<div class="gmail_quote">Proposed changes to the Fisheries Act - an Act that has been TOO SUCCESSFUL. in preventing environmental harm.<br><br><b>Bill C-38</b><br><a href="http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=5524772&File=368#113">http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=5524772&File=368#113</a><br>
<br><b>The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario</b> also discusses these new changes.<br><a href="http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2012/03/20/proposed-changes-to-federal-environmental-laws-could-have-a-big-impact-on-provincial-environmental-regulation/">http://www.eco.on.ca/blog/2012/03/20/proposed-changes-to-federal-environmental-laws-could-have-a-big-impact-on-provincial-environmental-regulation/</a><br>
<br><b>Lake Ontario Waterkeeper</b> comments are below.<br><a href="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2012/05/01/heartbreaking-news-for-canadas-water-lovers/">http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2012/05/01/heartbreaking-news-for-canadas-water-lovers/</a><br>
<br>Carole<br><br><u></u><div><table border="2" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="2" width="480"><tbody><tr><td> <font face="arial, helvetica"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="460"><tbody><tr><td width="120">
<font face="arial, helvetica"><img src="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/lok/images/logo_weekly.jpg" alt="Lake Ontario Waterkeeper" align="t
op" border="0" height="55" hspace="5" width="110"></font></td><td width="220"><div align="center"><font face="arial, helvetica"><h4>Waterkeeper.ca Weekly: <br>May 1st, 2012</h4>
</font></div></td><td width="120"><a href="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/lok/images/logo_weekly.jpg" alt="Lake Ontario Waterkeeper" align="l
eft" border="0" height="55" hspace="5" width="110"></a></td></tr><tr><td colspan="3" width="460"><br></td>
</tr></tbody></table><b><br></b><div><div><b>Heartbreaking news for Canada’s water lovers</b></div><div><p></p><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="200"><tbody><tr><td> <u></u></td></tr><tr><td></td></tr>
</tbody></table></div> <hr><p></p><p>I remember the first time I sat around a kitchen table in a rural community giving environmental law advice. I was speaking with a farmer
who was beset by pollution running across his fields and destroying his fish and hunting camp along the Rideau Canal.</p><p>The family had asked my l
aw firm what we could do about the landfill leachate from a major Ontario city dump that was destroying habitat. No one from the City, the waste company or government had offered to help them. Now everyone in the room — his wife and mother at the wood stove, his sons and daughters and grandkids around the table — was keenly awaiting what I h
ad to say. </p><p>I asked: Are there any fish in the fields, ditches or nearshore? The family told me the bay was once the best fishing area around and that fish still spawned in the fields and ditches every spring. </p>
<p>I asked: Can I get access to the water draining from the
dump to sample as it runs onto your land? The family told me the exact locations where the water bubbled up on the dump walls and ran year-round onto
their property. </p><p>I answered: I can help.</p><p>We documented th
e fish in the ditches and the bay. We sampled the leachate (it was toxic).
We contacted government authorities and the company, alerting them that we
had evidence the dump was in contravention of the Fisheries Act. Immediately, they took action to stop the pollution. To this day, that area on the river is protected from landfill toxins.</p><p>My story is not unique. It has
been played out across Canada thousands of times. When evidence of a Fisheries Act contravention was compiled, the harmful acts were almost always stopped.</p><p style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)">Even when government or industry did not act, the Fisheries Act allowed citizens to enforce the law independently. In fact, the Fisheries Act says that, if convicted, a polluter pays half of the fine to the
individual who brought the charges. This is meant to “encourage the public to participate in the protection of community resources.”</p><p>Such citizen-led actions form an important part of Canada’s environmental protection laws. In the past 16 years, I have personally been involved in investigating legal actions against the Cities of <a href="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2004/05/17/landmark-decision-on-lake-ontario/" target="_blank">Kingston</a>, <a href="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2010/03/22/stalled-the-hamilton-harbour-cleanup-show-10-2010/" target="_blank">Hamilton</a>, <a href="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2010/05/11/free-petitcodiac-river-flows-again-show-16-2010/" target="_blank">Moncton</a>, <a href="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2005/05/30/waterkeepers-final-submission-on-technoparc-investigation/" target="_blank">Montreal</a>, and Toronto a
s well as the Ontario Ministry of Environment, Ontario Hydro, OPG, <a href="http://www.waterkeeper.ca/2010/04/13/case-closed-edwards-vs-dte-energy/" target="_blank">DTE</a> and other polluters for Fisheries Act violations. That work resulted directly or indirectly in clean-ups on the Cataraqui River, Humber River, Moira River, Petitcodiac River, St. Clair Riv
er, Lake Ontario, St. Lawrence River and other waters across Canada. <
/p></p><p>All of this was possible because the Fisheries Act made it illegal to
pollute or destroy fish and fish habitat in Canada. The offenses under the
Act were criminal in nature, meaning enforcement was free from political interference or economic lobbying by industry. The laws protected every comm
unity, regardless of the size of the project, the abundance of fish, or the
“economic value” of nature. </p><p><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">That is all about to be wiped out.</span> The <a href="http://bit.ly/Budget2012Impl" target="_blank">budget implementation bill</a> that Parliament is considering now radically changes the Fisheries Act. <span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)">Under the new law, cabinet ministers and industry will have unprecedented influence over fish and fish habitat policy. </span></p>
<p>Under the
new law, decisions about which Canadian communities deserve protection will
be made based on political and economic factors. There is no role for science or the rule of law. </p><p>The consequences of the changes will be
felt immediately. Will Lake Ontario’s fish be protected? Or will our
small commercial fishery be deemed “insignificant”? Will we see sewage treatment plant upgrades in Vancouver, Victoria, or Halifax? Or will environmental benefits be deemed “insignificant” in light of
the cost? Clean-ups like the ones we saw at the dumpsite beside the farmers field will most certainly be things of the past. </p><p>When I
read about the changes, I know that every farmer, hunter, angler, and
community member who loves access to swimmable, drinkable, fishable waters
will lose out.</p><p>I know that, if I was a young environmental lawyer sitting at that kitchen table today, I wouldn’t be able to offer the same help I did all those years ago to the farmer and his family. That
breaks my heart.</p><p></p><hr></div></font></td></tr></tbody></table></div>
</div><br>