WITHDRAWN: Potential Implications of the Canadian Species at Risk Act on Oil and Gas Companies

2008 ◽  
pp. 515-519
Author(s):  
Jason K. Smith
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Species At Risk Act ◽  
Oil And Gas Companies

Species Listing under Canada's Species at Risk Act

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 1609-1617 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. SCOTT FINDLAY ◽  
STEWART ELGIE ◽  
BRIAN GILES ◽  
LINDA BURR
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Species At Risk Act

The effects of lead agency, nongovernmental organizations, and recovery team membership on the identification of critical habitat for species at risk: insights from the Canadian experience

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric B. Taylor ◽  
Susan Pinkus
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Nongovernmental Organizations ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Critical Habitat ◽  
Lead Agency ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Recovery Planning ◽  
Recovery Strategies ◽  
Species At Risk Act

Evaluation of legislation and procedures in place to help recover species at risk of extinction is an important component of conservation efforts. Despite its biological importance and key role in species protection and recovery legislation, identification of critical habitat is inconsistently applied. We analyzed data from 126 recovery strategies implemented under Canada’s nascent (2002) Species at Risk Act (SARA) to determine how lead agency, Federal Court rulings, and the proportion of independent team members influenced identification of critical habitat. Only 17% of strategies led by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans included critical habitat, compared with 63% of strategies led by Environment Canada, indicating that aquatic species at risk are much less likely to have critical habitat identified. A 50% increase in recovery strategies that identified critical habitat following precedent-setting court judgments suggests that legal action by nongovernmental organizations played a key role in the evolution of recovery policy for species at risk in Canada. The proportion of independent scientists on a recovery team was statistically unrelated to identification of critical habitat at a national scale, but case studies indicate that independent team members may play an important role in ensuring compliance and transparency during recovery planning.

Cost recovery: when reducing costs for an asset can increase costs for an operator

2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 571
Author(s):  
Robin Ludwig
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Joint Venture ◽  
Cost Allocation ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Operating Model ◽  
Allocation Process ◽  
Reducing Costs ◽  
Unpredictable Environment ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
Oil And Gas Companies

In an unpredictable environment, oil and gas companies within Australia need to reduce their cost of production in order to protect the company’s margins. Many large companies are doing this by adapting a traditional asset-based operating model to be a central functionally aligned model, and creating synergies through offshoring, outsourcing, combining corporate capabilities across global assets, and/or creating centres of excellence. A functionally aligned centralised operating model, however, has the potential to increase the complexity for companies when recovering costs from their joint venture partners. In order to be recoverable, an operator must prove that the costs incurred are still directly related to the asset and by moving functions away from the front line, attribution to assets can be complex. If not allocated, documented and communicated in line with the joint venture agreements, the recoverability of these costs is put at risk. It could, therefore, eventuate that the reduction of costs for an asset results in an increase of costs for the operator. When assessing the recoverability of costs, operators should consider: (i) documenting the end to end cost allocation process and communicate this with joint venture partners; (ii) embedding robust governance and tools to aid cost transparency; and (iii) reviewing their contractual obligations as operations evolve. If the appropriate steps are taken, an operator can reduce costs without increasing their own costs by putting recoverability at risk.

Canadian species at risk (2006–2008), with particular emphasis on fishes

2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (NA) ◽  
pp. 53-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Hutchings ◽  
Marco Festa-Bianchet
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Marine Fish ◽  
Spatiotemporal Analysis ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Wildlife Species ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Status ◽  
Special Concern ◽  
Species At Risk Act ◽  
Diadromous Species

In accordance with the Species at Risk Act (SARA), the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) is nationally responsible for assessing wildlife species considered to be at risk of extinction. A parliamentary review of SARA provides impetus for an up-to-date summary of recent assessments (2006–2008) and a spatiotemporal analysis of the status of Canada's largest vertebrate group of species at risk, fishes. From April 1978 through December 2008, COSEWIC had assessed 13 wildlife species as extinct and 564 at some level of risk (extirpated, endangered, threatened, special concern). Among these 577 assessments, 112 are for fishes (76% freshwater and diadromous; 24% marine). Slightly more than one-quarter (27%) of Canada's 205 freshwater and diadromous species of fishes, many of which are in southwestern Ontario and southeastern Quebec, have been assessed as being at risk throughout all or parts of their ranges. The percentage of Canadian freshwater and diadromous fish species assessed by COSEWIC as endangered or threatened (16%) is similar to the percentage of freshwater and diadromous fishes in the US that have been listed under the Endangered Species Act (12%). The proportion of wholly freshwater fishes assessed by COSEWIC that have been added to SARA's legal schedule is somewhat lower than that of other taxa. However, whereas the US listed its first marine fish in 2005, the Canadian government has to date not accepted COSEWIC's advice to list an endangered or threatened marine fish since the proclamation of SARA in 2003.

Canada's Species at Risk Act

Fisheries ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (12) ◽  
pp. 11-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Irvine ◽  
Mart R. Gross ◽  
Chris C. Wood ◽  
L. Blair Holtby ◽  
Neil D. Schubert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Species At Risk Act

scholarly journals Protecting biodiversity in British Columbia: Recommendations for developing species at risk legislation

FACETS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alana R. Westwood ◽  
Sarah P. Otto ◽  
Arne Mooers ◽  
Chris Darimont ◽  
Karen E. Hodges ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
British Columbia ◽  
Endangered Species ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Provincial Government ◽  
Individual Species ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Or Groups ◽  
Species At Risk Act ◽  
Species Declines

British Columbia has the greatest biological diversity of any province or territory in Canada. Yet increasing numbers of species in British Columbia are threatened with extinction. The current patchwork of provincial laws and regulations has not effectively prevented species declines. Recently, the Provincial Government has committed to enacting an endangered species law. Drawing upon our scientific and legal expertise, we offer recommendations for key features of endangered species legislation that build upon strengths and avoid weaknesses observed elsewhere. We recommend striking an independent Oversight Committee to provide recommendations about listing species, organize Recovery Teams, and monitor the efficacy of actions taken. Recovery Teams would evaluate and prioritize potential actions for individual species or groups of species that face common threats or live in a common area, based on best available evidence (including natural and social science and Indigenous Knowledge). Our recommendations focus on implementing an adaptive approach, with ongoing and transparent monitoring and reporting, to reduce delays between determining when a species is at risk and taking effective actions to save it. We urge lawmakers to include this strong evidentiary basis for species recovery as they tackle the scientific and socioeconomic challenges of building an effective species at risk Act.

scholarly journals Fixing the Canadian Species at Risk Act: identifying major issues and recommendations for increasing accountability and efficiency

FACETS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1474-1494
Author(s):  
Audrey Turcotte ◽  
Natalie Kermany ◽  
Sharla Foster ◽  
Caitlyn A. Proctor ◽  
Sydney M. Gilmour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Government Accountability ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
Species Protection ◽  
Inclusive Approach ◽  
Legislative Amendments ◽  
Species At Risk Act ◽  
Risk Protection

Since the implementation of the Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2003, deficiencies in SARA and its application have become clear. Legislative and policy inconsistencies among responsible federal agencies and the use of a subjective approach for prioritizing species protection lead to taxonomic biases in protection. Variations in legislation among provinces/territories and the reluctance of the federal government to take actions make SARA’s application often inefficient on nonfederally managed lands. Ambiguous key terms (e.g., critical habitat) and disregard for legislated deadlines in many steps impede the efficacy of SARA. Additionally, the failure to fully recognize Indigenous knowledge and to seek Indigenous cooperation in the species protection process leads to weaker government accountability, promotes inequity, and leads to missed opportunities for partnerships. New legislative amendments with well-defined and standardized steps, including an automatic listing process, a systematic prioritization program, and clearer demands (e.g., mandatory threshold to trigger safety net/emergency order) would improve the success of species at risk protection. Moreover, a more inclusive approach that brings Indigenous representatives and independent scientists together is necessary for improving SARA’s effectiveness. These changes have the potential to transform SARA into a more powerful act towards protecting Canada’s at-risk wildlife. (The graphical abstract follows.)

scholarly journals Conservation status of caribou in the western mountains of Canada: Protections under the species at risk act, 2002-2014

Rangifer ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justina C. Ray ◽  
Deborah B. Cichowski ◽  
Martin-Hugues St-Laurent ◽  
Chris J. Johnson ◽  
Stephen D. Petersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
First Nations ◽  
Captive Breeding ◽  
Conservation Status ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Predator Control ◽  
Conservation Units ◽  
Preventative Measures ◽  
The Status ◽  
Species At Risk Act

In April 2014, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) reviewed the status of caribou in the western mountains of Canada, in keeping with the ten-year reassessment mandate under the Species at Risk Act. Assessed as two ‘nationally significant’ populations in 2002, COSEWIC revised the conservation units for all caribou in Canada, recognising eleven extant Designatable Units (DUs), three of which -- Northern Mountain, Central Mountain, and Southern Mountain -- are found only in western Canada. The 2014 assessment concluded that the condition of many subpopulations in all three DUs had deteriorated. As a result of small and declining population sizes, the Central Mountain and Southern Mountain DUs are now recognised as endangered. Recent declines in a number of Northern Mountain DU subpopulations did not meet thresholds for endangered or threatened, and were assessed as of special concern. Since the passage of the federal Species at Risk Act in 2002, considerable areas of habitat were managed or conserved for caribou, although disturbance from cumulative human development activities has increased during the same period. Government agencies and local First Nations are attempting to arrest the steep decline of some subpopulations by using predator control, maternal penning, population augmentation, and captive breeding. Based on declines, future developments and current recovery effects, we offer the following recommendations: 1) where recovery actions are necessary, commit to simultaneously reducing human intrusion into caribou ranges, restoring habitat over the long term, and conducting short-term predator control, 2) carefully consider COSEWIC’s new DU structure for management and recovery actions, especially regarding translocations, 3) carry out regular surveys to monitor the condition of Northern Mountain caribou subpopulations and immediately implement preventative measures where necessary, and 4) undertake a proactive, planned approach coordinated across jurisdictions to conserve landscape processes important to caribou conservation.

scholarly journals Diet of a rare Canadian fish species, Carmine Shiner (Notropis percobromus) in the Birch River, Manitoba, Canada

2020 ◽  
Vol 134 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-70
Author(s):  
Eva C. Enders ◽  
Tharshinidevy Nagalingam ◽  
Amanda L. Caskenette ◽  
Tyana A. Rudolfsen ◽  
Colin Charles ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Fish Species ◽  
Aquatic Insects ◽  
Diet Composition ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Stomach Contents ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Species At Risk Act

Due to its restricted occurrence and existing threats, Carmine Shiner (Notropis percobromus) has been listed as threatened under the Canadian Species at Risk Act. Little is known about Carmine Shiner biology, and understanding its diet composition will help inform future conservation actions. Consequently, the aim of this study was to analyze the diet of Carmine Shiner. Fish were caught throughout the open water season using beach seines, and stomach contents were analyzed. Carmine Shiner feed on a variety of terrestrial and aquatic insects. Diets did not differ substantially between year classes, and we observed no clear temporal trends in diet composition.

The Recovery Illusion: What Is Delaying the Rescue of Imperiled Species?

BioScience ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catarina C Ferreira ◽  
Thomas J Hossie ◽  
Deborah A Jenkins ◽  
Morgan Wehtje ◽  
Cayla E Austin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Land Tenure ◽  
The United States ◽  
Risk Level ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
Species At Risk ◽  
Road Density ◽  
Recovery Planning ◽  
Species At Risk Act ◽  
Imperiled Species

Abstract With unprecedented losses in biodiversity, the need for stronger environmental policy has emerged as a conservation priority. Yet recovery planning for imperiled species remains a cumbersome, slow legislative process. In the present article, we examine features of recovery planning for species listed under Canada's Species at Risk Act to determine those influencing recovery planning duration. We found that the time to completion of recovery strategies increases with the number of jurisdictions concurrently listing the species, greater land tenure diversity, species population size, and road density. Species at risk in Canada with no listing status in the United States also suffered longer delays. To achieve a more efficient, timely, and defensible implementation of recovery planning, we recommend that governments prioritize recovery planning on the basis of risk level, promote transjurisdictional collaboration among listing agencies, anticipate and mitigate conservation challenges associated with multitenured and developed landscapes, and adopt procedures that enhance compliance with legislated timelines for recovery planning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document