Date of Completion

2022

Document Type

Honors College Thesis

Department

Department of Plant Biology

Thesis Type

Honors College

First Advisor

Brendan Fisher

Second Advisor

Stephen R. Keller

Third Advisor

Yolanda F. Chen

Keywords

maple, sustainable certifications, forest management standards, sugarbush, maple sugaring

Abstract

The environmental impacts of maple sugar have changed drastically over the sugaring industry’s history in North America, from management by indigenous groups, to commercialization and exploitation by white colonizers, to 20th century guidelines and modern-day management schemes attempting to be more ecologically conscious. One of the best ways to assess the current impacts of maple sugar production is by comparing the “sustainable” certification guidelines that influence sugarbush management to sustainable forest management (SFM) goals. This can be accomplished by comparing these certifications to each other in relation to the SFM goals, how well each of the requirements for the certifications are backed by scientific evidence, as well as how well each of the requirements align with the everyday practices of modern sugarmakers. Three certifications were examined throughout this study: the USDA National Organic Standards, the CFIA Canadian Organic Standards, and the FSC-US Forest Management Standards. Out of these three, the FSC-US Forest Management Standards were determined to have the highest performance and be the most reliable of the certification schemes, followed by the USDA National Organic Standards and then the CFIA Canadian Organic Standards. Additionally, the USDA National Organic Standards was the highest performing certification for specifically maple sugar production, as they included specific guidelines on tree tapping and sugarbush operations. It is difficult to determine the actual impact of maple sugar operations on the environment, as there is a lack of empirical evidence linking specific management practices to their impacts in real time; however, what can be determined is that the three “sustainable” certifications evaluated in this paper tend to be well verified by available scientific literature and meet many of the accepted sustainable forest management goals.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Share

COinS