OTTAWA – The government’s proposed endangered species legislation will do more harm than good, farm representatives told MPs last week.
At a Parliament Hill hearing, two Alberta ranchers warned the proposed rules may encourage farmers to quietly destroy habitat or species, rather than get caught in the restrictive web of the law.
“The legislation in its current form will create a conflict between landowners and conservation groups and will be detrimental to the future of wildlife on private lands,” Jim Turner of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association told the House of Commons environment committee.
Read Also
Saskatchewan farmer uses tile drainage to manage water
The integration of both irrigation and tile drainage results in higher yields, water efficiency, improved soils and less nutrient runoff, says one producer.
He said the proposed law fails to guarantee compensation to farmers whose land becomes a protected habitat, threatens them with hefty fines, intrudes on private property rights, encourages “environmental vigilantes” to harass farmers and does not do enough to encourage voluntary compliance.
“I believe cattle producers will react more favorably to a carrot than a stick,” he said.
The Canadian Federation of Agriculture complained the legislation prefers to threaten reprisals than to “encourage people to do the right thing.”
The national farm lobby said farmers, like other Canadians, want protection of endangered species and their habitats.
“Farmers are ready to do their part,” said the federation. “They want to be approached, though, as intelligent human beings with a contribution to make, not as criminals.”
Opposition MPs on the committee liked what they heard from the critics.
Wouldn’t voluntary regulations and incentives to landowners work better? asked Vegreville, Alta. Reform MP Leon Benoit.
“Most farmers and ranchers do not like excessive regulations,” agreed Turner.
But the farm representatives found themselves locking horns with Liberal MPs who see the endangered species legislation as an effective compromise. Earlier, MPs had heard from environmental activists that the law does not go far enough to force private landowners to be responsible.
It proposes to protect endangered species which cross boundaries or live on federal lands, calls for development of recovery plans if a habitat is threatened and leaves open the possibility of compensation if a recovery plan requires restricted use of affected land.
Karen Kraft-Sloan, parliamentary secretary to the environment minister, told the witnesses the legislation mirrors existing rules for migratory birds and some provincial endangered species laws.
She said the farmer fears are exaggerated.
Tim Andrew, who ranches 17,000 acres near Hanna, Alta., told the committee he and fellow ranchers fear they could face stiff fines if they innocently turn cattle onto a pasture that houses hidden endangered species habitat.
He also worried that the legislation’s allowance for private citizens or groups to launch actions against landowners suspected of endangered species offenses is an invitation to well-financed environmental groups to harass farmers.
