Environment Committee on April 30th, 2013

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Thank you to all the witnesses.

Ms. Granskou, I'm very thankful that you talked about the Ring of Fire, and how important a mineral find it is going to be to our country and to the first nation communities that are in the area. You talked a lot about needing to make sure that all levels of government work together to ensure we come up with the proper end results. You've also talked a lot about land use planning and the importance of land use planning.

Land use planning, as I understand it, is predominantly something done by the provincial jurisdictions. Would you suggest or agree that federal money in some cases like this would be best used going directly to the provinces to come up with these solutions?

[Mary Granskou]

Support could go directly to the provinces, but more importantly what we recommend is that the support go to those processes, where provinces, first nations and others are at the table working together. That would be the prerequisite for support. Because if you don't have that partnership agreement, you're not going to advance the outcome.

I don't know if that answers your question.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Yes, definitely. My questions revolve a little bit around the electricity need that is in that area and that region. You're absolutely right, this is something that the provinces and the first nation communities need to be at the table to talk about.

Thank you for that.

Mr. Lowe, would you agree with me that producers are the first line of defence when it comes to habitat conservation?

[Bob Lowe]

Definitely. They are the people there.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

So when we're talking about that, I think it's important—and it's been raised several times—that we respect landowners' rights, making sure that we work with producers hand in hand so that we respect landowners' rights and create more incentives, rather than regulations.

Is this something that you and the Canadian cattlemen would agree with?

[Bob Lowe]

Yes, that's our focus. For anything to succeed it has to be incentive-based, not regulation-based.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Do you have an example of any incentives that have been successful in this field in the last several years?

[Fawn Jackson]

Yes. I think it can be either recognition-based or it could be in the form of a payment.

In B.C. there is a program that is paying farmers for.... It's just getting up and running for species at risk. There are the ALUS programs across Canada, the alternative land use services programs, that pay farmers as well.

The key is that you don't want to create species at risk or any other habitat as a liability for the producer, because if they don't want it on their lands because they see it as being a risk to what they're going to be able to do on that land, that's a big problem for all of us. What we want to do is make sure they understand that their private property rights are respected. We can move forward in that sort of atmosphere.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

I absolutely agree with you on respecting the private property rights.

What level of government would you recommend as best to work with local producers in this? Would it be the municipal level, the provincial level, or a cross-national level, the same rules for everyone?

[Fawn Jackson]

Over the last year we've really looked at ecosystem services programs trying to figure out what is our policy on them and under what principles would we now support a program. One of the big things was that it needs to be locally driven, so at the municipal level.

However, when talking to these numerous organizations that have been trying to get up and running, I've asked, “What would have helped you to get up and running? What were your biggest obstacles?” Lots of them said that just the start-up of getting people in the room, getting a staff person on board, all these sorts of things, and having somebody to lean on for expertise.

That's where our recommendation comes from, for creating a seed fund that these regional programs could apply for. They might need, sort of, $60,000 to get up and running. Then after that they would be on their own in bringing the right partners together. We think that it could be a really effective use of government dollars to get things started on the right track.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

I think that's an excellent point.

How much time do I have?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Megan Leslie]

None, even with the compliment. We're pretty strict here.

Thanks, everyone. This is a good discussion, so we'll return to Madame Quach.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My next questions will be for Ms. Jackson.

You said earlier that wetlands are rarely drained. You say it would be better to work with ranchers so they have a better understanding of how environmental assessments work and how to protect riparian areas on grazing land.

Mr. Lowe, you talked about creating a common fund for producers in order to put in place better environmental practices on farm land.

I met with a group of producers who said that to put in place better agricultural practices, the federal government would have to invest more in research and technological innovation. Could you talk a bit more about that? How could we help producers so that land, habitat and ecosystems would be better protected? At the same time, do you think that as a result, cattle and animals could be in better health and provide more to the local, regional and perhaps even national economy?

[Fawn Jackson]

You make an excellent point on the research front. We can't develop best management practices unless we know what we should be doing and how we should be doing it. I think research and innovation are always a good investment, so we certainly support that.

You talked about how to manage riparian areas and grasslands, and how to develop BMPs, best management practices. I think that's really important. That is an area where we, as an agriculture industry, need support. As I mentioned before, it's really difficult to manage for a multitude of resources. Not only do you have to know how to take care of your animals, you have to know how to market your animals. You have to know how to take care of your riparian area and your species at risk, and the list goes on and on.

You can imagine that for a family farm—our average herd size in Canada is just over 60 head and is run by a family—that's a lot to take on, so support for those areas in terms of research, in terms of extension, is integral to conservation and agricultural efforts going forward.

Does that answer your question?

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Yes, that is very helpful, thank you.

My next question is for Ms. Granskou.

You also talked about the issue of the mechanism for habitat protection. We know that in its last budget, the federal government changed fish habitat protection, for example.

Do you think that undermining environmental protection, stripping environmental assessments and decreasing protection for lakes and rivers could have consequences on biodiversity? I imagine that is the case for the boreal forest, because there are also rivers and lakes there. What effect can that have on protecting habitats and ecosystems that are found in the boreal forest?

[Mary Granskou]

First of all, I want to say that fisheries is not my area of expertise. The last thing I want to do is comment on something on which I'm not qualified.

In terms of how we move forward, Canada is a federation. It's a combination of federal, provincial, regional, municipal regimes. It's the combination of all of it that's going to be key in a particular region.

One thing I will underscore is that the boreal in some places is half water. It's very much managing a landscape and advancing the best practices that recognize that what you're doing is working across an area. For instance, in northern Ontario, when you think of building a road across that landscape or waterscape, you're thinking about a road, but also—pardon the metaphor—part road, part bridge, in effect. It's a very dynamic, complex landscape for engineering.

It's the decisions we make, and supporting the right decisions is absolutely fundamental to the lasting nature of any solution or infrastructure.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Megan Leslie]

Thank you very much.

We'll move on to Mr. Woodworth.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

My thanks to all of the witnesses, and a particular warm welcome to Mr. Farwell.

I appreciate your being here and I want to convey publicly the regrets of our chair, Dr. Harold Albrecht. He was very interested in coming today to hear your evidence but had an unavoidable prior commitment and couldn't make it.

I want to ask some questions that may be a little bit technical. I'm going to resort mainly to Mr. Farwell, if I may. I would like, first of all, to inquire whether the Grand River Conservation Authority has worked with, benefited from, or contributed to what I understand goes under the acronym of NAHARP, the national agri-environmental health analysis and reporting program.

I wasn't really aware of how much the GRCA was involved with farm planning until I heard your evidence, and I don't know whether this is a tool that you use or not. I hope I'm not putting you too much on the spot by asking.

[Joe Farwell]

I can certainly confirm that I'm not familiar with the acronym, so I don't believe we've done any work with that program.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I may send you some information about it because I would like the GRCA to be plugged into that.

I also was interested in your comments about the environmental farm plan. Again, the acronym has changed. I'm hoping the program delivery is the same. Around April 1, 2009, that shifted into the Canada Ontario farm stewardship program. I wondered if you knew anything about that.

[Joe Farwell]

Certainly. We still participate through that program. One of the real special parts of that program, as I understand it, is that farmers sit down in workshops and work through their environmental plans. There's some learning that happens. There's some commitment that happens when we work through a workshop. Then from that some funding can flow to carry out some improvements to any environmental features on the land.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Does GRCA have any direct role in participating in those kinds of stewardship programs with farmers?

[Joe Farwell]

Certainly we do. We don't deliver the workshops under the environmental farm plan—that's carried out through different groups—but we do actually have a connection. A requirement for our funding programs is participation in the environmental farm plan, so we're very familiar with how it works.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Very good. I also wanted to ask you about the GRCA's rural water quality program. I noted that it's done in conjunction with all three levels of government. I wondered if you could tell me what participation the Government of Canada has in the rural water quality program that GRCA runs.

[Joe Farwell]

The Government of Canada doesn't provide direct funding assistance. That all comes through our municipal partners through the environmental farm plan, and so continuing support for that plan becomes an important piece.