wondering about this story--fisheries act

[32-40win]

Wondering if this may have any basis in fact, and what it really could affect;

http://blogs.canada.com/2012/03/13/are-tories-secretly-rewriting-the-rules-on-protecting-fish-habitat/

[fzo]

it would be of interest to me too living in germany.

[hl649]

The Canada Fisheries Act does not directly protect fish or their habitat. It is very specificaly states that it protects Fisheries not the fish or their habitat. That is to say that any population of fish (i.e., fish is defined as sport fish) that are or have been a part of a recreational, commercial, or native fishery it is protected under the act. The fish themselves and their habitat are protected indirectly because they support the Fishery.

My interpretation of the proposed new wording of the act will strengthen the act by opening up the options of the court and not limiting them to Habitat in Section 35.

Just to clarify: I spent the better part of my life as a Habitat Biologist employed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in Nanaimo. My job was enforcing Section 35 and 36 of the Fisheries Act.

[TyreeUM]

The Canada Fisheries Act does not directly protect fish or their habitat. It is very specificaly states that it protects Fisheries not the fish or their habitat. That is to say that any population of fish (i.e., fish is defined as sport fish) that are or have been a part of a recreational, commercial, or native fishery it is protected under the act. The fish themselves and their habitat are protected indirectly because they support the Fishery.

My interpretation of the proposed new wording of the act will strengthen the act by opening up the options of the court and not limiting them to Habitat in Section 35.

Just to clarify: I spent the better part of my life as a Habitat Biologist employed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in Nanaimo. My job was enforcing Section 35 and 36 of the Fisheries Act.

I guess I am just a bit confused,

35. (1) No person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat.
Marginal note:Alteration, etc., authorized

(2) No person contravenes subsection (1) by causing the alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat by any means or under any conditions authorized by the Minister or under regulations made by the Governor in Council under this Act.

Explain to me again how this does not currently protect fish habitat?

“fish” includes

(a) parts of fish,
(b) shellfish, crustaceans, marine animals and any parts of shellfish, crustaceans or marine animals, and
(c) the eggs, sperm, spawn, larvae, spat and juvenile stages of fish, shellfish, crustaceans and marine animals;

Now explain to me how this only refers to protecting "Fisheries" and not "Fish", which clearly is defined in the section above as ANY fish species at ANY life stage...

[TomE]

Gonna be a tough sell..The Northern Gateway Pipeline will go through! Hell or unProtected High Water!