Environment Committee on May 28th, 2009

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

All right. That's exactly where I'm at.

Just to follow up, I'm really talking about your first recommendation, which is, as I understand it, to say that the minister should have three months for consultations. Did I understand your first recommendation correctly?

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

At present, the GIC has nine months to make a decision. It could make a decision in one month.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

We're talking about the consultation process. Maybe I have your recommendation wrong, but as I understood it, your recommendation 1 is that the minister do his consultations and forward the recommendation to the GIC in three months. Isn't that your recommendation?

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

Well, not exactly. The act does not specify a consultation period.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I know, but I'm looking at your recommendation. Let me read it to you:

Subject to subsection 27(2)(c), within 3 months of receiving a copy of an assessment of the status of a wildlife species from COSEWIC under subsection (1), the Minister shall forward the assessment to the Governor in Council.

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

Let me explain why it's worded the way it is.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I'm really just asking you whether you think the minister could conduct any kind of meaningful consultation in order to be ready to forward the recommendation to the Governor in Council in three months.

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

That will depend on the minister. That will depend on the government. That will depend on a variety of things. There are consultations that take place within a three-month period--

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Right. So in fact--

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Woodworth, your time has expired.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Oh. I'm sorry.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Monsieur Ouellet.

[Christian Ouellet, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

I will give my time to Monsieur Bigras.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Bigras.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

In my questions, I would like to make specific reference to the March 2008 report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. The report deals with the protection of species at risk. With particular reference to an inventory of species at risk, on page 9, paragraph 5.20 of the report prepared by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, here is what he says:

There is no comprehensive inventory of species at risk to provide the baseline information needed for the development of science-based recovery strategies and action plans.

Do you believe that there should be a legislative requirement for detailed inventories that provide scientific information? This does not seem to be the case up to now. According to the commissioner, there is no inventory of species at risk that would allow for the development of science-based action plans.

Do you feel that your recommendations should be considered in establishing the inventory?

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

I should say initially that I have not read that section of the commissioner's report, but I take from your remarks that they're commenting on what they perceive to be a lack of an inventory, in essence. Is that correct?

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

[Inaudible--Editor]

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

So the degree to which COSEWIC.... COSEWIC has very limited opportunities to contribute to such an inventory. We certainly use existing inventories as a basis for deciding which species to undertake new status assessments on, but in fact we have a fairly limited capacity to undertake new assessments.

Right now, we have a capacity to assess the status of about 60 or 70 species a year, but at present most of those are species reassessments or reviews of the classifications of species we have already assessed. At present, we examine the status of new species for about 15 species per year. So we have a limited capacity even if we did have a full inventory.

Do I think as a scientist and a biologist that it would be a good idea? I think it absolutely would be a good idea.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

If I am not mistaken, 203 species were put on the list in 2002. In 2007, there were 389. In the report by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, we find out that the current Species at Risk Act is not being observed, especially with regard to recovery strategies for at least 228 species.

In fact, the commissioner finds that:

Under the Act, as of June 2007, completed recovery strategies were required for 228 species at risk. None of the three organizations met this requirement.

The three organizations are Parks Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Environment Canada. The commissioner further finds that:

In total, recovery strategies for 55 species were completed at that date. Parks Canada produced strategies for 54 percent of the species it is responsible for..., Fisheries and Oceans Canada produced strategies for 32 percent..., and Environment Canada for 12 percent...

With the government not providing recovery strategies for these species, what is the impact of the lack of a recovery program in your work? You, of course, have to assess species when they are on the list. What is the impact of the lack of a recovery program on your work as a scientist, given that the three organizations are not meeting their requirements under the act?

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

Basically this comes down to a variety of factors that have prolonged the process and the establishment of recovery strategies, listing decisions, and so on. The longer that timeframe is, the more likely a species will be sent back to COSEWIC for further information or reconsideration, which will prolong things even further.

The degree to which the timeliness of a recovery strategy influences COSEWIC's assessments is a bit difficult to evaluate. The act at present stipulates that COSEWIC must review its classification of each species at least every 10 years, or earlier if it has reason to believe the status of a species has changed significantly. So our timetable for reassessing or reviewing these classifications will not depend on the timeliness of the implementation of recovery strategies, but it might affect status. All else being equal, the sooner recovery strategies are put in place, the more likely and the sooner the status of a species will improve.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Mr. Calkins, the floor is yours.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate your coming here, Dr. Hutchings.

How many of the current membership of 57 would you consider to be people with strictly scientific knowledge and background, outside of the aboriginal traditional knowledge?

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

I would consider almost all of them--

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

How many ichthyologists, ornithologists, herpetologists are there? What are we looking at?

[Prof. Jeffrey Hutchings]

I'd say we're looking at 57...55 including the ATK.