Evidence of meeting #23 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was parks.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Thank you for being here today. I know this marine space is rich in plankton and, by extension, is rich in marine life.
How do you intend to protect that marine life? Will fishing regulations be implemented? If so, what would they be, in your opinion?
3:45 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
Under the interim management plan, basically there will not be any fishing in 3% of the area. I want that to be clear. We assessed the ecological and scientific hot spots. In some of the places identified, it will not be possible to remove fish, for example.
3:45 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
That is right. In other places, the principle of sustainable removal will apply. We are going to work with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, as well as the Haida community, on a permanent management plan that will assess all of these issues. To ensure that this ecology is protected in the long term, Parks Canada will implement a science-based program that will rely upon knowledge from universities and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and the traditional knowledge of the Haida community. Our objective and legal obligation is to protect the ecology in the long term and to ensure that all activities are sustainable.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Will this program that you are going to set up evolve, based on the marine life conditions?
3:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
It is the notion of continuous management. When science or community consultations provide us with more information, we will act accordingly. That is really the approach Australia has taken. It involves learning to work with the communities and scientific experts and taking long-term measures jointly. That is the approach we prefer at Parks Canada.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC
You know that not very far from here, to the south, they fish using nets, trawl nets, which have a devastating effect on the marine floor. If removal were possible, would fishing be prohibited so as not to destroy the marine floor?
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC
It is already in there? So you will favour sport fishing instead.
3:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
Yes, but there will still be some commercial fishing. Some major changes will be made, including an ecosystem-based approach to managing this protected area. We are going to work with the Haida community and our federal partners—the Department of Fisheries and Oceans—but we will also undertake public consultations and establish an advisory committee on managing the marine park.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC
Will Parks Canada or the Department of Fisheries and Oceans be the one implementing that legislation or those evolving regulations?
3:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans will be responsible for managing the fisheries, but the applicable legislation and strategy will depend on the issues and circumstances involved, so as to ensure long-term protection.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
3:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
Yes, but in this case, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans also has control, as well as authority when it comes to managing fisheries.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just have a quick question, and then I'm going to turn it over to my colleague, Nathan Cullen.
I asked the question on Tuesday, but now that we have Ms. Bourbonnière here, I'd like to ask the question again, because I'm not familiar with this legislation. I have some familiarity with the Parks Canada legislation.
I remain puzzled why this is going to be a marine park reserve and not immediately a park. It's my understanding that usually the reason you go to a reserve is because there are matters unresolved—for example, a land claim—but it's my understanding that the land claim is resolved. I am also curious to know if there is a difference in legal ramifications if it's a reserve and hasn't been formalized yet as a park.
3:50 p.m.
Acting Executive Director and Senior Counsel, Legal Services, Parks Canada Agency, Department of Justice
The land claim is not resolved, and the regime that's applicable is in essence the same.
3:50 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
The only difference, I would say, is one is having clear title to the land, for example, in a national park, because we have the reserve concept also. So unless all of the rights have been extinguished—and in the case that there are still land claims, those rights have not been extinguished—we have the reserve concept in our legislation, in national parks and the national marine conservation area.
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I have one other quick question.
I understand that there is obviously to-ing and fro-ing on boundaries and that the buffer area around the land is pretty tight. As part of the discussion of the other marine protected areas, are there discussions about potentially expanding that buffer area, given the potential tanker traffic? And was Parks Canada consulted in the decision to lift the moratorium on tanker traffic through that area?
3:55 p.m.
Director, Parks Establishment, Parks Canada Agency
On the tanker traffic issue, I'm not aware of our having participated in consultations or having been consulted, in part because we are not aware of tanker traffic that goes within the ten-kilometre area. So we're not aware of that.
With respect to the buffer, there's no formal buffer associated with this national marine conservation area reserve and there have been no discussions about changing the boundary. The boundary was agreed to in 1988 and has always been the subject of and put on maps in the 1988 agreement and in the two agreements that we have signed with the Haida, one in 1993 and one in 2010.
As I referenced before, when other marine protected areas are established, along with this one, there is an opportunity for the various departments and responsible authorities to discuss how to collaborate. But I just want to make it clear to the committee that there is no formal buffer associated with this NMCA or provided for under the legislation.
What we are encouraged to do is to look at managing on an ecosystem basis and to collaborate with other authorities and stakeholders beyond the boundaries, but there is no statutory buffer.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I'll just pick up from there, Chair, if that's all right. Thanks.
It's a rare moment, as a committee member, when I feel like sliding over to your side to defend and sing the praises of this project.
My only criticism is that there are some nice pictures in your presentation, but it does no real justice to this place. It's so extraordinarily beautiful, and you should be commended for the efforts. We all like to talk about our ridings; that's why we're here. This place is easy to talk about and to celebrate and enjoy. I'm glad we're at this point where it feels that this is finally moving forward after a couple of decades.
I may have missed this in earlier testimony, so forgive me if I have, but is there something unique about the governance model that the Haida use that has enabled us to get to this point? The Haida have been quite advanced in having a self-managed and co-management governance model in place on Haida Gwaii. Has that been a helpful element to Parks Canada's approach and the government's approach? If so, does it bode well in other parts of the country where you seek to do something similar?
3:55 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Parks Canada Agency
I must say, if the current partnership and cooperative management and co-management of Gwaii Haanas national park reserve through the archipelago management board, which has representatives from both Parks Canada and the Haida Nation, had not been as solid as it is, we would not be here today. I think I can say that.
The respect that both the Haida have shown to Parks Canada and Parks Canada has shown to the Haida is the fundamental reason we were successful in getting an agreement with the Haida Nation and with DFO. I think this brings the relationship to a new level, including the marine component, but also including our partners at DFO, who will be part of the archipelago management board.
As I mentioned earlier, it also allows us to look at western science but also seriously consider and be part of the process of traditional knowledge. I would say that this is one of the few places in the world internationally where, from the start of the process, aboriginal communities have been involved as true partners in the whole process.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I suppose that was part of my point as to how we go about making parks and conservation areas.
I think there's a famous story of Chrétien when he was a minister of parks and also natural resources. He looked out a window as he was flying over the far north and said, “That looks like a good place for a park.” He recounted this story at a meeting I was at, and everyone laughed and thought that was great, but there was a part of me that said there are people there too. I don't offer it as a criticism of the former prime minister, but the days of just getting out a map and circling areas that seem interesting to us hopefully are gone.
