i: HABITAT MANAlil-MI-NI 



this arc;i. l.imilcd by msiitlkicnt slaH ;irul lacking proper 

 hahital inventi>r> intormatii>n. the IX-parlmcnt cannot 

 hope to cope with the large and rising volume ot referrals 

 it IS asked to consider annually, or to adequately monitor 

 industrial operalunis. 



In Chapter I*? I recommend that all ol the IX-part- 

 ment's staffing and budgetary commitments for programs 

 in the Pacific region be analyzed in relation to its priori- 

 ties. Pending completion of this analysis. 1 propose that 

 the start" alliKated to habitat management be strength- 

 ened at least to the level committed before cuts were 

 made in recent years: 



22. As an interim nK'asure, the habitat iiuinaKcnK-nt staff 

 of tin.- Di'parliiK'iil's Pacific region slioukl fK' 

 increased b\ about fO |K>rs<)ii-ycars in addition to the 

 staff to be transferreif from tlie Fnvironmcmal fVolec- 

 tion Service and Ifiose reijuired to compile tlic pro- 

 posed liabitat inventory. 



Participants in the Commission's hearings pointed out 

 that the Department's fishery officers need more support 

 from biologists who have the local scientific knowledge 

 needed to assist with planning and referrals relating to 

 forestry and other resource developments in watersheds. 

 Only if fishery officers can receive such support can con- 

 tinuity and consistency be achieved in setting and enforc- 

 ing standards for habitat protection. Decentralizing pro- 

 fessional stafi" will strengthen this kind of support and 

 improve communications between field personnel and 

 senior management. I therefore recommend — 



23. A core of technical experts should he maintained In 

 the Habitat iVIanagement Branch in Vancouver to deal 

 with major impact assessments and estuary and water 

 nianagenjent studies, but the balance of the branch 

 should be decentralized and be responsible to area 

 managers. 



There also appears to be insufficient coordination 

 between the Habitat Management Branch and the Sal- 

 monid Enhancement Program. It has been suggested that 

 the efforts of these two groups would be more effective if 

 they developed a closer working relationship or perhaps 

 were integrated into one group. Similarly, the transfer of 

 habitat research a few years ago from the Habitat Protec- 

 tion Branch to the Fisheries Research Branch might be 

 reconsidered. These issues cannot be dealt with in isola- 

 tion from the Fisheries Research Branch and the Sal- 

 monid Enhancement Program organizations, so they 

 should be examined in the general review of the Pacific 

 region activities recommended in Chapter 19. 



Provincial Involvement in Habitat IVIanagement 



In British Columbia, the provincial government's poli- 

 cies for allocating and managing Crown land, timber. 



minerals ami water have a predominant influence over 

 the health of fish habitat. In addition, the province exer- 

 cises important controls over water and environmental 

 c|ualily in general. The challenge is to harmoni/c federal 

 and provincial activities in this area, to strengtiien the 

 habitat management effort, and to avoid unnecessary 

 tluplication of ctfort and sources of friction. 



Ihe province is indirectly involved in habitat manage- 

 ment through various statutes relevant to environmental 

 controls. One of these is the Pollution Control Act,''' 

 administered by the Waste Management Branch of the 

 Ministry of Environment. With a few specific exceptions, 

 the legislation requires a pollution control permit to dis- 

 charge wastes or contaminants into water or air. Objec- 

 tives have been developed for abatement standards 

 required by various industries, and permits are usually 

 based on these. Permits sometimes incorporate require- 

 ments recommended by the Department of Fisheries and 

 Oceans and other federal authorities under the referral 

 arrangements described earlier. 



The provincial Water Act-'' asserts the ownership of the 

 provincial Crown of virtually all fresh water in the prov- 

 ince and requires users to obtain licences to divert, store 

 or withdraw water. The Act lists the beneficial uses of 

 water but. conspicuously, no mention is made offish. The 

 potential for conflict between the Province's water- 

 licensing policies and fisheries values was recently illus- 

 trated in court action over the release of water from a 

 hydroelectric water-storage facility in the northern inte- 

 rior. 



Another important provincial statute is the Environ- 

 mental and Land Use Act,-^ which provides for a provin- 

 cial cabinet committee to review proposed industrial and 

 other developments and to reserve sensitive areas. The 

 recently passed Environment Management Act" pro- 

 vides the Ministry of Environment with emergency pow- 

 ers as well as authority to require mitigation and abate- 

 ment of adverse environmental impacts and environmen- 

 tal assessments. 



While none of these provincial laws is aimed explicitly 

 at fish and aquatic habitats, the way they are applied can 

 have a major influence over them. The administering 

 agencies employ a wide range of regulations, administra- 

 tive policies and practices in support of the statutes, and 

 these too have an important influence on fish habitat.-' 



The province's direct involvement in fish habitat arises 

 through its administrative authority over freshwater spe- 

 cies delegated to it by the federal government. The Fish 

 and Wildlife Branch of the Ministry of Environment con- 

 siders development and project referrals in the same 

 manner as the Department of Fisheries and Oceans 

 (sometimes reviewing the same proposals): it enforces the 

 habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act for 



