A Look Back at Species at Risk Legislation across the Provinces of Canada

            We have highlighted several endangered species that have been listed under Newfoundland’s Endangered Species Act (ESA) and under Canada’s Species at Risk Act (SARA) in previous blogs.  We were going to compare Newfoundland’s species at risk legislation to Canadian legislation, but addressing differences between provinces is vital before this transition.  As such, this week’s focus will be on how legislation for terrestrial endangerment varies between provinces.  We will address how British Columbia and Ontario are doing in terms of endangered species legislation compared to Newfoundland, and highlight some of the pros and cons associated with provincial legislation.

            British Columbia is Canada’s most biologically rich province, due in part to its topography¹.  In part to protect its rich species diversity, British Columbia has established the BC Conservation Data Centre (CDC).  The BC CDC is a scientific body, under the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management, that lists species at risk (i.e., at risk of extirpation provincially or nationally) within the province¹.  However, this listing does not protect species.  The listing of endangered species and protective measures fall under the jurisdiction of the Identified Wildlife Management Strategy (IWMS) or Wildlife Act¹.  Unfortunately, there have been large discrepancies between the species that have been scientifically recognized as at risk and those species that are protected under the IWMS and Wildlife Act^1,2.  A lack of commitment by the British Columbian government to the listing and recovery of species at risk (see Table 1) places endangered species at greater susceptibility to extinction without the implementation recovery actions¹.

Table 1. The number of elements (*includes both species and plant communities) listed at risk by the BC Conservation Data Centre and the actual number of species recognized and listed under the Wildlife Act and Identified Wildlife Management Strategy (modified from Table 3 of Wood and Flahr, 2004).

British Columbia’s Legal Recognition of its Scientifically Listed Elements at Risk*
Current Number of Elements at Risk on BC’s Scientific Lists	1569
Current Number of Legally Recognized Species at Risk in BC	43

            Similar to Newfoundland, Ontario has established an Endangered Species Act.  First established in 1971, the original Endangered Species Act of Ontario was modified in 2007 to protect species against changes in land and resource usage (e.g., deforestation and agricultural expansion) that pose threats to native species³.  The improvements to the Act broaden the scope of protection of species and their habitats, an increase in enforcement, and greater accountability of the Ontario government³.  Within the Endangered Species Act of Ontario (2007) there is increased emphasis on incorporating scientific information (as well as community and aboriginal traditional knowledge) to identify species at risk and potential threats to the species and its habitat⁴.  Further, the Ontario ESA has created recovery strategies for endangered and threatened species that are to be completed within 1 year of the listing of a species as endangered or threatened⁴.

From our previous discussion on Newfoundland’s Endangered Species Act, we can see that Ontario and Newfoundland have similar legislative models for listing species at risk, but British Columbia stands out as an outlier (not having a stand-alone species at risk act²).  Ontario, on the other hand, has been more comprehensive in evaluating and listing species, such as invertebrates (e.g., insects and molluscs), whereas Newfoundland has only evaluated vertebrate animals^5,6.

            However, having the legislation and actually implementing the legislation are not the same.  Newfoundland’s Species Status Advisory Committee (SSAC) released their annual report for 2010/2011, and, unfortunately, the province is not implementing is legislation to its fullest extent.  A summary of species with an SSAC assessment and whether they were actually designated as threatened reveals that of the 34 species assessed, and 16 are awaiting long overdue responses from the Minister (see Figure 1)⁷.

Figure 1.  The proportion of species (16 total)  assessed by Newfoundland’s SSAC that have recommended statuses of Endangered, Threatened, and Vulnerable, awaiting an overdue response from the Minister (data from Appendix 3 of SSAC, 2011).

           

            On a brighter note, Ontario has been more active in listing its species at risk.  However, they too have species that have been classified by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO).  In 2010, the COSSARO annual report revealed that of the 21 species assessed, 6 have not yet been listed as species at risk in Ontario⁸.  While it may look like Newfoundland is listing more species than Ontario, the Newfoundland report includes recommendation dates starting in 2004, while the Ontario annual report addresses only species assessed and listed in 2010(see links below to view the SSAC and COSSARO reports in detail)^7,8.

Photo Credit: ARKive, 2012⁹

Figure 2.  A Bobolink which has been listed as Endangered by the SSAC of Newfoundland with an overdue response from the minister.  The Bobolink is also listed as Threatened by COSSARO, and has yet to be listed.

            Having compared between Canadian provinces, we will now address how Newfoundland’s Endangered Species Act compares to the Species at Risk Act of Canada, and eventually internationally. 

Links:

British Columbia Species at Risk Legislation: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/legislation.html 

Ontario's Endangered Species Act: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_07e06_e.htm#BK4

SSAC Annual Report: http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/wildlife/endangeredspecies/ssac/ssac_annual_report_2010_2011.pdf           

COSSARO Annual Report: http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodconsume/groups/lr/@mnr/@species/documents/document/stdprod_087434.pdf

References:

1 Wood, P.M. and L. Flahr.  2004.  Endangered species seriously? British Columbia’s species-at-risk policies. Canadian Public Policy 30(4):381-399.

2 Province of British Columbia.  2012. Species at risk legislation.  Retrieved on March 21, 2012 at http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/legislation.html 

3 Ministry of Natural Resources (Ontario).  2010.  The endangered species act 2007.  Retrieved on March 21, 2012 at http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Species/2ColumnSubPage/

STEL01_131232.html

4 Government of Ontario.  2007. Endangered species act, 2007.  Retrieved on March 21, 2012 at http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_07e06_e.htm#BK4

5 Ministry of Natural Resources (Ontario).  2012.  Species at risk.  Retrieved on March 21, 2012 at http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Species/2ColumnSubPage/276722.html

6 Department of Environment and Conservation (Newfoundland). 2011. Species at risk.  Retrieved on March 21, 2012 at http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/wildlife/endangeredspecies/

index.html

7 Species Status Advisory Committee.  2011.  SSAC annual report 2010-2011.  Retrieved on March 22, 2012 from http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/wildlife/endangeredspecies/

ssac/ssac_annual_report_2010_2011.pdf

8 Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario.  2010.  2010 annual report from the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO) to the Minister of Natural Resources.  Retrieved on March 22, 2012 at http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodconsume/

groups/lr/@mnr/@species/documents/document/stdprod_087434.pdf

9 ARKive. 2012. Images of life on Earth.  Retrieved on March 22, 2012 at http://www.arkive.org/bobolink/dolichonyx-oryzivorus/image-G51391.html