Saving SARA

Photo via Flickr.
Photo via Flickr.

Flora and fauna are an undeniable part of Canadian identity. They are a hallmark symbol that appear everywhere, from our coins to our beer bottles, representing our nation worldwide.

But what is being done to protect our native wildlife from the changing landscape of our country? With Ottawa’s recent announcement to give the Species at Risk Act (SARA) a much needed overhaul, many ecologists and environmentalists fear that the strategies proposed by Environment Minister Peter Kent would further disable the act.

Parliament has initiated a mandatory five-year review of the act’s effectiveness in which four independent environmental organizations have collaborated to provide feedback and recommendations on its implementation. Among these are Ecojustice, Environmental Defense, the David Suzuki Foundation and Nature Canada.

In place since 2002, SARA’s purpose is to ensure protection and recovery for species at risk in Canada. They have the official listings and recognitions of plants and animals under their jurisdiction, with the mandate of identifying the habitats to protect fragile ecosystems. Some animals affected by the Act are grizzly bears, timber rattlesnakes, woodland caribou, screech owls and many more.

SARA also receives recommendations from the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada but often significantly delays adding recommended species to the list or doesn’t add them at all. According to the David Suzuki Foundation website, animals can be denied listing because of “economic, social or political impacts.”

For example, the site refers to the fact that scientists have recommended that polar bears be added to the list of endangered species, but the government has continued to postpone the addition.

This is one of the main shortcomings of SARA according to the review board, claiming the delays for inclusion in the listing are too long, going way beyond the official nine-month deadline. According to Nature Canada, 53 species at risk are facing a faster decline while the government takes 17 to 29 months to determine the listing, some of which are indefinitely pending.

Of the 551 species recommended by the committee, only 449 have been adopted by SARA. Only 35 per cent of the fish assessed to be “at risk” have been added to the list since 2004, and none that are “endangered or threatened.”

A major flaw is the absence of a clear timeline for action planning strategies. With no legal binding agreement to deadlines, projects sometimes remain idle and unfinished for years, going way past their initial due date.

The other problem is that the majority of reports which are done do not identify critical habitat. Habitat loss is the main cause for population declines in a staggering 84 per cent of species at risk in Canada. Identifying these habitats has proven to be a difficult task, since SARA does not cover the country as a whole. Protection of habitat is only mandatory on federally owned land such as national parks, military bases and much of the northern territories.

It seems that the government is focused principally on the cost efficiency of the Species At Risk Act. Recovery strategies and action plans to protect our habitats and our species are not cheap, and in a still fumbling economy, our wildlife has been put on the back burner. Habitats are not determined by political boundaries and governments should extend the coverage of wildlife regardless of land ownership. Regulated timelines forged by the law should also be more vigorously applied, since the delays in countless projects are paralyzing the recovery of many species.

In the 10 years that have followed SARA’s creation, it seems Canada has not taken bold enough actions to save our precious legacy. Let’s just hope that in the coming months the right decisions concerning aligning priorities are made, for the sake of the animals and us.

Related Posts