Natural Carbon Sequestration in Our Coastal Waters

Scientific explanations of climate change facts can be confusing for us all. I decided to do some reading to see if I could wrap my brain around some of the facts, and I discovered that I had a lot to learn! I was particularly interested in finding out more about coastal habitats such as seagrass beds and saltmarshes sequestering carbon. This sounds important and amazing - but I did not have a clue what it meant! So after some digging, I discovered just how natural carbon sequestration in coastal habitats works. Here is what I discovered.


Carbon Cycle
It all starts with the carbon cycle, which is the movement of carbon atoms through all things on the planet: the atmosphere, living and non-living organic material, our bodies, oceans, sediments (including fossil fuels) and the Earth’s core. There is a balance between these major reservoirs of carbon. Some things, like volcanic eruptions and burning fossil fuels, increase the amount of carbon in circulation in the atmosphere and oceans. Other natural processes like photosynthesis remove and store it. Plants take carbon from the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide, and through photosynthesis turn it into the sugars and carbohydrates that form plant material. Some of this carbon in plants is consumed by other animals that use the carbon to build their own bodies. Some carbon returns to the atmosphere and oceans or into soil or marine sediments as life forms decompose. Although the carbon cycle is on the move, the proportion of carbon that is in our oceans or atmosphere has been pretty steady over the years, allowing the species that depend upon it to evolve based on its presence in set concentrations.




Sequestration of Carbon
The carbon cycle makes it seem as though carbon is always on the move, but much of our planet's carbon has been stored for millions of years, in fossil fuels, and for hundreds of years in large trees. So you can see why cutting down trees and burning fossil fuels has upset the carbon balance: It is all back in in the atmosphere and oceans! What is needed, in addition to to halting the burning of fossil fuels, are actions like protecting and increasing forest cover and supporting other processes that take carbon out of circulation from the air and water then store in a stable solid form. There are many schemes to artificially sequester carbon, but most of them are so energy intensive that they would create as much of a carbon footprint as they elevate, some would take to long to be useful on a massive scale, and others have been banned from consideration due to unknown side effects that could be worse than the problems we are starting with!

Natural Carbon Sequestration
Natural carbon sequestration is carbon stored by plants and animals. The most effective form is when terrestrial and marine plants sequester carbon into the soil or sediments around their roots in a mineral form, storing it for thousands of years or more. These carbon sequestering plants are extremely important for reducing the amount of carbon circulating in the atmosphere and oceans. Of these, the marine coastal habitats such as mangroves, salt marsh and sea grass do this job the best. Marine species sequester the same overall amount of carbon as terrestrial species, even though there is 99.95% less plant material in the oceans doing the same job. This is due to special chemical processes in marine sediments. (This means half a kilogram of marine plant material can sequester as much carbon as 1,000 kgs of plant material on land)

Protecting Seagrass and Saltmarsh
Seventy percent of the marine plants that naturally sequester carbon are found in coastal areas such as seagrass meadows and salt marshes. Much of these areas have been lost since the 1940s due to coastal development, and have been damaged by run off from agricultural and industrial activities. Scientists of the United Nations Environment Program recommended to the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Change Conference that 80 percent of the world’s remaining seagrass and salt marsh habitat be protected as an important step among the range of strategies necessary to combat global climate change and ocean acidification.

So given that we know what to do - why aren't we doing it?

There is one thing you can do right now that would only take one minute. Send a letter to our Minister of Fisheries and Oceans - telling her about the importance of protecting these critical habitats with marine protected areas in order to ensure that they keep on sequestering carbon.



Information about natural carbon sequestration (if you want more) is also available in these reports.

* IUCN: The Management of Natural Coastal Carbon Sinks
* UNEP: Blue Carbon Report

How ya doing, chum?

Warmish temperatures during the day, cool ones at night, and my pumpkins are actually turning orange, which is a rarity in Sointula! With fall in full swing, and looking towards winter, I thought I would make my first blog posting since returning from maternity leave about something that also points to this time of year on the coast….the chum salmon run.

Some of you may be rolling your eyes. Why talk about the dog salmon (named because of their large teeth at spawning time), when there are cataclysmic events happening on the Fraser with the sockeye this year? Even the Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) website says our poor chum is “the least sought-after of the Pacific salmon species”. Well, I have to ask, least sought after by whom? By the commercial and recreation fishing sectors? By the consumer?

Chum salmon are the last of the species of Pacific salmon to return to our rivers to spawn. In the ocean, they can often be confused with sockeye because of their silver bright colour, but as they approach their natal streams, they differentiate themselves by their distinctive vertical streaks. They are historically extremely abundant and spawn in more than 880 streams and rivers along the BC coast. In my neck of the woods, chum are just now returning to the Nimpkish, Kokish, Cluxewe and Quatse Rivers.

Last month, the Globe and Mail reported that bears on the Central Coast are starving because of the lack of chum salmon. Last year this was happening in Knight Inlet because of the lack of pink salmon. Poor cousin or not, every species of salmon has a place in the ecological web on this coast. And every species of salmon is under threat, whether by infestation of sea lice, warming ocean temperatures, or just plain mismanagement.

Stock outlooks posted by DFO for the 2009 chum runs for Johnstone Strait and Mainland inlets are either low or near target. What floors me is that the difference between the definitions of what is “low” and what is “near target” is substantial. An area that is getting a near target assessment is defined as “stock is (or is forecast to be) within 25% of target and stable or increasing”. An area that is getting a low assessment is defined as “stock is (or is forecast to be) well below target or below target and declining”. It’s like the point at which the pendulum will swing from one side to the other. Is it increasing or decreasing? Are we going to focus less on “managing” a stock if its near target?

And what are the consequences if we are mistaken?

* In researching this blog posting, I looked up the predicted returns on chum this year. All well and good until I want to see it in a bit more detail by stream. I have to admit I am mystified at how anyone can even find this information, let alone interpret it.

http://www.psf.ca/

http://www.nvisea.org/

http://www-ops2.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/xnet/content/salmon/webdocs/SalmonStockOutlook2009.htm

http://squamish2010.ca/SHOREKEEPERS/

Part 4: Interviews from Sointula - LEK from BC's Central Coast

Part 4 of a 6 Part Series - by Kirie McMurchy

During my interview project with Living Oceans Society, every single person I interviewed mentioned the Mifflin Plan. The Mifflin Plan is the colloquial name for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Pacific Salmon Revitalization Strategy that came into effect under then-minister, Fred Mifflin. The Mifflin Plan was a reaction to a decrease in fish stocks in the 1980’s and it attempted to conserve the stocks by reducing the size of the fishing fleet. The plan went about this in two ways: buying back fishing licenses to reduce the number of boats able to fish and sectioning up the coast into zones so one fishing license no longer allowed one to fish the whole coast. It has been said that in one year alone, the west coast lost more than 8,000 jobs from the salmon industry. In a community whose lifeblood was the salmon fishing industry, it is understandable why this was such a huge blow.
The following is an excerpt from an interview I conducted with Living Oceans own, Will Soltau about his recollections of the Sointula-hatched action against the Mifflin Plan in the mid ‘90’s.

Excerpt of Interview with Will Slotau (contributed with permission)
"It was April of ’96 [that] we decided that we had to do something. There was a bunch of us from [Sointula] that went up to [the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) office in] Port Hardy. The secretary came up, these two guys just jumped up on the counter, went inside, one of them opened the door and we all rushed into the main office and we said “We’re not leaving until we hear from the minister that he’s not going to implement the Mifflin Plan!” and they said “Okay, good luck.” DFO got on the phone to find out what they should do." "So we made promises [that we would not be violent or destructive] and DFO left that night from work and they brought in a couple of commissionaires to sort of babysit us all night. The rotation of our people that were in the office changed on a daily basis. After about a week DFO didn’t like this free flow of people in and out of the office, and they didn’t want to drag us out and create a scene like that so what they decided they’d do was they would lock the doors and the people that were in there that day could leave at any time but they would not be allowed back in. There were eight of us, I believe, and we spent another eighteen days in there. It got pretty tense after a while. We were sleeping on the floor people would bring us food and they were still marching outside, they had placards by that time. " "Because of us, the DFO office in Tofino, Nanaimo, and finally in Vancouver got occupied but we were the first ones that actually took action like that. They might have even occupied the Prince Rupert office, I can’t remember. There were people that came from Port Hardy and Port McNeil once we occupied the office but the plan was hatched by a bunch of Sointulians." "Glen Clark was premier of BC at the time and he was all for supporting the fishermen, he had gotten the union behind him and there was a big press conference down in Vancouver one day and there was a bunch of people that had come to the office to protest. It was getting pretty noisy outside and I kind of felt like things were coming to a head with this whole press conference and the way people were feeling. Those of us that had been inside had had enough after eighteen days. So I let a bunch of people that were outside in and some of the people that were inside went out and from there it just kind of dissolved. Everybody was cleared out that evening, the cops showed up but they just kind of escorted people outside and then DFO locked the doors and that was the end of that. Nothing really came of it, DFO didn’t change one bit. "

Kirie McMurchy is a Guest contributor to coastal voices blog. If you have Local Knowledge about the ocean or about living on the Central Coast of British Columbia - we want to hear from you! Contact us at info@livingoceans.org.

Happy Canada Day!

I know, I'm a day early. But that's only because I'll be helping to (wo)man the Living Oceans table at the Canada Day celebration in Campbell River tomorrow. In between barbecues, flags, face painting, beer and fireworks, please stop by our LOS table at Ostler Park tomorrow to learn more about the sea that surrounds our great country on 3 sides.

In the meantime, some fun facts about Canada:

Canada has the world's longest coastline (202,080 km)1

The highest tides on Earth are found in the Bay of Fundy, east of New Brunswick. The channeling effect of the bay is responsible for the amazing difference between high tide and low tide, which, during spring tides, can reach 53.5 feet. (That's almost as tall as a four-story building!) 2

Every Canadian province and territory has its own commercial fishing industry. (Yes, even Alberta!)


Got something to add? Comment with your interesting Canada/Ocean facts below!



1. CIA World FactBook, Canada, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/CA.html, accessed on 29 June 2009
2. http://www.bayoffundy.com/highesttides.aspx

Genetically Modified Atlantic Salmon. Spooky.

Aqua Bounty Technologies has created an Atlantic salmon whose genetic properties have been crossed with those of an eel-like creature called ocean pout. This genetically modified fish reaches market size twice as fast as regular Atlantic salmon; and while Aqua Bounty is not currently seeking approval to sell this fish in Canada, its quest for USA FDA approval is likely to have an impact on American trading partners.*

Graph Source: http://www.aquabounty.com/products/aquadvantage-295.aspx

If this fish is approved for market, it would be a landmark decision, as there are currently no genetically engineered animals approved for food anywhere in the world. What do you think about this new AquAdvantage Fish? Would you eat it if it came to the market in Canada? If wild fish stocks continue to decline, are genetically engineered fish just the inevitable way of the future?

*Read more about the implications of this fish on Canadian markets in the May 20th Globe and Mail.

Endangered Species in BC

Did you know that British Columbia does not have an endangered species law? British Columbia is one of the only provinces in Canada (and one of the few jurisdictions in North America) that does not have a stand-alone law that protects species at risk.

Until recently, I thought that the federal government's Species at Risk Act (SARA) provided enough protection for endangered species in British Columbia, but according to the folks at Ecojustice Canada:
"Canada’s federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) offers little help. It generally applies only on federal lands, which cover a mere 1 percent of BC’s land base. SARA gives the federal government the power to apply “safety net” provisions to protect species outside of federal lands; but these discretionary powers have never been used, even for severely endangered species like BC’s spotted owl."1

There are at least 1600 species that need protection in our province, and many of these species are found in the marine ecosystem. The lack of a formal endangered species law in British Columbia leaves these species at risk without adequate legal protection. For more information about this issue and how you can take action, visit www.lastplaceonearth.ca.

New Wave Energy Project

The Canadian government recently gave $2.7 million to SyncWave Systems to fund the demonstration of an ocean wave converter on the west coast of Vancouver Island.

"The SyncWave Power Resonator is a next-generation frequency-based wave energy converter that tunes itself to maximize energy capture from the everchanging ocean swell" says Nigel Protter, President & CEO of SyncWave Systems Inc. "Additionally, our device was designed from the start to be simpler to mass produce and support, imperative to the goal of obtaining low cost bulk renewable energy from the sea. We’ve also spent a lot of time establishing viable markets for this technology and feel the time is now to seize a significant position in this rapidly emerging, potentially enormous, global environmental technology opportunity". 1

What do you think about this? Was this money well spent? Is this technology that could be brought to the North Island?

Healthy Oceans

February Survey Results

The results from our February survey are in!

When shown the statement "given the current world economic situation, I would now be more likely to support government policies that boost our economy at the expense of the environment",

0% of our readers strongly agreed

7% (2) of our readers agreed

18% (5) of our readers disagreed, and

74% (20) of our readers strongly disagreed with this statement

While most of us do not believe that the economy must come at the expense of the environment, not enough of us are taking action to make sure that our country's policies reflect our values. Under the guise of quick economic stimulus, the current federal government is dismantling measures that have been put in place to protect the environment. (For example, John Baird recently announced that Ottawa will be getting rid of 90% of the federal environmental assessments in order to facilitate a billion dollars worth of new infrastructure projects.) We need to let the federal government know that we value BOTH the economy AND the environment, and we expect them to make choices that reflect these values.

Thank you to everyone who participated in February's survey, and don't forget to respond to this month's survey question about the PNCIMA forum!

Justice for BC's Orca Population

Photo: NOAA Public Archives

Last week, the federal government issued an Order that will provide legal protection for endangered killer whales' habitat. This is an exciting victory for Ecojustice and all of the environmental groups that filed the lawsuit that precipitated this Order.

Here is the full press release:


Stunning policy reversal could mark turning point for 85 remaining whales
Ecojustice lawsuit forces government to legally protect BC killer whale habitat
Vancouver, BC Feb 25, 2009

After British Columbians celebrated the unexpected arrival of two newborn killer whales last week, there is another new cause for hope for BC's imperilled killer whale populations. This week, the federal government issued an Order that will provide legal protection for the endangered species' habitat - a stunning policy reversal after a lawsuit was launched by environmentalists last year.

The lawsuit was filed by Ecojustice, formerly Sierra Legal Defence Fund, on behalf of nine of Canada and BC’s leading environmental organizations. It alleged that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans had failed to require much-needed legal protection for the killer whales’ critical habitat. DFO had claimed instead that existing laws and unenforceable guidelines were sufficient to protect the orcas’ habitat from serious threats like toxic contamination, acoustic degradation and declining salmon stocks.

“To recover, killer whales need more than the status quo from the federal government and so we’re thrilled our lawsuit forced it to issue this habitat protection Order,” said Ecojustice lawyer Lara Tessaro. “Now we’ll be pushing to ensure this Order leads to action.”

The federal government’s complete turnaround marks a victory for BC’s most iconic species and for the environmental groups behind the lawsuit: Dogwood Initiative, Environmental Defence, David Suzuki Foundation, Raincoast Conservation Society, Sierra Club of BC, International Fund for Animal Welfare, Greenpeace, Georgia Strait Alliance and Wilderness Committee. It also marks the first time that Canada has ever issued an Order under its Species at Risk Act to protect critical habitat. However, the Order does not reference threats to critical habitat documented by scientists in the government’s Resident Killer Whale Recovery Strategy.

“We know we need to change the way we care for our marine environment to protect killer whales and their habitat,” said Kathy Heise, Marine Scientist with Raincoast Conservation. “We hope to work with DFO to incorporate the needs of killer whales’ into the management of our salmon fisheries.”

“To give this Order teeth, DFO must keep killer whales’ critical habitat free of tanker traffic and the risk of catastrophic oil spills,” said Will Horter of Dogwood Initiative.

Killer whales face many serious threats throughout their habitat on the west coast such as declining salmon stocks, increased boat traffic, toxic contamination, and acoustic impacts from dredging, seismic testing and military sonar. DFO is scheduled to release an action plan within the next four years, but still has not created an action planning team with independent killer whale scientists.

“Each time we think the government has finally given these ailing populations greater legal protection, they find a way to avoid meaningful change. Is this another hollow promise or will the federal government do the right thing and prohibit harmful activities in the orcas’ critical habitat?” asked Sarah King of Greenpeace.

Kim Elmslie of the International Fund for Animal Welfare stated, “We will continue to monitor DFO to ensure that every effort is made to protect this critically endangered species for future generations.”

“This is one landmark victory on the long road to killer whale recovery. We’re relieved to see the government using the Species At Risk Act and we look forward to seeing similar habitat protection Orders for other endangered species,” said Aaron Freeman of Environmental Defence.

For more information, please visit http://www.ecojustice.ca/ or contact:
Lara Tessaro, Staff Lawyer, Ecojustice Canada, cell (604) 313-3132
Aaron Freeman, Policy Director, Environmental Defence, (613) 564-0007, cell (613) 697-7281
Chris Genovali, Executive Director, Raincoast Conservation Society, (250) 655-1229, cell (250) 888-3579
Christianne Wilhelmson, Georgia Strait Alliance, (250) 539-2424
Colin R. Campbell, Sierra Club BC, cell (250) 361-6476, office 250 386-5255 ext. 236
Gwen Barlee, Policy Director, Wilderness Committee, (604)683-8220, cell (604) 202-0322
Matt Takuch, Dogwood Initiative, (250) 370 9930 ext. 21
Rob Rosenfeld, Communications Manager, IFAW Canada, (613) 241-3982 ext. 221
Sarah King, Oceans Campaigner, Greenpeace Canada, (778) 227-6458
Sutton Eaves, Marine Communications Specialist, David Suzuki Foundation, (416) 854-3265
For further scientific information about Resident Killer Whales, please contact:
Dr. Lance Barrett-Lennard, Co-Chair of the Killer Whale Recovery Team, Vancouver Aquarium at (604) 659-3752
To obtain video footage or audio of the BC’s killer whales, please contact Laura Hendrick, Ecojustice Communications Coordinator at (604) 685-5618 ext. 242.

Pacific Salmon Treaty

On Monday, Canada and the United States renewed the Pacific Salmon Treaty (PST), first signed in 1985. Some changes were made to the PST, and the renewed chapters "will help to ensure the long-term sustainability of Pacific salmon stocks while supporting an economically viable fishing industry on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border".

While I applaud the Honorable Gail Shea, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, (in picture) for continuing to keep long-term sustainability of Pacific salmon stocks on the agenda, I can't help but feel a little pessimistic. This treaty was first signed 24 years ago, and for the past 24 years, fish population and ocean health has declined - largely a result of poor fisheries management practices.

The renewed treaty will remain in place until 2018, at which point I assume it will be reviewed and renewed again. Or perhaps by that time, it will no longer be necessary, because there will be no remaining wild Pacific salmon to protect.

A gloomy thought...