Thank you for the question.
In the critical habitat report, exhibit 2.4 shows that only 57% of the conservation actions on federal land were clearly monitored, but as you pointed out, the average isn't a very good measure. Parks Canada is batting a thousand at 100%, while both Fisheries and Oceans and Environment and Climate Change are only in the teens.
A simple answer would be for DFO and Environment and Climate Change Canada to copy a little bit of the success story from Parks Canada. They have a database that tracks all their actions on federal land and consolidates that information. That's why they got the check mark from us.
The simple answer would be for Fisheries and Oceans and Environment and Climate Change Canada to take it as seriously as Parks Canada does and consider employing the same sort of tracking and database system that Parks Canada employs. It's not the only solution, but it would be the simplest solution.