Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 156, Number 22: Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act

May 28, 2022

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

Biodiversity is rapidly declining worldwide as species become extinct. According to a recent report from an international panel of experts, an average of around 25% of species in assessed animal and plant groups are threatened. This suggests that around one million species already face extinction, many within decades. Unless measures are undertaken to reduce the intensity of drivers of biodiversity loss, further acceleration in the global rate of species is anticipated which is, according to the report, already at least tens to hundreds of times higher than it has averaged over the past ten million years.^{footnote 1} In the same report, the experts have also identified and ranked the five direct drivers of biodiversity loss and degradation with the largest relative global impacts so far. These drivers are, in descending order: changes in land and sea use; direct exploitation of organisms; climate change; pollution; and invasive alien species.

Canada, the second-largest country in the world and home to a large assortment of species, is not exempt of this global biodiversity crisis. According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), between 1970 and 2014, mammals declined by an average of 43%, grassland birds dropped by 69% and the fish populations declined by 20% straight across Canada.^{footnote 2} With this rapid and steep decline in biodiversity, Canada is experiencing many adverse effects that are typically associated with habitat and species loss.

Biodiversity is positively related to ecosystem productivity, health and resiliency^{footnote 3} (i.e. the ability of an ecosystem to respond to changes or disturbances). Given the interdependency of species, a loss of biodiversity can lead to decreases in ecosystem function and services (e.g. natural processes such as pest control, pollination, coastal wave attenuation, temperature regulation and carbon fixing). These services are important to the health of Canadians, and also have important ties to the Canadian economy. Small changes within an ecosystem can lead to a loss of individuals and species resulting in adverse, irreversible and broad-ranging effects on Canadians.

Background

Canada is a country with a rich natural environment that supports a large diversity of plant and animal species. This natural heritage is an integral part of its national identity and history. Wildlife is valued by Canadians for aesthetic, cultural, spiritual, recreational, educational, historical, subsistence, medical, ecological and scientific reasons. Canadian wildlife species and ecosystems are also part of the world’s heritage.^{footnote 4} The Department of the Environment (the Department) is mandated, among other things, 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 scale^{footnote 5} or extirpated^{footnote 6} from Canada. The Parks Canada Agency (PCA), as the competent authority, also contributes to the protection and conservation of these species within its network of protected heritage places,^{footnote 7} including national parks and national marine conservation areas.

The primary federal legislative mechanism for delivering on this responsibility is the Species at Risk Act (SARA or the Act). 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. In 2003, when SARA was first enacted, the official list of wildlife species at risk (Schedule 1) included 233 species. Since then, the list has been amended on a number of occasions to add, remove or reclassify species. As of September 2021, there are 640 species listed under Schedule 1.

With the proclamation of SARA in 2003, the Act established the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), an independent scientific advisory body, responsible for providing the Minister of the Environment (the Minister) with assessments of the status of wildlife species that are at risk of disappearing from Canada. The assessments are carried out in accordance with section 15 of SARA, which, among other provisions, requires COSEWIC to determine the status of species it considers to be at risk and to identify existing and potential threats to the species. COSEWIC members meet twice every year to review information collected on wildlife species and assign each wildlife species to one of seven categories: extinct, extirpated, endangered, threatened, special concern, data deficient, or not at risk.^{footnote 8}

After COSEWIC has provided its assessments of species at risk to the Minister of the Environment, the Minister has 90 days to post a response statement on the Species at Risk Public Registry (SAR Public Registry) indicating how the Minister intends to respond to the assessment and related anticipated timelines. The response statements outline the extent of the consultations on proposed changes to Schedule 1 of SARA.

Subsequent to the consultations and required analysis carried out by departmental officials, an order in council published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, formally acknowledges receipt of the COSEWIC assessments. This then triggers a regulatory process through a proposed order whereby the GIC may, within nine months of receipt of the assessment, on the recommendation of the Minister,

(1) add a wildlife species to Schedule 1 of SARA according to COSEWIC’s status assessment;
(2) not add the wildlife species to Schedule 1; or
(3) refer the assessment back to COSEWIC for further information or consideration.

If the GIC does not make a decision within nine months of the formal receipt of COSEWIC’s assessment, subsection 27(3) of SARA states that the Minister shall amend Schedule 1 according to those assessments.

In addition to recommending new additions to Schedule 1, COSEWIC may review the status of a previously assessed wildlife species and recommend a new classification for these species. Reclassification is important to ensure the designation is consistent with the latest available scientific information, allowing for better decision-making regarding the species in terms of its conservation prioritization. Species are up-listed when their status has deteriorated since their last assessment (e.g. through population decline). When the status improves, they can be down listed or delisted to ensure that the species are protected according to the purposes of SARA while minimizing impacts on stakeholders and resources.

Prohibitions under SARA

Upon listing, wildlife species benefit from various levels of protection, depending on their status, as per the general prohibitions under sections 32 and 33 of SARA. Tables 1.1 and 1.2 below summarize the various protections afforded.

Table 1.1: Summary of protections offered to wildlife species and their residences immediately upon their addition to Schedule 1 of SARA — Application of general prohibitions by type of species and their location
Species status	Species protected by the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994	Aquatic species	All other listed species
Special concern	SARA’s general prohibitions are not applicable (for species of special concern).	SARA’s general prohibitions are not applicable (for species of special concern).	SARA’s general prohibitions are not applicable (for species of special concern).
Threatened, endangered, and extirpated	General prohibitions apply everywhere in Canada for migratory birds.	General prohibitions apply everywhere in Canada for aquatic species.	In the provinces, general prohibitions apply only on federal lands^{table a1 note a} . In the territories, general prohibitions apply only on federal lands under the authority of the Minister of the Environment or the Parks Canada Agency.
Table a1 note(s) Table a1 note a Federal land means (a) land that belongs to Her Majesty in right of Canada, or that Her Majesty in right of Canada has the power to dispose of, and all waters on and airspace above that land; (b) the internal waters of Canada and the territorial sea of Canada; and (c) reserves and any other lands that are set apart for the use and benefit of a band under the Indian Act, and all waters on and airspace above those reserves and lands. Return to table a1 note a referrer

Table 1.2: Summary of protections offered to wildlife species and their residences immediately upon their addition to Schedule 1 of SARA — General prohibitions
Species status	Protection of individuals (SARA, section 32)	Residence protection (SARA, section 33)
Special concern	SARA’s general prohibitions do not apply.	SARA’s residence protection does not apply.
Threatened, endangered, and extirpated	Protection for individuals of the species against being killed, harmed, harassed, captured or taken. Prohibition against the possession, collection, buying and selling or trading of an individual of the species or any part or derivative of this individual.	It is an offence to damage or destroy the residence of one or more individuals of a species. The residence of extirpated species is only protected if a recovery strategy recommends reintroduction into the wild in Canada.

On non-federal lands, listed species that are not an aquatic species or a migratory bird protected by the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 (MBCA) can only be protected under SARA by an order in council.^{footnote 9} The Minister of the Environment 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.

Recovery planning

Listing a species under an endangered, threatened or extirpated status triggers mandatory recovery planning by the competent minister,^{footnote 10} in order to address threats to the survival or recovery of the listed species. For species of special concern, a management plan must be developed within three years of listing.

SARA states that a proposed recovery strategy must be posted in the SAR Public Registry:

within one year of listing, for endangered species; and
within two years of listing, for threatened and extirpated species.

In preparing the recovery strategy, the competent minister must determine whether the recovery of the listed wildlife species is technically and biologically feasible. If it is not feasible, the recovery strategy must include a description of the species’ needs and, to the extent possible, the identification of its critical habitat, and the reasons why its recovery is not feasible.

For wildlife species for which there has been a determination that recovery is feasible, recovery strategies include:

the description of the species and its needs;
the identification of the threats to the survival of the species and threats to its habitat, and a description of the broad strategy to be taken to address those threats;
the identification of the species’ critical habitat (i.e. the habitat necessary for a listed wildlife species’ recovery or survival);
a schedule of studies to identify critical habitat where available information is inadequate;
examples of activities that are likely to result in the destruction of critical habitat;
a statement of the population and distribution objectives for the species (i.e. the number of individuals, populations and/or geographic distribution of the species required to successfully recover the species);
a general description of the research and management activities needed to meet those objectives; and
a statement of the time frame for the development of one or more action plans.

Recovery strategies must be prepared in cooperation with:

appropriate provincial or territorial governments;
other federal ministers with authority over federal lands where the species is found;
wildlife management boards authorized by a land claims agreement;
directly affected Indigenous organizations; and
any other person or organization that the competent minister considers appropriate; and
with landowners (including provinces and territories) or other persons that the competent minister considers to be directly affected by the strategy.

Once a final recovery strategy has been posted on the Public Registry, the competent minister must then prepare one or more action plans based on the recovery strategy. Action plans are also prepared in consultation with the above-mentioned organizations and persons. SARA does not mandate timelines for their preparation or implementation; rather, these are set out in the recovery strategy. Action plans must include:

the identification of critical habitat, to the extent possible, if not already identified, consistent with the recovery strategy;
examples of activities likely to destroy critical habitat;
a statement of the measures that are proposed to protect the species’ critical habitat, including entering into conservation agreements under section 11 of SARA;
the identification of any portions of critical habitat that have not been protected;
methods to be used to monitor the recovery of the species and its long-term viability;
an evaluation of the socio-economic costs of the action plan and the benefits from its implementation; and
any other matters that are prescribed by the regulations (if any) in accordance with subsection 49(2) of the Act.

Protection of critical habitat

Requirements under SARA for the protection of critical habitat depend on whether the species are aquatic, migratory birds protected under the MBCA, or other species, as well as whether these species are found on federal lands, in the exclusive economic zone, on the continental shelf of Canada or elsewhere in Canada. For migratory birds that are protected under the MBCA, their nests and nest shelters are protected against destruction throughout Canada.

When critical habitat or portions of critical habitat have been identified on federal lands, in the exclusive economic zone of Canada or on the continental shelf of Canada, SARA requires that it be legally protected within 180 days of its identification in a recovery strategy or an action plan. Protection can be achieved through provisions under SARA or any other Act of Parliament, including conservation agreements under section 11 of the Act.

If critical habitat is located in a migratory bird sanctuary under the MBCA, in a national park included in Schedule 1 of the Canada National Parks Act, in the Rouge National Urban Park established by the Rouge National Urban Park Act, in a marine protected area under the Oceans Act, or in a national wildlife area under the Canada Wildlife Act, the competent minister must publish a description of that critical habitat in the Canada Gazette within 90 days of the date that the critical habitat was identified in a final recovery strategy or action plan. The critical habitat protection under subsection 58(1) of SARA (i.e. prohibiting the destruction of critical habitat) comes into effect automatically 90 days after a description of the critical habitat is published in the Canada Gazette, and the critical habitat located in the federally protected area is legally protected under SARA.

If critical habitat is identified on federal land but not found in the protected areas listed above, the competent minister must, within 180 days following the identification of this habitat in a final posted recovery strategy or action plan, either:

(1) make a ministerial order under subsection 58(5) of SARA to apply subsection 58(1) of SARA, prohibiting the destruction of this critical habitat; or
(2) publish a statement on the SAR Public Registry explaining how the critical habitat (or portions of it) is protected under another Act of Parliament, including conservation agreements under section 11 of the SARA.

If the critical habitat of a migratory bird species protected by the MBCA is located outside federal lands, the exclusive economic zone, the continental shelf of Canada or a migratory bird sanctuary under the MBCA, the critical habitat would be protected only once an order in council has been made to that effect, following recommendation from the competent minister. Where the critical habitat of a migratory bird protected by the MBCA is identified in a recovery document and an order or statement explaining how the critical habitat is protected is published, the SARA prohibition against the destruction of critical habitat is broader than the protections offered under the MBCA to individuals, their eggs, nests and nest shelters.

For portions of critical habitat for species other than aquatic species or species protected under the MBCA on non-federal lands, SARA considers the protection of the critical habitat by other governments (e.g. provinces, territories). In the event that critical habitat is not protected in these areas, the GIC may, by order, apply the SARA prohibition against destruction of that critical habitat. In cases where the Minister of the Environment is of the opinion that critical habitat on non-federal lands is not effectively protected by the laws of a province or territory, by another measure under SARA (including agreements under section 11) or through any other federal legislation, the Minister must recommend an order to the GIC to apply the SARA prohibition against destruction of critical habitat on non-federal lands. Before making the recommendation, the Minister must consult with the appropriate provincial or territorial minister. In all cases, the GIC makes the final decision whether to proceed with the order to protect the critical habitat in question.^{footnote 11}

Permits issued under SARA

A person intending to engage in an activity affecting a listed species, any part of its critical habitat or the residences of its individuals that is prohibited under SARA may apply to the competent minister for a permit under section 73 of the Act. A permit may be issued if the Minister is of the opinion that:

the activity is scientific research relating to the conservation of the species and conducted by qualified persons;
the activity benefits the species or is required to enhance its chance of survival in the wild; or
affecting the species is incidental to the carrying out of the activity.^{footnote 12,} ^{footnote 13}

In addition, the permit may only be issued if the competent minister is of the opinion that the following three conditions are met:

all reasonable alternatives to the activity that would reduce the impact on the species have been considered, and the best solution has been adopted;
all feasible measures will be taken to minimize the impact of the activity on the species or its critical habitat or the residences of its individuals; and
the activity will not jeopardize the survival or recovery of the species.

Section 74 of SARA allows for a competent minister to issue permits under another Act of Parliament (e.g. the Canada National Parks Act) to engage in an activity that affects a listed wildlife species, any part of its critical habitat or the residences of its individuals, and have the same effect as those issued under subsection 73(1) of SARA, if certain conditions are met. This is meant to reduce the need for multiple authorizations.

For migratory birds protected by the MBCA and SARA, a SARA-compliant MBCA permit may be issued to authorize an activity affecting a listed migratory bird, instead of two separate permits being issued. In order for a single permit to be issued, all conditions set out in paragraphs 73(2) to 73(6.1) of SARA must be met. The permitting option for the particular activity must also be available under the MBCA.

Permits under SARA can be issued if an activity affects the residence of a migratory bird if that residence is not a nest or a nest shelter protected under the MBCA. Permits can also be issued under SARA for activities affecting the protected critical habitat of a listed migratory bird, because critical habitat is not protected under the MBCA.

Management of species of special concern

The addition of a species of special concern to Schedule 1 of SARA serves as an early indication that the species requires attention. Triggering the development of a management plan at this stage enables the species to be managed proactively, maximizes the probability of success, and is expected to avoid higher-cost measures in the future.

The management plan includes conservation measures deemed appropriate to preserve the wildlife species and avoid decline of its population. It is developed in cooperation with the relevant provincial and territorial governments, other federal government departments, wildlife management boards, Indigenous partners and organizations, and any appropriate stakeholders, and must be posted within three years of the species being listed.

New designatable units

Through the definition of wildlife species as a “species, subspecies, varieties or geographically or genetically distinct population of animal, plant or other organism…,” SARA recognizes that conservation of biological diversity requires protection for taxonomic entities below the species level (i.e. designatable units), and gives COSEWIC a mandate to assess those entities when warranted. These designatable units and their proposed classification (e.g. endangered, threatened, species of special concern) are presented in COSEWIC assessments in the same way as with other wildlife species. In some cases, based on scientific evidence, wildlife species that were previously assessed may be reassessed and recognized to include fewer, additional or different designatable units. COSEWIC will publish assessments and classifications for any designatable units that may or may not correspond to the previously recognized wildlife species.

Should COSEWIC assess a newly defined designatable unit at the same classification level as the originally listed wildlife species, Schedule 1 could be amended to reflect this more current listing of the species pending GIC decision, consistent with the best available scientific information.

Objective

The objective of the proposed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act (the proposed Order) is to help maintain Canada’s biodiversity and support the health of Canadian ecosystems by preventing wildlife species from becoming extirpated from Canada or extinct and to contribute to their recovery, as well as to respond to COSEWIC’s recommendations.

Description

COSEWIC has assessed the status of 13 wildlife species in Canada. Pursuant to Section 27 of the SARA, this Order amends the List of Species at Risk (Schedule 1) under the Species at Risk Act by adding nine species, by reclassifying three, and by changing the scientific name of one.

These 13 species are found across Canada, with the majority of species found in British Columbia and Ontario. These species were grouped together because the actions being considered under the Order are anticipated to have low, if any, incremental impacts on stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples.

Of the 13 species included in the proposed Order:

Nine are proposed to be newly listed as endangered or special concern;
One is proposed to be reclassified from endangered to threatened;
One is proposed to be reclassified from endangered to special concern;
One is proposed to be reclassified from threatened to special concern; and
One would have its name changed.

These changes can be found in Table 2.1 to Table 2.3. A detailed description of each species, their ranges and threats can be found in Annex 1 of this document. Additional information on these species can also be found in the COSEWIC status reports.^{footnote 14}

Table 2.1: Species proposed for addition to Schedule 1 of SARA
Taxonomy	Species	Scientific name	Current status	Proposed status	Range
Mosses	Dalton’s Moss	Daltonia splachnoides	None	Endangered	British Columbia
Mosses	Carey’s Small Limestone Moss	Seligeria careyana	None	Endangered	British Columbia
Mosses	Drooping–leaved Beard–moss	Oxystegus recurvifolius	None	Endangered	British Columbia
Vascular Plants	Hairy Paintbrush	Castilleja tenuis	None	Endangered	British Columbia
Vascular Plants	Dwarf Hesperochiron	Hesperochiron pumilus	None	Endangered	British Columbia
Vascular Plants	Columbia Quillwort	Isoetes minima	None	Endangered	British Columbia
Vascular Plants	Hairy Valerian	Valeriana edulis ssp. ciliata	None	Endangered	Ontario
Anthropods	American Bumble Bee	Bombus pensylvanicus	None	Special Concern	Ontario, Quebec
Anthropods	Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp	Dielis pilipes	None	Special Concern	Ontario

Table 2.2: Species proposed for reclassifications in Schedule 1 of SARA
Taxonomy	Species	Scientific name	Current status	Proposed status	Range
Mammals	Peary Caribou	Rangifer tarandus pearyi	Endangered	Threatened	Northwest Territories and Nunavut
Reptiles	Greater Short-horned Lizard	Phrynosoma hernandesi	Endangered	Special Concern	Alberta and Saskatchewan
Vascular Plants	Goldenseal	Hydrastis canadensis	Threatened	Special concern	Ontario

Table 2.3: Species proposed for name change
Taxonomy	Species	Scientific name	Current status	Proposed status	Range
Anthropods	Karner Blue	Plebejus samuelis^{table a5 note 15}	Extirpated	N/A	Ontario
Table a5 note(s) Table a5 note 15 Scientific name change, currently listed on SARA Schedule 1 as Lycaeides melissa samuelis. Return to table a5 note 15 referrer

Regulatory development

Consultation

Under SARA, the independent scientific assessment of the status of wildlife species conducted by COSEWIC, and the decision made by the GIC to grant legal protection by listing a wildlife species under Schedule 1 of the Act, are two distinct processes. This separation guarantees that the panel of scientists may work independently when assessing the status of wildlife species and that Canadians have the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process of determining whether or not wildlife species will be listed under SARA to receive legal protections.

The Government of Canada recognizes that the conservation of wildlife is a joint responsibility and that the best way to secure the survival of species at risk and their habitats is through the active participation of all those concerned. SARA’s preamble stipulates that all Canadians have a role to play in preventing the disappearance of wildlife species from Canada’s lands. One of the ways that Canadians can get involved is by sharing comments concerning the addition, reclassification, or removal of species to Schedule 1 of SARA. All comments received are considered by the Minister when making listing recommendations to the GIC, and comments received from those who will be most affected by the proposed changes are given particular consideration (e.g. follow-up consultations with key Indigenous organizations). Consultations are considered in relation to the potential consequences of whether or not a species is included under Schedule 1.

The Department begins initial public consultations with the posting of the Minister’s response statements in the SAR Public Registry within 90 days of receiving a copy of an assessment of the status of a wildlife species from COSEWIC. Indigenous Peoples, stakeholders, organizations, and the general public are also consulted by means of a publicly posted document titled Consultation on Amending the List of Species under the Species at Risk Act: Terrestrial Species. For Peary Caribou, this was published in January 2017 on the Public Registry. For the remaining 11 species, excluding the Karner Blue, the document was published in January 2020 for the species included in this proposed Order.

The consultation documents provide information on the species, including the reason for their designation, a biological description and location information. They also provide an overview of the SARA listing process. These documents were distributed directly to over 3 300 individuals and organizations, including Indigenous Peoples and organizations, provincial and territorial governments, various industrial sectors, resource users, landowners and environmental non-governmental organizations with an interest in a particular species. Subscription to the SAR public Registry’s E-mail newsletter is voluntary and subscribers receive periodical updates on new items added to the SAR public Registry.

Initial consultation results summary

Initial consultations with interested stakeholders and the general public started in January 2017 for the Peary Caribou. For the remaining 11 species, pre-regulatory consultations on amendments to the Schedule 1 of the SARA occurred from January 2020 to April 2021, an extension of 11 months due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Department’s operations in a variety of ways across programs and regions. In-person activities have been curtailed or postponed, while others have occurred virtually. Some activities that can only be done ’on the ground’, including fieldwork, monitoring, enforcement, and work requiring the physical manipulation of instruments, have been completely halted in Indigenous communities. Despite these challenges, the Department has encouraged the use of virtual tools and technologies to facilitate the general public and stakeholders’ ability to comment on the proposed listing of species within this Order.

The Department received a total of 53 comments regarding the species included in the proposed Order. Comments were received from provinces, wildlife management boards and Indigenous organizations, non-governmental environmental organizations, individual, and industry associations. Most of the comments supported, or did not oppose, modifications to Schedule 1 of SARA. However, three comments expressed opposition.

Five comments were received during the 2017 extended consultation period for the Peary Caribou, originating from one wildlife management board and four Indigenous organizations. On March 27, 2018, the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board approved the proposed down-listing of Peary Caribou from endangered to threatened, and three Indigenous organizations supported the proposed status reclassification for the species. One Indigenous organization did not initially support the proposed listing and requested additional information given the rare occurrence of the species in the area. Once the Department shared additional information and rationale for the proposed listing, the organization formally indicated its support for the down-listing of the species while encouraging the continued study of Peary Caribou to ensure the sustained growth of the population.

The other 48 comments were received between January 2020 and April 2021. 45 comments did not oppose the proposed modifications to Schedule 1 of SARA whereas three comments expressed opposition. To note that the Department engaged a wide variety of stakeholders and Indigenous organizations, but only accounted for comments in which opinions were explicitly expressed for species included in the proposed listing. As such, when counting the total number of comments received for this proposal, the Department counts one comment per species. Therefore, several comments may have been attributed to the same respondent if they submitted comments on more than one species.

The Department of the Environment is committed to a collaborative process throughout the assessment, listing and recovery planning processes. The results of the public consultations are of great significance to the process of listing species at risk. The Department carefully reviews the comments it receives to gain a better understanding of the benefits and costs of amending the List of Wildlife Species at Risk.

Detailed feedback on the proposed amendments

(a) Opposition to the proposed down-listing of the Greater Short-horned Lizard

With respect to the Greater Short-horned Lizard, the Alberta Wilderness Association (AWA), an environmental non-governmental organization, believes the proposed down-listing is not appropriate for the Alberta subpopulations of this species due to lack of information and ongoing threats.

The AWA indicated that more information is required before down-listing the Alberta subpopulations of the Greater Short-horned Lizard, since trends in population size and habitat quality of this species are currently unknown. The AWA suggests the precautionary principle should be followed until further assessment has taken place. Due to population decline of the species in several locations, as well as the inferred and projected decline in population and habitat quality, the AWA opposes the proposed down-listing. Furthermore, the Alberta subpopulations are subject to ongoing threats from land-use change and habitat conversion. The subpopulations reside primarily on private or provincially managed Crown lands, which have much more variable conditions and are less secure than the Grasslands National Park where the species is also known to occur. Down-listing the species could also give the impression that the species’ population size and habitat quality have improved, despite the information gaps and ongoing threats to habitat quality in Alberta. This could diminish the regional sense of urgency to recover the species.

Response from the Department

As mentioned in the COSEWIC Status Report, new localities have been documented across its entire Canadian range, including occupied areas in Alberta that were unknown at the time of the previous assessment. Population fragmentation serves as an indicator for one of the quantitative criteria (Criterion B, Small Distribution Range and Decline or Fluctuation) used by COSEWIC when assessing the conservation status of wildlife species. This new evidence suggests that there are several subpopulations that continue to persist and are presumed to have good viability, which does not support severe fragmentation. This is one of the main factors allowing the Greater Short-horned Lizard to meet the COSEWIC criteria for special concern rather than endangered. In light of this, COSEWIC no longer considers the distribution of the species to be severely fragmented. This is one of the main factors allowing the Greater Short-horned Lizard to meet the COSEWIC criteria for special concern rather than endangered.

The Department recognizes that a wildlife species’ distribution and its associated threats are not always even across the landscape. Although COSEWIC considers this variability in the distribution of a wildlife species and its threats, it assesses the status of the species in its entire Canadian range.

The Recovery Strategy for the Greater Short-horned Lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) in Canada (published in 2015) does consider that the primary threats to the species can be avoided or mitigated. Although the recovery strategy is not required for a species listed as being of special concern, if the Schedule 1 status of this species is down listed, the Recovery Strategy would still be available on the public registry to support the conservation of the species. This would allow any partners that have been contributing to the conservation of the species through activities described in the recovery strategy to continue to do so.

The status of special concern does trigger the development of a management plan for the species and its habitat. The plan must include measures for the conservation of the species. Moreover, the development of a management plan must be prepared in cooperation with any person or organization that the Minister considers appropriate. In addition, it must be prepared in consultation with any landowner, lessees and other persons whom the minister considers directly affected or interested in the management plan.

The concerns expressed by the AWA with the down-listing suggests that it would lead to a corresponding lowering of public concern, and that as a result, the species’ situation would deteriorate. Should this prove the case, any person who considers there is an imminent threat to the survival of a wildlife species in Canada may apply to COSEWIC for an assessment of the threat (subsection 28(1)) and for an emergency amendment of the list (subsection 29(1)).

(b) Opposition to the proposed listing of the American Bumble Bee

Quebec’s Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs (MFFP) opposes the listing of the American Bumble Bee and expects the Department of the Environment to provide stronger rationale for its special concern status designation. In addition, the MFFP expects to receive clear description and explanations of protection or recovery measures for the critical habitat of the species.

More broadly, the MFFP referenced section 4.1 of the “Entente de collaboration pour la protection et le rétablissement des espèces en péril au Québec,” which stipulates that the province of Quebec shall provide leadership for activities related to the protection and recovery of species at risk of common interest and their habitats on its territory. As such, the MFFP argued that Quebec has all the legal and regulatory tools to ensure the protection of all species on its territory, including the Loi sur les espèces menacées ou vulnérables (RLRQ, chapitre E-12.01) and the Loi sur la conservation et la mise en valeur de la faune (RLRQ, chapitre C-61.1). Furthermore, the MFFP indicated that any addition of species to the SARA could generate certain socio-economic impacts in Quebec that are not taken into account.

Response from the Department

The Department of the Environment acknowledged receipt of the comments submitted by the MFFP and confirmed that collaboration between biologists of both respective organizations is essential for the implementation of effective conservation measures. Under the Canada-Quebec agreement for the protection of species at risk in Quebec, and pursuant to the collaborative channels already in place between the Department of the Environment and MFFP biologists, the Department is committed to continuing this cooperation, including for new species that may be listed under Schedule 1 of SARA in the future.

To note the American Bumble Bee’s proposed listing as Special Concern will not trigger SARA’s general prohibitions. As such, critical habitat will not be identified nor will the development of a recovery strategy be performed. In addition, SARA does not apply in lands in a province that are not federal lands unless an order is made to provide that they apply.

(c) Opposition to the proposed listing of the Goldenseal

A member of the general public was opposed to the down-listing of the Goldenseal stating it would be detrimental to the species. The individual noted that the species has been known to have many medicinal properties that have been known for thousands of years. Spiritually, the species has been revered for thousands of years by Indigenous Peoples. The individual stated that the Goldenseal is in serious danger of extinction in the wild due to untimely overharvesting and habitat destruction. The individual further explained there are minimal areas where the species can still be found, and that the proposed listing could greatly affect the abundance of the species. As such, the species should not be down-listed. Unless drastic steps are seriously undertaken with the amount of concern shown toward industrial practices, endangered species will become extinct.

Response from the Department

The Department recognizes the importance of Goldenseal to Indigenous Peoples for its use in traditional medicines but also with regards to its spiritual significance. As many plants of the Ranunculacae family, Goldenseal is known to produce many bioactive alkaloids making this plant also attractive in the herbal medicine industry.

In their reasons for designation, COSEWIC observed that increased survey effort has resulted in the discovery of new subpopulations of this species since their last assessment, although subpopulations remain subject to threats from deforestation and invasive species. In addition, COSEWIC acknowledges harvesting of this plant as a threat. In 2002, this species was listed on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Canada does not issue CITES export permits for wild specimens of this species. Due to the interest in this plant for harvesting, COSEWIC considers this species as data sensitive. COSEWIC did identify, however, that the most significant threat to this plant species is habitat destruction through logging.

The Department recognizes that changing the status of Goldenseal from threatened to special concern would remove the general prohibitions on federal lands and the protection of the critical habitat as described in the Recovery Strategy published in 2020 on the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) public registry. Although the recovery strategy is not required for a species listed as special concern, if the Schedule 1 status of this species is down-listed, the Recovery Strategy would still be available on the public registry, continuing to support the conservation of the species.

The status of special concern does trigger the development of a management plan for the species and its habitat that must be prepared in cooperation with any person or organization that the Minister considers appropriate. The plan must include measures for the conservation of the species. In addition, it must be prepared in consultation with any landowner, lessees and other persons whom the minister considers directly affected or interested in the management plan.

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultations

Modern treaty obligations

Section 35 of the Constitutional 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 Regulation, an assessment of modern treaty implications was conducted on the regulatory proposal. The assessment identified the following implications.

The Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act pertains to the addition, reclassification, and delisting of 12 species, one of which is found on federal lands in areas with modern treaties:

Peary Caribou (Nunavut and Northwest Territories)

The Peary Caribou occurs on lands covered by the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (NLCA) and the Inuvialuit Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. As such, the Department of the Environment consulted with Indigenous partners on the proposed down-listing of the Peary Caribou from endangered to threatened. In March 2018, the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board (NWMB) took a decision to approve the listing of Peary Caribou as threatened, which was communicated to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. In addition, four Indigenous organizations also provided their support for the proposed amendment to Schedule 1 of SARA for this species. After careful analysis of relevant modern treaty provisions, it has been determined that the reclassification of the Peary Caribou from endangered to threatened is expected to have minimal impacts on treaty rights. The general prohibitions under SARA (sections 32 and 33) do not apply to settlement lands recognized under modern treaties, as they are not considered federal lands as per the definition under SARA. Also, considering that there will be no change in the application of SARA general prohibitions on federal lands associated with the reclassification of the Peary Caribou from endangered to threatened, no incremental impacts are expected for Indigenous Peoples.

Under SARA, the listing of a species as threatened or endangered requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan. In the development of the recovery strategy, the Minister is required to cooperate with different parties as listed in paragraph 39(1)(c) of SARA, which include wildlife management boards established under land claim agreements. These boards must be consulted when making decisions and recommendations with respect to the recovery of species in their settlement areas. The recovery strategy must also be prepared, to the extent that it will apply to that area, in accordance with the provisions of the agreement as per subsection 39(2) of SARA. As for the development of the action plan, similar obligations are applicable as per paragraph 48(c) and subsection 48(2) of SARA.

In order to fulfill its modern treaty obligations, the Department will consult and involve First Nations and Indigenous organizations that are parties to these treaties in recovery planning for this species as well as the relevant wildlife management boards including the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and the Wildlife Management Advisory Council.

Indigenous engagement and consultations

Canada has committed to a renewed, nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous Peoples based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation and partnership. In line with this commitment, the Department of the Environment is taking measures to have meaningful consultations with Indigenous Peoples and organizations in the interest of respect, co-operation and partnership. In parallel, discussions are taking place with interested Indigenous communities to determine the most appropriate approaches to consult with them.

The Department has reached out to engage with Indigenous Peoples and organizations, as well as modern treaty holders, to enable those who would be impacted by the proposed Order to state their views. In January 2017, ECCC sent targeted emails and letters to Indigenous organizations and wildlife management boards inviting their comments on the proposed down-listing of the Peary Caribou from endangered to threatened. Please refer to the “Initial consultation results summary” section for more details on feedback provided by stakeholders. In January 2020, ECCC sent targeted emails and letters to individual First Nations and Indigenous organizations, inviting their comments. The email or letter provided background information on the initiative and on the species to be listed/or reclassified with a focus on the ones that are known to occur in the province/territory where the First Nation reserve or Indigenous group is located. The notice also clarified the consultation approach and offered additional information sources on the listing and consultation processes for terrestrial species. In addition, the Department offered the opportunity to discuss this proposal further with individual First Nations and Indigenous organizations who requested it either through a phone discussion, teleconference or an in-person consultation session.

Comments were received during the 2017 extended consultation period regarding the Peary Caribou from three Indigenous organizations and two Hunters and Trappers Organizations, all of which supported the proposed listing recommendations. In addition to the comments received from Indigenous organizations for Peary Caribou, one comment was received from Indigenous groups with respect to the remaining 12 species included in this proposal. They originate from the Shawanaga First Nation. The Shawanaga First Nation supported the listing of the American Bumble Bee as the species helps pollinate all the medicines that are sacred and important for the Anishinaabe community.

Most of the amendments included in this proposal are not anticipated to result in any incremental costs to stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples as they are either special concern or a reclassification from an existing status that confer the same level of protection for the species.

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 Environment,

(1) accept the assessment and add the species to Schedule 1;
(2) not add the species to Schedule 1; or
(3) refer the matter back to COSEWIC for further consideration.

The protection of species at risk is a shared responsibility between the federal government and the provinces and territories; therefore, the federal government has to respect their 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

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 over the next 10 years 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. Costs provided in present value terms were discounted at 3% over the period of 2022–2031. Unless otherwise noted, all monetary values reported in this analysis are in 2020 constant dollars.

Overall, the proposed Order is expected to benefit Canadian society. Protection of these species would preserve associated socio-economic and cultural values, which include option values, existence values, and values derived from services such as pest control and nutrient cycling. 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.

Since critical habitat is only identified in a recovery strategy following the listing stage in Schedule 1 of SARA, the extent of critical habitat identification (and therefore related protection measures) is unknown at this time. As such, the analysis is based on the best available information at this stage.

Benefits and costs

Benefits

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. This process also provides an opportunity to consider the impact of measures to recover the species and to consult with stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples. These activities may be augmented by projects from local governments, stakeholders and/or Indigenous Peoples to protect species and habitats, for example, through projects funded through the Habitat Stewardship Program,^{footnote 15} which requires support and matching funds from other sources. These projects enhance the Government of Canada and other stakeholders’ ability to understand and respond effectively to the conservation needs of these species and their habitats.

The special concern designation serves as an early indication that the species requires attention due to a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats. This helps manage the species proactively, maximizing the probability of success and preventing higher-cost measures in the future stemming from potential threatened or endangered designations. The incremental benefit of down-listing species to a special concern designation stems from management efforts that reflect the best available scientific information, as provided by COSEWIC. Such efforts ensure that the species are protected according to the purposes of SARA, with minimal impacts on stakeholders, Indigenous Peoples and government resources.

Cost savings stemming from down-listings

In this proposed Order, the down-listing of the Greater Short-horned Lizard from endangered to special concern, and Goldenseal from threatened to special concern, would result in avoided costs since the development of action plans would no longer be required. This avoided cost to government is estimated at about $20,000 per species (undiscounted), for a total of $40,000 (undiscounted).

Since general prohibitions would no longer apply, for the two species mentioned above, there could also be avoided costs to stakeholder and Indigenous Peoples who would no longer need to apply for a permit or mitigate their practices to respect the prohibitions. No permit requests for either the Greater Short-horned lizard or the Goldenseal have been submitted since 2015. However, based on historical permit applications over the last 10 years, there is the potential that five permits, including permits initiated by Indigenous Peoples, would no longer need to be requested by researchers over the next 10 years for these specific species, amounting to cost savings of approximately $8,000 for applicants and $10,000 for the Government of Canada. However, stakeholders often bundle permit applications for multiple species (i.e. one permit for multiple species), which means that permit applications might not decrease as a result of the proposed Order. Therefore, these potential cost savings are not taken into account.

Total economic value of species conservation

Preventing the extinction or extirpation of these species would likely result from a combination of the proposed Order and additional protection measures undertaken by various levels of governments, stakeholders, and Indigenous Peoples. Such measures are an integral part of maintaining biodiversity in Canada and conserving Canada’s natural heritage, which in turn provides benefits to the Canadian society. The total economic value framework is often used to assess how environmental assets such as species at risk contribute to the well-being of society. Using this framework, the analysis found that the protection of the species listed in the proposed Order is associated with maintaining and enhancing a variety of benefits for Canadians, including socio-economic and cultural value, pest-control benefits, and nutrient cycling benefits. Although the expected benefits cannot be attributed to the proposed Order alone, some information about the benefits that these species provide to Canadians is discussed below for context.

Socio-economic and cultural values for Indigenous Peoples

Of the species recommended for listing, the Peary Caribou, the Hairy Valerian, the American Bumble Bee, and Goldenseal are significant to the ways of life of many Indigenous Peoples, providing social, cultural, and medicinal benefits. For many Indigenous communities, caribou have been one of the primary sources of food and nutrition. Consuming caribou meat and using other parts of the animal allows for avoiding costs of store-bought food and goods.^{footnote 30} The traditional caribou hunt supports social cohesion, and contributes to preservation of Indigenous culture, languages and tradition.^{footnote 31,}^{footnote 46} Finally, caribou are recurrent and central in Indigenous stories, songs, art and ceremonies.^{footnote 19}

In multiple Indigenous communities, the Hairy Valerian has traditionally been eaten and used medicinally, although most documented uses are based on the related subspecies Edible Valerian.^{footnote 34} Some Indigenous groups celebrate the bumblebee, through masks,^{footnote 21} artwork, images in totem poles, and through traditional dance^{footnote 22} that has been revived in recent years.^{footnote 37} Goldenseal is used by Indigenous Peoples in tea to help alleviate ulcerated or inflamed mucous membranes.^{footnote 24}

Pest control benefits

The Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp provides pest control services by acting as a natural biological control agent against two species of Ten-lined June Beetles.^{footnote 39} The wasp acts as a parasite that lives externally on the beetles and eventually kills them.^{footnote 25} Ten-lined June Beetles are considered plant pests because they feed on the roots of native woody plants including willows, roses, sagebrush, and poplars.^{footnote 25} The beetle larvae can also be a significant agricultural pest to tree fruits such as apple and pear, and other food crops such as strawberries, potatoes, corn, cane fruits, and others.^{footnote 25} Therefore, the wasp can prevent the beetle larvae from being a significant agricultural pest.

Scientific and research value

Extracts of Hairy Valerian have been clinically documented to induce sleep and to relieve the spasms of involuntary muscles.^{footnote 40} Goldenseal has been found to naturally lower low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels.^{footnote 41} Although little research has been done on the effects of Goldenseal on human health, the plant is used for a variety of conditions including colds and other respiratory tract infections, allergic rhinitis (hay fever), ulcers, and digestive upsets.^{footnote 28} It is also used as a mouthwash for sore gums, as an eyewash for eye inflammation, and can be applied to the skin for rashes and other skin problems.^{footnote 28} The roots of Goldenseal are dried and used to make teas, extracts, tablets, or capsules.^{footnote 28}

Nutrient cycling

Several of the 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 great benefits to Canadians. For example, caribou usually consume a diet rich in nitrogen and contribute to nutrient cycling via their droppings during seasonal migrations.^{footnote 29,}^{footnote 16} In nutrient-poor environments, the Hairy Paintbrush may break down nutrients from less available forms for other organisms.^{footnote 17,}^{footnote 18} Some lichens, like the White-rimmed Shingle Lichen and the Cryptic Paw Lichen, are nutrient-rich and can extract the nitrogen in the air to metabolize it or convert it into nitrogenous compounds (nitrates) in the soil.^{footnote 33,}^{footnote 20} Nitrates are leached from both living and dead lichens and become available to plant life in the immediate areas.^{footnote 34}

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 35,}^{footnote 36,}^{footnote 23} The caribou is a prominent example of an iconic Canadian wildlife species whose continued existence is valued by Canadians regardless of whether they will ever interact with the caribou directly.^{footnote 38,}^{footnote 25} For instance, in a 2011 study, Alberta households surveyed were willing to pay, on average, approximately $206 per year for 50 years to ensure three self-sustaining Woodland Caribou herds, and approximately $371 per year for 50 years for 13 self-sustaining Woodland Caribou herds.^{footnote 26} Similar attitudes toward caribou conservation are likely to be shared, at least in part, by other Canadians toward the Peary Caribou.

Option value

The Canadian public and businesses may value the preservation of genetic information that may be used in the future for biological, medicinal, genetic and other applications.^{footnote 27} Several of the species recommended for listing are associated with such values (i.e. option values). For example, caribou, specifically their antlers and bone marrow, may have human health benefits.^{footnote 42,}^{footnote 43} Genetic and genomic information could also be used to inform research on evolutionary history, ungulate (i.e. deer, moose and other wild large mammals with hooves) fitness and diseases (including resistance and susceptibility), and functional genomics.^{footnote 44,}^{footnote 45}

Costs

The costs associated with the proposed species listings are expected to be low. These species were batched together in this Order, as opposed to the chronological order of publication of their latest COSEWIC assessment, specifically because a preliminary valuation analysis determined that listing them would impose minimal to no cost on stakeholders and/or Indigenous Peoples.

For each species, the analysis considered three types of incremental costs associated with the proposed Order:

1) Costs to stakeholder and Indigenous Peoples of complying with general prohibitions on First Nation reserves or other federal lands;
2) Costs to the Government of Canada for recovery strategy, action plan or management plan development, compliance promotion and enforcement;
3) Costs of permit applications and issuance for both stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples, and the Government of Canada; and
4) Other costs.

The analysis takes into account impacts expected to arise from general prohibitions as well as any future critical habitat protection order on federal lands, to the extent that information is available. Incremental critical habitat implications would only be expected for species newly listed as endangered or threatened. Due to the locations of the known occurrences of the newly listed species in this proposed Order, except for Dalton’s Moss, critical habitat is unlikely to be identified on federal land and, as such, no future critical habitat protection orders are expected. At this time, all other occurrences are located on provincial lands (both provincial protected area and provincial crown land) or private lands and if critical habitat is only identified at these locations, then no additional critical habitat protection order on federal land would be expected. However, search effort for these species is low. If locations on federal land are found in the future, additional critical habitat may be identified and more protection orders might be triggered.

Dalton’s Moss occurs within Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve and therefore critical habitat will likely be identified at this location, which would require a protection order. However, the land in Gwaii Haanas National Park already benefit from protections under the Parks Canada Agency. Therefore, no incremental impact from this future protection order is expected.

Each type of incremental cost of the proposed Order is discussed below.

1) Costs to stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples

The listing of these species would have no incremental costs to stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples stemming from SARA’s general prohibitions other than from potential permit applications, detailed in subsection 3 below. This is explained by two elements; first, general prohibitions do not apply to species being listed or reclassified as special concern. Second, for species listed as threatened or endangered, general prohibitions are triggered only for species found on federal lands, resulting in no new impacts on stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples when species are not known to occur on those lands.

Only one species affected by the proposed Order is listed as endangered and found on federal lands — Dalton’s Moss, located on Parks Canada Agency (PCA) properties. Although SARA’s general prohibitions apply across PCA’s network of protected heritage places upon listing, species are already afforded similar protection in the national parks and national historic sites under the Canada National Parks Act. Therefore, the proposed Order would result in no incremental impacts related to compliance with general prohibitions other than potential permit applications. The only expected incremental cost to stakeholders as a result of the proposed listing of the species occurring on the Parks Canada properties is the potential cost of permit applications as discussed below.

2) Administrative costs to the Government of Canada

As outlined in Table 3 below, administrative costs to the Government of Canada differ depending on the listing category, as different categories trigger different reporting requirements.

Table 3: Type of listing and associated costs to the Government of Canada
Type of listing	SARA requirements	Estimated cost per species
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	Updating recovery strategy and action plan	$3,000 to $10,000
New listing as endangered, threatened or extirpated	Development of a recovery strategy and action plan	$20,000 to $25,000 per document
Species name change	Update documents	$3,000

Four species would be listed or reclassified as species of special concern: American Bumble Bee, Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp, Greater Short-horned Lizard, and Goldenseal. For these species, the identification of critical habitat is not required. Efforts to recover these four 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 $40,000 and $60,000 (undiscounted) for all species in this group.

Seven species have been newly assessed by COSEWIC as endangered: Carey’s Small Limestone Moss, Dalton’s Moss, Drooping-leaved Beard-moss, Columbia Quillwort, Dwarf Hesperochiron, Hairy Valerian, and Hairy Paintbrush. 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 $280,000 and $350,000.

The reclassification of Peary Caribou from endangered to threatened will require updating the recovery strategy and action plan documents. The undiscounted costs to the Government of Canada for this process are estimated between $3,000 and $10,000.

One species, the Karner Blue, has been assigned a new name, but retains the same extirpated status. The total cost to the Government of Canada to update the recovery strategy to change the species name is estimated to be up to $3,000.

Among all the species identified in this listing, only Dalton’s Moss would require compliance promotion, with the estimated total cost of $3,000 in the first year.

No incremental enforcement costs to the Government of Canada are expected from the proposed Order as only one species being listed as threatened or endangered is found on federal lands. Dalton’s Moss is found on Parks Canada properties and as such, is already protected by the federal agency, therefore needing no additional enforcement effort.

Administrative costs related to the Government of Canada permit review are discussed below.

3) Permitting applications

Permits would be required for activities that would be prohibited under SARA. Although no conclusions can be made on whether a permit could be issued prior to the submission 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 not certain that additional permit requirements would be triggered as a result of the proposed Order but this analysis uses data on previously requested permits to make assumptions about the number of potential permit applications. Specifically, it is assumed that there may be one permit application per federal property with species occurrence, and one additional permit application for each Parks Canada property. The permit applications would likely be for research or activities that benefit the species, and would be prepared by academic institutions or other research organizations (e.g. nongovernmental organizations, governments). The average costs related to permit applications under SARA are presented in tables 4.1 and 4.2 below.

Table 4.1: Permit applications costs — Costs to applicants
Type of permit application	Cost per permit^{table b2 note a} ^{table b2 note b}
Industry, including Indigenous Peoples (incidental take permit)	$2,500
Industry (incidental take permit) – SARA compliant increment only	$600
Researcher/scientist (research permit)	$1,200
Researcher/scientist (research permit) – SARA compliant increment only	$300
Parks Canada on Parks Canada land/ Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) on National Wildlife Area or Migratory Bird Sanctuary	$800
Table b2 note(s) Table b2 note a 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), there would be an additional cost to make the permit SARA compliant, 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). Return to table b2 note a referrer Table b2 note b The estimates have been rounded. Return to table b2 note b referrer

Table 4.2: Permit applications costs — Administrative costs to the Government of Canada
Type of permit application	Cost per permit^{table b3 note a} ^{table b3 note b}
New permit – ECCC	$3,000
SARA compliant increment – federal government	$700
Table b3 note(s) Table b3 note a 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), there would be an additional cost to make the permit SARA compliant, 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). Return to table b3 note a referrer Table b3 note b The estimates have been rounded. Return to table b3 note b referrer

Since there is only one species in the proposed Order that is known to occur on a federal land, it is assumed that the proposed Order could trigger up to two new permit applications: one from researchers and the other from PCA to authorize its projects within this national park.

For researchers, applying for SARA permits where a previous Canada National Parks Act permit was required may involve incremental costs of $300 per permit. As indicated in Table 4.1, PCA applicants that apply for SARA permits for projects within national parks assume a cost of up to $800 per species. Therefore, the total incremental cost to all applicants in the Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve of Canada, and Haida Heritage Site is estimated at $1,100 (undiscounted). The total incremental costs to the Government of Canada^{footnote 32} associated with the review of these two permit requests in the ten years following the listing could be up to $1,400 (undiscounted).

4) Other costs

a) Implications for environmental assessments

There may be implications for projects^{footnote 47} required to undergo an environmental assessment by or under an Act of Parliament (hereafter referred to as federal EA). However, any costs are expected to be minimal relative to the total costs of performing a federal EA. Once a species is listed in SARA Schedule 1, under any designation, additional requirements under section 79 of SARA are triggered for project proponents and government officials undertaking a federal EA. 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. However, the Department of the Environment always recommends to proponents in EA guidelines (early in the EA process) to 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.

b) Potential impacts of future SARA regulations

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 non-federal land may require the taking of regulatory action with associated benefits as well as potential costs for the landowners, users of the land, and the federal government. The socio-economic impact of each individual regulatory action will be assessed should this additional protection become necessary.

Costs and benefits summary

In summary, 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 and nutrient cycling benefits, existence and option values. Aside from permit-related expenses, the proposed Order is not anticipated to impose incremental costs on Indigenous Peoples or stakeholders. The overall costs to the Government of Canada related to this Order are anticipated to be low, and stem from the development of recovery strategies, action plans or management plans as well as from permit application processing, compliance promotion and enforcement activities.

Aside from permit-related expenses, the proposed Order is not anticipated to impose incremental costs on stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples other than the Government of Canada. The overall costs to the Government of Canada related to this Order are anticipated to be low, and stem from the development of recovery strategies, action plans or management plans, permit-related administrative costs, and from compliance promotion activities. Based on the list of species included in the proposed Order, the overall net cost to government is estimated to be between $290,000 and $380,000 over ten years (2022–2031), discounted at 3% to a base year of 2020. For all permits, the incremental cost to applicants (i.e. industry, Indigenous Peoples, other levels of government, researchers and scientists) is estimated to be $1,100 incurred in the first year.

The species included have four different categories of impacts related to their proposed status amendment to Schedule 1 of SARA, as summarized in Table 5 below.

Table 5: Costs to stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples by listing category
Proposed Amendments to Schedule 1	Species	Costs
New listing as endangered (7 species)	Carey’s Small Limestone Moss Dalton’s Moss Drooping-leaved Beard-moss Columbia Quillwort Dwarf Hesperochiron Hairy Valerian Hairy Paintbrush	The general prohibitions are only triggered when species are found on federal lands. Based on best available information, of the seven species proposed to be listed as endangered, only Dalton’s Moss is known to occur on federal lands (Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve of Canada, and Haida Heritage Site). For this species, projected undiscounted costs related to permit applications for applicants such as industry, Indigenous reserves, other levels of government, researchers and scientists are estimated to be $1,100. Projected undiscounted costs to government of reviewing permit applications are estimated to be $1,400. Dalton’s Moss would also require compliance promotion, with estimated undiscounted costs to Government of Canada of $3,000 in the first year. Species listed as endangered subsequently require the drafting of Recovery Strategies and Action Plans. The projected undiscounted costs for Government of Canada to develop those documents are estimated between $40,000 to $50,000 per species or between $280,000 and $350,000 for these 7 species.
Reclassification from endangered to threatened (1 species)	Peary Caribou	There are no incremental costs to Indigenous Peoples and/or stakeholders from reclassifying Peary Caribou’s status from endangered to threatened because general prohibitions are already in place. The undiscounted costs to the Government of Canada of updating the recovery strategy and action plan documents are estimated to be between $3,000 and $10,000.
Listing or reclassification to special concern (4 species)	American Bumble Bee Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp Greater Short-horned Lizard Goldenseal	SARA’s general prohibitions do not apply to species of special concern and, as such, no incremental costs would be incurred to Indigenous Peoples and/or stakeholders. However, species listed as special concern subsequently require the drafting of a Management Plan. The projected undiscounted costs for the Government of Canada to develop management plans for the proposed listing or reclassification of four Special Concern species, estimated to cost between $10,000 to $15,000 per species, is estimated to be between $40,000 and $60,000.
Changes to species’ name (1 species)	Karner Blue	No incremental costs are expected to Indigenous Peoples and/or stakeholders, except an estimate of $3,000 to Government of Canada for updating recovery documents.

Small business lens

Analysis under the small business lens concluded that the proposed regulation will not impact Canadian small businesses.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on business and no regulatory titles are repealed or introduced.

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The protection of wildlife species is also 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 listed under some provincial legislation and the proposed Order would complement this existing protection. Environment and Climate Change Canada also works with its federal partners (i.e. Department of Fisheries and Oceans and PCA) to determine the impact of the listing of species. Some of the species under consideration are currently listed under some provincial legislation, and the proposed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act would complement this existing protection. Those statuses are shown in the Table 6 below:

Table 6: Existing provincial and territorial designations of species included in the proposed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act
Common species name	Range	Proposed SARA listing	Provincial / Territorial status
Peary Caribou Rangifer tarandus pearyi	Northwest Territories and Nunavut	Endangered to threatened.	Northwest Territories (threatened)
Greater Short-horned Lizard Phrynosoma hernandesi	Alberta and Saskatchewan	Endangered to special concern	Alberta (endangered) Saskatchewan (prohibitions apply)
Goldenseal Hydrastis canadensis	Ontario	Threatened to special concern	Ontario (threatened)
Karner Blue (Plebejus samuelis55)	Ontario	N/A	Ontario (extirpated)

The Department also works with its federal partners (i.e. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and PCA) to determine the impact of the listing of species. The development of the recovery strategies and action plans, which would be triggered after amending the status of the species included in the proposed Order, would require input from and coordination with different land management authorities such as other levels of government and Indigenous communities. Costs related to the development of these documents are estimated in the section above. The magnitude of economic impacts stemming from cooperation with those other land management authorities would be dependent on their level of participation and engagement in the recovery planning process and action following the development of action plans. This engagement would be voluntary and therefore its extent is unknown at this time. However, since the level of coordination needed for these species proposed for SARA status amendments is expected to be relatively low compared to other, more high-profile species with broader distribution ranges, associated economic impacts are also expected to be low. These costs cannot be quantified at this time.

Strategic environmental assessment

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

The Order would help Canada meet its commitments under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Given the interdependency of species, a loss of biodiversity can lead to decreases in ecosystem functions and services. These services are important to the health of Canadians and have important ties to Canada’s economy. Small changes within an ecosystem resulting in the loss of individuals and species can therefore have adverse, irreversible and broad-ranging effects.

The amendments to Schedule 1 of SARA would also support the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS)^{footnote 48} goal of “Healthy wildlife populations,” and the following target: “By 2020, species that are secure remain secure, and populations of species at risk listed under federal law exhibit trends that are consistent with recovery strategies and management plans.” The amendments would support this goal by helping to ensure that species are provided appropriate protection. They would also indirectly contribute to the FSDS goal of “Effective action on climate change” by supporting the conservation of biodiversity because many ecosystems play a key role in mitigating climate change impacts. These actions would also support the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals^{footnote 49} concerning Life on Land (goal 15) and Climate Action (goal 13).

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 impacted by the proposed Order.

The region of residence was identified as the main factor determining how a person would be impacted by the proposal. The listing of new species to Schedule 1 of SARA or their reclassification as endangered or threatened (from 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 of. Certain of the species included in listing Orders that occur on these lands have important cultural, ceremonial and socio-economic significance for Indigenous Peoples. Therefore, individuals residing on Indigenous reserves are the main subgroup that could be negatively affected by the listing of species under Schedule 1 of SARA.

The species that would trigger the general prohibitions under SARA as part of this proposal are not known to be located on reserve lands, which means that there are no anticipated impacts on Indigenous Peoples because general prohibitions are triggered only on federal lands of which reserves are part of.

The Department performed consultations to ensure all potentially affected parties had the opportunity to provide input into the listing proposal. It was understood by the Department that the information that forms the basis of the consultations is complex, and therefore not easily accessible to persons with low literacy skills or without a science background. Language may also be a barrier to meaningful participation in consultations for Indigenous Peoples. To address these challenges, the Department offered to provide teleconferences or face-to-face meetings to explain the proposal and discuss its potential impacts to the communities who requested more support.

Rationale

Biodiversity is crucial to ecosystem productivity, health and resiliency, yet is rapidly declining worldwide as species become extinct. The proposed Order supports the survival and recovery of 13 species at risk in Canada, thus contributing to the maintenance of biodiversity in Canada. In the case of the 7 new species proposed to be listed as endangered, they would be protected on federal lands through the general prohibitions of SARA, which include prohibitions on killing, harming, harassing, capturing, possessing, collecting, buying, selling and trading. In addition, these species would benefit from the development of recovery strategies and action plans that identify the main threats to species survival, and, when possible, the critical habitat that is necessary for their survival and recovery in Canada.

Peary Caribou was listed as endangered under SARA, which provided protection for individuals and residences on federal lands and included provisions for the protection of critical habitat once identified in a recovery strategy or action plan. Reclassifying from endangered to threatened recognizes that the species is still under threat. This status change would not affect the existing SARA general prohibitions already in place for this species. In addition, the four species proposed to be listed or reclassified as species of special concern would benefit from the development of a management plan, which includes measures for the conservation of the species.

In summary, the proposed listings or reclassifications of the species included in this Order would benefit Canadians in many ways, yet no major costs would be incurred by stakeholders or Indigenous Peoples. The costs to Government are expected to be relatively low.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

Following the listing, the Department of the Environment would implement a compliance promotion plan. Compliance promotion initiatives are proactive measures that encourage voluntary compliance with the law through education and outreach activities and raise awareness and understanding of the prohibitions. Potentially affected Indigenous Peoples and/or stakeholders would be reached in order to:

increase their awareness and understanding of the Order;
promote the adoption of behaviours that will contribute to the overall conservation and protection of wildlife at risk in Canada;
increase compliance with the Order; and
enhance their knowledge regarding species at risk.

These objectives may be accomplished, where applicable, through the creation and dissemination of information products explaining new prohibitions on federal lands with respect to the species included in this proposed Order;^{footnote 50} the recovery planning process that follows listing or reclassification; how stakeholders and Indigenous peoples can get involved; and, general information on each of the species. These resources would be posted on the SAR Public Registry. Mail outs and presentations to targeted audiences may also be considered as appropriate.

Within PCA’s network of protected heritage places,^{footnote 51} front line staff are given the appropriate information regarding the species at risk found within their sites to inform visitors on prevention measures and engage them in the protection and conservation of species at risk.

Subsequent to listing, the preparation and implementation of recovery strategies, action plans or management plans may result in recommendations for further regulatory action for the protection of wildlife species. It may also draw on the provisions of other Acts of Parliament to provide required protection.

Compliance and enforcement

SARA provides for penalties for contraventions to the Act, including fines or imprisonment, seizure and forfeiture of things seized or the proceeds of its 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 the Act, 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.

Service standards

As stated above, section 73 of SARA allows individuals to apply to the Minister for a permit to engage in an activity affecting a listed wildlife species, its critical habitat or the residences of its individuals. Upon notifying an applicant that their application for a section 73 permit is received, the Minister has 90 days to either issue or refuse to issue the permit.^{footnote 52} The 90-day timeline may not apply in certain circumstances.

The Permits Authorizing an Activity Affecting Listed Wildlife Species Regulations contribute to consistency, predictability and transparency in the SARA permitting process by providing applicants with clear and measurable service standards for the section 73 permit application process. The Department of the Environment measures its service performance annually, and performance information is posted on the Department website^{footnote 53} no later than June 1 for the preceding fiscal year.

Contact

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

ANNEX 1 — DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES BEING ADDED, RECLASSIFIED OR REMOVED TO SCHEDULE 1 OF THE SPECIES AT RISK ACT

A- Species proposed for addition to Schedule 1 of SARA:

1. Carey’s Small Limestone Moss (Seligeria careyana) – Endangered

About this species

Carey’s Small Limestone Moss is a minute, delicate, yellow to light-green moss that grows in loose colonies. The species is known from just three sites on Haida Gwaii, all located on northwest Moresby Island.

Given the overall rarity of moss at Haida Gwaii, its restriction to a substrate that is infrequent on the islands, the extensive search effort for the species on that substrate, and the few colonies found at known sites for the species, it is unlikely that more than 250 colonies exist in Canada. Overall, Carey’s Small Limestone Moss has not been monitored, therefore trends are unknown. The species is endemic to Canada so there is no possibility of “rescue” from outside populations.

Benefits of the species

Carey’s Limestone Moss is recognized as a special element of biodiversity in British Columbia based on its apparent survival in a glacial refugium. Throughout the world, many species of Seligeria are rare, including four of the seven species that occur in British Columbia.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Three comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

The species is a narrow habitat specialist that occurs exclusively on shaded, pure limestone cliffs in areas of hypermaritime climate. This moss has small, fragile spores that severely limits its dispersal ability to new sites. The primary threats to Carey’s Small Limestone Moss are climate change, quarrying, and tsunamis. The species is extremely vulnerable to the effects of climate change, particularly increased temperatures and reduced precipitation in summer.

A SARA listing as endangered creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

2. Dalton’s Moss (Daltonia splachnoides) – Endangered

About this species

Dalton’s Moss is a small, glossy yellow-green to bronze coloured moss with reddish stems and linear-lanceolate leaves. The leaves are untoothed, have a yellowish border, and a ridged costa (‘midrib’) that almost reaches the leaf tip. The sporophytes consist of a red stalk and a small, brown, upright, cylindric-ovoid capsule with a short neck and a contracted base. The highly distinctive calyptra (hood-like structure covering the lid of the capsule) is pale and conspicuously fringed.

Population trends are unknown and can only be determined through monitoring.

Benefits of the species

The Dalton’s Moss has no known species benefits.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Three comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

The three most significant threats to Dalton’s Moss are extensive browsing of understory vegetation by introduced Sitka Black-tailed Deer, climate change and associated sea level rise, and stochastic events such as landslides. Both subpopulations are located within protected areas so should not be affected by logging or water level manipulation, including installation of hydroelectric dams.

A SARA listing as endangered creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

3. Drooping-leaved Beard-moss (Oxystegus recurvifolius) – Endangered

About this species

The Drooping-leaved Beard-moss is a pale, yellowish-green moss that typically grows on moist, organic soil. Characteristics distinguishing it from closely related species include the oblong strap-shaped leaves with light-coloured margins, and leaf apices that bend downward and are sharply and irregularly toothed.

The Canadian population of Drooping-leaved Beard-moss is composed of five known subpopulations. Based on a targeted search in 2017, one of the subpopulations appears to have been extirpated as the result of hydroelectric development. Three subpopulations are thought to be extant, and the status of another is unknown. Historical population sizes were not recorded but herbarium specimens collected between 1964 and 1975 indicate there were at least eight colonies among the five subpopulations. Currently there are thought to be 10 to 12 extant colonies among three or four subpopulations.

Benefits of the species

In British Columbia, the species is recognized as a special element of biodiversity based on its rarity and highly restricted distribution. The Canadian population accounts for an estimated one fifth of the global population.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Three comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

With a very restricted distribution in Canada, key threats to the species include climate change (particularly at high elevation), landslides, introduced invasive Sitka Black-tailed Deer, and logging. The species is not expected to adapt to predicted climate change, and migration in response to climate change is inhibited by the lack of effective means of reproduction and dispersal.

A SARA listing as endangered creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

4. Columbia Quillwort (Isoetes minima) – Endangered

About this species

Columbia Quillwort is a perennial fern ally and has small, green, simple, quill-like leaves arising from a globose rootstock. The leaves are swollen at the base where the reproductive microspores and megaspores are contained within sporangia.

A rare Pacific Northwest endemic, the species is known in Canada from four subpopulations in extreme southern British Columbia (Castlegar area), all of which have been discovered since 1996. As of 2017, there were 1,145 plants (1,019 mature) known in Canada. Reductions in habitat quality and quantity have resulted from recreational activities (specifically mountain biking), and from establishment of non-native plants, such as Spotted Knapweed.

Benefits of the species

The Columbia Quillwort has no known species benefits.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Four comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

All known subpopulations of the species occur on provincial crown land. Upslope logging and road building may alter hydrologic patterns, impacting downslope seepage and encouraging the spread of non-native invasive plants. The most serious non-native competitor is Spotted Knapweed which competes with Columbia Quillwort for water and other resources at all sites. More severe droughts associated with climate change may impact on spore production. Recreational activities including mountain biking and hiking may also have negative impacts on Columbia Quillwort plants and their habitat. Small isolated populations can suffer from limited genetic diversity and inbreeding depression.

A SARA listing as endangered creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

5. Dwarf Hesperochiron (Hesperochiron pumilus) – Endangered

About this species

Dwarf Hesperochiron is a perennial, herbaceous plant that grows up to 10 cm tall from a slender stem connected to smaller offshoots by thin rhizomes. The generally hairless simple leaves grow in a basal rosette. There are from one to eight solitary, showy flowers per plant. The flowers are 1 to 3 cm wide, 5-lobed, with white petals and hairy, yellow throats. There are often striking purple markings on the petals. The fruits are oval capsules with many small seeds.

The specific causes of decline of the Dwarf Hesperochiron are unknown. The total number of mature individuals is very small (under 200). All Canadian sites are on Provincial Crown Land and potentially subject to logging of surrounding areas and/or road building activity with subsequent changes to site hydrology. Competition from non-native plants, most notably Spotted Knapweed, is the most significant threat expected to lead to habitat degradation over time. Drought and atypically intensive natural fire, as per climate change projections, could potentially damage or eliminate one or more occurrences within three generations.

Benefits of the species

Dwarf Hesperochiron is associated with spring seepage and it flowers and sets seed when moisture is available. The species is a showy species and a desirable horticultural plant. The species occurs in specialized habitat with other plants of conservation concern.

There is no published information on Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge of this species. It is a small plant with a limited distribution and no obvious medicinal properties or utilitarian purpose; it is unlikely to have significance to First Nations.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Three comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

All Canadian sites are on Provincial Crown Land and potentially subject to logging of surrounding areas and/or road building activity with subsequent changes to site hydrology. Negative impact on the thin substrate by mountain-biking activity has been noted close to one occurrence. Competition from non-native plants, most notably Spotted Knapweed, is the most significant threat expected to lead to habitat degradation over time. Drought and atypically intensive natural fire, as per climate change projections, could potentially damage or eliminate one or more occurrences within three generations.

A SARA listing as endangered creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

6. Hairy Valerian (Valeriana edulis ssp. ciliata) – Endangered

About this species

The Hairy Valerian (Valeriana edulis ssp. Ciliate) is a tall flowering plant, often growing one metre in height or more. It is a long-lived perennial, and not all mature plants flower every year. Flowers are visited and likely pollinated by a variety of insects, and most pollen is deposited within 10 m of the source plant. Seeds are small and are probably dispersed by gravity, wind and water. Hairy Valerian does not reproduce vegetatively. The species is found in wet prairies and fens in southwestern Ontario, which are very rare habitats.

Declines have been observed in its distribution, number of locations, and quality of habitat, and declines are inferred in the number of mature individuals. The three remaining locations have few mature individuals, which are threatened by commercial development, invasive species, and natural succession.

Benefits

This species has large taproots that were a source of food and medicine for Indigenous peoples. In multiple Indigenous communities, the Hairy Valerian has traditionally been eaten and used medicinally, although most documented uses are based on the related subspecies Edible Valerian.^{footnote 54} Some Indigenous groups celebrate the bumblebee, through masks, artwork,^{footnote 55} images in totem poles, and through traditional dance^{footnote 56} that has been revived in recent years.^{footnote 57}

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Three comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

As there are no previous estimates of abundance at any Ontario sites, trends are unknown. However, the total number of plants in Canada can be inferred to have declined. The abundance of Hairy Valerian has declined along the Maitland River due to the recent establishment of the non-native cultivar of Reed Canary Grass. Five of the eight documented subpopulations in Canada are considered extirpated. In general, invasive species are the primary threat to this taxon. Other possible threats include industrial development, succession, herbicide use, and recreational trails.

A SARA listing as endangered creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

7. Hairy Paintbrush (Castilleja tenuis) — Endangered

About this species

Hairy Paintbrush is a delicate annual plant, 4.5 to 30 cm tall (rarely up to 52 cm), arising from a slender taproot or branched root system. Stems are covered with a mixture of short hairs and soft spreading long hairs. Flowers are arranged in a terminal spike, with green lanceolate to ovate floral bracts with pointed tips.

Invasive non-native plants, in particular Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea stoebe ssp. micranthos), compete for water and other resources. Shrub and conifer encroachment associated with successional processes will degrade habitat over time. Hemiparasites are especially sensitive to climate change because changes to temperature and CO₂ will impact both the hemiparasite and their host plants.

Benefits

Hairy Paintbrush flowers from mid-June to mid-July and the flowers are adapted for bee pollination. In nutrient-poor communities, the Hairy Paintbrush may break down nutrients from less available forms for other organisms.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Four comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

Competition from non-native plants, most notably Spotted Knapweed, is the most significant observable threat. Limited genetic diversity is expected within this isolated population. Potential exists for increased drought and natural fire (as per climate change projections) to damage or eliminate the population within three generations. As a hemiparasite, it is further threatened due to detrimental climate change impacts on its host.

A SARA listing as endangered creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

8. American Bumble Bee (Bombus pensylvanicus) — Special concern

About this species

The American Bumble Bee (Bombus pensylvanicus) is a medium-sized bumble bee with a relatively long head and tongue length compared to many other bumble bee species in Canada. The distinctive dark wings and characteristic yellow and black abdominal banding pattern of females are diagnostic, and consistent throughout its Canadian range. Males have longer antennae than females, with a predominantly yellow abdomen with an orange tip.

The species experienced significant declines prior to 1980, and overall trends suggest it is still becoming rarer, though it persists within a portion of its historical range in Canada. Causes for declines remain unclear, but pesticide use, habitat conversion, and pathogen spillover from managed colonies are probably contributing factors.

Benefits

The American Bumble Bee is an important pollinator of a variety of plant species and is significant to the ways of life of many Indigenous peoples, providing social, cultural, and medicinal benefits. Notably, in Inuit culture, the bee represents the change in seasons and the return of important sustenance species such as Arctic Char.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Eight comments did not oppose this species listing, and one comment was made that opposed its listing.

Rationale for listing

The specific causes of decline for American Bumble Bee are unknown, although it is likely due to a combination of factors. The American Bumble Bee is susceptible to pesticide use, land use activities that reduce floral resources and/or nesting site availability, and pathogens. American Bumble Bee also appears to have low genetic diversity, which likely contributes to its decline and increases the production of sterile males.

The SARA listing as special concern does not trigger SARA prohibitions, but will require the development of a management plan to enable proactive management of the species.

9. Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp (Dielis pilipes) — Special concern

About this species

The Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp is a large, uncommon black and yellow wasp. This large distinctive wasp is restricted to the low-elevation Antelope-brush and sagebrush ecological communities of the south Okanagan and Similkameen valleys of British Columbia. The species is a solitary ectoparasitoid of one or both of the two species of Ten-lined June beetles (Polyphylla crinita and P. decemlineata) that range in southern British Columbia. June beetle larvae are considered pests on a wide range of native shrubs, fruit trees, ornamental and garden plants.

The cumulative effects of fire suppression activities and the spread of non-native/alien plants have contributed to a decline in the habitat quality and quantity available to both species of Ten-lined June beetle hosts and the Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp.

Benefits

The Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp is considered a natural biological control for the beetle larvae.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Four comments did not oppose this species proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

The loss, degradation, and fragmentation of open, sandy habitats, and pesticide application on adjacent agricultural lands during the adult flight period are the primary threats to the species. Further threats include increasing numbers of non-native plants into the open sand habitats, which limit detectability of host beetle larvae by adult female wasps. The species may become Threatened if factors suspected of negatively influencing the persistence of the species are not managed.

The SARA listing as special concern does not trigger SARA prohibitions, but will require the development of a management plan to enable proactive management of the species.

B- Species proposed for reclassification in Schedule 1 of SARA

10. Greater Short-horned Lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) – Down-listing from Endangered to Special Concern^{footnote 58}

About this species

Greater Short-horned Lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) is the only species of lizard found in Alberta and Saskatchewan. The species occurs farther north than any other iguanid lizard species globally. It is the most widespread and generalist of all horned lizard species. Greater Short-horned Lizard is a small (snout-vent length of approximately 69 mm for adult females), dorsoventrally flattened lizard with a fringe of protruding scales along the sides, and an array of ’horns’ and a deep hornless notch across the back of the head. The blotched dorsal colouration and ability to remain motionless provide the lizards an excellent camouflage, helping protect them from predators and allowing them to ambush prey.

Overall, the population size of the species has likely declined, especially from the time of initial agricultural development early in the 20th century. More recent declines are evident in local areas, particularly near Medicine Hat. In other instances, lack of recent records may be related to lack of survey effort and not reflect true declines in population size or occupancy. In these instances, trends in subpopulation size are unknown.

Benefits

The Greater Short-horned Lizard has no known species benefits.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Seven comments did not oppose this species listing, and one comment was made that opposed its listing.

Rationale for listing

Range-wide threats include habitat modification by invasive plants and increased vulnerability to summer droughts and freeze/thaw events associated with climate change. Approximately 70% of the population occurs in Grasslands National Park, but subpopulations outside the protected area, including all subpopulations in Alberta, are subject to additional threats including agriculture, oil and gas drilling, increased predation because of habitat modification, and other human developments.

A recovery strategy has been posted for this species after it was listed as endangered in 2009. A down-listing from endangered to special concern does not preclude the conservation efforts already underway since it requires the development of a management plan to prevent the species from becoming further at risk.

11. Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadensis) – Down-listing from Threatened to Special Concern

About this species

Goldenseal is an herbaceous perennial that grows to 10 to 50 cm tall. It is characterized by its gnarled yellow rhizome, which bears scars that look like the wax seals historically used to close letters. The plant bears one to three leaves, each with five lobes.

Benefits

Goldenseal is still a species of commercial interest and is an ingredient in various herbal products. In addition, the plants were used as a traditional herbal medicine by Indigenous peoples.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2020 to April 2021. Three comments did oppose the proposed listing of this species and one comment was made that opposed the proposed listing.

Rationale for listing

Although the number of mature individuals of this long-lived plant appears to be stable in recent decades, the remaining subpopulations remain subject to threats from deforestation, harvesting, and invasive species.

A recovery strategy has been posted for this species since it was listed as threatened in 2003. A down-listing from threatened to special concern does not preclude the conservation efforts already underway since it requires the development of a management plan to prevent the species from becoming further at risk.

12. Peary Caribou (Rangifer tarandus pearyi) – Down-listing from Endangered to Threatened

About this species

Peary Caribou are the smallest North American caribou. They are mostly white with a slate back and a grey stripe down the front of the legs. In winter, the slate back may turn a dingy brown, and some individuals appear almost entirely white. Antler velvet is slate-coloured instead of brown like deer and other caribou. The antlers tend not to spread as widely as those of other caribou but otherwise they are similar. The skull has a short rostrum and high cranium. The hooves are short and wide. They are genetically distinct from other caribou in Canada.

Benefits

Peary Caribou are integral components of Inuit and Inuvialuit culture and economy. As the only source of caribou meat for several Arctic communities, they are important in the subsistence economy of local communities, and represented in traditional crafts that are marketed and collected throughout Canada and internationally. Persisting at the limits of plant and animal existence, Peary Caribou are an integral part of Arctic biodiversity and increasingly important in the scientific study of ecosystem response to climate change.

Consultation

Consultations were undertaken for this species from January 2017 to October 2017. Five comments did not oppose this species listing.

Rationale for listing

The overall population has experienced an estimated three-generation decline of 35%, but has been increasing over the past two decades. The highest-impact threats derive from a changing climate, including increased intensity and frequency of rain-on-snow events negatively affecting forage accessibility in winter, and decreased extent and thickness of sea ice causing shifts in migration and movement patterns.

A SARA listing as endangered or threatened creates immediate protection for individuals and their residences on federal lands and requires the development of a recovery strategy and action plan(s).

C- Species proposed for scientific name change in Schedule 1 of SARA:

1- Karner Blue (Plebejus samuelis) – Scientific name change from Lycaeides melissa samuelis to Plebejus samuelis

About this species

The Karner Blue is a small butterfly with a wingspread of just 22 to 32 mm. The upper side of the male’s wing is iridescent light blue, edged with a thin black line that parallels a white fringe on the wing’s outer margins.

This butterfly occurred within a restricted range in oak savannah and woodland habitats in southern Ontario. Its population decline and degradation of its habitat are well documented. The species has not been seen since 1991 despite ongoing search efforts.

Benefits

There is no known benefits specific to this species.

Consultation

No consultations were undertaken for this species.

Rationale for listing

There has been no change in effective protection for this species at the federal level given its extirpated status.

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to subsection 27(1) of the Species at Risk Act ^{footnote a}, proposes to make the annexed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Order within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be addressed to Paula Brand, Director, Species at Risk Act Policy, Canadian Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment, 351 St. Joseph Boulevard, Gatineau, Quebec, K1A 0H3 (tel.: 1‑800‑668‑6767; email: LEPreglementations-SARAregulations@ec.gc.ca).

Ottawa, May 24, 2022

Wendy Nixon
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act

Amendments

1 Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act ^{footnote a} is amended by striking out the following under the heading “Arthropods”:

Blue, Karner (Lycaeides melissa samuelis)
- Bleu mélissa

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

Blue, Karner (Plebejus samuelis)
- Bleu mélissa

3 Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by striking out the following under the heading “Mammals”:

Caribou, Peary (Rangifer tarandus pearyi)
- Caribou de Peary

4 Part 2 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by striking out the following under the heading “Reptiles”:

Lizard, Greater Short-horned (Phrynosoma hernandesi)
- Grand iguane à petites cornes

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

Hesperochiron, Dwarf (Hesperochiron pumilus)
- Hespérochiron nain
Paintbrush, Hairy (Castilleja tenuis)
- Castilléjie grêle
Quillwort, Columbia (Isœtes minima)
- Isoète du Columbia
Valerian, Hairy (Valeriana edulis ssp. ciliata)
- Valériane ciliée

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

Beard-moss, Drooping-leaved (Oxystegus recurvifolius)
- Trichostome à feuilles recourbées
Moss, Carey’s Small Limestone (Seligeria careyana)
- Séligérie de Carey
Moss, Dalton’s (Daltonia splachnoides)
- Daltonie faux-splachne

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

Caribou, Peary (Rangifer tarandus pearyi)
- Caribou de Peary

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

Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadensis)
- Hydraste du Canada

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

Lizard, Greater Short-horned (Phrynosoma hernandesi)
- Lézard à petites cornes majeur

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

Bumble Bee, American (Bombus pensylvanicus)
- Bourdon américain
Wasp, Yellow Scarab Hunter (Dielis pilipes)
- Scolie dorée

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

Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadensis)
- Hydraste du Canada

Coming into Force

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

Footnotes

Footnote a

S.C. 2002, c. 29

Return to footnote a referrer

Footnote 1

Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), 2019. Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Summary for Policymakers (PDF). Accessed October 2021

Return to footnote 1 referrer

Footnote 2

World Wildlife Fund, 2018. Living Planet Report Canada. Accessed October 2021.

Return to footnote 2 referrer

Footnote 3

Cleland, E. E. (2011) Biodiversity and Ecosystem Stability. Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):14

Return to footnote 3 referrer

Footnote 4

Preamble to the Species at Risk Act (2003).

Return to footnote 4 referrer

Footnote 5

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) defines an extinct species as a wildlife species that no longer exists.

Return to footnote 5 referrer

Footnote 6

Section 2 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) defines an extirpated species as a wildlife species that no longer exists in the wild in Canada, but exists elsewhere in the wild.

Return to footnote 6 referrer

Footnote 7

Heritage places under the PCA authority include places such as national parks, national historic sites, heritage canals, national marine conservation areas and the Rouge National Urban Park.

Return to footnote 7 referrer

Footnote 8

More information can be found on the COSEWIC website

Return to footnote 8 referrer

Footnote 9

Subsection 34(2) of SARA for provinces and subsection 35(2) of SARA for territories.

Return to footnote 9 referrer

Footnote 10

As defined in SARA, “competent minister” means (a) the Minister responsible for the Parks Canada Agency with respect to individuals of the wildlife species in or on federal lands administered by that Agency; (b) the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans with respect to aquatic species, other than species mentioned in paragraph (a); and (c) the Minister of the Environment with respect to all other individuals of the wildlife species.

Return to footnote 10 referrer

Footnote 11

As per section 61 of SARA.

Return to footnote 11 referrer

Footnote 12

Subsection 73(2) of SARA.

Return to footnote 12 referrer

Footnote 13

Species at Risk Act Permitting Policy [Proposed] (PDF)

Return to footnote 13 referrer

Footnote 14

COSEWIC status reports.

Return to footnote 14 referrer

Footnote 15

For more information, visit the Habitat stewardship for species at risk web page.

Return to footnote 15 referrer

Footnote 16

Pokiak, M. An Inuvialuit Way of Life (PDF). The Department of Education, Culture and Employment (ECE) of the Northwest Territories.

Return to footnote 16 referrer

Footnote 17

Samson, C. and J. Pretty. (2005). Environmental and Health Benefits of Hunting Lifestyles and Diets for the Innu of Labrador. Presented at British Association of Canadian Studies, First Nations, First Thoughts Conference, Edinburgh.

Return to footnote 17 referrer

Footnote 18

Condon, R. G., Collings, P. & Wenzel, G. (1995). The Best Part of Life: Subsistence Hunting, Ethnicity, and Economic Adaptation among Young Adult Inuit Males. Arctic 48, no. 1: 31-46.

Return to footnote 18 referrer

Footnote 19

Armitage, P. (1992). Religious Ideology Among the Innu of Eastern Quebec and Labrador. Religiologiques. 6:64-110.

Return to footnote 19 referrer

Footnote 20

COSEWIC. 2018. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Hairy Valerian Valeriana edulis ssp. ciliata in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 35 pp. (https://species-registry.canada.ca/index-en.html#/species/1443-1030).

Return to footnote 20 referrer

Footnote 21

Johnson, S. “Bumble Bee Mask”. Spirits of the West Coast Art Gallery. Last accessed September 1, 2021. https://spiritsofthewestcoast.com/products/bumble-bee-mask

Return to footnote 21 referrer

Footnote 22

Smelle, N. “Students learn to Think Indigenous”. Bancroft This Week. Published June 16, 2015. Last accessed September 1, 2021. http://www.bancroftthisweek.com/?p=4644

Return to footnote 22 referrer

Footnote 23

Kramer, J. (2004). Figurative Repatriation: First Nations ‘Artist-Warriors’ Recover, Reclaim, and Return Cultural Property through Self-Definition. Journal of Material Culture, 9(2), 161-182. http://www.firstnations.de/media/01-3-kramer.pdf (PDF)

Return to footnote 23 referrer

Footnote 24

“Goldenseal”. Species at risk. Government of Ontario. Last updated August 12, 2021. Last accessed September 1, 2021. https://www.ontario.ca/page/goldenseal

Return to footnote 24 referrer

Footnote 25

COSEWIC. 2018. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Yellow Scarab Hunter Wasp Dielis pilipes in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. x + 50 pp. (http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=24F7211B-1). Page 10.

Return to footnote 25 referrer

Footnote 26

Enciso-Rodríguez, R. (1997). Micropropagation of Valeriana edulis ssp. procera. Planta Med, 63, 274–275. doi: 10.1055/ s-2006-957674.

Return to footnote 26 referrer

Footnote 27

Abidi, P., Chen, W., Kraemer, F. B., Li, H., & Liu, J. (2006). The medicinal plant goldenseal is a natural LDL-lowering agent with multiple bioactive components and new action mechanisms. Journal of Lipid Research, 47(10), 2134–2147. doi: 10.1194/jlr.m600195-jlr200.

Return to footnote 27 referrer

Footnote 28

“Goldenseal” National text-center for Complementary and Integrative Health. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Last updated March 2021. Last accessed September 1, 2021. https://nccih.nih.gov/health/goldenseal

Return to footnote 28 referrer

Footnote 29

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Wildflowers, Beauty, Lichens. Why are lichens important?.

Return to footnote 29 referrer

Footnote 30

COSEWIC. (2014). COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Caribou (Rangifer tarandus), Newfoundland population, Atlantic-Gaspésie population and Boreal population, in Canada (PDF). Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xxiii + 128 pp.

Return to footnote 30 referrer

Footnote 31

Grewell, Brenda J. “Hemiparasites generate environmental heterogeneity and enhance species coexistence in salt marshes.” Ecological Applications 18, no. 5 (2008): 1297-1306.

Return to footnote 31 referrer

Footnote 32

Press, M. C., & Phoenix, G. K. (2005). Impacts of parasitic plants on natural communities. New Phytologist, 166(3), 737–751. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01358.x

Return to footnote 32 referrer

Footnote 33

Richardson, D. H. S., & Cameron, R. P. (2004). Cyanolichens: Their Response To Pollution And Possible Management Strategies For Their Conservation In Northeastern North America. Northeastern Naturalist, 11(1), 1–22. doi: 10.1656/1092-6194(2004)011[0001:ctrtpa]2.0.co;2

Return to footnote 33 referrer

Footnote 34

Environment Canada. (2012). Management Plan for the Cryptic Paw Lichen (Nephroma occultum) in Canada. Species at Risk Act Management Plan Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa.VII pp. + appendix.

Return to footnote 34 referrer

Footnote 35

Metrick, A., and Weitzman, M. L. (1996). Patterns of behavior in endangered species preservation. Land Economics, 72(1), 1–16.

Return to footnote 35 referrer

Footnote 36

Jacobsen J.B., Boiesen J.H., Thorsen B.J., and Strange N. (2008). What’s in a Name? The Use of Quantitative Measures vs. ‘Iconized’ Species When Valuing Biodiversity. Environmental Resource Economics. 39: 247-263.

Return to footnote 36 referrer

Footnote 37

Richardson, L., & Loomis, J. (2009). The total economic value of threatened, endangered and rare species: An updated meta-analysis. Ecological Economics, 68(5), 1535-1548.

Return to footnote 37 referrer

Footnote 38

Tanguay, M., W.L. Adamowicz and P. Boxall. (1995). An Economic Evaluation of Woodland Caribou Conservation Programs in Northwestern Saskatchewan. Project Report 95-01.

Return to footnote 38 referrer

Footnote 39

Adamowicz, W., P. Boxall, M. Williams, J. Louviere, (1998). Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 80, No. 1, pp. 64-75.

Return to footnote 39 referrer

Footnote 40

Harper, D.L. (2012). Analyzing the Economic Benefit of Woodland Caribou Conservation in Alberta. Graduate Thesis, University of Alberta. 2011 values converted to 2019 CND using the Canadian GDP deflator.

Return to footnote 40 referrer

Footnote 41

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: The Ecological and Economic Foundations (2010). Chapter 5: The economics of valuing ecosystem services and biodiversity, pp. 45-46.

Return to footnote 41 referrer

Footnote 42

Biernaskie, J., Faculty of Veterinary Medicine. University of Calgary, News. Self-healing reindeer antlers could lead to breakthrough in human skin regeneration.; Jain, S. (2016). Cell Culture Models For Studying Prion Propagation And Anti-prion Compounds. A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science, Graduate Program in Veterinary Medical Sciences, Calgary, Alberta.

Return to footnote 42 referrer

Footnote 43

Meng, M.S., G C West, L Irving, (1969). Fatty acid composition of caribou bone marrow. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. Volume 30, Issue 1, 187-191.

Return to footnote 43 referrer

Footnote 44

Yannic, G., Pellissier, L., Ortego, J., Lecomte, N., Couturier, Cuyler, C., Dussault, C., Hundertmark, K.J., Irvine, R.J., Jenkins, D.A., Kolpashikov, L., Mager, K., Musiani, M., Parker, K.L., Røed, K.H., Sipko, T., Þórisson, S.G., Weckworth, B.V., Guisan, A., Bernatchez, L. and Côté, S.D. (2014). Genetic diversity in caribou linked to past and future climate change. Nature Climate Change vol. 4, pg 132–13.

Return to footnote 44 referrer

Footnote 45

Courtois, R., Bernatchez, L., Ouellet, JP. and Breton, L. (2003). Significance of caribou (Rangifer tarandus) ecotypes from a molecular genetics viewpoint. Conservation Genetics, Vol. 4: 393.

Return to footnote 45 referrer

Footnote 46

This cost includes additional expenses and labour as well as the costs of updating currently active permits and issuing new ones due to a possible increase in the number of scientific permits requested.

Return to footnote 46 referrer

Footnote 47

Under s.79 of SARA, a project means a designated project as defined in ss.2 or s.66 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, a project as defined in subs. 2(1) of the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act or a development as defined in subs. 111(1) of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act.

Return to footnote 47 referrer

Footnote 48

Federal Sustainable Development Strategy.

Return to footnote 48 referrer

Footnote 49

Sustainable Development Goals.

Return to footnote 49 referrer

Footnote 50

With this proposal, the general prohibitions would only be triggered for the species that are proposed to be listed as Endangered

Return to footnote 50 referrer

Footnote 51

Heritage places under the PCA authority include places such as national parks, national historic sites, heritage canals, national marine conservation areas and Rouge National Urban Park.

Return to footnote 51 referrer

Footnote 52

Section 3 of the Permits Authorizing an Activity Affecting Listed Wildlife Species Regulations, SOR/2013-140.

Return to footnote 52 referrer

Footnote 53

Department of the Environment service performance

Return to footnote 53 referrer

Footnote 54

COSEWIC. 2018. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Hairy Valerian (Valeriana edulis ssp. ciliata) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 35 pp. (http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=24F7211B-1)

Return to footnote 54 referrer

Footnote 55

http://atelierentomologica.tumblr.com/post/48363203765/bee-william-jr-wasden-northwest-canadian-coast

Return to footnote 55 referrer

Footnote 56

http://www.bancroftthisweek.com/?p=4644

Return to footnote 56 referrer

Footnote 57

http://www.firstnations.de/media/01-3-kramer.pdf (PDF)

Return to footnote 57 referrer

Footnote 58

Legal name change in French only from “Grand iguane” to “petites cornes”.

Return to footnote 58 referrer

Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 156, Number 22: Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

Issues

Background

Prohibitions under SARA

Table a1 note(s)

Recovery planning

Protection of critical habitat

Permits issued under SARA

Management of species of special concern

New designatable units

Objective

Description

Table a5 note(s)

Regulatory development

Consultation

Initial consultation results summary

Detailed feedback on the proposed amendments

Response from the Department

Response from the Department

Response from the Department

Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultations

Modern treaty obligations

Indigenous engagement and consultations

Instrument choice

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

Benefits

Cost savings stemming from down-listings

Total economic value of species conservation

Socio-economic and cultural values for Indigenous Peoples

Pest control benefits

Scientific and research value

Nutrient cycling

Existence value

Option value

Costs

1) Costs to stakeholders and Indigenous Peoples

2) Administrative costs to the Government of Canada

3) Permitting applications

Table b2 note(s)

Table b3 note(s)

4) Other costs

Costs and benefits summary

Small business lens

One-for-one rule

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

Strategic environmental assessment

Gender-based analysis plus

Rationale

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

Compliance and enforcement

Service standards

Contact

ANNEX 1 — DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES BEING ADDED, RECLASSIFIED OR REMOVED TO SCHEDULE 1 OF THE SPECIES AT RISK ACT

A- Species proposed for addition to Schedule 1 of SARA:

1. Carey’s Small Limestone Moss (Seligeria careyana) – Endangered

About this species

Benefits of the species

Consultation

Rationale for listing

2. Dalton’s Moss (Daltonia splachnoides) – Endangered

About this species

Benefits of the species

Consultation

Rationale for listing

3. Drooping-leaved Beard-moss (Oxystegus recurvifolius) – Endangered

About this species

Benefits of the species

Consultation

Rationale for listing

4. Columbia Quillwort (Isoetes minima) – Endangered

About this species

Benefits of the species

Consultation

Rationale for listing

5. Dwarf Hesperochiron (Hesperochiron pumilus) – Endangered

About this species

Benefits of the species

10. Greater Short-horned Lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) – Down-listing from Endangered to Special Concern^{footnote 58}