This Web page has been archived on the Web.

Follow-up Petition on a motorized vessels regulation in the Columbia Wetlands, British Columbia

Petition

May 25, 2006

Office of the Auditor General of Canada
and the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
Attention: Petitions
240 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0G6

Telephone: (613) 995-3708
Fax: (613) 941-8286
Email: petitions@oag-bvg.gc.ca

Dear Madam/ Sir;

On behalf of my organization, representing over 800 members and on behalf of all the many individuals, groups, government agencies and municipalities that were consulted and provided written endorsements for our properly constructed application to regulate motorized boating within the provincial protected area of the Columbia Wetlands under the Canada Shipping Act, I am submitting an addendum to petition no. 154 petition under the Auditor General Act.

In 2002, my organization submitted a formal application under the Canada Shipping Act as directed by the Canadian Coast Guard, following months of extensive public consultation and scientific research. We, and those with whom we consulted, acted in good faith and dutifully fulfilled the often arduous and exhaustive requirements set out by the coastguard. Almost four years have passed and the federal government has failed to act on our application. Because of this neglect, an environmentally and socially valuable natural asset of British Columbia and one honoured and prized by all Canadians is at risk of suffering damage. June 2005, the Columbia Wetlands achieved Ramsar Status, the first site in over seven years designated by Canada and a fitting acknowledgement of their ecological and social value.

Although there was initial response from the government ministries involved to our original petition, and I enclose those responses*, the forward momentum has ground to a halt. The bureaucracies, notably the Ministry of Transport, continue to delay forward momentum. There is, at minimum, a perception that the Ministry of Transport has no intention of regulating motorized boating on the Columbia Wetlands and will continue to raise unnecessary roadblocks that appear to be designed to frustrate and obstruct the applicants for regulation to the point that we will abandon the application. If this is not the intent of the Ministry of Transport, we have understandably derived the impression that it is.

Thank you for providing this opportunity to address the lack of action from the federal government Ministries of Transport and Environment with an addendum to our original petition.

A Canadian resident

The Addendum petition:

Wildsight filed our original petition, July 2005. Since that time, we did receive response from the Ministries involved that initially caused us to feel optimistic that there would be forward movement on the boating regulation application. However, this commitment now appears to be little more than lip service. Unfortunately, while the Ministry of Transport dawdles, inappropriate boating behaviours continue to damage wildlife in the Columbia Wetlands. This is especially objectionable, considering that the same federal government last year endorsed designation of the Columbia Wetlands under the United Nations Ramsar convention on wetlands of international importance.

As Canadian citizens, we have dutifully fulfilled and continue to fulfil every requirement under the Canada Shipping Act to regulate motorized boating in the Columbia Wetlands WMA. The regulatory process is long and involved. It must proceed without delay.

We ask for this addendum to petition no. 154 at this time as a means to stimulate a direct and specific response from Transport and Environment Canada as to when the boating regulation will be enacted and to see demonstrated substantive and measurable action on their part. To date, we have only received verbal and written responses acknowledging the need for protection and the need for policy review, none of which result in the actual remedy that the BC Court of Appeal noted in their decision, referenced in our original petition. When we made this application and during the subsequent years during which we followed the instructions of the Coast Guard to the letter and fulfilled all the stated requirements, we were led to believe that a regulation would soon be forthcoming if only we fulfilled one more condition. This continues to be the situation. Ministry of Transport attributed the blame for delay on inadequacies on the part of the applicant, something that is akin to "blaming the victim" and a response that is both unfair and untrue.

In reference to my letter of April 11, 2006 to [name and position withheld], Transport Canada, I asked [name withheld] specific questions:

1. You identified that the lack of a clear, concise problem statement was the reason for delay. While it is highly regrettable that this perceived barrier was not identified to us over the last nearly four years of close and constant contact with the Canadian Coast Guard, please indicate whose responsibility it is to prepare such a statement and the target date for completion.

2. You also stated that the hold up is brought about by the failure of Environment Canada to provide certain information Please state specifically what information you require from Environment Canada and why your agency thinks that this information isn't already available in the boxes of documents generated by this application to date.

While [name withheld] responded at length, in an email dated 19 Apr 2006, I do not think he specifically and adequately addressed the questions above underlined in italics. Rather he reiterated many points dealing in general with Canadian regulatory policy. My organization requests specific answers to these specific questions.

#1, While [name withheld] indicates that this is the responsibility of the applicant, he doesn't explain why the problem statement we have reiterated over the past four years is not considered adequate and, why this was not explained and corrected years ago.

#2. Here [name withheld] lists the requirements but does not explain why they refuse to access this information, which is already available in the application documents. He notes, "While a lot of documents have been produced over the years, these basic questions and answers have yet to be clearly laid out." If "a lot of documents have been produced", they have been produced directly as a result of the numerous specific requests made of us by his department and contain the information necessary to move forward.

Once again I repeat, that Wildsight has responded immediately to every request, no matter how obscure or repetitive, made to us by the Office of Boating Safety, for over four years. It is exasperating, to say the least, that the Office of Boating Safety now uses the very documents they requested to excuse their inability to take action and move forward.

We further seek some recourse by which Transport Canada can be forced to fulfill its obligations. The federal government challenged the province in the courts to win the right to regulate and has now failed to act, leaving a provincial protected area unprotected as a direct result of that failure. The government agencies in question must proceed and expedite a boating regulation on the Columbia Wetlands Wildlife Management Area.

I enclose correspondence* received since filing the original petition.

Thank you

Signed on May 29, 2006

Ellen Zimmerman
Program Manager for the Columbia Wetlands
Wildsight
P.O. Box 1496, Golden, British Columbia
Canada
V0A 1H0
Ph/fax: 250-348-2225
ellen@wildsight.ca

*[attachments not included]

[top of page]

Minister's Response: Environment Canada

4 October 2006

Ms. Ellen Zimmerman
Program Manager for the
Columbia Wetlands
Wildsight
P.O. Box 1496
Golden BC
V0A 1H0

Dear Ms. Ellen Zimmerman:

I am writing to provide Environment Canada's response to your Environmental Petition No. 154B to the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, concerning the regulation of motor vessels in the Columbia Wetlands of southwestern British Columbia. Your petition was received in the Department on June 6.

Please find enclosed Environment Canada's detailed response, which addresses the issues that fall within the Department's areas of responsibility.

I understand that Transport Canada will be responding separately to the questions that fall under its mandate.

I appreciate this opportunity to respond to your petition and trust that you will find this information helpful.

Yours sincerely,

[Original signed by Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment]

Rona Ambrose

ENVIRONMENT CANADA

RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL PETITION No. 154B

UNDER THE AUDITOR GENERAL ACT

SUBMITTED BY

MS. ELLEN ZIMMERMAN

Responses to Questions Regarding a Boating Regulation
for the Columbia Wetlands Ramsar Site

1. Question

We ask for this addendum to petition No. 154 at this time as a means to stimulate a direct and specific response from Transport and Environment Canada as to when the boating regulation will be enacted and to see demonstrated substantive and measurable action on their part.

Response

On February 14, 2006, senior Environment Canada and Transport Canada officials met in Ottawa to discuss the Columbia Wetlands boating regulation issue and determine a path forward. At this meeting, both agencies acknowledged that a timely resolution of the issue is necessary.

Under the Federal Regulatory Policy, a Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) is required for any new regulation. The two departments agreed, on February 14, 2006, to cooperate in the development of this substantial document. Environment Canada will lead on the ecological components of the RIAS and Transport Canada will lead the non-ecological components. Transport Canada is expected to forward the first draft of its contribution to the RIAS to Environment Canada by the fall of 2006. Environment Canada is committed to reviewing this component of the RIAS promptly.

As part of its contribution to the RIAS requirements, Environment Canada will develop a detailed case statement that will provide a solid justification, based on science, for a boating regulation in the Columbia Wetlands. This case statement will draw upon information provided in Wildsight's submission to the Office of Boating Safety, a review of the scientific literature, consultation with other resource management agency professionals and any available and pertinent ecological field data.

To further inform the detailed case statement, Environment Canada's Canadian Wildlife Service has also awarded a contract to Tierra Environmental Consulting to provide additional habitat-use data for waterfowl and waterbirds present in the Columbia Wetlands. Surveys will be conducted during breeding, brood-rearing and fall-staging periods and will be used to characterize habitat-use by species potentially vulnerable to boating activity.

Upon the completion of the case statement (expected in the fall of 2006), Environment Canada and Transport Canada will convene to discuss the available regulatory options. Transport Canada will then consult the applicant and others and determine which regulatory option is most appropriate, with an eye on having a regulation in place for the spring of 2007. In the interim, Transport Canada regional officials have agreed to assist the applicant (Wildsight) in gaining authorization for voluntary compliance buoys and signage in the Columbia Wetlands. Transport Canada may also review the number of boats and types of activities occurring in the Wetlands.

2. Question

Whose responsibility is it to prepare a case statement and the target date for completion?

Response

As indicated above, Environment Canada has agreed to lead the development of the detailed case statement required for the RIAS. The target date for its completion is no later than January 2007.

3. Question

What information you (Transport Canada) require from Environment Canada (…) that is not already available in the boxes of documents generated by this application to date?

Response

Transport Canada has requested that Environment Canada supplement the Wildsight application with a solid scientific justification (for a regulation) that includes site-specific data on migratory bird species potentially vulnerable to boating activity.

[top of page]

Minister's Response: Transport Canada

5 October 2006

Ms. Ellen Zimmerman
Program Manager for the Columbia Wetlands
Wildsight
PO Box 1496
Golden, British Columbia
V0A 1H0

Dear Ms. Zimmerman:

This is in response to your second petition (No. 154B) under Section 22 of the Auditor General Act concerning the Columbia River and Wetlands System.

The then Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, outlined in his letter to you dated November 15, 2005, some of the essential steps for an application for a regulatory amendment to move forward.

These steps include:

• clear identification of the specific problems;
• whether non-regulatory alternatives have been explored; and if they proved unsuccessful; and
• propose appropriate restrictions that could be expected to address the specific problems.

With these parameters in mind, our Pacific Region Office of Boating Safety convened a meeting of stakeholders in Vancouver on June 23, 2006. As you know, the meeting was attended by representatives of Wildsight, Environment Canada and Transport Canada and an update was provided by both departments on where things stood and on the way forward.

With clear goals in place, Environment Canada has started fieldwork that is expected to accurately and precisely inventory the types of flora and fauna that are currently found in the wetlands that may be negatively affected by vessel operations.

Transport Canada has been advising Wildsight on the placement of non-regulatory signage to mitigate any potential impact that vessels may have on known sensitive areas and also to fulfill one of the essential requirements of the Government of Canada Regulatory Policy which is to explore non-regulatory alternatives. Transport Canada has also started to inventory the types of vessels operated in the area in order to determine the potential impacts that these vessels can reasonably be expected to have on the wetlands.

Once this work is completed and the pertinent information is on hand, the interested parties will be in a position to make recommendations on the way forward.

While it is recognized that the process is time consuming, it is the only way to ensure that a proposed regulatory amendment will have the best chances of being implemented.

Thank you for your continued interest in this matter.

Yours truly,

[Original signed by Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities Transport Canada]

The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, P.C., M.P.