All right. No problem, Mr. Chair.
Xstrata has implemented Canada-wide biodiversity evaluations and management plans for their properties.
It's very difficult to quantify the work that has been done by a wide range of stakeholders, including business, as much of it is not reported. Much of the business-associated habitat conservation work is actually carried out not by individual businesses but frequently through partnerships with local or national conservation groups. There's also a lot of work carried out by individuals on their properties. But there's no single entity that produces an annual report of all habitat conservation activities in Canada.
The second question you asked was about “publicly available knowledge and expertise on habitat conservation”. In Canada, there is much readily accessible information on habitat conservation. The information is available in documents, online, through conservation organizations, from government, and also through industry associations. Some specific examples of information and expertise available include: NatureServe Canada, through its conservation data centres, which provide information on species at risk; Carolinian Canada, with its Big Picture project, which identifies natural heritage systems of large core natural areas, other significant natural areas, corridors, and linkages; and information provided by various types of NGOs in Canada.
There's a collective of substantial expertise throughout Canada. However, some of this information may be scattered, mainly through the diversity of ecosystems, but also through the sheer size of our country. In 2012, the CBBC conducted a survey. It found that 84% of respondents found the accuracy of data available to them was deficient, and 79% of respondents found there was not enough data to meet their needs.
What are the most effective habitat conservation groups?
Well, it's difficult to put a name to the most effective habitat conservation groups in Canada without additional criteria, such as the number of acres conserved, the effective use of funding, community engagement, species of concern, and such things. Small local groups can be very effective, and they often have local support, including from business. They normally tackle smaller projects, but the cumulative effect of these projects is often as important as larger projects. Local groups are also aware of local issues that can often garner hands-on support for conservation actions.
National organizations can be more effective in getting a broader base of support and frequently have research-oriented sections within their organizations. However, these organizations may pursue higher-profile projects that may be more costly but may not necessarily meet the need for conservation. Ducks Unlimited Canada, when it comes to on-the-ground conservation activities, is one of the stellar organizations in Canada. One of the important components that gives strength to an organization is its members. Not only does DUC have a great membership, but these members dedicate substantial time to helping raise funds for the organization and to working on conservation projects.
How is “conserved land” defined and accounted for in Canada?
There are many conservation techniques that are used in Canada, such as fee simple acquisitions, easements, conservation agreements, stewardship agreements, and such. There are so many ways for this to be accounted for, and some organizations may count the same acres several times, whether they're secured, restored, or managed.
There are also different definitions of specific terms. For example, one organization may consider an acre secured through a time-limited stewardship agreement, while another may consider this acre to not be secured but only influenced. This can have a great influence on the numbers of conserved acres in our records. Conserved lands can mean different things to different people. For some, it can mean only land that is removed from human impacts, while for others it may mean that it is managed in ways that allow for healthy habitats and species while also allowing human activities, as long as they are environmentally and economically sustainable.
The definition of conservation seems to be a universally accepted term. The main difference between countries is how this activity is accomplished. When looking independently at land or water conservation, businesses tend to focus on the concept of integrated landscape management, which ensures that important conservation values are conserved regardless of the official status of the land, while allowing compatible development activities where they can be undertaken without causing a net permanent loss of important conservation value.
When it comes to recovering a species, how do best management practices initiatives compare to prescriptive government-related measures?
The best management practices are often referred to as stewardship initiatives and are activities that are implemented generally on a voluntary basis. They are usually up and above regulatory requirements. Prescriptive and government-mandated measures are usually the minimum business must do to maintain their regulated licence to operate. These measures will guarantee a specific habitat quality that should ensure the continued health of a species in habitat conditions. These measures are often very effective in providing direction to business and legislators in the long-term planning exercises to help conservation species in habitats, but it may not be enough to stop the decline due to other circumstances.
Businesses that adopt and implement best practices are showing a commitment to conservation and are often going well beyond their regulatory requirements. These voluntary steps above prescriptive measures may be what are required to put the species and the habitat well on the way to recovery.
How can the federal government improve habitat conservation in Canada?
The federal government has created national parks, wildlife areas, migratory bird sanctuaries, and such, but there is still more that needs to be done to conserve our habitats and species, so we can rely on them. The federal government must not only lead by example, but must provide the tools, resources, and incentives for others to become actively involved in habitat conservation activities.
These include: completing national environmental assessments at the regional and ecosystems level; implementing conservation measures to measure the ability of natural habitats to provide the services needed to maintain environmental and economic sustainability; completing and following up the national conservation plans; ensuring that federally held lands have a habitat conservation plan in place, not only for species at risk; developing conservation education programs that are aimed at all sectors of society, including schools and businesses; providing support to NGOs that are struggling to assist Canadian businesses to develop and implement environmental conservation into their daily business activities;—