Evidence of meeting #75 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 sara.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
You also mentioned the precautionary principle. If you could write your recommendation to the committee, what would you like the committee to have in its report? What's on your wish list for the precautionary principle?
Director, Biodiversity Research Centre, Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
I think what we're striving for at the moment is what we've already promised to do, which is to meet the Convention on Biological Diversity guidelines of 10% marine and 17% terrestrial lands. The one caution is that we have to do it in a way that matches where habitats are most endangered at present. As my colleague Jeanette Whitton said, a lot of the pressure is coming in the southern portions of Canada, and this is where, relatively speaking, we lack protected areas.
Liberal
Director, Biodiversity Research Centre, Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
I'd recommend that we work to achieve that 17% terrestrial land base in habitat protection by 2020.
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
What definition should we use? Last week, we were hearing that it might be possible to make our 17% in four years using the Aichi targets, according to our interpretation. How do you feel about that?
Director, Biodiversity Research Centre, Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
Can you flesh that out a little bit more? What do you mean by “our interpretation”?
Liberal
Kirsty Duncan Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
We heard this from one witness group. If you look at IUCN, if you look at Aichi targets, you see that you might be able to interpret—“interpret” being the key word—the definition in a certain way.
Director, Biodiversity Research Centre, Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
We have to be very cautious here. For example, it's not enough to have a patch of forest that we're not cutting down now, moving that patch that we're not cutting down to another place, and then moving it again, meanwhile cutting down every one of those patches in succession. That does not make an old-growth forest.
It depends on what is meant exactly by using those habitats that are under protection. To really preserve a habitat we cannot have major impacts and hope it will rebound. Those habitats don't necessarily rebound. There are alternative stable states, and we can move them away.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
I think the point that was being made in terms of measurement is that many groups are doing good conservation work. Those efforts are not measured within the target. I think that was the point Ms. Duncan was getting at.
I want to thank our witnesses for being here, especially those from the west who had to get up early to appear. It's good to have all of you here.
This meeting is adjourned.