Environment Committee on Dec. 7th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

The meeting is now open to the public.

I want to assure the committee members that the sound tests were successful.

Witnesses who appeared before our committee last week or previously are back with us today to finish our discussions.

I would like the four witnesses to take two minutes to summarize their opening remarks, in order to refresh the committee members' memories. We'll then move on to questions.

Mr. Stegemann, please take no more than two minutes to remind us of what you said last time.

[Andrew Stegemann, Former National Director, Our Living Waters, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will remind you that I have five specific recommendations that I humbly suggested this committee make in its final report.

The first is that the Government of Canada meaningfully advance its commitment to reconciliation with indigenous peoples by developing pathways and providing resources for the co-governance of shared waters with indigenous nations, including recognizing and upholding inherent indigenous water rights and authority and fulfilling the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The second is that the Government of Canada play a key role in creating and mobilizing the knowledge and tools, both western and indigenous, needed to understand, predict and respond to water challenges and opportunities, particularly against the backdrop of climate change. This includes enhanced funding to amplify existing data collection and dedicated support for community-based water monitoring.

The third is that the Government of Canada take steps to strengthen co-operation across this federation around shared water decision-making and management among all the different levels of government. This includes, importantly, respecting the jurisdiction of indigenous nations and peoples and provincial, territorial and municipal governments, and focusing on that high-level capacity support while providing leadership and guidance on water management best practices.

The fourth is that the Government of Canada lead through an approach that emphasizes the importance of watershed boundaries in all of our water decision-making. This watershed approach should consider interconnected ecological, social, economic and cultural values that must be balanced to ensure the well-being of communities and ecosystems across what are interconnected watersheds. This includes supporting watershed-based collaboration across the country, working to ensure that adequate environmental flows provide enough water to make certain that life can thrive.

The final recommendation is that the Government of Canada prioritize renewing outdated federal water laws and policies with an immediate focus on renewing the over 50-year-old Canada Water Act in collaboration with provincial, territorial and indigenous governments, ensuring that the renewed Canada Water Act is consent-based and rooted in nation-to-nation relationships that actually are co-drafted with indigenous nations.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Stegemann.

We'll now turn to Mr. O'Connor.

Thank you for joining us in person once again, Mr. O'Connor.

You have the floor for two minutes.

[David O'Connor, Project Manager, Invasive Species, Regional Environmental Council of Estrie, As an Individual]

Mr. Chair, committee members, we're here to talk about freshwater. I urge you to give water protection the attention that it deserves.

We're responsible for 20% of all the freshwater on the planet. Millions of lakes and rivers are in danger of dying, and hundreds of native species are at risk of extinction. For example, all the invasive mussels in Lake Huron amount to 90% of its biomass.

Like many Canadians, I have a favourite lake. I'm sure that you do too. If we don't act, aquatic invasive species will move into your lake. They're already in mine.

The federal government plays a key role in the fight against aquatic invasive species. It must do better. We need national legislation that prohibits boats from being transported while their drain plugs are in place and that includes fines proportional to the value of the boats.

Transport Canada must enforce its current legislation and require the use of water filtration and sterilization systems on all boats equipped with one or more ballast tanks. Boats should be classified according to their risk of transporting invasive species. Licence fees should be proportional to this risk.

Above all, it's important to support the fight against invasive species. As members of Parliament and representatives of Canadians, whether you like it or not, you have a stake in this fight.

Before I answer your questions, I have one for you. Are you strong enough to take up this fight? If you plan to show weakness by hiding behind distractions such as the carbon tax or other issues unrelated to our waters, please give way to someone strong enough to stand up for our waters.

Water is life.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Mr. Gilvesy, could you give us a little roundup of your opening statement last week for about two minutes to refresh our memory?

[Bryan Gilvesy, Chief Executive Officer, ALUS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, for inviting me to speak again today.

You'll recall that I'm a farmer and rancher. I'm in Norfolk County, Ontario, and I am also the CEO of the only farmer-led community-based charitable organization in Canada, delivering nature-based solutions on farmland. Our organization is called ALUS. It has been implementing one of the most effective and scalable solutions to water quality protection for nearly two decades now. We build and restore natural infrastructure on marginal or economic farmlands.

We know that the solution can exist at the grassroots because we have supported over 1,600 Canadian farm families and ranchers in building nature-based solutions that enhance natural infrastructure on their lands to protect water quantity and quality, including restoring and/or creating tens of thousands of acres of wetland habitat.

Our network is now delivered through 14 community partners that provide our grassroots backbone, knowledge and support. ALUS has demonstrated how the agricultural community can deliver effective solutions to freshwater quality concerns across the country. We recommend that the committee recognize the opportunity for the Government of Canada to invest in our network of farmers and ranchers who stand ready to scale their efforts and deliver measurable water quality outcomes through nature-based solutions for the benefit of Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Gilvesy.

Finally, last but not least, we have Ms. Curran.

[Deborah Curran, Executive Director, Environmental Law Centre, University of Vicoria]

Good afternoon to the committee.

In this era of collaborative governance with indigenous communities and when climate change is having a significant impact on the way in which our communities are able to interact with water as a fundamental piece of our economic and ecological infrastructure, the federal government will now be required to take a larger role in issues around flow and also water pollution.

In our constitutional makeup in Canada so far, we've assumed that water is largely the responsibility of the provincial governments. It's now quite clear, given the interprovincial impacts, the impacts on federal lands and the impacts on indigenous communities and collaborative governance, that the federal government has a much larger role to play. The renewal of the Canada Water Act is a perfect opportunity to figure out what that is.

There are a couple of long-standing water quality issues that the federal government will need to address very quickly. These include applying a strict non-degradation standard to the effluent released from tailings ponds from the tar sands upstream of Wood Buffalo National Park, to examine the responsibility of the federal government and the failure to control coal mine pollution emanating from the Elk Valley and to refer the international cross-border pollution from coal mining in the Kootenay River watershed to the International Joint Commission.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you very much.

We'll be able to get two rounds in, so Mr. Deltell, go ahead for six minutes.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to focus on Bryan Gilvesy's comments.

Mr. Gilvesy, I'll sum up your remarks in my own words. The land can take care of itself when we pick the right moments. The environment and agriculture can be regenerated and protected through good farming practices.

Can you provide a few examples of your experiences in your community? You said that thousands of farms have benefited from this pragmatic and effective approach where you listen to nature and adapt to it. Can you give a specific example in your area that shows how your experience and approaches have been put to good use and that could inspire all the people who want to see lower emissions, the smallest possible carbon footprint and a healthier environment for everyone?

[Bryan Gilvesy]

I'll go directly to my own farm.

I became involved in this world as the third participant farmer in the ALUS program back in 2006. Over 1,600 farm families have followed our lead.

One very simple example is this: Through our restoration work on native grasslands, which ALUS has helped me achieve on my lands, organic matter has doubled in 11 years. That means the land has the ability to hold, from every single rainfall event, approximately 25,000 more gallons of water. That means there are 25,000 gallons more—from every water event—allowed to seep in and stay in the soil, rather than run off directly into the watercourses. Just about every one of our project sites across the country increases soil and organic matter and increases biodiversity. All of this has the effect of slowing water as it seeps through the soil. It recharges and replenishes our water table while slowing the outflow of water into our lakes and rivers, where the damage can be done.

It's complicated, but not complicated at all.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I'll elaborate further.

Farms are getting bigger and bigger. Understandably, this poses a different challenge. Is it easier for you to take and implement measures for small farms? Could the measures taken for smaller farms be applied to large farms, or should better environmental solutions for the farming community really be considered on a case‑by‑case basis?

[Bryan Gilvesy]

The answer is both.

Small farmers, of course, are a bit more closely connected to their soil. They can put their hands in the dirt and identify where a wetland or buffer strip would be most efficacious.

Large farmers, however, have tools that small farmers don't. Modern-day farming tools allow them to identify pieces of farmland that are marginal or uneconomic to farm because of the scale and size of farming. Think about the land along a gully in southern Ontario, for instance, where the big equipment can't get into the corners, nooks and crannies. That's where erosion can occur. Therefore, this provides a technical tool for those large farmers to identify where the opportunity lies, engage with our program, naturalize those sites and reap large benefits.

I think we have an opportunity to reach all sizes of farmers, and we have experienced that. The tools—the ways they identify lands to enter into this program—are just a little different.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Let's talk about your tools and machinery. We all know that working on a farm means covering quite considerable distances, so you need powerful machinery. Most, if not all, of your machines currently run on oil or diesel.

Are you considering a new approach to your daily activities involving the electrification of equipment or lower oil and diesel use in the farming community?

[Bryan Gilvesy]

My experience is limited on that front. I have been engaged personally with a tractor manufacturer that wanted to test the electrification of farm equipment, but my experience is limited to that.

I would say that by and large, we farm with fossil fuels. Increasingly, the way we can reduce our use of fossil fuels involves more no-till agriculture, for instance, or fewer passes across the field—those sorts of things.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Deltell.

Ms. Chatel, the floor is yours.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My questions are for Mr. Gilvesy.

ALUS is making a major impact in my constituency of Pontiac, in the Outaouais. Good progress has been made. I hope to have the chance to invite someone from my constituency who plays a very active role in the ALUS program.

First, congratulations on this wonderful initiative. I'm so pleased that the sustainable Canadian agricultural partnership has funded more programs of this type.

I read your recommendations, and they resonate strongly in my constituency. Your recommendations, which you made jointly with other organizations such as the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, include the importance of aligning actions across governments with the national biodiversity strategy's goals and targets. These recommendations are set out in section 1.2 of your report.

Given the coordination required between the different levels of government and the farmers to protect biodiversity, it takes a long time for ALUS‑type projects to get off the ground.

Can you shed some light on this recommendation, which I think is important?

[Bryan Gilvesy]

Thank you for hosting ALUS in your community. We're very proud of what's been achieved there. We hope to repeat that Outaouais success again and again across the country with proper financial support.

What's interesting to recognize is that sometimes our work falls through the cracks. Clearly, if we're using natural systems on farmland to do something that benefits biodiversity, there's a clear water benefit to that, a clear climate benefit and a very clear resilience benefit to our rural communities across Canada. Sometimes we get caught up on governments delivering on one of those four priorities without recognizing the opportunity to tackle all four of the problems at the same time by using nature to help us solve biodiversity, climate and the water crisis that we face in Canada.

It's funny how we have siloed things, but at the same time, the opportunity exists to see other actors that can benefit from our work. I point most directly to our community partners in Alberta that come to us as a municipality, because they value the natural infrastructure that our project sites can provide to them on top of the climate, water, and resilience benefits.

Harmonizing on this point of leverage, many things can occur when we work with nature and find opportunities in the rural countryside in Canada.

[Sophie Chatel, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you. That's very enlightening.

As you said, a number of stakeholders involved in biodiversity and water protection work in silos. The federal government should really take the lead in trying to dismantle this approach.

I have a question for Mr. O'Connor.

You spoke about courage and the importance of not hiding behind slogans that would slash our programs, our climate measures and our children's future. I couldn't agree more. Yes, I have the courage to work so that our children have a future.

You spoke about zebra mussels. I want to hear about solutions. These mussels are found all over the Great Lakes.

[David O'Connor]

Mussels are almost impossible to eradicate once they've settled in. In my area, the Bleu Massawippi organization is working very hard and is slowly gaining the upper hand over the zebra mussels. However, in the Great Lakes, unfortunately, it's somewhat of a lost cause. Right now, the goal is to reduce new introductions, to stop these species from spreading beyond the Great Lakes and to ensure that they remain only where they're already found.

Each mussel can release a million eggs a year. This amounts to over 100,000 mussels per square metre in some areas. Prevention must be the first step. It's also the most effective way to lower risks and prevent other issues.

Once the situation calls for control measures, costs rise exponentially. Take the Great Lakes, for example. A town has water intakes on Lake Ontario. It costs the municipality over $50,000 a year just to keep mussels out of the water intakes. I have another example. In a municipality in our area, mussels have managed to infiltrate the water treatment plant. The municipality must replace 12 filters in their plant every year, and each filter costs $20,000. The municipality has a population of 2,500.

The most important thing is to prevent contamination and the introduction of these species. To this end, boats must not be transported while their drain plugs are in place. This is one of the easiest ways to prevent contamination. That way, the boat drains and much less contaminated water is transported from one body of water to another.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Pauzé has the floor.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I want to thank all the witnesses for coming back.

Mr. O'Connor, thank you for making the trip twice in less than a month.

There are five regional environmental councils in Quebec. Your council in the Eastern Townships covers 128 municipalities, nine regional county municipalities and 3,000 lakes larger than one hectare. When we met earlier this fall, I learned a great deal about invasive species.

I'll ask you two questions, to avoid having to interrupt you. I'll then let you respond.

As part of this study, questions were sent to all departments. Oddly enough, Transport Canada responded in each case that the questions weren't applicable. It was quite mind‑boggling.

However, we believe that Transport Canada has a role to play. In your opinion, what measures can it implement right now to protect our lakes? I'm not talking about measures for 10 years from now, but measures for right now.

I'm also interested in the Western Aquatic Invasive Species Resource Center, which applies a strategy not used in Canada to contain invasive species.

The floor is yours.

[David O'Connor]

I just want to clarify one thing. The Western Aquatic Invasive Species Resource Center is active in a number of Canadian provinces. British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan are part of this group. I gave the example of some states that have washing stations on their borders, but Alberta has some as well.

I was surprised to hear that Transport Canada said that it had nothing to do with this fight. Transport Canada manages boat registrations and licences for pleasure craft operators, and the focus should really be on pleasure craft. Outside the Great Lakes, pleasure craft are responsible for introducing invasive species into uncontaminated bodies of water.

Many states use the fees for the annual renewal of boat licences to help support their anti‑contamination program. This means that the boaters who pose the greatest threat must fund the programs to reduce these risks and threats.

In terms of measures for right now, Transport Canada has a program for ships equipped with ballast tanks. This program requires the installation of systems that filter and sterilize the water entering the ballast tanks. We should require similar systems in all boats equipped with ballast tanks. For example, a boat designed for water sports may be equipped with ballast tanks with a capacity of hundreds of litres. It draws all this ballast into the boat. If the operator forgets to empty these tanks, the boat could be carrying hundreds of litres of contaminated water. Without a filtration system, it's impossible to clean this water. It's even impossible to empty these ballast tanks completely. Either Transport Canada must set up inspection and decontamination stations, or it must enforce its current ballast regulations and make cleaning and sterilization systems mandatory in all ballast tanks.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I know that New York state has extremely strict rules. However, if the waterways run through Michigan or other states with weaker legislation, how can we win the fight against invasive species?