• With respect to the first Pillar of the draft BEHF on a whole-of-government approach, it is fully expected that our elected government must demonstrate vision, leadership, and integration through the Premier, who is responsible to set the tone from the top, and the Ministers appointed by the Premier, who are responsible for their respective ministries. The Premier is responsible for setting the mandate letter for each of the appointed Ministers. The Executive Council (cabinet) is expected in the normal course of its mandate to manage decision-making, policies, processes, and legislation to be tabled at the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, examined, debated, and voted upon by the elected Members of the Legislative Assembly (“MLAs). This is at the very core of our parliamentary system of government.

• A provincial election must be called in 2024. B.C. voters have a right to be informed in this provincial election year on the legislative agenda of the incumbent government respecting biodiversity and ecosystem health. Which legislation will give effect to the intended prioritization across all sectors, and how? The draft BEHF avoids discussing these critical questions. The incumbent B.C. government must do so before calling the next provincial election later this year. All political parties and all individuals running for elected office for their respective constituencies should do so as well during the provincial election campaign.

• The whole-of society approach, the second of the three Pillars of the Framework, is facing a litmus test with the drafting of the final BEHF, the ensuing implementation plan, the legislative action that is supposed to follow, and the parallel engagement process involving amendments to the Land Act.

• With respect to the third Pillar of the draft BEHF on adopting an open and transparent process, the draft BEHF is silent on Parts 6.0 (Habitat and ecosystem conservation and protection), 7.0 (Habitat enhancement and restoration), and 8.0 (Species at risk protection and recovery) of the Tripartite Framework Agreement on Nature Conservation signed by B.C. on November 3, 2023. Many interested parties and members of the public may also be unaware that the B.C. government is currently involved in drafting amendments to the Land Act and conducting another public engagement in parallel to the draft BEHF, while no information has been provided on the scope and tenor of these draft amendments. The B.C. government should immediately correct this public information gap.

• The draft BEHF shows that the B.C. government is still delaying in practice the full and binding application of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to the laws of British Columbia respecting forests, water, lands, and resource extraction activities on what is currently designated as provincial Crown land.

1 (RSBC 1996), Chapter 157. 2 (SBC 2002), Chapter 69.  3 (RSBC 1996), Chapter 300.

2. Introduction

In its present form and content, the draft BEHF raises several significant concerns that will likely elicit comments from a wide spectrum of First Nations, local governments, resource extraction industries, NGOs, conservation advocates, the science community, and members of the public.

The media release publishing the draft BEHF for comments on November 15, 2023, under the title “B.C. prioritizing ecosystem health, biodiversity”4, states that “The framework is another action the Province is taking as part of ongoing work to improve stewardship of B.C.’s lands, forests and water, to implement the recommendations of the Old Growth Strategic Review and to honour B.C.’s commitments under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act”.

The media release further states that “The framework is expected to be finalized in early 2024, following consultation. B.C. will co-develop new or update existing legislation to achieve the vision and intent of the framework”.

The covering message from the Minister of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship sets the general tone for the draft BEHF, with a statement that “Through this draft Framework, we are committing to a collaborative stepwise approach to prioritizing healthy ecosystems and biodiversity, and to take a holistic approach to stewarding B.C.’s land and water resources, ensuring that they are healthy and resilient for the long term” (Page ii).

The general Statement of Intent is that “The British Columbia government commits to the conservation and management of ecosystem health and biodiversity as an overarching priority and will formalize this priority through legislation and other enabling tools that apply to, and can be accessed by, all sectors” (Page 1). There is however no mention of a timeline or target deadlines for action on legislation or “other enabling tools”.

The stated Purpose of the Framework is to provide “... strategic direction that sets the course for changes in legislation and current practices that aligns the Province’s commitment to UNDRIP with specific goals that are intended to maintain and enhance biodiversity and ecological integrity, protect and conserve priority areas, restore degraded ecosystems, and ensure healthy communities and economies for generations to come. It sets out desired outcomes, principles, and broad directions on which we can build the next steps required to deliver legislation, detailed policies, and actions necessary - jointly with First Nations and with involvement from all British Columbians. It will facilitate short-term shifts towards transformational changes” (Page 4).

The final paragraph of the Conclusions and Next Steps section states that “In addition, recognizing that the Framework sets out a pathways approach, the next steps will be to develop an implementation plan that identifies interim measures and the expected timelines for all measures, whether short, medium, or long term” (Page 10).

The draft BEHF is therefore another framework announcement by the B.C. government containing a general outline of non-binding intentions to be further elaborated through a multi-step process, pathways, and various approaches, with a view to eventually implementing future legislative action, but without a clear legislative agenda, timeline, target deadlines, or specific deliverables.

4 https://news.gov.bc.ca/29861.

3. Improving Stewardship of B.C.’s Lands, Forests and Water

The stewardship for B.C.’s lands, forests and water falls within the portfolio of the Ministry of Forests, and the separate portfolio of the more recently created Ministry of Water, Lands and Resource Stewardship, which was carved out of the former all-encompassing portfolio of the former Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development5.

The stewardship of forests on provincial Crown land remains entrusted to private forest tenure holders under an industry professional reliance model adopted over two decades ago6, and the stewardship of forests situated on privately-owned land is entrusted to private landowners under a separate statute7. B.C.’s several forest statutes are outdated and in need of a major overhaul.

Forest tenures granted on provincial Crown land, including the vast and most lucrative tree farm licences, are mainly controlled by a small number of non-Indigenous large integrated industry players. Widespread industrial timber harvesting through clearcutting continues to be the prevalent forestry practice in British Columbia, causing extensive and irreparable harm to biodiversity, ecosystem health, species at risk and their habitat, as well as flooding, soil stability, water quality, and natural carbon storage by the forests.

The draft BEHF is completely silent on addressing the urgent need to change the most damaging industrial forestry practices still prevailing in British Columbia (clearcutting, timber harvesting of primary forests to produce carbon-emitting wood pellets for export, timber harvesting in high-priority at-risk old growth forest areas, and extensive industrial spraying of chemicals such as glyphosate. This fundamental issue must be addressed through legislation.

The draft BEHF is therefore expressly linked to the old growth strategic review (“OGSR”).

The “Facts about protecting old growth in B.C.” section in the media release on the draft BEHF does not even mention the OGTAP report or the 2.6 million hectares of high-priority at-risk old growth forest areas that were to be immediately protected from logging.

The conservation funding target contemplated specifically for the protection of high- priority at-risk old growth forests is through the creation of an Old Growth Nature Fund by Canada and B.C., with matching funding of $50 million each8. B.C.’s new Conservation Financing Mechanism announced on October 26, 2023, targets a broad spectrum of other future initiatives, including for climate change and wildfire risk9. Both public funding mechanisms are tied to future fundraising from private sector donors.

The B.C. government has yet to implement the key Recommendation No.6 in the report of the Old Growth Strategic Panel (“OGSRP”) publicly released more than three years ago, and the subsequent recommendations of its own independent experts on the immediate implementation of Recommendation No.6 for the protection from logging of all the 2.6 million hectares of high-priority at-risk old growth forest areas identified, delineated, and mapped in the report of the Old Growth Technical Advisory Panel (“OGGTAP”) publicly released more than two years ago. This lingering major deficiency must be clearly addressed through legislation without further delay. An outline for such legislation is attached in the Appendix to this submission.

8 Section 6.4.3 of the Tripartite Framework Agreement on Nature Conservation (https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/integrated-nature-initiatives/nature- agreements/canada-british-columbia-nature-agreement.html).
9 https://news.gov.bc.ca/29736.

5. Funding to Support Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health

The Tripartite Framework Agreement on Nature Conservation between Canada, B.C., and the First Nations Leadership Council (“Tripartite Agreement”) signed on November 3, 2023, mentions that “In the context of B.C. establishing a provincial-scale conservation funding mechanism, the Parties will seek alignment with contributions of funding flowing through this Agreement to leverage provincial and third-party investments into conservation financing” (Section 11.7). The more than $1 billion of future funding mentioned for nature conservation in British Columbia is essentially based on three-way matching requirements between the two levels of government through existing programs, and the private sector through future philanthropic donations and crowd-sourcing. The matching formula, terms and conditions, and future conservation funding agreements have yet to be determined at this time.

The draft BEHF is silent on the amount, sources, and timeline for funding to be devoted by the B.C. government specifically for future biodiversity and ecosystem health programs, initiatives, and actions. This deficiency needs to be addressed when the final BEHF is drafted and published after the deadline for comments of January 31, 2024.

6. Upholding and Implementing the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA)

DRIPA was passed unanimously by the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia and came into effect on November 28, 2019, more than four years ago10. It incorporates the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into the laws of British Columbia. Section 1 (4) of DRIPA clearly states that “Nothing in this Act is to be construed as delaying the application of the Declaration to the laws of British Columbia.”

The draft BEHF shows that the B.C. government is still delaying in practice the full and binding application of the Declaration to the laws of British Columbia respecting forests, water, lands, and resource extraction activities on what is currently designated as provincial Crown land.

10 (SBC 2019), Chapter 44.

7. Whole-of-Government Approach

The first Pillar in the draft BEHF is “Taking a whole-of-government approach that demonstrates vision, leadership, and integration: including setting ecosystem health and biodiversity objectives and standards that apply across sectors, and integrating and aligning provincial government decision-making, policies, processes, and legislation that affect ecosystems” (Page1).

It is fully expected that our elected government must demonstrate vision, leadership, and integration through the Premier, who is responsible to set the tone from the top, and the Ministers appointed by the Premier, who are responsible for their respective ministries. The Premier is responsible for setting the mandate letter for each of the appointed Ministers. The Executive Council (cabinet) is expected in the normal course of its mandate to manage decision-making, policies, processes, and legislation to be tabled at the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, examined, debated, and voted upon by the elected Members of the Legislative Assembly (“MLAs). This is at the very core of our parliamentary system of government.

A provincial election must be called in 2024. B.C. voters have a right to be informed in this provincial election year on the legislative agenda of the incumbent government respecting biodiversity and ecosystem health. Which legislation will give effect to the intended prioritization across all sectors, and how? The draft BEHF avoids discussing these critical questions. The incumbent B.C. government must do so before calling the next provincial election later this year. All political parties and all individuals running for elected office for their respective constituencies should do so as well during the provincial election campaign.

Members of the public cannot be reasonably engaged on public policy consultations such as the draft BEHF unless the public consultation process is fully open and transparent, with a full and comprehensive prior public disclosure of all the relevant elements in prior framework announcements and agreements, and the existence of other material processes underway, such as the upcoming amendments to the Land Act.

11 (RSBC 1996), Chapter 245.
12 https://engage.gov.bc.ca/govtogetherbc/engagement/land-act-amendments/. See also “Vaugn Palmer: B.C. NDP quietly consult on sweeping changes to managing public lands”, Vancouver Sun, January 26, 2024.

10. Governance and Oversight

The draft BEHF heralds the establishment of “... an Office of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health within the B.C. Public Service with the necessary powers and authorities to lead a coordinated and collaborative approach across government and in partnership with First Nations to implement the framework ...” It does not state however to what Minister this new office would be reporting to, or what human and financial resources it would have, or how and to what extent existing Ministries would be bound to contribute to its information gathering and sharing activities on the status of ecosystem health and biodiversity, the development of ecosystem and biodiversity objectives “... that can then be recognized in legislation”, or championing “... policies and approaches; and ensuring accountability...” (page 8).

The proposed Office of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health would add another bureaucratic layer to B.C.’s Public Service, with no statutory mandate or powers to cause any paradigm shift in the administration or bring about actual results through legislative action. This completely misses the mark on the governance and the oversight needed to uphold and enforce biodiversity and ecosystem health measures going forward. B.C.’s Public Service should not be placed in a position to set the priorities, interministerial coordination and the legislative agenda on its own.

11. Foundation

The draft BEHF states that “The Framework is built on the foundation of upholding and implementing the articles set out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the requirements of the Declaration Act” (Page 7). There is no doubt that the articles of the UN declaration, as incorporated in the laws of British Columbia through DRIPA, should be applied to legislation and government decisions going forward.

Efforts to protect biodiversity and ecosystem health worldwide have spanned well over three decades, leading to the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (“CBD”). Canada was the first country to ratify this landmark multilateral treaty in 1992. The CBD established the Conference of the Parties (“COP”) and the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (“SBSTTA”). At its fifteenth meeting, the COP adopted the Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework13. This elaborate framework was endorsed by Canada in spite of intense lobbying efforts by the resource extraction industries against its adoption. The draft BEHF contains only a footnote on this framework (page 15) which does not even appear in the body of the text. There are also three other footnotes that do not appear in the body of the text14.

The draft BEHF does not discuss the effect of the 1992 COP multilateral treaty signed by Canada, or the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, nor does it state that the province, like Canada, endorses that framework and the Bonn Challenge for Landscape Restoration. It does not discuss or refer to the Canadian Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk, or why B.C. is one of the few Canadian provinces still holding out on having a provincial species at risk legislation. It does not discuss the National Framework for Species at Risk Conservation, the Pan-Canadian Approach to Transforming Species at Risk Conservation in Canada, or the 2018 report of Canada’s Federal, Provincial and Territorial Departments Responsible for Parks, Protected Areas, Conservation, Wildlife and Biodiversity15.

Through the draft BEHF, the B.C. government is signaling that it plans to go it alone and remodel international, national, and inter-provincial frameworks already in place, with no actual plans, timeline, or deliverables. The B.C. government should clearly commit to endorse the Convention on Biodiversity, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the National Framework for Species at Risk Conservation, the Convention on Migratory Birds16, and to adopt a provincial species at risk law.

13 CBD/COPDEC/15/4, 19 December 2022 (15 pages): https://www.cbd.int/gbf/ (footnote i).
14 Canada’s 2030 National Biodiversity Strategy, 2023: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate- change/services/biodiversity/national -biodiversity-strategy.html (footnote ii)
Parliament of Canada, 2023: https://www.parl.ca/legisinfo/en/bill/44-1/s-5 (footnote iii)
UBC, Biodiversity of BC: https://linnet.geog.ubc.ca/biodiversity/ (footnote iv)
15 One with Nature: A renewed Approach to Land and Freshwater Conservation in Canada,

16 As enacted in Canada’s Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 (S.C. 1994, c.245)

12. Actions

The Actions statement in Section 5 of the draft BEHF does not mention any potential protection or enforcement measures that are already needed, or that will be needed while the implementation of the Framework continues to be developed further.

The draft BEHF does not address the urgent necessity to change the most damaging practices of the resource extraction industries in B.C. on biodiversity, ecosystem health, and species at risk and their habitat. This problem should not be further ignored or sidestepped by the B.C. government.

13. Pending Litigation

The draft BEHF is silent on two significant pending legal actions seeking to compel Canada and B.C. to take protective and enforcement actions for species at risk listed in SARA and their habitat17, and whether the B.C. government intends to continue challenging these actions respectively before the Supreme Court of British Columbia and the Federal Court of Canada while the BEHF and the implementation plan that should follow are still being developed.

17 The Friends of Fairy Creek Society is seeking a declaratory judgement from the Supreme Court of British Columbia to confirm that Canada and B.C. are obligated to protect the natural old growth forest habitat of the Marbled Murrelet, a listed species at risk under SARA, pursuant to the Convention on Migratory Birds signed by Canada, the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 and the Species at Risk Act (SARA). The NGO ecojustice, representing the Wilderness Committee and Sierra Club BC, applied to the Federal Court of Canada to seek a ruling that Canada is obligated to protect the critical habitats of at-risk migratory birds across Canada under SARA, including the Marbled Murrelet in B.C.

14. A Clear and Specific Legislative Agenda is Urgently Needed

The B.C. government should commit in principle to tabling before the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia the following Bills within a specific timeline following the next provincial election:

1. a Bill for the protection of biodiversity, ecosystem health, species at risk and their habitat under provincial law;

2. a Bill for the immediate and permanent protection from logging of all the high- priority at-risk old growth forest areas identified, delineated, and mapped by the B.C government’s own experts in the report of the Old Growth Technical Advisory Panel publicly released on November 3, 2021, as well as the most intact watersheds for each region and ecosystem identified on Map 6 in this report;