Vol. 133, No. 40 — October 2, 1999

Canadian Wheat Board Contingency Fund Regulations

Statutory Authority

Canadian Wheat Board Act

Sponsoring Department

Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

Description

Chapter 17 of the Statutes of Canada 1998 (Bill C-4, An Act to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act) authorizes the creation of a contingency fund. Specifically, paragraph 6(1)(c.3) provides authority for the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) "to establish a contingency fund consisting of the amounts specified by the regulations..."

The fund, which will not be financially supported by the Government of Canada, is to be used to provide financial backing in the event of potential losses from the use of three new pricing and marketing tools provided for in the recent amendments to the Canadian Wheat Board Act (CWB Act). The amended CWB Act now provides for the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) buying grain for cash and allowing producers to take early pool cash-outs. There is also the possibility of the fund being used in the future to cover the CWB making adjustment payments on its own authority.

Regulations are required under the Act to allow the CWB to make deductions from amounts that it receives in the course of its operations and credit those amounts to the contingency fund. These Regulations will also provide rules for the Board of Directors for establishing and operating the fund. The Regulations are intended to ensure:

— that the Board of Directors has the authority to make deductions and to credit these amounts to the contingency fund;

— that the producers' interests are safeguarded in terms of the CWB's use of producers' funds; and

— that the public interest is also safeguarded in terms of risk to the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF).

Alternatives

The amended CWB Act provides for new pricing tools, but requires that a contingency fund be established before three of these tools can be used. Regulations are required before this contingency fund can be established. If the CWB is to use any of these three specific pricing tools, there is no alternative to passing regulations.

Benefits and Costs

The regulations provide the CWB with a large degree of flexibility in setting up the contingency fund. The CWB retains the ability to determine the details of exactly how much is deducted and from which sources.

There will be no cost to the Government of Canada.

Deductions from any of the sources listed in the regulations would have a minor economic impact on wheat and barley producers. The maximum deduction of $50 million would represent less than 0.2 percent of the value of normal CWB sales over a five-year period.

Consultation

Consultations on the contingency fund regulations have been held with the industry. On January 21, 1998, a meeting was held in Regina to obtain producer and industry feedback on draft proposals for a contingency fund, and for the election of the CWB Directors. This meeting was attended by approximately 15 producer and grain-handling organizations.

Based on feedback received at that meeting, the Minister responsible for the CWB wrote on July 3, 1998, to western farm organizations and provincial governments, providing them with draft proposals for regulations to apply to the contingency fund. Recipients were requested to provide their comments.

The Standing Committee of the Senate on Agriculture and Forestry also consulted industry stakeholders on the issue of the contingency fund when it held hearings on Bill C-4, from March to May 1998.

Compliance and Enforcement

These Regulations govern the actions of the CWB Board of Directors with respect to the contingency fund. Subsection 3.12(2) requires that directors comply with the regulations. Section 68 provides penalties for those who commit offences under the Act including the failure to comply with regulations.

Contacts

Mr. Donald Adnam, Deputy Director, International Markets Analysis, Grains and Oilseeds Division, Market and Industry Services Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sir John Carling Building, 930 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5, (613) 759-7640; and Mr. David Byer, Legal Counsel, Justice Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sir John Carling Building, 930 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5, (613) 759-7880.

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is hereby given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to sections 6(see footnote a) and 61 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, proposes to make the annexed Canadian Wheat Board Contingency Fund Regulations.

Any interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must be addressed to Mr. Howard Migie, Director General, Adaptation and Grain Policy, Sir John Carling Building, Room 409, 930 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5, and cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of this notice.

Ottawa, September 29, 1999

MARC O'SULLIVAN
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD CONTINGENCY FUND REGULATIONS

INTERPRETATION

1. In these Regulations, "Act" means the Canadian Wheat Board Act.

AUTHORIZATION

2. (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), the Corporation may deduct an amount from any amount it receives in the course of its operations under the Act and credit the amount so deducted to the contingency fund established under paragraph 6(1)(c.3) of the Act, including

(a) any amount referred to in subsection 8(1) or section 33.01 of the Act;

(b) payments received from grain sold during a pool period;

(c) interest that accrues in respect of sales of grain on credit; and

(d) gains from the activities of the Corporation under section 39.1 of the Act.

(2) The Corporation may not make a deduction of an amount referred to in subsection (1) if, as a result of the deduction, a loss would be paid out of moneys provided by Parliament under subsection 7(3) of the Act.

(3) The Corporation may not deduct an amount referred to in subsection (1) and credit it to the contingency fund if, as a result of the credit, the balance of the fund would exceed $50,000,000.

COMING INTO FORCE

3. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

[40-1-o]

Regulations Amending the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations

Statutory Authority

Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act

Sponsoring Department

Department of the Environment

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

Description

Introduction

Throughout history, people have depended on wild plants and animals for food, apparel, shelter and commodities for trade. Trade can be beneficial, while posing little risk to populations, as long as wildlife is managed at sustainable levels. When carried out at unsustainable levels, wildlife trade has the potential to put populations of some species at risk and to contribute to the loss of the world's biodiversity.

Canada and over 140 other nations are Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which was adopted in 1975 to address threats to wildlife that may result from trade pressures. CITES involves monitoring and controlling trade in animal and plant species which are, or could become, threatened with extinction as a result of trade. CITES implements trade controls by prohibiting commercial trade in species that are threatened with extinction, while permitting trade in other listed species, subject to conservation considerations and monitoring of the trade.

Within Canada the permit issuance program for authorizing and monitoring the international movement of CITES-listed species for commercial, personal, scientific and other purposes is implemented through a partnership, led by Environment Canada, of federal, provincial and territorial wildlife departments. In general, Environment Canada issues import and temporary movement permits, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans issues export permits for fish and marine mammals, and provincial and territorial wildlife authorities issue export permits for species managed by them.

Canada implements CITES through the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (WAPPRIITA), which became law in 1996. At that time, the federal government announced that the regulatory program under the Act would be developed over the coming years through several regulations. The first step was the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations, which also came into effect in 1996 and addresses the species to be protected by the Act. The Government advised that future regulations would deal with streamlining opportunities, such as exemptions to CITES permit requirements where provided for under the Convention, administrative matters and cost-recovery.

Regulatory Proposal

This regulatory proposal would improve the administration and enforcement of CITES in three areas: permit requirements, labeling provisions and administrative matters. The objectives are: to streamline processes and eliminate controls that create an inconvenience for the public and increase costs to Government, while providing little conservation benefit for wildlife; and to improve enforcement and administration of the Act.

CITES Personal and Household Effects Exemptions and Personal Pet Provisions

Currently, WAPPRIITA and its Regulations require that the import into or export out of Canada of all CITES-listed wild animals and plants, and their parts and derivatives must be done under the authority of CITES permits issued either by Canada, another country or both, depending upon the conservation status of the species involved. The Convention, however, acknowledges that requiring permits for the movement of items which are strictly for personal and household use creates inconvenience to the public and a heavy administrative and enforcement burden for Government, without commensurate conservation benefits. The Convention, therefore, allows Parties to implement exemptions from CITES permit requirements for a wide range of personal and household effects.

Tens of thousands of people enter and leave Canada each day. Given the relatively small number of non-commercial personal and household effects associated with the movements of each of these individuals, the effort spent trying to monitor and enforce this situation with respect to CITES-regulated species would be better spent on commercial shipments, which present a greater risk of harm to species in trade. Most activities covered by the exemptions and personally owned pet provisions present a low risk to the species involved. By implementing reasonable exemptions for personal and household effects and new provisions for personal pets, monitoring and enforcement efforts can be shifted to commercial trade, where the largest conservation benefit can be obtained.

The personal and household effects exemptions and personally owned pet provisions would apply only to items that are for the personal or household use of the person or household claiming the exemptions. They would not apply to imports or exports for commercial purposes. Where an exemption is claimed and the item is subsequently disposed of within 90 days, the purpose of the import or export would be considered, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have been for commercial reasons and could be prosecuted accordingly.

The personal and household effects exemptions and the personally owned pet provisions would apply only to Canada's requirements under CITES. They in no way would affect any permits or other requirements under Canada's Health of Animals Act, Plant Protection Act or other federal statute, provincial/territorial wildlife legislation or those of other countries for either CITES or other purposes.

Personal and Household Effects — The proposed regulation would implement some exemptions from CITES permit requirements for specific types of personal and household effects, including tourist souvenirs and black bear and sandhill crane hunting trophies, all of which are considered to be personal and household effects under CITES.

Exemptions would not apply to the export of any Canadian species that is listed nationally as endangered or threatened, or to the import of any undesirable species listed in Schedule II of the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations, such as mongooses or starlings. In general, the new provisions would apply to movements between Canada and all other countries, with the exception of the hunting trophy exemptions for black bear and sandhill crane, which would apply only to fresh, frozen or salted trophies that are being taken between Canada and the United States by hunters who are residents of Canada and the United States.

In the case of tourist souvenirs purchased on a trip outside a person's country of residence, the exemption would not apply to any Appendix I species (see footnote 1) and their parts and derivatives or to any live animals or plants. Similarly, it would not apply to the export from Canada of raw, unprocessed or simply dried specimens, except in the case of a black bear or sandhill crane hunting trophy and feathers. Exemptions for sturgeon caviar would be limited to 250 grams per person per trip.

Personal Pets — The Temporary Export/Re-import Certificate, currently used for personal pets owned by Canadian residents, would be replaced by a new Certificate of Ownership, which would be issued to Canadian residents for their personal pets under subsection 10(1) of the Act. These passport-like certificates could be used for multiple trips during a period of up to three years and would have to be presented to Customs each time the animal leaves or enters Canada. No regulatory change is needed to implement this measure. A regulatory provision is needed, however, to authorize acceptance and use by Canada of similar documents issued by other countries to their residents. This authority is included in the proposed regulatory amendments and is conditional on compliance of these documents with requirements of the Convention.

Declaration Requirement — As part of its annual report to the CITES Secretariat, Canada provides data on the number and types of permits which it issues. With the implementation of personal and household effects permit exemptions, the information on the movement of most personal and household effects into or out of Canada would no longer be available from the collection of permits. The proposed regulatory amendment would authorize the Minister to require persons claiming the exemption upon entry or exit from the country to complete a declaration, should the Minister determine that information is needed on the implementation of the Convention.

Labeling

Many shipments containing products made from wild animals and plants enter and leave Canada each year. Obtaining clear, accurate and timely identification of CITES-listed species in containers and packages is a major enforcement concern, both within and outside Canada. Also, having to prove by forensic techniques that the actual contents coincide with stated contents is a well recognized international problem, and one that is expensive, time-consuming and thus impractical to address routinely using current methods. Sometimes packages or shipping containers have multiple and conflicting statements of contents on marks, labels or accompanying documents.

To enable Canada to deal with the problem of misleading labels, the proposed Regulations authorize prosecutions under the Act based on what a mark, label or accompanying document claims that a container or package which is being exported or imported contains, unless there is evidence to the contrary that raises doubt.

Administrative Matters

Two administrative amendments are proposed. The first would prescribe the information to be included on a removal notice in order to permit enforcement officers to use the removal authority provided in the Act (e.g. the contravention of the Act which is believed to have occurred, the terms and conditions for removal, such as inspection, marking and packaging, and port of export). The second amendment would extend the period before which detained or seized items are automatically forfeited to the Crown.

Removal Notice — Section 18 of the Act provides that, where an enforcement officer has reason to believe that something is being imported into Canada in contravention of the Act, they may issue a removal notice in a prescribed form and manner. While the response to a suspected violation is normally seizure of the items involved, it may sometimes be preferable to order their removal from Canada. Specifying the form and contents in regulation would provide enforcement officers with the means to use this option. The advantage is that the specimens are removed quickly without the necessity for or costs associated with a court proceeding. The violator assumes responsibility for the costs.

Forfeiture — Currently, section 14 of the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations states that, where something is detained or seized, it is forfeited to the Crown if it is not removed within 70 days. Sometimes more time is needed for the importer, exporter or enforcement officer to obtain the information necessary to complete a review or investigation of the case (e.g. information from foreign governments, scientific advice, translations). The proposed amendment would extend the automatic forfeiture period to 90 days.

Alternatives

Personal and Household Effects Exemptions and Personal Pet Provisions

Personal and Household Effects Exemptions — The Parties to CITES have recognized that requiring permits for the personal and household goods of individual travellers may not be justifiable or necessary as a means of meeting conservation objectives. Consequently, the Convention and subsequent resolutions of the Parties provide that countries may allow exemptions from or modifications to CITES permit requirements for personal and household effects.

Currently, WAPPRIITA and the Regulations require exporters and importers to obtain permits from Canada and/or another country depending upon the level of regulation of the species under CITES, prior to shipment into or out of Canada. To change this situation, a regulatory amendment is required setting out permit exemptions.

In signing the Convention, Canada agreed to implement the terms of the Convention with respect to the system of permits. The status quo of requiring permits for all international movements of CITES species, including all personal and household effects, places an unnecessary administrative burden on the public and increases the cost to Government of administering the system, but produces little conservation benefit for traded species. On the other hand, revoking all CITES permit requirements for commercial, as well as personal and household goods, is not an option in view of Canada's international commitments, nor is it justifiable from the conservation perspective of the species involved in international trade. Implementing limited exemptions from permit requirements for personal and household effects is recognized as legitimate by the Convention and Conferences of the Parties. A number of jurisdictions, including our major trading partners, the United States and the European Union, have already implemented personal and household effects exemptions. It is the optimal alternative.

To ensure Canada's continuing compliance with the Convention regarding information requirements and to ensure that inappropriate levels of trade in personal and household effects are detectable, an enabling provision is proposed which would allow the Minister to require a declaration, as needed in specific situations. Not including such a provision in the Regulations would mean that Canada would not be in a position to collect such information if required for conservation or other purposes related to implementation of the Convention.

Personally Owned Pet Provisions — No regulatory change is needed to create Canadian Certificates of Ownership for use by pet owners who are Canadian residents when they travel out of the country and return. However, permitting acceptance and use in Canada of similar documents issued by other countries to their residents does require a regulatory change. Not proceeding with this amendment would cause inconvenience to visitors to Canada travelling with their pets and create an administrative burden for the CITES permit offices in both Canada and other countries by failing to implement these more efficient measures recommended by the last Conference of the Parties (1997).

Labeling

Achieving voluntary compliance with providing accurate, complete identification of contents of containers or packages has not been achieved anywhere in the world. Many packages and containers entering or leaving the country claim to contain CITES-listed animals or plant species, but are not accompanied by the required permits. Similarly, others have multiple labels or are accompanied by documents containing conflicting information with regard to contents.

The volume of trade makes physical inspection of each container and package to verify contents impossible. Further, when an inspection or prosecution does occur, identification of the species contained in the shipment is often not possible by visual means (e.g. parts or derivatives of a species), or in some cases even by forensic methods. The cost of using forensic techniques (e.g. microscopic examination, chemical analysis, or DNA analysis) is prohibitive. To counter the high costs, various Canadian and foreign laws authorize prosecutions based on what an item is represented to be, as well as what it actually is. This approach is used, for example, in Canada's Controlled Drugs and Substances Act for prosecutions under that Act. The proposed regulatory amendment incorporates a similar approach into Canada's wildlife trade law, by permitting prosecution based on purported contents, unless there is evidence to the contrary that raises a reasonable doubt.

The option was considered of requiring that all packages and containers whose contents included wild animals or plants or their parts or derivatives listed under the Act be identified by an exterior label accurately identifying the species. This option was rejected as impractical, given the multiple and often unrelated packages in the large shipping containers used in international trade, the potential for attracting additional theft, and the associated additional costs that would be involved.

Administrative Matters

Removal Notice — Until the form of the removal notice and manner in which it will be used is prescribed in regulations, enforcement officers may not use this method of resolving violations. Maintaining the status quo, with its attendant costs to Government for storage and care following detention or seizure, is not a preferred option in many cases when removal of the specimen or goods from Canada at the cost of the importer is feasible.

Forfeiture — Currently, section 14 of the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations specifies automatic forfeiture to the Crown, if a detained or seized item is not removed within 70 days. Sometimes this time period is too short. Extending this period to 90 days is reasonable for both the Crown and the affected importers and exporters. Extending the period even further was considered, but rejected, because of the high costs to Government of storing and caring for seized or detained goods or live animals and plants.

Benefits and Costs

Personal and Household Effects Exemption and Personal Pet Provisions

Currently, permits must be obtained for all personal and household effects involving CITES-listed species. Many members of the public are not aware of the requirements and, therefore, do not get the permits. The proposed regulatory amendment would eliminate the permit requirement when the specified types of items are being imported or exported for personal, non-commercial use. Detentions, seizures and court proceedings that result in little conservation benefit to the species involved would be reduced. Requirements that must be met by the public would be substantially less than under the current permit system.

Based on the numbers of CITES export permits issued by the provinces and territories in 1996, for example, the total number of permits issued would probably decrease from approximately 15 000 to 5 800 or by about 60 percent under the proposed Regulations. For hunting trophies alone, some 8 600 black bear and 100 sandhill crane CITES export permits would no longer be needed by United States. hunters taking their legally harvested animals back home. This would result in substantial savings in staff time for the provincial and territorial offices that issue these permits. All provinces and territories also require a provincial or territorial export permit for black bears or have mandatory reporting by non-resident hunters, or both. Implementing the hunting trophy exemption would, therefore, not mean a loss of information for provincial and territorial black bear management programs.(see footnote 2)

In circumstances where the Minister requires a declaration to be completed, the cost would still be less than the current permit issuance process. Such a declaration system would be implemented in concert with Revenue Canada (Customs) processes.

Staff of Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Revenue Canada (Customs), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and provincial and territorial wildlife agencies involved in the administration and enforcement of CITES in Canada will require information and training on the contents of the proposed Regulations. This would be done in ongoing internal communications and training programs. Thus, additional costs as a result of this initiative would be minimal.

Information materials will be required to inform the public of the proposed exemptions and the personally owned pet provisions. When people apply for permits for activities which no longer require a permit, the new rules will be explained. Provision of CITES information to the public is an ongoing activity and any changes will be incorporated into existing and new materials. Additional costs will be minimal.

Labeling

Many packages and containers claim to contain threatened and endangered or harmful species whose import or export is regulated under the Act; however, forensic testing is too prohibitively expensive to permit routine testing of package contents for enforcement purposes. Permitting prosecution based on the claims on a label or accompanying document, unless there is a reasonable doubt to the contrary, will substantially reduce costs to Government for testing product contents. It also will enhance Government's capacity to ensure compliance with the Act, with attendant benefits for conservation of Canadian and foreign species which are or may be threatened with extinction by trade and the protection of Canadian ecosystems. There will be costs to manufacturers and distributors to produce and use accurate marks, labels or accompanying documents regarding claims made with respect to species listed under the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations if the current information is incorrect. This, however, is a reasonable cost of business for those wishing to import goods into or export goods from Canada.

Notification of the new labeling provisions will be incorporated into existing public information materials and on the CITES Internet site maintained by Environment Canada. Businesses will be notified by mail and other means. There will be modest additional costs to Government for these products, which will be borne from within existing programs.

Administrative Matters

Use of removal orders would avoid costs to Government of storing and caring for goods and live animals and plants that would otherwise have been detained or seized and ensure that the costs for removal are borne by the importers or exporters. Staff of Environment Canada, Revenue Canada (Customs) and the RCMP involved in the enforcement of WAPPRIITA at ports of entry will require information and training on the use of removal notices, and on obtaining extensions to the time period before automatic forfeiture occurs. This can be done as part of ongoing internal communications and training programs and, therefore, costs will be minimal.

Consultation

Consultation on this regulatory proposal has been ongoing since 1997. Environment Canada maintains a list of about 800 organizations and individuals, including importers-exporters and environmental, industry and hobbyist non-governmental organizations, provincial and territorial wildlife departments, wildlife management boards created under Aboriginal land claim agreements, other federal departments and agencies, and individuals interested or involved in wildlife trade. Packages containing detailed information on these regulatory proposals were sent to each of these organizations and individuals in late 1997 or in early 1998, and they were invited to provide written comments. Two public meetings were held in the spring of 1998 to provide an opportunity to provide input and exchange views.

In addition, the CITES Management Authorities of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the Instituto Nacional de Ecología of Mexico, as well as the CITES Secretariat, have been consulted. Federal government departments consulted include Revenue Canada (Customs), Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Natural Resources Canada (Canadian Forest Service), Health Canada and the RCMP.

The provinces and territories, which issue CITES export permits, were consulted at an early stage in the development of the proposals and have been kept involved in the process. They are highly supportive of the exemptions in general and the hunting trophy exemptions in particular, because of the administrative burden currently involved in permit issuance, and believe that provincial and territorial management programs for black bear and other species will not be negatively affected.

The Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board has also indicated its support for these proposals.

Non-government organizations, businesses and the public generally support the personally owned pet provisions. Falconry groups support the pet proposal. Some environmental groups stressed the importance of identifying the individual animal on the Certificate of Ownership to ensure that one animal is not substituted for another. As a result, all pets will need to be identified using appropriate techniques.

The inclusion of falconry birds as personally owned pets was supported by some provinces. Other provinces were supportive only if sufficient safeguards were to be in place to ensure unregulated trade does not occur. Raptors are included in the personally owned pet provision and the requirements surrounding the Certificate of Ownership for personally owned pets are more stringent than those applied under the current Temporary Export/ Re-import Certificate.

Several environmental organizations and one individual raised concerns about the loss of information which would no longer be available from permits when personal and household effects were exempted from this requirement. Particular concerns related to data on black bear hunting trophies going to the United States. Environment Canada contacted all provinces and territories with black bear populations to confirm the information collection mechanisms used to monitor the bear harvest by non-resident hunters (i.e. the bears most likely to be exported). All provinces and territories require provincial or territorial export permits or mandatory reporting of the kill, or both, which essentially duplicates the information obtained from CITES export permits.

For other species, environmental organizations remained concerned about monitoring trade and how to determine the conservation implications for species involved in trade under the exemptions, when provincial information mechanisms are not available. Several environmental organizations recommended that declarations be required when exemptions apply. Several provinces also supported this suggestion. The proposed Regulations recognize that declarations may sometimes be necessary to obtain trade information and provides authority for the Minister to require declarations in those circumstances.

Some environmental organizations were concerned that providing an exemption for tourist souvenirs made from some CITES-listed species (Appendices II and III) could be confusing for Customs officers and allow more restricted species (Appendix I — species threatened with extinction, as in the case of ivory) to slip through border points without the required permits. As is done currently, when there is any question about the admissibility of a wildlife import or export, the Customs officer would detain the item and consult the appropriate Environment Canada enforcement officer. Environment Canada will prepare a list of the most common species sold as souvenirs, indicating whether or not they are eligible for the exemption, for distribution to all Customs staff to assist them in making this determination; this will aid in the handling of the vast majority of cases.

Generally, all stakeholders have voiced support for the proposed labeling provisions and administrative amendments. The provinces, territories and CITES Secretariat are also supportive of these amendments. The one business that commented stated that the labeling requirement would lead to prosecutions, but offered no further comment.

Environmental organizations suggested that all animals and plants or all wildlife and not just CITES-listed species be included in the labeling provisions. The proposal covers all animals and plants to which WAPPRIITA applies.

Environmental organizations also supported a provision that would require that all packages or containers accurately list any species controlled under the Act on an exterior label. The proposed Regulations, for the reason of feasibility cited in "Alternatives" above, do not make labeling mandatory, but rather authorizes prosecutions based on what any mark, label or document affixed to or accompanying the product claims that it contains.

To ensure that all parties have every opportunity to comment on these proposals, a copy of this Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement will be distributed to all individuals and organizations consulted to date, immediately following publication in the Canada Gazette, Part I. As well, a notification of its availability will be placed on the Environment Canada Web site.

Compliance and Enforcement

Environment Canada would encourage voluntary compliance with the regulatory amendments through its public information program, particularly focusing on those individuals and groups specifically affected by the legislation. This would include information products, such as Environment Canada's CITES Web pages and brochures for travellers, and for other specialized audiences, such as importers and exporters, so that Canadians and others know how to lawfully import and export wild animals and plants, and their parts and derivatives.

All federal, provincial and territorial offices responsible for the issuance of CITES permits would be provided with information on the personal and household effects exemption and other changes to guide them in their work and to respond to public requests for information on permit requirements. Officers of Revenue Canada (Customs), Environment Canada and the RCMP, as well as provincial/territorial officers responsible for the enforcement of CITES and WAPPRIITA, would be advised and given instructions pertaining to these regulatory changes. Information would also be incorporated into the existing CITES training programs for enforcement officers.

In the case of the personal and household effects exemptions, complying with the new situation would mean fewer requirements for the public than currently exist. In this case, promoting compliance is not as critical as when legal requirements are being increased. Persons seeking permits who do not require them would be informed when they applied for a permit.

The ability to prosecute violations, based on stated or actual content, is a provision which enforcement and inspection staff have requested and support. Officers of Canada Customs, Environment Canada, the RCMP, other appropriate federal government departments and provincial ministries and provincial CITES management authorities would be advised of the changes. Businesses on the mailing list would be advised directly. All businesses would be advised through new and revised information products, such as brochures, that would be prepared and broadly circulated.

Following final approval of the regulatory amendments, Environment Canada would inform the CITES Secretariat and request that they issue a formal notification to the Management Authorities of all Parties to the Convention so that they are aware of them and can provide the relevant information to their enforcement staff and to their publics who are considering transporting CITES-listed products to or from Canada.

Penalties for violating the Act or the Regulations reflect the seriousness with which wildlife trade violations are viewed. For an individual, the penalty for each offence may be up to $25,000 and up to six months imprisonment on summary conviction, and up to $150,000 and imprisonment for up to five years when guilty of an indictable offence. Corporations are liable to fines of up to $50,000 on summary conviction, and $300,000 for an indictable offence. Penalties may be doubled for repeat offenders. Minor infractions will be dealt with through a ticketing system, with fines ranging from $100 to a maximum of $400.

Contact

Sandra Gillis, Chief, Program Analysis and Coordination, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, 351 Saint-Joseph Boulevard, Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3, (819) 953-1404 (Telephone), (819) 953-6283 (Facsimile).

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is hereby given that the Governor in Council, pursuant to section 21 of the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act,(see footnote b) proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations.

Interested person may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations to the Minister of the Environment within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to the Director, Biodiversity Protection Branch, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3.

Ottawa, September 29, 1999

MARC O'SULLIVAN
Asistant Clerk of the Privy Council

REGULATIONS AMENDING THE WILD ANIMAL AND PLANT TRADE REGULATIONS

AMENDMENT

1. Section 14 of the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations(see footnote 3) and the heading before it are replaced by the following:

EXEMPTIONS

Interpretation

14. The definitions in this section apply in this section and sections 15 to 19.

"commercial purpose" means any activity related to the sale, offering for sale, purchase, trade or barter of any animal or plant, or any part or derivative of one, without regard to its quantity or weight, including

(a) any display, performance or exhibit of such a thing for gain or profit; and

(b) the use of any such thing for the purpose of soliciting sales. (fin commerciale)

"customs officer" has the meaning assigned to the word "officer" in subsection 2(1) of the Customs Act. (agent des douanes)

"household effect" means a plant or dead animal, or a part or derivative of one, that is imported to or exported from Canada for other than commercial purposes and that

(a) is owned and possessed by an individual in the individual's ordinary country of residence and that forms part of the individual's household belongings that are being shipped to or from Canada, to the individual's new residence; or

(b) forms part of an inheritance from an estate that is imported to or exported from Canada. (objet à usage domestique)

"hunting trophy" means a dead animal or part or derivative of one in a fresh, frozen or salted condition that an individual acquired and possessed through legal hunting; (trophée de chasse)

"personal baggage" means, where an individual uses a commercial passenger conveyance to enter or depart from Canada, all hand-carried items and all checked baggage of the individual and, where an individual uses any other type of conveyance to enter or depart from Canada, baggage that is being carried in or on the same vehicle, vessel or aircraft as the individual. (bagages personnels)

"personal effect" means any of the following things that is imported into or exported from Canada for other than commercial purposes:

(a) a plant or dead animal, or a part or derivative of one, that is owned and possessed by the individual in the individual's ordinary country of residence and that, at the time of its import or export is part of the individual's clothing or accessories or is contained in the individual's personal baggage; and

(b) a tourist souvenir or a hunting trophy. (objet personnel)

"pet" means a living animal that an individual owns as a personal pet and that is listed in Part I of Schedule I but not in Schedule II. (animal de compagnie)

"tourist souvenir" means a dead animal, other than a hunting trophy, or dead plant, or a part or derivative of one that is listed in column I of an item of Schedule I and in respect of which there is a reference to Appendix II or III of the Convention in column II of that item and that is being imported into their ordinary country of residence by an individual who acquired, owned and possessed it outside their ordinary country of residence during a sojourn from which they are returning. (souvenir de voyage)

Personal Effects and Household Effects

15. (1) Subject to subsection (2) and sections 16 and 18, an individual is exempt from holding an import or export permit issued under subsection 10(1) of the Act for any animal or plant, or any part or derivative of one, that is listed in Schedule I but not in Schedule II or Schedule III and that is a personal effect or a household effect.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply

(a) in the case of a tourist souvenir, where it was acquired in a country where removal from the wild occurred and where that country requires the prior grant of an export permit;

(b) in the case of the export of a dead plant or dead animal, or a part or derivative of one, other than feathers and hunting trophies, that is raw, unprocessed, semi-processed or simply dried; and

(c) in the case of a hunting trophy, except where the hunting trophy is a black bear (Ursus americanus) or sandhill crane (Grus canadensis) that is exported from Canada to the United States or imported into Canada from the United States by an individual who is ordinarily resident in Canada or the United States and that consists of,

16. The exemption referred to in subsection 15(1) does not apply in respect of the importation or exportation of sturgeon caviar by an individual, if the quantity of caviar being imported or exported is greater than 250 g per individual.

Pets

17. Subject to section 18, an individual who is ordinarily resident in a country other than Canada who imports a pet into Canada for other than commercial purposes and subsequently exports the pet from Canada is exempt from holding a permit issued under subsection 10(1) of the Act if

(a) the individual has obtained from the competent authority of the individual's ordinary country of residence a permit, certificate or other written document authorizing the export from, and subsequent import into, that country of the pet; and

(b) the permit, certificate or other written document meets the requirements of the Convention and the resolutions passed by the Parties to the Convention regarding the movement of pets.

Exemption Conditions

18. (1) An individual may be exempted under subsection 15(1) from holding a permit under subsection 10(1) of the Act on the condition that the individual not sell or dispose of the plant or animal or part or derivative of one that is the subject of the exemption within 90 days after the date on which the exemption is claimed.

(2) An individual may be exempted under section 17 from holding a permit under subsection 10(1) of the Act on the condition that the individual not sell or dispose of the pet that is the subject of the exemption outside of the individual's ordinary country of residence within 90 days after the date on which the exemption is claimed.

DECLARATION

19. (1) Any individual who imports into Canada or exports from Canada an animal or plant, or any part or derivative of one, and who is exempt from holding a permit under these Regulations shall, on the request of an officer or a customs officer, under subsection (2), make a declaration at the time of import or export on a form provided for that purpose by the Minister.

(2) The officer or customs officer shall require a declaration where the Minister requires it in order to obtain information relating to the implementation of the Convention.

(3) The declaration shall be signed by the importer or exporter and include the following information in respect of the imported or exported plant or animal, or any part or derivative of one:

(a) the name, street address and telephone number of the importer or exporter, as the case may be;

(b) a description of the animal, plant or part or derivative, in sufficient detail so as to permit it to be identified, including its common name and, if known, its scientific name, and, where applicable, a description of any thing that contains or is made up of the animal, plant or part or derivative;

(c) its number or quantity;

(d) its country of import or export, as the case may be;

(e) whether the animal or plant, or any part or derivative of one was acquired by the individual outside the individual's ordinary country of residence during a sojourn from which they are returning and if so, the name of the country in which it was acquired; and

(f) the date of import or export.

LABELLING

20. Unless there is evidence that raises a reasonable doubt to the contrary where a person imports into Canada or exports from Canada an animal or plant, or any part or derivative of one listed in Schedule I or II in a container or package that is marked, labelled or accompanied by a document that sets out information in respect of the identity of the animal, plant or derivative, that identity is deemed to be that set out on the mark, label or document.

REMOVAL NOTICE

21. For the purposes of subsection 18(1) of the Act, a removal notice shall contain the following information:

(a) the name, street address and telephone number of the importer;

(b) the name, street address and telephone number of the exporter;

(c) the provision of the Act or these Regulations that the officer believes has been contravened;

(d) a description of the thing to be removed; and

(e) the period of time within which the thing must be removed.

REMOVAL REQUIREMENTS

22. An officer who requires the removal of all or part of a thing in accordance with subsection 18(1) of the Act shall require that the thing or part thereof be inspected and, to the extent possible, marked and labelled, and that a place of export be indicated on the label or accompanying document.

FORFEITURE

23. For the purposes of paragraph 19(3)(a) of the Act, the period within which a thing must be removed is 90 days after the date of its detention under section 13 of the Act.

2. The reference "(Section 3 and subsection 6(3)" that follows the heading "SCHEDULE I" of the Regulations is replaced by "(section 3, subsection 6(3), section 14, subsection 15(1) and section 20)".

3. The reference "Section 6/article 6)" that follows the heading "OTHER SPECIES REQUIRING AN IMPORT PERMIT" in Schedule II of the Regulations is replaced by "Sections 6 and 14, subsection 15(1) and section 20/articles 6 et 14, paragraphe 15(1) et article 20)".

4. The Regulations are amended by adding the following after Schedule II:

SCHEDULE III

(subsection 15(1))

SCHEDULE I SPECIES RECOGNIZED AS ENDANGERED OR THREATENED IN CANADA

PART I

FAUNA

Item	Column I Regulated Taxa	Column II English Common Name	Column III French Common Name
1.0.0	MAMMALIA
1.1.0	CETACEA
1.1.1	Monodontidae
	(1) Delphinapterus leucas	White (Beluga) Whale	Béluga (baleine blanche)
1.1.2	Delphinidae
	(1) Phocoena phocoena	Harbour Porpoise	Marsouin commun
1.1.3	Balaenopteridae
	(1) Megaptera novaeangliae	Humpback Whale	Rorqual à bosse
1.1.4	Balaenidae
	(1) Balaena mysticetus	Bowhead Whale	Baleine boréale
	(2) Eubalaena glacialis	Right Whale	Baleine noire
1.2.0	CARNIVORA
1.2.1	Mustelidae
	(1) Enhydra lutris	Sea Otter	Loutre de mer
1.3.0	ARTIODACTYLA
1.3.1	Bovidae
	(1) Bison bison athabascae	Wood Bison	Bison des bois
2.0.0	AVES
2.1.0	FALCONIFORMES
2.1.1	Falconidae
	(1) Falco peregrinus anatum	Peregrine Falcon (anatum)	Faucon pèlerin, anatum
2.2.0	GRUIFORMES
2.2.1	Gruidae
	(1) Grus americana	Whooping Crane	Grue blanche d'Amérique
2.3.0	CHARADRIIFORMES
2.3.1	Scolopacidae
	(1) Numenius borealis	Eskimo Curlew	Courlis esquimau
2.4.0	STRIGIFORMES
2.4.1	Strigidae
	(1) Strix occidentalis	Spotted Owl	Chouette tachetée
	(2) Speotyto cunicularia	Burrowing Owl	Chouette des terriers
3.0.0	REPTILIA
3.1.0	TESTUDINATA
3.1.1	Dermochelyidae (1) Dermochelys coriacea	Leatherback Turtle	Tortue luth

PART II

FLORA

Item	Column I Regulated Taxa	Column II English Common Name	Column III French Common Name
1.0.0	ARALIACEAE
	(1) Panax quinquefolius	American Ginseng	Panax à cinq folioles (Ginseng d'Amérique)
1.1.0	CACTACEAE
	(1) Opuntia Humifusa	Eastern Prickly Pear Cactus	Raquette de l'Est
1.2.0	ORCHIDACEAE
	(1) Cypripedium candidum	Small White Lady's-slipper	Cycripède blanc
	(2) Isotria medeoloides	Small Whorled Pogonia	Petite Pogonie verticille
	(3) Isotria verticillata	Large Whorled Pogonia	Grande Pogonie verticille
	(4) Liparis liliifolia	Purple Twayblade	Liparis à feuilles de lis
	(5) Platanthera praeclara	Western Prairie White Fringed Orchid	Platanthère blanchâtre de l'Ouest
	(6) Triphora trianthophora	Nodding Pogonia	Triphore penche
1.3.0	RANUNCULACEAE
	(1) Hydrasis canadensis	Golden Seal	Hydraste du Canada

COMING INTO FORCE

5. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

[40-1-o]

Regulations Amending the Wildlife Area Regulations

Statutory Authority

Canada Wildlife Act

Sponsoring Department

Department of the Environment

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

Description

Background

Land use change and the subsequent loss of habitat is the most important threat to wildlife populations and diversity in Canada. An effective protection option is to incorporate important sites into the federal system of National Wildlife Areas.

National Wildlife Areas (NWAs) are established through the Wildlife Area Regulations under the authority of the Canada Wildlife Act. The Act allows the Minister of the Environment to purchase, acquire or lease any lands for the purpose of research, conservation and interpretation with respect to migratory birds and other species.

The amount of wildlife habitat is declining in Canada as diverse and unique areas become increasingly encroached upon. A Wildlife Policy for Canada emphasizes that protection of habitats and ecosystems is the most cost effective method of preserving wildlife. Moreover, the Policy indicates that restoring habitat is difficult, expensive, and often impractical.

The expansion and consolidation of key habitat areas is required if Canada is to address its domestic wildlife management priorities and meet its international obligations under such initiatives as the World Conservation Strategy (1980), the Ramsar Convention (1981), the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992), the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, and various migratory bird agreements with Latin American countries.

The acceleration of the identification and protection of Canada's critical wildlife habitat is endorsed in the Biodiversity Convention and by the Statement of Commitment to Complete Canada's Networks of Protected Areas, the latter of which was signed in 1992 by the federal, provincial and territorial Ministers responsible for Parks, Wildlife and Forests.

The establishment and enlargement of NWAs complement Environment Canada's commitment to reverse habitat loss and fragmentation trends by increasing habitat protected outside of national parks by 6 percent by the year 2000.

Proposal

The purpose of this proposed amendment to the Wildlife Area Regulations is to incorporate existing federal land holdings into three NWAs: Îles de Contrecœur and Îles de l'estuaire in Quebec, and Shepody in New Brunswick.

The Îles de Contrecœur NWA is located 35 km northeast of Montréal in the St. Lawrence River. Established by the Canadian Wildlife Service in 1981, Îles de Contrecœur NWA is of critical importance to the waterfowl of the Montréal region and beyond. It is provincially recognized for its abundance of gadwalls (a type of dabbling duck) and other species.

This amendment proposes adding 103.65 hectares of land acquired from Transport Canada under the St. Lawrence Action Plan to the Îles de Contrecœur NWA, thereby providing legal protection to these lands against activities that could have an adverse effect on migratory birds and their habitat. The addition of the 103.65 hectares would increase the Îles de Contrecœur NWA to 312.02 hectares.

Similarly, this amendment proposes that 1 hectare, also acquired from Transport Canada, be added to the Îles de l'estuaire NWA, increasing its area to 408.66 hectares. Managed by the Canadian Wildlife Service since 1986, the Îles de l'estuaire NWA, in the St. Lawrence River, stretches more than 120 km between the municipalities of Kamouraska and Bic. It is of critical importance to seabirds such as the common eider.

Finally, this amendment would add 171 hectares to the Shepody NWA (1980), increasing the area of this NWA to 978.6 hectares. The Shepody NWA consists of three sections — Germantown, New Horton and Mary's Point. Germantown and New Horton are Fundy dykelands that, although once saltmarshes that were drained and used for agriculture, have been restored as significant freshwater marshland for waterfowl. The Mary's Point section is a coastal headland surrounded by critical inshore flats used by migratory shorebirds. It has received national and international recognition as both a Ramsar site (i.e., a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention) and a Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network site.

Alternatives

Maintaining the status quo would be to continue to manage and administer the areas in a fragmented manner, without benefit of protection under the Canada Wildlife Act. Alternate modes of management, such as private stewardship and migratory bird sanctuary designation, do not permit comprehensive management or habitat protection, respectively.

Benefits and Costs

The new lands that would be incorporated into the Îles de Contrecœur and the Îles de l'estuaire NWAs would group together isolated pockets of land. This will enable Canada to more effectively meet its commitment to conserving wetlands and other habitats with considerable potential for migratory birds and other species.

The lands proposed for addition to the Shepody NWA, which were acquired by the federal government over five years ago, were purchased at market value and there was no expropriation. The proposed management strategy for the area, subject to public review, will allow most of the present recreational activities to continue, provided that the integrity of Shepody's unique habitat is ensured. The Mary's Point section of the Shepody NWA draws over 14 000 people annually to view the migrant shorebirds.

No additional costs will be incurred by the incorporation of these lands into these NWAs.

National Wildlife Areas, like other protected areas, play an important educational role in heightening public awareness of Canada's natural heritage and in instilling respect for ecosystems, the foundation of all forms of life. Protected areas are also important in Canada and at the international level as tourist destinations.

In all three cases, the additional habitat protection afforded by the proposed amendment will ensure continued economic spin-offs for the local communities. There is a clear economic gain to Canadians and to the Government as a result of protecting and managing migratory birds and some of the areas important for their breeding and survival. Data collected in a 1991 survey by Statistics Canada showed that hunting and viewing migratory waterfowl contributed $1.6 billion to the gross domestic product, generated $694 million in government revenue from taxes, and sustained 28 600 jobs. The economic impact of recreational activity associated with all types of wildlife, not just migratory birds, is even more substantial: a contribution of $7 billion to the gross domestic product, $3.1 billion in government revenue from taxes, and 126 400 jobs, which represent $3.8 billion in personal income for Canadians. The cost to government is several orders of magnitude smaller. The substantial international benefits provided to citizens of the United States and Latin America are not included in the above estimates. Also, these economic benefit figures do not attempt to quantify the many other benefits of NWAs as intrinsically important components of ecosystems, or their social, cultural, and spiritual importance.

Consultation

Within the framework of the federal-provincial agreement under the St. Lawrence Action Plan, the provincial authorities involved support the acquisition of the lands and their incorporation into the Îles de Contrecœur and Îles de l'estuaire NWAs, with the objective of consolidating the areas. The local and municipal authorities were informed of the proposal and expressed no objections. Local stakeholder groups consulted include the Société de protection des eiders de l'Estuaire, the Club des ornithologues de Lanaudière, and the Association des chasseurs laurentiens.

With regard to Shepody, the government of New Brunswick was consulted and local stakeholder groups notified of the proposed changes to the NWA boundary. National and regional conservation organizations have voiced a need for preserving critical wildlife habitat and are supportive of NWA designations. As the proposed amendments will continue to permit traditional uses of the land (except for timber harvesting), no opposition is expected.

Compliance and Enforcement

Enforcement officers of Environment Canada and designated provincial and territorial conservation officers enforce the Wildlife Area Regulations. Under the Canada Wildlife Act, the maximum fine for a summary (minor) conviction offense by an individual is $50,000. The maximum fine for an indictable (serious) offence is $100,000. A corporation may be fined up to $100,000 for a summary conviction and $250,000 for an indictable offense. There are provisions for increasing fines for continuing or subsequent offenses. Minor offenses will be dealt with under a ticketing system.

Contacts

Ed Wiken, Chief, Habitat Conservation Division, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, (819) 994-9533 (Telephone), (819) 994-4445 (Facsimile), Ed.Wiken@ec.gc.ca (Electronic mail).

Yvon Mercier, Habitat Protection Biologist, Quebec Region, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, 1141 Route de l'Église, P.O. 10 100, Sainte-Foy, Quebec G1V 4H5, (418) 648-3685 (Telephone), (418) 649-6475 (Facsimile), Yvon.Mercier@ ec.gc.ca (Electronic mail).

Colin M. MacKinnon or Kevin Davidson, Atlantic Region, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, P.O. Box 6227, Sackville, New Brunswick E4L 1G6, (506) 364-5039 or 364-5038 (Telephone), (506) 364-5062 (Facsimile), Colin.Mac Kinnon@ec.gc.ca or Kevin.Davidson@ec.gc.ca (Electronic mail).

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is hereby given that the Governor in Council proposes, pursuant to section 12(see footnote c) of the Canada Wildlife Act,(see footnote d) to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Wildlife Area Regulations.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations to the Minister of the Environment within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice and be sent to the Director, Biodiversity Protection, Canadian Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3.

Ottawa, September 29, 1999

MARC O'SULLIVAN
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

REGULATIONS AMENDING THE WILDLIFE AREA REGULATIONS

AMENDMENTS

1. Item 3(see footnote 4) of Part II of Schedule I to the Wildlife Area Regulations(see footnote 5) is replaced by the following:

3. Shepody National Wildlife Area

In the County of Albert,

In the Parish of Harvey,

(1) Germantown Marsh Unit

All those parcels of land, shown bounded by a heavy line on Plan 66082 recorded in the Canada Lands Surveys Records at Ottawa;

said parcels containing together about 696 hectares (1,720 acres).

(2) Mary's Point Unit

All those parcels of land more particularly described under Firstly to Ninthly as follows:

Firstly, those two parcels described in a deed of transfer between George F., Hazel C., and Hugh M. Teed, Muriel E. Young, Mary G. Gillis, Eric L. Teed, and Gloria J. Trivett and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in the Registry Office for the County of Albert under number 79555, and also described in a deed of transfer between Muriel V., George F., and Eric L. Teed and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 79556;

Secondly, that parcel described in a deed of transfer between John D. and Ella Mae Northrup and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 82715;

Thirdly, that parcel described in a deed of transfer between Matilda Barbour and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 86696;

Fourthly, that parcel described as Parcel I in a deed of transfer between Ronald A. and Eunice E. Church and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 84456;

Fifthly, those two parcels described in a deed of transfer between Osborne Long and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 84711;

Sixthly, that parcel described in a deed of transfer between Murray R. and A. Audrey Long and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 84461;

Seventhly, that parcel described as lot 22 in a deed of transfer between Kenneth Tower and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 84457;

Eighthly, that parcel described as lot 23 in a deed of transfer between George Bishop and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 84460;

Ninthly, that parcel described as lot 24 in a deed of transfer between Marion Jones and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 84712;

said parcels containing together about 108.5 hectares (268 acres).

(3) New Horton Unit

All those parcels of land more particularly described under Firstly to Sixthly as follows:

Firstly, those two parcels described as Parcel A and Parcel B in a deed of transfer between The Farm Adjustment Board and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in the Registry Office for the County of Albert under number 72271;

Secondly, that parcel described as Parcel 3 in a deed of transfer between Percy Lane Waddy and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 84831;

Thirdly, that parcel described as Parcel 1 in a deed of transfer between I. Merrill, Adelia and Percy Wilbur and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 88822;

Fourthly, that parcel described as Parcel 4 in a deed of transfer between I. Merrill, Adelia and Percy Wilbur and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 85506;

Fifthly, that parcel described as Parcel 5 in a deed of transfer between Leonard Cannon and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 85388;

Sixthly, that parcel described as Parcel 1 in a deed of transfer between Calvin A. and Gladys C. Barbour and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada, registered in said office under number 85114;

said parcels containing together about 184.6 hectares (456.1 acres).

2. Item 2 (see footnote 6) of Part III of Schedule I to the Regulations is replaced by the following:

2. Îles de Contrecoeur National Wildlife Area

(1) All those islands and parts of islands and the islet in the St. Lawrence River, lots and parts of lots in the Registration Division of Verchères, in the parish of Contrecœur, more particularly described under Firstly to Thirdly as follows:

Firstly, lots 428 to 477 inclusive, being the whole of Saint-Ours Island; lots 479 and 480, being the whole of Contrecœur Island; lots 486 to 489 inclusive, being the whole of Ronde Island; lots 490 to 510 inclusive, being the whole of Grande Island; lots 511 to 523 inclusive, being the whole of Devant l'Église Island; lot 525, being the whole of the island known as Aux Oignons Island; lots 526 to 541 inclusive, being the whole of Aux Rats Island; lots 542 and 543, being the whole of the islet of Aux Rats Island; lot 578, being the whole of Richard Island;

Secondly, that part of the island known as Dorval Island, or Duval Island, described as 1/3, 1/3 and 1/6 undivided interests in lot 478 in deeds registered in the Registry Office at Verchères under numbers 114915, 146958 and 146959, respectively;

Thirdly, lots 569 to 577 inclusive, described in a deed registered in the Registry Office at Verchères under number 155169;

all the aforementioned islands and lots are shown on plan 66181 in the Canada Lands Surveys Records at Ottawa.

(2) All that island in the St. Lawrence River, in the Registration Division of Berthier, in the parish of Saint-Antoine-de-Lavaltrie, more particularly described as follows:

Lot 1, being the whole of Mousseau Island, described in deeds registered in the Registry Office at Berthier under numbers 191183 and 191184, respectively.

3. Item 7 (see footnote 7) of Part III of Schedule I to the Regulations is replaced by the following:

7. Îles de l'Estuaire National Wildlife Area

In the Registration Division of Rimouski, all that part of that island, in the St. Lawrence River, including its foreshore and reefs, more particularly described as follows:

Bicquette Island, situated in the proximity of Du Bic Island at approximate latitude 48°25'N and approximate longitude 68°50'W, designated as lot 748 on the Plan and Book of Reference for the Cadastre of the Parish of Sainte-Cécile-du-Bic, in the Rimouski Registration Division, and described in a deed registered in the Registry Office for said Division under number 2548;

Except: the parcel designated as "PARCELLE I, Partie LOT 748", and shown on the plan prepared by Roger Boisclair, Quebec Land Surveyor, as number 1820 of his minutes, dated September 30, 1987, being plan number DMADC-Q-05537 of the Canadian Coast Guard, Laurentian Region;

In the Registration Division of Kamouraska-Témiscouata, all those islands and parts thereof, in the St. Lawrence River, including their foreshores and reefs, more particularly described under Firstly to Fifthly as follows:

Firstly,

(a) Blanche Island, being without cadastral designation, situated about 2.4 km northeast from the northeasterly point of Aux Lièvres Island at approximate latitude 47°56'N and approximate longitude 69°40'W;

(b) Aux Fraises Island, being without cadastral designation, situated about 3.2 km southwest from the southwesterly point of Aux Lièvres Island at approximate latitude 47°45'N and approximate longitude 69°48'W;

said islands being described in a deed registered in the Registry Office for the Kamouraska Registration Division under number 234210 and shown on plans MM-82-5406 and MM-82-5407, respectively, prepared by Public Works Canada, Real Estate Services, dated January 11, 1982;

Secondly, Du Pot à l'Eau-de-Vie (Brandy Pot) Island, being without cadastral designation, fronting the City of Rivière-du-Loup and near Aux Lièvres Island at approximate latitude 47°52'N and approximate longitude 69°41'W, Du Pot à l'Eau-de-Vie Island being the property of the Federal Government in accordance with the expropriation documents registered in the Registry Office for the Témiscouata Registration Division on September 16, 1913;

Except: that part of said island lying easterly of a line having an astronomic azimuth of 354°49' and a length of 117.35 m, said line being at a distance of 59.44 m on an astronomic azimuth of 264°49' from the centre of the new riding light, as shown on plan EM-79-4912 prepared by Public Works Canada, Real Estate Services, dated November 6, 1979;

Thirdly, that part of the island known as Du Long Pèlerin Island, being a part of lot 551 on the Plan and Book of Reference for the Official Cadastre of the Parish of Saint-André, in the Kamouraska Registration Division, as described in the Deed of Discharge (Quit Claim) in favour of the Federal Government and registered in the Registry Office for said district under number 47445 on June 20, 1928;

said part of said island is shown on Plan EM-79-4914 prepared by Public Works Canada, Real Estate Services, dated November 6, 1979;

Fourthly, the island known as La Grande Île de Kamouraska, being a part of lot 504 on the Plan and Book of Reference for the Cadastre of the Parish of Saint-Louis-de-Kamouraska, in the Kamouraska Registration Division, and described in the deed registered in the Registry Office for the said district under number 9159 on June 18, 1961;

Except: that part of said island containing the navigational aid installations of the Department of Transport (Canada);

said island and part of said island are shown on plan EM-79-4913 prepared by Public Works Canada, Real Estate Services, dated November 6, 1979;

Fifthly, the islands of Kamouraska designated as lots 506, 507, 508 and 509 in the Official Cadastre for the Parish of Saint-Louis-de-Kamouraska, in the Kamouraska Registration Division, and described in the deed registered in the Registry Office for the said Division under number 121477 on March 26, 1980;

said islands are known under the names Brûlée Island, De la Providence Island and Les Récifs and shown on Plan MM-82-5408 prepared by Public Works Canada, Real Estate Services, dated January 11, 1982.

COMING INTO FORCE

4. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

[40-1-o]

Footnote a

S.C., 1998, c. 17, s. 6 and 28

Footnote 1

Appendix I lists species that are threatened with extinction, and which are or may be affected by trade. CITES import and export permits are issued only under special circumstances for primarily non-commercial uses. Appendix II lists those species that might become threatened by trade. A CITES export permit from the country of export is required prior to importing or exporting an Appendix II species or product. Appendix III lists species that a country has identified as subject to regulation within its jurisdiction for the purpose of preventing or restricting exploitation. A CITES export permit is required to export an Appendix III species or product from the listing country; a CITES certificate of origin is required for re-export from other countries.

Footnote 2

While the recent closure of the spring black bear hunt in Ontario will reduce the total number of CITES export permits issued to non-residents in the spring season, it is probable that the overall annual level (and thus the associated workload) will stay substantially the same because hunters will shift their efforts to the fall season.

Footnote b

S.C., 1992, c. 52

Footnote 3

SOR/96-263

Footnote c

S.C., 1994, c. 23, s. 14

Footnote d

S.C., 1994, c. 23, s. 2

Footnote 4

SOR/80-417

Footnote 5

C.R.C., c. 1609; SOR/94-594

Footnote 6

SOR/86-675

Footnote 7

SOR/86-675

NOTICE:
The format of the electronic version of this issue of the Canada Gazette was modified in order to be compatible with extensible hypertext markup language (XHTML 1.0 Strict).