Environment Committee on March 31st, 2015

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

I'd like to call the meeting of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development to order. This is meeting number 50. Today we're meeting to continue our study of licensed hunting and trapping in Canada.

Appearing by video conference we have Mr. Mark Boyce, professor, of the department of biological sciences, University of Alberta.

We also have by video conference two of our witnesses whom we were unable to connect with earlier. Thank you for your patience.

From Manitoba Wildlife Federation we have Ron Olson, managing director; and from Delta Waterfowl Foundation Jonathan Scarth, senior vice-president.

Thank you to all of you.

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chair, could you get each one to wave, so that we know who's who?

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Okay. Mr. Boyce, I think, is on the left screen here.

Oh, I'm sorry; I was wrong.

Then from the Manitoba Wildlife Federation—

I guess Ron Olson is not in the room yet.

[A voice]

Not quite; it's “Rob”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Oh, is it Rob? I'm sorry. I was informed about that error on the sheet and I forgot to make a note of it.

It's Rob Olson—I'm sorry about that—and Jonathan Scarth.

We're going to begin with Mr. Boyce for an opening 10-minute statement, followed by Rob Olson and then by Jonathan Scarth for 10 minutes each. Then our witnesses will have rounds of questions put to them.

Mr. Boyce.

[Professor Mark Boyce, Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, As an Individual]

Thank you for inviting me to testify.

I am a Canadian citizen and a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. I'm very active in the Wildlife Society, which is the professional organization to which most wildlife biologists belong.

My position at the University of Alberta was endowed by the Alberta Conservation Association, with revenues from the sale of hunting and fishing licences in Alberta. The Alberta Conservation Association was founded in 1997 to ensure that revenues from the sale of hunting and fishing licences were allocated to conservation rather than going into provincial coffers.

My job is to supervise graduate student research in wildlife, and I have one of the largest wildlife research programs in Canada. My particular focus is on large mammals, fur-bearers, and game birds. My research program has been funded by a long list of organizations, including NSERC and Delta Waterfowl. The amount of funding my research program has attracted since I moved to Alberta in 1999 is approximately $30 million. I've had relatively little funding directly from the Alberta provincial government, but I work very closely with the provincial government in identifying wildlife management needs for Alberta.

Hunters and anglers are the primary stimulus for conservation in North America. We support conservation more than any other interest group, and most conservation programs in North America would not exist without the efforts and investments of hunters and anglers. In addition, the economics of hunting, trapping, angling, and other nature-based forms of recreation are substantial.

In the United States, the economic consequences of hunting and fishing amounted to $159 billion in 2007. Just by way of comparison, that's two and a half times the total oil exports from Canada in one year. The Canadian tourism council believes that Canada could capture a much greater amount of revenue from hunting and fishing because we have such spectacular hunting and fishing opportunities.

Before moving to Alberta in 1999, I spent most of my life in the United States, so I have some experience with the U.S. system. There are three elements of the United States fishing, hunting, and trapping system that I'd like to highlight.

The first is the cooperative fish and wildlife research unit system that's distributed across the states. There are 40 of these units and they're jointly funded by the federal government, the state government, and universities. They help to meet the research needs of the state, and they train the next generation of fish and wildlife researchers. I was a co-op unit student at the University of Alaska where I did my master's work.

Second, major funding for wildlife education, monitoring, and research is supported by the Pittman-Robertson fund that directs revenues from an 11% excise tax on hunting equipment, firearms, and ammunition, managed by the Department of the Interior, with allocations to the states on a 25%:75% match, 75% coming from federal revenues.

Third, the Dingell-Johnson Act provides the same sort of support for fisheries education, monitoring, and research based on an excise tax on fishing tackle. The Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson programs have been extremely important in ensuring a steady flow of funds for wildlife and fisheries, something that is urgently needed in Canada.

We can actually do it better than the U.S.A. by expanding the base to include camping equipment, binoculars, and other outdoor equipment, and then provide broader support, including for non-game species.

Hunters and anglers are proud of the fact that we are the primary source of funding for conservation in North America. Living in the United States, I never heard anyone complain about the Pittman-Robertson excise tax, partly because most people don't know they're being taxed. The tax is imposed on the price of the item before you purchase it, unlike the GST, which is added on afterwards.

Continuing funding for monitoring and research is crucial to being able to ensure sound management of wildlife resources. Provincial support for fisheries and wildlife is sometimes volatile. As an example, last week 150 staff from Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development were cut as a consequence of reduced energy revenues because of the low price of oil.

In addition to my supervision of fish and wildlife research, I'm an avid hunter and angler, and my wife and I maintain a registered trapline in the Rocky Mountains. Canada leads the world in the development, testing, and legal requirements of humane trapping standards. Trapping produces a continuing source of revenues from crown land and if well managed can generate fur value of approximately 25-50% of that obtained by forestry on the same land base. Trapping provides revenue every single year and when the rotation—like in the Rocky Mountains and many places—is 100 years, those 100 years of accumulated fur returns off of the same land base can be a substantial amortized total.

In addition trappers provide an important service by controlling problem wildlife. I've done a fair amount of work on beaver control. Flooding damage to infrastructure and crops costs industry, municipalities, and agriculture across Canada hundreds of millions of dollars each year, sometimes approaching $1 billion.

A final comment is that hunters and trappers are passionate about our traditional way of life that inspires us.

Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, Mr. Boyce. Thank you for staying well within your time.

We'll move now to Mr. Rob Olson, managing director, Manitoba Wildlife Federation

Mr. Olson, welcome.

[Rob Olson, Managing Director, Manitoba Wildlife Federation]

Hello and thank you.

Can you all hear me okay from Winnipeg? Is it working?

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

We can hear you very well.

[Rob Olson]

I want to thank you all for the opportunity to speak today. I'm really excited to be here to speak about this topic of hunting.

I'll tell you a little bit about myself. I'm a hunter, a trapper. I've dedicated my life to biology and conservation of living things and wild places. It defines who I am. It defines my family. It's really important to me and my community. I can trace my culture back at least seven generations to Norway where we came from originally.

I'm really lucky to be the managing director of the Manitoba Wildlife Federation. It's a tremendous group. Hunters, anglers, and trappers are our members. We have 14,000 of them. We're organized in a hundred clubs across Manitoba. We have an amazing network of people who are really committed to conservation. They have done amazing things. In our province alone, we have conserved over 30,000 acres of habitat for wildlife: game species, non-game species, endangered species. Our clubs and members are really passionate and committed to making sure that wild places are here forever.

These people give their time and money on a level that is breathtaking. These are everyday citizens, everyday Canadians. They come from all walks of life and they do incredible stuff at the local level.

We always talk about environmentalism, and I learned in university, and I've learned I guess in life, that you want to think globally and act locally. In that regard, I think our federation members are incredible examples of that. They do endless work in their communities. There are too many fish habitat restoration projects to count. They do it on their own. They raise the money locally. They put in their own money. They're out there with their kids, their wives, their families, building fish-spawning structures, for example. They love doing it. They love putting back. Bird nesting boxes.... There are a variety of habitat treatment projects—trying to improve habitat out there for wildlife.

Right now in Manitoba we have a moose crisis. We have moose crashing in our province currently. Our members are setting up consultations with aboriginal hunters. They're trying to build relationships and alliances to be able to bring the moose back. They're driving hundreds of miles to attend consultation meetings and meetings that are coordinating hunters to try to bring back the moose. They do it simply by being asked. They go. It's not a question if they're going to go; they're going to go for the moose. They care that much.

The comments before me and coming after me, I think will well establish the money, the economic importance and the kinds of contributions that hunters have made as conservationists.

I want to talk very briefly about this notion of hunters as environmentalists. In our view, we do a lot of work at the Manitoba Wildlife Federation to recruit new hunters and fishers. We've always believed that hunters and anglers are the very important people who are going to work to make sure the animals and fish are here forever, and the habitat that they rely on. We've always felt that. A recent study out of Cornell has shown that hunters are four times more likely than an average citizen to participate in conservation work to make sure we have sustainable resources forever.

I started a youth hunting program here in Manitoba that spread across Canada. I did it as an a Delta Waterfowl employee. It's one of my favourite things that I've ever worked on. The most important part of it for me is the first night before the hunt. We talk to the kids before they go out and say, “Listen, you're going to hunt in the morning. You're going to go out and hunt ducks. It's going to be a great experience. We're going to get our own meat. We're going to learn how to cook it and prepare it and get connected to our food. When you do that, you're responsible for them forever. Forever they're entrusted to your care, so you have to make sure you always put back more than you take.”

That is our approach and our vision to conservation. Hunters can really drive energy as environmentalists because they're so connected to the resource. They are a big opportunity for us to engage them as environmentalists. Think of them more in that light.

I feel like the old rules don't apply anymore. I mean, who's an environmentalist? When you say environmentalist and you talk to a Canadian, it may conjure up all kinds of images. You may think of Greenpeace trying to stop whalers or something like that.

Maybe that's the old view. I often ask people those questions. I'm very curious about that. I think the old rules don't apply anymore. I think now we see this massive movement of urban people coming back to hunting. We have recruitment programs, as I said, trying to get people reconnected to the land and reconnected to where their food comes from. We can't meet the demand.

Hunters as a constituency and as a community—it's a rainbow now. We have more women coming to it than you might imagine or guess. We can't meet the demand for the number of ladies who want to try this now. One of the fastest-growing areas for interest in hunting, fishing, and trapping for us, especially hunting, is with new Canadians. When you line people up against the wall and say, “Those are hunters”, they may not look like it, in your mind's eye.

As well, they think they're environmentalists. It would be news to them that they're not. They wear that on their sleeves. They're really committed to doing that work. I often meet people who will say, “How can you hunt and care about the environment? You're actually killing the animals that you say you care about.” But we don't do conservation to have more wildlife to hunt; because we hunt we have to do conservation. We're obligated to do that. We feel like it's our responsibility.

Now with our youth programming, and with the new hunters, we tell them that the thinking we have, to put back more than we take, extends beyond hunting. We all take resources: our homes, our cars. We all need resources to live. Canada is very much a resource-based economy. We take from the land. If we can all apply that same environmental thinking to everything we do as Canadians every day, we'll put back more than we take—all the time. If we can apply that hunters mindset to everything we do in Canada when we're talking about taking resources, taking from the land, we'll be a lot better off environmentally and a lot more connected to protecting the environment.

The last thing I'll say is that I recognize—I just saw it through the media—that there's maybe a bit of controversy around thinking of hunters as environmentalists and considering them in the environment committee. I can understand that. I would encourage all the people involved here today, regardless of what party you're involved in, to think of people like me, my family, and my wife as an opportunity. Think of us as an opportunity. Pull us in deeper. Engage us. Give us a challenge. Hunters love a challenge. There's no challenge we won't try to tackle if it benefits the environment, if it benefits the animals, if it benefits the habitat they rely on. Think of us as environmentalists. Pull us in deeper and see us as the opportunity that we feel we are.

With that, I'll just thank you again for the opportunity to be here today. We really appreciate that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you, Mr. Olson. Thank you for that message from your heart.

We'll now go to Delta Waterfowl Foundation, to Mr. Jonathan Scarth, senior vice-president.

Welcome, Mr. Scarth.

[Jonathan Scarth, Senior Vice-President, Delta Waterfowl Foundation]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to offer some observations.

Delta Waterfowl, for your background, is an international charity dedicated to the conservation and sustainable use of waterfowl. Our constituency is the duck hunting community in both Canada and the United States but our remarks apply generally to the contributions of hunters, trappers, and anglers.

Our first observation with regard to your study of licensed hunting and trapping is that it's about time. I want to thank the standing committee for demonstrating the initiative to investigate the contributions that the sustainable use community makes to the environment and for making it a priority to enquire into this unique and symbiotic relationship.

The linkage between hunting, fishing, trapping, and environment and sustainable development is a relationship that bears study as a success story in stimulating investments to the environment from those who enjoy it. Hunting, fishing, and trapping are too often an afterthought portrayed as in conflict or as activities that need to be curtailed in some manner to achieve conservation and the environmental goals, and nothing could be further from the truth. That hunters, anglers, and trappers are the first and best conservationists is a statement that is uncontroversial within our community, one that invests more than any other segment of society in conservation. Yet we continue to endure simple-minded criticism from those within the anti-hunting and anti-use community who contribute little to the environment other than their attacks on the main investors in conservation.

There are a variety of ways to describe the relationship between the sustainable use community and the environment. Let's start with a few examples and some raw numbers.

The duck hunting community that supports our organization can lay claim to putting in place and supporting one of the oldest and most successful investments in the environment in North America. The United States federal migratory bird hunting and conservation stamps, commonly known as duck stamps, are pictorial stamps produced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service beginning in 1934 and serve as the federal U.S. licence for hunting migratory waterfowl. Since they were established in 1934 sales of federal duck stamps have generated more than $800 million, which were earmarked and have been used to purchase, or protect with easements, over six million acres of wetland habitat in the United States, including lands protected in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's national wildlife refuge system.

Waterfowl, of course, are not the only wildlife that benefit from the sale of these federal duck stamps. Numerous other bird, mammal, fish, reptile, and amphibian species rely on wetlands. One-third of the United States endangered and threatened species find food or shelter in refuges established using federal duck stamp funds. People have benefited more generally from the federal duck stamp. Hunters have places to enjoy their passion and other outdoor enthusiasts have places to hike, watch birds, photograph, and explore. The wetlands purify water supplies, store flood water, reduce soil erosion and sedimentation, sequester carbon, and provide spawning areas for fish important to sport and commercial fisheries.

This model has been replicated time and time again. Almost every jurisdiction in North America now has funding that is generated from hunting, angling, and trapping licence sales and spent on the environment. In the United States, and Mark touched on these statistics, annual state hunting licence sales exceeded $764 million in 2009 and fishing licence sales were over $600 million. This model was imported into Canada in 1985 with the establishment of the Canadian wildlife habitat conservation stamp required to duck hunt and invested by Wildlife Habitat Canada in habitat projects.

These licence fees have been followed in the U.S. by the imposition of federal excise taxes on most hunting, angling, and shooting sports equipment. They were introduced in 1937 for wildlife and in 1950 for sport fishing, and now generate almost $400 million a year for conservation. Moreover, this baseline funding has provided matching funds that leverage even more public and private investments in conservation. These models have been in place for so long that they are literally taken for granted both by the sustainable use community, by our community, which constantly seeks to build on this investment, and by the non-hunting community who are largely unaware of this bedrock commitment to conservation and the environment.

In terms of investments in conservation, the sustainable use community goes from strength to strength building on these licence-based revenues with private philanthropy and volunteerism, and Rob touched on much of that.

A recent study published in The Journal of Wildlife Management and summarized in Scientific American found that hunters and bird-watchers were almost five times more likely than non-recreationists to carry out land stewardship. These dual hunter-bird-watchers were almost three times more likely than non-recreationists to donate money to conservation. The paper referred to them as conservation superstars.

Beyond the direct contributions of money and volunteer time, duck hunters contribute directly to the management of overabundant wildlife populations, as we are currently experiencing with Arctic nesting goose populations, snow geese and Ross’s geese. I would note that in doing so we are often met with opposition from anti-hunting groups that oppose science-based management while contributing nothing to the environment or conservation. Given the overwhelming importance of predation as a limiting factor for wildlife populations, trappers have a growing role in helping manage both game and endangered wildlife species.

It is also hunting and angling groups that are in the forefront of efforts to help build durable environmental policies and programs that integrate sustainable use, and to work within the resource and agricultural communities to accommodate and sustain wildlife and fish populations. I have presented to your committee before on our alternative land use services program and the national conservation plan, both efforts that are cost-shared with money from the hunting and fishing community.

To those within the sustainable use community, this extraordinary willingness to invest in conservation is second nature. ln part, it is enlightened and informed self-interest that drives the hunter to invest in conservation. The experience of hunting is a priority for us, and we give back in order to experience abundance in the field and thus contribute to research and production of wildlife.

Our organization was founded over a hundred years ago, and it became a research organization on the strength of a contribution from a philanthropist who committed to putting two ducks back in the air for every duck that he harvested in the fall.

This willingness to pay for environmental improvements stands in contrast to sectors of society less connected to environmental issues. A recent Nanos poll indicated that while 71% of Canadians said they support or somewhat support imposing new taxes on businesses that emit greenhouse gases, a minority, 37% to 41%, were willing to consider new taxes on gasoline and home heating oil.

The commitment to invest from the hunting, angling, and trapping communities springs from a deep emotional connection between the environment and the hunter, angler, and trapper. The commitment gives us a disproportionate need to give back after we take a duck to enjoy for the table. It is a unique connection, and the evidence suggests that this community is far more willing to contribute in time, money, and engagement in environmental conservation.

Thank you for this recognition. Your committee is well advised to study and reflect on this phenomenon.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Thank you very much, Mr. Scarth.

We will now move to our opening round of questions, for seven minutes each, beginning with Mr. Sopuck, please.

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

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much to the presenters.

Just as a bit of FYI, Dr. Boyce, my own master's was funded by Dingell-Johnson funds, so I am deeply sympathetic to that particular idea.

My first question is for Mr. Olson, a very direct question. Why is it important for the environment and sustainable development committee to study this topic?

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

Mr. Olson, go ahead.

[Rob Olson]

It is important because as a constituency these are people.... If that community is committed to actually doing things for the environment and making the environment better, then this is a constituency that you have to engage. To engage them, you have to know them. To know them, you have to study them.

I would say that is the number one thing. Engage us, use us, pull us in, challenge us, give us the rope, and we'll pull. To me, that is the number one reason why it is essential that you folks bring us in deeper.

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

Mr. Scarth, as is known, both the Liberals and NDP oppose the environment committee conducting this study—

[Megan Leslie, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

That is actually incorrect. We certainly held a press conference about other topics that we could study, but it is not correct that we oppose this study. We are in favour of this study.

[The Chair, Conservative, Harold Albrecht]

This is not a point of order. It's a point of debate.

We'll move back to Mr. Sopuck.

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

Well, the NDP press release says NDP presses the environment committee to refocus its priorities. The other parties obviously didn't think this was a priority.

Mr. Scarth, why do you think that was and why is this study a priority? Why hasn't the hunting and trapping community been given the credit that is due to it for its efforts in conservation?

[Jonathan Scarth]

I think most Canadians are not aware of the contributions that hunters, anglers, and trappers make to conservation, either financially, in a taxation sense as we've covered, or in a philanthropic sense. I think the funding is taken for granted within the sustainable use community and I think it's unknown within the community outside of that sector.

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

Mr. Scarth, I understand that Delta Waterfowl applied for some funding under the national conservation plan, the wetland program for the alternate land use services conservation program that Delta operates. Can you describe that program and why it is important? Why are hunters involved with habitat conservation on the privately owned farmed landscape?

[Jonathan Scarth]

The evolution of the alternative land use services program began with our conversations with farmers. It was very much a conversation with the hunting community, who were seeking to conserve more habitat on a landscape that is for the most part privately owned. Waterfowl depend, ducks depend on basically the privately owned part of the Midwest in the U.S. and Canada.

We began having a conversation with farmers and we discovered in that conversation that we had more in common than we had as differences. The design of our ALUS program is to work with incentives, be respectful of property rights, and work with the agricultural community, as opposed to the other models, which involved taking habitat away from the privately owned landowner community or regulating their activity. We found a way in these conversations. We found a kinship between those who are seeking to grow things on the landscape as hunters and as farmers to work together. That was the genesis of the program and we're very excited at the growth of it across the country.

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

Mr. Olson, I'm interested in the phenomenon of urban people taking up hunting. Of course it's a false dichotomy to say that hunting and trapping is a rural issue. It's clearly not. I was born and raised in Winnipeg and got up with my dad early in the morning to go hunting for many weekends in the fall. Why is it, Mr. Olson, that urban people seem to be flocking to hunting and fishing now after many years when many of them didn't do this? Why are they taking this up?

[Rob Olson]

We're not sure. In our becoming an outdoorswoman program we have spots for 75 ladies every year in May and it sells out immediately. I was there last year teaching the gals how to fillet fish and stuff like that. I asked them the question, “Why are you here?” These ladies are young professionals from the city. They have no particular connection to the country and didn't come from a farm. What they said was, “You know, we're so disconnected now.” It's troubling to them. It's almost like they got so disconnected they now crave getting reconnected. They're craving something authentic. They want an authentic experience. They have concerns about their food. They want to get their own food. They want to feel that pride of getting their own meat, knowing where it came from, processing it themselves, and feeling the pride of that. It's like canning your own vegetables. There's a certain pride in that.

I think that's why it's happening and it's happening a lot. We have a program now with a group called Food Matters Manitoba and none of them look like hunters. You know they don't look like hunters in your mind's eye, what you think of as a hunter. They are hunters now. They have us teaching inner-city kids, primarily aboriginal kids in the core of Winnipeg, how to clean and process Canada geese and ducks in home education class and make fajitas out of them. You wouldn't have thought that would be happening 15 or 20 years ago. Would we have been cleaning geese in downtown Winnipeg in a school and cooking them?

That's how big the demand is. That's how much people are craving to get back to that. For us of course it's an amazing phenomenon because now we can engage them all in conservation. That's the payoff. We can bring them all into being environmentalists. Those people in the city, now they've had that experience, it's more likely I think—and research has shown that now—that we can suck them into this committee's agenda.