This article first appeared in the Tofino-Ucluelet Westerly News
Protection of fish habitat threatened
Critics warn
By Andrew Bailey
Westerly News
May 24, 2012
Federal NDP fisheries critic Robert Chisolm recently spoke in opposition to changes proposed to the Fisheries Act, stipulated in the government's budget as Bill C-38.
"The most damaging part of this whole bill is the attack being waged on fishing communities across this country and on the ecosystem, frankly, because fish habitat is about the ecosystem," he said during a May 8 debate in the House of Commons.
"Habitat is the water and land necessary for the survival of all species, including fish. Habitat destruction is the most common reason for species decline, and the Fisheries Act has been essential in protecting fish habitats and the fisheries they support."
The government is tinkering with section 35 of the Fisheries Act, which speaks to the protection of fish habitat, and making it more specific to be just about the protection of fish, according to Jessica Hutchinson of Coastal Rainforest Services in Ucluelet.
Section 35 of the Act prohibits harmful alteration, disruption, or destruction, (HADD) of fish habitats, according to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans' website.
The changes to the act, which will come into force by order of the cabinet, will completely remove the HADD provisions from the act, according to a May 22 report published by Canada's Ecojustice organization.
"The changes mean that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans will no longer be notified of certain projects or activities that will harm fish habitat- Theoretically, projects such as pipelines, mines, or agricultural activities could be exempted from this part of the act," the Ecojustice report states.
Under the proposed alterations, only in circumstances where streams are permanently altered will an infraction be considered to have occurred, according to Ecojustice.
"For example, a company could remove vegetation from a spawning stream, or temporarily divert a stream for road work activities, which would destroy a year class of salmon but not permanently alter the habitat," the report states.
Hutchinson does not believe it is possible to protect fish without also protecting habitats.
"One of the most effective ways to protect fish populations, and species in general, is through habitat protection," Hutchinson explains, "so when you change regulations to pro-tect fish only, you're taking away the ability of professional biologists and environmental monitorers to protect the species."
Ucluelet's Salmon Ladder Derby coordinator Lisa Brisco points to the lessons learned through research done by the Friends of Clayoquot Sound.
"The protests that took place with all the logging issues resulted in learning that the riparian zones are probably the most precious areas of salmon enhancement," Brisco says.
"On Vancouver Island, historically, the loggers would just fell trees anywhere they wanted and drag them through river streams and it's been learned that that totally killed off the salmon run," adds Brisco.
"So much of the work I do for the Central Westcoast Forest Society is restoring habitat that's been degraded by historic logging practices and other activities," Hutchinson says.
"I know first-hand the degradation that can be caused and the impact that degradation can have on fish populations-if anything we should be increasing the protection for fish habitat and it seems that the government is moving in the opposite direction," she adds.
"The changes being proposed by the government, simply as they relate to the Fisheries Act and the definition with respect to the protection of fish habitat, are destructive beyond belief, and we cannot allow that to happen," says Chisolm.
"In my mind, this needs greater discussion with scientists, as well as the public in general, before it's moved forward. But they're speeding it up and not allowing adequate public input," Hutchinson says.
-reporter@westerlynews.ca
No comments:
Post a Comment