Subject: Wild Animal and Plant Protection Act (WAPPA), Statutes of Canada 1992,

From: Norbert Kondla <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 14:04:46 PST

To: LEPS-L1 --INTERNET [email-masked].

*** Resending note of 03/20/96 13:43

in case you were wondering why i am concerned about wappa

      Box 762
      McBride, B.C. V0J 2E0
      30 January 1995

To: Hon. Sheila Copps
    Minister of Environment
    Government of Canada

Dear Sheila Copps,

         Chapter 52

I am writing to commend the Government of Canada for its efforts in developing
legislation and regulations to protect endangered species and control
commercial trade in wildlife.  But I am also writing to express serious
concerns about certain provisions of WAPPA and the draft Wild Animal and Plant
Trade Regulations.

I study and collect butterflies as a hobby.  I do this at my own expense (no
cost to the taxpayer!).  I travel extensively and share my knowledge by
publishing the results of my work and helping to define which species may be
endangered.  I also exchange specimens with collectors and researchers in other
parts of the country and in foreign countries.  I do not traffic in endangered
species.

These are constructive pursuits and certainly do not contribute to the
extinction of wild animals or plants.  Global habitat destruction is the real
villain.  Consequently I am extremely dismayed to find that WAPPA and its draft
regulation can easily turn me into a lawbreaker and subject me to fines up to
$150,000 plus a jail term up to 5 years.  I have to ask myself why I should
bother to help define endangered species and document biodiversity at my own
expense when the activities necessary to do so could have such bizarre
consequences.

Subsection 6(1) of WAPPA requires me to avoid contravening "any law of any
foreign state".  Surely you recognize the impossibility of a citizen of
Canada, who is not engaged in commercial activity, being aware of the tens of
thousands of laws in hundreds of foreign countries?  Subsection 7(2) places an
equally impossible responsibility on me when it comes to taking a vacation in
Canada and collecting non-endangered butterflies.  Unless I took the time to
review all the provincial acts and regulations that apply to every hectare of
land that I stop to investigate butterflies on (which is clearly impossible) I
will end up eventually violating the act and again subject to large fines or
jail time.

Fortunately the act itself limits the definition of animal and plant to species
listed in an appendix to CITES.  But I still recommend that subsections 6(1)
and 7(2) of the act be amended to be consistent with section 4 of the act, ie.
limit them to endangered species and commercial activities.  It would be most
helpful to ensure that 'trade' in animals and plants is clearly defined as
being limited to commercial activity so that the act does not become a pitfall
for entomologists and hobby insect collectors who transport and exchange dead
bugs that are not endangered.  I see no purpose in using scarce taxpayers
dollars to regulate non-commercial movement of non-endangered plants and
animals.

What really scares me is the redefinition of animal and plant contained in the
draft Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulation.  The expanded definition includes
any extant wild species of the plant and animal kingdom.  The purpose of such a
needlessly broad definition is obscure.  It is this redefintion in conjunction
with subsections 6(1) and 7(2) of the act that is guaranteed to make
lawbreakers out of every professional entomologist and hobby insect collector
in the country.  I recommend that you change this part of the regulations to
focus on animals and plants that are deemed to be endangered under provincial
laws or the laws of foreign states.  Section 6(1) as written is an extremely
draconian requirement that is unbefitting a democratic country.  I shudder to
think that I could become a lawbreaker because I contravened some trivial law
of a foreign country that I cannot influence or object to through democratic
process.  Why would you support such a requirement that is justified for
serious matters such as murder, drug smuggling or trafficking in endangered
species; but which makes no sense when applied to non-endangered bugs.?  It
seems to me that the regulators have cast their net too widely.

I also want to object to section 11 of the draft regulations which requires
that all animals and plants be brought into Canada through one of six postal
information centres if shipped by mail.  Neither Canada Post nor the Canadian
Wildlife Service has people on staff who can recognize the hundreds of
thousands of insect species which have been described and hence nothing useful
could be achieved through this requirement.  At worst it would lead to request
for more people and dollars to have officials poking their fingers into
packages of dead, dry butterflies that are not endangered and which do not
harbour pests injurious to crops.  I recommend this section of the regulations
be reconsidered so that it is limited to the import of endangered species or
other select species for which there is justifiable reason for specifying
import locations.

It is important that you and your officials recognize that insect population
dynamics are such that it is almost impossible for hobby or scientific
collecting to cause the extinction of insects.  Huge amounts of research need
to be done just to complete documentation of what species exist and what the
ecology of these species is.  In some groups of animals most of the work is
done on a volunteer basis by people with no institutional affiliation and at no
cost to the taxpayer.  It is important that we do not let regulatory actions
designed around the ecology of vertebrates and legitimately focussed on
endangered species, interfere with harmless and useful activities related to
other non-endangered groups of organisms.

Thank you for your attention.  I urge you to have your officials reconsider
these provisions of WAPPA so that it meets your intentions to protect
endangered species and regulate commercial wildlife trade without having
dysfunctional consequences such as discouraging much needed research or turning
hobby insect collectors into lawbreakers.  A reply as to your intentions about
these matters would be most appreciated.

N. Kondla

Cheers,
Norbert Kondla  Internet: [email-masked]
Operations Manager, Robson Valley Forest District
British Columbia Forest Service  (604) 569-3704