DFO, Enbridge disagreed over fish protection along pipeline route: documents

Federal fisheries officials had “troubling” disagreements with Enbridge Inc. over the company’s interpretation of it responsibility to protect fish habitat along the Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline route before the company submitted its proposal in 2010, internal documents say.

Photograph by: Handout/Enbridge , Handout/Enbridge

DFO, Enbridge disagreed over fish protection along pipeline route: documents

By PETER O'NEIL and MIKE DE SOUZA,

Vancouver Sun and Postmedia News

June 14, 2012

OTTAWA — Federal fisheries officials were having "troubling" disagreements with Enbridge Inc. over the company's interpretation of its responsibility to protect fish habitat along the Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline route before the company submitted its project proposal in 2010, according to internal documents.

Enbridge was concluding some of the crossings, over an estimated 1,000 waterways, were low risk when fisheries biologists felt the same were medium or high risk to fish and fish habitat, according to emails obtained through the Access to Information Act.

"There is not much movement (by Enbridge) for avoidance of sensitive areas," said one biologist at a February, 2010 meeting, according to a record of that gathering of four officials with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO).

"Sometimes the proponent is pushing for the cheapest option," said another meeting participant in his reply.

The clash between Enbridge and DFO took shape more than two years before the Harper government, which had been heavily lobbied by Enbridge over concerns about DFO demands, tabled Fisheries Act amendments in its budget implementation bill in April.

Those changes, which according to critics would "gut" DFO's ability to protect habitat, have become a flashpoint in the opposition's battle against bill C-38 during a marathon voting session Wednesday and Thursday in the House of Commons.

Enbridge said one of the biologists, during the 2010 meeting, was designating stream crossings as "low risk" of habitat damage "that should have been medium or high risk."

There were also concerns, cited in documents obtained by Postmedia News, about Enbridge's approach to streams known for having important spawning channels or for wildlife species listed under the federal government's Species at Risk Act (SARA) or under the B.C. government's endangered species list.

A third biologist at the same meeting "stated concern on how the proponent is proposing the crossing methods through streams with SARA-listed species, spawning channels, with no hesitation. This is a concern and was raised at the last meeting with Enbridge."

Read more here

Decapitating the Fisheries Act...

Decapitating the Fisheries Act by removing the HADD: A Critique of the Rationale

Written by: Arlene Kwasniak and William Donahue

Source: The University of Calgary Faculty of Law Blog on Developments in Alberta Law

Decision considered: Federal government proposal to remove habitat protection from the Fisheries Act.

The federal government of Canada proposes to remove the habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act RSC 2000, c F-14, s 35. Countless Canadians have vigorously spoken out against this proposal because removing these provisions would be a critical and fundamental change not only to federal legislative approach, but also to the management, protection, and well-being of fisheries in Canada.

The federal government’s proposed change is questionable for three reasons. One, as the federal government has exclusive constitutional authority over inland and coastal fisheries it would be unconscionable to remove the habitat protection provisions from the Fisheries Act. Two, the evidence shows that the habitat provisions of the Fisheries Act have not posed significant economic barriers to development. Three, we already have the legal tools to assure an appropriate level of regulatory requirements with respect to project applications that will impact Canada’s fisheries.

Fish Habitat Protection Endangered

Reforms to the Fisheries Act that would end federal oversight over much of the country's fresh water are proving difficult for some provinces to swallow. (Canadian Press)

This topic has received very little coverage in the Calgary media.

We think it’s an important issue deserving of more attention. We hope you agree.

Otto Langer, a retired federal fisheries biologist, released two weeks ago a leaked internal information spelling out planned changes to the Fisheries Act.

A section that went into force in 1986, prohibiting any activities that could harm fish habitat, would be replaced by a ban on anything causing an "adverse effect" on "fish of economic, cultural or ecological value."

The Harper government had planned to slip these significant changes to the Fisheries Act into its Budget Omnibus Bill, which is set to be delivered on March 29.

Mr. Langer has since responded to the Fisheries Minister's defence of the plan that many are saying would gut the fisheries act.

There has been growing opposition to this proposed move.

Trout Unlimited Canada’s CEO Jeff Surtees wrote a letter to Keith Ashfield, Minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Jeff Surtees was also interviewed on Lets Go Outdoors radio regarding this topic.

Two former Progressive Conservative cabinet ministers (both also former Fisheries Ministers), Thomas Siddon and John Fraser, have spoken out very strongly against the proposed changes.

A group of 625 scientists, including David Schindler (U of A), sent a letter urging the government to abandon any changes.

The Canadian Society For Ecology and Evolution, representing 1,000 ecologists and evolutionary biologists, in a letter to Ashfield from president Jeffrey Hutchings, said "In the interests of transparency and accountability, and in the interests of Canadian society, we respectfully request that the science advice received in this regard be made publicly available without delay.”

In addition to the links provided above, two more very informative articles have appeared: Fish habitat: Why rock the boat? and Federal budget may rile environmentalists.

If you are concerned about these proposed changes, there are several options available to make your views known.

You can sign a petition that has been making the rounds of the fly fishing community.

You can personalize, and send, an electronic message via the Sierra Club,

However, your most effective course of action (in our opinion) would be to write to your MP, Minister Keith Ashfield and Prime Minister Harper at your earliest convenience.

Or perhaps best of all, follow up with all three!

And do it today. The clock is ticking.

TUC Responds Regarding Leaked DFO Document

Photo: Copyright Bow River Shuttles 2012

Lesley Petersen (Biologist) & Jeff Surtees (CEO)

Trout Unlimited Canada

TUC Responds Regarding Leaked DFO Document

In response to concerns of Trout Unlimited Canada members and supporters across Canada regarding potential changes to the fish habitat provisions of the federal Fisheries Act, CEO Jeff Surtees wrote to The Honourable Keith Ashfield, Minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

A press release by a former Department of Fisheries and Oceans biologist, Otto Langer has been widely reported in the media. That press release stated that Mr. Langer had been provided with a leaked government document which says that Cabinet is planning to water down the habitat protection provisions of the Canada Fisheries Act by deleting the habitat protection provisions of section 35 of the Act and replacing it with a new section which does not mention or protect habitat.

The story, as reported by CBC News, can be seen here

TUC’s letter of concern to Minister Ashfield can be viewed here

TUC CEO Talks to Lets Go Outdoors

Trout Unlimited Canada CEO Jeff Surtees talks to Lets Go Outdoors radio regarding potential changes to the fish habitat provisions on the federal Fisheries Act.

Please visit the Lets Go Outdoors website to listen to this interesting interview.

VIA: TUC Newsroom

Canada poised to roll back fish protection laws, biologist claims

A Grizzly Bear catches a salmon in the Great Bear Rainforest. The Harper government is planning to gut the powers in federal legislation intended to protect fish habitat, making it easier for projects like Calgary-based Enbridge Inc.'s Northern Gateway pipeline to B.C. to clear federal hurdles, according to a retired fisheries biologist who obtained the information from a government source.

Photograph by: Handout, Larry Travi

Canada poised to roll back fish protection laws, biologist claims

Move would make it easier for projects like Calgary-based Enbridge Inc.'s Northern Gateway pipeline to B.C. to clear federal hurdles

By PETER O'NEIL, 

Vancouver Sun 

March 13, 2012 

OTTAWA - The Harper government did not challenge Tuesday opposition allegations that it is poised to “gut” legislation that has been a key tool for decades in forcing industrial and natural resource projects to go through environmental reviews.

“There has been absolutely no decision made with regard to this issue,” Fisheries Minister Keith Ashfield told the House of Commons when confronted with the allegations of a former federal fisheries biologist.

Ashfield’s office later released a statement reiterating that no decision has been made but that changes are needed. “Federal fisheries policies designed to protect fish are outdated and unfocused in terms of balancing environmental and economic realities.”

Former bureaucrat Otto Langer made public Monday proposed wording changes in the federal Fisheries Act that he said would make it easier for projects like Calgary-based Enbridge Inc.’s Northern Gateway pipeline to B.C. to clear federal hurdles.

Langer, who worked for the federal government for 32 years, said he was told the change would be included in upcoming federal omnibus legislation following the March 29 budget.

The changes would prohibit activity that would cause an “adverse effect” on “fish of economic, cultural or ecological value.”

The law currently bans activity that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat.

Read more

Here is Otto Langer’s press release. The retired biologist says he received some leaked information that the Tories are planning to remove the term “habitat” from the Fisheries Act, undoing decades of habitat protection work.

No Habitat, No Fish: Harper Plans for Elimination of Wildlife Protection

Source: Paul Harps (On Facebook), Chinook Waters Fly Fishing Club