Evidence of meeting #27 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was landscape.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Would you see 12 new marine protected areas? As you said, we won't meet them by 2012, but would you like to see that?
5:05 p.m.
National Conservation Director, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
Yes, thank you.
CPAWS has an ongoing campaign to protect 12 marine protected area by 2012. We are making some progress on a number of those sites, which is great. We're continuing to work to encourage that to happen.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Okay, that's terrific.
If you could draft your ideal marine conservation plan, I'd like to know what it would look like. I also have to address something said earlier. I think what Ms. Barnett said is really important, which is that you have to use the right tool in the right area. You have to address that.
If you could draft your ideal plan, what would it look like? If you could make the recommendations for this report, what would they be?
5:05 p.m.
National Conservation Director, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
Reiterating what I said earlier, I think we need to make sure that it addresses large land and seascape scale approaches. It would take us from one-off projects to a larger landscape, more integrated approach.
We need to make sure that we complete a network of core protected habitat areas in all of the regions. This isn't just the federal government. This is all of our jurisdictions and interests—private landowners, indigenous peoples—working together to bring under a common framework all the tools we have and to develop new tools where necessary to achieve that ultimate goal.
Obviously, we need to make huge progress on the working landscape. CPAWS works on public lands. That's why I'm talking about public lands. That's our mandate. But obviously, in the southern part, there is huge room for improvement on private lands, and that's essential. On the public lands that are allocated to industrial uses, and are used and are sustaining our communities, we absolutely need to make significant progress. That's where things like the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement and other similar initiatives.... There are a huge number of initiatives under way across this country. That's the exciting thing here. We're not starting from scratch. In Quebec, the government has made a commitment to protect 50%.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Thank you.
Mr. Wareham, I really think this needs to protect the atmosphere, biodiversity, terrestrial landscape, freshwater, groundwater, and marine protected areas. You've mentioned climate change a number of times. What do you think this conservation plan should include to address climate change?
5:05 p.m.
Senior Marine Conservation Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation
I think there's a large component about efficiency. Energy efficiency comes in a couple of ways.
The education component of energy efficiency brings people on board. As I mentioned earlier, try to engage people on issues they can understand. Work with them. They start to see the broader impacts.
Clean air is part of our goal. The reduction in greenhouse gas emissions also contributes to cleaner air.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Mr. Wareham, what specifically in the conservation plan could you recommend to this committee that would take action on air quality and climate change that would be part of the conservation plan?
5:05 p.m.
Senior Marine Conservation Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation
I believe we need a national policy to reduce the emissions from transportation, both individual transportation and commercial transportation. It's one of the largest greenhouse gas emitters in the country and it's the largest urban pollution source. We need to get aggressive about transportation emission reductions.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
Is there anything you would like to say about protecting wetlands and forests, because of the carbon?
5:05 p.m.
Senior Marine Conservation Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation
I agree with what Mr. Sopuck mentioned. Our goal is to protect these systems and it requires a range of tools. Protected areas is one of them, but there are all kinds of things that we have to do to rebuild things. We have to maintain existing wetlands, while reconnecting natural corridors in places where either agriculture or industrial practices are marginal. We need to rebuild the carbon capture systems with forest wetlands.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:10 p.m.
Senior Marine Conservation Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation
There are marginal wetlands that have been converted to agriculture under agriculture policies aimed at quotas. If we can change some of that to recover those wetlands, they will reform very quickly and can become carbon sinks. It is similar with forests. We need to protect intact forests while accommodating development in second-growth forests to capture more carbon.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I also wish to thank the witnesses for being here today. Moreover, their presentations were very relevant and very interesting. My first question is for Mr. Wareham.
Earlier, my colleague mentioned the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement. Is this agreement between the major forest companies and several environmental groups working, even though they have different interests?
5:10 p.m.
Senior Marine Conservation Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation
I think it can work and it will work. As for the scope of the outcomes, it's a bit of a guess how far we'll get, but without a consolidation of industry, first nations, and all levels of government with the academic and NGO community, we won't get lasting solutions. I believe it will work to increase the conservation benefit that we realize from the boreal forest overall.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you very much.
I would like to ask another question of all the witnesses. Should the government grant priority in its national conservation plan to private lands or public lands?
I would like all three witnesses to give me a brief answer to this question.
5:10 p.m.
National Conservation Director, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
We have to work on both private lands and public lands. About 90% of Canada is public lands, so if we work only on private land, we're missing a huge chunk of the country. However, there are significant numbers of species at risk, and there is lots of work to do on the private lands, where most people live. So there's work to be done, lots of work, in engaging Canadians and restoring healthy ecosystems. We really need to do both.
5:10 p.m.
National Policy Analyst, National Operations, Ducks Unlimited Canada
I agree. I think it needs to be both, and it needs to be targeted at major issues, opportunities, and barriers within the private landscape and the public landscape. We need to have a lot of good minds working on things like developing incentive programs—that's the private-land piece that we really need to put our thinking caps on about.
5:10 p.m.
Senior Marine Conservation Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation
Proportionally, we have a lot of public land in Canada. If we're really going to have a national conservation plan that serves to protect those larger systems and larger populations of wildlife and fisheries, public lands and waters need to have proportionally more investment in this plan. But it's also important to do what we can on private lands.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
I would like to ask one short question of the three witnesses.
At present, only 1% of our marine waters are protected. An ambitious project aims to increase this protection to 10%. Now we are hearing that the Conservative government would like to amend the Fisheries Act in order to remove the requirements respecting protection of the habitat.
Do you think that such a measure is compatible with conservation? Mr. Wareham can answer first.
5:10 p.m.
Senior Marine Conservation Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation
When we talk about all the varieties of tools that we need to conserve nature, habitat provisions in the Fisheries Act are very important. They are one of the key tools we have used, and I think we need to continue to use.
With regard to the oceans, we have many tools—the National Marine Conservation Areas Act, the Wildlife Act, the Fisheries Act—which can protect areas at another level. So the Fisheries Act habitat provisions are one component. This applies to many different places, but we have other tools as well that are important to use.
5:15 p.m.
National Conservation Director, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society
I agree with Mr. Wareham. Strong environmental laws are very important and the habitat provisions are part of that. A suite of acts are specifically designed to create marine protected areas, so those are in place. Absolutely, it's important.
