The Arctic’s Baffin Bay and Davis Strait region is home to seals, bowhead whales, polar bears and up to 90 per cent of the world’s narwhals. The area’s marine waters also provide habitat for 116 species of fish, such as Arctic char, an important dietary staple for Nunavut’s Inuit communities.

Although the area is crucial to Inuit for hunting and other traditional activities, the federal government has approved underwater seismic blasting by a consortium of energy companies. They plan to fire underwater cannons from boats to map the ocean floor for oil and gas deposits, in preparation for offshore drilling.

The blasting, approved by Canada’s National Energy Board in 2014, is meeting fierce opposition.

A lower court affirmed the NEB decision in 2015, claiming Inuit were adequately consulted on the project — something Inuit dispute. To prevent destruction of their hunting grounds, the remote hamlet of Clyde River in Nunavut and the Nammautaq Hunters and Trappers Organization appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which agreed to hear the case later this year. A positive decision could halt seismic blasting and affirm the right of Indigenous peoples to decide their own future regarding resource development in their territories, which is central to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, of which Canada is a signatory.

This case is in an isolated region. But the threat of massive development in yet another traditional territory is not an isolated case. Indigenous peoples are on the front lines of environmental change around the planet. Ever-expanding resource developments are degrading traditional territories that have sustained communities for millennia, from Arctic tundra to primeval rainforest to arid desert. They’re criss-crossed with roads, transmission lines and pipelines, and pockmarked by pumpjacks, flare stacks and other infrastructure for drilling, fracking and strip-mining fossil fuels. Most developments proceed without consent from local communities and with minimal benefit to them in terms of jobs, training and economic prosperity.

Numerous studies show that Indigenous communities usually bear the brunt of resource development, from declining water quality to destruction of traditional hunting and fishing grounds. The social consequences are devastating. Earlier this year I participated in the Canadian Indigenous Health Conference, which brought public health experts together with Indigenous elders, political leaders, youth, hunters and trappers. Many First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities’ social problems — including alcoholism, physical abuse, depression and suicide — are linked to the vacuum left when communities can no longer hunt, fish, trap, gather berries and otherwise live off their lands as their ancestors did.

Despite living in one the world’s wealthiest countries, Inuit face chronic food insecurity. Nearly 70 per cent of households in communities like Clyde River struggle with getting enough nutrition to stay healthy, compared to eight per cent for the country as a whole.

Traditional activities like hunting and fishing are critical to Indigenous communities’ food security, but they also support a holistic approach to the overall health and well-being of Indigenous peoples. A David Suzuki Foundation study on the importance of caribou hunting to First Nations in the boreal forest found “harvesting as a practice is not solely a process of obtaining meat for nutrition. With each hunt a deliberate set of relationships and protocols is awakened and reinforced. These include reciprocity, social cohesion, spirituality and the passing on of knowledge to future generations.”

Scientists fear high-intensity sounds from seismic blasting in the Arctic could adversely affect marine wildlife, exacerbating the food-insecurity crisis. Inuit hunters have observed altered migration patterns of some species, and reported horrific damage to the internal organs of seals and other animals exposed to underwater seismic blasts.

Clyde River’s resistance to big oil is classic David versus Goliath. On one side, powerful corporations with money and access to politicians. On the other, one of the world’s oldest cultures, which has survived for millennia in harmony with the environment. Former Clyde River mayor Jerry Natanine said, “Inuit do not live on the land; we are part of it. We form an indivisible unity with the Arctic environment that we are fighting to preserve for our people and our culture to survive and thrive.” 

Let’s stand with Inuit and stop seismic blasting in the Canadian Arctic.

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Ontario and Northern Canada Director Faisal Moola.

Learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.

Image: Christian Aslund, Greenpeace

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.

Alberta is home to two of Canada’s imperilled caribou populations, the southern mountain and boreal woodland herds. Both are threatened with extinction.

Under the federal Species at Risk Act, the boreal woodland caribou recovery strategy requires provinces to develop range plans by 2017, outlining paths to recovery. Because caribou need large, intact areas, degraded habitat must be restored so industrial and natural disturbances affect no more than 35 per cent of each range.

The challenge to recover caribou is not Alberta’s alone; it is a national undertaking. Boreal caribou are threatened in every province except Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.

Federal assessments show high levels of oil, gas and forestry activity mean no boreal herd in Alberta is likely to survive without significant changes in habitat management. In 2011, the range of the Little Smoky herd was assessed as being 95 per cent disturbed by industrial activity, and oil, gas and forestry have since caused further damage.

In many ways, the Little Smoky herd symbolizes what is wrong with our approach to land management. While humans are one of about 10 to 30 million species, many of which require vast areas to survive, we set targets for protecting 12 per cent of our land base for wildlife while taking over the other 88 per cent. Politicians in Alberta have spoken of “balancing” economic and ecological values, but seeing less than five per cent of the Little Smoky range left undisturbed highlights the faulty scales.

Alberta recently released its draft range plan for the Little Smoky boreal and A la Peche southern mountain herds, allowing continued forestry and petroleum approvals in both ranges. It also proposes ongoing predator control — in the Little Smoky range, hunters killed 841 wolves between 2005 and 2012 — and a “rearing facility,” a 100-square-kilometre permanent enclosure to fence in female caribou and “export” yearlings. The public can comment on the plan until August 5.

To be fair, the draft plan, based on a mediator’s recommendations, includes progressive elements such as restoring old seismic lines, and the province has committed to significant protected areas for some northern caribou populations. And Alberta’s current government is paying the price for previous governments’ years of inaction to address caribou habitat needs.

READ MORE: Will Alberta's Last-Ditch Effort to Save the Caribou Be Enough?

But the plan’s troubling components could set a terrible national precedent.

It outlines a vision for a “working landscape,” where “caribou and careful development co-exist.” Yet no evidence exists that working forests work for caribou. Caribou don’t adapt to human presence like squirrels or raccoons. They’re intensely shy creatures that avoid humans and human-created disturbances.

Band-aid solutions like predator control and enclosures don’t pertain to Alberta alone; they represent a growing national trend of allowing industrial activities to continue, merely softening negative effects rather than ensuring adequate habitat is maintained for species’ survival. Mitigation might lessen the bite of impacts or stave off extinction, but it will not advance recovery. That can only occur by restoring healthy, functioning ecosystems.

Governments that employ predator control rarely, if ever, pursue sufficient habitat protection measures to justify its use. By allowing habitat disturbance to worsen over the next five years, Alberta will likely prolong its reliance on killing predators.

Both predator control and permanent enclosures impair functional ecosystems, of which predator-prey dynamics are a linchpin. Caribou are integrally shaped by interactions with their habitat and the predators they try to avoid. Experiments like caribou enclosures muddy the recovery landscape. Captive breeding initiatives are usually cast as good news but often detour from addressing primary problems.

The mediator recommended examining the potential for similar enclosure projects in other caribou ranges. This must not happen. Wildlife “zoos” must not become the new norm. We should be blunt about what permanent enclosures represent: our epic failure to manage landscapes so they can continue to support wildlife.

As the mediator recommends, governments must work not only with industry to change management practices but also with conservation organizations and Indigenous communities, many of which rely on caribou — or did before herds disappeared — for sustenance. Provincial governments must uphold their responsibility to recover caribou by ensuring healthy ecosystems are maintained and restored. Half measures that keep caribou alive through human interventions while further degrading their homes won’t suffice.

David Suzuki is a scientist, broadcaster, author and co-founder of the David Suzuki Foundation. Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Science Projects Manager Rachel Plotkin.

Image: Alberta woodland caribou. Photo: R. Arssenault via SAGE

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.

An alarming new study published Tuesday by the National Audubon Society says that almost half the bird species in the continental United States and Canada are already threatened by climate change.

The study — Audubon’s Birds and Climate Change Report — finds that 126 species will lose more than 50 per cent of their current ranges by mid-century with no possibility of relocating if global warming continues at its current pace.

“A further 188 species face more than 50 per cent range loss by 2080 but may be able to make up some of this loss if they are able to colonize new areas,” an accompanying media release says. “These 314 species include many not previously considered at risk. The report indicates that numerous extinctions are likely if global temperature increases are not stopped.”

“It’s a punch in the gut. The greatest threat our birds face today is global warming,” Audubon Chief Scientist Gary Langham, who led the investigation, said in the media release.

“That’s our unequivocal conclusion after seven years of painstakingly careful and thorough research. Global warming threatens the basic fabric of life on which birds — and the rest of us — depend, and we have to act quickly and decisively if we are going to avoid catastrophe for them and for us.”

Audubon President and CEO David Yarnold described the potential loss as staggeringly horrific.

“This report is a roadmap, and it’s telling us two big things: We have to preserve and protect the places birds live, and we have to work together to reduce the severity of global warming,” Yarnold said.

The report, which studied 588 bird species, says a number of iconic birds in the continental United States and Canada — including the Bald Eagle, the Common Loon and Baltimore Oriole — are under increasing threat.

Protecting birds, the non-profit conservation organization’s report added, will require both redoubling conservation efforts to safeguard critical habitat and curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

Coincidentally, the Audubon study was published the same day as a World Meteorological Organization (WMO) report found that the level of atmospheric greenhouse gases reached a new record high in 2013.

The Geneva-based WMO’s annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin said the 2013 levels were fuelled by a surge in levels of carbon dioxide, a finding that may make politicians and national governments work harder and more cooperatively to fight climate change.  

According to a related WMO media release, the report showed that between 1990 and 2013 there was a 34 per cent increase in radiative forcing — the warming effect on our climate — because of long-lived greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane and nitrous oxide.

“In 2013, concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was 142 per cent of the pre-industrial era (1750), and of methane and nitrous oxide 253 per cent and 121 per cent respectively,” the release said.

WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said there is no doubt our climate is changing and our weather is becoming more extreme due to human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.

“The Greenhouse Gas Bulletin shows that, far from falling, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere actually increased last year at the fastest rate for nearly 30 years. We must reverse this trend by cutting emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases across the board,” Jarraud said. “We are running out of time.”

Noting that carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for many hundreds of years and in the ocean for even longer, he said the report provides scientific data politicians can use to make decisions related to climate change.

“We have the knowledge and we have the tools for action to try to keep temperature increases within 2°C to give our planet a chance and to give our children and grandchildren a future,” Jarraud said.

“Pleading ignorance can no longer be an excuse for not acting.”

Image Credit: Tambako The Jaguar 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.

Alberta Energy Minister Diana McQueen toured key U.S. cities this week in an effort to gain the interests of major oil refiners and producers before an auction Wednesday will see the sale of 1,300 acres of new oil and gas leases. The leases overlap 650 acres of critical boreal caribou habitat as well as mountain caribou ranges. 

Caribou is an endangered species in the province, with a long history of being placed second to the province’s oil and gas priorities. Last week Alberta put 1,235 acres of mountain caribou range up for auction despite a recent Environment Canada report that called for the restoration of the region given the threat of local herds disappearing.

Both Alberta and the Government of Canada have consistently failed to stem the rapid decline of the province’s endangered caribou, a species now protected under the federal Species at Risk Act. An Environment Canada recovery plan, released in 2012, advanced habitat protection as one of the only means available to protect the vanishing species.

According to Carolyn Campbell conservation specialist at the Alberta Wilderness Association adequate habitat protection measures have yet to be put into place while oil and gas development continues to dramatically outpace conservation efforts.

“New leasing in caribou range should halt,” she said, “until there are real rules to prevent new footprint and restore old footprint.”

Although new project-level guidelines require industry to at times delay or coordinate new projects that will impact habitat, Campbell says the rules “still allow for a lot of harmful footprint.”

Both Alberta Energy and Canada’s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA) were asked about the leasing of land in caribou habitat but were unable to provide comment by the time of publication. 

Caribou are naturally timid creatures, their grazing and mating patterns easily disturbed by human and industrial activities. The rapid expansion of Alberta’s oilsands, including open-pit mines and infrastructure-heavy in situ extraction, as well as far-reaching oil and gas exploration in the region including the creation of seismic lines cut through large portions of the boreal forest, has dramatically reduced safe caribou habitat in which herds can persist at healthy levels.

Oil and gas industry activity in caribou ranges. Map by Global Forest Watch.

According to Campbell, the linear footprint caused by seismic lines and other surface disturbance “stimulates populations of deer, moose and predators” and “provides easy access for predators to reach caribou.” But the overwhelming scientific evidence, she said, “is that loss of habitat is the ultimate cause of caribou population declines.”

In 2011 the Canadian government released a draft recovery strategy that was heavily criticized for recommending a province-wide wolf cull as a means of supporting flagging caribou populations without addressing habitat loss. The plan drew wide-ranging condemnation from the scientific and environmental communities as well as First Nations who held industrial development was to blame for caribou declines, not the province’s wolves.

An independent study later confirmed Alberta’s wolves eat very little caribou and sustain themselves on a diet of deer, moose and elk. Although the fragmentation and disturbance of caribou habitat put caribou and wolves in closer quarters. 

"Caribou and wolves have co-existed over thousands of years,” Campbell said, “but too much human footprint robs the caribou of their ability to minimize overlap with wolves.”

In late 2012, five years after it was due, Environment Canada released a revised recovery strategy that called the oil and gas industry and the government of Alberta to work together to ensure at least 65 per cent of caribou habitat remain undisturbed to ensure caribou survival.

Critics were quick to point out the federal recovery strategy did not outline how Alberta should implement the 65 per cent strategy, leaving the plan largely undefined. Since then industry in Alberta has continued to operate mostly unimpeded, putting the caribou on a “collision course” with oil and gas interests, as Simon Dyer from the Pembina Institute put it at the time.

“The provincial government has previously not followed it scientists’ recommendations, nor even multi-sector groups’ recommendations, to temporarily stop leasing and logging until range plans are developed that focus on habitat recovery,” Campbell said. 

Mountain caribou populations have declined by more than 60 per cent since 2002. Boreal herds are in a similarly precarious state. In 2011 the Canadian government placed 70 per cent of Alberta’s boreal woodland caribou herds in or on the border of a ‘not self-sustaining’ category.

Although caribou declines have been tracked by scientists and conservationists for decades, the province’s emphasis on oil and gas development, coupled with loose and undefined recovery plans, has left the species struggling. And according to Campbell, this could have wide-reaching consequences for the surrounding ecosystem, even across provincial boundaries.

“If you look at the attached Environment Canada map (above) of boreal woodland caribou across Canada, it’s Alberta where most of the herds are at highest risk of dying out under current policies. This affects the genetic diversity and viability of neighbouring B.C., the North West Territories and Saskatchewan caribou populations. 

Beyond that, caribou are indicators of whether the boreal and foothills forests are healthy. If we change how these forests are managed so that caribou populations can recover (which Alberta states is its policy goal), then our northern Mackenzie watershed will be healthier, and many other species will benefit too, such as migratory birds that depend on old growth forest and intact wetlands.” 

Under Canada’s new caribou recovery strategy Alberta is legally required to develop plans to preserve and restore caribou ranges within five years. The province has yet to demonstrate how these plans will move forward in the face of new energy leases and land sales.

Although some basic changes could make a bit difference, Campbell said.

“In 2012, in response to thousands of Canadians speaking up for a strong boreal caribou recovery strategy, the federal government did strengthen the strategy to be more habitat-focused. Second, to its credit, in 2013 the Alberta government stopped new energy leasing in two west central Alberta caribou ranges and deferred some logging in one of those ranges until range plans are developed for those caribou.

This is a start, and it shows how important it is for citizens to get involved.”

But, she added, these efforts need to be backed up by “real rules to reduce footprint” which might mean a “re-thinking of forestry and energy.” Ultimately, resource managers are going to have to work together to more responsibly manage industry impacts and reduce disturbance to caribou habitat, she said.

Image Credit: Zak Richter/NPS 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.

Critics cried foul last week after oilsands giant Syncrude was awarded the inaugural Towards Sustainable Mining Environmental Excellence Award at the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) industry gala held in Vancouver on Monday, May 12.

The Fort McMurray-based company was recognized for its work in land reclamation, the attempt to re-establish ecosystems destroyed during oilsands development.

The company was specifically lauded for its work with fen wetlands, a sensitive and complex peat ecosystem that is a key part of the Boreal Forest and the local watershed, through its Sandhill Fen Research Watershed Initiative research project.

“We're quite pleased to have been selected. We see it as a demonstration of our commitment to improving our reclamation process,” said company spokesperson Will Gibson by phone. “It underscores our need to meet the public's expectations, and part of that is constant improvement.”

But, for some, labelling any work done in the oilsands as 'sustainable' may be premature, if not entirely contradictory. 

An 'industry award'

“It's industry giving awards to industry,” said Carolyn Campbell of the Alberta Wilderness Association, a conservation group working to conserve ecosystems and wilderness in the province. “It's misleading to say they are taking a significant approach to sustainable mining. Tar sands mining is inherently unsustainable. The push for fossil fuel development is destroying the boreal wetlands.”

For Campbell, attempts to bring back ecosystems that have been under pressure from mining for decades is too little too late. “This needed to be considered 40 years ago,” when the first oilsands developments began, said Campbell.

Most people may have heard of peatlands – Canada is the world's largest producer of peat moss for horticultural purposes – but few know about the importance, and uniqueness, of fens. While similar to peat bogs, fens are distinguished by a high water table and a slow, regular flow of water which makes them much more rich in minerals and much less acidic than bogs.

Fens support a specific set of vegetation and animal life and, because of these unique characteristics, are considered much more difficult to reproduce than other peatlands – which already present an enormous ecological challenge. Fens are an integral part of the northern Boreal ecosystem, which itself is tied to the health of Canada's important watersheds, like the adjacent Athabasca and Peace River watersheds. While fens are a small part of the entire Boreal forest, their loss has a significant impact on the surrounding ecosystem.

Their importance isn't lost on Gibson, who stressed in the interview that Syncrude is committed to monitoring their 52 hectare test site for the next 10 to 20 years in order to better understand and replace the fens that have been removed during oilsands development.

Gibson strongly rejects the ideas that Syncrude's reclamation work is simply window dressing. “Over half of our [research and development] spending goes into reclamation projects,” he said, adding, “would people prefer we do nothing?”

Reclamation cannot offset conservation

“Of course, they shouldn't be doing nothing,” Eriel Deranger told DeSmog Canada in a telephone interview. Deranger is a member of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN), located over 200km northeast of Fort McMurry and directly downstream from the centre of oilsands development. Her traditional territory lies in the Athabasca watershed and has been significantly affected by industrial development to the south. 

“Reclamation work needs to be done. But it can't be used to justify the further expansion of the tar sands,” Deranger said. She is also a spokesperson for the annual Healing Walk, which brings together Indigenous and non-Indigenous people to visit the oilsands region and discuss industry's impacts.

For Deranger, the question isn't only about whether the fens can eventually be brought back, but the immediate and ongoing impacts that are justified through what is branded as 'sustainable development' of the oilsands.

The destruction of key parts of the northern Boreal ecosystem has a direct impact on the ACFN's and other First Nations' access to their traditional territory and to their way of life.

“The real issue,” she said, “is that these projects are going to be erasing these ecosystems for 50 to 100 years. That also means the loss of our treaty rights for 50 to 100 years.” And while it's clear that there have been advances in reclamation techniques, she said, the pace of development in the oilsands has greatly outrun any improvements.

The uncertain science 

Recent scientific reports have presented mixed results about the potential for reclamation. A 2013 study from the Université de Laval's Peatland Ecology Research Group found that the various mosses found in peat fens were able to withstand water with higher salt contents – similar to what they would be exposed to in reclamation areas – at a higher degree than expected, which researchers felt showed a strong indication that fens could be re-introduced post-mining.

At the same time, they highlighted that the study was done in limited laboratory settings, and that the complexities of a natural environment would complicate the re-establishment process.

Even if fens can be re-introduced, another peer-reviewed report questioned whether reclamation efforts could ever truly re-create or undo the damage of the original fens in the first place.

In a 2012 paper, researchers Rebecca C. Rooney, Suzanne E. Bayley, and David W. Schindler from the University of Alberta concluded that regardless of the ability to re-establish fens, the destruction of peatlands – which store a large amount of carbon in the ground, acting as a massive natural carbon sink – would result in the release of seven years worth of mining and upgrading emissions at 2010 production levels into the atmosphere.

They also noted the difficulty of recreating the water flow necessary for fens will mean that any eventual reclamation results would cover 65 per cent less territory than fens covered pre-mining.

Of the total area currently mined for oilsands, only 0.12 per cent of the land has been certified reclaimed, with some seven percent currently in progress of being reclaimed. The only certified reclaimed site is Sycrude's Gatweay Hill, which received the official reclamation distinction from Alberta Environment in 2008.

While the site has been vaunted as an industry success, Deranger sees it as a disturbing precursor to reclamation projects as the future for her people's territory. Gateway Hill, she said, is a clear sign that industry-styled reclamation projects cannot be used as an offset for protecting untouched land.

“I see fenced-in areas that have no relevance or value to First Nations people. They're fenced-in regions that they tout as a conservation zone,” she said.

"These areas were once areas that housed wild buffalo, that hunters and trappers utilized, that fishers utilized, that we considered sacred sites. And we're talking about creating a big sign that says, 'Look at the successes of this industry!' Why don't we juxtaposition it with, 'Look at what industry has destroyed.' Frankly, it's a little bit absurd and insulting."

Image Credit: Syncrude's Gateway Hill from CAPP

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.

This week the federal government was legally obligated to establish protected habitat for threatened North Pacific humpback whales. Instead the Harper government suddenly moved to take the humpback off the “threatened species” list. That would eliminate the legal requirement under Canada’s Species At Risk Act for protecting habitat along the British Columbia coast.

The government based the downgrade on a recommendation made by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), the independent scientific body that designates which wildlife species are in trouble, in 2011.

Critics have noted the decision eliminates a major obstacle to both the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline and the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. After the conditional approval of the Northern Gateway pipeline by the National Energy Board's joint review panel, the University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre launched a legal complaint on behalf of B.C. Nature requesting the government's recovery strategy for humpback whales be taken into consideration.

A federal recovery strategy for humpback whales on the B.C. coast released in October cited potential increased oil tanker traffic as a danger to dwindling populations. The recovery strategy, released after a five-year delay, also noted the danger toxic spills posed to critical habitat.

If built, the two pipeline projects would increase oil tanker traffic from eight to 28 per month, increasing the risks of collisions with whales, potential spills in vital habitat and excessive noise.

The good news is that the North Pacific humpbacks are recovering after nearly being wiped out by whale hunting, Marty Leonard, chair of COSEWIC, told DeSmog Canada.

The whales were listed as a species of “special concern” back in 2011, Leonard said. “Their numbers are increasing which is good to see. But they still face threats.”

Those threats include oil spills, collisions with ships, entanglement in fishing gear and overfishing of their food sources.

The Pacific Ocean is the largest feature on the planet — bigger than all land areas combined. After 250 years of whaling, an estimated 1,400 humpbacks remained in the North Pacific. They’re among the largest marine mammals reaching 14 metres in length and weighing up to 40 tonnes. Hunting was banned in 1965 and today there are about 20,000 in the entire region. Perhaps 3,000 are found seasonally in B.C. waters.

The Species At Risk Act took affect in 2003, prior to which Canada had little endangered species protection.

In 2005, COSEWIC listed North Pacific humpbacks as a “threatened” species. COSEWIC defines “threatened” as a species likely to become endangered if nothing is done. “Endangered” means about to go extinct. The government’s move will demote the status of humpbacks to “species of special concern.”

The federal government is required to produce an official “recovery strategy” for all species on the endangered and threatened lists, including legal protection of essential habitat.

Despite its legal obligation, the Harper government has persistently failed to do so for humpbacks and another 170 species.

In September 2012, Ecojustice lawyers filed a lawsuit in response to the Harper government’s delay on behalf of five environmental groups, the David Suzuki Foundation, Greenpeace Canada, Sierra Club BC, Wilderness Committee and Wildsight.

In February 2014, the Federal Court ruled the Harper government was breaking the law and was very critical of the government’s delay.

“We took the federal government to court and won,” said Caitlyn Vernon of the Sierra Club BC. 

“There is clearly an enormous systemic problem within the relevant Ministries,” Justice Anne L. Mactavish wrote in her judgment.

Justice Mactavish also noted that when it comes to protecting species, delay can lead to extinction.

The lawsuit prompted the Federal government to develop a recovery strategy for North Pacific humpbacks in September 2013, eight years after being listed as threatened.

The recovery strategy required legal protection of designated feeding grounds to be in place by this week, Vernon told DeSmog.

But rather than implement such protections, the government moved to downgrade the status of the whales to eliminate the need for legal protection of habitat.

“It’s good news humpback numbers are increasing, but their recovery is fragile. The science is clear that increased tanker traffic from the proposed pipelines will affect that recovery,” said Vernon.

“One oil spill and they’re back on the endangered species list.”

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.

As production in Alberta's oilsands continues to expand, waste byproducts continue to build up as well, from petcoke piles to tailing ponds. Now the energy companies behind the oilsands boom are planning to dump their growing volumes of toxic wastewater into man-made lakes, in the hope that they eventually become natural habitats.

Jeremy van Loon of Business Week writes that Syncrude Canada, Royal Dutch Shell, and ExxonMobil affiliate Imperial Oil "are running out of room to store the contaminated water that is a byproduct of the process used to turn bitumen–a highly viscous form of petroleum–into diesel and other fuels."

By 2022 the monthly output of wastewater from these companies "could turn New York's Central Park into a toxic reservoir 11 feet deep, according to the Pembina Institute," writes van Loon.

To accommodate the growing volume of byproduct, the energy companies have reportedly "obtained permission from provincial authorities to flood abandoned tar sand mines with a mix of tailings and fresh water." According to van Loon, this would "transform northern Alberta into the largest man-made lake district on earth."

Syncrude's Base Mine Lake, on which work began last summer, will measure 2,000 acres when complete, and is expected by the company to "eventually replicate a natural habitat, complete with fish and waterfowl."

Non-profit environmental group Pembina describes these end pit lakes as "high-risk and experimental," noting that "historical data about using end pit lakes as toxic waste dumps are insufficient to determine whether or not they are a safe, long-term tool for reclaiming tailings waste as no example of a functional end pit lake currently exists."

There are about 30 end pit lakes planned for the Athabasca Boreal region, according to Alberta's Cumulative Environment Management Association.

"There's no way to tell how the ecology of these lakes will evolve over time," said Jennifer Grant, director of oilsands at Pembina. "It's all guesswork at this point. It's reckless."

"We're playing Russian roulette with a big part of an important ecosystem," said David Schindler, an ecology professor at the University of Alberta. "Nothing is going to grow in that soup of toxic elements except perhaps a few hydrosulfide bacteria. And all of the unforeseen events are being downplayed."

Syncrude began creating an end pit lake 30 miles north of Fort McMurray this summer, filling in a mine with fresh water from a dam to a depth of 16 feet to keep toxic tailings down at the bottom. According to company spokeswoman Cheryl Robb, trials involving "test ponds" resulted in naturally occurring ecosystems, with microbes helping to break down pollutants.

However, van Loon writes that the "largest test pond was 4 hectares–roughly 1/200th the size of Syncrude's lake."

"The big question we have is how long will it take before the water is clean, how long is it going to take before the littoral zones develop and the shoreline vegetation builds up?" said Robb. "But we're confident in the technology."

One of the major concerns surrounding end pit lakes is the possibility of contaminated water seeping into the boreal ecosystem. In October, "communities bordering Canada's Athabasca River were cautioned not to drink from the waterway after a breach in a coal tailings storage pond dumped 1 billion liters (264 million gallons) of contaminated water into an area west of Edmonton."

According to Pembina, the exact amount of seepage from tailings in Alberta is "either not known or has not been made public," but modelled estimates suggest that "11 to 12.6 million litres of tailings leak from tailings ponds each day."

Image Credit: WhitneyH / 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.

Coastal First Nations (CFN) has launched a new website to help educate the public and drum up support for the First Nations ban on bear trophy hunting in BC's Great Bear Rainforest. The website provides easy access to information about the bears, their habitat, and the First Nations ban on hunting them for trophies.

The website is a part of the Bears Forever project, launched on September 4 with the release of the short documentary 'Bear Witness' and the results of a poll documenting the opinions of BC residents on the trophy bear hunting ban.

"This website gives all British Columbians a chance to meet some of our real coastal bears, and speak up on their behalf," said Heiltsuk Coastwatch Director William Housty.

The CFN is an alliance of Wuikinuxv, Heiltsuk, Kitasoo/Xai'xais, Nuxalk, Gitga'at, Metlakatla, Old Massett, Skidegate, and the Council of the Haida Nation, collaborating to create a sustainable economy on BC's North and Central coast and Haida Gwaii.

The ban was announced by the CFN last September, prohibiting trophy hunting for bears within the unceded territories of member nations. The September 2013 telephone poll conducted by McAllister Opinion Research for the CFN Bear Working group shows that 87 percent of British Columbians surveyed agree with the ban, with 71 percent "strongly" in favour.

Angus McAllister, president of McAllister Opinion Research, said that 91 percent of hunters surveyed "agree that their fellow hunters should respect First Nations laws and customs when on First Nations territory. And 95 percent of hunters agree that people should not be hunting if they're not prepared to eat what they kill."

Despite the ban, a young grizzly bear first sighted by field technicians camping in the Kwatna estuary during spring, was killed by trophy hunters in May 2013. The bear, named 'Cheeky' by the technicians for its playful curiosity, was shot three times while he browsed in an open field. His head, paws and skin were cut off for trophies by the hunters, and the rest of his body left to rot in the estuary.

Housty said that the "so-called sport is a violation of First Nations laws and customs," and that the poll "shows people across the province share these values. Trophy hunting for bears is wasteful and unfair."

Steve Thomson, Minister of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations told the Vancouver Sun that he "[doesn't] agree with the approach they've taken to ban the activity within their traditional area." Thompson argued that the province's "policy approach provides the appropriate balance and respects the traditional opportunities and economic contribution that both resident hunting and guide-outfitting provide for B.C."

Current BC provincial regulations permit bear trophy hunting in the Great Bear Rainforest during spring and fall. Hunters are allowed to pursue bears that have just woken from hibernation or are feeding by the banks of salmon streams. Some use planes or SUVs to spot the bears.

The Great Bear Rainforest encompasses the world's largest intact temperate rainforest, stretching along the BC coast from the Discovery islands to the Alaska panhandle. It is home to grizzly bears, black bears, and is the sole habitat of the white Kermode or "spirit bear."

The CFN argues that trophy bear hunting is wasteful, disrespectful to First Nations culture, and gets in the way of ecotourism ventures like wildlife viewing. It could also prove damaging to the ecosystem of the coastal rainforest, as "nobody knows how many bears there are in the Great Bear Rainforest," according to the site.

The Bears Forever project aims to shed more light on the role of bears in the ecosystem, through a science project bringing together the University of Victoria, the Wuikinuxv, Nuxalk, Kitasoo/Xai'xais and Heiltsuk Nations, and Raincoast Conservation Foundation.

"Bears are an essential part of our culture, and the coastal ecosystem," said Nuxalk biologist and elected councillor Megan Moody. "Here in the Great Bear Rainforest, the salmon they carry into the forests is responsible for up to 80% of the nutrients in our huge old-growth coastal trees. Whether we see it or not, all sorts of plants and animals rely on bears, including us as people."

The website encourages visitors to sign a pledge showing support for the First Nations ban on trophy bear hunting. Visitors can also make donations to help get the word out and alert hunters of the ban.

Image Credit: Douglas Neasloss / Bears Forever

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 Harper government followed the advice of industry associations when making controversial changes to the Fisheries Act in the 2012 omnibus budget bills, documents relased through access to information legislation reveal.

Gloria Galloway writes for the Globe and Mail that in 2010, "the High Park Group consulting firm was commissioned by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) to gather industry and business observations about the habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act."

The released documents show that phrasing regarding changes to fisheries protections "suggest that wording was offered by industry associations," according to Galloway.

Negative feedback from the 23 organizations consulted, including the Canadian Electricity Association (CEA), the Canadian Hydropower Association (CHA) and the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce (SKCC), correlates with changes made to legislation protecting fish and their habitats.

For example, the consultant's report said that "CEA/CHA and SKCC call for modification of the act's definition of 'fishery' to clarify that it refers to 'commercial, recreational, subsistence or aboriginal use of fish as a resource."

One of the biggest changes made in Bill C-38 was, as Galloway points out, the removal of "broad protections that covered all fish habitats," narrowing the focus of the law to protect only fish "that are part of a commercial, recreational or aboriginal fisheries, or to fish that support such a fishery."

Incidentally, the High Park Group reportedly noted that there was a "lack of cogent and substantive documentation of industry positions on the issue" of concerns about the pre-2012 Fisheries Act, as well as a lack of evidence to back up claims including "that it was too unpredictable, that it caused considerable barriers to infrastructure investment, and that it increased regulatory costs and timelines."

The Department of Fisheries and Oceans didn't neglect to also consult with environmental groups about the Fisheries Act, having done so between 2006 and 2009. It appears feedback from environmental groups did not figure as heavily in the changes ultimately made.

In fact, another report released by the department under access to information said that environmental groups called the Fisheries Act "one of the strongest laws in Canada that can be used to protect our environment" and called for it to be strengthened and enforced.

Andrew Gage of West Coast Environmental Law, one of the environmental groups consulted by the DFO, said the Harper Conservatives are "a government listening only to industry concerns."

The DFO reportedly said in an e-mail that they're "still focusing on preserving fish habitat," but using a "common-sense approach that focuses on managing threats to Canada's recreational, commercial and aboriginal fisheries and the fish and fish habitat on which they depend."

Critics of the changes to the Fisheries Act include Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, who said the DFO created "a new definition for what a fishery is and completely [ignored] the comments from a wide consultation from people on the ground who are actually protecting the fishery."

This isn't the first time that the Harper government has proven its commitment to putting 'natural resources development' and industry interests ahead of environmental protection.

Other documents released through access to information requests have already revealed that the federal government solicited industry support for environmental reforms written into the Omnibus Budget Bill C-38. Additonal documents show the government made pipeline development a top priority for that bill, at the fossil fuel industry's request, and further colluded with the oil and gas industry when tweaking the bill's environmental legislation and industrial project review process.

Image Credit: Geoffrey Kehrig / 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.