[NatureNS] From CH Migratory Bird Act challenged by Irving

From: "Andy Moir/Chris Callaghan" <andyandchris@ns.sympatico.ca>
To: <NatureNS@chebucto.ns.ca>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:08:59 -0300
Precedence: bulk
Return-Path: <naturens-mml-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;"| (cd /csuite/info/Environment/FNSN/MList; /csuite/lib/arch2html)"

next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C88F18.A54A34B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Irving challenges migratory bird protection laws

By CHRIS MORRIS The Canadian Press
Wed. Mar 26 - 5:14 AM

BURTON, N.B. - New Brunswick forestry giant J.D. Irving Ltd. is =
challenging Canada's laws protecting migratory birds at a time when =
experts warn that some bird populations are in free fall.

Arguments began Tuesday in New Brunswick provincial court on an =
application by Irving to have the Migratory Birds Convention Act =
declared unconstitutional.

The company filed the application after it was charged under the federal =
act as a result of the destruction of several great blue heron nests =
during a logging operation in Cambridge Narrows, N.B., in 2006.

Irving has pleaded not guilty to the charge, but in advance of the =
trial, it introduced a motion challenging the constitutionality of the =
act, which has been on the books since 1917.

Irving is claiming that the Migratory Birds Act violates the Charter of =
Rights.

"As well, we say it is unconstitutional because it really is provincial =
jurisdiction, not federal jurisdiction," said Irving lawyer Christopher =
Wayland of Toronto.

Prosecution witness Steve Wendt, a former director with the Canadian =
Wildlife Service, told court that protection of migratory birds is just =
as important now as it was 90 years ago, when the convention was enacted =
by the United States and Britain, on behalf of Canada.

"When the migratory bird convention came into being, people had observed =
several extinctions," Wendt told the court, using the disappearance of =
the passenger pigeon as an example.

"There was a lot of concern then and we have similar concerns now."

Wendt says a number of migratory birds, including such insect-eating =
species as the common nighthawk and the swallow, are vanishing from the =
Canadian landscape, making the protection of remaining habitat critical.

The Audubon Society recently published a list of songbirds that are =
disappearing at alarming rates from North America, including such =
once-common species as the evening grosbeak and the field sparrow.

"All naturalists know the history of what happened to migratory birds at =
the turn of the century, when there was unlimited hunting and taking of =
birds, and the federal law effectively helped bring back some species," =
said Roland Chiasson of Nature New Brunswick, who attended court =
proceedings in Burton.

"If this act is struck down, what is going to happen the day after? That =
really concerns us. This law has worked."

Albert Koehl, a lawyer with Ecojustice, formerly the Sierra Legal =
Defence Fund, said forestry companies across Canada are closely watching =
the Irving case.

He said logging companies are worried the charge against Irving may =
signal a change in policy at Environment Canada, which has largely left =
the forestry industry alone when it comes to enforcing bird protection.

"What's new is that a logging company was actually charged with not =
complying with the Migratory Birds Convention Act," Koehl said.

"We know logging companies are worried about the provisions because the =
provisions are clear - you cannot destroy a migratory bird nest. But the =
federal government has not been taking action against logging =
companies."

Koehl said environmentalists want the federal government to do more to =
protect birds and their habitat.

Environment Canada's wildlife enforcement division has accused the =
Irving company and one of its foremen of cutting a logging road through =
a great blue heron nesting site in the Cambridge Narrows area, =
destroying at least six nests and disturbing several others.

------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C88F18.A54A34B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" =
size=3D3>Irving=20
challenges migratory bird protection laws<BR><FONT=20
class=3DContent_Sub_Headlines></FONT><BR><FONT class=3Dbyline>By CHRIS =
MORRIS The=20
Canadian Press</FONT><BR><FONT class=3Dbyline>Wed. Mar 26 - 5:14=20
AM</FONT><BR></FONT><FONT class=3DContent_body-links>
<P>BURTON, N.B. =97 New Brunswick forestry giant J.D. Irving Ltd. is =
challenging=20
Canada=92s laws protecting migratory birds at a time when experts warn =
that some=20
bird populations are in free fall.</P>
<P>Arguments began Tuesday in New Brunswick provincial court on an =
application=20
by Irving to have the Migratory Birds Convention Act declared=20
unconstitutional.</P>
<P>The company filed the application after it was charged under the =
federal act=20
as a result of the destruction of several great blue heron nests during =
a=20
logging operation in Cambridge Narrows, N.B., in 2006.</P>
<P>Irving has pleaded not guilty to the charge, but in advance of the =
trial, it=20
introduced a motion challenging the constitutionality of the act, which =
has been=20
on the books since 1917.</P>
<P>Irving is claiming that the Migratory Birds Act violates the Charter =
of=20
Rights.</P>
<P>"As well, we say it is unconstitutional because it really is =
provincial=20
jurisdiction, not federal jurisdiction," said Irving lawyer Christopher =
Wayland=20
of Toronto.</P>
<P>Prosecution witness Steve Wendt, a former director with the Canadian =
Wildlife=20
Service, told court that protection of migratory birds is just as =
important now=20
as it was 90 years ago, when the convention was enacted by the United =
States and=20
Britain, on behalf of Canada.</P>
<P>"When the migratory bird convention came into being, people had =
observed=20
several extinctions," Wendt told the court, using the disappearance of =
the=20
passenger pigeon as an example.</P>
<P>"There was a lot of concern then and we have similar concerns =
now."</P>
<P>Wendt says a number of migratory birds, including such insect-eating =
species=20
as the common nighthawk and the swallow, are vanishing from the Canadian =

landscape, making the protection of remaining habitat critical.</P>
<P>The Audubon Society recently published a list of songbirds that are=20
disappearing at alarming rates from North America, including such =
once-common=20
species as the evening grosbeak and the field sparrow.</P>
<P>"All naturalists know the history of what happened to migratory birds =
at the=20
turn of the century, when there was unlimited hunting and taking of =
birds, and=20
the federal law effectively helped bring back some species," said Roland =

Chiasson of Nature New Brunswick, who attended court proceedings in =
Burton.</P>
<P>"If this act is struck down, what is going to happen the day after? =
That=20
really concerns us. This law has worked."</P>
<P>Albert Koehl, a lawyer with Ecojustice, formerly the Sierra Legal =
Defence=20
Fund, said forestry companies across Canada are closely watching the =
Irving=20
case.</P>
<P>He said logging companies are worried the charge against Irving may =
signal a=20
change in policy at Environment Canada, which has largely left the =
forestry=20
industry alone when it comes to enforcing bird protection.</P>
<P>"What=92s new is that a logging company was actually charged with not =
complying=20
with the Migratory Birds Convention Act," Koehl said.</P>
<P>"We know logging companies are worried about the provisions because =
the=20
provisions are clear =97 you cannot destroy a migratory bird nest. But =
the federal=20
government has not been taking action against logging companies."</P>
<P>Koehl said environmentalists want the federal government to do more =
to=20
protect birds and their habitat.</P>
<P>Environment Canada=92s wildlife enforcement division has accused the =
Irving=20
company and one of its foremen of cutting a logging road through a great =
blue=20
heron nesting site in the Cambridge Narrows area, destroying at least =
six nests=20
and disturbing several others.</P></FONT></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C88F18.A54A34B0--

next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects