Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 157, Number 49: Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act (Chestnut-collared Longspur and Nine Other Wildlife Species)

December 9, 2023

Statutory authority
Species at Risk Act

Sponsoring department
Department of the Environment

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Order.)

Issues

In November 2019, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) assessed the status of the Chestnut-collared Longspur and nine other wildlife species. The assessments were received by the Minister of the Environment (the “Minister”) on September 2, 2020.The Minister published Response Statements on December 2, 2020. The Response Statements identify how the Minister intends to respond to COSEWIC’s assessments of wildlife species. The Response Statements also initiate the listing and recovery process for species identified as being at risk and establishes timelines for these processes.

Pursuant to subsection 27(1.1) of the Species at Risk Act (SARA), the Governor in Council (GIC) may review COSEWIC’s assessment and on the recommendation of the Minister may

Should the GIC not take one of the above actions within nine months after receiving COSEWIC’s assessment, as signified by the registration of a receipt order, subsection 27(3) of SARA requires the Minister to amend the List in accordance with COSEWIC’s assessment. Accordingly, an Order in Council is needed to address COSEWIC’s status assessments for these 10 species.

Background

The Department of the Environment (the Department) is mandated to preserve and enhance the quality of the natural environment, including flora and fauna. Although the responsibility for the conservation of wildlife in Canada is shared among all levels of government, the Department plays a leadership role as federal regulator in order to prevent terrestrial species from becoming extinct at the global scalefootnote 1 or extirpatedfootnote 2 from Canada.

The primary federal legislative mechanism for delivering on this responsibility is SARA. The purposes of SARA are to prevent wildlife species from becoming extirpated from Canada or extinct; to provide for recovery of wildlife species that are listed as extirpated, endangered or threatened; and to manage species of special concern to prevent them from becoming endangered or threatened.

COSEWIC has completed status assessments for the following species:

A detailed description of each species, their ranges and threats can be found on the Species at Risk Registry, in the document entitled Consultation: amending terrestrial species list on Species at Risk Act, summary: December 2020. Additional information pertaining to these species can also be found in the COSEWIC status reports.

General protections

When a terrestrial species is listed on Schedule 1 of SARA as extirpated, endangered or threatened, general prohibitions apply automatically on federal lands. These general prohibitions make it an offence to kill, harm, harass, capture or take the species, and/or to possess, collect, buy, sell or trade the species or any part or derivative of such. It is also prohibited to damage or destroy the residence (e.g. nest or den) of the species.

On non-federal lands, these general prohibitions only apply to a listed terrestrial species if an order is made by the GIC.footnote 3 The Minister must recommend that such an order be made if the Minister is of the opinion that the laws of the province or territory do not effectively protect the species or the residences of its individuals. (Note that migratory birds protected under the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 [MBCA], as well as their nests and eggs, are protected by SARA anywhere they are found in Canada when listed as extirpated, endangered or threatened on the List.)

Listing a species as endangered, threatened, or extirpated triggers mandatory recovery planning by the competent ministerfootnote 4 in cooperation with Indigenous communities, appropriate provincial or territorial governments, other federal ministers with authority over federal lands where the species is found, and wildlife management boards authorized by a land claims agreement, among others. If the recovery of the species is possible, the recovery strategy must address threats to the survival of the listed species, including any loss of habitat, and must include, among other things, the identification of the species’ critical habitat, to the extent possible, based on the best available information.

The strategy must also include a statement of when one or more action plans in relation to the recovery strategy will be completed. Action plans summarize the projects and activities required to meet the recovery strategy objectives and goals. Plans include information on habitat, details of protection measures, and evaluation of socio-economic costs and benefits of the recovery strategy.

If a critical habitat is identified on federal lands, the competent minister must protect it using the various tools available under SARA, including, but not necessarily limited to, a critical habitat protection order.

For species that are listed on Schedule 1 as special concern, the general prohibitions mentioned above do not apply. However, the addition of a species of special concern to Schedule 1 of SARA triggers the development, within three years of listing, of a management plan that enables the species to be managed proactively, maximizes the probability of recovery, and reduces the likelihood of requiring higher-cost recovery measures in the future. The management plan includes conservation measures for the species and its habitat, with the goal of preventing the species from becoming threatened or endangered.

Objective

The objective of the proposed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act (Chestnut-collared Longspur and Nine Other Wildlife Species) [the “proposed Order”]is to ensure that the various measures available under SARA to protect and recover species at risk are applicable to the species reclassified or added to the List through the proposed Order.

Description

The proposed Order would amend Schedule 1 to SARA by adding nine new species to the List, and reclassifying one species already on the List, as described below:

Regulatory development

Consultation

The Department began consultations on December 2, 2020, with the comment period for these 10 species running to April 2, 2021. Indigenous peoples, stakeholders, organizations, and the general public were consulted by means of a publicly posted document titled Consultation on Amending the List of Species under the Species at Risk Act – Terrestrial Species (PDF) (December 2020).

The Department sent an email to 3 404 individuals and organizations that had subscribed to the mailing list of the Species at Risk Public Registry. The email invited comments on proposed amendments to the List resulting from COSEWIC’s assessments of the terrestrial species, and provided links to relevant information, including on the listing and consultation processes.

The Department’s regional staff also reached out directly to approximately 2 480 contacts, including Indigenous peoples and organizations, provincial and municipal governments, contacts in industry, resource users, landowners and environmental non-governmental organizations. Certain contacts received a regionalized notification email highlighting the relevant species being considered for a change in status in the region. Other contacts with land or interests within species’ ranges received a package of consultation materials with copies of, or links to, the consultation document mentioned above as well as fact sheets about the species proposed to be listed or reclassified. The documents provided species information, including the reason for the designation, a biological description and location information, as well as an overview of the SARA listing process. In many cases, Indigenous communities and organizations were provided with physical copies of materials as well.

Partners, stakeholders and the general public were invited to provide comments to the Department by email, letter, or through an online survey.

As a result of restrictions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, it was not possible to have in-person meetings. Given the complex nature of these consultations, the Department offered teleconferences to explain the proposal and listing process. This helped ensure the consultation process remained accessible to people of all abilities, including those with differing educational backgrounds and/or no scientific training. Regional staff followed up with Indigenous partners on the initial consultation request, where resources permitted, with phone calls and/or additional emails seeking input before the expiry of the consultation period.

Initial consultation results summary

No concerns were raised during the consultation period regarding the proposed Order. In total, the Department received nine responses.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultation

Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes and affirms aboriginal and treaty rights of Indigenous peoples of Canada, including rights related to activities, practices, and traditions of Indigenous peoples that are integral to their distinctive culture. As required by the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, an assessment of modern treaty implications was conducted on the proposed Order. This assessment determined that none of the species included in the proposed Order are known to be found on federal lands pertaining to a modern treaty. Modern treaty rights are not anticipated to be impacted by the listing of these 10 species.

The ranges of all 10 species were examined for overlap with First Nations reserves or Indigenous traditional territories. Where such an overlap existed (or potentially existed), the appropriate Indigenous communities and organizations were contacted for comment.

As discussed in the consultation section above, the Department consulted with Indigenous communities and organizations to determine whether the proposed Order could potentially impact communities’ interests or activities as the range of the species could be located on traditional lands. Emails and, in some cases, hard copies were sent to Indigenous communities indicating the proposed amendments to the List and inviting recipients to provide comments. Follow-up teleconferences were offered to provide additional context to the materials sent, and reminder emails were sent and in some cases phone calls made near the comment deadline. Six First Nations and Indigenous organizations responded; of these responses, one supported the Order and five did not provide a position with respect to listing (as detailed above).

Instrument choice

SARA stipulates that, after receiving an assessment from COSEWIC on the status of a wildlife species, the GIC may review that assessment and may, on the recommendation of the Minister of the Environment

The protection of species at risk is a shared responsibility between the federal government and the provinces and territories; therefore, the federal government must respect its responsibilities to protect species on federal lands, or everywhere in Canada for migratory birds or aquatic species.

The Act includes sections that support voluntary stewardship approaches to conservation in collaboration with any other government in Canada, organization or person. While these sections could be used to generate positive outcomes for a species, the obligation for the Minister to make a recommendation to the GIC for a decision in respect of an assessment cannot be bypassed.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

This analysis presents the incremental impacts, both benefits and costs, of the proposed Order. Incremental impacts are defined as the difference between the baseline scenario and the scenario in which the proposed Order is implemented over the same time period. The baseline scenario includes activities ongoing on federal lands where a species is found and incorporates any projected changes that would occur without the proposed Order in place.

An analytical period of 10 years has been selected, because the status of the species must be reassessed by COSEWIC every 10 years. Unless otherwise noted, all monetary values reported in this analysis are in 2023 constant dollars. Costs provided in present value terms were discounted at 3% over the period of 2024–2033.

Overall, the proposed Order is expected to benefit Canadian society. The protection and recovery of these species would help preserve and enhance associated benefits to Canadians such as socio-economic and cultural value for Indigenous peoples, pest-control, pollination and nutrient cycling benefits, as well as scientific and existence values. The costs associated with the proposed Order are expected to be low. They are related to the development of recovery strategies, action plans and management plans, where applicable, as well as potential permit applications and compliance promotion. Other costs stemming from the proposed Order related to the trigger of general prohibitions and future critical habitat protection orders (CHPO) on federal departmental lands for species listed as threatened or endangered are expected to be low or non-existent.

Benefits

The proposed Order would support the survival and recovery of 10 species at risk in Canada, by triggering a suite of actions described in the background section.

Under SARA, endangered, threatened, and extirpated species benefit from the development and implementation of recovery strategies and action plans that identify the main threats to their survival, and, when possible, the habitat necessary to their survival and recovery in Canada. Special concern species benefit from the development of a management plan, which includes measures for the conservation of the species. These documents enable coordinated action by responsible land management authorities wherever the species are found in Canada. Improved coordination among authorities increases the likelihood of species survival. These activities may be augmented by actions from local governments, stakeholders and/or Indigenous peoples to protect species and habitats, for example, through projects funded through federal programs such as the Habitat Stewardship Program for Species at Risk (HSP) and the Critical Habitat Interdepartmental Program (CHIP), which require support and matching funds from other sources. The objectives of the HSP are to support habitat projects that benefit species at risk and that prevent others from becoming a conservation concern; enable Canadians to become actively involved in stewardship projects for species at risk which will result in tangible and measurable conservation benefits; and improve the scientific, sociological, and economic understanding of stewardship as a conservation tool. The objectives of the CHIP are to conserve and recover species at risk through maintaining or improving their habitat, mainly on federally owned and/or administered lands; gather valuable data on species at risk and their critical habitat to support and help meet recovery goals; support federal organizations in meeting SARA legal requirements to protect species at risk critical habitat on federal lands; support conservation work by focusing on targeted species-specific activities for internally prioritized species; and promote partnerships between federal organizations, provincial and territorial governments, universities, various stakeholders and Indigenous peoples.

The special concern classification also serves as an early indication that a species requires attention due to a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats. This helps manage the species proactively, maximizing the probability of conservation and stewardship, and preventing higher-cost measures in the future stemming from potential threatened or endangered classifications.

Total economic value of species conservation

The Total Economic Value (TEV) framework is often used to assess how environmental assets such as species at risk contribute to the well-being of society. However, preventing the extinction or extirpation of the species in the proposed Order would likely not be attributable to the proposed Order alone, but also to additional protection measures undertaken by various levels of government, Indigenous peoples, and stakeholders. Such measures are an essential element for successfully maintaining or restoring biodiversity in Canada and preserving Canada’s natural heritage, which in turn provides benefits to the Canadian society. Nonetheless, using the TEV framework, the analysis found that the continued existence of these species would be associated with maintaining a variety of benefits for Canadians including socio-economic and cultural value for Indigenous peoples, pest-control, pollination, and nutrient cycling benefits, as well as scientific and existence values, among others. These are further described below.

Socio-economic and cultural values for Indigenous peoples

Many of the species recommended for listing are significant to the ways of life of many Indigenous peoples, providing social, cultural, and medicinal benefits, as well as being of historical and traditional significance. Some examples are provided below.

Pest control

The Plains Hog-nosed snake eats a variety of amphibians, small mammals, insects, and lizards and therefore plays a role in limiting these populations, some of which often exhibit pest-like characteristics.footnote 14,footnote 15,footnote 16 They have the strongest role in limiting toad populations because toads are their primary source of nutrition.footnote 17 They are therefore considered as a pest control agent.footnote 18

The Chestnut-collared Longspur partly relies on insects for food during summer months or when insects are available, also serving pest control purposes.footnote 19

Pollination

Nocturnal moths, such as the Reversed Haploa Moth and the Manitoba Oakworm Moth, are significant pollinators, including for economically valuable crops.footnote 20,footnote 21 Moreover, the Erebidae family (which includes the Reversed Haploa Moth) were identified as one of several moth species that transported pollen to plants that did not receive pollen from diurnal pollinators, suggesting that although less efficient than bees and butterflies, certain moth species may play a crucial role as a landscape-level pollinator.footnote 22

Nutrient cycling

Some species recommended for listing provide nutrient cycling benefits as a result of their diet, movement (including seasonal migration) and life cycle, playing important roles in keeping their ecosystem functioning, which in turn provide benefits to Canadians.

In moist environments such as the Pacific Northwest, mosses such as the Slender Yoke-moss harbour cyanobacteria that convert atmospheric nitrogen into a form that can be taken up by other plants, an important process for ecosystems limited in nitrogen.footnote 23 Bryophyte mosses are also important in initiating soil formation on barren terrain such as rocks and cliffs, in maintaining soil moisture and in recycling nutrients in forest vegetation.footnote 24

Snails and slugs such as the Shagreen, the Toothed Globe and the Carolina Mantleslug, also play an important role in nutrient cycling and soil building processes and a moderate role in decomposition.footnote 25,footnote 26 For example, snail shells are an essential source of calcium for many of their predators such as birds, who need the nutrient for forming eggs and embryos. One study showed that during egg-laying season, female wild turkeys consumed as much as 40% more snails than normal.footnote 26,footnote 27

Seed dispersion

The Chestnut-collared Longspur primarily feeds on seeds, especially during winter months.footnote 28 Seed-eating birds contribute to the capacity of plants to spread by dispersing seeds through their droppings. They can help bring plants to suitable habitats where these specific plants were not present or bring back plants to ecosystems that have been destroyed.footnote 29

Scientific and research value

The study of bryophytes, the overarching species family that includes the Slender Yoke-moss, has led to the discovery of various biological phenomena that have had an influence on research in areas such as genetics and cytology.footnote 24

Medicine has historically been prepared from goldenrod species such as the Gillman’s Goldenrod in the Manitoulin region to treat sore throats, fevers, boils, burns, and other ailments.footnote 30 Two patents have been registered in the United States with the purposes of creating medicinal products from goldenrods, including Gillman’s Goldenrod, underscoring the scientific value of this species.footnote 31,footnote 32

Several of the species recommended for listing serve as indicators of the status of their ecosystems and environment, and are therefore useful for scientific research. One of the better known uses of mosses such as the Slender Yoke-moss is as a bioindicatorfootnote 33 of air pollution, due to their absorptive surfaces and reliance on atmospheric sources of water and nutrients.footnote 23 Moths such as the Reversed Haploa Moth and Manitoba Oakworm Moth are bioindicators for open and forested habitats.footnote 34 A study on Anticosti Island has found moths to be complementary to plants as the best indicator species for various herbivore grazing populations.footnote 35 Due to their lack of migratory behaviour and limited mobility, snails and slugs such as the Shagreen, the Toothed Globe and the Carolina Mantleslug are indicative of past and present health of an ecosystem as a whole.footnote 36

Existence value

Many people derive well-being from simply knowing that a species exists now and/or in the future. Although no quantitative estimates of the existence value of the specific species recommended for listing are available, related studies indicate that society places substantial value on vulnerable species, and especially charismatic, symbolic, or emblematic species.footnote 37,footnote 38,footnote 39 Although the species in the proposed Order are not considered especially well known, they are considered vulnerable.

Option value

The general public and stakeholders may hold a value associated with the preservation of Canadian genetic information that may be used in the future for biological, medicinal, genetic engineering and other applications.

Furthermore, a decision about whether to take action to prevent a species from becoming extinct involves several issues regarding uncertainty and irreversibility. In particular, the potential irreversibility of a decision to not protect creates an imbalance in the cost of making a ’wrong’ decision. Economic theory also suggests there is a benefit to erring on the side of avoiding an irreversible outcome (i.e. extinction).footnote 40 Therefore, even in situations where protection costs outweigh benefits, with uncertainty and irreversibility, the added costs of an incorrect decision could tip the balance, making the overall benefits of protection outweigh the costs.

Costs

The impacts of the proposed Order are expected to be low as the addition or reclassification of these species on Schedule 1 of SARA would impose zero to minimal costs on stakeholders and/or Indigenous peoples.

This analysis considers incremental impacts expected to arise from the development of recovery strategies, action plans and management plans; compliance with general prohibitions, including permit applications; and, to the extent possible, compliance with any future critical habitat protection order on federal departmental lands. Since critical habitat is only identified in a recovery strategy following the listing of a species on Schedule 1 of SARA, the extent of critical habitat (and therefore protection measures and associated impacts) is generally unknown at the time of publication. For each species, the analysis considered four types of incremental costs associated with the proposed Order:

Costs to Indigenous peoples and stakeholders

The listing of three species as special concern (Plains Hog-nosed Snake, Manitoba Oakworm Moth, and Puvirnituq Mountain Draba) or the reclassification of one species (Chestnut-collared Longspur) from threatened to endangered (uplisting) would have no incremental costs to Indigenous peoples and stakeholders stemming from the proposed Order, because either general prohibitions and critical habitat protection do not apply (for species of special concern) or they are not incremental (uplisting from threatened to endangered).

However, there are three species found on federal land, which are proposed to be newly added to the List as endangered and for which general prohibitions would apply: the Shagreen, the Toothed Globe, and the Reversed Haploa Moth.

The Shagreen occurrences were found within Point Pelee National Park (Ontario), a national park administered by Parks Canada. Critical habitat could be identified on this property. Although SARA’s general prohibitions and potential critical habitat protection orders apply across Parks Canada-administered protected heritage sites, species and habitats are already afforded similar protection in national parks and national historic sites under the Canada National Parks Act. However, it is expected that Parks Canada applicants may apply for SARA compliant permits, as described further below.

One occurrence of the Toothed Globe was recorded in the 1980s on the Chippewas of the Thames First Nation reserve (Ontario). This First Nation’s reserve territory is intertwined with two other reserves — Munsee-Delaware and Oneida First Nations. Therefore, all three reserves are assumed to potentially have occurrences of the snail. However, the properties have seen minimal to no development since the 1980s, keeping the natural areas largely unchanged and no occurrences have been reported or confirmed recently. Moreover, Chippewas of the Thames are involved in habitat and species at risk stewardship on their land. They received a Stewardship Award in 2017 for purchasing and planting over 3 000 trees in order to establish new forests and wooded areas with different purposes, including enhancing habitat for wildlife to increase biodiversity. Additionally, based on best available information, there is no potential development project or ongoing activity across the three reserves that could be affected by the proposed Order. Therefore, potential impacts that might be incurred by the three First Nations stemming from the proposed Order are expected to be minimal to nil, especially considering the uncertainty surrounding the continued presence of the species in the area due to the age of the last confirmed occurrence. It is assumed that these three reserves are highly unlikely to incur costs stemming from this Order, other than for a potential permit application.

The Reversed Haploa Moth occurs within Camp Ipperwash (Ontario), a property currently administered by the Department of National Defence of Canada (DND). In addition to general prohibitions, there is a possibility that critical habitat could be identified at this location, which could result in the protection of the critical habitat at the site through a protection order if the site is deemed not sufficiently protected. However, DND decommissioned the facilities at the property in 1995 — stopping all military, development and other potential threatening activities — with the objective of transferring the property to the nearby Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point First Nation.

At this time, known occurrences of the three other species proposed to be listed as endangered or threatened in the proposed Order (Slender Yoke-Moss, Gillman’s Goldenrod, and Carolina Mantleslug) are located on provincial lands (both provincial protected area and provincial crown land) or private lands. Hence, neither the general prohibitions nor critical habitat protection orders are expected to be triggered on federal land as a result of the listing of these three species. Therefore, the proposed Order would result in no incremental impacts to stakeholders or Indigenous peoples associated with these three species.

Administrative costs to the Government of Canada

As outlined in Table 1 below, administrative costs to the Government of Canada differ depending on the status assigned to a listed species, as different status categories trigger different requirements.

Table 1: Type of listing and associated incremental costs to the Government of Canada.
Type of listing SARA requirements Estimated cost per species table b1 note *
New listing or reclassification as special concern Development of a management plan $10,000 to $15,000
Reclassification from endangered to threatened or vice versa Updates to the recovery strategy and action plan $3,000 to $10,000 per document
New listing as endangered, threatened or extirpated Development of a recovery strategy and action plan $20,000 to $25,000 per document
New listing as endangered, threatened or extirpated Enforcement and compliance promotion Compliance promotion costs are estimated between $2,000 and $3,000 per species, while enforcement costs vary per species.
Table b1 note(s)
Table b1 note *

Estimates have been rounded.

Return to table b1 note * referrer

Three species would be listed as species of special concern: (1) Manitoba Oakworm Moth, (2) Plains Hog-nosed Snake, and (3) Puvirnituq Mountain Draba. For these species, the identification of critical habitat is not required. Efforts to recover these three species through the development of management plans are estimated to be between $10,000 and $15,000 per species. Therefore, the total undiscounted cost to the Government of Canada for these species is estimated to be between $30,000 and $45,000.

Five species have been newly assessed by COSEWIC as endangered: (1) Shagreen, (2) Toothed Globe, (3) Reversed Haploa Moth, (4) Gillman’s Goldenrod and (5) Slender Yoke-moss. One species has been newly assessed by COSEWIC as threatened: (1) Carolina Mantleslug. Efforts to recover these species through the development of both recovery strategies and action plans are estimated to be between $40,000 and $50,000 per species. Therefore, the total undiscounted cost to the Government of Canada for these species is estimated to be between $240,000 and $300,000.

The reclassification of the Chestnut-collared Longspur from threatened to endangered (uplisting) as well as updating its French name will require updating of the recovery strategy and action plan documents. The undiscounted costs to the Government of Canada for this process are estimated to be between $3,000 and $10,000.

Among all the species identified in this listing, the Shagreen, the Toothed Globe, and the Reversed Haploa Mothwould require compliance promotion, with an estimated cost of $3,000 per species in the first year, for a total of $9,000.

Enforcement costs

The proposed Order is expected to generate enforcement costs for the Government of Canada. Since the Toothed Globe and the Reversed Haploa Moth have confirmed occurrences on federal lands and proposed to be listed as “endangered,” these species would be added to the Department’s Enforcement Branch mandate for individual and/or residence protections. Pre-operational enforcement efforts (i.e. strategic development and engagement with Indigenous peoples) are estimated to cost about $6,000. The enforcement costs during the first year of operation are estimated at about $13,000. These include $5,000 for analysis, $7,500 for inspections (including operations and transportation costs), and $500 for measures to deal with alleged violations (including warnings). The estimated total for each subsequent year of operation is about $10,000. The total enforcement costs over the 10-year analytical time period is estimated at $109,000 (undiscounted). Concerning the Chestnut-collared Longspur, enforcement protections are already in place for this species due to its current status as threatened. The Shagreen is found on lands managed by Parks Canada and as such, already benefits from enforcement efforts by Parks Canada.

Permit applications

Permits would be required for activities that would otherwise be prohibited under SARA. This analysis uses data on previously requested permits to make assumptions about the number of potential permit applications. Although no conclusions can be made on whether a permit could be issued prior to the submission and review of an application, this analysis takes into account the potential labour cost implications of permit application and review as a result of the proposed Order. It is assumed that applicants would need to apply for each required permit only one time over the 10-year analytical period.

Specifically, it is assumed that there may be one permit application per federal property or First Nation reserve with species occurrence, and one additional permit application for a place administered by Parks Canada. For properties that already require a permit under another Act of Parliament for an activity to take place (e.g. National Park, National Wildlife Area, etc.), there would be a cost to make the permit SARA compliant in accordance with Section 74 of SARA, which is estimated to be approximately a quarter of the effort of a new permit application (or about seven hours of the applicant’s time). The average costs related to permit applications under SARA Sections 73 and 74 are presented in tables 2a (for applicants) and 2b (for the Department or Parks Canada).

Table 2a: Average applicant cost associated with the administrative burden of applying for a SARA permit
Type of permit application Cost per permit application table b2 note * Number of applications
New SARA permit application under Section 73 $3,300 4
SARA permit application for research purposes or beneficial activities on Parks Canada-administered lands under Section 74 — SARA compliant increment $400 1
SARA permit application for incidental activities by the Parks Canada Agency on Parks Canada-administered land under Section 74 — SARA compliant increment $800 1
Table b2 note(s)
Table b2 note *

While there are no fees to obtain a SARA permit, there are opportunity costs associated with the administrative burden of having to apply for a permit. Estimates have been rounded.

Return to table b2 note * referrer
Table 2b: Average cost of SARA permit applications review by ECCC or PCA
Type of permit application Cost per permit application table b3 note * Number of applications
New permit review $4,200 4
SARA compliant increment permit review $1000 2
Table b3 note(s)
Table b3 note *

While there are no fees to obtain a SARA permit, there are labour costs to Government to review and process permit applications. Estimates have been rounded.

Return to table b3 note * referrer

As noted, two species in the proposed Order occur on two non-reserve federal lands: (1) the Reversed Haploa Moth occurs on Camp Ipperwash, a property administered by DND; and (2) the Shagreen occurs on Point Pelee National Park, land administered by Parks Canada. It is assumed that the proposed Order could trigger up to three permit applications for these two properties: one new application from DND, and two SARA compliant increment applications on Point Pelee National Park from researchers as well as from Parks Canada to authorize certain activities or projects within a national park. These permits are estimated to cost $3,300, $400 and $800 to applicants, respectively, for a total of $4,500 (undiscounted).

One species, the Toothed Globe, could possibly be found in the Chippewas of the Thames First Nation reserve, the Munsee-Delaware Nation reserve and the Oneida Nation of the Thames reserve. Although the latest recorded occurrence in the area dates from 1980, it is assumed that the proposed Order could trigger up to three new permit applications for these three locations in order to remain conservative. Based on historic data, up to two of the three permit applications could come from businesses. The applicant cost for a new permit is estimated to be $3,300. Therefore, the total incremental costs to Indigenous applicants at these locations could be up to $9,900 (undiscounted).

The total incremental costs to the Government of Canadafootnote 41 associated with the review of these six potential permit requests, four of which would be new and two of which would be a SARA compliant increment could be up to $18,800 (undiscounted).

Other costs

The proposed Order may have implications for projectsfootnote 42 required to undergo an impact assessment (IA) by or under an Act of Parliament (hereafter referred to as a federal IA). However, any additional costs generated by the proposed Order are expected to be minimal relative to the total costs of performing a federal IA. Once a species is listed in Schedule 1 of SARA, under any designation, additional requirements specified under Section 79 of SARA are triggered and need to be taken into consideration by government officials undertaking a federal IA. These requirements include identifying all adverse effects that the project could have on the species and its critical habitat and, if the project is carried out, to ensure that measures are taken to avoid or lessen those effects and to monitor them in a manner consistent with the recovery strategy. However, the Department recommends, in the Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines, that proponents evaluate effects on species already assessed by COSEWIC that may become listed under Schedule 1 of SARA in the near future so these costs are likely already incorporated in the baseline scenario.

The listing of a wildlife species under SARA as threatened, endangered or extirpated triggers a series of obligations for the government, including the preparation of a recovery strategy that includes the identification, to the extent possible, of the habitat necessary for the survival or recovery of the species (critical habitat), and different obligations regarding the protection of that critical habitat. Protecting critical habitat on federal lands is required under SARA and could require regulatory action. If the Minister formed the opinion that critical habitat on non-federal land was not effectively protected or that there was an imminent threat to species, other regulatory action could be taken under SARA. The socio-economic impact of each individual regulatory action would be assessed if this additional protection becomes necessary.

Summary of benefits and costs

The proposed Order is expected to trigger protections and coordinated actions to support recovery of the listed species, thereby contributing to the benefits that they provide to Canadian society. Species conservation is associated with socio-economic and cultural values, pest control, pollination, seed dispersion and nutrient cycling benefits, as well as scientific and existence values. Aside from potential permit-related expenses, the proposed Order is not expected to impose incremental costs on Indigenous peoples and stakeholders other than the Government of Canada. The overall costs to the Government of Canada related to this Order are anticipated to be between $360,000 and $440,000 over 10 years, and stem from the development or update of recovery strategies, action plans or management plans, permit-related administrative costs, compliance promotion and enforcement activities, as shown in Table 3 below. For all permits, the incremental cost to applicants (i.e. industry, First Nations, other levels of government, researchers and scientists) is estimated to be $14,000, incurred in the first year, also shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Summary of monetized costs incurred by stakeholders and the Government of Canada
Affected stakeholder or First Nation(s) Description of cost Monetized cost in present value table b4 note *
Chippewas of the Thames, Munsee-Delaware and Oneida First Nations Permit applications by First Nations $9,900
Other governmental departments (OGDs) — Department of National Defense, Parks Canada Permit applications $4,500
Total costs to First Nations and Other Government Departments (rounded) $14,000
Government of Canada Permit applications review $18,800
Recovery strategies and action plans development and updates $240,000 to $320,000
Compliance promotion $2,000 to $3,000
Enforcement costs $95,000
Total costs to Government of Canada (rounded) $360,000 to $440,000

Table b4 note(s)

Table b4 note *

Estimates have been rounded.

Return to table b4 note * referrer

Small business lens

Analysis has determined that two out of the three permit applicants on the three First Nation reserves where the Toothed Globe could be found may be small businesses. It is expected that these businesses would incur $3,300 in administrative burden each, for a total of $6,600. Since the Order only addresses the status of the species and not the conservation measures, a flexible option was not possible.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule applies since there is an incremental increase in administrative burden on business, and the proposal is considered burden under the rule. Based on historic data, it is expected that two out of the three permit applicants on First Nation reserves where the Toothed Globe could be found may be small businesses. It is assumed that each of these businesses would apply for one permit and could each incur $2,554 in administrative burden, for a total of $5,108. These are the same costs as identified in the small business lens, but displayed in 2012 constant dollars. No regulatory titles are repealed or introduced.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The federal government plays a leadership role as federal regulator in the designation of species at risk in Canada. However, the protection of wildlife species is a responsibility shared between the federal, provincial and territorial levels of government. The provincial and territorial governments have indicated their commitment to protecting and recovering species at risk through their endorsement of the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk in 1996.

Some of the species under consideration are currently designated as vulnerable under certain provincial legislation, as indicated in Table 6 below, and the proposed Order would complement this existing protection.

Table 4: Existing provincial designations of species included in the proposed Order Amending Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (Chestnut-collared Longspur and Nine Other Species)
Common species name Range Proposed Amendment to Schedule 1 of SARA Provincial legislation and designation
Shagreen Ontario (ON) Endangered ON – Endangered Species Act, 2007 – Designated "Endangered"
Toothed Globe Ontario (ON) Endangered ON – Endangered Species Act, 2007 – Designated "Endangered"
Reversed Haploa Moth Ontario (ON) Endangered ON – Endangered Species Act, 2007 – Designated "Threatened"
Gillman’s Goldenrod Ontario (ON) Endangered ON – Endangered Species Act, 2007 – Designated "Endangered"
Slender Yoke-moss British Columbia (BC) Endangered None
Carolina Mantleslug Ontario (ON) Threatened ON – Endangered Species Act, 2007 – Designated "Threatened"
Plains Hog-nosed Snake
  • Alberta (AB)
  • Saskatchewan (SK)
  • Manitoba (MB)
 Special concern

MB – Endangered Species and Ecosystems Act – Designated "Threatened"

Some protections under:

  • AB – Wildlife Act
  • AB – Provincial Parks Act
  • SK – Parks Act
  • SK – The Wildlife Act, 1998
  • MB – Wildlife Act
  • MB – Provincial Park Act
Manitoba Oakworm Moth Manitoba (MB) Special Concern None
Puvirnituq Mountain Draba Quebec (QC) Special concern None currently; recommended to be listed as "Threatened" (see QC – Act respecting threatened or vulnerable species; Regulation: List of plant and wildlife species which are likely to be designated as threatened or vulnerable)
Chestnut-collared Longspur Alberta (AB) Saskatchewan (SK) Manitoba (MB) From Threatened to Endangered

MB – Endangered Species and Ecosystems Act – Designated "Endangered"

Some protections under:

  • AB – Wildlife Act
  • SK – The Wildlife Act, 1998

The Department also works with its federal partners (i.e. Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Parks Canada) to determine the impact of the listing of species.

Strategic environmental assessment

A strategic environmental assessment concluded that the proposed Order would result in important positive environmental effects for the species to be listed, and their respective ecosystems. Specifically, it demonstrated that the protection of these wildlife species at risk contributes to national biodiversity and protects ecosystem productivity, health and resiliency.

The proposed Order would support the 2022-2026 Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS) Goal 15 to “Protect and recover species, conserve Canadian biodiversity” and would support the Government of Canada’s priority, as stated in the FSDS, of “enhancing the implementation of the Species at Risk Act.” Beyond providing specific protections to individuals of a species, the listing of species via the proposed Order is the first step in taking further action to protect habitat as section 58 of SARA prohibits the destruction of a species’ critical habitat (via a critical habitat protection order) if the species is listed as threatened, endangered or extirpated. Therefore, the listing of species could lead to the protection of habitat, a clear intent of FSDS Goal 15. This proposal would, moreover, contribute to the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 15 “Life on land” which aims to halt biodiversity loss, protect biodiversity and natural habitat by preventing the extinction of threatened species.

By supporting the conservation of biodiversity and maintenance of healthy ecosystems, the proposed Order would indirectly contribute to FSDS Goal 13, to “Take action on climate change and its impacts” (and the associated SDG 13, “Climate Action”). Many ecosystems play a key role in mitigating climate change impacts. Coastal ecosystems contribute to absorbing excess flood water or buffering against coastal erosion or extreme weather events. In addition, forests, peatlands and other habitats are major stores of carbon. Protecting and supporting conservation of ecosystems may also help limit atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

The proposed Order would also support the recently adopted Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (December 2022) and the overarching global goal of ensuring “biodiversity is sustainably used and managed and nature’s contributions to people, including ecosystem functions and services, are valued, maintained and enhanced, with those currently in decline being restored.”

Gender-based analysis plus

A gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) was performed for this proposal, looking at whether characteristics such as sex, gender, age, race, sexual orientation, income, education, employment status, language, visible minority status, disability or religion could influence how a person is affected by the proposed Order. The analysis found that, in general, Canadians benefit positively from the protection of species at risk and from maintaining biodiversity.

The region of residence was identified as the main factor determining how a person would be affected by the proposal. The listing of new species to Schedule 1 of SARA or their reclassification as endangered or threatened (from species of special concern) triggers the application of the general prohibitions to kill, capture or harm the protected species. Whenever these general prohibitions are implemented, they may disproportionately impact Indigenous peoples because they only apply on federal lands, of which Indigenous reserves are part. Certain species included in the listing order that occur on Indigenous lands also have important cultural, ceremonial and socio-economic significance for Indigenous peoples. Therefore, individuals residing on Indigenous reserves are the main group that could be negatively affected by the listing or reclassification of species under Schedule 1 of SARA.

The Department would use compliance promotion activities to make listing information and related materials available to individuals living in rural or remote regions. The Department would also strive to ensure that individuals with limited scientific knowledge or training are aware of the impacts of the proposed Order by providing materials that are easily understandable and written in plain language.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

The proposed Order would come into force on the date on which it is registered.

The Department is responsible for compliance promotion, and enforcement of the Order. The Department conducts compliance promotion activities to increase awareness of the protection of listed species. The Department continues to work with all stakeholders and provincial partners to conserve and protect listed species and regularly engages with local habitat stewardship groups to bolster awareness and to help protect the species.

SARA provides for penalties for contraventions to the Act, including fines or imprisonment and seizure and forfeiture of things seized or of the proceeds of their disposition. Agreements on alternative measures may also be used to deal with an alleged offender under certain conditions. SARA also provides for inspections and search and seizure operations by enforcement officers designated under SARA. Under the penalty provisions of SARA, a corporation found guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $300,000, a non-profit corporation is liable to a fine of not more than $50,000 and any other person is liable to a fine of not more than $50,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than one year, or to both. A corporation found guilty of an indictable offence is liable to a fine of not more than $1,000,000, a non-profit corporation to a fine of not more than $250,000, and any other person to a fine of not more than $250,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years, or to both.

Under Section 73 of SARA, the competent minister may enter into an agreement or issue a permit authorizing a person to engage in an activity affecting a listed wildlife species, any part of its critical habitat, or the residences of its individuals. Section 74 allows for the competent minister to issue permits under another Act of Parliament (e.g. Canada National Parks Act) that would have the same effect as those issued under Section 73. SARA sets out the conditions and factors that the Minister must consider before issuing a permit.

Section 3 of the Permits Authorizing an Activity Affecting Listed Wildlife Species Regulations imposes a 90-day service standard on the Government of Canada to issue or refuse permits under Section 73 of SARA. The 90-day timeline may be suspended in certain situations and may not apply in certain circumstances, such as a permit issued under another Act of Parliament. The service standards timelines contribute to consistency, predictability and transparency in the permitting process by providing applicants with clear and measurable service standards. The Department measures its service performance annually and performance information is posted on the Department’s website no later than June 1 for the preceding fiscal year.

Contact

Paula Brand Director
Species at Risk Act Policy Division
Wildlife Management Directorate
Canadian Wildlife Service
Environment and Climate Change Canada
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0H3
Email: LEPreglementations-SARAregulations@ec.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council proposes to make the annexed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act (Chestnut-collared Longspur and Nine Other Wildlife Species) under subsection 27(1) of the Species at Risk Act footnote a.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Order within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. They are strongly encouraged to use the online commenting feature that is available on the Canada Gazette website but if they use email, mail or any other means, the representations should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to Paula Brand, Director, Species at Risk Act Policy, Canadian Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment, 351 St. Joseph Boulevard, 15th floor, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3 (tel: 1‑800‑668‑6767; email: LEPreglementations-SARAregulations@ec.gc.ca).

Ottawa, November 24, 2023

Wendy Nixon
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act (Chestnut-collared Longspur and Nine Other Wildlife Species)

Amendments

1 Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Actfootnote a is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Birds”:

Longspur, Chestnut-collared (Calcarius ornatus)
Plectrophane à ventre noir

2 Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Molluscs”:

3 Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Arthropods”:

Moth, Reversed Haploa (Haploa reversa)
Haploa inversé

4 Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Plants”:

Goldenrod, Gillman’s (Solidago gillmanii)
Verge d’or de Gillman

5 Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Mosses”:

Yoke-moss, Slender (Zygodon gracilis)
Houppe gracile

6 Part 3 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by striking out the following under the heading “Birds”:

Longspur, Chestnut-collared (Calcarius ornatus)
Bruant à ventre noir

7 Part 3 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Molluscs”:

Mantleslug, Carolina (Philomycus carolinianus)
Limace à manteau de la Caroline

8 Part 4 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Reptiles”:

Snake, Plains Hog-nosed (Heterodon nasicus)
Couleuvre à groin des plaines

9 Part 4 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Arthropods”:

Moth, Manitoba Oakworm (Anisota manitobensis)
Anisote du Manitoba

10 Part 4 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Plants”:

Draba, Puvirnituq Mountain (Draba puvirnituqii)
Drave des monts de Puvirnituq

Coming into Force

11 This Order comes into force on the day on which it is registered.

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

  • contain personal information
  • contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
  • express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
  • contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
  • contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
  • constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
  • encourage or incite any criminal activity
  • contain external links
  • contain a language other than English or French
  • otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that public email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.