A major shift in forest management practices is taking root across Northern Ontario’s vast wilderness. Domtar Corporation, one of the region’s significant forestry players, announced yesterday they will suspend plans to spray glyphosate-based herbicides in managed forests northeast of Sudbury.
The decision represents a significant departure from standard industry practice. For decades, forestry companies have relied on aerial herbicide applications to suppress competing vegetation after harvesting operations. This technique helps conifer seedlings establish more quickly in areas dominated by fast-growing species like poplar and birch.
“After consultation with local communities and Indigenous partners, we’ve decided to explore alternative vegetation management approaches,” said Martin Lavoie, Regional Forestry Manager at Domtar. “We recognize the deep connection many residents have to these lands and the concerns raised about chemical applications.”
The announcement follows months of growing opposition from local environmental groups, hunters, and Indigenous communities who’ve questioned the ecological impacts of broad herbicide use. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in products like Roundup, has been at the center of international debates regarding potential health and environmental effects.
Lisa McCormick, who leads the Northern Forest Advocates coalition, called the decision “a watershed moment for forest management in Ontario.”
“These forests aren’t just timber—they’re complex ecosystems and the foundation of our way of life,” McCormick told me during a visit to their Timmins office. “When you spray herbicides, you’re not just killing unwanted plants. You’re potentially affecting everything from moose habitat to blueberry harvesting that northern families have relied on for generations.”
The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry requires forest companies to follow the Crown Forest Sustainability Act, which mandates successful regeneration after harvesting. Companies typically view herbicide application as the most cost-effective way to meet these obligations.
Ministry spokesperson Jolanta Kowalski confirmed that while herbicide use remains legal under provincial regulations, companies can pursue alternative approaches if they meet regeneration standards. “Forest managers have flexibility in how they achieve successful renewal, provided they demonstrate compliance with approved forest management plans,” she said.
For Indigenous communities across Northern Ontario, the herbicide debate touches on deeper issues of land stewardship and traditional practices. Chief Walter Naveau of Mattagami First Nation has been a vocal critic of forest spraying programs that overlap with traditional territories.
“Our people have managed these forests for thousands of years without chemicals,” Chief Naveau explained during a community gathering last month. “The moose, the berries, the medicines—they’re all connected. When you introduce these substances into the system, you’re affecting food security and cultural practices that define who we are.”
Recent research from Lakehead University’s Faculty of Natural Resources Management suggests that alternatives to herbicide application, while initially more expensive, may provide broader ecological benefits. Dr. Nancy Luckai’s team has documented how diverse forest compositions support greater wildlife abundance and may prove more resilient to climate change impacts.
“When we manually thin competing vegetation rather than eliminating it chemically, we tend to see more diverse forest structures developing,” Dr. Luckai noted in her 2022 study published in the Canadian Journal of Forest Research. “This diversity often translates to better habitat value and potentially greater carbon sequestration.”
The decision carries economic implications that extend beyond the forestry sector. Northern Ontario’s tourism industry, valued at over $1.6 billion annually according to provincial figures, relies heavily on the perception of pristine wilderness. Hunting outfitters and wilderness guides have increasingly expressed concerns that herbicide programs could undermine visitor experiences.
“People come north to experience something authentic and wild,” explained James Wabano, who operates a guiding service near Cochrane. “When clients see warning signs about recent spraying, it changes how they feel about the landscape, even if officials tell us it’s safe.”
Domtar’s announcement doesn’t necessarily signal an industry-wide shift. Other major operators including Resolute Forest Products continue to utilize herbicide programs as part of their forest management strategies, citing provincial approval and scientific support for the practice.
The company’s decision arrives against a backdrop of changing public expectations about environmental stewardship. A recent Angus Reid poll found that 68% of Ontario residents support stricter limitations on herbicide use in publicly owned forests, though opinions vary significantly between urban and rural respondents.
For the workers who would have implemented the spray program, the announcement brings mixed reactions. Equipment operators and technicians who typically earn premium wages during spray seasons may face reduced hours, while others welcome the opportunity to transition to alternative management approaches.
“It’s complicated,” admitted Samuel Lapierre, a heavy equipment operator with fifteen years in the industry. “The spray work pays well, but I’ve also seen how selective cutting and manual tending can create longer-term employment. Most of us just want sustainable work and healthy forests—sometimes those goals seem at odds.”
As autumn approaches and the typical spraying season concludes, communities across Northern Ontario are watching to see if Domtar’s decision represents a one-off adjustment or the beginning of broader changes in how the province’s forests are managed. Either way, the conversation about chemicals, forests, and the future of northern landscapes has clearly entered a new phase.
