Environment committee  I wouldn't know. I would say that the no net loss policy is and has been an extremely important principle that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has applied, and the policy does indicate that, yes, if development is going to destroy fish habitat, then by all means let's....

Environment committee  We have some concerns with respect to how some federally managed lands are being managed. For example, national wildlife areas, which are a tremendous resource, are often overlooked. Most Canadians have never even heard of them, but the Canadian Wildlife Service manages almost as

Environment committee  I think your question related to the fact that in a number of protected areas the surface rights are protected but not subsurface rights, and that obviously is an issue. That was the issue in Suffield, the fact that the subsurface rights were proposed for development. Let me st

Environment committee  As I mentioned, this no net loss policy was developed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in 1986, in parallel with some changes to the Fisheries Act that protected fish habitat. In the most recent omnibus budget bill, those changes have largely been undone. However, the ch

Environment committee  My first comment is that right now there is actually quite good collaboration among the levels of government, and particularly with the not-for-profit organizations who are working on the ground on the landscape, the folks like Nature Conservancy of Canada and Wildlife Habitat Ca

Environment committee  It is pretty much lost. After the act has come into force, we now have less than 1% of the environmental assessments taking place than before, but that's a separate argument. I just want to say regarding the Mackenzie gas project that as part of that whole effort... and with thi

Environment committee  There are lots of issues with respect to implementing the Species at Risk Act. Our view is that the act does not need to be rewritten. The act itself is working well. It's really a question of implementing it. There have been challenges, and I certainly know that the Canadian W

Environment committee  I wouldn't say we need a regulation on compensation. I'd say the committee might want to think about it.

Environment committee  In my view, it just needs to be implemented.

Environment committee  I could, but, Bill, do you want to take it?

Environment committee  Perhaps I could take this. So far, in terms of how the Department of Fisheries and Oceans applies the no net loss policy—

Environment committee  I'm not sure we can immediately jump to the conclusion that there is going to be a net loss. I think what has to happen is that whatever government agency is involved.... And there is a problem constitutionally here, in that the federal government has responsibility for fish and

Environment committee  Yes, I know. I appreciate that. The idea is how you actually achieve it. I think we have to recognize that when you start into a negotiation and into discussions, if you had that principle of no net loss, you go into the discussions with the developer knowing this is basically wh

Environment committee  I don't see why it would. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans was able to fairly successfully implement its policy for over 20 years—

Environment committee  I think the best tool the federal government has is to provide a little bit of money. A little bit of money goes an awfully long way when you're talking about the naturalists' communities or the angler and hunter communities. They don't need much money to do an incredible amount