Category Archives: Protection of Species

Legal Hunting of an Endangered Species: A Grizzly Tale in Alberta

Legislation commented on: Wildlife (Grizzly Bear – Ministerial) Amendment Regulation, Alta Reg 115/2024

PDF Version: Legal Hunting of an Endangered Species: A Grizzly Tale in Alberta

On July 9 the Alberta government issued a news release announcing that the Minister of Forestry and Parks has reinstated a grizzly bear hunt in Alberta. In this post, I describe the legislative amendment made to enable the hunt and explain how effective endangered species legislation (non-existent in Alberta) would make it much more difficult for the Minister to do this. Alberta’s endangered species law and policy has always been a sad joke in terms of facilitating protection or recovery of species, but the UCP government has now managed to make this a sad and twisted joke. Alberta has joined a select group of countries in the world that authorize hunting of a majestic fauna species that they also designate as threatened with extinction (membership in this group includes many African nations who cater to trophy hunters – see Elephants, lions and leopards: 13 countries where rich people hunt endangered animals.

Continue reading →

Canadian Species at Risk, Where the Government Ignores Emergencies and Law

By: Drew Yewchuk

Decision Commented On: Western Canada Wilderness Committee v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2024 FC 870 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Canadian Species at Risk, Where the Government Ignores Emergencies and Law

Western Canada Wilderness Committee v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2024 FC 870 (CanLII) is a Federal Court decision about the obligations of the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change (the Minister) to recommend emergency protections for species facing imminent threats to their survival or recovery under the Species at Risk Act, SC 2002, c 29 (SARA). Justice Yvan Roy concluded that the Minister had unlawfully delayed recommending that the Governor in Council issue an emergency order under SARA for the spotted owl, and rejected the Minister’s interpretation that recommending an emergency order could be delayed while the Minister gathered extensive information. The decision also addresses a long-term problem with the implementation of SARA: internal executive branch processes have not complied with the text, purpose, or past judicial interpretations of SARA.

Continue reading →

‘Negative Population Growth’ for Boreal Caribou in Alberta

By: Shaun Fluker

Report Commented On: First Report on the implementation of the Section 11 agreement for the conservation and recovery of the woodland caribou in Alberta (January 19, 2024)

PDF Version: ‘Negative Population Growth’ for Boreal Caribou in Alberta

In late January, Alberta issued the first Report on implementation of the Agreement for the conservation and recovery of the Woodland Caribou in Alberta, signed by Alberta and Canada under section 11 of the Species at Risk Act, SC 2002, c 29 [SARA] in October 2020. Commentators have noted that the Report reveals little progress by Alberta on protecting what is left of boreal caribou in this province. This criticism is certainly warranted, however the commitments made by Alberta in this Agreement will never result in progress towards halting the march of caribou towards extirpation (see “Canada and Alberta Agree to More Pie-In-The-Sky on Woodland Caribou”). What the Report does make transparent is: (1) Alberta continues to authorize the destruction of caribou habitat despite saying publicly that the government is committed to achieving population recovery; and (2) Alberta’s only real action plan to save caribou is to kill wolves. Continue reading →

Misunderstanding Cooperative Federalism: Environment and Climate Change Canada Unreasonably Failed to Protect Migratory Bird Habitat

By: Drew Yewchuk

Case Commented on: Western Canada Wilderness Committee v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2024 FC 167 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Misunderstanding Cooperative Federalism: Environment and Climate Change Canada Unreasonably Failed to Protect Migratory Bird Habitat

Western Canada Wilderness Committee v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2024 FC 167 (CanLII) is a recent decision of the Federal Court rejecting the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change’s restrictive interpretation of migratory bird habitat under the Species at Risk Act, SC 2002, c 29 (SARA). The decision also offers some interesting notes about co-operative federalism in the environmental context. Continue reading →

Biodiversity Offsets and the Species at Risk Act (Canada)

By: Shaun Fluker

Matter Commented On: Environment and Climate Change Canada Draft Offsetting Policy for Biodiversity

PDF Version: Biodiversity Offsets and the Species at Risk Act (Canada)

The federal government has a laudable objective of ‘no net loss’ for development projects that will harm biodiversity in Canada. For threatened species who will lose habitat because of development, the concept of ‘no net loss’ means either avoidance, mitigation, or offsets. Avoidance of habitat loss (e.g. no project) is rarely seriously considered – and is really nonsensical when a project footprint overlaps with habitat – and efforts aimed at mitigation of adverse effects on threatened species are widely known to be pie-in-the-sky measures with little or no effectiveness (see here). Thus, a ‘no net loss’ outcome in the context of choosing between development and protecting habitat necessarily means the use of biodiversity offsets. David Poulton has written extensively for ABlawg on the topic of biodiversity offsets and resource development (see e.g. here), and a constant theme in this topic is the legal and policy vacuum on biodiversity offsets. In 2016, the Public Interest Law Clinic submitted comments on a proposed offsets policy under section 73 of the Species at Risk Act, SC 2002, c 29 (Drew Yewchuk and I posted that submission to ABlawg here). Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) has recently issued a draft Offsetting Policy for Biodiversity which will replace its 2012 policy, and this post publishes my submission letter giving comments to ECCC on the Offsets Policy as it relates to threatened species, in response to the public engagement which closed on February 17, 2023. Continue reading →