August 2009 Edition

                                          What's Happening at the FCC

Endangered Species – Habitat/Critical Habitat

In early July the federal Court made its first substantive ruling regarding Canada’s endangered species Act. It concerned Sage-Grouse, an endangered prairie bird. While there was considerable knowledge of the bird’s habitat, Environment Canada determine that there was not enough knowledge to identify the bird’s critical habitat. Environment Canada did, however, set out a number of studies to try to identify critical habitat for the bird. Environmental groups did not accept this position and challenged the position in Federal Court claiming there was enough known habitat and some should be identified as critical and specifically protected as required under the endangered species legislation.

The Court agreed. In essence, the Court took the approach that in the absence of “best available information”, the government should consider all the known habitat to be “critical”, at least until there is further information suggesting it is not. A ruling that the Fisheries Council of Canada cannot accept and we have suggested the government should challenge.

The consequences of this ruling could be dramatic on Canada’s fisheries as our commercial harvest typically occurs in a multi-species environment. Protection and recovery measures for aquatic species at risk have impacts on activities related to the harvest of other species found in the same place at the same time. We are already concerned that there is a growing tendency to identify known habitat of listed species as “critical habitat” without the benefit of peered review scientific assessment separating habitat and critical habitat. This ruling exasperates an already confused file.

The Fisheries Council has requested (i) the government to challenge the ruling; and (ii) the formation of an informal DFO/FCC working group to develop guidelines and criteria for identifying critical habitat for aquatic species.

Information Sessions: 2010 EU Catch Certificate Requirement

DFO is holding information session on how the DFO catch certificate process will help exporters comply with the 2010 EU requirements. Sessions have been held in July. No registration is required. The upcoming sessions in August are:

Halifax, August 6: 1-5pm – Holiday Inn, Dartmouth

St. John’s, August 7:1-5pm – the Delta

Vancouver, August 13; 8am –noon – the Fairmont

Exports to Ukraine

The Ukraine has announced that it plans to introduce new Port Health regulations in 2010 that will impact a wide range of imports including seafood. The requirements proposed appear onerous. The Fisheries Council of Canada has requested International Trade Canada to request the Ukraine to notify the World Trade Organization (WTO) of their intent so that the WTO can review proposed measures to ensure they are not trade distorting and are consistent with general WTO rules.

Also, there are rumours that the Ukraine plans to follow Russia’s lead and establish a list of approved seafood exporters to the Ukraine. The FCC has requested the CFIA to investigate and, if true, engage the Ukraine authorities on the issue.

Plant Construction/Sanitation

In response to audit criticism by the EU, USA, and Russia, CFIA has decided to introduce a Schedule I & II component in CFIA audits’ of plant’s QMP. At present, CFIA audits the plant’s QMP to determine that the plant is in control of its operations. During the audit a product compliance test may be undertaken or, perhaps, the plant’s recall procedures would be tested. As CFIA moves forward, a specific construction/equipment/sanitation component will be added to the audit. By late Fall, the intent is that every QMP audit will include a construction/equipment/sanitation review and this will persist for about a year. CFIA recognizes that this initiative could be problematic/costly for some plants. As such, they have agreed that the initiative should be perceived as a phased-in response to the criticisms, particularly those of the EU, and that the timelines proposed regarding remedies would be reasonable and reflect the degree of food safety concern regarding the identified construction/equipment/sanitation deficiency.

Prior to the introduction of QMP, CFIA inspections focussed on Schedule I & II. Plants were graded as A, B, C, D based on the number of critical, serious, and minor deficiencies detected with a D being a failed rating and the plant’s registration put in jeopardy. CFIA confirms that they are not/not going back to this approach. First of all, CFIA does not have any standards of measurements of compliance to Schedules I & II. As well, there is no official guidance document to direct inspectors and industry regarding the assessment/scoring.

Next Steps

August _ CFIA letter to plants regarding the initiative to add a Schedule I &II component to the QMP audit;
September _ CFIA to issue a Q&A document to help explain how the initiative will operate.
October _ CFIA to issue a Corrective Action Plan Guideline.

As this initiative moves forward, the FCC will rely on its Inspection/Technology Committee to guide our input/recommendations/comments.

USA - Food Safety Enhancement Act

The US House of Representatives passed its Food Safety Enhancement Act on July 30th. The Senate is proceeding with its FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. Once the Senate’s Bill is passed, a joint working group of the House of Representatives and the Senate will be formed to try to reconcile the Bills so that they can present to the President a jointly supported Bill for his approval. Both houses are committed to trying to get the supported Bill to the President in this fiscal year.

The Fisheries Council of Canada has been working with CFIA, Agriculture&Agri- Food Canada, and the Canadian Embassy in Washington. Main talking points are: