Support strong Canadian climate journalism for 2025
Environmental groups aren’t the only ones characterizing Canada’s recent draft Ocean Noise Strategy as weak and watered down. The same criticism came from inside the department.
Key Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) staff were unimpressed with the proposed framework to address the surging problem of noise pollution, internal communications obtained by Canada’s National Observer suggest.
When the draft strategy rolled out in August, three years after its delivery was promised, it was highly criticized. Environmental groups and scientists said the plan lacked any immediate, meaningful actions to deal with the problem, such as noise-reduction targets for excessively noisy areas or noise pollution limits for industrial activities like shipping.
During the strategy’s internal review process, the DFO deputy minister’s office also forwarded staff comments about the document’s weaknesses, according to emails obtained through access-to-information legislation.
One email observed that “there is only one actual noise management or reduction measure within the entire strategy,” and questioned whether it should be called a “strategy” at all.
“This [framework] must have been a long time underway, but it is really light on actual strategy ... ie a plan that leads to an end,” the email stated.
“If this is to be a Strategy, there should actually be some more items in here or plans for more items,” the email said, adding that the draft strategy lacked direction, seemed to be largely focused on doing more research — and perhaps, merited a title change.
Despite the criticism, the strategy was approved unaltered, the email chain suggests.
The government documents also noted there is currently no budget or funds allocated to implement the final strategy and action plan.
In other documents, staff expressed concern the strategy would still attract negative comments from industries, including fish harvesters, shipping associations and seismic operators. The emails show the ministry's media communication plan sought to reassure industry that the strategy did not include any new regulations to accomplish a reduction in noise.
“Emphasis will be placed on the coordination and planning aspects of the Strategy to help alleviate any perceived ties to prescriptive management measures,” various government emails noted.
Before publication deadline, DFO did not respond to questions or offer comment about the communications, the strategy’s possible weaknesses or its lack of funding.
The draft ocean noise strategy lays out 20 recommendations associated with three broad topic areas: science and knowledge-gathering; assessment and management; and communication, coordination and engagement.
There are no new suggested goals, objectives or new reduction targets to address noise pollution in the marine environment, despite the fact that industries, like the shipping and fishing sectors, Indigenous partners, research and environmental organizations were asked to provide input before the draft strategy was developed.
Released Aug. 23, the draft strategy has undergone another 60-day consultation period for feedback from the public and interested groups. The federal government is now using that information to shape an action plan and final strategy due sometime in 2025.
Hussein Alidina, WWF-Canada’s lead specialist for marine conservation, noted the group has repeatedly told DFO that a strategy needs to chart a clear path with timelines to reduce underwater noise and manage its harms to marine life.
“It was clear when this strategy was released that it was more of a plan for a plan,” Alidina said.
There should also be regional plans for hot spots of excessive noise, such as the Salish Sea and the St. Lawrence Estuary, where endangered southern resident killer whales and belugas reside and are exposed to unsustainable and harmful levels of sound pollution, Alidina said.
“It’s 100 times louder than it would be naturally [in the Salish Sea], and we know we have to act to reduce that.”
Acoustic smog from large ships, fishing boats, tugs, recreational vessels and ferries all hinder threatened orcas and other marine life’s ability to communicate with young, capture food and find mates.
Noise pollution will also disrupt formerly silent spaces along the coast of northern B.C. and the Arctic Ocean, where increased vessel traffic is expected as LNG export facilities come online on the West Coast, and with increased mining and commercial fishing activity in the North as ice retreats with global warming.
Some noise-mitigation measures already in place — like the Port of Vancouver’s ECHO Program — are beneficial, but they are temporary and don’t reduce noise enough to protect vulnerable species and other marine life, said Lance Barrett-Lennard, Raincoast Foundation’s whale conservation research director.
The port’s program involves voluntary, seasonal measures, such as the rerouting and slowdown of commercial vessels, to reduce physical and noise disturbance to southern residents with a current population of 73. The threatened whales recently suffered the death of a calf whose mother carried its corpse around on her head in an apparent show of mourning.
Compliance with the port’s voluntary slowdowns and route changes is high, but the program doesn’t address rising noise pollution tied to increased shipping associated with the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 and Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion projects, Barrett-Lennard said.
A carrot-and-stick approach is needed by the federal government to reward ships and companies that reduce noise and penalize the worst offenders, he said.
“I’d like to see the ocean noise strategy work toward a system to identify and restrict exceptionally noisy vessels,” Barrett-Lennard said.
“The general rule of thumb in my field is that 20 per cent of the vessels produce 80 per cent of the noise.”
There is biological and political urgency for the federal government to put in place effective noise-reduction measures and an emergency order to protect endangered southern resident killer whales, Barrett-Lennard said.
Effective measures need to be set up rapidly given the Liberal government’s recent implosion, he added.
“The new government is less likely to put anything meaningful in place if the election goes the way we all think it will,” Barrett-Lennard said.
“This is the time for the existing government to create a bit of a legacy for itself, draw a line in the sand and say, ‘We've made progress on this issue,’ instead of kicking the can down the road.”
With files from Jimmy Thomson / Canada’s National Observer
Rochelle Baker and Jimmy Thomson / Canada’s National Observer
Comments