Revisions to Fisheries Act were unscientific, biologists at universities of Calgary and Dalhousie say
Federal government changes to Canada’s fisheries legislation have eviscerated the ability to protect habitat for most of the country’s fish species, scientists at the universities of Calgary and Dalhousie say in a new study.
The changes were politically motivated, unsupported by scientific advice – contrary to government policy – and are inconsistent with ecosystem-based management, fisheries biologists John Post and Jeffrey Hutchings say.
Their comprehensive assessment, in a peer-reviewed paper titled “Gutting Canada’s Fisheries Act: No fishery, no fish habitat protection,” is published in Fisheries, a journal of the 10,000-member American Fisheries Society.
“The biggest change is that habitat protection has been removed for all species other than those that have direct economic or cultural interests, through recreational, commercial and Aboriginal fisheries,” says Post, professor of biological sciences at the University of Calgary.
Habitat protection curtailed
Before, “there used to be a blanket habitat protection for all fish species,” he says. “Now there’s a protection just for species of economic importance which, from an ecological standpoint, makes no sense.”
Studies cited by Post and Hutchings show that not protecting habitat is the “single greatest factor” for the decline and loss of commercial and non-commercial species on land and in water.
Yet the changes to the Fisheries Act removed the “mandated legal protection” of habitat even for fish species that are in decline, Post says.
About three-quarters of approximately 80 freshwater fish species in Canada listed as being at risk, threatened or endangered “are not going to receive the protection that they did in the past,” Post says.
Hutchings is a former chair of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada while Post is a current member. Both scientists’ research is supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
A streamlined process for development projects
One reason the federal government gave for making the changes last year was to streamline environmental reviews and make the regulatory process more efficient for development projects.
But Post and Hutchings’ paper cites peer-reviewed scientific studies which found that between 2006 and 2011, only one project proposal among thousands was denied by the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
Only 1.6 per cent of 1,238 convictions under the previous Fisheries Act between 2007 and 2011 pertained to the destruction of fish habitat.
Go deeper with Bing News on:
Protecting habitat
- 2 tiny PNW river creatures were common near Tri-Cities. Do they need federal protection?
(They) speak volumes about how poorly we’ve treated our Pacific Northwest rivers, which desperately need stronger protections.” ...
- Seattle's Waterfront Park hailed for eco-friendly overhaul, enhancing Elliott Bay's Marine Habitat as Earth Month Ends
Seattle's waterfront revamp is celebrated for eco-friendly features and a rebuilt Elliott Bay Seawall promoting marine life and pedestrian paths.
- How can we protect grizzly bears from their biggest threat—trains?
Railways are a magnet for hungry grizzlies in their critical habitat along the Continental Divide. Conservationists are racing to find solutions.
- NYC to install ‘bee hotels’ in 7 public plazas to protect at-risk pollinators
Pollinator Port Project will install habitats for at-risk native bee populations at seven public plazas and open streets, giving them a place for nourishment.
- Habitat For Humanity’s New CEO Is a Big Reason Why the Bond Included Housing Dollars
Habitat for Humanity is at a really critical inflection point ... really important to the creation and preservation and protection of affordable homes in the community. You were a critical part of ...
Go deeper with Google Headlines on:
Protecting habitat
[google_news title=”” keyword=”protecting habitat” num_posts=”5″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]
Go deeper with Bing News on:
Habitat protection
- 2 tiny PNW river creatures were common near Tri-Cities. Do they need federal protection?
(They) speak volumes about how poorly we’ve treated our Pacific Northwest rivers, which desperately need stronger protections.” ...
- Habitat For Humanity’s New CEO Is a Big Reason Why the Bond Included Housing Dollars
Habitat for Humanity is at a really critical inflection point ... really important to the creation and preservation and protection of affordable homes in the community. You were a critical part of ...
- Alaska asks judge to toss critical habitat for threatened seals
Alaska claims the federal government failed to consider its economic interests on the North Slope when designating critical habitat the size of Texas.
- Legal Victory Secures Protection Decisions for 15 Species Across U.S.
WASHINGTON— The Center for Biological Diversity today secured court-ordered deadlines from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for final endangered species protections for 10 species, critical habitat ...
- Lawsuit seeks protection for imperiled Arkansas mudalia snails
An environmental group is suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the Arkansas mudalia snail under the Endangered Species Act. In Arkansas and Missouri, including along the North Fork ...
Go deeper with Google Headlines on:
Habitat protection
[google_news title=”” keyword=”Habitat protection” num_posts=”5″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]