Perth County council directs changes to proposed forestry bylaw update

Perth County council has directed staff to revise several key components of a proposed update to its forest conservation bylaw following months of public consultation and ongoing feedback from the agricultural community and other stakeholders.

At its April 2 meeting, council received a draft of the updated bylaw – now titled a bylaw to regulate the destruction or injuring of trees in woodlands and woodlots in the County of Perth – presented by county executive director of legal and corporate services Stefan Zhelev and chief administrative officer (CAO) Lori Wolfe.

The draft reflects feedback gathered through the consultation process, which has highlighted the challenge of balancing environmental protection with the practical needs of farmers and rural landowners.

Among the most notable proposed changes was the inclusion of a permitting process intended to address the small number of situations in which a notice of intent (NOI) to destroy or injure trees would not meet the criteria outlined in the bylaw but may still warrant consideration.

According to Zhelev, approximately 100 notices of intent are submitted annually, with roughly 95 per cent resolved through the existing process. The proposed permit option was intended to address the remaining small percentage of more complex cases.

Under the proposal, landowners whose NOI applications were denied could apply for a permit allowing tree removal or injury under specific conditions, with the potential for an appeal process should the permit also be denied.

“What happens currently, at the point where the bylaw official is contacted and they make a determination on whether or not the proposed activity falls inside or outside of the bylaw, effectively no decision is made,” Zhelev said, explaining why there is no appeal process currently included as part of the NOI process. “In theory, there is nothing in writing from the municipality and it makes it difficult to appeal. What are we appealing if there is no decision?

“ … In theory, (an appeal) could happen at the divisional court level, but to my understanding, it has never been done.”

Council, however, expressed concern the additional process could be unnecessarily complicated for landowners and difficult to administer. Instead, councillors suggested incorporating a peer-review process involving another registered professional forester when an NOI application is denied, allowing for a second expert opinion without adding another layer of bureaucracy.

“This is less than five per cent; we’re spending a humungous amount of time on something that is very, very small,” Coun. Rhonda Ehgoetz said. “If they don’t like the process, go to court. I’m sorry. That’s how you do it. … We’re supposed to be simplifying the process and adding this permit, to me, doesn’t simplify it.”

“I think the suggestion of just having a peer review if the notice of intent is turned down is the solution to this,” added Coun. Matt Duncan. “It does give an individual that feels he needs another avenue; it gives them an avenue. If at that point, the peer reviewer decides yes, the notice-of-intent refusal was correct, then they have the position to go to court then. But at least it gives them the chance to be heard – a sober second thought.”

The draft bylaw also includes proposed changes intended to clarify how agricultural practices intersect with forest-conservation rules, particularly along the edges of cultivated fields.

Among those changes are provisions allowing farmers to selectively trim tree branches along field edges to allow farm equipment to pass safely, as well as permitting the repositioning of dead trees that have encroached on cultivated land or access routes adjacent to woodlands or woodlots.

Council also directed staff to refine definitions within the bylaw, including removing the standalone definition of woodlot and incorporating the definition of windbreak within the woodland definition to better distinguish between the two.

The distinction between windbreaks and woodlots has been a focal point throughout the consultation process, with some farmers expressing concern certain windbreaks could inadvertently be classified as protected woodlots depending on their size or density.

Windbreaks, generally defined as linear treed areas consisting of one to three rows of planted trees, play an important role in reducing soil erosion, protecting crops and livestock, and improving overall farm productivity.

By removing the woodlot definition and clarifying how windbreaks are treated within the bylaw, council signalled its intent to allow farmers greater flexibility to manage windbreaks and living snow fences without concern those features could trigger additional regulatory requirements.

“Given the relatively small impact against the total tree canopy of Perth County, I’m starting to lean towards saying let’s just take that woodlot definition out,” Coun. Todd Kasenberg said. “It’s woodlands that we’re concerns about. We’ll protect those with vigour and if we take out the woodlots, we still probably need the provision for windbreaks against woodlands because there could be an override.

“Generally, we’re not going to lose it all. … I don’t think people will go crazy and take (all the woodlots) down.”

According to Zhelev, woodlots make up just 813 acres of the 50,661 acres of total tree canopy in Perth County – roughly 1.6 per cent. Woodlands, meanwhile, account for 49,849 acres of the total tree cover in the county.

The bylaw review process began in 2024 following direction from council to examine how Perth County’s existing regulations compare with those in neighbouring municipalities and to ensure the bylaw reflects current forestry practices and legislative requirements.

Throughout the consultation process, staff have received significant feedback from conservation authorities, agricultural organizations, municipal councils and members of the public, reflecting a wide range of perspectives on how best to balance environmental stewardship with agricultural productivity.

County staff will now incorporate council’s direction into a revised draft of the bylaw, which is expected to return for further consideration at the May 21 council meeting.