Month: February 2019

Mary Gorman of the Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition (SOSS), speaks passionately for protecting the Gulf of St. Lawrence at Pa’qtnkek Water Ceremony with Ethan Hawke, October 26, 2015.

Credit: Andrea Schaffer via Flickr

After four years of research by the St. Lawrence Coalition, Gulf 101 – Oil in the Gulf of St. Lawrence: Facts, Myths, and Future Outlook was released last week (June 10^th 2014) in tandem with World Oceans Week. The report explores the facts and myths surrounding oil exploration and exploitation in the Gulf as well as possible future scenarios that may result from these activities.

The 80-page report highlights our lack of understanding towards the ecosystems within the Gulf as well as the oceans currents and other environmental components found there. The environment of the Gulf is subject to conditions that are not seen in other areas of oil development such as winter ice that would make cleaning up an oil spill almost impossible, threatening the destruction of the slowly recovering cod stocks as well as the currently thriving fisheries and tourism industries that so many communities depend on.

The report provides true insight for why Save Our Seas and Shores and the St. Lawrence Coalition asks you to lend your support to a moratorium on oil and gas in the Gulf. Go here to take action!

The Gulf 101 Report generated massive media attention in all five Gulf provinces. Here is a selection:

Newfoundland

The Telegram: http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2014-06-09/article-3755759/Group-calls-for-oil-and-gas-moratorium-in-the-Gulf-of-St.-Lawrence/1

Nova Scotia

Chronicle Herald: http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1206569-hunt-for-oil-gas-in-gulf-of-st-lawrence-questioned

CBC Nova Scotia: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/groups-call-for-gulf-of-st-lawrence-oil-and-gas-moratorium-1..2669369

Prince Edward Island:

The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2014-06-09/article-3756428/Group-calls-for-moratorium-on-drilling-in-Gulf-of-St.-Lawrence/1

http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/Opinion/Letter-to-editor/2014-06-10/article-3757764/Oceans-Day-reminds-us-to-protect-the-Gulf/1

Quebec

CBC News Montreal (online): http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/moratorium-on-gulf-of-st-lawrence-oil-exploration-sought-1.2669637 (June 9)

Go hear to read the Press Release on the report from the David Suzuki Foundation:

English: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/media/news/2014/06/groups-and-first-nations-in-five-provinces-demand-a-stop-oil-and-gas-activities/

French: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/fr/medias/communiques-de-presse/2014/06/des-groupes-et-premieres-nations-des-cinq-provinces-exigent-un-arret-des-activit/

Man-made noise in the oceans may have significant damaging effects on shellfish populations, according to a new international study.

This University of St. Andrews in Scotland press release below describes the study:

Credit: University of St. Andrews

A team of researchers from the Scottish Oceans Institute at the University of St Andrews, Scotland, the University of La Laguna, Canary Islands and the University of Auckland, New Zealand, found that marine invertebrates, such as shellfish, suffered significant body malformations after being exposed to noise.

The team conducted a sound playback experiment on New Zealand scallop larvae, comparing their development to a control group kept in quiet conditions. The results show that the exposed scallops suffered significant development delays, with 46% of them developing body abnormalities, while no malformations were found in the controlled larvae.

The strong impacts observed in the experiment suggest that abnormalities and growth delays could also occur at lower noise levels in the wild, suggesting routine underwater sounds from oil exploration and construction could affect the survival of wild scallops.

Team leader, Dr Aguilar de Soto, from the University of St Andrews and the University of La Laguna said:

Nobody knew that noise exposure could affect the growth of animals so dramatically so it was a real surprise to discover malformations in these microscopic larvae. What is actually going wrong inside the cells is still a mystery that we need to investigate. Shellfish larvae go through radical body changes as they grow and noise seems to disrupt this natural process.

Fishermen worldwide complain about reductions in captures follow seismic surveys used for oil explorations. Our results suggest that noise could be one factor explaining delayed effects on stocks?

MASTS (Marine Alliance for Science and Technology for Scotland) senior research fellow Dr Mark Johnson of St Andrews said:

Between shipping, construction and oil explorations, we are making more and more noise in the oceans. There is already concern about the possible effects of this on whales and dolphins. Our results show that even small animals could be affected by noise. It is important to find out what noise levels are safe for shellfish to help reduce our impact on these key links in the food chain?

The full report is published in the Nature Publishing Group journal, Scientific Reports.

This 32 page report presents the Gulf of St. Lawrence as a unique marine ecosystem that features complex oceanographic processes and also maintains a high biological diversity of marine life. The information provided covers physical systems such as the properties of water, physical oceanography and geological components. The biological aspects include descriptions of macrophytic, planktonic and benthic communities, reptiles, fish, marine birds and mammals. There is also a discussion on the human components such as settlement, industrial activity and governance. By providing relevant information in this format the report highlights the challenge of managing multiple human activities within the context of a dynamic, diverse and unique marine ecosystem. It was produced by Fisheries and Oceans Canada in 2005.

Gulf of St. Lawrence A Unique Ecosystem DFO

Are blasting airguns jeopardizing Atlantic Ocean’s ecosystem?

by Robert Devet Halifax Media Co-op

November 21, 2013

K’JIPUKTUK, HALIFAX – Nova Scotia’s offshore oil and gas production is on the upswing. Natural gas is flowing from the Deep Panuke natural gas field on the Scotian Shelf.

And now there are two new kids on the block. This time it’s oil they are after.

Shell Canada spent the summer mapping the geology of a large area in the Shelburne Basin about 300 kilometers south east of Halifax. Next summer BP Exploration (Canada) will follow suit.

Shell for one is happy with the results of its discovery effort. “The initial indication is that the data we’re seeing looks really good,” Shell spokesperson Larry Lalonde told the Chronicle Herald in early September of this year. “We’re quite excited about what we are seeing.”

But local environmental activists are worried. And the concern is not just about spills like the one we saw in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. Concerns emerge even in this early discovery stage when geologists are determining how much oil there really is, and where exactly that oil can be found.

Problem is, that discovery process is a very noisy affair.

Seismic testing involves the use of airguns fired from moving ships. The airguns generate loudblasts below the ocean’s surface approximately every 20 seconds. The nature of the resulting seismic waves allow geologists to map the geological strata below the ocean floor.

Many environmentalists believe that the noise generated by airguns, almost as loud as dynamite explosions, has a profoundly negative effect on fish, sea turtles and whales in the seismic testing area.

Beaked Whales spend 98% of their time below the surface and are unlikely to be spotted by observers on board of the seismic testing vessels, biologist Lindy Weilgart tells the Halifax Media Co-op. Photo: WikiCommons.

Lindy Weilgart, a Dalhousie University research associate in Biology, has studied the effects of seismic testing on marine wildlife since she was a postdoctoral fellow at Cornell University.

Biologist Lindy Weilgart believes more can be done to protect marine wildlife from seismic testing off the coast of Nova Scotia. Photo: Dalhousie University

“When the airgun is fired you actually see a bubble coming to the surface, air is released under incredibly high pressure, and with a very sharp onset,” says Weilgart. “One shot, and if you don’t have ear protectors on you can go deaf.”

Weilgart is not just worried that sea creatures find themselves too close to the airguns and suffer permanent hearing damage. There are other reasons why seismic testing is particularly hard on ocean dwellers, says Weilgart.

Although under water sound drops off faster, it carries much further than it does on land. The sound of the airguns can be heard as far as 4,000 kilometers away. Combine that with how crucial sound is for fish and sea mammals, and you have a big problem.

“Often it is the quiet signals that are important,” says Weilgart. “For instance, fin whales have to listen for the sounds of potential mates, to meet up. For them it could mean the difference between a mating opportunity or not.”

And not just whales. Weilgart mentions studies that show that fish make very poor decisions about handling their prey when in a noisy environment. Even squid are affected.

The impact of seismic testing on ocean wildlife is complex. Weilgart gives example after example to drive home this point.

“We have to look at it in the way the animal experiences it, we have to be animal-centric,” says Weilgart. And behaviour isn’t always a good indicator of what is really going on.

“Sometimes the most vulnerable and most desperate of the individuals will stay, not because they aren’t bothered by the seismic testing, but because they can’t afford to leave, they don’t have the luxury,” says Weilgart.

Sea creatures are not just facing this one seismic survey, they are dealing with other noise sources as well, says Weilgart. Ships, the bow thrusters of oil platforms, the seismic ships themselves make noise.

Then there is stress caused by overfishing and loss of prey, climate change and warming of the oceans, acidification, the list goes on.

Environmental approval for this summer’s seismic testing by Shell was granted by the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board, an independent joint federal-provincial agency that regulates all offshore oil and gas activities.

It’s written approval of this summer’s seismic testing effort states that it is not likely to result in significant adverse environmental effects, especially given the precautionary measures to which Shell has committed.

Those precautionary measures consist of independent monitors who travel on board of the ships and watch for whales and turtles, and sensors that pick up sounds made by whales below the ocean surface. Work stops immediately when there is any sign that such ocean wildlife is present.

Mark Butler, Policy Director at the Ecology Action Centre in Halifax, does not think that is good enough.

What monitors are able to observe is just the tip of the iceberg, Butler says. Thick fog and big waves can make it very difficult to see a tail flick somewhere in that vast expanse of ocean.

Butler is also not happy that the exploration by Shell was taking place during the summer. He believes that it is better to stop seismic testing during sensitive periods.

“People don’t realize how much life comes into our waters in the spring and summer to feed, it’s like a highway out there,” says Butler.

This is why Butler asked that Shell postpone the seismic testing until later in the year, but Shell refused, arguing that the project was already approved and that bad weather in winter was too much of a risk to the crew.

“If you are striving, as some would perhaps suggest, for no environmental impact than there would be no man-made activities on land or on sea,” says Stuart Pinks, CEO of the Offshore Petroleum Board.

“But the purpose of the environmental assessment is to make sure that there is no significant adverse impact and to minimize any impact that has been identified to the lowest extent possible,” Pinks says.

Minimizing impact may be a matter of degree, but for Weilgart we’re not cautious enough.

“You can’t keep asking the animal to adapt, there is not enough luxury and play in the system,” says Weilgart. “The oceans are not doing well, and now you are throwing this at them.”

“At the very minimum you have to be precautionary.”

Follow Robert Devet on Twitter @DevetRobert

http://halifax.mediacoop.ca/story/offshore-seismic-testing-puts-wildlife-risk-biolog/19939

https://www.facebook.com/events/575211705860496/

Read here what The Guardian news of PEI says about the issue and these public talks.

Seismic airgun activity for oil and gas exploration has been approved by the Obama Administration. At present, the Department of Interior is deciding whether to allow seismic surveys for offshore drilling in the Atlantic Ocean from New Jersey to Florida. The proposed surveys would employ loud and continuous sound blasts that would cause devastating impacts to whales, dolphins, sea turtles, fishes and other marine life, as well as the ecosystem.
Blasts from seismic airguns have been shown to interfere with the mating, feeding, communication, and migration activities of numerous species, including the critically endangered Northern Atlantic right whale which numbers around 300 whales.

http://www.change.org/en-CA/petitions/seismic-airgun-activity-off-atlantic-coast-of-u-s-could-harm-thousands-of-marine-animals?utm_campaign=mailto_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Joann Alberstat Chronicle Herald

March 8, 2013

Shell Canada’s proposed seismic survey could have an impact on the migration patterns of bluefin tuna off the coast of Nova Scotia, the federal Fisheries Department says.

A department official has told the industry regulator that the global energy giant should have a more detailed plan to avoid interfering with migrating tuna, or the midshore fishery, on the Scotian Shelf.

“New information on bluefin tuna migrations indicate that they travel along the shelf edge during the same time as the proposed seismic activity,” Donald Humphrey said Wednesday in an email to the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board.

Humphrey, with the habitat management division, also said department staff have heard from several area fisherman who have asked Shell for more information about the seismic program but have not had a response.

“I would like to emphasize the importance of engaging these stakeholders,” the filing says.

Calgary-based Shell, a subsidiary of the Dutch oil and gas company, plans to start a 3-D seismic survey program of six deepwater blocks. The parcels are located about 350 kilometres south of Halifax.

Shell wants to explore almost 12,200 square kilometres of an area known as the Shelburne Basin.

The wide-azimuth surveys, part of a $1-billion exploration program planned over six years, will help the company examine the basin for potential drilling sites.

The survey program will run from April to September, with more work scheduled during the same time frame in 2014.

The 3-D surveys involve several vessels towing air-gun source arrays, with the two outer vessels also towing streamers.

While DFO has raised concerns about bluefin tuna, an Eastern Shore fisherman said Friday he’s concerned about the possible impact the survey could have on the snow crab fishery.

Peter Connors said scientific studies about the potential impact of seismic work on fish species have been inconclusive.

“The scientists aren’t prepared to say that it does cause any harm. It may or may not. We really don’t know,” the Sober Island fisherman said.

Connors, who is president of the Eastern Shore Fishermen’s Protective Association, also fishes lobster and halibut, which is another species found in the deepwater area that Shell wants to be explore.

Because the survey work would take several months, fishermen are also talking to Shell about minimizing the seismic program’s impact on various fisheries, he said.

A spokesman for aboriginal fishermen in Truro said the seismic work would also be done in an area that has swordfishing.

“They are aware of the longliners and are addressing that issue,” Roger Hunka, director of the Maritime Aboriginal Aquatic Resources Secretariat, said of the dialogue swordfisherman are having with Shell.

A Shell spokesman said the company has consulted with fisheries representatives and will continue to do so.

“We have made efforts to provide project information regularly and respond to any questions or concerns,” Stephen Doolan said in an email.

The board said earlier this week that it takes all stakeholder comments into account in deciding on the survey plan.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/business/911706-ottawa-shell-survey-could-affect-bluefin-tuna

From the US based group Oceana.org

According to government estimates, 138,500 whales and dolphins will soon be injured and possibly killed along the East Coast if exploration companies are allowed to use dangerous blasts of noise to search for offshore oil and gas.

The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) is considering allowing geophysical companies, working on behalf of oil and gas companies, to use seismic airguns to search for offshore oil and gas in the Atlantic Ocean, from Delaware to Florida. These airguns use compressed air to generate intense pulses of sound, which are 100,000 times more intense than a jet engine.

These loud blasts are used on a recurring basis, going off every ten seconds, for 24 hours a day, often for weeks on end. They are so loud that they penetrate through the ocean, and miles into the seafloor, then bounce back, bringing information to the surface about the location of buried oil and gas deposits.

Airgun blasts harm whales, dolphins, sea turtles and fish. The types of impacts marine mammals may endure include temporary and permanent hearing loss, abandonment of habitat, disruption of mating and feeding, beach strandings and even death. Seismic airguns could devastate marine life, and harm fisheries and coastal economies along the Atlantic coast. Seismic testing in the Atlantic would also be the first major step toward offshore drilling, which further harms the marine environment through leaks, oil spills, habitat destruction and greenhouse gas emissions.

This seismic testing, and all of the consequences that may ensue, are unnecessary because there cannot be any drilling in the Atlantic for at least the next five years, and oil and gas companies already own undeveloped leases on millions of acres of federal lands and water.

Follow the conversation on Twitter at #seismic

Watch this short video – What is Seismic Airgun Testing?

Download a copy of “A Deaf Whale is a Dead Whale: Seismic Airgun Testing for Oil and Gas Threatens Marine Life and Coastal Economies” (PDF)
***************************************************************************

Click here to learn more about seismic testing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence

Oceana, a US based organization, explains seismic testing in this short, but potent video.

Save Our Seas and Shores is not alone in our work to protect the Gulf.
Here’s only some of the many groups working to protect the Gulf of St. Lawrence from oil and gas development!

Sierra Club Atlantic

PEI Watershed Alliance

David Suzuki Foundation

St. Lawrence Coalition Saint-Laurent

Council of Canadians

Ecology Action Centre

Blue Whale Campaign

The Gulf Restoration Network is committed to uniting and empowering people to protect and restore the natural resources of the Gulf Region. Since the BP disaster began in the Gulf of Mexico, the Gulf Restoration Network has been documenting the environmental and community impacts of the disaster through an ongoing video series, Gulf Tides.

It’s like a bad dream that you can’t wake up from. The company that has wanted to drill in the Gulf of St. Lawrence for nine years, the same company responsible for seismic testing while the endangered blue whale was migrating, wants a new license.

This in spite of numerous calls for a moratorium on all oil and gas development in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and an historic statement from the Chiefs of the Mi’qmawei Mawiomi calling for a 12-year moratorium on oil and gas in The Gulf.

We need to wake up from this nightmare. It is up to the federal Minister of Natural Resources, Bill Carr and the Newfoundland and Labrador Natural Resources Minister Siobhan Coady to make this stop, and they will receive your comments and letters until October 17th in response to this request for a new license.

The Gulf of St. Lawrence is one of the most precious marine ecosystems we have. Given the federal government’s commitment to better environmental regulation and protection of our oceans, it’s time to declare the Gulf of St. Lawrence off limits to oil and gas and to start making good on promises.

Please send your letter  today! 

Thank you for taking action.

Gretchen Fitzgerald – National Program Director
Sierra Club Canada Foundation

Save Our Seas and Shores, PEI Chapter c/o Voluntary Resource Centre 81 Prince St. Charlottetown PEI

C1A 4R3

September 26, 2016

Hon. James Gordon Carr Minister of Natural Resources

Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E4

Hon. Siobhan Coady Minister of Natural Resources PO Box 8700 St. John’s NL A1B 4J6

Dear Ministers:

Re: Proposed Issuance of New Licence to Corridor Resources by Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

The Prince Edward Island chapter of Save Our Seas and Shores (SOSS PEI) protests the proposed issuance of a new exploration licence to Corridor Resources to replace the licence it has held since 2008 (Exploration Licence No. 1105) for the same lands. SOSS PEI urges you to refrain from approving issuance of this new licence to Corridor Resources.

Exploration Licence No. 1105 was issued on January 15, 2008 for the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, located mid-way between the Magdalen Islands and the west coast of Newfoundland. This four-year licence was extended in 2011, 2013 and most recently on January 4, 2016. In January 2017, Licence No. 1105 will reach the maximum non-renewable term of nine years. We note that, for each extension, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (the NL Board) waived the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension.

In its notice in the Canada Gazette (2016-09-17), the NL Board proposes to issue the new licence pursuant to paragraph 61(1)(b) of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act, S.C., 1987, c.3, and paragraph 60(1)(b) of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act, R.S.N.L. 1990, c. C-2. These paragraphs state that the board may issue an interest without making a call for bids where “the board is issuing the interest to an interest owner for the surrender by the interest owner, at the request of the board, of another interest or a share of another interest, in relation to all or a portion of the offshore area subject to that other interest.” In this case, the NL Board is proposing a new licence for “the same lands as those associated with Exploration Licence No. 1105” (as stated in the Canada Gazette), not for “another interest or a share of another interest.” Such a misuse of the provisions of the Act to circumvent the nine year maximum term of a licence should not be permitted.

The notice in the Canada Gazette states that the new licence “will provide appropriate time for a robust review process…” We note that the NL Board has had plenty of time to initiate a robust review process. In August 2011, the NL Board contracted with former New Brunswick Ombudsman Bernard Richard to carry out an independent review of the Old Harry project, then in February 2012 terminated his contract, without justification, before any public consultations were held. Since then, the NL Board has dragged its heels despite numerous inquiries asking when and how these consultations will be carried out. The issuance of a new licence to Corridor Resources to cover for the NL Board’s inexplicable failure to conduct a review or the required public and Aboriginal consultations would be an abuse of process.

We note that, in a Canadian Press article printed in the Charlottetown Guardian on September 17, 2016, the Natural Resources Canada spokesperson is quoted as saying that the government will take into account feedback received through the Canada Gazette process in deciding whether to approve the new licence. We strongly urge you to take our concerns into account and refuse to approve the new licence for Corridor Resources on the Old Harry prospect.

Sincerely,

Colin Jeffrey

Chair, Save Our Seas and Shores-PEI Chapter (SOSS PEI)
SOSS is a coalition of fishing organizations, environmental and tourism groups, coastal landowners, First Nations organizations, and individuals who are concerned that the ecologically rich and diverse Gulf of St. Lawrence, home to over 4,000 marine species, is particularly sensitive to any disturbance caused by seismic surveys, exploration and drilling for oil and gas. cc Sean Kelly, Manager of Public Relations, C-NLOPB Prime Minister Rt. Hon. Justin Trudeau Hon. Catherine McKenna, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard Elizabeth May, MP and Leader, Green Party of Canada Hon. Lawrence MacAulay, MP Hon. Wayne Easter, MP Sean Casey, MP Robert Morrissey, MP Hon. H. Wade MacLauchlan, Premier of Prince Edward Island Hon. Robert Mitchell, Minister of Communities, Land and Environment Hon. Paula Biggar, Minister of Transportation, Infrastructure and Energy Hon. Alan McIsaac, Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries

Greg Wilson, Manager, Environmental Land Management

Opponents say it’s about time the federal government intervened to protect the area.
By Ian Bickis

The Canadian Press
Sept. 16, 2016

CALGARY—A regulator’s proposal to give more time to an energy company that wants to drill in the Gulf of St. Lawrence is provoking anger from opponents who say it’s high time the federal government intervene to protect the area.

The Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board said Friday it is proposing to grant Corridor Resources a new four-year exploration licence in an area known as Old Harry because there isn’t enough time to complete consultations and an environmental assessment before its current licence expires Jan. 14.

“We’re reeling, absolutely reeling,” said Mary Gorman, co-founder of the Save our Seas and Shores Coalition, which has been pushing against the Halifax-based company’s drilling plans for the nine years it has had a licence for exploratory drilling in Old Harry.

“It’s like ‘Groundhog Day.’ You’re stuck in some kind of time warp that keeps repeating itself.”

The Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition and other environmental and First Nation groups have been calling for a moratorium to prevent offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence over concerns of the potential effects a spill would have on the area’s sensitive ecology.

“I would say to the honourable prime minister, ‘Where’s the beef?’” Gorman said. “What are you actually doing to protect the East Coast. … You got every seat out of us. Where are you for us now?”

The federal government could not immediately be reached for comment.

The board, which regulates Newfoundland’s offshore oil industry, said its proposal would give it the time needed to conduct a review of drilling in Old Harry. The proposal requires the approval of the provincial and federal governments.

Provincial Natural Resources Minister Siobhan Coady said in a statement that the government will take time to consider it.

“Our decision will be informed by evidence, including feedback from stakeholders, as well as our social licence,” Coady said. “We support responsible economic development, protection of the environment, and worker health and safety in Newfoundland and Labrador’s offshore.”

Corridor Resources did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

The federal government has estimated that the Gulf and surrounding areas potentially hold 39 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 1.5 billion barrels of oil.

The Old Harry site is located about 80 kilometres off the southwest tip of Newfoundland.

Source: Toronto Star

Lobster fisherman wary of Gulf of St. Lawrence oil drilling FRAM DINSHAW STAFF REPORTER Published May 10, 2016 – 6:25pm

Last Updated May 11, 2016 – 8:55am

As lobster season gets underway Tuesday in Cape Breton, a top local fisherman is warning that oil exploration and drilling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence could wreak havoc on local marine life.

“It could ruin our industry,” said Jordan MacDougall, president of the Inverness South Fisherman’s Association.

He warned that any oil spill would settle on the seabed — prime lobster habitat — and devastate their populations.

“You wouldn’t be able to sell your product and it would probably give Canada a negative name for that product from other areas,” said MacDougall.

His comments come just four months after regulators granted a one-year extension on an oil exploration licence for Corridor Resources Inc. at the Old Harry site off the western coast of Newfoundland, in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence.

But some warn that drilling for oil at Old Harry may detonate a ticking time bomb.

According to the David Suzuki Foundation, a 10,000-barrel oil spill at Old Harry in winter would hit the coasts of Cape Breton, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, and Les Iles de-la-Madeleine, which belong to Quebec. Simulations at other times of year also predict oil hitting the west and southern coastline of Newfoundland.

The areas that would be worst-affected by any spill would likely vary between seasons, but the Gulf of Saint Lawrence’s prevailing current runs anti-clockwise, which would push oil away from the open Atlantic and potentially endanger all five provinces bordering it.

“The Gulf of Saint Lawrence should be off-limits for drilling because it’s an extremely valuable marine area in terms of fisheries — lobster, tuna, snow crab, as well as herring,” said federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May.

She also said the gulf was home to several species of endangered whales. The Species at Risk Public Registry lists blue whales as living in the gulf. The Alternative Journal also listed belugas as endangered in late 2014 after their numbers in the Saint Lawrence estuary and gulf dropped below 1,000.

“It’s really critical that we have protection of the Gulf of Saint Lawrence,” said May.

But she said that needed environmental protections were stripped away by the former Conservative government when it passed C-38 in 2012, an omnibus bill that reduced protections for Canadian fisheries and fish habitats. Protection is now limited to only commercial, recreational or First Nations fisheries. Furthermore, the new law forbids only the killing of fish or the permanent altering of their habitats.

C-38 also included a new Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, replacing a stricter law that was passed in 1992, according to the Environmental Law Centre (ELC).

The 2012 act removed the requirement for a federal environmental assessment for all development projects. Even in cases when a project is designated by regulation, C-38 allows the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to determine that an assessment is not required.

Secondly, the federal government may decide not to conduct its own environmental assessment of a designated project on the basis that the project is being assessed provincially, which the ELC maintains is a delegation of federal power and jurisdiction to the provinces.

This leaves provincial agencies such as the Canada-Newfoundland & Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (CNLOPB) and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum board free to conduct their own assessments without referring to the federal cabinet, according to May.

“The rest of Canada is not paying attention to these smaller agencies that got power to do environmental assessments under Harper,” said May, who added that C-38 had to be repealed by the present Liberal government.

May also criticized the renewal of Corridor Resources Inc.’s oil exploration licence for free in January.

“It’s the fourth year they’ve gotten it for free,” said May.

However, the CNLOPB said that environmental protection was a top priority when reviewing applications for oil drilling in areas like Old Harry.

“The Canada-Newfoundland & Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board delivers world-class regulatory oversight with safety and environmental protection as our top priorities.

“A comprehensive strategic environmental assessment update was completed for the Western Newfoundland Offshore Area in 2014, and a project-specific environmental assessment would also be required prior to authorization of a drilling program under the board’s jurisdiction,” said board spokesman Sean Kelly in an email.

He added that other obligations had to be met regarding installations, training and competency, emergency response plans, financial capacity and the industrial benefits of a proposed program.

The Herald tried contacting both Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Corridor Resources Inc.’s CEO Steve Moran for more information but was unable to reach them by late Tuesday afternoon.

Source: Chronicle Herald  (Links added – not contained in original article.)

January 25, 2016

Hon. James Gordon Carr Minister of Natural Resources

Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E4

Hon. Siobhan Coady Minister of Natural Resources PO Box 8700

St. John’s NL A1B 4J6

Dear Ministers:

Re: Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board and the Gulf of St. Lawrence

I am writing of behalf of the Prince Edward Island chapter of Save Our Seas and Shores (SOSS PEI). SOSS is a coalition of fishing organizations, environmental and tourism groups, coastal landowners, First Nations organizations, and individuals who are concerned that the ecologically rich and diverse Gulf of St. Lawrence, home to over 4,000 marine species, is particularly sensitive to any disturbance caused by seismic surveys, exploration and drilling for oil and gas.

As you know, for the third time in the past four years, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (the NL Board) has granted a one-year extension to Corridor Resources exploration licence on the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, located mid-way between the Magdalen Islands and the west coast of Newfoundland. Citing regulatory factors as its reason, the NL Board also waived, for the third time in four years, the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension. The “regulatory factors” the NL Board referred to is the requirement for public and Aboriginal consultations which the Board must hold as part of the environmental assessment for this project.

In August 2011, the NL Board contracted with former New Brunswick Ombudsman Bernard Richard to carry out an independent review of the Old Harry project, then in February 2012 terminated his contract, without justification, before any public consultations were held. Since then, the NL Board has dragged its heels despite numerous inquiries asking when and how these consultations will be carried out. Even now, the NL Board in its January 15, 2016 news release, says it will announce plans for consultations with Aboriginal groups and the public “at a later date”, not sometime soon. Does the Board intend to keep on delaying the consultations indefinitely and continue to give Corridor Resources free licence extensions?

The current licence extension for Corridor Resources is just one in a series of irresponsible, biased actions and decisions on the part of the NL Board. In 2012, the Board contracted with AMEC Environment and Infrastructure to update the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Newfoundland portion of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The purpose of the SEA was to assist the Board “in determining whether further exploration rights should be offered in whole or in part for the Western NL Offshore Area.” During the time the SEA was being conducted, the NL Board issued a call for bids for licences, including licences within the Gulf. Clearly, the Board assumed that further exploration rights would be offered in the Gulf, regardless of the findings of the SEA.

The SEA update report from AMEC discussed: numerous risks to marine species and the fisheries and tourism industries, the presence of many sensitive areas and endangered species, important data gaps, and the complex and deteriorating state of the Gulf. The lack of social acceptability was apparent from the results of the public consultations held in the five Gulf provinces. Of 597 written submissions and verbal comments, 582 expressed concerns regarding continued petroleum exploration in the Gulf. The logical conclusion, based on the findings in the report, would have been that the known risks outweigh the potential benefits. Instead of the normal procedure in which the authors of a report write the conclusions, the NL Board made the bizarre decision to write the conclusions itself. (This fact is no longer obvious in the final report on the Board’s website, perhaps due to criticism the Board received for writing its own conclusions.) Predictably, the NL Board concluded that “petroleum exploration activities generally can be undertaken in the Western NL area using the mitigation measures identified in the document.”

In addition, the Board concluded that suggestions that petroleum exploration activities in the Gulf should cease were policy decisions not within its mandate, despite the fact that the purpose of the report was, as noted above, to assist the Board in deciding whether to continue offering exploration rights in the NL portion of the Gulf.

As you know, to date only two of the five Gulf provinces have set up Offshore Petroleum Boards: Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. The Nova Scotia Board ceased any activity in the Gulf after a public review panel responded to public and Aboriginal concerns in 1999. If the NL Board did not have a pro-petroleum industry bias, it would also cease all activity in the Gulf.

The roles of the NL Board are to facilitate the exploration and development of hydrocarbon resources in the NL Offshore and to protect the environment and worker safety. As noted in the Wells Report of 2010, these are conflicting roles. Clearly, the NL Board shows by its actions and decisions that protecting the Gulf ecosystem is not a priority.

We believe that the federal and NL governments have abrogated their responsibilities to oversee the decisions of this appointed body. Decisions, including the recent free extension of Corridor Resources licence, appear to have been rubber-stamped by the federal and NL Ministers of Natural Resources. Only NL benefits from oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf, while the other four Gulf provinces share the risks. The protection of marine species and the rights of the First Nations, fishers, and other residents of the Gulf provinces to protect the Gulf ecosystem and pursue their livelihoods are being ignored.

In light of the failure of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board to act in a responsible manner, SOSS PEI is calling on the federal and Newfoundland and Labrador governments to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to offshore oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Sincerely, Ellie Reddin

Past-Chair, Save Our Seas and Shores-PEI Chapter (SOSS PEI)

c. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay, MP Hon. Wayne Easter, MP Sean Casey, MP Robert Morrissey, MP Hon. H. Wade MacLauchlan, Premier of Prince Edward Island Hon. Robert Mitchell, Minister of Communities, Land and Environment Hon. Paula Biggar, Minister of Transportation, Infrastructure and Energy Hon. Alan McIsaac, Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries

Greg Wilson, Manager, Environmental Land Management

Defenders of the Gulf of St. Lawrence who live on Prince Edward Island are telling James Carr, Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources, and his provincial counterpart in Newfoundland and Labrador Siobhan Coady that it is time to pull the plug on the C-NLOPB.

This action follows the publication of Ellie Reddin’s Jan 27th article in the Journal Pioneer and PEI’s The Guardian, which pointed out a series of irresponsible, biased decisions made by the C-NLOPB over the past several years, including their recent decision to provide Corridor Resources a third extension on their exploration license for the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. In her followup letter to the Ministers, Reddin wrote: “Citing regulatory factors as its reason, the [C-NLOPB] also waived, for the third time in four years, the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension. The “regulatory factors” the Board referred to is the requirement for public and Aboriginal consultations which the Board must hold as part of the environmental assessment for this project.”

“Decisions, including the recent free extension of Corridor Resources licence, appear to have been rubber-stamped by the federal and NL Ministers of Natural Resources. Only NL benefits from oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf, while the other four Gulf provinces share the risks. The protection of marine species and the rights of the First Nations, fishers, and other residents of the Gulf provinces to protect the Gulf ecosystem and pursue their livelihoods are being ignored.”

In light of the failure of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board to act in a responsible manner, SOSS PEI is calling on it’s members to write to the Ministers to demand that the federal and Newfoundland and Labrador governments to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to offshore oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

See SOSS PEI full letter to federal Minister James Carr, and NL Minister of Natural Resources Siobhan Coady here.

The Gulf needs your support. Add your voice to SOSS PEI’s by sending a short email message to the Ministers – here’s is a sample message you could copy and paste, or personalize as you wish:

Dear Ministers:

I am writing to express my support for the letter you recently received from SOSS PEI regarding the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB) and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. As outlined in the letter, the C-NLOPB has shown by its actions and decisions over the past several years that it is failing to carry out its responsibility to protect the Gulf environment. As Ministers responsible for the C-NLOPB, please act to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

(Your Name)
(Your home community and province)

Email addresses for the two Ministers are:
Minister.Ministre@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca and siobhancoady@gov.nl.ca

Mary Gorman of the Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition (SOSS), speaks passionately for protecting the Gulf of St. Lawrence at Pa’qtnkek Water Ceremony with Ethan Hawke, October 26, 2015.

By Ellie Reddin
January 26, 2016

For the third time in the past four years, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board has granted a one-year extension to Corridor Resources exploration licence on the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and waived the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension.

This extension was granted because the board has not conducted the public and Aboriginal consultations required as part of the environmental assessment for this project.

For the past two years, the board has dragged its heels despite numerous inquiries asking when and how these consultations will be carried out. It says it will announce plans for consultations “at a later date.”

Does the board intend to keep on delaying the consultations indefinitely and continue to give Corridor Resources free licence extensions?.


The current licence extension for Corridor Resources is just one in a series of irresponsible, biased actions and decisions on the part of the board. In 2012, the board contracted with AMEC to update the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Newfoundland portion of the Gulf. The purpose of the SEA was to assist the board “in determining whether further exploration rights should be offered in whole or in part for the Western NL Offshore Area.” While the SEA was being conducted, the board issued a call for bids, including for licences within the Gulf. Clearly, the board assumed that further exploration rights would be offered in the Gulf, regardless of the findings of the SEA.

The SEA update report from AMEC discussed: numerous risks to marine species and the fisheries and tourism industries, the presence of many sensitive areas and endangered species, important data gaps, lack of social acceptability, and the complex and deteriorating state of the Gulf. The logical conclusion would have been that the known risks outweigh the potential benefits. Although the authors of a report normally write the conclusions, the board decided to write the conclusions itself. Predictably, they concluded that “petroleum exploration activities generally can be undertaken in the Western NL area…”

Only two of the five Gulf provinces have set up Offshore Petroleum Boards: Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. The Nova Scotia Board ceased any activity in the Gulf in 1999. If the NL Board did not have a pro-petroleum industry bias, it would also cease all activity in the Gulf.

The roles of the NL Board include facilitating hydrocarbon resource development in the NL Offshore and protecting the environment. As noted in the Wells Report of 2010, these are conflicting mandates. Clearly, the NL Board shows by its actions and decisions that protecting the Gulf ecosystem is not a priority.

Given the failure of the NL Board to act in a responsible manner, Save Our Seas and Shores P.E.I. is calling on the federal and Newfoundland and Labrador governments to remove the board’s mandate pertaining to the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Ellie Reddin Save Our Seas and Shores-P.E.I. Chapter

Cornwall, PEI

Source: Journal Pioneer

(OTTAWA)  January 22, 2016 – Elizabeth May is standing alongside local community leaders to denounce the decision of provincial and federal regulators to give Corridor Resources Inc. a free pass for the third time at the Old Harry site, a proposed deep water oil well in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence.

“This is a shocking decision,” stated the Green Party Leader. “Putting thousands of livelihoods and our environment at risk by continuing to explore for oil and natural gas in this critical ecosystem is unacceptable. To compound the problem by not even requiring them to pay their fee, that is really outrageous.”

Community groups have long been calling for a full moratorium on oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Corridor Resources Inc. had until Friday, January 22 to pay a $1-million deposit to extend their licence, but provincial and federal regulators agreed to waive that fee earlier this week – the third time this has happened. The local fishing industry is worth in excess of $1.5 billion, and tourism along the Gulf directly employs tens of thousands of people across multiple provinces.

“This is a free pass to the oil and gas industry, and a slap in the face to fishermen, Aboriginal communities, and the local tourism industry, which all rely on the health of the Gulf of St. Lawrence,” concluded May. “This licence should never have been extended, much less for free.”

– 30 –

For additional information or to arrange an interview, contact:

Debra Eindiguer Debra.eindiguer@greenparty.ca

t: (613) 240-8921

Green Party of Canada | Parti vert du Canada

812-116 rue Albert Street Ottawa, ON K1P 5G3

Canada

PRESS RELEASE
Montréal, January 19 2016

Against all odds, the Canada – Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (the Board), with the approval of both federal and Newfoundland Natural Resources ministers (James Carr and Siobhan Coady), extended Corridor Resources’ exploration license EL1105 on the Old Harry site for an extra year, a license that was set to expire last Friday January 15. This favour was granted without even requiring the mandatory one million dollars drilling deposit to obtain an extension. It is the third time in four years that Corridor obtains such a special privilege, a situation that is strongly denounced by the St. Lawrence Coalition.

The Board justifies this exploration license extension by saying it is necessary in order to hold public as well as First Nations consultations. Yet, ex-Environment Minister Peter Kent had already asked the Board in August 2011, over four years ago, to hold such “extensive public consultations”. The Board did set up an inter-provincial consultation in September 2011, to be under the direction of Commissioner Bernard Richard, but it was canceled in February 2012 by the Board, without justification, a few days before it officially started.

Danielle Giroux, president of Attention FragÎles and Sylvain Archambault, biologist (SNAP Québec) and spokesperson for the St. Lawrence Coalition.

“The required consultations have still not been held. And now the Board dares to say that the extension is needed to perform consultations that they have been pushing forward for the last four years. This is disrespectful to all the citizens, scientists, fishermen, First Nations, who, for many years, have had deep concerns about the dangers of such offshore drillings” says Sylvain Archambault, biologist (SNAP Québec) and spokesperson for the St. Lawrence Coalition.

In the Magdalen Islands, people are also distressed with this news: “The Corridor Resources drilling project, a mere 80 km from the archipelago, stirs up major concerns with numerous citizens and organizations on the islands. During the past few years, Magdalen Islanders have voiced regularly their opposition to the drilling project and their fears over the impacts of opening the Gulf of St. Lawrence to the oil industry” emphasizes Danielle Giroux, president of Attention FragÎles.

“Corridor Resources is a junior company with no offshore experience and limited financial means. Even if the firm struggles to fulfill its license obligations and survives from extension to extension since 2008, it still holds two licenses on the Quebec portion of Old Harry, licenses currently under moratorium. Why would Quebec take enormous risks by lifting its moratorium and associating itself with a junior company struggling to keep its license in Newfoundland?” asks Christian Simard of Nature Québec.

“The Gulf of St. Lawrence is host to great biological diversity and its durable fishing and tourism industries should be encouraged” says Jean-Patrick Toussaint, Science Project Manager at the David Suzuki Foundation. “For many years, numerous groups, citizens and scientists, have asked the federal minister of Natural Resources to work in a concerted manner with the five Gulf provinces to put in place a true integrated management of the Gulf. As a matter of fact, the federal government has recently committed to better protect Canada’s marine areas, including the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The federal government should invite the provinces to work together for better protection of the Gulf, rather than giving a free-pass to Corridor Resources” concludes Mr Toussaint.
– 30 –

The St. Lawrence Coalition is composed of 85 organizations and associations, including First Nations, and over 5000 individuals from various economic sectors and the 5 coastal provinces. Members of the Coalition are calling for a moratorium on exploration and exploitation of oil and gas across the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The St. Lawrence Coalition is overseen by a steering committee composed of Attention FragÎles, the David Suzuki Foundation, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS Québec) and Nature Québec.

Please download the St. Lawrence Coalition report on oil exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence “Gulf 101”

July 22, 2015 John McCauley, CPA CMA Director, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor Ottawa ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 613-948-1785 Fax: 613-957-0897

Email: Regulations@ceaa-acee.gc.ca

Dear Mr. McCauley,

Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition, a coalition of fishermen, First Nations, environmental organizations, and concerned citizens has been advocating protection of the Gulf of St Lawrence from offshore oil and gas development for over fifteen years.

We are advocating this protection due to our Gulf’s extremely sensitive nature, counter-clockwise currents that only empty into the Atlantic once a year, winter ice cover and prime breeding grounds for over 2,200 marine species that spawn, nurse and migrate year round.

Given that the offshore oil and gas industry already has unfettered access to approx. 88% of East Coast waters, with only Georges Bank under moratorium, the fact that we are still fighting for the Gulf’s protection after all this time indicates the disrespect we feel our federal government has for the hundreds of coastal communities and multi-billion dollar renewable fishery and tourism industries in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador, who rely on our Gulf for its sustenance. We are growing tired of this disrespect, given that our livelihoods go directly back into our coastal communities and into municipal, provincial and federal coffers.

At this time, we are writing to comment on the proposed regulations that would make the Canada–Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board (the Nova Scotia Board) a responsible authority under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012).

In our opinion, entrenching powers for industry controlled offshore petroleum boards into Canada’s Environmental Assessment Act is NOT responsible conduct and will NOT LEAD to a responsible authority. Rather, we consider this a dangerous precedent.

We are profoundly discouraged that CEAA, a federal agency whose legislated mandate is to protect Canada’s environment (and the public interest) would consider such an ill-conceived notion. It is a step backwards. We urge you to reconsider these proposed regulations.

Do you remember the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon disaster? Allow us to stir your memory:

Five Years After BP Spill, New Rules to Boost Safety -LA Times April 20, 2015: “On April 20, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 people in one of the nation’s worst environmental disasters. For 87 days, the country was transfixed by images of millions of barrels of oil gushing from the seafloor, coating marine life and soiling more than a thousand miles of coast from Texas to Florida. The spill of 3.19 million barrels of oil into the gulf, an amount determined by a federal judge, upended how the federal government regulates offshore drilling… According to a study prepared by the Natural Resources Defense Council, more than $11.6 billion has been paid to individuals. Commercial fisherman could lose $8.7 billion by 2020 along with 22,000 jobs, and lost tourism dollars are more than $22.7 billion. “As many as 5,000 marine mammals may have been killed along with 1,000 sea turtles and nearly 1 million coastal and offshore seabirds, the environmental group said.” “Before the disaster, the Minerals Management Service, part of the Department of the Interior, was the one-stop federal agency handling all issues related to natural gas and oil production on the continental shelf. It awarded leases, collected royalties, conducted environmental impact studies and carried out safety inspections — prompting complaints that its mission created CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. For example, how could the same agency seeking to increase oil revenue be trusted to strictly regulate safety, which could cut income? A month after the disaster, US Interior Secretary Ken Salazar ordered that the agency be split into the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement and the Office of Natural Resources Revenue. Each arm focused on a different task, separating revenue from safety and both from leasing issues.

Separation is good for all of the agencies, said Eileen P. Angelico, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement. “I think it allows us to focus on our mission and to do it more effectively than before.””

Mr. McCauley, it is clear from these comments that separating its environmental protection from the same agency that promotes offshore oil and gas development has been good for the US.

Why won’t Canada do this? A separate safety regulator was recommended by the Offshore Helicopter Safety Inquiry in Newfoundland so why is CEAA apparently choosing to ignore Recommendation 29 of the Wells Inquiry?

It is our position that the proposed effort to entrench industry controlled boards into Canada’s Environmental Assessment agency is an initiative that will take us backwards, further weakening Canada’s environmental protection. Further, it will deepen and will make even worse the conflict of interest that the C-NSOPB and the Newfoundland Board (C-NLOPB) are already in.

We strongly oppose these proposed regulations.

Sincerely, Mary Gorman

Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition

Over the past number of months, all municipalities in Prince Edward Island were provided information by PEI SOSS in the form of a Resolution on Oil and Gas Exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence . The proposed resolution provided two options for municipalities: Moratorium until Review/Public Consultation Occurs and Moratorium Leading to Ban.

Since then, the following municipalities have informed us that they have discussed and approved a resolution with one or both of the two options presented, and have sent a letter to the Premier to indicate their respective councils’ positions. Those municipal councils who have passed the resolution are as follows:

Victoria-by-the-Sea (moratorium)
North Rustico (permanent ban)
Cavendish
Miltonvale Park
Murray Harbour
Murray River (both options)
Breadalbane

Bonshaw Community Council will present an updated Resolution to the Federation of PEI Municipalities at their AGM on April 28th. Many thanks to all who have taken initiative in their respective areas to further this cause & protect of the Gulf!

Pictou Advocate
July 17, 2013

Green Heroes: Well loved author and conservationist Farley Mowat with local resident Mary Gorman, Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition. (Photo courtesy of Cinefocus Canada)

MERIGOMISH – The oceans dominate our blue planet yet marine species are some of the first to go. Called into action, Green Heroes are defending marine life with every means necessary, from the written word to waging battles at sea. Green Heroes™ is back for a second season. This time there is a new group of heroes in this smart, sexy and green Web/TV crossover and a local woman, Mary Gorman, is one of them.

Produced by CineFocus Canada in association with TVO, the six 30-minute series (www.greenheroes.tv/tv-episodes) tells stories of people who acted on their ideas and “ventured forth” to protect the planet. From the celebrity to the everyday person, each story details the different paths and interests the Green Heroes have taken in their quests to help save the world.

The story arch of each episode begins with the tipping point event of Green Heroes – the moment that moved them from apathy to action. It then tells of the obstacles and challenges they overcame, ending on the impact their action had on the environment. The goal is to show how a change was made and a community inspired, and to surprise people by including Green Heroes who are not your status quo, but whose story speaks to a mainstream audience. By shining a light on real people who have become Green Heroes through their actions and dedication, the aim is to give everyday people the nudge they need to also become passionate green participants.

Mary Gorman of Merigomish is trying to stop a disaster before it starts: Canada’s own Gulf Oil Spill. Twelve years ago, she turned from fisherman’s wife to Green Hero after two leases were issued for oil and gas development on the shores of her home. Knowing spills were likely and would impact 2,000 marine species including endangered ones, Gorman decided to prevent a disaster instead of reacting later. Today, she has formed a growing movement – Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition – with support from celebrities like Ethan Hawke and Jason Priestley. Her struggle and resulting victory led to her winning the inaugural Green Heroes award, as selected by fans of the web channel and a jury of esteemed environmental and broadcast judges.

Farley Mowat is one of Canada’s most widely read authors and best-known conservationists. His books, such as Never Cry Wolf, have reached more than 14 million readers. After Mowat’s war service in 1946, he trekked in Canada’s Great North where he witnessed the demise of indigenous culture and animals by industrial colonialism. Today, he is one of Canada’s most vocal conservationists, using his books and voice to shed light on the loss of nature and the need to protect it. He is an active supporter of such groups as Sea Shepherd and Mary Gorman’s mission to protect the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Gorman says of Mowat: “Not only did Farley fight for Canada in World War 2, he has been fighting ever since to protect our world’s vast oceans that were once brimming with wildlife. He will go down in history not only as a literary icon but as one of the world’s earliest and bravest environmentalists, who understands how dependent we are on healthy oceans”.

Alexandra Cousteau is another Green Hero. Through her Blue Legacy project and as a filmmaker and TV host, Cousteau continues the work of her renowned grandfather Jacques-Yves Cousteau and her father Philippe Cousteau Sr.

Green Heroes aired Tuesday night and will air again Sunday at 8:30 p.m. on TVO.

The Nova Scotia Commission on Building our New Economy is examining the province’s rural economic prospects in a series of community meetings held around the province.

Acadia University president and commission chair Ray Ivany, called the commission’s work a chance for Nova Scotians to discuss potential future prosperity for rural areas in NS.

“Nova Scotia is on the brink of its greatest opportunity in generations. We’ve got the shipbuilding contracts, offshore exploration and construction of the Maritime Link… It’s exciting. But I believe that our local economies throughout Nova Scotia – not just in HRM – can thrive, not simply survive, by understanding these opportunities, and sharing ideas about building a better future.”

One wonders what planet Mr. Ivany lives on to suggest that offshore oil exploration can build a better future for Nova Scotians. Not everyone agrees with him.

The Pictou Advocate covered the meeting in Stellarton, NS. In the April 3, 2013 edition, the article notes:

“Some residents have been skeptical of the exercise due to growing concern over oil and gas exploration, such as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, proposed to extract possibly viable underground natural gas supplies inland, as well as exploratory drilling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence that stakeholders fear would harm the gulf’s fishery.”

The article goes on to quote a local resident, Trudy Watts, who is president of a community development cooperative in the area who stated:

“The blowout of the Deepwater exploratory oil well in the Gulf of Mexico – and the resulting damage to tourism, fishery and restaurant industries – should be enough to bump offshore exploration off Mr. Ivany’s Top 3 list,” she said. “I hope that the commission is truly open to a diversity of ideas that will no doubt include enhancing our fishery and tourism sectors, as part of the way we build a smart, sustainable economy that includes rural Nova Scotians.”

We can only hope that the commission’s interim report, due to come out later in April, will showcase the ideas for a healthy sustainable future which include an oil free Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Minister makes “inaccurate” comments in meeting March 20, 2013

Advocate (Pictou, NS)

To the Editor re: “Oil spill, clean up report raises Gulf group’s fears” (Advocate March 6, 2013), I want to correct inaccurate comments made by Energy Minister Charlie Parker.

1) “Parker acknowledges that Gorman was given considerable time to discuss the moratorium.”
 For the record, my first question was not about the Gulf of St. Lawrence moratorium. I asked Parker what he intends to do about the billion dollar Shell lease he has approved on NS’s Scotian Shelf. The seismic program for this lease, beginning next month, is for four to six months from April to September each year for the next six years, during fishing seasons, spawning, bluefin tuna migration etc. It covers over a million hectares of ocean bottom. We’ve been told that in a few years, there will only be two populations left on the Scotian Shelf – gray seals and oil rigs. (WARNING: Our Gulf could be next).

2) The ‘considerable time’ Parker refers to, was three minutes. So I guess Gulf NS’s inshore breeding grounds are only worth three minutes of discussion at NDP gov’t public meetings. To be fair, our coalition did meet privately for 25 minutes with the county’s three NDP MLA’s about protecting our Gulf. But we were only able to cover one page of our presentation because these MLAs are not good listeners. 
In contrast, MP Peter MacKay met with us for one hour and 20 minutes, listened intently, asked intelligent questions, acknowledged the danger of risking sensitive breeding areas and renewable multi-billion dollar fishery and tourism industries, only to access short term fossil fuels. He agreed to follow up on it.

3) “‘Parker also said the province has made no decision on a moratorium in the Gulf.’ “In reality, we don’t have a position,” he said.’ 
We’re relieved he is backtracking. But at the Antigonish meeting Parker, Deputy Minister Coolican and MLA Maurice Smith were asked if the NDP would support a moratorium in Gulf NS. All 3 said “NO”. (It’s on the public record).

In ‘reality’, Parker signed a petition a decade ago for a moratorium in our Gulf when we were fighting shoreline leases on Cape Breton Island. Perhaps, because he knows the Gulf of St. Lawrence has the largest lobster production in the world. But “little or no information is available… on lobster larval distribution and settlement” * according to DFO scientists.

Gulf fishers are also worried about herring if oil and gas proceeds. Since 20 years after the Exxon Valdez disaster, there is still no herring fishery where that oil spill happened in Alaska.
 DFO scientists have stated “every month of the year molting, spawning, egg hatching, larvae, feeding, migration, juveniles, adults, and planktonic stages are happening”.*

This is why Canada’s Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans in their report on Canada’s Oceans Act (October 2001) stated “it may be prudent to consider placing this region under an oil and gas moratorium similar to that on the Georges Bank region”.

So why are we fighting this same battle 10 years later?

It is ironic that before Parker was elected, he supported a moratorium. But now that he has the power as Energy Minister to implement one, he chooses to squander this privilege and unique opportunity to protect those who put their faith in him.
 What a kick in the head to Gulf inshore fishers who have a long history as leaders in conservation of their own stocks. They do so, knowing that if they protect their fish, we will continue to have a fishery sustaining hundreds of coastal communities and tens of thousands of jobs in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. 
Unless, of course, it is destroyed by others.

*DFO Maritime Provinces Regional Habitat Status Report 2001

Mary Gorman, 
Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition
, Merigomish

Mary Gorman
September 27, 2011

This blog post first appeared on blog.greenheroes.tv

Mother Nature will have the final word

Canada’s national media has been ignoring our struggle against unnecessary fossil fuel development on our East Coast. Obviously unnecessary, since even Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver concedes an ‘excess’ of supply is coming out of the Tar Sands. A coalition of fishermen, First Nations, environmentalists, scientists, teachers etc have been struggling for over a year to have our voices heard in an effort to protect Canada’s Gulf of St. Lawrence, home to over 2,000 marine species, from offshore oil and gas development.

With the nuclear fallout in the Japan Sea and the ongoing Gulf of Mexico crisis, it seems that more and more of our earth’s natural renewable marine food supply is in peril. According to DFO scientists, ‘over one million ton of fish migrate through the Gulf of St. Lawrence annually’. Does anyone with any common sense honestly believe this is sustainable without identifying and protecting this sensitive marine breeding ground that is our Gulf?

It is incomprehensible to me that at a point in history when scientists, from all over the world, are warning us to ease up on fossil fuels, to give Mother Nature a chance to heal, that in NL, NS and all of Canada, we are full throttle ahead with fossil fuel development.

What right does our generation have to suck every last drop of fossil fuels out of this earth? These precious nonrenewable fuels may well be needed by future generations.

And to Mr. Harper’s government who called climate change protesters ‘extremists’ in the House of Commons, let me assure you, the extremists are those in denial of climate change, wilfully blinded by greed.

Mother Nature doesn’t give one hoot whether or not you believe in climate change. She will rebalance this earth from the rapacious ‘excesses’ of the industrial revolution. Mother Nature will have the final word on this battle.

Mary Gorman of Merigomish, N.S., is a writer and unwaged activist, and is a co-founder of the Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition.

Mary Gorman
July 19, 2011

This blog post first appeared as a Commentary in the Guardian PEI.

Protecting our gulf for future generations

The Tar Sands is not our only ecological struggle in Canada. A coalition of environmentalists, First Nations, inshore fishers, scientists, tourism operators, artists, teachers and municipalities from the Maritimes and Quebec are uniting to fight a preventive battle – to protect the Gulf of St. Lawrence from offshore oil development.

A company has applied to drill an exploratory well in ‘Old Harry’, located in the Laurentian Channel, which is the main artery in and out of our Gulf for over 2,000 marine species who spawn, nurse and migrate year around. Dr. David Suzuki calls it “one of the most precious ecosystems on our planet”. It is divinely beautiful.

The offshore oil industry likes to talk about co-existence and mitigation. But how can there be co-existence if spawning, nursery and migratory areas are up for grabs? The science on these 2,000 marine species is so limited, mitigation becomes just another ‘spin’ word. How does one mitigate the unknown?

Our Gulf is six times smaller than the Gulf of Mexico. The magnitude of last year’s BP spill would have covered completely the coastlines of half the provinces in the country. With counterclockwise currents, it only empties into the Atlantic once a year. It is one of the windiest regions in North America with winter ice cover. (How do you clean up spills under ice?)

Canada’s offshore regulatory structure is a disaster waiting to happen. Run by unelected, oil friendly provincial offshore boards, there are five different jurisdictional boundaries in our gulf, a single moving body of water. Trouble is, fish don’t recognize provincial boundaries; they swim though them. These boards allow the oil companies to monitor their own environmental requirements. Last fall, the Canada Newfoundland Board allowed seismic to proceed while endangered blue whale were migrating.

After the BP spill last year, I couldn’t sleep for a week. I felt a connection with people all over the world who were grieving, as I was, over how shamefully we have protected the essentials of life – air, water, soil and food – for those to come. For 50 years, our oceans have been one big dumping ground of industrial effluent globally. Our oceans are more acidic now. We are disrupting the fragile ecological balance between our oceans and atmosphere that create the oxygen levels that sustain life on earth. The BP spill didn’t help. Nor is the nuclear fallout in the Japan Sea.

Is it worth risking multi-billion dollar renewable fishery and tourism industries in Acadian, Gaelic, Mi’kmaq and Maliseet coastal communities, who have historic precedence in these waters that have sustained us for centuries?

Do we want the Gulf of St. Lawrence to become the next Gulf of Mexico?

Please, email Canada’s Environment Minister Peter Kent at kent.p@parl.gc.ca and demand a moratorium on offshore oil and gas development in Canada’s Gulf of St. Lawrence. The endangered blue whale will thank you. So will your grandchildren.

Mary Gorman of Merigomish, N.S., is a writer and unwaged activist, and co-founder of the Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition.

By Irene Novaczek
Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition

A small group of Prince Edward Islanders, ventured to the Magdalene Islands to join other concerned citizens at a forum to explore the costs and benefits of drilling a deep oil well, in the area dubbed “Old Harry”, in the Laurentian Trench between the Maggies and western Nfld. Corridor Resources owns the exploration permit and they want to proceed through a screening level environmental assessment and drill as soon as possible (2012 – 2014). After hearing of the risks and meager to non-existent benefits for rural coastal communities who will be affected by the pollution that accompanies such activities, the forum participants called for the full panel review of the project, as well as a strategic environmental assessment to consider the wider implications. However, even before going this route it is clear to many of us that the existing framework for decision-making is gravely flawed. Therefore, we first need a moratorium on all further exploration in the gulf, to give time for research, reflection and extensive public consultation leading to the reform of the petroleum board and environmental assessment systems.

[Check out the link to the forum to view various presentations given by scientists, oil industry etc.]

Small boat harbour, Magdalene Islands (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Heading into the village of Old Harry – the nearest Magdalene landfall to the proposed oil field. (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Old Harry Beach (Credit: Irene Novaczek)
View from the youth hostel (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Supporters arriving to demonstrate outside forum. Nice and noisy! (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Random notes to self (Credit: Irene Novaczek)
Lots of media covering the event, including independent media. (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Line-ups at the mike clearly showed the depth of concern and by times, anger and disgust in the room. Here are folk lined up for the 10 minute question period with Corridor, after listening politely to their 50 minutes of “how to drill an oil well”, promises and reassurances… Perhaps one third of those who immediately sprang to the mike managed to get a question answered. (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Fishing coop (Credit: Irene Novaczek)
From the perspective of bureaucrats in St Johns and Ottawa, our inshore fleets look mighty small and insignificant. But they are in fact the basis for coastal cultures, regional cuisines and tourism, among other values. (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Marilyn Clark was born in Old Harry. The only reason anyone outside of Nfld now knows about plans to drill in the Gulf is that she’s a student at Memorial and her eye was drawn to the press release about the project because they used the name of her village as the name of the oil field. (Credit: Irene Novaczek) Crab pots – lots of crab in the Old harry prospect area (Credit: Irene Novaczek)

Just say no to Old Harry development

By MARY GORMAN, Freelance Montreal Gazette

July 27, 2010

I could barely read “Boundary feuds thwarting attempts to drill promising prospects in the St. Lawrence” (Gazette, July 20). Surreal, it referred to the huge stakes involved in the “29-km long field of undersea hydrocarbons” as if “Old Harry” is all that exists in our precious Gulf of St. Lawrence. No mention of the 50,000 jobs created annually by the Gulf’s multibillion-dollar fishery and tourism industries. Or the economic, ecological, and social impact this deepwater well could pose. It takes only one blown well, as we know from the Gulf of Mexico disaster. No mention of spawning, nursery, and migratory areas for lobster, herring, snow crab, mackerel, whales, and dolphins, to name a few. Fragile Atlantic salmon, cod, and wolfish, fin whale and humpback whale are in trouble. The right whale, bluefin tuna, piping plover, and leatherback turtle are endangered. Time and again, offshore oil industry giants have proven they cannot prevent, stop, or clean up spills before damage occurs for decades, if not centuries. Twenty years later, only four per cent of the oil spilled from the Exxon Valdez has been recovered. For 40 years, scientists have been calling for a moratorium on exploration and drilling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. In 1973, a McGill University professor called for a ban, describing it as “the most productive marine region in Canada that should never be placed in harm’s way.” Because of the counterclockwise circulatory currents, he said, oil and gas contamination would be widespread along the Gulf shorelines of all five east coast provinces. Ten years ago, after exploration leases were issued along Cape Breton’s shoreline by Nova Scotia’s petroleum board, scientists from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans referred to the Gulf’s semi-landlocked nature and winter ice cover (How do you clean up spills under ice?) stating, “This is a biologically diverse area where sensitive life stages of marine organisms are present throughout the year.” Meaning, there is no safe time to proceed with seismic blasting. As well, the Standing Committee of Fisheries and Oceans and the Fisheries Resource Conservation Council called for a moratorium. At a public review about the Cape Breton leases, even the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers testified its industry wants sensitive marine areas identified and placed out of bounds. So how can it be, a decade later, we’re back on this wretched road again? Where ordinary citizens have to step up to fill the void left by oblivious federal and provincial politicians? Tourism ministers are asleep at the switch. Only one environment minister, P.E.I.’s Richard Brown, has called for a Summit on Offshore Oil and Gas, after visiting Louisiana. The hypocrisy is that, under Canada’s Oceans Act, inshore fishermen have been under precautionary quotas for 20 years. Yet when it comes to oil and gas, the DFO and Environment Canada have signed off on their legislated mandates to protect marine habitat to petroleum boards that allow the oil industry to monitor their environmental requirements. This is eerily similar to the lack of oversight that caused the BP ecological nightmare. Who made the decision to place the protection of marine habitat in the hands of the petroleum industry? Rather than embracing renewable energy, our governments have betrayed the public interest by pandering to the offshore petroleum industry. They are risking the survival of historic coastal communities, ancestral Gaelic, Acadian, and First Nation fishing grounds and the oceans that sustain life on Earth. The fish that have been the source of livelihoods for centuries (and will continue for future generations if we stop this disrespect) don’t recognize provincial boundaries. They swim through them.

The solution to the jurisdictional bickering over who gets Old Harry is simple: No one should.

Mary Gorman is a Nova Scotia writer and activist, and a founding member of the Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition.

Save Our Seas and Shores, PEI Chapter c/o Voluntary Resource Centre 81 Prince St. Charlottetown PEI

C1A 4R3

September 26, 2016

Hon. James Gordon Carr Minister of Natural Resources

Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E4

Hon. Siobhan Coady Minister of Natural Resources PO Box 8700 St. John’s NL A1B 4J6

Dear Ministers:

Re: Proposed Issuance of New Licence to Corridor Resources by Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board

The Prince Edward Island chapter of Save Our Seas and Shores (SOSS PEI) protests the proposed issuance of a new exploration licence to Corridor Resources to replace the licence it has held since 2008 (Exploration Licence No. 1105) for the same lands. SOSS PEI urges you to refrain from approving issuance of this new licence to Corridor Resources.

Exploration Licence No. 1105 was issued on January 15, 2008 for the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, located mid-way between the Magdalen Islands and the west coast of Newfoundland. This four-year licence was extended in 2011, 2013 and most recently on January 4, 2016. In January 2017, Licence No. 1105 will reach the maximum non-renewable term of nine years. We note that, for each extension, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (the NL Board) waived the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension.

In its notice in the Canada Gazette (2016-09-17), the NL Board proposes to issue the new licence pursuant to paragraph 61(1)(b) of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act, S.C., 1987, c.3, and paragraph 60(1)(b) of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act, R.S.N.L. 1990, c. C-2. These paragraphs state that the board may issue an interest without making a call for bids where “the board is issuing the interest to an interest owner for the surrender by the interest owner, at the request of the board, of another interest or a share of another interest, in relation to all or a portion of the offshore area subject to that other interest.” In this case, the NL Board is proposing a new licence for “the same lands as those associated with Exploration Licence No. 1105” (as stated in the Canada Gazette), not for “another interest or a share of another interest.” Such a misuse of the provisions of the Act to circumvent the nine year maximum term of a licence should not be permitted.

The notice in the Canada Gazette states that the new licence “will provide appropriate time for a robust review process…” We note that the NL Board has had plenty of time to initiate a robust review process. In August 2011, the NL Board contracted with former New Brunswick Ombudsman Bernard Richard to carry out an independent review of the Old Harry project, then in February 2012 terminated his contract, without justification, before any public consultations were held. Since then, the NL Board has dragged its heels despite numerous inquiries asking when and how these consultations will be carried out. The issuance of a new licence to Corridor Resources to cover for the NL Board’s inexplicable failure to conduct a review or the required public and Aboriginal consultations would be an abuse of process.

We note that, in a Canadian Press article printed in the Charlottetown Guardian on September 17, 2016, the Natural Resources Canada spokesperson is quoted as saying that the government will take into account feedback received through the Canada Gazette process in deciding whether to approve the new licence. We strongly urge you to take our concerns into account and refuse to approve the new licence for Corridor Resources on the Old Harry prospect.

Sincerely,

Colin Jeffrey

Chair, Save Our Seas and Shores-PEI Chapter (SOSS PEI)
SOSS is a coalition of fishing organizations, environmental and tourism groups, coastal landowners, First Nations organizations, and individuals who are concerned that the ecologically rich and diverse Gulf of St. Lawrence, home to over 4,000 marine species, is particularly sensitive to any disturbance caused by seismic surveys, exploration and drilling for oil and gas. cc Sean Kelly, Manager of Public Relations, C-NLOPB Prime Minister Rt. Hon. Justin Trudeau Hon. Catherine McKenna, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Hon. Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard Elizabeth May, MP and Leader, Green Party of Canada Hon. Lawrence MacAulay, MP Hon. Wayne Easter, MP Sean Casey, MP Robert Morrissey, MP Hon. H. Wade MacLauchlan, Premier of Prince Edward Island Hon. Robert Mitchell, Minister of Communities, Land and Environment Hon. Paula Biggar, Minister of Transportation, Infrastructure and Energy Hon. Alan McIsaac, Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries

Greg Wilson, Manager, Environmental Land Management

January 25, 2016

Hon. James Gordon Carr Minister of Natural Resources

Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E4

Hon. Siobhan Coady Minister of Natural Resources PO Box 8700

St. John’s NL A1B 4J6

Dear Ministers:

Re: Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board and the Gulf of St. Lawrence

I am writing of behalf of the Prince Edward Island chapter of Save Our Seas and Shores (SOSS PEI). SOSS is a coalition of fishing organizations, environmental and tourism groups, coastal landowners, First Nations organizations, and individuals who are concerned that the ecologically rich and diverse Gulf of St. Lawrence, home to over 4,000 marine species, is particularly sensitive to any disturbance caused by seismic surveys, exploration and drilling for oil and gas.

As you know, for the third time in the past four years, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (the NL Board) has granted a one-year extension to Corridor Resources exploration licence on the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, located mid-way between the Magdalen Islands and the west coast of Newfoundland. Citing regulatory factors as its reason, the NL Board also waived, for the third time in four years, the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension. The “regulatory factors” the NL Board referred to is the requirement for public and Aboriginal consultations which the Board must hold as part of the environmental assessment for this project.

In August 2011, the NL Board contracted with former New Brunswick Ombudsman Bernard Richard to carry out an independent review of the Old Harry project, then in February 2012 terminated his contract, without justification, before any public consultations were held. Since then, the NL Board has dragged its heels despite numerous inquiries asking when and how these consultations will be carried out. Even now, the NL Board in its January 15, 2016 news release, says it will announce plans for consultations with Aboriginal groups and the public “at a later date”, not sometime soon. Does the Board intend to keep on delaying the consultations indefinitely and continue to give Corridor Resources free licence extensions?

The current licence extension for Corridor Resources is just one in a series of irresponsible, biased actions and decisions on the part of the NL Board. In 2012, the Board contracted with AMEC Environment and Infrastructure to update the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Newfoundland portion of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The purpose of the SEA was to assist the Board “in determining whether further exploration rights should be offered in whole or in part for the Western NL Offshore Area.” During the time the SEA was being conducted, the NL Board issued a call for bids for licences, including licences within the Gulf. Clearly, the Board assumed that further exploration rights would be offered in the Gulf, regardless of the findings of the SEA.

The SEA update report from AMEC discussed: numerous risks to marine species and the fisheries and tourism industries, the presence of many sensitive areas and endangered species, important data gaps, and the complex and deteriorating state of the Gulf. The lack of social acceptability was apparent from the results of the public consultations held in the five Gulf provinces. Of 597 written submissions and verbal comments, 582 expressed concerns regarding continued petroleum exploration in the Gulf. The logical conclusion, based on the findings in the report, would have been that the known risks outweigh the potential benefits. Instead of the normal procedure in which the authors of a report write the conclusions, the NL Board made the bizarre decision to write the conclusions itself. (This fact is no longer obvious in the final report on the Board’s website, perhaps due to criticism the Board received for writing its own conclusions.) Predictably, the NL Board concluded that “petroleum exploration activities generally can be undertaken in the Western NL area using the mitigation measures identified in the document.”

In addition, the Board concluded that suggestions that petroleum exploration activities in the Gulf should cease were policy decisions not within its mandate, despite the fact that the purpose of the report was, as noted above, to assist the Board in deciding whether to continue offering exploration rights in the NL portion of the Gulf.

As you know, to date only two of the five Gulf provinces have set up Offshore Petroleum Boards: Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. The Nova Scotia Board ceased any activity in the Gulf after a public review panel responded to public and Aboriginal concerns in 1999. If the NL Board did not have a pro-petroleum industry bias, it would also cease all activity in the Gulf.

The roles of the NL Board are to facilitate the exploration and development of hydrocarbon resources in the NL Offshore and to protect the environment and worker safety. As noted in the Wells Report of 2010, these are conflicting roles. Clearly, the NL Board shows by its actions and decisions that protecting the Gulf ecosystem is not a priority.

We believe that the federal and NL governments have abrogated their responsibilities to oversee the decisions of this appointed body. Decisions, including the recent free extension of Corridor Resources licence, appear to have been rubber-stamped by the federal and NL Ministers of Natural Resources. Only NL benefits from oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf, while the other four Gulf provinces share the risks. The protection of marine species and the rights of the First Nations, fishers, and other residents of the Gulf provinces to protect the Gulf ecosystem and pursue their livelihoods are being ignored.

In light of the failure of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board to act in a responsible manner, SOSS PEI is calling on the federal and Newfoundland and Labrador governments to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to offshore oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Sincerely, Ellie Reddin

Past-Chair, Save Our Seas and Shores-PEI Chapter (SOSS PEI)

c. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay, MP Hon. Wayne Easter, MP Sean Casey, MP Robert Morrissey, MP Hon. H. Wade MacLauchlan, Premier of Prince Edward Island Hon. Robert Mitchell, Minister of Communities, Land and Environment Hon. Paula Biggar, Minister of Transportation, Infrastructure and Energy Hon. Alan McIsaac, Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries

Greg Wilson, Manager, Environmental Land Management

Defenders of the Gulf of St. Lawrence who live on Prince Edward Island are telling James Carr, Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources, and his provincial counterpart in Newfoundland and Labrador Siobhan Coady that it is time to pull the plug on the C-NLOPB.

This action follows the publication of Ellie Reddin’s Jan 27th article in the Journal Pioneer and PEI’s The Guardian, which pointed out a series of irresponsible, biased decisions made by the C-NLOPB over the past several years, including their recent decision to provide Corridor Resources a third extension on their exploration license for the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. In her followup letter to the Ministers, Reddin wrote: “Citing regulatory factors as its reason, the [C-NLOPB] also waived, for the third time in four years, the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension. The “regulatory factors” the Board referred to is the requirement for public and Aboriginal consultations which the Board must hold as part of the environmental assessment for this project.”

“Decisions, including the recent free extension of Corridor Resources licence, appear to have been rubber-stamped by the federal and NL Ministers of Natural Resources. Only NL benefits from oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf, while the other four Gulf provinces share the risks. The protection of marine species and the rights of the First Nations, fishers, and other residents of the Gulf provinces to protect the Gulf ecosystem and pursue their livelihoods are being ignored.”

In light of the failure of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board to act in a responsible manner, SOSS PEI is calling on it’s members to write to the Ministers to demand that the federal and Newfoundland and Labrador governments to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to offshore oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

See SOSS PEI full letter to federal Minister James Carr, and NL Minister of Natural Resources Siobhan Coady here.

The Gulf needs your support. Add your voice to SOSS PEI’s by sending a short email message to the Ministers – here’s is a sample message you could copy and paste, or personalize as you wish:

Dear Ministers:

I am writing to express my support for the letter you recently received from SOSS PEI regarding the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB) and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. As outlined in the letter, the C-NLOPB has shown by its actions and decisions over the past several years that it is failing to carry out its responsibility to protect the Gulf environment. As Ministers responsible for the C-NLOPB, please act to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

(Your Name)
(Your home community and province)

Email addresses for the two Ministers are:
Minister.Ministre@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca and siobhancoady@gov.nl.ca

By Ellie Reddin
January 26, 2016

For the third time in the past four years, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board has granted a one-year extension to Corridor Resources exploration licence on the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and waived the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension.

This extension was granted because the board has not conducted the public and Aboriginal consultations required as part of the environmental assessment for this project.

For the past two years, the board has dragged its heels despite numerous inquiries asking when and how these consultations will be carried out. It says it will announce plans for consultations “at a later date.”

Does the board intend to keep on delaying the consultations indefinitely and continue to give Corridor Resources free licence extensions?.


The current licence extension for Corridor Resources is just one in a series of irresponsible, biased actions and decisions on the part of the board. In 2012, the board contracted with AMEC to update the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Newfoundland portion of the Gulf. The purpose of the SEA was to assist the board “in determining whether further exploration rights should be offered in whole or in part for the Western NL Offshore Area.” While the SEA was being conducted, the board issued a call for bids, including for licences within the Gulf. Clearly, the board assumed that further exploration rights would be offered in the Gulf, regardless of the findings of the SEA.

The SEA update report from AMEC discussed: numerous risks to marine species and the fisheries and tourism industries, the presence of many sensitive areas and endangered species, important data gaps, lack of social acceptability, and the complex and deteriorating state of the Gulf. The logical conclusion would have been that the known risks outweigh the potential benefits. Although the authors of a report normally write the conclusions, the board decided to write the conclusions itself. Predictably, they concluded that “petroleum exploration activities generally can be undertaken in the Western NL area…”

Only two of the five Gulf provinces have set up Offshore Petroleum Boards: Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. The Nova Scotia Board ceased any activity in the Gulf in 1999. If the NL Board did not have a pro-petroleum industry bias, it would also cease all activity in the Gulf.

The roles of the NL Board include facilitating hydrocarbon resource development in the NL Offshore and protecting the environment. As noted in the Wells Report of 2010, these are conflicting mandates. Clearly, the NL Board shows by its actions and decisions that protecting the Gulf ecosystem is not a priority.

Given the failure of the NL Board to act in a responsible manner, Save Our Seas and Shores P.E.I. is calling on the federal and Newfoundland and Labrador governments to remove the board’s mandate pertaining to the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Ellie Reddin Save Our Seas and Shores-P.E.I. Chapter

Cornwall, PEI

Source: Journal Pioneer

Press Release, July 21/2015

In a powerful show of unity, First Nation communities and fishing industry representatives call on the Federal Ministers of Natural Resources, Environment, and Fisheries to suspend petroleum development in the Gulf of St. Lawrence until it can determine that these activities would pose no risk to commercial fisheries.

The Gulf’s Aboriginal Communities, Harvester, and Processor Associations, call on the federal government to hear public concerns and evaluate the risks of drilling in a semi- enclosed body of water that supports hundreds of coastal communities in 5 provinces.

“The government is ignoring that the Gulf of St. Lawrence is partially landlocked and one of the most sensitive and productive marine breeding regions in Canada with over 2,200 marine species that spawn, nurse and migrate year around. Due to the sensitive nature of the St. Lawrence it unlikely that a billion dollar fishing industry could withstand oil and gas development,” says Marilyn Clark, executive director of the Nova Scotia Fish Packers Association.  Although Strategic Environmental assessment (SEA) have been undertaken by both Newfoundland and Quebec, these inadequate assessments failed to look at the Gulf as a whole, she said.

“We know there is very little capacity to respond to an oil spill due to high winds and counter clockwise currents that only empty into the Atlantic once a year, leaving NS, NB, PEI, QC and NL coastlines vulnerable to contamination. Despite this, the environmental assessment process has been downgraded to allow companies to drill exploratory wells without consulting people depending on these waters for their livelihoods,” states fisherman Leonard Leblanc of Cheticamp, Nova Scotia.

Spill simulations undertaken by the Rimouski Institute of Ocean Science demonstrate that fish and plankton critical to the Gulf’s food chain would have to migrate through oil at both the Laurentian Channel and Straight of Belle Isle, which are entry and exit regions critical to the Gulf’s entire eco-system.

Even Corridor Resources, who wants to drill at Old Harry, acknowledge in their EA report that: “There are environmental and technological constraints to response and cleanup. High sea states and visibility are examples of typical environmental constraints, while technological constraints include pumping capacity of oil recovery devices and effectiveness of chemical dispersants.” Furthermore, several months of ice coverage in the winter escalate these important limitations.

Nearly two years ago, First Nations formed the Innu, Maliseet and Mi’gmaq Alliance and signed an agreement to protect the Gulf from Oil and Gas Development. They have recently renewed this commitment and reiterated their request for a 12 year Moratorium.

To date, they have yet to be consulted on the Old Harry project.

“Quebec’s Environment Assessment (SEA) detailed many gaps in knowledge and understanding of the Gulf of St Lawrence.  We have existing Aboriginal rights and constitutionally protected Treaty Rights as recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada. We will do all that is necessary to protect our way of life and prevent any exploratory plan to be carried out in the Gulf,” explains Troy Jerome, Executive Director of the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat.

In the event of a spill, Canadian law demands a company to have a measly 1 billion dollars of compensation monies. This is deeply inadequate when you consider that Gulf fisheries are worth more than one billion each year. Investments in boats, licenses, and fish plants dependent on renewable resources for their operations are worth far more than these proposed damages. The BP Macondo disaster cost BP over $40 billion dollars so far and could cost the company over $60billion due to ongoing litigation.

“How do you quantify damages to living species that have been around for thousands of years if you are not even taking into account ecological value?” asks Clark. “In short, the Gulf of St. Lawrence fishing industry will accept no less than a full, independent expert review panel, acting in the 5 provinces, as is warranted by public concerns in section 38 (2) b of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act”, she concludes.

For further information contact:

Marilyn Clark 902.774.0006 (French/English)
Director Nova Scotia Fish Packers Association

Troy Jerome 506.759.2000 (French/English) Executive Director

Nutewistoq, Mi’gmawei, Mawiomi Secretariat

Leonard LeBlanc 902-302-0794 (French/English)
Gulf Nova Scotia Fishermen’s Coalition

Ian MacPherson 902-566-4050 (English)
PEI Fishermen’s Association

Jean-Pierre Couillard 418-269-7701 (French)
Association des Capitaines Propriétaire de la Gaspésie

July 21, 2015

by Danielle Rochette

APTN National News

Eighteen organizations spread out over four provinces are banding together and calling on the federal government to stop any kind of oil exploration work in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

The group sent a letter Tuesday to Natural Resources Minister Greg Rickford, Fisheries Minister Gail Shea and Minister of Environment Leona Aglukkaq. [See press release here]

“As fisheries representatives active in all parts of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, we are writing to inform you that we will oppose any petroleum development in the Gulf of St. Lawrence without prior consultation and a thorough understanding of the impacts to our seafood industry,” the letter states.

It’s not clear who penned the letter.

The Nutewistoq M’igmawei Mawiomi Secretariat is one of the organizations that is part of the coalition.

The group pointed out that the process that will allow companies to explore for oil, will also allow them to circumvent the environmental or consultation process.

“Given that exploratory drilling has been downgraded to a simple ‘screening exercise,’ which does not necessitate consultation with existing users, we demand that the Old Harry prospect be put to a full review panel as is warranted by public concern under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act” the letter states.

A Mi’kmaq group out of Quebec is already lobbying the Quebec government to put in place a 12-year moratorium on exploration work in the Gulf. [See APTN story here: Nations band together to fight future oil exploration in Gulf of Saint Lawrence]

There is also a coalition made up of environmental groups and First Nation communities fighting any kind of oil work. They’re concerned that thousands of fisheries and tourism jobs will be at stake if there is a spill in the Gulf.

“We would also like to remind the federal government that the Gulf of St. Lawrence is a common body of water and that spills occurring in one area cannot be contained by provincial delineations,” they say in the letter.

The Gulf waters touch five provinces, Quebec, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.

Source: Groups band together to fight oil exploration on Gulf of St. Lawrence – APTN National news

On Saturday, November 1st, the Prince Edward Island Preserve Co. in New Glasgow, PEI hosted a fundraising dinner in support of the Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter’s Blue Whale Campaign to protect the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. Save Our Seas and Shores PEI and Sierra Club member, Colin Jeffery, spoke to those in attendance, highlighting and expanding upon some of the more notable threats that have already begun to impact the health of the Gulf, such as: climate change, excess nutrients and invasive species. Jeffery then focused his talk on the perils of oil and gas explorations that further threaten the hypersensitive and already fragile ecosystem within Gulf waters.

The Blue Whale Dinner was a successful fundraising event, but equally, and perhaps more so, it raised public awareness on the issues that directly impact the overall health and sustainability of life in the five provinces that border the Gulf, as well as the Gulf’s role as an integral part of a greater ecosystem far beyond our shores. As past-chair of the Save Our Seas and Shores PEI, Ellie Reddin stated, “It was a lovely evening…[and] it would make a fine annual event!”.

The Blue Whale Campaign is building public support for increased protection of our threatened Gulf ecosystem and a moratorium on oil and gas development in these waters.Read a more in depth account of the Blue Whale Dinner on the PEI Preserve company Blog post here.

The PEI Chapter of Save Our Seas and Shores (SOSS) would like to offer its full support to the Innu, Maliseet, and Mi’gmaq First Nations of Eastern Canada as they call for a moratorium on oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. These First Nations communities are right to protest a lack of adequate consultation during the planning of offshore petroleum development in the Gulf.

“Public consultation for Newfoundland’s recently released Strategic Environmental Assessment Update was wholly inadequate and had no discernible influence on the conclusions made” according to SOSS PEI member Colin Jeffrey.

“The silence around the issue of drilling for oil at the Old Harry site is deafening.  The health of the Gulf’s fragile ecosystem is vital for sustaining marine life and livelihoods here in PEI, as well as in our neighbouring provinces. We must insist on more effective public engagement and consultation during the decision making process to give voice to those who wish to protect the integrity of the Gulf and our way of life for generations to come” according to lobster fisherman and SOSS PEI member Ian Forgeron.

The PEI chapter of Save Our Seas and Shores will continue to support all who stand against degradation of this fragile ecosystem through offshore petroleum development.  Together we can protect this important inland sea for the benefit of all Atlantic Canadians.

Over the past number of months, all municipalities in Prince Edward Island were provided information by PEI SOSS in the form of a Resolution on Oil and Gas Exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence . The proposed resolution provided two options for municipalities: Moratorium until Review/Public Consultation Occurs and Moratorium Leading to Ban.

Since then, the following municipalities have informed us that they have discussed and approved a resolution with one or both of the two options presented, and have sent a letter to the Premier to indicate their respective councils’ positions. Those municipal councils who have passed the resolution are as follows:

Victoria-by-the-Sea (moratorium)
North Rustico (permanent ban)
Cavendish
Miltonvale Park
Murray Harbour
Murray River (both options)
Breadalbane

Bonshaw Community Council will present an updated Resolution to the Federation of PEI Municipalities at their AGM on April 28th. Many thanks to all who have taken initiative in their respective areas to further this cause & protect of the Gulf!

On November 26th, 2013, that Standing Committee on Fisheries, Transportation and Rural Development recommended in its recent report to the Legislature that the government act on the requests that PEI Save Our Seas and Shores put forward in our petition calling for, “a moratorium on all oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf of St. Lawrence”. See recommendation 5 and the related discussion here.

The transcript of Sylvain Archambault’s presentation to the Standing Committee on Fisheries, Transportation and Rural Development is now available here.

Similarly, in Prince Edward Island’s Legislative Assembly, the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Environment, Energy and Forestry presented their recommendations to the government. The entire report is of interest and, like the Standing Committee on Fisheries, Transportation and Rural Development (the report I sent you yesterday), the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Environment, Energy and Forestry recommends the requests of PEI SOSS petition be adopted.

See the video and skip forward to 88 minutes.

The written report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Environment, Energy and Forestry (which includes a more detailed discussion) is available here.

Let’s hope the government gives adequate weight to the recommendations of the two standing committees!

This blog appears with permission from Ocean Resources.

Lessons in safety By Ryan Van Horne

Ocean Resources

It has been more than 30 years since Canada’s worst offshore tragedy.

In February 1982, the drill rig Ocean Ranger sank off Newfoundland with a loss of 84 lives. A Royal Commission that criticized industry for poor safety training, equipment, and lax inspection spurred a profound shift in Canada’s offshore.

The Ocean Ranger disaster isn’t the only accident that has an effect on safety in the offshore.

In July 1988, a fire aboard Piper Alpha, a North Sea production platform off Scotland, claimed the lives of 167 men. It is still the worst offshore accident in terms of lives lost.

In March 2009, Cougar Flight 91, which crashed off Newfoundland and Labrador with a loss of 17 lives, led to the Wells Inquiry, headed by former Newfoundland judge Robert Wells. That inquiry made a number of recommendations, most notably the creation of an autonomous and dedicated safety regulator.

More recently, the offshore safety debate was fueled by the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010. The drill rig exploded, killing 11 crew. The ensuing oil spill was the largest in U.S. history.

With so many tragedies from which to derive lessons, it’s fair to ask if Canadian governments, regulators and industry have learned enough and reacted appropriately.

That’s a question Richard Grant asks often. Grant is the president of Grantec Engineering Consultants Inc., a Hammonds Plains, NS, firm and vice-chair of the Canadian Strategic Steering Committee on Offshore Structures Standards.

“With respect to Ocean Ranger, a large number of lessons have been learned, including those pertaining to proper training of personnel on the rigs, emergency evacuation systems, response times and survival suits,” said Grant, who was a staff member at the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board (CNSOPB) from 1997 to 2002.

The same cannot be said for lessons that should have been learned from Piper Alpha, Grant says. Piper Alpha was designed as an oil production platform but later converted to gas production, which is what it was being used for when it was destroyed by fire.

Grant says the Canadian Offshore Installation Regulations, which date back to the 1980s, have not been updated to capture issues relating to fire and explosion safety on offshore platforms.

“Other jurisdictions, namely the UK and Norway, have worked diligently and quickly to address the shortcomings pertaining to fire and explosion safety,” says Grant.

For example, in 1995 the UK Health and Safety Executive (HandSE) introduced new regulations for the prevention of fires and explosions for offshore installations.

The HandSE also switched from a certification approach to a verification approach. A key aspect of this is that inspections of offshore installations are performed by “independent competent persons.” Canada, says Grant, is still using the dated pre-Piper Alpha certification approach.

Deepwater Horizon was an example of what can happen when you cut corners, Grant says. It also underscored the diligence required by regulators and the U.S. moved quickly to address that.

Other major players in the offshore industry, such as the United Kingdom, Norway and Australia, have switched to autonomous and dedicated safety regulators, something Grant says is necessary for the substantial reform needed in Canada.

Grant hopes it does not take another offshore disaster in Canada for governments to take a critical look at the regulatory regime. While he advocates a single national regulator, the most important area to focus on is improving the quality of inspections.

Inspectors “need to be highly skilled and they need to know what they are looking at,” Grant says.

There are several benefits to a single safety regulator, he adds, such as consistency, effectiveness and efficiency, and improved safety.

A big problem in Canada is the glacial pace of regulatory change.

“In the past 10 years only one such regulation has been produced for the Atlantic Canadian offshore – the drilling regulations. This speaks volumes about the inefficient regulatory development process in Canada.”

Grant found “many significant deficiencies in the Canadian offshore regulations” while he was with the CNSOPB, and little has been done to correct that.

There are three offshore regulators in Canada: the National Energy Board, the CNSOPB, and the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB), with the possibility of more.

Grant would like to see a review of the Canadian offshore regulatory system, similar to the one Australia did in 1999 when it used a team or respected international offshore safety specialists.

Andrew Younger, the energy critic for the Liberal Party of Nova Scotia, introduced a private member’s bill in the legislature last fall, urging the NDP government to start a conversation with the federal government about a single safety regulator.

Although the bill didn’t pass, that conversation has begun – with Ottawa and the Newfoundland and Labrador government.

“We are working with them to ensure we have structures in place that reflect regulatory best practice for safety,” says Nova Scotia Department of Energy spokeswoman Tracy Barron. “Justice Wells has raised serious issues and it’s important for us to consider his findings.”

Stuart Pinks, CEO of the CNSOPB, thinks Canada has learned from previous accidents and says the safety regime in Nova Scotia is “robust” and the track record proves its adequacy.

“Does it mean that it is absolutely perfect and there can’t be some improvements?” says Pinks. “No, there’s always improvements that can be made and we’re constantly making improvements.”

The Nova Scotia and Newfoundland boards were created consistent with recommendations of the Hickman inquiry into the Ocean Ranger disaster. While some argue that the structure makes safety take a back seat, Pinks disagrees.

“Our decision-making hierarchy is set up such that safety and environmental protection are paramount in our decision making,” he says.

After the Wells inquiry, the CNSOPB looked for ways to give further separation to decision making.

The CNSOPB set up a separate committee at the board of directors’ level — the health, safety and environment committee – “to make sure that health, safety and environment are receiving the paramountcy in decision making that the board has dictated that it should,” says Pinks, who used to be the board’s chief safety officer. “Safety is No. 1 in my mind.”

Newfoundland and Labrador made a similar change based on the Wells inquiry, said C-NLOPB spokesman Sean Kelly.

“We have separated safety and operations to make two departments instead of one,” said Kelly. “Both departments will work closely together to ensure the Board maintains proper oversight of all aspects of offshore safety.”

Some argue that the safety regulator should not have any other role, such as approving exploration licenses. The flip side to that, though, is that the CNSOPB can make sure that safety maintains top priority.

“There are some significant advantages of an integrated regulator and I’ll give you a really good example with our last call for bids,” Pinks says, referring to Shell Canada’s pitch to drill in deep water.

All bidders had to submit a separate technical qualification bid with their commercial bid. If a company did not demonstrate proficiency in drilling in deep water – and experience doing so in the last 10 years – their commercial bid would have been returned unopened.

“We can move health, safety and environmental protection and additional measures right up front to assure that we are only granting licences to qualified and competent companies,” says Pinks.

The CNSOPB co-operates closely with its counterparts in Newfoundland and other jurisdictions. The board is also a member of the International Regulators Forum and routinely compares its regulatory regime to that of other major players in the offshore industry.

“I can pick up the phone and call the UK or Norway and say we’ve got such and such an issue in our offshore,” says Pinks. “Being able to talk to them is a real benefit for us.”

About 10 years ago, Pinks says industry lamented that the level of oversight in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland’s offshore was costly. After Deepwater Horizon, industry expressed gratitude that Atlantic Canada has such a strong regulatory regime.

Nova Scotia has enough challenges such as climate and tricky geology, it shouldn’t make reaping the benefits of its offshore resources more difficult by having an unnecessarily sticky regulatory regime.

For oil companies, time is money and so their biggest concern with the regulatory process is efficiency.

“They want a process that holds them to high standards, but is done in the most expedient way possible,” Pinks says.

Canada is switching to goal-based regulations because technology advances quickly and prescriptive regulations can become outdated.

Prescriptive regulations set goals for what industry must achieve in terms of managing safety and managing environmental protection. It allows for the adoption of new technology and new practices very quickly.

This presents a challenge, though, as the job of a safety inspector becomes more difficult under a goal-based regime.

“The competency expectations of your inspectors and your surveyors does go up under a goal-based regime,” Pinks says.

To account for that, CNSOPB has what he calls “a robust training budget” and much of that training is done internationally.

Proponents of a separate safety regulator point to the benefits of such a change, but it must be remembered that it is not a panacea. In the United Kingdom, which has a powerful and autonomous safety regulator, there were two helicopter crashes around the same time that Cougar Flight 91 crashed into the North Atlantic – one three weeks before and the other three weeks after.

There are inherent dangers in the offshore industry and proponents of change would be wise not to focus solely on the structure of a safety regulator.

Even Justice Wells did not do that, although his name has become synonymous with that idea.

Wells said the safety on offshore installations has been greatly improved and that helicopter travel is probably the most dangerous part of the industry.

Many criticized Transport Canada following Cougar Flight 91, but it is not simply an aviation issue. There are risks with respect to flying helicopters in an ocean environment and industry needs to mitigate those as much as possible.

Lastly, anyone responsible for improving offshore safety would do well to heed this advice from Justice Wells.

“The bright light of public scrutiny is the best way to ensure … we get safety right, while at the same time understanding that it is an ongoing journey which never ends at a final destination.”

Defenders of the Gulf of St. Lawrence who live on Prince Edward Island are telling James Carr, Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources, and his provincial counterpart in Newfoundland and Labrador Siobhan Coady that it is time to pull the plug on the C-NLOPB.

This action follows the publication of Ellie Reddin’s Jan 27th article in the Journal Pioneer and PEI’s The Guardian, which pointed out a series of irresponsible, biased decisions made by the C-NLOPB over the past several years, including their recent decision to provide Corridor Resources a third extension on their exploration license for the Old Harry prospect in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. In her followup letter to the Ministers, Reddin wrote: “Citing regulatory factors as its reason, the [C-NLOPB] also waived, for the third time in four years, the $1 million deposit required for a licence extension. The “regulatory factors” the Board referred to is the requirement for public and Aboriginal consultations which the Board must hold as part of the environmental assessment for this project.”

“Decisions, including the recent free extension of Corridor Resources licence, appear to have been rubber-stamped by the federal and NL Ministers of Natural Resources. Only NL benefits from oil and gas exploration and development in the Gulf, while the other four Gulf provinces share the risks. The protection of marine species and the rights of the First Nations, fishers, and other residents of the Gulf provinces to protect the Gulf ecosystem and pursue their livelihoods are being ignored.”

In light of the failure of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board to act in a responsible manner, SOSS PEI is calling on it’s members to write to the Ministers to demand that the federal and Newfoundland and Labrador governments to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to offshore oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

See SOSS PEI full letter to federal Minister James Carr, and NL Minister of Natural Resources Siobhan Coady here.

The Gulf needs your support. Add your voice to SOSS PEI’s by sending a short email message to the Ministers – here’s is a sample message you could copy and paste, or personalize as you wish:

Dear Ministers:

I am writing to express my support for the letter you recently received from SOSS PEI regarding the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB) and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. As outlined in the letter, the C-NLOPB has shown by its actions and decisions over the past several years that it is failing to carry out its responsibility to protect the Gulf environment. As Ministers responsible for the C-NLOPB, please act to remove the Board’s mandate pertaining to oil and gas exploration and development activities in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

(Your Name)
(Your home community and province)

Email addresses for the two Ministers are:
Minister.Ministre@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca and siobhancoady@gov.nl.ca

Mary Gorman of the Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition (SOSS), speaks passionately for protecting the Gulf of St. Lawrence at Pa’qtnkek Water Ceremony with Ethan Hawke, October 26, 2015.

Award-winning journalist Maureen Googoo, owner/editor of Kukukwes.com covered this story. The  excerpts and photographs below come from the complete article on Kukukwes.com, an independent Aboriginal news organization.

From left, Troy Jerome, Ethan Hawke, Listuguj Chief Scott Martin and Paqtnkek Chief P.J. Prosper take part in water ceremony Oct. 26 (Photo: Stephen Brake)

“Mi’kmaq leaders from Listuguj, Gespeg and Gespegagiag in Quebec – which form the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat – worked with officials with Paqtnkek and the Save Our Seas and Shores coalition to ask the Hollywood actor help them raise awareness about the negative effects of offshore drilling in the Gulf area.”

“Troy Jerome, executive director of the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat in Quebec, said Canada should not allow offshore drilling in the Gulf of St. Lawrence without first consulting with and speaking to the Mi’kmaq, Maliseet and Innu peoples.”

L to R Mary Gorman (Save Our Seas and Shores); Listuguj Chief Scott Martin; Paqtnkek Chief P.J. Prosper; actor Ethan Hawke and Troy Jerome executive director of the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat. (Photo: Stephen Brake)

“And the way to speak to Mi’kmaq is to bring one comprehensive study that shows the body of water, the Gulf as one ecosystem and what could happen if there’s drilling,” Jerome said at the news conference.”

Ethan Hawke took part in a water ceremony in Paqtnkek along the shores of Pomquet Harbour Oct. 26 (Photo: Stephen Brake)

Source: Kukuwes.com

The Gulf of St. Lawrence as seen from space. “Highly significant ecological areas such the Gulf should be top on our list to declare off-limits, whether oil is at $40 or $400 a barrel,” writes Gretchen Fitzgerald of the Sierra Club. (NASA)

GRETCHEN FITZGERALD Chronicle Herald

November 16, 2015

Your Nov. 7 Weekend Focus: “Oil, Water and Old Harry” got it wrong when it implied that oil prices are the most important obstacle to oil and gas development in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

The implication of this slant is that if oil prices rise, we will see development go ahead. The article also got it wrong when it implied that the threat of one oil well was insignificant to the Gulf’s ecology and economy. Finally, the article also ignored the fact that a single well, as damaging as it could be, is merely the toehold for future development, and that in the context of global climate change, it is imperative we shift away from these dangerous fossil fuel projects.

Groups have been fighting oil and gas development in the Gulf long before oil prices dipped. As the Newfoundland and Labrador offshore petroleum board acknowledged in 2010, they had never received such an intense public response to a project before they announced they were considering exploration at Old Harry in the middle of the Gulf.

This is because the Gulf is a unique place that is particularly vulnerable to oil development — and many people, from fishermen to scientists to national environmental groups such as Sierra Club feel strongly about this. This opposition will outlast the vagaries of oil price fluctuations.

Gretchen Fitzgerald, Director, Atlantic Canada chapter, Sierra Club Canada (Photo: Flickr)

Granted, because there has been no arm’s-length, ecosystem-wide assessment for oil and gas development in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, it is difficult to figure out what the whole story is.

Although a single ecosystem, parts of Gulf waters are considered jurisdiction of five eastern provinces and the federal government. The Gulf is also considered traditional territory for indigenous communities that have fished and lived on its shores for millennia. Our previous federal government’s lack of ability or willingness to play a co-ordinating role to oversee complex, inter-jurisdictional issues like the Gulf has added to the confusion.

As I write, consultations are underway in Quebec to assess the impacts of developing provincial petroleum resources, and mirror legislation has been passed provincially and introduced federally to create a management scheme similar to our offshore Accord Act — potentially opening up the Quebec portion of the Gulf to development.

Similarly, consultations are underway in Newfoundland to assess fracking, and the area that has experienced the most intense interest from fracking companies is located in the Gulf, off the West Coast of Newfoundland.

As we witnessed when the BP spill spewed billions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, quickly followed by a toxic brew of dispersant chemicals designed to hide the oil under the surface (chemicals that oil companies can now be permitted to use in Canada), an exploratory well can have devastating impacts.

Only one-quarter of the three billion barrels of crude spilled in the BP disaster is accounted for, and tar balls still wash up on beaches. Mangroves that are nurseries for sea life — similar to the salt marshes in our Gulf of St. Lawrence —have been damaged or destroyed. Dolphins have been poisoned by the oil, and marine mammal strandings have spiked since the spill.

Oil and chemical traces are found in fish and shellfish in the Gulf of Mexico, with unknown consequences for their development and the food chain. Imagine the impact of a similar spill on the marine mammals, sea turtles and fish that now live in our Gulf — which is six times smaller in size than the Gulf of Mexico.

As the BP spill illustrated, one exploratory well is certainly enough to damage our Gulf and the communities it supports. But one well would probably lead to others, increasing the risk with each additional project.

In the weeks leading up to UN negotiations on climate change in Paris, we need to acknowledge that some oil will need to be left in the ground to secure our future. Highly significant ecological areas such the Gulf should be top on our list to declare off-limits, whether oil is at $40 or $400 a barrel.

Gretchen Fitzgerald is director, Atlantic Canada chapter, Sierra Club Canada Foundation.

Source: Chronicle Herald

When the Deepwater Horizon oil well blowout spewed 5-million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, one of the main tools used against the oil was a chemical dispersant called Corexit. 7-million litres of this detergent-like chemical was used to break up oil slicks, in part to disperse the oil into the water and prevent contamination of coastlines, birds, and marine mammals.

It was also thought that dissolving the slicks like this would increase the rate at which natural bacteria would bio-degrade the oil. But work by Dr. Samantha Joye, a microbiologist in the Department of Marine Sciences at the University of Georgia, and her colleagues, has shown that Corexit seems to inhibit, rather than facilitate, the ability of microbes to break down oil, leaving the toxic oil in the water for longer.

This throws into question a big part of the case for using chemical dispersant on oil spills.

Samantha Joye, a professor of marine sciences in the University of Georgia Franklin College of Arts and Sciences, studies the oil plumes generated by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon blowout. (Credit: Todd Dickey/University of Georgia)

“The dispersants did a great job in that they got the oil off the surface,” Joye said. “What you see is the dispersants didn’t ramp up biodegradation.”

In fact, she found the oil with no dispersant “degraded a heckuva lot faster than the oil with dispersants,” Joye said.

Joye’s team chronicled nearly 50,000 species of bacteria in the Gulf and what they did to the water with oil, and water with oil and dispersant.

One of the main groups of oil munchers are fat little sausage-shaped bacteria called marinobacters, Joye said. They eat oil all the time and comprise about 3 percent of the bacteria in normal water. But when there’s oil, they eat and multiply like crazy until they are as much as 42 percent of the bacteria, Joye said.

But when the dispersant was applied, they didn’t grow. They stayed around 3 percent, Joye said.

Instead, a different family of bugs called colwellia multiplied more, and they don’t do nearly as good a job at munching the oil, Joye said. She theorized that for some reason the dispersant and marinobacters just don’t work together.

So if the oil wasn’t degraded by the bacteria, the question remains: Where did it go? Joye guesses it might still be on the floor of the gulf.

Should authorities avoid dispersants in the future? “That’s an extraordinarily complicated question,” says Joye. Corexit has its problems, but it does seem to keep oil away from coasts. “Nobody wants to see oiled birds, turtles, and dolphins, but the bottom line is that if you disperse that oil, it’s still in the water. You feel better, but is it improving the situation? My gut instinct is that I would put my faith in the microbial communities to do their job.”

Sources:
Listen to CBC podcast interview with Dr. Samantha Joye
Associated Press
The Atlantic

Actor Ethan Hawke, right, attends the Mi’kmaq community’s water ceremony on the shores of Pomquet Harbour to support the aboriginal call for a moratorium on oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, near Antigonish, N.S.
(Andrew Vaughan/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

By: Keith Doucette

ANTIGONISH, N.S. — The Canadian Press

Published Monday, Oct. 26, 2015 5:03PM EDT

Four-time Academy Award nominee Ethan Hawke has added his star power to efforts by environmentalists and a Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq community who are trying to muster support for a moratorium on oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Hawke was the special guest of the Mi’kmaq community’s annual water ceremony held Monday in Pomquet Harbour near Antigonish.

Hawke, who owns land in nearby St. George’s Bay, was asked to attend the event in support of his neighbours.

The actor said he wanted to stand up for “an absolutely magical place” where he has lived for parts of the summer for the past 15 years.

“I’m sure some people are wondering what I’m doing here,” said Hawke. “I’m largely here as your neighbour and your friend and a friend to this area.”

Hawke said the native community members have proven to be trustworthy stewards of the land and it was an honour to take part in their event.

The ceremony involved prayers and offerings by Mi’kmaq elders as the sound of traditional drums and the smell of burning sweetgrass filled the air.

Held each season, it honours the Mi’kmaq people’s relationship with the water, the fish, the land, and their resources.

Hawke said he’s glad his celebrity drew media to cover the event. But he also downplayed his participation.

“I know the real difference will be made in other rooms,” he said. “It’s just an opportunity to talk about it. I was invited to be a part of this so I take it seriously.”

The Mi’kmaq and environmental groups want a 12-year moratorium on any potential drilling in the gulf. They say it will take that long to complete a proper and comprehensive environmental assessment of a bio-diverse area of the ocean.

“While Canada’s thinking about drilling out there . . . we are telling them that they can’t do it without talking to the Mi’kmaq,” said Troy Jerome, executive director of the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat.

Jerome said with a new Liberal government about to take power in Ottawa Canadians need to ask their MPs what they are doing about the gulf.

“Ethan Hawke is here doing something about the gulf, what are you (MPs) doing about the gulf?” he said.

Jerome told a news conference that Atlantic petroleum boards are operating at pace where Nova Scotians don’t feel they have a say about oil drilling.

The Gulf of St. Lawrence is one of the largest marine breeding regions in Canada with more than 2,000 marine species.

The area is home to endangered whales and is also home to a lucrative lobster fishery.

Source: Globe and Mail

Additional Canadian Press coverage appeared in the PEI Guardian

By: Ben Cousins The Canadian Press

Published on Sun Oct 25 2015

ANTIGONISH, N.S. — Four-time Academy Award nominee Ethan Hawke will be in northern Nova Scotia Monday to help with the Mi’kmaq community’s water ceremony and support the aboriginal call for a moratorium on oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Hawke, who owns land in the St. George’s Bay area near Antigonish, was contacted by the local Mi’kmaq community to attend the event in support of his neighbours.

“We trying to show the world that the Gulf of St. Lawrence is not available for oil exploration,” said Troy Jerome, executive director of the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat. “It’s a race to get oil as opposed to a race protect the environment.”

“When you look at the state of the environment and climate change, I think we should be racing to protect the land where we can.”

The water ceremony is held in each season to give offerings and honour the Mi’kmaq people’s relationship with the water, the fish, the land.

For two years now, the group has been saying there should be a 12-year moratorium to give time to conduct a proper study by a third-party that looks at the Gulf as a whole ecosystem.

Jerome says up until now, studies have only been done by individual provinces.

“The oil is not going to know which side of the border to stop its spill at,” he said. “It’s going to go all over the place.”

“Our salmon do not follow a provincial boundary, they go right through the channel.”

Jerome says officials told him when you combine the provincial studies together, they achieve a comprehensive study for the area.

“For us, that flies in the face of good science.”

The Gulf of St. Lawrence is one of the largest marine breeding regions in Canada with more than 2,000 marine species choosing to spawn, nurse and migrate there year round.

It is also home to endangered whales and hosts some of the largest lobster production in the world.

The Mi’kmaq say the area is a sensitive ecosystem due to its winter ice cover, high winds and counter clockwise currents that only flush into the Atlantic once a year.

Jerome says Atlantic petroleum boards are operating at pace where Nova Scotians don’t feel they have a say about oil drilling.

He says the tourism and fishing industries in the area are obviously concerned, but outside of that, not a whole lot of people really know about what’s going on.

“We want to get people in the Atlantic to become more aware that these kinds of drilling programs are proposed in their water.”

The venue for the water ceremony in Antigonish is also of historical significance.

The site was the location for the events that led to the Marshall Decision.

In 1993, Donald Marshall Jr., a member of the Membertou First Nation, was stopped for fishing in Antigonish County, N.S., for fishing eels without a license.

He claimed he was allowed to catch and sell fish by virtue of a treaty signed with the British Crown.

Six years later, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed Donald Marshall Jr. had a treaty right to catch and sell fish, thus changing the way First Nations people could hunt and catch in Canada.

Source: Metronews.ca

TOM AYERS Cape Breton Bureau
Published October 22, 2015 – 11:28am

Oscar-nominated actor, writer and director Ethan Hawke is expected to attend a Mi’kmaq water ceremony on Monday at Paq’tnkek First Nation to support an aboriginal call for a moratorium on oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

“Ethan Hawke has some land in that area down there,” said Troy Jerome, executive director of the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat.

“That’s why we were able to convince him to come out and do something with us, because he knows the area right there and he knows about the issue with the Gulf.”

Paq’tnkek Chief Paul (PJ) Prosper will host the secretariat — a group representing three First Nation communities along the Gaspe peninsula — along with Nova Scotia supporters and Innu and Maliseet from around the Gulf, at the ceremony at 1 p.m. on Summerside Road in Afton, Antigonish County.

That is near the site where the late Donald Marshall Jr. was arrested for eel fishing, an affair that ended with a Supreme Court decision in his name that confirmed the aboriginal right to fish.

This week, Shell Canada received approval to begin exploratory drilling off the southwest shore of Nova Scotia, while Corridor Resources, a Halifax junior exploration company, still has an interest in oil and gas exploration in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Aboriginals aren’t opposed to all petroleum exploration and drilling, said Jerome, but the waters of the Gulf need to be protected to ensure the aboriginal right to fish is not harmed.

Also, the entire region’s economy depends on fishing and tourism, which would be threatened by oil and gas development, he said.

“The Gulf is a very unique ecosystem, as opposed to other bodies of water, so I think there’s a hook there to say that (exploration) could happen in other areas, but in the Gulf, if there is some kind of accident out there, it’s going to devastate the whole economy, right from Halifax all the way to Gaspe and Newfoundland.”

The secretariat is backing a call made last year by Mi’kmaq chiefs and others for a 12-year moratorium on exploration in the Gulf and asking government regulators to commission an independent study of the entire Gulf region, instead of requiring companies to conduct limited studies within a smaller radius from potential exploration sites.

It is also hoping to raise awareness of the issues in the Gulf, where the counterclockwise current could carry pollutants around the shores of the four Atlantic provinces and Quebec, said Jerome, and sea ice in winter could make any cleanup difficult.

And at least three provincial regulatory bodies cover oil and gas development in the Gulf.

“We see this whole Gulf exploration happening under a shroud,” said Jerome. “They’re doing it in public, but the public doesn’t know that they could have a say about what’s happening.

“No one’s drilling right now, and we’re trying to make sure that no drilling occurs. The Mi’kmaq proposed a 12-year moratorium and people came back and said, ‘Why a 12-year moratorium?’

“For us, it’s quite clear that the Gulf is one large ecosystem, and you cannot study it by going to the Newfoundland portion and studying that, going to Quebec and studying that portion, and studying the Nova Scotia portion.”

Source: Chronicle Herald

TOM AYERS CAPE BRETON BUREAU
Published September 22, 2015 – 7:47pm
Last Updated September 22, 2015 – 7:58pm Whales leaving traditional feeding grounds for Gulf of St. Lawrence: oceanographer Cape Breton residents are seeing more right whales offshore as the ocean mammals search for food. The top and sides of whales’ heads have raised patches of skin that are black and called callosities. These are the identifying features for distinguishing individual right whales, shown here as they surface off Cape Breton. (MOIRA BROWN / Canadian Whale Institute)

Researchers say endangered right whales may be going the wrong way when it comes to shipping lanes and fishing grounds around Cape Breton and into the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

Kim Davies, an oceanographer at Dalhousie University, said that right whales have significantly changed their migration patterns over the last few years.

The endangered marine mammals are leaving their traditional feeding grounds off southern Nova Scotia and the Bay of Fundy and are increasingly making their way into the Gulf of St. Lawrence to chase food.

“Because these changes in the right whale distribution have been occurring over several years — I think 2011 was the first year they really started disappearing — we’re growing more and more concerned,” said Davies.

Right whales are typically in the region from June to October, chasing large, high-energy zoo-plankton that arrive every summer along with cold Arctic water, she said, and that food source has been largely absent lately from the Roseway Basin off Barrington and from the Bay of Fundy.

It’s not yet clear whether the plankton change is due to global warming or melting Arctic sea ice, Davies said, “but it is climate related.”

Government and industry have worked together to change seasonal shipping and fishing regulations off the South Shore and in the Fundy region to protect right whales, but that work has not been done in the open ocean or the Gulf, she said.

“That is the No. 1 concern,” said Davies.

“We have very good information on shipping, about where vessels are and where fishing takes place in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and across the Scotian Shelf, but we have practically no information about right whales and their migration, outside of their well-known habitats.”

This year, researchers from several organizations kicked a monitoring program into high gear, said Davies. She started surveying off Nova Scotia using underwater drones that listened for whales near offshore oil and gas fields, and some aerial surveys were conducted in the Gulf.

Scientists were surprised to find 35 to 40 right whales near Prince Edward Island and the Gaspe Peninsula, she said.

“They’re popping up in odd places everywhere,” said Davies.

“We heard them out at the shelf break last week, 200 kilometres offshore, which is very concerning because of the oil and gas seismic exploration that’s going to occur there.”

Davies said using underwater drones to listen for right whales, a system can be developed to alert shipping and fishing vessels in the area, but that work is just starting.

Moira Brown, a senior scientist at the Canadian Whale Institute, said the right whale population has been growing again over the last few years, with more than 500 individuals identified in the area, but more effort is needed to monitor the population’s shifting migration patterns.

They are being spotted regularly by whale watching tours off Cape Breton and by others in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and are also appearing off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, she said.

“In fact, there have been more sightings (this year) in the Gulf of St. Lawrence than there have been in their two critical habitats in the Bay of Fundy and the Roseway Basin,” she said.

The whales have always travelled to the Gulf, said Brown, but not in great numbers.

“There’s no doubt that we are very data poor on that end. It’s certainly time to get up there and do more surveys.”

Davies said two right whales were entangled this summer in fishing gear off Ingonish, and both were released. One was rescued by a group from Newfoundland after a buoy rope became wrapped around its tail. In the other instance, a right whale was penned inside a mackerel net.

The Whale Release and Strandings Group, based in St. Philip’s, N.L., was sent to Cape Breton in July to look for an entangled humpback when it came across one of the right whales, said Julie Huntington, education co-ordinator with the group.

“It’s great that we were there and able to respond,” she said.

Brown and Davies said that with the changing migration patterns, it wouldn’t be surprising if Fisheries and Oceans Canada was concerned about right whales getting tangled in fishing gear.

No one from the department was available for comment Tuesday.

Link to this story

Ask New Brunswick court to quash construction permit issued to Chaleur Terminals Inc., cite failure to consult CBC News

Jul 07, 2015

Mi’gmaq communities in the Gaspé region have take legal action against the New Brunswick government and Chaleur Terminals Inc., in a bid to halt construction of an oil terminal in Belledune, N.B.

Listuguj Mi’gmaq First Nation and the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat filed a notice of application with the Court of Queen’s Bench in Campbellton, N.B., on Monday.

They are seeking to quash the approval to construct permit, environmental approval permit and site approval issued to Chaleur Terminals by the New Brunswick Department of Environment earlier this year.

The band and not-for-profit corporation allege the provincial government has breached its “ongoing duty to consult and to seek to reach a reasonable accommodation with the applicants,” according to the court documents.

They want the court to issue an order prohibiting the government from issuing any further permits, approvals or authorizations to Chaleur Terminals “until such time as the province of New Brunswick has fulfilled its obligations to the applicants.”

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

The New Brunswick government and Chaleur Terminals have not yet filed responses with the court.

Sacred duty to protect salmon

Troy Jerome, executive director of the Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat, contends the proposed project is in violation of aboriginal title, rights and treaties.

He says his people have a sacred duty to protect the salmon in the Matapedia and Restigouche rivers, along which the oil would be carried in rail cars.

​”Our people here fish salmon. If you look out on the river today, they’re out there fishing salmon. It’s our way of life. We’ve been doing that for thousands of years and we went and [did] what we had to do to defend our way of life in terms of protecting the salmon,” he said.

‘If there’s even one rail tank that spills into that river, it’s a lot more important to us than those 40 jobs.’- Troy Jerome, Mi’gmawei Mawiomi Secretariat

“We are one with the salmon. So the salmon [are] looking to us to protect them, and they provide us nourishment, so we have that kind of relationship, that direct relationship. And Chaleur Terminals right now, they’re talking about a couple of jobs, even up to 40 jobs — if there’s even one rail tank that spills into that river, it’s a lot more important to us than those 40 jobs.”

220 rail cars of Alberta oil daily

Chaleur Terminals, a subsidiary of Alberta-based Secure Energy Services, purchased 250 acres from the Port of Belledune last year. It plans to transport Alberta crude oil to Belledune by rail, for marine export abroad.

Construction is expected to start at the end of 2015 or 2016 and take about 18 months. Once complete, the project would see about 220 rail cars carrying oil to Belledune every day.

Jerome says people in the Gaspé area don’t have much faith in CN Railway after upgrades earlier this year caused irreversible damage to the local salmon population, according to anglers.

And he says efforts to discuss the project with the provincial and federal governments have so far not resulted in proper engagement.

In April, CN Railway dumped 6,000 tonnes of rocks on the side of its tracks to prevent erosion — and right into an important salmon breeding ground in the Matapedia River, causing irreversible damage, according to Quebec’s Atlantic Salmon Federation.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) officials have said the rail company didn’t respect its maintenance work permit when it dumped the rocks during an important time in the Atlantic salmon breeding cycle.

A total of 22 municipalities in Quebec have voiced opposition to Chaleur Terminals’ project in Belledune.

Local politicians in New Brunswick, however, have said they welcome the estimated 200 jobs it will create during construction and 40 permanent full-time jobs once it’s in operation.

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/quebec-first-nations-take-legal-action-against-belledune-oil-terminal-1.3141269

Who We Are

Save Our Seas and Shores is a coalition of fishing organizations, environmental and tourism groups, coastal landowners, First Nations organizations and individuals, and citizens who are dedicated to defending the Gulf of St. Lawrence from offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling.

What We Do

For over 14 years, Save Our Seas and Shores has galvanized public outcry against the oil and gas industry’s encroachment into the Gulf of St. Lawrence. We continue to press governments at all levels for a moratorium, in order to protect  a unique, biodiverse ecosystem which supports multi-billion dollar fishery and tourism industries. The Gulf of St. Lawrence is home to over 2,000 species, including the endangered blue whale, who spawn, nurse and migrate year round through this productive ecosystem. All of this life deserves nothing short of a complete moratorium on oil and gas exploration and drilling.

In 1999, Save Our Seas and Shores formed as a coalition to protect Gulf Nova Scotia (the southern part of the Gulf of St. Lawrence) from oil and gas leases irresponsibly issued by the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board on both sides of the iconic Cape Breton Highlands National Park. While the Nova Scotia government of the day did not stand up for our Gulf and issue a moratorium, a Public Review Commission was held. Following this, and the three years of intense campaigning by Save Our Seas and Shores, the oil company did not pursue exploration in Gulf Nova Scotia.

Our current campaign for a moratorium for the entire Gulf of St. Lawrence began shortly after the disastrous BP Deepwater Horizon blowout in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010. We learned that the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB) had issued a lease to Corridor Resources, the same company that had tried to get into the southern end of the Gulf a decade earlier. This junior company, with no offshore experience, is proposing to drill in the middle of one of the most productive channels of the entire Gulf, in the “Old Harry” prospect, between Newfoundland and the Magdalene Islands (Quebec).

Since then, we’ve been fully engaged in organizing public events, doing media interviews, creating alliances, and making our views known to politicians.  Our efforts have brought key allies on board including Farley Mowat, actors Ethan Hawke and Jason Priestley; musicians Philip Glass, Teresa Doyle and Lizzie Shanks; and scientists such as Dr. Lindy Weilgart, an international expert on the impacts of seismic on marine life.

Save Our Seas and Shores works closely with many NGOs and groups who support the call for a moratorium, including the Sierra Club’s Atlantic Chapter, Council of Canadians, Ecology Action Centre, and our sister coalition the St. Lawrence Coalition Saint-Laurent.

While we are non-partisan, Save Our Seas and Shores will work with any politician from any party who supports a moratorium on oil and gas exploration and drilling in the Gulf.

Join Us

Jump in and join our efforts to defend the Gulf of St. Lawrence! Here’s how.

Contact Us

Save Our Seas and Shores Coalition PO Box 47 Merigomish, Nova Scotia, Canada

B0K 1G0

Here’s the issue

Oil companies want to explore and drill for oil in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The first drill is proposed for the “Old Harry” prospect, located only 70 km from the Magdalene Islands, Quebec, 80 km from western Newfoundland and 120 km from Cape Breton Is., Nova Scotia. If we don’t stop this, the fishing and tourism economies of 5 provinces and First Nations territories will be at risk from oil spills. The Canadian government is pushing for energy development and gives full control of offshore drilling activities to unelected Petroleum Boards which are tipped in favour of the oil industry.

Why We’re Saying No to Oil in the Gulf of St. Lawrence

1. The Gulf of St. Lawrence ecosystem is too precious to risk.

The Gulf has been described as the most productive marine ecosystem in Canada, containing the largest concentration of krill in the northwest Atlantic. Krill is a foundation species in the marine food chain of the Gulf, which is home to over 2,000 marine species that spawn, nurse and migrate year round. The Gulf of St. Lawrence gives the largest lobster production in the world. Over one million tons of mature marine fish funnel through the Gulf each spring and fall. Endangered blue whale, right whale, piping plover, leatherback turtle, and harlequin duck depend on a healthy Gulf.

2. ‘Co-existence’ between oil exploration and development and a bio-diverse Gulf ecosystem is not possible.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) scientists say this is a biologically diverse area where sensitive life stages of marine organisms are present year round. We say there is no “right time” for seismic surveying and other oil related activity.

3. Too little is known about the Gulf’s marine ecosystem to safely proceed with exploration or drilling.

Experts admit that the Gulf ecosystem is “not well understood”. And yet, the oil companies say they will mitigate risks. But you can’t mitigate the unknown. According to DFO scientists, there are knowledge gaps about early life stages and habitat requirements of all life stages. The precautionary principle, which is within Canada’s Oceans Act, states that where there is scientific uncertainty and the threat of harm, a precautionary approach must be applied. In 2000 – 2001, two Canadian bodies – the Fisheries Resource Conservation Council and the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans – both recommended a moratorium, recognizing the precautionary principle.

4. The Gulf ecosystem is already fragile and experiences extreme physical conditions.

The Gulf of St. Lawrence is a semi-enclosed sea, with currents that flow counter clockwise within the Gulf for up to 11 months before exiting into the Atlantic. The DFO Habitat Status Report (2001) states: “Any impacts from oil and gas exploration activities will be amplified due to the small, shallow, enclosed nature of the environment and the high biomass and diversity year-round.” Spill simulations show that an oil spill could drift to the shores of half of the provinces of Canada. The Gulf already faces environmental threats of land-based sources of pollution such as heavy metals and pesticides; shipping discharges; coastal development; and climate and air quality issues. Allowing the oil and gas industry into the Gulf would add thousands of barrels of drill cuttings, waste-water, and continuous small spills.

5. Oil development threatens existing jobs.

Multi-billion dollar renewable, sustainable fishing and tourism industries rely on a healthy Gulf for jobs in 5 provinces; Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and New Brunswick; and First Nations territories. In the Gulf, we are all neighbours.

6. You can’t eliminate or predict oil spills. Atlantic Canada is not prepared.

Time and again, offshore oil industry giants have proven they cannot prevent, stop, or clean up spills before damage occurs that lasts for decades.  Twenty-four years after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, herring stocks in Alaska’s Cordova Bay have not fully recovered. As research continues in the Gulf of Mexico, scientists are finding that impacts on animals who live on the sea bed has extended far beyond the localized area of the drill site. Their most recent work shows the impact zone to be up to 100 sq kilometres. If a spill happens in Canada, the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum board lacks the capacity to respond.

7. We need to wean ourselves off fossil fuel.

In order to prevent the Gulf continuing on the path to becoming a dead zone, as well as to prevent uncontrolled climate change, we must leave at least 80% of known fossil fuel reserves in the ground and convert to non-polluting renewable energy technologies as quickly as possible.  Instead of drilling in the Gulf, Atlantic Canada, with its ample wind and solar potential, could become a model of renewable energy for the rest of Canada.

What We Want

We are calling for an immediate moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling for the entire Gulf of St. Lawrence.

The Canadian government, First Nations and the provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland Labrador must work together to the protect critical marine environments, fisheries and wildlife. The economies and ways of life of the communities around the Gulf rely on a healthy Gulf to thrive.

Who supports a moratorium?

Within a few weeks of launching our campaign for a moratorium, over 40 groups signed on to our letter demanding action. We remain grateful to those early supporters! Now there are thousands more and we urge you to join us!

What You Can Do
We’ve got some ideas! Check out Taking Action

Looking for More Information?
Check out Learn More