Keywords:Pesticide Control Act – ss. 1, 6(1), 6(3); Pesticide Control Act Regulation – ss. 2, 16(2), 16(3); Pest Control Products Act – ss. 2, 4(2); pesticide use permits; Vision; Release.
This was an appeal by Mr. McMahon, the Forest Society, and the Eco Centre from the decision of the Deputy Administrator to issue a Pesticide Use Permit to the Ministry of Forests, authorizing the use of Vision and Release on 24 cutblocks. The Appellants sought to have the permit cancelled on the grounds of inadequate consultation with the Sinixt Nation, issuing a false and misleading public notice in relation to the permit application and harm to the environment and human health. The Ministry requested a one year extension of the permit.
There was evidence before the Board that the Sinixt Nation was not an Indian Band under the Indian Act. As there was no legal argument on the issue of whether there is a duty to consult with aboriginal peoples who are not a recognized Indian Band under that Act, the Board could not decide the consultation issue. On the public notification issue, the Board found that the notice did not contravene the regulatory requirements and that the Appellants had adequate advance notice of the application. The Board also found that the Appellant’s had not shown, on the balance of probabilities, that there would be an adverse effect on human health or the environment as a result of the permit. However, the Board directed the permit to be amended to include an inspection by an independent qualified professional who was not an employee of the Ministry. The Ministry was unable to satisfy the Board that an extension was necessary so its application was denied. The Board upheld the Permit with some minor amendments. The appeal was dismissed.