B. C. Marine Environmental Policy

A Proposal for a Giant National Park in Northern BC

2012-01-21T16:45:00.000-08:00

We owe it to our Great Helmsman, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, for first raising the idea of creating a giant national park in Canada. Although such a visionary idea seems unlikely for the whole of Canada ( much as our American cousins and the George Soros socialist billionaires of this world would wish it ), we could start by declaring the whole area to the north of God's Pocket in British Columbia to be one.

I mean, we already have Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve in Haida Gwaii, plus the Great Bear Rainforest on the mainland. And in between, there is both a moratorium on offshore oil and gas and a crude oil tanker moratorium in the Queen Charlotte Basin. So, why not just connect the dots and turn the whole darn area into one huge preserve, available for future generations to behold and marvel at, before it's too late?

So, thanks, Mr. Prime Minister ( or, if I may- 'Steve', as George W. Bush so fondly called you! ) for planting the idea in my head. I'll forward this proposal to the PNCIMA ( Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area ) Initiative your government so brazenly tried to kill last year, on the grounds that it had been infiltrated by American money- those same Yankee dollars that are trying to shut down Canada, stop progress and take us back to the Dark Ages.

An Alternative Solution to BC Ferries' Budget Woes

2011-08-25T11:54:00.000-07:00

A propos the proposed cuts to BC Ferries, here’s my take on things. I am writing from the perspective of a Victoria resident who makes occasional trips to Vancouver, sometimes for business and sometimes for pleasure. Most of those trips tend to be round trip affairs, and almost always during the week. I always take my car.

I don’t go to Vancouver very often- certainly not as often as I used to. There are two, related reasons for that- the prohibitive costs involved and deficiencies in the schedule.

Say, for instance, I want to attend a one-day conference in Vancouver. Typically, these affairs begin with early registration, sometimes with breakfast thrown in. This period usually runs from 8 to 8:30 AM. Then comes the keynote speech, typically around 9 AM. Well, if I get the 7 AM ferry from Victoria, I’ll be lucky to arrive at the conference by 9:30 AM, which means I’ve missed the first hour of activities, networking, etc. So, if I want to be there for that portion of the activities, I basically have to travel to Vancouver the night before and stay in a hotel, at an additional cost of around $200. What with fares, conference fees, hotel bill and meals, gas, etc. we’re talking of total costs in the neighbourhood of $500 to $600, just for a one day event! THAT’S WHY I TEND NOT TO DO SUCH TRIPS ANYMORE- THEY’RE IMPRACTICAL AND WAY TOO EXPENSIVE!:

Now, let’s take the ‘pleasure’ example. Here we might want to travel to Vancouver during the day and take in dinner and a concert in the evening. Again, because of BC Ferries’ odd schedule, whereby the last ferry leaves Tsawassen at 10 PM ( if you’re lucky! ), it’s not doable. So, here again, one is forced to stay overnight in a hotel, which becomes prohibitively expensive.

In short, BC Ferries gets us both ways: one either arrives too late in the morning in Vancouver, or has to return too early in the evening to Victoria.

What’s the solution? Why not put two of the older, smaller ferries on the Swartz Bay-Tsawassen run very early in the morning and late at night? I think there might be quite a market for this type of run, because it would save a lot of people like myself an awful lot of money.

In conclusion, cutting ferries and the schedule is one way to possibly save money. But, what I’m proposing could potentially MAKE money for the corporation, as it responds to pent up demand.

Question for Politicians Participating in April 12, 2011 Federal Election Debate

2011-04-03T12:58:00.000-07:00

“The prospect of supertankers on BC’s North Coast is causing concern out west. Fear of oil spills has prompted a proposed legislated ban on tanker traffic in that fragile region. Since such a prohibition would probably just shift tanker activity from the North to the South coast of BC, would you be in favour of establishing a Royal Commission to sort this whole matter of West Coast tanker traffic out?”

A Call for a Royal Commission Into Tanker Traffic on the B. C. Coast

2011-03-26T08:56:00.000-07:00

In terms of environmental issues on the west coast, oil tankers are among the most controversial. What is clearly needed is a Royal Commission into oil tanker traffic up and down the 27,000 km-long coasline. At the moment, there are just too many often conflicting marine environmental issues related to the shipment of oil by sea- from Enbridge's Northern Gateway project out of Kitimat in the north, to Kinder Morgan's planned expansion of its Trans Mountain pipeline to Burnaby in the south. If Kinder Morgan gets its way, a supertanker oil terminal could eventually be built at Roberts Bank in the Salish Sea, to support Very Large Crude Carriers ( VLCCs ) laden with tar sands bitumen destined for Asia. The rationale for building such a terminal is that only relatively small tankers can navigate Burrard Inlet, where Kinder Morgan's current tanker terminal, the Westridge facility, is located, whereas supertankers would be de rigeur on the China run to make shipments en masse economical. Roberts Bank could potentially handle such large tankers.If Enbridge's Northern Gateway project for the North Coast is rejected on environmental grounds, or because it is not deemed to be in the public interest, then attention will shift to the South Coast for shipment of tar sands bitumen, with potentially devastating impacts on the endangered southern resident killer whales whose critical habitat straddles the area. Thus, ruling out tankers up north is clearly an unsustainable, beggar thy neighbour policy. What is needed instead is a coherent, overarching strategy with respect to tanker traffic up and down the coast- whether it is permitted at all, and if so, where, how and to what extent. Also important is the issue of how the sector is regulated and administered, especially from the perspective of oil spill prevention and response. The current response regime, involving a complex relationship between industry, the Coast Guard and the Province of B.C., is completely dysfunctional.

Only a Royal Commission can properly sort all these issues out, with the benefit of public input and scientific studies. An ancillary matter for the commission to examine would be the considerable threat of oil spills from other commercial traffic, i.e. the bunker fuels used by cargo vessels, container ships, ferries, etc.

Download Radio Interview re Upcoming Oil Spill Talk

2010-01-20T16:08:00.000-08:00

Gerald Graham was recently interviewed by Todd Barsby at CHLY 101.7 FM in the leadup to an upcoming lecture he is presenting on the threat of of oil spills in the Queen Charlotte Basin. Click here to download the ten minute interview.

Free Oil Spill Talk at VIU Nanaimo, Jan. 27, 2010

2010-01-11T21:40:00.000-08:00

Dr. Gerald Graham has been invited to give a free public lecture entitled "The Threat of Oil Spills in the Queen Charlotte Basin" at Vancouver Island University in Nanaimo, British Columbia on January 27, 2010 from 7-8 PM in Building 355, Rm. 203. The presentation is part of the university's annual Science and Technology lecture series.

Annotated Critique of RSTV Public Letter

2007-11-04T07:44:00.000-08:00

Responsible Sewage Treatment Victoria (RSTV) recently circulated a public letter in which its 92 members criticise plans to build a secondary treatment plant for Victoria sewage, which is currently dumped untreated into the Strait of Juan de Fuca via two outfall pipes. Here is my annotated response:

"The undersigned citizens of Greater Victoria support the efforts of our local, provincial, and federal governments to explore alternative methods of handling liquid waste disposal in our community. This is disingeneous: many of the signatories, including a number of professors from UVic, are in fact ardent supporters of the current practice of dumping raw, untreated sewage into the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Moreover, they are adamantly opposed to building a sewage treatment plant, whatever the cost, because they think it is a complete waste of time, replacing a service they claim nature does essentially for free. The region is growing and changing, and future needs must be considered. We are however concerned that objective information is needed, and soon, balancing the costs and benefits of all currently available options. Including the costs and benefits of dumping raw sewage into Victoria Bight; has your group looked at that? I see a potentially significant cost to the environment and economy ( e.g. tourism, whalewatching, windsurfing, fishing, etc. ) and very little benefit. Thus, dumping raw sewage into the Strait may be a case of "penny wise, pound foolish".

We have been impressed by the detailed assessment by well-informed people - environmentalists, marine scientists, engineers, economists and health care professionals - that has been assembled on the web site http://www.rstv.ca/ . Surely this is self-serving, amounting as it does to a pat on one's own back.

The evidence indicates that the worst problem with the existing liquid waste disposal system is the continued failure to address storm drain overflows. Last January, for example, heavy rains resulted in raw unscreened sewage being discharged from storm drain outfalls along the coastline over 40 times. This is one problem, but whether it is "the worst problem" is open to debate, to say the least. There are many other problems with dumping raw, untreated sewage into the Strait, such as the fact that no one really knows what happens to it, where it goes, and what impact it has on the environment. My position is that the onus should be on those who claim that the sewage has no appreciable impact on the environment to prove that, and yet such proof does not really exist. On the contrary, a serious argument can be made that the waters of the Strait are too cold to break down the sewage the way the proponents of dumping claim that it does, and to destroy pathogens. Moreover, oceanographic evidence presented to the MMAC suggests that a significant percentage of the sewage and contaminants it contains is not flushed out to sea but instead ends up in Haro Strait, prime habitat to the endangered southern resident killer whales. While no one is suggesting that raw sewage is the principal, let alone only reason for the orcas' decline, it could be the straw that breaks the camel's back, since the immune systems of the whales in question are already stressed to the limit.

The Ministry of Environment has mandated sewage treatment, at an estimated cost of $1.1 billion dollars. Yet the currently recommended plan submitted to the Minister would not fix the storm drain problem. Nor would it enhance the already exemplary source control program (which stops many toxic chemicals from ever going down the drain). The source control program is ambitious, but suffers from two main problems: it does not cover raw sewage, and it does not cover what householders dump down their drains and toilets- a potential toxic cocktail of discarded prescription drugs, grease, used paints, oil, household cleaners and chemicals, etc. The proposed treatment expenditure is huge: $1.1 billion is equivalent to $500-700 per year, per average household, in the core area for the next 50 years. The cost is similar to the annual cost per Victoria household of the entire City of Victoria Police Department.

Evidence-based policy requires evidence. Evidence works both ways: provincial studies have produced evidence that contaminants from Victoria sewage, including mercury, are ending up in the sediment of Juan de Fuca Strait. Open government requires that citizens be informed. With these requirements in mind, we assert that the Ministry of Environment has a duty to commission and publish an independent, objective, cost-benefit study of the proposed land-based treatment option. Why not just come out and say what most of you apparently think, i.e. that there is no evidence that the current practice of dumping raw sewage does any harm, and that there is also no evidence that mandating secondary treatment will do any good.

Consistent with provincial and federal guidelines for cost-benefit analysis, such a study must examine all relevant alternatives, including a) the existing system “as is” (the status quo) i.e. the system many of your signatories, including especially a group of UVic oceanographers, believe works so well; b) the existing system with low-cost and probably highly-cost-effective enhancements, related to storm drain discharges and source control and c) the currently proposed plan. d) another plan or plans; I mean, why stop there?

Before proceeding with a $1.1 billion expenditure, citizens of the Capital Regional District, and interested observers elsewhere, should be provided with evidence of the environmental or other benefits to be expected from the treatment plan proposed, and the harms that may result (for instance from the disposal of large volumes of sludge that will be trucked through residential neighbourhoods). Let us not be too selective here: this same sludge, absent treatment, currently ends up in the Strait. What harm is that practice doing?; is this not a valid question as well?

At present, only hypothetical benefits have been identified for proposed land-based treatment. Likewise, only hypothetical benefits of the existing practice have been identified. The costs are substantial. This is hardly good evidence for acceptable, rational public policy.

Before the CRD spends more of our local tax dollars on planning for land-based treatment, it is essential that the evidence be assembled on the costs and benefits of all viable alternatives. We call on the Ministry of Environment to fund, commission, and publish such a study, with no further delay.

To be fair and balanced, any study should look at the costs and benefits of doing nothing versus the costs and benefits of various alternatives."

Signed: Gerald Graham, Ph. D., Nov. 3, 2007

Will the Queen of the North Wreck Be Raised?

2007-03-27T16:13:00.000-07:00

One year after the Queen of the North ferry sank off Gil Island in Wright Sound, one of the options that is perhaps being considered for dealing with the diesel fuel, lubricants and other oil products on board, is to raise the entire vessel from the seabed 400 metres beneath the surface. Blowing the wreck up has also been mentioned by one source, perhaps in jest.

One of the problems with even considering recovering the oil down there is that the authorities don't know how much there is left in the fuel tanks. A lot of the 200,000 litres of diesel fuel on board may, for instance, have been released more or less immediately upon impact with the ocean bottom. That would account for the extensive, rainbow-coloured sheen that was observed on the surface over the course of the first few days after the disaster, and which spread to nearby Fin Island and other adjacent locales. In addition, an unknown quantity of diesel fuel has been slowly but surely coming to the surface, as this observer noticed on September 21, 2006 when he visited the site off Gil Island. At the present time, the leaking fuel is probably no worse that what one finds at your average marina anywhere along the BC coast; in other words, a minor inconvenience, unless of course you have absolute zero tolerance for such things, in which case you would demand that everything be done to stop the leak.

Contrary to what has been reported on radio and TV, though, although half the wreck is ensconced in mud or silt, it could, apparently, be raised, if money is no object, which appears to be the case. On the other hand, there seem to be two complicating factors: two passengers are thought to have gone down with the ship, and there is a fear that the superstructure may not survive an attempt to bring it to the surface. Thus, the risk is that in the process of raising the Queen of North an even greater spill could be triggered. This no one would want. This risk must be raised against another risk - that associated with leaving the oil on board, to gradually leak out, or possibly create another environmental emergency at some point down the road.

In short, the responsible parties will at some point have to decide whether the risk of leaving the oil on board the wreck at the bottom of the sea, presumably to eventually discharge all of its remaining contents, outweighs the risk of either siphoning the fuel oil off or retrieving the wreck. BTW, what would you do, in your capacity as an armchair salvage expert? Send us your comments, and don't turn that dial: we shall keep you posted as events unfold.

BC North Coast Ocean Technology Opportunities

2007-02-24T09:27:00.000-08:00

As presented at a COINPacific Forum in Victoria on June 5, 2006, a plan is afoot to create an Ocean Observation System along the lines of the VENUS and NEPTUNE projects, for the North Coast of BC. This project would be funded by government but industry operated. The declared intent of such a project would be to create a private sector ocean science community within BC, steering the focus away from existing government and university research centres such as IOS and PBS.

One has to wonder about the wisdom of using taxpayer money to finance such an initiative, especially since private entities tend to control the intellectual property these projects generate. The main problem with such ventures is that the datasets they generate are privately owned, and so governments, the public and the private sector do not have free access to them, to either validate the findings of the relevant research, or to add value to the data and results.

Questions also arise as to what kind of research is done, who sets the research priorities, what the research is done for, and the way in which it is conducted.

Thus, there is a need to explain why it is that potentially hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars should be funnelled into private sector technology and marine science programs when government research centres on the west coast are starved for cash.

In the final analysis, commercial ocean science ventures should stand or fall on their own merits, and should not be heavily subsidised by governments. Moreover, major science planning on the west coast, and indeed all of our coasts, should be science- rather than technology-driven.

Reflections on Role for COINPacific in Developing an Ocean Information Technology Cluster

2007-02-24T09:10:00.000-08:00

As presented at the COINPacific Forum in Victoria on June 27, 2005, numerous coastal and oceans information and knowledge databases and platforms are either available or planned for British Columbia. Many of these repositories are leading edge. Some, though not all, are already available to the public in one form or another, while others will be made available in the future. There would appear to be a tremendous opportunity to add value to these databases, through partnerships involving government, universities, NGOs and the private sector. COINPacific could play a central role as a catalyst in promoting and fostering the commercialisation of these knowledge sources, taking advantage of synergies, establishing what amounts to an ocean information cluster, and generally championing the development and dissemination of ocean knowledge in the province of British Columbia and beyond.

The Role for the Private Sector

There are obviously many more high tech firms involved in the ocean information technology sector in BC than were represented at the COINPacific Forum. Just a cursory look at the directory on the VIATEC web site ( http://www.viatec.ca/directory.php?operation=sector&area=list&id=25 ) reveals a host of ocean-related companies, many of them world class. Victoria is also a hotbed of information technology firms, including my own, as another VIATEC web page indicates ( http://www.viatec.ca/directory.php?operation=sector&area=list&id=9 ).

The private sector is the driver of the economy, and the high tech sector is the engine of the new economy. Governments can foster growth, but Canada's future wellbeing lies in the development of new technologies, in researching and developing innovative solutions to emerging problems and challenges, and in creating wealth on a sustainable basis. The private sector, however, cannot and should not work alone in identifying and developing this potential: partnerships will be required to fully exploit these opportunities.

Leveraging the Traditional, Resource Sector Economy

Embracing information technology in the new economy does not by any means amount to the rejection of the "old economy" as represented by fishing, logging, mining and other extractive industries such as oil and gas. In other words, we do not have to turn our backs on these sectors in favour of, for instance, renewable energy technologies such as wind, wave and tidal power. The economic future of BC is likely to be characterised by a healthy balance among all these sectors, old and new. In fact, high tech advances are already transforming the more traditional sectors, thereby adding value to the economy and making these sectors world-beaters in a competitive, global economy. In the decades to come, however, only those traditional sectors that have managed to adapt themselves to the knowledge-based economy will survive and prosper.

Overcoming a Mistrust of Business in BC in General, and on Vancouver Island in Particular

For COINPacific to succeed in creating a vibrant, creative ocean information technology cluster, one of the big hurdles to overcome will be an abiding suspicion of the private sector and private sector initiatives. In Victoria and on Vancouver Island in general, this latent hostility to anything that has to do with new ideas, change, progress and development is legendary. There is nothing inherently wrong with leveraging technology that was originally developed with taxpayers' money, with capitalising on that wealth of knowledge, and with taking it a step or two further. British Columbia needs an ocean information technology champion, someone who can articulate the benefits of technology transfer, someone with the vision to promote it, establish partnerships and generally create the conditions under which this emerging sector can flourish.

What COINPacific Is and Is Not

The BC oceans community is faced with a number of contentious public policy issues at the present time, and the author has himself been deeply involved in a number of these struggles. In a free and open society, debate on these issues is to be encouraged. However, COINPacific is not the most appropriate forum in which to conduct this debate. Rather, the primary purpose of CoinPacific should be to provide a forum for the:

sharing of information and knowledge on ocean information technology
identification of knowledge gaps and priorities for investigation
exploration and development of commercial opportunities and technology transfer
establishment of public/private sector partnerships to add value to ocean information technology products and services, thereby maximising the potential of the information databases at hand

Opportunity Knocks

The establishment of a COINPacific office housed within the Innovation and Development Corporation ( IDC ) [ http://web.uvic.ca/idc/ ] at the University of Victoria is a welcome event. The IDC has a proven track record in technology transfer, establishment of joint ventures and spin-off firms, nurturing of incubator companies, etc. The university is also one of Canada's premier centres for ocean-related teaching and research. COINPacific should capitalise on these strengths of the University of Victoria, which give it a competitive edge, all the while ensuring that other universities, the private sector, the NGO community and other users of information technology are fully involved, as equal partners in this exciting and innovative initiative. At the same time, the public needs to be reassured that free and open access to the original ocean information databases, which were developed with taxpayers' money, will be maintained.

The Challenge

From an industry perspective, the task will be to draw in ocean information technology firms which are often competing with one another, and which are therefore often sceptical of any initiative to share information, especially that which may or may not be subject to intellectual property restrictions. The trick will be to convince local partners that we are not so much competing against each other as working with each other in competition with the rest of the world, and that the more we collaborate, the better able we are to create a sustainable, world-class ocean information technology sector of benefit to us all- our children, their children, as well as society in general. Let this be our legacy to them all.

Investing in the Pacific Gateway to the Mind

2007-01-25T11:34:00.000-08:00

Roadway schmoadway! Bridges schmidges! We need to invest in human capital instead of pouring billions of taxpayers' dollars into massive public infrastructure projects that are obsolete the moment the ribbons are cut at the opening ceremonies. Backward as the Lower Mainland's transportation system may be, its dilapidated state pales when compared to the status of the province's educational system. Dollar for dollar, investing in the development of peoples' brains has a far better payback than any road, bridge or container port.

What made me think of this is an interesting story in today's Van Sun by Michael Kane, entitled "Demand boosts container imports by 30%". The stats cited in the article essentially confirm my long-held suspicion that most of the shipments from the Port of Vancouver (POV) consist of bulk cargo exports to Asia, whereas Asian countries are adding value to these imports and transforming them into manufactured goods which they then ship back to us. It's kind of the reverse of what you'd expect from a supposedly developed country such as Canada -don't you think? As if that weren't bad enough, 30% of the containers they ship to us full of manufactured goods go back empty! What does that tell you about our Pacific trading relationships? It's rather asynchronous, don't you think?

So much for the KBE or knowledge-based economy. It's just a variation on the old Canadian theme of hewers of wood and drawers of water, aka the rocks and trees economy.

Is this what the Pacific Gateway project is all about - facilitating more of the same? Are these the kinds of jobs we want for our children and grandchildren - driving trains and container trucks, working in the potash and uranium mines, chopping down forests, growing wheat, barley and canola on the drought-stricken Prairies, driving a giant loader at that stain on the human conscience which is Ft. McMurray, etc? Or do we instead want them to be innovators, getting Ph. D.s in neuroscience, finding cures for cancer, and developing leading edge software - these kinds of brainpower pursuits that are the way of the future? Investing in these sectors, and educating our young people accordingly, is how we're going to maintain a competitive edge over other countries, and especially emerging markets.

It's all about choices, isn't it? Choosing the kind of future we want for BC and then building it. We need to start investing in the Gateway of the Mind. Instead of building more roads and bridges to nowhere, and a costly and transitory winter olympics, we should be expanding the stock of intellectual capital of this province - fighting illiteracy; promoting numeracy and the development of patents; putting money into university centres of excellence, joint ventures, networks and clusters; developing incubator companies; making seed capital available to SMEs; and guaranteeing post-secondary education for all who meet the entrance requirements. Incredibly, BC boasts the lowest post-secondary participation rate of any province in Canada, a dubious distinction that is bound to be perpetuated so long as we persist in favouring the development of industries and sectors that require only a trade.

Roads don't generate ideas - creative people generate ideas! Bridges don't file patents - innovators file patents! We've got to move beyond the old Neanderthal approach to development as epitomised in the thinking of the Gordon Campbell's of this world - the petit bourgeois whose constituency seems to be every Tom, Dick and Harry who greases the Liberty Party pole.

Finally, I suggest a good way to start turning things around would be to oppose the proposed massive expansion of the Deltaport terminal at Roberts Bank. That would at least give the endangered southern resident killer whales a fighting chance at survival.

Where the Great Bear Rainforest Meets the Great Blue Sea

2007-01-21T13:47:00.001-08:00

The feds have just announced funding for BC's Great Bear Rainforest Initiative. It's all very nice to sign another agreement protecting the coastal rainforest, but what happens to the same treasured area if the offshore oil and gas moratorium is lifted, or if supertankers laden with tar sands oil start plying the Queen Charlotte Basin?

In other words, it's all well and good to talk about ecosystem-based management, but where is the recognition that the land and sea are inextricably linked, and that in order to save the forest in general, and the Kermode Bear in particular, you have to protect the ocean as well, and develop an integrated approach? Let's not forget that we are talking here about the so-called "Salmon Forest", as Tom Reimchen calls it, and that a catastrophic oil spill could cause irreversible harm to both the marine and terrestrial environments.

In short, while this initiative is a significant step forward, we are only halfway there if we wish to truly protect the entire region, encompassing both land and sea, from the ravages of development. What we need to do is protect not just the central and north coasts but the Queen Charlotte Basin as well. To this end, we should support DFO's PNCIMA planning initiative for the North Coast, and reaffirm the oil and gas and tanker moratoria until such time as the PNCIMA process is complete.

The Observer

2007-01-17T11:07:00.000-08:00

The raven knows where our past lays
The raven knows it true
He sleeps at night, ‘caws’ by day
Fixing his eyes like glue.

There was a time the raven soared
Above the cedars by the coast
Even before the waves first roared
And Skedans was known to most.

I saw a raven above the trail
He waited while I ate my lunch
And when I left him for a sail
He ate the crumbs, the whole darned bunch.

Wherever you go on Haida Gwaii
You’re bound to hear the raven’s cackle
But never leave your gear nearby
For you’re sure to lose your block and tackle.

Now, logging came and logging went
And fishing’s come and gone
But the raven’s seen what god has sent
And knows what man has done.

Drilling rigs may punch the sky
While tankers ply the strait
The raven with his watchful eye
Just watches while he waits.

The eagle soars majestically
The fish come back to spawn
The raven sleeps but fitfully
Still waiting for the dawn.

A cruise ship passes close to shore
Seagulls in its wake
The raven waits a little more
To see what it can take.

Float planes come, float planes go
Bringing fishers from the mist
The raven takes it all in tow
Adding memories to his list.

Years from now, when I’m gone
To where I do not know
The raven will still sing his song
And the winds continue to blow.

The Future of Coburg Peninsula at Esquimalt Lagoon

2006-10-25T06:52:00.000-07:00

Introduction

Coburg Peninsula is the spit of land that forms Esquimalt Lagoon, just west of Victoria, the capital of British Columbia on Canada's wet coast. The peninsula means different things to different people. To some it is a road connecting one part of Colwood to another, or perhaps something they look out on from their backyards. For these and other people the peninsula is a key feature of Esquimalt Lagoon, which is both a migratory bird sanctuary and a popular recreation area. And to emergency officials Coburg Peninsula is a vital exit route and shortcut to Fort Rodd Hill.

From an environmental perspective, talk about the future of Coburg Peninsula is really a discussion about the future of Esquimalt Lagoon itself, for as the peninsula goes, so goes the lagoon. Save the peninsula and one stands a good chance of saving the lagoon. Misuse and mistreat the peninsula and the lagoon stands a good chance of being lost at some point in the not-too-distant future. That would be a tragedy indeed, for Esquimalt Lagoon is the jewel in the crown of Colwood’s public spaces.

Viewed in this light, Coburg Peninsula’s future would seem to hinge, in part at least, on the scale and footprint of a number of proposed developments in the surrounding area. These developments, which include Legacy Estates, Royal Bay and the proposed Michelle skyscraper condominium, are bound to place increasing pressure on Esquimalt Lagoon in general, and Coburg Peninsula in particular. Assuming these developments get approved, the only realistic way to protect the peninsula may be to take steps to reduce vehicular traffic on that stretch of Ocean Boulevard. And the best way to do that is to prevent commuter traffic from using Coburg Peninsula as a secondary transportation artery.

The Current Traffic Problem

Coburg Peninsula is already buffeted by vehicular traffic. Traffic surveys conducted in 2004, for instance, indicate that on weekdays upwards of 500 vehicles traverse this stretch of Ocean Boulevard during the morning and evening rush hour periods. It is estimated that at least another 500 vehicles enter the area each day on average for recreational purposes.

No one can say for sure what impact all of this traffic is having on the local environment. However, it is obvious to even the casual observer that the resulting air pollution, noise and speeding traffic cannot but have a negative effect on the birds found in this migratory bird sanctuary – including the significant numbers of herons, geese, ducks and swans regularly found there.

At the very least, the authorities should be asking themselves whether the passage of significant numbers of vehicles through the area at least five days a week is consistent with its status as a migratory bird sanctuary.

The Looming Threat

If the current traffic situation is bad enough now, proposed developments in the vicinity pose serious threats to Esquimalt Lagoon in general, and Coburg Peninsula in particular. Chief among these proposals are the Lagoon Estates and Michelle developments to the north, as well as the Royal Bay development to the west. The Lagoon Estates development calls for approximately 600 units to be built on the property adjacent to the lagoon. The Michelle concept calls for a 41-storey condominium to the area northeast of the lagoon. For its part, Royal Bay will see a total of 2150 units built in phases.

Unless planning steps are taken, these developments would inevitably result in more and more vehicular traffic along Coburg Peninsula. Conceivably, at some point down the road Esquimalt Lagoon’s continued vitality or indeed its very existence could be jeopardised by these new sources of traffic.

Proposed Mitigative Measures: An Assessment

One way to mitigate the potentially negative impact of Royal Bay traffic on Esquimalt Lagoon would be to block off access to and from Royal Bay via Lagoon Road. However, new traffic from Lagoon Estates alone could conceivably double the amount of commuter use of Coburg Peninsula each weekday. As for the Michelle development, its potential impact on local traffic flows is unknown at the present time.

The principal way in which the Interim Management Guidelines proposed for Coburg Peninsula intend to deal with the traffic problem is to slow traffic down by placing an obstruction midway along the peninsula, which vehicles would have to go around. This may have its intended effect, but whether it is enough to cause commuters to take another route is an open question.

Preventing Access to Coburg Peninsula by All Commuter Traffic

Given the present and future threats that increases in vehicular traffic along Coburg Peninsula present to Esquimalt Lagoon, the only realistic approach to dealing with the problem may be to close off that particular stretch of Ocean Boulevard to commuter traffic. This proposal would seem to have a degree of support from local residents, but it is rejected by civic officials, who point to the boulevard’s key role as an emergency access route.

This undoubtedly valid objection to closing off Coburg Peninsula to commuter traffic could be overcome by placing a locked gate midway along the peninsula, which could only be opened by emergency officials using a remote control device. The idea is that officials would be able to open the gate for their own use, and for the use of the general public during other emergencies such as earthquakes, forest fires, etc., when secondary access routes are required. The advantage of a remote control device is that emergency vehicles would not lose valuable time by having to stop and open the gate during an emergency call.

Such a solution would have the effect of allowing recreational users to continue to access Esquimalt Lagoon via Ocean Boulevard from both directions, while making through traffic impossible.

Summary and Conclusion

Saving Esquimalt Lagoon involves much more than just taking steps to conserve Coburg Peninsula. Valid as all those proposed measures are, an ecosystem-based approach is required if the entire lagoon is to have a sustainable future. This means that one has to take into account what is happening not just on the peninsula, but within the watershed of the lagoon as well. It also means moving beyond the parochial view apparently held in some quarters that Coburg Peninsula is “just another artery” within Colwood’s road network.

It would seem that unless drastic steps are taken, traffic density on the Coburg Peninsula stretch of Ocean Boulevard is bound to increase dramatically in years to come. The consequences of this heightened activity cannot be but negative for the environment in general, and wildlife in particular.

One way to prevent this deteriorating situation from developing would be to take steps to prevent the area from being used by commuters, while continuing to facilitate access by recreational users and emergency vehicles alike.

In the final analysis, the matter of saving Esquimalt Lagoon is not just a traffic or transportation issue. Rather, it is a question of where Esquimalt Lagoon fits into Colwood’s long term plan. Ultimately, what the issue comes down to is how much the community values such outstanding natural spaces, and what sacrifices it is prepared to make to conserve them.

If Colwood sees itself as a progressive, green community, and wishes to project this image to the rest of the world as well, then taking a bold step to conserve Esquimalt Lagoon would be as good a place as any to start.

In Search of the Elusive Humpback

2006-09-24T07:36:00.000-07:00

On the southern tip of Gil Island, a short boat ride from where the Queen of the North sank earlier this year near Hartley Bay, there exists a whale research station operated year-round by Hermann Meuter and Janie Wray. Alumni of Paul Spong’s Orcalab on Hanson Island, Hermann and Janie have been researching cetaceans, principally humpbacks and killer whales, full-time since 2002. This September I spent a fascinating week as their guests, getting to know the area, going out on the water just about every day, and helping to record whale songs from their acoustics lab.

In the course of my very enjoyable stay, I was lucky to see several humpbacks and a few killer whales, plus two colonies of Steller sea lions, an elephant seal, and numerous Dall’s porpoises. And while I did not see the fabled Spirit Bear which roams nearby Princess Royal Island, other visitors to the region did. Nor did I see any wolves. But, what I did was many of the 64,000 returning pink salmon which returned to Gil Stream this year to spawn. I watched in utter amazement as the females desperately sought to lay their eggs in the stream bed, before breathing their last breath, as Janie patiently filmed the scene from the shore. Unfortunately, the number of pinks returning to other rivers and creeks in the region is way down this year.

This is normally a good time of year for spotting and recording humpbacks in the area, as they bulk up on their way back down to Hawaii after a summer of feeding in more northerly climes. Of the estimated 20,000 humpbacks worldwide, roughly 5000 make the Northeast Pacific their summer residence. Of these, approximately 200 frequent the waters around Gil Island, including the appropriately-named Whale Channel, Squally Channel and Wright Sound. This fall, however, the bulk of the local population seems to have gone to some of the more inner channels, such as Ursula and Douglas, where Janie discovered more than a dozen individuals in recent days.

Cetacealab’s three sets of solar-powered hydrophones continuously monitor the sounds of the orcas and humpbacks – from Money Point in Wright Sound, Borde Island in Whale Channel, and just in front of Cetacealab in Taylor Bight. Hermann and Janie have a five-year record of the presence of these whales in the area – where they are, the kind of activity they are engaged in, what pod they are from, and their abundance. The value of their work is therefore incalculable; no one else is doing anything as remotely ambitious in such an out-of-the way, pristine though hostile environment.

Hermann and Janie eat, breath and sleep whales. Loudspeakers are wired throughout their cabin, which includes the acoustics studio and their living quarters. Thus, if the whales start singing during the night, the sound will undoubtedly wake the intrepid researchers, prompting them to get out of bed and run down to record them. There is even a loudspeaker outside their cabin, just in case they are not in the house when the singing begins.

Meuter and Wray also spend as much time as they can out on the water, looking out for the whales, and observing their behaviour up close and personal, as it were. In the summer, when the weather is good, they are out almost every day; in winter, they are lucky to get out one week in three. The rest of the time, they just tough it out in the comfort of their cabin cum research station, compiling statistics, catching up on paperwork, applying for research grants, etc.

Currently, there are two looming threats to the whales of the area, as well as to Cetacealab’s research program. One is a project called Batholiths, which, if approved, will entail three weeks of continuous seismic booms in and around Douglas Channel in the fall of 2007. The other is Enbridge’s Gateway pipeline and Kitimat tanker terminal proposal which, if it gets the green light, could see supertankers regularly transiting Wright Sound, Squally Channel and Whale Channel with their cargo of Alberta crude oil by 2010. Both of these projects pose significant risk to the health and existence of the whales, whether from the interference they will cause to their echolocation and feeding habits, or, in the case of the Enbridge project, from the oil spill threat.

If you would like to learn more about Cetacealab and the whales of Caamano Sound, and are concerned about the fate of the whales in light of the impending projects, visit the lab’s web site at www.cetacealab.org. Cetacealab is also a registered charity in British Columbia, which means that all donations are tax-deductible. Hermann and Janie heavily rely on public donations to pay for equipment, maintain the lab, and sustain their unique research program.

Gil Island Notebook

2006-09-19T10:21:00.000-07:00

Hi, folks! Here I am, on the southern end of Gil Island, where Hecate Strait and Douglas Channel meet on BC's North Coast. This is the home of the humpbacks, and I am staying with my friends Hermann and Janie from Cetacealab.

Last Saturday we spotted two humpbacks while out on the water in appropriately-named Whale Channel. Yesterday we got as far as Squally Channel, on a beautiful, sunny calm afternoon. No whales were present, but the scenery was spectacular, with the steep sloping evergreen forests rising out of the translucent, deep blue sea. Magical! Our seaborne outing was followed by a hike up a boggy incline in back of Janie and Hermann's cabin, with stunning views from the summit over to the channel between Ashdown Island and Princess Royal Island, home of the Kermode, or 'Spirit' Bear, so named because of its whitish colour.

What impresses me most about this region, which is basically Caamano Sound, is its vastness and relatively-pristine state. When you are out on the water in Whale Channel, for instance, all you see is water, interrupted by islands and the hills and mountains that adorn them. There is next to no evidence of human presence on the horizon, in any direction.

This seemingly idyllic place is about as isolated as it gets. Sure, King Pacific Lodge is only a fifteen-minute boat ride away, and the Gitgat community of Hartley Bay perhaps an hour by boat. However, these two sites are themselves far from civilisation. And right here on Gil Island, which is about the size of Salt Spring Island in the Gulf Islands, our only neighbours are the whales ( humpbacks and killer whales, mainly ), the sea lions, the eagles, the spawning pink salmon, the wolves, the ravens and the black bears.

As I write this I have the headphones on, listening in on at least one humpback singing nearby the hydrophone at Money Point, near Hartley Bay. Hermann and Janie, who are both away this evening, leaving me in charge of the acoustics lab, tell me that it is quite unusual for the humpbacks to sing during their feeding sojourn in this part of the woods. Normally this kind of behaviour occurs only during the winter months, at their Hawaiian mating grounds. It is thought that the male humpback ( and it is only the male that sings ) could be getting in a bit of practice before the long journey south.

Janie and Hermann have been researching the distribution and habits of whales for the past four years. I will be filing further instalments of my experience up here in the days to come.

Touring an Alaskan Supertanker

2006-09-09T09:01:00.000-07:00

One fine day in the summer of 2005, I fulfilled a longstanding wish of mine - I toured an Alaskan supertanker. The Alaskan Frontier was in for repairs at a Victoria shipyard. Although she was only nine months old at the time, cracks had already developed in each of her two giant rudders. The largest of these cracks measured a whopping nine feet. The crack had been spotted by chance during a maintenance dive to check on another matter. Had the cracks not been spotted accidentally, a visual inspection of the rudder would not have been required for another four years - so much for stringent safety standards!

Checks on the Alaskan Explorer, sister ship of the Alaskan Frontier revealed three cracks on one of its rudders as well. Both vessels had been built in San Diego. The contract for the rudders had apparently gone to a German company, which then subcontracted to a Croatian firm. At the time of my tour, the ship's owners were negotiating compensation with the shipbuilders. One of the issues that had apparently arisen was whether the rudders needed to be replaced, or simply repaired. In the end, it seems they were merely repaired. However, the ship had to be taken out of service for several weeks, thereby resulting in a loss of income to the tanker's owners.

The Alaskan Frontier is owned by the Alaskan Tanker Company (ATC), which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of BP. She plies the Trans Alaska Pipeline (TAPS) route between Valdez, Alaska in the north and Washington State and California in the south. She is more than three football fields long, double-hulled, 185,000 DWT and capable of carrying 1.3 million barrels of crude oil in her tanks, putting her in the Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) class of tankers. This is the same class of tankers that Enbridge proposes to use on its Gateway tanker route out of Kitimat.

She has lots of backup systems in case of catastrophic failure: twin diesel-electric engines, twin props, and even twin engine rooms. She is basically designed to withstand the rough seas of the TAPs route, which present some of the wildest seafaring conditions on the worldocean. Her hull is meant to be flexible, so that she doesn't just break in two. Thus, while she was being repaired, and was therefore empty, there was apparently a one foot bend in her from bow to stern. However, when she is fully-laden the bend is thought to be around one or two inches.

Working on a tanker is a very dangerous job, and so every effort is made to ensure a safe working environment. Like all modern tankers, this supertanker has an inert gas system designed to prevent explosions from occurring in empty crude oil tanks. Also, a blast shield separates the cargo holds from the stern section of the vessel, where the bridge, accommodation and engine room are located.

Crews work a twelve hour shift - four on, four off, then eight on followed by eight off. They also must sleep during their eight hours off. Periodically they are rotated onto home leave for an extended period of time, during which time another full crew complement takes over. In contrast to older vessels, these modern ships require relatively few crew to run them; to keep costs down and avoid human error, everything that can be automated is.

When fully-laden, the crude oil on board is stored in a total of twenty cargo tanks. There are also segregated ballast tanks, so that when ballast water is discharged, it is not mixed with crude oil as in the bad old days of tanker operations. Another improvement relates to the cleaning of empty cargo tanks. In the past, these were washed with water, with the resulting wastewater/oil mix sometimes being dumped into the ocean. Now, the latest tankers, the Alaskan Frontier included, use a system called COW, for "Crude Oil Washing", whereby the tanks are washed with crude oil which is then recovered, recycled and reused, rather than discharged to sea.

The ship has twenty-four feet of freeboard, so that when fully-loaded, heavy seas do not come washing over the deck. There are also scuppers several inches high on the deck, to prevent any crude oil or other debris from washing overboard. The cargo oil pipes that one traditionally sees on the deck of a tanker are hidden to the naked eye, instead running below deck.

What the cracked rudders on this supermodern, spanking new behemoth demonstrate is that not even the most up-to-date technology can protect against system failure. In this case, disaster was averted by a chance dive that detected an enormous crack. But, what might have happened if the crack had gone undetected and perhaps grown over time? Would the ship's integrity have been compromised? Would one rudder have been sufficient, or would it, with its own cracks, have eventually failed as well? It's anybody's guess, but it does set off the alarm bells. The bottom line is, although risk can be minimised, it can never be eliminated, even with the best of intentions.

Shipping crude oil in extremely rough seas, day in and day out, year in and year out, is an inherently dangerous activity, and nature can take its toll on both crews and equipment. Tanker companies and the regulatory authorities alike have to be ever vigilant, imposing the strictest engineering standards, regularly inspecting for cracks and the like, and learning from experience. Beyond that, there is the societal question as to whether it is worth taking the risk transporting oil in such treacherous seas, next to such a fragile and remote environment as the Queen Charlotte Islands and Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve, which is sometimes referred to as The Galapagos of the North. Is it worth risking the lives of the humpback whales that are currently feeding in the area, or the killer whales that call this region home? Does Enbridge's promise of a tug escort in confined channels along the proposed Gateway supertanker route eliminate the risk, or merely attenuate it?

These are just some of the questions facing communities as they come to terms with the prospect of VLCCs regularly plying the waters of Douglas Channel, navigating past Hartley Bay and Gil Island, where the Cetacealab whale research lab is located, and eventually out into Hecate Strait, Dixon Entrance, Queen Charlotte Sound and points beyond.

My tour of this behemoth, which is still relatively small by international tanker standards, ended with lunch in the cafeteria with the Captain of the Alaskan Frontier, Ralph Torjusen, a native of Manhattan. Many thanks to him and to Mr. Anil Mathur, President of ATC, for allowing this informative tour to take place.

BC Marine Environmental Policy Papers Made Available

2006-09-01T11:54:00.000-07:00

A total of eleven written submissions by Dr. Gerald Graham to various public consultation processes related to marine environmental policy on the wet coast of Canada are now available. Topics covered include the:

1) Deltaport Third Berth Expansion Project Comprehensive Study
2) BC Offshore Oil and Gas Moratorium Panels (3)
3) Southern Resident Killer Whale Draft Conservation Strategy (2)
4) Southern Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area Feasibility Study
5) Marine Mammmal Regulations Initiative
6) Scott Islands Marine Wildlife Area Initiative
7) SETAC Panel Victoria Sewage Review
8) COINPacific Forum
9) Batholiths Project ( work in progress )
10) Critique of Enbridge Gateway Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Consultation Process ( work in progress )

Submissions range in length from one page to fourteen. They are available either individually or as a CD set.

A complementary sample of Dr. Graham's work can be seen in the next blog entry, on the topic of the Deltaport Third Berth Expansion Project.

Deltaport Expansion Imperils Orcas

2006-09-01T09:22:00.000-07:00

Introduction

Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s 2005 comprehensive study of the Deltaport Third Berth Expansion Project concluded that “(T)he potential cumulative effects of additional vessels visiting Deltaport is likely to be negligible” ( P. 179 ). It is the contention of this submission that the conclusion reached by the DFO study is based on incomplete information as well as an incorrect interpretation of data that is available.

What the study looked at and determined

The DFO study looked at the impact of increased ship movements to and from the expanded Deltaport terminal, as well as from the entirely new, second terminal which is expected to be operational by 2021. These movements are anticipated to increase as follows:

• From 3.1 ship movements per day in 2003 to 3.4 when the third berth addition to the existing terminal is in operation.
• Up to 5.3 ship movements per day when the second terminal is in operation in 2021 ( P. 179 ).

The study correctly noted the recent trend towards larger container vessels being used ( P. 179 ).

The study conceded that “(T)he project will introduce some additional residual effects of noise and collision risk from additional ship visits” ( p. 179 ) Nevertheless, the study concluded that given the

“…low quantity of vessels and the slow speed… from existing and projected future vessels visiting Deltaport, compared to other vessels in the Strait of Georgia, the collision and noise risk to marine mammals is considered to be negligible.” ( P. 180 )

Deficiencies in the study

The author takes issue with this conclusion, basically on four grounds:

1. The increase from 3.1 ship movements per day to 3.4 and then 5.3 is significant, not insignificant. Similarly, the increase in the risk of collision and the noise risk to marine mammals will not be insignificant.
2. The study fails to consider the increased threat of oil spills presented by an increase in ship movements. The increased threat level this represents to the endangered southern resident killer whales is significant.
3. The study only considers the impact of increased ship movements in the Strait of Georgia, whereas it should be looking at the impact of these ship movements in Boundary Pass, Haro Strait and the Strait of Juan de Fuca, all of which form part of the core habitat for the southern resident killer whales of the area.
4. The project has, it seems, not been TERMPOLed.

Let us examine each of these points in turn.

The increase in ship movements is significant

An increase from 3.1 to 3.4 ship movements per day may not seem like much, but it is actually an increase of 109.5 ship movements per year through one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. What is more, we are talking here about what are generally very large vessels – vessels that are getting larger and larger each year.

Furthermore, an increase from 3.1 ship movements per day today to 5.3 ship movements per day fifteen years from now would represent an increase of 803 ship movements per year, which by any yardstick is a very large increase in transits. In short, the increase in ship traffic is likely to be considerable rather than marginal, with potentially significant increases in collision risk, noise risk and ship strike risk to marine mammals as well.

The threat of oil spills is significant

For some inexplicable reason, the comprehensive study only looks at the increased threat posed by noise and ship strikes. While these are no doubt important threats, so is that posed by oil. The oil spill threat comes not just from tankers but from the fuel on board cargo vessels.

It is generally recognised that oil spills represent one of the principal threats to the survival of southern resident killer whales, which are on both Canadian and American endangered species lists.

The environmental threat of increased shipping extends well beyond Georgia Strait

Again, for some unknown reason, the comprehensive study only looks at the threat posed by increased shipping in the Strait of Georgia, i.e. the body of water in the immediate vicinity of the project site. While undoubtedly significant, the entire commercial shipping route to and from the Pacific Ocean, in and out of Deltaport should be taken into account. This route includes, from west to east, and in addition to Georgia Strait, the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Haro Strait and Boundary Pass. Taken together, these four waterways constitute the core habitat of the endangered southern resident killer whales. In fact, for much of the year large cargo ships navigate in very close proximity to the whales, particularly in Haro Strait on the American side of the border, close to San Juan Island. Significantly, part of this region, particularly around Boundary Pass, is being considered by Canadian authorities for designation as a National Marine Conservation Area.

Within each of these maritime areas, a significant increase in the level of commercial shipping activity can be expected to increase the amount of noise the killer whales are subjected to. The risk of collisions, ship strikes and oil spills will also necessarily increase.

What ever happened to TERMPOL?

Transport Canada is supposed to apply the TERMPOL review process whenever a new berth is being built along the coast. TERMPOL is expected to be implemented in respect of the anticipated Gateway project which Enbridge is considering for Kitimat. Thus, why not for Deltaport expansion at Roberts Bank? While TERMPOL principally applies to terminals handling bulk oil, natural gas and chemicals, it can be applied to other cargoes as well. Given the presence along the proposed shipping route of southern resident killer whales, a Species at Risk Act-listed endangered species, and the significant threat to them posed by oil spills, one is hard pressed to see how the Minister of Transport could refrain from applying the TERMPOL process in this instance.

Conclusion

Contrary to the bold assertion in the comprehensive study to the effect that the effects of increased shipping related to the Deltaport expansion are likely to be minimal, this critique humbly submits that the cumulative effects of this long-term project are potentially catastrophic in respect of the southern resident killer whales which frequent the area used by ships entering and leaving Deltaport.

DFO’s comprehensive study completely ignores the fact that Deltaport shipping traffic will traverse, on a daily and continuous basis, year in and year out, the core habitat for these same whales, and that Environment Canada is considering the establishment of a National Marine Conservation Area in an area that encompasses the major shipping channel of Boundary Pass.

Already subjected to a number of stressors, including noise, ship strikes and the threat of oil spills, as well as the lack of prey and environmental contamination, the significant increases in ship traffic associated with the Deltaport expansion could sound the death knell for this icon of the Pacific Northwest. One need only look to Prince William Sound, where the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill virtually wiped out one local pod of orcas, for an example as to what might happen.

For all these reasons, at the very least, the authors of the comprehensive study need to go back to the drawing board, demonstrate that they are aware of these significant threats, and indicate what steps are planned to mitigate the negative effects associated with them. Only by doing this can their study be worthy of the designation ‘comprehensive’.

Time to Terminate TERMPOL

2006-08-21T06:52:00.000-07:00

Well, maybe not TERMINATE, but certainly overhaul! TERMPOL is the process Transport Canada ( TC ) uses to evaluate the viability of the shipping component of coastal terminal projects. While TERMPOL goes back quite some time, and has served its purpose, it has shown its weaknesses in the case of Enbridge's Gateway proposal for a tanker terminal at Kitimat on BC's North Coast. It is clearly time to either scrap the process and start from scratch, or drastically revamp the way government reviews such projects.

In the case of Gateway, the real deficiency in the process is that the project shouldn't even be reviewed in the first place, since there is a longstanding moratorium in effect on tanker traffic in the Queen Charlotte Basin. But, tell that to the boys at the shipping branch of TC, who have been in cahoots with shippers so long they bend over backwards to please the industry. The shippers say "Jump!", and TC says: "How high?".

The main weaknesses of TERMPOL are manifold. For starters, it is a voluntary process, which means the proponent doesn't have to submit to it. I don't know if there has ever been an instance when a project hasn't been reviewed because the proponent refused to go through the hoops, but the question really is academic - the process should be made mandatory, so as to give it teeth.

Another problem with the process is that it is basically conducted in secret. The documentation the proponent is tasked with furnishing is kept confidential, with the public not having any access to it. Nor is there any public input into the process. In short, there is absolutely no form of public consultation involved in TERMPOL, whether it be a duty of the proponent to consult the public or of Transport Canada to let the public say what they think about the proposal. Instead, one is left with the distinct impression that the old boys are just continuing the kind of "Nudge nudge, wink wink!" practice that shippers and government regulators everywhere are notorious for. We are talking here about a kind of culture that runs very deep, and that goes back generations.

A further weakness of TERMPOL is that it basically applies only to construction of new berths. This restriction allowed Encana's condensate tankers to enter Kitimat recently without TERMPOL applying, since the proponent is using an existing berth instead of building a new one. The same loophole will also be used, no doubt, by Trans Mountain Pipeline to get around their proposed capacity increase of the TMX line, in the case of the so-called Anchor Loop project. In other words, they'll be able to dramatically increase the number of fully-laden tankers leaving their marine terminal at Burnaby, so long as they use the one berth that's there now, and don't build a new one. Do you think the endangered killer whales of the Salish Sea give a hoot whether the tanker that's spewing out oil all around them came from a new dock or an old one? The situation is ludicrous!

Finally, the process is woefully inadequate in that it only applies to oil, natural gas and chemical terminals, and not the massive expansion of container terminal expansion planned for Vancouver and Prince Rupert. This particular loophole allows the ambitious Deltaport expansion at Roberts Bank in the Strait of Georgia to proceed without ever being TERMPOLed. Again, do you think the killer whales in the area care whether the oil that is wiping them out came from a supertanker or an enormous container ship? I think not.

In summary, what looks at first blush like a viable effort by the government to put order into the process of reviewing coastal development projects with a marine shipping component is actually a leaky boat. In the case of the Enbridge Gateway project, the evaluation of the marine component is evidently regarded by the proponent as little more than an add-on to the pipeline component of its proposal. Unless and until the TERMPOL process is completely rethunk, all marine projects with a shipping component that has potentially negative environmental implications should be an integral part of the transparent NEB process for project review. This is the only way to assure public input, and public access to all the relevant project documentation.

Hello "Hyundai Republic", Goodbye Orcas!

2006-05-31T21:54:00.000-07:00

Global TV in Vancouver, along with the BC pilotage authority, heralded the arrival of the 304-metre long container vessel Hyundai Republic to the Centerm terminal in Vancouver harbour today. Meanwhile, whale lovers wept silently in a corner at the thought of this 'behemoth', as the announcer so proudly described it, passing through Haro Strait and Boundary Pass, hard by the remaining, endangered southern resident killer whales which call these channels home.

The Hyundai Republic is said to be the second largest vessel to ever enter the port of Vancouver. If that weren't bad enough, we are informed ( 'warned' is perhaps a more apt term! ) that she is just one of five in her class, with all of them expected to make regular calls in future. Perish the thought, for:

The bigger the vessel, the more fuel she is likely to carry.
The biggger the vessel, the worse the smog situation in the Lower Mainland is likely to get.
The bigger the vessel, the louder the noise her engines and props are likely to make underwater, thereby interfering with whale echolocation.
The bigger the vessel, the bigger her wake.
The bigger the vessel, the harder it is to manoeuvre her in close quarters, and the longer it takes for her to stop in an emergency.
The bigger the vessel, the more trucks will be needed on local roads to bring her containers to and fro the terminal. The more trucks on the road, the more pollution in the air.
The bigger the vessel, the more roads and bridges will have to be built as part of the massive Gateway project in the Lower Mainland.

Suffice it so say, then, that the arrival of this monster of a ship is just another nail in the coffin of the southern resident killer whales. In the long run, they don't stand a chance against a giant like this. Maybe one of these icons of the Pacific Northwest will get impaled on the bow of the Hyundai Republic or one of its sister ships. I sure hope not. But the fact of the matter is that the arrival of this huge container ship signals the beginning of a new and frighening era in BC shipping. And when the mainstream news media engages in its customary boosterism upon the arrival of the first in its class, you know there is little hope in changing public opinion. In fact it got so bad that the TV journalist in question, Tony Parsons, urged his viewers to hurry on down to the dock to see the vessel before she left port.

American scientists tell us there is a 100 percent chance that the three pods of southern resident killer whales which frequent Georgia Basin and Puget Sound most of the year will disappear within the next hundred years. When I see footage of this massive ship, greater than three football fields in length, it suddenly becomes clear to me what they are talking about, and why they are saying what they are. Still, I'd like to think that the orcas stand a fighting chance, and that that 100 percent figure has only been rounded off to the nearest hundred, so that maybe in fact we have as much as a 49 percent chance of saving them, by prohibiting the passage of such enormous ships in their path, for instance.

As the saying goes, where there is no vision, the people perish. Well, the same holds true for the oceans - where there is no vision, the orcas perish. So long as the kind of cargo cult mentality epitomised by the Global TV segment predominates, there is no hope for the orcas. And if there is no hope for the orcas, then humanity probably doesn't have much of a future either.

The Perils of Marine Planning in BC

2006-05-31T16:45:00.000-07:00

The federal government's planning process for the wet coast of Canada is floundering. It's not just the Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area ( PNCIMA ) initiative on the North Coast either. There are other government processes active on the north and central coasts as well, that are in more or less direct competition with development proposals for the offshore, especially offshore oil and gas. The Scott Islands Marine Wildlife Conservation initiative is just one example; that plan was a deliberate attempt by David Anderson to throw a spanner in the works of efforts to lift the moratorium. Guess who won that battle?; well, actually it's a stalemate so far.

The same thing is happening on the south coast, only few people are noticing. The most obvious example is the Southern Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area ( SSGNMCA ) initiative. Laudable as this project may seem on the surface, especially given the precarious status of the southern resident killer whales in the area, it is actually somewhat ludicrous to even consider designating one of the world's greatest shipping routes, namely Boundary Pass connecting Vancouver to the Pacific, as a conservation area. I mean, either it's a major maritime route or a vital conservation area, but you can't have it both ways, because having several thousand enormous vessels passing through it each year is incompatible with the goals of conservation. If you are serious about declaring the area a conservation area, then, fine, you'll have to walk the talk by banning commercial ships from the zone. The Yanks have done it off the coast of Washington state, where tankers are banned from a marine area adjacent to Olympic National Park. Fat chance of the Canucks doing likewise in Boundary Pass - where else is traffic supposed to go? Rosario Strait on the US side of the maritime boundary? Don't even think about it!

If all of this weren't bad enough, the government supports the Pacific Gateway initiative, which if it goes through will probably result in a doubling or tripling of maritime shipping traffic in and out of Vancouver, not to mention PR. Pity the orcas!

It's kind of like Ducks Unlimited building their Canadian HQ right smack in the middle of a Manitoba marsh, except that in the case of the Southern Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area it's the reverse: here the plan is to plunk a conservation area down in the midst of a busy shipping corridor. This is really putting the cat among the pigeons. Government is forever doing silly things like that, promoting one goal in one direction and then promoting another goal that is basically incompatible with the first. Just like with the explosive growth of the oil sands, supported with tax write-offs, at the same time as we tout our commitment to Kyoto. Which is it - oil sands or Kyoto? Which is it - SSGNMCA for Boundary Pass and a conservation strategy for killer whales, or massive expansion of the Roberts Bank container terminal? Which is it, approval of five or six big projects with shipping components in Kitimat and Prince Rupert, or a credible planning process in the form of PNCIMA? Okay, fine, if through PNCIMA these projects eventually get approved, that's okay, if that's what people want. But why consult people in a region about their collective future if the regulatory processes applicable to these projects ( which collectively amount to a megaproject, in my opinion ) are going to operate under the old rules and the old system. This is why people don't trust government. For PNCIMA to be credible, maybe there should be a moratorium on the approval processes for all these projects, until such time as PNCIMA is up and running and has come up with a plan in, say, five to ten years. THAT would show that the government means business. But, of course, it will never happen.

Among the problems associated with PNCIMA is the fact that the process engages only First Nations communities, and not the muncipalities such as Prince Rupert and Kitimat where most if not all of the proposed coastal development is scheduled to occur. For PNCIMA to be truly effective as a planning tool, all stakeholders must be part of the process.

In short, by setting up competing processes, with a two-track approach to policy objectives, we seem to be creating a situation in which conflict is inherent and unavoidable; and then we ask and expect all parties to duke it out and reach a consensus. This is totally unrealistic, in my opinion. Instead, what we have to do is incorporate sustainable development processes and thinking into existing processes, such as the NEB, TERMPOL, etc., so that conservation is built into the planning process rather than superimposed on top of it. As someone once said years ago, the real sign that Canada practices what it preaches when it comes to the environment will be when there is no longer a department called Environment Canada. Instead, sustainable development principles and respect for the environment will be built in to the policies, programs, practices and intitiatives of all government departments, across the board.

The BC Offshore Oil and Gas Moratorium

2006-05-03T17:09:00.001-07:00

What ever happened to the burning issue of lifting the decades-old British Columbia offshore oil and gas moratorium? The grapevine has it that Gordon Campbell has been leaning on Stephen Harper to lift the federal ban, but that Ottawa is in no hurry to do so. Meanwhile, Shell Canada head Clive Mather was recently reported to be pushing for resumption of exploration activity. For its part, the public seem to have no desire for offshore activity, and the Queen of the North ferry disaster has only served to highlight the perils of doing anything in these waters. Then there are hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which are said to have destroyed an incredible 113 Gulf of Mexico production platforms, plus 457 pipeline gathering systems. If this isn't a wake up call on the subject of drilling in extreme environments, then what is? I mean, the Gulf was one of those areas cited by proponents of lifting the ban as a success story, with an impeccable safety and environmental record.

Mind you, offshore Newfoundland is another frontier area often mentioned as a model for BC offshore exploration and development. Well, you can forget about that claim now, because just this week Petro Canada was fined a record $290,000 CDN for the 2004 Terra Nova spill. In this case, a test separator malfunctioned for five hours at the floating production, storage and off-loading vessel, which is located 350 kilometres offshore. The result was that a total of approximately 160,000 litres of crude oil spilled into the ocean before crew noticed anything. Unbelievably, the company says that no one has been disciplined for the spill, since it was a team effort. Way to go team! If we stick together it's truly amazing what we can accomplish!

The point in all this is that when operating in extreme environments such as the Gulf of Mexico or offshore Newfoundland, Murphy's law kicks in - anything that can go wrong will go wrong. You can take all the precautions imaginable, and over-engineer everything, but at the end of the day you're still tempting fate by operating in sometimes horrendous conditions, or leaving yourself open to human error. Do we really want to take such a chance in the Queen Charlotte Basin, where marine bombs occur on average seventeen times each winter with little or no warning, and where it would be virtually impossible to clean up a major spill during wintertime? Scientists tell us that the impact of a major spill in the region could be catastrophic and irreversible. Prevailing winter winds could whip the oil ashore, trapping it in the area's many inlets, bays and fjords. Is it worth risking salmon and other stocks for just a marginal gain in the world's reserves of oil and gas? Why not use up proven reserves onshore instead, where the risks are better understood, and it is easier, in theory at least, to contain a spill?

These are just some of the questions one asks oneself as one awaits word as to whether the offshore oil and gas moratorium is about to be lifted. The oilpatch likes to go to the ends of the earth to find and exploit offshore oil and gas, but does it really have to go everywhere? Are there no places that are better left undisturbed? If there are certain frontier areas where we should not defy the gods, the Queen Charlotte Basin would seem to be a prime candidate for inclusion. In other words, leave the Basin alone. Go somewhere else with your seismic work, your drilling rigs, your production platforms, your tankers and your pipelines. Do not defile what some like to call The Galapagos of the North.

Regulating the Whale Watching Industry

2006-05-03T17:09:00.000-07:00

B.C. marine mammal enthusiasts are eagerly awaiting the federal government's decision as to whether they intend to go ahead with regulations governing the whale watching industry on the wet coast of Canada. Fisheries and Oceans Canada announced its intention of doing so in 2003, going so far as to seek public comment on a draft set of regulations. There is no word as to whether the current minority conservative government in Ottawa plans to take this dossier a step further and actually introduce legislation on the subject.

Aside from some rather weak regulations prohibiting harrassment of marine mammals, and a set of voluntary whale watching guidelines which the courts have used as a yardstick for determining whether harrassment has actually ocurred, the lucrative whale watching fleet is virtually ungoverned. This is in spite of the fact that the southern resident killer whales, which are the principal target of the industry, are officially listed as endangered on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border, in the Georgia Basin/Puget Sound area. Scientists have determined that the orcas are subject to threats from a number of sources, including contaminated habitat, dwindling food supply, noise pollution, and interference from the whale watching fleet and pleasure craft, which on a good summer day can number in excess of one hundred vessels. The guidelines are intended essentially to keep the boats a safe distance from the whales, while allowing the public to enjoy a wildlife experience for which they often pay top dollar.

The guidleines are by and large respected, at least by the commercial whale watching fleet, although such outlawed practices as getting in the path of the whales are extremely common. The whale watching business is highly competitive, and the vessel operators are under much pressure from clients to get closer and closer to the whales, and to get as close up as other boats. The result is that the guides often resort to a practice called 'leapfrogging', which brings them from a position alongside or behind the whales to one up in front of them. Nevertheless,it is the flotilla of pleasure craft that is most often guilty of infractions, sometimes out of ignorance, no doubt, but other times because there is little fear of sanction. Meanwhile, the Marine Mammal Monitoring Group ( M3 ) from Canada, and its American counterpart, Soundwatch from Friday Harbour on San Juan Island, try to keep an eye on what is going on and educate boaters, but they have no real powers of enforcement.

What is really lacking, and desperately needed, is control on the numbers, types and size of the fleet out on the water of Haro Strait at any given time. One whale expert has suggested a type of quota for the noise level, for instance, although it is difficult to see how this could be effectively enforced. A more likely control would be to place limits on the horsepower of the engines of the vessels involved, or perhaps the decibel level emanating from them underwater. Restrictions on the numbers of zodiacs tracking the whales, and/or the size of the vessels, are no doubt also being contemplated, as these types of suggestions were put forward during the course of the consultations. One theory has it that having a smaller number of large vessels capable of accommodating large numbers of whale watchers might have less of an overall impact on the whales than a large number of noisy, smaller, faster craft such as the zodiacs. At any given time on a lovely summer day there might be upwards of 18 to 24 zodiacs in the vicinity of the whales. When one considers that the orcas can be basically surrounded by a fleet this large from morning to night between May and October, the potential negative impact on these creatures is not hard to imagine. For this same reason, refuges, where the whales can go to excape the noise, the pollution, and the general congestion are also no doubt being considered.

In short, it would appear that something is going to have to be done to protect this endangered species from a largely unregulated business activity in the waters around Haro Strait in particular. What form that regulation might take is anyone's guess, but one can assume that there will be beefed up monitoring, control or enforcement, even if only to apply the existing regulations prohibiting harassment. The bottom line is that while self-enforcement has its plusess and minuses, it is probably insufficient to protect the southern resident killer whales from undue interference. Thus, stay tuned to this blog for updates as to the federal government's plans, as they are announced, possibly in the months to come.

The Southern Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area Reserve

2006-05-03T17:08:00.000-07:00

Environment Canada is about to hold yet another round of consultations regarding its proposed Southern Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Area Reserve. This is the third go round of a lengthy process to put forward some strategic ideas and garner public input and support for the plan. But is it realistic, or is it rather a misguided, overly-ambitious and thinly-disguided attempt at empire-building? Only time will tell, but in its present state the draft feasibility study is full of platitudes, pays lip service to every planning buzzword imaginable, and basically reinvents the wheel.

In a nutshell, the idea of creating a marine conservation area right smack in the middle of one of the world's busiest shipping lanes seems preposterous. What the Government of Canada should be doing instead is coming up with a comprehensive plan for the area - one which is built on consensus, shared values and visions, and mutual understanding. Instead, what we face is a needlessly complicated bureaucratic process which no one understands, which duplicates existing regulatory systems, and which merely adds to the existing planning approaches rather than building on them or replacing them. This is unfortunate, for it forces even those who believe in intelligent planning and sustainable development to reject an initiative that would otherwise be laudable, on the grounds that it is unworkable and impractical.

The officials responsible for the elaboration of this feasibility need to go back to basics, and to refrain from hopelessly raising public expectations as to what the process is to achieve. Commercial shipping is expected to expand by leaps and bounds in the years to come. A report issued May 9, 2005, for instance, by the Western Transportation Advisory Council, predicts that container shipping traffic in BC is expected to triple in the course of the next ten years. Although part of this growth will be taken up by a new container terminal in Prince Rupert, much of it will come from the Lower Mainland. In greater Vancouver, for instance, container capacity is expected to grow from the current 1.7 million TEUs to over 5 million. At Roberts Bank, a third berth is being built at the Deltaport terminal, and an entirely new second three berth terminal is also planned. Such expansion plans come on the heels of an already nmajor expansion of container handling capacity at the Centerm and Vanterm container terminals in Burrard Inlet. The Centerm terminal, recently bought by Dubai Ports World, has already been expanded from a capacity of 360,000 TEUs per year to 800,000, and is slated to grow even further to 1.2 million TEUs per year.

Can this kind of rapid growth ever be compatible with conservation values?; if so, how? Would one limit the size of the vessels, for instance, or the number of vessels in the area at any given time, or create zones that are off limit to cargo vessels, tankers and the like? These are all perfectly valid questions, because Boundary Pass, the principal shipping route through the area, is right smack in the middle of the proposed conservation area. This would seem to make a mockery of the idea of conservation, since an oil spill from one of these ships could cause enormous damage to the local marine ecosystem.

In addition, more emphasis needs to be placed on supporting the development of existing bodies, such as the Islands Trust, and existing initiatives such as the Southern Resident Killer Whale Conservation Strategy and Georgia Basin Action Plan, rather than creating new mechanisms, institutions and processes to deal with pressing issues involving conflicting use and values. Thus, instead of scrapping the current initiative, it should undergo a complete rethink as to what it should seek to achieve, and how it should try to get there.

The Southern Resident Killer Whale Conservation Strategy

2006-05-03T17:06:00.000-07:00

Having designated the southern resident killer whales an endangered species, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is currently developing a conservation strategy for this icon of the Pacific northwest. The draft strategy under consideration recognises that there are a number of threats to the orcas, and accordingly proposes a series of measures to counter these negative effects and reverese the dwindling numbers.

The principal threats to southern resident killer whales, which number less than one hundred individuals at present, are environmental pollution, reduction in availabliity of prey, and disturbance of habitat from noise, ship traffic, etc. Potentially catastrophic oil spills are among the principal threats identified. The problem with the plan is that by focussing on a long-term recovery strategy, it fails to come to grips with the clear and present danger of an oil spill from a tanker, cargo vessel or cruise ship. A large spill from any one of these sources could wipe the local orcas off the map virtually overnight, or condemn them to eventual extinction, as was the case with the Exxon Valdez spill in Prince William Sound in 1989, where the local pod of orcas was decimated.

Clearly, measures need to be taken now to separate ship traffic from the whales, particularly in Haro Strait, where cargo vessels typically come within one kilometre of the whales every day during the summer months. It is one thing to have Vessel Traffic Separation Systems, radar, GPS, mandatory pilotage, lighthouses, foghorns and other navaids throughout the area, but as the recent Queen of the North ferry sinking up north demonstrated, accidents can still happen, and when they do the results can be disastrous. Fortunately in the case of the ferry tragedy, the environment was for the most part spared. However, will we be so lucky if, say, a fully-laden tanker out of Vancouver runs aground in Boundary Passage?

Consideration should be given to declaring the southern Gulf Islands an Area to Be Avoided ( ATBA ) under IMO rules. This way, traffic could be diverted to the American side, to perhaps Rosario Strait, where the Alaskan tankers currently naviagate on their way to the refineries at Ferndale and Anacortes. Moreover, Canadian law should require tug escorts for tankers in and out of Vancouver, just as our American cousins do. Limits should also be placed on the size of tankers, again as the Yanks do. We Canucks like to talk the talk when it comes to the environment, but on this issue we need to walk the walk; the Americans have a far more aggressive approach to marine environmental protection in this case than we do.

We also need to take a long hard look at the proposal to expand the Trans Mountain tanker terminal in Burnaby, for it is ludicrous to envisage an up to eigthfold increase in tanker traffic through the Salish Sea at the same time the government of Canada is entertaining proposals to conserve the endangered orcas. We have to ask ourselves: what do we value more, shipping goods and bulk cargo to and from Asia in much greater amounts in order to fuel our development, or the continued existence of these magnificent creatures. How much teeth will American and Canadian endangered species legislation have if development in the Georgia Basin/Puget Sound region is allowed to proceed unfettered, thereby sealing the fate of the marine mammals? Put another way, are we prepared to sacrifice our standing of living so that we can continue to enjoy watching orca whales in this part of the world?

These are difficult questions, and they involve tough choices. Scientists give southern resident killer whales a very slim chance of surviving the next hundred years, no matter what is done to protect them. But, does that mean we should not try? Does that mean that we shouldn't even bother, because in effect we'd be wasting our time and money? Tell that to your grandchildren the next time they see an orca swim by. Life is all about choices, and even with the best of intentions and the most stringent controls on shipping and development the orcas may still disappear. Nevertheless, we have a duty, both moral and legal, to do all we can to bring the orcas back from the brink of extinction, to take measures to conserve them, to clean up their habitat, and to minimise the chances of a catastrophic oil spill wiping them out.

So, write your MP and MLA and tell them you're concerned about the way things are going in the Salish Sea. Tell them you worry about the survival of our beloved orcas if a third berth is added to the Deltaport terminal at Roberts Bank, as is currently planned, and an entirely new three-berth terminal added as well. Tell them you don't like Kinder Morgan's plans to dramatically increase the number of tanker movements from its Burnaby terminal through the Salish Sea either. Finally, participate in the federal consultation process for the Soutern Strait of Georgia Marine Conservation Area. In other words, stand up and be counted if you want to save the whales.

Contaminants in Victoria Sewage and Killer Whales: The Missing Link

2006-05-03T17:05:00.000-07:00

The gold-plated, blue ribbon SETAC expert panel charged with reviewing the matter of the disposal of raw Victoria sewage into the Strait of Juan de Fuca is scheduled to report to its client, the Capital Regional District ( CRD ) on July 12. For $600,000 it had better be good. For that amount, the CRD could have commissioned a first class feasibility study for a tertiary sewage treatment facility. Instead, what we anticipate is yet another study friendly to the position of the CRD technocrats and a fistful of local oceanographers who have been co-opted, which is basically that the century-old practice of dumping liquid waste into the ocean off the southern tip of Vancouver Island is perfectly safe from an environmental perspective, and that there is therefore no need to get rid of the two outfall pipes in the region, one at Macaulay Point and the other at Clover Point. Defenders of the dumping practice argue that the cold waters of Victoria Bight, plus the strong currents, provide a natural, beneficial flushing function which rapidly rids the area of any and all sewage.

Having said that, the panel will have to deal with one of the issues raised in a submission by the current author. The study in question, entitled "Is Victoria Sewage Contaminating Southern Resident Killer Whales?" was commissioned by the T Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation, and can be downloaded off of the Victoria Sewage Alliance web site. ( Just click on the "Dr. Gerald Graham's Submission" link on line five of substantive text. ) The submission examines the possible link between contaminants in Victoria sewage and contaminants in southern resident killer whales. What it finds is that although there is no smoking gun pointing to Victoria sewage as the cause for the decline in local orca populations, there are indicators which suggest that raw Victoria sewage is contributing to the orcas' plight.

The link between contaminants in Victoria sewage and contaminants in resident killer whales is basically as follows:

1) A number of the contaminants in Victoria sewage, such as PCBs and mercury, are also present in the southern residents;
2) A pathway exists to transport contaminants that come out of the Clover Point outfall pipe to nearby Haro Strait, which is core habitat for southern residents.

Scientists have in fact postulated that bottom currents around that outfall pipe tend, at least half of the time, to end up in Haro Strait, a core habitat area for two of the local orca pods some of the time, and one pod year-round. Raw Victoria sewage could also be contaminating chinook salmon, the principal diet of the southern residents.

More research needs to be done for a direct link to be established between the sewage contaminants and the contaminants in the southern resident killer whales. For instance, effluent tracer studies could be undertaken. In the meantime, and especially since we are dealing here with a species which has been officially designated as endangered on both sides of the forty-ninth paradox, the pre-cautionary principle should prevail. That principle, it will be recalled, basically states that absence of scientific certainty should not be used as an excuse for avoiding action which might could solve a pressing environmental problem. In other words, one could study the matter of declining orca numbers to death, but in the meantime the target species could go the way of the dodo bird and the great auk. Better to act now, while we have a chance to save these magnificent creatures, rather than dither and risk their disappearance. For, as the Sierra Club bumper sticker used to remind us, "Extinction is Forever!".

An immediate commitment to build local sewage treatment facilities and halt raw sewage discharge into the Strait of Juan de Fuca is all the more appropriate given the Mayor of Victoria's support for such a move, and the federal government's renewed financial commitment to such an initiative. In short, there is no need to wait for the boondoggle SETAC report before deciding to act.

Kill the Tankers, Save the Whales

2006-05-03T02:14:00.000-07:00

Kinder Morgan announced yesterday that it plans to increase its Trans Mountain Pipeline capacity from the current 225,000 barrels per day ( bpd ) to 1.1 million bpd. The Trans Mountain line runs from Edmonton to Burnaby, British Columbia, from where most of the oil is shipped by another pipeline to the United States. However, at the present time a small percentage of the oil that ends up in Burnaby is shipped out by tanker, at the rate of about one tanker shipment per month.

This staggered expansion project will see capacity increase to 300,000 bpd by 2008, and to 400,000 the following year, and eventually to over one million bpd. How much of this capacity will end up being shipped through Georgia Strait, Boundary Pass, Haro Strait and the Straight of Juan de Fuca is unknown. Nevertheless, the tanker component of the expansion project should definitely form part of the proposed review of the project by the National Energy Board ( NEB ), which is expected to commence in August of this year, if for no other reason than the fact that this tanker route runs right through the critical habitat area for the southern resident killer whales. These orcas are an officially-listed endangered species in both Canada and the United States. It is generally recognised that a major oil spill could have catastrophic impacts on the southern residents, potentially wiping out the entire southern resident population, which currently consists of approximately 90 individuals in three pods - J, K and L. The 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska's Prince William Sound, it will be recalled, essentially decimated a local pod of killer whales, to the point where their eventual extinction is a virtual certainty.

BCers should rise up and protest this massive expansion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline for its potential impact on the health of the local marine environment, popularly referred to as the Salish Sea. Canadian controls over tanker movements in this area are far less stringent than those of our American counterparts for Puget Sound and the Straight of Juan de Fuca. Our Yankee cousins, for instance, impose limits on the size of tankers in the region, and have requirements for tug escort over certain portions of the route. Canada has no such restrictions at present.

A stark choice may face Canadians - do we want to protect the orca whales, an iconic symbol of the Pacific Northwest, or do we want to develop the southern mainland as a principal outlet for tar sands oil on the west coast? Which do we prefer? Because to think that we can have both, especially when the orcas are already subject to a wide variety of stressors, including noise pollution, deterioration of habitat, scarcity of food supply and hounding by whale watching vessels, is to dream in Technicolour.

So, get out there and demand that the NEB's public review of the Kinder Morgan expansion include the tanker component. Also, demand that the BC and federal governments institute a comprehensive planning process for the Salish Sea - one that effectively recognises the crucial links between future development of the Lower Mainland and marine environmental quality in the region. The Kinder Morgan expansion, when coupled with other plans for upgrading of facilities, such as the doubling of capacity at the Roberts Bank bulk terminal, force one to take a long, hard look at the direction in which we are headed. We talk the talk about sustainable development for our kids and grandkids, but with these and other development proposals on the table, does this accurately reflect our vision for the area? Are these plans, for instance, compatible with the goals and objectives of the draft Southern Strait of Georgia National Marine Conservation Reserve initiative? Somehow I doubt it. We must be prepared to walk the walk as well, to put our money where our mouth is, and to stand up for what we believe in.

Kinder Morgan's proposals should also be looked at in terms of the cumulative effects this and other maritime shipping proposals on the Lower Mainland could have on the marine environment. For instance, in addition to the expansion of the Trans Mountain terminal, a third berth is being added to the Deltaport terminal, and a new terminal is being built at the Roberts Bank facility. It is definitely time to stand up and say "Enough is enough!" We want the same kind of planning for the marine environment that we have come to expect for terrestrial ecosystems. Better still, we want the terrestrial and marine ecosystems to be viewed in an integrated manner, in recognition of their fndamental interconnectedness."

BC Ferries Walks Away from Spill, Heads Towards Bank

2006-04-29T19:37:00.000-07:00

The latest report from the field indicates that BC Ferries has decided to let mother nature take care of the Queen of the North oil spill, even though diesel is said to still be leaking from the wreck at the rate of 1-4 litres per hour. Also, even though the Transportation Safety Board is preparing to send another mini-submarine down to the wreck, this latest mission will not have an environmental component.

Meanwhile, the BC Ferry Commissioner, Martin Crilly, has allowed BC Ferries to declare the sinking of the QOTN a situation involving force majeure. The practical effect of this designation allows the ferry company to collect about $45,000 per day in subsidies for the QOTN ferry route until May 18, even though the ferry is 1200 feet below the surface of the ocean. Press reports estimate that in total BC Ferries will collect $2.5 million as a result of this administrative decision. Presumably, if an inquiry eventually determines that criminal negligence was involved in the sinking, then the money would have to be returned, under the well known common law principle that a criminal must not profit from his crimes. Also, one wonders whether all those businesses and individuals adversely affected by the disruption of service resulting from the sinking will be eligible for government compensation as well.

There is no word yet as to whether BC Ferries will be fined under Canadian marine environmental protection laws for unlawfully discharging oil into the marine environment, or whether an exemption will be granted here as well. Nor is it entirely clear who is paying for the oil spill cleanup costs, which already exceed one million dollars. One report from a source close to the scene seemed to indicate that the BC taxpayer was footing the bill, much as it did for the Fast Cat super ferry debacle a few years ago. So much for the polluter pays principle.

Stay tuned to this blog for continuous updates on this curious saga, which seems to take different twists and turns each day. Welcome to the whacky world of BC politics, where the ship of state is still in the hands of a man previously convicted for drunk driving. Call it "Tanker A on the Rocks", if you will.

Queen of the North Oil Spill Blog Generates Heated Response

2006-04-28T13:45:00.000-07:00

More than one month after the Queen of the North ferry sank off Gil Island, the environmental aspects of the incident, which this blog has focussed on, are starting to generate feedback. Within the past three days, three sets of anonymous comments have been posted on the blog by someone ( perhaps more than one person ) who obviously is or has been involved in the response operation. Readers can access the comments by scrolling down the page to the end of each article. I'll just summarise the comments here, and provide a bit of a rebuttal where I feel it is warranted.

The gist of the comments is that the amount of oil spilled is minimal, that it is not in any case recoverable, and, above all, that it is having minimal impact on marine life and shorelines in the area.The diesel in question is said to evaporate rapidly, and what doesn't evaporate becomes weathered and disappears within half a day.

We are also told that chronic pollution near our ports or indeed anywhere along the coast of BC is far worse than anything coming from the Queen of the North wreck. Furthermore, the claim is made that this is just the latest in a series of wrecks off the BC coast that either has leaked oil, is leaking oil, or will eventually leak oil. What, then, is all the fuss about, the commenter wonders?

The latest comment suggests that over the course of the first week of the response effort, only about 20 litres of oil was recovered, at a cost of one million dollars. The commenter goes on to suggest that as a result of message boards such as this one, and also because of alleged "false media coverage", the incident has been politicised. We are told that money shouldn't be wasted on trying to recover oil that is basically unrecoverable, and that deploying protective boom is the only response strategy that's working right now.

This last commenter obviously has some first hand experience with the incident, because he or she claims that the oil comes up in drops the size of a pea which, within the space of about 30 seconds, explodes into a four foot plus rainbow sheen visible from the air and from boats. However, it cannot be recovered, will be visible for under four hours, and will then become invisible to the naked eye.

With this in mind, the commenter wonders whether this is a good way to spend taxpayers' money, risking the health and safety of workers in the process, just because of the optics. We are told not to come back later on and complain that the operation cost the taxpayers a lot of money.

My response to these comments is as follows: great, you have added a lot of useful information, but where were you a month ago when this kind of info was sorely needed and scarcer than a bikini in January in Tuktoyaktuk? So, now we know how much oil was recovered ( virtually nil ), that it cost a whack of money ( a cool million ) to even try, and that the current on-the-water operation is being paid for by BC taxpayers. That latter point in particular is news to me; what ever happened to the polluter pays principle? In other words, how come BC Ferries, a private entity, is not paying for the response operation?

Now that this kind of information is out there in the public domain, perhaps now, belatedly, we can have an informed and intelligent debate about the extent and utility of a continued response operation. The need for a sustained monitoring program would seem obvious, and the potential for avoiding damage by deploying protective boom would also seem compelling, but is there any need to do anything else, particularly if no other strategies are said to work? Personally, this is the first time I heard that the authorities are doing anything else. What, pray tell, are they doing? Do they have any vessels, booms, skimmers and sorbent pads out on the water?; if so, you could have fooled me. But assuming they do, is there any net environmental benefit from resorting to these strategies, or is this just another case of PR boom being deployed, showing the flag, looking busy, etc? You know, all the typical response options that generate positive media coverage and keep the public happy, but have virtually no positive impact on the marine environment?

So, let's hear more of your comments, and let's here more from the authorities, who have done a rather pathetic job of communicating with the public until now, more than one month after the incident occurred.

Queen of the North Oil Spill: "An Orca Runs Through It"

2006-04-11T22:16:00.000-07:00

Hermann Meuter and Janie Wray, reserchers at Cetacealab on Gil Island, near the site of the Queen of the North ferry wreck, report on the journal portion of their web site what is believed to be the first sighting of a killer whale swimming through the diesel sheen from the leaking ferry. According to the Cetacealab account, yesterday evening at around 6 PM A32, a 22 year old male, was seen surfacing "right in the middle of a 25 feet wide sheen of diesel!!" This event apparently occurred in Wright Sound, south of the entrance to Grenville Channel.

This observation would seem to add a whole new dimension to the response operation, since until now the authorities have argued that the impact of the diesel on wildlife has been minimal. Granted, no one knows what the impact of swimming through a thin sheen of diesel fuel will be, or indeed whether the other members of the same matriline also waded through oil. However, Hermann has also indicated in an email to me tonight that earlier today he and Janie spotted the entire A5 pod of northern residents in the area; this pod consists of approximately a dozen individuals. Thus, we could well be about to witness a live and unfortunate experiment on the impact of oil on a group of whales. Let's hope it does not happen.

In terms of later arrivals of northern residents, Hermann reports that several of the A-Clan pods, such as A12, A30, A4, B and C, are likely to arrive in May and June. He also says there are occcasional visits from G-Clan pods, and last year almost all of the R's showed up as well.

Humpbacks have already started arriving in the area, according to Hermann: three individuals are said to have been spotted in Caamano Sound last Saturday. Hermann also informs me that contrary to popular belief, humpbacks do not just pass through on their way to Alaska. Instead, a group of between forty and fifty resident humpbacks tends to reside in the area during the summer months. Apparently the bulk of them tend to arrive in July.

Stay tuned to the Cetacealab journal, as well as this blog, for an update from Hermann and Janie as to what they witnessed today, Tuesday, out on the water from the unique vantage point of their boat.

Who's Looking Out for Marine Mammals Swimming Through "Queen of the North" Diesel Fuel?

2006-04-11T15:24:00.000-07:00

The BC Environment Ministry released another press release on April 10, this time announcing in bold headlines that the diesel sheen from the Queen of the North spill was decreasing. What they fail to point out anywhere in the update is that 20 days into the incident, fuel and perhaps other lubricants continue to leak from the sunken vessel. Not only that, but Hermann Meuter, co-director of Cetacealab, a whale research station on Gil Island, near the site of the disaster, reports that all three members of the A36 matriline of northern resident killer whales "...were in contact with diesel fuel last evening (Monday). A32 was seen to surface right in the middle of a 25 feet sheen of diesel". This report comes from a boat from Hartley Bay which had been tracking the whales in Wright Sound. Tuesday morning, Hermann and his partner were "...getting ready to head out to monitor the situation" on the water. A full description as to what happened last night, and what they find today, is promised for their web site Cetacealab later today .

The question therefore arises as to what, if anything, the authorities are doing about the possible impact of the oil on the marine mammals in the vicinity, including not just the orcas but also the 50 plus Pacific white-sided dolphins that showed up last week? Are they at all concerned about the potentially negative impact this oil could have on these animals? If so, what are they doing to mitigate that impact? For instance, they say they are monitoring the spill from the air every second day; but, are they relating this information to the location and path of the marine mammals in the area? Also, have they considered hazing as a means of keeping the whales and dolphins away from the sheen?

In a CanWest News Service article posted on the www.canada.com web site Tuesday, the claim is made that no one knows at this stage how much of the 220,000 litres of diesel, 20,000 litres of light oil and 220 litres of hydraulic oil on board the vessel has leaked out so far. Incident Commander Lance Sundquist admits, however, that fuel is still leaking from the ship. And although he doesn't know how much is leaking, he says it is likely to be "a fairly minimal amount". According to the article, last Saturday "two diesel sheens of 500 litres were spotted from a flight over the site". One of these sheens was apparently five to ten metres wide, while the other was approximately one metre wide. The article goes on to state that "(t)he fuel leak is still being checked by boat each day". Meanwhile, B. C. Ferries are reported in the same web article as apparently “meeting with two European salvage companies to discuss the possibility of removing diesel from the vessel, or other ways of preventing long-term damage".

Who can say for sure that if the whales and dolphins swim through the diesel sheen they won't be adversely affected? What about the potential effect of the oil on their eyes? And what if they inhale the vapours? Can the authorities, specifically the federal authorities responsible for protection of the marine environment in general, and of marine mammals in particular, reassure us that the oil on the surface is so thin, or so spread out, or in such small quantities, that its impact is likely to be minimal? Because one thing we know about diesel fuel is that although half will evaporate within 24 hours, the other half is quite toxic.

In short, there are all sorts of unanswered questions concerning the fate and wellbeing of the marine mammals in the area of the Queen of the North spill, but very few answers. The latest BC Environment Ministry press release does say that "A Wildlife Response Plan was developed to address any wildlife potential impacted by the fuel spill". What does this mean: that the plan will only be implemented once wildlife are impacted? That's what it sounds like to this observer.

The fact of the matter is that if whales and dolphins are swimming through diesel sheen, as they certainly appear to be, a plan should be operationalised now. In other words, don't wait until dead or dying marine mammals start washing up on shore before implementing a plan. This is a variation of the old adage to the effect that "life is what happened to me while I went about making my plans!"

A step in the right direction would be for people such as Paul Ross, an oil spill and wildlife expert from Environment Canada, his counterpart, Karen Hutton, from DFO, Peter Ross, a marine mammal toxicologist from the Institute of Ocean Sciences, or John Ford, a killer whale expert from the Pacific Biological Station, to come forward and say something along the lines of:

"We are very concerned about a recent report that killer whales have been observed swimming through diesel fuel from the Queen of the North spill in Wright Sound. Our strategy to deal with this disturbing development includes monitoring the marine mammals and their journey in and around the oil, looking for any sign that they or their prey may be adversely impacted, and examining possible measures, including hazing techniques, to mitigate these impacts. Our surveillance program includes aircraft and vessels, working in tandem. We will continue to implement this program so long as marine mammals are in the area, or until such time as the leaks are staunched."

Who knows, maybe all this is being done as we speak, but if it is, it sure is being kept top secret. Okay, so the authorities have a boat out there every day, and an airplane evvery second day, but what are these assets doing to specifically address the issue of the marine mammals threatened by the oil? The public has a right to know. Moreover, the community of Hartley Bay, plus the researchers at Cetacealab, shouldn't have to do this kind of protection work on their own, with their own vessels, fuel and volunteer commitment. This is what we pay our taxes for, so that organisations with the skills, capacity and mandate to get out there on the water and in the air actually do their job, not because they are hounded into doing something by people like myself and Hermann Meuter, but because they are on the ball, on top of things, anticipating and responding if and as required.

So, what we need is someone to come forward and accept responsibility for this issue of the marine mammals and the oil spill, to tell us what the situation is, what the risks are, and what, if anything, they plan to do about it. Is it to much to expect that a provincial ( or federal, for that matter ) press release deal with this issue, instead of burying one's head in the sand like an ostrich?

Eye in the Sky Misses the Boat At Height of Queen of the North Oil Spill

2006-04-08T07:19:00.000-07:00

In an article written by Laura Levin and appearing in the April 7 edition of the Esquimalt News, the rather astonishing claim is made that because of bureaucratic bungling, a Government of Canada airplane decked with sophisticated equipment to detect oil slicks from the air was not deployed during the most critical period following the recent Queen of the North oil spill.

Environment Canada owns a DC3 equipped with a raft of high-tech equipment designed to detect marine oil spills from the air. The plane and its crew are said to have left Ottawa March 22, the same day the ferry sank. That's quite a quick initial response, although it took an incredible three days for the plane to reach Vancouver Island. For some reason, the plane only flew five hours each day. At first blush, it seems like a better idea would have been to put the plane on a CN freight train to Prince Rupert. And you think I'm kidding!

Once on Vancouver island, one might have expected the DC3 to reach Gil Island, site of the ferry disaster, or perhaps Prince Rupert, in another day or so. Think again, partner! It seems that because the contract of the operator, who is hired to fly and maintain the plane, was set to expire at the end of the fiscal year, March 31, the aircraft ended up sitting on a runway at Victoria International Airport for several days at least, until a one month extension was finally granted. It is unclear from the newspaper article whether the plane eventually did get deployed to the site of the incident, and whether it's gear did end up getting used. In this context, it is interesting to note that, as reported in yesterday's blog, as recently as two days ago a float plane observed sheens of oil still present in the general vicinity of the wreck.

Levin writes that the plane's "...crew stay(ed) in Sidney hotels during some of the most critical moments of the cleanup effort". Bryan Healey, the contractor operating the plane for Environment Canada's Environmental Technology Centre in Nepean, Ontario, is quoted in the article as saying that "The whole exercise could have been enhanced if they (had) used the airplane to map the oil and tell the people on the ground where it is". But perhaps the best quote of all comes from Gitga'at First Nation Chief Bob Hill:

"If there is high-tech equipment that could have been used, this government has the responsibility to do what is in their power to guage (sic) the impact of a spill of any kind. The cleanup has been 50 percent - the bare minimum. The over-flight of high technology equipment should have happened and should continue to happen for a short time - why else would the government invest in that type of equipment if it's not utilised?"

You said it, Bob! The first few days after a spill occurs are generally the most critical in a spill response effort. There is a brief window of opportunity that you don't want to miss. You want to be able to detect and track the oil as soon as possible, before it spreads. The sophisticated sensors on board the DC3 allow technicians to detect oil that the naked eye misses, or confuses for something else. Once a slick is identified from the air, spill trajectory analysis follows. A timely and efficient response effort depends on coordinated and synchronised action between the plane, vessels on the water and shoreline cleanup crews. If all these factors are present, then the containment and recovery operation can, in theory at least, stand a fighting chance of succeeding. Unfortunately, in the case of the Queen of the North spill, in the absence of the DC3 on scene, they missed the boat, to choose a rather appropriate metaphor.

To be fair, the authorities were lucky that the spill involved, for the most part, it seems, light diesel, fifty percent of which evaporates within the first 24 hours. Diesel fuel is, however, quite toxic: it turns out that it is the vapours that tend to pose the greatest threat to wildlife in the vicinity of a diesel spill. To date, there does not seem to be any evidence that vapours are present, let alone having a deleterious effect, off of Gil Island. Thus, so far at least, environmental damage appears to have been relatively minimal. What on earth would have happened if the spill had involved large amounts of thick black crude, and it took the remote sensing plane five days to arrive on scene?; one shudders to think!

Still, because the diesel sheen originating from the Queen of the North is invisible from the water, but detectable from the air, and since a float plane apparently spotted diesel sheens just two days ago, perhaps the DC3 should be up there now, doggedly going aboout its business. There would seem to be an obvious need for this kind of operation at the present time, since Hermann Meuter of Cetacealab reports that the killer whales have started to return, and more than 50 Pacific white-sided dolphins were spotted in the vicinity of the spill as recently as yesterday morning.

Pacific White-sided Dolphins Spotted in Vicinity of Queen of the North Oil Spill Site

2006-04-07T10:51:00.000-07:00

Hermann Meuter, co-director of Cetacealab on Gil Island, about 40 kms from the site of the recent Queen of the North ferry incident, is somewhat concerned about the fate of a large group of Pacific White-sided dolphins in the area. Hermann spotted more than fifty of these dolphins early Friday morning, spread out over the entire width of Whale Channel, between York Point and Borde Island. Hermann believes that the dolphins most likely traveled through streaks of diesel sheen which were spotted in the area on Thursday. He says the dolphins "were not very active" when he saw them, although he has no idea whether they were adversely impacted by the oil.

Hermann received the report of the diesel sheen sightings from Marven Robinson of the nearby community of Hartley Bay. The sheens in question were spotted Thursday afternoon from a float plane off of Shrub Point. They are on the east side of Gil Island, in Whale Channel, parallel to Gil Island and stretching towards Princess Royal Island. Burrard Clean are thought to have sent some boats to Shrub Point to check things out, but found no evidence of sheen. Hermann reports, however, that diesel is still leaking from the sunken wreck.

Queen of the North Oil Spill Incident: The Latest Scoop

2006-04-03T15:55:00.000-07:00

The oil spill response operation in respect of the Queen of the North ferry incident has indeed wound down, as reported in the previous posting on this blog. Provincial officials are now instituting a long-term monitoring program, so that they will know in future, for instance, if any oil reaches the shoreline.

Nevertheless, oil is said to continue to leak from the sunken vessel in very small amounts. The mini-sub that went down and examined the wreck eight days ago found leaks in three places, releasing marble-sized drops. Some oil is therefore still reaching the surface, taking the form of a rainbow-coloured sheen which is only visible from the air. This oil which is being released is not thought to be causing environmental problems at the present time, and the options for cleanup are few and far between.

Provincial officials have no idea how much oil has escaped, but suspect that a lot of the diesel fuel involved in the initial spill was released when the vessel impacted the seabed with what was undoubtedly a great big thump. Not only is the bottom of the vessel not visible; in fact, the sunken hulk is said to be buried in silt up to its scrape boards.

It now appears that the Queen of the North had a total of ten tanks on board. How many of these might have been ruptured or damaged is also anyone's guess.

So, all in all, from a provincial perspective at least, the response operation is thought to have gone relatively smoothly, serving as a dress rehearsal for larger spills, and providing authorities with an idea as to what the logistical and resource requirements might be in the event of, say, a supertanker catastrophe involving crude oil.

It will be recalled that Enbridge has plans to bring tar sands crude oil right by Gil Island, where the QOTN spill occurred, within the next four years or so.

Queen of the North Oil Spill Response Effort Winding Down?

2006-03-29T22:38:00.000-08:00

Eight days after the Queen of the North ferry sank and started discharging oil and fuel oil from its berth on the seabed, under 1400 ft. of water, the response operation appears to be winding down. The last press release was issued Tuesday, the 28th of March, and appears to indicate that the only plan from here on in is to monitor the situation, which we are told has "stabilised", whatever that means. It seems the BC Environment Ministry was ready to pull the plug on the operation, but in response to flak from the community of Hartley Bay, Burrard Clean has decided to stay in the area beyond Friday.

Why do the responders apppear to be about to fold their tents? Well, for one thing, it appears that the leak from the wreck has slowed to a trickle. Also, the cleanup operation was somewhat futile to begin with. Of course, economics also play a role: oil spill response operations can get pretty darned expensive.

Who can blame the authorities for planning an exit strategy? I mean, after all, booms and skimmers don't work on light diesel, and sorbents are of limited utility when the oil is spread so far and wide. I guess it's just that old standby response strategy of: "Let nature take its course", is it not? You know, the prefered strategy of most response organisations around the world.

But, a lot of hard questions remain, and answers are few and far between. For instance, I have a few queries for the Incident Commander. I would like to know the following:

1- What has happened to all the ribbons of oil that were displayed on those nice maps you put out? Have they all dispersed, dissolved and evaporated? If so, why not put out a new, updated map indicating that? And what about those pockets of oil around Fin Island?

2- What have the Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Teams (SCAT) found? For instance, how many kms of beaches and rocky shoreline are oiled or soiled, and what is the plan to mitigate the effects?

3- What kind of wildlife have been impacted, aside from three groggy birds? There have been reports of an oiled seal, for instance; is there any truth to that?

4- How much oil do you estimate escaped from the vessel, and how much remains? Is it all coming from one tank, two tanks, or do you not know?.

5- You say the flow rate has slowed considerably. The last estimate you provided was 50 litres per hour, which could have meant the spill would go on for months and months. What is the current flow rate, and how long do you think the tank or tanks will continue to empty out?

6- It seems the mini-sub did its job and headed home; is that right? We saw some nice still shots and video of the vessel's stern and hull, but what about the source of the leak or leaks? Did they find anything? How exhaustive was their search? How many leaks did they find? Are the tanks below sea level?

7- If leaks were found from the sunken hulk, what is the plan - to staunch them, suction the oil out of the tanks, encase the vessel in concrete, perhaps?

8- What about the clam beds, and the seaweed harvest, and the coming herring spawn, and the imminent arrival of killer whales? What are your contingency plans for each of these? Are you just going to monitor these elements, and hope for the best, or are you taking any concrete steps to protect them? Is there a shellfish closure in effect, and if so, where?

9- Who is monitoring the surface above the wreck to determine whether oil reoccurs, and at what rate? Is Coast Guard on scene for that, or local fishing boats, or what?

Whale Expert Provides First Hand Account of Queen of the North Oil Spill Response

2006-03-29T08:10:00.000-08:00

Hermann Meuter of Cetacealab, a whale research station at the southern end of Gil Island, near where the Queen of the North ferry sank a week ago, has provided this personal account of his boat trip to the spill incident area. I am reprinting his observations in their entirety, unedited.

"Hello Gerald,

I wanted to give you an update on what we know is going on around Gil Island regarding the oil spill. We had a chance to get out on the water on Sunday, the day the underwater cameras were deployed.

We travelled north in Whale Channel to the side close to the shoreline. We were not able to find any spilled diesel along that shore. Having said that, it is very difficult to make out any spill from a boat, compared to a bird eye view a plane or helicopter would provide. We later scanned the beaches around Farrant and Fin Island helping out the people of Hartley Bay to find any debris, especially life jackets, left from the Queen of the North.

There were at least four boats from Hartley Bay working the beaches. It sure looks like that they are left to do the major part of the clean up. The north side of Fin Island seems to be affected quite heavily from the diesel. A seal haulout along that shoreline is covered in diesel, no seals on the rock which is very unusual. High winds prevented the boats to travel the west side of Fin Island. An unconfirmed report states that the diesel has reached the Estevan Island group.

As of this morning it sounds like that Burrard Clean is going to stop recovering the spill soon as there is not much diesel coming to the surface. At that point the people of Hartley Bay and this ecosystem will slowly vanish off the public eye.

We are expecting the first pods of Killer whales soon in this area. We will do our best to monitor their movements through the area and their possible contact with the spilled oil.

Regards,

Hermann Meuter"

More Details Emerge as to Queen of the North Oil Spill Response

2006-03-27T08:41:00.000-08:00

According to a CBC News story posted on its web site Monday morning, the 225,000 litres of diesel fuel in the sunken Queen of the North's fuel tanks are leaking out at the rate of 50 litres per hour. It is not clear from the article whether the leak is from both of the tanks, or just one. If it is just one, then at the current flow rate it would take just over three months for the tank to empty. If both tanks are leaking, it could take up to six months. Of course, that's not to say that all the oil will escape; for one thing, officials will be trying their utmost to staunch the flow, and hopefully they will be able to do this within a matter of days. But, it does give one an idea of the magnitude of the task confronting the responders.

The same CBC News report indicates that the following resources are involved in the cleanup:

- two fishing vessels
- two tugboats
- two equipment barges
- three support boats
- one skimmer
- 3 kms of floating boom

Notably absent from this list is any mention of Canadian Coast Guard vessels. Nor is the Coast Guard represented on the Joint Incident Command team, according to details included in the latest press release issued by the BC Environment Ministry, who seem to have taken de facto control of the response operation. The Coast Guard's role appears to be relegated to the relatively minor role of calculating the flow rate of oil from the wreck; using free software from NOAA, this can be done in a matter of minutes if you know the dimensions of the fuel tanks, the amount of oil in the tanks, the rate of flow, etc.

The Coast Guard's mandated role in a response operation such as this is that of FMO, or Federal Monitoring Officer. That is to say, it keeps an eye on things, and if it feels at any stage that the RP ( Responsible Party ) is either unwilling or unable to act, then it will intervene, taking over repsonsibility for the operation. There is no indication that this stage will ever be reached in the case of the Queen of the North incident.

As for the state of the wreck on the bottom of the sea, a BC Ferries press release Sunday night indicated that the 145 metre-long sunken hulk of the Queen of the North "is resting in silt on her keel", intact, in 1400 ft. of water. ( For those of you on metric, 1400 ft. is 427 metres. ). On CBC Radio News morning, a reporter in Prince Rupert added that the silt the vessel was resting in came right up to the level of the passanger deck.

In terms of the spill's environmental impact, a Vancouver Sun/Canadian Press story by Darah Hansen, with files from Jonathan Fowlie, cites Mark West of Burrrard Clean, BC Ferries' RO or Reponse Orgnaization, as saying that clam beds are protected from the oil because they are "deep below the water in a muddy substrate", whereas the oil is on the water's surface. This makes it "...harder for the fuel to penetrate the shellfish". The article also has Nick Russo of Environment Canada indicating that "...clams would be tested after they were harvested to see if they were contaminated".

Another article, this one by the Canadian Press and posted on the Canada.com web site, cites Mark as saying that protective booming has been placed around the shellfish beds, with limited effectiveness.

Finally, Nick Russo of Environment Canada reported Monday that three birds were found that had apparently been stressed by the spill.

Ministry Issues First Queen of the North Spill Update

2006-03-26T12:16:00.000-08:00

BC's Ministry of the Environment yesterday issued the first Information Update related to the Queen of the North oil spill and the related response effort. The press release includes a very useful map of the incident area, including locations of diesel sheens and protective booms.

Four sensitive areas have been identified, including two on Gil Island, one at Kulkayu and one at Crane Bay ( to protect an oyster bed, we are told ).

Aerial reconnaissance of Grenville Channel, Farren Island and Fin Island has also been completed by the SCAT ( Shoreline Assessment and Cleanup ) team. Pockets of oil were identified.

Impacts on wildlife have not been found so far, and major impacts are not expected, we are told.

Today, Sunday, the response team hopes to target two new sites for booming and sorbent sweeping: Hawk and Crane Bays.

Queen of the North Oil Spill Response Operation Continues

2006-03-26T06:40:00.000-08:00

Judging by TV images of the Queen of the North spill response effort, attempts to clean up oil spewing from the wreck of the sunken vessel appear to be somewhat ineffective. This is mainly due to the nature of the oil itself: light, No. 2 diesel is virtually impossible to skim off the surface of the ocean. The best bet is probably to use sorbents, and to deploy deflective boom along sensitive shoreline. Still, booms won't work if the winds and waves whip the oil either over or under the boom, or if the boom gets ripped up. Fortunately, today's marine weather forecast bodes well for the cleanup effort and deployment of mini-subs.

Environment Canada says that a weak low pressure system west of the Queen Charlottes is expected to dissipate as it drifts northward today, Sunday. The forecast calls for cloudy periods, with a few showers. Over northern waters, moderate to strong southeasterlies are anticipated along the coast, easing as the trough moves off today. Winds will ease to light to moderate easterlies tonight. Winds will be northerly outflow of 15 knots, shifting to southerly inflow winds of 10 to 15 knots this afternoon, easing to light this evening. Overnight, the winds should rise to northerly outflow, 10 to 15 knots. The outlook for 24 hours from now is for light to moderate variable winds. All in all, then, another balmy day on the wet coast of Canada.

Regrettably, there is still no information from the authorities as to how much oil has spilled to date, or how thick it is. Precious little information has also been provided as to weather conditions, currents, tides, spill trajectory, the number of vessels and personnel involved in the operation, etc. At this stage, five days into the biggest BC marine oil spill in almost twenty years, we don't even know the coordinates, i.e. latitude and longitude, for the wreck. The only thing that's been issued is a map showing the approximate location of the wreck, just off the northeast tip of Gil Island in Wright Sound.

On Saturday evening, CTV's Vancouver affiliate, as well as Global TV in Vancouver, both showed aerial footage of four response vessels in close proximity to one another near the shoreline. Boom was strung out from one of the vessels, just trailing behind in the water. There was no evidence of any mechanical skimmers in the water, trying to collect the oil. Instead, what this viewer could see was a fairly large swath of sheen, perhaps fifty to one hundred metres in width, stretching from a point perhaps one half of a nautical mile offshore right up to the adjacent shoreline. The location of this slick would appear to indicate the position above the wreck of the sunken ship.

The CTV reporter introducing the story was heard to say that the leaking fuel covered an area "larger than Vancouver". ( Gee whiz! I sure hope the belugas at the Vancouver Acquarium have been relocated, and the entire city cordoned off! ). One hopes that precautions are being taken to protect the response vessels and their crews from any hazards associated with the presence of the diesel fuel on the surface of the water, such as noxious vapours or possible explosion. It looks good to the public to see lots of vessels and activity at the site of a high profile oil spill, but the question is: is the operation safe? If it isn't, it should be shut down immediately, because safety is paramount, always trumping image.

Meanwhile, designated "Incident Commander" Andy Ackerman of the BC Environment Ministry seems to have taken on the mantle of official spokesperson for the responders, attempted to provide a relatively upbeat assessment of the response effort on both the CTV and Global newscasts. He reported that four booms, totalling 5500 feet in length, plus a U-shaped boom at the site of the wreck, had been deployed so far. The diesel is, he says, "breaking up", the sheen has spread ( That doesn't sound terribly positive to me! ), and officials were keeping a "really close watch" on the situation ( i.e. That's all they can do, really - stand by and look busy! ). All in all, he considered the situation to be "very fortunate", and was "very pleased how we're moving along". He went on to say that "We're moving along much quicker than we thought we would be." ( I wonder what that is supposed to mean, since the oil is apparently still leaking from the sunken hulk, and the authorities have not given any indication that one ounce of oil has been removed from the surface. )

It was also reported on CTV that the barge carrying the two mini-subs from North Vancouver was expected to arrive on scene Saturday night at 8 PM local time ( 0400 hrs Zulu Time Sunday ), and to get to work examining the hulk on Sunday. That operation is expected to take up to a week.

For its part, the Transportation Safety Board reported Saturday that when the vessel ran aground, she apparently sustained damage all along her starboard side, from bow to stern.

Canadian Press reported Saturday that local people from Hartley Bay are seeing oil on the shoreline. "Rocks are slippery and you can see it (oil ) on the seaweed". The properties of diesel fuel are such that half of it evaporates in the water within 48 hours; unfortunately, the other half can be very toxic to wildlife in the vicinity. We are told that "(t)he community harvests halibut, salmon, cod, seaweed and shellfish such as clams and mussels..." The salmon run is expected to start in June.

It remains a total mystery as to how such a large ship, with such a highly-skilled and experienced crew, and so much sophisticated navigational gear on board, could be so far off course for so long without either of the two crew on the bridge noticing that anything was amiss. A very rough calcuation indicates that from the time the vessel left Grenville Channel to the moment of impact, twelve minutes probably elapsed. It seems that during all this time the vessel was headed directly for Juan Point on Gil Island, where it eventually ran up against an object roughly the size of Salt Spring Island. So, it looks like the automatic pilot might be the culprit, as this faulty course is what you would end up with if you just continued along the course that got you through narrow Grenville Channel. One possibility is that the retiring crew, which we are told had been replaced shortly before the incident occured, neglected to tell the replacement crew on the bridge that the automatic pilot was still on. Either that, or the replacement crew forgot to change course when it came on duty. But, how that crew could apparently go twelve minutes without noticing anything was wrong on the GPS, the radar, the compass, the sonar, or even by using visual sight, is one of the big questions that remains unanswered. Because, when she hit Gil Island, it seems that the Queen of the North was a full five degrees off course, with tragic results. Reports suggest that even some passengers could see Gil Island to starboard before impact; if they could, why couldn't the two crewmembers on board? Were they drunk or on drugs, or what? Thes are the kinds of questions the investigators will be asking.

Shedding Light on Queen of the North Oil Spill

2006-03-25T06:11:00.000-08:00

An article in Saturday's Globe and Mail penned by Jonathan Woodward and Petti Fong sheds a bit more light on the environmental aspects of the Queen of the North oil spill off Gil Island on BC's central coast.

According to the story, it now appears that two mini-subs will descend this afternoon to the site of the wreck on the bottom of the seabed. One of the tasks of these manned submersibles will be, according to a BC Ferries representative, to "locate the hull breaches through which diesel fuel is leaking into Wright Sound...". Officials still do not know how much of the ship's 220,000 lites of No. 2 diesel, 20,000 litres of light oil, along with 220 litres of hydraulic oil, has leaked from the two fuel tanks on board.

Woodward and Fong also report that BC Ferries is "...examining options to plug the leaks or to pump out the remaining fuel", according to Phil Nuytten, designer of the mini-subs.

It is now being reported that because the weather was calmer in Wright Sound on Friday than the day before, response crews succeeded in looping 330 metres of containment boom around the point where the spilled fuel was reaching the surface. It appears the ship went down in area off of Gil Island's Juan Point. A propos, on CTV NewsNet last night, there was an aerial shot of deflective boom that had been deployed across what looked like the mouth of an inlet that was perhaps 300 metres wide. Encouragingly, the boom appeared to be holding.

Gettting back to the latest 'Slop and Pail" piece, Nick Russo of Environment Canada is cited in the latest Globe as saying that the "choppy waves" of Friday's storm evaporated much of the diesel on the surface, and that "...what remains is an incredibly thin film".

We are now hearing that "(s)ome fuel made it to fragile clam beds, but they would survive", according to Russo. This is the first time we have heard that sensitive resources have been impacted in any way, and it is not terribly reassuring, as diesel fuel, while considered very light, is also very toxic.

As for the latest marine weather forecast for the area of Douglas Channel, Environment Canada is calling for moderate to strong east to southeast winds. However, late today westerly winds are expected to move on to the central coast. Winds will be light, rising to southerly inflow 15 knots this morning, and then easing to variable 5 to 15 knots this evening. There is expected to be variable cloud, and shower activity. The outlook for the next 24 hours is for light to moderate southerly inflow winds.

All in all, then, the prospects look fairly promising for the response effort today, as well as for the launch of Nuytco Research Limited's two Deepworker mini-subs.

Readers are encouraged to let me know if they have any information to add to this Saturday morning SitRep. In any case, I shall keep you posted as matters unfold. Bonne journee, en tout cas!

Oil Continues to Flow from Queen of the North Wreck

2006-03-24T19:56:00.000-08:00

Steve Mertl of Canadian Press has written an article on the Queen of the North ferry incident entitled "First view of sunken ferry could come Saturday afternoon, sub operator says". The article includes important information concerning the oil spill caused by the wreck. Steve quotes Phil Nuytten of Nuytco Research Limited as saying that a one-person submersible could be sent down to the wreck as early as Saturday afternoon. Meanwhile, CTV Newsnet showed two Nuytco mini-subs loaded onto a trailer bed in North Vancouver, ready to head for the dive site several hundred miles to the north.

Among other things, Nuytco's Deepworker 2000 will look for the source of the spill that continues to leak from the sunken hulk. Also on CTV NewsNet, Deborah Marshall, spokesperson for BC Ferries, explained that the mini-sub will try to find out if the vessel's fuel tanks have been punctured, if oil is indeed leaking out, and whether the leak can be plugged.

Getting back to the Canadian Press article by Steve Mertl, finding the source of the leak is, understandably, a high priority for the BC Environment Ministry. Meanwhile, Andy Ackerman, who is refered to in the article as an "Incident Commander" is quoted as saying that the ship's diesel fuel continues to well up from the vessel "on a constant basis". We are also told that technicians are attempting to calculate the rate at which the oil is escaping, in the hopes of determining if it is slowing down ( or, I might add, speeding up, or even staying the same!).

At the surface and in the surrounding waters, booms have been deployed in an effort to contain "the sheen of diesel spreading from the wreck site". According to Ackerman, calmer weather has permitted some success in deploying the booms. ( He doesn't say, however, whether they've had any luck actually removing the oil from the surface with skimmers. Light, diesel oil tends to be problematic in this regard ). Ackerman adds that the combination of sun and wind have tended to "break down the spill".

As for what's happening at the shoreline, a SCAT ( short for Shoreline Cleanup Assesment Team ) has turned its attention to protecting sensitive areas and resources, including shellfish beds. Steve reports that a member of the Gitk'a'ta First Nation from nearby Hartley Bay is assisting the SCAT team.

So, this is one of the best progress reports we have had so far on the spilll response operation. On the one hand, the fact that oil is still reaching the surface is bad news for the environment. On the other hand, the fact that a manned submersible could actually reach the wreck site within eighteen hours of the vessel's sinking is a positive development, especially if the source ( or sources ) of the leak can be identified. The marine weather outlok for Saturday calls for showers and light to moderate southerly inflow winds, which bodes fairly well for the response and dive operation tomorrow.

This blog will try to keep you posted as events unfold. I know that some readers are relying on its postings as virtually the only source of information on the environmental aspects of this shipping disaster. For this reason, I shall try to be as timely, accurate and thorough as possible in summarising developments. Do let me know if you have anything to add to the narrative. I am particularly interested in spill trajectory analysis, as well as the thickness of the spill, and anything to do with currents.

Digest of News on Queen of the North Oil Spill

2006-03-24T07:24:00.000-08:00

Matthew Ramsey and Ethan Baron report in an article in Friday's Vancouver Province entitled "Questions about ferry continue to grow" that two Deepworker 2000 submersibles owned by Nuytco Research Limited of North Vancouver, BC are expected to descend the 370 metres to the site of the wreck of the Queen of the North ferry tomorrow, Saturday. Phil Nuyten, famed founder of the company and developer of the mini-subs, says he expects his two divers on the one-person subs to find the wreck in four pieces on the bottom. The mini-subs are expected to shine their powerful spotlights on the wreckage.

Meanwhile, in an anonymous article on the Canoe web site entitled "Sinking likely to affect communities", David Hahn, President of BC Ferries is quoted as saying "We'll get a better sense of the state of the sea bottom, state of the ship, besides doing the pollution issue". Chief Robert Hill of the Gitk'a'ata Hartley Bay band, is reported to be concerned about the impact of the spill on his community. He is worried that the oil will damage marine resources upon which his people rely.

For its part, Friday's Globe and Mail has a detailed account of the environmental aspects of the sinking. Jonathan Woodward, in an article entitled "Workers race to clean up oil leaking from wreckage", writes that oil continues to bubble to the surface and spread out up to five kilometres from the site of the sinking. So far, though, the slick has apparently not hit the coast. Cleanup crews are trying to protect three sensitive beaches, but bad weather is not allowing booming on the water. The good news is that high winds are keeping the oil in the middle of Wright Sound, according to Wright. Within the five kilometre radius of oil around the site where the ship went down, "long ribbons of fuel are arranged in windrows", covering about ten percent of the area. Mr. Woodward points out that although diesel fuel evaporates quicker than other oil, it is more toxic to wildlife in the short term because it gets absorbed in the bloodstream. Meanwhile, not unexpectedly, the Living Oceans Society is reported here and elsewhere as criticising the slow environmental response to the spill.

Lastly, Larry Pynn, an oil spill veteran reporer from the 'good old days' of the Nestucca barge spill of December 1988, has a piece in Friday's Vancouver Sun entitled "Fuel slick spreads 5 km but no damage so far". Larry claims the slick is moving in a southerly direction, driven by 20 to 30 knot winds coming out of Douglas Channel. Clam and mussel beds are being protected on shore. A Burrard Clean barge is on scene, as is the CCG North Rock. Daily helicopter flights are reportedly tracking the slick and guiding the response effort. It is worth pointing out that BC Ferries and their contracted response organisation, Burrard Clean, are still leading the cleanup operation, with the Canadian Coast Guard acting in a monitoring capacity, according to Don Rodden, a Coast Guard spill response spokesperson. Rodden is quoted by Pynn as saying that he's satisfied with BC Ferries' effort so far.

The last point that I, as an oil spill expert myself, would add, is that the current marine weather forecast for Douglas Channel calls for southerly inflow winds of 10 to 15 knots this morning, becoming light this afternoon. Under conditions such as these, response vessels should be able to deploy containment boom and use skimmers to collect oil off the surface, although the type of oil involved is not terribly conducive to skimming activity. The prototype marine oil spill software my company, Worldocean Consulting Ltd, and another company are developing, indicates that burning the oil on the ocean would not be a viable response option. Application of dispersants is, however, within the realm of possibility. Some commercially available dispersants have been approved for sale in Canada; but, their application on an actual spill has thus far never been approved. Maybe the Queen of the North spill will be a first, although the slick may be a little too close to shore for comfort for dispersant use.

BC Oil Spill Sitrep, Courtesy of Worldocean Consulting Ltd

2006-03-23T16:25:00.000-08:00

BC Environment Minister Barry Penner briefed reporters on the response to the Queen of the North spill earlier today. He was heard on CBC Vancouver radio news to say that aerial surveillance of the spill scene by the response partners was continuing. Containment booms were being deployed, although the light diesel oil was proving difficult to recover. He also said that the slick was abating, that the rate at which oil was spilling out of the wreck was slowing, and that so far there was no evidence of dead birds or other wildlife.

The Queen of the North Oil Spill: the Initial 40 Hours

2006-03-23T09:42:00.000-08:00

A day and a half after the sinking of BC Ferries' Queen of the North ferry, the oil spill cleanup effort continues. This blog entry tries to piece together what we know and don't know about the incident, based on available information. It will focus on efforts to prevent oil from escaping from the ship, to clean up any oil that does escape, and to prevent environmental damage.

The Queen of the North sank off of Gil Island in Wright Sound, 135 kms south of Prince Rupert, near the community of Hartley Bay on the northern B. C. coast, at approximately 08:43Z on Wednesday, 22 March, 2006. The Queen of the North is a 125 metre, 8806 tonne vessel; it was built in Germany in 1969, and had a draw of 4.9 metres. It was one of the larger vessels in BC Ferries' thirty-five vessel fleet. It is thought to have struck a rock and started to list badly an hour before sinking, in foul weather ( 35 knot winds, 2 metre waves ). Fortunately, with the help of the Canadian Coast Guard vessel Sir Wilfred Laurier and a fishing boat, the Lone Star, a total of 99 passengers and crew were rescued. However, two additional passengers are missing, and presumed to have perished with the ship.

The vessel is submerged, and so there is an environmental issue here. The area is rich in terms of biological diversity, and with the severe weather that can be experienced in the region at this time of year, even a relatively small slick could spread rapidly.

The response partners, consisting of Canadian Coast Guard, Environment Canada and other branches of government, plus Burrard Clean from the private sector, are engaged in aerial and sea-based monitoring and surveillance of the area around the wreck as we speak, to look for evidence of oil slicks on the sea surface as well as in the water column. The Queen of the North had 220,000 litres of No. 2 diesel fuel on board, plus 23,000 litres of lubricating oil. There were also a total of sixteen vehicles on board, which could be leaking gasoline and engine oil.

Diesel fuel is a lighter type of oil. Paul Ross, Environment Canada's oil spill expert on the scene, is quoted in Thursday's Vancouver Sun as saying that the ferry's fuel evaporates faster than bunker fuel oil, losing as it does 40% of its volume within the first 48 hours. On the other hand, diesel is more toxic than bunker. Ross is also quoted as saying that the rough seas predicted for the area will help disperse the oil. Strong to gale force winds are predicted for the area overnight Thursday and into Friday morning.

On Wednesday afternoon CBC Newsworld showed video shot from a plane of what definitely looked like a rainbow sheen of oil in the area. An RCMP officer being interviewed on the program via telephone claimed that the slick was 8 sq. kms in size, and that it was spreading. Don Rodden, Coast Guard's oil spill spokesperson on the west coast, mentioned in one news report that the oil had formed into windrows, and was probably evaporating rapidly. BC Environment Minister Barry Penner said Thursday that the slick appears to be breaking up. Nonetheless, the authorities are considering deploying protective booms along the coast, to prevent any leaked oil from reaching sensitive shoreline and resources. The First Nations people of Hartley Bay will no doubt be concerned for their traditional eulachon fishery. The herring spawn usually occurs around this time of year as well. The authorities could well be considering local shellfish closings at this time. For the longer-term, potential interference of the oil with salmon runs would also be an area of concern. So far no dead seabirds or other wildlife have been reported.

One of the items to be determined is whether the vessel's fuel tanks were punctured when she ran aground or as she hit the bottom. Another question would be: was this an instantaneous release of oil, or is oil continuing to flow from the hulk lying on the bottom of the ocean? Presumably, at the first opportunity divers will go down with underwater cameras or a Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) and conduct a survey as to the extent of the damage and the environmental risk. Eventually, all oil on board may have to be removed, to avoid the potential for leaks due to corrosion.

The wreck is apparently in 1200 feet of water; at that depth, the surrounding water may be cold enough to gel the oil such that it won't flow easily. On the other hand, if it is released from the tanks, it could float to the surface in the form of tar balls. Undoubtedly the oil spill response experts on the scene are examining these and other scenarios as we speak.

Gil Island's coordinates are Lat 53°12'00", Long 129°13'59". It is home to a whale research station called Cetacealab (www.cetacealab.org). The co-director of Cetacealab, Hermann Meuter, reports that the arrival of the first northern orcas of the season is approaching; they come to the area to feed on salmon.

Gateway to Nowhere?

2005-11-06T21:51:00.000-08:00

The government has come out with its much-ballyhooed Pacific Gateway strategy, intended to open up Canadian markets to Asia. Meanwhile, Enbridge has unveiled plans for its own Gateway project, which involves a pipeline from the Alberta oil sands to Kitimat, and tanker traffic from there to points beyond. The only problem is, there is a thirty-three year old moratorium on crude oil tanker traffic in the Queen Charlotte Basin, and so far Cabinet has not lifted the ban. Moreover, the government of the day is about to fall

Enbridge, the proponent of Gateway, says it has filed a preliminary project information package with the various regulatory authorities, such as CEAA, the NEB and TERMPOL. The company plans to submit a formal application by around the end of July, 2006, assuming it lines up enough customers for the oil. It may decide not to go ahead with the project for the time being, however, since markets to the central and southern US look more promising at the moment. In any case, for Gateway to go ahead, the tanker ban would have to be lifted by Ottawa for the project to even be considered for approval. Enbridge has been made aware of the tanker ban by an environmental activist and tanker spill expert, but seems intent on pushing forward anyway, in an effort no doubt to test the waters and see how firm support is for the decades-old moratorium. This matter could easily end up being settled in court.

The ban in question was established in the early seventies, when the fear was that the Americans wanted to send Alaskan oil in tankers down the BC coast. Canada eventually got the tanker companies to agree to keep their boats well clear of the Queen Charlottes and most of Vancouver Island. The Canadian tanker ban is just a matter of policy; it does not have any real basis in law, such as, for example, by virtue of an Order-in-Council. Powerful firms such as Enbridge and Terasen, who have a competing proposal, want to ship the 'devil's excrement' out to Asia and/or California and are meeting little if any resistance from Ottawa. With a shipping-friendly ( remember Canada Steamship Lines, anybody? ) Prime Minister in office, can one really expect this government to get up on its hind legs and cite an obscure ban that not one in a hundred marine people know about, let alone the general public?

If they know anything about a crude oil tanker moratorium, folks tend to cite the West Coast Tanker Exclusion Zone (WCTEZ), which is the voluntary agreement that forms the basis for keeping the Alaskan fleet well away. Few are aware of the more general ban, which keeps all crude oil shipments, be they Canadian or foreign flag, out of the Queen Charlotte Basin. But, if the truth be known, most people don't even know about the WCTEZ; all they can recall is the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration and production. Ironically, that thirty-three year old ban was instituted as a sort of after-thought, after the tanker ban was conceived, on the theory that if we were going to exclude crude oil tankers from the basin, then we had better be consistent and not let oil drilling occur either.

This author has waged a virtual solo effort for years now to keep the tanker ban in place; even the ban's original champion, outgoing MP David Anderson from Victoria, seems to have lost interest. This author thought his lonely campaign had paid off when the 2004 Royal Society expert panel report concluded that the ban in question should be maintained, for the time being at least. Apparently, though, this recommendation was lost on everyone else, including the general public, the federal government, the pipeline proponents and our pussycat fifth estate.

In short, if, as it appears, the tanker moratorium may bite the dust, at the relatively young age of thirty-three, particularly if a Conservative, western-oriented, business-friendly ("How high do you want me to jump?") government is formed at the time of the next election, expected early in the new year. Ultimately, though, if the ban is scrapped, the reason would seem to be that not enough people cared. Was it Martin Luther King who said: "The real problem in this world is not the evil people; it's all those good people out there who do nothing"? A fitting epitaph on the headstone of the moratorium, perhaps.

So, if Enbridge gets its way, within about five years, perhaps just in time for the 2010 Whistler Winter Olympics, we could see six or seven 320,000 DWT VLCCs exiting Hecate Strait each month, each with a cargo of 2.3 million barrels of crude oil on board. As the old Chinese proverb says: "Be careful what you wish for!"

The Future of the Queen Charlotte Basin

2005-10-31T19:51:00.000-08:00

This is one of the more pressing issues we will be covering on this blog. Enbridge Pipelines wants to build a pipeline from the tar sands of Alberta to Kitimat on the B. C. coast. From there the oil would be shipped in supertankers to Asia and/or California. Only problem is, there's a moratorium on crude oil tanker traffic in the Queen Charlotte Basin, i.e. off the coast from Kitimat. One of the fears is that if the tanker ban is lifted for Enbridge, then Alaskan tankers heading for the refineries of Puget Sound could perhaps take a detour through B. C. waters instead of following their current offshore route.

All of B. C.'s North Coast is characterised by extreme conditions, particularly in winter. Thus, if an oil spill were to occur anytime between October and March, responders would be hard-pressed to mount a credible cleanup operation, given the winds and waves that typically prevail at that time of year. This would be a shame, because the area is incredibly rich in terms of biodiversity, and relatively pristine. Scientists estimate that a major spill could have consequences that are catastrophic and irreversible.

There are other proposals for the marine region as well, including the Kitimat and Prince Rupert LNG projects, Encana's Kitimat condensate project, Terasen's TMX project, the Terasen/Pembina condensate project, as well as a big container port project for Prince Rupert. In fact, as of May 8, 2006, Encana had already begun shipping in condensate via tanker to Kitimat, for transshipment by rail to Alberta; no environmental assessment was demanded or required for this project, on the grounds that it did not require expansion of the Kitimat port facilities.

All these plans and projects are being hatched against the backdrop of a planning mechanism called PNCIMA, short for Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area, which treats the whole region as a LOMA, or Large Ocean Marine Area. Noble as the PNCIMA effort may be, it looks like a case of "too little too late!"

In short, a few years from now the entire Queen Charlotte Basin could turn into a beehive of marine shipping activity, with far-reaching consequences for the health of the marine ecosystem. The question we must ask ourselves is: are we ready for any of this? And, we haven't even broached the issue of offshore oil and gas development per se, which is currently under moratorium. Any one of these projects could have serious impacts for the marine environment, and collectively they could be dynamite. The cumulative effects of all these activities over the course of the next five to ten years could be devastating.

Stay tuned!