Environment Committee on March 31st, 2015

[Prof. Mark Boyce]

I might point to a particular example. I would disagree that being green doesn't necessarily mean no development and no economy. I would offer as an example the proposed triage system for caribou habitat in Alberta.

We have maps showing the net present value of hydrocarbon resources below the surface across Alberta. We can identify those places where the value of the energy resource is so extremely high that those are probably not places where we're going to achieve caribou conservation. There are other places—in the Caribou Mountains, for example, in the north and in the Bistcho Lake area in the northwest—where the net present value of hydrocarbon resources is extremely low. Focusing our attention in places where we can still maintain caribou habitat, but recognizing that other areas are going to be sacrificed for development, seems to me to be good strategy and good planning.

Right now we don't do that in Alberta. We're trying to save all of the herds. There's no protection of any of those areas from industrial development. It's happening willy-nilly across the entire province.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

A short response, you have about 20 seconds.

[Jonathan Scarth]

As a supplemental then, I would urge the committee to think differently about the private land strategy versus the crown land strategy. I think the models with regard to the private land strategy are there in the infrastructure file. I think you've been there before. I heartily agree with Dr. Boyce's comments about the sort of land use planning and the crown land.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much.

Back to Mr. Sopuck.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Thank you.

Mr. Scarth, I heard you describe yourself once as a recovering lawyer so I'm going to talk about legislation here.

On November 24 of last year every member of Parliament received a letter signed by a number of groups, including Delta Waterfowl and the Manitoba Wildlife Federation regarding Bill C-592, which is a private member's bill by the NDP member of Parliament for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine. It's an act to amend the Criminal Code regarding cruelty to animals.

In the letter we received...I will quote from it:

Bill C-592 seeks to re-introduce the same wording that has caused all of these previous bills to be defeated.

There they're referring to other animal rights bills.

If passed, the bill could unintentionally criminalize all sorts of accepted, necessary and traditional practices. Everything from food production, hunting, fishing, and trapping, research using animals, sports and entertainment, and private ownership would be impacted.

Mr. Scarth, could you talk about the legal implications of a bill like this, especially if a judge chooses to interpret it in a very extreme manner? How could this affect hunting and trapping?

[Jonathan Scarth]

I'll answer the second part of the question first. It could be devastating. It's an example of some of the legislation I referred to earlier where the unintended consequences or intended consequences on the hunting, fishing, and trapping community would be devastating from the perspective of the activity carrying on and in a more superficial sense the signal that sends to that community, which is investing in environmental conservation, that the activity is not going to be respected or tolerated.

I think the specific legal threshold that you cross is from the area of property rights into criminal activity, as was the case with the gun registry where the prospect was that a law-abiding hunter could be accused of criminal activity. I would urge the committee to think in all of the policies they see how they would impact the hunting, trapping, and angling community because these types of initiatives can have unintended and negative consequences on a sector that is investing heavily in environmental conservation.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Well, it's interesting; in my own research on this particular bill, because it deals with the issue...and the NDP have a couple more bills in place, plus the Liberals have two along these lines. Of course the Liberals had Bill C-15B back in the early 2000s.

The one thing that all these bills have in common is that they deal with the issue of animals feeling pain. Obviously mammals can feel pain, but when one goes down to invertebrates—this particular bill deals with invertebrates—if one does any research on whether a lobster feels pain, or a fish that's on the end of a hook feels pain, the jury, quite frankly, is still out on much of that.

Again, if a judge interprets this bill...and thankfully it will never pass, I'm sure. It could really put in legal jeopardy all of these activities that we cherish.

Could you expand, Mr. Scarth, on what you discussed in terms of unintended consequences of such bills as Bill C-592 and the long-gun registry in particular in terms of its effect on hunters and trappers and their very important conservation activities?

[Jonathan Scarth]

We talked earlier about the symbolism of the RCMP issue and the gun registry. The long-gun registry in particular was a rallying cry for our hunting community, not only because of the sort of regulatory red tape, if you like, that it set before hunters but also because it sent a much more negative emotional signal that this activity was not something that was either valued or appropriate.

I believe that is why the reaction to the introduction of the long-gun registry was so passionate and so visceral in most parts of rural Manitoba and amongst the aboriginal community. The signal it sent was that this activity was distasteful and to be regulated. There was really very little sensitivity to the investments and the desire to recruit more hunters, more anglers, and more people to enjoy the wildlife resources of our country. I think the passion that evoked is the passion that we've spoken about this morning.

[Robert Sopuck, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Marquette, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

We'll move to our last questioner.

Mr. Toet, you have five minutes, please.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Professor Boyce, you talked a little bit about all the gas and oil wells in Alberta and their effects. As a committee, we actually did some travel on one of our studies a couple of years back. In the Alberta foothills we had a great opportunity to see—through the Nature Conservancy of Canada, with which we have partnered with a fair amount of funding to continue the growth of these type of projects—the ability in a cattle region for them to actually integrate along with industry and work side by side. We saw some of the wells and some of the pipelines and the ability to work together with the cattle industry to make sure that this was done in a way that would conserve these areas for future wildlife, for future habitat.

I'm assuming you're aware of these types of projects going on. Have you seen the success of some of these?

[Prof. Mark Boyce]

Absolutely. In fact, one of my research projects that has been a focus for several years has been on access management. This has been happening in the foothills of the east slopes of Alberta. We've worked with Shell and various timber companies to gate roads—in particular, new roads that are going into new wells and new clear-cuts—to reduce the amount of recreational traffic on those roads. The gates are amazingly effective at preserving wildlife values. We have elk and we have grizzly bears using those areas as though there were no roads there. The matter of traffic on the roads is the major displacement.

Access management is a very powerful way to ensure, on crown lands, that we are able to have development as well as wildlife on the same land base. But certainly there is not necessarily a negative consequence if development is done smart.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

Mr. Olson, I had the pleasure a couple of weeks ago of bringing greetings to your Manitoba Wildlife Federation annual dinner and was very pleasantly surprised—maybe I should have know this—to find out that the president of the Manitoba Wildlife Federation is a constituent of mine, living in urban Winnipeg. I think that speaks volumes to the engagement that we're having in the urban community. How important do you think it is having president Brian Strauman being an urban resident and understanding both the connection between....?

You would think that would be helpful in bringing our urban residents to a deeper understanding of the need for conservation, what hunting and trapping is all about, and the positive aspects it has for us as urbanites.

[Rob Olson]

I would agree. I think it's a measurable value that our president comes from Winnipeg; it's huge. What's so strong about our board of 10 Canadian citizens is that they're everyday Canadians like me, and half come from the city and half from the country. It's really interesting because you get their views. You'll see the rural people who are farmers and they're talking about those things. You see the city guy asking why those guys are draining the wetlands out there, and then the farmers talk about their thing and you see that back and forth.

So it's awesome our president is from the city. That helps us with understanding our recruitment focus in Winnipeg, but the real magic is that we have rural and urban Manitobans on our board. It's a chance for them to connect and have a conversation and understand each other and come out of there with an understanding that we need farmers to conserve. They have a role in this, and they have some duties as Canadians to do good on their land. But then the Winnipeg guys like Brian are understanding too though, that's their land and it's not going to be free. It has to be a cost share. It has to be 50:50.

So the real magic is the fact that we have a mix.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

In your introductory remarks you commented a couple of times to pull us in deeper and engage us. I hope you walk away today having a sense that there has been a deeper engagement and that engagement will continue and grow and foster over time because I think you're right. It's critically important to environmental protection that the hunting, trapping, angling community is integral to it. Everyone of you spoke about the work that the people in hunting and trapping and angling do on the ground for environmental conservation. As was alluded to in the article mentioned by Mr. Scarth, they are the environmental superstars. They are the ones doing the work on the ground, and I think we have to continue to engage them at a deeper level.

Thank you for your time today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, Mr. Toet.

I would just like to comment as well that I think in all the testimony we've heard over these last number of weeks, today was the first time for me that it came so clearly as in page 3 of your comments in the English, Mr. Scarth, where you commented about the angling, hunting, and the alternate land use services with the farm community coming together. I think that's one thing that was probably most clearly articulated today, and it seemed like a really important point to make.

On that note we want to thank each of you for the passion you bring to your field of endeavour, and thank you for taking the time today. Again, our apologies especially to our Winnipeg witnesses today for our lack of ability to connect at our last meeting.

This meeting is adjourned.