Environment Committee on May 23rd, 2013

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

You mentioned the possibility that the Canadian government might conduct stricter environmental assessments. Changes have been made to the act in recent environmental assessment bills. Many environmental assessment responsibilities have been assigned to the provinces. What do you think about that?

[Andréanne Blais]

Quebec is recognized internationally thanks to the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement. I am not concerned about Quebec, but an assessment should perhaps be conducted for the other provinces based on more thorough research on the impact of the changes that have been made.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

There are a lot of social problems. How can we reconcile regional economic development with the endemic recessions in the major democracies and the survival of ecosystems? Do those three factors pose a problem? How can we reconcile all that?

[Andréanne Blais]

That is an excellent and important question. When a recession occurs, development tends to take precedence over collective goods. However, you have to consider that a wetland provides society with ecological goods and services worth $10,000 per hectare. If that $10,000 per hectare is lost, society will have to pay for it. If a recession occurs and society develops its wetlands, it will wind up in greater distress and have fewer goods and services.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Do I have any time left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Go ahead.

[Lise St-Denis, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I have another question for you.

Has Canada failed to meet its international obligations under the Convention on Wetlands?

[Andréanne Blais]

I would say that Canada was on the right track. We have 37 Ramsar sites. The convention you refer to is often called the Ramsar Convention. We have 37 sites, and 17 of them are protected areas. We are on the right track.

However, cuts in recent years have particularly affected employees in national parks who organized awareness activities for visitors. Here at home, the Lac-Saint-Pierre Biosphere Reserve has also undergone cuts, and those cuts will obviously have an impact on the proper management of Ramsar sites in Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Ms. Blais and Ms. St-Denis.

We welcome our witnesses from the Conseil régional de l'environnement de Laval, Mr. Guy Garand and Madame Marie-Christine Bellemare. Welcome. I'm sorry you had some traffic issues, but we're glad you were able to arrive and appear before the committee.

All of the committee members have a PowerPoint presentation.

I'm going to give our witnesses a 10-minute opening statement. Because of where we are in the rotation of questions, I'm going to use the chairman's prerogative and say that after their presentation we're going to move into another seven-minute round. I'm going to name the committee members who have already requested to be on the list. If any party wants to change that sequence, it's up to you.

I have on the list Madame Quach, Mr. Lunney, Monsieur Pilon, and Madame Rempel. Those will be our four questioners following the presentation. If any of the committee wants to change those, you can let me know while the presentation is proceeding.

I welcome Mr. Guy Garand to start the presentation.

[Guy Garand, Managing Director, Conseil régional de l'environnement de Laval]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I apologize for being late. There was a major accident on Highway 50 and we were caught in a traffic jam.

I am here today with Marie-Christine Bellemare, who is a biologist. She is a project officer with us and covers wetlands and all natural areas in Laval. I cover natural environments and biodiversity in Laval and the greater Montreal area.

If we look at policies across Canada, we must proceed by stages and break them down into three parts: Canada, Quebec and the municipalities. Canada enforces its regulations on the wetlands it owns. The Government of Quebec enforces section 22 of the Environment Quality Act, which requires authorization or a certificate of authorization in order to fill in or alter wetlands. The municipalities manage compensation as such and monitor compensation.

Here I have a 1972 map that shows you the area of greater Montreal, which today is called the Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal. The red area is the entire area that was urbanized at the time and shows heat islands that have an impact on biodiversity, natural environments and human beings. Here we are in 1982. In the photograph, you can see that the red area has doubled in size as a result of development and the loss of agricultural areas and natural environments including wetlands within those areas. These are studies that I directed in the 1980s. You have the last photo, which dates back to 2005, when I conducted the last study with a consortium of universities: the Université du Québec à Montréal, the Université de Montréal and the Institut de recherche en biologie végétale. As you can see, we have lost an enormous number of natural environments and wetlands.

To continue, let us look at the five major regions of the Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal. This is in the registry of the Government of Quebec. As you can see, from January 1, 2010 to May 8, 2013, 411 certificates of authorization were issued in greater Montreal for Laval, Montérégie, Laurentides and Lanaudière. You can see that, of that number, 92% of certificates of authorization were granted for the destruction or alteration of wetlands in the greater Montreal area, and that only one application was rejected by the Government of Quebec. That is utterly shameful, and I mean "utterly", and this continues at the same pace today.

We at CREL have been monitoring developments in the wetlands since 2000. We have been monitoring all that for exactly 13 years. With regard to wetlands that have disappeared, the white area is the area that can be developed. We are not talking about wetlands on farmland.

To give you an idea, in 2004, the Government of Quebec, CREL and the City of Laval decided, based on a specific photograph, that there were exactly 352 wetlands and that we had 332 hectares of land, the white area here, where development was permitted. As you can see, we lost a few wetlands in 2004. That was also the case in 2005, 2007, 2010 and 2012. We now have 97 wetlands that have been completely lost forever, 77 of which were partly altered. Consequently, 50% of wetlands have disappeared, which means that 38% of the area of wetlands in the Laval area has been lost. That is also what is happening for the entire greater Montreal area. Consequently, I now believe, based on the scientific knowledge we have about wetlands and the ecosystem, biological and water filtration and retention benefits they give us, that there is an urgent need to conserve these environments.

With regard to compensation, you can look at the pie chart in the lower left, which is framed in black. The red and beige represent wetlands for which there has been compensation and that have been returned to the large pie chart. There has been acquisition for compensation over 53% of the wetlands. However, that acquisition was not necessarily on the basis of one wetland for another. In many cases, a wetland is destroyed but replaced by a fallow field, woodland or a riparian zone.

As you can see, there are 3.2 hectares of wetland under management. That is not compensation. So it can be considered as a loss. The 17.6% corresponds to the development of riparian zones. Here again, there is no protection and no compensation. There has also been a loss of some 30 hectares, 29%. As you can see, there has been little or no compensation and we have a net loss.

Approximately 15% of our wetlands remain in the river corridor of Montreal and the greater Montreal area today, including flood plains and wetlands on lands.

I think the present situation is quite dramatic. Climate change is staring us in the face, and it will have an impact on biology and on these ecosystems. One need only think of the quality of water in the river. Water levels are falling everywhere in the rivers in the metropolitan area. You can correlate that with the destruction of wetlands, the channelling of streams and the filling in of flood plains, which are also wetlands.

As for the benefits and utility of wetlands, I am going to hand the floor over to Ms. Bellemare.

Thank you.

[Marie-Christine Bellemare, Project Officer, Conseil régional de l'environnement de Laval]

Good morning, everyone.

The perspective of the Conseil régional de l'environnement de Laval is mainly regional and local, but the purpose of our presentation today is to show you that, in spite of the big federal and provincial machine, when it comes down to actual situations at the municipal level, we see that wetlands are not well protected. Something is not working in the system, as the information we have presented to you shows.

The problem, in my opinion, is that wetlands are constantly threatened because people still feel they have no value. People see them as mere swamps. And yet they have very high value. I believe Andréanne talked about that earlier. They provide many goods and services to the community.

In the major metropolitan areas, the problem is that wetlands are often situated on private lands. Consequently, we must convince their owners to conserve them or else provide conservation organizations such as the CRE with the necessary tools to acquire them. In many instances, that is costly because these are private lands. That is a problem. We have to examine this issue. There are many potential solutions.

I will take this opportunity to show you a few photographs to give you an idea of what we experience every day, particularly in Laval. Beautiful wetlands like this, which have high ecological value, are completely filled in. As you can see, the compensation required after they are filled in is not necessarily equivalent to the ecological loss incurred.

As I told you, our mandate is mainly regional, but we believe the problem across Canada is that there is considerable inequality among the provinces. There is a Canadian policy, but it has not really helped achieve specific conservation or standardization objectives. Consequently, the provinces are somewhat left to their own devices. We think one solution would be to implement a framework with specific major policy directions. Then each province could, in a way, compare itself to the others.

In our view, the Canadian approach to compensation is very flexible. However, the definition of "compensation" differs depending on the province or territory where we work. Can you compensate for the loss of a wetland with a land environment? Not necessarily, but it is done. Can you compensate for one hectare with another hectare? There are some ratios. Some scientific research is currently being done on that.

In addition, compensation is rarely monitored. Wetlands that have been altered are restored, but no monitoring is necessarily done to determine whether that compensation has been successful.

On that subject, I am going to tell you about the watershed-scale perspective. People currently examine the land, restore the wetland and go away. However, if a large plant is polluting the water upstream, the wetland is not restored because other pollutants seep into it. So you have to work on a much more comprehensive scale. The watershed scale is both geographic and ecological.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

May I ask you to wrap up shortly?

Thank you very much.

[Marie-Christine Bellemare]

In short, it is a very logical scale. Action should be taken on this scale. That would make it possible to work in several types of wetlands with different and complementary functions. Peat bogs, marshes and swamps are examples of that. Some wetlands are also said to be isolated or riparian. They are directly linked to watercourses. They do not have the same function at all, but they are also relevant.

We have to find a way to establish criteria to assess the importance of those various wetlands.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, and thanks for respecting our time commitment. We do want to give our committee members time to ask questions.

I may have indicated earlier, and I didn't intend to do that, that committee members are limited only to ask questions of our current witnesses. We still have our video witness with us, Madame Blais. You're welcome to direct your questions to either of our witnesses.

We're going to proceed now to Madame Quach.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here with us. It is very interesting to listen to you.

I have several questions to ask. I am going to start with you, Mr. Garand.

How do you think that failure to enforce certain acts or to compensate in a way that is not necessarily fair may undermine water quality in wetlands?

[Guy Garand]

In our jargon in biology, wetlands are nature's kidneys, just as forests are nature's lungs. Water flows inside plants, and it is the plants that work for us, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Plants capture all kinds of pollutants and even some oils.

All major urban centres today have wastewater treatment plants. I do not want to advertise for it, but the Auberge Le Baluchon, a very large inn in Saint-Paulin, has spent millions of dollars to create wetlands in order to treat its wastewater. That is an example, a model to follow.

In Montreal's Parc Jean-Drapeau, a large beach has been created on an island and water is filtered there by watershed plants.

We could easily cite similar examples in the United States and Europe. This is a new trend that is much less expensive.

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

All right.

Do you think it would be effective to pass a federal act on the subject?

[Guy Garand]

It might be difficult to adapt that act to very large urban centres, but they must definitely be protected. As regards watershed management, we see that there is a shortage of wetlands in many areas, whereas wetlands help maintain water quality and recharge the water table. Water filtered by wetlands seeps into the water table and supplies many municipalities.

Some municipalities in the Eastern Townships were short of water two years ago when the water table ran dry. Was there a connection with wetlands?

As Ms. Blais mentioned, New York City's drinking water is supplied by the Catskill Mountains, which are situated 200 km or 300 km from the city. That place is known for the quality of the water it provides to New York. I think many major urban centres could protect their large natural filtering watersheds in order to supply themselves because most of the water in cities such as Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver is highly polluted.

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

All right. So all that could offset climate change.

You also addressed the issue of water levels. We often hear that the water levels in the St. Lawrence have constantly fallen in recent years.

How do you think establishing a network of wetlands could help offset the effects of climate change and perhaps even improve our planet?

[Guy Garand]

Protecting or increasing the number of wetlands could have an impact on climate change, but that is not the solution we should adopt. We are headed in the wrong direction if we think that natural environments, both forests and wetlands, will reduce climate change. To really address climate change, we must also attack road transport across Canada and the United States. I would even say this is a global issue. In a way, wetlands are there to help us.

My biggest fear is about water levels in the Rivière des Mille Îles, which have been low since 2001. The river was low at various times in 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2010, and municipalities have been forced to boil their water for six to eight weeks since the last low-water period. The river continues to dry out. Without going through the BAPE, the Government of Quebec issued an order to cut down a rocky headland between Lac des Deux Montagnes and the Rivière des Mille Îles to supply nearly 400,000 inhabitants with water.

I cited some figures on this subject. There are plans to build 75,000 to 100,000 more housing units in northern Laval and in the major Laurentides and Lanaudière regions on the north shore of Laval. The water collection done there will also drain the waterways.

Climate change, the channelling of streams and the filling in of flood plains are having an impact on the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River, but in addition to that there is all the residential water use. Every citizen, business and institution uses an enormous amount of water without paying any attention.

We have always been told that Canada is a country of water and forests. Today, unfortunately, we see that the forests are being depleted and that there are problems with both our forests and our waterways. And yet Canada is considered one of the largest drinking water reserves in the world. All Canadians should be concerned about this asset and should want to protect and develop it because countries south of us, such as the United States, will one day need it.

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

Yes, in the quite near future. Thank you very much.

Ms. Blais, you talked a lot about educational networks. In the past two years, cuts have been made to Parks Canada, including to the Biosphere Reserve, which is the only museum in North America engaged in raising environmental awareness. You said that the cuts made to national parks could have an impact on management of the Ramsar sites, which include 17 protected areas.

How do you think those cuts could affect the number and quality of wetlands?

[Andréanne Blais]

I am going to cite the Lac Saint-Pierre Biosphere Reserve as an example. We have an enormous problem: a moratorium had to be called on the yellow perch, which is a very common species of fish in our waterways. That species is now very rare in Lac Saint-Pierre, and the reason for that is the destruction of habitat in wetlands and riparian zones, as Mr. Garand mentioned. Wetlands protection will therefore help preserve one Ramsar site.

People believe that a site is protected because it has been designated a Ramsar site, but that is not the case. A Ramsar site has connections everywhere. However, the waterways that flow into Lac Saint-Pierre do not come from Ramsar sites. The areas surrounding Ramsar sites must be preserved whether or not they are protected areas. As you mentioned, the Biosphere Reserve is doing an excellent job in this regard. However, the cuts have had the effect of reducing awareness activities, among other things.

Fortunately, the provincial government has set aside a budget to protect the yellow perch, and the Biosphere Reserve has used that budget to conduct research on the yellow perch and to raise awareness. The fact remains that these centres must be funded so that society can be made aware of the issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, Ms. Blais.

Thank you, Ms. Quach.

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

Mr. Lunney.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I will ask my questions in English. Unfortunately, my French is somewhat deficient,

we might say.

I want to thank our witnesses for contributing, and very enthusiastically, I might add, to the subject matter and to this important discussion.

Madame Blais, you mentioned something about peat wetlands being displaced by cranberry production, and then cranberry prices coming and going. These lands might take years to remediate. But cranberries are wetland growth too.

Can you explain a little more about that? It's the first time we've heard this concept. There's a lot of cranberry production in British Columbia, and in the Lower Mainland. Can you just explain a bit about this situation with cranberries and how that is resulting in a diminution of the value of those lands?

[Andréanne Blais]

Here in the Centre-du-Québec region, the Agricultural Operations Regulation, the AOR, limits the expansion of farming operations. We have water quality problems. However, although it has been proven that agriculture contributed to the pollution of the watercourses, the AOR does not cover small fruits, including cranberries.

Cranberry production is currently expanding in the Centre-du-Québec. Cranberries need two things in order to grow: water and soil with an acidic pH. Peat bog sites offered excellent growing conditions for cranberries, in particular soil acidity and water. Since peat bogs have been destroyed, however, there is no way to restore those cranberry-growing conditions. It is like building an asphalt road. There is no possible way back.

Many certificates of authorization have been granted for this crop, but the people at the Quebec Cranberry Growers Association are working with the department to develop techniques for growing cranberries outside peat bogs. They will target sandy lands. Sand has an acidic pH. They will create closed circuits in which water will circulate on the land without it being necessary to draw supplies from watercourses.

Cranberries consume more water than any other crop. A ground water study just conducted in our region shows that approximately 90% of water consumption can be attributed to cranberry production. There are still some problems, but I believe growers are starting to work in a spirit of reconciliation. They have gradually begun to leave the peat bogs. However, the damage that has been caused is irreversible.