Environment Committee on May 2nd, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Ms. Duncan.

I'm going to move now to Monsieur Jacob.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses for coming to meet with us this morning to inform us about this subject.

My first question is for the representatives of Ducks Unlimited Canada.

In my riding, Knowlton, in the Eastern Townships, there is an organization that has now moved to Eastman, which is still in my riding. That organization is the Appalachian Corridor. The people of that organization worked and still work miracles with a small budget to protect wetlands and promote the biodiversity of the flora and fauna.

Do you know these types of organizations? What contribution do they make and what work do you do in cooperation with them?

[Greg Siekaniec]

I apologize, as I personally do not know that organization. But if they are delivering wetland conservation, I'd be very interested in working with them hand in hand.

I would have to ask my colleague whether or not he's familiar with them.

[Jim Brennan, Director of Government Affairs, Ducks Unlimited Canada]

I'm not directly familiar with them, but our Quebec program may well be. Unfortunately, our Quebec director is not with us today.

We work extensively with local, on-the-ground, community-based conservation organizations. I could name some. For example, in Ontario, we've worked with Habitat Haldimand in the lower Grand River area. We've done some very interesting work with them.

That is a very important part of our business planning, working with community-based groups, because we don't have the resources to do the conservation work that needs to get done on many of the landscapes across the country. So working with community-based groups is central to our business operations everywhere in Canada.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

I am still speaking to the representatives of Ducks Unlimited Canada.

Some witnesses who have appeared before the committee since we started this study felt that the environmental value of wetlands was undeniable and that too rapid development leading to the infilling of wetlands, for example, could have disastrous effects on biodiversity and the environmental health of those places.

Earlier you spoke about appropriate balance. So, first, do you agree with the statement I just made? Second, how can we ensure that the development and protection of these places is carried out simultaneously without the one undermining the other?

[Greg Siekaniec]

I agree with the comment. I believe that unchecked development, without some thought given to the conservation impact, can be detrimental to many areas. I believe we have some good examples of that, which we are trying to figure out how to correct right now. The Lake Winnipeg basin is an example.

I believe that there are opportunities for conservation and development to go hand in hand, so as to result in a conserved status along with the development. I'd like to make reference to the native plant solutions that we have in Winnipeg. We work hand in hand with developers to put in good, functioning wetlands within community developments. These are developments that people can use, places where they can actually allow their dogs to swim. They are a much more healthy environment than just retention ponds. This is an example of how development has gone hand in hand with our interests and our strategy to better the landscape.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My next question is for Mr. Scarth.

Do you believe that scientific research is essential for the conservation of habitat?

[Jonathan Scarth]

Absolutely, but I would say it's more important that we apply the knowledge we have in policy development.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

All right.

How has science helped your foundation gain better knowledge of the actions that should be taken to conserve duck habitats, for example?

[Jonathan Scarth]

We know more about raising ducks and how ducks survive on the landscape than we do about any other animal in the world. We can measure the actual ecological production of waterfowl, for example, at a level that is not possible for most other species.

We know a lot about what types of landscapes can actually reproduce ducks and grow the fall flight of waterfowl, and that is why they're a really good measuring stick for biodiversity. We can understand how some landscapes produce ducks, and other landscapes don't produce ducks. That's why they provide a very good signature species for policy development. You can measure the results of your habitat work with ducks, unlike any other species.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Jacob.

We'll move now to Mr. Lunney for five minutes.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll start with Mr. Siekaniec, from Stonewall, Manitoba. My mother was born in Balmoral. So we're almost neighbours in some fashion there.

I just wanted to flag this for the committee. In your presentation—I don't know if you went through it, because there is more here than you could say in your 10 minutes—I think your answer to our first question about the most effective conservation organizations was that they tended to possess seven qualities. You listed several items: that they are science-based, have grass-roots support, that they lever resources, that they target conservation of priority habitats, and have a landscape approach to conservation, and that they reach out and collaborate, and employ adaptive management to continuously improve their programs.

I think that's the best answer we've heard so far to that particular question, so I want to thank you for that.

I want to say congratulations to Ducks Unlimited for their 75 years. We all appreciate the work you have done for so many years, and all of you at the table today are leaders in this realm.

Having said that, I want to flag over to another part of the discussion about ALUS and politically sustainable private-public partnerships to deliver conservation incentives. That was dealt with in Mr. Scarth's presentation, I believe, but others have been talking about this as well.

In your presentation, Mr. Scarth—I'll start with you—you mentioned the best program in memory, the conservation chapter in the U.S. farm bill south of the border. We've heard from other farm organizations about the ecological farm plan here in Canada, in which some 74,000 farms, or about 50% of the farms, are involved.

Can you compare these programs for us? What is it about this U.S. farm bill south of the border that maybe has qualities that we haven't incorporated in our environmental farm plan?

[Jonathan Scarth]

Thank you for the question.

I would contrast the environmental farm plan as a road map of how to do conservation on a farm, whereas the conservation reserve program that I referred to in the U.S. actually provided incentives to deliver that plan. It really paid an annual amount to landowners in the prairie region of the mid-western U.S. to grow perennial cover and to set aside wetland and upland cover areas. In the last 20 years of measuring production from these lands, as I covered in my previous answer, that is the only program that has created a significant increase in waterfowl production, bar none.

That program was responsible for an incremental production to the continental population. Nothing else we've done has even come close to the effect of that program.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

You mentioned 20 years of measurement. Is that 20 years since it was incorporated?

[Jonathan Scarth]

Correct. It was incorporated into the 1985 farm bill by the U.S. Congress. At the same time, in Canada we began our North American waterfowl management plan. There was a natural experiment of sorts north and south of the border, and the Americans won hands down on this. They invested heavily in conservation and they saw a dramatic increase in production of wildlife from south of the border, while we were going in the opposite direction.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Is that concept consistent, then, with what we heard from Ducks Unlimited?

In your response to the question about wish lists by the previous member across the way here, you mentioned conservation easements. Would conservation easements be part of the program you're talking about? Is that one concept?

[Jonathan Scarth]

No, it's different. I would have the U.S. Farm Bill in the incentive category. I'd put easements in the acquisition category. I think the more certainty you insist upon, the less of a footprint you're going to affect, so if you want to buy land, if you want to buy easements, you will have a long-term effect, but you will have a long-term effect on a small footprint of the landscape because landowners are not willing, in my view, to give up and sell that much land that you would have any significant effects.

What the U.S. did was incorporate incentives directly into its farm policy, which was a significant step, so no longer is it being delivered as an add-on or a peripheral program. It was at the heart of the U.S. Farm Bill and it was able, therefore, to really get attention and to make a significant investment in incentives. That had a remarkable effect on wildlife production in the U.S., and, as I said, it is the only program we can point to in the last 30 years that has had a significant impact ecologically.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thanks for that, Mr. Chair.

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

You have a minute and 30 seconds.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

On a list of incentives, Nature Conservancy, you mentioned a bunch of tools for leverage. I would like you to list that again, if you could, but could you just pick the most effective tool in the leverage basket?

[John Lounds]

Is that directed at conservation particularly? Tax incentives for donations is one way, but certainly, in our world, the removal of the capital gains tax on ecological gifts, the eco-gifts program, has been a huge incentive. But it doesn't replace actually being able to bring matched money to the table under a private-public partnership. It's that combination that seems to drive people.

Jonathan was mentioning how to get more people to do this. We found a lot more people interested in easements as a result of those kinds of incentives being available on the landscape. The question is that you can get more people involved, but perhaps you don't have the same permanence of the outcome versus having a smaller group involved, regarding permanence, so what's the combination of those things that makes the most sense going forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lunney.

We'll move now to Madam Quach, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to all of you for your testimony.

I have a number of questions for Mr. Siekaniec.

You talked a lot about the loss of wetland habitats. In fact, 70% of wetlands in Ontario have been lost. The same is true in the Prairies, hence the importance of protecting them to a greater degree, given all the benefits those wetlands afford. Ducks Unlimited Canada went into my riding, in Beauharnois, and, as a result, wetlands are now part of the Beauharnois landscape near the hydroelectric power station. We are now seeing life re-establish itself around the station.

You mentioned that $4 billion in benefits are generated as a result of biodiversity in ecosystems. Can you tell us a little about the services that ecosystems render in the fight against climate change, for example, and in the protection of habitats?

[Greg Siekaniec]

Thank you.

Ecosystem services are extremely important to society as a whole. As we've already discussed a little bit, when you change a landscape to a point where the ecosystem services are not provided, you have far-reaching and very significant impacts and damages that do occur.

Again, as I mentioned, whether it be about flooding, invasive species movement, or erosion, there are a lot of values and benefits that are gained when you have a healthy, fully functioning ecological system along with the biological diversity that it affords.

It is extremely important to note that even if there is a 70% loss, if you have an opportunity to preserve what's there, that should be number one, because the investment you have to make in restoring and repairing is huge in comparison. Again, that goes back to the balance that has to be reached between putting conservation on the ground and working hard to ensure that you keep working landscapes in mind, that you work with landowners to keep them fully functioning within the basic communities and counties.

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

Thank you very much for that answer.

To study all these environmental benefits, I imagine you had to deal with scientists and researchers so that you could measure them. Can you tell us how useful scientific research is in habitat conservation?