In his article, Mr Swain says “On the environmental side, the media coverage has been almost entirely about the risks of the pipeline itself. Leaks or bursts could seriously damage any of the 600-odd streams it must cross, many of which are key parts of salmon ecosystems”.  However, he inquires “… what about the saltwater side of this transport system?”.

Mr Swain describes the route to Kitimat as “… 300 km of tricky navigation in waters distinguished by fog, storms, and quite amazing tidal currents.”  He further describes the preparations needed to “… reduce navigational risks to an acceptable minimum …”.   These would include an expanded pilotage system, with new stations at Kitimat and Banks Island, boats to service the tankers, as well as Coast Guard ships to supervise the transits and to respond to emergencies.

An alternative route to Prince Rupert is suggested by Mr Swain which would give a more direct entrance to the Pacific Ocean reducing the probability of a tanker disaster and the investment by the Coast Guard and the Pilotage Authority.

At the end of his piece Mr Swain urges to ask ourselves: “… why Enbridge chose the less safe route, and whether we as taxpayers have to pay the premium for the risks the company has created”.

A full copy of this article can be found here.

**Please note that PacMARA takes no position on the Enbridge’s proposed pipeline issue.

Can the ban on shark finning in North America help systematic conservation planning efforts?

Shark finning is a serious problem as the practice is decimating shark populations around the world. However, the efforts of various non-profits, politicians and governments, and many individuals to ban shark finning have been successful in cities across North America, and the efforts are currently spilling over into Europe.

Shark finning is the act of catching a shark, cutting off all of its fins, and throwing the shark back in the water…still ALIVE. The barbaric procedure is undertaken for a special dish highly desired in Asian countries. Shark fin soup is considered lucky in Asian cultures and holds high status in social circles. It is also a billion dollar industry.

Until recently, shark fin soup could only be afforded by the rich, as the price was extremely high. Now, however, many Asians can afford the dish – meaning millions of people – as China’s population nears 1 billion. So the number of shark fins used for soup has increased drastically; 95% of which are consumed by China.

China has not yet passed legislation to protect sharks from finning, although efforts are underway. Recently, a hard-fought bill banned the possession and sale of shark fins in California, the largest consumer outside of Asia. The legislation was due to a unique collaboration between many NGOs ranging from the Humane Society to Heal the Bay. Individuals, such as food writers and cartoonists, also helped raise public awareness on the issue.

Other governments to ban finning include Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Guam, the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, and Chile. Canada is in the process of banning shark fin importation as well, which would stop around 77,000 kilograms from coming into the country per year. Fins and their soup are already illegal in and around Toronto.

Protecting sharks from finning could ignite the public to want Marine Protected Areas in the Oceans. MPAs are hard to sell to the public as they are seen more as an exclusion tool than a protection tool. If MPAs concentrate on protecting sharks within a set of boundaries, than other species found within those boundaries will also be protected. Therefore, managers can use sharks as the fuel to get the public to demand Marine Protected Areas in the Oceans.
This demand for conservation rather than consumption would allow conservation planners to incorporate shark protection into systematic marine conservation planning efforts. An advantage of including sharks in conservation planning is that their distribution is widespread, requiring more area to be considered for protection. If more areas are protected for sharks, then other habitats and species that lie within the boundaries would also be protected.

Do you think that bans on shark finning and on shark fin soup will help systematic conservation planning efforts for our oceans?

- Andrew Lewin, Board Member; and Heather Coleman, Science Advisor

In Photo (from left to right): Norma Serra* (PacMARA staff), Dan Farr (Biota Research Ltd), Lief Olson (O2 Planning + Design Inc.), Tim Wilson* (Compass Resource Management Ltd), Lindsay McBlane* (Parks Canada), (bottom) Trevor Weins* (Apropos Information Systems Inc), and Tom Habib* (University of Alberta)

They are available in PDF or below, in both English and Spanish:

“Ten Commandments for Marxan in Planning”

1. Decision support tools like Marxan can be very beneficial to planning processes;

2. These tools should only be used when they are needed; i.e. if the problem can be readily solved using conventional approaches, then that is preferable;

3. For spatial planning with many overlapping considerations, the use of decision support tools like Marxan is recommended;

4. When used in planning, Marxan should be driven by the agreed-upon goals and objectives of the planning process;

5. Good planning requires a mix of good science, governance, and communication / engagement with users;

6. Tools like Marxan require proper use of data and cannot be expected to provide solutions to problems for which there are no data.

7. Ultimately, sustainable development and planning is a social decision;

8. Tools like Marxan can assist in providing a pool of solutions and pointing out options that have not been considered before. It can highlight areas of conflict, as well as ‘win-win’ situations.

9. Used properly, Marxan solutions reflect due diligence in making use of available information, including available social and economic data; and

10. Local knowledge / concerns and other considerations (e.g. management practicalities) will mean that zoning decisions will differ in certain ways from those solutions produced by Marxan. In general the boundaries will be straighter with the shapes more regular (e.g. boxes).

“Diez Conclusiones en el uso de Marxan para la Planificación”

1. Herramientas de apoyo a las decisiones como Marxan pueden ser muy beneficiosas para los procesos de planificación;

2. Estas herramientas sólo se deberían utilizar cuando se necesiten; es decir, si el problema se puede resolver utilizando enfoques convencionales, entonces estos son preferibles;

3. La utilización de herramientas para la toma de decisiones como Marxan es recomendable para la planificación espacial con muchas consideraciones sobrepuestas;

4. Es importante que los objetivos y las metas del proceso de planificación sean acordadas previamente para guiar Marxan;

5. Una adecuada planificación requiere buena ciencia, política, y comunicación / inclusión de los usuarios;

6. Herramientas como Marxan requieren un uso adecuado de los datos y no se puede esperar que proporcione soluciones a problemas donde no existen datos;

7. En última instancia, el desarrollo sostenible y la planificación son una decisión social;

8. Herramientas como Marxan pueden proporcionar un grupo de soluciones y señalar opciones que no han sido consideradas con anterioridad. Pueden señalar áreas de conflicto y situaciones con ganancias para ambas partes [‘win-win’ situations].

9. Utilizado adecuadamente, las soluciones de Marxan pueden reflejar el ‘análisis adecuado’ [due diligence] de la información disponible, incluyendo los datos social y económicos; and

10. Los conocimientos y preocupaciones locales, además de otras consideraciones como la practicabilidad de la gestión, pueden generar que las decisiones de zonación locales difieran de las soluciones proporcionadas con Marxan.  En general, en estos casos los bordes de las zonas resultarán más rectos y con formas más regulares, como los cuadrados.

P.O. Box 49002

Victoria, BC, V8P5V8

Canada

Phone: 778-300-1801

Tom Hooper has an MSc in Tropical Marine Ecology from the University of Newcastle and has worked on fisheries projects in Tanzania, Madagascar and Zimbabwe. He spent six years on the Indian Ocean Island of Rodrigues leading a programme of marine research and education that culminated in four MPAs being gazetted in 2007. He was awarded an MBE in 2004 for services to Marine Conservation and he is a trustee of the Marine Education Trust. Between 2007 and 2009, he built a partnership of MPA practitioners across Spain, France, UK and Portugal to form the MAIA project which is being led by the French MPA Agency.

Dr. Perry currently heads the Ecosystem Approaches Program at the Pacific Biological Station, and is one of two co-leads for the DFO Strait of Georgia Ecosystem Research Initiative. He was Chair of the recently completed international Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics (GLOBEC) program, whose goal was to understand how global change will affect the abundance, diversity and productivity of marine populations. He is also a past Chief Scientist and Chair of the Science Board for the North Pacific Marine Science Organisation (PICES). He is an Adjunct Professor at the Fisheries Centre of the University of British Columbia, and has taught courses on fisheries oceanography at universities in Canada, Chile, and Portugal. He is a past Editor for the scientific journal Fisheries Oceanography, is presently an Associate Editor for the journal Ecology and Society, and is a member of the Editorial Boards for Fisheries Oceanography and Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability.

The Pacific Marine Analysis and Research Association (PacMARA) is an impartial and independent network of researchers and practitioners, working together to share and coordinate information, develop high-quality research and analyses, provide training, and fill the critical gaps in our knowledge of British Columbia’s complex coastal and marine environment. Our membership includes interested individuals and groups drawn from government, First Nations, academia, the private sector and environmental non-governmental organizations.

The Program Manager would represent PacMARA locally, participating in activities related to marine ecosystem based management, marine spatial planning, and associated science policy development. He or she would also assist the Science Advisor in organization and delivery of PacMARA training courses and publications internationally.

This challenging opportunity would best suit a highly motivated, confident, individual who is looking to make a significant contribution to both the BC and global marine EBM domain.

Formal qualifications, knowledge and experience requirements include a university degree in marine ecology, biology or resource management (Masters or PhD preferred) and 3-5 years proven experience in collaboration, partnership development and relationship building in a resource management context.

This position may eventually transition to full-time.

Please respond by Friday 17 June 2011 to:
Michele Patterson,
PacMARA Vice President
mpatterson (at) pacmara.org

DSTs that use interactive software including maps, models, communication modules, and additional components can help solve problems that are too complex and multi-faceted to solve using human intuition or conventional approaches alone. Used properly, planning tools can:

• Save time, energy, and resources
• Guide users through difficult steps of decisionmaking processes so they can quickly move from data analysis to final decisions
• Repeat analyses with relative ease and reduce redundancy by leveraging the work of others
• Reduce requirements for human expertise
• Help users explore a wider range of alternatives
• Document decisions about inputs and parameters
• Increase the understanding of planning requirements and limitations for multiple sectors in the planning process

Download a copy of the guide here!