Environment Committee on May 7th, 2013

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

That's great. It's amazing what can be done when people get together creatively to restore habitat that has been disturbed. We have a prime example of how it can be developed over time. Out on the west coast on Vancouver Island we have the Butchart Gardens, a quarry that is a major tourist attraction where a tremendous variety of plants are showcased on the west coast.

But talking about impact over time, Ducks Unlimited were here recently. They have been working for 75 years now in helping to restore wetlands. Organizations such as the Ontario Federation of Hunters and Anglers are represented here today. But over 75 years, if I remember the testimony, they have secured something like 6.4 million acres. Now, apparently, that land that has been conserved by Ducks and by the Nature Conservancy and others is not counted in our conservation efforts. Do you have any suggestions on how we can manage counting land that has been conserved where tremendous efforts have been made by all kinds of organizations?

Dr. Quinney, I'll bring you in on this as well. I would ask both of you to comment on this perhaps. You talk about how $1 million was leveraged over $20 million for over 600 projects, if I have that right. On the west coast, we have the Pacific Salmon Foundation that is doing similar work, tremendous habitat restoration work involving community organizations.

How can the federal government leverage this kind of work and contribute through a national conservation plan and still have those efforts considered somehow towards our conservation efforts and objectives? I'll let you both jump in on that.

[Luc Robitaille]

I'll let Reg answer the question on Ducks Unlimited because he has worked a lot with them.

[Reginald Melanson, Executive Director, Canadian Business and Biodiversity Council]

Thank you. When you're looking at tracking acres, or composite conservation, it's a problem. It is a huge problem because one of the first issues is that acres come and go. You may have a conservation agreement for 25 years, and you have 200 acres. All of a sudden you're at year 26 and you've lost 200 acres.

There are all types of things, and also the length and type of conservation activities that are going on, so it's very difficult to track down. For example, I used to manage the North American waterfowl management plan, and we work on a tracking system called the NTS, national tracking system. We started working on that in 1992. We're still working on that. It's very difficult.

If you take one organization, they're fine. You can track their acres, and they can do it. Government, for example, gives out grants for money. Part of the grant agreement process is to report back with their accomplishments, but when you start trying to track different organizations and government to see what has been accomplished, you're getting the use of different definitions. For example, you're going from a stewardship agreement, which some consider to be influenced, while others consider it to be secured.

So you could have an increased stake that you don't actually have. I used to have a fairly good sizeable lot myself, and I did a lot of habitat conservation. I did about a quarter-mile stream rehabilitation. I did a lot of work, and I know a lot of people who do that, a lot of people. That will never show up in any report anywhere.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Mr. Melanson, that's an issue we're going to have to struggle with at committee.

Your time is up, Mr. Lunney, but maybe we can come back and follow up on that with a future round.

We'll move now to Monsieur Choquette.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for your testimony.

Mr. Robitaille, you started talking about the importance of scientific data, and, I believe, connectivity tools that allow us to know what else is happening.

Is that a recommendation you would make to this committee? The federal government cannot do everything, but do you think the most important points they should focus on are sciences, connectivity, and the ability to obtain information on those areas that urgently require conservation?

You think that this is what we should be working on, and that therefore resources and funds should be invested in science, do you not?

[Luc Robitaille]

I'm going to give you a business perspective, in particular that of the CBBC members. We are all experts in our own area but we're not necessarily biodiversity experts. It is difficult for us to find the best practices in the right areas and make appropriate efforts.

The government is a very good reference point in terms of consolidating all that data and at least providing some basis for interpretation. This would be of huge assistance to businesses wishing to improve their activities in that area, and it would be just as beneficial for ecosystems and biodiversity.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

In fact I believe you recently published a document called “Canadian Business & Biodiversity Leadership Declaration”.

Could you tell us a little more about that declaration? How could it help guide the committee in terms of habitat conservation?

[Luc Robitaille]

We are just in the process of drawing up that declaration. I don't remember exactly how many points it contains. I believe there are about a dozen. In order to become full-fledged members of the CBBC, businesses have to sign that declaration. At first, we did not want that to prevent businesses from joining the group, especially since so much can be learned from leaders in other businesses. Eventually this declaration will be mandatory for all members, but the purpose is to encourage people to improve their performance in that area.

We're still working on the declaration. As I mentioned earlier, the group was only created in 2009. We are beginning to work as a group on all those points but the basic declaration has now been drafted.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much.

Earlier on we were speaking off the record, about the importance of preventing climate change and about the much greater role that the federal government should be playing. We're speaking about conservation, but we're also speaking about the impact of climate change on habitats, for example drought and the melting of glaciers.

Other witnesses have recommended that the committee undertake a study that would focus solely on the consequences of climate change. Would you support that recommendation?

[Luc Robitaille]

That is one of the issues we discussed with NGOs last week. Our sites often contain areas that have not been exploited yet. We would like to use those areas, that will eventually be used for extraction, as laboratories. We would like to do tests in order to determine whether or not it would be appropriate to reforest or rehabilitate a site, and which species would be best adapted to that area when we are trying to rehabilitate it in the future.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Robitaille. Your testimony has been very informative.

Mr. Wallis, I would like to ask you the same question. Over the course of our study on habitat conservation, we've spoken about melting glaciers, drought , etc. These will have significant consequences. The issue of climate change and how it will have a negative influence on habitat conservation has also been raised.

Would you also recommend that this committee undertake a separate study on climate change?

[Cliff Wallis]

Certainly. As a review of federal lands, how they contribute to assisting with, for example, carbon sequestration and things like that, I think it should be rolled into your work.

It's a big topic, so I'm not sure—climate change as a whole—but maybe parcel it out and see what contribution federal lands should be making to things like working with climate change issues, including carbon sequestration.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Mr. Wallis and Mr. Choquette.

We'll move now to Mr. Toet, for five minutes.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our guests today. This has been very enlightening in a lot of ways.

Mr. Robitaille, it's a bit of a different angle, but I want to talk to you a little about the business aspect. Obviously, you're working with industry and with businesses that are seeing the need to be part of the solution here and are very actively involved in that.

In regard to the business aspect, is a business ever able to streamline and still effectively deliver their products?

[Luc Robitaille]

Streamline, you're talking about the biodiversity now or—

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

The business, yes.

[Luc Robitaille]

Well, obviously, we represent a wide variety of businesses. There are extractives. There are companies that are in the agricultural sector. There are companies like ours that do not have a direct impact on biodiversity, it's more through our land holdings—

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I'm just talking about, though, from a business standpoint. As a businessman, are you able to ever look at your business and streamline your business, and still deliver your product very effectively?

[Luc Robitaille]

Absolutely, because for us it's a critical part of our licence to operate. If we don't manage lands correctly, it will be very difficult for us to move forward either with our current operations or with our future operations. So it's a critical element for us to deal with biodiversity to make sure our business is aligned with the needs of the ecosystems and also our stakeholders. It's part of the business right now. It's not an element that's added on. It's something that we have to consider right from the start.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Would your company see the only solution to improving your ability to deliver your product as having to spend more money? I'm strictly talking from a business aspect. We'll get to the biodiversity in a second, but strictly from a business aspect, can a business, spending less money, actually deliver their product very effectively?

[Luc Robitaille]

Yes, I believe so.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, that's important.

I'm sure as a businessman you've also had your managers in many times to look at how we are spending our resources. Are we spending them in an efficient and proper way? Can we cut back on some of the spending of those resources and still deliver our product efficiently?

[Luc Robitaille]

Yes.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Yes, so it's an ongoing thing that any business does and the bigger the business, the more savings you'll find going through those processes.

The only reason I make that point, Mr. Robitaille, is because you said earlier if a company was cutting back on something, like cutting back on spending, all of a sudden you would destroy the real capability of that company. That's a very untrue statement and I just wanted to have that clarified.

Some of the work that you did talk a little about and one of the statements you made was that industry will play a key role in conservation going forward. I was very intrigued by that statement because I also believe it to be a very true statement. You gave some examples. You talked about OPG and the Milton quarry, and some of the peat industry work. I was wondering if you could expand on just one of those cases. I know you talked a little about the Milton quarry, but maybe you could talk about some of the work the peat industry is doing.

To talk about the aspect of understanding that the work that these organizations are doing, to a large degree.... It is unfortunate that they're paid lip service and never counted when we look at what we're doing for conservation efforts in Canada, when we look at these international things such as IUCN. They don't count all that work as being anything that's contributing to our conservation efforts in Canada and the fairness of that with the great work that industry is doing. Could you comment on that?

[Luc Robitaille]

Reg can help me on the peat assessment, but I can give you an example from my sector.

Right now, on the aggregate side, we're working with Environmental Defence and other NGOs at developing a standard, which I mentioned in my presentation, on aggregate extraction. We're even trying to push this standard further to include cement and also ready-mix operations. This will include which types of lands are suitable for our type of operations, how it should be handled, and how much recycling we should be doing before we extract new materials.

The standard is meant to be totally broad, not only our operations on the site but also how our products are being used, so that we can manage this. It's a volunteer standard, a little bit like the FSC that was developed years ago. We think this standard is even ahead of where regulations would let us act today.