Investigating the White Rose oil spill
(incident date, Tuesday September 9, 2008)
A web page describing attempts to obtain information about a significant offshore oil spill - Ian L. Jones, Professor, Department of Biology, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Contents of this web page (click to scroll down )
Correspondence with environmental regulators
Veritas vos liberabit (the missing data)
Cory's Shearwater identification and status in Canada
Correspondence from Husky Energy
Results of freedom of information requests
Auditor General unable to audit CNLOPB
Minor oil spill reported at White Rose field
Source: CBC News September 10, 2008 | 5:32AM
"A small quantity of oil spilled into the Atlantic Ocean Tuesday near a floating platform drilling off Newfoundland's southeast coast, the operator said.
Husky Energy said as many as 30 barrels of oil spilled into the ocean near the floating platform at the White Rose field. Husky said the oil was breaking up in the ocean.
The spill happened Tuesday morning, as crews were offloading crude oil into an adjacent tanker.
The spill is considered fairly minor. In November 2004, almost 1,000 barrels of oil flowed into the ocean after a mechanical failure occurred at the nearby Terra Nova field. The resulting slick expanded to nine kilometres in length and one kilometre in width.
Husky said there was no visible effect on wildlife in the area from Tuesday's spill."
Production affected by White Rose oil spill
Source: CBC News September 10, 2008 | 9:12 AM NT
"A small quantity of oil spilled into the Atlantic Ocean Tuesday near a floating platform drilling off Newfoundland's southeast coast, the operator said.
Husky Energy said production has been scaled back as repairs are made to a broken hose, which caused as many as much as 30 barrels of oil to spill into the ocean Tuesday near the floating platform at the White Rose field.
Trevor Prichard, general manager of production operations with Husky, said Wednesday that the latest aerial surveillance showed that oil was being dispersed in the water. Crews, though, are attempting to collect as much of the oil as possible.
White Rose managers do not know what caused the hose to break.
"At this moment in time, we're unsure," Prichard told CBC News on Wednesday morning.
"We need to investigate how the hose broke, so we'll be recovering the equipment; we have it in quarantine offshore at the moment, and that needs to be transported onshore for further investigation."
Prichard said production will not return to full capacity until the hose is repaired.
Meanwhile, Prichard said there is no evidence to show that wildlife in the area were affected by the spill. The aerial surveillance detected one whale in the area. Prichard said there are no signs that seabirds were affected by the contamination. The spill happened Tuesday morning, as crews were offloading crude oil into an adjacent tanker.
The spill is considered fairly minor. In November 2004, almost 1,000 barrels of oil flowed into the ocean after a mechanical failure occurred at the nearby Terra Nova field. The resulting slick expanded to nine kilometres in length and one kilometre in width."
White Rose is an oil field located 350 kilometres off the east coast of Newfoundland, a harsh environment. Oil is extracted from seabed wells and then pumped into the Searose, a Floating Production Storage and Offloading vessel (FPSO). The White Rose Field is located in an important area for seabirds.
Oil spills, even relatively small ones, can be deadly to seabirds. Even a dime sized oil stain on a seabird (a few mL) destroys the insulating value of the bird's plumage, birds ingest the poisonous oil as they preen themselves, these together kill the bird. It is critical that all oil spills be closely monitored to quantify the damage to the environment and gather evidence of the infringement of environmental laws. Two important methods of monitoring oil spills are surveys to count dead and dying seabirds at sea (from the air or surface craft following the spilled oil as it drifts away from the pollution source, ideally assisted by drift blocks) and on beaches as weakened birds seek land and are cast ashore. Some photographs of oiled murres, with notes on Environment Canada evidence handling.
30 barrels of crude oil is about 4770 Litres
"The distribution and abundance of vulnerable (to oil) pelagic seabirds, July to September"
source: A.R. Lock, R.G.B. Brown and S.H. Gerriets. 1994. Gazetteer of marine birds in Atlantic Canada - an atlas of vulnerability to oil pollution. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Atlantic Region.
ILJ: notice that one of the three east coast Newfoundland seabird ultra-high density squares (purple, 100-753 birds per km) lies immediately to the south of the oil field - thus although somewhat sparse, the historical database suggests that the spill occurred in an area with abundant vulnerable seabirds (most likely shearwaters)
Canadian Wildlife Service 'Birds oiled at sea' webpage
"We can no longer tolerate the release of oil into our pristine marine environment resulting in the death and injury to thousands of seabirds."
ILJ: strangely, no-where was offshore oil and gas activity mentioned on the BOAS web page (The page has now been removed entirely.).
Canada - Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board
"C-NLOPB's mandate is to facilitate the exploration for and development of the hydrocarbon resources in the Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Area in a manner that conforms to the statutory provisions for... ... environmental protection..."
Example penalty for polluting
In a recent conviction, a Newfoundland and Labrador provincial court judge ordered the Motor Vessel (MV) Nordic Fighter, a Norwegian-registered tanker, to pay a $70,000 penalty for accidentally discharging 64 Litres of oil off Placentia Bay on June 22, 2004 ($1,093.75 per litre spilled).
Government web page for the Selandang Ayu oil spill in Alaska
a model for oil spill response and public information release
Correspondence with environmental regulators
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Date: October 20, 2008 10:29:34 AM NDT
To: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'at sign' cnlopb.nl.ca
Subject: White Rose oil spill survey
Hi 'CNLOPB spokesperson',
Reports in the media following the recent 4770 Liter oil spill at White Rose quoted industry reps stating that a survey was conducted to detect oiled wildlife and 'no evidence of damage' was found. We are very curious about this, and certainly more information needs to be disclosed so seabird researchers and the public can judge the extent of environmental damage arising from this oil spill.
Therefore, would it be possible for you to provide me with the following information please?
1) Name and contact information of the person(s) who conducted the survey.
2) Summary of the protocol used for the survey.
3) Summary of the results of the survey (numbers of birds and marine mammals counted in the vicinity of the spill).
Thanks for your prompt reply to this. I look forward to further detailed correspondence concerning this spill event.
Sincerely,
Ian
Ian L. Jones
Professor, Department of Biology, Memorial University
From: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'at sign' cnlopb.nl.ca>
Date: October 20, 2008 1:58:54 PM NDT
To: "Ian Jones" <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Subject: RE: White Rose oil spill survey
Hi Ian,
The seabird observations that were conducted at the time of the spill were done by an observer on the drilling unit in the White Rose field.
The protocol that was used is a standard CWS protocol. If you want to know more about it, perhaps 'CWS EC manager' or 'CWS EC biologist#1' at CWS can assist.
Regards,
'CNLOPB spokesperson'
Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board (C-NLOPB)
Fifth Floor, TD Place, 140 Water St., St. John's, NL, Canada, A1C 6H6
Tel: xxx-xxx-xxxx, Blackberry: xxx-xxx-xxxx, e-mail: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'at sign' cnlopb.nl.ca, web: www.cnlopb.nl.ca
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Date: October 20, 2008 2:02:47 PM NDT
To: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'at sign' cnlopb.nl.ca>
Subject: Re: survey
Hi 'CNLOPB spokesperson',
Thanks for your quick reply. I take it then that the survey was done entirely from the drilling platform alone and not from any vessels or aircraft? Please confirm.
Would it be possible for you to provide the following, please?
1) Name and contact information for the person(s) who conducted thesurvey.
2) Summary of the results of the survey (numbers of birds and marine mammals counted in the vicinity of the spill).
Thanks!
Ian
From: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'at sign' cnlopb.nl.ca>
Date: October 20, 2008 4:33:55 PM NDT
To: "Ian Jones" <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Subject: RE: survey
Hi Ian,
May I suggest you contact 'CWS EC manager' or 'CWS EC biologist#1' for assistance with getting answers to your questions since the survey(s)/report(s)were done for CWS. I can probably get their contact info if don't already have it.
I haven't spoken with our Environmental Compliance Officers today, but as far as I know, the observers are contract personnel and Husky did have aircraft surveillance. Again, it would be best to talk to CWS about it.
Sorry if my response sounds like I'm passing the buck. That's certainly not my intent. It's just that the observation work/surveys were done for CWS and the reports go to CWS for analysis. What info they release or don't release is up to them.
If I can help with any other queries, please don't hestitate to contact me.
Cheers
'CNLOPB spokesperson'
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Date: October 20, 2008 4:36:01 PM NDT
To: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'at sign' cnlopb.nl.ca>
Subject: Re: survey
Hi 'CNLOPB spokesperson',
Thanks for the info - I had no idea CWS was involved - I will ask them about this.
Thanks again for your help with this.
Ian
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Date: October 20, 2008 4:38:38 PM NDT
To: 'CWS EC biologist#1'
Subject: Fwd: survey
Hi,
No luck in getting info from CNLOPB.
Would it be possible for you to provide me with the following information please?
1) Name and contact information of the person(s) who conducted the survey.
2) Summary of the protocol used for the survey.
3) Details of the results of the survey (numbers of birds and marine mammals counted in the vicinity of the spill).
Thanks!
Ian
From: 'CWS EC Manager' 'at sign' EC.GC.CA>
Date: October 27, 2008 2:49:29 PM NDT
To: <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Cc: 'Husky consultant'at sign' nfld.com>, 'CWS EC biologist#1'at sign' EC.GC.CA>, 'EC person' at sign' EC.GC.CA>
Subject: RE: survey
Ian,
'CWS EC biologist#1' passed along your email for response. 'Husky consultant' on behalf of White Rose is the best contact to address the specifics of all your questions (one through to three). I have advised 'Husky consultant' (cc'd on this email) of your request for information.
'Husky consultant', Consulting Ecologist, Telephone: 709-xxx-xxxx
Fax: xxx-xxx-xxxx, Mail: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Email: 'Husky consultant' 'at sign' nfld.com
Regards,
'CWS EC manager'
**************************************************
'CWS EC manager'
Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service
6 Bruce Street Mount Pearl, Newfoundland & Labrador A1N 4T3
Email: 'CWS EC manager' 'at sign' ec.gc.ca
Tel: 709 772-7456 Fax: 709 772-5097
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Date: October 27, 2008 3:27:40 PM NDT
To: 'Husky consultant' 'at sign' nfld.com
Subject: White Rose oil spill
Hi 'Husky consultant',
Reports in the media following the recent 4770 Liter oil spill at White Rose quoted industry reps stating that a survey was conducted to detect oiled wildlife and 'no evidence of damage' was found. We are very curious about this, and certainly more information needs to be disclosed so seabird researchers and the public can judge the extent of environmental damage arising from this oil spill.
Therefore, would it be possible for you to provide me with the following information please?
1) Name and contact information of the person(s) who conducted the survey.
2) Summary of the protocol used for the survey.
3) Summary of the results of the survey (numbers of birds and marine mammals counted in the vicinity of the spill).
Thanks for your prompt reply to this. I look forward to further detailed correspondence concerning this spill event.
Sincerely,
Ian
Ian L. Jones
Professor, Department of Biology, Memorial University
From: 'Husky consultant' 'at sign' huskyenergy.com>
Date: October 30, 2008 12:31:12 PM NDT
To: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Cc: 'Husky manager' 'at sign' huskyenergy.com>
Subject: RE: White Rose oil spill
Dear Dr. Jones
This note is to acknowledge receipt of your request for information on the recent oil spill experienced from the SeaRose FPSO. I have tabled this information with Husky and given the availability of folks that need to consider this request this week I do not expect Husky will be in a position to respond until mid next week.
For the purposes of any future contacts on this matter please use my Husky email address provided on this email. My office phone at Husky is 709-724-3967.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. Best regards,
'Husky consultant'
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Date: October 30, 2008 5:21:27 PM NDT
To: 'Husky consultant' 'at sign' huskyenergy.com>
Subject: Re: White Rose oil spill
Hi 'Husky consultant',
Thanks a lot for the note.
I look forward to your response.
Cheers,
Ian
NO FURTHER E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE FROM 'Husky consultant' WAS RECEIVED
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>
Date: November 24, 2008 2:04:54 PM NST
To: 'CWS EC manager' 'at sign' EC.GC.CA>
Cc: 'CNLOPB spokesperson', 'CWS EC biologist#1' 'at sign' EC.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: White Rose survey
Hi Kim,
I have received no information from 'Husky consultant' about a post spill survey at White Rose. 'CNLOPB spokesperson' previously directed me to your office as the "best" source of information about this matter. I assume that because (s)he is the spokesperson for CNLOPB, and CNLOPB has jurisdiction over environmental matters related to offshore oil development, that her/his advise is correct - CWS St. John's is the appropriate source.
Therefore I am again asking if it would be possible for you to provide me with the following information, without further delay, please:
1) Do you know whether a post spill survey was undertaken to look for evidence of oiled seabirds? YES or NO
2) If you do know, was a survey conducted? YES or NO
3) Name and contact information of the person(s) who conducted the survey.
4) Summary of the protocol used for the survey.
5) Summary of the results of the survey (e.g., numbers of birds and marine mammals counted in the vicinity of the spill).
6) Will EC scientists be preparing a damage assessment for this oil spill?
Thanks very much in advance for providing this information. I am sure you will want to do so as EC policy, as outlined in your Birds Oiled At Sea web page, includes the following statement:
"Government agencies, industry, and the private sector have to work together as a unit to bring this to a halt. We can no longer tolerate the release of oil into our pristine marine environment resulting in the death and injury to thousands of seabirds. Narrator: We have the eyes, the ears, the technology... we have the will...each person, each department provides a vital piece of the puzzle... working together, we make a powerful team...working together, we will stamp out this unconscionable environmental crime. Our only effective long term solution is to prevent oil dumping in the first place. Canadians demand it... the world expects it.... the seabirds deserve it... because for them there's no second chance..".
http://www.ns.ec.gc.ca/boas/index_e.html
Sincerely,
Ian
Ian L. Jones, Professor, Department of Biology, Memorial University
From: 'CWS EC manager' 'at sign' EC.GC.CA>
Date: January 9, 2009 11:52:38 AM NST
To: "Bill Montevecchi" <mont 'at sign' mun.ca>, "Ian Jones" <iljones 'at sign' mun.ca>, 'CWS EC biologist#2'at sign' EC.GC.CA>, 'CWS EC biologist#1'at sign' EC.GC.CA>, "CWS EC consultant#1' 'at sign' EC.GC.CA>
Cc: 'EC person' 'at sign' EC.GC.CA>, 'CNLOPB manager' 'at sign' cnlopb.nl.ca>, 'Husky consultant' 'at sign' nfld.com>, 'EC topmanager'at sign' EC.GC.CA>
Subject: CWS report: SeaRose FPSO crude spill
In an effort to support requests for information, Environment Canada - Canadian Wildlife Service has developed a follow up report which identifies EC-CWS response activities and follow up with regards to the SeaRose FPSO crude spill incident (September 2008) as they relate to both our scientific and technical program areas. Specific requests for additional information from other parties/agencies involved in these events should be directed to the appropriate parties where relevant as indicated in previous emails.
We plan to develop this type of follow up report for all pollution incidents which involves Canadian Wildlife Service response in the future. Please advise if you would like to be included on the distribution list for these reports.
Ian, I understand that you were looking for a copy of the map embedded in the report. I have attached a separate copy of this figure for your use.
Regards,
'CWS EC manager'
<<SeaRose incident summary report CWS Final.pdf>> <<26 Aug - 23 Sep counts.jpg>>
'CWS EC manager'
Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service
"A total of 2622 birds were observed between 26 August and 11 September 2008 from the three platforms in both fields (total observation time = 39 hours). The majority (56%) were shearwaters (Greater, Manx, and Cory's), followed by..." [ILJ: but not Sooty Shearwater?]
"There are no (believable) records of Cory's Shearwater from the northern Grand Banks." local seabird expert
From: Ian Jones <iljones ' atsign' mun.ca>
Date: March 6, 2009 5:19:16 PM NST
To: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'atsign' cnlopb.nl.ca>
Subject: Sea Rose oil spill charges
Hi 'CNLOPB spokesperson',
I am writing to ask why CNLOPB has not laid MBTA charges against Husky Energy in relation to their 4770 Litre oil spill that occurred on September 9, 2009. The oil spill took place at a location with large numbers of migratory birds present, and I believe the Atlantic Accord Act and the Bill C-15 amendment should cover this event "C-15, An Act to amend the Migratory Birds Convention Act (1994), and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (1999)".
I would appreciate it if you could provide a detailed and specific explanation that I can post on my web page about this event, as numerous people have been asking me about this. Thank you for your prompt attention to my request.
http://www.mun.ca/serg/WhiteRose3.html
Ian
Ian L. Jones, Professor, Department of Biology
From: 'CNLOPB spokesperson' 'atsign' cnlopb.nl.ca>
Date: March 6, 2009 7:21:34 PM NST
To: <iljones 'atsign' mun.ca>
Subject: Re: Sea Rose oil spill charges
Hi Ian,
It is still under investigation.
'CNLOPB spokesperson'
From: 'DFO science advisor' 'atsign' dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Date: May 5, 2010 9:51:41 AM NDT
To: <iljones 'atsign' mun.ca>
Subject: Re: oil spill response in Canada
Good morning Ian,
I am closely following the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and read the article in the Winnipeg Free Press containing your interview this morning. I have been trying to gather information regarding wildlife response to oil spills in Canada. So far, I've communicated with some folks at EC/CWS and others at DFO, but so far have not received the information I am looking for. In any case, I thought perhaps you might be able to lead me in the right direction.
I am already familiar with the CWS regional response plan basics; what I am after are the logistical details of spill response in Canada in terms of wildlfe operations. To provide some context and background, I was involved in oil spill response in xxxxxxxxxxxx for many years prior to my return to Canada in 2008. The organization I worked for (xxxxxxxxxxx) has held an MOU with xxxxxxxxxxxxx Dept. of Fish and Game for more that 3 decades, and our responsibility was to provide scientific expertise in the asessment, and data and evidence collection, of dead and debilitated wildlife impacted by oil spills. These efforts are of course critical for modeling the actual impacts of a spill on wildlife populations, and therefore essential for any subsequent Natural Resource Damage Assessment. Through an additional contract with CDFG, I also co-managed a team of ~65 biologists throughout xxxxxxxxxxxxx, and provided annual team training regarding the state spill response protocols for data and evidence collection and also offered drill scenario training. Our team, called the Wildlife Processing Unit, is an integral component of the state of xxxxxxxxx's Incident Command System (see attached). I have responded, as co-coordinator of this group, to three significant spills in xxxxxxxxxxxxx since 2001 and also to the Prestige oil spill in Spain (at the request of Birdlife International) in 2002.
Now, as xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx science advisor at DFO, I have a keen personal and professional interest in all stakeholder roles in oil spill response in Canada. The CWS plan specifically identifies DFO as being responsible for providing advice regarding marine mammals to the "Lead Agency" (although there is no mention of fish or inverts in the plan). However, I am not familiar with any of the specific protocols for documenting the impacts of oil on dead and debilitated wildlife in Canada, including marine mammals. As outlined in the attached document, the state of xxxxxxxxxxxxx has extensive infrastructure and protocols (with trained personnel for all components) in place dealing specifically with all aspects of wildlife operations, and these are available publicly at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/ospr/report/wildlife_response_plan_6-30-2005.pdf and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/ospr/report/wlp_appendicies6-30-05_final.pdf. I would like to know if any of the regional plans in Canada have similar operational and data collection protocols for documenting the impacts of oil on dead and debilitated wildlife (and if they are available publicly), and if there is a similar spill response mechanism (e.g. the Incident Command System), and how each of the response agencies (and appropriate strike teams) fit in to this structure?
I was asked by senior management on Friday, what would DFO's role be, who are our contacts in place regarding wildlife response, and how would our Minister respond if there were a significant spill in Canada that threatened, for example, migrating belugas, or tuna, or the lobster fishery, or threatened cod stocks? I could not answer these questions. As a former (and always in my heart) seabird biologist, I am also personally interested in spill response as it pertains to seabirds. As you also may know, there are plans to begin drilling in Baffin Bay this summer, and as far as I know, we do not have any capacity to deal with potential spills in that region (although apparently Harper has said there will never be a spill in the Arctic because of our strict regulations, so clearly we shouldn't be at all concerned). In addition, there are now concerns of potential interactions between the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the Canadian stock of bluefin tuna. Unfortunately, the timing couldn't be much worse, as the adult fish are in that area and spawning now. This is the only known spawning area for fish that support the Canadian fisheries, as shown by recent otolith microchemistry work.
As I said above, I have many years of experience and an intense personal and professional interest in oil spill response and would like to become involved and more familiar with spill-related wildlife operations in Canada. Any information you can provide to help guide me to someone with answers will be most appreciated.
Sincerely,
'DFO science advisor'
Fisheries and Oceans Canada / Pêches et Océans Canada
12S048-200 Kent Street / 12S048-200 rue Kent
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0E6
Tel: xxx-xxx-xxxx/ Fax: xxx xxx-xxxx
From: Ian Jones [mailto:iljones 'atsign' mun.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 8:35 AM
To: 'DFO science advisor'
Cc: various luminaries
Subject: Fwd: oil spill response in Canada
Hi 'DFO science advisor',
Thanks for your correspondence. You pose several very important questions to which we urgently need answers. I would be happy to speak on the phone or meet with you to discuss these questions.
In the meantime, I think it would be useful for you to examine how CWS/EC has responded to past Newfoundland oil spills as that likely predicts how they would respond today and in the future.
Please study the following materials carefully and let me know if you have any questions:
my offshore oil web pages:
Terra Nova oil spill (Nov 21, 2004) http://www.mun.ca/serg/acwern/TerraNova.html
White Rose oil spill (Sept 8, 2008) http://www.mun.ca/serg/WhiteRose3.html
CBC Crosstalk (audio podcast, May 4, 2010) discussion of matters closely related to your questions.
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/nlradionoon_20100503_31735.mp3
CBC interview (online video, April 30, 2010) discussion of matters closely related to your questions.
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Canada/NL/Web_Exclusive/ID=1482043151
Thanks for your interest and good luck to you.
Ian
Ian L. Jones
Professor
Department of Biology, Memorial University
St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3X9, CANADA
From: 'DFO science advisor' 'atsign' dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Date: May 5, 2010 10:44:35 AM NDT
To: "Ian Jones" <iljones 'atsign' mun.ca>
Cc: various luminaries
Subject: RE: oil spill response in Canada
Thanks so much for your prompt reply, Ian. I will indeed review the information you provided and will let you know if I have any questions. Ultimately, I am really hoping to find a plan that is similar to what xxxxxxxx has in place, including details (and I mean the real minutia) of all aspects of wildlife operations in spill response. I helped to write (and periodically revise) these protocols, and a review of just the table of contents in the xxxxxxxxxx plan provides a sense of what the entire spill response community has contributed over the past few decades in terms of experience, preparedness, planning and forethought. This is arguably the the most complete and effective framework for oiled widlife response globally, and we should learn as much as we can from it.
Hopefully I will find what I'm looking for, but if not, perhaps we could all think about conducting a workshop to facilitate the development of specific regional plans and protocols. There is no need to reinvent the wheel here; several months ago I spoke with xxxxxxxxxx, who is the Director of the Oiled Wildlife Care Network (OWCN; housed at UC xxxxx in xxxxxxx), regarding the possibilities of providing advice and guidance (xxxx's credentials can be found at http://www.owcn.org/xxxxxxxx), and he was thrilled with the idea. He is, however, quite busy setting up wildlife operations in Louisiana at the moment.
Again, thank you for the information, and I'll let you know what I find out.
Cheers,
'DFO science advisor'
Fisheries and Oceans Canada / Pêches et Océans Canada
12S048-200 Kent Street / 12S048-200 rue Kent
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0E6
Tel: xxx-xxx-xxxx/ Fax: xxx xxx-xxx
From: 'DFO science advisor' 'atsign' dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Date: May 5, 2010 10:54:14 AM NDT
To: "Ian Jones" <iljones 'atsign' mun.ca>
Subject: RE: response in Canada
Thanks Ian...I am getting the feeling that I am being ignored by EC/CWS, although I'm not sure if it's my premature paranoia or their fear of not being able to answer the questions.
Cheers,
'DFO science advisor'
Fisheries and Oceans Canada / Pêches et Océans Canada
12S048-200 Kent Street / 12S048-200 rue Kent
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0E6
Tel: xxx-xxx-xxxx/ Fax: xxx xxx-xxxx
From: Ian Jones <iljones 'atsign' mun.ca>
Date: May 6, 2010 10:40:52 AM NDT
To: 'DFO science advisor' 'atsign' dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Cc: various luminaries
Subject: EC/CWS's plan for oil spill response
Hi again 'DFO science advisor',
Here are my thoughts (briefly) on EC/CWS's plans for response to offshore oil spills in Newfoundland and Labrador, re seabirds.
Environment Canada's plan, as far as I can tell, is to collect seabird distribution data by haphazard sampling (observers on government and industry ships of opportunity) to build a large model of mean seabird density offshore for different times of year (e.g., see the attached map). When an offshore spill occurs, this model will be compared to remotely sensed data on spill trajectory, and effects (e.g., on seabirds) will be inferred from how the spill trajectory overlaps modeled mean seabird density. Environment Canada will produce a report, similar to the one produced after the Terra Nova spill, the estimates the number of seabird "put at risk" by the spill. The concept of "put at risk" has not been properly defined and has no confidence limits. No actual mortality estimate, with confidence limits, is planned and few or no appropriate direct measurements of mortality offshore is anticipated. The density model is interesting in relation to seabird ecology but will be of little to no use in assessing damage by an offshore oil spill, large of small. The reason is that the 'mean' density of birds in any location has little relevance when the hour to hour, day to day, and week to week variation in bird numbers is extremely high. In other words, the number of birds at a particular spot, even in a rich area near the rigs/shelf break, could be in the tens, hundreds, thousands, or more, or less, depending on the day - we simply wouldn't know how many birds interacted with the spill by this method.
To quote David Schneider:
"Monitoring prior to a blowout is an expensive fool's errand (type I error). Which may explain the lack of response to your requests for a protocol. The only thing you will get from counts before and after a blowout is that a well-paid statistician will force you to accept the null hypothesis, no change in average (because of hyper variance of counts at sea). And even if the before vs after was significant, a competent statistician could nullify you on the CI (control impact) side."
Therefore, I believe Environment Canada's current plan to estimate damage to seabirds by offshore oil spills off Newfoundland is poorly thought out, statistically indefensible, and will be basically useless in achieving its intended ends.
A rigorous response to an oil spill (in relation to quantifying damage to seabirds) would involve, at a minimum:
1) Presence of independent trained biologist seabird observers on the rig to begin observations immediately when a spill occurs (only useful during the actual release of oil, not afterwards).
2) Immediate presence of independent trained biologist seabird observers on dedicated ship(s) at the spill scene within hours of the spill. These vessels would follow the oil as it drifts away from the rig, until the oil was sufficiently dispersed to be no further danger to wildlife. These observers would (among other things) measure seabird density in and near the oil slick, observe birds going in to the oil, observe and collect carcasses, and collect drift blocks released from the rig and at sea in the oil to quantify mortality. One vessel with a team of observers could probably handle a small spill (e.g., White Rose, Sept 8, 2008). For a larger spill two or more vessels and teams would be required. This would produce an actual mortality estimate with confidence limits.
This (not Environment Canada's plan) would be the only way to estimate damage to seabirds by offshore oil spills off Newfoundland. This would apply equally to Marine Mammals that are the concern of DFO. These points were made by me and others to Environment Canada after the Terra Nova oil spill in 2004. For political reasons, Environment Canada has not followed outside expert advise, and no effective means is in place to quantify damage.
It would be acceptable to me if Environment Canada simply publicly acknowledged that it is currently neither prepared or able to properly quantify damage to seabirds by offshore oil spills off Newfoundland. However, I would again offer to work with you and with Environment Canada to produce a rigorous, defendable, quantitative plan for offshore response that would produce the numbers we urgently need (and in fact that Canadian laws require) to assess environmental impact. Alternatively, we can work with the independent inquiry into spill response in Newfoundland, that Danny Williams is suggesting will occur soon. Or we can take our concerns directly to the public via the media if all else fails.
Let me know if you have any questions of comments on the above.
Sincerely,
Ian
Ian L. Jones
Professor
Department of Biology, Memorial University
St. John's, Newfoundland, A1B 3X9, CANADA
No further correspondence has been received from 'DFO science advisor' and all questions posed by this expert remain unanswered.
Veritas vos liberabit (the missing data)
The vessel Veritas Vantage was engaged in seismic surveys for Husky Energy on the northern Grand Banks around the White Rose oil field during all of September 2008. Beside marine mammals, systematic surveys were made for seabirds (10 minute Tasker-type counts) - there was a professional seabird biologist on board during the entire seismic survey period on from mid May to the end of September 2008. The seabird data would be highly relevant to the investigation of impacts of the September 9 oil spill, as they were made from a moving platform criss-crossing the spill area, and the data were collected by professional biologists who are experts in seabird identification and monitoring. It seems strange that these data were not available to CNLOPB and Environment Canada - or if they were available, why these data were not included in the above report. One year after the spill (September 2009) these crucial data have not been released, nor have Environment Canada, Husky Energy and CNLOPB even acknowledged their existance!
Veritas vos liberabit: Latin proverb, meaning 'the truth will set you free'
Veritas: Latin, the truth
Vantage - place or situation affording some advantage (especially a comprehensive view or commanding perspective)
Cory's Shearwater identification
links:
http://www.birdguides.com/species/species.asp?sp=011056
http://www.neseabirds.com/shearcory.htm
http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/infocenter/Idtips/h0880id.html
Godfrey, W.E. 1986. The Birds of Canada. National Museums of Canada, Ottawa
Correspondence from Husky Energy
No further information received from CNLOPB, Environment Canada or Husky Energy.
Results of freedom of information requests
Freedom of Information Applications were submitted in April 2009 (see here) to the Federal Government, asking for Environment Canada documents and e-mail correspondence related to the White Rose spill and Dr IL Jones' investigation of the spill - c.300 pages of documents were received on March 4, 2010. Review of these docs to ascertain whether any of the information contained in them is relevant to the September 9, 2008, White Rose oil spill indicates no new (i.e., not already presented on this web site) or relevent information is contained in the docs received. Nor are any of my basic questions about the White Rose spill and spill response answered.
"Canada's access to information laws are on the verge of becoming completely meaningless due to chronic delays and foot dragging, a new report warns. Released today by interim Access to Information Commissionier Suzanne Legault, the report says growing delays are eroding Canadians’ right to obtain documents from their government. 'This right is at risk of being totally obliterated because delays threaten to render the entire access regime irrelevant in our current information economy,' Ms. Legault writes." Globe and Mail, April 13, 2010. In relation to its handling of FOI requests, Environment Canada was rated 22nd out of 24 government agencies and received an F (unsatisfactory) rating.
*zero tolerance: "The policy or practice of not tolerating undesirable behavior, especially in the automatic imposition of severe penalties for first offenses."
Possible negative effects of this incident could be mitigated by supporting the effort to remove introduced House Mice (Mus musculus) from Gough Island, where they prey on and threaten Greater Shearwaters and other seabirds.
From: ILJ <iljones 'atsign' mun.ca>
Date: Mar 10, 12:12 pm
Subject: looking for oil spill/seabird death info
To: nf.birds
I am investigating past and present seabird mortality caused by offshore oil and gas activity - requesting testimonials (anonymous or otherwise), digital photographs, video, any other evidence et c. documenting oil spills, light attractions and other events likely to cause mortality at offshore platforms, FPSOs, tankers et c. Sources will be kept strictly confidential. Please pass on to anyone you know who might be witnessing these events or is in possession of evidence concerning these events.
Thanks, Ian
Auditor General unable to audit CNLOPB
Petroleum board says unrestricted access not in legislation (St. John's Telegram, January 25, 2012)
"According to the acting AG, any attempts at conducting a review to his liking have been “a lengthy and often frustrating process” and the offshore petroleum board has had “varying responses.”
“The inability to complete the planned review is regrettable, as the CNLOPB will not be held accountable in the same manner as other entities within the jurisdiction of the Auditor General Act” the report states.
The CNLOPB has previously stated a section within the Accord Acts (section 119, federal) discusses privileged and proprietary information and creates hurdles that do not permit the board to provide unrestricted access to all information relating to the board and activities offshore."
accountability
A concept in ethics, often used synonymously with responsibility, answerability, enforcement, blameworthiness, liability and other terms associated with the expectation of account-giving (e.g., polluters should be held accountable for environmental damage). As an aspect of governance, it has been central to discussions related to problems in both the public and corporate worlds. Wiki
Atlantic Accord Implementation Act (AAIA)
Legislation, written by the petroleum extraction industry and the governments of Canada and Newfoundland and Labrador, designed (in part) to exempt the industry from the usual environmental laws regarding marine pollution and to control disclosure of information regarding pollution events.
CNLOPB
Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board - an organization (staffed partly with petroleum industry insiders) set up by the petroleum extraction industry and Canadian government lackeys to regulate extraction activities in Newfoundland and Labrador offshore via the terms of the AAIA
conflict of interest
The entanglement or contradictions of an organization’s internal interests with other obligations (e.g., to the public good), such that an independent observer might reasonably question whether the organization’s actions or decisions are improperly influenced by considerations of internal financial or political interest.
conspiracy theory
"explanation of a historical or current event as the result of a secret plot by a usually powerful cabal. Conspiracy theories are often viewed with skepticism because they contrast with mainstream explanations for historical or current events and lack conclusive evidence to support themselves. The term is therefore often used pejoratively in an attempt to characterize a belief as outlandishly false and held by a person judged to be a crank or a group confined to the lunatic fringe" Wiki
corruption
"to destroy (from the Latin corruptus); the abuse of power in decision-making processes, a form of behaviour that deviates from ethics, morality, tradition, law and civic virtue"
coverup
"an attempt, whether successful or not, to conceal evidence of wrong-doing, error, incompetence, or other embarrassing information"
environmentalist
"a person who advocates the sustainable management of resources and stewardship of the natural environment through changes in public policy or individual behavior" Wiki
errand boy
"A boy who earns money by running errands"
fifth column
a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group such as a nation from within, to help an external power.
FPSO
"A floating offshore oil production vessel that has facilities for producing, treating and sorting oil from several producing wells and which puts (offloads) the treated oil into a tanker ship for transport to refineries on land..."
incompetence
inability to perform and function properly, (e.g., dysfunctional administrative behaviors that hinder attainment of organization goals), synonymous with ineptitude, inability, inadequacy, incapacity, ineffectiveness, uselessness, insufficiency, skill-lessness, unfitness, incapacity. Wikipedia and Collins Thesaurus of the English Language.
information control
protocols facilitating the controlled release of information and opinion (e.g., by censorship, non-disclosure agreements, government secrecy, punishment of whistleblowers, muzzling of employees et c.) by an organization or industry to maintain a favourable image of that organization or its policies, and the promotion of political interests
intimidation
tactic involving the use of direct or implied threats to deter individuals (e.g., whistleblowers) from doing what they are doing
Kafkaesque
eponym used to describe situations reminiscent of the literary work of the early 20th century Prague writer Franz Kafka, including intentional distortion of reality by anonymous bureaucrats - the term's meaning has transcended the literary realm to apply to real-life occurrences and situations that are incomprehensibly complex, bizarre, or illogical. Wiki
obfuscation
concealment of the facts by deliberately making communications confusing, ambiguous or difficult to interpret
Orwellian
Adjective describing a situation, idea, or societal condition that George Orwell identified as being destructive to the welfare of a free society. It connotes an attitude and a policy of control by propaganda, surveillance, misinformation, denial of truth, and manipulation of the past. Wiki
propaganda
"the dissemination of information aimed at influencing opinions or behaviors of people. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense, often presents information primarily in order to influence its audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda." Wiki
proper channels
euphemism for 'information control' (see above)
pseudoscience
"Any established body of knowledge which masquerades as science in an attempt to claim a legitimacy which it would not otherwise be able to achieve on its own terms is not science... The most important of its defects is usually the lack of the carefully controlled and thoughtfully interpreted experiments which provide the foundation of the natural sciences and which contribute to their advancement. Another term, junk science, is often used to describe scientific theories or data which, while perhaps legitimate in themselves, are believed to be mistakenly used to support an opposing position... Thus the arguments in favor of limiting the use of fossil fuels in order to reduce global warming are often characterized as junk science by those who do not wish to see such restrictions imposed, and who claim that other factors may well be the cause of global warming. A wide variety of commercial advertising (ranging from hype to outright fraud) would also fall into this category. Finally, there is just plain bad science, which is commonly used to describe well-intentioned but incorrect, obsolete, incomplete, or over-simplified expositions of scientific ideas." Wiki
Quisling
synonymous with traitor - particularly applied to politicians and cival servants (e.g., federal government employees) who favour the interests of other nations or powers over those of the people they are supposed to represent - named after Vidkun Quisling.
sacred cow
An object or practice which is considered immune from criticism, especially unreasonably so. (e.g., in Newfoundland: the seal hunt, the northern cod fishery, the moose, the offshore oil industry, CNLOPB).
scared cow
(see sacred cow)
science
"A system of acquiring knowledge based on scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research. Using controlled methods, scientists collect data in the form of observations, record observable physical evidence of natural phenomena, and analyze this information to construct theoretical explanations of how things work. Science is the effort to discover and increase human understanding of how reality works. Its purview is the portion of reality which is independent of religious, political, cultural, or philosophical outlook (and conflict of interest). Using controlled methods, scientists collect data in the form of observations, record observable physical evidence of natural phenomena, and analyze this information to construct theoretical explanations of how things work... A strict following of a scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of a scientist's bias on the outcome of an experiment. This can be achieved by correct experimental design, and a thorough independent anonymous peer review of the experimental results as well as conclusions of a study." Wiki
science fiction
"that class of prose narrative treating of a situation that could not arise in the world we know, but which is hypothesized on the basis of some innovation in science or technology, or pseudo-science or pseudo-technology, whether human or extra-terrestrial in origin" Kingsley Amis
seabird
birds adapted to life in the marine environment, usually independent of land - known for their vulnerability to oil pollution
self-regulation
"the regulation (by an organization or industry) of its own behaviour without independent external control or monitoring"
shill
A person who is paid to help an organization (e.g., 'Big Oil') while pretending to have no association with it, and give onlookers the impression that he or she is an enthusiastic independent observer (or e.g., regulator). The group that hires the shill is using crowd psychology, to encourage onlookers (who are unaware of the set-up) to believe something. Shills are often employed by confidence artists. The term plant is also used. The term is also used to describe a person who is paid to help a political party or other advocacy organization to gain adherents; the shill gives the impression of being unrelated to the group in question. Wiki
stonewall
"to obstruct or hinder any discussion"
"the front fell off" :-)
Last updated: February 22, 2012 This page is
maintained by Ian L. Jones (iljones 'at' mun.ca)
Official disclaimers: nothing in the contents of this site or its links should be taken to represent MUN policy; this site and links to external sites are provided for education and research purposes, their inclusion here in no way implies that MUN endorses the content or use of these sites.
