The Imbalance of Marine Science in Canada

Air chemistry laboratory at Alert, Northwest Territories.

In January 1993, Jean Charest, then Minister of the Environment, asked the Canadian Polar Commission to examine a proposal for an Arctic Marine Scientific Research Station.

The proposal was, and is still, vitally important. It is in the best interest not only of those who live in the Arctic, but also of all Canadians. Together, the initial proposal, the Canadian Polar Commission's review, and the government's response raise a number of troubling questions about Canada' s commitment to arctic research.

First and foremost, the proposal demonstrates that Canada has little in the way of scientific research facilities in the Arctic. It brings into question our national commitment to discover and understand fully the extent of contaminants entering the Arctic Ocean and their possible effects on the health and lifestyle of northern peoples whose existence depends on the ocean' s resources.

The review of the Polar Commission draws attention to the enormous imbalance in how Canada defines its scientific priorities and highlights the inability of government departments with major scientific responsibilities for arctic regions to co-operate to meet both their national and their northern obligations.

The main proponent for an Arctic Marine Scientific Research Station is Dr. Harold "Buster" Welch. All those the Polar Commission spoke to in its review praised Dr. Welch and some of his associates in Fisheries and Oceans for the existing facilities; in fact, the only arctic marine lab now in operation in northern Canada was built almost piece by piece from equipment and buildings Dr. Welch scrounged from government agencies and departments operating in Resolute Bay over the past 25 or so years. Although some research money has been directed to improving these meagre facilities, those interviewed by the commission stressed that the facilities still are greatly inadequate if Canada is to meet its international obligations in arctic science, particularly arctic marine science.

The demands on this lab from a small group of competent and dedicated arctic marine scientists have been very heavy. For the past 10 years, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has operated it primarily during summers, and Dr. Welch has spent the past few winters there.

The researchers at the lab report that their arctic marine science work has just begun to identify how little we actually know and understand about the arctic marine ecosystem and its impacts on our natural environment and on the northern peoples. The scientific panel advising the Polar Commission stressed that there is an immediate need to give greater priority to arctic marine science.

The ocean area we are talking about is enormous. Few people realize that the ocean and arctic waters within the 12-mile territorial limit equal the arctic land area of approximately 1.4 million square kilometres. The Canadian portion of the Polar Continental Shelf is comparable in size to the area within the 200-mile economic zones of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans combined. Moreover, the combined Canadian coastlines of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans measure less than half that of the Canadian Arctic Ocean.

This vast region is the critical habitat for a high proportion of the world's marine mammals; yet scientifically we know very little about it. Greater research of arctic marine systems would allow us to gain insights into its energy flows and nutrient cycles that would add significantly to general ocean science theory. In time, new fishery and important economic opportunities may be identified.

Canada clearly has a national obligation and an international responsibility to research and manage this vast and important arctic marine sea. We are told, however, that this country can afford neither the three million dollars to build an adequate marine station nor the 1.2 million dollars in annual operating costs.

Anyone examining Canada's arctic marine research or monitoring at this moment would properly ask how we can afford not to consider such a facility and, indeed, whether such a facility would not offer Canada substantial savings in its overall commitment to arctic science. To its credit, Canada has embarked on a massive scientific programme to study and measure climatic change. Early indications from the study suggest that global warming will have severe effects in polar regions because relatively small temperature changes influence the extent of ice cover and raise shorelines in the Arctic. Clearly, an arctic marine station should be a key element of our national global change initiative.

The 1991 Environment Canada report "Health of Our Oceans" identified the need for more intensive study in the Canadian Arctic. It noted that neither environmental quality guidelines and objectives nor comprehensive and co-ordinated monitoring systems have been established for the Arctic.

The Department of the Environment now appears to be developing a long-term arctic monitoring programme of which an arctic marine station should be a vital component. In fact, Dr. Welch and other marine scientists will argue that an arctic marine station should be the first priority. Without it, a base for continued long-term comprehensive monitoring will not be established, and the gaps in knowledge that now plague arctic scientists will continue to do so.

Canada and other circumpolar countries are co-operating in the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) to monitor and assess the extent and sources of contaminants that have been detected over the past few decades in the arctic food chain. Northern communities and the aboriginal peoples who depend on fish and marine mammals as their main sources of food are rapidly becoming concerned and, in some cases. alarmed over the growing incidence of PCBs and other industrial contaminants in the region.

It is certain that the proposed station would be an essential element in AMAP; in fact, one wonders whether this critically important multi-million-dollar programme can be successful or effective without such a facility.

Government departments that could be expected, by virtue of their mandates and interests, to take leadership roles in this initiative have been evasive in their responses to the proposal, and the Minister of Fisheries, whose department operates the existing inadequate facility, has responded, "budgets and priorities have resulted in a move away from the establishment of large-scale field stations with significant fixed costs. The Fisheries and Oceans Minister is now putting the priority on co-operative research projects with local hunters and trappers associations." Although no one doubts the importance of work to be done in the communities, many question whether it can be done if we do not improve our understanding of the greater arctic ecosystem.

Indeed, the proposal submitted by Dr. Welch and the concept endorsed by the Polar Commission's review panel avoided high capital and operating costs. It was suggested that the facility be operated co-operatively by all of the key government departments having relevant mandates and commitments to all aspects of arctic research: Indian Affairs and Northern Development; Energy, Mines and Resources; DND; the Coast Guard; Fisheries and Oceans; the Department of the Environment; National Health and Welfare; and others. More than 20 federal departments and agencies have a mandate for arctic research. As well, a significant number of university researchers and international arctic scientists wish to do polar work.

Together, government agencies with mandates for northern research now spend more than two and a half billion dollars per year, yet among them they apparently cannot establish a single facility that would cost only slightly more than one million dollars per year and that may offer exceptional returns to the overall Canadian arctic science effort.

Government departments have argued against the station because there is no clear indication of a demand for such a facility. In fact, the opposite seems the case, as researchers are forced to other regions because there is no adequate arctic facility to support their work.

The recommendation to the government calls for the station to be built at Resolute Bay, to expand on existing facilities and to save money. For anyone who has been involved in, or looked at, arctic research in the past 30 or so years, Resolute is an example of arctic research and co-operation. Since 1959, the Polar Continental Shelf Project (PCSP), under the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, has provided professional support including field transportation, equipment storage facilities, accommodation, meals, and a basic laboratory for scientific activities.

There is no question that the base camp facility at PCSP and the proposed marine station at Resolute Bay would complement each other. Resolute is the crossroads of the Arctic and the jumping-off spot for hundreds of polar researchers, and the region is scientifically significant. It is in the centre of the Polar Basin, where a huge mix of polar waters exit both east and west and may influence both the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans.

In the Polar Commission review, we found no one who did not stress an urgent need for such a facility. The many arguments made in its favour are based on the need for much greater knowledge about the polar regions, particularly the marine areas. To Inuit and others who live in the northern regions and depend on the ocean for their livelihood, such a facility is essential for continued health and well-being. They are calling for national equality in the way the Government of Canada approaches marine science.

John Amagoalik, Chairman of the Nunavut Implementation Commission, which is responsible for the creation of the Nunavut territory, recently told the Polar Commission that he and other Inuit support Dr. Welch' s proposal. Mr. Amagoalik believes that the Arctic is every bit as important as the Atlantic and the Pacific and that the federal government has an obligation to provide year-round, fully operational research facilities there. To continue not to do so, particularly in light of the significant body of scientific opinion on the need for such facilities, indicates an embarrassing imbalance in Canada's commitment and obligation to ocean research.

Whit Fraser is the Chairman of the Canadian Polar Commission.

Copies of the Canadian Polar Commission's report on the arctic marine facility can be obtained by writing to the Canadian Polar Commission, 1710-360 Albert Street, Ottawa K1R 7X7.