Environment Committee on June 17th, 2013

[Dr. Chris Miller]

The horses have been on Sable Island for hundreds of years. It's not possible to separate the horses from Sable Island. The two go hand in hand. We don't view that as a threat to the ecological integrity. We view the horses as part of the Sable Island ecosystem.

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

Thanks. I appreciate that perspective.

Now I want to come right back to where Madam Quach was headed, because I did hear some different perspectives there.

Minister Preyra, with your very enthusiastic representation on behalf of your own constituents, and Ms. Leslie among them, about the enthusiasm for the park, I think I heard you say that the creation of a park will lead to its protection and enjoyment for everyone in the area. Ms. Woodley, I heard you say in your remarks that your vision for the future of the park would be that it be left alone as much as possible in a wild and natural state. I think I heard Mark Butler refer to that as well. You expressed a concern that Canadians might love it to death.

It brings us back to this question about what a visitor experience to the island might look like. I think, Minister Preyra, you headed that way when you talked about the adventure tours parked offshore. What is your vision for what a park would look like there? How would you manage visitor experiences?

I'd throw it out to the people I mentioned to maybe expand on your vision of what a tourist experience and a visitor experience to the island should look like.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Ms. Woodley, do you want to start off?

[Alison Woodley]

Once again, I'm going to ask Dr. Miller to respond. He's the one who's been doing the thinking on this on behalf of CPAWS. He has been doing a lot of thinking on this, so I'll ask Dr. Miller to respond.

[Dr. Chris Miller]

CPAWS' approach on the issue of visitation, and what we have been encouraging Parks Canada to do, is to bring the Sable Island experience to people, and not people to Sable Island. It's a remote piece of geography and it's very difficult to get to. It's very sensitive.The overwhelming feeling, at least in Nova Scotia for the most part, is to leave it alone. In fact, when a national park was first proposed, the big concern in Nova Scotia was whether that was good enough and whether this would increase visitation.

What we're proposing that Parks Canada focus on is to develop off-island visitor experiences. This may be a state-of-the-art facility in downtown Halifax, or somewhere else in Nova Scotia, where people can go to learn about Sable Island and understand its rich cultural history and its natural history. This is essentially to take off the pressure of people wanting to go to the island. In addition to that, in concert with bringing this experience to the people on the mainland and perhaps through websites and virtual experiences as well, we would cap the number of visits to the island near current levels. Certainly, we would look to Parks Canada to assess this as part of their management plan, that is, what is a scientifically defensible carrying capacity for visitation to the island.

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

Thank you, Mr. Miller.

Minister Preyra, I think you had something to say.

[Leonard Preyra]

Yes, just that I agree completely with Mr. Miller. There's one thing that came through in the consultations. People would love to visit Sable Island, but they also said that they understand why they shouldn't, so they would like to have a virtual visit. We have received a number of proposals to do exactly that, to create opportunities for virtual visits. I know Parks Canada is working on that as well.

I should also note that the Ecology Action Centre and Zoe Lucas and a number of groups also want that human presence, and that will involve scientific research, monitoring, and atmospheric testing. Parks Canada and the two governments will also have to establish protocols around that.

The visitation, as I understand it, as I heard in the consultation, and as Parks Canada has heard, will be no different from the most rigorous national parks that we have, the northern parks, Torngat Mountains, Nahanni, and all those. There will be very strict limits on who can visit and what they can do under those conditions. We do want to make sure that we use this as a teaching and learning opportunity, as a base for future research. But Nova Scotians and Canadians really want to be connected. It's an iconic place that exists in the imagination and they shouldn't be separated from it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much.

I have one concern, Minister Preyra and Ms. Leslie. Will you have an opportunity to visit the island for canvassing purposes during election cycles?

[A voice]

You could ask the one constituent who is on the line.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

We'll move now to Mr. Choquette.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for the information they are providing us with today.

Contrary to Ms. Leslie, I am far from being an expert on Sable Island. My questions may therefore be a bit simplistic, at first glance. What's more, if this bill came from the House of Commons, we would have had more time to study it. Unfortunately, it comes from the Senate, which is not elected and not accountable. It is really unfortunate.

My question is for Mr. Barry.

If you don't want to conduct oil and gas exploration and development on the island, why would there be a seismic and geological program? Why do you need to do seismic and geological testing?

[Andrew Barry]

If you look at what our current outlook is, we have no plans for any seismic or drilling activities that are underneath or around Sable Island. The key is that we don't know what might happen in the future. There is a resource under the island. At the moment developing that resource is not economical, but—who knows—over time with the way technologies advance, that resource may be accessed and developed. We don't know whether additional seismic may be required to access that resource.

Today we have no plans, but if you limit it today and limit it forever, then you essentially are shutting out the development of that resource.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Unless I am mistaken, the gas under the island is non- conventional, and you would probably have to use fracking.

[Andrew Barry]

Underneath the island is a gas resource. Whether the quality of that resource requires fracking technology has not been contemplated in the plans. I'd say it's too early to talk about or to understand what development techniques would be required for that resource.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Miller, I have a few questions for you on the same subject.

In your opinion, what would be an appropriate distance for an exclusion zone? Currently, it is one nautical mile, if I am not mistaken. What do you suggest?

[Dr. Chris Miller]

There is not a specific number that we would suggest. We just don't have the first-hand experience at that site in the marine environment to make that recommendation. What we can say is that the concept of developing buffer zones around national parks is something that CPAWS promotes. It's something that we would like to encourage to happen in other national parks across Canada. So at that level, the fact that there will be a buffer zone around Sable Island is encouraging.

I do agree with Mark Butler that one nautical mile is very close to the island, and if you are on the island you will certainly feel that industry is imposing on the island. There will be disruption in that regard, but we can't recommend a specific figure for the marine exclusion zone.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Butler, what do you think?

[Mark Butler]

I would agree with Mr. Miller, and I would suggest four or five nautical miles from the island.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Does the idea of exploration being done under the island concern you?

[Mark Butler]

I think I'm less concerned about the fact that they might be drilling under the island since, as Mr. Barry said, that's fairly far down. It's a fact though that the drilling in the end is attached to the drill platform. If the drill platform is close to the island, it brings with it a bunch of impacts from discharge of produced water to light to flaring to small spills, which regularly happen on platforms. Let's not forget that Sable Island is different in its geography. It's long and thin. It's not like some other parks where perhaps once you're 10 kilometres into the park these things are less visible and have less impact on the park.

If, for example, you had drill rigs on either side of the island, there would be detrimental impacts on both visitor experience and, I think, the ecology of the island.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Ms. Rempel now, for five minutes.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have very brief questions for Mr. Pinks and Mr. Preyra. Then I'll direct the rest of my questions to Ms. Lucas.

My understanding is that the one nautical mile buffer zone actually protects an area that's over 200 square kilometres, which is approximately seven times the size of the island. Is that correct?

[Stuart Pinks]

I'd have to do some quick math.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the protection that Bill S-15 affords to Sable Island is greater than just the island itself.