West Coast Environmental Law
Research Foundation Workshop

SFU Harbour Centre, Vancouver, Friday, June 14, 1996

Speaking Notes

LIST OF INTEREST GROUPS,
AND DATES OF MEETINGS

Table 1:

Stakeholder Groups consulted on the more detailed content of the legislative proposals.

Summary

There is work in progress on a Fish Protection Act or whatever it will eventually be called.

If we examine the differences between Vancouver and surroundings in 1870 and the present time, it is possible to see the reduction in the number of streams and water bodies. We have basically paved over them all.

Events in the last few years show forward movement on fish protection. In the fall of 1994 the Fisheries Working Group was asked to look at legislation. In 1995 the Kemano project was canceled. In fall 1995, a BC habitat conservation plan strategy paper identified areas of possible legislative change, and consultation with stakeholders occurred. The last throne speech focused on fish habitat and signaled that an act would be brought in, along with a program of fish habitat protection. With regard to Fisheries Renewal BC, additional measure will be developed in consultation with stakeholders. The Sustainable Environment Charter addresses incentives related to clean air and water. There is a commitment to developing a nonpoint source strategy too.

Toby Vigod understands that amendments to the federal Fisheries Act are to be reintroduced in October. Highlights of possible legislative changes at the provincial level include:

1) Protection of instream flows and of fish and fish habitat (Water Act).

2) Protection for threatened and endangered fish (Wildlife Act).

3) No major dams on the Fraser River (provincial Fisheries Act).

4) Enhance local government authority (Municipal Act).

5) Improvements to Habitat Conservation (special accounts appropriation fund).

With regard to the proposed amendment to the Fisheries Act regarding no new major dams on the Fraser or its major tributaries, dams will have to be defined. In terms of the Water Act, there will be requirements to consider instream flows in water use decisions, with the onus on the applicant to provide information. For the Wildlife Act, a power will be established to designate, by region, species of fish and plants and invertebrates which are a factor in fish habitat. With regard to the Municipal Act and Vancouver Charter enabling provisions will address the inclusion of environmental policies in Official Community Plans, requirements for development impact assessment and consultation with MELP on environmental issues at key times. The Urban Salmon Habitat Program is directed toward ensuring sustainable wild salmon source and habitats in human settlement areas.

A mix of legal and policy measures is needed. Toby Vigod doubts that much legislation will be introduced this summer, but next spring will be the key.

Discussion

Question (to Toby). There are links between the three speakers. David talked about proactivity; Otto talked through ideas about the chance to do something new in the province, but we saw the same stuff in 1966 — "enable" "shall consider" — but no insistence. The only requirement under the Municipal Act was to consult with MELP.

Response. Point is well taken, although at least it is mandatory consideration. In the EAB there was not even this legislative basis. No other legislation in Canada comes this close. The province knows what it would like to do with the Water Act. When she was talking to cattle ranchers last week, they were fearful of even "must consider." Awareness is needed. Maybe we can improve Act further. With regard to municipalities there are a range of capacities and concerns. There is forward movement but signals are that it will be slow. There is work being down in some specific areas but municipalities say that they need to have tools.

Question. While happy to hear about changes to the Municipal Act, why not put a simple direct clause about fish/habitat in this legislation, something like "council may by bylaw protect fish habitat."

Response. Environment definition is broadened in the proposals the government is considering — are meant to cover fish habitat. There is a problem with the current term "foul" used in the Municipal Act.

Question. What are the proposed changes to s. 35? What potential effects would they have on transfers of power or resources to the provinces? What will delegation agreements say? Does the province have the will to protect the environment as it protects development?

Response. Larger projects will still be under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, so smaller projects could be delegated to the provinces.

Follow-up question. But 90% of what is now covered won't be because they are small — can the province take on this task?

Response. Our premier wants more responsibility on this. A key issue is transfer of resources. There is certainly some duplication now and the province thinks it can take over. I think there is a will.

Question. There is lack of enforcement of existing laws. Is there a willingness to prosecute licensees? Is this government committed to strong enforcement?

Response. When Ministry thought others may be cut, said "no this remains a priority".

Question. Resources to community awareness etc.?

Response. (Toby) There is more now than there were before. There has been an increase in conservation officers budget since the NDP.

There will be a new budget next week. BC is not facing the same numbers as in other provinces, which allows things like fish to become a priority for the province.