The BNN network channel just had a good interview with the Professor of Ecology from the University of Alberta, and he mentioned that they submitted a petition to the Government against the removal of the "habitat" clause. Within a week, they had over 600 signatures. He said that if they continue with the petition for another week, they will most likely reach 5000 signatures.
This is obviously a huge concerns for a lot of Canadian. Thank God.
The part that worries me most is the subsection mentioned in Jon5hill start up , following the new proposed section;
35(1) No person shall carry on any work, undertaking or activity, other than fishing, that results in an adverse effect on a fish of economic, cultural or ecological value.Under the subsection 35 (2)
No person contravenes subsection (1) ifunder d)(d) the work, undertaking or activity is carried on in, on, over, under, through or across any Canadian fisheries waters, and
Doesn't that mean that just about anything goes, from bulldozer, 4X4, whatever else,
seems to me that this subsection really leaves a huge gray hole ;and allows everything under the sun to proceed with the Work
without any review or restrictions?
?
Author
Topic: FISH HABITAT -- still needs protection (tell your MP) (Read 8916 times)