M VHII M M \N U.I All NI 



rcuul.Uioiis iti.ii chaiaclcri/cs arrangements in other 

 prDVinccN. 



I have concluded ihal a tornial agreeincni Ixiwccn ihc 

 governments of Canada and British Columbia offers the 

 hest hope lor ciHMiliiiatini; their policies and programs 

 lor hahitat management m the province. Because there 

 are numerous outstanding jurisdictu>nal issues that 

 shoukl K' addressed uiuler an umbrella lederal-provin- 

 cial agreement (including the Salmonid Enhancement 

 Program, maricuiture and ocean ranching, and regulation 

 of the priK'essing sector) I have devoted Chapter 18 to 

 this subject. 



A major element ot the agreement should be an expres- 

 sion of the need for joint action by the two governments 

 to imprme the protection and management offish habi- 

 tats. It should address the need tor integrating salmomd 

 enhancement with habitat protection; coordinating habi- 

 tat management with other natural resource activities; 

 providing for federal participation in provincial resource 

 planning processes; assembling data compatible with the 

 needs of provincial resource planners; coordinating fed- 

 eral and provincial responsibilities for fish habitat in 

 inland waters; and integrating federal habitat protection 

 requirements into provincial pollution control permits 

 and resource tenure documents. 



CONCLUSION 



To properly manage fish habitat, certain conditions 

 must be fulfilled. First, the Department must have infor- 

 mation about the resources it is expected to protect and 

 manage. This is alarmingly deficient at present, and I 

 have proposed this be corrected through a systematic 

 habitat inventory sponsored by the federal and provincial 

 governments. Equally necessary is information about the 

 impact of activities in watersheds on fish productivity; 

 this too is lacking, and I discuss the needed research in 

 more detail in Chapter 6. 



Second, the managers neetl objectives. Tliese are now 

 conspicuously lacking also; resource managers have hith- 

 erto simply been responding defensively to the initiatives 

 of others With better information about the capabilities 

 ot the habitat and opportunities lor imprt)ving it, the 

 I Vp.ii imeiit will be in a ptisition to set itself goals for fish 

 production b\ regions and watershetls. Tliis will focus the 

 etforts of habitat managers, enhancement planners and 

 fisheries managers; it will force other resource agencies to 

 recogni/e the implications of their long-term objectives 

 for those of fisheries; and it will provide a touchstone for 

 assessing the effects of proposed developments. 



Third, the Department needs the legal and procedural 

 machinery for engaging systematically in integrated 

 resource management through close cooperation with 

 provincial resource agencies and improved approval 

 arrangements. 



Finally, the Department needs the wherewithal in staff 

 and budget to carry out its heavy responsibilities in this 

 area. Savings and eflRciencies could be realized by elimi- 

 nating duplication of effort among federal departments 

 and by reccMicilmg federal and provincial administrative 

 responsibilities, as I have suggested. But, in addition, a 

 stronger staff and budgetary commitment must be made 

 if the Department is to deal adequately with the huge 

 task of protecting the habitat of Canada's highly sensitive 

 Pacific fish in the face of massive and widespread indus- 

 trial activities. 



Commentators on the subject of habitat protection are 

 often gloomy about the future, and they can find 

 justification for pessimism in past experience. But my 

 investigations have left me much more optimistic about 

 the possibilities, not only for preserving the capabilities of 

 ,our aquatic resources to produce fish, but also for 

 enhancing them. 



