Conservation technician Kenneth Lingerfelt holds up a brook trout at Yellowstone Prong in the Pisgah National Forest in North Carolina, on May 1, 2019.Angela Wilhelm/The Associated Press
Canada’s process for assessing which native wildlife species are at risk of disappearing is critically under-resourced and falling further behind each year, a new audit has revealed
At the current level of support, it would take more than 30 years to complete assessments for more than 1,000 vulnerable species that are considered to be a priority by conservation scientists. These include species such as the Canadian toad, the horned lark and brook trout.
The need for timely assessments is growing as habitat loss, pollution, climate change and other threats put increased pressure on species at risk.
“We could lose species without even knowing that they were in need of protection and recovery,” said Jerry DeMarco, federal Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, during a news briefing on Thursday.
Mr. DeMarco’s comments followed the release of five reports delivered to the House of Commons that scrutinize the federal government’s performance on a range of environment-related matters.
One of the reports is focused on the relationship between the federal government and the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), an independent body of experts tasked with providing information and recommendations on species at risk.
Scientific assessments overseen by COSEWIC for Environment and Climate Change Canada are the first step on the road to a species becoming listed for federal protection. Under the Species at Risk Act, Ottawa is required to develop and implement a recovery plan for each listed species. The act also requires COSEWIC to conduct reassessments of listed species at 10-year intervals to determine if their status has changed.
But the number of species requiring assessment or reassessment has clearly outpaced the committee’s budget.
In his report, Mr. DeMarco notes that the government has responded by limiting the number of assessments and reassessments that the committee can do each year. Over a period of three fiscal years from 2021 to 2024, the limit was lowered each year down to a target of 60 assessments.
The commissioner’s report also notes there was no analysis conducted by the government that would justify why it had imposed that particular limit.
More importantly, the government has consistently failed to provide an adequate budget for COSEWIC to meet even the lowest limits that were set for it. The result is a growing backlog of unassessed species.
Included in the audit is a response from Environment and Climate Change Canada. The department said it agreed with the commissioner’s recommendations and would work with COSEWIC to achieve appropriate targets – but with the caveat that it would do so “within available resourcing.”
David Lee, COSEWIC’s current chair, said that assessments have increased in volume and complexity. Assessments are overseen and paid for by the committee and typically conducted by biological contractors.
“With an increased budget, I believe we could put out more calls for bids for status reports and accept more status reports and thereby complete more assessments than currently,” Dr. Lee said.
Eric Taylor, a professor at the University of British Columbia and a former chair of COSEWIC, said human resources may prove to be a barrier even if the committee’s budget can be increased. Declining commitments to academic programs in conservation biology suggest there could be a shortage of trained individuals with the necessary expertise to conduct assessments if targets are increased.
All of this has adverse consequences for wildlife, said James Pagé, a biodiversity specialist with the Canadian Wildlife Federation. Without timely assessments that lead to federal listing, species cannot benefit from programs designed to aid their recovery.
“The real problem is there are so many species that are potentially at risk that we just can’t even get to assessing them,” he said. “Beyond the flaws of the process or the funding, it’s human activity that has caused that situation.”