The fisheries department still hasn’t provided advice on whether Atlantic cod — populations of which crashed in the late 1980s and early 1990s, leading to a fishing moratorium — should be listed.SHANE GROSS/The Globe and Mail
Fisheries and Oceans Canada does not adequately protect aquatic species at risk, and demonstrates a bias against protecting species bearing commercial value, Jerry DeMarco, commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, said in a report tabled Tuesday in the House of Commons.
Although the Species At Risk Act entered into force in 2004, the department has not yet provided advice to the minister on whether half of the species assessed by an advisory panel as being at risk should be listed as requiring protection. (It still hasn’t provided advice on whether Atlantic cod – populations of which crashed in the late 1980s and early 1990s, leading to a fishing moratorium – should be listed.) It also hasn’t published any scientific reports on 13 of the 15 species that fall under its direct responsibility.
The department’s approach has led to significant delays in listing at-risk species, the report stated.
Assessed risk status of aquatic
species in Canada
Number of species, as of Nov. 2021
Freshwater species
Marine species
NOT AT RISK
40
28
SPECIAL CONCERN
36
27
THREATENED
38
25
ENDANGERED
49
52
EXTIRPATED
EXTINCT
DATA-DEFICIENT
8
22
3
15
0
1
MURAT YÜKSELIR / THE GLOBE AND MAIL, SOURCE:
COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF ENDANGERED
WILDLIFE IN CANADA
Assessed risk status of aquatic species in Canada
Number of species, as of Nov. 2021
Freshwater species
Marine species
NOT AT RISK
40
28
SPECIAL CONCERN
36
27
THREATENED
38
25
ENDANGERED
49
52
EXTIRPATED
EXTINCT
DATA-DEFICIENT
8
22
3
15
0
1
MURAT YÜKSELIR / THE GLOBE AND MAIL, SOURCE: COMMITTEE
ON THE STATUS OF ENDANGERED WILDLIFE IN CANADA
Assessed risk status of aquatic species in Canada
Number of species, as of Nov. 2021
Freshwater species
Marine species
NOT AT RISK
40
28
SPECIAL CONCERN
36
27
THREATENED
38
25
ENDANGERED
49
52
EXTIRPATED
EXTINCT
DATA-DEFICIENT
8
22
3
15
0
1
MURAT YÜKSELIR / THE GLOBE AND MAIL, SOURCE: COMMITTEE
ON THE STATUS OF ENDANGERED WILDLIFE IN CANADA
“Measures have been in place to protect Canada’s wildlife for over 100 years, and legislation to protect and recover species at risk for nearly 20 years,” Mr. DeMarco told reporters. “But preserving what remains of this country’s biodiversity will require more than just words on paper.”
Of a dozen species the report studied in detail – including Atlantic cod, steelhead trout, Chinook salmon and Atlantic bluefin tuna – the department recommended not listing any of the species that were commercially valuable. Its recommendations were “not always clearly supported by scientific information.”
Canada is a major seafood exporter. According to a report released this summer by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Canada’s marine capture production amounted to 710,000 metric tonnes (live weight) in 2020, about half the annual average during the 1980s. Nearly 20,000 were employed in processing aquatic products, down from about 32,000 two decades earlier.
Fisheries report brings hope to Indigenous communities, sparks anger in industry
Canada has two main laws that protect aquatic biodiversity. Under the Fisheries Act, which provides for conservation and protection of fish and fish habitat, the department is responsible for maintaining prescribed major fish stocks at, or above, sustainable levels. The Species at Risk Act was intended to prevent animals, plants and other organisms from disappearing.
The commissioner’s report says the department lacks sufficient staff to enforce either of those laws, particularly in Ontario and the Prairies. And while the report acknowledged the difficulties of assessing the health of dwindling species over large swaths of ocean, it didn’t accept that as justification for the department’s performance.
“The precautionary principle, articulated in the Species at Risk Act and department policy, states that a lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for not preventing the reduction or loss of species at risk.”
The department did not respond to interview requests from The Globe and Mail on Tuesday. In a statement, it said it takes time to complete the required processes and to analyze all the information to identify a course of action. It added that the Species At Risk Act was only one of several legislative tools it uses.
Oceana Canada, a charity dedicated to protecting and restoring marine ecosystems, conducts annual audits of Canada’s fisheries. Robert Rangeley, its director of science, said the department’s failure to draw up and implement rebuilding plans for endangered populations has undermined the oceans’ resilience, with serious implications for commercial fisheries.
“The rebuilding plans that are in place under the Fisheries Act are insufficient, and there are very few of them,” Dr. Rangeley said. “There are a large number of stocks that are of uncertain status, and the ones that are healthy are 30 per cent of our stocks. That trend has hardly changed over the years of our fisheries audit.”
Other departments fared better under the commissioner’s scrutiny.
Another report released on Tuesday found Natural Resources Canada, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission “did a good job” of managing the federal government’s extensive inventory of low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste. Most is contaminated soil, some of it dating as far back as the 1930s. There are also decommissioned buildings, aging infrastructure and contaminated lands.
“The organizations managed this waste in accordance with both national and international standards that help protect the environment as well as the safety of current and future generations,” Mr. DeMarco said.
That finding could be a blow to opponents of a radioactive waste disposal facility proposed at AECL’s Chalk River Laboratories site in Deep River, Ont. The facility’s environmental assessment awaits a decision from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
Ole Hendrickson, a researcher with Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County, said the commissioner failed to provide evidence that the federal government was making progress in reducing its $16-billion liability for nuclear waste.
“Canadian taxpayers are being taken to the cleaners,” he wrote in an e-mail.