Environment Committee on May 3rd, 2016

[Kevin Stringer]

Let me just add, one of the interesting results, I would say, or consequences of having the formal mandate on the marine side of 5% and 10% is it's galvanized people.

It's galvanized my department. It enabled us to go forward with the budget and say, folks, if we're going to do this, we absolutely have to have a reinvestment.

It's galvanized the town. Our colleagues around this table have come together to say, God, how on earth are we going to do this? It's moved us out of, I guess we'll get to this one next year, and this one next year. It got us out of our comfort zone and thinking about different things.

It's galvanized the stakeholders. We've had environmental groups come and say, we can help. Here are some thoughts. We've had the fisheries industry, the oil and gas industry, and others come and say, okay, we get it. This is going to happen. This didn't use to happen. They've said, we could help, and If you could just do it this way.

Without having that in the public domain, it would be much harder. It's still going to be enormously difficult. We do have a lot of science work done and a lot of prep work done. We have the provinces. We've re-established that group. It's galvanized everyone, and that's actually made a huge difference.

I share the optimism. I would say, and I've often said to our own staff, that we're really excited about this, and we're also a little bit terrified. Our objective is to keep this higher than this, and to keep everybody moving—and so far, so good.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Can I ask, over what period of time has this galvanization taken place?

[Kevin Stringer]

From November 4 to November 5, I would say, when we saw the mandate letter.

It really was when we saw that, and it's all in the public domain. We all got it in our mandate letters. We connected in November. We connected with environmental groups and brought them together as a group in early December. We've been talking to others, as well.

It's been less than six months, since we've seen that. You can see it coming together. We are now looking at doing things differently.

For us, it means larger protected areas, different ways to do it, finding a different way to decrease the amount of time it takes—instead of seven years to do an MPA, it has to take less—and identifying what types of things can count that we haven't really thought about. Are there some fisheries closures where we can change how we do it so that they would count? It's these types of things.

There's been an enormous amount of work not only in our department, not only in government, but among all the players. It really is, as I say, an all-in process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you

Mr. Aldag.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Where to go? I have so many questions.

With Fisheries, we'll continue with some of what we've been talking about.

I was looking at the presentation. You spoke about five of 13 priority marine bioregions. You've just been speaking about galvanizing, getting things moving.

This goes back to my previous question about systems plans for Fisheries and Oceans. Perhaps you could give us a written submission simply on what's there. I'm concerned, or curious, about the other eight priority marine bioregions, what the plans are there, how they fit in. Your comments were, we protected 1% of oceans over 20 years, and now we have a year to get to the 5%. That's a concern. It's good to see that people are rallying behind the challenge that's been put out there. Perhaps we could get your thoughts on how we...or if there's anything else you want to comment on.

I'd also like to then move it to anybody working within systems plans, on how we position those for the future, the next generation of thinking on protected areas.

We'll start with Fisheries on the current system plan, the remaining bioregions, and then move to the future planning that's needed.

[Kevin Stringer]

Let me start by saying, just building on that galvanized.... On setting these targets of 5% and 10%, I would say the 10% is going to be easier to achieve than the 5% by next year.

Our longer-term objective is those 13 bioregions and to establish MPA networks in those 13 bioregions that achieve a number of objectives: that they're connected; that they're related; that they're replicated; and that we have a different set, a broad set, of protections in those areas. Once we have that in all 13 bioregions.... That's our plan.

The great benefit of the 5% and 10% objectives is they are gathering the community in a way it hasn't been gathered before. We believe we can ride that to achieve the longer-term objective. As we're moving ahead on the 5% and 10%, we're talking to everybody, as I am here, about that longer-term objective. It's certainly about getting to the 5% and 10%, but that contributes to that longer-term objective, which we think is the right way forward in terms of MPA networks, different types of protections, with all of the principles associated with that.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Just for Environment Canada and Parks, if you have thoughts on the next version of system plans guiding you, and what's going to direct us, if you could give us those in writing, that would be appreciated.

I did want to raise a couple of quick things.

I found a figure that says that Canada is 152nd of 240 jurisdictions for percentage of lands protected, so when we start talking about these targets of 17% and 10%, our previous response talked about biodiversity, and I think that really needs to be what's guiding us. I do get really concerned when we are driven only by targets.

So when we talk about these future systems plans, we have to look at our biodiversity goals and how we will achieve those.

I'm just trying to—

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have two minutes to get it out there.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Let's get a minute maybe from Environment and then a minute from Parks on this idea of the future of systems plans moving beyond just the target thinking and into something richer.

What point are we at in Parks specifically, which has been with this plan since the 1970s? Has any thought been given to moving beyond that and what that might look like?

[Kevin McNamee]

As I've mentioned before, we acknowledge that in the next several years we're going to have to start to look at what the next version will be in terms of the national parks systems plan, but currently we are focused on getting the areas in the unrepresented ones. In terms of our marine systems plan, as I mentioned, we have only five of 29 represented, so we will continue to work on that plan.

I do want to stress that it is not just a question of percentages. It is a question of where these places are located.

A national park reserve in the south Okanagan would add about 0.001 to the target, yet it is incredibly rich in terms of biological diversity, so it's important in these systems plans that we look at what we are contributing to a target and, as Kevin said, that we use that to drive us to get new areas. However, when we are designing them, part of the future and current plan is to look at key areas, to make sure that they're representative or that important bird habitats and things like that are effectively and equitably managed and well connected. It's that notion of connecting these protected areas that is really essential.

Again, I'm sure you'll be hearing about that on Thursday and we'll be addressing that through our work.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

I know, Mr. Cuzner, that you wanted to ask something very quickly, and you have maybe 30 seconds.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

I don't know if I'll be able to do it in 30 seconds.

It's about St. Anns Bank. The concern there is that there's going to be a relocation of effort. We saw it in the area 19 crab fishery when the guys from area 12 came over and fished right on that line and it really hit the...so you guys put in a one-mile buffer and it worked out really well. However, with St. Anns Bank, they think that the intensity of the effort is going to increase down by St. Paul's.

Are you concerned at all that rather than a distribution of effort, there's an intensity of the effort in St. Paul's, and it has had an unintended consequence?

[Kevin Stringer]

I'm going to ask Jeff to speak to the specifics.

I would just say we're talking about this. We need to move forward on marine protected areas and on different types of protections. Human activities are taking place out in these areas. We do work closely with fisheries groups and we also work with other industries. There are challenges and there are impacts.

That is why it has taken as long as it has, but I'll ask Jeff to speak to the specifics on the St. Anns issue.

[Jeff MacDonald, Director General, Oceans and Fisheries Policy, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Just with regard to the question from the member in terms of increasing the intensity of effort, there obviously has been ongoing dialogue in terms of the establishment of that particular MPA, and part of the dialogue is related to not only the question of intensity of effort but also the benefits of marine protected areas and the potential for spillover effect for a particular species.

I know that DFO staff have had those conversations with all of their fleets, and it's an ongoing part of the establishment of the MPA. As Kevin said, it's an important consideration and the industry makes an important contribution to MPA planning as well as to the design of it. One of the emerging areas in terms of MPA research is that of the benefit of the spillover effect, and that's been part of the dialogue on the establishment of St. Anns Bank, for example.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you very much. You know, it's difficult because it's a privilege to have all of you in front of us to get a chance to ask questions. It's hard when we don't have as much time as we need. I'm going to add a bit more time for the two questioners who follow, to make up for the extra time I gave the Liberals.

Mr. Shields, you normally have five minutes, but I'm going to give you seven. Go ahead.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. McLean, thank you for bringing up the Suffield base and National Defence. They need some help. We have a huge problem there, and it needs to be solved. I hope you have some influence and you don't introduce another species, so we get another problem. We have to take care of the elk because they shouldn't have been there. Are you going to get that one fixed? You brought it up, so I'm guessing you know the Suffield base.

[Robert McLean]

Thank you very much for the question. I'd like to check with our region with respect to the plans and the discussions we would be having with the Department of National Defence on how to manage that issue. Perhaps we can get back to you in writing.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Good. I look forward to that one. Thank you.

There's a piece here I think is missing. You're talking about a lot of expansion. I'm familiar with Parks. By the way, Waterton Park is the best national park in Canada. If you haven't been there, you should go there. There's an issue out there, with my having met with tourism, and having met with some other people about the future trends for employment. You employ a sector of community and leadership, in a sense, for what we want to do in our parks. They're drastically short of people now, and the prediction is within 10 years they will be 50% shorter of the leadership types of people who will build our tourism industry in this type of area. It's decreasing now, our tourism in this area, because of lack of manpower.

Are you in the schools? Are you meeting with the school counsellors? Are you developing programs for employment in this sector? We're not getting it.

[Kevin McNamee]

Unfortunately I can't respond with details to your question, so we can get back to you. At the same time, I'd say over the last 10 years we have been doing more to work in partnership with the tourism industry, in terms of looking at how we can deliver iconic visitor experiences that are consistent with national park ideas.

In particular—and maybe I'm going to ask Nadine to speak to this—we've put a lot of emphasis on indigenous tourism. I don't know if you want to add something to that.

All of this, in part, will lead to better leadership that you're talking about.

[Nadine Crookes, Director, Natural Resource Conservation Branch, Parks Canada Agency]

Yes. Thank you for taking the opportunity to address this.

In the area of indigenous tourism, but more broadly with the tourism industry, Parks Canada has invested a lot of time and effort in researching and working with community members. There are the 300 Kevin referenced at the beginning of his speech. We are trying to understand the trends, the needs, the capacity issues, the trajectory in terms of what visitors are looking for, the visitors who don't come and what they're looking for, and trying to find ways and means of developing those partnerships that are consistent with national park ideals.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

You don't have a program for schools. You're not in the schools. You're not talking to school counsellors. If you don't get there, people are not going to go into these professions. The projections of shortage of employees means—I go back to Mr. Aldag—there won't be people in the parks. They won't be there. If you don't have a constituency, you don't have a support base out there. Canadians are not there, and the iconic tourists won't be there if you don't have trained people. If you don't get into the school systems, and show them the opportunities, we're going to be done because nobody's going to be there.

[Nadine Crookes]

Right. We do have programs that are offered by individual parks in our 44 parks across the system that work on specific projects. For example, in Pacific Rim National Park reserve, out on the west coast of British Columbia, we have a species at risk program reintroducing Pink Sand-verbena into our dune system. We do work with schools, with scout groups, and with others to actively involve those community members in the reintroduction.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Okay, you're getting closer.

[Kevin McNamee]

We'll get closer in writing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

You have two minutes.