IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIES AT RISK ACT (SARA) (2004 – Revised 2006)

The “Species at Risk Act” (SARA) was passed by Parliament in 2002, coming partly into force in 2003 and completely on June 1, 2004. Its intent is to prevent wildlife species from becoming extinct, to provide for recovery of species which are at risk as a result of human activity, and to manage species of special concern to prevent them from becoming endangered or threatened. It applies to all wildlife species, including marine fish.

SARA protects plants and animals included in the “List of Wildlife Species at Risk”. Species are put on the list following assessment by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and acceptance of this assessment by the Governor in Council.

Once SARA is fully in effect, it becomes an offence to kill, harm, harass, capture or take an individual of a legally listed species unless an incidental harm permit has been issued. Mandatory recovery strategies and action plans must then be developed according to specific time lines.

Terrestrial species, birds, reptiles, plants, mosses subject to SARA are truly in the wild. They are not conserved or managed by any level of responsible government. When these species are endangered, unfortunately, there is a need for the blunt prohibition measure of SARA because no other regulatory regime exists to protect these species. However, for fish species, the prohibition on killing or harming a single individual could mean closing otherwise strong and successful fisheries. The impact on harvesters and their ability to earn a livelihood, on the industry and its ability to supply its markets, and on the communities that depend on the wealth generated by fishing is potentially enormous.

Canada’s commercially harvested fish and shellfish species are conserved and managed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). This management regime is guided by the precautionary approach. DFO has extensive resources in the areas of science, monitoring, and enforcement. As well, DFO Fisheries Management has developed an array of fisheries conservation and rebuilding tools to address stock declines.

The intent of SARA was “the establishment of complementary legislation and programs for the protection and recovery of species at risk in Canada”. SARA, rather than being complementary to the Fisheries Act is in conflict. In the case of Sakinaw and Cultus Lakes salmon, the restrictive tool kit of SARA (i.e. prohibition) for rebuilding species had to be abandoned because of the intermingling nature of the salmon runs. However, responsible fisheries management rebuilding tools under the Fisheries Act were available and have been put in place. In addition, COSEWIC status reports on species they recommend for listing can be seriously flawed and out of date as was the case with recent recommendations on interior Fraser Coho and bocaccio.

This lack of being complementary and poor information on which to base important decisions is creating an unfortunate divide between responsible fishing organizations and environmental groups, both committed to sustainable fisheries resources.

THE CHAMBER RECOMMENDS

That given the potential impact on the fishing industry and the communities it supports that:

1. COSEWIC needs to develop endangered species listing criteria that are right for marine species. The prevailing advice among most respected marine scientist is that the existing COSEWIC criteria are based on terrestrial species and are not appropriate for marine species. The criteria must be amended to properly reflect marine species population dynamics;

2. the most recent and technically sound scientific advice available must be used when considering species for listing;

3. no species should be considered for listing until a complete socio-economic impact analysis on losses to all affected industries has been done, this includes fishing, forestry, agriculture and tourism;

4. with respect to SARA, there is a need to bring forward amendments to SARA to recognize fully the fisheries conservation, management, and recovery capabilities of the Fisheries Act to address aquatic species at risk;

5. in view of the role of DFO as outlined above, COSEWIC should not concern itself with commercial fish species and fish species monitored by DFO. Its analysis in fisheries should be restricted to providing a probability of extinction or extirpation from which the government of Canada can determine whether action is appropriate and, if so, whether that action should be taken under the Fisheries Act or SARA; and

6. COSEWIC and its subcommittees need to be governed by the check and balances that federal government scientific and advisory bodies adhere to. It should follow the SAGE guidelines. This scientific report sets out open, transparent, and peer review processes for generating science advice for the federal government.