Harper Government Takes Further Steps to Enable the Aquaculture Industry to Thrive

A

agentaqua

Well-Known Member
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?mthd=index&crtr.page=1&nid=862749

Regulatory Changes to Reduce Duplication While Maintaining Strong Environmental Standards
June 26, 2014 - Ottawa, Ontario

The Honourable Gail Shea, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, announced today that the Government of Canada will take extra steps to increase sustainable aquaculture production in Canada while protecting the environment.

Despite Canada benefitting from the longest coastline in the world, it continues to lag behind other countries. Red tape and regulatory burden are among the main causes for this situation. This sector is currently being regulated by ten different federal acts.

A modernized regulatory environment will allow Canada to take advantage of the global demand for fish and seafood products that continues to rise. It will improve coherence, simplicity and accountability while maintaining strong environmental standards.

Earlier this year the Government has announced a $54 million investment for the renewal of the Sustainable Aquaculture Program, which includes an aquaculture regulatory reform agenda. Today’s announcement clarifies the role of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans on the deposit of substances in water for the purposes of aquaculture.

As the next step of this process, new proposed Aquaculture Activities Regulations will be pre-published in early July, 2014 in the Canada Gazette, Part I, for a 60-day public comment period.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada has been working with its regulatory partners to develop the proposed Regulations to ensure they build on existing provincial and federal regulatory regimes. When finalized, the proposed Regulations would resolve uncertainties in the application of various federal Acts, eliminate overlap and duplication issues and reflect the unique circumstances of aquaculture.

Quick Facts
The aquaculture industry in Canada now creates over 14,000 full-time equivalent, year-round, stable jobs in rural, coastal, and Aboriginal communities.
With its tremendous set of natural advantages for aquaculture production, Canada has to better position itself to tap into global demand, especially in the context of the expected signature of trade agreements with the European Union and South Korea.
Aquaculture accounts for nearly 50 per cent of seafood consumed worldwide. By 2030, it is estimated that demand will exceed supply by 40 million tonnes.
The next steps in the aquaculture regulatory reform agenda will include a number of regulatory initiatives such as amendments to the Pacific Aquaculture Regulations. These will establish a licence fee schedule and provide for annual payment installments for multi-year aquaculture licences.
Quote
“Our Government is committed to job creation, economic growth and long term prosperity. Canada benefits from the longest coastline in the world and a growing aquaculture sector can provide jobs to rural, coastal and Aboriginal communities. Today we are taking further steps to enable the aquaculture industry to thrive and create much needed jobs, while being sustainable and environmentally sound.”

The Honourable Gail Shea, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
Related Products
Backgrounder - Proposed Aquaculture Activities Regulations
Associated Links
Consulting With Canadians
- 30 -

Media contacts
Frank Stanek
Media Relations
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
613-990-7537

Sophie Doucet
Director of Communications
Office of the Minister
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
613-992-3474
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...-rules-would-permit-harmful-dumping-1.2748802

Ottawa's new aquaculture rules would permit harmful dumping
Deposit of unused feed, fish feces, pest control chemicals and organic matter would be allowed
By Paul Withers, CBC News Posted: Aug 27, 2014 7:41 PM AT Last Updated: Aug 27, 2014 7:41 PM AT

Under the new regulations, fish farms like this one require the immediate reporting of unusual fish kills. (CBC)


The federal government is proposing new aquaculture regulations that would permit the dumping of harmful substances on the ocean bottom beneath fish farms.

Ottawa says the proposed rules resolve a contradiction — some say an impediment — to the growth of the industry in Canada.

"We are providing more clarity to Canadians on how we manage the sector," says Eric Gilbert, director general of aquaculture for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Canada's Fisheries Act bans the deposit of "deleterious" substances unless authorized by regulation.

The proposed regulations released Saturday would allow the deposit of unused feed, fish feces, pest control chemicals and organic matter from anti-fouling measures. All are part of fish farming, but are considered deleterious substances.

"There is tons of human activity that generate deleterious substances that at the end of the day end up in the sea and could have a negative impact," says Gilbert.

"When we are dealing with fish farming, either shellfish or fin fish farming, we have the tools on hand to make sure those impacts are manageable."

Rob Johnson
Environmentalist Rob Johnson with Ecology Action Centre says the whole premise seems incorrect. (CBC)

He says the proposed regulations spell out reporting requirements, monitoring and practices that make aquaculture sustainable.

The regulations would require the immediate reporting of unusual fish kills.

Industry members would be required to report annually how, when and where they use pest control drugs and how much organic material is deposited.

Overall results would be reported publicly, but data on individual farms would not.

"The whole premise seems incorrect," says environmentalist Rob Johnson of the Ecology Action Centre in Halifax.

He argues DFO is accepting pollution to promote more salmon farming.

"This is a way of allowing deleterious substances, harmful substances, in the marine environment when the law was intended for that not to happen," he says.

In Atlantic Canada the regulation of aquaculture is shared between the federal and provincial governments.

The Nova Scotia government tells CBC News it is still studying the proposed regulations, as did the region's largest aquaculture company, Cooke Aquaculture, of New Brunswick.

An independent regulatory review of aquaculture in Nova Scotia commissioned by the province in 2013 will release a final report this fall.

Federal officials have scheduled a meeting with stakeholders on Sept. 8 at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography to discuss the proposed regulations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Environmental lawyers find glaring gaps in proposed aquaculture regulations
Tuesday, September 2, 2014 West Coast Environmental Law Association

VANCOUVER. Environmental lawyers have raised serious concerns over proposed new federal regulations that would allow aquaculture facilities to dump aquatic drugs, pesticides and fish waste into wild fish habitat with impunity. In submissions made today to Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), the West Coast Environmental Law Association has rejected the government’s plan to reduce oversight over fish farms and calls for stronger environmental laws to protect BC’s struggling salmon populations.

“This is a classic case of government turning a blind eye to the risks of industrial activities,” said Anna Johnston, staff counsel at West Coast Environmental Law. “DFO is essentially proposing to divest itself of responsibility for the harms fish farms cause to wild fish populations and their habitat. It must uphold its obligation to Canadians to ensure that aquaculture does not come at the cost of Aboriginal, commercial and recreational fisheries,” said Johnston.
The regulations would permit aquaculture facilities to dump drugs, pesticides and biochemical oxygen demanding matter (fish food and waste) into fish-bearing waters without a licence or environmental assessment. Proposed by DFO, they would also exempt the facilities from the prohibition against causing serious harm to fish. The proposed regulations would require facilities to submit annual reports, but existing farms would not need to include in those reports a description of the impacts of their operations.

“With over 100 salmon farms along BC’s coast, it is essential that we understand the cumulative impacts of BC’s growing aquaculture industry,” said Jessica Clogg, Executive Director and senior staff counsel at West Coast. “Under the proposed regulations, fish farms are being treated as silos, with no apparent requirement that the combined impact of the multitude of existing and future facilities be assessed. DFO has a responsibility to protect wild fish and their habitat. Under these regulations, it would be shirking that duty.”

The regulations are a result of sweeping changes to federal environmental laws in recent years, including the 2012 omnibus budget bill C-38. Fisheries Act changes in this controversial bill were opposed by scientists, First Nations, community groups, fishing associations, conservation groups and former fisheries ministers as environmentally irresponsible and undemocratic.

“Environmental deregulation puts the things Canadians value most, like clean water and wild fish, at risk,” says Johnston. “The proposed Aquaculture Activities Regulation further undermines these values at the expense of all Canadians.”
The proposed regulations and invitation to comment can be found on the Canadian Gazette, at: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2014/2014-08-23/html/reg1-eng.php.
West Coast’s submissions on the proposed regulations and related information can be found at:http://wcel.org/sites/default/files... Aquaculture Regulations 14-09-02 (final).pdf.
-30-
Contact: Anna Johnston, West Coast Environmental Law Association, Staff Counsel; Cell: 604-340-2304; email: ajohnston@wcel.org.

File Download:
application/pdf icon2014-09-02-Environmental lawyers find glaring gaps in proposed aquaculture regulations.pdf
 
Importance of Rigorous Aquaculture Regs Cannot be Overstated
CHRONICLE HERALD - Opinions

BLACK: Importance of rigorous regs cannot be overstated
BILL BLACK
Published August 29, 2014 - 3:51pm

On July 4, the 143-page draft report by the Doelle-Lahey Independent Aquaculture Regulatory Review Panel was released.

After a period of public consultation, the final report will be submitted in September. The broad direction that it will take is clear.

Key messages include:

1. The panel rejected calls to ban marine-based fin fish (i.e. salmon) facilities, given their economic importance and the ability of regulation to manage risks. It should be permitted only in sites that lend themselves to appropriate risk management.

2. That said, the current regulatory practice came in for considerable criticism for being neither effective nor transparent. The attitude of government officials toward those concerned about the impact of salmon pens is inappropriately dismissive.

3. Likewise, the attitude of some, but not all, opponents was inappropriately dismissive of the economic importance of the industry.

4. It is not ideal that the provincial Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture is responsible for both promoting and regulating the industry. But separating it will lead to regulatory complexity and duplication of resources, so a change is not recommended. This is contingent on the Department of Environment becoming independently responsible for environmental monitoring.

5. The report outlines elements of a more rigorous and transparent regulatory regimen. The new requirements would be phased in for existing operations.

A key recommendation of the Ivany report on Building Our New Economy was for the “adoption of the most effective and widely accepted certification standards for sustainable resource use, conservation and responsible harvesting practices.”

The Doelle-Lahey panel worked hard at engaging the diverse perspectives and has set the stage for fulfilling Ivany’s recommendation for a successful and sustainable aquaculture industry. Readers interested in a good example should Google “Faroe Islands Salmon.”

This is an opportunity for the government to show some decisiveness. Shortly after the final report is issued next month, Fisheries and Aquaculture Minister Keith Colwell should endorse its direction and state that government’s focus is now on how to manage marine salmon farms, not whether they should be permitted.

Second, he should set an ambitious timetable for implementation of new regulations. There is a shared interest in getting this done promptly. For those concerned about existing operations, it hastens the day when they will be more rigorously regulated.

For salmon farmers, it hastens the day when new operations can be launched. Beyond that, good operators in any business prefer a well-regulated environment that keeps other players from giving their industry a bad name.

An equally important third step is required.

As pointed out by Bob Howse in his news analysis on Aug. 23 (“The politics of pollution”), the long delay in fixing the unacceptable pollution from the Northern Pulp mill repeats a historic pattern of tardy or weak enforcement of environmental regulations when jobs are at stake.

Environment Minister Randy Delorey’s announcement the previous day added teeth but did not change the substance of the previous order, giving the company until May 30 to fix the air pollution problem. And no plan is yet in place to deal with the effluent treatment at Boat Harbour.

Last week’s Opinions section also included an eloquent plea by Andy MacGregor for people to understand the economic impact of the mill, and to therefore be tolerant of the time needed to fix the pollution problems.

Many of those opposed to marine aquaculture, fracking and many other resource industries are understandably skeptical about the effectiveness of renewed regulatory regimens, no matter how well-considered, on the grounds that they will not be properly enforced.

As a practical matter, any viable future for Nova Scotia, particularly the rural parts, must include successful resource industries. The Ivany report acknowledges as much. So does the Doelle-Lahey aquaculture report. But rural communities will only provide the social licence necessary for successful resource industries if there are sufficient efforts to engage them, and satisfaction that environmental regulations will be enforced.

The track record of enforcing renewed aquaculture regulations will be very important to the acceptance of developments in other resource industries. Ideally, there will be many sites, both large and small, so that if one has to be shut down for environmental reasons, the impact on the province as a whole will not be as devastating as would be the loss of the Northern Pulp mill.

We cannot have a successful resource economy without credible and effective regulation.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/238117800/Independent-Aquaculture-Regulatory-Review-for-N-S
- See more at: http://asf.ca/importance-of-rigorous-aquaculture-regs-cannot-be-overstate.html#sthash.LWuARVQS.dpuf
 
http://aquaculturereform.wordpress.com/

The Atlantic Coalition for Aquaculture Reform (ACAR) was formed in the fall of 2010 by a number of groups in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia who share a common concern about the negative environmental and social impacts of the salmon aquaculture industry on our shared waters. By uniting our voices we will push for effective regulation of the aquaculture industry in Atlantic Canada’s waters and beyond.

Read our BASIS OF UNITY, which outlines our shared concerns.

The Atlantic Coalition for Aquaculture Reform consists of the following organizations:

Fundy North Fishermen’s Association (New Brunswick)
Grand Manan Fishermen’s Association (New Brunswick)
Fundy Weir Fishermen’s Association (New Brunswick)
Ecology Action Centre (Nova Scotia)
Fundy Baykeeper/CCNB (New Brunswick)
St. Mary’s Bay Coastal Alliance Society (Nova Scotia)
Friar’s Bay Development Association (New Brunswick)
Friends of Shelburne Harbour (Nova Scotia)
MAYDAY-Shelburne County
Partnership for the Sustainable Development of Digby Neck & Islands Society (Nova Scotia)
Atlantic Salmon Federation
New Brunswick Salmon Council
Nova Scotia Salmon Association
Salmonid Council of Newfoundland and Labrador
Prince Edward Island Council – Atlantic Salmon Federation
Association for the Preservation of the Eastern Shore
Contact ACAR:

Matt Abbott (CCNB) at (506).529.8838 or marine@conservationcouncil.ca
Rob Johnson (EAC) at (902).446.4840 or atlantic@seachoice.org
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfo...n-sea-lice-drug-would-have-cost-35k-1.2760940

Information on sea lice drug would have cost $35K
Liberals say they backed down from info request after PC government quoted them on how much it would cost
CBC News Posted: Sep 09, 2014 5:02 PM NT Last Updated: Sep 10, 2014 7:15 AM NT

Dwight Ball said a price tag of $35-thousand to access information about a drug used to tackle sea lice was too expensive. (CBC)


Information that the leader of Newfoundland and Labrador's Liberals claims is free in British Columbia, would have cost the party about $35,000 here.

Dwight Ball said the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture quoted him $25 per hour for almost 1,000 hours of work, plus another $10,000 for photocopying of information that was requested by the Liberals having to do with the drug SLICE.

The Liberals would have had to pay up to $35K for info on the salmon lice drug, SLICE. Thoughts?
That much money for information that should be public anyway? Seems a bit unreasonable to me
With confidential information involved, it makes sense that workers need to go through it first - and those workers need to be paid
We've a right to know which companies are using a drug to treat salmon; the province needs to rethink its cost for releasing the information
I don't really care; this doesn't have an impact on me either way
VoteView Results
SLICE is used to treat farmed salmon that have become infected with sea lice, a nemesis for both the fish and the companies that farm them.

"In many jurisdiction like B.C., as an example, this information is readily available to the public. Actually, the numbers are posted online,” said Ball.

His access to information request sought details on how much of the Health Canada-approved drug was being used in Newfoundland and Labrador.

“We should have information on how much is being used, how much of it is coming into the province. This is not something we should be ashamed of,” he said.

Ball also wanted to know which companies were using SLICE, and whether or not they had to report every time they used it.

He said he was told that because SLICE is approved by Health Canada, that when a company uses SLICE they do not have to report it.

Ball said he was also told that usage only requires a veterinarian's prescription before SLICE can be mixed with salmon feed.

The Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture said it would take 996 hours for staff to compile and screen all the information for potentially sensitive information, and to ensure that any confidentiality agreements would not be broken.

The department noted the information might include private, third-party details that could breach the "veterinarian-client-patient relationship."

Ball said it's not necessarily the use of the drug that concerns him, but rather the effort and cost associated with accessing details about it.

“I’ve read all the documentation on this and they have had some success [with SLICE]. My concern is that I think publicly, we should be aware.”

Ball said the Liberals have since abandoned their request for the information because his party simply cannot afford it. That's despite the promise of a refund, depending on the amount of information that might have to be redacted or blacked out.

He was also made aware of his right to take up the matter with the province's information and privacy commissioner.

Ball said he hopes the obstacles that he encountered will be addressed once the final report is released into a review of the province's Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't forget everyone - the deadline for comments is for the 22nd of October - THIS October - 1 week away.

For those who have not yet attempted to go through the webpage and draft regs:

1/ These regs started as "Fish Health and.." regs. Somehow the fish health dropped-off after consultations with industry - while the focus then became helping industry subvert and avoid s. 35 and 36 of the Fisheries Act - prohibitions against release of a deleterious substance,
2/ All the future dumping of sea lice pesticides will be done by avoiding s.35 and s.36 of the Fisheries Act, avoiding the prohibition against causing serious harm, avoiding the precautionary approach, avoiding the Framework for the Application of Precaution in Science-based Decision Making About Risk (2003), avoiding the Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, avoiding the Regulations Establishing Conditions for Making Regulations under Subsection 36 (5.2) of the Fisheries Act, and avoiding the Persistence and Bioaccumulation Regulations under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999,
3/ There will be no scientifically-defensible site-specific monitoring for adverse effects on non-target organisms through a risk assessment beforehand,
4/ Instead - if while walking on the net-pens - an employee accidentally happens to "notice" "unusual morbidly or mortality" (undefined terms) - then they have 24 hours to let DFO know. Otherwise - they can call DFO and tell them they treated their fish after 96 hours has passed - or maybe earlier if they want to,
5/ Yearly reports will be generated - and that's your public notice folks!!!
 
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

OldBlackDog
DFO Cuts meetings with Sportsfishers.
Replies
4
Views
956
Unreel
Unreel
IronNoggin
Petition to the House of Commons
Replies
22
Views
1K
G Gordon
G Gordon
Whole in the Water
Concerns about herring kills at B.C. fish farms
Replies
26
Views
2K
Fishing?
F
B
New small boat regs coming ?
Replies
9
Views
2K
beemer
beemer
Bifmalibu
From the BCWF today....
Replies
1
Views
468
walleyes
walleyes
Back
Top