The summer of 2017 was an extraordinarily deadly one for North Atlantic right whales, a species already hovering on the brink of extinction.

Investigations are ongoing into the cause of death of 15 right whales off the Atlantic Coast of Canada and the U.S., although it’s not too soon to point the finger at human activity, Megan Leslie, vice president of oceans for WWF-Canada, told DeSmog Canada.

“I’ve been frustrated by reports that we don’t know what’s killing these whales,” Leslie said.

“We do. We know it’s human activity. There haven’t been necropsies on all of the whales, but the ones where there have been it’s clearly been blunt force trauma from ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear.”

As widely reported, a bizarre spat of ten whales were found dead in the Gulf of St. Lawrence in June and July. Since then another five whales have been found floating dead or washed ashore in Canada and the U.S.

There are an estimated 500 right whales, which can grow to be 50 feet long, left in the entire world.

That means the deaths represent three per cent of the global population killed in only one summer.

It’s completely unprecedented.

‘Immediate Measures’ Needed to Save Species

“It is hard to overstate how serious this problem is,” Leslie, who was the former federal NDP environment critic and MP for Halifax, said.

“People have been looking at how to rebuild this population and now with these deaths I’m quite worried that it’s no longer a discussion about how to rebuild the population, but even how to just save it.”

The federal government has introduced some new rules in response, including closing a snow crab fishery, continuing surveillance flights and implementing a temporary mandatory slow-down in the area by about one-third of average speeds.

On Aug. 30, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Dominic LeBlanc announced the government is developing a new set of rules for commercial fishing gear and practices to help prevent deadly entanglements.

But conservationists fear it might not be enough.

ICYMI: Industry Sways Feds to Allow Offshore Drilling in Laurentian Channel Marine Protected Area

“These immediate measures are desperately needed,” said Alexandra Barron, an ocean conservation manager for the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, in an interview with DeSmog Canada.

“However, our position is we need to start managing these waters much more proactively and considering the needs of endangered whales.”

North Atlantic right whale entangled in fishing ropes. Photo: NOAA News Archive 123110 via Flickr

Over 70 Per Cent of Right Whales Bear Scars from Fishing Entanglements

Right whales have been killed before in Canadian waters, but the average number of deaths was only 3.8 per year prior to 2017.

That means there’s been a potential tripling of whale casualties in a single year, a huge blow for a population that only recently rebounded from a dangerous low of under 300 whales in the 1990s.

A spokesperson for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) wrote in an e-mail that it takes scientists between six and eight weeks to receive complete results on cause of death for the whales following the necropsies and samples.

Leslie said one of the whales had been caught in fishing gear for two weeks before it died.

More than 70 per cent of North Atlantic right whales actually bear scars from such encounters.

However, due to the tragic death of a member of the Campobello Whale Rescue Team in July 2017 during a disentanglement, the DFO has temporarily suspended all disentanglement operations.

The WWF notes that between 1970 and 2006, humans were responsible of 48 per cent of the deaths of right whales, mostly due to ship strikes or entanglements.

Many Critical Habitats Still Unexplored

However, it’s less known why the whales have moved from the Bay of Fundy or off the coast of Nova Scotia to the Gulf of St. Lawrence, where there’s considerably higher shipping traffic and more fishing gear.

There are some hypotheses around impacts of climate change and water temperatures, with the whales potentially following food sources. However, Barron said that right whales have been in the area and used the Gulf of St. Lawrence prior to this season. It’s difficult to draw any real conclusions without comprehensive coast-wide surveying, she said, in order to find out exactly where the whales might go.

Currently, Canada only has two designated areas of critical right whale habitat: the Grand Manan Basin and Roseway Basin. Barron said that by contrast, the U.S. has effectively designated their entire shelf waters throughout Maine and other northern states as critical habitat.

“We’re likely to see shifts in their movements in future years,” she said. “And we need to start mapping these areas of use and planning for that in the future.”

Between August 23 and 30, an expedition led by Oceana Canada used advanced exploration technology to survey much of the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Robert Rangeley, director of science at Oceana Canada and key planner of the expedition, said in an interview with DeSmog Canada that much of the region is still fairly uncharted, pointing to the American Bank (located just off the Gaspé Peninsula in the Quebec portion of the Gulf of St. Lawrence).

“It’s got this official designation as an area of interest for a Marine Protected Area,” he said. “But it’s never been explored. None of these areas have been explored with cameras. We don’t really know what’s down there.”

Such a current lack of knowledge obviously impedes the ability for the federal government to craft appropriate regulations to ensure the survival of right whales and other marine mammals.

3% of World’s #Endangered #RightWhales Died This Summer, Mostly in Canada’s Unprotected Waters https://t.co/duH3p5vLHv #cdnpoli @DLeblancNB

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) September 1, 2017

Network of Marine Protected Areas Could Help Save Right Whales

And that’s where marine protected areas (MPAs) are supposed to come in.

As previously reported by DeSmog Canada, the federal government is aiming to protect 10 per cent of marine areas by 2020. However, proposed regulations for the Laurentian Channel MPA in the Gulf of St. Lawrence are under serious fire as they currently allow for potential offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling.

Conservationists suggest that a critical way to protect right whales is via the MPA network.

ICYMI: Canada Has Three Years to Increase Protected Areas by 60% And, Um, It’s Not Going to Be Easy

“These processes have been to this point very, very slow,” Barron said. “We need to start moving more quickly on these processes and identifying those potential areas where we may see whales: even if we’re not seeing them this year, that might be where they go next year, and we need to start making sure those sites are properly protected for the whales long into the future.”

Allowing oil and gas activities in the region would result in a series of catastrophic impacts, including increased marine traffic and chances of ship strikes, destruction of zooplankton and other food sources, contamination of food webs with toxic waste and a much higher chance of oil spills.

Unless the federal government protects such areas with strict regulations, there’s no real guarantee that this year’s death toll will be anomalous in the future.

“The deck is stacked against these whales,” Leslie concluded. “There’s so much coming at them, we’ve just got to figure out a way to help them survive.”

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.

The B.C. government passed legislation that changes the boundaries of Finn Creek Provincial Park last Thursday, to make way for the expansion of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline even though the province has yet to give its approval to the controversial project.

In its pipeline expansion allocation Kinder Morgan requested the province redraw the boundaries of four provincial parks to facilitate pipeline construction.

Last week B.C. changed the boundaries of Finn Creek Provincial Park to make way for the pipeline that is currently undergoing review with the federal National Energy Board. The NEB’s final recommendation is expected by May 20.

“This pipeline project clearly threatens the values that this park was established to protect,” Peter Wood with the B.C. chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), said. “It should never have been allowed to proceed this far, let alone be approved. Allowing industrial activity in an ecologically sensitive area like Finn Creek Park runs counter to the government’s mandate of protecting these places.”

Finn Creek Provincial Park is located along the North Thompson River, an area BC Parks says is rich in ecological diversity, with local grizzly and moose populations, and provides spawning habitat for bull trout, Coho and Chinook salmon.

The province appears to be making way for the pipeline even though the B.C. Ministry of Environment found the project did not meet conditions set out by the province in 2012. The B.C. Ministry of Environment did not respond to a request for comment by the time of publication.

Update: The B.C. Ministry of Environment released a statement to DeSmog Canada saying, "this proposed boundary adjustment would not be brought into force unless and until the project is approved by the National Energy Board, the Province is satisfied its five conditions have been met, and the Province has issued an environmental assessment certificate. Until such time, this boundary adjustment does not permit any form of construction of the proposed pipeline."

Wood asked, "why would they proactively legislate changes to open the park to the pipeline before the NEB has even arrived at a decision?" Even though the proposed changes would only affect a small portion of the park, roughly 2.43 hectares according to the Ministry of Environment, "in principle, it doesn't make sense," Wood said.

"My understanding is that the park protects wild salmon, grizzly bears and moose. I haven't seen the documents related to how these values will be affected," Wood said. "But I think the bigger concern is that this major change was buried in a 'miscellaneous statutes' omnibus bill."

"If it's no big deal, why not be transparent and tell the public that they are changing the park to accommodate the Kinder Morgan pipeline?" 

In August 2015 over 30 groups and individuals, including CPAWS, publicly withdrew from the Kinder Morgan review process, citing a lack of transparency, balance and accountability in the proceedings.

Wood said the government’s decision to redraw provincial parkland boundaries in favour of the pipeline is concerning.

“Why is the B.C. Government proceeding as if this pipeline project is a done deal?” he said.

“It’s inappropriate for the province to be allocating resources to opening up our parks for a pipeline, let alone one that may never be approved.”

“This is particularly shocking given the high levels of opposition from First Nations and the general public.”

Kinder Morgan’s submission to the province requests parkland boundaries also be altered in the North Thomson River Provincial Park, Lac Du Bois Grasslands Protected Area and Bridal Veil Falls Provincial Park.

This article was updated May 17, 2016 to include comment from the Ministry of Environment and additional comment from Peter Wood.

Image: Yoho National Park in B.C. via Pigeonsgross/Instagram

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.

A broad coalition of organizations from across Canada wants Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to halt construction of the Site C dam by refusing to issue federal permits needed for construction of the $9-billion project that will flood 23,000 hectares of land along 107-kilometres of the Peace River Valley.   A letter to Trudeau, signed by 25 organizations ranging from Amnesty International and the Council of Canadians to the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society and the David Suzuki Foundation, asks that the new Liberal government live up to its promises of a new relationship with First Nations.   “Our organizations are profoundly concerned that construction of the Site C dam is being pushed ahead despite the conclusion of a joint federal-provincial environmental assessment that it would severely and permanently undermine indigenous peoples’ use of the land; harm rare plants and other biodiversity; make fishing unsafe for at least a generation and submerge burial grounds and other crucial cultural and historical sites,” an open letter released by the coalition says.   The letter urges Trudeau to rescind all permits and to re-examine the previous government’s approval of the dam, which was given despite Treaty 8 claims that it violated treaty rights.   “The people of Treaty 8 have said no to Site C. Any government that is truly committed to reconciliation with indigenous peoples, to respecting human rights and to promoting truly clean energy must listen,” the letter says.

The provincial government is largely responsible for Site C permits, but the federal government must issue permits in areas of federal jurisdiction such as fisheries, transport and wildlife. 

BC Hydro did not respond to questions about outstanding permits in time for publication.   During recent climate change negotiations in Paris, most Canadians were delighted that Trudeau linked climate change with human rights, Joe Foy, from the Wilderness Committee, said.   “The Peace River is where the rubber meets the road. This is clearly against what this government and this country stands for,” Foy said.   “The federal government needs to go on record now that, at every step of the way, they will resist this.”   Candace Batycki, spokesperson for the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative, one of the organizations that signed the letter, said Site C is not just another resource development project.   “The Site C dam is one of the largest resource development projects underway in Canada and its impact on the environment and local First Nations will be severe,” she said.   First Nations from the Peace River area have already asked the federal government to step into the controversy and AFN National Chief Perry Bellegarde is among those who have called for a second look at the project.   Chief Roland Willson of West Moberly First Nations said there has not yet been an opportunity to meet with members of the Trudeau cabinet, but letters have gone to all ministers.   “I have to believe in my heart they are seriously considering it. They have to understand the process was severely flawed,” he said.   “They can’t talk about a new enhanced relationship and start stabbing their fingers in our eyes…There’s no doubt it’s an infringement of treaty rights,” he said.   Trudeau should understand that there are ways to produce the power, such as run-of-river hydro projects, that do not destroy the valley, Willson said.   So far, an old-growth forest has been destroyed and there are minor earthworks, “but there is nothing irreversible,” he said.   Site C still faces three legal challenges and BC Hydro has applied for an injunction against First Nations members camping at historic Rocky Mountain Fort.   BC Hydro claims the protesters have been preventing contractors from completing their work on the south bank of the Peace River since January 4 and the petition will be heard in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver on February 22.   “We will still be at the camp, whatever courses are followed. This is Treaty 8 territory,” said Helen Knott of Prophet River First Nation, who is among the Treaty 8 Stewards of the Land women who have been taking shifts camping at the fort.   The group has asked Trudeau and Premier Christy Clark to suspend all approvals for logging, road building and land clearing in the Peace River Valley until all the court cases have been heard, there has been a federal review of the infringement of treaty rights and an independent review of the project by the B.C. Utilities Commission.   Knott said she is willing to be arrested, but hopes it will not be necessary as she is heading to Toronto and Ottawa next week to meet with federal government representatives.   No meetings have yet been organized, she said.   “But we want to make every effort to do this the right way. I do have some sort of hope that something magical will happen,” she said.

You can click here to read more about Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and climate change.

Image: Sign on the banks of the Peace River via the ECOReport.

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.

Eighteen Canadian charities have written a letter to the country’s political parties asking them for platform commitments to enhance the ability for charities to engage in public policy debates.

The charities argue in their letter that “without years of organizing effort by Canadian charities, Canada would not have dealt with issues such as addressing acid rain, promoting safe driving, reducing smoking and banning toxic chemicals.”

The chief concern lies around the current regulation of so-called “political activities” — defined by the Canada Revenue Agency as any activity that seeks to change, oppose or retain laws or policies. Charities are currently limited to spending ten per cent of their resources on these “political activities.”

[view:in_this_series=block_1]

Groups that signed onto the letter include Oxfam Canada, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Amnesty International Canada, David Suzuki Foundation and Equiterre.

“Our society has evolved and our legislation hasn’t,” Eric Hebert Daly, executive director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, told DeSmog Canada.

Charities have changed from being primarily service providers — doing things like running soup kitchens and helping the disabled — to contributing direct knowledge of social issues to public policy debates, Hebert Daly argued.

“It seems ridiculous to not let the experts be the ones to speak out on issues that they’re experts in,” he said. “If you’re a corporation, you can write off 100 per cent of your spending on political activity and have no restrictions whatsoever, but if you’re a charity you can only write off 10 per cent. There’s a real discrepancy there that doesn’t seem to make sense.”

Right now, the letter the charities sent to federal politicians would qualify as “political activity” and would need to be accounted for under the ten per cent rule.

“When they hear political activity, most people think ‘supporting a political party’ but there’s a huge gap between creating public policy and supporting a political party,” Hebert Daly said.

Charities are banned from taking part in “partisan activity” (supporting or opposing a candidate or political party).

Several of the charities that signed onto the letter have been audited since 2012, when the federal government dedicated $13.4 million to the Canada Revenue Agency to audit the political activities of charities.

The groups argue in their letter that the current regulations are confusing:

“A confusing regulatory environment leaves many would-be advocates unclear how proactively charities can advocate for policy change. The existing interpretation of the Income Tax Act appears to be open to widely divergent interpretations of what constitutes charitable activity … The result is a chill where charities feel that their efforts are being discouraged, subjected to rhetorical attacks or harsh or arbitrary review.”

Hebert Daly says all political parties should be interested in reforming the law so there is no question about arbitrary application of the rules or silencing of dissent.

“The fact that the interpretation itself can change at any moment is part of the problem,” he said. “It would simply take a bureaucrat three seconds to change their mind at CRA and we’d be way above the 10 per cent.”

The groups are asking for an open consultation process involving a broad range of charities and the public to help develop new regulations for the sector.

“The debate on this has really just started,” Hebert Daly said. “I think you need to have an open and honest conversation in the public view about what makes sense in terms of modernizing the Income Tax Act.”

Photo: Dave King via Flickr

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.

A little-known Bill, the Park Amendment Act, that will drastically alter the management of B.C. parks is set to become law today, creating controversy among the province’s most prominent environmental and conservation organizations. The passage of Bill 4 will make way for industrial incursions into provincial parklands including energy extraction, construction of pipelines and industry-led research.

The Bill, quietly introduced in mid-February, has already met significant resistance in B.C. where the Minister of Environment received “thousands of letters” of opposition, according to Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society’s Peter Wood. “There has been absolutely zero public consultation, and the pace at which this was pushed through suggests this was never a consideration,” he said in a press release.

“This Bill undermines the very definition of what a ‘park’ is,” Gwen Barlee from the Wilderness Committee said in the same statement, “given that our protected areas will now be open to industrial activity.”

“This is a black day for B.C. Parks – the provincial government is ensuring that none of our parks are now safe from industrial development,” she said.

According to staff lawyer Andrew Gage with the West Coast Environmental Law the bill is “difficult to square” with the sentiments underlying the B.C. Parks Service, which claims provincial parks and conservancies are a “public trust” for the “protection of natural environments for the inspiration, use and enjoyment of the public.”

In an overview piece, Gage wrote “Bill 4 allows for industry (and others) to carry out ‘research’ in provincial parks related to pipelines, transmission lines, roads and other industrial activities that might require park land. It also reduces legal protection for smaller parks.”

He noted that preliminary ‘research’ carried out by mining company Taseko in preparation for an environmental assessment of the controversial Prosperity Mine included the drilling of 59 test pits, eight drill holes 50 to 75 metres in depth, and ten holes roughly 250 metres in depth to collect metallurgical samples. The tests also required the creation of 23.5 kilometres of exploratory trails.

Bill 4 claims permits for ‘research’ will only be considered after a “thorough review of protected area values,” yet, Gage writes, “this requirement is nowhere to be found in Bill 4.”

This amounts to a “’trust, us, we’re government’ approach,” writes Gage.

Previously park use permits were only granted to those able to demonstrate the proposed activity was “necessary for the preservation or maintenance of the recreational values of the park involved.” Bill 4 rids the Park Act of this safeguard.

“The government has sent a clear signal that it is open to having pipelines cut through our globally renowned protected areas,” said Al Martin of the B.C. Wildlife Federation. “The Act will now allow industrial expansion in some of B.C.’s most beloved parks, placing them at risk.”

Critics are also concerned the changes will open pristine landscapes to environmentally destructive oil and gas extraction processes.

“This legislation opens the door to pipelines, oil and gas drilling and industrial activities that are counter to the values that created our parks system,” said Darryl Walker from the B.C. Government and Service Employees’ Union. “If Bill 4 passes, 2014 will be the year that B.C. Parks changed forever,” he said.

Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society and a group of other environmental NGOs have already collected nearly 10,000 signatures and letters in an effort to stop the implementation of the bill.

These groups are claiming the total lack of public consultation left local communities, park users and conservation groups out of the decision making process. 

Image Credit: Garth Lenz, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society

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.

A world heritage site in Newfoundland is under extreme threat from fracking, according to a recent report by the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS). The report, entitled “One Step Forward / Two Steps Back” says Gros Morne Park, along with several other nationally and provincially protected areas, is in danger from “inappropriate development.”

Recently, a proposal by Shoal Point Energy Limited and several other companies to search for oil in the rock layers just metres from the park's border captured the attention of The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). During its June meeting in Phnom Penh, Cambodia UNESCO delegates drafted a resolution to ask for further environmental review from the Canadian government.

UNESCO declared Gros Morne Park a world heritage site in 1987 because it offers a unique glimpse into the tectonic processes that formed the east coast through continental drift. The coveted designation marks the park for protection alongside the world’s most important natural and cultural landmarks.

Robert Cadigan, president and CEO of the Newfoundland and Labrador Oil and Gas Industries Association, tried to quell fears in an interview with MacLean’s Magazine by pointing to the industry’s safety record. “There have been tens of thousands of wells fracked in Western Canada, just as an example — successfully — with no environmental damage.”

But the CPAWS report points out that development would greatly increase traffic on the park’s one road as well as lead to possible ground water contamination. It may also endanger the area’s well-developed tourism industry.

“For 30 years people have worked really hard to build a sustainable tourism industry around Gros Morne, based on Gros Morne. And this proposal would put that existing economy at risk,” pointed out CPAWS representative Alison Woodley.

Other dangers to the Canadian park system mentioned in the CPAWS report include the Yukon territorial government’s scrapping of its Peel Watershed Planning commission.

A major sub-basin of the Mackenzie River, the Peel Watershed is a largely pristine wilderness with massive biodiversity. There is currently a moratorium on development while consultations with First Nations groups continue, but there are already 8431 active mineral claims in the area, 6773 of which were staked after the planning process began.

After seven years of study, First Nations groups and the territorial government recommended 80% of the watershed be protected. Shortly thereafter, the plan was scrapped entirely. In February, Green Party leader Elizabeth May wrote an open letter to the Yukon government urging them to take the commission’s advice.

Ontario too backed away from its 2010 commitment to increase the protected area in Algonquin Park from 22% to 49%.

On the federal scale, budget cutbacks of $30 million per year have lead to a 30% reduction in ecosystem scientist positions and put some major ecological restoration programs on hold.

The report from CPAWS also called out Manitoba for continuing to allow mining and logging in protected areas. Although Manitoba agreed to ban peat mining in February of this year, the province is still in the process of approving a copper mine in Grass River Provincial Park.

The Hudbay copper mine will be situated by Reed Lake, a crucial travel corridor for endangered woodland caribou.

In terms of future recommendations, the report suggests strengthening regulations against oil and gas exploration in Nova Scotia’s Sable Island National Park. The area was designated a national park in June.

"Yesterday, oil and gas companies could drill on Sable Island and today with royal assent they won’t be able to," said Halifax MP and NDP environment critic Megan Leslie.

The Green Party objected to the designation, saying stronger protections are needed to stop oil and gas exploration in the area.

The CPAWS report points out that southern Alberta’s Castle wilderness area, which has been endangered by logging, oil and gas exploration, may become a Wildland and Provincial Park.

The region features spectacular rock formations and supplies drinking and agricultural water for 70 communities. Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development will have a land use report on the area available in August.

Canada’s national and provincial parks provide not only spectacular views for tourists but also preserve wildlife diversity and assure a clean water supply for much of the country. CPAWS collaborates with indigenous people, local communities, governments and industry to ensure that this continues to be true. Their goal is to protect half of Canada’s public land and water. 

Image Credit: VisitGrosMorne via Flickr Image Credit: peelwatershed via Flickr Image Credit: Charles Truscott via CPAWS

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.