The federal government has taken action recently to reduce the amount of plastic waste found on land and in oceans, rivers and lakes.

In June, for example, it said it would ban single-use plastics by 2021. “It is tough to explain to your children why dead whales are washing up on our beaches with their stomachs jammed packed with plastic bags,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau commented at the time.

Despite this progress, one of the main plastic polluters — shellfish aquaculture — continues to threaten marine ecosystems.

Coastal British Columbia is rugged and jagged. Its drowned fjords are home to wild salmon and the ecosystems that depend on them. Tucked away between Vancouver and Denman islands is Baynes Sound, a serene inland sea, home to sea mammals, globally important duck and bird populations, and a biological diversity unmatched along our coast.

So unique is this ecosystem that, 20 years ago, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) recommended regions within this area be set aside as protected areas.

Threats to the sound include increased tourism, urbanization and an-as-yet-unregulated seaweed harvest. The greatest threat, however, is an expanding shellfish industry that provides a continual source of plastics to the sound.

Shellfish aquaculture

For the past 14 years, community beach cleanups have measured the plastic in Baynes Sound. An astonishing four to six tonnes of plastic debris, including anti-predator netting, plastics trays, ropes and styrofoam, is collected from the beaches annually. Now polyvinyl chloride (PVC) piping, used for the farming of geoducks is also being washed ashore.

Geoducks are native to the coastal waters of western Canada and the northwest United States. They are the largest burrowing clam in the world and are a delicacy in China, Korea, Japan and the Pacific Northwest. Photo: U.S. Department of Agriculture / Flickr

In 2017, the DFO gave the West Coast shellfish industry a green light to expand its farming practices to include the lucrative geoduck, a luxury protein used in sashimi, to meet the demand from Hong Kong and the rest of China.

Geoducks (pronounced “gooey ducks”) are large salt-water clams, found naturally along the Pacific coast. Sales of farmed geoduck to this select market netted close to $56 million in 2017.

Geoduck Romesco at Taylor’s Shellfish in Seattle, Washington. Photo: T.Tseng / Flickr

Farming them involves placing juvenile geoducks into rows and rows of 18-inch long segments of PVC piping, planted vertically into the intertidal sediments, at a density of one pipe per square foot. Nets are secured with elastic bands over the pipe to protect the immature geoduck.

But the pipes become loose within days, especially after storm events, and the beach becomes littered with the plastic netting, elastics and pipes. Wave action and ultraviolet light from the sun degrade the pipes, creating fragments and then microplastics (items smaller than five millimetres in diametre) that further pollute the marine environment.

Ecosystem and health impacts

PVC is one of the most common plastic polymers in use, and its breakdown can damage ecosystem and human health.

The particles may harm invertebrates, fish, seabirds and other organisms that consume them. The chemicals in the plastic debris, including plasticizers, phthalates, flame retardants and stabilizers, can leach out of particles and have the potential to harm marine organisms. Finally, the pipe fragments can also act as a substrate, providing pathogenic marine organisms and parasites in near-shore environments with a place to grow and multiply.

“Canadians know first-hand the impacts of plastic pollution, and are tired of seeing their beaches, parks, streets and shorelines littered with plastic waste,” Trudeau said in a statement after he announced the single-use plastics ban.“We have a responsibility to work with our partners to reduce plastic pollution, protect the environment and create jobs and grow our economy. We owe it to our kids to keep the environment clean and safe for generations to come.”

So, why the paradox?

The government says it’s intent on protecting at least 10 per cent of our coastal ecosystems and reducing the threat of plastics to our marine environments. Yet the industry, which is managed by our federal government, has been given permission to introduce hazardous plastics into one of B.C.‘s most sensitive ecosystems.

Geoduck planting at the Deep Bay Marine Field Station biological research facility, operated by Vancouver Island University’s Centre for Shellfish Research in Bayes Sound, B.C. Photo: VIUDeepBay / Flickr

The ban on plastic holds consumers accountable. It targets their behaviour and will force change. But this is only part of the problem.

The other part of the problem is the industry practice of discharging dangerous plastics into sensitive ecosystems. Government is regulating a change in consumer behaviour. Why not do the same for industry?

If the government’s goal is to protect these sensitive marine ecosystems, it needs to stop the flow of plastics from industrial sources including the unregulated shellfish industry. The economic gain of farming sashimi for a select market is not worth the environmental cost.

Shelley McKeachie, a founding member, past chair and director of the Association for Denman Island Marine Stewards, co-authored this article.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Widespread species decline at the hands of humans is a powerful tale. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, more than 27 per cent of 100,000 assessed species are threatened with extinction. This disappearance is a warning that something is amiss on Earth.

The Anthropocene is the newly recognized geological epoch defined as widespread environmental change or crisis caused by human activity. Some predict history will remember it as the sixth mass extinction event on Earth.

Yet when the choice lies between protecting an endangered species or pursuing economic development, we almost always side with development. Maybe this shouldn’t be a surprise: as a species, we have evolved with a predisposition to favour growth over environmentally rational decisions. The world is literally dying around us as we continue to pursue the myth of endless growth.

Paying no heed

In June 2019, Canada’s federal government approved the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion to carry oil from Alberta to the coast of British Columbia. It did so despite an environmental assessment that found marine vessel traffic associated with the additional pipeline capacity will further dim the already dire prospects for the endangered southern resident killer whales.

This was not much of a surprise, really, since the federal government had already approved the pipeline expansion in November 2016. That approval, however, was quashed by the Federal Court of Appeal in August 2018, in part because the original environmental assessment had failed to consider the pipeline’s adverse impacts to the marine environment.

At a policy level, Canada marked its commitment to protect species at risk in 1992 when it ratified the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. The federal, provincial and territorial governments agreed to a national approach for the protection of species at risk in 1996.

The strongest legislation to protect species at risk in Canada is generally considered to be the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA). But describing SARA as “strong” is misleading.

Studies show that species are less likely to be listed as threatened or endangered under SARA if they are the target of a commercial harvest. The most obvious example may be the demise of the Atlantic cod, a marine fish once abundant off the coast of Newfoundland. It has still not been listed under SARA despite having lost 99 per cent of its population since the 1960s due to overfishing.

And only rarely does the habitat necessary to the survival or recovery of a species at risk, called critical habitat protection, get legally protected under SARA.

As the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion approval illustrates, SARA is too easily disregarded by federal officials. Arguably SARA has protected only two species from economic development: the small population of greater sage grouse in southeastern Alberta and a population of the western chorus frog in a suburb of Montréal.

Whooping crane woes

Some provinces still have no dedicated legislation for the protection of species at risk. Alberta is one of the laggards. Provincial officials in Alberta routinely approve resource development at the expense of species at risk protection.

Perhaps the most glaring and obvious example is the massive ecological footprint of forestry, drilling sites, seismic lines, oilsands mines and in-situ oil extraction projects in northern Alberta. This has contributed to a sharp decline in woodland caribou populations.

Alberta continues to offer pie-in-the-sky measures to halt this decline. But in 2018, the province suspended efforts to protect caribou habitat, claiming that Albertans needed a caribou protection plan that also protected jobs and the economy. Say what?

On July 25, the Alberta Energy Regulator approved yet another new oilsands mine to be constructed and operated by Teck Resources just 30 kilometres south of Wood Buffalo National Park, despite finding that the mine will have a significant adverse impact on what is left of caribou habitat in this region of Alberta.

The Alberta Energy Regulator also acknowledged that the proposed Teck mine falls under the migratory pathway for the only native population of migratory whooping cranes on Earth (their summer breeding habitat is protected in Wood Buffalo National Park), and that during migration, the cranes could land on the mine’s tailings ponds and come into contact with the toxic soup.

A whooping crane family in their wintering grounds at Aransas National Wildlife Refuge in Texas. Photo: Flickr

The whooping crane is listed as an endangered species under SARA, and mortality risk during migration is considered to be a primary threat to the overall total population of about 500 birds.

Nonetheless, the Alberta Energy Regulator found that any additional mortality of cranes because of this new mine would not have any adverse impact on the species. It would rely on proposed bird deterrent mechanisms to prevent cranes from landing in the tailings ponds. Yet the effectiveness of all known deterrent mechanisms used by oilsands operators has been questioned and surely any adverse impact on an endangered species should be viewed as significant.

The Teck mine still requires federal approval before it can proceed, so there is perhaps still a distant hope of protecting further destruction of habitat for the threatened caribou and endangered cranes.

Commercial pass

British Columbia is another province without dedicated endangered species protection laws. Enacting new legislation had been a policy priority for the B.C. government until recently, when in response to concerns about the adverse economic impacts of protecting caribou, the premier announced that new legislation was off the drafting table.

The Ontario Endangered Species Act was, at one time, considered to be strong legislation. However, in 2013 the Ontario government enacted regulations under the legislation to exempt certain commercial activities such as forestry, hydro-electric generation, quarrying and wind power generation from rules that protect endangered species.

In April 2019, the Ontario government proposed further amendments to its Endangered Species Act. Environmental advocates say these changes will give industry a free pass to exterminate species at risk in the province.

Economic gain, environmental pain

Meaningful legal protection of species at risk in Canada requires effective legislation implemented by all levels of government, but the provinces are the key. That’s because the overwhelming majority of endangered wildlife in Canada and their habitat are located on lands owned by the provinces.

Habitat loss is the primary cause of species decline and energy development is a significant contributor in this regard. Those with the greatest legal power to protect species at risk (that is, provincial officials) also happen to be those with the most to gain economically from the extraction and development of natural resources.

The result is predictable. Species decline will continue to accelerate in Canada as we push for more energy development and reduce the regulation of resource extraction and economic growth. Legal protection for endangered species in Canada seems to be getting weaker at precisely the moment when it should be getting stronger.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.