Evidence of meeting #49 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was waterfowl.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Gregory Weeks  Secretary, National Board of Directors, Ducks Unlimited Canada
Brian Craik  Director, Federal Relations, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)
Cameron Mack  Executive Director, Wildlife Habitat Canada
Pierre Latraverse  President, Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs
James Brennan  Director, Government Affairs, Ducks Unlimited Canada

10:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thanks, Mr. Carrie. Your time is up.

We'll move to Mrs. Hughes for another five minutes, please.

10:15 a.m.

NDP

Carol Hughes NDP Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Thank you very much.

Earlier, most of you spoke on the economic benefit and impact of some of the challenges you're having. With respect to the national conservation plan, is it adequate to do the type of conservation that needs to be done? Basically, is what we are doing sufficient? I think I'd like a bit of an answer to that. Do you need more of a long-term plan for funding? What do you need?

The rest of it could also be answering the question from my colleague Megan Leslie, which not everybody had a chance to answer. It would be great to have that feedback.

10:20 a.m.

Director, Government Affairs, Ducks Unlimited Canada

James Brennan

The important thing to look at is the model, and I think the partnership model is one that works.

If you look at the North American waterfowl management plan and the partnerships it brings to the table in terms of leveraging money from different interested parties into the land, that's a working model that has produced tangible results, certainly since the mid-1980s. That's a fact that was acknowledged by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development about a year and a half ago in the commissioner's report.

The national conservation plan programming has been very well received so far. In fact, certainly on the wetland conservation fund, the program is completely oversubscribed.

You asked what is required. We would suggest more money going into that particular program is required. It's being driven by demand. There are many, many landowners and many conservation groups out there who would like to participate in that program, but there simply aren't enough funds to have the kind of impact that could be had through the full expression of that activity.

You asked about policy. Certainly the federal government has a long-standing federal wetland policy, which we think merits taking another look at. It was created by the federal government in 1991, and the operational principles were established in 1996. It's a good policy. We think there's an opportunity for the federal government to show leadership with its provincial counterparts. We'd like to see effective wetland policies in every jurisdiction in Canada, backed by legislation and regulation.

We'd like to see habitat loss mitigation sequences in place in every province and territory. There is some very good legislation on the books in the Atlantic provinces right now, and certainly steps are being taken in other provinces to get to a point where habitat loss is being addressed and offset. Certainly Alberta has a new policy, and I know that Manitoba is working on a policy as well. But the policies are not the same across the country, and that's certainly an issue.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Would any of the other panel members like to respond?

Mr. Mack.

10:20 a.m.

Executive Director, Wildlife Habitat Canada

Cameron Mack

I think earlier on I talked about the fact that you can protect something or you can rehabilitate something if it's screwed up. I think one of the good things about the NCP is that it does have a fair amount of money engaged in protection through land securement and other things. The reason that's important is it's a lot cheaper and generally more effective to protect something than it is to fix it up afterwards. Yet we spend so much money on rehabilitation when in some cases we haven't really done the math to figure out whether we should be focusing on protection in a bigger way.

I think the government needs to be very leveraged if it's in the rehabilitation business. That goes back to what Jim was saying about doing a lot of stewardship projects. However, they're highly leveraged with local groups. We're getting free labour in many cases, volunteer labour. Also, industries and others are providing cut-rate infrastructure and that sort of thing. It would be very costly for the government to actually replace the kinds of things we're managing to do as partners in stewardship. There's a protection component of the NCP that I think is a very wise investment, and there's some in rehabilitation.

How I try to demonstrate why protection is more important than rehabilitation is by saying that if you drink black coffee, it's a lot easier to protect it from cream than it is to rehabilitate a double-double later.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

I was going to use a dental connection there: it's a lot easier to brush and floss than it is to put crowns and bridges everywhere.

We move to Mr. Sopuck for five minutes.

10:20 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

We've heard a lot today about the linkage between hunting and conservation. Obviously, anything that inhibits the recruitment of new hunters or hunting itself could have some conservation consequences.

This is why I was very alarmed when I read Hansard from October 27, where Jean Crowder, the New Democratic MP for Nanaimo—Cowichan, said that she supports legislation in which “animals would be considered people and not just property”. That same day, Françoise Boivin, the New Democratic MP for Gatineau, said that animals should be treated with “the same protection that we afford to children and people with mental or physical disabilities”.

This is obviously an attempt to introduce an animal rights policy into the federal government. I should note as well that there is an NDP MP's private member's bill, Bill C-592, which many of the traditional groups are objecting to. This bill has the potential to unintentionally criminalize all sorts of accepted animal use practices.

As well, when we looked at the effects of the long gun registry on hunter recruitment—the long gun registry was brought in by the previous government and eliminated by ours, of course—that had a serious impact on hunter recruitment.

I'd like Mr. Weeks, first, and Mr. Latraverse, second, to answer the following question. What are the conservation consequences if we lose a significant portion of our hunting community?

10:25 a.m.

Secretary, National Board of Directors, Ducks Unlimited Canada

Gregory Weeks

Well, from our perspective at Ducks Unlimited, the hunting heritage is very ingrained in our organization. As I've mentioned, our organization was conceived by the hunting community and is very strongly supported by the hunting community, and from that perspective, we support the hunting community as part of our fabric. We also have a youth mentorship program that we support. In addition to that, we are very active in the school systems throughout Canada, in helping to educate classes from grade 3 up to high school. We don't shy away from our hunting heritage. It is ingrained in our fabric, and it's an important aspect of what we are. That is why we support hunting in Canada.

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

Mr. Latraverse, go ahead.

10:25 a.m.

President, Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs

Pierre Latraverse

It is very important that hunting activities can continue in Canada. It is absolutely essential for keeping game populations healthy. Wildlife harvesting activities are also crucial for reducing road accidents and damage experienced by farmers because of the overpopulation of some wild species, such as the snow geese or the white-tailed deer. We need to consider hunting as the best tool for managing animal populations. More importantly, it brings major economic benefits. We therefore completely agree that hunting is the best tool for managing animal populations, for many reasons.

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB

Mr. Latraverse, you made a comment that I noted. You said that hunters and anglers are essentially the only ones who pay for conservation. I think there is a lot of truth to what you say. I understand that at the hunting and angling advisory panel the groups are considering new ways to raise revenue for wildlife and fisheries conservation. In fact, you are almost asking to be taxed, which is unusual in Canada these days, but from my standpoint as a hunter of many, many decades, it is completely understandable.

Can you speculate on where we could possibly get some more revenues for fish and wildlife conservation? Thank you.

10:25 a.m.

President, Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs

Pierre Latraverse

I could give you an example from Quebec.

A few years ago, in Quebec, hunters, anglers, trappers and all the major wildlife organizations asked the government to increase the cost of permits and to give a portion of that increase back to wildlife. Eighty-five per cent of the increase has been given back to wildlife because of a financial measure called Réinvestissement dans le domaine de la faune. At a round table with the government, the major wildlife organizations determine the best actions that need to be taken to have healthy wildlife and increase the revenue generated by the economic benefits of hunting. That has given some outstanding results.

Right now, 175,000 moose hunters are spending substantial amounts of money to practice their sport in light of those reinvestments in wildlife, which are available because of the permit fees. It is very rare that those who like to observe wildlife buy hunting permits.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Merci beaucoup. We'll have to move on to the next questioner.

Mr. Leef, for five minutes, please.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

My question will be for Mr. Craik. It dovetails with what Mr. Latraverse was saying about hunters paying.

As an outfitter, I worked with the Kluane First Nation in Yukon Territory for three successive years when they had an exclusive opportunity to offer hunts in their traditional territory for Dall sheep. Those hunts were auctioned off over those years. One year the sheep went for $165,000; the next year it was $175,000, and the following year it was $315,000. It clearly demonstrates the philanthropic view of hunters in general because the tag itself is about $10 in Yukon.

On your end, you have an opportunity, exclusive rights for Cree on category II lands and category III for the establishment of outfitting concessions.

How many outfitting concessions are there? Do the Cree have a similar regime where they're able to turn some of the money from hunts into conservation-based projects?

The Kluane First Nation used 50% of the proceeds to go directly into conservation-based projects on their traditional territory. Do you have anything like that in your region?

10:30 a.m.

Director, Federal Relations, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)

Brian Craik

Well, it's a little different because, I believe, there are about three outfitters right now in the north, and they're all in trouble because of the collapse in the caribou herd.

There's not much more that can be said. There's not much revenue being made in those outfitting camps right now.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Are there opportunities for the Cree to utilize a similar type of program to effectively rehabilitate that caribou herd? Are there conservation objectives in mind to participate in that sort of thing, using that philanthropic angle that hunters are clearly prepared to participate in?

10:30 a.m.

Director, Federal Relations, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)

Brian Craik

The herd did not collapse as a result of some kind of external cause. It collapsed because of nature.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Carrying capacity.

10:30 a.m.

Director, Federal Relations, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)

Brian Craik

Carrying capacity was exceeded and they basically ate themselves out of browse.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

You have to wait for a bit of restoration based on other management principles.

10:30 a.m.

Director, Federal Relations, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)

Brian Craik

It may take 25 years.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

That's a fair point. Thank you.

This is a question for everybody to comment on quickly.

I'm looking back to 2011. Our government created the hunting and angling advisory panel. MP Norlock brought in a bill respecting a national hunting, trapping and angling heritage day. We have the national conservation plan to restore, preserve, and reconnect Canadians to wildlife and nature.

The recreational fisheries conservation partnership fund has restored 2,000 linear kilometres of habitat. We've leveraged about $7 million against $25 million invested by the federal government with over 100 projects. There were hundreds of community partners involved in that.

We've established a hunting and angling caucus. We've had a strong stance on traditional products, such as seal products markets for aboriginal and Inuit people. The fisheries committee is undertaking a recreational angling study right now. This committee, the environment committee, is reviewing hunting and trapping contributions to Canada.

As Mr. Sopuck mentioned, getting rid of the long gun registry had an impact on hunter recruitment. We have a Minister of the Environment who is a hunter first, and a born Inuit.

In your recollection, have we ever seen a federal government in Canada's history engage themselves with hunters on a conservation front like we have seen in the last four years?

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

We'll begin with Mr. Craik.

10:30 a.m.

Director, Federal Relations, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)

Brian Craik

I personally haven't been involved with that a lot, but I know there has been more dialogue between the aboriginal people and the federal government, and I think it's appreciated.

10:35 a.m.

Secretary, National Board of Directors, Ducks Unlimited Canada

Gregory Weeks

I don't know whether I can comment historically, but what I will say is that the opportunity to be engaged at this time is greatly appreciated, and it's important to me as a lifelong conservationist and hunter that we're being asked to sit at the table with this committee to voice our views.