The Professional
Foresters Act, 2000
1. What is the title of the new legislation?
It is the Professional Foresters Act, 2000 or Bill
110.
Public Interest
2. Why is this legislation considered to be in
the public interest?
The legislation contributes to ensuring the sustainability
of Ontario’s forests.
The public interest argument that was developed
and accepted by the three political parties and government bureaucrats
is as follows.
The sustainability of Ontario’s forests was at risk.
The fact that anyone could practice forestry in Ontario could
result in silvicultural standards and guidelines not always being
applied as they should be on Crown lands. There was a lack of
any regulatory regime on private lands.
The problem was the result of three factors. First,
existing legislation imposed no professional standards on anyone
practicing forestry in Ontario. This resulted in situations where
the misapplication of appropriate technical silvicultural standards
could have resulted in significant environmental damage to forest
sites and isolated or long-term confrontations over both land
use and silvicultural practices. Secondly, misapplication might
have affected the desired results in terms of poor levels of regeneration,
incomplete release of young growth and inadequate pest control
treatment. Finally, on private lands that are outside the responsibility
of the Crown and its forestry legislation, regulatory regimes
were totally lacking save for some situations where tree-cutting
by-laws (which do not address the requirements of a healthy forest)
were established by the municipality. On crown and private lands,
with no overall professional standards in place and anyone being
able to carry out forestry practices, the end result was a dispersal
of accountability and a gap in the overall regulatory regime.
This legislation will go a long way to correct this
situation. The main focus of the Bill is to require that the Ontario
Professional Foresters Association (OPFA) license all professional
foresters practicing in Ontario. In addition, non-professionals
who carry out some forestry practices will be licensed by the
OPFA through special permits. The end effect is that anyone practicing
professional forestry in Ontario will be licensed by the OPFA
and held publicly accountable for his or her actions. Professional
standards of practice must be adhered to, a Code of Ethics will
guide the manner in which obligations are carried out and standards
for continuing education will be established and maintained. Accountability
will be significantly strengthened on both Crown and private lands;
confrontations on land use and silvicultural practices will be
reduced, with a corresponding reduction in the costs of management.
In the end, the benefits of the Bill will touch
a wide range of constituents. The risk to the sustainability of
Ontario’s forests will be significantly reduced. The establishment
of licensed foresters as a continuing commitment to sustainability
will raise government credibility both at home and abroad. Overall
management costs will be reduced. The use of licensed foresters
in forest management and certification will improve the competitive
position of Ontario industry in the global marketplace and increase
credibility at home. The overall accountability for the sustainability
of Ontario’s forests will be clearer and more focused.
3. The Crown Forest Sustainability Act together
with other rules and codes already protects the public interest
on Crown land and there are other avenues to protect private land,
so why do we need licensing to protect the public interest?
Refer to the response to question # 2
Communications
4. Will there be a communications initiative over
the next several months to convey our new roles and responsibilities
to members, the public and interest groups?
Special notification letters are being sent to every
organization that is likely to have an interest in this subject.
This includes governments at all levels, employers, NGOs, academic
institutions etc. In addition, a province-wide media release has
been issued to all of the daily and weekly newspapers in the province.
Letters have also been sent to all OPFA members and to a number
of former members who now may want to consider rejoining the Association.
The OPFA website (www.opfa.on.ca) will continue to carry copies
of all special announcements and the timetable for the Regional
meetings.
Of particular interest to the members will
be the regional information sessions that will be convened at
different locations across the province to answer questions that
members and others may have.
5. What will the public know about licensed vs.
non-licensed foresters?
The process of increasing public awareness on the
issue of “licensed foresters” is an ongoing one. A special, long
term Communications Plan will be developed for this purpose.
TOP OF PAGE
Members
6. What are my legal obligations as a result of
the new Act?
Any legal obligations of R.P.F.s have not changed
with the passage of the new Act. The Act does enable the Association
to develop additional programs associated with the public interest
e.g. mandatory continuing education and quality assurance and
once these types of programs are developed and implemented it
is likely that one’s legal obligations would change. The changes
would largely be in the area of record keeping and reporting –
to the Association and to the public in instances of a complaint
being made against a member.
7. Will the term Registered Professional Forester
still be the one that is used?
Yes, Registered Professional Forester is the term
that will be used.
8. Will foresters be required to write licensing
exams like other licensed professionals?
This is not being contemplated. The only examinations
required at this point are those that are required where new applicants
are found to deficient relative to the academic qualifications
for membership.
9. Will it be possible to certify specialties such
as Forest Engineering within the practice of forestry?
Yes. Many professions now certify members as specialists
within several sub-categories. For example, in the legal profession,
a lawyer can be certified as a specialist in family law. In forestry,
there are many possible categories including urban forestry, forest
engineering, silviculture, forest ecology, forest wildlife and
so on. Each specialty would require its own set of definitions
and qualifications. This could be done by regulation or by-law.
10. How will being an R.P.F. differ under licensing
from what it is to-day?
Membership in the OPFA is voluntary at present.
Under the new Act it is mandatory in order to practice forestry
as described by the legislation. There will be a legal underpinning
to the practice of forestry and inappropriate or illegal practice
will be subject to legal action and fines. All foresters will
be bound by the same professional standards of practice and Code
of Ethics. Further, members could be subject to peer review and
to public audit, as will the OPFA itself. This may sound a bit
daunting, but these matters are part and parcel of an effective
and active profession, and are common to other more high-profile
professions. They enable it to fulfill its regulatory role in
the public interest and help to bring respect to the profession
and its members.
As the profession of forestry becomes more active
and effective in fulfilling its role, there will be a significant
difference in how members are perceived and in their ability to
have a positive influence on how forestry is practiced. This will
not happen overnight, but it will happen as the profession asserts
itself. Members can also expect to be asked to volunteer their
time to help operate the profession. Having more members involved
as volunteers not only improves the product and spreads the workload,
but also increases member awareness of the role and function of
the profession.
11. What is in this for me? How will licensing
provide personal and direct benefit to the individual member?
At the heart of professionalism is an altruistic
desire to serve the public good and practice the profession to
the highest possible ethics and standards. Besides the effects
of licensing outlined here and in previous discussion papers (i.e.
a more effective and active profession, a positive influence on
forest management, etc.), members will have to judge for themselves
whether licensing will affect them personally and whether this
should be a significant factor in their decision. The purpose
of licensing is to improve the profession's ability as a whole
to serve the public interest.
Membership Information
12. How will the OPFA deal with related groups
who are not organized, e.g., forest technicians, but who may wish
to belong to the OPFA?
The view was expressed at one meeting that the OPFA
should seek to bring in non-foresters who are well qualified,
perhaps through a special membership category. It was felt that
this would result in a more inclusive organization, would broaden
its influence, and would demonstrate a broader support base for
the licensing initiative. In fact the new bylaws provide for a
new membership category of Full Associate Membership to enable
grand parenting of qualified individuals who are engaged in some
aspect of professional forestry as part of their regular work.
If there is interest in a broader approach such as affiliations
or other types of associate membership categories for groups such
as forest technicians, it is likely that the OPFA would enter
into discussions with those groups to see what the specific interests
were and why there was interest in membership. The results would
be taken to Council and the process would unfold from there. It
is unlikely that any decision relating to the membership of “groups”
would be taken without discussions with the membership.
13. What is the status of existing R.P.F.s and
what will be the qualifications for membership under the new legislation?
Those who were R.P.F.s prior to Bill 110 will
continue to be R.P.F.s when Bill 110 is implemented. Bill 110
does not impose any membership criteria beyond giving the Association
to pass by-laws relative to the setting of membership criteria.
There are no plans to increase the membership demands beyond what
exist now. There may be some “tinkering” with the criteria in
the context of facilitating the ability of R.P.F.s to move from
province to province and the need to grant special permits, but
the essential membership criteria for RPFs (B. Sc. F., sponsorship,
experience) will remain unchanged.
14. Will there be new categories of membership
or categories of work that require different levels of registration
within the Association?
Bill 110 allows the Association to attach “conditions”
to a certificate, but it is anticipated that this will be the
exception rather than the rule. The Association is reviewing all
of the membership classes with a view to providing more flexibility
for membership while at the same time maintaining the integrity
of the working professional. If the review proceeds, it will be
reviewed with the membership before any major changes in classes
or criteria are made.
15. How will the licensing impact retired members
who may still wish to continue to be members and may or may not
do some forestry work?
If a retired member is working, he or she will be
subject to the same professional standards as any full time member.
16. How will licensing affect those who do not
practice “classical” forestry?
Any person practicing professional forestry as described
in the Scope of Practice will be required to be a member of the
Association.
Licensing will not affect the membership status of those who currently
belong to the Association. Current members would remain members
as long as they pay their dues and abide by the codes and requirements
of the Association. Any qualified forester can join the Association
and remain a member regardless of what kind of forestry they practice,
and whether or not they practice forestry. Licensing restricts
the practice of professional forestry to R.P.F.s, but does not
restrict membership to foresters who practice professional forestry.
All members are required to abide by the applicable ethics and
standards of the profession in all aspects of their work no matter
what that work may be.
TOP OF PAGE
Accountability
17. Will foresters now become liable for non-sustainable
forest practices?
Professional foresters are responsible for carrying
out their duties in accordance with professional standards of
practice and the Code of Ethics. They are not responsible for
the development of silvicultural standards and guidelines. These
are the responsibility of the owner of the land. In specific situations
the appropriate forest practice may not be considered to be sustainable,
however when the practice is viewed in a larger context, it may
well be.
Liability can attach in two ways. First, a member
may be the subject of a complaint for professional misconduct
(including breaching the Code of Ethics and standards of practice
of the profession), unskilled practice or incapacity. Such a complaint
would be dealt with according to the complaints and discipline
procedures outlined in the Act, and accompanying guidelines developed
by the OPFA. Under licensing, these procedures are strengthened
and will be better understood by the public, employers, and members.
Second, a member could be sued in a court of law under the tort
of professional negligence, a situation which licensing does not
change. A plaintiff would have to establish that a duty of care
existed, that it was breached, and that harm resulted. Whether
non-sustainable forest practices could be the subject of such
a lawsuit would be determined by the court. Given that professional
foresters are acting in the public interest, sustainability needs
to be an over-arching concern of the practitioner. In specific
situations however, liability would be difficult to establish.
18. What new responsibilities will an R.P.F. have
from the perspective of liabilities, professional conduct and standards
(continuing education, contribution to the Association, etc.)?
The new Act strengthens the procedures for complaints
and discipline, along with the ability of the association to enforce
professional ethics and standards. The presence of public members
on Council and key committees, along with mandatory reporting
requirements to the Minister places a greater onus on the association
to ensure that forestry is practiced to high standards and in
the public interest. Programs to enable to association to fulfill
this mandate could include continuing education requirements and
peer review. These programs will likely include requirements for
record keeping and reporting. In addition, the association will
have a greater reliance on members volunteering to serve on various
committees and working groups.
19. How does the new Act change the responsibilities
of a professional forester acting as part of a multi-disciplinary
team working on a forest management plan?
The Act does not affect the working level responsibilities
that the professional forester has with the other members of the
team. The Act does increase the accountability of the professional
forester for the components of the plan that he/she is accountable
for. It also increases the accountabilities of other professional
foresters who might review and/or approve the plan.
20. At what point is "supervision" by
an R.P.F. no longer effective in terms of R.P.F. accountability?
Each R.P.F. must make this assessment based on the
specific circumstances. In a disciplinary or a legal proceeding,
it would have to be determined whether the proximity of supervision
is such that the R.P.F. can reasonably monitor and accept responsibility
for the work of the person being supervised. The OPFA could be
requested by members to provide guidance in particular circumstances.
21. How far does R.P.F. accountability extend in
the management planning process?
R.P.F.s should not be held accountable for something
that is beyond their control. The question of accountability in
the management planning process, both on Crown and private land,
is one that should be addressed by the OPFA so that guidance can
be provided to members.
TOP OF PAGE
Practice of Professional
Forestry
22. What is the definition of the “practice of
professional forestry”?
This definition forms the basis of the scope of
practice of the profession. The practice of professional forestry
is “the provision of services in relation to the development,
management, conservation, and sustainability of forests and urban
forests where those services require knowledge, training and experience
equivalent to that required to become a member under this Act
and includes,
- The designing, specifying or approving of silviculture
prescriptions and treatments, including timber harvesting;
- The appraisal, evaluation and certification of
forests and urban forests;
- The auditing of forest management practices;
- The assessment of impacts from planned activities
on forests and urban forests;
- The classification, inventory and mapping of
forests and urban forests;
- The planning and locating of forest transportation
systems including forest roads
This is outlined in Section 3 (1) of the new Act.
These are examples only and do not represent
an exhaustive list of what constitutes the practice of professional
forestry.
Scope of Practice
23. How will the Scope of Practice be interpreted
to determine who must become a licensed R.P.F.? and what is the
plan for further definition?
An interpretation of the Scope of Practice
has been prepared which provides an explanation of the meaning
of the terms as found in the Act. This is a public document and
is available from the OPFA office upon request. The document identifies
that:
- The definition of the practice of professional
forestry - Section 3. (1)-together with the exemptions, has
the flexibility to permit a multidisciplinary approach to continue
and to enable the core practice of a professional forester to
evolve over time
- Sections 3. (1) (a)-(f) do not define the full
range of practices of professional foresters, but rather define
the types of activities, the performance of which requires a
certificate of registration
- Sections 3. (1) (a)-(f) do not represent an exhaustive
list of what constitutes the practice of professional forestry
but are merely examples
In addition, the documents identifies the tests
for inclusion as well as providing an understanding of the phraseology
used in the definition of professional forestry
With respect to process, the OPFA will be establishing
a “Blue Ribbon Panel” of respected R.P.F.s as the body that will
make recommendations to Council on scope of practice issues. All
requests for decisions having to do with scope of practice (e.g..
does a particular work activity fall within the scope of practice?),
will be referred to the panel for an opinion (non-binding).
TOP OF PAGE
Professional Standards
of Practice
24. Will professional standards of practice be
developed and enforced?
Yes. The development of additional standards will
be a responsibility of them Practice Standards and Ethics Committee.
Enforcement will be through the complaints process and through
the possible implementation of a “Quality Assurance” or “Peer
Review” process which the new Act allows for.
The Committee will also be responsible for making recommendations
as to the type of training/education required in order that members
can be assured that they understand not only the nature of a particular
standard but also how it is to be utilized.
25. How will professional standards of practice
and the Code of Ethics be enforced under the Act?
This is one area in which the OPFA will become more
active. Complaints against R.P.F.s can be made by members of the
public, employers, and other R.P.F.s. Those which merit investigation
will be pursued by the OPFA. In some cases, members may be referred
to a quality assurance program for skills upgrading. In others,
charges may be laid against an R.P.F., and a disciplinary hearing
will be held. A discipline panel will have a range of sanctions
to apply, including reprimands, skills upgrading, suspension,
and de-registration. All of these procedures are internal to the
profession, and apply only to members. The OPFA will make more
efforts to educate the public, employers and members regarding
their rights and the complaints and disciplinary procedures of
the Association.
In addition, the OPFA can take more active measures
by initiating a peer review program to ensure that members abide
by ethics and standards. This could also result in corrective
measures such as a referral to a quality assurance program for
upgrading of skills, or, in extreme cases, discipline. The professional
accountability that results from these measures will significantly
raise the awareness of members regarding the importance of practicing
to high standards and of maintaining competence.
Crown Forest Sustainability
Act
26. How will licensing legislation affect other
existing legislation?
The 1957 OPFA legislation has been replaced by the
new Act, the Professional Foresters Act, 2000. Section 54 (3)
of the new Act specifies that when there appears to be any conflict
between this Act and the Crown Forest Sustainability Act, the
latter shall prevail. The new Act causes the new definition of
‘professional forester” to be substituted into the Crown Forest
Sustainability Act.
The new Act relates to the authority of the
Ontario Professional foresters Association to regulate the practice
of professional forestry in Ontario. It does not provide the Association
or its members with authority relative to the determination of
silvicultural standards. The determination of these standards
remains the authority of the landowner and in the case of Crown
land, the Crown.
Bill 110 has no labour relations provisions.
TOP OF PAGE
Special Permits
27. How will licensing affect those who now practice
some aspect of professional forestry but who are not foresters and
are not exempted?
The practice of professional forestry as defined
by the legislation will, by law, have to be done by or overseen
by an R.P.F. (subject to exemptions). Non-foresters currently
practicing some aspects of professional forestry (if this is outside
the accepted scope of practice of their occupation) would have
the opportunity to apply to the OPFA for a special permit in the
form of a membership category called “Full Associate membership”
as provided for in the by-laws. The work subsequently undertaken
would be limited to that described by the terms of their membership
and they would have to abide by the ethics and standards of the
profession. Full Associate Members would not be entitled to use
the initials "R.P.F.", but could be assigned another
designation yet to be determined.
It is not anticipated that Full Associate Memberships
would be granted in large numbers but could certainly be used
to safeguard the incomes of well-qualified, competent non-foresters,
e.g., forest technicians, whose practice may entail some aspect
of professional forestry. Others in this category would be required
to work within the allowances of the legislation, for example,
doing work overseen by an R.P.F.
Exemptions
28. How will the new Act affect related occupations,
which also practice in the forest?
The legitimate activities of other professions,
trades and individuals will be exempted from the legislation to
the extent possible. Some obvious exemptions include biologists,
arborists, landscape architects, scientists, researchers, forest
technicians, teachers and woodlot owners. The key in exempting
other professions and occupations is that they are acting within
the accepted scope of their particular profession, trade, craft
or occupation. To be effective, one of the things licensing should
do is prevent the unauthorized practice of professional forestry.
Every occupation, trade or profession has its own
scope of practice. If it is not written down anywhere, it would
have to be established by witnesses within the context of a hearing
or court action. Some scopes of practice will overlap with the
practice of professional forestry. However, provided an individual
is practicing within his or her scope of practice, there will
be no conflict with the practice of professional forestry. Only
if they step outside their own scope of practice is there potential
for conflict. For example, in a recent court case, an arborist
allegedly incorrectly assessed the value of a small stand of trees
on a private woodlot (an R.P.F. was brought in as an expert witness
to value the stand and establish correct forest valuation techniques).
This may have been a misapplication of arboriculture valuation
techniques, outside the scope of practice of the arborist.
Where there is serious concern for overlap, the
OPFA will have to conduct discussions with the other profession
or occupation and attempt to reach agreement on what functions
may or may not be performed by each other. There is precedent
in other licensed professions that the OPFA can draw upon for
guidance in such matters.
TOP OF PAGE
Unlicensed Practitioners
29. Will foresters and non-foresters be able to
practice forestry in Ontario if they are not licensed?
On the effective date of the new Act, it will be
against the law for anybody to practice professional forestry
in Ontario unless they are exempted or are a licensed member of
the Ontario Professional Foresters Association. Foresters who
are not licensed members of the Association will not be able to
practice forestry in Ontario. For those practicing foresters who
are not members, the implication is that they must become licensed
members in order to be able to continue to practice. Those who
are not foresters will have to apply for a “special permit” in
order to continue their activities.
30. What will happen to people that are found to
be practicing forestry on April 1, 2001? Will there be a grace period?
Unlicensed individuals will be breaking the law
if they attempt to continue to practice forestry after April 1,
2001. The current draft bylaws require that an application for
Full Associate Membership be submitted to the Registrar within
two years of the date the Act came into force (April 1, 2000).
This allows for grand parenting for qualified individuals. Although
it is possible that prosecutions could occur within this period,
it is likely that this time will be used to locate and encourage
affected individuals to apply for grand parenting, or to determine
whether they fall within the exemptions. At this point no formal
“grace period “ has been identified although this is an issue
that Council will be considering.
31. What is the process for taking legal action
against those who are practicing forestry without a license?
The process for taking legal action is that the
OPFA would bring an action against an individual in the Divisional
Court. Prior to this, the OPFA will develop and implement a protocol
to be followed when issues involving unlicensed practitioners
are brought to its attention.
The Act provides for the laying of a charge of unauthorized
practice of professional forestry, which could lead to court action
and fines. Procedures will be governed by the Provincial Offenses
Act. The legislation also enables the OPFA to seek an injunction
to prevent a continuing violation.
In the event of a complaint relating to the unauthorized practice
of forestry by a non-member, the OPFA could issue a "cease
and desist" letter to the individual who is the subject of
the complaint. In most cases this should resolve the problem.
If not, the OPFA could choose to investigate and prosecute the
individual. Guidelines will be developed for the OPFA to follow
when a complaint is received. If the OPFA chooses not to pursue
the matter, the complainant could either seek to investigate and
prosecute privately, or seek the involvement of the police and
the Crown prosecutor.
32. Do "loggers" practice forestry? How will they be
dealt with under licensing?
The activities of loggers would become a problem
only if they begin offering services that fall within the definition
of the practice of professional forestry as described by the legislation.
They would then be subject to the provisions of the legislation
relating to the unauthorized practice of forestry.
Logging that is carried out improperly or negligently,
or outside the context of forest management planning holds the
potential for serious harm to forest resources and is a concern
to many members. It is an issue that should be addressed in detail
by the OPFA in consultation with other stakeholders.
It is likely that some “loggers” do practice forestry
and therefore would be considered in the same fashion as those
foresters practicing without a license. At the same time, it is
likely some loggers do not practice forestry and therefore would
not require a license or special permit. Each situation would
have to be reviewed on a case by case basis.
TOP OF PAGE
Employer Impacts
32. What will prevent a company from practicing
forestry without foresters?
Any company performing activities falling within
the definition of professional forestry practice as set out in
the legislation will have a legal responsibility to have the work
done or overseen by an R.P.F.
33. Can an employer now require its foresters to
be licensed?
Yes a private company can require that its foresters
be licensed. It would be a condition of employment that the employer
could stipulate.
34. How will licensing affect employer/employee
relations?
This question arose at several earlier meetings.
Occasionally, members are asked to carry out duties that they
feel are not consistent with professional ethics or standards
of practice. As with any other profession, professional ethics
and standards must take precedence. It is not sufficient to simply
advise the employer or client of the consequences and then proceed
to carry out instructions that violate professional ethics and
standards. For example, a lawyer or accountant employed by a corporation
or client cannot carry out unethical or illegal instructions without
risk of suspension or discipline from the profession (i.e. lawyers
must comply with their Code of Professional Conduct, and accountants
with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). Similarly, an
engineer cannot perform work that does not comply with professional
standards regardless of employer or client instructions. They
must advise their employer or client of this and can point to
professional directives and examples in support of their position.
Every other member of the profession would be in the same situation
and most employers or clients would be aware of this. Professionals
do not determine management objectives, but do have an obligation
to advise employers and clients regarding their options. Having
accepted the objectives, they must carry them out within limits
established by the profession (as well as other applicable laws
or policies).
An R.P.F. in this situation must respond in a similar
manner, with the OPFA providing the necessary support in the form
of ethics, standards of practice, and directives to members advising
them how to handle the matter. Advice in particular situations
could also be made available on request (some professions have
a Practice Advisory Committee for this purpose). In addition,
the OPFA must educate employers and the public as to the role
of R.P.F.s and how they are required by the profession, to practice
within the parameters of professional ethics and standards.
34. In a company which employs several foresters,
why would it be necessary for any more than one of them to be a
licensed R.P.F.?
Under the Act, all foresters who wish to practice
professional forestry must be licensed. Experience in other jurisdictions
suggests that most foresters maintain their memberships as much
from professional pride and a desire to interact with their peers
as from any legal requirements. Both foresters and employers see
more benefits than disadvantages in the R.P.F. designation, and
in B.C. for example, many positions are designated as R.P.F. mandatory
by employers. It will be incumbent on the OPFA to educate both
employers and potential members of the benefits and requirements
of licensing.
36. How do we deal with a situation where an agency
hires non-foresters to fill positions whose job descriptions involve
"forestry practice" in everything but name?
(see the answer to question 33)
Private Landowners
37. How will licensing affect the ability of private
woodlot owners to manage their own land?
This is a many-faceted question but, essentially,
private woodlot owners have ownership of the resource on their
land and can establish whatever management objectives are desired.
Licensing does not prevent individual woodlot owners from practicing
forestry on their own land, and whether or not their objectives
are appropriate will be governed by other laws and regulations,
i.e., provincial, municipal, etc., not by Bill 110.
Woodlot owner rights are a specific exemption in
the new Act to ensure that they will not be infringed upon. However,
if a woodlot owner requests an R.P.F. to have input into the development
of management prescriptions, etc.; the R.P.F. would be required
to evaluate the objectives for technical appropriateness and decline
to participate if they are in conflict with accepted standards
of practice or the OPFA's Code of Ethics. Having accepted the
project and the owner's objectives, an R.P.F. must carry them
out within the parameters of professional ethics and standards
of practice. This could be seen as a major advantage to the landowner
in having R.P.F. input.
38. Can licensing help to prevent the unskilled
practice of forestry on private woodlots?
Many members express concern and can share
firsthand stories about damage inflicted on private woodlots by
unscrupulous or unskilled operators. Some members would like the
OPFA to play an active role in improving the quality of forestry
practiced on woodlots. Other members are concerned that licensing
will curtail the rights of woodlot owners (it will not, as discussed
above). However, the OPFA's involvement on woodlots will have
to be driven by demand from the woodlot sector and from woodlot
owners themselves.
In the case of individuals or operators who may
be mismanaging a woodlot or causing harm in some other way, the
licensing legislation will provide for the laying of a charge
of unauthorized practice of professional forestry which could
lead to court action and fines. The legislation will also provide
for an injunction to prevent a continuing violation. These provisions
would only be applicable to persons other than the woodlot owner
who may be practicing professional forestry without being qualified
or authorized to do so.
R.P.F.s are certified by the OPFA as having achieved
a professional level of education and training in forestry, and
are professionally accountable to practice forestry according
to high ethics and standards. As such, R.P.F.s are a potentially
valuable resource for the private woodlot sector and it is possible
that opportunities for OPFA or R.P.F. involvement on private woodlots
may result from programs, which would benefit from this involvement.
39. How will a woodlot be defined?
For purposes of the legislation, a woodlot would
have to be owned by an actual person, i.e., not a corporation
or organization. Size is not normally a determining factor except,
perhaps, at the extremes. Beyond that, it would have to adhere
to the common understanding of forest land.
TOP OF PAGE
Complaints and Discipline
40. Will the Complaints and Discipline Committees
have a broad enough representation to deal effectively with issue
brought before them? Forestry is a diverse and complex and issues
range from FRI to silviculture to urban forestry. Can the committees
cope?
The public complaints and discipline processes allow
the Association to acquire the necessary technical expertise to
be able to determine the validity of complaints. The discipline
process allows, via the hearing process, for the calling of expert
witnesses, so there is the opportunity to acquire special technical
expertise as part of both processes when required.
41. What support will the OPFA provide to an R.P.F.
if a complaint is received from an outside source?
When the Association receives a complaint against
a member, the Association has a duty to investigate the validity
of the complaint. A protocol will be developed for this and that
protocol will be available to all members of the Association.
Certainly the affected member would be notified when a formal
complaint has been received and would be given the opportunity
to speak to the complaint and to provide such material that may
be necessary in order to dispute the complaint. The Association
would work with the member to ensure that any material received
was complete and that all of the identified components of the
complaint were covered in the member’s response.
In the complaints and discipline process, the Association
determines if the complaint is valid and if so acts as prosecutor
through the investigation and disciplinary process. This is consistent
with the Associations role of “regulating the practice of professional
forestry.” It will be necessary for the member who is the subject
of a complaint to obtain advice elsewhere regarding the substance
of the complaint. However the OPFA can provide support and information
regarding procedural matters and in ensuring that material supplied
by both the member and the complainant is complete.
Continuing Education
42. What are the specifics of the continuing education
program that will be implemented as a result of this new Act?
The development of a Continuing Education model
is underway. The policy framework for the model, the “Blended
Approach”, was the subject of a breakout session at the May 17,
2000 AGM and based on the feedback received, Council has requested
that some program options be developed for consideration by the
membership. The model is one of a blended approach to mandatory
continuing education with an Association Defined component focused
on general forestry awareness and a User Defined component where
members are responsible for maintaining their own competencies
in their specific areas of practice.
With respect to the Association Defined component
subjects might include (but not be limited to),
- new forestry legislation
- revisions to existing forestry legislation
- emerging approaches to forest ecosystem management
- changing social and economic pressures affecting
forest management
With respect to the member defined component, members
practicing in certain fields may be required to refresh and maintain
their knowledge and skills. The details in terms of which areas
of practice will be subject to this requirement and how and when
the requirements must be fulfilled will be subject to membership
approval. The cost of such a program would have to be affordable.
There will be a full discussion with the membership
prior to Council implementing any model.
TOP OF PAGE
Quality Assurance/Audits
43. How can the OPFA ensure the competency of its
members?
The Code of Ethics requires that members only
undertake work, which they are competent to perform. If mandatory
continuing education is pursued, members practicing in certain
fields may be required to upgrade their knowledge and skills on
a regular basis. Increased enforcement of ethics and professional
standards of practice will help ensure members practice in a competent
manner. This increased enforcement and accountability can occur
in two ways.
First, the OPFA can increase the awareness of members,
employers and the public as to complaints and discipline procedures
so that poor practices can be brought to the attention of the
OPFA and dealt with. Second, the OPFA can take a proactive approach
with a practice review program that would entail peer review of
members' practices on a regular basis.
These and other programs can be explored and developed
with member input and will be subject to member agreement. Some
aspects, such as increasing awareness of complaints and discipline
procedures, can be undertaken immediately if licensing is achieved,
while others will take time to develop and implement. The objective
is to assure the public that R.P.F.s are qualified, competent
in their areas of practice, and accountable to practice to high
ethics and standards.
A Quality Assurance Program could also be developed
which would focus on the rehabilitative aspects of the discipline
process. For example, a member could be referred to this program
rather than a discipline hearing. This could be a non-punitive
way of dealing with members who require upgrading, and a person
taking part in this process would only be referred to discipline
as a last resort.
44. How would a peer review work in terms of frequency
of reviews, costs, etc?
At this point no model has been developed so no
details are available. Any models that are developed would have
to be reviewed with the membership and Council before any decision
is taken.
45. How will audits work? Will I have to keep certain
types of records of what I do and how I do it?
Audits may or may not be different from peer reviews
depending on what type of initiative Council decides should be
utilized. The development of a model which outlines the types
of records that members should be maintaining, will be a responsibility
of the Association to develop in concert with any decision of
Council on this subject.
46. How will peer review work in practice?
This has yet to be determined. A detailed program
will have to be developed in draft form and proposed to the membership
for approval. The OPFA can look to other jurisdictions and other
professions for guidance. By way of example, the Quebec Order
of Forest Engineers annually selects at random a portion of their
membership to receive and submit a questionnaire relating to their
practice. A portion of these is selected at random and the members
are visited for review. Each review must be appropriate to the
member's practice. The purpose of such a program is to provide
assurance to the public that the profession is being adequately
monitored and regulated, and to assist members with their own
professional development.
TOP OF PAGE
Insurance
47. What types of insurance will R.P.F.s are required
to have as a result of the new legislation?
The Act has enabling provisions for requiring Errors
and Omissions (Professional Liability) Insurance. It will be up
to Council to determine the extent to which Errors and Omissions
Insurance will be a requirement for members. It is likely that
if the provision is enacted, that it would only apply to “forestry
consultants”, including those with special permits. It is unlikely
that it would apply to those employed by forest companies or government.
It is expected that the latter employers will have already arranged
for coverage for their own employees by way of a “master policy”.
Issues of home, office, and life and as to insurance will be the
responsibility of the individual R.P.F.
At this point the OPFA has arranged for Errors and
Omissions Insurance (Professional Liability) though an OPFA master
policy and has also arranged for home, office and auto coverage
for members at reduced rates through its own broker LMS Prolink.
Privacy
48. How will licensing impact the information on
members that may have to make available by the OPFA to the public?
Exactly what information will be made public?
Where an individual may be required to submit documents
or evidence as part of a disciplinary process, that “material”
would normally be made public unless the discipline committee
feels that it would be in the best interests of the public for
it to remain confidential.
Other than this, the public is not entitled to any other “member”
information, other than that contained in the Register, which
is open for public inspection unless such inspection represents
a risk to the safety of a person. It is at the discretion of a
member, that a member may choose to make additional information
public as part of his/her marketing activity.
Cost/Fees
49. Under licensing will fees and insurance increase
R.P.F.s' cost of doing business to the point where membership is
more of a hindrance than help?
Insurance has been previously discussed. When the
Act is implemented, there will be an increase in staff requirements
and committee activity. Any increases beyond the present fee structure
must be proposed and justified to the membership, and approved
by the membership. Members of the Association of British Columbia
Professional Foresters, for example, have rejected proposed fee
increases in the past. Licensing must be made to work in practice,
and fees must be appropriate to the size of our membership and
its ability to support the profession.
TOP OF PAGE
The Association
50. What are the legal obligations of the Association
under the new Act?
The Association is legally obligated under the new
Act to regulate the practice of professional forestry and to govern
its members in accordance with the Act, the regulations and the
bylaws in order that the public interest may be served and protected.
This is a fundamental change in the role and clearly defines a
regulatory role for the Association.
Several additional specific objects are listed in
subsection 5(2) and include establishing standards of knowledge
and skill, standards of qualification, standards of practice and
standards of professional ethics.
The immediate obligations relate to the functioning
of the legislated committees, including the registration, complaints
and disciplinary processes. The legislation requires that the
Association be involved in the processes in very specific ways
and where adjustments need to be made to current business practices
to be in compliance with the legislation, these will have to be
made. In addition, should Council decide to implement any of the
“enabling” programs identified in the legislation, the Association
will be required to develop the necessary protocols and to carry
out implementation.
51. What new responsibilities will the OPFA have
to institute immediately to administer this new legislation?
The major areas of change are in registration, complaints
and discipline. The new legislation is very specific as to the
processes that are to be followed in these program areas and so
these will have to be addressed immediately after implementation.
(see question 35).
52. By-laws will remain to provide strong direction
to the OPFA following the licensing of R.P.F.s. If the powers of
the OPFA are not outlined to the full extent in the new Act, what
provisions, if any, are there to guide the powers of the OPFA?
There are several “provisions” or safeguards in
the new legislation to not only guide the powers of the OPFA,
but to ensure that the OPFA does not develop by-laws relating
to initiatives or programs not identified in the new legislation.
The first of these are the objects of the Association
as defined in Section II of the Act. Legally, the Association
is not permitted to enact by-laws that do not relate to the objects
of the Act. In addition, the Act specifically identifies in Section
53 (1), those instances in which the Council may pass by-laws.
Therefore by-laws cannot be put in place which do not relate an
instance in this section.
Secondly, the Act is quite specific as to the duties
of the Association with respect to registration, complaints and
discipline. It is not possible for the Association to put processes
or procedures in place, which are contrary to what is stated in
the Act. There is some, but not much flexibility here.
Third, the enabling provisions of the Act, as noted in Section
53 (1), are specific as to what by-laws can be established to
the objects of the Act. There is no flexibility here.
Finally, while the OPFA is established as a self-regulating
Association, the Minister of Natural Resources is the Minister
responsible. Ultimately, this Minister has the power to ensure
that the Association is not developing by-laws to govern its activities
in areas that are beyond the scope of the legislation.
TOP OF PAGE
Value of Licensing
53. Does the advent of certification programs for
forest products reduce the need for licensing?
These programs are based on detailed criteria, strictly
audited and enforced. Technical accuracy and credibility are essential
to their success and would be enhanced with the involvement of
R.P.F.s. However, R.P.F. involvement would be meaningful only
with a strong organization behind them that would be able to ensure
adherence to professional ethics and standards of practice. Again,
one of the most important benefits associated with the involvement
of an R.P.F. relates to the notion of professional accountability.
54. Will licensing increase the "clout"
of the OPFA?
Of great concern to foresters over the years
is the way in which various interest groups influence the course
of forest management, and the lack of response and influence of
the profession. The opinion and voice of a self-regulated profession
with an independent and professional opinion on forest management
issues will add a different and necessary perspective to this
type of debate.
A strong and independent profession under
licensing should influence the dialogue on forest management,
and standards of practice developed by the profession (and based
on the science of forestry), could serve as a benchmark for foresters
dealing with competing interests and values and a plethora of
other forestry codes.
As a regulatory body, the main concern of the OPFA
will be the fulfillment of its legislative mandate. Any lobbying
involving forestry issues must not compromise this. However, there
is some scope for acting as an independent, reasoned voice in
forestry matters, based on professional ethics and standards.
As such, the OPFA could help to facilitate a rational and informed
debate in forestry matters.
As an example of the role a profession might play
in matters of public policy, the Professional Engineers of Ontario
were recently commissioned by the government to conduct an independent
audit of the safety of the new Highway 407.
Miscellaneous
55. How will conflicts with other agencies having
interest in forest management be resolved?
The OPFA will be required to inform other agencies
as to the purposes of licensing. Licensing is focused on the professional
practice of forestry, and it is not the OPFA's intention to infringe
upon the legitimate rights of others, either individuals or organizations.
56. Won't licensing result in a significant loss
of membership, making it more difficult for the OPFA to serve the
public's needs?
Some foresters may not see the need to be licensed
for what they do in their current employment, while others will
need it to continue to practice. Experience in B.C. and Quebec
where foresters are licensed does not suggest that many members
will be lost. On the contrary, the more active and vital the profession
becomes, the more foresters want to be a part of it whether they
need to or not. In 1991 when the OPFA was moving towards licensing,
many members re-joined because they felt the profession was finally
becoming more active. The net impact on membership is expected
to be at least neutral, with a possible modest increase in members.
57. Will there be an Ontario College of Foresters
to oversee licensing requirements, etc.?
An Ontario college of Foresters is not anticipated.
The Registrar and the Registration Committee will oversee licensing
requirements. The profession is not large enough in Ontario to
warrant consideration of any other mechanism.
58. Will licensing have any impact on a forester's
mobility from one province to another?
By virtue of the undertakings of the Canadian Forestry
Accreditation Board, the core curriculum in forestry schools across
the country is fairly consistent and forms the major part of the
entrance requirements to professional foresters' associations.
As a result, foresters are readily able to move from one jurisdiction
to another. The major differences between provinces is in forest
law and policy and province-specific forest conditions, and it
is reasonable for associations to require a working knowledge
of these aspects as part of their entrance requirements.
At the present time, the OPFA is engaged in discussions
with the professional forestry associations from other provinces
to develop an interprovincial agreement on the mobility of R.P.F.s.
The purpose of the agreement is to make it easier for R.P.F.s
to move between provinces. The new Act enhances our views at the
discussion table.
TOP OF PAGE
This page last modified September 17, 2005
|
