Photo by Frank Fichtmueller / Pond5
By Dr. Valli Fraser-Celin
Gordon, S. C. C., Duchesne, A. G., Dusevic, M. R., Galán-Acedo, C., Haddaway, L., Meister, S., Olive, A., Warren, M., Vincent, J. G., Cooke, S. J., & Bennett, J. R. (2024). Assessing species at risk legislation across Canadian provinces and Territories. FACETS, 9, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2023-0229
A group of scientists interested in the species at risk (SAR) legislation across Canada teamed up to assess current species at risk laws and regulations in all 13 provinces and territories; if there were no SAR-specific laws, they examined applicable legislation concerning wildlife. The last similar assessment was conducted in 2012 by Ecojustice which concluded that Canada was doing an “abysmal job” protecting species at risk and their habitats across the country.
Unlike the Ecojustice report, this paper did not examine the federal Species At Risk Act (SARA). Instead the authors examined provincial and territorial legislation that focused on the Acts regulating SAR, species listing, protections for species and their habitats, and recovery plans. They examined legislation according to the four main criteria used by Ecojustice: “identify species at risk, don’t kill them, give them a home, and help them recover”. The authors also provide seven recommendations for improvement.
Image by FoxysGraphic / Getty
Below is a high-level summary of each province and territory’s species at risk related legislation, listing process (identify species at risk), species/habitat protection (don’t kill them/give them a home), and recovery strategies (help them recover).
Species at Risk Legislation by Province/Territory
| Province/Territory | Legislation | Listing Process | Species/Habitat Protection | Recovery |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| British Columbia Four species are considered threatened or endangered under the Wildlife Act; 85 at risk under the Forest and Range Practices Act. These have not been updated since 1990. | No SAR Act; legislation distributed across multiple acts (e.g. Wildlife Act, etc). | Species listed as endangered or threatened under the Wildlife Act. Species assessments and recommendations for listing are conducted by the B.C. Conservation Data Centre. | When listed, species are automatically protected against hunting, trapping, transport, and harm. | Recovery plans are created through a federal-provincial partnership, however, legislation does not detail a specific timeframe or that a strategy must be implemented. Recovery plans must include Indigenous representation and Indigenous Knowledge. |
| Alberta 24 species are listed by the province. | The Wildlife Act is used by the province to enforce SAR protections and only protects at-risk vertebrate species. | Species status is updated every 5 years by the Alberta Conservation Association and Alberta Environment and Parks. The Minister of Environment and Protected Species is ultimately responsible for species listings. | Habitat designation falls under legislation such as the Wilderness Areas, Ecological Reserves, Natural Areas and Rangelands Act. | Critical habitat may be incorporated into protections for recovery plans, however the implementation of such planning is not required under the Wildlife Act. |
| Saskatchewan 15 species are listed under the Wild Species at Risk Regulations, however this has remained unchanged since 1999. | SAR are listed under The Wildlife Act. | Listing is developed by the Minister of Environment with approval from the Lieutenant Governor in Council. | The Wildlife Act protects listed species but not habitats, though some regulations may be put into place at the discretion of the Ministry. The Director of Fish and Wildlife can approve licences to remove or destroy SAR if they post a threat to human life or property. | The Minister may prepare recovery plans and may take into consideration scientific evidence. No timeline or updates are required. |
| Manitoba Manitoba is the only jurisdiction in North America to list entire ecosystems as threatened or endangered. 65 species are listed under the ESEA. | Most SAR are listed under The Endangered Species and Ecosystems Act (ESEA) with some species protected under The Wildlife Act. | The Minister of Natural Resources and Northern Development must organize an Endangered Species Advisory Committee made up of 7-9 professional scientists. The committee must provide annual recommendations. | SAR are protected under the ESEA. Their habitat is also protected from destruction, interference, or disturbance even on private property. | A recovery strategy or reintroduction in the case of extirpated species (unless not feasible) must be developed by the Minister’s department. No timelines or updates are required and no strategies are publicly available. |
| Ontario 266 are listed by the province. | SAR are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). A committee of experts, scientists and Indigenous Knowledge holders must be developed. | The committee develops assessment and classification criteria which is then presented to the Minister who then has 12 months to amend classifications, or ask for another report which resets the 12 months, which can cause delays. | SAR and their habitat are protected under ESA, with regulations for private land. The Minister may suspend initial protection for up to 3 years for a newly listed species. | Recovery plans must be prepared within one year for endangered species and two years for threatened species. Within nine months the Minister must publish a response statement to the recovery strategy, and must release a progress report no later than five years after the initial response statement. However, recovery strategies have been delayed for many species, some for more than eight years. |
| Québec 151 species are listed by the province. | SAR protected under the Act Respecting Threatened or Vulnerable Species (ARTVS) and the Act Respecting the Conservation and Development of Wildlife (ARCDW). Additional rights held by Indigenous Peoples fall under the Act Respecting Hunting and Fishing in the James Bay and New Québec territories. | The listing process includes the advice of an independent committee with scientific expertise. There is no timeline for listing a species, which may only be listed as threatened or vulnerable. | No automatic protection for listed animal species (with some exceptions) however the ARTVS does prohibit harm to plant species with some exceptions. | Recovery plans may be implemented by the government; a review of the plans is not required. Recovery plans are publicly available for animals, but not plants. |
| Newfoundland and Labrador 35 species are listed by the province. | SAR are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), with Inuit rights to harvesting held under the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement Act. | A committee makes recommendations following the recommendation criteria by COSEWIC. Decisions must be based on scientific and traditional ecological knowledge. There is no timeline for listing. | Species listed as threatened, endangered, or extirpated are protected, but not those listed as vulnerable. There is no automatic habitat protection. | A recovery team is required to develop a recovery plan for species classified as threatened, endangered, or extirpated. The recovery plan must be published within three years for extirpated species, two years for threatened species, and one year for endangered species, though extensions may be granted. A management plan outlining conservation measures must be developed for species classified as vulnerable and released within three years of their designation. It is not required to implement these plans. |
| New Brunswick 91 species are listed by the province. | SAR are protected under the Species at Risk Act (SARA NB). | The Minister appoints the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk (COSSAR) to assess at-risk wildlife, prioritize species for protection, and review classifications every 10 years. | SARA NB mandates the designation of SAR but does not include enforceable timelines or provide habitat protection. For species listed as extirpated, endangered, or threatened under the NB SARA, the Minister must conduct a protection assessment to decide whether protection measures are necessary. This assessment considers management, social and economic impacts, and land ownership. | A management plan is required for species of Special Concern, but there are no deadlines, and only two out of 21 plans have been completed to date. For species listed as extirpated, endangered, or threatened, a feasibility assessment determines if recovery is possible |
| Prince Edward Island 28 species are federally listed in PEI. | Prince Edward Island does not have separate legislation for protecting SAR; protections are part of the Wildlife Conservation Act. | If the Minister of Environment, Energy, and Climate Action identifies a species as at risk, they may recommend its listing as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern to the Lieutenant Governor in Council. The Act does not require the Minister to list any species, and no species have been listed since the creation of the Act. | Listed SAR are protected from possessing, killing, or disturbing and endangered or threatened species, and destroying/interfering with habitat is prohibited, however, there is no explanation of how species habitat is determined. | The Minister is not obligated to create recovery plans but must prepare a wildlife inventory report every 10 years. |
| Nova Scotia 63 species are listed by the province. | The Nova Scotia Endangered Species Act (ESA) assigns responsibility for managing SAR to the Minister of Natural Resources and Renewables. ESA explicitly ensures that it does not infringe upon Indigenous treaty rights. | A Species-at-Risk Working Group, composed of scientific experts, is appointed by the Minister to manage species listings under ESA; with decisions based on both scientific and traditional knowledge. | Once a species is listed it is illegal to kill, possess, disturb, or interfere with the species or its occupied areas. The Minister may designate core habitat for additional protections through a recovery plan, but this has never been implemented. | Within a year of listing an endangered species, and within two years for a threatened species, the Minister must establish a recovery team and develop a recovery strategy. The strategy must identify threats to the species, recovery options, and core habitat, analyze the costs and benefits of recovery, and recommend a course of action with a timeline. |
| Yukon There are four species listed as specially protected wildlife under the Wildlife Regulation. | Yukon lacks specific legislation for species at risk. The Wildlife Act provides some protections for 5% of species present in Yukon; it is limited to vertebrates, excluding fish, plants, fungi, and invertebrates | The Wildlife Act does not address SAR; the Commissioner in the Executive Council can designate a population, species, or group of wildlife as specially protected. | Specially protected wildlife are safeguarded under the Wildlife Act through prohibitions on hunting, trapping, or possession, except for Inuvialuk or permit holders. There are no automatic habitat protections for these species. | The Wildlife Act does not mandate SAR management or recovery plans. However, since 2012, the Government of Yukon has participated in developing management plans for various wildlife. |
| Northwest Territories 12 species are listed by the territory. | SAR are protected under SARA (NWT). | Two bodies manage species at risk (SAR) designation: the Conference of Management Authorities and the Species at Risk Committee. | There is no automatic protection for listed species or habitats. | SARA (NWT) mandates that the CMA develop a management plan or recovery strategy for SAR. |
| Nunavut 23 species are federally listed in NWT. | SAR are protected under the Nunavut Wildlife Act (NWA). The NWA is guided by Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit concepts and principles regarding respecting the land, wildlife, and people. A principle of NWA is to maintain healthy populations of wildlife capable of sustaining harvest. | The NWA has provisions for identifying and listing SAR however,they have not been implemented. | Any listed species is protected from harvesting, harm, and harassment; no critical habitat has been designated. | A recovery policy must be developed within two years of a species being listed as endangered or threatened. |
Recommendations
Provinces and territories hold authority over SAR and their habitats under the Canadian Constitution and related federal legislation. This has resulted in inconsistent protections due to varying legislation across jurisdictions. Common issues include the failure to list at-risk species or providing inadequate protection for those listed. The authors therefore developed seven key recommendations that could improve SAR legislation across jurisdictions.
1 Pursue dedicated and harmonized SAR legislation. Some jurisdictions have a single dedicated law for conserving species, while others integrate SAR provisions into other legislation on hunting, fishing, and wildlife management, or they are distributed across multiple laws. Harmonizing legislation would ensure consistent protection for species within jurisdictions, facilitate cross-jurisdictional partnerships, and improve conservation efforts for species with transboundary ranges.
2 Reduce reliance on discretionary power. Decision-making authority for listing and protecting SAR is often held by the minister administering the act. Many laws give ministers discretionary power, stating they may take certain actions, such as listing a species. To ensure effective protection, SAR legislation should mandate leadership by a minister dedicated to environmental protection, with enough resources for enforcement. Species listing, habitat identification, and recovery plan development should be science-driven, include Indigenous consultation, and remain free from political interference.
3 Embrace Western science and Indigenous rights, science, and evidence. Some provinces and territories appoint independent committees with both Western scientific and Indigenous experts to recommend species listings, while others don’t use these types of committees. To ensure that evaluations are evidence-based, legislation should mandate the establishment of independent committees composed of qualified scientists and Indigenous Knowledge holders.
4 Establish reasonable timelines. Laws are only effective when they include timelines and accountability systems. Enforceable deadlines should be established for species listing, recovery plan development, implementation, and achieving species recovery.
Photo by slowmotiongli / Getty
5 Restrict and regulate exemptions. Permits and exemptions must be strictly regulated to minimize harm to SAR. Many permit applications do not have a review process, and there are no protocols to ensure compliance. While certain activities may require exemptions, jurisdictions should adopt practices like those in the Newfoundland and Labrador Endangered Species Act, which allows exemptions only if the activity does not increase the species’ risk. Ministries should implement rigorous guidelines for evaluating exemption applications and establish inspection protocols.
6 Protect habitat on government and private lands. While many jurisdictions automatically protect listed species from harm, habitat protections are often limited to publicly owned land. Some jurisdictions partner with private landowners to conserve habitat. However, critical habitat should be protected on private land, supported by compensation to prevent harmful actions like species removal, and reinforced through results-based reward programs for landowners who adequately maintain critical habitat.
7 Commit to transparent decision-making. Transparency fosters public engagement and government accountability. The listing and protection process should be publicly accessible whenever possible while excluding sensitive information such as the locations of at-risk species. A transparent approach would promote accountability and provide opportunities for the public to provide input on SAR recovery plans.
Is Canada adequately protecting species at risk?
SAR legislation has largely remained unchanged since the 2012 Ecojustice report, while some Acts have not changed since their inception. While some jurisdictions have weakened their legislation, others’ have been significantly improved. However, the details of their implementation and success remains largely unknown. The authors conclude by stressing that: “To combat biodiversity loss and conserve unique ecosystems effectively, Canadian provinces and territories must bring SAR legislation to a higher and more consistent standard”.
In conclusion, we clearly have some work to do to protect Canada’s at-risk species and their habitats.
About Dr. Valli Fraser-Celin
Dr. Valli Fraser-Celin holds a PhD in Geography from the University of Guelph where she studied human-African wild dog conflict and conservation in Botswana, Africa. Valli has always been interested in the human dimensions of wildlife, in particular, humans’ relationships with large carnivores, she collaborated with the Fur-Bearers on a research project exploring Canadians’ perceptions of and knowledge about wolves. Valli is also passionate about dogs, and advocates for dog welfare through her Instagram @thelivesofwilddogs. In her spare time, she runs a pet pantry at her local community centre for pet guardians experiencing pet food insecurity.
