Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act: SOR/2024-135
Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 158, Number 14
Registration
SOR/2024-135 June 17, 2024
SPECIES AT RISK ACT
P.C. 2024-713 June 17, 2024
Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of the Environment, pursuant to subsection 27(1) of the Species at Risk Act footnote a, makes the annexed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act.
Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act
Amendments
1 Part 3 of Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act footnote a is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order under the heading “Mammals”:
Wolf, Eastern (Canis sp. cf. lycaon)
Loup de l’Est
2 Part 4 of Schedule 1 to the Act is amended by striking out the following under the heading “Mammals”:
Wolf, Eastern (Canis lupus lycaon)
Loup de l’Est
Coming into Force
3 This Order comes into force on the day on which it is registered.
REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
(This statement is not part of the Order.)
Issues
The Eastern Wolf (Canis sp. cf. lycaon) was listed in Part 4 — Special Concern on Schedule 1 (List of Wildlife Species at Risk) of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2003. A reassessment of the species by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canadafootnote 1 (COSEWIC) was received by the Minister of the Environment (the Minister) in 2015. The reassessment noted a small population size with a restricted range, rendering population expansion unlikely outside of protected areas, and as such assessed the Eastern Wolf as threatened.
The Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act (the Order) is needed to reclassify the Eastern Wolf from a status of special concern to threatened to ensure that the species is afforded a level of protection commensurate with risks to the species’ survival. Listing species at risk on Schedule 1 of SARA, and the associated protections triggered by this listing, support not only the protection of the species, but also overall biodiversity and ecosystem productivity.
Background
The Eastern Wolf is a medium-sized canid with females weighing an average of 24 kilograms (kg) and 29 kg for males. Their fur (pelage) is often described as reddish-brown/tawny but is highly variable. The species is found mostly in deciduous and mixed forest landscapes with dens located in conifer/hardwood-dominated landscapes near a permanent water source, with their territory size often near 200 kmfootnote 2. The wolves live in family-based packs composed of a breeding pair and offspring from the current and previous years. An average of five pups are born from late April to early May and they remain at the den site for 6–8 weeks. Dispersing juveniles leave the pack after 37 weeks. Their diet generally consists of White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus), Moose (Alces alces) and Beaver (Castor canadensis).
The current distribution of Eastern Wolves is thought to be restricted to the forests of central Ontario and southwestern Quebec, namely the Great Lakes–St. Lawrence Forest Region. Eastern Wolves were extirpated from most of their original range in North America due to eradication of large canids over much of the past 400 years. The population size is unknown, but likely fewer than 1 000 mature individuals exist. The estimated minimum population size is 236 mature individuals, mainly located within protected areas. There is little population trend information outside of Algonquin Provincial Park, the site with the most Eastern Wolf records to date, which depicts a relatively stable population.
In 1999, COSEWIC considered the Eastern Grey Wolf (Canis lupus lycaon) a subspecies of the Grey Wolf (Canis lupus) and placed it in the Data Deficient category.footnote 2 Status was re-examined (as Eastern Wolf, Canis lupus lycaon) and designated special concern in 2001. Debate exists about the taxonomic status of the Eastern Wolf but there is consensus, based on genetic analyses, that the Eastern Wolf is not a subspecies of Grey Wolf. In May 2015, the species was reassessed by COSEWIC as a new wildlife species, the Eastern Wolf (Canis sp. cf. lycaon), and was designated as threatened. In the 2015 COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report, the Eastern Wolf was noted to be worthy of conservation because of its distinctiveness, persistence, significance as a large carnivore, and likely part of the last remnant population of the large canids from eastern North America.
General protections
SARA is the primary federal legislation for protecting species at risk and preventing terrestrial species from becoming extinct or extirpatedfootnote 3 from Canada. Environment and Climate Change Canada (the Department) plays a leadership role in delivering on this responsibility, although the responsibility for the conservation of wildlife in Canada is shared among all levels of government. The purposes of SARA are threefold: to prevent wildlife species from becoming extirpated from Canada or extinct; to provide for the 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. When a terrestrial species is listed on Schedule 1 of SARA as extirpated, endangered, or threatened, general prohibitions under sections 32 and 33 of SARA apply automatically on federal land.footnote 4 These general prohibitions make it an offence to kill, harm, harass, capture, or take the listed (extirpated, endangered, or threatened) species, and/or to possess, collect, buy, sell, or trade the listed species or any part or derivative of such. It is also prohibited to damage or destroy the residence (e.g. nest or den) of the species.
Listing a species as endangered, threatened, or extirpated triggers mandatory recovery planning by the competent minister(s)footnote 5 in cooperation with appropriate provincial or territorial governments, other federal ministers with authority over federal lands where the species is found, and wildlife management boards authorized by a land claims agreement, among others. If the recovery of the species is deemed possible, the recovery strategy must address threats to the survival of the listed species, including any loss of habitat, and must include, among other things, the identification of critical habitat, to the extent possible, based on the best available scientific information.
The recovery strategy must also include a statement of when one or more action plans in relation to the recovery strategy will be completed. Action plans summarize the projects and activities required to meet the recovery strategy objectives and goals. Action plans include information on habitat, details of protection measures, and evaluation of socio-economic costs and benefits of the recovery strategy.
If critical habitat is identified on federal lands, the competent minister must protect it using the various tools available under SARA, including, but not necessarily limited to, a critical habitat protection order.
Threats and limiting factors
The main threat and limiting factor for Eastern Wolves outside protected areas are likely human-caused mortality from hunting and trapping, which is facilitated by road networks. Based on research in Algonquin Provincial Park, excessive mortality likely limits dispersal, and alters pack breeding dynamics, leading to another main threat, gene introgression (hybridization) with Eastern Coyotes (Canis latrans var.), due to the lack of available mates of their own species (i.e. Eastern wolves). Habitat loss and fragmentation associated with road networks and urbanization is expected to continue outside protected areas and may deter population expansion.footnote 6
Objective
The objective of the Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act is to support the survival and recovery of the Eastern Wolf in Canada.
Description
The Order amends the List of Wildlife Species at Risk (Schedule 1 of SARA) by up-listing the Eastern Wolf from a species of special concern to threatened.
Regulatory development
Consultation
The Department posted the Minister’s response statement for the Eastern Wolf on the Species at Risk Public Registry on December 23, 2015, which opened consultations. These consultations were supported through the posting of the document entitled Consultation on Amending the List of Species under the Species at Risk Act: Terrestrial Species on the Public Registry in January 2016. The Eastern Wolf was included in this package with an extended nine-month consultation period, from January to October 2016. The consultation document provided information on the Eastern Wolf, including the reason for the proposed reclassification, a biological description and location information. The consultation document was also directly distributed to over 3 200 individuals and organizations, including Indigenous groups, provincial and territorial governments, various industrial sectors, resource users, landowners, and environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGO) with an interest in this species.
Although the initial consultations date back to 2016–2017, the comments remain valid, as the Eastern Wolf faces the same threats as it did at the time of the consultations (a conclusion supported by the species’ 2021 management plan). There have been no significant changes to benefits and socio-economic factors since 2016–2017 with respect to this species, and additional consultations, beyond the Canada Gazette, Part I prepublication consultation, with stakeholders and Indigenous peoples (who largely supported the proposed listing) were therefore deemed not warranted.
To ensure comprehensive and inclusive consultations, in 2016–2017 the Department organized teleconferences and identified direct points of contact to explain the proposal and discuss its potential impacts as needed. In total, the Department received 2 627 comments. Comments were received from ENGOs, Indigenous groups, an industry organization, a provincial government, other federal government departments, and individual members of the public. The majority supported or did not state a position on the proposed up-listing of the Eastern Wolf from special concern to threatened.
Summaries of the initial consultations can be found in the proposed Order Amending Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act, which was prepublished in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on November 11, 2023.
Prepublication in the Canada Gazette, Part I
The proposed amendment was published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on November 11, 2023, followed by a 30-day public comment period. The link to this comment period was also posted on the Public Registry and a social media campaign was launched to raise awareness and encourage stakeholder participation. At the request of stakeholders, the deadline to submit comments on the proposal was extended to January 26, 2024.
A total of 406 comments were received.
There were 18 comments supporting the proposed Order, including 11 individuals, three First Nations and/or Indigenous groups, two non-governmental organizations (NGO), one ENGO and one government-owned contractor-operated organization. Stakeholders noted the important impact the Eastern Wolf has on the ecosystem, including the importance of critical habitat and safe corridors to help with pack dispersal. One First Nation group noted its expertise on Eastern Wolf and offered to undertake genetic analysis testing in their Nation. One stakeholder suggested that the hunting and trapping of all animals should be ceased.
Three comments provided general observations concerning Eastern Wolf populations but did not provide a position on the proposed Order.
A total of 385 comments opposed the proposed Order.
Of these, 339 comments originated from an email/letter-writing campaign organized by the Ontario Fur Managers Federation. The form letter from the campaign identified three main points:
- No evidence to suggest the Eastern Wolf population is decreasing and noted that the COSEWIC report suggests that the Algonquin Park population is stable;
- The analysis did not include consequences on other species in the ecosystem (increased predation of prey species); and
- The socio-economic impacts on trappers and the socio-economic impacts of decreased deer/moose populations (related decrease in hunting licenses purchased) were not assessed.
With the form letters, 49 individuals included further information and reasons for their opposition to the proposed Order. Details are included below.
Outside the letter-writing campaign, 46 opposing comments were received from 32 individual stakeholders, 11 NGOs, one municipal government, one provincial government and one member of a First Nation. Comments covered a range of topics, but were generally related to one of the following six themes:
Comments on the analysis in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS)
The Department received comments from individuals, NGOs, and a municipal government noting concerns with the analysis undertaken in the original RIAS including:
- The negative impact on the balance/health of ecosystems, if the Eastern Wolf is protected, and the impact on other prey species was not captured in the RIAS;
- The economic ramifications on hunters, trappers, and livestock owners were not included in the RIAS.
Wildlife species depend on ecosystems for habitat and are also essential in creating and modifying ecosystems. The presence of apex predators can help keep populations and activities of smaller predators and prey in check. The loss of apex predators from ecosystems has been tied to a rise in smaller predators, such as coyotes, which can result in increased pressure on prey.footnote 7 Although the Department has no official position on the impacts of how species live together in an ecosystem and depend on one another, the positive impacts and support of greater biodiversity seen from the relocation and release of wolves in Yellowstone National Park in the United Statesfootnote 8 would suggest up-listing the Eastern Wolf may enhance ecosystems.footnote 9
The potential socio-economic costs to groups such as farmers, fur managers and hunters/trappers from increased Eastern Wolf predation on livestock and prey species are addressed in the “Regulatory analysis” section below, under “Costs.”
The Department undertook a cost-benefit analysis of the Order, which considered any projected changes over the next 10 years arising from the direct application of the general prohibitions of SARA on federal lands, which are triggered with the listing of the species. The Department determined this to be a low-cost proposal. The details can be found in the “Regulatory analysis” section below.
Impacts on Indigenous harvesting rights
One individual and a member of a First Nation noted concerns that the proposal impacts Indigenous rights to harvest the species.
The Department acknowledges Indigenous peoples will not be able to hunt or trap the Eastern Wolf on federal lands when the Order comes into force. Based on consultations from the pre-listing phase and the comments provided by First Nations groups during the Canada Gazette, Part I, comment period, impacted First Nations groups did not raise concerns related to the ability to hunt or trap Eastern Wolf. Preliminary consultation input suggested that the Eastern Wolf is generally not a harvested species. First Nations groups that provided a stance on the proposal were supportive.
Existing Ontario provincial protections already in place
Comments from individuals and NGOs noted the extensive provincial protections that are already in place in Ontario, suggesting that federal protections could be duplicative and burdensome. Commenters also noted concerns that there will be nowhere left to hunt and trap the Eastern Wolf in Ontario once the new prohibitions are implemented.
The prohibitions under sections 32 and 33 of SARA that are enacted by the Order apply to federal lands only. Federal lands are separate and distinct from provincial lands and are therefore not duplicative of the protections already in place in Ontario. The protection of species at risk is a shared jurisdiction across Canada. The Department has a core responsibility to protect, conserve and recover terrestrial species at risk and their critical habitat. The Department works cooperatively with the provinces and territories, Indigenous groups, other federal departments and agencies and other partners and stakeholders to undertake conservation measures to recover species at risk and protect biodiversity at large. To deliver on its obligations and commitments under SARA, the Department will continue working towards the protection of species at risk. The Department will continue to engage with partners in the delivery of SARA activities.
Identification of the Eastern Wolf
Numerous individuals, NGOs, and a municipal government noted the inability to differentiate between Eastern Wolf, Grey Wolf, and Coyote without genetic testing. Concerns were raised that the inability to distinguish the Eastern Wolf could lead to a halt of all canid harvesting.
The Department recognizes that it can be difficult to distinguish an Eastern Wolf from other wolf species and coyote-wolf hybrids by sight. The Department, in conjunction with Parks Canada will collaborate with federal land managers to raise awareness of the species’ existence on federal lands and will help foster compliance promotion for potentially affected stakeholders and Indigenous peoples using education materials that will help trappers and hunters better identify the Eastern Wolf where it occurs on federal land. Notifications will be sent to federal land managers and Parks Canada staff to ensure awareness of the new protections afforded to the Eastern Wolf with the coming into force of the Order and the Department will publish an Order summary on the Public Registry. Additional materials, such as a frequently asked questions document may be developed. All compliance promotion materials will be available on the Public Registry.
COSEWIC assessment
Individuals, NGOs, and a municipal government disagreed with the COSEWIC assessment noting it was outdated, lacked data, and referenced a stable population in Algonquin Park. Several individuals shared their observation of stable or increasing Eastern Wolf populations in their locations and disagreed with hunting and trapping as being a main threat to the species.
While COSEWIC did note that the Eastern Wolf population was stable in some areas (e.g. Algonquin Provincial Park population), the overall assessment found the Eastern Wolf to be threatened. The Department recommended listing based on the best scientific information available at the time of the COSEWIC assessment and reflecting the use of the precautionary principle: threats to the survival or recovery of the Eastern Wolf should be addressed and cost-effective measures to prevent the reduction or loss of the species should not be postponed because of a lack of full scientific certainty. A reassessment of a wildlife species previously designated in a category of risk is conducted by COSEWIC every 10 years, or earlier if warranted.
Future restrictions on non-federal lands
Two NGOs and a municipal government noted their concern about potential future restrictions that could be placed on non-federal lands.
Up-listing the Eastern Wolf to threatened under SARA triggers a series of obligations for the Department, including the preparation of a recovery strategy that includes the identification, to the extent possible, of the critical habitat necessary for its survival and recovery. The Department has noted the stakeholder concerns and SARA provides the opportunity for these factors to be considered in recovery planning, permitting, and compliance promotion activities. In a case where the Minister 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 Governor in Council (GIC) to apply the SARA prohibitions against destruction of critical habitat on non-federal lands. Before making such a recommendation, the Department would engage in consultations with the appropriate provincial or territorial ministers, stakeholders, and Indigenous groups. In all cases, the GIC makes the final decision on whether to proceed. Until a recovery strategy is finalized, and critical habitat is identified, any costs or impacts associated with a future critical habitat protection order, or other necessary means of critical habitat protection are uncertain.
Other comments received
A provincial government reiterated their comments from pre-listing consultations, noting the Eastern Wolf is not recognized as a distinct species in their province and there could be potential negative economic consequences for the province, if the species is up-listed.
The taxonomic status of the Eastern Wolf has been the subject of debate, however recent progress in genetic research has led to a better understanding of the origins of several species and hybrids of the genus Canis in North America. The genetic analyses have indicated that the Eastern Wolf is not a subspecies of the Grey Wolf, and all indications are that the Eastern Wolf is a distinct species under SARA. Regarding the concerns related to the socio-economic impacts of up-listing, as per the Cabinet Directive on Regulation, the Department undertook a cost-benefit analysis of the Order. The details of which can be found in the “Regulatory analysis” section below.
Modern treaty obligations and Indigenous engagement and consultation
As required by the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation, an assessment of Modern Treaty implications was conducted in relation to the Order. The Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence does not overlap with any Indigenous lands covered by Modern Treaty Agreements, and as such, no modern treaty implications are anticipated.
Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes and affirms the 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.
The Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence intersects with several First Nation reserves, including 11 in Ontario and 3 in Quebec. To ensure comprehensive consultations were undertaken, the Department sent targeted emails and/or letters to individual First Nations organizations, inviting their comments during the initial consultations in 2016–2017. The correspondence set out the consultation approach and offered additional information sources on the listing and consultation processes for terrestrial species. In addition, the Department offered the opportunity for further discussions with any group who requested it, via either a telephone or teleconference consultation session. Five First Nations participated in further consultation sessions including four from Ontario and one from Quebec.
During the additional consultation sessions, one First Nation indicated that some community members trap Grey Wolves and coyotes. Concerns were raised about the difficulties identifying canid species and hybrids, and how this might affect trapping activities. Members were concerned about whether the up-listing of the Eastern Wolf would limit trapping in certain areas, as there is a possibility that the Eastern Wolf may be trapped accidentally even if traps target other species. These comments are addressed in the “Cost-benefit analysis” section of this document.
One First Nation noted that there are only two trappers in their community, and it is unknown if they have ever encountered an Eastern Wolf. It was suggested that the community may require additional educational resources and opportunities to improve the perception of species at risk and encourage stewardship. Information and expertise from First Nation communities will be sought during the recovery planning phase to ensure the inclusion of Indigenous knowledge and scientific expertise in the preparation of recovery documents.
Representatives from two First Nations highlighted the social and cultural significance of the Eastern Wolf to their communities. They suggested that additional resources be attributed to awareness and Eastern Wolf conservation within their respective communities. Interest in DNA sampling of harvested pelts was indicated to help further identify distribution of the species. It was also suggested that educational resources be shared with hunters to help in the identification of the Eastern Wolf.
One First Nation indicated that wolves are not historically trapped in their community, with only three wolves having been harvested by community members. Questions were raised regarding Indigenous rights to harvest listed species for ceremonial and medicinal purposes. The Department indicated that the harvesting of Eastern Wolves off reserve falls under provincial jurisdiction. However, possession of harvested individuals on reserve lands for ceremonial and medicinal purposes would be exempt from application of the federal general prohibitions under SARA. A comment was also made remarking that any restrictions or regulations applying to the Eastern Wolf will affect the community, as the species is located within their traditional territory. Furthermore, a comment was made indicating the community’s general support for the protection of species at risk, but that the Chief and Council would like to see the integrity of their rights maintained.
One First Nation expressed concerns regarding the engagement process, noting that they require more time for the consultation process to review and respond, and that they felt a lack of engagement by the government with people who hold an intimate knowledge of the species. A community member of the same First Nation also expressed concerns with up-listing the Eastern Wolf, citing implications to their beaver trap line. They mentioned that hunters and trappers will be affected if increased Eastern Wolf predation reduces moose, deer and beaver populations. Additionally, it was questioned whether the Department would compensate trappers for their assistance with DNA sampling of canid species.
Many of the comments received point to a need for additional educational materials to help raise awareness about the Eastern Wolf and to assist communities in the identification of the species. The Department is developing compliance and promotion materials to assist the public on this matter. The Department assessed the potential socio-economic impacts (as well as the benefits) that the proposal could have on Indigenous peoples, specifically. The analysis is presented below in the “Cost-benefit analysis” section of this document. With respect to the length of the consultation period, initial consultations were undertaken over a period of nine months (from January to October 2016), which is the time frame for terrestrial species undergoing extended consultations. Follow-up engagement with Indigenous groups and interested stakeholders took place beyond the close of the public consultations, into 2017. The Department makes every effort to ensure that Indigenous communities have the time and resources necessary to participate in the consultation process.
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 competent minister,
- (1) accept the assessment and amend Schedule 1 of the Act (i.e. add, up-list or down-list the species)
- (2) decide not to amend Schedule 1 of the Act
- (3) refer the matter back to COSEWIC for further information or consideration
SARA also stipulates that where the GIC has not taken one of the courses of actions above within nine months after receiving an assessment by COSEWIC, the Minister shall, by order, amend the List in accordance with COSEWIC’s assessment. In the case of the Eastern Wolf, the GIC received the COSEWIC assessment on November 8, 2023.
The protection of species at risk is a shared responsibility between the federal government and the provinces and territories; therefore, the federal government must respect its responsibilities to protect species on federal lands, or everywhere in Canada for migratory birds or aquatic species.
While the Act includes sections that support voluntary stewardship approaches to conservation in collaboration with any other government in Canada, organization, or person and can generate positive outcomes for a species, they do not constitute an alternative to the provisions of the Act as regards a GIC decision or Ministerial Order.
Regulatory analysis
This analysis presents the incremental impacts, both benefits and costs, of the Order. Incremental impacts are defined as the difference between the baseline scenario and the scenario in which the Order is implemented over the same 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 Order in place. The scenario in which the Order is implemented includes the impacts expected to arise from general prohibitions as well any potential future critical habitat protection order on federal lands. 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. Therefore, the analysis is based on the best information available at the time of publication.
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” or “over 10 years” terms were discounted at 3%footnote 10 the period of 2024–2033 to a base year of 2023. Unless otherwise noted, all monetary values reported in this analysis are in 2023 constant dollars.
The Order is expected to trigger protections and coordinated actions to support recovery of the Eastern Wolf, thereby helping to preserve and enhance, in the long-term, the associated socio-economic value and cultural significance to Indigenous peoples, as well as economic, recreational, and cultural opportunities for Canadians (e.g. trapping, wildlife watching, continued existence of an iconic Canadian species). Not all benefits of biodiversity are associated with clear models for attributing value, so the monetary value of those elements that can be quantified is not a complete overall picture of the value of conserving a species. The costs incremental to the Order are expected to be low.
Some First Nation trappers may incur losses stemming from the prohibition on First Nation reserves of activities that can harm Eastern Wolf such as trapping. Losses are estimated to range from zero to up to a present value of $1.2 million over 10 years, depending on the compliance scenario that materializes. No other stakeholders are expected to incur costs related to compliance with general prohibitions, although some may have to apply for a permit, under SARA, to conduct specific activities. For all permit applications expected, the combined incremental cost to applicants (i.e. First Nations, other federal departments, researchers, and scientists) is estimated to be about $80,000 and assumed to be incurred in the first year only. It is assumed that applicants would apply for each required permit only once during the 10-year period, and that the applications would be submitted within the first year following listing. Government administrative costs related to the Order are anticipated to be low, and stem from the development of the recovery strategy and the action plan, permit application review, and compliance promotion and enforcement activities. These are estimated to range between $800,000 and $1.1 million over 10 years. Therefore, the overall costs to society are estimated to range between $900,000 and $2.4 million over 10 years.
Benefits
The assessment of benefits for protecting the Eastern Wolf follows the total economic value (TEV)footnote 11 framework. Success in securing the Eastern Wolf’s continued existence would likely result from a combination of protection and recovery measures undertaken by federal and provincial governments, First Nations peoples and stakeholders. The benefits described below are associated with the successful recovery of Eastern Wolf populations and are not directly attributable to the Order. The current level of scientific knowledge about the species’ population trend remains low but up-listing it to threatened may enable more funding opportunities for scientific research or recovery projects that would benefit the species under existing funding programs dedicated to species at risk conservation and recovery. New scientific research could help determine the factors that may help the species recover over the long term.
Cultural significance to First Nations peoples
As a wolf species, the Eastern Wolf has many meanings for First Nations peoples and is significant to the ways of life for many communities. The land on which the Eastern Wolf resides is also of high importance to First Nations communities for the many flora and fauna that are part of the forest ecosystem, as well as for the many traditional practices that still take place on those lands.
In an effort to gather knowledge on the Eastern Wolf, some First Nations community members shared with the Department the level of significance and importance of the wolves and their dens within their culture and traditions.footnote 12 Research conducted by a First Nation in collaboration with academics also found significant interconnectedness between the Eastern Wolf and Anishinaabeg law as well as the Algonquin way of life. It also found that wolves continue to be considered “equivalent to humans” to this day by some Indigenous people.footnote 13 Stories and teachings related to wolves exist across many First Nation communities. For those consulted, wolves share many spiritual characteristics with humans (e.g. living in family groups and taking care of each other), and are a model for how to interact with nature (e.g. hunting, sustainability, or maintaining a natural balance). A relationship akin to a relationship with a brother or a fellow human exists with wolves. Some individuals expressed having had various experiences with wolves, such as walking with them, sleeping near them, feeling protected by them, and having spiritual experiences involving them when out on the land.footnote 14
Some First Nation communities across Canada report a history of cohabitation with wolves. In some communities, it is considered high praise to be described as “hunting like a wolf.”footnote 15 Wolves are considered as “powerful spirits in the bush” by certain First Nations in eastern Canada, symbolizing guardianship, loyalty and being humble and not arrogant.footnote 12 Athabascan Nations also consider the wolf as important as a brother. The traditional designation of some matrilineal clans as “wolf clans” in Huron, Mohawk, Oneida, and Onondaga cultures date from the early adaptation to an agricultural lifestyle.footnote 16 In these clan systems, different clans are represented by different animals and birds;footnote 17 wolf clans were among the most common. Members of a clan try to abide by the values attributable to their clan animal, which is considered a relative and ancestor of the clan members.footnote 18
As described by McIntyre (1995), if a wolf is trapped accidentally and gravely injured, the situation is explained to the wolf before it is killed and the remains are handled with dignity in order to prevent bad spirits from affecting future hunting efforts.footnote 19 People from the Blackfoot Nation describe the wolf as a sacred medicine animal.footnote 13 Some describe the wolf “nation” as deserving the same rights as people. In addition, many First Nations stories and legends positively portray the wolf, referring to the wolf as an Elder, Teacher, Mentor or Benefactor.
Direct use by First Nations peoples through harvesting
First Nations peoples have been harvesting wolves for various purposes for centuries. For example, wolf parts were historically used among eastern woodlands, plains, and West Coast First Nations communities for ritual and ceremonial purposes. In some instances, wolf skin pouches were used during ceremonies to enclose articles or objects of great significance.footnote 20 More generally, wolf bones, hair, teeth, skins and organs have been used in ceremonies.footnote 21 In some First Nations communities, wolf pelts were used in ceremonies to invoke wolf spirits.footnote 13 While details of sacred ceremonies involving the wolf are not sharable outside the various First Nations communities, some Mohawk and west coast First Nations ceremonies continue to include wolf parts.footnote 22
First Nations peoples from the eastern woodlands have harvested wolves for their hides and body parts to make clothing or utensils, and for decorative, recreational and trade purposes. They have also occasionally harvested wolves for their meat.footnote 23,footnote 13 However, other than in moments of food scarcity, wolves were rarely harvested for their meat.footnote 21 In other words, wolves would only be a last-resort food source.
Non-Indigenous trapping
Wolves and coyotes are harvested mostly through trapping for the purpose of selling their furs and hides for revenue. Based on Canadian fur auction results between 2016 and 2021,footnote 24 on a review of offerings on the market, as well as anecdotal evidence, the value of an average Eastern Wolf pelt is estimated to be within a range of $65 to $204, depending on physical characteristics such as size and colour.footnote 25
Functional benefits
Wolves structure the ecosystems operating under them. Eastern Wolf is known by certain First Nations to curb overpopulated or diseased deer populations.footnote 26 Deer overpopulation causes increased probabilities of deer-car collisions, with associated material and health costs to society.
Recreational value
Wolves provide recreational value to Canadians and visitors; many people enjoy observing them in the wild. One indicator of the recreational value provided by wolves lies in the fact that wolves can be found in most major commercial zoos in Canada, which charge visitors a fee to enjoy watching fauna.footnote 27
In Yellowstone National Park in the United States, the restoration of the wolf population has contributed $69 million in additional annual tourism expenditures for local economies.footnote 28 Algonquin Provincial Park, which is home to most of the Eastern Wolf’s known occurrences, is known to hold “wolf howl” events, where rangers and visitors drive to a location and try to imitate wolf howls to prompt a response back from wolf packs within the park.footnote 29 The last successful “wolf howl” in Algonquin Provincial Park had 1 204 people participate.footnote 30
Existence value
Many people derive well-being from simply knowing that a species exists now and/or in the future. Although no quantitative estimate of the existence value of the Eastern Wolf exists, multiple studies indicate that society places substantial value on vulnerable species, especially charismatic, symbolic, or emblematic species.footnote 31,footnote 32,footnote 33 Wolves are iconic Canadian wildlife species, as indicated by their presence in most zoosfootnote 27 and their prominence in sports teams’ names.footnote 34 Additionally, multiple valuation studies conducted before 2009 in the United States estimated the willingness-to-pay as a one-time payment for either the Grey Wolf’s reintroduction in local natural spaces or for avoiding its local extirpation, at an average of $115 per household.footnote 35 Although the willingness-to-pay for avoiding the loss of the Eastern Wolf in Canada may be different, this demonstrates the general public’s interest for wolf conservation.
Option value
Canadian residents and firms may hold a value associated with the preservation of Canadian genetic information that may be used in the future for biological, medicinal, genetic engineering and other applications. As the Eastern Wolf is genetically distinct from other canid species such as Grey Wolf and Eastern Coyote, it may have an option value related to research, disease prevention, and potential conservation options in the future.
Furthermore, a decision about whether to take action to prevent a species from becoming extinct involves several issues regarding uncertainty and irreversibility. In particular, the potential irreversibility of a decision to not protect creates an imbalance in the cost of making a “wrong” decision. Economic theory also suggests there is a benefit to erring on the side of avoiding an irreversible outcome (i.e. extinction).footnote 36 Therefore, even in situations where predicted protection costs outweigh quantified benefits, given uncertainty and irreversibility the overall benefits of protection may in fact outweigh the costs.
Costs
Costs to First Nations peoples, federal departments and other stakeholders are expected to arise from compliance with general prohibitions, including potential permit applications, and compliance with any future critical habitat protection orders on federal lands. Costs to the Government of Canada would include the effort to develop the recovery strategy and the action plan, permit application processing, as well as enforcement and compliance promotion activities. These costs are discussed further below.
Costs to First Nations peoples of complying with general prohibitions
First Nations peoples that trap canids on reserves could potentially be affected by the Order, as general prohibitions would no longer allow this activity on federal lands, regardless of purpose. Trapping is the largest anthropogenic threat to the Eastern Wolf’s recovery.footnote 37 There are indications that trapping for wolves and coyotes is occurring within the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrencefootnote 38 and that some members of potentially implicated First Nation reserves may engage in this activity. However, it is difficult to estimate the level of Eastern Wolf trapping relative to trapping of other canid species, and, more specifically, to estimate the extent of Eastern Wolf trapping occurring on First Nation reserves as opposed to off reserves. Of the 14 First Nation reserves where the Eastern Wolf could be found, 3 do not have conditions that would be suitable for trapping, while the rest is considered suitable for trapping.
Analysis of commercial trapping losses to First Nations trappers
Given a lack of data on First Nations trapping on reserve and uncertainties regarding how trappers would adjust behaviour to comply with the Order, three scenarios were developed to estimate potential impacts of the Order on commercial trapping. The scenarios do not provide advice on how or where a trapper should conduct trapping activities but were instead created for impact analysis purposes. The scenarios are presented in increasing order of estimated costs to First Nations trappers.
Scenario 1: First Nations trappers choose to trap canids off reserves on non-federal land rather than on reserve
The first scenario is based on anecdotal evidence and the Eastern Wolf’s preferred avoidance of areas occupied by humans. One of the main assumptions is that only minimal or zero trapping of canids currently occurs on reserves within the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence. For those cases where First Nations trappers do engage in trapping of canids on reserves, this scenario assumes that they would choose to trap canids off reserves in order to comply with the general prohibitions against killing individuals set out under SARA. This is based on the assumption that they could not trap other wolves without significant risks of unintentional Eastern Wolf catch. It is also assumed that targeting coyotes on reserves would still pose a risk, although moderate, of unintentionally catching Eastern Wolf. There may be costs related to relocating traps outside reserves and having to travel farther distances to trap lines, as well as for applying for a provincial hunting license which is required off reserve. It is assumed, however, that for the most part, considering the relative limited size of First Nation reserves, Indigenous trappers operating on reserves likely already own a provincial trapping licence. Geospatial analysis shows that First Nation reserves where canid trapping has probability to occur overlaps with less than one percent of the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence, and that lands surrounding most First Nation reserves are likely suitable to Eastern Wolf, which means First Nations trappers would only travel a relatively short distance to reach new trapping areas, for the most part.
For this scenario, based on the distance travelled to substitute trapping outside the Eastern Wolf’s range, the net estimated loss to First Nations peoples could range from zero to a few thousand dollars per year. However, it is assumed that the lost revenue would be offset by higher prices to maintain profits from selling canids harvested off reserve (on non-federal lands).
Scenario 2: First Nations trappers on reserves substitute wolf trapping equipment to target other species
Although not necessarily suitable from a cultural perspective, this scenario presumes that a proportion of First Nations trappers would choose to change their trapping equipment to target other species on reserve (e.g. coyote, beaver). This is based on two assumptions: first, some First Nations trappers may find it easier or may prefer pursuing trapping activities on reserve, instead of substituting trapping locations; second, coyote traps and trapping practices are considered different enough from those of wolves to prevent most or any accidental Eastern Wolf catch.footnote 39 The trappers that would choose to substitute their equipment would be required to buy new equipment and adjust their trapping practices to target and catch non-wolf animals.
Although a potentially higher-cost option for First Nations trappers, it is expected that they would not incur high losses under this scenario, which could be a more viable option in cases where using lands surrounding reserves for trapping wolves would not be the chosen alternative. In this scenario, it is assumed that there are no other factors preventing an increase in trapping of other species (e.g. population sustainability) which equals the decrease in canid trapping.
Scenario 3: First Nations trappers cease all canid trapping activities on First Nations reserve and federal lands
Although anecdotal evidence alludes to minimal trapping occurring on reserves, the full extent of trapping on reserves remains unknown at this time. Therefore, to remain conservative, this higher cost scenario assumes that 100% of the canids harvested by First Nations peoples are caught on federal reserves. This means that a relatively high number of canids are assumed to be caught every year on the implicated First Nation reserves. To comply with general prohibitions under SARA against killing Eastern Wolf individuals, this scenario assumes that First Nations trappers would cease all canid trapping on reserves. This assumes that they could not trap other wolves without a high risk of catching Eastern Wolves and they would believe that traps targeting coyotes would still pose a risk of catching Eastern Wolves as bycatch. Some trappers may substitute with trapping off reserve (on non-federal lands) and with trapping for non-canid species. However, it is assumed that these alternatives would not be sufficient to compensate entirely for the loss due to the relatively high number of trappers engaged in canid trapping under the assumptions of this scenario.
Additionally, this scenario assumes that zero substitution takes place. As such, the loss to First Nations communities is estimated using an approximation of the number of canids harvested by First Nations trappers and then multiplying it by an average value per pelt based on market price. Approximately 50% of trappers in Canada identify as Indigenous.footnote 40 As such, it is assumed that 50% of Eastern Wolves trapped were trapped by Indigenous peoples. This factor is then multiplied by the number of wolf and coyote hides harvested in the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence as per provincial published statistics, which results in the approximate number of canid harvests that are attributable to First Nations trappers. Furs and hides prices vary widely based on multiple factors such as physical characteristics (e.g. size, colour). Based on reports of sales from prominent fur auctions, a range of average canid pelt value of $77 to $248 is used for this analysis.footnote 41 As there is no way to estimate the average expenses/spending associated with wolf trapping and hide selling, the losses to First Nations trappers are based on revenues.
Based on these assumptions and available data, estimates of losses to First Nations trappers for this scenario range from $50,000 to $150,000 annually, or between $400,000 and $1.24 million over 10 years. These estimates are considered overestimates based on the conservative nature of the assumptions taken.
It is expected that scenarios 1 or 2 would be more likely to materialize than scenario 3, based on the most rational behaviour expected to be adopted by First Nations trappers that engage in the trapping of canids on reserves.
Analysis of trapping and possession on First Nation reserves for non-commercial purposes
Under SARA, the possession of Eastern Wolf parts or derivatives for ceremonial or medicinal purposes would still be allowed on First Nation reserves following implementation of the Order. Based on consultation results, there is no indication that Eastern Wolf parts are kept on reserves for purposes other than ceremonial or medicinal purposes. While possession for these purposes is exempted under SARA, killing Eastern Wolves on First Nation reserves would be prohibited. Therefore, in addition to the costs related to prohibition of commercial trapping, there may be costs to First Nations peoples related to these other purposes, which are not considered in the three previous scenarios.
To comply with general prohibitions, there is a high likelihood that those First Nations trappers would substitute that activity with trapping off reserve on non-federal lands. These trappers would incur costs corresponding to the distance they would travel to reach a new trapping location off reserve. Assuming trapping for non-commercial purposes is relatively infrequent, these First Nations Indigenous trappers would likely incur minimal costs.
There is also a possibility that some trappers would stop trapping for canids altogether. Although customs of First Nations peoples and communities within the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence are not entirely known, it is assumed that if trappers halted canid trapping, they could lose the opportunity to benefit from the traditional uses of the hides or body parts of wolves. This could be for purposes such as ceremonies, which can be central to the identity of many First Nations peoples,footnote 42,footnote 43 as well as for decorative or recreational purposes, or as artefacts.footnote 44 They would also lose the capacity to use this particular experience as an opportunity to pass on knowledge and teach specific skills to younger members of their family or to enjoy interactions inherent to this activity, such as connecting with one another, including family and friends. A part of these losses could be substituted at a moderate cost through buying hides on the fur market, although uses that rely on the actual trapping experience could not be substituted.footnote 45
Additionally, some First Nations trappers may be targeting canids on reserves to reduce the predation on other species that represent their main trapping targets for either revenue or consumption purposes. In preventing future canid trapping on First Nation reserves, the Order may affect the productivity of these First Nations trappers’ other trap lines, which could result in revenue losses, the extent of which has not been estimated due to significant uncertainty.
Analysis of other potential direct impacts on non-Indigenous trapping
Since canid trapping and hunting is currently not allowed on any of the 10 federally administered properties implicated by the Order (see Table 1 below), there will be no impact to hunters or trappers on those properties.
Certain trappers have raised concerns following prepublication in Canada Gazette, Part I, that the administrative burden to engage in wildlife management (e.g. coyote population control), such as permit applications, will become even more time consuming, particularly in Ontario where Eastern Wolf already benefits from significant provincial protection. But since general prohibitions triggered by the Order on federal lands will not directly affect non-Indigenous trappers, their administrative burden is expected to remain unchanged.
Analysis of other potential indirect impacts on non-Indigenous trapping
Many stakeholders raised concerns following prepublication in the Canada Gazette, Part I, about potential indirect impacts from incremental protection for the Eastern Wolf on federally administered lands and First Nation reserves. For instance, many hunters and hunting-related associations expressed concern that an increase in canid populations will move across the boundaries of the federal lands and First Nation reserves due to these additional protections and affect their activities on non-federal lands. In theory, an increase in canid populations beyond federal land properties could lead to increased predation of prey species such as beaver, deer and moose which are being hunted for commercial purposes. It could also lead to increased competition with non-apex predators (e.g. fox, mink, marten), which are also hunted for commercial purposes, making them less prevalent in the wild. Hunters and trappers operating near areas that would gain incremental protection could therefore incur costs from reduced harvests and associated fur sales, unless they increase canid trapping efforts in those areas. A few farmers and farming-related associations have also raised similar concerns about the potential increase in canid populations near federal properties, which could lead to more predation on livestock. This would force farmers to engage in more preventative measures to limit those consequences, which can be costly to implement (e.g. fencing, raising guardian animals, labour). However, since canid trapping is currently not allowed on the 10 federally administered properties implicated by the up-listing (see Table 1 below), it is not expected that the Order will lead to increased canid numbers in the areas surrounding these properties, as it is not changing in any significant way the permitting scheme for hunters and trappers. As for population increases following the protection on the 11 First Nation reserves identified where the wolf may occur and where trapping would be considered safe to humans to conduct (i.e. away from human settlements), given the minimal new areas that would be covered by the general prohibitions (i.e.~0.7% of the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence) and considering that canid trapping is likely not regularly conducted on all 11 of those reserves, it is expected that fluctuations in canid populations in areas surrounding reserves due to the Order will remain minimal.
Analysis of costs to other government departments
There are 10 federally administered properties under the authority of 5 different federal departments and agencies identified as both being located within the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence and containing habitat at least somewhat suitable to the Eastern Wolf may be affected by the Order. Trapping is not currently allowed on these properties. Minimal impacts from the Order are expected for all these properties with the exception of the Chalk River Laboratories (CRL) property where higher costs may be incurred. These properties are listed in the table below.
| Name of property | Federal Department owner | Region |
|---|---|---|
| Burwash Military Training Site | National Defence | Northern Ontario |
| CFB Petawawa | National Defence | Eastern Ontario |
| Chalk River Laboratories | Atomic Energy of Canada Limited | Eastern Ontario |
| Georgian Bay Islands National Park of Canada | Parks Canada | Central Ontario |
| Killaloe/Bonnechere Airport | Transport Canada | Northern Ontario |
| Nuclear Demonstration Site | Atomic Energy of Canada Limited | Eastern Ontario |
| CFB Valcartier | National Defence | Capitale-Nationale, Quebec |
| Forges du Saint-Maurice National Historic Site of Canada | Parks Canada | Mauricie, Quebec |
| Gatineau Park | National Capital Commission | Outaouais, Quebec |
| La Mauricie National Park of Canada | Parks Canada | Mauricie, Quebec |
Two properties owned by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), the CRL and a site referred to as the Nuclear Demonstration site, are operated by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), a government-owned contractor-operated company. Trapping on AECL properties is not authorized, and CNL has an environmental and wildlife management program which helps support compliance with SARA and overall limit negative impacts of its activities over local fauna and flora. However, following concerns raised by CNL during consultations conducted in 2017 related to monitoring, habitat definition, and threats identification, the Department consulted with them again in 2022 to obtain additional details on potential impacts to their plans and activities. One such plan is the proposed construction of a Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) on the CRL property for storing solid low-level nuclear waste such as contaminated personal protective clothing and building materials mostly generated at the CRL site, but also other AECL facilities or from commercial sources (e.g. Canadian hospitals and universities).footnote 46 This project was authorized by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) on January 8, 2024. In a letter sent to the Department as part of the Canada Gazette, Part I, consultations in 2023, CNL confirmed after genetic testing was conducted, the presence of Eastern Wolf and Eastern Wolf hybrids at the CRL property. CNL has also identified wolf dens and rendezvous sites in the area, but away from the proposed NSDF site, which they have been monitoring using trail cameras since 2021.
The NSDF’s construction phase would start with the clearing of a forested patch of land to prepare the site. Surveys conducted by CNL found no active wolf dens (considered a residence under SARA) on the potential construction site. However, a full analysis of the impacts of the construction activity on Eastern Wolf individuals at the site would need to be conducted through a SARA permitting lens to determine the impact of the Order on the project. The wolf dens identified on the CRL property are located in a different area a few kilometres away from where the NSDF project is planned to be built. The section “Potential impact of future SARA regulations,” below, provides additional details about the potential future SARA regulatory action. The Department has conducted cost estimates for various scenarios of potential future regulatory action. Except under the least probable scenario, costs to CNL would be negligible. In a scenario where the project was unable to proceed, CNL estimates costs at $160 million, corresponding to cancelling the current project.footnote 47
Two military bases and one shooting range owned by the Department of National Defence (DND) contain habitat suitable for the Eastern Wolf: CFB Petawawa, CFB Valcartier and the Burwash Military Training site. There are limited impacts expected for DND, as trapping is not authorized and DND has environmental and wildlife management programs in place to support compliance with SARA and other environmental legislation. However, where activities are related to national security or authorized under another Act of Parliament, the properties or portions of them may be exempted from the general prohibitions and critical habitat protections under SARA.
Three Parks Canada administered properties contain habitat that could be suitable to the Eastern Wolf, but only La Mauricie National Park of Canada is likely to have Eastern Wolf occurrences. Therefore, and given it contains pristine habitat for the Eastern Wolf, critical habitat has high potential of being identified within this property. However, species and habitats are already afforded protection in national parks and national historic sites under the Canada National Parks Act. Therefore, Parks Canada would incur no incremental impacts from having to comply with general prohibitions or from a potential critical habitat protection order stemming from the Order. However, it is expected that Parks Canada SARA compliant permits may be needed for some activities in this park, as described further below.
A property owned by Transport Canada (TC) is currently in the process of being transferred to a First Nation. Given this ongoing process, TC has ceased all activities at the property, and is therefore not implicated by the Order.
Gatineau Park, which is under the authority and management of the National Capital Commission (NCC), was identified as having habitat suitable to the Eastern Wolf. However, genetic testing conducted by the NCC concluded that local wild canids are not Eastern wolves.footnote 48
Costs of permit applications
Permits would be required for activities that would otherwise be prohibited under SARA. Although no conclusions can be made on whether a permit could be issued prior to the submission and review of the application, this analysis considers the potential labour cost implications of applying for a permit as a result of the Order and assumes that no further costs are incurred by applicants related to prohibitions, i.e. the permit would be approved. It is assumed that applicants would need to apply for each required permit only once over the 10-year analytical period.
Based on the analysis of upcoming projects, it is unlikely that many permit applications would be submitted for incidental activities. On the other hand, research permits and those for activities benefiting the species or required to enhance its chance of survival in the wild are likely to be applied for. In addition to the consultations for the change in status for this species, there have been ongoing consultations on the development of the management plan. The Department’s consultations and these recovery engagement efforts have shown that at least some First Nations communities have already participated in or are actively participating in ongoing research activities targeting Eastern Wolf recovery, some as part of various conservation funding programs. Some First Nations have also signified their interest to collaborate with the federal government on conservation and recovery of the Eastern Wolf during preconsultations.
Assuming one First Nation band will apply for permits on behalf of all First Nations reserves with which they are associated, it is estimated that bands would apply for 12 permits.footnote 49 Of these 12, up to 2 permits are expected for activities where affecting the species is incidental to the conducting a specific activity, and the rest is assumed to be for research related to the conservation of the species or for activities that benefit the species. These permits are estimated to cost the First Nations up to $18,000 (undiscounted) in administrative costs.
Federal departments are anticipated to apply for up to 10 permits in total, with up to 6 for activities where affecting the species is incidental to conducting a specific activity, 1 for research purposes or to benefit the species and 3 to make Parks Canada permits under the Canada National Parks Act SARA compliant. Given that CNL has extensive wolf presence on their properties, which is likely to be identified as Eastern Wolf, they have estimated above average costs per permit application. Therefore, the potential incremental resources required for the preparation of permit applications and notification letters are approximately $48,000 (undiscounted) in labour cost. Based on the average expected permitting costs, permits for all other federal properties are estimated to cost up to $15,000 (undiscounted) in administrative costs.
The total incremental costs to the Government of Canada associated with the review of these 22 potential permit applications, 19 of which would be new and 3 of which would be the SARA compliant increment, in the 10 years following the listing are estimated to cost up to $65,000 (undiscounted).
| Type of permit application | Cost per permit table b2 note a | Number of applications |
|---|---|---|
| Incidental impact permit | $2,700 | 8 |
| Research permit | $1,300 | 11 |
| Parks Canada on Parks Canada administered land | $800 | 3 |
Table b2 note(s)
|
||
| Type of permit application | Cost per permit table b3 note a | Number of applications |
|---|---|---|
| New permit – the Department | $3,400 | 19 |
| SARA compliant increment permit – the Department | $700 | 3 |
Table b3 note(s)
|
||
Administrative costs to the Government of Canada
The cost to the Government of Canada to develop the recovery strategy and the action plan for the Eastern Wolf is estimated to be between $160,000 and $400,000 (undiscounted).
Implications in terms of compliance promotion for the Eastern Wolf are uncertain at this time, but assumptions based on the activities expected to be undertaken and material expected to be developed is estimated to be $15,000 in the first year of implementation of the Order.
The Order is expected to generate enforcement costs for the Government of Canada. Pre-operational enforcement efforts (i.e. strategic development and engagement with First Nations peoples and stakeholders) is estimated to cost about $48,000. The enforcement cost during the first year of implementation is estimated at about $100,000. This includes $34,000 for engagement and analysis, $48,000 for inspections and $18,000 for measures to deal with any alleged violations. The estimated total for each subsequent year of operation is estimated to be $55,000, for total costs of $600,000 over 10 years.
Implications on impact assessments
There could be some implications for projectsfootnote 50 required to undergo an impact assessment (IA) by or under an Act of Parliament. However, any costs are expected to be minimal relative to the total cost of performing an IA. Once a species is listed in Schedule 1 of SARA, under any designation, additional requirements under section 79 of SARA are triggered for project proponents and government officials undertaking an IA. These requirements include identifying all adverse effects that the project could have on the species and its critical habitat and, if the project is carried out, to ensure that measures are taken to avoid or lessen those effects and to monitor them. However, the Department always recommends to proponents in IA guidelines (early in the IA 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.
Potential impact 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 initially 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 then subsequent obligations related to the protection of that critical habitat. Protecting critical habitat on federal lands is required under SARA and could require regulatory action, such as a critical habitat protection order. If the Minister formed the opinion that critical habitat on non-federal land was not effectively protected or that there was an imminent threat to the species, other regulatory action could also be taken under SARA. The socio-economic impacts of each regulatory action would be assessed if this additional protection became necessary.
Summary of benefit-cost analysis
Implications for affected First Nations
Given the significant cultural and spiritual value associated with wolves within the traditions of many First Nations in Canada, including the Eastern Wolf, First Nations peoples would likely benefit more than any other demographic groups in Canada from any measure that contributes to the protection and conservation of this species.
General prohibitions may impact Indigenous people if they engage in trapping of canids on the First Nation reserves located within the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence. As they would no longer be permitted to harm or kill an Eastern Wolf on federal land, trappers may have to change their trapping activities to ensure compliance with the Order. There are indications that trapping for wolves and coyotes does occur within the Eastern Wolf’s extent of occurrence and that members of these potentially implicated First Nation reserves engage in this activity. However, canid trapping is likely practised by only a small proportion of these individuals, and the proportion of those who practise it on reserves is likely significantly smaller.
| Affected Activity | Description of cost |
|---|---|
| First Nations trapping for non-commercial purposes | First Nations peoples who occasionally engage in trapping of canids on reserves for non-commercial purposes and end-uses (e.g. cultural, ceremonial) may also incur impacts. Although disproportionate impacts for these individuals could be expected, it is assumed that they could continue engaging in non-commercial trapping beyond the reserves’ boundaries, on non-federal lands, where there is likely significantly more habitat suitable to canids, and presumably more canids. This would somewhat mitigate the resulting negative impacts on these individuals. |
| Affected stakeholder | Description of cost | Monetized total present value (over 10 years) |
|---|---|---|
| First Nations trappers for commercial purposes | Avoidance of canid trapping on First Nations reserves | 0 – $1.24 million table b5 note a |
| Activity resulting in incidental takes of Eastern Wolves | Permit applications by First Nations bands | $18,000 |
Table b5 note(s)
|
||
Other benefits of the Order
Other than contributing to maintaining the cultural and spiritual value of the Eastern Wolf to First Nations peoples as mentioned above, the Order is expected to trigger protections and coordinated actions to support recovery of the wolf, which will help to preserve and enhance economic, recreational, and cultural opportunities for Canadians (e.g. wildlife watching, continued existence of an iconic Canadian species).
Monetized Costs to the Government of Canada
| Affected stakeholder | Description of cost | Monetized total present value (over 10 years) table b6 note a |
|---|---|---|
| Other departments and agencies | Permit applications | $65,000 |
| Department of the Environment | Permit applications processing | $65,000 |
| Development and publication of recovery strategy and action plan | $150,000 to $380,000 | |
| Compliance promotion | $15,000 | |
| Enforcement | $600,000 | |
Table b6 note(s)
|
||
The total incremental monetized costs to society of the Order are expected to be low, estimated to be between $900,000 and $2.4 million over 10 years.
| Affected stakeholders | Description of cost | Monetized total present value (over 10 years) table b7 note a |
|---|---|---|
| Indigenous Peoples and First Nations | Mitigation costs for avoidance of canid trapping and permit application costs for activity resulting in incidental takes | $18,000 to $1.24 million |
| Government of Canada | All costs | $895,000 to $1.13 million |
| Total monetized costs to society | ~$900,000 to $2.4 million table b7 note b | |
Table b7 note(s)
|
||
Small business lens
Analysis under the small business lens concluded that certain Canadian small businesses would be affected by the Order. First Nations trappers that engage in commercial trapping of canids on First Nation reserves could be affected by the Order. It may force them to mitigate their activities to avoid catching Eastern Wolves, which could result in incremental costs for them. However, based on the multi-scenario analysis presented above, it is expected that trappers will choose the two most likely scenarios, which would not result in significant costs for them. In the unlikely event that they would decide to stop trapping for canids altogether and not substitute with trapping of other species or trap off reserves and not on federal lands, then they may incur higher costs.
One-for-one rule
The one-for-one rule does not apply, as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on businesses and no regulatory titles are repealed or introduced.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), a government-owned contractor-operated company, is likely to incur administrative costs due to new permit applications required to make their activities compliant under SARA once the Eastern Wolf’s status is up-listed to threatened. Since CNL is operating on behalf of the Government of Canada, in this role it does not meet the definition of a business for the purposes of this analysis.
Regulatory cooperation and alignment
The federal government plays a leadership role as federal regulator in the designation of species at risk in Canada. However, the protection of wildlife species is a responsibility shared between the federal, provincial, and territorial levels of government.
In the Province of Ontario, the Eastern Wolf is listed under Ontario’s Endangered Species Act, 2007, as threatened. In Ontario, wolves are protected from regulated hunting and trapping in the Algonquin Provincial Park, in the townships surrounding the Park, and in all provincial Crown Game Preserves. Eastern Wolves are also protected from hunting, but not from trapping, in the French River Park. In the Province of Quebec, wolves are considered fur-bearers and hunting and trapping of the species are regulated under the Act Respecting the Conservation and Development of Wildlife. However, they are not protected under the Act Respecting Threatened or Vulnerable Species. At the time of publication of the COSEWIC assessment in 2015, the Eastern Wolf was not officially recognized as a distinct species by Quebec. That was still the case as of February 2024.
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. In this spirit of cooperation, the Government of Ontario, and the Government of Quebec provided comments during the development of the Eastern Wolf’s 2021 Management Plan. These acts of provincial cooperation are expected to continue with future development of the recovery strategy and action plans. The development of the recovery strategies and action plans, which would be triggered after amending the status of the species included in the Order, would also require input from and coordination with different land management authorities such as other levels of government and Indigenous communities.
Strategic environmental assessment
A strategic environmental assessment concluded that the Order results in important positive environmental effects. Specifically, it demonstrates that the protection of wildlife species at risk contributes to national biodiversity and protects ecosystem productivity, health and resiliency.
The Order helps 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. The Eastern Wolf is considered an important keystone species providing important ecosystem services such as nutrient cycling which help to keep ecosystems productive, and animal population control which helps to maintain optimal habitat for other animals and plant species. Slight changes within an ecosystem resulting in the loss of individuals and species can therefore have adverse, irreversible and broad-ranging effects.
The Order supports the 2022–2026 Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS) goal to “Protect and Recover Species, Conserve Canadian Biodiversity” by directly supporting the protection and recovery of the Eastern Wolf, thereby conserving Canadian biodiversity. The Order supports this goal by helping to ensure that the Eastern Wolf is provided appropriate protection consistent with the recommendations made by COSEWIC and can benefit from recovery measures, as appropriate. It would also indirectly contribute to the FSDS goal of “Effective Action on Climate Change” by supporting the conservation of biodiversity, because the forest ecosystems of the Eastern Wolf play a key role in mitigating climate change impacts, as they sequester atmospheric carbon. The proposed Order also supports the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development concerning Life on Land (goal 15) and Climate Action (goal 13).
The Order supports the recently adopted Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Frameworkfootnote 51 and the overarching global goal regarding the “sustainable use and management of biodiversity to ensure that nature’s contributions to people are valued, maintained, and enhanced.”
Gender-based analysis plus
A gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) assessment was conducted for this proposal, looking at whether characteristics such as sex, gender, age, race, sexual orientation, income, education, employment status, language, visible minority status, region of residence, disability, or religion could influence how a person is impacted by the Order.
The analysis found that, in general, Canadians benefit positively from the protection of species at risk and from maintaining biodiversity. However, First Nations peoples, in particular male trappers, may disproportionately incur negative impacts because of the Order, as they are generally more engaged in trapping activities than any other demographic group across Canada. It could be challenging for them to try to compensate for the loss of revenue arising from having to decrease or cease canid trapping habits in order to avoid Eastern Wolf by-catch, and to find an alternative source of income. A 2015–2016 First Nations Regional Health Survey reported that 4.3% of First Nation adults (6.9% males and 1.6% females) across Canada engaged in trapping activities during the three months prior to the survey.footnote 52 Of the approximately 50 000 active trappers across Canada, half are estimated to be Indigenous peoples.footnote 53
Although the number of Indigenous trappers that engage in canid trapping on the implicated First Nations reserves as well as their sociodemographic profile are unknown, a Quebec provincial survey determined that in 2016, around 95% of all trappers were male, while 70% of trappers were also over 44 years old, and 45% had high school education, or less.footnote 54
Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards
Implementation
The Order comes into force on the day on which it is registered.
As a newly listed threatened species on Schedule 1 of SARA, the Department is responsible for the preparation of a recovery strategy for the Eastern Wolf. The recovery strategy will be prepared in cooperation with the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, Parks Canada, Indigenous groups, and any other person or organization that the Department considers appropriate. If recovery is deemed feasible, the recovery strategy will address threats to the survival of the Eastern Wolf and identification of its critical habitat to the extent possible. A statement of when one or more action plans in relation to the recovery strategy will be completed is also required. The recovery strategy must be included in the public registry within two years after the species is listed.footnote 55,footnote 56
Compliance and enforcement
The Department and Parks Canada will implement a compliance promotion plan. Compliance promotion initiatives are proactive measures that encourage voluntary compliance with the law through education and outreach activities and help raise awareness and understanding of the prohibitions. Compliance promotion initiatives aim to:
- increase awareness, understanding and compliance with the Order;
- promote the adoption of behaviours that will contribute to the overall conservation and protection of wildlife at risk in Canada; and
- increase general knowledge regarding species at risk.
These objectives may be accomplished, where applicable, through the dissemination of information products to Indigenous peoples and/or stakeholders explaining new prohibitions on federal lands with respect to the Eastern Wolf as it relates to the Order. These products would be posted on the SAR Public Registry. Mail-outs and presentations to targeted audiences may also be considered, as needed.
Within Parks Canada’s network of protected heritage places, front-line staff are given the appropriate information regarding the species at risk found within their sites to inform visitors of prevention measures and engage them in the protection and conservation of species at risk.
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. The offences and punishments are set out under SARA.footnote 57
Permits issued under SARA and service standards
Under section 73 of SARA, the competent minister may enter into an agreement or issue a permit authorizing a person to engage in an activity affecting a listed wildlife species, any part of its critical habitat, or the residences of its individuals. Section 74 allows for the competent minister to issue permits under another Act of Parliament (e.g. Canada National Parks Act) that would have the same effect as those issued under section 73. SARA sets out the conditions and factors that the Minister must consider before issuing a permit.
Under the Permits Authorizing an Activity Affecting Listed Wildlife Species Regulations, the Department is normally required to make a decision on a permit application within 90 days. The 90-day countdown begins on the date of the notice informing an applicant that the Department has received a complete application. If an application is incomplete, the Department will notify the applicant, and the time limit will be suspended until all the missing information is received. The regulations set out the exceptions to the 90-day service standard. The purpose of the service standards is to contribute to consistency, predictability and transparency of the SARA permitting process by providing applicants with clear and measurable service standards for the permit application process. The Department measures its service performance annually, and performance information is posted on the Department’s website no later than June 1 for the preceding fiscal year.
Contact
Paula Brand
Director
Species at Risk Act Policy Division
Canadian Wildlife Service
Environment and Climate Change Canada
351 Saint-Joseph Boulevard, 15th Floor
Gatineau, Quebec
K1A 0H3
Telephone: 1‑800‑668‑6767
Email: LEPreglementations-SARAregulations@ec.gc.ca