Science Advisory Report  2014/015

Science Advice for Managing Risk and Uncertainty in Operational Decisions of the Fisheries Protection Program

Summary

For most projects reviewed by the Fisheries Protection Program, the uncertainty largely lies in the nature and magnitude of the impacts of the project on fish and fish habitat (and fisheries productivity), and “risk” will refer to uncertainties about future events, not about whether or not a project will occur. Key sources of uncertainty in implementing the Fishery Protection Policies include:

• Uncertainty about impact prediction
• Uncertainty about the effectiveness of activities intended to mitigate or offset any negative project impacts
• Uncertainty about future states of nature

For self-assessment or assisted assessment a project can proceed only if there is a low likelihood and low uncertainty regarding both the death of fish and a net negative residual impact on habitat, prior to considerations of any offsetting activities. For proponent self-assessment to have such low uncertainty, the project will typically comprise routine activities with standard guidance on the best practices for performance of these activities.

For assisted assessment, standardized guidance on routine operational practices for conduct of the project has not been provided, or the proponent cannot apply available guidance to the project. However, with expert assistance, project-specific approaches can be identified or developed that avoid or adequately mitigate death of fish and residual impacts on habitat, again, prior to consideration of any offsetting activities.

Projects that are large, complex, or otherwise likely to potentially cause changes to fish habitat or death of fish that cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated with appropriate project design require substantial expert planning to identify appropriate measures for better avoidance, mitigation and offsetting of death of fish or residual harm to habitat, and to ensure the overall intent of the Fishery Protection Provisions is met.

For self-assessment or assisted assessment, risk of failing to achieve the intent of the Fishery Protection Provisions would only be managed effectively if the same common, high standard of protection to fisheries productivity was met. The necessary low level of risk can only be achieved under two conditions:

• The project had no residual effects on habitat nor death or fish
• The project was designed so the combination of expected beneficial and detrimental effects resulted in no loss of local productivity, without any offsetting).

A single project that presents a risk of a non-zero net loss of local productivity of a relevant fish population might not, by itself, directly cause a loss of productivity of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal (CRA) fishery. However, a decision rule consistently allowing such projects to proceed would, over time, have high likelihood of resulting in such loss at the scale of CRA fisheries, and fail to provide for sustainability and ongoing productivity of fisheries.

There are a number of methods that can be used to analyze equivalency, ranging from service-to-service methods to completely economic assessments, and properties of each method are considered. The calculation of equivalence within an offsetting program should acknowledge, assess, and as fully as possible manage all the sources of uncertainty: uncertainty about impact prediction, effectiveness of mitigation/offsetting, and future states of nature.

Discounting is generally used when conducting analyses for offsetting to equate productivity losses resultant from residual effects of a project to potential gains expected from an offsetting program. Discounting is unlikely to be a consideration in self-assessment or assisted assessments, but needs to be considered in all projects requiring offsetting.

Productivity may be measured in many ways and for the Fishery Protection Policies and Provisions should be done at appropriate geographic scales. When productivity is assessed, a suite of productivity indicators is usually more robust than a single indicator. Guidance is provided on considerations in choosing appropriate suites of criteria. Under the Fishery Protection Program, projects with small impacts are not generally expected to require project-specific indicators. However, indicators can be useful on a regional scale to ensure that the goals of the Fishery Protection Program are being met.

The complexity of the tools and information, and involvement of DFO staff are expected to increase at each level of assessment. The possible tools for self-assessment will generally be designed for activities that are proposed frequently and for which there is extensive experience with both likely impacts and effective avoidance and mitigation actions for any impacts. Assisted assessments will require more case-specific support for a project to have a sufficiently low level of risk. Projects requiring full or comprehensive assessments will require more involved and sophisticated tools to determine if death of fish or residual impacts on habitats can be avoided, or if authorization should proceed and for developing offset programs. Useful tools for each type of assessment are tabulated.

Cumulative effects need to be taken into account in Fishery Protection Program assessments. If the Fishery Protection Policy implementation framework increases the likelihood that a project will on average yield net benefits (and so outweigh potential negative outcomes) then there would be a great reduction in the risk that the intent of the Fishery Protection Provisions will not be achieved due to cumulative effects.

This Science Advisory Report is from the National Peer Review meeting of September 30 to October 3, 2013 on Operational Advice for Fisheries Protection Program. Additional publications from this process will be posted on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada Science Advisory Schedule as they become available.

Complete document (PDF, 323 KB)

Accessibility Notice

This document is available in PDF format. If the document is not accessible to you, please contact the Secretariat to obtain another appropriate format, such as regular print, large print, Braille or audio version.