Court points fi nger at ministers for failing to enforce Species At Risk Act
OTTAWA — A Federal Court judge has ruled that the environment minister and the fisheries minister both broke the law by failing to enforce the Species at Risk Act.
In a case covering four species that Justice Anne Mactavish calls “the tip of the iceberg,” the court found there’s a major systemic problem in the two ministries charged with protecting endangered and threatened wildlife.
The 47- page ruling released Friday states that “public officials are not above the law. If an official acts contrary to a statute, the courts are entitled to so declare.”
At issue was a challenge brought by five environmental organizations, who asked the court to enforce provisions under the Species at Risk Act.
The groups cited four particular species: the Nechako white sturgeon, the pacific humpback whale, the marbled murrelet and the southern mountain woodland caribou.
In every case, the government had failed to propose recovery strategies after the species were formally identified, missing statutory deadlines by up to six and a half years.
“It is simply not acceptable for the responsible ministers to continue to miss the mandatory deadlines that have been established by Parliament,” Mactavish wrote.
A spokeswoman for Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq responded to the judgment by acknowledging that recovery strategies or management plans are currently required for 192 species, of which 163 are overdue.
“Environment Canada has significantly accelerated its progress in recent years and has published 85 strategies and plans in the last three years,” Jennifer Kennedy said in an email.
“It is also finalizing a posting plan to ensure transparency
This kind of delay — five years or more — threatens the very survival of some Canadian wildlife species.
STEWART ELGIE PROFESSOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA
with respect to upcoming recovery documents and progress in reducing the number of overdue recovery documents over the next few years.”
The judgment cited evidence those recovery plans could have an impact on the approval of the Northern Gateway pipeline, which will affect all four of the species cited in the case.
As Mactavish ruled, “the absence of posted recovery strategies deprives the ministers of considerable leverage in dealing with the impact of industrial development on species at risk.”
The judgment found the government did not contest the evidence — “although they do deny that recovery strategies have been intentionally delayed in order to facilitate industrial development.”
Stewart Elgie, a professor of environmental law at the University of Ottawa, characterized the judgment as “a stern wakeup call to the government.”
In an interview, Elgie likened species on the list to criticalcare patients at a hospital emergency ward.
“If we don’t act quickly, some of them face real risk of extinction, so this kind of delay — five years or more — threatens the very survival of some Canadian wildlife species.”
He said when the legislation came into force in 2003, some 200 threatened species required protection plans and created an immediate backlog.