ANOTHER GROSSLY INADEQUATE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT LAUNCHED IN HOUSE OF COMMONS

"After 5 years of trying, the Federal Government still hasn't got it right. The new Species at Risk Act may sound tough, with its up to $1 million fines, but it's weaker than wet toilet paper," says Paul George, founder of Western Canada Wilderness Committee, the largest membership-based, citizen-funded wilderness conservation group in Canada.

George points out that the Act has fatal flaws. It makes the decision as to what is or is not an endangered species a political (federal cabinet) rather than a scientific decision. It only has mandatory habitat protection (very narrowly defined as nests, dens and the like) on Federal lands. Federal lands which comprise less than 2 percent of B.C. The "safety net" kick-in of federal action to cover for inaction by the "bad boy" provinces (including B.C. and Alberta) which have no endangered species legislation, is only at the political discretion of the Federal Cabinet. The tabled legislation does not even allow citizens to go to court when the government refuses to enforce the law.

Western Canada Wilderness Committee claims that this Act is in many ways weaker that the 1996 federal endangered species legislation which failed because of widespread protest from thousands of citizens and nearly every environment group in Canada.

The vast majority of Canadians support tough and effective endangered species legislation. "It looks like the backroom, big-industry lobby has won again. If Environment Minister David Anderson, who is forwarding this Species at Risk Act, stubbornly refuses to improve the bill, our only hope is that our friends to the south who have had good endangered species legislation for years will join concerned Canadians in putting increased pressure on Canada," concluded a disgusted George. The survival of many of the U.S. endangered species, like the grizzly bears in the lower 48 states, depends on the species being better protected in Canada.