[en] Regulation of radiological hazards to humans is greatly simplified by the existence of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The average RBE values or radiation weighting factors recommended by the ICRP are based on non-human data. The ICRP has also indicated that 'the standard of environmental control needed to protect man to the degree currently thought desirable will ensure that other species are not put at risk.' This statement appears to be supported by technical publications from other organizations. Two published objections by AECB staff to the scientific technical background of the ICRP statement do not offer any good reason to reject this ICRP statement. A brief summary is given of the joint working group report on the topic indicated in the title. It is noted that regulators of cancer-causing chemicals have in general paid less attention to natural sources than have the regulators of radiological hazards. Most non-human species are exposed to about 1 millisievert (mSv) equivalent dose of radiation per year from natural sources. Caribou and organisms living underground are noted as examples where radiation exposures from natural sources are considerably higher. The natural biota is in general remarkably resistant, both in the laboratory and in field studies, to the effects of high doses of radiation. A recent review by the International Atomic Agency concluded that dose rates below the equivalent of 400 mSv per year are unlikely to after the survival of non-human species. It is recommended that caution and common sense be applied in any future research on radiological protection of non-human species in the environment in Canada. Many of the proposed U.S. regulations to control chemical and radiation in the environment are not cost-effective. It is to be hoped that efforts to protect non-human species from potential radiological hazards in Canada do not slide into a similar kind of irrational quagmire. (author)