Why I Believe BC Needs A Provincial Species at Risk Act
As some of you know, I started working again as a wildlife ecologist in BC about a month ago. I'm starting to feel finally like I'm filling the boots the last ecologist left while also doing my job my own way. This job will never be as rewarding as it could be without a proper species at risk act at the provincial level that can help protect critical habitat for endangered species. And just in case you thought the government was doing a good job, the list of species at risk here is growing and now up 1900 which is an astronomically high number for a northern temperate country. But don't despair yet! The BC government wants YOU (especially if you live in BC and are reading this) to weigh in with your thoughts. A report was just released by the BC Species at Risk Task Force which is critical of the sluggish policy and legislative efforts of the BC government.
Article from yesterday on: "Public to get say on species protection,Task-force report is released with recommendations for rule changes": http://www.timescolonist.com/technology/Public+species+protection/5050455/story.html.
The full report from the Task Force if you are interested: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/sartaskforce/
In a nutshell, there is a Canadian federal Species at Risk Act which protects species at risk and their habitat (the habitat is the really important one) but only on federally-owned land. In BC, that's less than 5% of the land area. Basically, if for the vast majority of species found on private or provincial land, they do not warrant a clear and concise level of protection. This is a huge problem especially for our beautiful temperate rainforest which is under threat from urbanization, it's a problem for me as I don't have a strong legistated backing to rely on for responsible management and development strategies and it's a problem for development companies who request clarification on what is and what is not allowed and expected from them.
In a bit more detail- the federal Species at Risk Act does require provincial and territorial governments to write Recovery Strategies for each endangered species which includes a desription of 'critical habitat'. Critical Habitat can be described as habitat with the highest suitability or best yumminess for the species. A good provincial Species at Risk Act would then say any endangered species found on critical habitat, would then require the protection of this habitat. So if an endangered snail is found on a tar road, the road would not count as needing protection but it if were found in an area identified as critical habitat for it, then that area could then be protected and managed. At the moment, I feel like people in BC and Alberta (which also does not have an endangered species act) are being lead down the garden path into thinking this is how it works right now but it doesn't. Really. I have met many wonderful, knowledgable and frustrated biologists who work for the provincial Ministry of Environments who are waiting for the go ahead to make good policy but there isn't yet the political pressure from the public to go ahead. If this is important to you, please write in and let them know. They are requesting input from the public right now as of July 1st, 2011.
Think about it!
Article from yesterday on: "Public to get say on species protection,Task-force report is released with recommendations for rule changes": http://www.timescolonist.com/technology/Public+species+protection/5050455/story.html.
The full report from the Task Force if you are interested: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/sartaskforce/
In a nutshell, there is a Canadian federal Species at Risk Act which protects species at risk and their habitat (the habitat is the really important one) but only on federally-owned land. In BC, that's less than 5% of the land area. Basically, if for the vast majority of species found on private or provincial land, they do not warrant a clear and concise level of protection. This is a huge problem especially for our beautiful temperate rainforest which is under threat from urbanization, it's a problem for me as I don't have a strong legistated backing to rely on for responsible management and development strategies and it's a problem for development companies who request clarification on what is and what is not allowed and expected from them.
In a bit more detail- the federal Species at Risk Act does require provincial and territorial governments to write Recovery Strategies for each endangered species which includes a desription of 'critical habitat'. Critical Habitat can be described as habitat with the highest suitability or best yumminess for the species. A good provincial Species at Risk Act would then say any endangered species found on critical habitat, would then require the protection of this habitat. So if an endangered snail is found on a tar road, the road would not count as needing protection but it if were found in an area identified as critical habitat for it, then that area could then be protected and managed. At the moment, I feel like people in BC and Alberta (which also does not have an endangered species act) are being lead down the garden path into thinking this is how it works right now but it doesn't. Really. I have met many wonderful, knowledgable and frustrated biologists who work for the provincial Ministry of Environments who are waiting for the go ahead to make good policy but there isn't yet the political pressure from the public to go ahead. If this is important to you, please write in and let them know. They are requesting input from the public right now as of July 1st, 2011.
Think about it!