustainable Forest Management in Canada. Overview Canada’s Forests. https://www.sfmcanada.org/en/canada-s-forests (accessed April 18, 2019).
3 Teitelbaum, S., Beckley, T., and Nadeau, S. (2006) A national portrait of community forestry on public landin Canada. The Forestry Chronicle 82(3): 416-428. (Also available at http://pubs.cififc.org/doi/pdf/10.5558/tfc82416-3, (accessed April 18, 2019).
4 Natural Resources Canada (2017-07-26) Canada’s forest laws.
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/canada/laws/17497 (accessed April 18, 2019).
5 University of British Columbia First Nations Studies Program. 2009. Indigenous Foundations: Aboriginal
Rights. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/aboriginal_rights/ (accessed April 18, 2019).
6 Borrows, J. (2015) Aboriginal title and private property. The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s
Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 71: 90-134.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 13 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 1: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWSThe Organization* shall comply with all applicable laws*, regulations and nationallyratified* international treaties, conventions and agreements. (P1 V4)
1.1

The Organization* shall be a legally defined entity with clear, documented andunchallenged legal registration*, with written authorization from the legally competent*
authority for specific activities. (New)INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex A (under section 1. Legal rights to harvest) for a list of federal and provincial
laws and regulations related to this Criterion*.
1.1.1

Legal registration* to carry out all activities within the scope of the certificate granted bya legally competent* authority is documented.

1.2

The Organization* shall demonstrate that the legal status* of the Management Unit*,
including tenure* and use rights*, and its boundaries, are clearly defined. (C2.1 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex A (under section 1. Legal rights to harvest) for a list of federal and provincial
laws and regulations related to this Criterion*.
1.2.1

Legal* tenure* to manage and use resources within the scope of the certificate granted
by a legally competent* authority is documented.

1.2.2

The boundaries of all Management Units* within the scope of the certificate are clearlymarked or documented and shown on maps.

1.3

The Organization* shall have legal* rights to operate in the Management Unit*, which fit
the legal status* of The Organization* and of the Management Unit*, and shall comply
with the associated legal* obligations in applicable national and local laws* andregulations and administrative requirements. The legal* rights shall provide for harvest of
products and/or supply of ecosystem services* from within the Management Unit*. The
Organization* shall pay the legally prescribed charges associated with such rights andobligations. (C1.1, 1.2, 1.3 V4)INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex A for a minimum list of applicable laws*, regulations and nationally ratified*international treaties, conventions and agreements.
CITES requirements are covered by the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation ofInternational and Interprovincial Trade Act (WAPPRIITA) and other existing national
legislation.
1.3.1

Forest management activities* in the Management Unit*, planned and ongoing, arecarried out in compliance with:
1. Applicable laws* and regulations;
2. Administrative requirements;
3. Legal* rights; and4. Customary rights* of Indigenous Peoples*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 14 of 159 –INTENT BOX
In Canada, the term “customary right” is not commonly used in Indigenous rights discourse. It
is much more common to use customary law*, traditional law, Natural Law or legal* traditions
that are codified in written (e.g. wampum belts or sacred scrolls) and unwritten forms (e.g.
songs, dances) and passed on through the generations. More importantly, though, thevalues, beliefs, and understanding of law are conveyed through the continuing practices,
customs and traditions of the society. These practices make up the customary rights* ofIndigenous Peoples*.
Annex A refers to a minimum list of current laws and regulations which represent legal* rights.
The identification of customary rights* that are not recognized under Canadian laws andtheir consideration is achieved through Principle 3.
1.3.2

Payment is made in a timely manner* of all applicable legally prescribed charges
connected with forest management.

1.4

The Organization* shall develop and implement measures, and/or shall engage* withregulatory agencies, to systematically protect the Management Unit* from unauthorized
or illegal resource use, settlement and other illegal activities. (C1.5 V4)INTENT BOX
It is not always possible for The Organization* to enforce protective measures when The
Organization* is not the landowner and/or does not have the legal* rights of control. In
Canada, regulatory bodies have the legal* responsibility for controlling illegal activities.
Measures to protect the Management Unit* from unauthorized or illegal resource use,settlement and other illegal activities emphasize prevention, rather than act ‘after the fact’.
1.4.1

Within the scope of The Organization’s* authority, measures are implemented to identify,
prevent and control unauthorized or illegal harvesting, hunting, fishing, trapping,collecting, settlement and other unauthorized activities.

1.4.2

Where protection is the legal* responsibility of regulatory bodies, a system is implemented
to work with these regulatory bodies to identify, report, discourage, control and address
unauthorized or illegal activities.

1.5

The Organization* shall comply with the applicable national laws*, local law*, ratified*international conventions and obligatory codes of practice*, relating to the transportationand trade of forest products within and from the Management Unit*, and/or up to thepoint of first sale. (C1.1, 1.3 V4)

1.5.1

Compliance with relevant national laws*, local laws* and ratified* international
conventions relating to the transportation and trade of forest products, including CITES
species, up to the point of first sale is demonstrated, including through possession ofcertificates for harvest and trade.

INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex A for a minimum list of applicable laws*, regulations and nationally ratified*international treaties, conventions and agreements.
CITES requirements are covered by the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation ofInternational and Interprovincial Trade Act (WAPPRIITA) and other existing national
legislation.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 15 of 159 –1.6

The Organization* shall identify, prevent and resolve disputes* over issues of statutory or
customary law*, which can be settled out of court in a timely manner*, throughengagement* with affected stakeholders*. (C2.3 V4)INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex E for details describing how disputes* are addressed throughout theStandard.
1.6.1

A system is in place whereby complaints* can be made known to The Organization*
related to applicable laws* or customary law*.

1.6.2

A publicly available* dispute resolution process that can be adapted through culturally
appropriate* engagement* is in place, including mechanisms to address disputes ofsubstantial magnitude* that include provisions for ceasing operations.

1.6.3

Complaints* are responded to in a timely manner*. Complaints* that are not resolved areelevated to disputes* and are being addressed via a dispute resolution process.

INTENT BOX
FSC recognizes that The Organization* may not have control over statutory or legal* matters, or
may not be directly involved in a dispute* regarding the Management Unit*. In these cases, itwould be reasonable for The Organization* to work within its sphere of influence* to encourage
parties, where appropriate, to work together to resolve the dispute*.
1.6.4

An up-to-date record of complaints* and disputes* is maintained and includes:
1. Steps taken to resolve complaints* and disputes*;
2. Outcomes of all complaints* and dispute resolution processes; and3. Unresolved disputes*, the reasons they are not resolved, and how they will be
resolved.

1.6.5

The dispute resolution process as established in Indicator 1.6.2 is implemented, following
the provisions for ceasing of operations for disputes of substantial magnitude*.

1.7

The Organization* shall publicize a commitment not to offer or receive bribes in money or
any other form of corruption, and shall comply with anticorruption legislation where thisexists. In the absence of anticorruption legislation, The Organization* shall implement
other anticorruption measures proportionate to the scale* and intensity* of management
activities* and the risk* of corruption. (New)1.7.1

A policy is implemented that:
1. Includes a commitment not to offer or receive bribes of any description;
2. Meets or exceeds related legislation; and3. Is publicly available* at no cost.

1.7.2

Bribery, coercion and other acts of corruption do not occur.

1.7.3

Corrective measures are implemented if corruption does occur.

1.8

The Organization* shall demonstrate a long-term* commitment to adhere to the FSC
Principles* and Criteria* in the Management Unit*, and to related FSC Policies andStandards. A statement of this commitment shall be contained in a publicly available*
document made freely available. (C1.6 V4)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 16 of 159 –1.8.1

A publicly available* written policy, endorsed by an individual with authority to
implement the policy, demonstrates a long-term commitment to forest management
practices consistent with FSC Principles* and Criteria* and related Policies and Standards.

INTENT BOX
The individual with authority is not necessarily the president of a company or the most senior
manager or the highest-lever manager. For example, depending on the circumstances,••an individual may have been delegated authority for the implementation of FSC
certification;
if the policy is integrated in the management plan*, the individual may be the person in
charge of and fully responsible for the forest management plan*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 17 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 2: WORKERS’* RIGHTS AND EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONSThe Organization* shall maintain or enhance the social and economic wellbeing ofworkers*. (New)
2.1

The Organization* shall uphold* the principles and rights at work as defined in the ILO
Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (1998) based on the eight ILO
Core Labour Conventions. (C4.3 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
There are no known gaps between the ILO Core Conventions and the Canadian national/
provincial regulations so there is low risk* for violation. See Annex A for more details.
2.1.1

Employment practices and conditions for workers* demonstrate conformity with federal
and provincial labour laws and with the principles and rights of workers* addressed in the
ILO Core Labour Conventions.

2.1.2

Workers* are able to establish or join labour organizations of their own choosing, subject
only to the rules of the labour organization concerned.

2.1.3

Collective bargaining agreements are implemented where they exist.

2.2

The Organization* shall promote gender equality* in employment practices, training
opportunities, awarding of contracts, processes of engagement* and management
activities. (New)2.2.1

Systems are implemented that promote gender equality* and prevent gender
discrimination in employment practices, training opportunities, awarding of contracts,
processes of engagement* and management activities*.

2.2.2

Job opportunities are open to both women and men under the same conditions.

2.2.3

With consideration for worker* experience, performance, and working conditions,
women and men are paid equally using a direct and secure method of payment.

2.2.4

Maternity and paternity leave is available for no less than a six-week period afterchildbirth, and there is no penalty for taking it.

2.2.5

Women and men are encouraged and supported to actively participate in all levels of
employment and decision-making.

INTENT BOX
Decision-making activities can vary within a business and at different levels of decisionmaking. They may include participation in forest management planning meetings, technicalor strategic committees, decision-making forums, steering committees, membership on theboard of directors, etc.
Support for the active participation in meetings may include scheduling the timing of
meetings to accommodate family obligations, for example.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 18 of 159 –2.2.6

Confidential and effective mechanisms exist for reporting and eliminating cases of sexual
harassment and discrimination based on gender, marital status, parenthood or sexual
orientation.

2.3

The Organization* shall implement health and safety practices to protect workers* fromoccupational safety and health hazards. These practices shall, proportionate to scale,intensity and risk* of management activities*, meet or exceed the recommendations of
the ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Forestry Work. (C4.2 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex A for a list of the main health and safety laws and regulations.
2.3.1

Compliance with relevant occupational health and safety regulations as specified in
Annex A is demonstrated.

INTENT BOX
In this Standard, the requirements of the ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health inForestry Work are covered by Canadian legislation. Refer to Annex A, section 3.4 of thetables.
Legislation in Canada is equal to (or sometimes exceeds) this ILO Code of Practice.
2.3.2

A worker* health & safety program for all workers that meets the requirements of Annex
C is developed, implemented and reviewed periodically.

2.3.3.

Records are kept on health and safety practices including accident rates, a descriptionof accidents and their causes, and lost time due to accidents.

2.3.4.

The average frequency and severity of accidents over time are comparable to, or lower
than, national or provincial forest workers* averages, where those exist. If statistics onforest workers* averages do not exist, the average frequency and severity of accidents
over time remain low or are declining.

2.4

The Organization* shall pay wages that meet or exceed minimum forest industry
standards or other recognized forest industry wage agreements or living wages*, wherethese are higher than the legal* minimum wages. When none of these exist, The
Organization* shall through engagement* with workers* develop mechanisms fordetermining living wages*. (New)

2.4.1

Remuneration, including wages and benefits (such as health and retirement provisions),
for workers* is comparable to or exceeds prevailing regional standards in the industry.

2.4.2

Wages, salaries and contracts are paid on time.

2.5

The Organization* shall demonstrate that workers* have job-specific training andsupervision to safely and effectively implement the management plan* and all
management activities*. (C7.3 P&C V4)

2.5.1

Workers* have job-specific training consistent with Annex B to safely and effectively
contribute to the implementation of the management plan* and all management
activities*.

2.5.2

Up-to-date training records are kept for workers*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 19 of 159 –2.6

The Organization*, through engagement* with workers*, shall have mechanisms forresolving grievances and for providing fair compensation* to workers* for loss or damage
to property, occupational diseases*, or occupational injuries* sustained while working for
The Organization*. (New)INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex E for details describing how disputes* are addressed throughout theStandard.
While this Criterion* applies to worker* complaints* and disputes* while working on theManagement Unit*, it is recognized that The Organization* has limited capacity in managing
and implementing dispute resolution processes where The Organization* is not directly
involved in the dispute* (e.g. dispute* between a contractor and subcontractor operatingon the Management Unit*).
In some cases, complaints* or disputes* may exist between a worker* and their employer
where the employer is not The Organization*. In these cases, the requirements of theCriterion* are still applicable, only the approach for demonstrating conformance may bedifferent. For example, in these cases, it is possible for The Organization* to verify that theemployer’s systems for receiving (2.6.1), managing (2.6.2, 2.6.3) and resolving (2.6.4)
complaints* and disputes* with their workers* are in place and being implemented by theemployer.
2.6.1

A system is in place whereby complaints* from workers* can be made known to theiremployer.

2.6.2

A publicly available* dispute resolution process that can be adapted through culturally
appropriate* engagement* is in place.

2.6.3

Complaints* are responded to in a timely manner*. Complaints* that are not resolved areelevated to disputes* and are being addressed via a dispute resolution process.

2.6.4

An up-to-date record of complaints* and disputes* is maintained and includes:
1. Steps taken to resolve complaints* and disputes*;
2. Outcomes of all complaints* and disputes resolution processes, including, whereapplicable, fair compensation* to workers* for loss or damage to property,
occupational diseases*, or occupational injuries* sustained while working for The
Organization*; and3. Unresolved disputes*, the reasons they are not resolved, and how they will be
resolved.

2.6.5

Workers* are covered by safety insurance, in accordance with provincial laws andregulations.

INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex A (under section 3.4 Health and Safety) for a list of provincial safety insurance
laws and regulations.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 20 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 3: INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’* RIGHTSThe Organization* shall identify and uphold* Indigenous Peoples’* legal* and customary
rights* of ownership, use and management of land, territories* and resources affectedby management activities*. (P3 P&C V4)
INTENT BOX
Indigenous Peoples’* rights (i.e. Aboriginal and treaty rights) as per Section 35 (1) of theConstitution Act, 1982) are considered collective rights* in that the rights belong to a group
and not to an individual. As per the Constitution Act, 1982, “Aboriginal peoples” include First
Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples.
In addition to these collective rights*, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples (UNDRIP) and ILO 169 include the protection of basic human rights (i.e. individual
rights) of Indigenous Peoples*. Individual rights, held by affected stakeholders* in thisStandard who are also members of an Indigenous community, are addressed in Principle 1(Criterion1.6) and Principle 7 (Criterion 7.6), and are not subject to the requirements of Free,
Prior and Informed Consent* (FPIC*) and other national and international human rights
instruments (e.g. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms).
The right to FPIC* is a collective right* held by Indigenous Peoples* and recognized ininternational law. While FSC Canada has provided guidance on developing processes touphold* this right, it is preferable that The Organization* remains open to discussing thedefinition, scope and nature of such a process with the rights holders.
The principle of good faith* and the acceptance of a shared responsibility for meaningful
consultation and accommodation is fundamental to the implementation of a FPIC* process.
To ensure there is broad support for the implementation of a FPIC* process, initial and ongoing engagement* with Indigenous Peoples* may also include governments and otherstakeholders* with whom the affected Indigenous Peoples* have a fiduciary relationship.
The intent of Principle 3 is to ensure that all management activities*, including the buildingof relationships between The Organization* and Indigenous Peoples*, are conducted forthe benefit of the entire community. Economic and social benefits gained by a private
enterprise from forest management opportunities offered by The Organization* areaddressed in Principle 5. In circumstances where Indigenous Peoples* express concern oran interest in management activities* not directly related to legal* or customary rights* ofIndigenous Peoples*, The Organization* may address them through the requirements ofPrinciple 4 – Community Relations.
Customary rights*: This term is defined in the Glossary. Canadian law has recognized certain
customary practices and laws that may be unique to specific Indigenous Peoples* or ashared custom across many groups. In the context of FSC certification, these practices
constitute customary rights*. Governments have recognized traditional forms of land
governance through legally binding agreements* such as government-to-government
consultation agreements and agreements related to modern day treaty negotiation. Suchagreements may provide examples of customary rights* pertinent to the forestry context(refer to the Preamble for additional context).
The right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent*: The right to FPIC* is a key principle ofinternational human rights law. It is intended to protect the legal* and customary rights* ofIndigenous Peoples* and prevent further destruction and alienation from lands, territories*
and resources upon which their cultures, livelihoods and lives depend. In the context of the
FSC Standard, the right to FPIC* is attributed to identified affected rights holders as per

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 21 of 159 –Indicator 3.1.4. The rights that may be addressed through a FPIC* process in 3.2.4 are thoserights that may be impacted by management activities* as identified in Indicator 3.1.4.
Disputes*: This term is defined in the Glossary. Complaints* and disputes* regarding thelegality of the forestry operation (e.g. forest tenure* allocation or management regulations)are addressed in Criterion 1.6. Dispute resolution processes that are specific to negotiatedagreements between The Organization* and affected Indigenous Peoples*, but may not be
publicly available*, are addressed in Indicators 3.2.4 and 3.3.3. If complaints* or disputes*
registered by affected Indigenous Peoples*, related to the impact of the forest
management activities*, are not addressed in Criterion 1.6 and in Principle 3, they could be
addressed in Criterion 4.6.
Culturally appropriate* engagement*: These terms are defined in the Glossary and further
explained in Annex F. The Organization* may wish to further clarify what this means in theirown context (e.g. private land, small landholders, community forests*). For example,
engagement* is not limited to stakeholders* or Indigenous Peoples*, but may also include
government officials with responsibilities related to management activities*. The purpose of
the engagement* is to ensure all relevant information is collected to fulfil the requirementsof management planning and the Standard.
Private Lands: Canadian courts and legislation recognize that legal* and customary rights*(specifically use rights*) and private property rights (i.e. right of ownership) may co-exist. This
Standard does not abrogate or derogate from the right to property. The legal rights* andcustomary rights* addressed in Principle 3 are based on the pre-settlement conditions of theregion (i.e. prior to the granting of land) and must be identified on a case-by-case basis,
preferably through culturally appropriate* engagement* and relationship building. The
mechanisms (i.e. type of agreements) used to uphold* these rights on private lands may
differ from public lands. There is an evolving legal* framework related to Aboriginal andtreaty rights and private lands in Canada. FSC Canada will monitor and adapt the FPIC
Guidance or provide normative* direction when/if necessary.
FPIC Guidance: For more information on the nature and scope of Indigenous Peoples* rights,
including the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent*, refer to FSC Canada Free, Prior andInformed Consent (FPIC) Guidance.
3.1

The Organization* shall identify the Indigenous Peoples* that exist within theManagement Unit* or those that are affected by management activities*. The
Organization* shall then, through engagement* with these Indigenous Peoples*, identify
their rights of tenure*, their rights of access to and use of forest resources and ecosystemservices*, their customary rights* and legal* rights and obligations, that apply within theManagement Unit*. The Organization* shall also identify areas where these rights arecontested. (New)

3.1.1

Indigenous Peoples* that may be affected by management activities* are identified.

3.1.2

Through culturally appropriate* engagement* with the Indigenous Peoples* identified in
3.1.1, the following is documented and/or mapped using best available information*:
1. Their legal* and/or customary rights* of tenure*;
2. Their legal* and/or customary* access to, and use rights*, of the forest resources andecosystem services*;
3. Their other legal* and/or customary rights* and responsibilities that may be affectedby management activities*;
4. The evidence supporting these rights and responsibilities; andFSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 22 of 159 –5. Areas where rights are contested between Indigenous Peoples*, governments and/or
others.
3.1.3

When there is disagreement about the legal* and/or customary rights* affected bymanagement activities*, The Organization* attempts, through culturally appropriate*
engagement*, to reach agreement on an interim scope of rights to be recognized andupheld*. This process is conducted in good faith*, documented and available at thetime of audit.

INTENT BOX
The intent of Indicator 3.1.3 is to support the development and maintenance of meaningful
relationships that support long-term and culturally appropriate* engagement* that is fosteredthrough dialogue. In the beginning, it may be helpful for The Organization* to make persistentand sincere attempts to meet with Indigenous Peoples* identified in Indicator 3.1.1 and discuss
the nature and scope of the legal* and customary rights* that may be impacted bymanagement activities*.
For private Land: In situations where legal* and/or customary rights* are asserted by
Indigenous Peoples* (identified in Indicator 3.1.1) without evidence, and private land owners
determine through impact assessment that the negative impacts of the assertion are too high,the right to private property may be weighed against the rights of Indigenous Peoples*.
3.1.4

Legal* and/or customary rights* that may be impacted by management activities* on
specific areas of the Management Unit* are identified, and a summary of the means bywhich these rights, and contested rights, may be addressed is provided by The
Organization*.

3.2

The Organization* shall recognize and uphold* the legal* and customary rights* ofIndigenous Peoples* to maintain control over management activities* within or related to
the Management Unit* to the extent necessary to protect their rights, resources and lands
and territories*. Delegation by Indigenous Peoples* of control over management
activities* to third parties requires Free, Prior and Informed Consent*. (C3.1 and 3.2 P&C
V4)

3.2.1

Prior to management activities* and through a mutually agreed* upon culturally
appropriate* engagement* process, it is determined when, where and how Indigenous
Peoples* can participate in management planning, both strategic and/or operational,
to the extent necessary to protect their rights, resources, lands and territories*.

3.2.2

Culturally appropriate* support for Indigenous Peoples* participation in management
planning is provided.

3.2.3

The legal* and/or customary rights* of Indigenous Peoples* affected by management
activities* identified in Indicator 3.1.4 are recognized and upheld*.

3.2.4

Where evidence exists that legal* and/or customary rights* of Indigenous Peoples*
related to management activities* have been violated, the situation is corrected, if
necessary, through culturally appropriate* engagement* and/or through the dispute
resolution process as required in Criterion 1.6.

3.2.5

Free, Prior and Informed Consent* is obtained prior to management activities* that affectthe rights identified in Indicator 3.1.4 through a process that:

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 23 of 159 –1. Engages the Indigenous Peoples* in the assessment of the economic, social andenvironmental values* of the forest management resource;
2. Documents an approach to identifying the goals and aspirations of affected rights
holders related to management activities*;
3. Includes a mutually agreed* upon dispute resolution process;4. Supports dialogue regarding the rights and responsibilities of Indigenous Peoples* tothe resource;
5. Informs affected Indigenous Peoples* of their right to withhold consent or modify
consent to the proposed management activities* to the extent necessary to protect
their rights, resources, lands and territories*; and6. Supports decision-making by affected Indigenous Peoples* that is free of coercion,manipulation or intimidation.
When Free, Prior and Informed Consent* has not been obtained, The Organization*
demonstrates best efforts* to support a culturally appropriate* engagement* processwith affected Indigenous Peoples* that is advancing in good faith* with the intent ofreaching an agreement based on Free, Prior and Informed Consent*.
INTENT BOX
The goal and objective* of a culturally appropriate* engagement* process between The
Organization* and affected Indigenous Peoples* is to obtain Free, Prior and Informed
Consent* for management activities* proposed within the Management Unit* that may
adversely impact their legal* and customary rights*, as identified in Indicator 3.1.4, toresources, lands and territories*. The strategies and actions required by all parties to theseprocesses will vary. The trust and confidence required to build and maintain a relationshipthat supports such a decision may require significant effort over a long period of time on
the part of The Organization* and affected Indigenous Peoples*.
The right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent*: Refer to the Intent Box for Principle 3 above.
It is possible that while a process is in place to obtain Free, Prior and Informed Consent*, aformal agreement may not be reached at the time of audit. It is also possible that, forreasons outside the sphere of influence* of The Organization*, there may be a lack of
response or cooperation from affected Indigenous Peoples*, and therefore no
documented support for either the process or management activities*.
However, the intent to obtain Free, Prior and Informed Consent* can be demonstrated
through other means. Some examples include through policy and procedures, work plans,
and records of communication (or attempted communication) with Indigenous Peoples*when an agreed-upon FPIC* process is not in place. Communication and support fromgovernment agencies with fiduciary and legal* obligations to Indigenous Peoples* may also
be helpful to demonstrating best efforts*, particularly when efforts by The Organization* toengage* Indigenous Peoples* have been unsuccessful.
Scale of rights: While Indicator 3.1.4 and Criterion 3.5 call for the identification andprotection of Indigenous Peoples* rights at an operational and site-specific level, theapplication of rights, including cumulative impacts, may also apply across theManagement Unit*. In this case, rights would be addressed at the strategic planning level,
as described in 3.2.1.
Good faith*: Good faith* is defined in the Glossary. It is a term used in ILO Conventions andrecognized as an auditable element. The principle of good faith* implies that the parties
make every effort to reach an agreement, conduct genuine and constructive negotiations,avoid delays in negotiations, respect concluded agreements, and give sufficient time to

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 24 of 159 –discuss and settle disputes*. Additional information is provided in the FSC Canada Free, Priorand Informed Consent (FPIC) Guidance document.
Recognizing that Indigenous Peoples* may not want to grant Free Prior and Informed
Consent* and/or delegate control for their own reasons, Indigenous Peoples* may choose
to offer their support for management activities* in a different way of their choosing (refer
to Indicators 3.3.1 and 3.3.2).
Private Land: There is an expectation that the approach to obtaining Free, Prior andInformed Consent* on private lands will be different. This may include:
•
•

•

3.3

a lengthier process of engagement* to reach agreement, especially if rights holders
have been excluded from the forest* land for a long time;engagement* with individual rights holders (i.e. customary rights*) who claim andexpress an interest in accessing private property to carrying out their legal* andcustomary rights* and responsibilities (e.g. collection of birch bark, medicinal plants,
hunting or social gathering); andthe development of a shared understanding of best practices to mutually recognize
and respect each party’s rights to property (e.g. securing permission to enter private
property through agreement.)

In the event of delegation of control over management activities*, a binding agreement*
between The Organization* and the Indigenous Peoples* shall be concluded throughFree, Prior and Informed Consent*. The agreement shall define its duration, provisions forrenegotiation, renewal, termination, economic conditions and other terms andconditions. The agreement shall make provision for monitoring by Indigenous Peoples* of
The Organization’s* compliance with its terms and conditions. (New)INTENT BOX
This Criterion* builds upon the FPIC* process as described in Indicator 3.2.5 through thedevelopment, implementation and monitoring of binding agreements*. These agreements
do not require a delegation of control over management activities*. The purpose ofagreements is for The Organization* to address the impact of management activities* on thecustoms, values, sensitivities and ways of life of Indigenous Peoples*.
3.3.1

A binding agreement* contains the terms and conditions on which Free Prior andInformed Consent* is reached, based on culturally appropriate* engagement*.

3.3.2

Records of binding agreements* are maintained.

3.3.3

The binding agreement* defines the duration, provisions for renegotiation, renewal,
termination, economic conditions, provisions for monitoring and dispute resolution.

3.4

The Organization* shall recognize and uphold* the rights, customs and culture of
Indigenous Peoples* as defined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples (2007) and ILO Convention 169 (1989). (C3.2 P&C V4, revised tocomply with FSC-POL-30-401, ILO 169 and UNDRIP)

INTENT BOX
The requirement of culturally appropriate engagement* throughout the Standard is intended
to facilitate a relationship building process based on dialogue, knowledge sharing andmutual respect. Through continuous engagement*, The Organization* and Indigenous

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 25 of 159 –Peoples* may discuss and eventually mutually agree* on the role of FSC certification inmeeting Canada’s commitment to UNDRIP as well as the unratified ILO Convention No.169.
Indigenous Peoples* may raise concerns related to UNDRIP and ILO 169. The ongoingengagement* process set out in this Standard (Principle 1 and 3) provides an opportunity for
The Organization* to determine what is actionable (within their sphere of influence*) throughprovisions elsewhere in Principle 3, or other parts of the Standard. The intent of culturally
appropriate engagement* is to prevent violations of Indigenous Peoples* rights.
Additional supporting information for the implementation of this Criterion* is available in the
FSC Canada FPIC Guidance document.
3.4.1

There is no evidence that the rights, customs and culture of Indigenous Peoples* as
defined in UNDRIP and ILO Convention 169 are violated by The Organization*.

3.4.2

Where evidence that rights, customs and culture of Indigenous Peoples* as defined in
UNDRIP and ILO Convention 169 have been violated by The Organization*, The
Organization* documents the situation, including steps to a just and fair redress for theviolation of the rights, customs and culture of Indigenous Peoples*, in keeping with thedispute resolution process in Indicator 3.2.5.

3.5

The Organization*, through engagement* with Indigenous Peoples*, shall identify sites
which are of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritual significance andfor which these Indigenous Peoples* hold legal* or customary rights*. These sites shall berecognized by The Organization* and their management, and/or protection* shall beagreed through engagement* with these Indigenous Peoples*. (C3.3 P&C V4, revised to
POL 30-401)

3.5.1

Sites of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritual significance for which
Indigenous Peoples* hold legal* or customary rights* are identified through culturally
appropriate* engagement*.

3.5.2

Agreed upon measures to protect such sites are documented and implemented throughculturally appropriate* engagement* with Indigenous Peoples*. When Indigenous
Peoples* determine that physical identification of sites in documentation or on maps
would threaten the value or protection* of the sites, other means are used.

3.5.3

Wherever sites of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritual significanceare newly observed or discovered, management activities* in the vicinity cease
immediately until protective measures have been agreed to with the Indigenous
Peoples*, and as directed by local* and national laws*.

3.6

The Organization* shall uphold* the right of Indigenous Peoples* to protect and utilize
their traditional knowledge* and shall compensate local communities* for the utilizationof such knowledge and their intellectual property*. A binding agreement* as per
Criterion 3.3 shall be concluded between The Organization* and the Indigenous Peoples*for such utilization through Free, Prior and Informed Consent* before utilization takes
place, and shall be consistent with the protection of intellectual property* rights. (C3.4
P&C V4)

INTENT BOX

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 26 of 159 –The intent of this Criterion* is to prevent the commercialization of traditional knowledge*
without compensation by The Organization* for the purposes of creating a product and/or
service. It is not meant to prevent the sharing of information by Indigenous Peoples* for the
purposes of management plan* development.
3.6.1

Traditional knowledge* and intellectual property* is protected and is only used when theacknowledged owners of that traditional knowledge* and intellectual property* haveprovided their Free, Prior and Informed Consent* formalized through a binding
agreement*.

3.6.2

Indigenous Peoples* are compensated according to the binding agreement* reachedthrough Free, Prior and Informed Consent* for the use of traditional knowledge* andintellectual property* for commercial purposes.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 27 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 4: COMMUNITY RELATIONSThe Organization* shall contribute to maintaining or enhancing the social andeconomic well-being of local communities*. (P4 P&C V4)
INTENT BOX
Local Community* vs. Indigenous Peoples*:In this Standard, a local community* refers to a non-indigenous group of people. A local
community* and an Indigenous community (referred to in this Standard as Indigenous
Peoples*) may occupy overlapping areas within a Management Unit*.
In general, Principle 4 addresses requirements regarding local communities* unless the
Indicator* specifies Indigenous Peoples*. The inclusion of Indigenous Peoples* in Criteria 4.3,
4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 is based on the decision by FSC Canada to separate rights-basednegotiations and processes from business related negotiations and agreements. Furthermore,
the topics covered by these Criteria* are not implicitly included within the agreement
requirements in Principle 3. However, it should be noted that Indigenous Peoples* and The
Organization* may choose to address these topics such as opportunities for employment,
training, economic development or impact mitigation through agreements and processes
established in Principle 3.
Local Community* vs. Affected Stakeholders*:
Local communities* are included in the definition of affected stakeholder* therefore mostrequirements applicable to affected stakeholders* will apply to local communities*.
However, additional consideration for local communities* is identified throughout thisPrinciple*, such as those related to employment and training opportunities, social andeconomic development, avoidance and mitigation of negative impacts, as well as a
specific dispute resolution process.
Rights and other Concerns Related to Stakeholders* & Individuals:
Stakeholders* (if not a local community*) and individual rights and concerns are notaddressed in Principle 4. Instead, all legal* or customary rights* pertaining to affectedstakeholders* or individuals are addressed in Principle 1. Other affected stakeholders*,
interested stakeholders* and individuals’ concerns are addressed in Criterion 7.6.
Applicability of Local Community* Rights and Traditional Knowledge* in the Standard:
In the Canadian context of forest management and related activities, local communities*
have legal* rights related to general human rights and access to public land. There are few
known instances where local communities* have legal* collective rights* related to
management activities* on public land. However, as a group who inhabit a specific area, it isnecessary to maintain the resources they utilize as well as their quality of life.
In Canada, customary rights* (or customary laws*) have been identified for:1) communities established before colonization; and2) communities who developed their own customs, practices, traditions and recognizablegroup identities separate from their First Nation, Inuit and European ancestors (e.g. Métis).
(https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100014419/1100100014420)
No customary rights* have been established for non-Indigenous local communities*.
However, the evolutionary nature of legal frameworks could potentially result in a Canadian
local community* gaining customary rights* status for long-held practices. The intent of the
Indicators* related to customary rights* in this Principle* is to make them applicable only
once a local community* has established such customary rights*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 28 of 159 –In addition, according to the FAO and United Nations documents (UN-REDD Guidelines on
FPIC interpretation), FPIC* should apply to Indigenous Peoples* and to minority groups whoshare common characteristics with Indigenous Peoples*. Local communities* in Canada do
not share these characteristics.
Furthermore, no traditional knowledge* and intellectual property* have been knowingly
identified and recognized for local communities*. Criterion 4.8 is applicable when strong
evidence is provided by the local community* to demonstrate ownership of traditional
knowledge* and intellectual property*.
4.1

The Organization* shall identify the local communities* that exist within the Management
Unit* and those that are affected by management activities*. The Organization* shallthen, through engagement* with these local communities*, identify their rights of tenure*,
their rights of access to and use of forest resources and ecosystem services*, theircustomary rights* and legal* rights and obligations, that apply within the Management
Unit*. (New)

4.1.1

Local communities* that may be affected by forest management activities* are
identified.

4.1.2

Through culturally appropriate* engagement* with the local communities* identified in
Indicator 4.1.1, the following are documented and/or mapped:
1. Legal* and customary rights*;
2. A summary of means by which these rights identified in 4.1.2.1 may be addressed isprovided by The Organization*;
3. The interests of local communities* related to forest management activities* in theManagement Unit*;
4. The benefits, goods and/or services from the Management Unit* used by local
communities*;
5. Areas where there are conflicts affecting or related to The Organization’s* activities.
The conflict may be between local communities*, governments, Indigenous Peoples*
and/or others.

INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex F for more guidance related to culturally appropriate* engagement*.
4.2

The Organization* shall recognize and uphold* the legal* and customary rights* of local
communities* to maintain control over management activities* within or related to theManagement Unit* to the extent necessary to protect their rights, resources, lands andterritories*. Delegation by local communities* of control over management activities* tothird parties requires Free, Prior and Informed Consent*. (C2.2 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
This Criterion* applies to rights identified in 4.1.2.1. Refer to the Intent Box at the beginning of
Principle 4.
4.2.1

Through culturally appropriate* engagement*, local communities* are informed of when,
where and how they can comment on and request modification to management
activities* to the extent necessary to protect their rights identified in 4.1.2.1.

4.2.2

The legal* and customary rights* of local communities* related to management
activities* are not violated by The Organization*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 29 of 159 –4.2.3

Where evidence exists that legal* and customary rights* of local communities* related to
management activities* have been violated, the situation is corrected, if necessary,through culturally appropriate* engagement* and/or through the dispute resolution
process detailed in Criteria 1.6 or 4.6.

4.3

The Organization* shall provide reasonable* opportunities for employment, training andother services to local communities*, contractors and suppliers proportionate to scale*and intensity* of its management activities*. (C4.1 P&C V4)

4.3.1

The Organization* ensures that reasonable* opportunities for employment, training andother services, proportionate to the scale* and intensity* of the management activities*
are communicated and provided to affected local communities* and Indigenous
Peoples*, local workers*, local contractors and local suppliers, either directly or throughcollaboration.

INTENT BOX
These opportunities may be either directly or indirectly linked to The Organization’s*
management activities*. This differs from Criterion 4.4, which requires that additional
activities, not linked to management activities*, need to be implemented and/or supported.
4.4

The Organization* shall implement additional activities, through engagement* with local
communities*, that contribute to their social and economic development, proportionate
to the scale*, intensity* and socio-economic impact of its management activities*. (C4.4
P&C V4)4.4.1

In proportion to the scale* and intensity* of management activities* affecting thecommunity, opportunities for local social and economic development are identified
through culturally appropriate* engagement* with affected local communities* andIndigenous Peoples* and/or other relevant organizations identified by the local
community* or the Indigenous Peoples*.

4.4.2

Projects and other activities that contribute to local social and economic benefits andare relative to the scale* of the socio-economic impact of management activities* are
implemented and/or supported.

4.5

The Organization*, through engagement* with local communities*, shall take action to
identify, avoid and mitigate significant negative social, environmental and economic
impacts of its management activities* on affected communities. The action taken shallbe proportionate to the scale, intensity and risk* of those activities and negative impacts.
(C4.4 P&C V4)

4.5.1

Through culturally appropriate* engagement* with affected local communities* andIndigenous Peoples*, significant negative social, environmental and economic impactsof management activities* are identified.

4.5.2

Through culturally appropriate* engagement* with affected local communities* andIndigenous Peoples*, measures to avoid and/or mitigate significant negative impacts
identified in Indicator 4.5.1 are determined and implemented.

4.6

The Organization*, through engagement* with local communities*, shall havemechanisms for resolving grievances and providing fair compensation* to local

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 30 of 159 –communities* and individuals with regard to the impacts of management activities* of
The Organization*. (C4.5 P&C V4)
INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex E for details describing how disputes* are addressed throughout theStandard.
4.6.1

A system is in place whereby complaints* can be made known to The Organization*
related to impact of forest management activities* on affected local communities* andIndigenous Peoples*.

4.6.2

A publicly available* dispute resolution process that can be adapted through culturally
appropriate* engagement* is in place, including mechanisms to address disputes ofsubstantial magnitude* that include provisions for ceasing operations.

4.6.3

Complaints* are responded to in a timely manner*. Complaints* that are not resolved areelevated to disputes* and are being addressed via a dispute resolution process.

4.6.4

An up-to-date record of complaints* and disputes* is maintained, and includes:
1. Steps taken to resolve complaints* and disputes*;
2. Outcomes of all complaints* and dispute resolution processes, including, whereapplicable, fair compensation*; and3. Unresolved disputes*, the reasons they are not resolved, and how they will be
resolved.

4.6.5

The dispute resolution process as established in Indicator 4.6.2 is implemented, following
the provisions for ceasing of operations for disputes of substantial magnitude*.

4.7

The Organization*, through engagement* with local communities*, shall identify sites
which are of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritual significance,
and for which these local communities* hold legal* or customary rights*. These sites shallbe recognized by The Organization*, and their management and/or protection* shall beagreed through engagement* with these local communities*. (New)

4.7.1

Sites of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritual significance for which
local communities* hold legal* and/or customary rights* are identified through culturally
appropriate* engagement* and are recognized by The Organization*.

4.7.2

Measures to protect such sites are agreed, documented and implemented throughculturally appropriate* engagement* with local communities*. When local communities*
determine that physical identification of sites in documentation or on maps would
threaten the value or protection* of the sites, other means are used.

4.7.3

When sites of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritual significance are
newly observed or discovered, management activities* in the vicinity will cease
immediately until protective measures have been agreed to with the local
communities*, and as directed by local and national laws*.

INTENT BOX
Newly observed or discovered sites of special significance should be recognized as a resultof a credible process, such an archaeological excavation or other similar investigation.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 31 of 159 –4.8

The Organization* shall uphold* the right of local communities* to protect and utilize theirtraditional knowledge* and shall compensate local communities* for the utilization ofsuch knowledge and their intellectual property*. A binding agreement* as per Criterion
3.3 shall be concluded between The Organization* and the local communities* for such
utilization through Free, Prior and Informed Consent* before utilization takes place, andshall be consistent with the protection of intellectual property* rights. (New)INTENT BOX
Criterion 4.8 is applicable when strong evidence is provided by the local community* todemonstrate ownership of traditional knowledge* and intellectual property*. Refer to the
Intent Box at the beginning of Principle 4.
The use of Indigenous Peoples’* traditional knowledge* is addressed in Criterion 3.6.
4.8.1

Traditional knowledge* and intellectual property* of the local community* are protected
and are only used when the local community* has agreed through a binding
agreement* and compensation is provided according to the agreement.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 32 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 5: BENEFITS FROM THE FOREST*The Organization* shall efficiently manage the range of multiple products and servicesof the Management Unit* to maintain or enhance long term economic viability* and therange of social and environmental benefits.
5.1

The Organization* shall identify, produce, or enable the production of, diversified benefits
and/or products, based on the range of resources and ecosystem services* existing in
the Management Unit* in order to strengthen and diversify the local economy
proportionate to the scale* and intensity* of management activities*. (C5.2 and 5.4 V4)INTENT BOX
The Organization* is expected to make reasonable* attempts to identify the range of
products and benefits available in the Management Unit*. The Organization* is expected todiversify the production of benefits and services from the Management Unit* as much as theirtenure* rights permit. For commercial operations, a diversification of commercial
opportunities is expected to increase adaptability to market fluctuations and thereby
increase the likelihood of long-term economic viability* of The Organization*. In addition,
diversification provides the basis for contributing to a diversified and more stable local
economy.
This Criterion does not require that products and services are harvested, developed or
marketed by The Organization* itself. However, it is expected that The Organization* provides
opportunities to interested local entrepreneurs and individuals to develop, process andmarket products and services derived from the Management Unit*, to retrieve products andservices from the Management Unit*, or to utilize the benefits and products from theManagement Unit*, if required.
The Organization* is not required to provide opportunities or pursue activities that would
prevent it from achieving its own management objectives* or conformance with the
Principles* and Criteria*. Examples of how The Organization* can provide such opportunities
may include permitting local people and enterprises to conduct the following activities:• Harvesting of non-timber forest products*,• recreational or (eco-) tourism activities within the Management Unit*,• collection of dead wood for local processing.
The Organization* may only permit activities if they are within the limit of The Organization’s*
tenure* rights. Otherwise, it is reasonable that The Organization* works within its sphere of
influence*, where appropriate.
This Criterion* recognizes that the extent of possible diversification depends on the specificsituation (e.g. existing range of resources, ecosystem services* available and opportunity
costs) of the Management Unit*.
This Criterion* also recognizes that continual diversification is not required. Not all potentiallymarketable* products from a Management Unit* are always saleable, or command aconsistent price. Furthermore, benefits produced by the Management Unit* may not be of
direct commercial or economic benefit but they may be of indirect benefit to the local
economy.
The development of ecosystem services* remains optional in this FSC standard. If The
Organization* wants to make promotional claims regarding ecosystem services*,
conformance to FSC International procedure FSC-PRO-30-006 on “Ecosystem Services
Procedure: Impact Demonstration and Market Tools” will need to be demonstrated.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 33 of 159 –5.1.1A range of ecosystem services*, non-timber and timber forest resources and productsthat could strengthen and diversify the local economy are identified.

5.1.2

Consistent with management objectives* and within the limits of The Organization’s*
tenure* rights, some of the resources, products and services identified in Indicator 5.1.1
are produced and/or made available for others to produce, as a means to strengthen
and diversify the local economy.

5.1.3

When The Organization* makes FSC promotional claims regarding the provision of
ecosystem services*, it is in conformance with the procedure FSC-PRO-30-006 on“Ecosystem Services Procedure: Impact Demonstration and Market Tools”

INTENT BOX
This Indicator* is applicable only if the applicant intends on making ecosystem service*claims, otherwise, it is optional.
5.2

The Organization* shall normally harvest products and services from the Management
Unit* at or below a level which can be permanently sustained. (C5.6 V4)

5.2.1

Analysis and calculation of harvest levels for timber forest products are done frequently
enough (at least every 10 years) to ensure they remain current with respect to harvest
activities, natural disturbances, management objectives*, and supporting information,such as inventories.
The analysis and calculation of harvest levels are based upon:
1. A precautionary approach* that reflects the quality of information and assumptions
used;
2. Management objectives* and strategies as set out in the management plan*,including those for restoration*;
3. Current management practices, performance and success of silvicultural systems*;
4. Best available information* on growth and yield;
5. Best available and quality inventory data;
6. Volume and area reductions caused by mortality and decay, as well as natural
disturbances, such as fire, insects and disease;
7. Adherence to all other requirements in this Standard;
8. Operational constraints;
9. Harvest projections or wood supply calculations that extend to a planning horizon
long enough to provide quality results. A rationale for the choice of the planninghorizon is provided, but is at least 80 years;
10. Future forest condition objectives* as/if identified in the forest management plan*;and
11. Available sensitivity analyses of the factors that apply to harvest level calculations,
including the effects of climate change when growth and yield projections areavailable.

INTENT BOX
It is acceptable for some issues, such as mortality and decay, not to be incorporated into theanalysis and calculation of harvest levels, if these issues are considered through other means,such as during harvest level allocations.
5.2.2

Based on the timber harvesting level* as analyzed for Indicator 5.2.1, a maximum
allowable annual cut for timber is determined, with respect to these conditions:

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 34 of 159 –1. The maximum allowable annual cut does not impair the ability of the Management
Unit* to continue to provide the products and services, ecosystem functions* andecosystem services* of the unit.
2. Temporary or long-term* changes in the yield or standing volumes of any specificforest product arising from management activities* are permitted, provided thatthese fluctuations do not impair the achievement of the objectives* described in the
management plan* through the mid- and long-term*.
INTENT BOX
Fluctuations in the yield and in harvest rates can be the consequence of disturbances or of aplanned management strategy. It is expected that in situations of major disturbance,
fluctuations could be more significant and occur over a longer period.
5.2.3

Actual annual timber harvest is recorded and the averaged level of harvest over adefined period (maximum of 10 years) does not exceed the allowable cut determined in
Indicator 5.2.2.

5.2.4

The harvest of commercial non-timber forest products* under control of The
Organization* does not exceed a level that can be sustained. Sustainable harvest levels
for non-timber forest products* are based on best available information*.

5.3

The Organization* shall demonstrate that the positive and negative externalities* ofoperations are included in the management plan*. (C5.1 V4)

5.3.1

Management planning takes into account the long-term positive and negativeenvironmental and social impacts of management activities*.

5.4

The Organization* shall use local processing, local services, and local value adding tomeet the requirements of The Organization* where these are available, proportionate toscale, intensity and risk*. If these are not locally available, The Organization* shall makereasonable* attempts to help establish these services. (C5.2 V4)

INTENT BOX
The intent of this Criterion* is for The Organization* to promote further socio-economic
benefits through economic opportunities beyond direct employment by The Organization*.
The desired outcome is that The Organization* stimulates the local economy through thepurchase of relevant local services and products, or supports the creation of relevant new
local services and supply of relevant local products. In areas where local service providers
are already in place, the preference is to support these businesses before hiring other service
providers who are not local.
5.4.1

Where cost, quality and capacity of non-local and local options are at least equivalent,
local goods, services, processing and value-added facilities are used.

5.4.2

Reasonable* attempts are made to encourage and/or support capacity where local
goods, services, processing and value-added facilities are not available.

5.5

The Organization* shall demonstrate through its planning and expenditures proportionate
to scale, intensity and risk*, its commitment to long-term economic viability*. (C5.1 V4)

5.5.1

Sufficient expenditures and investments are made to implement the management plan*in order to meet this Standard and to ensure economic viability* of The Organization*over the long-term.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 35 of 159 –INTENT BOX
If The Organization* is a for-profit business, economic viability* means that The Organization*
has the objective* to be profitable over time. The intent of this Indicator* is that The
Organization* generates a return on invested capital that is sufficient to ensure stable
operations and investment in the business.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 36 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 6: ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES* AND IMPACTSThe Organization* shall maintain, conserve* and/or restore* ecosystem services* andenvironmental values* of the Management Unit*, and shall avoid, repair or mitigate
negative environmental impacts. (P6 P&C V4)
NOTEFor a certificate holder previously certified under one of the Canadian regional FSC Standards,
some Indicators* in Principle 6 of this Standard may not be achievable within the normal oneyear schedule required for conformance (as per the effective date of the Standard).
Refer to Annex H for details.
INTENT BOX
Best Available Information*
Several Indicators* in this Principle* require that best available information* be used to provide
a baseline for management activities* or as a basis for analyses in subsequent Indicators*.
Organizations* are expected to implement these requirements in consideration of an FPIC*
process, as described in Principle 3, that is inclusive of information sharing related to legal*
and customary rights* as well as site, stand*, and landscape values* of economic, social, andcultural significance to Indigenous Peoples*.
The definition of best available information* provides general direction on the type of
information to be gathered and the extent of effort required to gather the information. To
place appropriate limits on what should be involved in gathering best available information*,
the definition notes that it should be constrained by reasonable* effort and cost. The intent of
the term reasonable* is to emphasize that limits, such as cost and practicality, exist on the
expectations of the effort required to gather information.
Refer to the Glossary for a full definition of best available information*.
Engagement* with Indigenous Peoples*
Several Indicators* in this Principle* require engagement* with Indigenous Peoples*. The
Organization* is expected to implement these obligations in a manner consistent with thespecific requirements of Indicator 3.1.2.
Maps
Where maps or mapped information is required by this Principle*, evidence of digital files,
instead of hard-copy maps, is sufficient.
6.1

The Organization* shall assess environmental values* in the Management Unit* and thosevalues outside the Management Unit* potentially affected by management activities*.
This assessment shall be undertaken with a level of detail, scale* and frequency that is
proportionate to the scale, intensity and risk* of management activities*, and is sufficientfor the purpose of deciding the necessary conservation* measures, and for detecting
and monitoring possible negative impacts of those activities. (New)INTENT BOX
Information required by the Indicators* in this Criterion* is used in the assessment of other
Indicators*, primarily in Principle 6 and Principle 9. Conformance with these Indicators*, that
require gathering or collating of information, ‘queues up’ subsequent analyses ormanagement actions required in later Indicators*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 37 of 159 –6.1.1Best available information* is used to identify and define the state and condition ofregional- and landscape*-scale* environmental values* within and, where potentiallyaffected by management activities*, outside of the Management Unit*.
Consistent with the scale, intensity and risk*of the operation, best available information*
includes:1. Forest* cover (maps and quantitative summaries);
2. Distributions of forest types*, age-classes* and patch sizes (as required by Indicator
6.1.3) (quantitative summaries);
3. Road* networks (maps and quantitative summaries);
4. Hydrologic features* (maps);
5. Lake, stream and wetland* classifications including identification of fish-bearing
water bodies* (maps and quantitative summaries);
6. Existing carbon stores, where readily available (quantitative information);
7. Percent of protected area* by ecosystem* classification unit;
8. Rare ecosystems* (maps and quantitative summaries);
9. Identification of species at the edge of their natural ranges and outlier populations;and10. Status of habitat* (known locations, trends, extent of area) for species at risk* that use
forest habitats* and habitats* affected by forest management (quantitative
summaries and range maps).

6.1.2

Best available information* is used to identify and define the state and condition ofstand*- and site-scale*environmental values* within the Management Unit*.
Consistent with the scale, intensity and risk* of the operation, best available information*
includes:1. Point-specific wildlife values and wildlife habitat* values (e.g. mineral licks, stick nestsof herons and eagles) (mapped information);
2. Locations known to be of use by species at risk* and access-sensitive species (e.g.
den sites, nests, areas of traditional use) (mapped information);
3. Sensitive sites, including steep slopes, shallow soils, moist soils, wetlands*, and soils
subject to compaction (e.g. structured clay) (mapped information);
4. Spawning grounds and other important aquatic sites (e.g. wetlands* with a history ofproviding feeding areas for moose) (mapped information).

INTENT BOX
As with many Indicators*, the requirements of this Indicator* are to be addressed consistent withthe scale, intensity and risk* of the operation. The nature of some of the values identified in thisIndicator* may be transitory. For example, stick nests are not permanent features on thelandscape*, therefore, it is reasonable* for those requirements to be addressed only relative tothe operations identified within the short-term planning horizon (which is typically one to ten
years). This is consistent with the approach taken in Indicator 6.2.2, which requires impacts ofstand*-level values be assessed prior to implementing management activities*.
6.1.3

Using best available information* and appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* offorest management activities*, an assessment of the current forest* is made, addressing:
1. The distribution of forest types* (quantitative information);
2. The distribution of forest types* by age classes (quantitative information); and3. The range of natural disturbance sizes and sizes of post-disturbance remnant
patches.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 38 of 159 –INTENT BOX
Analyses required in Indicators 6.1.3 and 6.1.4 are used in subsequent Indicators* that address
setting of targets for different aspects of forest condition (i.e. Indicator 6.8.1 - forest community
composition, and Indicator 6.8.3 - forest patches). Although RONV* analysis is generally
considered to be more robust and appropriate for identifying preferred future forest conditions,the Indicator* also addresses the use of PIC* analysis, recognizing that the data and effort
required for RONV* may make that approach impractical.
The Organization* may elect to use a mix of RONV* and PIC* analyses based on the condition of
their forest*, for use in the subsequent Criterion 6.8 Indicators*.
The Indicator* includes requirements to characterize the present forest* by age classes andassess natural conditions* of forest types* by age class. This requirement is intended to recognizethat some age classes may be broad, such as in Great Lakes-St. Lawrence and Acadian forest
types*, and may include classes of multi- or all-aged forest*.
Indigenous Peoples’* traditional use of a forest* is consistent with the concept of pre-industrial
forests* as describe in the Glossary.
It is the intent that all reasonably-available data be considered in the analyses for Indicators 6.1.3
and 6.1.4, and reasonable* and defensible interval classes (i.e. for age classes and disturbancesizes) also be considered.
6.1.4

An assessment of the range of natural variation* (RONV*) of the forest* is completed. If
sufficient data are not available to complete a RONV* assessment, an assessment of the
pre-industrial condition* (PIC*) is completed. The RONV* or PIC* analysis includes:
1. An assessment of the natural range of the amount of each forest type*;
2. An assessment of the natural range of forest types* by age class; and3. An assessment of the natural range of disturbance sizes and sizes of post-disturbanceremnant patches.

6.1.5

Assessments of environmental values* identified in Indicators 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 are updatedwith sufficient frequency to conduct adaptive management* depending on the scale,intensity and risk* of management activities*.
Assessments are provided in a manner such that:
1. Impacts of management activities* on the identified environmental values* and risks*
to these values can be assessed as per Criterion 6.2;
2. Necessary conservation* measures to protect values can be identified as per
Criterion 6.3; and3. Monitoring* of impacts or environmental changes can be conducted as per Principle
8.

INTENT BOX
The frequency with which assessments of environmental values* should be updated varies with
the nature of the values themselves. It is reasonable that assessments be updated based on the
period over which there may be a reasonable* expectation of a change in status of a value,
and the period over which it is possible to detect the effects of management. Therefore, forexample, it is likely that the status of habitat* for a species at risk* be updated more frequently
than information on lake, stream, and wetland* classification.
6.2

Prior to the start of site-disturbing activities, The Organization* shall identify and assess thescale, intensity and risk* of potential impacts of management activities* on the identified
environmental values*. (C6.1 P&C V4) (New)FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 39 of 159 –6.2.1

Appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* of the operation, an assessment is conducted
identifying potential impacts, by comparing landscape*-level conditions of key
environmental values* at the start of the present forest management plan* to projected
future conditions for the near term*, and where practical, for the long-term* as well. At aminimum, the assessment considers:
1. Age-class* distribution;
2. Forest type* distribution;
3. Patch size distribution;
4. Road* density by road*-type; and5. Spatial distribution of anthropogenic disturbed areas.

INTENT BOX
For this Indicator*, the context for comparison of present and future conditions of environmental
values* of the forest* is that a period of 5 to10 years is normally used for the near-term* and 100
years or more is normally used to represent the long-term*.
This Indicator* contains the term ‘where practical’ to recognize that it is difficult and generally of
less utility to make long-term* predictions for road* density by road* type and for the spatial
distribution of disturbed areas. Therefore, it is reasonable* for the assessment of long-term
potential impacts made to address this Indicator’s* requirements to focus on age-class* andforest type* distributions.
6.2.2

Impacts on stand* level values are assessed prior to implementing management
activities*. Appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* of the operations, assessments
identify impacts on stand* and site qualities including:
1. Coarse woody debris;
2. Density of standing dead and live trees;
3. Residual patch size and species of residuals;
4. Ecological values associated with wetland* and riparian zones*;
5. HCVs* that occur at a local scale* (e.g. stands* of rare trees, important bird migrationsites); and6. Environmental values* identified in Indicator 6.1.2.

INTENT BOX
This Indicator* does not require that measurements of the listed values be provided for eachstand* in which operations are undertaken. The assessment may be a comparison of predictedlevels of post-operational values with those determined to be appropriate for the forest* or forest
types* based on reasonable* benchmarks (e.g. for values such as standing dead and live trees)or efforts to ensure no impairment of important values (e.g. riparian values and HCVs).
The requirement of this Indicator* to assess impacts “prior to implementing management
activities*” can be addressed by assessing impacts at the start of the forest management
planning period, or at the start of annual planning of operations.
Identified impacts should reflect the silvicultural system* used in managing harvest areas*.
6.3

The Organization* shall identify and implement effective actions to prevent negative
impacts of management activities* on the environmental values*, and to mitigate andrepair those that occur, proportionate to the scale, intensity and risk* of these impacts.
(C6.1 P&C V4)

6.3.1

Appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* of the forest management activities*,management plans* or associated documents (e.g. Ground Rules, Standard Operating

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 40 of 159 –Procedures, etc.) identify means to protect soils from physical damage and prevent
negative impacts, based on best management practices*.
The best management practices* related to protection* of soils from physical damage
address the following:
1. Prior identification of unstable soils and ground surfaces, and sites sensitive tocompaction, rutting, and erosion;
2. Construction of roads* and landings on unstable soils and ground surfaces andunstable slopes;
3. Constructing and maintaining roads* and implementation of all forest operations to
avoid or minimize erosion;
4. Use of alternative harvesting and site preparation equipment (e.g. low groundpressure equipment) and/or other mitigation measures, such as seasonal timing, andtemporary suspension of activities during unfavourable weather to minimize soil
rutting and compaction; and5. Identification of precautionary damage thresholds.
6.3.2

The means identified in Indicator 6.3.1 to protect soils from physical damage and prevent
negative impacts are effectively implemented.

6.3.3

Appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* of the forest management activities*,management plans* or associated documents (e.g. Ground Rules, Standard Operating
Procedures, etc.) identify means to protect soils from nutrient loss and prevent negative
impacts, based on best management practices*.
The best management practices* related to nutrient loss address the following:
1. Identification of sites sensitive to nutrient loss;
2. Use of delimbing-at-stump and/or slash dispersal on sensitive sites;
3. Use of winter harvesting on sensitive sites;
4. Maintenance of a diversity of plants and trees on site; and5. Identification of precautionary thresholds to protect soils from nutrient loss on sensitivesites.

INTENT BOX
In Canada, under most commercial forest management regimes and on most forest* sites,
nutrient removal due to logging is not significant. This is addressed in this Indicator* byrecognizing scale, intensity and risk*, and by specifically limiting the actions required in thenumbered points to sensitive sites.
6.3.4

The means identified in Indicator 6.3.3 to protect soils from nutrient loss and prevent
negative impacts are effectively implemented.

6.3.5

Appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* of the forest management activities*,management plans* or associated documents (e.g. Ground Rules, Standard Operating
Procedures, etc.) identify means to avoid or minimize loss of productive forest* area
based on best management practices*.
The best management practices* related to loss of productive forest* area address thefollowing:
1. Slash management (e.g. burning, piling, re-distribution);
2. Regeneration of roads*, landings and skid trails;
3. Maximum corridor widths for different classes of roads*;
4. Minimizing the areal extent of landings; and5. Identification of precautionary thresholds.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 41 of 159 –6.3.6The means identified in Indicator 6.3.5 to avoid or minimize the loss of productive forest*
area and prevent negative impacts are effectively implemented.

6.3.7

Management activities* prevent negative impacts to carbon values.

INTENT BOX
Carbon values in managed forests* are protected by avoiding damage to forest soils andensuring harvest levels are sustainable, as addressed by Indicators 6.3.1 – 6.3.6 and 5.2.1 – 5.2.3.
6.3.8

Where precautionary thresholds have been exceeded, or where management
activities* have caused negative impacts as related to Indicators 6.3.1 – 6.3.7, measures
are adopted to prevent further damage, and negative impacts are mitigated and/or
repaired.

6.4

The Organization*shall protect rare species* and threatened species* and their habitats*in the Management Unit* through conservation zones*, protection areas*, connectivity*
and/or (where necessary) other direct measures for their survival and viability. These
measures shall be proportionate to the scale, intensity and risk* of management
activities* and to the conservation* status and ecological requirements of the rare*andthreatened species*. The Organization*shall take into account the geographic range andecological requirements of rare* and threatened species* beyond the boundary of theManagement Unit*, when determining the measures to be taken inside the Management
Unit*. (C6.2 P&C V4)

6.4.1

Best available information* is used to develop a list of species at risk* known or strongly
suspected to exist within and adjacent to the Management Unit*, and to identify the
habitats* of the species at risk*. The list is presented in the management plan* or
associated documents and is updated annually. The list of species at risk* includes:
1. All species, subspecies, and designated populations formally listed in schedules
referenced in federal or provincial endangered species/species at risk* legislation, or
provincial wildlife/biodiversity legislation that have been classified as Endangered,Threatened, Vulnerable, Special Concern or similar designations; and2. All species that have been assessed as ‘at-risk’ designation by bodies formallyrecognized in federal or provincial endangered species legislation (e.g. theCommittee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), andequivalent provincial bodies).

INTENT BOX
Official FSC language related to Criterion 6.4 requires that it address rare species* andthreatened species*. This is somewhat confusing because these phrases have different meaning
in a Canadian context from those identified in FSC reference material. For this Criterion*, the term
species at risk* is used rather than rare species* and threatened species*, as it is more clearly
embodied in Canada’s language regarding species whose survival is of concern. The two partsof this Indicator* correspond to the differences between those species that have been
regulated (or listed) as species at risk* in federal or provincial legislation (see point 1 in thisIndicator*), and those species that have been assessed as species at risk* by COSEWIC or asimilar provincial assessment body, as indicated in point 2.
This Indicator* requires that the habitats* of species at risk* be identified. In most circumstances,
it is not practical to identify the specific habitats* of wide-ranging species at risk*, other than tonote their broad habitat* affiliations. In these circumstances, it would be reasonable* for thelocations of particular species at risk* features (such as nests or concentrations of plants) to be

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 42 of 159 –identified (while taking into account the requirements of Indicator 9.1.4 regarding the need tokeep information on sensitive sites confidential).
Species at risk* that are of concern to Indigenous Peoples* have been identified by the
Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge Subcommittee of COSEWIC.
6.4.2

Plans are developed by qualified specialists* to protect and manage the habitat* of
those species at risk* identified in Indicator 6.4.1 that may be affected by forest
management activities*. The plans address the following:
1. Identification of potential impacts of management activities* on species at risk*, theirconservation status and habitat* associations;
2. Means to address protection of species at risk* and their habitats* through the use ofprotected areas*, designated conservation lands*, managing for habitat*connectivity*, provision of contiguous tracts of habitat*, access management andother habitat* management measures as appropriate; and3. Social and economic concerns, and concerns of Indigenous Peoples*.
Measures to address social and economic concerns do not constrain or impair efforts toprotect and manage species at risk* and their habitats*.

INTENT BOX
Plans to address the needs of species at risk* do not need to be approved federal or provincial
agencies or plans, but can be documents written to fill a gap in existing direction fromgovernments and their regulatory agencies. Plans written specifically for a Management Unit*,
however, should not conflict with higher-level plans that have regulatory approval unless theyexceed requirements of those higher-level plans.
As described in Criterion 6.5, there is no expectation that owners of private lands will cedeownership of any portion of their property to create protected areas*; therefore, it is notexpected that protected areas* will be a mechanism used in plans to protect species at risk* onprivate lands.
Addressing social and economic concerns and the concerns of Indigenous Peoples* is intended
to support the effective development and implementation of a species plan.
Refer to the Glossary for a fuller definition of plans for species at risk*.
Even though woodland caribou is addressed through a supplemental Indicator* (6.4.5), Indicator
6.4.2 is applicable to all species at risk, including woodland caribou.
6.4.3

Species at risk* and their habitats* are protected through implementation of plans
identified in Indicator 6.4.2 by The Organization* or in collaboration with government
resource management agencies, overlapping tenure holders*, and Indigenous Peoples*.

6.4.4

Where plans do not exist or are inadequate in addressing known risks* to a species, aprecautionary approach* is applied. The precautionary approach* is applied to
management of forest landscapes*, local habitat* and other locations that are known to
be important to the species at risk*.

6.4.5

Management of boreal woodland caribou habitat is implemented following approach
6.4.5a, 6.4.5b, or 6.4.5c below.

INTENT BOX
Scope

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 43 of 159 –This Indicator* applies to boreal woodland caribou only. Refer to Annex G for information
regarding mountain caribou.
Structure
There are three ways to conform with this Indicator* as identified in Approach 6.4.5a, 6.4.5b,
and 6.4.5c. Approach 6.4.5a requires that a SARA-compliant1 range plan* based on the
Range Plan Guidance for Woodland Caribou, Boreal Population (Environment and Climate
Change Canada 2016) be implemented. If such a range plan* has not been prepared,
either Approach 6.4.5b or 6.4.5c may be employed.
The requirements for Approach 6.4.5b, which are based largely on the Federal Recovery
Strategy (Environment Canada 2012), are articulated in Table 6.4.5. The requirements are
increasingly stringent as circumstances regarding the condition of the caribou populationand levels of habitat* disturbance on the caribou range* and the Management Unit*
present an increasing risk* to the population.
Approach 6.4.5c permits other methods of habitat* management to be implemented,
provided they are based on best available information* and peer-reviewed science andthat their development includes the involvement of interested and affected stakeholders*and affected Indigenous Peoples*.
Terminology
This Indicator* uses several terms that are critical to its effective use. Refer to the Glossary
for definitions of: Critical habitat*, Cumulative disturbance*, Net expansion*, and Range
plan*.
Integration of Conservation* and Indigenous Measures in Caribou Conservation Planning
Various elements of this Standard address conservation* measures at the landscape* level,
as well as Indigenous Peoples* sites and values. Efforts to integrate protection* measures atthe local and landscape* scale to achieve multiple objectives* within caribou ranges* areencouraged.
6.4.5a A range plan* that is SARA-compliant and addresses caribou habitat* management in amanner consistent with the content, measures and objectives* identified in the Range
Plan Guidance for Woodland Caribou, Boreal Population (Environment and Climate
Change Canada 2016), or subsequent direction from Environment and Climate Change
Canada that replaces or supplements the Guidance exists, and is being implemented. At
a minimum, the content of the range plan* being implemented includes:
1. An assessment of the status of the population in the range, supplemented byinformation on the status of the population in the Management Unit*;
2. An assessment of the habitat*, including current habitat* condition, critical habitat*,and disturbance levels;
3. Identification of important habitat* or landscape* features, including continuous
tracts of undisturbed habitat*, known calving areas, and travel corridors;
4. Habitat* management measures that will support self-sustaining caribou populations
and protect critical habitat*;
5. A demonstration of how at least 65% undisturbed habitat* in the range will beachieved or maintained over time;1

A SARA (Species at Risk Act)-compliant range plan is a caribou habitat management plan that has been confirmed byEnvironment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) as meeting the requirements of section 7.4 of the Federal Recovery
Strategy for the Woodland Caribou, Boreal population, in Canada.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 44 of 159 –6. Incorporation of Indigenous Peoples’* knowledge; and7. Monitoring of habitat* condition.
INTENT BOX – Approach 6.4.5a
Approach 6.4.5a is applicable where appropriate range plans* exist. The requirements
related to range plan* content identified above are key provisions identified by ECCC
(2016). It is the expectation of the direction provided by ECCC (2016) that range plans* will
be prepared by government agencies. The Organization* will have responsibilities, orshared responsibilities, for implementation of the range plan*.
The requirement to assess the status of the caribou population in the range is intended tolead to a conclusion as to whether the population is stable, increasing, decreasing, or
unknown.
Where only a portion of the Management Unit* is covered by a range plan* that meets therequirements of Approach 6.4.5a, the range plan* is being implemented for that portion of theManagement Unit*, and Approach 6.4.5b or 6.4.5c is being implemented for the remainder ofthe Management Unit* that is within a caribou range* not covered by the range plan*.
Where a range plan* that meets the requirements of Approach 6.4.5a above does not exist,
management of caribou habitat* is being implemented following Approach 6.4.5b or 6.4.5c.
6.4.5b Management of caribou habitat* is implemented following the requirements of Table
6.4.5. The following requirements are also addressed:
1. Updated measurements of cumulative disturbance* are used, where available,
provided that the methodology used in calculating cumulative disturbance* anddefinitions of human-induced and natural disturbance are comparable to those
employed by Environment Canada (2012).
2. Best efforts* are made to keep projected levels of cumulative disturbance* on
caribou ranges* below 35% when a large natural disturbance occurs thatsignificantly elevates the levels of cumulative disturbance*. Expert* input is used to
identify how to adjust management activities* following large natural disturbances.

Table 6.4.5. Requirements for the management of caribou habitat*.
The numbers in the gray-shaded cells refer to the numbered requirements listed in the lower part of thetable. The letters in the cells are for reference only.
Caribou range*
Population Status

Stable or Increasing

Range Risk* Category(% cumulative
disturbance*)

Management Unit* Disturbance Category(% cumulative disturbance* in the portion of theManagement Unit* that overlaps caribou range*)
≤35%

>35%

Low (≤20%)

Cell A:

1

Cell B:

2

Moderate (>20-35%)

C:

1, 3

D:

2, 4

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 45 of 159 –Decreasing or
Unknown 2

High (>35%)
Low (≤20%)

E:
G:

2, 5
1

F:
H:

2, 4, 5, 62

Moderate (>20-35%)

I:2, 3, 5, 6

J:

2, 4, 5, 6High (>35%)

K:

2, 4, 5, 6

L:

2, 4, 5, 6

Description of Required Management Strategies
1.

Carefully planned implementation of forest management activities* that follow a precautionary
approach* is permitted.

2.

Carefully planned implementation of forest management activities* that follow a precautionary
approach* is permitted. Access is managed to minimize impacts on caribou and caribou habitat*.

3.

Planning efforts are in progress to maintain cumulative disturbance* within the Management Unit* at≤ 35%.

4.

At least 50% of the undisturbed habitat*as of January 1, 2018 (using the most up-to-date data for
disturbance available) in the portion of the Management Unit* that is within a caribou range* is set
aside from forest management for 30-50 years and remains reserved for the duration of that period.
ECCC (2016) is used as a basis for identifying and managing undisturbed habitat* to be set aside.
Cumulative disturbances* in the remaining areas only increase in the near-term* when linked to aplan demonstrating a shift to ≤35% at the Management Unit* level in the coming 30-50 years.

5.

Planning efforts consider the level of cumulative disturbance* at the range level and contribute toefforts to maintain or reduce range disturbance to ≤ 35%.

6.

Habitat* restoration* is in progress.

INTENT BOX – Approach 6.4.5b
35% Benchmark for Disturbed Area
Approach 6.4.5b uses a disturbance level of 35% as the high-risk* threshold in Table 6.4.5
Requirements for the management of caribou habitat*. The threshold is not intended toserve as a target level of disturbance, but as a level beyond which significant measures arenecessary to address the state of habitat* on caribou ranges*. However, 35% is not a ‘tipping
point’ beyond which caribou population will switch from sustainable to unsustainable.
Rather, this management threshold, prescribed by Canada’s Federal Recovery Strategy forthe boreal population of woodland caribou, is a point along a continuum of risk* for boreal
caribou that carries with it some uncertainty. Specifically, the Federal Recovery Strategy
notes that, “This recovery strategy identifies 65% undisturbed habitat in a range as thedisturbance management threshold, which provides a measurable probability (60%) for a
local population to be self-sustaining. This threshold is considered a minimum thresholdbecause at 65% undisturbed habitat there remains a significant risk* (40%) that local
populations will not be self-sustaining."
The significance of the 35% benchmark is also recognized in the Range Plan Guidance forWoodland Caribou which states, “A demonstration of how at least 65% undisturbed habitat in
the range will be achieved or maintained over time on the landscape is essential to the range
plan.” This is recognized in the structure of Table 6.4.5 and several of its requirements.

As described in the intent box for Approach 6.4.5b below, requirements associated with the population
status of decreasing or unknown also apply to circumstances in which the population is stable orincreasing due to extraordinary human intervention.
2

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 46 of 159 –Spatial Aspects
Some Management Units* may include areas both within and outside caribou ranges*. For
this Approach, the management requirements identified in Table 6.4.5 are to be assessed
based only on the area of the Forest Management Unit* within caribou ranges*.
If a Management Unit* extends into more than one caribou range*, this Approach’s
requirements based on the level of disturbance within the Management Unit* are to beaddressed separately for the distinct portions of the Forest Management Unit* in eachcaribou range*.
Figures 1 to 3 in Annex G provide examples of the Approach’s requirements in different
situations.
The Importance of Population Information
The framework in Table 6.4.5 is based on cumulative disturbance* and caribou population
status in caribou ranges*. The conventional means of evaluating caribou population status isthrough the use of data on demographic trends, such as population growth rate, calf
recruitment, and female survival. Table 6.4.5 recognizes this by specifically identifying
management requirements associated with the status of populations within caribou ranges*.
There may be circumstances in which a caribou population is stable or increasing due to, orwith the assistance of, extraordinary human intervention, such as predator control or fencingof large areas. Based on the weight of evidence, if a population is believed to be stable orincreasing only because of such measures, the requirements associated with the population
status of “decreasing or unknown” should be used as a basis for evaluation of conformancewith the requirements of Table 6.4.5.
Table 6.4.5 – Requirement 4
Requirement 4 involves an assessment of the state of caribou habitat* within theManagement Unit*as of January 1, 2018 (using the most up-to-date data for disturbanceavailable). The Organization* may either compile information, or access already-existing
spatial information, on the extent of disturbance in the Management Unit* so that therequirement to set aside at least 50% of the undisturbed area for at least 30-50 years can beaddressed.
The requirement states that ECCC (2016) is to be used as a basis for identifying andmanaging undisturbed habitat* to be set aside. Refer to Section 5 (“Managing the 65%
Undisturbed Habitat*”) of ECCC (2016) for important considerations related to this direction.
Habitat* Restoration*
As it is used in Table 6.4.5 Requirements for the management of Caribou Habitat, habitat*
restoration* is the process of returning habitat* to a condition suitable for use by caribou
and/or a state comparable to its condition prior to disturbance, in the context of the overall
caribou range* condition. The ultimate intent of habitat* restoration* is the recovery andpersistence of caribou populations.
Approach 6.4.5b, Requirement 1 – Measures of cumulative disturbance*
This requirement identifies that approaches other than those used by Environment Canada
may be used in quantifying cumulative disturbance*. This refers to the increasingly standardpractice by provinces and territories to use provincial/territorial datasets to quantify
disturbance, rather than the national disturbance layer in Environment Canada (2012).
Approach 6.4.5b, Requirement 2 – Best efforts* to keep projected levels of disturbance
below 35%

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 47 of 159 –In the boreal forests, large natural disturbances, such as fire or windthrow, may significantly
affect levels of cumulative disturbance* in Management Units* and caribou ranges* andadd to overall risk* to caribou persistence in a caribou range*. Large disturbances outside
the Management Unit* may affect the level of cumulative disturbance* in the caribou
range* in which the Management Unit* exists.
6.4.5c Through an efficient collaborative process* with self-identified interested and affectedstakeholders* and affected Indigenous Peoples*, a caribou conservation* approachconsistent with the Range Plan Guidance for Woodland Caribou, Boreal Population(ECCC 2016) is implemented for the Management Unit*.
Informed by best available information* and peer-reviewed science, the approach
fosters stewardship of caribou habitat* that supports self-sustaining caribou
populations. The approach includes:
1. An assessment of the status of population in the Management Unit*;
2. An assessment of the current habitat* condition, critical habitat*, and disturbancelevels;3. Identification of important habitat* or landscape* features, including continuous
tracts of undisturbed habitat*, known calving areas and travel corridors;
4. Habitat* management measures that will support self-sustaining caribou populations
and protect critical habitat*;
5. Incorporation of a habitat* disturbance threshold informed by experts* to meet
habitat* requirements for the caribou range* in which the Management Unit* exists;
6. Respect for, and effective engagement* of, Indigenous Peoples*;
7. Incorporation of knowledge from interested and affected stakeholders*;
8. Evaluation of socio-economic impacts; and9. Monitoring of habitat* condition and population response.
INTENT BOX – Approach 6.4.5c
In the absence of a range plan* (Approach 6.4.5a) and in recognition that the scientific basis
for managing caribou habitat* continues to evolve, this Approach provides a means to
implement management other than that identified by Approach 6.4.5b.
Engagement* and Development of Caribou Conservation Plans
This Approach requires that engagement* be undertaken with self-identified stakeholders*and affected Indigenous Peoples*. Efforts to engage could include contacting stakeholders*with a history of FSC involvement and/or interest in conservation* and informing them of theopportunity to participate. Stakeholders* who express an interest are “self-identified”. There is
no requirement for The Organization* to engage stakeholders* who do not express an interest.
Although the efficient collaborative process* is similar to that identified in Criterion 6.5, thestakeholders* and Indigenous Peoples* involved need not be the same because the topics
involved (i.e. caribou habitat* management and Conservation Areas Networks*) requiredifferent sets of knowledge and may involve different groups of stakeholders* and Indigenous
Peoples*.
It is reasonable* that The Organization*, in collaboration with stakeholders* and Indigenous
Peoples*, develop a process for efficient cooperation that may involve delegation ofrepresentation across groups that share common interests.
The results of the socio-economic evaluation (item 8 in the Indicator*) are intended to
improve the effectiveness of protection of caribou populations and their habitats.
Incorporation of New Science and Information

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 48 of 159 –This Approach facilitates incorporation of new science and information into the means used
to manage caribou habitat*. The Approach requires the use of best available information*and peer-reviewed science. This perspective is consistent with that identified in the Range
Plan Guidance (ECCC 2016) that requires strong scientific evidence to support managing therange below the 65% undisturbed threshold.
Although Approach 6.4.5c can be based on the use of more recent and credible informationand science, the nature of its requirements regarding assessment of habitat*, habitat
management measures, monitoring, etc. are consistent with those identified for Approach
6.4.5a.
6.4.6

Training is provided to all relevant workers* in field operations and planning on theidentification of species at risk*, and on appropriate measures to take when a species at
risk* or sign of a species at risk* is identified during field operations.

6.4.7

When a species at risk* or sign of a species at risk* is identified during field operations,protection* measures consistent with the plans or precautionary approach* identified in
Indicators 6.4.3 and 6.4.4 are implemented and relevant information is immediately
provided to the appropriate resource management agencies.

INTENT BOX
This Indicator* refers to “signs” of a species at risk*. Signs can include nests, tracks, dens, orother indications that a species exists in the forest*.
6.4.8

The Organization* demonstrates within the scope of its authority and within its sphere of
influence* how it is addressing the following:
1. Prevention of illegal hunting, trapping, and fishing of species at risk*;
2. Collection of data on populations and habitats* of species at risk*;
3. Management of habitat* for species at risk*; and4. Monitoring of habitats* and populations of species at risk*.

INTENT BOX
This Indicator’s* requirement that The Organization* work within the scope of its authority isintended to recognize limitations on the legal responsibilities and rights associated with various
tenure* situations. Owners of private lands have more rights associated with activities such asaccess management, habitat* manipulation, etc. than The Organizations* that practiceforestry on tenured lands, although all are subject to laws related species at risk*.

6.5

The Organization* shall identify and protect representative sample areas* of native
ecosystems* and/or restore* them to more natural conditions*. Where representative
sample areas* do not exist or are insufficient, The Organization* shall restore* a
proportion of the Management Unit* to more natural conditions*. The size of the areas
and the measures taken for their protection* or restoration*, including within plantations*,
shall be proportionate to the conservation* status and value of the ecosystems* at thelandscape* level, and the scale, intensity and risk* of management activities*. (C6.4 and10.5 P&C V4 and Motion 2014#7)

INTENT BOX

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 49 of 159 –Overview
This Criterion* addresses effort to add to the Conservation Area Network* in the Management
Unit* by filling gaps in the existing network with new designated conservation lands* andsecondary conservation lands*. The role of The Organization*, as expressed through thisCriterion’s* Indicators* is to lay the groundwork for working towards and achieving a vision for
the Conservation Areas Network*.
Terminology
A Conservation Areas Network* is comprised of those portions of Management Unit* andadjacent area of ecological influence* for which conservation* is the primary, and in somecircumstances, exclusive objective*. On public forests, the Conservation Areas Network* is thesum of protected areas* and designated conservation lands*. On private forests, theConservation Areas Network* also includes secondary conservation lands*.
Protected areas* are lands protected by legislation, regulation, or government land-use
policy. Provincial parks are an example of these lands. Designated conservation lands* are to
be managed through the exclusion of forest management activities* in recognition of theirecological and/or cultural values. Forest management is permitted on secondary
conservation lands* provided that it maintains the ecological and cultural qualities that are
the basis of the lands’ designation.
Refer to the Glossary for complete definitions of terms used in this Criterion*.
Objectives* - Public Forests
On public forests, a long-term* objective* of designated conservation lands * is to transition tolegal* protected status (i.e. protected areas*). However, it is recognized that the ultimate
decision to move those designated conservation lands* to protected status belongs togovernments, not The Organization*. Creation of protected areas* is usually the product ofbroad government initiatives that often include engagement* with stakeholders*,
communities, and with Indigenous Peoples*. Lack of immediate increases in the regulated
protected area network (i.e. within the period of validity of a certificate) should be viewed in
the context of the complexity of the processes involved and the challenges inherent inbalancing ecological, social, economic and social interests. It does not necessarily imply
failure to meet this Criterion’s* Indicators*.
The process of attempting to move designated conservation lands* within the traditional
territories of Indigenous Peoples* to legal* protected status can only proceed based on theirFree, Prior and Informed Consent*.
Designated conservation lands* are expected to be permanently protected whether or notthey are successful in transitioning to legally protected status. In other words, in the indefinite
time between identification of designated conservation lands* and their movement to official
legally protected status, the lands are to be exempted from forest management activities*,
except in relatively rare circumstances (described in Indicator 6.5.9).
Objectives* - Private Forests
Privately owned forests are expected to contribute to the Conservation Areas Network*through the identification and creation of designated conservation lands* and secondary
conservation lands*. However, private landowners are not expected to attempt to move
designated conservation lands* or secondary conservation lands* to legislated status on theirlands.
Relationship with Principle 9This Criterion* focuses on identification of lands that serve to fill gaps in the Conservation Areas
Network* for which protection* through the exclusion or limitation of forest management

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 50 of 159 –activities* should be a priority. Therefore, there is overlap between the mandate of thisCriterion* and the role of High Conservation Values (HCVs)*, identified in Principle 9. As
described in the HCV Common Guidance3, and consistent with the HCV Framework provided
in this Standard (Annex D), HCVs* can include areas that require total protection*, and areasthat can be used to produce forest products if management is consistent with maintaining or
enhancing HCVs*. Therefore, some areas identified as HCVs* can also be designatedconservation lands* and secondary conservation lands*, and others, while still playing
important roles in management activities* and conservation*, may not be. The identificationof designated conservation lands* and secondary conservation lands* does not in any way
detract from the importance of HCVs* in which some forest management activities* may still
occur.

6.5.1

For forests* managed on public lands, an efficient process is used to engage* Indigenous
Peoples* whose traditional territory overlaps the Management Unit* and self-identified
interested and affected stakeholders*, regarding the identification and management ofdesignated conservation lands*.
The process includes the development of a mechanism to achieve consensus* on theidentified designated conservation lands*.

INTENT BOX
This Indicator* requires that an engagement* process be undertaken with self-identified
stakeholders*. Self-identified stakeholders* are stakeholders* with a history of FSC involvement
and/or interest in conservation* and who express an interest in participating when informed of
the opportunity to be involved. There is no requirement for The Organization* to engage*stakeholders* who do not express an interest.
Dealing with many individuals and/or groups with overlapping interests can lead to an
unwieldy process and slow progress. It is reasonable* that The Organization*, in collaboration
with the stakeholders* and affected Indigenous Peoples*, develop a process for efficient
cooperation that may involve delegation of representation across groups that share common
interests. Delegation requires the support of stakeholders* and affected Indigenous Peoples*.
6.5.2

Using best available information*, an analysis is used to identify potential gaps in thecompleteness of the Conservation Areas Network* in the Management Unit*. Elements
considered for inclusion in the gap analysis address enduring features*, representation ofnative ecosystems*, landscape* connectivity*, High Conservation Values* and High
Conservation Value areas*.
The analysis uses inputs from the entire area of ecological influence*.
The results of the gap analysis are mapped.

INTENT BOX
Area of Ecological Influence*

3HCV Resource Network. 2013. Common Guidance for the Identification of High Conservation Values.

Proforest and the High Conservation Values Network. 63 p.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 51 of 159 –The area of ecological influence* (AEI) includes the entire area encompassed by ecologicalunits (e.g. ecodistricts*, biogeoclimatic zones) that occur at least partly within theManagement Unit*. The intent of using an area that extends beyond the Management Unit* inthe gap analysis is to incorporate a broader landscape* perspective into consideration of theConservation Areas Network*. An analysis that takes account of a broad landscape* (i.e.
including the area of ecological influence*) is better suited to providing an accurate
assessment of conservation* gaps. There may be circumstances in which there is little
protected area* encompassed by the Management Unit*, but considerably more in the areaof ecological influence*. In such a circumstance, there may be fewer gaps than would be
identified if only lands encompassed by Management Unit* were used in the analysis.
In the figure below, the Management Unit* overlaps two ecological units, so the area of
ecological influence* includes the total areas encompassed by both ecological units. To
provide the most useful gap analysis, data from the entire area of ecological influence*
should be used. However, depending on the size of the area of ecological influence*, and theavailability of data formatted to facilitate efficient analysis, the level of effort required toincorporate all elements identified in the Indicator* that occur outside the Management Unit*
may be unrealistic. A reasonable* starting point for the analysis would consider information on
the size and location of protected areas* from outside the Management Unit*.

6.5.3

A peer review* of the gap analysis is completed by one or more independent experts*.

6.5.4

For forests* managed on public land, the gap analysis and peer review* are madepublicly available*, including in electronic format.

6.5.5

Areas that address Conservation Areas Network* gaps are identified as designatedconservation lands* or secondary conservation lands*.

INTENT BOX
As noted previously, designated conservation lands* may occur on both private andpublic forests, whereas secondary conservation lands* may occur only on private forests.
6.5.6

Designated conservation lands* and secondary conservation lands* are of sufficient size
to ensure the values they are intended to address are effectively protected based on aprecautionary approach*.
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 52 of 159 –6.5.7The Conservation Areas Network* comprises a minimum of 10% of the area of theManagement Unit*. The extent of the Conservation Areas Network* on the Management
Unit* is identified by considering:
1. Relative extent of the Conservation Areas Network* in the area of ecologicalinfluence*;
2. Contribution of the Conservation Areas Network* to the attainment of regional
provincial, national and international (e.g. Aichi biodiversity targets) conservation*and protected area* targets;
3. Best available scientific information and research regarding appropriate
conservation* targets;
4. Previous contributions of The Organization* to Conservation Areas Network* on lands
that were formerly within the Management Unit*; and5. Socio-economic considerations (e.g. implications for wood availability and harvest
levels).
Evidence is provided to validate any claim of the existence of protected areas* thatwere formerly within the Management Unit*.

INTENT BOX
As described earlier, on public forests, the Conservation Areas Network* is the sum ofprotected areas* and designated conservation lands*, whereas on private forests, it also
includes secondary conservation lands*. This Indicator* requires that the Conservation
Areas Network* must comprise a minimum of 10% of the area of the Management Unit*.
However, 10% should not be also interpreted as a maximum or desirable level in all
circumstances. There may be instances in which a more extensive Conservation Areas
Network* is warranted based on the factors considered in the gap analysis (Indicator
6.5.2), and the distribution of protected areas* and other ecologically and culturally
important lands within the area of ecological influence*. Provided that at least the 10%threshold is reached, the overall size should reflect a balance of the points listed in thisIndicator*.
6.5.8

For forests* managed on public land, consensus* is achieved on the identification ofdesignated conservation lands* through implementation of the process identified in
Indicator 6.5.1.

INTENT BOX
Indicator 6.5.8 builds upon the process identified in Indicator 6.5.1. Indicator 6.5.1 requires
engagement* with Indigenous Peoples* and stakeholders* to build a process to achieveconsensus*. It is expected that the process developed to achieve consensus* includes theparticipation of The Organization*, and that the interests of The Organization* be among
those considered in the achievement of consensus*.
Consensus* should be the result of a process seeking to take into account the views of The
Organization*, Indigenous Peoples*, and stakeholders*, and to reconcile any conflicting
arguments. It need not imply unanimity.
6.5.9

Forest operations including harvesting, silviculture*, and road* building, are notundertaken by The Organization* within designated conservation lands* except when
confirmed by independent expert* opinion as appropriate to achieve objectives*
associated with restoration* or maintenance of natural conditions*.

INTENT BOX

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 53 of 159 –Most organizations operating on public land can only control management activities* within
their allocated rights as tenure* holders, and so this Indicator* refers specifically to “Forest
operations…undertaken by The Organization*”, recognizing that other industrial operations
may have overlapping tenure* rights. Indicator 6.5.11 addresses obligations of The
Organization* related to its sphere of influence*.
In rare cases, road* building may be necessary to conduct management operations in areas
beyond designated conservation lands*. Such road* building and maintenance within adesignated conservation land* should only be undertaken when use or creation of existing oralternate access would be extremely difficult and result in more ecological damage thanalternatives.
6.5.10 For forests* managed on private land, forest operations are undertaken on secondary
conservation lands* only when they maintain the ecological and cultural qualities thatare the basis of the lands’ designation.
6.5.11 For forests* managed on public land, The Organization* works within its sphere of
influence* to achieve the following:
1. Move designated conservation lands* to full legal* regulated status;
2. Recognition of designated conservation lands* in management plans* and otherrelevant documents; and3. Avoid harvesting, road* building and other operations proposed by other tenure*holders that are not consistent with conservation* objectives* of designatedconservation lands*.
Free, Prior and Informed Consent* is obtained prior to efforts to work within The
Organization’s* sphere of influence* to achieve regulated status for designatedconservation lands* that overlap Indigenous Peoples’* traditional territories (per Criterion
3.2).
INTENT BOX
Sphere of Influence* and FPIC*This Indicator* recognizes that Free, Prior, and Informed Consent* of Indigenous Peoples* isnecessary before attempts should be made to move designated conservation lands* on
traditional territories to legally protected status. The Organization* is expected to inquire with
Indigenous Peoples* regarding their interest in seeking legal* protection for lands in theirtraditional territories. Where FPIC* is not obtained, the lands are expected to remain as
designated conservation lands*, but efforts on the part of The Organization* to obtain legally
protected status do not proceed. Requirements 2 and 3 in the above Indicator* are to beaddressed regardless of the attainment of FPIC*, as these requirements do not relate to theattainment of legally protected status.
After Designated Conservation Lands* have been moved to legislated status
When an area of designated conservation lands* is moved to regulated protected statusthrough collaborative efforts with the regional, provincial or federal government, newdesignated conservation lands* need not be identified to replace the ones that have been
granted regulated status, although the objectives* associated with achieving the total area ofthe conservation areas network*, as identified in Indicator 6.5.7, would remain in place. The
success of moving designated conservation lands* to regulated status should be noted by theauditors along with the gap that it addressed so that in future gap analyses, assessments andaudits, The Organization* will not need to ‘replace’ the formally protected designatedconservation lands* with new ones.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 54 of 159 –6.5.12 The completed gap analysis is reviewed at least every five years, and updated if
necessary, based on availability of new information or advances in gap analysis
methodology.
If substantial changes to the gap analysis occur as a result of the update, a peer review*is undertaken.
INTENT BOX
This Indicator* requires that the gap analysis be reviewed at least every five years. This does
not necessarily mean that the gap analysis will need to be redone at that interval. As the
Indicator* requires, the analysis will only need to be redone or updated if relevant new
information or an improved methodology becomes available.
For example, new information that may necessitate updating the gap analysis could include
the creation of new protected areas* that address some of the previously-identified gaps, oran improved landscape* classification system that provides an improved basis for identifying
gaps. The bar for deciding whether there is a sufficient basis for proceeding with an updateshould be neither too high nor too low. The expectation is that updates only are considered if
it is likely that the new analysis will identify meaningfully different gaps from those identified in
the previous analysis.
6.6

The Organization* shall effectively maintain the continued existence of naturally
occurring native species* and genotypes*, and prevent losses of biological diversity*,
especially through habitat* management in the Management Unit*. The Organization*
shall demonstrate that effective measures are in place to manage and control hunting,fishing, trapping and collecting. (C6.2 and C6.3 P&C V4)

6.6.1

For all harvest areas* including those on which salvage operations following natural
disturbances are to be undertaken, best available information* is used to identify targets
for the post-harvest forest composition for:1. Density and spatial distribution of residual (live and dead) trees and patches within
harvest areas*;
2. Size distribution of live and dead trees;
3. Size distribution of patches;
4. Residual species composition; and5. Management of coarse woody debris.
Targets are appropriate for the silvicultural systems* (e.g. clear-cut, selection,
shelterwood) in use.
Targets are set taking concerns for worker* safety into account.

INTENT BOX
In some circumstances, it may not be possible or practical to set quantitative targets. For
example, it may be too difficult to measure coarse woody debris, and there may beuncertainty about appropriate amounts to maintain. Nonetheless, it is known that woody
debris plays an important ecological role, and so targets may include the way management
practices will address maintenance on the site, such as minimizing the crushing of large
downed logs, leaving of unmerchantable* portions of logs at the stump, etc. In other cases,
practical considerations may constrain the ability of The Organization* to set targets; forexample, where deciduous trees are harvested in the winter it may not be possible to set
specific targets for retention of dead trees. Assessment of conformance with this Indicator*
should take considerations such as these into account.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 55 of 159 –6.6.2

Management activities* are implemented to achieve the targets identified in Indicator
6.6.1.

6.6.3

Management activities* maintain regionally uncommon stand*- and site-scaleecological elements and important habitat features*, including:
1. Ancient forest* patches;
2. Rare sites and plant communities as defined by ecological classification systems;
3. Vernal pools;
4. Small wetlands*;
5. Den sites;
6. Nest sites for birds of prey;
7. Ungulate calving sites/areas;
8. Spawning sites for fish;
9. Important bird migration sites;
10. Super-canopy trees*;
11. Wallows; and12. Mineral licks.

INTENT BOX
Best available information* should be used to identify stand*- and site-scale environmental
values* as required in Indicator 6.1.2. Although some habitat features* may not be identified
before the start of operations, it is still necessary to address the requirements of this Indicator*
to maintain those values. Management activities* can maintain these values by, for example,
ensuring that operational staff have adequate tools and training to recognize the values andimplement appropriate protective measures. However, it is recognized that the season during
which the operation takes place can make it difficult or impossible to identify some values(e.g. it would likely not be possible to identify den sites, very small wetlands* or wallows during
winter operations).
6.6.4

Best efforts* are made to maintain habitat features* and increase the quality andquantity of habitat features*, including those identified in Indicator 6.6.3, that havesuffered long-term* degradation due to forest management activities*.

INTENT BOX
In the context of this Indicator*, degradation does not simply mean a decline in short-term
abundance, but is a more serious condition in which the state of a habitat feature* does notprovide the ecological value it normally does in the forest*. It would be difficult or impracticalto attempt to improve the quality or quantity of some habitat features*, such as wallows, forexample, that may have declined. It is possible, however, to enhance or restore* others, suchas spawning beds for fish that have been affected by erosion caused by forest management
activities*, for example. Implementation and auditing of this Indicator* will require good
judgement, focusing on practical efforts that are likely to produce tangible results.
6.6.5

The Organization* works within the scope of its authority and within its sphere of
influence* to implement sustainable management related to hunting, fishing, andtrapping, and collecting activities for which there are known concerns.

INTENT BOX
This Indicator* is similar to Indicator 6.4.7 in the manner in which it requires The Organization* towork within the scope of their authority and within their sphere of influence*. Refer to the
Intent Box for that Indicator* for discussion on these topics.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 56 of 159 –6.7

The Organization* shall protect or restore* natural watercourses, water bodies*, riparianzones* and their connectivity*. The Organization* shall avoid negative impacts on water
quality and quantity and mitigate and remedy those that occur. (C6.5 and 10.2 P&C V4)

6.7.1

Best management practices* are in place that identify measures to protect water
bodies*, riparian zones*, and water quality. At a minimum, the measures address thefollowing:
1. Buffer widths sufficient to protect water quality, aquatic and emergent vegetationand habitat* for fish, invertebrates, other aquatic species, and terrestrial species;
2. Machine-free zones that are not entered except where required for construction ofcrossings or other approved infrastructure* or restoration* of riparian functions or
water bodies*;
3. Restriction of in-stream activities to avoid sensitive fisheries seasons;
4. Prevention of negative changes in water quantity and quality including throughmaintaining stream shading sufficient to protect against deleterious changes instream temperature;
5. Minimizing disruption of natural drainage patterns, including when locating andconstructing roads*, landings and skidways;
6. Prevention of sedimentation of water bodies*; and7. Protection* of intermittent streams* and ephemeral streams*.

INTENT BOX
Intermittent* and ephemeral streams* can be important aquatic features, providing habitat*and hydrologic function. This Indicator* requires that these streams be protected during forest
management activities*. In many circumstances, it is not reasonable* to expect thatintermittent* and ephemeral streams* will be mapped as they are not apparent at all times ofthe year and are frequently hidden by forest canopy. Nonetheless, protection* of these water
bodies* is possible and could be demonstrated through the provision of training andinstructions to workers* so that appropriate steps can be taken when streams areencountered during operations.
Indicators* in Principle 10 address the need to protect water bodies* from chemicals andfertilizers*.
6.7.2

The best management practices* identified in Indicator 6.7.1 are being implemented.

6.7.3

Restoration* activities are implemented for watercourses, water bodies*, riparian zones*
and their connectivity*, water quantity and water quality:
1. Where protection* measures implemented by The Organization* fail to protect
environmental values* from impacts of forest management activities*, and/or
2. When damage has been caused to these environmental values* by past activities of
The Organization* or previous forest managers.

INTENT BOX
The Organization* is encouraged to identify appropriate benchmarks for defining when
restoration* activities are necessary. These benchmarks could address the gravity of existing or
likely environmental degradation, impacts on affected stakeholders*, impacts on forest
operations, safety of all users and cost.
Instances in which previous measures to protect water quality or aquatic systems are not up
to contemporary standards, but are effective nonetheless, the most prudent course ofmanagement action may be to leave the existing measures, such as box culverts, in place. In
some instances, attempts to fix antiquated measures may result in more damage than simply

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 57 of 159 –leaving the measure in place. The Organization* is expected to use best judgement in thesecircumstances and be able to validate their course of action based on experience and/or
best management practices*.
6.7.4

Where management activities* that are not within its direct control have the potential tosignificantly affect water bodies* and/or riparian zones*, The Organization* works within
its sphere of influence* to attempt to prevent degradation, implement protective
measures and remedy instances in which past measures are no longer effective.

6.7.5

Best management practices* are in place that identify measures to control changes inflow in watersheds* with significant downstream values resulting from management
activities*. Appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* of operations the measures
include:1. Employing analytical approaches to identify and avoid hydrological impacts
associated with decreased or increased flows caused by forest management
activities*;
2. Management of cutblock* and harvest area* sizes, elevation and aspect;
3. Avoiding subsurface and surface drainage interception and/or diversion by roads*
and trails;
4. Planning and implementing harvesting to minimize road* density; and5. Prompt road* reclamation and reforestation of logged sites.

INTENT BOX
Potential impacts of forestry on peak flow are greatest in areas with moderate to steep
topography. In Canada, such areas occur primarily in British Columbia and western Alberta,
but occur in other parts of the country too. The need to address this Indicator* is based onscale, intensity and risk*, so consideration of topography will influence the extent to which The
Organization* is expected to implement the requirements of this Indicator*.
This Indicator* requires that analytical approaches be used to identify and avoid hydrologicalimpacts associated with increased flows, but does not specify which approaches are to be
used as regional differences in regulatory, environment, topography and downstream values
may play a role in deciding which approaches are most appropriate.
6.7.6

The best management practices* identified in Indicator 6.7.5 are being effectively
implemented.

6.8

The Organization* shall manage the landscape* in the Management Unit* to maintain
and/or restore* a varying mosaic of species, sizes, ages, spatial scales and regeneration
cycles appropriate for the landscape values* in that region, and for enhancing
environmental and economic resilience*. (C10.2 and 10.3 P&C V4)

6.8.1

Based on the analyses undertaken for Indicators 6.1.3 and 6.1.4, targets are identified forthe distribution of forest types* and age classes of forest types* that are intended tomaintain, restore*, or enhance the condition of the forest* appropriate to the regional
context.
Targets may take anticipated impacts of climate change into account provided they
are based on best available information*.
Target age-class* distributions represent the full range of natural forest* ages such thatold forest* classes are incorporated into the targets.

INTENT BOX

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 58 of 159 –The Organization* should identify targets that require them to make diligent efforts to achieve
progressive outcomes related to forest structure and composition that take the regional
context into account. In regions with a long history of settlement and land conversion, where
the forest* has been significantly altered from a pre-industrial condition*, an appropriate
target may include the maintenance of natural forests*. In forests* that have not beensignificantly altered, appropriate targets may take into account opportunities to return theforest* to a more natural condition. Such targets may be based on the use of the interquartile
range* where a RONV* analysis has been used in Indicator 6.1.4.
As identified in the Intent Box for Indicator 6.1.4, there may be circumstances in which it isappropriate to use a blended approach of range of natural variation* and pre-industrial
condition* to set targets for the future forest condition. In these circumstances The
Organization* is expected to implement the requirements of this Indicator* for those portionsof the forest* that are most well-suited for each approach.
6.8.2

Measures are being implemented to achieve the targets for distributions of forest types*
and age classes of forest types* identified in Indicator 6.8.1.

6.8.3

Based on the analyses undertaken for Indicators 6.1.3 and 6.1.4, targets are identified forthe size distribution of forest patches to maintain, restore*, or enhance the condition of
the forest* as appropriate to the regional context.
The targets also take into account the needs of species at risk* that require large areas ofcontiguous habitat*.

INTENT BOX
As for Indicator 6.8.1, The Organization* should identify targets that require them to makediligent efforts to achieve progressive outcomes related to forest structure and composition,and take the regional context into account. Considerations should include the extent towhich the size distribution of forest patches of the present forest* differs from pre-industrial
conditions*. Pre-industrial* and natural conditions* may not be appropriate targets given thatlarge disturbances may not be socially acceptable.
6.8.4

Measures are being implemented to achieve the targets for forest patch sizes, identified
in Indicator 6.8.3.
These include:
1. Maintain contiguous blocks of forest* that are of natural-disturbance origin;
2. Aggregate existing and planned disturbances as a means of creating andmaintaining large contiguous blocks; and3. Minimize the extent of roads* and other linear disturbances in the contiguous blocks,
including through removal and reclamation.

INTENT BOX
This Indicator* involves efforts to maintain contiguous blocks of forest* that are of natural
disturbance origin, while implementing measures to achieve the targets identified in Indicator
6.8.3. This requirement is not intended to be additive to those expressed in other Indicators*
that may also deal with large blocks of forest*, such as Indicator 6.4.5 (caribou), or therequirements of HCV* Categories 2 and 3 (addressed in Principle 9) that address landscape*level ecosystems* and large remnant ecosystem* patches. In other words, if the maintenanceof contiguous areas of forest* of natural-disturbance origin is addressed elsewhere, additional
efforts should not be required to address the requirements of this Indicator*.
The Indicator’s* requirement for maintenance of contiguous blocks of forest* that are ofnatural-disturbance origin should take forest type* and management history into account.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 59 of 159 –Some forest* areas may have a long history of management involving frequent stand* entries
and are generally not susceptible to large natural disturbances. In such cases, there should
be moderated expectations of the extent to which this requirement can be addressed inforests* with a long history of management and limited natural disturbance.
6.8.5

In a manner consistent with the ecology of the ecoregion* and forest types* being
managed, management activities* show consideration for maintenance andrestoration* of connectivity* in the forest landscape*.
Connectivity* planning considers the natural mosaic of forest types* and disturbancepatterns, as well as managing roads*, linear disturbances, culverts and other crossings ofwetlands* and water bodies*, and other barriers that affect connectivity*.

6.8.6

Appropriate to the scale, intensity and risk* of operations, access management is being
implemented for roads* developed for forest management that:
1. Addresses use management strategies (including deactivation* and/or
abandonment* and maintenance) for all grades of road* under the management of
The Organization* or in collaboration with other authorities;
2. Considers intactness in areas with sensitive biological values and where remoteness isa key tourism value;
3. Implements access development, use, and road* reclamation in contiguous blocks
as identified in Indicator 6.8.4, while considering the needs of species at risk* andaccess-sensitive species;
4. Identifies and attempts to maintain a fair and equitable balance between theecological value of intactness and social and economic values associated withmaintenance of access; and5. Is consistent with or exceeds requirements of approved government/landmanagement plans*.
Where access and/or other linear disturbances are being constructed or used by othertenure* holders or other land users, The Organization* works within its sphere of influence*
to address the components of this Indicator* and encourage others to address thecomponents of the Indicator*.

INTENT BOX
This Indicator* requires use management strategies to address deactivation* and/or
abandonment and maintenance for all grades of roads*. There may be circumstances inwhich neither deactivation* nor abandonment* is appropriate, such as when a road* hascustomary or legal* use by a community or is required by other resources users. In such cases,
it would be reasonable* that the management plan* indicates the rationale and plans forongoing use.
This Indicator* refers to road* reclamation in contiguous blocks, linking the requirements of thisIndicator* to those of Indicators 6.8.3 and 6.8.4. Reclamation can be either passive, throughrestriction of access, including removal of water crossings, or active, through practices suchas planting or otherwise facilitating regeneration on road* surfaces. Decisions regarding
appropriate practices used should take into consideration the likely success of the practices
in returning roads* to forested conditions as promptly as is practical.
Refer to Indicator 6.5.9 for consideration of road* building in designated conservation lands*.
6.8.7

The Organization* works within its sphere of influence*, with managers, agencies andIndigenous Peoples* responsible for managing lands adjacent to the forest* tocoordinate approaches to landscape*-level management, including:

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 60 of 159 –1. Management to facilitate landscape*-scale* connectivity*;
2. Management to minimize cumulative disturbances*; and3. Maintenance and/or restoration* of large contiguous areas.
6.9

The Organization* shall not convert natural forest* to plantations*, nor natural forests* orplantations* on sites directly converted from natural forest* to non-forest land use, except
when the conversion:a. Affects a very limited portion* of the area of the Management Unit*, andb. Will produce clear, substantial, additional, secure long-term*conservation* benefits in
the Management Unit*, andc. Does not damage or threaten High Conservation Values*, nor any sites or resources
necessary to maintain or enhance those High Conservation Values*. (C6.10 P&C V4
and Motion 2014#7)

INTENT BOX
Refer to the Glossary to understand how the word plantation* is used in this Standard.
This Criterion* applies to current and future or planned conversion. Past conversion is covered
in Criterion 6.10.
If the plantation* site was a natural forest* immediately prior to being converted to aplantation*, then it may not be converted to non-forest uses. However, if the plantation* site
was non-forest immediately prior to being converted to a plantation*, then it may be
converted back to non-forest uses.
The construction of forest roads*, other essential infrastructure* for forest management
activities and essential public utilities, such as powerlines, pipelines and railways, are notconsidered to be conversion processes.
In this Criterion*, forest* is also meant to be natural forest*, such as a wooded ecosystem* orsavannah, for example. As such, non-forest uses or non-forest land uses are not constrainedby the meaning of forest* as simply a “tract of land dominated by trees.”
6.9.1

The Organization* shall neither convert natural forest* to plantations*, nor convert naturalforests* to non-forest land use, nor convert plantations* on sites directly converted fromnatural forest* to non-forest land use, except when the conversion affects a very limited
portion* of the Management Unit*. Where conversion is undertaken by The
Organization*, the conversion:
1. Will produce clear, substantial, additional, secure, long-term* conservation* benefits
in the Management Unit*; and2. Does not damage or threaten High Conservation Values*, or any sites or resources
necessary to maintain or enhance those High Conservation Values*.

6.10

Management Units* containing plantations* that were established on areas converted
from natural forest* after November 1994 shall not qualify for certification, except where:
a. Clear and sufficient evidence is provided that The Organization* was not directly or
indirectly responsible for the conversion, orb. The conversion affected a very limited portion* of the area of the Management Unit*
and is producing clear, substantial, additional, secure long-term*conservation*
benefits in the Management Unit*. (C10.9 P&C V4)

6.10.1 Based on best available information*, accurate data related to prior land use and forest
type* present before and after conversion is compiled on all conversions from naturalforest* since 1994.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 61 of 159 –6.10.2 Areas converted from natural forest* to plantation* since November 1994 are notcertified, except where:
1. The Organization* provides clear and sufficient evidence that it was not directly or
indirectly responsible for the conversion; or
2. The conversion is producing clear, substantial, additional, secure, long-term*
conservation* benefits in the Management Unit*; and3. The total area of plantation* on sites converted from natural forest* since November
1994 is less than 5% of the total area of the Management Unit*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 62 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 7: MANAGEMENT PLANNING
The Organization* shall have a management plan* consistent with its policies andobjectives* and proportionate to scale, intensity and risks* of its management
activities*. The management plan* shall be implemented and kept up-to-date basedon monitoring information in order to promote adaptive management*. The associatedplanning and procedural documentation shall be sufficient to guide staff, inform
affected stakeholders* and interested stakeholders* and to justify management
decisions. (P7 P&C V4)
INTENT BOX
Management plan* refers to the collection of documents, reports, records and maps thatjustify and regulate activities carried out on the Management Unit*. Management plan*
documentation can build from existing planning processes, and is not solely confined toprovincially regulated or required documents. Refer to the Glossary for the full definition ofmanagement plan*.
7.1

The Organization* shall, proportionate to scale, intensity and risk* of its management
activities*, set policies (visions and values) and objectives* for management, which areenvironmentally sound, socially beneficial and economically viable*. Summaries ofthese policies and objectives* shall be incorporated into the management plan*, andpublicized. (C7.1a P&C V4)

7.1.1

Vision, values and strategic objectives* that support the management plan* are alignedwith the requirements of this Standard.

7.1.2

Operational management objectives* that address the requirements of this Standard aredescribed in the management plan*.

INTENT BOX
For this Criterion*, values refer to the long-term* values of The Organization* regarding
conformance with the FSC Principles* and Criteria*, at a minimum.
7.2

The Organization* shall have and implement a management plan* for the Management
Unit* which is fully consistent with the policies and management objectives* asestablished according to Criterion 7.1. The management plan* shall describe the natural
resources that exist in the Management Unit* and explain how the plan will meet the FSC
certification requirements. The management plan* shall cover forest management
planning and social management planning proportionate to scale, intensity and risk* ofthe planned activities. (C7.1 P&C V4)

7.2.1

The management plan* includes management actions, procedures, strategies and othermeasures to achieve the management objectives*.

7.2.2

The management plan* includes the legal* provincial forest management planningrequirements and addresses the following elements:
1. Management objectives*;
2. Description of the forest resources to be managed, environmental limitations,land use and ownership status, socio-economic conditions and profile ofadjacent lands;
3. Results of assessments and monitoring programs;

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 63 of 159 –4. Planned management activities* and silvicultural systems* used, based on theecology of the forest* and its social context;
5. Rationale for timber harvesting levels* and species selection;
6. Measures to prevent and mitigate negative impacts of management activities*;
7. Measures to conserve and/or restore* values identified throughout the otherPrinciples* of the Standard;
8. Maps describing the forest resources, key infrastructure*, land use andmanagement designations (including HCVs*), and planned management
activities*.
INTENT BOX
The information required for adjacent lands primarily refers to shared values, resources, andservices. It may not be possible in all circumstances to provide a profile of adjacent lands.
The expectation is that information regarding adjacent lands will be provided only in cases
where the information is publicly available*, such as within a forest management plan* on aneighbouring Crown land* Management Unit*.
7.3

The management plan* shall include verifiable targets* by which progress towards eachof the prescribed management objectives* can be assessed. (New)

7.3.1

Verifiable targets* and the frequency at which they are assessed, are established toensure progress towards each management objective*, and are used as the basis formonitoring, as described in Principle 8. Targets are measurable (where possible), address
short-term and long-term* time frames (as applicable), and each is supported by arationale, including underlying assumptions.

INTENT BOX
Examples of verifiable targets*:••••

The terms and conditions of the binding FPIC* agreement are met;
Rutting does not exceed 5% of the harvest area* per year;
Road* density target of 1.5 km primary and branch road* per square km is met;
The cumulative disturbance* is less than 35% within the caribou range* portion ofManagement Unit*.

7.4

The Organization* shall update and revise periodically the management planning andprocedural documentation to incorporate the results of monitoring and evaluation,
stakeholder* engagement* or new scientific and technical information, as well as torespond to changing environmental, social and economic circumstances. (C7.2 P&C V4)

7.4.1

The management plan* is revised and updated periodically to consider:
1. Monitoring and evaluation results, including results of audits;
2. Stakeholder* engagement* results;
3. New scientific and technical information; and4. Changing environmental, social, or economic circumstances.

7.5

The Organization* shall make publicly available* a summary of the management plan*
free of charge. Excluding confidential information*, other relevant components of the
management plan* shall be made available to affected stakeholders* on request, and at
cost of reproduction and handling. (C7.4 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
Examples of confidential information* include data and content:

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 64 of 159 –

•
•
•
•
•
•

7.5.1

Related to investment decisions;
About intellectual property* rights;
Which is client confidential;
Which is, by law, confidential;
Whose dissemination could put at risk* the protection* of wildlife species andhabitats*;
About sites that are of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritualsignificance to Indigenous Peoples* (see Criterion 3.5), as requested.
A summary of the management plan* in a format comprehensible to stakeholders*,
including policies and management objectives* (defined in Criterion 7.1), maps andexcluding confidential information*, is made publicly available* at no cost.

INTENT BOX
At the discretion of The Organization*, the entire management plan* can be provided, if
this reduces the administrative burden.
7.5.2

Relevant components of the management plan*, excluding confidential information*,are provided upon request, at cost for production and handling.

7.6

The Organization* shall, proportionate to scale, intensity and risk* of management
activities*, proactively and transparently engage* affected stakeholders* in its
management planning and monitoring processes, and shall engage* interested
stakeholders* on request. (C4.4 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
Culturally appropriate* engagement* is described in Annex F.
Refer to Annex E for details describing how disputes* are addressed throughout theStandard.
7.6.1

Affected stakeholders* are provided with an opportunity for culturally appropriate*
engagement* in planning processes and monitoring programs of management
activities* in which they are affected.

7.6.2

Upon request, interested stakeholders* are provided with an opportunity forengagement* in planning processes and monitoring programs of management
activities* that affect their interests.

7.6.3

A system is in place whereby complaints* can be made known to The Organization*
related to impact of forest management activities* on affected stakeholders*, other thanthe ones concerned in Criterion 4.6.

7.6.4

A publicly available* dispute resolution process that can be adapted through culturally
appropriate* engagement* is in place.

7.6.5

Complaints* are responded to in a timely manner*. Complaints* that are not resolved areelevated to disputes* and are being addressed via a dispute resolution process.

7.6.6

An up-to-date record of complaints* and disputes* is maintained, and includes:
1. Steps taken to resolve complaints* and disputes*;
2. Outcomes of all complaints* and dispute resolution processes, including, whereapplicable, fair compensation* for loss or damage to property; andFSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 65 of 159 –3. Unresolved disputes*, the reasons they are not resolved, and how they will be
resolved.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 66 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 8: MONITORING AND ASSESSMENTThe Organization* shall demonstrate that, progress towards achieving the management
objectives*, the impacts of management activities* and the condition of theManagement Unit*, are monitored and evaluated proportionate to the scale, intensity
and risk* of management activities*, in order to implement adaptive management*. (P8P&C V4)
INTENT BOX
The main objective* of monitoring is to allow The Organization* to implement adaptive
management*. This objective* also determines the intensity*, frequency, scheme,
schedules and procedures for monitoring. There is flexibility regarding all these factors, aslong as the monitoring enables adaptive management*. Monitoring should be consistentand replicable over time, suitable for quantifying significant social, economic andenvironmental changes over time, and suitable for identifying risks* and unacceptable
impacts.
The overall setup of the monitoring system also depends on the scale, intensity and risk* ofmanagement activities*. Some monitoring variables deal with issues with high levels ofrisk*. Examples include variables for which there is a high risk* of not achieving targets, ormanagement activities* that could cause negative social, economic or environmental
impacts. Risk* is also high when knowledge of the likelihood of negative impacts is weak.
Such variables need to receive priority in monitoring systems.
•••

Criterion 8.1 addresses requirements to monitor the implementation of the
management plan*.
Criterion 8.2 addresses requirements to monitor and evaluate the significant
environmental (8.2.1) and social and economic (8.2.2) impacts of management
activities*, as well as changes in the environmental condition (8.2.3) of theManagement Unit*.
Criterion 8.3 deals with the analysis of the results of monitoring and evaluation for
feedback into the periodic revision of the management plan*, as required byCriterion 7.4. The objective* is to ensure lesson-learning and continuous
improvement in the quality of management, consistent with the adaptive
management* approach described in Principle 7. Monitoring results should be
used in decision-making at an early stage in the planning process for the nextmanagement plan*.

In all provinces, some aspects of forest monitoring are the responsibility of the provincial
government. Some of the monitoring responsibilities identified in this Principle* may be
carried out by provincial governments through existing programs. It is not the intent of thisPrinciple* that The Organization* should duplicate established regulatory monitoring
practices. Even though the wording used to articulate the Indicators* in Criterion 8.2 isdirected toward The Organization*, The Organization* may rely on other agencies where
those agencies have responsibility for relevant monitoring. Furthermore, it is recognizedthat provincial governments and forest stakeholders* can influence or constrain The
Organization’s* ability to independently meet FSC monitoring requirements. It is intended
that there is cooperation between agencies so that The Organization* can demonstrateprogress in achieving management plan* objectives* through sufficient forest monitoring.
Principle 7 requires forest management to adhere to the principles of adaptive
management*. An important component of adaptive management* is the monitoring
regime. The concept of adaptive management* is carried forward to this Principle* andFSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 67 of 159 –the monitoring should be designed to explicitly evaluate the effect of management on
resources and values.
8.1

The Organization* shall monitor the implementation of its management plan*, including
its policies and management objectives*, its progress with the activities planned, and theachievement of its verifiable targets*. (New)8.1.1

A monitoring plan is documented and implemented in order to monitor the
implementation of the management plan*, including its policies, management
objectives* and achievement of verifiable targets*.

8.2

The Organization* shall monitor and evaluate the environmental and social impacts of
the activities carried out in the Management Unit*, and changes in its environmental
condition. (C8.2 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
The monitoring program to evaluate environmental, social and economic impacts ofmanagement activities* and the changes in environmental condition should be designed
in a way to focus on the identification of significant and adverse impacts, and consider thecost of implementing monitoring initiatives, as well as a reasonable* timeframe by whichchanges in conditions can be detected. The information used to fulfill the monitoring
requirements can be obtained from various sources, including The Organization*.
8.2.1

Monitoring is sufficient to identify significant environmental impacts of management
activities*, including (where applicable):
1. Poor regeneration (Criteria 10.1 and 10.5);
2. Invasiveness or other adverse impacts associated with alien species* (Criterion 10.3);
3. Adverse effects of fertilizers* (Criterion 10.6);
4. Adverse effects of pesticides* (Criterion 10.7);
5. Adverse effects of biological control agents* (Criterion 10.8);
6. Physical damage to soil, loss of soil nutrient and loss of productive forest* area
(Criterion 6.3);
7. Adverse effects of increased access (Indicator 6.8.4);
8. Site level damage of harvesting and extraction on residual trees and on
environmental values* (Criterion 10.11);
9. Damage caused by inappropriate storage or disposal of waste materials* (Criterion
10.12).

8.2.2.

A system is in place to monitor the social and economic aspects of management
activities*, including (where applicable):
1. Illegal or unauthorized activities identified by The Organization* (Criterion 1.4);
2. Resolution of disputes* (Criteria 1.6, 2.6, 4.6, 7.6);
3. Sexual harassment and gender discrimination (Criterion 2.2);
4. Occupational health and safety (Criterion 2.3);
5. Timely payment of wages The Organization* is responsible for or that is within The
Organization’s* sphere of influence* (Criterion 2.4);
6. Health of workers* related to the exposure to pesticides* or fertilizers* (Criterion 2.5
and Indicator 10.7.7);
7. Full implementation of the terms in binding agreements* (Criterion 3.3);
8. Protection* of sites of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritualsignificance to Indigenous Peoples* and local communities* (Criteria 3.5 and 4.7);

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 68 of 159 –9. Actual annual harvests compared to projected annual harvests of timber and nontimber forest products* (Criterion 5.2); and10. Economic viability* of The Organization* (as required by Indicator 5.5.1).
8.2.3

Systems are in place to obtain up-to-date monitoring information identifying significant
changes in environmental conditions caused by forest management activities*, including(where applicable):
1. The maintenance and/or enhancement of ecosystem services* (Criterion 5.1) (when
The Organization* makes FSC promotional claims regarding the provision of
ecosystem services*, or receives payment for the provision of ecosystem services*);
2. Species at risk* and the effectiveness of actions implemented to protect them andtheir habitats* (Criterion 6.4);
3. Naturally occurring native species* and biological diversity*, and the effectiveness ofactions implemented to conserve* and/or restore* them (Criterion 6.6);
4. Water bodies*, riparian zones*, water quality and flow in watersheds*, and theeffectiveness of actions implemented to conserve* and/or restore* them (Criterion
6.7);
5. Forest types*, age classes per forest type* and forest patch sizes, and theeffectiveness of actions implemented to maintain and/or restore* these features(Criterion 6.8); and6. Conversion of natural forest* to plantations* or conversion to non-forest cover(Criterion 6.9).

8.3

The Organization* shall analyze the results of monitoring and evaluation and feed theoutcomes of this analysis back into the planning process. (C8.4 P&C V4)

8.3.1

The results of monitoring are incorporated into relevant organizational procedures and/or
the management plan* through periodic updates.

8.3.2

If monitoring results show inconsistencies with the FSC Standard, then management
objectives*, verifiable targets* and/or management activities* are revised.

8.4

The Organization* shall make publicly available* a summary of the results of monitoring
free of charge, excluding confidential information*. (C8.5 P&C V4)

8.4.1

Monitoring results covered in Indicators 8.2.1, 8.2.2 and 8.2.3 are made publicly
available* at no cost in a format comprehensible to stakeholders* and excluding
confidential information*.

INTENT BOX
At the discretion of The Organization*, the entire results, or a summary, of monitoring can beprovided if this reduces the administrative burden.
8.5

The Organization* shall have and implement a tracking and tracing system proportionate
to the scale, intensity and risk* of its management activities*, for demonstrating thesource and volume in proportion to projected output for each year, of all products from
the Management Unit* that are marketed as FSC certified. (C8.3 P&C V4)

INTENT BOX
Forest products must be covered by a valid Chain-of-Custody (CoC) or joint Forest
Management/ Chain-of-Custody (FM/CoC) certificate to be considered FSC-certified or tocarry the FSC logo. The tracking and tracing system referred to in this Criterion* is the basis

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 69 of 159 –for assessing whether products leaving the Management Unit* meet CoC requirements,
and can be passed on to the purchaser as FSC-certified material. Therefore, this Criterion*
only applies to situations where the intent is that the products from the Management Unit*
are sold or marketed as FSC-certified.
The Criterion* requires the demonstration of the source and volume of all products leaving
the Management Unit* to ensure that any FSC-certified material claimed by the purchaser
can be verified as originating from a valid FSC-certified Management Unit*. This is needed
as one of the checks against ‘greenwashing’ of uncertified products entering the certified
supply chain.
8.5.1

A system is implemented to track and trace all products transported from theManagement Unit* that are marketed as FSC-certified.

8.5.2

Information about all timber products that leave the Management Unit*, and information
about all non-timber forest products* sold or delivered by The Organization* is compiled
and documented, including:
1. Species name;
2. Product name or description;
3. Volume (or quantity) of product;
4. Information to trace the material to the point of origin;
5. Logging date, reference date or period;
6. If basic transformation activities take place in the forest*, the date and volume
produced; and7. Whether the material was sold or delivered as FSC-certified.

INTENT BOX
For this Indicator*, the reference date or period refers to the timeframe by which the timber
product was harvested, hauled outside the forest gate, or delivered to the purchaser.
Basic transformation activities do not include tree de-limbing, topping or chipping.
The "forest gate" is considered to be the point of entry to, or exit from, the forest* and isdefined in the chain of custody documentation or in the forest management plan*.
8.5.3

Sales invoices and transport documents are kept for a minimum of five years for all FSCcertified products sold or delivered by The Organization*.
A. Sales invoices identify, at a minimum, the following information:
1. Name and address of purchaser;
2. The date of sale;
3. Species name;
4. Product description;
5. The volume (or quantity) sold;
6. Certificate code; and7. The FSC Claim “FSC 100%” identifying products sold as FSC-certified.
B. Where sales invoices are not issued, transport documents and/or otherdocumentation related to certified products track, at a minimum, the following
information:
1. Identification of the destination;
2. The date of transport or delivery;
3. Species name or group;
4. Product description;

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 70 of 159 –5. The volume (or quantity) delivered;
6. Load or batch reference number; and7. Proof the certified product comes from a FSC-certified forest*.
INTENT BOX
On Crown land*, wood products harvested are often not sold, but rather, ownership istransferred from the licensee to the purchaser at the forest gate. In this case, 8.5.3.A is notapplicable.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 71 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 9: HIGH CONSERVATION VALUES*The Organization* shall maintain and/or enhance the High Conservation Values* in theManagement Unit* through applying the precautionary approach*. (P9 P&C V4)
INTENT BOX
Refer to Annex D: HCV* Framework for direction on appropriate interpretation andimplementation of HCV* categories.
Common Guidance
HCV* assessors, resource managers* and auditors should refer to the Common Guidance for
the Management and Monitoring of High Conservation Values (Brown and Senior 2014) or
relevant reference material provided by FSC for advice regarding implementation of the
Indicators* addressed in this Principle*.
HCVs* and HCV Areas*
Many Indicators* in this Principle* refer to both HCVs* and HCV areas*. There is overlap in theterms, but the distinction between them is important. HCVs* are the values themselves as they
are identified below; HCV areas* are the physical areas that are needed for the existence ofidentified HCVs*. For example, an endangered bog-dwelling orchid may be a HCV*, but thebog in which the orchid exists is a HCV area*.
Best Available Information* and Principle 3
As with other Principles* in this Standard, several Indicators* in Principle 9 require that best
available information* be used to provide a baseline for management activities* or as a basis
for analyses in subsequent Indicators*. The Organization* is expected to implement theserequirements in consideration of a FPIC* process, as described in Principle 3 that is inclusive of
information sharing related to legal* and customary rights* as well as site, stand*, andlandscape values* of economic, social, and cultural significance to Indigenous Peoples*.
The definition of best available information* provides general direction on the type of
information to be gathered and the extent of effort required to gather the information. To
place appropriate limits on what should be involved in gathering best available information*,
the definition notes that it should be constrained by reasonable* effort and cost. The intent of
the term reasonable* is to emphasize that limits, such as cost and practicality, exist on the
expectations of the effort required to gather information.
Engagement* with Indigenous Peoples*
As with other Principles* in the Standard, several Indicators* in Principle 9 require engagement*with Indigenous Peoples*. The Organization* is expected to implement these obligations in amanner consistent with the specific requirements of Indicator 3.1.2.
Maps
Where maps or mapped information is required by this Principle*, evidence of digital files,
instead of hard-copy maps, is sufficient.
9.1

The Organization*, through engagement* with affected stakeholders*, interested
stakeholders* and other means and sources, shall assess and record the presence, status
and likelihood of occurrence of the following High Conservation Values* in theManagement Unit*, proportionate to the scale, intensity, and risk* of impacts ofmanagement activities*:

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 72 of 159 –HCV 1 – Species diversity. Concentrations of biological diversity* including endemic*
species, and rare*, threatened* or endangered species that are significant* at global,
national or regional levels.
HCV 2 – Landscape*-level ecosystems* and mosaics. Intact Forest Landscapes* andlarge landscape*-level ecosystems* and ecosystem* mosaics that are significant* at
global, national or regional levels, and that contain viable populations of the great
majority of the naturally occurring species in natural patterns of distribution andabundance.
HCV 3 – Ecosystems* and habitats*. Rare*, threatened*, or endangered ecosystems*,
habitats* or refugia*.
HCV 4 – Critical*ecosystem services*. Basic ecosystem services* in critical* situations,
including protection* of water catchments and control of erosion of vulnerable soils andslopes.
HCV 5 – Community needs. Sites and resources fundamental to satisfying the necessities
of local communities* or Indigenous Peoples* (for livelihood, health, nutrition, water,etc.), identified through engagement* with these communities or Indigenous Peoples*.
HCV 6 – Cultural values. Sites, resources, habitats* and landscapes* of global or national
cultural, archaeological or historical significance, and/or of critical* cultural, ecological,
economic or religious/sacred importance for the traditional cultures of local
communities* or Indigenous Peoples*, identified through engagement* with these local
communities* or Indigenous Peoples*. (C9.1 P&C V4 and Motion 2014#7)
INTENT BOX
What is a HCV Assessment*?
This Criterion* requires the preparation of a HCV assessment*. A HCV assessment* is adocumented description of HCVs* that clearly reports on the presence of values, theirlocation (if not confidential), status, and as much as possible, should provide information on
habitat* and other key resources that support the values. The assessment is a framework
document that is to be used to develop management and monitoring strategies to maintain
and/or enhance the values.
The HCV Assessment*:
•
•
•
•

9.1.1

Addresses all six HCV* categories;
Uses best available information* on the status and other attributes of the HCVs*;
Describes the current condition of the HCVs* and whether they are declining, stable
or increasing; andUses results from culturally appropriate* engagement* with Indigenous Peoples*,affected* and interested stakeholders* with an interest in the conservation* andmanagement of HCVs*.
A HCV assessment* is completed using best available information* of the status of HCV*
Categories 1-6 as defined in Criterion 9.1, the HCV areas* they rely on, and theircondition.
The assessment is completed using the National Framework (Annex D) or anotherframework that meets the same intent and addresses all HCV* categories and values
identified in the National Framework.

INTENT BOX

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 73 of 159 –Descriptions of the condition and state of HCVs* and HCV areas* identified in the HCV
assessment* report should facilitate monitoring of the results of management efforts. To
implement useful effectiveness monitoring, the initial state of the HCVs* and HCV areas*
should be well-articulated and quantitatively defined, where possible.
9.1.2

The HCV assessment* uses results associated with the identification of HCVs* and HCV
areas* from culturally appropriate* engagement* with Indigenous Peoples*, andaffected* and interested stakeholders* with an interest in the conservation* andmanagement of HCVs* and HCV areas*. The assessment also uses input from qualified(technical and/or scientific) specialists*.

INTENT BOX
The expectation of this Indicator* is that engagement* with affected* and interested
stakeholders* and Indigenous Peoples* addresses all HCV*-related topics, for which there isan interest in contributing.
For this Indicator*, qualified technical and scientific specialists* include individuals withexpertise in the topics being addressed, regardless of who they are employed by.
9.1.3

All HCVs* and HCV areas*, except those considered sensitive for ecological or cultural
reasons, which are definable based on location are delineated on maps consistent withthe scale* of the designation (e.g., global, national, regional, large home range, isolated
occurrence, etc.).

9.1.4

Information regarding the location and identity of sensitive sites is held in confidence.

INTENT BOX
Sensitive sites referred to in this Indicator* are HCVs* that are especially vulnerable to humanpresence. These sites may include cultural values of spiritual or historic importance andecological values that are sensitive to damage or disruption.
9.1.5

A review by one or more qualified specialists* is completed. Input from the review isaddressed in the HCV assessment*.

INTENT BOX
For this Indicator*, qualified specialists* includes individuals who were not involved in thedevelopment of the HCV assessment* report. The area of expertise of the qualified
specialist(s)* should be appropriate for the content of the HCV assessment*. For example, it
may be necessary for the document to be reviewed by an ecologist and a social scientist,
depending on the extent to which these topics feature prominently in the HCV assessment*.
On the other hand, a single reviewer may be sufficient if the person has broad experience in
FSC’s approach to HCVs*.
9.1.6

The HCV assessment* report is updated every five years. Portions of the assessment are
updated more frequently in response to changes in the status of species at risk* or when
there are significant changes in the state of other HCVs* or HCV areas*.

INTENT BOX
When significant changes to the HCV assessment* report are implemented or when thereport is updated after five years, the expectation is that the update process includes
engagement* with stakeholders* and culturally appropriate* engagement* with Indigenous
Peoples*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 74 of 159 –Examples of significant changes include: recognition of ecosystems* that have declined
markedly in abundance (HCV 3), change in the recognition that the forest* plays in meetingthe needs of local communities* (HCV 5), or when the boundaries of the certified forest* areexpanded to encompass additional area. Incorporating revisions in the status of species at
risk* is not considered a significant change.
9.1.7

If significant changes have been made to the HCV assessment* as a result of
implementation of Indicator 9.1.6, a review of the updated assessment report iscompleted by one or more qualified specialists*.

9.1.8

The HCV assessment* report and review are made publicly available*, including inelectronic format.

9.2

The Organization* shall develop effective strategies that maintain and/or enhance theidentified High Conservation Values*, through engagement* with affected stakeholders*,
interested stakeholders* and experts*. (C9.2 P&C V4)

9.2.1

Threats* to HCVs* are identified using best available information*.

9.2.2

Management strategies and actions that use a precautionary approach* aredeveloped and are effective to maintain and/or enhance HCVs* and to maintainassociated HCV areas* prior to implementing management activities*.

9.2.3

Indigenous Peoples*, affected* and interested stakeholders*, and qualified specialists*
and/or experts* are engaged* in the development of management strategies andactions to maintain and/or enhance the identified HCVs* and HCV areas*.

9.2.4Management strategies are reviewed and updated in conjunction with updates to the
HCV assessment* report, as described in Indicators 9.1.6 and 9.1.7.

9.3

The Organization* shall implement strategies and actions that maintain and/or enhance
the identified High Conservation Values*. These strategies and actions shall implement
the precautionary approach* and be proportionate to the scale, intensity and risk* ofmanagement activities*. (C9.3 P&C V4)

9.3.1

The HCVs* and HCV areas* on which they depend are maintained and/or enhanced,
including by implementing the strategies developed through the Indicators* in Criterion
9.2.

9.3.2

Implementation of the strategies developed in Criterion 9.2 prevent damage and avoid
risks to HCVs*, even when the scientific information is incomplete or inconclusive, andwhen the vulnerability and sensitivity of HCVs* are uncertain.

9.3.3

Activities that are inconsistent with strategies developed in Criterion 9.2 cease
immediately and actions are taken to restore* and protect* the HCVs* and HCV areas*.

9.3.4

The Organization* works within its sphere of influence* to facilitate implementation ofactivities required to maintain and/or enhance HCVs* and HCV areas*.
Where a specific HCV* or HCV area* abuts or straddles a Management Unit* boundary,or is potentially affected by activities outside of the Management Unit*, The
Organization* works within its sphere of influence* to coordinate activities with managers
and users of adjacent lands to maintain and/or enhance the HCVs* or HCV areas*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 75 of 159 –9.4

The Organization* shall demonstrate that periodic monitoring is carried out to assesschanges in the status of High Conservation Values*, and shall adapt its management
strategies to ensure their effective protection*. The monitoring shall be proportionate to
the scale, intensity and risk* of management activities*, and shall include engagement*with affected stakeholders*, interested stakeholders* and experts*. (C9.4 P&C V4)

9.4.1

A program of periodic monitoring assesses:
1. Implementation of management strategies;
2. The status of HCVs* including the HCV areas* on which they depend; and3. The effectiveness of management strategies and actions for the protection of HCVs*,
to fully maintain and/or enhance the HCVs*.

9.4.2

The monitoring program includes engagement* with affected* and interested
stakeholders*, Indigenous Peoples*, and experts* and/or qualified specialists*.

INTENT BOX
Affected* and interested stakeholders*, Indigenous Peoples*, and experts* and/or qualified
specialists* should be involved or consulted in the design of the monitoring program. The
extent to which they play a role in implementation of monitoring will depend on thetechnical expertise needed, their interest, abilities, and capacity required to participate, andthe confidentiality of the information being collected. The role of the potential participants inmonitoring should be determined based on discussions between the parties and The
Organization*.
9.4.3

The monitoring program has sufficient scope, detail and frequency to detect changes in
HCVs*, relative to the initial assessment and status identified for each HCV*.

INTENT BOX
Monitoring can have significant costs. It is reasonable* that The Organizations* look for
efficiencies in its efforts to design practical monitoring programs.
Monitoring periodicity should be based on:
1. The period over which there may be a reasonable* expectation of change in thestatus of HCVs*.
2. The period over which it is possible to detect the effects of management strategies
and actions; and3. The risk* and intensity* of the forestry operations.
9.4.4Management strategies and actions are adapted when monitoring or other new
information shows that these strategies and actions are ineffective at addressing themaintenance and/or enhancement of HCVs*.

9.4.5

Monitoring needs are reviewed in conjunction with updates to the HCV assessment*
report as described in Indicators 9.1.6 and 9.1.7 and the updates to the management
strategies as described in Indicator 9.2.4.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 76 of 159 –PRINCIPLE 10: IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES*Management activities* conducted by or for The Organization* for the Management
Unit* shall be selected and implemented consistent with The Organization’s economic,
environmental and social policies and objectives* and in compliance with the
Principles* and Criteria* collectively. (New)
10.1

After harvest or in accordance with the management plan*, The Organization* shall, by
natural or artificial regeneration methods, regenerate vegetation cover in a timely
fashion to pre-harvesting or more natural conditions*. (New)INTENT BOX
The period required for regeneration is typically shorter for areas to be planted or seeded(artificial regeneration) than areas selected for natural regeneration. This Criterion* does notgive preference to planting as a way to shorten the period for regeneration, because incertain cases, natural regeneration approaches are more suitable.
Regeneration is expected to be achieved for each stand* but the composition and structure
objectives* may be achieved at the block or the landscape* level.
10.1.1Harvested sites are regenerated in a timely manner* to maintain environmental values*.

10.1.2

Regeneration activities are implemented in a manner that:
1. Is suitable to recover or improve overall pre-harvest* or natural forest* compositionand structure; or
2. According to the best available information*, promote or enhance the resilience* ofthe future stand* while considering climate change.

10.2

The Organization* shall use species for regeneration that are ecologically well-adapted
to the site and to the management objectives*. The Organization* shall use native
species* and local genotypes* for regeneration, unless there is clear and convincing
justification for using others. (C10.4 C4).

10.2.1 Species chosen for regeneration are ecologically well-adapted to the site, are native
species* and are of local provenance, unless clear and convincing justification isprovided for using non-local genotypes* or non-native species*.
10.2.2 Species chosen for regeneration are consistent with the regeneration objectives*.
10.3

The Organization* shall only use alien species* when knowledge and/or experience
have shown that any invasive impacts can be controlled and effective mitigation
measures are in place. (C6.9 and C10.8 V4)

10.3.1 An alien species* is used only when direct experience or the results of scientific researchdemonstrate that the species is not invasive.
10.3.2 A plan to prevent the spread of invasive species* introduced by The Organization* isdeveloped and implemented in a timely manner*.
Where The Organization*, as a tenure* holder, does not have authority over the control
of invasive species* on the Management Unit*, The Organization* works within its sphereof influence* to prevent the spread of invasive species*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 77 of 159 –INTENT BOX
The introduction of invasive species* is not permitted as per Indicator 10.3.1. Rather, Indicator
10.3.2 applies to invasive species* introduced by The Organization* inadvertently or prior tocertification.
10.3.3 Management activities* are implemented in cooperation with regulatory bodies and/or
experts* where these exist, with the aim to minimize or control the most significant
negative impacts of invasive* alien species* that were not introduced by The
Organization* but that are within the scope of The Organization’s* management
activities*.
10.4

The Organization* shall not use genetically modified organisms* in the Management
Unit*. (C6.8 V4)

10.4.1 Genetically modified organisms* (GMOs) are not used.
10.5

The Organization* shall use silvicultural practices that are ecologically appropriate for thevegetation, species, sites and management objectives*. (New)10.5.1 Silvicultural practices are implemented that are ecologically appropriate for the site andits associated fauna and flora, as well as for management objectives*.
INTENT BOX
This Indicator* is complementary to Indicators 10.1.1 and 10.1.2 as it applies to all silvicultural
practices, such as site preparation, spacing, cleaning and pruning.
Ecologically-appropriate silvicultural practices for the site means that the site will have thefuture capacity to support the native plant and animal species that existed pre-harvest.
Ecosystem-based management and a mix of “coarse filter” and “fine filter” approaches canbe used to meet this requirement.
In this Indicator*, “ecologically appropriate” means that silviculture* practices should be
performed to meet not only the management objectives* but also the requirements ofIndicator 6.8.1 (if different).
10.6.

The Organization* shall minimize or avoid the use of fertilizers*. When fertilizers* are used,
The Organization* shall demonstrate that use is equally, or more ecologically andeconomically beneficial, than use of silvicultural systems* that do not require fertilizers*,
and prevent, mitigate, and/or repair damage to environmental values*, including soils.
(C10.7 P&C V4 and Motion 2014#7)

INTENT BOX
These Indicators* apply to fertilizer* application directly on the Forest Management Unit*.
Fertilizer* used in the growing of nursery stock, including remaining residues found on oraround the plant, or fertilizer* added to the growing medium (e.g. commercial peat pellets),
are not the focus of these Indicators*.
10.6.1 The use of fertilizers* is minimized or avoided.
10.6.2 When fertilizers* are used:

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 78 of 159 –1. Measures are employed to avoid contamination of surface and ground water,
protect non-timber forest values and maintain long-term* soil health, such as soilorganic matter, pH balance, and so on;
2. Buffer zones are used to protect rare plant communities, riparian zones*,
watercourses* and water bodies*;
3. Their types, application rates and frequencies, and sites of application are
documented;
4. Damage to environmental values* resulting from fertilizer* use is mitigated or
repaired; and5. The ecological and economic benefits of using them are equal to or higher than thebenefits of silvicultural systems* that do not require fertilizers*.
10.7

The Organization* shall use integrated pest management and silviculture* systems which
avoid, or aim at eliminating, the use of chemical pesticides*. The Organization* shall not
use any chemical pesticides* prohibited by FSC policy. When pesticides* are used, The
Organization* shall prevent, mitigate, and/or repair damage to environmental values*and human health. (C6. and C10.7 V4)INTENT BOX
The FSC Guide to Integrated Pest, Disease and Weed Management in FSC Certified Forests
and Plantations (2009) is an optional generic framework that can assist managers indemonstrating that they have a strategy for reducing, minimizing or eliminating the impactsof pesticide* use. It can also assist managers in preventing and minimizing impacts frompests, diseases, fire and invasive plant introductions with prevention and alternative control
methods rather than the use of chemical pesticides*.
The Use of Herbicides in Canada
Vegetation management is crucial to meeting management objectives*. In certain
circumstances, the use of chemical pesticides* may be an acceptable practice. Whenchemical pesticides* are used, a rationale needs to be provided, as described in Indicator
10.7.2. Pesticides* are potentially acceptable when used for:1. Controlling composition: The use of herbicides could increase artificially regenerated
stands* reaching free-to-grow status. (OMNR, 1986; OMNR, 1988; Armson et al., 2001).
2. Controlling alien* invasive species*: The control of alien* invasive species* may
include an integrated pest management (IPM) approach involving chemicaltreatments. (Wikeem & Miller, 2006).
3. Increasing forest yield: While the use of intensive mechanical release combined withearly reforestation of tall planting stock may be an asset in the implementation of
ecosystem-based management, it could also pose problems where the objective* is
to maximize wood production (Thiffault & Roy, 2011). Herbicides in some cases havepositive impacts on coniferous growth (Thiffault et al., 2003; Comeau, 2014; Homagain
et al., 2011).
The use of herbicide spraying on public forests has been, and continues to be, contentious
across Canada (Wagner 1994; Buse et al., 1995; Wagner et al.; 1998; Thompson et al., 2012).
Many communities, including Indigenous Peoples*, have expressed concern about theapplication of glyphosate-based herbicides (Kayahara and Armstrong, 2015), particularly its
potential impacts on non-timber forest values such as the harvest of wildlife, fish and edible
wild plants. It is important to consider these concerns when developing a vegetation
management strategy. This aspect should be kept in mind and addressed through Criterion
4.5 that identify, avoid and mitigate impacts of management activities* on local
communities* and through Criteria 7.5 and 7.6, which require the management plan* to bemade available to the public and requires complaints* related to management activities* to

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 79 of 159 –be addressed. Furthermore, human and environmental values* and health are also
addressed in Indicators 10.7.6 and 10.7.7.
10.7.1 Integrated pest management, including selection of silvicultural systems*, is used to avoid
or reduce the frequency, extent and amount of chemical pesticide* applications, andresult in non-use or overall reduction in applications.
10.7.2 When chemical pesticides* are used, a rationale for using them is developed andincludes:1. A description of all circumstances where pesticides* are being considered;
2. The identification and documentation (using best available information*) ofpotentially effective non-pesticide* methods of control, including their impacts on
various factors such as tree growth, forest composition, worker’s* health and safety,
and habitats* for species at risk*;
3. A clear preference for non-pesticide* control methods when their effects meet
management objectives* and they are not cost prohibitive;
4. Objective evidence demonstrating that the pesticide* is the only effective, practicaland cost-effective way to control the pest; and5. If pesticides* are used, and two or more pesticides* are equally effective, the lesser
hazardous pesticide* is used.
10.7.3 Chemical pesticides* prohibited by FSC’s Pesticide Policy are not used or stored by The
Organization* in the Management Unit* unless FSC has granted a derogation. The
Organization* works within its sphere of influence* to minimize the use and storage byother parties in the Management Unit* of prohibited chemical pesticides*.
10.7.4 Records of pesticide* usage including trade name, active ingredient, quantity of active
ingredient used, date of use, location of use, and reason for use are maintained.
INTENT BOX
It is advisable to maintain records for 10 years or more to be able to track the management
usage and history, and to demonstrate the reduction of the quantity of pesticides throughtime. In addition, ten years should be a sufficient length of time for products used in Canada
to track the toxicity levels of pesticides that remain in the environment over long periods oftime.
The Organization* is expected to maintain records, but it is acknowledged that while notdesirable, it may be possible that some records are lost if ownership changes.
10.7.5 The use of pesticides* complies with all legal* requirements of Annex A related to thetransport, storage, handling, application and emergency procedures for cleanup
following accidental spillages of dangerous products.
INTENT BOX
In this Standard, the ILO requirements of the document “Safety in the Use of Chemicals at
Work” regarding transport, storage, handling, application and emergency procedures forcleanup following accidental spillages are included in Canadian legislation. Refer to Annex
A, sections 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 of the tables.
10.7.6 When pesticides* are used:
1. Measures are employed to avoid contamination of surface and ground water;
2. The selected pesticide*, application method, timing and pattern of use offers theleast risk* to humans and environmental values*; andFSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 80 of 159 –3. While achieving effective results, quantities of pesticide* used are minimized.
10.7.7 Damage to environmental values* from pesticide* use is prevented and mitigated or
repaired. Impacts on human health are avoided.
10.8

The Organization* shall minimize, monitor and strictly control the use of biological control
agents* in accordance with internationally accepted scientific protocols*. Whenbiological control agents* are used, The Organization* shall prevent, mitigate, and/or
repair damage to environmental values*. (C6.8 V4)

10.8.1 The use of biological control agents* by The Organization* is minimized, monitored andcontrolled in compliance with internationally accepted scientific protocols*. Biologicalcontrol agents* are used only where alternative pest control methods are:1. Not available; or
2. Ineffective in achieving silvicultural objectives*; or
3. Prohibitively expensive, considering environmental and social costs, risks* andbenefits.
INTENT BOX
In this Standard, internationally accepted scientific protocols* refers to the FAO Code of
Conduct for the Import and Release of Exotic Biological Control Agents that has been
adopted as International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) under the International
Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). The Code sets out internationally-agreed procedures foragents capable of self-replication for research, for field release for biological control, or for
use as biological pesticides. The Code is addressed to entities, to be followed where national
legislation does not exist or is inadequate. In Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection
Agency (CFIA) is Canada's representative to the International Plant Protection Convention(IPPC). Canada is a contracting party to the IPPC and ensures the compliance with theConvention.
10.8.2 Rationale for the use of biological control agents* is documented and based on peerreviewed scientific evidence.
10.8.3 The Organization* will work within its sphere of influence* to minimize the use of biologicalcontrol agents* by other parties in the Management Unit*.
10.8.4 The use of biological control agents* by The Organization* is recorded including type,
quantity used, period of use, location of use and reason for use.
10.8.5 Damage to environmental values* caused by the use of biological control agents* isprevented and mitigated or repaired within The Organization’s* sphere of influence* andthrough cooperation with other parties.
10.9

The Organization* shall assess risks* and implement activities that reduce potential
negative impacts from natural hazards* proportionate to scale, intensity, and risk*. (New)INTENT BOX
Examples of natural hazards* may include droughts, floods, fires, landslides, storms, insects ordiseases outbreaks and avalanche.
Recognizing that natural hazards* also include natural disturbances, such as wind and fire,
mitigating risk* means also managing for resilience* as opposed to attempting to control or
prevent natural hazards*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 81 of 159 –There are two examples on how damage from natural hazards* may be reduced: 1) a
reduction of the frequency, intensity*, distribution or severity of natural hazards*; and 2) the
mitigation of their impacts, for example, by salvaging timber.
10.9.1 Frequent and/or severe natural hazards* that occur regionally are identified using thebest available information*.
10.9.2 Potential significant negative impacts of natural hazards* on infrastructure*, forest
resources, local communities* and Indigenous Peoples* in the Management Unit* are
documented or assessed.
10.9.3 Management activities* that can cause an increase in frequency, distribution or severityof natural hazards* are identified for those hazards that may be influenced bymanagement.
10.9.4 Management activities* are modified and/or measures are developed andimplemented that reduce the identified risks*.
INTENT BOX
The Organization*, as a tenure* holder, may have limited control over some management
activities*, for example, fire suppression. If they cannot modify the activity or if they cannot
develop measures to limit the identified risk*, it would be reasonable for The Organization* towork within its sphere of influence* to reduce or limit the risk*.
The Organization* shall manage infrastructural development, transport activities andsilviculture* so that water resources and soils are protected, and disturbance of anddamage to rare* and threatened species*, habitats*, ecosystems* and landscapevalues* are prevented, mitigated and/or repaired. (C6.5 V4)

10.10

NOTE
The requirements to protect environmental values* are covered in Principle 6 and include
specific measures related to development, maintenance and use of infrastructure* andsilviculture*. If a certificate holder is in conformance with the Indicators* listed below, they will
have met the requirements of Criterion 10.10:
•
•
•
•
•

Water resources: Indicators 6.3.1, 6.3.2, 6.7.1 to 6.7.6.
Soils: Indicators 6.3.1 to 6.3.7.
Species at risk*: 6.4.2 to 6.4.6.
Rare and threatened habitats & ecosystems values: 6.6.3 and 6.6.4.
Rare and threatened landscape values: 6.8.1 to 6.8.6.

10.11

The Organization* shall manage activities associated with harvesting and extraction oftimber and non-timber forest products* so that environmental values* are conserved,
merchantable* waste is reduced, and damage to other products and services isavoided. (C5.3 and C6.5 V4)

NOTE
Certificate holders will meet the requirements of Criterion 10.11 if they conform with the three
Indicators* below, as well as Indicators 6.3.1 to 6.3.7 and Indicators 6.6.1. and 6.6.2.
10.11.1

Harvesting practices optimize the use of merchantable* timber, unless left on-site toprovide structural diversity and wildlife habitat*, or for silvicultural or cultural reasons.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 82 of 159 –INTENT BOX
The harvesting of merchantable* but non-marketable* trees should be minimized.
10.11.2

Harvesting and silvicultural operations are conducted in such a way as to avoid or
minimize damage to residual trees (crown, trunk and root), including nonmerchantable*/non-marketable* trees and trees being left for future harvest.

10.11.3

Selection cutting shall maintain or improve stand* quality while ensuring that native tree
species are maintained at an ecologically appropriate scale*, unless an alternative yetsound rationale is provided.

10.12

The Organization* shall dispose of waste materials* in an environmentally appropriatemanner. (C6.7 V4)

10.12.1

Operational procedures related to handling of chemicals, liquid and solid non-organic
wastes materials*, including fuel, oil, batteries and containers are in place and are
implemented. At a minimum, the procedures address:
1. Collection, storage, and disposal of waste in an environmentally appropriatemanner;2. Adherence to a waste recycling program, where it exists;
3. Measures to prevent spills;
4. Emergency plans for cleanup and treatment of injuries following spills or otheraccidents;
5. Refueling constraints, including buffers around riparian zones* and water bodies*;
6. Removal of used materials, including machinery and equipment; and7. Securing abandoned buildings owned by The Organization* on the Management
Unit*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 83 of 159 –Annex A: Minimum list of applicable laws*, regulations and nationallyratified* international treaties, conventions and agreements
A minimum list of applicable laws*, regulations and nationally ratified* international treaties,
conventions and agreements is provided to facilitate the use of this Standard, with special
relevance for FSC Principle 1 and Principle 2. Because of its size, this list is available in a separate
Companion Document to Annex A that can be accessed from the FSC Canada website at:https://ca.fsc.org/en-ca and look for “Annex A Companion Document”.
The status of the laws, regulations and nationally ratified* international treaties, conventions andagreements listed in the Annex A Companion Document are up-to-date at the time of
publication of FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of Canada, but are subject to change.
An update of the Companion Document will be made available periodically. Efforts were madeto identify the key treaties, laws and regulations that apply to forest management in Canada,
however, the list provided should not be assumed to be exhaustive. The Organization* is required
to comply with all applicable laws* and regulations, whether or not they are listed in the
Companion Document.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 84 of 159 –Annex B: Training Requirements for Workers*
Workers* have job-specific training related to their area(s) of responsibility that safely andeffectively contribute to the implementation of the management plan* and all management
activities*. Where relevant, workers* can:
1. Implement forest activities to comply with applicable legal* requirements (Criterion 1.5);
2. Understand the content, meaning and applicability of the eight ILO Core Labour
Conventions (Criterion 2.1);
3. Recognize and report on instances of sexual harassment and gender discrimination(Criterion 2.2);
4. Safely handle and dispose of hazardous substances to ensure that use does not pose
health risks* (Criterion 2.3);
5. Carry out their responsibilities for particularly dangerous jobs or jobs entailing a special
responsibility (Criterion 2.5);
6. Exercise their right to refuse work that is believed to be unsafe to the individual or anotherworker*;7. Identify where Indigenous Peoples* have legal* and customary rights* related to
management activities* (Criterion 3.2);
8. Identify and implement applicable elements of UNDRIP and ILO Convention 169(Criterion 3.4);
9. Identify sites of special cultural, ecological, economic, religious or spiritual significance toIndigenous Peoples* and implement the necessary measures to protect them before thestart of forest management activities* to avoid negative impacts (Criterion 3.5 andCriterion 4.7);
10. Identify where local communities* have legal* rights related to management activities*(Criterion 4.1);
11. Carry out social, economic and environmental impact assessments* and develop
appropriate mitigation measures (Criterion 4.5);
12. Implement activities related to the maintenance and/or enhancement of declared
ecosystem services* (Criterion 5.1);
13. Handle, apply and store pesticides* (Criterion 10.7); and14. Implement procedures for cleaning up spills of waste materials* (Criterion 10.12).

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 85 of 159 –Annex C: Worker's* Health & Safety Program
A worker's* Health & Safety Program includes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

A comprehensive safety policy;
Identification of danger, and measures to control or to minimize the danger;
Identification of safety training needs and the provision of safety training;
The provision of appropriate safety equipment for workers* and woodlands staff
based on assigned tasks (e.g., hardhats, eye protection, gloves, hearing protection,
suitable footwear, etc.);
Regular monitoring of the condition and functionality of safety features on
equipment;
A sufficient ratio of workers* trained in first aid, for the number of workers* on site;
A safety procedure for workers* working alone; andThe review and revision of health and safety practices after major incidents or
accidents.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 86 of 159 –Annex D: High Conservation Value* (HCV*) Framework
The High Conservation Value* (HCV*) framework assists The Organization* in determining
whether HCVs* are present within the forest* area under management. Organized as a series ofquestions, the framework guides the assessment process that is then verified by the certification
body.
Upon the successful identification of a HCV*, The Organization* is required to conform to the
Principle 9 Criteria* and Indicators*.
Use of the Framework
Each of the six categories of HCV* contain a series of questions. Negative answers mean thatthe forest* does not include HCV* based on current information. Positive answers lead to further
investigation through additional questions.
A positive response to any question that is labelled DEFINITIVE means that the elements underconsideration are HCVs*. However, a negative response to a question labelled DEFINITIVE should
not be interpreted to mean that the HCV* threshold has not been reached. Rather, The
Organization* should then answer the questions labelled GUIDANCE. Positive answers indicate
the potential presence of HCVs*. If questions labelled GUIDANCE are answered positively, itstrengthens the potential for the presence of HCVs*. It is then expected that The Organization*
will provide a summary substantiating why the forest* area was identified as an HCV* or not.
Note: The framework is not intended to be a prescriptive approach. Guidance in interpreting thesix components of the HCV* definition leads the investigation to develop the evidence andthresholds for making an HCV* designation. If an HCV* designation is determined, The
Organization* should provide a rationale for the decision. Ultimately, the decision for designatinga HCV* resides with the forest manager, based on the input of experts* and engagement* withstakeholders* and Indigenous Peoples*. Where community needs (HCV 5) or cultural values(HCV 6) specific to Indigenous Peoples* are identified on behalf of the Indigenous Peoples*,then as a precautionary approach*, engagement* processes based on the right to Free, Priorand Informed Consent* (FPIC)* should be used (refer to Principle 3 and FSC Canada Free, Priorand Informed Consent (FPIC) Guidance).
The Issue of Scale*
Criterion 9.1 of Principle 9 states that assessments for the presence of HCVs* will be appropriate
to the scale, intensity and risk* of the operation. This implies that expectations for smaller or lessintensively managed forest operations would be lower than for larger or more intensively
managed operations.
• The FSC definition implies that there are multiple scales* at which HCVs* are identified. For
example, a globally or nationally significant designation would be applied to broadlandscapes* or at an ecoregional scale*, with forests* that are significant* on a global,
continental or national (Canadian) level, while regionally significant might apply to awatershed* or a specific ecosystem* that is significant* at the provincial or regional level. At
scales* where forests* are under 1000 ha, a landowner with a rare old growth stand* in ahighly developed landscape* would be required to designate the forest* as a HCV* andensure the same conservation* approach as for a large land holder.
• The FSC definition also identifies differing scales* between the various HCVs*. For example, alarge landscape* level forest* (Category 2) tends to be large in geographic scale* (e.g.
greater than 50,000 ha), and therefore the thresholds used to describe the HCV* and relatedconservation* attributes must be relevant to that large scale*. Identification of an HCV area*

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 87 of 159 –•based on concentrations of biodiversity values (Category 1) may be large, medium or small(e.g. less than 1000 ha in geographic scale*), and should be appropriate to the biology ofthe species or groups of species. Forest* areas identified as HCVs* based on being in orcontaining rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems* (Category 3) might encompass a
range of scales*, from large areas to single stands* or ecosites. Forests* identified asproviding basic services of nature (Category 4), and basic needs of communities (Category5) might be medium to large in scale* with conservation* actions relevant to those scales*.
HCVs* are environmental, ecological and social in nature and do not necessarily follow
administrative boundaries. The HCV* and the area where it is located may be smaller orlarger than the actual forest* being assessed or audited. The forest manager’s direct
responsibility is for the lands over which she/he controls, however Indicators* in Principle 9
require The Organization* to working within their sphere of influence* to maintain or enhance
HCVs* that are beyond their boundaries.

The Precautionary Approach*
An important component to the management of HCVs* is the application of a precautionary
approach*. As HCVs* are values that are deemed to be regionally, nationally or internationallysignificant* and thus require the highest “duty of care”, the application of a precautionary
approach* is one way of helping to ensure that these values are maintained.
For its use in this Standard, FSC defines the precautionary approach* as:An approach requiring that when the available information indicates that management
activities* pose a threat* of severe or irreversible damage to the environment or a threat*to human welfare, The Organization* will take explicit and effective measures to preventthe damage and avoid the risks* to welfare, even when the scientific information isincomplete or inconclusive, and when the vulnerability and sensitivity of environmental
values* are uncertain.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 88 of 159 –Item

Rationale

Guidance on Assessing HCV*

Possible Sources

HCV 1 - Species Diversity
Concentrations of biological diversity* including endemic* species, and rare*, threatened* or endangered species, that are significant* at
global, regional or national levels.
1. Does the forest*
contain species at risk*
or potential habitat* of
species at risk* as listed
by international,
national or
territorial/provincial
authorities?

Ensures themaintenance ofvulnerable and/or
irreplaceable
elements of
biodiversity.
This Indicator* allows
for a single species ora concentration of
species to meet HCV*
thresholds.

Global:CITES (Appendix I and II AND III)4,
IUCN red data list5,
Conservation Date Centre G1 andG2 element occurrences.

A single species with habitat* in the forest* is a HCV* in the
Canadian context.

Regional/National:
Species designated as rare*,threatened* or endangered byprovincial, territorial or national
legislation (e.g. provincial red lists
and COSEWIC6 list in Canada).
Information is managed in eachprovince by Conservation Data
Centers.

The assessment of whether a species is a HCV* is notdependent on whether there is a risk* from forest
operations. Management and risk* to a value is not
relevant to the significance of the value. Once it isdesignated as a HCV*, the specific management
requirements are determined. In some cases, nomanagement will be required because there is no risk*
from forestry. (DEFINITVE)

The list of species representative ofhabitat* types naturally occurring in
the Management Unit* isdetermined or reviewed byqualified ecologist expert*(s).
2. Does the forest*
contain endemic*
species?

Ensures themaintenance ofvulnerable and/or
irreplaceable
elements of
biodiversity.

Provincial Data Centers will record
any endemic* species.

Are any rare*, threatened* or endangered species in theforest*? (DEFINITIVE)

Is there critical habitat* for rare*, threatened* orendangered species in the forest*? (DEFINITIVE)
Are there any ecological or taxonomic groups of rare
species* that would together constitute a HCV*?
(GUIDANCE)
Does the forest* contain an endemic* species orconcentration of endemic* species? (DEFINITIVE)

4

https://www.cites.org/eng/app/index.php
http://www.iucnredlist.org/
6 Information on Canadian federally listed species can be obtained at: http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/index.htm
5FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 89 of 159 –Item
3. Does the forest*
include critical habitat*
containing globally,nationally or regionallysignificant* seasonal
concentration of
species (one or several
species, e.g.
concentrations ofwildlife in breedingsites, wintering sites,
migration sites,
migration routes or
corridors - latitudinal aswell as altitudinal)?

Rationale
Addresses wildlife
habitat* requirements
critical* tomaintaining
population viability(regional “hot spots”).

Possible Sources
Global:BirdLife International7, Audubon
Society8, Conservation
International
Regional/National:
National and local agencies withresponsibility for wildlife
conservation*; Results from habitat*
models.

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
Are there any landscape* features or habitat*characteristics that tend to correlate with significant
temporal concentrations of a species or groups of species(e.g. where species occurrence data is limited)?
(GUIDANCE)Is there an IBA (Important Bird Area) in the forest*?
(DEFINITIVE)

Local experts*, traditional
knowledge*
Bird Studies Canada.9
Ducks Unlimited Canada10

BirdLife International provides maps and lists of Important Bird Areas. Current level of coverage varies between regions and in countries within regions. Information(including data sources), can be found at http://www.birdlife.net/sites/index.cfm
8 Audubon Society. Information on Important Bird Areas in America can be found at: http://www.audubon.org/bird/iba/index.html
9 Bird Studies Canada maintains information on identified Important Bird Areas at: http://www.ibacanada.ca/
10 Ducks Unlimited Canada: http://www.ducks.ca/
7FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 90 of 159 –Item
4. Does the forest*
contain critical
habitat* for regionallysignificant* species(e.g. species declining
regionally)?

Rationale
Meta-population
viability

Possible Sources
Regionally significant* species are
determined using the sources
below.
1. Conservation Data Centre G3,
S1-S3 species and communities.
2. Range and population estimatesfrom national or local authorities
and local experts* for:a) red listed species (see sources
above);b) species at risk* (in existinglegislation and/or policy);c) results from habitat* models,d) species representative ofhabitat* types naturally
occurring in the Management
Unit* or focal species*; and,e) species identified as
ecologically significant*through engagement*.

Guidance on Assessing HCV*Is there known critical habitat* for a regionally significant*species (including aquatic species)? (DEFINITIVE)
One reason for a species being regionally significant* isthat there has been a decline over time. This can include
aquatic species that are within the forest*. Some species
may be declining but are still common. Beaver and deer insome areas can undergo steep declines for a period andmay be identified as regionally significant*.
Is the population of regionally significant* species locally at
risk* (e.g. continuing trend is declining rather than stable or
improving)? (GUIDANCE)
Does the forest* contain limiting habitat* for regionallysignificant* species? (GUIDANCE)The list of species representative ofhabitat* types naturally occurring in
the Management Unit* isdetermined or reviewed byqualified ecologist experts*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 91 of 159 –Item
5. Does the forest*
support concentrationsof species at the edgeof their natural ranges
or outlier
populations?11

Rationale
Relevant
conservation* issues
include vulnerability
against range
contraction andpotential genetic
variation at range
edge. Outlier andedge of range
populations may also
play a critical* role ingenetic/population
adaptation to global
warming.

Possible Sources
Range and population estimatesfrom national or local authorities
and local experts* for:a) red listed species (see sources
above);b) major forest (tree species)
types*; andc) species identified as
ecologically significant*through engagement*.
The list of species representative ofhabitat* types naturally occurring in
the Management Unit* isdetermined or reviewed byqualified ecologist experts*.

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
Are any of the range edge or outlier species representativeof habitat* types naturally occurring in the Management
Unit*? (DEFINITIVE)
Are there any ecological or taxonomic groups of range
edge and/or outlier species/sub-species that would
together constitute a globally, nationally or regionallysignificant* concentration? (GUIDANCE)
Are there naturally occurring outlier populations ofcommercial tree species? (DEFINITIVE)
Commercial species are highlighted here because of their
combined importance, biologically and economically.

NatureServe provides searchable databases and other information on species and ecosystem distribution in North America (www.natureserve.org) and distribution of
birds and mammals in Latin America at www.infonatura.org
11

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 92 of 159 –Item
6. Does the forest* lie
within, adjacent to, or
contain a conservation
area:a) designated by aninternational
authority,b) legally designatedor proposed byrelevant
federal/provincial/territorial legislative
body, orc) identified inregional land use
plans orconservation*plans.

Rationale
Ensures compliancewith theconservation* intent
of a designatedprotected area*.

Possible Sources
International designations include:
UNESCO World Heritage Sites 12
RAMSAR sites 13
International Biological Program
sites
Legally designated sites in Canada:
CCAD (available from GeoGratis)
WWF Designated Areas Data Base
Areas under deferral pending
completion of land use planning
and-or completion of protectedareas* system.
Local government land use plans.
Other conservation* planning
exercises (e.g., Previous WWFCanada conservation suitability
analysis).
Where there is conflicting
information regarding the location
and/or conservation* status of aconservation area designated byan international authority, then theforest manager should assume thatthe forest* contains HCVs*.

12
13

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
Are the values for which the conservation area has been
identified, consistent with the assessment of HCVs* in thisframework? (DEFINITIVE)
To illustrate, a park may not have any values that would
qualify it as a HCV*, as in a purely recreational park,
although this would be unusual. If it is not designated as aconservation value, a park may have social or economic
significance and be designated elsewhere in the HCV*
framework.
Are there forest* areas important to connect conservation
areas to maintain the values for which the conservation
areas were identified? (GUIDANCE)
Are there forest* areas important to safeguardconservation areas to maintain the values for which theconservation areas were identified? (GUIDANCE)
Most parks or other areas legally protected from industrial
use are not part of a forest license. In that case, the value
in need of protection* by forest companies could be theboundary line to ensure no trespassing occurs, or visualconsiderations. Whether a “buffer” is needed or importantis a local decision depending on several factors. See
Criterion 6.5 of the Standard for further guidance.

UNESCO World Heritage Sites. Information can be obtained from: http://en.unesco.org/
RAMSAR sites. Maps of wetlands of international importance in Canada can be obtained from: www.wetlands.org

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 93 of 159 –Item

Rationale

Guidance on Assessing HCV*

Possible Sources

HCV 2 – Landscape*-level ecosystems* and mosaics.
Intact Forest Landscapes* and large landscape*-level ecosystems* and ecosystem* mosaics that are significant* at global, regional or
national levels, and that contain viable populations of the great majority of the naturally occurring species in natural patterns of distribution
and abundance.
7. Does the forest*
constitute or form partof a globally,nationally, or regionallysignificant* forest
landscape* that
includes populations ofmost native species*?

Large, intact
ecosystems* aregenetic andpopulation reservoirs
for the surrounding
lands, and provide
areas of sufficient size
for landscape*-scale
natural processes tooccur.

Global Forest Watch Canada;
GIS-related information from forest
companies and government
resource-management agencies;
Global Forest Watch International.

Are there contiguous forest landscapes* that have thefollowing characteristics? (DEFINITIVE)• at least 50,000 ha in size;• minimal width of 10 km;• free of permanent infrastructure* and less than 5%
non-permanent anthropogenic disturbance;• free of large-scale industrial resource extraction
activities;• dominated by forest*, but inclusion of otherecosystems* to a reasonable* extent is permissible;• dominated by native plants and communities;• not necessarily dominated by old forest* communities.
For Intact Forest Landscapes*:• Refer to FSC Advice Note 20-007-018 V1-0 for Advice
on interpreting the default clause of Motion 65 forinterim direction on implementing management
requirements for Intact Forest Landscapes*.
•

See also May 2017 FSC Document “Questions andAnswers Pertaining to the Motion 65 Advice Note.”•

Refer to FSC Canada’s Interim Guidance for theDelineation of Intact Forest Landscapes for guidanceon IFL Delineation

If unfragmented forest landscapes* exist that are larger
than 5,000 ha but smaller than 50,000 ha, the area may be

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 94 of 159 –Item

Rationale

Possible Sources

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
considered a landscape* level forest* and addressed
through Question 10 of HCV 3.

HCV 3 – Ecosystems* and habitats*.
Rare*, threatened*, or endangered ecosystem*, habitats* or refugia*.
8. Does the forest*
contain naturally rareecosystem* types?

These forests* containmany unique species
and communities thatare adapted only tothe conditions foundin these rare forest
types*.

Conservation Data Centre G1-G3
community types;
WWF Ecoregion Conservation
Assessments;
Conservation International
National vegetation surveys andmaps;
Local research institutions

Are there ecosystems* that have been officially classified
as being rare, threatened or endangered by a relevant
national or international organization? (DEFINITIVE)
Is a significant amount of the global extent of theseecosystems* present in the country and/or ecoregion?
(GUIDANCE)
Application note: Mapping of these areas may not be
precise because of limited information. Mapping may not
be required unless forestry operations are to occur in thevicinity.

Authorities on Biodiversity (e.g.
NatureServe)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 95 of 159 –9. Are there
ecosystem* types
within the forest* or
ecoregion* that havesignificantly declined
or under sufficient
present and/or future
development pressuresthat they will likely
become rare in the
future (e.g., old seral
stages)?

Vulnerability andmeta-population
viability.
This Indicator*
includesanthropogenicallyrare forest ecosystem*
types (e.g. late seral
red and white pine ineastern Canada).

Relevant government authorities;
WWF Ecoregion Conservation
Assessments;
Suitable forest* or vegetation
inventories;
Potential vegetation mapping;
Regional and local experts*;
Conservation Data Centre S1-S3
community types.

Does the forest* consist of mature and/or old forest*
stands*, where the amount of old forest* remaining in that
ecosystem* type has been reduced to less than 50% of
estimated natural occurrence of old forest*? (DEFINITIVE)
Is the forest* within an ecoregion* with little remaining
original forest type*? (GUIDANCE)
Have these ecosystems* significantly declined (e.g. lessthan 50% loss)? (GUIDANCE)
Application note: Targets for the previous two questions
should be based on landscape* dynamics (e.g. range ofnatural variation*).
Is there a significant proportion of the declining ecosystem*
type within the Management Unit* in comparison to thebroader ecoregion*? (GUIDANCE)
Application note: If a type is abundant in adjacentprotected area*, there may be less need for HCV
designation.
Does potential vegetation mapping identify areas within
the Management Unit* that can support the declining
ecosystem* type (i.e., regeneration potential)?
(GUIDANCE)
How well is each ecosystem* effectively secured by theprotected area* network and the national/regional
legislation? (GUIDANCE)
Application note: This question is based on the premise thatmanagers should maintain all forest types* and ages withina reasonable* balance considering natural conditions*.
Although this can be very difficult on some historicallydamaged forests*, restoration* should be the long-term*goal. For example, the historic old white pine forests* ofcentral Ontario are often designated HCVs and are slowly
recovering after many decades of high grading* in the 19thand early 20th centuries.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 96 of 159 –Item
10. Are large
landscape* level
forests* (i.e., large
unfragmented forests*)
rare or absent in theforest* or ecoregion*?

Rationale
In regions or forests*
where large
functioning
landscape* level
forests* are rare or do
not exist, as in highly
fragmented forests*,
many of the remnant
forest patches requireconsideration as
potential HCVs* (i.e.
‘best of the rest’).

Possible Sources
Global Forest Watch intactness
mapping;
Forest cover data provided bycompanies/government.

Vulnerability; species
diversity; significant*ecological processes.

Does the Management Unit* contain intact or
undeveloped watersheds* over 5,000 ha in size?
(Guidance)
Do the largest remnant forest patches include a significant
proportion of climax species (i.e. not dominated bypioneer species)? (GUIDANCE)
Application note: ‘Remnant’, here describes the remaining
patches of the natural forest* that still contain the original
ecosystem* characteristic species and structure.

Identifies remnant
forest patches/blocks
where unfragmented(by permanent
infrastructure*)landscapes* do not
exceed size
thresholds.
11. Are there nationally/regionally significant*diverse or unique forest
ecosystems* or forests*
associated with uniqueaquatic ecosystems*?

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
Are moderate to large remnant patches (thousands ofhectares) the best examples of intact forest* for theircommunity and landform types? (GUIDANCE)

Application note: In designating remnant landscape* level
forests*, managers should consider structural features suchas woody debris and standing dead trees (i.e. structurally
complex), late seral stands*, known populations ofsignificant* species, or species representative of habitat*
types naturally occurring in the Management Unit*.
Relevant government authorities;
WWF Ecoregion Conservation
Assessments;
Regional environmental
background studies;

Are there important and/or unique geological areas thatstrongly influence vegetation cover or wildlife features,such as serpentine soils, marble outcrops, karst hot springsfor bat hibernacula? (GUIDANCE)

Ducks Unlimited Canada;

Are there important and/or unique microclimaticconditions that strongly influence vegetation cover, suchas high rainfall, protected valleys? (GUIDANCE)

Government databases (e.g. Areasof Natural & Scientific Interest (ANSI)in Ontario).

Do these ecosystems* possess any exceptional
characteristics, including exceptional species richness,critical* species, etc.? (GUIDANCE)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 97 of 159 –Item

Rationale

Possible Sources

Guidance on Assessing HCV*HCV 4 – Critical* ecosystem services*.
Basic ecosystem services* in critical* situations, including protection* of water catchments and control of erosion of vulnerable soils andslopes.
12. Does the forest*
provide a significant
source of drinking
water?

13. Are there forests*
that provide asignificant ecologicalservice in mediating
flooding and/or
drought, controllingstream flow regulation,
and water quality?

The potential impact
to humancommunities is sosignificant as to becatastrophic, leading
to significant loss of
productivity, or
sickness and death.

The forest manager should obtain
the information from the relevant
authorities - resource management
studies, relevant economic
development studies, traditional
occupancy studies, regional land
use plans, etc. - to determine if thewrong actions or management
could cause serious cumulative or
catastrophic impacts on thesebasic services.

Is the watershed* or recharge area* critical* to maintaining
the quality, quantity and seasonal flows of the primarydrinking water source for a community or group ofindividuals? (DEFINITIVE)

Forest* areas play a
critical* role inmaintaining water
quantity and quality
and the service
breakdown has
catastrophic impacts
or is irreplaceable.

Hydrological maps;

Are there high-risk* areas for flooding or drought?
(DEFINITIVE)

Hydrologists in government
departments or local research
institutions.

Is the watershed* or recharge area* critical* to maintaining
the quality, quantity and seasonal flows of agricultural
irrigation water sources, or water for other significant
economic activities? (GUIDANCE)

Are there particular forest* areas that potentially affect asignificant or major portion of the water flow? For example,
75% of water in a larger watershed* is funneled through aspecific catchment area, river channel, or other critical*
sub-watershed* area. (GUIDANCE)
Does the forest* occur within a sub-watershed* that is
critically important to the overall catchment basin?
(GUIDANCE)
Are there particular forest* areas that are critical* subwatersheds* that potentially affect water supplies for otherservices, such as reservoirs, irrigation, river recharge orhydroelectric schemes? (GUIDANCE)

14. Are there forests*
critical* to erosion
control?

Soil, terrain or snow
stability, including
control of erosion,
sedimentation,

Maps, remote sensing data, aerial
photos, Governmental
departments,

Are there forest* areas where the degree of slope carries
high risk* of erosion, landslides and avalanches that affecthuman infrastructure*? (DEFINITIVE)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 98 of 159 –Item

Rationalelandslides, oravalanches.

Possible Sources
engagement* with relevant
experts*.

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
Are there soil and geology site types that are particularly
prone to erosion and terrain instability? (GUIDANCE)Is the spatial extent of erosion-prone or unstable terrainsuch that the forest* is at high risk* of impact and of
cumulative impacts? (GUIDANCE)

15. Are there forests*
that provide a critical*
barrier to destructive
fire (in areas where fireis not a common
natural agent ofdisturbance)?

Recent forest fire
events in Canada
have raised theinterest in thisconcept.

Are there forest* areas where there is a high risk* ofuncontrolled, destructive fire and in which forest* areas orforest types* can act as a barrier to the spread of fires?
Do these forest* areas contain or are they adjacent tohuman settlements or communities that would be at risk*
from uncontrolled, destructive forest fire?
Managers should accept HCV designations for forests*
adjacent to communities and manage using the
precautionary principle in consideration of the safety of
the inhabitants. How this is defined should be determined
locally.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 99 of 159 –Item
16. Are there forest
landscapes*, or
regional landscapes*,that have a critical
impact on agriculture
or fisheries?

Rationale
Mediating wind andmicroclimate at an
ecoregional scaleaffecting agriculturalor fisheries
production. Riparian
forests* play a critical*role in maintaining
fisheries by providingbank stability,
sediment control,
nutrient inputs, andmicrohabitats.

Possible Sources
Agricultural and Fisheries scientists- inuniversity and research institutions;
Governmental Departments (e.g.
Department of Fisheries andOceans, Agriculture and Agri-food
Canada);Local and provincial government
departments.
-

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
Are there agricultural or fisheries production areas in theforest* that are potentially severely negatively affected bychanges in wind and microclimate and microhabitat,such as woody debris from riparian vegetation?
(GUIDANCE)
Are there fisheries areas, spawning areas or other critical*
fish habitat* - either commercial or tourism outfitters dependent on the larger landscape* condition?
Are there other non-timber resources such as fur trap lines,
wild rice production areas, mushroom harvest areas*,
berry harvest areas* that are dependent on the larger
landscape*?

More local effects offorest* areas
adjacent toagriculture andfisheries production
may be more
relevant in the HCV*
component
regarding meeting
basic needs of local
communities*.
HCV 5 - Community needs.
Sites and resources fundamental for satisfying the basic necessities of local communities* or Indigenous Peoples* (for example forlivelihoods, health, nutrition, water), identified through engagement* with these communities or Indigenous Peoples*.
17. Are there local
communities*? Thisshould include bothpeople living inside theforest* area and thoseliving adjacent to it.

There is a distinction
being made between
the use by individuals
and where use of theforest* is fundamental
for local
communities*.

Engagement* with the communities
themselves is the most important
way of collecting information.
Literature sources, such as reports
and papers, can be very usefulsources of information.

Having established that the community uses the forest* tofulfill some needs it is now necessary to assess whether it isfundamental to meeting any basic needs. This question
applies to all livelihoods, not just subsistence. The way that
this assessment can be done is variable, depending on thesocio-economic context and the need. However, it will
always involve engagement* with the community itself.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 100 of 159 –Item

Rationale

Possible Sources
Knowledgeable people andorganizations such as local
community* organizations, NGOs,or academic institutions. This type ofgroup can often provide a quick
introduction to the issues andprovide support for further work.

Guidance on Assessing HCV*Engagement* can be conducted by people other than
the forest managers directly. Engagement* should use
locally appropriate language, and not FSC technicalterminology, such as HCV*, threshold, etc.).

Review of studies of traditional land
use and non-timber use of theforest*.

Is this the sole source of the value(s) for the local
communities*? (GUIDANCE)

Review of socio-economic profilesof communities.

The following are general guidance questions to assess
whether the value meets HCV* thresholds.

Is there a significant impact to the local communities*
because of a reduced supply of these values?
(GUIDANCE)
If community members make use of the forest* for basic
needs or livelihoods, such as food, medicine, fodder, fuel,building, craft materials, and income, it should be assumed
that this is an important value and a possible HCV*.

HCV 6 - Cultural values.
Sites, resources, habitats* and landscapes* of global or national cultural, archaeological or historical significance, and/or of critical*
cultural, ecological, economic or religious/sacred importance for the traditional cultures of local communities* or Indigenous Peoples*,identified through engagement* with these local communities* or Indigenous Peoples*. (Source: FSC 2011).
18. Is the traditional
cultural identity of thelocal community*
particularly tied to a
specific forest* area?

In this context of thisstandard “local
community*” isdefined as: (Human)communities that are
in or adjacent to theManagement Unit*,
and also those thatare close enough tohave a significant
impact on theeconomy or theenvironmental values*

Engagement* with the communities
themselves is the most important
way of collecting information. This isdifficult to do and may require
professional help in the planning or
implementation.
Knowledgeable people andorganizations such as local
community* organizations or
academic institutions. Literaturesources such as reports and papers,
where available.

Assessors will be presented with a wide range of HCVs* asculturally significant*. The practice in Canada is
acceptance of this range of values as HCVs*. Some forest
inhabitants consider the entire forest* to be of significant*value, while others have a small area with a local wellknown value. There are several examples of values that
may not meet the threshold (or significance level) for FSC
definition but which functionally must use precautionary
management.
Do the communities consider the forest* to be culturally
significant*? Possible indications for cultural importanceinclude:FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 101 of 159 –Item

Rationaleof the Management
Unit* or to have theireconomies, collective
rights*, or
environments values
significantly affectedby the forest
management
activities* on theManagement Unit*.”
In Canada,
communities to beconsidered are theones officially
identified as amunicipality by the
Canada Revenue
Agency who lists
them and shows their
qualified donees
status under the
Income Tax Act(http://www.craarc.gc.ca/chrtsgvng/qlfddns/mncpltseng.html). The
respective provincial
lists may be also used.

19. Is there asignificant overlap ofvalues, such as
ecological and/or
cultural values, that
individually did notmeet HCV thresholds,

Consideration ofseveral spatiallyoverlapping values isimportant in
optimizing
conservation*
management.

Possible Sources
Review studies of traditional land
use and non-timber use of theforest*.

Guidance on Assessing HCV*
1. Names for landscape* features;
2. Stories about the forest*;
3. Sacred or religious sites;
4. Historical associations; and,5. Amenity or aesthetic value.

Review of socio-economic profilesof communities.
Review of websites, community
promotional material, brochures,
etc.

Neighbourhood analysis can beused to summarize point values,
such as species occurrences,feeding areas, mineral licks, or
spawning areas, within a spatial
window of a size that is relevant for
the ecosystem* type and values
under consideration.

- Are there several overlapping conservation values?
(GUIDANCE)
Application note: When there are two or more events orvalues that may not meet an HCV* threshold individually,
managers should use their discretion in assessing the
combined value as HCV*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 102 of 159 –Itembut collectively
constitute HCVs?

Rationale
Individual values that
do not meet thethreshold for critical*
and/or outstanding
may collectively meet
the threshold.

Possible Sources
If concentration of single values
was not undertaken in any of theprevious steps (e.g. S1-S3 species
occurrences), then include this in
the analysis.
Overlays of multiple values to assess
spatial coincidence.

Guidance on Assessing HCV*Do the overlapping values represent multiple themes, as
species distribution, significant* habitat*, concentrationarea, relatively unfragmented landscape*, for example?
(GUIDANCE)
Are the overlapping values within, adjacent to, or near an
identified HCV* or existing designated conservation lands
or secondary conservation lands? (GUIDANCE)
Are the overlapping values adjacent or near an existing
protected area*? (GUIDANCE)Do the overlapping values provide an option to meet
protected areas* representation requirements, that is, can
one overlap an under-represented landscape* as assessedusing a protected areas* gap analysis? (GUIDANCE)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 103 of 159 –Annex E: Dispute Resolution
A key outcome of implementing this Standard is the avoidance and/or mitigation of disputes*.
All disputes* that need to be addressed through this Standard are related to, or a consequenceof, The Organization’s* activities. Requirements throughout the Standard are designed to foster
dialogue, and involvement in management planning is intended to build agreement andsupport. However, a dispute* may still occur and the dispute resolution process should be used
only after other measures have been exhausted.
Please note this Standard is making an important distinction between a dispute* and adispute of substantial magnitude*. As per the Glossary:
Dispute. Represent a formal disagreement, after the initial attempts to resolve a complaint*
have not been achieved.
Dispute of substantial magnitude: Is a dispute* that involves one or more of the following:• Where the negative impact of management activities* on local communities* or on
Indigenous Peoples’* legal* or customary rights* is of such a scale that it cannot bereversed or mitigated;• Physical violence;• Significant destruction of property;• Presence of law enforcement or military bodies;• Acts of intimidation against workers* and stakeholders*.
A dispute* can become of substantial magnitude if it is of substantial duration, implies asignificant number of interest and has a significant negative impact to the forest resource /value.
Disputes of substantial magnitude* are not common and represent the exception.
Structure of the Dispute Resolution Criteria*
The structure of the Criteria* addressing disputes* throughout the Standard (Criteria 1.6, 2.6, 4.6
and 7.6) is designed to address the various types of concerns raised by individuals orcommunities, and ensure the appropriate level of response and action required is taken by The
Organization*.
In the everyday operation of The Organization*, enquiries, such as requests for information or arequest for a solution to an issue, from stakeholders* are common and most often The
Organization* can easily and expeditiously address these. If a stakeholder* is not satisfied withthe outcome of its query or is not receiving a response within a reasonable* time, he may lodge
a complaint* internally with The Organization*. If the complaint* has not been resolved to thesatisfaction of the stakeholder*, and if the stakeholder* wishes to pursue the matter further, theissue escalates to a dispute*.
In this Standard, this escalation process requires that The Organization* have in place a system totrack, manage and address complaints* and disputes* related to:••••

Statutory or customary law* (Criterion 1.6);
Working conditions while working for The Organization* (Criterion 2.6);
Impacts of management activities* on local communities* and Indigenous Peoples*(Criterion 4.6); andImpacts of management activities* on other affected stakeholders* (excludes local
communities* and Indigenous Peoples*) (Criterion 7.6).

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 104 of 159 –To address the application of dispute* management amongst various parties and aspects offorest management, a consistent framework has been developed and is being applied to eachapplicable Criterion*. However, it is possible that The Organization* chooses to use the same toolor process to meet the requirements of the Indicators* in different Criteria*. The generalframework steps applied in Criteria 1.6, 2.6, 4.6 and 7.6 are:
1. A system is in place whereby people can make their complaints* known to The
Organization*.
2. The development of a general dispute resolution process framework, which needs to beadapted through culturally appropriate* engagement* prior to implementation.
3. Complaints* are responded to in a timely manner*. If not, they become a dispute* andthe dispute resolution process is then adapted and implemented.
4. Records of complaints* and disputes* are kept, as well as outcomes of actions taken.
5. For Principles 1 and 4 only: If the dispute* is elevated to a dispute of substantial
magnitude*, then the value or right at risk* must be maintained/protected.
Dispute Resolution Processes and Indigenous Peoples*:Complaints* from Indigenous Peoples* are dealt with using the same structure as describedabove. Complaints* related to statutory or customary law*, working conditions (if applicable),and to impacts of forest management activities* are addressed as described above. However,Indigenous Peoples* may also have complaints* related to the implementation of agreements
they may have with The Organization* that are covered in Principle 3. The Standard also requires
a dispute resolution process clause to be included in any binding agreements* (Indicator 3.3.3)
and to Free, Prior and Informed Consent* agreements with Indigenous Peoples* (Indicator 3.2.5).
Dispute Resolution Process
The design of the dispute resolution processes and the related resolution mechanisms should
consider the following:
•
•

•
•

•

•

Account for a wide range of situations, including addressing cases of dispute of
substantial magnitude*;
The use of different approaches to resolving the dispute*, which may include a neutral
third party, such as mediation, negotiation or other conciliatory processes. These shouldmatch the level and nature of the dispute*;
Consensual or restorative processes such as mediation, negotiation or other conciliatory
processes where the goal is for the parties to reach agreement are preferred;
Disputes* are best dealt with those closest to the situation and with the relevant parties
involved. If there is a dispute of substantial magnitude*, the response should be tied tothe specific area that is under dispute*;
Ceasing operations may be considered as a part of the dispute resolution process when
proposed management activities* may negatively impact the rights or interests ofaffected stakeholders* or Indigenous Peoples*, or may generate irreversible damage toan important value;
In the case of disputes* arising from the infringement of Indigenous Peoples* rights, animmediate cease of operations should be part of the resolution mechanism, for as longas is required to establish an appropriate dispute resolution process. The intention here isto require that the parties engage in dialogue to properly identify the nature and scopeof the dispute* and appropriate mechanisms for resolving such a dispute*.

If a dispute* occurs, The Organization* is expected to follow the steps required in their dispute
resolution process, to respond in a timely manner*, to document the dispute* and the process
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 105 of 159 –used, and to justify unresolved disputes*. It is also expected that all parties involved in thedispute* are working in good faith* and in a reasonable* manner, and that all parties candemonstrate the efforts deployed to resolve the dispute*.
The Standard also requires that The Organization’s* dispute resolution processes be publicly
available* to inform parties, at least, of the general process. The Standard does not necessarily
require the specific aspects of the dispute resolution process implemented with a specific party
to be public. Parties may agree on what should be public and what should remain confidential.
For interested stakeholders* and interested individuals, no dispute resolution process is formallyrequired to be put in place. However, the Standard requires The Organization* to provide
opportunities for engagement* in the planning process of management activities* upon request.
Interested stakeholders* may also use the processes described in the last section of this Annex:
FSC Procedures to Process Disputes* and Appeals.
Disputes of Substantial Magnitude*
If the dispute* escalates and becomes a dispute of substantial magnitude*, operations may berequired to cease in the area directly related to where the dispute* exists. However, ceasing
operations should be used as a last resort when the previous actions have failed to resolve theissue, and where there is a real danger associated to the continuation of forest operations. It isthen required that the dispute resolution process includes mechanisms to address disputes ofsubstantial magnitude* which should include provisions in case of an emergency to avoid
implementing the last resort action of ceasing operations.
Existing Dispute Resolution Processes
Where local or national laws* for resolving grievances and/or compensation exist,
implementation of these provisions might suffice to conform with these Criteria*, if agreed
through engagement* with the party involved. If there is no agreement that these laws suffice,then additional mechanisms developed through engagement* with the party involved, arerequired.
Disputes* Beyond the Control of The Organization*
It is recognized that The Organization* may not have the control over statutory or legal* mattersor they may not be directly involved in the dispute* on the Management Unit*. Where thedispute* is between a complainant and another party, The Organization* should work within its
sphere of influence* to encourage parties, where appropriate, to work together to resolve thedispute*.
FSC Procedures to Process Disputes* and Appeals
Lastly, FSC has its own dispute resolution system and procedures for processing disputes* andappeals (see FSC-PRO-01-005 and FSC-PRO-01-008). Certifying bodies also have dispute
resolution systems in place for addressing concerns related to conformance to FSC standards.
These are available to any stakeholder* or interested party to enact. Stakeholders* or interested
parties are encouraged to first attempt to bring the issue forward to The Organization* forresolution prior to enacting FSC’s or the certifying body’s dispute resolution system.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 106 of 159 –FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 107 of 159 –Annex F: Culturally Appropriate* Engagement*
Throughout the Standard, it is required to engage with various parties in a culturally appropriate*way. The Organization* should develop a methodology to implement culturally appropriate*approaches for engagement*. This Annex intends to give some guidance to facilitate theimplementation of engagement* approaches that will foster the efficient involvement ofspecific groups.
The level of engagement* required and the culturally appropriate* approaches used can varydepending on the intended group and the context. Good and efficient engagement* involves
the consideration of the following:A) Level of engagement*
Different levels of engagement* exist. They include the following:
➢
➢
➢
➢
➢

Inform: To provide information primarily in one direction, with limited opportunity for
dialogue.
Consult: To obtain feedback on analysis, alternatives and/or decision.
Involve: To work directly, throughout the process, to ensure that intended group issues
and concerns are consistently understood and considered.
Collaborate: To partner with the intended group in each aspect of the decision including
the development of alternatives and the identification of the preferred solution.
Empower: To place final decision-making in the authority of the intended group.

The level of engagement* may be variable depending on the intended group, the rights andresponsibilities of the group and the level of impact of the activity on the intended group. In theStandard, the level of engagement* is also partly defined by the specific required action of theStandard, such as inform, develop, etc., as described in the Indicator*.
B) Culturally appropriate* approach:
The approach can be adapted to the level of engagement* required and adjusted to meet theneeds of the intended group, as appropriate.
A culturally appropriate* approach should consider, but not restricted to, the elements listed
below.
1) Cultural difference/ attitude:
Some cultural differences are identified and the state of the actual relationship isassessed to determine:a) Preferences for direct or indirect negotiation;b) Attitude toward authority;c) Attitudes toward competition, cooperation and conflicts;d) Status of the current relationship and existing level of trust;e) Presence of disillusionment on experience;f)Lack of consultation or consultation fatigue;g) Ways of understanding and interpreting the world.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 108 of 159 –2) Representation:• Representatives are identified for each activity in which engagement* is required,including (where appropriate) local institutions, organizations and authorities.
• Groups are equally represented and included.
3) Communication:
Meaningful communication between parties includes:a) Mechanisms for how information is exchanged;b) Different methods for cross-cultural communication including how information ispresented;c) Sensitivities in the use of jargon;d) Shared level of understanding of the language used to communicate forest
management planning and certification processes (written and spoken).
e) Utilization of a language spoken/understood by the group.
4) Documentation:••

Outcomes and agreements are recorded and shared with approval sought on thecontent and intended use of the records.
The way outcomes and agreements are shared both internally and externally shouldbe agreed to in advance.

5) Timeframe:• Timeframe for the engagement* is determined and allows adequate involvement.
• Availability of participants is considered.
6) Capacity:• Consideration is given to the capacity and required resources necessary to facilitate
an appropriate level of engagement*, including access to appropriate technology
and the level of knowledge of the affected community.
7) Decision making:•Approach for making decisions, including consideration of direct or indirect
negotiation, is determined.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 109 of 159 –Annex G: Caribou in the Standard
Caribou are recognized as an important species in Canada because of the social significanceattached to their continued existence, their status as a hallmark species at risk* and the fact that
their presence in a forest* can be an indication of ecosystem integrity*. For these reasons,special attention has been paid to caribou in this Standard, and Indicator 6.4.5 is devoted
entirely to management of habitat* for boreal woodland caribou.
Caribou Taxonomy
All of Canada’s caribou- from woodland caribou in the boreal forest to the vast migratory
herds of the tundra - belong to a single species, Rangifer tarandus. However, after that basic
distinction, the taxonomy and language used to describe subdivisions within the species
become complex. This is due in large part to the continuing evolution of our understandingof caribou ecology, and to some extent, the burden of language used over the years to
describe caribou. The following terms are used to describe subdivisions within the species:
subspecies, migratory patterns, ecotypes, designatable units, population groups,
populations, subpopulations, ranges, herds, and probably others. There is common distinction
made between mountain and boreal caribou, referred to here as different ecotypes ofwoodland caribou.
Mountain caribou, which are divided into northern and southern populations, are found inwestern Canada. Boreal caribou are found throughout the northern boreal forests. Forest
management occurs in the areas occupied by both ecotypes and so it is appropriate thatboth enter discussions related to the FSC Standard. Mountain caribou are addressed in thelast portion of this Annex.
The preferred means of addressing the Indicator* is to manage caribou habitat* according to a
SARA-compliant range plan* prepared and implemented in a manner consistent with thecontent, measures and objectives* in the Range Plan Guidance for Woodland Caribou (ECCC
2016). However, given that it may be a while before such range plans* exist in all areas of theboreal forest inhabited by caribou, the Indicator* presents two options for achieving
conformance in circumstances where a SARA-compliant range plan* does not yet exist. The first
option is to manage according the requirements of Table 6.4.5, and the second is to implement
other approaches developed through an engagement* process, that is still consistent with theRange Plan Guidance requirements.
It is possible that management following the requirements of Table 6.4.5 will be implemented inforests* across the country until a SARA-compliant range plan* has been developed and is being
implemented. Although Table 6.4.5 is detailed, following its requirements involves a relatively
simple application of a risk* management approach to managing caribou habitat*. Many of
the requirements are based on the approach put forward in the Federal Recovery Strategy forthe boreal population of woodland caribou (Environment Canada, 2012) regarding theidentification and effective protection* of critical habitat*. The key supporting documents for theFederal Recovery Strategy are Environment Canada’s scientific review and assessment ofcritical habitat* (Environment Canada, 2008; Environment Canada, 2011) that provided
empirical evidence of a strong negative correlation between the extent of disturbance withincaribou ranges* and recruitment into the population.

Examples of Implementation of Table 6.4.5
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 110 of 159 –There are two overlapping spatial components to Table 6.4.5:
1. The cumulative level of disturbance within caribou ranges*, and
2. The cumulative level of disturbance within the portions of Forest Management Units* thatoverlap caribou ranges*.
Because of the number of ways in which caribou ranges* and Forest Management Units* mayoverlap, some complexity may arise in the application of the requirements related to Table 6.4.5
in different circumstances. Figures 1 through 3 provide examples of the requirements in different
situations:Figure 1: Example of Indicator* requirements with a stable population.
In Figure 1, a single Forest Management Unit* with 40% disturbance is completely enveloped bya caribou range*. The disturbed area in the range is 25%. Given that the caribou population
status is stable, requirements 2, and 4 (Cell D) in Table 6.4.5 apply.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 111 of 159 –Figure 2: Example of Indicator* requirements in a complex situation: One FMU within two ranges
Figure 2 presents a situation in which one Forest Management Unit* overlaps with portions of two
caribou ranges*. Because the caribou population in Caribou Range B is in decline, and the levelof disturbance in the range is moderate, between 20 and 35%, requirements 2,3,5, and 6 (Cell I)
associated with Table 6.4.5 apply to that portion of the FMU that overlaps with Range B.
In Caribou Range C, the proportion of area disturbed is moderate (22%). The proportion of theForest Management Unit* disturbed in the overlapping area is 28% and the caribou population isstable. Therefore, requirements 1 and 3 (Cell C) of Table 6.4.5 apply to the portion of the FMU
that overlaps with Range C.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 112 of 159 –Figure 3. Example of Indicator* requirements in a complex situation: Two FMUs exist within asingle caribou range*.
In Figure 3, the proportion of the caribou range* that is disturbed is 18% and the caribou
population is stable. With 38% of Forest Management Unit* 1 disturbed, requirement 2 (Cell B)
associated with Table 6.4.5 applies to FMU 1. With only 15% of Forest Management Unit* 2
disturbed, requirement 1 (Cell A) applies to that FMU.
Caribou and Landscape* Management
Important issues in managing caribou habitat*, and the habitat* of other wide-range species
are also addressed in components of other Indicators* in the Standard. Most of these are in
Criterion 6.8, which addresses landscape* management through Indicators* related to:
•
•
•
•
•

Management of forest types* and age classes (Indicators 6.8.1 and 6.8.2);
Management of forest patches (Indicators 6.8.3 and 6.8.4);
Maintenance and restoration* of connectivity* (Indicator 6.8.5);
Access management (Indicator 6.8.6);
Coordinating landscape* management activities* with adjoining lands (Indicator 6.8.7).

The combination of Indicators 6.8.1 to 6.8.5 is intended to result in contiguous areas of forest*
that provide for habitat* connectivity*. Simple corridors of relatively unbroken forest* through a
disturbed matrix do not suffice in providing connectivity* because caribou do not consistently
travel along the same pathway. Therefore, broad expanses of contiguous habitat* are needed
to provide connectivity*.
Access management, as addressed in Indicator 6.8.6, is a critical component of managing thequality of forests* for caribou. Impacts from access result in:
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 113 of 159 –

•
•
•
•
•

Fragmentation of forest communities, degrading the connectivity* of those communities;
Creation of barriers for movement of caribou and other sensitive wildlife;
Provision of access corridors for predators, which may increase predation rates;
Facilitation of intentional or accidental harvest; andCreation of additional development, which further degrades habitat* quality.

Indicator 6.8.6 includes requirements to manage roads* through all stages of their life cycle,
including development, use and maintenance, abandonment* and reclamation.
Caribou and other wide-ranging species use forests* at scales* that transcend the size of Forest
Management Units*. This poses a significant challenge for managers of certified forests* as thefate of caribou and other wide-ranging species on their forest* lands is affected by activities
undertaken and decisions made beyond the boundaries of their forests*. Indicator 6.8.7
attempts to address this problem by requiring that The Organization* work within their sphere of
influence* to facilitate landscape*-scale management.
What about Mountain Caribou?
Indicator 6.4.5 specifically addresses boreal caribou, and so it is reasonable* to ask why
comparable attention is not provided for the mountain caribou ecotype of woodland caribou.
The answer is that the ecology of mountain caribou is more complex, with more unknowns. A
calibrated relationship between the extent of cumulative disturbance* and caribou recruitment,
which provides the basis for the Federal Recovery Strategy for boreal caribou and which
provides the basis for a ‘neat’ Indicator* for boreal caribou does not exist for mountain caribou.
Mountain caribou are divided into two types: northern and southern, with more than 70 ranges,
or herds, for both types (and 3 population groups of southern mountain caribou). There aresubstantial differences between the population groups and herds in their patterns of altitudinalmigration, use of high-altitude alpine habitats* and low-altitude forest habitat*. Matrix habitat,
which provides refuge from predation, is recognized as a key component of their ecology
particularly for southern mountain caribou, and is recognized as critical habitat* in the Federal
Recovery Strategy for that population (Environment Canada 2014). Given this complexity, it was
impractical to provide relatively precise direction for managing mountain caribou in a single
Indicator*, or to add it to the direction for boreal caribou that exists in Indicator 6.4.5. However,this does not mean that protection* for mountain caribou is absent from the Standard. There areseveral Indicators* that address ecological values and management actions that are importantin the stewardship of mountain caribou - and other species at risk* - including the following:
•
•
•
•
•

Indicator 6.4.2 addresses planning for species at risk*;
Indicators 6.4.3 and 6.4.4 address implementation of plans and use of a precautionary
approach*;
Indicators 6.8.3 and 6.8.4 address management of forest patches;
Indicator 6.8.5 addresses maintenance of connectivity*; andIndicator 6.8.6 addresses access management.

In addition, mountain caribou should be designated as a High Conservation Value* due to its
status as a species at risk*, and so the requirements of Principle 9 will apply.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 114 of 159 –Annex H: Interim Indicators
NOTE
For a certificate holder previously certified under one of the Canadian regional FSC Standards(see conditions in Section 1 below), some Indicators* in Principle 6 of this Standard may not be
achievable within the normal one-year schedule required for conformance (as per theeffective date of the Standard). These Indicators* address challenging topics that may involve
multi-year processes including consultation with stakeholders* and Indigenous Peoples*,detailed analytical efforts, and shifts from previous management practices. In recognition ofthis, interim indicators have been identified for several Indicators* to provide additional time,
beyond the normal conformance schedule, to achieve initial conformance.
Interim indicators, based on equivalent Indicators* from FSC Canada’s previous regional
standards, are provided for landscape-related requirements (new Standard Indicators 6.1.4
and 6.8.1-6.8.4), and Indicators* associated with the Conservation Areas Network* (i.e.
Criterion 6.5).

1. Implementation Approach and Schedule for Conformance
The following points identify key aspects of the approach and schedule for conformance forinterim indicators:
Applicability and Timelines for Interim Indicators:
•
•

•

•
•
•
•

•

Interim indicators apply only to The Organizations* that are FSC-certified prior to theeffective date of this Standard.
Interim indicators are in effect until the achievement date* which is the date when The
Organization* must demonstrate conformance to the Standard Indicator*. At this timethe validity of the interim indicator expires.
The achievement date* is either the second or third evaluation under the new Standard,
after the effective date. The evaluation in this context refers to a re-certificationassessment or annual surveillance audit that would assess conformance to the newStandard.
The first evaluation of the new Standard after the effective date is considered as year
one for the use of the interim indicators.
Where the conformance to requirements of an interim indicator is not demonstrated
within the prescribed timeline, a non-conformance will be identified.
Where a new Standard Indicator* is not fully met by the achievement date*, a nonconformance will be identified.
FSC Canada’s previous regional standard requirements expire 12 months after the newStandard’s effective date. Only the Indicators* specified in this Annex (applicableStandard in Section 4 below) remain valid until their achievement date*, as indicated inTable H-1 and H-2.
Interim indicators shall be applied following FSC’s normative documents related toassurance.

Interim indicators are provided in Tables H-1 and H-2 below.

2. Interim Indicators – Landscape Requirements
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 115 of 159 –Table H-1. Interim Indicators (Landscape)Achievement date*Standard Indicator*of the Standard
Indicator*
Indicators 6.1.4, 6.8.1, 6.8.2, 6.8.3 and6.8.4 as detailed below.

Third Evaluation* (thecertificate holder
remains inconformance withthe current regional
standard until newStandard indicators
are met).

6.1.4 An assessment of the range ofnatural variation* (RONV*) of the forest*
is completed. If sufficient data are notavailable to complete a RONV*
assessment, an assessment of the preindustrial condition* (PIC*) iscompleted. The RONV* or PIC* analysis
includes:1. An assessment of the natural rangeof the amount of each forest type*;
2. An assessment of the natural rangeof forest types* by age class; and3. An assessment of the natural rangeof disturbance sizes and sizes ofpost-disturbance remnant patches.
6.8.1 Based on the analyses
undertaken for Indicators 6.1.3 and6.1.4, targets are identified for the
distribution of forest types* and age
classes of forest types* that are
intended to maintain, restore*, orenhance the condition of the forest*
appropriate to the regional context.

Second Evaluation

Interim Indicator
6.1.0 Conformance with the following
Indicators* is maintained:• Boreal Standard: Indicators 6.1.5,
6.1.6, 6.3.4, 6.3.5, 6.3.6, 6.3.12• GLSL Standard: Indicators 6.1.3, 6.1.7,
6.3.1, 6.3.2, 6.3.3• BC Standard: 6.1.2, 6.1.7, 6.3.7, 6.3.8,
6.3.10• Maritime Standard: 6.3.1, 6.3.3, 6.3.7
See section 4 below.
6.1.4i An analytical plan has been
prepared, data have been collated
and analyses have commenced toassess the range of natural variation* or
pre-industrial condition* as identified in
Indicator 6.1.4.

Second Evaluation

6.8.1i In conjunction with efforts related
to Indicator 6.1.4i, efforts are underway
to identify targets for the distribution offorest types* and age classes of forest
types* to maintain, restore*, or enhance
the condition of the forest*, appropriate
to the regional context.

Third Evaluation

None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this indicator is dependent
upon completion of Indicator 6.8.1.

Second Evaluation

6.8.3i In conjunction with efforts related
to Indicator 6.1.4i, efforts are underway
to identify targets for the size distributionof forest patches to maintain restore*, orenhance the condition of the forest*,
appropriate to the regional context.

Targets may take anticipated impactsof climate change into accountprovided they are based on best
available information*.
Target age-class* distributions represent
the full range of natural forest* ages
such that old forest* classes areincorporated into the targets.
6.8.2 Measures are being implemented
to achieve the targets for distributionsof forest types* and age classes offorest types* identified in Indicator 6.8.1.
6.8.3 Based on the analyses
undertaken for Indicators 6.1.3 and6.1.4, targets are identified for the size
distribution of forest patches tomaintain, restore*, or enhance the

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 116 of 159 –Standard Indicator*

Achievement date*of the Standard
Indicator*

Interim Indicatorcondition of the forest* as appropriate
to the regional context.
The targets also take into account theneeds of species at risk* that requirelarge areas of contiguous habitat*.
6.8.4 Measures are being implemented
to achieve the targets for forest patch
sizes, identified in Indicator 6.8.3. These
include:
1.
2.

3.

3.

Third Evaluation

None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion ofIndicator 6.8.3.

Maintain contiguous blocks offorest* that are of naturaldisturbance origin;
Aggregate existing and planned
disturbances as a means ofcreating and maintaining large
contiguous blocks; andMinimize the extent of roads* andother linear disturbances in thecontiguous blocks, including
through removal and reclamation.

Interim Indicators for Criterion 6.5

Table H-2. Interim Indicators for Criterion 6.5.
Standard Indicator*
All Indicators* in Criterion 6.5 asdetailed below.

6.5.1 For forests* managed on public
lands, an efficient process is used toengage* Indigenous Peoples* whose
traditional territory overlaps theManagement Unit* and self-identified
interested and affected stakeholders*,
regarding the identification andmanagement of designatedconservation lands*.

Achievement date*of the Standard
Indicator*
Third Evaluation(the certificate holder
remains inconformance withthe current regional
standard until newStandard indicators
are met).

Second Evaluation

Interim Indicator
6.5.0 Conformance with the Indicators*of Criterion 6.4 of the relevant Canadianregional FSC Standard is maintained.
Intent Box
The relevant Canadian regional FSC
Standard is either the National Boreal
Standard, the British Columbia
Standard, the Great Lakes-St.
Lawrence Standard, or the Maritime
Standard. See section 4 below.
6.5.1i For forests* managed on public
lands, Indigenous Peoples* whose
traditional territory overlaps theManagement Unit* and self-identified
interested and affected stakeholders*are engaged* in discussions to develop
a mechanism to achieve consensus* on
the identification of designatedconservation lands*.

The process includes the developmentof a mechanism to achieve consensus*
on the identified designatedconservation lands*.
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 117 of 159 –Standard Indicator*
6.5.2 Using best available information*,an analysis is used to identify potential
gaps in the completeness of theConservation Areas Network* in theManagement Unit*. Elements
considered for inclusion in the gap
analysis address enduring features*,representation of native ecosystems*,
landscape* connectivity*, High
Conservation Values* and High
Conservation Value areas*.

Achievement date*of the Standard
Indicator*
Second Evaluation

6.5.4 For forests* managed on publicland, the gap analysis and peer
review* are made publicly available*,
including in electronic format.
6.5.5 Areas that address Conservation
Areas Network* gaps are identified as
designated conservation lands* orsecondary conservation lands*.
6.5.6 Designated conservation lands*
and secondary conservation lands* areof sufficient size to ensure the values
they are intended to address are
effectively protected based on aprecautionary approach*.
6.5.7 The Conservation Areas Network*
comprises a minimum of 10% of thearea of the Management Unit*. The
extent of the Conservation Areas
Network* on the Management Unit* is
identified by considering:
1. Relative extent of the Conservation
Areas Network* in the area of
ecological influence*
2. Contribution of the Conservation
Areas Network* to the attainmentof regional, provincial, national
and international (e.g. Aichi
biodiversity targets) conservation*and protected area* targets;
3. Best available scientific information
and research regarding
appropriate conservation* targets;
4. Previous contributions of The
Organization* to Conservation

6.5.2i Analyses to identify gaps in thecompleteness of the Conservation
Areas Network* of the Management
Unit* have been initiated.
Intent Box
Initiation of analyses could entail
identification of the area of
ecological influence*, obtaining dataon the Conservation Areas Network*within the area of ecologicalinfluence*, identification of elements
for use in the analyses, andidentifying appropriate analyticalmethods.

The analysis uses inputs from the entire
area of ecological influence*.
The results of the gap analysis are
mapped.
6.5.3 A peer review* of the gap
analysis is completed by one or more
independent experts*.

Interim Indicator

Third Evaluation

Third Evaluation

Third Evaluation

Third Evaluation

Third Evaluation

None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion ofIndicator 6.5.2.
None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion ofIndicator 6.5.2.
None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion ofIndicator 6.5.2.
None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion ofIndicator 6.5.2.

6.5.7i Evidence is provided todemonstrate how each of thenumbered points in Indicator 6.5.7 isbeing, or will be addressed in identifying
the total proposed area of theConservation Area Network*.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 118 of 159 –Standard Indicator*

5.

2.

3.

Interim Indicator

Areas Network* on lands that wereformerly within the Management
Unit*; andSocio-economic considerations(e.g. implications for wood
availability and harvest levels).

Evidence is provided to validate any
claim of the existence of protectedareas* that were formerly within theManagement Unit*
6.5.8 For forests* managed on publicland, consensus* is achieved on theidentification of designatedconservation lands* throughimplementation of the process
identified in Indicator 6.5.1.
6.5.9 Forest operations including
harvesting, silviculture*, and road*building, are not undertaken by The
Organization* within designatedconservation lands* except when
confirmed by independent expert*
opinion as appropriate to achieve
objectives* associated with restoration*or maintenance of natural conditions*.
6.5.10 For forests* managed on private
land, forest operations are undertaken
on secondary conservation lands* only
when they maintain the ecologicaland cultural qualities that are the basisof the lands’ designation.
6.5.11 For forests* managed on publicland, The Organization* works within its
sphere of influence* to achieve thefollowing:
1.

Achievement date*of the Standard
Indicator*

Move designated conservation
lands* to full legal* regulated
status;Recognition of designatedconservation lands* inmanagement plans* and otherrelevant documents; andAvoid harvesting, road* building
and other operations proposed byother tenure* holders that are notconsistent with conservation*
objectives* of designatedconservation lands*.

Third Evaluation

6.5.8i Discussions intended to achieveconsensus on the identification ofdesignated conservation lands throughthe implementation of Indicator 6.5.1
have been initiated.

Third Evaluation

None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion ofIndicator 6.5.5.

Third Evaluation

None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion ofIndicator 6.5.5.

Third Evaluation

6.5.11i Overlapping tenure holders*,
neighbouring Forest Management Units*
and relevant government agencies are
informed of this Standard’s objectives
related to Conservation Area Networks*,
efforts underway by The Organization*and the roles and opportunities forothers to assist in reaching the goals.

Free, Prior and Informed Consent* is
obtained prior to efforts to work within
The Organization’s* sphere of
influence* to achieve regulated status
for designated conservation lands* that
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 119 of 159 –Standard Indicator*
overlap Indigenous Peoples’*traditional territories (per Criterion 3.2).
6.5.12 The completed gap analysis isreviewed at least every five years, andupdated if necessary, based on
availability of new information oradvances in gap analysis
methodology.

Achievement date*of the Standard
Indicator*
Third Evaluation.

Interim Indicator

None – No interim indicator is possible/
necessary as this Indicator* isdependent upon completion of all theother Indicators* in this Criterion*.

If substantial changes to the gap
analysis occur as a result of the update,a peer review* is undertaken.

4.

Indicators* from previous Canadian regional FSC Standards

National Boreal Standard
No.
6.1.5

6.1.6
6.3.4

6.3.5

6.3.6

Standard Indicator*

Appropriate to the scale of the operation and available information, the pre-industrial forest
condition and disturbance regime has been characterized, and includes at a minimum:▪
A description of major disturbance factors, including discussion of their distribution andfrequency; assessment of the size and extent of residual patches within fire boundaries,
and description of stand structure types and natural landscape patterns (e.g., patch sizesof disturbances as well as forest stands) associated with the various types of disturbance;▪
Estimated mean distribution and/or composition of tree species, forest cover types and/or
forest units, as appropriate;▪
Estimated mean and ranges of stand-replacing disturbance intervals by landscape unit
and/or forest zone; and where applicable, by forest unit, forest ecosystem or forest covertype;▪
A calculation of average fire return interval determined through fire history mapping andassessment of time since disturbance, including ground truthing; and▪
Estimated typical age class distribution, including full characterization of the age range ofold forests, by:•Landscape units and/or forest zones•
Forest cover types or forest units, and,•
Forest ecosystems or generalized landforms
The pre-industrial condition (PIC) analysis is subject to peer review and available for public
review.
Forest units and communities that are significantly under-represented relative to the preindustrial composition (as per analysis from 6.1.5) are being increased in abundance over the
longer term. In the near term, at a minimum, their abundance is being maintained with theintent to increase it over the longer term.
Management strategies maintain average landscape and/or regional distributions oramounts of the full age-range of old forests identified through the PIC analysis consistent withthe requirements of 6.1.5, allowing for a 25% departure from the estimated mean of older
forests - in recognition of the range of natural variability, practical constraints and competing
objectives. In the absence of a credible estimate of the mean, a minimum of 20 % of oldforest will be retained. If socio-economic concerns constrain the application of this indicator
in regions with exceptionally high natural proportions of older forests (e.g., greater than 60%),
there may be up to a maximum of a 50% departure from the mean, provided that theapplicant demonstrates broad consensus.
Targets for landscape patterns (disturbed and undisturbed patches) have been set, based
upon the characterization of the pre-industrial forest. Management is returning the forest
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 120 of 159 –6.3.12

6.4.1

6.4.2

6.4.3
6.4.4
6.4.5
6.4.6
6.4.7

landscape pattern to one consistent with the pre-industrial forest. This approach is consistent
with maintaining natural levels of core habitat and connectivity throughout the long-termplanning horizon.
Large areas (thousands of hectares) of contiguous core forest habitat, representative of thehabitat types of the landbase, exist and are maintained in the management unit. The
proportion of the management unit in large areas of core is guided by the outcome of the
pre-industrial forest condition analysis and by a target of maintaining at least 20% of the forest
management unit. Large cores consist primarily of mature and old forest, but may also
contain inclusions of up to 5% recently disturbed forest. To the greatest extent possible within
the current forest condition, large cores do not contain roads and other linear disturbances. In
planning future cores, the applicant chooses areas with a high probability of achieving thedesired condition (e.g., areas likely to be in a contiguous, roadless condition) and is working
within its sphere of influence to achieve this condition (e.g., access management,
decommissioning roads, bridge removal, etc.).
The applicant completes (or makes use of) a peer-reviewed scientific gap analysis to address
the need for protected areas in the eco-region(s) and ecodistrict(s) in which the forest issituated. The applicant uses the gap analysis and elements including representation,connectivity, intactness, age of the forest, rare ecosystems and other HCVF attributes to
identify the location and extent of additional protected areas.
The applicant designs, identifies and contributes candidate protected areas that make amaximum contribution to filling gaps in the protected areas system (per 6.4.1) based on therelative responsibility of the applicant. The level of the applicant’s responsibility is determinedby:•
The level of representation of enduring features within the forest; and,•The regional significance of the conservation values (e.g., quality or rarity).
The applicant works cooperatively with interested parties (e.g., Environmental-NGOs,
Indigenous People) in the analysis of gaps and candidate protected areas.
Results of the candidate protected area identification process described in indicator 6.4.2 aremapped.
The applicant has documentation demonstrating support by interested parties (e.g.
Environmental NGOs and Indigenous Peoples).
Forest operations including harvesting, silviculture and road building are not undertaken inprotected areas or candidate protected areas.
The applicant is working within their sphere of influence to move candidate protected areas
to full regulated protection as soon as possible.

Great Lakes – St. Lawrence Draft Standard
No.
Standard Indicator*
6.1.3

6.1.7
6.3.1

The natural variability and historic local pattern of the forest in the region has beencharacterized, and includes:
A description of major disturbance factors, including disturbance intervals;
Estimated mean distribution and/or composition of tree species, forest cover types
and/or forest unit as appropriate;
Estimated typical age class distribution.
The assessment is reviewed by qualified specialists and available for public review.
Benchmarks of current forest condition at the stand and landscape levels are in place toserve as references during impact assessment.
In consideration of the assessment results in 6.1, the manager has determined a long-term
desired future forest condition that maintains, enhances or restores natural conditions in naturalforests relating to:-diversity of forest types
diversity of successional stages
distribution of age classes, including old growthdiversity of forest structures (e.g. horizontal, vertical and pattern)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 121 of 159 –6.3.2
6.3.3
6.4.1

6.4.2

6.4.3

6.4.4
6.4.5

6.4.6
6.4.7

connectivity
levels of disturbances at the landscape level (e.g. watershed).
Quantitative short to mid-term (e.g. 2-5 years) objectives have been set, using expert input, tomaintain, enhance or restore natural conditions in natural forests.
Plans have been developed and are being implemented to achieve the objectives set out in
6.3.2.
The manager shall identify potential gaps in the representative completeness of protectedareas in the appropriate ecological unit(s) (ecoregions, ecodistricts, natural regions) containedon the management unit, using the best available tools and information, such as but notnecessarily limited to:land cover gap analysis; andenduring features gap analysis.
Where there are identified gaps, the manager shall use the gap analysis and consideration ofelements such as representativeness, connectivity, integrity, forest age, rare ecosystems, theresults of the HCVF analysis in 9.1 and other available analyses to determine and map thelocation and size of candidate protected areas.
The manager shall engage and cooperate with interested parties (e.g. ENGOs, Aboriginalcommunities) and qualified experts in carrying out the gap analysis and identifying candidate
protected areas.
General consensus is sought amongst interested parties on the conclusions of the gap analysis
regarding the identification and contribution of candidate protected areas.
The owner/manager actively supports initiatives open to all interested parties, which may
include government, industrial and private landowners, and non-government agencies toestablish systems of protected areas in the region of the landholding.
The manager shall not undertake forest management activities, including harvesting,silviculture and road construction in designated protected areas.
The manager demonstrates voluntary deferral of forest management activities, including
harvesting, silviculture and road construction in identified candidate protected areas. Forest
management activities may occur in candidate protected areas where agreed to through thegeneral consensus of interested parties.

FSC Regional Certification Standard for British ColumbiaNo.
Standard Indicator*
6.1.2

6.1.7

6.3.7
6.3.8

The manager collects and/or assembles reconnaissance level inventory information
appropriate for landscape level planning and completion of a management plan for the
management unit as a whole, including at a minimum:a) natural disturbance regime;b) list of potentially occurring native species (including at a minimum indicator plants,
focal species, and other species of concern); and,c) mapping of forest cover, BEC units to the variant level, hydrologic features,
reconnaissance terrain stability mapping, cultural features, visual sensitivity, land use
and other tenures.
Based on the best available information, the manager prepares a written description of theestimated range of natural variability including reference to ecosystem conditions andecosystem functioning (see Guidance Material on RONV). This description serves as anenvironmental base case (i.e. benchmark or reference ecosystem conditions) against which
to measure potential environmental changes or impacts resulting from proposedmanagement activities.
Silvicultural treatments, including regeneration, maintain a diversity of tree species and standtypes compatible with the range of natural variability at the landscape level.
Silviculture and stand management prescriptions contain objectives and measures for the
maintenance and/or restoration of stand structure to conditions compatible with the range ofnatural variability at the stand and landscape levels. Structural components, including at aminimum canopy complexity, live wildlife trees, snags and coarse woody debris are
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 122 of 159 –6.3.10
6.4.1

6.4.2

6.4.3

6.4.4

6.4.5

maintained or restored to quantities and distributions that are compatible with RONV. (seeGuidance on Applying RONV to Forest Management, with particular focus on Section 6.2,
“Natural Disturbance Regimes,” for guidance on stand level retention and maintenance ofother structural components).
Forest management maintains or restores a distribution of seral stages, patch sizes and interior
habitat that are compatible with the range of natural variability.
A network of protected reserves is established at multiple scales and managed within the
management unit (see also Guidance Material – A companion document to the FSC
Regional Standards for BC – Guidance on Planning). The reserve network:a) maintains key environmental values and options to reserve critical areas are notforeclosed by on-going operations;b) is delineated on maps, and where applicable, includes mapping of dynamic reserves
and dynamic reserve replacement areas;c) has written objectives for each reserve area related to that area's contribution tomaintaining or restoring ecological integrity; and,d) meets the applicable minimum percentage area for ecosystem representation by
BEC variant within the management unit, as determined by Table P6 – 1 (see below).
The design and management of the reserve network contributes to the maintenance and/or
restoration of ecological integrity by including at a minimum, areas whose size anddistribution are sufficient to meet the following objectives:a) includes representation of ecosystem variation within the management unit at a level
more detailed than the BEC variant, using characteristics appropriate to the
management unitb) habitat requirements for naturally occurring species that are not provided for in asuitable condition in other parts of the management unit,c) connectivity at the landscape and regional levels,d) protection of rare and endangered ecosystems and ecosystem conditions that are orare predicted to be at risk (e.g., interior forest conditions, old seral conditions), ande) scientific reference areas.
All protected reserves within Natural Disturbance Types 1 and 2 are permanent designations
with fixed locations. Where the manager has identified ecological benefits for management
treatments that mimic natural disturbances in NDTs 3 or 4, up to a maximum of 50% of thearea of protected reserves in those NDTs can be managed as dynamic reserves (a minimumof 50% must remain permanent reserves).
Management treatments in dynamic reserves that are intended to mimic stand-replacing
natural disturbances:a) are employed on a frequency (i.e. rotation age) that is at least 1.2 times theestimated average return interval for those disturbances;b) include stand level retention significantly above the estimated average naturalretention levels for those disturbances;c) use natural regeneration; andd) allow for natural stand development.
Management activities within protected reserves are limited to low impact activities
compatible with the protected reserve objectives, except under the following circumstances:a) harvesting activities only where they are necessary to restore or create habitat tomeet the objectives of the protected reserve, or to mitigate conditions that interferewith achieving the reserve objectives, orb) road-building only where it is documented that it will contribute to the minimization of
the overall environmental impacts within the management unit and will not jeopardize
the purpose for which the reserve was designated.

Maritimes Standard
No.

Standard Indicator*

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 123 of 159 –6.3.1

6.3.3
6.3.7
6.4.1
6.4.2

6.4.3

The present and projected silviculture, harvest and regeneration methods shall result in a mixof tree species, stand types, landscape ecology and stand structures that mimic the naturalvariability and historic local pattern of the Acadian Forest.
Silviculture practices result in age, diameter, species and height class distributions that arewithin the range of natural variability.
The owner/manager shall strive to approximate spatial patterns and distributions of forest
communities representative of natural forest characteristics for the landscape level.
Existing ecosystems on the forest management unit are inventoried according to classification
systems in use in the Province and documented on management plan maps.
Representative samples of ecosystems that are present on the management unit andunderrepresented in protected areas on the landscape are designated in the management
plan and on maps and protected in their natural state.
The owner/manager should actively support multi-stakeholder initiatives that include
government, industrial and private landowners, and non-government agencies to establish
systems of protected areas in the region of the landholding.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 124 of 159 –Annex I: List of Contributors
This Standard would not have been possible without the dedication and hard work ofvolunteers and contributors whose provided expertise and experience, and who
provided comments on the various drafts of the Standard. FSC Canada thanks thoselisted below and many others who may not have been listed.
FSC Canada Board of Directors:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Tyler Bellis, Council of the Haida Nation (2017-2018)
Arnold Bercov, Public and Private Workers of Canada (2013-2017)
Julee Boan, Ontario Nature (2016-2018)
Pier-Olivier Boudreault, Société pour la nature et les Parcs du Canada (SNAP Quebec)(2015-2017)
John Caluori, Unifor (2017-2020)
John Cathro, Individual (2011-2016)
Valérie Courtois, Individual (2011-2014)
Elston Dzus, Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. (2016-2020)
David Flood, Individual (2017-2019)
Renaud Gagné, Unifor (2016)
Catharine Grant, Individual (2017-2019)
Satnam Manhas, Ecotrust Canada (2014-2016)
Chris McDonell, Tembec Inc. (2011-2016)
Chris Miller, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (2013-2015)
Orrin Quinn, Ecotrust Canada (2011– 2013)
Colin Richardson, Haida Nation (2016-2017)
Lorraine Rekmans, Individual (2018-2020)
Steven Sage, Kruger Products L.P. (2013-2015)
Cameron Shiell, Public and Private Workers of Canada (2017-2019)
Brenda St-Denis, Wolf Lake First Nation (2013-2017)
Gerard Szaraz, Nature Quebec (2018-2020)
Andrew Tremblay, Domtar Inc. (2015-2019)
Bradley Young, National Aboriginal Forestry Association (2011-2016)

Standard Development Group (SDG):
The SDG was responsible for developing the FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard of
Canada with common Indicators*. Through the transfer and adaption of FSC International
Generic Indicators (IGIs), Canadian specific SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Rational,
Timebound) Indicators* were developed.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Nicolas Blanchette, INCOS Strategies (QC) - Social Chamber (2017-ongoing)
John Caluori, UNIFOR (QC) - Social Chamber (2016)
Scott Davis, Eastern Ontario Model Forest (ON) - Social Chamber (2013-2016)
Russell Diabo, Wolf Lake First Nation (QC/ON), shared seat - Aboriginal Chamber (2013ongoing)
Kevin Gillis, Mistik Management Ltd. (SK), shared seat - Aboriginal Chamber (2013ongoing)
André Gravel, Domtar Inc. (QC) - Economic Chamber (2017-ongoing)
Satnam Manhas, Ecotrust Canada (BC), shared seat - Social Chamber (2013-2014)
Chris McDonell, Tembec Inc. / Rayonier Advanced Materials (ON/QC) – Economic
Chamber (2016-ongoing)
Solange Nadeau, Natural Resources Canada (QC/NB) - Social Chamber (2013-ongoing)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 125 of 159 –

•
•
•
•
•
•

Dave Pearce, Wildlands league / CPAWS (ON) - Environment Chamber (2013-ongoing)
M.A. (Peggy) Smith, Lakehead University (ON) - Aboriginal Chamber (2013-ongoing)
Christopher J. Stagg, Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (BC) - Economic Chamber (20132016)
Karen Tam Wu, Forest Ethics (BC) - Environmental Chamber (2013-2014)
Guy Tremblay, Resolute Forest Products (QC) - Economic Chamber (2013-2017)
Cliff Wallis, Alberta Wilderness Association (AB) - Environmental Chamber (2014-ongoing)

Technical Expert Panels:
Technical Expert Panels (TEPs) were created to assist in providing scientific, cultural and auditing
expertise and technical input on critical topics to be considered when developing normative*
measures within this Standard. These topics were identified through early public outreach efforts
and surveys.
•

Species at Risk* (Caribou):o Elston Dzus, Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. (AB)o Christine Korol, Independent Consultant, formerly from Rainforest Alliance (ON)o Steve Morel, Mashteuiatsh's Environment Department (QC)o Justina Ray, Wildlife Conservation Society Canada (ON)•Principles 6, 9 and 10 (as per new P&Cs): Ecological & Operational Consideration:o Tom Clark, Independent Consultant (ON) (P9 only)o Patrick Garneau, Tembec Inc. (QC)o Louis Imbeau, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue (QC)o Kevin Gillis, Mistik Management Ltd. (SK) (also SDG)
o Dave Pearce, CPAWS, Wildlands League (ON) (also SDG)o Chris Ridley-Thomas, KPMG Performance Registrar Inc. (BC)o Kari Stuart-Smith, Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (BC)•Principle 3: Aboriginal Rights: Free, Prior and Informed Consent*:o Sandra Cardinal, Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. (AB)o Geneviève Labrecque, Tembec Inc. (QC)o Michel Mongeon, Independent Consultant (QC)o M.A. (Peggy) Smith, Lakehead University (ON) (also SDG)
o Sara Teitelbaum, Independent Consultant (QC)•

Community and Stakeholder* Rights:
o Robert Booth14, Domtar Inc. (ON) (2013-2015)o Steve Munro, Westwind Forest Stewardship Inc. (ON) (2015)
o Solange Nadeau, Natural Resources Canada, CFS (QC / NB) (also SDG)
o Harry Nelson, University of British Columbia (BC)o Cindy Pearce, Mountain Labyrinths Consulting (BC)•

Scale, Intensity and Risk* (SIR): small and low intensity managed forests (SLIMF):
o Olivier Côté, Syndicat des producteurs forestiers du Sud du Québec (QC)o Kari Easthouse, Cape Breton Private Land Partnership / NSLFFPA (NS)o Erik Leslie, Harrop-Procter Community Co-operative (BC)o Simon Mitchell, Woodland Steward (NB)o Dave Puttock, SilvEcon Ltd. (ON)FSC Canada extends deep appreciation to Rob Booth for his active participation and long-term
contribution to forest management and certification in Canada. He is warmly remembered and missed.
14

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 126 of 159 –•

Pesticides*, Conversion and Invasive Species*:o Brian Callaghan, Bureau Veritas Certification (ON)o Thom Erdle, University of New Brunswick (NB)o Will Martin, Rising Forest Management Consulting (NS)o Sandy Smith, University of Toronto (ON)o Conrad Yarmoloy, Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. (AB)•HCV Framework Revision Sub-Committee:
o Sophie Dallaire, Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs (QC)o Patrick Garneau, Tembec Inc. (QC)o Kevin Gillis, Mistik Management Ltd. (SK) (also SDG)
o Marie-Eve Sigouin, Tembec Inc. (QC)o Kari Stuart-Smith, Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (BC)•Intact Forest Landscape* and Indigenous Cultural Landscapes Sub-Committee:o Elston Dzus, Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc. (AB)o Louis Imbeau, Université du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue (QC)o Christine Korol, Independent Consultant (ON)o Geneviève Labrecque, Tembec Inc. (QC)o Dave Pearce, CPAWS, Wildlands League (ON) (also SDG)o Justina Ray, Wildlife Conservation Society Canada (ON)o M.A. (Peggy) Smith, Lakehead University (ON) (also SDG)

Standard Testing:
In total, 23 tests were conducted, including 2 field tests of the entire Standard and 21 desk/
scenario/field tests that explored key topics. The goal was to systematically and objectively
evaluate the practicality and implementation of proposed Draft 2 Indicators* by a Forest
Management Enterprise.
FSC Canada thanks those organizations who participated, from:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Abitibi River Forest Management Inc.
Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries Inc.
AV Group NB
Canadian Forest Products Ltd.
Chantiers Chibougamau Ltée
Domtar Inc.
J.D. Irving, Limited
Mistik Management Ltd.
Nawiinginokiima Forest Management Corporation
Resolute Forest ProductsTembec Inc.
Timiskaming Forest Alliance Inc.

And the participation of the testing auditors:••••

Mylène Raimbault, Rainforest Alliance
Daniel Martin, Abies Consultants Inc.
Ugo Lapointe, SmartCert
Chris Ridley-Thomas, KPMG Performance Registrar Inc.

Consultants:••

Mélodie Benoît-Lamarre, Traductions Hermès
Tom Clark, CMC Ecological Consulting
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 127 of 159 –

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Meagan Joan Curtis, Independent Consultant
Liana de Francesco, Independent Consultant
Eric Forget, Nova Sylva
Christine Korol, Independent Consultant
Pamela Perreault, Independent Consultant
Helena Rusak, Copy Editor Consultant
Krystal Seedial, Consultant acting as Programs and Communications Coordinator
Chris Wedeles, ArborVitae Environmental Services Ltd.

FSC Canada staff
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Bryce Denton, Financial Manager (2013-ongoing)
François Dufresne, President (2013-ongoing)
Elaine Marchand, Regional Manager, Eastern Canada (2013-ongoing)
Monika Patel, Director of Programs & Communications (2013- ongoing)
Vivian Peachey, Director of Standards (2013- ongoing)
Orrin Quinn, Regional Manager, Western Canada (2013-2017)
Elena Vissa, intern (2017)
Josh Zangwill, Business Management Manager (2013-2017)

Funders and main Partners
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Columbia Forest ProductGeorgia Pacific
Government of Quebec, Ministry of Forests, Wildlife and Parks
Ivey Foundation
Kimberley Clark
Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service
Procter & Gamble
Quebec Forest Industry Council
Toronto Dominion BankWorld Wildlife Fund U.S.
First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Sustainable Development Institute (FNQLSDI)
National Aboriginal Forestry Association (NAFA)

Stakeholder* Engagement*
FSC Canada thanks everybody who participated during the many consultations, surveys andevents.
•Surveys:▪ Process design and identification of values important to stakeholders* (August2012);▪ Strategic Direction Survey and Motion (February 2013);▪ Identification of Key Indicators (Spring-Summer 2013).

•

Regional workshop on Forest Management Standards Revision Process (2013):▪ North Bay, ON on April 3-4: 19 participants (SFL certificate holders);▪ Stouffville, ON on June 19: 9 participants (SLIMF certificate holders);▪ Vancouver, BC on June 27: 13 participants;▪ Quebec City, QC on July 3: 13 participants (certificate holders);▪ Fredericton, NB on July 10, 2013: 26 participants (stakeholders*);▪ Halifax, NS on July 11: 19 participants (stakeholders*);

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 128 of 159 –▪
▪
▪

Wendake, QC on July 18: 25 participants (FNQLSDI & Indigenous Peoples Expert
Group);
Webinar in French on August 6: 12 participants;
Webinar in English on August 8: 5 participants.

•

Species at risk* and caribou (2014):▪ Consultation period from September 21 to November 28, 2014: 18 participants;▪ Webinar on October 22: 52 participants.

•

Forest Management Standard, Draft 1 (2015-2016):▪ Consultation from December 1, 2015 to February 2, 2016: 49 participants;▪ Information webinars:- English session on January 11, 2016: 48 participants;- French session on January 12, 2016: 33 participants.
▪ Regional meetings:- Quebec session in Quebec City, QC, on January 14, 2016: 35 participants;- Industry-led session in North Bay, ON, on January 19-20, 2016: 30
participants;- Maritimes session in Amherst, NS on January 20, 2016: 19 participants;- Ontario webinar on January 22, 2016: 17 participants;- British Columbia webinar on January 26, 2016: 17 participants.
▪ National Aboriginal Forestry Association Forum on April 14, 2016 - FSC Canada
workshop on FSC Draft 1 National Standard Review and FSC Canada FPIC
Guidance Development: 35 participants.
▪ Topic oriented webinar on Free, Prior and Informed Consent on April 29, 2016:
approximately 20 participants.
▪ Impact analysis of the National Forest Management Standard (on IFL, ICL andcaribou Indicator*) from July 11to September 22, 2016: 4 participants.

•

Intact Forest Landscapes* (IFL) and Indigenous Cultural Landscapes (ICL):▪ FSC Canada Annual General Assembly (AGM) on November 5, 2014 in Quebec
City. A Panel Discussion on IFL and FSC certification: 42 participants.
▪ IFL & ICL Cross-chamber Facilitated Strategic Discussion on May 28, 2015 inVancouver: 19 participants.
▪ FSC Canada AGM on November 5, 2015 in Vancouver. Intact Forest & Indigenous
Cultural Landscapes Discussion: 45 participants.
▪ IFL and ICL Discussion Paper – consultation from December 1st, 2015 to February
2nd, 2016: 7 participants.
▪ NAFA National Forum on April 12-14, 2016: FPIC and Indigenous Forests:
Landscape, Certification and Nationhood. 109 participants.
▪ IFL Technical guidance & ICL Discussion Paper – consultation from December 6,2016 to February 17, 2017: 11 participants.
▪ Case study for IFL determination in Canada (2016): 4 participants.
▪ FSC Canada AGM on November 3, 2016 in Ottawa – Intact Forest & Indigenous
Landscapes Discussion: 50 participants.
▪ FSC Canada AGM on June 28-29, 2017 in Montreal. FSC Forest Management
Forum: 75 participants.

•

Forest Management Standard, Draft 2, and Free, Prior and Informed Consent Guidance(2016-2017):▪ Consultation from November 24 1 2016 to February 17, 2017: 30 participants.
▪ Questions & Answers - Information webinars:- Two English sessions on February 1st and 2nd, 2017: 10 and 11 participants;- French session on February 3rd, 2017: 12 participants.
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 129 of 159 –▪
▪

Industry-led session in North Bay, ON, on January 24-25, 2017: 29 participants.
FSC Canada AGM June 28-29, 2017 in Montreal. FSC Forest Management Forum:
75 participants.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 130 of 159 –GLOSSARYThis Glossary includes internationally accepted definitions whenever possible. These sources
include, for instance, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), theConvention on Biological Diversity (1992), the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) as well as
definitions from online glossaries as provided on the websites of the World Conservation Union(IUCN), the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the Invasive Alien Species Programme of
the Convention on Biological Diversity. When other sources have been used they are referenced
accordingly.
The term ‘based on’ means that a definition was adapted from an existing definition asprovided in an international source.
Words used in this Standard, if not defined in this Glossary or other normative* FSC documents,
are used as defined in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary or the Concise Oxford Dictionary.

Achievement date: The date at which The Organization* must demonstrate conformance to theStandard Indicator*, and the validity of the interim indicator expires.
Adaptive management: A systematic process of continually improving management policies
and practices by learning from the outcomes of existing measures.
(Source: Based on World Conservation Union (IUCN). Glossary definitions as provided on IUCN
website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Affected stakeholder: Any person, group of persons or entity that is or is likely to be subject to theeffects of the activities of a Management Unit*. Examples include, but are not restricted to (forexample in the case of downstream landowners), persons, groups of persons or entities locatedin the neighbourhood of the Management Unit*. The following are examples of affectedstakeholders:• Local communities*• Indigenous Peoples*• Workers*• Forest dwellers• Neighbors• Downstream landowners• Local processors• Local businesses• Tenure* and use rights* holders, including landowners• Organizations authorized or known to act on behalf of affected stakeholders, forexample social and environmental NGOs, labor unions, etc.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Age-class: A distinct group of trees or portion of the growing stock of a forest* recognizedbased on similar age or similar successional stage.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Alien species: A species, subspecies or lower taxon, introduced outside its natural past or present
distribution; includes any part, gametes, seeds, eggs, or propagules of such species that mightsurvive and subsequently reproduce.
(Source: Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Invasive Alien Species Programme. Glossaryof Terms as provided on CBD website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 131 of 159 –Ancient forest: Forests* which:• have not undergone any significant industrial activity;• are naturally regenerated;• contain trees of size, age and spacing which vary widely;• contain densities of dead standing trees (snags) and fallen trees that are greater than inyounger forests*;• contain trees that are large for the species and site combination;• contain canopies with many openings;• are typically small relative to the ecosystems* in which they exist; and• are at the extreme end of the normal natural disturbance cycle.
(Source: From a variety of sources, including FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations). 2002. Proceedings: Expert Meeting on Harmonizing forest-related definitions foruse by various stakeholders. Rome, 22-25 Jan. 2002.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/Y4171E/Y4171E34.htm; and Grumbine, R.E. 1993. Ghost Bears:
Exploring the Biodiversity Crisis. Island Press. Washington D.C.
Applicable law: Means applicable to The Organization* as a legal* person or business enterprisein or for the benefit of the Management Unit* and those laws which affect the implementationof the FSC Principles* and Criteria*. This includes any combination of statutory law*
(Parliamentary-approved) and case law (court interpretations), subsidiary regulations,associated administrative procedures, and the national constitution (if present) which invariably
takes legal* precedence over all other legal* instruments.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Aquifer: A formation, group of formations, or part of a formation that contains sufficientsaturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to wells and springs for that
unit to have economic value as a source of water in that region.
(Source: Gratzfeld, J. (editor) 2003. Extractive industries in arid and semi-arid zones. IUCN
Environmental Management Series No. 1.111 p.) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Area of ecological influence: The entire area encompassed by ecological units (for example
ecodistricts*, biogeoclimatic zones) that occur at least partly within the Management Unit*.
Identification of the area of ecological influence should consider the scale* of the Management
Unit* and the ecological qualities of the landscape* within which the Management Unit* islocated. The area of ecological influence should be based on an existing ecologicalclassification system in use in the Management Unit*’s* province or region.
(Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)
Best available information: Data, facts, documents, expert* opinions, and results of field surveys
or consultations with stakeholders* and engagement* with Indigenous Peoples* that are mostcredible, accurate, complete, and/or pertinent and that can be obtained through reasonable*
effort and cost, subject to the scale* and intensity* of the management activities* and thePrecautionary Approach*.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Best efforts: Persistent and sincere attempts by The Organization* to address a requirement. Bestefforts are not always met with success, but to address the Indicators’* requirements for best
efforts, evidence must be presented that continuing efforts by various means have been
attempted.
(Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 132 of 159 –Best management practice: Best management practices (BMPs) are methods or techniques
based on known science found to be the most effective and practical and that, if followed,
should meet the requirements of Indicators* or achieve objectives*.
(Source: Adapted from BC Ministry of the Environment (2015) and Business Dictionary (2015))
Binding agreement: A deal or pact, written or not, which is compulsory to its signatories andenforceable by law. Parties involved in the agreement do so freely and accept it voluntarily.
(FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Biological diversity: The variability among living organisms* from all sources including, inter alia,
terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems* and the ecological complexes of which they
are a part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems*.
(Source: Convention on Biological Diversity 1992, Article 2) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Biological control agents: Organisms* used to eliminate or regulate the population of otherorganisms*.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0, based on FSC-STD-01-001 V4-0 and World Conservation Union(IUCN). Glossary definitions as provided on IUCN website)
Caribou range: The geographic area occupied by a local population of boreal or mountaincaribou as identified by the Federal Recovery Strategy or action plans for boreal woodland
caribou (Environment Canada, 2012), or the Federal Recovery Strategy for southern mountaincaribou (Environment Canada, 2014), or updates to those strategies or revised areas identified
by provincial resource management agencies.
(Addition; Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)Collective rights: Shared or joint rights held by a local community* and that are not the mere
aggregation of rights held individually by members of the group.
(Source: FSC Canada Standard Development Group, based on Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy)
Community forest: Any forestry operation managed by a local government, community group,First Nation or community-held corporation for the benefit of the entire community, in which
profits are cycled back into the community, and has a total area equal to or under 80,000
hectares.
(Source: Adapted from BC Community Forest Association definition)
Complaint: The expression of dissatisfaction or concern by any person or organization presented
to The Organization*, relating to its management activities* or its conformity with the FSC
Principles* and Criteria*, where a response is expected.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0 definition of dispute and Merriam-Webster)
Confidential information: Private facts, data and content that, if made publicly available*, might
put at risk* The Organization*, its business interests or its relationships with stakeholders*, clientsand competitors.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Conflict of interest: Situation in which a party has an actual or perceived interest that gives, or
could have the appearance of giving, that party an incentive for personal, organizational, or
professional gain, such that the party’s interest could conflict, or be perceived to conflict with,the conduct of an impartial and objective certification process.
(Source: FSC-STD-20-001 V4-0)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 133 of 159 –Connectivity: The degree to which habitat* patches or environments are linked by single ormultiple corridors or broad expanses of habitat*. Connectivity recognizes the need for habitats*to address several kinds of movements: 1) daily movements among habitat* patches; 2)
migrations/movement between seasonal ranges/use areas; and 3) dispersal movements ofyoung animals. Conditions necessary for connectivity and its effectiveness will depend on thespecific purpose of the connectivity and the requirements of species or ecosystems* considered.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Regional Certification Standards for British Columbia 2005)
Consensus: General agreement, characterized by the absence of sustained opposition to
substantial issues by any important part of the concerned interests and by a process thatinvolves seeking to consider the views of all parties concerned and to reconcile any conflicting
arguments. Note: Consensus need not imply unanimity.
(Source FSC-PRO-01-003 V3-1)
Conservation/Protection: These words are used interchangeably when referring to management
activities* designed to maintain the identified environmental or cultural values in existence longterm*. Management activities* may range from zero or minimal interventions to a specified
range of appropriate interventions and activities designed to maintain, or compatible withmaintaining, these identified values.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Conservation Areas Network: Those portions of the Management Unit* and the area of
ecological influence* for which conservation* is the primary and, in some circumstances,
exclusive objective*. For public lands, the Conservation Areas Network is the sum of protectedareas* and designated conservation lands*. For private lands, the Conservation Areas Network is
the sum of protected areas*, designated conservation lands* and secondary conservation
lands*.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Conservation zones [and protection areas]: Defined areas that are designated and managed
primarily to safeguard species, habitats*, ecosystems*, natural features or other site-specificvalues because of their natural environmental or cultural values, or for purposes of monitoring,evaluation or research, not necessarily excluding other management activities*. For the
purposes of the Principles* and Criteria*, these terms are used interchangeably, without implyingthat one always has a higher degree of conservation* or protection* than the other.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Criterion (pl. Criteria): A means of judging if a Principle* (of forest stewardship) has been fulfilled.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V4-0)
Critical: The concept of criticality or fundamentality in Principle 9 and HCVs* relates toirreplaceability and to cases where loss or major damage to this HCV would cause serious
prejudice or suffering to affected stakeholders*. An ecosystem service* is critical (HCV 4) wherea disruption of that service is likely to cause, or threaten, severe negative impacts on thewelfare, health or survival of local communities*, on the environment, on HCVs*, or on thefunction of significant infrastructure*, such as roads*, dams, buildings etc. The notion of criticality
here refers to the importance and risk* for natural resources and environmental and socioeconomic values.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Critical habitat: In the context of Indicator 6.4.5, critical habitat for boreal caribou is identified
as: i) the area within the boundary of each boreal caribou range* that provides an overall
ecological condition that will allow for an ongoing recruitment and retirement cycle of habitat,
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 134 of 159 –which maintains a perpetual state of a minimum of 65% of the area as undisturbed habitat*; andii) biophysical attributes required by boreal caribou to carry out life processes. The precise
location of the 65% undisturbed habitat* within the range will vary over time.
(Source: Environment Canada 2011). For a more complete definition refer to Environment
Canada (2011)
Crown land: In Canada, public lands are often referred as Crown lands. The federal andprovincial/territorial governments have specific responsibilities regarding public lands so theselands can be administered differently in each province.
(Source: FSC Canada)
Culturally appropriate [mechanisms]: Means/approaches for outreach to target groups that are
in harmony with the customs, values, sensitivities, and ways of life of the target audience.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Cumulative disturbance: As used in Indicator 6.4.5, cumulative disturbance is the proportion of arange with combined anthropogenic and natural disturbances less than a benchmark age. A
commonly-used benchmark age has been 40 years, however there is uncertainty about thebroad applicability of this benchmark. Different boreal forest regions are characterized byvarying disturbance ecologies and there is also variability in the relationship between the level ofcumulative disturbance and caribou productivity. A benchmark of 40 years is typically used in
the absence of an empirical basis for another benchmark.
(Source: Adapted from Environment Canada 2011)
Customary law: Interrelated sets of customary rights* may be recognized as customary law. In
some jurisdictions, customary law is equivalent to statutory law*, within its defined area ofcompetence and may replace the statutory law* for defined ethnic or other social groups. In
some jurisdictions customary law complements statutory law* and is applied in specified
circumstances (Source: Based on N.L. Peluso and P. Vandergeest. 2001. Genealogies of thepolitical forest and customary rights in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, Journal of Asian Studies
60(3):761–812).
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Customary rights: Rights which result from a long series of habitual or customary actions,constantly repeated, which have, by such repetition and by uninterrupted acquiescence,acquired the force of a law within a geographical or sociological unit.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V4-0)
Cutblock: A contiguous area of forest* that has been harvested except for individual trees andpatches left either for silvicultural purposes or to provide ecological benefits.
(Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)
Deactivation/Abandonment: Used in reference to access road* management. Deactivation
and abandonment are undertaken with the intent of rendering roads* inaccessible orimpassable to motorized vehicles. Deactivation is an active process involving physicalmanipulation of road* surfaces or water crossings, whereas abandonment is a passive process
involving cessation of maintenance so that the road* surface eventually falls into disrepair or isnaturally revegetated.
(Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)
Designated conservation lands: Areas identified through the process of addressing therequirements of Criterion 6.5 that are to be managed through the exclusion of forest
management activities* (except in rare instances when necessary to achieve objectives*
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 135 of 159 –associated with restoration* or maintenance of natural conditions*) in recognition of theirecological and/or cultural values.
(Source: FSC Canada Standard Development Group)
Dispute. Represent a formal disagreement, after the initial attempts to resolve a complaint* havenot been achieved.
(Source: FSC Canada, based on Merriam-Webster)
Dispute of substantial duration: Dispute* that continues for more than twice as long as thepredefined timelines in the FSC System (this is, for more than 6 months after receiving thecomplaint, based on FSC-STD-20-001).
(Sources: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Dispute of substantial magnitude: A dispute of substantial magnitude is a dispute* that involves
one or more of the following:• Where the negative impact of management activities* on local communities or on
Indigenous Peoples* legal* or customary rights* is of such a scale that it cannot bereversed or mitigated;• Physical violence;• Significant destruction of property;• Presence of law enforcement or military bodies;• Acts of intimidation against workers* and stakeholders*.
A dispute* can become of substantial magnitude if it is of substantial duration, implies asignificant number of interests and has a significant negative impact to the forest resource /value.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Economic viability: The capability of developing and surviving as a relatively independentsocial, economic or political unit. Economic viability may require but is not synonymous withprofitability.
(Source: Based on the definition provided on the website of the European Environment Agency)(FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Ecoregion/Ecodistrict: Large unit of land or water containing a geographically distinct
assemblage of species, natural communities, and environmental conditions(Source: WWF Global 200. https://www.worldwildlife.org/biomes )Ecosystem: A dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their
non-living environment interacting as a functional unit.
(Source: Convention on Biological Diversity 1992, Article 2) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Ecosystem function: An intrinsic ecosystem* characteristic related to the set of conditions andprocesses whereby an ecosystem* maintains its integrity (such as primary productivity, foodchain, biogeochemical cycles). Ecosystem functions include such processes as decomposition,
production, nutrient cycling, and fluxes of nutrients and energy. For FSC purposes, this definition
includes ecological and evolutionary processes such as gene flow and disturbance regimes,
regeneration cycles and ecological seral development (succession) stages.
(Source: Based on R. Hassan, R. Scholes and N. Ash. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being:
Synthesis. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Series. Island Press, Washington DC; and R.F.
Noss. 1990. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conservation Biology
4(4):355–364) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 136 of 159 –Ecosystem integrity: A broad concept often equated with ecosystem* health; this term generally
includes the notions of containing a complete suite of naturally functioning ecological processes
across all scales consistent with the size of the ecosystem*, complete, or nearly complete
representation of naturally occurring species, minimally impaired by human-caused stresses.
(Source: adapted from King, A.W. 1993. Considerations of scale and hierarchy. In S. Woodley, J.
Kay, and G. Francis. Ecological Integrity and the Management of Ecosystems, 19-46. St. Lucie
Press. Delray Beach, FL.)
Ecosystem services: The benefits people obtain from ecosystems*. These include:• provisioning services, such as food, forest products and water;• regulating services, such as regulation of floods, drought, land degradation, air quality,
climate and disease;• supporting services, such as soil formation and nutrient cycling; and• cultural services and cultural values, such as recreational, spiritual, religious and othernon-material benefits.
(Source: Based on R. Hassan, R. Scholes and N. Ash. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being:
Synthesis. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Series. Island Press, Washington DC) (FSC-STD60-004 V1-0)
Efficient collaborative process: As used in Indicator 6.4.5c, involves circumstances in which The
Organization* engages with self-identified interested and affected stakeholders* and affected
Indigenous Peoples* to identify a caribou conservation approach. The process is collaborativein that the parties work together to achieve an agreed-upon end point, and the process isefficient in that it recognizes the need for timeliness to address The Organization’s* FSC
obligations and the urgency associated with identifying conservation-oriented caribou
management strategies.
(Source: FSC Canada)
Employee: Anyone who is on the payroll of a specific business, in a full-time, part-time orseasonal capacity, for whom the resource manager* withholds and remits taxes in accordancewith federal and provincial laws.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Canada Great Lakes St. Lawrence Standard 2010)
Endemic: A species or subspecies that is restricted to a defined geographical area.
(Source: FSC Canada HCV Sub-committee)
Enduring feature: A landscape* element or unit within a natural region characterized byrelatively uniform origin of surficial material, texture of surficial material and topography. (Source:
FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Engagement: The process by which The Organization* communicates, consults and/or provides
for the participation of interested and/or affected stakeholders* and Indigenous Peoples*,ensuring that their concerns, desires, expectations, needs, rights and opportunities are
considered in the establishment, implementation and updating of the management plan*.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-SDT-01-001 V5-0)
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Systematic process used to identify potential
environmental and social impacts of proposed projects, to evaluate alternative approaches,
and to design and incorporate appropriate prevention, mitigation, management andmonitoring measures. The assessment methodologies used must be scientifically sound. The
scope of an assessment is typically outlined at the start of the project so that the project has
some well-defined boundaries. These may include physical, temporal, political, cultural andfinancial limits within the project mandate. Aspects of the environment typically included in
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 137 of 159 –assessments are site impacts on soil, and site attributes, community impacts on local wildlife andecological communities, and landscape* impacts on the broader forest ecosystem*.
(Source: based on Environmental impact assessment, guidelines for FAO field projects. Food andagriculture organization of the United Nations (FAO). Rome, STD-01-001 V5-0) (FSC-STD-01-001
V5-0)
Environmental values: The following set of elements of the biophysical and human environment:• ecosystem functions* (including carbon sequestration and storage);• biological diversity*;• water resources;• soils;• atmosphere;• landscape values* (including cultural and spiritual values).
The actual worth attributed to these elements depends on human and societal perceptions.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Ephemeral stream: A stream that flows briefly only in direct response to precipitation in theimmediate locality and whose channel is always above the water table.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Expert: 1. An individual whose knowledge or skill is specialized and profound as the result ofmuch practical or academic experience. 2. A recognized authority on a topic by virtue of the
body of relevant material published on the topic, their stature within the professional community,
and the broadly-recognized accumulated related experience. 3. An individual who possess a
wealth of experience on a topic such as may be accumulated through practical means
including the accumulation of traditional knowledge*.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Externalities: The positive and negative impacts of activities on stakeholders* that are notdirectly involved in those activities, or on a natural resource or the environment, which do not
usually enter standard cost accounting systems, such that the market prices of the products of
those activities do not reflect the full costs or benefits.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Fair compensation: An action or process (which may include remuneration) offered to redress aharm that is proportionate to the magnitude and type of harm experienced or services
rendered by another party to reconcile the harm.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Fertilizer: Mineral or organic substances, most commonly N, P2O5 and K20, which are applied tosoil for enhancing plant growth.
(FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Focal species: Species whose requirements for persistence define the attributes that must bepresent if that landscape* is to meet the requirements of the species that occur there.
(Source: Lambeck, R., J. 1997. Focal Species: A multi-species Umbrella for Nature Conservation.
Conservation Biology vol. 11 (4): 849-856) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Forest: A tract of land dominated by trees.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0. Derived from FSC Guidelines for Certification Bodies, Scope ofForest Certification, Section 2.1 first published in 1998, and revised as FSC-GUI-20-200 in 2005,
and revised again in 2010 as FSC-DIR-20-007 FSC Directive on Forest Management Evaluations,
ADVICE-20-007-01). (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 138 of 159 –Forest Management Activities: see Management Activities*.
Forest Management Unit: see Management Unit*
Forest type: Forest type is a group of forest ecosystems* of generally similar composition that canbe readily differentiated from other such groups by their tree and under-canopy species
composition, productivity and/or crown closure.
(Source: Convention on Biological diversity)
Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC): A legal* condition whereby a person or community canbe said to have given consent to an action prior to its commencement, based upon a clear
appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications and future consequences of that
action, and the possession of all relevant facts at the time when consent is given. Free, prior andinformed consent includes the right to grant, modify, withhold or withdraw approval.
(Source: Based on the Preliminary working paper on the principle of Free, Prior and Informed
Consent of Indigenous Peoples (…) (E/CN.4/Sub.2/AC.4/2004/4 8 July 2004) of the 22nd Sessionof the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Sub-commission on the Promotion andProtection of Human Rights, Working Group on Indigenous Populations, 19–23 July 2004). (FSCSTD-60-004 V1-0)
Gender equality: Gender equality or gender equity means that women and men have equal
conditions for realizing their full human rights and for contributing to, and benefiting from,
economic, social, cultural and political development.
(Source: Adapted from FAO, IFAD and ILO workshop on ‘Gaps, trends and current research ingender dimensions of agricultural and rural employment: differentiated pathways out ofpoverty’, Rome, 31 March to 2 April 2009.). (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Genetically modified organism: An organism* in which the genetic material has been altered ina way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination.
(Source: Based on FSC-POL-30-602 FSC Interpretation on GMO (Genetically Modified
Organisms)). (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Genotype: The genetic constitution of an organism*.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5- 0))
Good faith: The principle of good faith implies that the parties make every effort to reach an
agreement, conduct genuine and constructive negotiations, avoid delays in negotiations,
respect concluded agreements, and give sufficient time to discuss and settle dispute*s.
(Source: FSC Policy Motion 40/2017)
Grassland: Land covered with herbaceous plants with less than 10% tree and shrub cover.
(Source: UNEP, cited in FAO. 2002. Second Expert Meeting on Harmonizing Forest-Related
Definitions for use by various stakeholders) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Group entity: The group entity is the entity representing the forest properties that constitute agroup for FSC forest management certification. The group entity applies for group certificationand finally holds the forest management certificate. The group entity is responsible to thecertification body for ensuring that the requirements of the FSC Principles* and Criteria* for Forest
Stewardship are met in all forest properties participating in the group. The group entity may be
an individual, e.g. a resource manager*, a cooperative body, an owner association, or othersimilar legal* entity.
(Source: FSC-STD-30-005)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 139 of 159 –Habitat: The place or type of site where an organism* or population occurs.
(Source: Based on the Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 2) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Habitat features: Forest* stand* attributes and structures, including but not limited to:• Old commercial and non-commercial trees whose age noticeably exceeds theaverage age of the main canopy;• Rare plant communities;• Trees with special ecological value;• Vertical and horizontal complexity;• Standing dead trees;• Dead fallen wood;• Forest* openings attributable to natural disturbances;• Nesting sites;• Small wetlands*, bogs, fens;• Ponds;• Areas for procreation;• Areas for feeding and shelter, including seasonal cycles of breeding;• Areas for migration;• Areas for hibernation.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Harvest area: A forest* area in which harvesting operations have taken place. A harvest area
often consists of more than one cutblock*. Cutblocks* within a harvest area are usually closeenough so that they are planned and implemented as part of the same forestry operation.
Cutblocks* within a harvest area are generally separated by patches or linear stretches ofcontiguous forest* so that there is not an uninterrupted cut area between the cutblocks*.
(Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)High Conservation Value (HCV): Any of the following values:
HCV 1: Species Diversity. Concentrations of biological diversity* including endemic* species*,
and rare*, threatened* or endangered* species, that are significant* at global, regional or
national levels.
HCV 2: Landscape*-level ecosystems* and mosaics. Intact Forest Landscapes*, large
landscape*-level ecosystems* and ecosystem* mosaics that are significant* at global, regionalor national levels, and that contain viable populations of the great majority of the naturally
occurring species in natural patterns of distribution and abundance.
HCV 3: Ecosystems* and habitats*. Rare, threatened, or endangered ecosystems, habitats* or
refugia*.
HCV 4: Critical* ecosystem services*. Basic ecosystem services* in critical* situations, including
protection of water catchments and control of erosion of vulnerable soils and slopes.
HCV 5: Community needs. Sites and resources fundamental for satisfying the basic necessities of
local communities* or Indigenous Peoples* (for example for livelihoods, health, nutrition, water),
identified through engagement* with these communities or Indigenous Peoples*.
HCV 6: Cultural values. Sites, resources, habitats* and landscapes* of global or national cultural,archaeological or historical significance, and/or of critical* cultural, ecological, economic or
religious/sacred importance for the traditional cultures of local communities* or Indigenous
Peoples*, identified through engagement* with these local communities* or Indigenous
Peoples*.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0, based on FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 140 of 159 –High Conservation Value assessment: The complete process of identifying High Conservation
Values* and High Conservation Value areas* and developing management and monitoringplans to ensure that the values identified are maintained or enhanced.
(Source: Adapted from Stewart et al. 2008)
High Conservation Value areas: Zones and physical spaces which possess and/or are needed
for the existence and maintenance of identified High Conservation Values*.
(FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
High grading: High grading is a tree removal practice in which only the best quality, mostvaluable timber trees are removed, often without regenerating new tree seedlings or removing
the remaining poor quality and suppressed understory trees and, in doing so, degrading theecological health and commercial value of the forest*. High grading stands* as a counterpoint
to sustainable resource management.
(Source: based on Glossary of Forest Management Terms. North Carolina Division of Forest
Resources. March 2009) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Hydrologic features: Water-related features visible at the land surface, such as stream channels,
lakes, springs, seepage zones and wetlands*.
(Source: FSC Canada BC Standard)
Independent expert: An expert* who is not employed by The Organization* or government andhas no apparent conflict of interest*.
(Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)
Indicator: A quantitative or qualitative variable which can be measured or described, andwhich provides a means of judging whether a Management Unit* complies with therequirements of an FSC Criterion*. Indicators and the associated thresholds thereby define therequirements for responsible forest management at the level of the Management Unit* and are
the primary basis of forest evaluation.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-002 V1-0)
Indigenous Peoples: The following criteria may be used to identify Indigenous Peoples:• The key characteristic or criterion is self-identification as Indigenous Peoples at theindividual level and acceptance by the community as their member;• Historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies;• Strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources;• Distinct social, economic or political systems;• Distinct language, culture and beliefs;• Form non-dominant groups of society;• Resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as
distinctive peoples and communities.
(Source: Adapted from United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous, Factsheet ‘Who are
Indigenous Peoples’ October 2007; United Nations Development Group, ‘Guidelines on
Indigenous Peoples’ Issues’ United Nations 2009, United Nations Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenous Peoples, 13 September 2007). (Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Infrastructure: In the context of forest management, roads*, bridges, culverts, log landings,
quarries, impoundments, buildings and other structures required while implementing themanagement plan*.
(IFSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 141 of 159 –Intact Forest Landscape: A territory within today's global extent of forest* cover which contains
forest* and non-forest ecosystems* minimally influenced by human economic activity, with anarea of at least 500 km 2 (50,000 ha) and a minimal width of 10 km (measured as the diameter ofa circle that is entirely inscribed within the boundaries of the territory).
(Source: Intact Forests / Global Forest Watch. Glossary definition as provided on Intact Forest
website. 2006-2014). (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0) (Methodological flexibility for delineating IFLs in
Canada is provided in FSC Canada 2017 « Interim Guidance for the Delineation of Intact Forest
Landscapes», May 25, 2017)
Intellectual property: Practices as well as knowledge, innovations and other creations of themind.
(Source: Based on the Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 8(j); and World Intellectual
Property Organization. What is Intellectual Property? WIPO Publication No. 450(E)) (FSC-STD-60004 V1-0)
Intensity: A measure of the force, severity or strength of a management activity* or otheroccurrence affecting the nature of the activity’s impacts.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0 V1-0)
Interested stakeholder: Any person, group of persons, or entity that has shown an interest, or is
known to have an interest, in the activities of a Management Unit*. The following are examples
of interested stakeholders.
• Conservation organizations, for example environmental NGOs;• Labor (rights) organizations, for example labor unions;• Human rights organizations, for example social NGOs;• Local development projects;• Local governments;• National government departments functioning in the region;• FSC National Offices;• Experts* on specific issues, for example High Conservation Values*.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Intermittent stream: A stream in contact with the groundwater table that flows only at certain
times of year, such as when the groundwater table is high and/or when it receives water fromsprings or from surface areas. Also known as a seasonal stream.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Internationally accepted scientific protocol: A predefined science-based procedure which iseither published by an international scientific network or union, or referenced frequently in theinternational scientific literature.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Interquartile range: A measure of variability based on dividing a data set into quartiles thatdefines the middle 50% of values in a distribution.
(Source: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 2014)
Invasive species: Species that are rapidly expanding outside of their native range. Invasive
species can alter ecological relationships among native species* and can affect ecosystem
function* and human health.
(Source: Based on World Conservation Union (IUCN). Glossary definitions as provided on IUCN
website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 142 of 159 –Lands and territories: For the purposes of the Principles* and Criteria* these are lands or territories
that Indigenous Peoples* or local communities* have traditionally owned, or customarily used or
occupied, and where access to natural resources is vital to the sustainability of their cultures andlivelihoods.
(Source: Based on World Bank safeguard OP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples, section 16 (a). July 2005.)(FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Landscape: A geographical mosaic composed of interacting ecosystems* resulting from theinfluence of geological, topographical, soil, climatic, biotic and human interactions in a given
area.
(Source: Based on World Conservation Union (IUCN). Glossary definitions as provided on IUCN
website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Landscape values: Landscape values can be visualized as layers of human perceptions overlaid
on the physical landscape*. Some landscape values, like economic, recreation, subsistencevalue or visual quality are closely related to physical landscape* attributes. Other landscapevalues, such as intrinsic or spiritual value are more symbolic in character and are influenced
more by individual perception or social construction than physical landscape* attributes.
(Source: Based on website of the Landscape Value Institute) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Legal: In accordance with primary legislation (national or local laws*) or secondary legislation(subsidiary regulations, decrees, orders, etc.). Legal also includes rule-based decisions made bylegally competent* agencies where such decisions flow directly and logically from the laws andregulations. Decisions made by legally competent* agencies may not be legal if they do not
flow directly and logically from the laws and regulations and if they are not rule-based but use
administrative discretion.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Legally competent: Mandated in law to perform a certain function.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Legal registration: National or local legal* license or set of permissions to operate as anenterprise, with rights to buy and sell products and/or services commercially. The license or
permissions can apply to an individual, a privately-owned enterprise or a publicly-owned
corporate entity. The rights to buy and sell products and/or services do not carry the obligation
to do so, so legal registration applies also to The Organizations* operating a Management Unit*
without sales of products or services; for example, for unpriced recreation or for conservation* of
biodiversity or habitat*.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Legal status: The way in which the Management Unit* is classified according to law. In terms oftenure*, it means the category of tenure*, such as communal land or leasehold or freehold orState land or government land, etc. If the Management Unit* is being converted from one
category to another, for example, from State land to communal indigenous land, the status
includes the current position in the transition process. In terms of administration, legal status
could mean that the land is owned by the nation, and is administered on behalf of the nation bya government department, and is leased by a government Ministry to a private sector operator
through a concession.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Living wage: The remuneration received for a standard work week by a worker* in a particularplace that sufficient to afford a decent standard of living for the worker* and her or his family.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 143 of 159 –Elements of a decent standard of living include food, water, housing, education, health care,transport, clothing, and other essential needs including provision for unexpected events.
(Source: A Shared Approach to a Living Wage. ISEAL Living Wage Group. November 2013) (FSCSTD-60-004 V1-0)
Local communities: (Human) Communities that are in or adjacent to the Management Unit*,
and also those that are close enough to have a significant impact on the economy or theenvironmental values* of the Management Unit* or to have their economies, collective rights* orenvironments values significantly affected by the forest management activities* on theManagement Unit*. In Canada, communities to be considered are the ones officially identified
as a municipality by the Canada Revenue Agency which list them and shows their qualified
donees status under the Income Tax Act (http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/chrts-gvng/qlfddns/mncplts-eng.html). The respective provincial lists may be also used.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Local laws: The whole suite of primary and secondary laws (acts, ordinances, statutes, decrees)
which is limited in application to a geographic district within a national territory, as well as
secondary regulations, and tertiary administrative procedures (rules/ requirements) that derive
their authority directly and explicitly from these primary and secondary laws. Laws deriveauthority ultimately from the Westphalian concept of sovereignty of the Nation State.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Long-term: For Indicators* that refer to long-term or longer-term as a basis for defining whenmodelled quantitative objectives* or targets of Indicators* should be achieved, the term means
the longest modelling horizon of the existing forest management plan*. The term is also used torefer to the time-scale of the forest owner or manager as manifested by the objectives* of the
management plan*, the rate of harvesting, and the commitment to maintain permanent forest*
cover. The length of time involved will vary according to the context and ecological conditions,and will be a function of how long it takes a given ecosystem* to recover its natural structure
and composition following harvesting or disturbance, or to produce mature or primaryconditions.
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-01-002 V1-0)
Low intensity forest: Forests* with a harvesting rate of less than 20% of the mean annual growth intimber, and either an annual harvest or an annual average harvest of less than 5,000 m 3(averaged over the certificate lifetime).
(Source: Based on FSC-STD-01-003)
INTENT BOX
Native forests* used solely for harvesting non-timber forest products* also qualify as low
intensity forests* regardless of size or intensity*.
Plantations* of non-timber forest products* shall not be considered low intensity forest*
Management Units* within the meaning of this Standard.
Management activities: Any or all operations, processes or procedures associated withmanaging a forest*, including, but not limited to: planning, consultation, harvesting, accessconstruction and maintenance, silvicultural activities (planting, site preparation, tending),
monitoring, assessment, and reporting.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Management objective: Specific management goals, practices, outcomes, and approaches
established to achieve the requirements of this Standard.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 144 of 159 –Management plan: The collection of documents, reports, records and maps that describe, justify
and regulate the activities carried out by any manager, staff or organization within or in relation
to the Management Unit*, including statements of objectives* and policies.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Management Unit: A spatial area or areas submitted for FSC certification with clearly definedboundaries managed to a set of explicit long-term* management objectives* which are
expressed in a management plan*. These areas include:• all facilities and areas within or adjacent to this spatial area or areas under legal* title ormanagement control of, or operated by or on behalf of The Organization*, forcontributing to the management objectives*; and• all facilities and area(s) outside, and not adjacent to this spatial area or areas andoperated by or on behalf of The Organization*, solely for contributing to the
management objectives*.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Marketable: A product that can be sold or exchanged because one or more buyers exist.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard, 2004)
Merchantable: A log or tree which meets or exceeds minimum size requirements and contains a
proportion of sound wood in excess of minimum requirements, as determined according toapplicable scaling (wood measurement) standards.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard, 2004)
Mutually agreed: The parties undertake obligations to each other to do, or not to do, one ormore actions to address legitimate concerns of individuals in a group decision-making process.
Evidence of an agreement can be oral or put in writing (and may be referred to as a contract).
(Source: FSC Canada, based on
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/mutual and https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/agree)
National laws: The whole suite of primary and secondary laws (acts, ordinances, statutes,
decrees), which is applicable to a national territory, as well as secondary regulations, andtertiary administrative procedures (rules/ requirements) that derive their authority directly andexplicitly from these primary and secondary laws.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Native ecosystem: See natural conditions*.
Native species: Species, subspecies, or lower taxon, occurring within its natural range (past or
present) and dispersal potential (that is, within the range it occupies naturally or could occupy
without direct or indirect introduction or care by humans).
(Source: Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Invasive Alien Species Programme. Glossaryof Terms as provided on CBD website). (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Natural conditions: For the purposes of the Principles* and Criteria* and any applications ofrestoration* techniques, terms such as ‘more natural conditions’, ‘native ecosystem’ provide formanaging sites to favour or restore* native species* and associations of native species* that are
typical of the locality, and for managing these associations and other environmental values* sothat they form ecosystems* typical of the locality. Further guidelines may be provided in FSC
Forest Stewardship Standards.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 145 of 159 –Natural forest: A forest* area with many of the principal characteristics and key elements ofnative ecosystems*, such as complexity, structure and biological diversity*, including soil
characteristics, flora and fauna, in which all or almost all the trees are native species*, notclassified as plantations*.
Natural forest includes the following categories:• Forest* affected by harvesting or other disturbances, in which trees are being or havebeen regenerated by a combination of natural and artificial regeneration with species
typical of natural forests in that site, and where many of the above-ground and belowground characteristics of the natural forest are still present. In boreal and northtemperate forests* which are naturally composed of only one or few tree species, acombination of natural and artificial regeneration to regenerate forest* of the samenative species*, with most of the principal characteristics and key elements of native
ecosystems* of that site, is not by itself considered as conversion to plantations*;• Natural forests which are maintained by traditional silvicultural practices including naturalor assisted natural regeneration;•

Well-developed secondary or colonizing forest* of native species* which hasregenerated in non-forest areas;•

The definition of natural forest may include areas described as wooded ecosystems*,
woodland and savannah.

The description of natural forests and their principal characteristics and key elements may befurther defined in FSC Forest Stewardship Standards, with appropriate descriptions or examples.
Natural forest does not include land which is not dominated by trees, was previously not forest*,
and which does not yet contain many of the characteristics and elements of native
ecosystems*. Young regeneration may be considered natural forest after some years of
ecological progression. FSC Forest Stewardship Standards may indicate when such areas may
be excised from the Management Unit*, should be restored towards more natural conditions*, ormay be converted to other land uses.
FSC has not developed quantitative thresholds between different categories of forests* in termsof area, density, height, etc. FSC Forest Stewardship Standards may provide such thresholds andother guidelines, with appropriate descriptions or examples. Pending such guidance, areas
dominated by trees, mainly of native species*, may be considered as natural forest.
Thresholds and guidelines may cover areas such as:• Other vegetation types and non-forest communities and ecosystems* included in theManagement Unit*, including grassland*, bushland, wetlands*, and open woodlands;•

Very young pioneer or colonizing regeneration in a primary succession on new open sites
or abandoned farmland, which does not yet contain many of the principal
characteristics and key elements of native ecosystems*. This may be considered as
natural forest through ecological progression after the passage of years;•

Young natural regeneration growing in natural forest areas may be considered as naturalforest, even after logging, clear-felling or other disturbances, since many of the principal
characteristics and key elements of native ecosystems* remain, above-ground andbelow-ground;•

Areas where deforestation and forest degradation have been so severe that they are nolonger ‘dominated by trees’ may be considered as non-forest, when they have very few
of the principal above-ground and below-ground characteristics and key elements ofnatural forests. Such extreme degradation is typically the result of combinations of
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 146 of 159 –repeated and excessively heavy logging, grazing, farming, fuelwood collection, hunting,fire, erosion, mining, settlements, infrastructure*, etc. FSC Forest Stewardship Standards
may help to decide when such areas should be excised from the Management Unit*,
should be restored towards more natural conditions*, or may be converted to other land
uses.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Natural hazards: disturbances that can present risks* to social and environmental values* in theManagement Unit* but that may also comprise important ecosystem functions*; examples
include drought, flood, fire, landslide, storm, avalanche, etc.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Near Term: For Indicators* which refer to near-term as a basis for defining when aspects ofIndicators* should be achieved or for the extent of a planning horizon, the term means within thetime frame of implementation of operational activities identified in existing management plans*.
Typically, this is around 5-10 years.
(Source: FSC Canada Species at Risk Technical Expert Panel)
Net expansion: In the context of Indicator 6.4.5, net expansion of forest management within therange (based on cumulative disturbance*) refers to an increase in cumulative disturbed area. In
this context, it is possible to harvest an area of previously unharvested forest* after acomparably-sized area of disturbed forest* has returned to an undisturbed state (that is, after it
has been restored). Harvesting within an existing cumulative disturbance* footprint does not
result in an expansion in disturbance. In these circumstances, the total area of disturbancewould not increase and there would be no net expansion of forest management.
(Source: FSC Canada Species at Risk Technical Expert Panel)
Non-timber forest products (NTFP): All forest products other than timber derived from theManagement Unit*.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Normative: In the context of normative requirements, they are the required elements to be
demonstrated and met. Conversely, non-normative means elements are not required, but
provide information, context and/or guidance to a concept such as an Intent Box.
(Source: FSC Canada)
Objective: The basic purpose laid down by The Organization* for the forest enterprise, including
the decision of policy and the choice of means for attaining the purpose.
(Source: Based on F.C. Osmaston. 1968. The Management of Forests. Hafner, New York; and D.R.
Johnston, A.J. Grayson and R.T. Bradley. 1967. Forest Planning. Faber & Faber, London) (FSC-STD60-004 V1-0)
Obligatory codes of practice: A manual or handbook or other source of technical instruction
which The Organization* must implement by law.
(Source: FSC-STD-01- 001 V5-0)
Occupational accident: An occurrence arising out of, or during, work which results in fatal or
non-fatal injury.
(Source: International Labour Organization (ILO). Bureau of Library and Information Services. ILO
Thesaurus as provided on ILO website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Occupational disease: Any disease contracted because of an exposure to risk* factors arisingfrom work activity.
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 147 of 159 –(Source: International Labour Organization (ILO). Bureau of Library and Information Services. ILO
Thesaurus as provided on ILO website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Occupational injuries: Any personal injury, disease or death resulting from an occupational
accident*.
(Source: International Labour Organization (ILO). Bureau of Library and Information Services. ILO
Thesaurus as provided on ILO website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Old forest: Later stages in forest development which may be distinctive in composition, but arealways distinctive in structure from earlier (young and mature) successional stages.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Organism: Any biological entity capable of replication or of transferring genetic material(Source: Council Directive 90/220/EEC). (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
The Organization: The person or entity holding or applying for certification and therefore
responsible for demonstrating compliance with the requirements upon which FSC certification isbased.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Overlapping tenure holder: A licensee, also known as a third-party licensee, that either:• holds the right to harvest timber on either all or a defined portion of an area that islicensed to and/or managed by another entity; or• holds a license for exploitation of another resource (e.g., oil and gas) on a land base also
occupied by a timber licensee or managed in part to produce forest products.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Peatland: Is constituted by flooded and soggy areas, with large accumulations of organic
material, covered by a layer of poor vegetation associated with a certain degree of acidity,
and which presents a characteristic amber colour.
(Source: Aguilar, L. 2001. About Fishermen, Fisherwomen, Oceans and tides. IUCN. San Jose
(Costa Rica)) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Peer review: Review by an independent expert* on the subject being considered. A key part ofthe peer-review process is documentation by the forest manager of the manner in which thepeer review was considered and incorporated into the products being reviewed.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Pesticide: Any substance or preparation prepared or used in protecting plants or wood or otherplant products or human health or livestock or biodiversity from pests; in controlling pests; or in
rendering such pests harmless. (This definition includes insecticides, rodenticides, acaricides,
molluscicides, larvaecides, fungicides and herbicides).
(Source: FSC-POL-30-001 FSC Pesticides Policy (2005))
Plans for species at risk: In this Standard, these plans are documented strategies andprocedures for managing species at risk* and/or their habitats*. Plans can consist of a range of
documents including those that have been developed and approved in accordance withfederal or provincial legislation, sometimes called “Action Plans” or “Recovery Strategies”. Plans
can also include documents written by qualified specialists* specifically to direct managementin the Forest Management Unit* and included in forest management plans*. Plans written
specifically for the Forest Management Unit* should not conflict with approved Actions Plans or
Recovery Strategies. Plans written specifically for the Management Unit* are not intended toreplicate the detail and scope of Action Plans or Recovery Strategies, but simply to outline the
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 148 of 159 –ways in which the manager is taking a precautionary approach* to mitigating the impact of its
activities on the species and/or allowing for its recovery. Measures may involve habitat*
protection*, conservation zones*, seasonal closures, etc. They will not necessarily require a stand‐alone plan or strategy for each species, and may be reflected in measures to implement otherrequirements of this Standard.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Plantation: A forest* area established by planting or sowing with using either alien* or native
species*, often with one or few species, regular spacing and even ages, and which lacks mostof the principal characteristics and key elements of natural forests*. The description ofplantations may be further defined in FSC Forest Stewardship Standards, with appropriate
descriptions or examples, such as:• Areas which would initially have complied with this definition of ‘plantation’ but which,after the passage of years, contain many or most of the principal characteristics and key
elements of native ecosystems*, may be classified as natural forests*.
• Plantations* managed to restore* and enhance biological and habitat* diversity,
structural complexity and ecosystem* functionality may, after the passage of years, beclassified as natural forests*.
• Boreal and north temperate forests* which are naturally composed of only one or few
tree species, in which a combination of natural and artificial regeneration is used toregenerate forest* of the same native species*, with most of the principal characteristics
and key elements of native ecosystems*s of that site, may be considered as naturalforest*, and this regeneration is not by itself considered as conversion to plantations.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Precautionary approach: An approach requiring that when the available information indicatesthat management activities* pose a threat* of severe or irreversible damage to the environment
or a threat* to human welfare, The Organization* will take explicit and effective measures toprevent the damage and avoid the risks* to welfare, even when the scientific information isincomplete or inconclusive, and when the vulnerability and sensitivity of environmental values*
are uncertain.
(Source: Based on Principle 15 of Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992, andWingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle of the Wingspread Conference, 23–25
January 1998) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Pre-harvest [condition]: The diversity, composition, and structure of the forest* or plantation* prior
to felling timber and appurtenant activities such as road* building.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V4-0)
Pre-industrial forest: A native forest* that has not been subjected to large scale* harvesting. A
forest* that provides for traditional uses by Indigenous Peoples* is a pre-industrial forest if it is notalso used for large scale* harvesting. Pre-industrial forests may have characteristics that exist
because of Indigenous Peoples’* use.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2014)
Pre-industrial condition (PIC): A natural condition representative of a pre-industrial forest*. As
used in Principle 6, a pre-industrial condition analysis is a data-based assessment generally
providing insight into the forest types*, age classes and landscape* condition. Sources of
information used in pre-industrial condition analyses may include scientific literature, historical
records (e.g. inventories, cruises, harvest volumes, dues payments), mill records, fire history, earlysurveyors’ notebooks and maps, and using computer models to ‘backcast’ the composition of
the pre-industrial forest*.
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 149 of 159 –(Source: FSC Canada Standard Development Group)
Principle: An essential rule or element; in FSC’s case, of forest stewardship.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V4-0)
Productive forest: All forest* areas which are capable of growing commercial trees.
(Source: Adapted from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 2009. Forest Management Planning
Manual)Protection: See definition of Conservation*.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Protected area: An area protected for conservation* purposes by legislation, regulation, or
government land-use policy to permanently control human occupancy or activity.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Protection areas: See definition of Conservation Zone*.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Publicly available: In a manner easily accessible to people generally. Confidential or proprietary
information is not included in material made publicly available.
(Source: Adapted from Collins English Dictionary, 2003 Edition) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Qualified specialist(s): Individuals whose expertise qualifies them to carry out work (e.g.
assessments, design of management practices, etc.) required by the FSC National Forest
Stewardship Standard, considering the following:• professional ethics;• accountability;• experience;• training;• formal qualifications;• familiarity with the FSC National Forest Stewardship Standard.
• familiarity with the ecosystem* condition and/or cultural/social/Indigenous factors
relevant to the Management Unit*.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Regional Certification Standards for British Columbia 2005)
Range of natural variation (RONV): The range of dynamic change in natural ecosystems*
considering natural factors that affect the breadth of ecosystem* condition. As used in Principle
6 a RONV analysis should portray a range of possible natural conditions* of forest types*, ageclasses* and landscape* patterns with probabilities associated with the various conditions.
(Source: Adapted from FSC Regional Certification Standards for British Columbia 2005)
Range plan: In the context of Indicator 6.4.5 and related Indicators*: The main purpose of arange plan is to outline how range-specific land and/or resource activities will be managed overspace and time to ensure that critical habitat* for boreal caribou is protected from destruction.
As such, each range plan should reflect disturbance patterns on the landscape*, as measured
and updated by the provinces and territories, and outline the measures and steps that will betaken to manage the interaction between human disturbance, natural disturbance, and theneed to maintain or establish an ongoing, dynamic state of a minimum of 65% of the range as
undisturbed habitat* at any point in time to achieve or maintain a self-sustaining local
population. While the general ecological principles and critical habitat* dynamics described in
the recovery strategy apply to all ranges, individual ranges also possess a unique mix ofecological and land use conditions (e.g. population condition, habitat* condition and
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 150 of 159 –configuration, social and legal arrangements) that must be factored into decision making.
(Source: Environment and Climate Change Canada 2016)
Rare species: Species that are uncommon or scarce but not classified as threatened. These
species are in geographically restricted areas or specific habitats*, or are scantily scattered on alarge scale*. They are approximately equivalent to the IUCN (2001) category of Near
Threatened (NT), including species that are close to qualifying for, or are likely to qualify for, athreatened* category in the near future. They are also approximately equivalent to imperilled
species.
(Source: Based on IUCN. (2001). IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species
Survival Commission. IUCN. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.)
Ratified: The process by which an international law, convention or agreement, including
multilateral environmental agreement, is legally approved by a national legislature or equivalent
legal* mechanism, such that the international law, convention or agreement becomes
automatically part of national law or sets in motion the development of national law to give thesame legal* effect.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Reasonable: Judged to be fair or appropriate to the circumstances or purposes, based on
general experience.
(Source: Shorter Oxford English Dictionary) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Recharge area: Area in which groundwater recharge occurs – where water moves downward
from the surface to groundwater. An area in which water reaches the zone of saturation bysurface infiltration.
(Source: Heath, R.C., 1984. Ground-water regions of the United States. U.S. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 2242.U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/wsp2242/#pdf)
Refugia: An isolated area where extensive changes, typically due to changing climate or by
disturbances such as those caused by humans, have not occurred and where plants andanimals typical of a region may survive.
(Source: Glen Canyon Dam, Adaptive Management Program Glossary as provided on website
of Glen Canyon Dam website) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Representative sample areas: Portions of the Management Unit* delineated for conserving or
restoring viable examples of an ecosystem* that would naturally occur in that geographicalregion.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Resilience: The ability of a system to maintain key functions and processes in the face of stressesor pressures by either resisting or adapting to change. Resilience can be applied to both
ecological systems and social systems.
(Source: IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (IUCN-WCPA). 2008. Establishing Marine
Protected Area Networks – Making it Happen. Washington D.C.: IUCN-WCPA National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration and The Nature Conservancy.) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Resource manager: A person or The Organization* that has been given the responsibilities byforest owners for the utilization of their forest resources, including operational planning andharvesting operations. In a group scheme, resource manager and group entity* may be thesame person/ organization. This is often referred to as ‘resource manager type of group’ or ‘Type
II Group’).
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 151 of 159 –(Source: FSC-STD-30-005)
Restore / Restoration: In some cases, restore means to repair the damage done toenvironmental values* that resulted from management activities* or other causes. In othercases, restore means the formation of more natural conditions* in sites which have been
degraded or converted to other land uses. (Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
The Organization* is not necessarily obliged to restore those environmental values* that havebeen affected by factors beyond the control of The Organization*, for example by natural
disasters, by climate change, or by the legally authorized activities of third parties, such as public
infrastructure*, mining, hunting or settlement. FSC-POL-20-003 The Excision of Areas from the
Scope of Certification describes the processes by which such areas may be excised from thearea certified, when appropriate.
Riparian zone: Interface between land and a water body*, and the vegetation associated with
it.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Risk: The probability of an unacceptable negative impact arising from any activity in theManagement Unit* combined with its seriousness in terms of consequences.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Road: A constructed linear feature capable of supporting use by a pickup truck.
(Source: FSC Canada Technical Expert Panel)
Scale: A measure of the extent to which a management activity* or event affects anenvironmental value or a Management Unit*, in time or space. An activity with a small or low
spatial scale affects only a small proportion of the forest* each year, an activity with a small or
low temporal scale occurs only at long intervals.
(Source: FSC-STD- 01-001 V5-0)
Scale, intensity and risk (SIR): See individual definitions of the terms scale*, intensity*, and risk*.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Secondary conservation lands: Areas identified through the process of addressing therequirements of Criterion 6.5 for which implementation of forest operations maintains theecological or cultural properties for which the lands are being conserved.
Significant: For the purposes of Principle 9, HCVs 1, 2 and 6 there are three main forms ofrecognizing significance.
• A designation, classification or recognized conservation* status, assigned by aninternational agency such as IUCN or Birdlife International;• A designation by national or regional authorities, or by a responsible national
conservation organization, based on its concentration of biodiversity;• A voluntary recognition by the manager, owner or The Organization*, based on
available information, or of the known or suspected presence of a significant biodiversity
concentration, even when not officially designated by other agencies.
Any one of these forms will justify designation as HCVs 1, 2 and 6. Many regions of the world havereceived recognition for their biodiversity importance, measured in many ways. Existing maps
and classifications of priority areas for biodiversity conservation* play an essential role inidentifying the potential presence of HCVs 1, 2 and 6.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 152 of 159 –Silvicultural system: A planned series of treatments for tending, harvesting, and re-establishing astand*.
(Source: Dictionary of Forestry, Presse de l’Université Laval, 2000)
Silviculture: The art and science of controlling the establishment, growth, composition, healthand quality of forests* and woodlands to meet the targeted diverse needs and values oflandowners and society on a sustainable basis.
(Source: Nieuwenhuis, M. 2000. Terminology of Forest Management. IUFRO World Series Vol. 9.
IUFRO 4.04.07 SilvaPlan and SilvaVoc) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Small-scale forest: Forests* managed for timber that are less than or equal to 1000 ha in size.
(Source: Based on FSC-STD-01-003)
Species at risk: All species or subspecies or designated populations formally listed in schedules
referenced in federal or provincial endangered species/SAR legislation or provincial
wildlife/biodiversity legislation that have been classified as Endangered, Threatened, Vulnerable,
Special Concern or similar designations. For this Standard the term species at risk also includes all
species that have been assessed as ‘at risk’ designation by bodies formally recognized in federal
or provincial endangered species legislation (e.g. the Committee on the Status of Endangered
Wildlife in Canada – COSEWIC, plus equivalent provincial bodies).
(Source: FSC Canada Species at Risk Technical Expert Panel)
Sphere of influence: Professional associations with colleagues or businesses, agencies andIndigenous Peoples* with whom individuals or businesses or agencies interact. When required by
Indicators* to work within one’s sphere of influence, The Organizations* and forest managers
shall interact with their colleagues, other professionals, Indigenous Peoples*, businesses andagencies, including government Ministries, Departments and other agencies, to achieve the
Indicators’* objectives*.
(Source: FSC Canada Species at Risk Technical Expert Panel)
Stakeholder: See definitions for the terms affected stakeholder* and interested stakeholder*.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Stand: A community of trees possessing sufficient uniformity in composition, constitution, age,arrangement or condition to be distinguishable from adjacent communities.
(Source: FSC Canada National Boreal Standard 2004)
Statutory law or statute law: The body of law contained in Acts of Parliament (national
legislature).
(Source: Oxford Dictionary of Law) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Super-canopy trees: Large, living, individual trees that tower over the forest canopy.
(Source: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 2010)
Tenure: Socially defined agreements held by individuals or groups, recognized by legal* statutes
or customary practice, regarding the ‘bundle of rights and duties’ of ownership, holding, accessand/or usage of a particular land unit or the associated resources there within (such asindividual trees, plant species, water, minerals, etc.).
(Source: World Conservation Union (IUCN). Glossary definitions provided on IUCN website) (FSCSTD-60-004 V1-0)
Threat: An indication or warning of impending or likely damage or negative impacts.
(Source: Based on Oxford English Dictionary) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 153 of 159 –Threatened species: Species that meet the IUCN (2001) criteria for Vulnerable (VU), Endangered(EN) or Critically Endangered (CR), and are facing a high, very high or extremely high risk* ofextinction in the wild. These categories may be re-interpreted for FSC purposes according to
official national classifications (which have legal* significance) and to local conditions andpopulation densities (which should affect decisions about appropriate conservation* measures).
(Source: Adapted from IUCN. (2001). IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN
Species Survival Commission. IUCN. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.)
Timber harvesting level: The actual harvest quantity executed on the Management Unit*,
tracked by either volume (e.g. cubic meters or board feet) or area (e.g. hectares or acres)
metrics for comparison with calculated (maximum) allowable harvest levels.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Timely manner: As promptly as circumstances reasonably allow; not intentionally postponed by
The Organization*; in compliance with applicable laws*, contracts, licenses or invoices.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Traditional knowledge: Information, know-how, skills and practices that are developed,
sustained and passed on from generation to generation within a community, often forming partof its cultural or spiritual identity.
(Source: based on the definition by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Glossary
definition as provided under Policy / Traditional Knowledge on the WIPO website) (FSC-STD-60004 V1-0)
Undisturbed habitat: Habitat* that is not within 500 m buffer of an anthropogenic disturbance orfire within a benchmark period. Consistent with the definition of cumulative disturbance*, acommonly-used benchmark for suitable boreal l forest conditions has been 40 years, however
there is uncertainty about the broad applicability of this benchmark. Different boreal forest
regions are characterized by varying disturbance ecologies. A benchmark of 40 years should be
used in the absence of an empirical basis for another benchmark.
(Source: Adapted from Environment Canada 2016)
Uphold: To acknowledge, respect, sustain and support.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Use rights: Rights for the use of resources of the Management Unit* that can be defined by local
custom, mutual agreements, or prescribed by other entities holding access rights. These rights
may restrict the use of resources to specific levels of consumption or harvesting techniques.
(Source: FSC-STD-01-001 V5-0)
Verifiable targets: Specific statement, describing a desired future state or condition of an
Indicator*, established to measure progress towards the achievement of each of the
management objectives*. They are expressed as clear outcomes, such that their attainment
can be verified and it is possible to determine whether they have been accomplished or not.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Very limited portion: The area affected shall not exceed 0.5% of the area of the Management
Unit* in any one year, nor affect a total of more than 5% of the area of the Management Unit*.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0, based on FSC-STD-01-002 V1-0)
Waste materials: Unusable or unwanted substances or by-products, such as:• Hazardous waste, including chemical waste and batteries;
FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 154 of 159 –• Containers;• Motor and other fuels and oils;• Rubbish including metals, plastics and paper; and• Abandoned buildings, machinery and equipment.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Water bodies (including water courses): Seasonal, temporary, and permanent brooks, creeks,
streams, rivers, ponds, and lakes. Water bodies include riparian areas, wetlands* lakes, swamps,
bogs and springs.
(Source: FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Watershed: An area of land that feeds water to a river, draining through the landscape* into
tributaries and main river channels. Also called catchments, drainage basins or river basins.
(Source: IUCN Definitions Document:
https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/en_iucn__glossary_definitions.pdf)
Wetlands: Transitional areas between terrestrial and aquatic systems in which the water table isusually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water.
(Source: Cowarding, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C., Laroe, E.T. 1979. Classification of Wetlands andDeepwater Habitats of the United States. DC US Department: Washington) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Under the Ramsar Convention, wetlands can include tidal mudflats, natural ponds, marshes,
potholes, wet meadows, bogs, peatlands*, freshwater swamps, mangroves, lakes, rivers andeven some coral reefs.
(Source: IUCN, No Date, IUCN Definitions – English) (FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)
Workers: All employed persons (including men and women) including part-time and seasonal
employees* of The Organization*, of all ranks and categories, as well as contractors,
subcontractors and overlapping or other forest license holders who are directly involved with theforest operations on the Management Unit*(s)* within the scope of the certificate (e.g. forest
management, planning, harvesting, road* building, on-site processing, hauling, timber sales,etc.).
(Source: Adapted from FSC-STD-60-004 V1-0)

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 155 of 159 –REFERENCE LIST
Documents Cited
Armson, K.A., Grinnell, W.R., and Robinson, F.C. (2001) History of reforestation in Ontario. In:
Wagner, R.G., and Colombo, S.J. (eds.) Regenerating the Canadian Forest: Principles andPractice for Ontario, pp. 3-22. Fitzhenry & Whiteside, Markham, Ontario.
Borrows, J. (2015) Aboriginal Title and Private Property. The Supreme Court Law Review:
Osgoode's Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 71. (Available at:
http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol71/iss1/5)
British Columbia Ministry of the Environment (2015) Guidelines and Best Management Practices(BMPs). http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/BMP/bmpintro.html
Brown, E., and Senior, M.J.M. (2014) Common Guidance for the Management and Monitoring ofHigh Conservation Values. HCV Resource Network.
Brysono, J.M. and Farnum K. Alston (2011) Creating Your Strategic Plan (Third Edition). JosseyBass, San Francisco CA.
Buse, L.J., Wagner, R.G., and Perrin, B. (1995) Public attitudes towards forest herbicide use andthe implications for public involvement. The Forestry Chronicle 71(5): 596-600.
Business Dictionary (2015). best management practice (BMP)
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/best-management-practice-BMP.html
CERFO (Centre d’enseignement et de recherche en foresterie de Sainte-Foy inc.) (ed.) (2000)
Dictionnaire de la Foresterie [Dictionary of Forestry]. Ordre des ingénieurs forestiers du Québec &Les Presses de l’Université Laval.
Comeau, P. (2014) Effects of aerial strip spraying on mixed-wood stand structure and tree
growth. The Forestry Chronicle 90(4): 479-485.
The Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11. (Available at:
http://canlii.ca/t/ldsx)
Dudley, N. (ed) (2008) Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. N.
Dudley, (ed.). Gland, Switzerland. International Union for Conservation of Nature.
Environment Canada (2008) Scientific Review for the Identification of Critical Habitat for
Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), Boreal Population, in Canada. Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada.
Environment Canada (2011) Scientific Assessment to Inform the Identification of Critical Habitat
for Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), Boreal Population in Canada: 2011 update.
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Environment Canada (2012) Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus
caribou), Boreal population, in Canada. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series.
Environment Canada, Ottawa.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 156 of 159 –Environment Canada (2014) Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou, Southern Mountainpopulation (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series.
Environment Canada, Ottawa.
Environment and Climate Change Canada (2016) Range Plan Guidance for Woodland
Caribou, Boreal Population. Species at Risk Act: Policies and Guidelines Series. Environment andClimate Change Canada, Ottawa.
FAO (2012) Environmental impact assessment, guidelines for FAO field projects. Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
FAO (2002) Proceedings: Expert Meeting on Harmonizing forest-related definitions for use byvarious stakeholders. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, 22-25 Jan.
2002. http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/Y4171E/Y4171E34.htm
FAO (2016) Free Prior and Informed Consent. An indigenous peoples’ right and a good practicefor local communities. Manual for project practitioners. Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations, 51 pp.
Forman, R.T.T., and M. Godron (1986) Landscape Ecology. Wiley. New York.
HCV Resource Network (2013) Common Guidance for the Identification of High Conservation
Values. HCV Resource Network. 63 pp. https://www.hcvnetwork.org/
Homagain, K., Shahi, C., Luckai, N., Leitch, M. F., and Bell, M. (2011) Benefit–cost analysis ofvegetation management alternatives: An Ontario case study. The Forestry Chronicle 87(2): 260273.
ILO (1993) Safety in the use of chemicals at work: An ILO code of practice. Geneva.
International Labour Office.
ILO (1998) Safety and health in forestry work: An ILO code of practice. Geneva, International
Labour Office.
ILO 169. Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, (1989) (No.169) URL:
http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_INSTRUMENT_ID:3123
14
Kayahara, G.J., and Armstrong, C.L. (2015) Understanding First Nations rights and perspectives
on the use of herbicides in forestry: A case study from northeastern Ontario. The Forestry
Chronicle 91(2): 126-140.
Lund, H.G. (2002) Definitions of Old Growth, Pristine, Climax, Ancient Forests and Similar Terms(Definitions of Forest State, Stage and Origin). Forest Information Services.
http://old.grida.no/geo/GEO/Geo-2-408.htm
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Policy Responses.
Findings of the Responses Working Group. Washington DC: Island Press, Pages 599-605.
OMNR (1986) Survey of Artificial Regeneration in Northern Ontario: Summary Report for
Northwestern, North Central and Northern Regions, Based on Field Sampling, 1984-1986.Ontario
Ministry of Natural Resources (as cited by Armson et al., 2001).

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 157 of 159 –OMNR (1988) Survey of Artificial Regeneration in Northern Ontario: Summary Report for
Northeastern and Algonquin Regions, Based on Field Sampling, 1987-1988. Ontario Ministry of
Natural Resources (as cited by Armson et al., 2001).
OMNR (2014) Forest Management Guide for Boreal Landscapes. Published by Ontario Ministry of
Natural Resources.
R. v. Powley, (2003) 2 SCR 207, 2003 SCC 43.
Stewart, C., Perpetua, G., Rayden, T., and Nussbaum, R. (2008) Good Practice Guidelines forHigh Conservation Value Assessments: practical guide for practitioners and auditors. Profest,
Oxford: England.
Thiffault, N., and Roy, V. (2011) Living without herbicides in Québec (Canada): historical context,
current strategy, research and challenges in forest vegetation management. European journalof forest research 130(1): 117-133.
Thiffault, N., Roy, V., Prégent, G., Cyr, G., Jobidon, R., and Ménétrier, J. (2003) La sylviculture desplantations résineuses au Québec. Le naturaliste canadien127(1): 63-80.
Thompson, D., Leach, J., Noel, M., Odsen, S., and Mihajilovich, M. (2012) Aerial forest herbicide
application: Comparative assessment of risk mitigation strategies in Canada. The Forestry
Chronicle 88(2): 176-184.
Turner, M.G. (ed.) (1987) Landscape Heterogeneity and Disturbance. Springer-Verlag, New York.
UNDRIP (The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) (2007) The United
Nations General Assembly. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Print. URL:
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdfhttp://www.un.org/esa/socdev/
unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdfhttp://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdfhttp://www.un.org/esa/socdev/
unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdfhttp://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2014) Unasylva. Vol 53.
UN-REDD Programme (2013) Guidelines on Free, Prior and Informed Consent. United Nations
collaborative initiative on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation, 58 pp.
Wagner, R.G. (1994) Toward integrated forest vegetation management. Journal of Forestry
92(11): 26-30.
Wagner, R.G., Flynn, J., and Gregory, R. (1998) Public perceptions of risk and acceptability offorest vegetation management alternatives in Ontario. The Forestry Chronicle 74(5): 720-727.
Wikeem, B., and Miller, V. (2006) Invasive Plants in British Columbia Protected Lands: A Strategic
Plan. British Columbia Ministry of Environment, 30 pp.

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 158 of 159 –Relevant FSC Documents
The following referenced documents are relevant for the application of this document. For
references without a version number, the latest edition of the referenced document (including
any amendments) applies.
FSC-DIR-20-007 FSC Directive on FSC Forest Management Evaluations
FSC-POL-01-004 Policy for the Association of Organizations with FSC
FSC-POL-20-003 The Excision of Areas from the Scope of Certification
FSC-POL-30-001 FSC Pesticides Policy
FSC-POL-30-401 FSC Certification and the ILO Conventions
FSC-POL-30-602 FSC Interpretation on GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms)
FSC-PRO-01-001 The Development and Revision of FSC Normative Documents
FSC-PRO-01-005 Processing Appeals
FSC-PRO-01-008 Processing Complaints in the FSC Certification Scheme
FSC-PRO-01-009 Processing Policy for Association Complaints in the FSC Certification Scheme
FSC-PRO-30-006 Ecosystem Services Procedure: Impact Demonstration and Market Tools
FSC-PRO-60-006 Development and Transfer of NFSS to FSC P&C V5-1
FSC-STD-01-001 FSC Principles and Criteria for Forest Stewardship V5-2 EN
FSC-STD-01-002 FSC Glossary of Terms
FSC-STD-01-003 SLIMF Eligibility Criteria
FSC-STD-30-005 FSC Standard for Group Entities in Forest Management Groups
FSC-STD-60-002 Structure and Content of National Forest Stewardship Standards
FSC-STD-60-006 Process requirements for the development and maintenance of National Forest
Stewardship Standards
FSC-GUI-60-002 SIR Guideline for Standard Developers
FSC-GUI-60-005 Promoting Gender Equality in National Forest Stewardship Standards
FSC Technical Series No. 2009-001. FSC Guide to integrated pest, disease and weed
management in FSC certified forests and plantations
FSC Canada. 2004 National Boreal Standard
FSC-STD-CAN-Maritimes-2008 Certification Standards for Best Forestry Practices in the Maritimes
RegionForest Stewardship Council Regional Certification Standards for British Columbia, 2005
FSC Forest Stewardship Standard Great Lakes St. Lawrence Region, Draft 3, 2010

FSC® NATIONAL FOREST STEWARDSHIP STANDARD OF CANADA (V 1-0)
– 159 of 159 –