species at risk

Question 1

making an argument

Answer 1

• give facts and reasons why view should be considered
• legal argument: reasons for a given position based on statutes, case precedents, academic legal texts and reasoning applied to facts of a situation

Question 2

species at risk in 1867?

Answer 2

• not in constitution act 1867
• shared responsibility between feds and provs depending on sp - case by case basis
• if province does nothing with respect to a provincial SAR, feds can step in - rarely done in practice

Question 3

species at risk fed legislation

Answer 3

• species at risk act
• purpose: to prevent wildlife from going extinct, to provide for recovery of widlife that are extirpated, endangered or threatened bc of humans, manage sp of concern to prevent from being endangered or threatened

Question 4

species at risk prov legislation (NS)

Answer 4

• endangered species act
• purpose: to provide protection, designation, recovery to conserve sp at risk
• not all provs have legislation

Question 5

how do you know what sp are listed

Answer 5

• NS: s12, deemed listed sp at risk, regulations made under act
• fed: schedule 1: list of wildlife sp at risk

Question 6

SARA applies to

Answer 6

• migratory birds and aquatic sp everywhere in canada
• some others
• sp only on federal lands

Question 7

who is responsible for SARA

Answer 7

• aquatic sp: minister of fisheries and oceans
• all others: minister of environment
• federal park: minister for parks canada

Question 8

ESA applies to

Answer 8

• all listed SAR

Question 9

who is responsible for ESA

Answer 9

• minister of the department of lands and forestry

Question 10

legal obligations under ESA

Answer 10

• establish recovery teams
• create recovery plants
• recovery plants must: identify core habitat, identify actions to encourage recovery, implement recovery plants to extent feasible

Question 11

ECELAW

Answer 11

• found that department of natural resources hasnt fulfilled legal obligations to complete recovery plans or identify core habitat
• concerned that prov is increasing risk for SARs

Question 12

auditor general of NS

Answer 12

• independent, non partisan officer

- assesses gov to hold it accountable

Question 13

AG’s report on SAR

Answer 13

• government isnt oding enough
• most plans are done, many of the ones that are done are late
• need more coordination with recovery teams
• management doesnt cover all sp
• plans not detailed enough
• recommendation: NR should establish recovery teams and develop new recovery and management plans

Question 14

ECELAW 2019 update

Answer 14

• situation worsened - dept of lands and forestry still failing to complete obligations

Question 15

AG 2019 update

Answer 15

• department didnt comply with AG’s recommendations

Question 16

bancroft v minister of lands and forestry

Answer 16

• grounds: failure to undertake statutory duties
• relief: declaration that minister is acting unlawfully, mandamus: order to comple minister to take action
• waiting for decision

Question 17

WCWC v minister of fisheries and oceans

Answer 17

• SARA: proposed recovery strategies in a certaim timeframe and final recovery strategies published in a certain timeframe
• justice mactavish: courts have right to review actions of gov to see if they comply with law bc ROL, assertion of democracy, not acceptable to miss deadlines, must grant relief, timelines reflect urgency
• case not binding to NS but will hopefully be convincing