Protection And Conservation Of Marine Mammals In Canada: A Case For Legislative Reform

The twentieth century was the century of modem whaling, as new technologies allowed whalers to exploit enormous numbers of whales from all oceans for processing into various products for industry and trade. Seals and sirenians (manatees and dugongs) were also heavily exploited in the 1900s, adversely affecting the populations of certain species. On entering the twenty-first century, numerous governments and organizations, and much of the general public now regard marine mammals, especially cetaceans, as having aesthetic and economic importance as well as intrinsic value outside the realm of exploitation. During the past decade, general awareness of the need to study the natural world at the ecosystem level has heightened, and it is recognized that threats to the survival of marine mammals go beyond that of commercial exploitation. Potential threats include habitat degradation, noise and chemical pollution, accidental strikes by ships, and incidental catch by commercial fisheries. Strategies for resolving these problems include the creation of marine protected areas to protect critical habitat, international cooperation in the development of conservation programs, and an increase in biological research to enhance management. The formulation of strong conservation policies and legislation at the national level is necessary to provide guidance for the implementation of these potential solutions. There is precedence at the international level for the types of protection needed. One example is the global moratorium on commercial whaling initiated in 1982 and implemented in 1986 by the International Whaling Commission (1WC). Despite the moratorium, however, a number of large whale species, including the right, Eubalaena glacialis; bowhead, Balaena mysticetus; blue, Balaenoptera musculus; sperm, Physeter macrocephalus; and humpback, Megaptera novaeangliae, are still considered endangered by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), the U.S. Division of Endangered Species, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). International whale sanctuaries were declared by a large majority of IWC members; for example, in 1979, in the Indian Ocean to 550S latitude; and in 1994 in the waters of the Southern Hemisphere, south of 40°S latitude. The prohibition against commercial whaling activities in these waters illustrates strong international support for the protection of whales. Since the declaration of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) in 1946, other international environmental conventions have been established. Several of these conventions have had implications for marine mammals and have set the stage for global conservation activities, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development Agenda 21 action plan, the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention), CITES, and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). While some nations have enacted legislation and taken policy stands on the protection and conservation of marine mammals, national legislative protection for marine mammals is far from universal. Canada, a nation normally recognized for its strong environmental and natural heritage initiatives, largely views marine mammals as a resource to be exploited. Canada was a signatory to the ICRW and a member of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), but in 1982 withdrew its membership stating it no longer had an interest in whaling. However, aboriginal whaling in Canada continues with annual takes of approximately seven hundred beluga, Delphinapterus leucas; and three hundred narwhal, Monodon monoceros, respectively. Since 1991, there has been a renewed interest in bowhead hunting in the western Arctic by native communities after some sixty years of not hunting this species. In 1996, after a twenty year pause, communities in the eastern Arctic also resumed bowhead whaling. The eastern bowhead stock is considered highly endangered-less than five hundred are thought to remain-and the international community has responded strongly to this problem. Walrus, Odobenus rosmarus, and up to ten species of seal can be taken by aboriginal peoples in Canada; harp, Pagophilus groenlandicus; and hooded seals, Cystophora cristata; are all hunted commercially by non-aboriginals. Canada has maintained a firm pro-commercial sealing policy, which has strengthened over the years despite public and international opposition. Currently, there are no comprehensive conservation programs or initiatives for marine mammals, and no deliberate legislative or policy commitments for their protection. Under the Canadian system, marine mammals and other marine animals are included in the definition of fish in the Fisheries Act. The definition of fish first appeared in the Fisheries Act in 1927. Despite numerous amendments of the Fisheries Act, this biologically invalid definition has been retained. Because of the lack of a comprehensive conservation framework, and the biologically inaccurate classification of marine mammals as fish, marine mammal management has suffered. Marine mammals should not be defined as fish, and arguments against this definition can be made on the basis of science, values, and management. The great biological differences between these two taxa, at both the physiological and behavioral levels, lead necessarily to different management requirements. Societal attitudes toward fish and marine mammals are different, and they are valued in different ways for different reasons. For example, fish is a primary food resource that represents a major basis of revenue, and a significant contribution to the economies of many communities. Marine mammals have intrinsic value, non-consumptive tourism value, and cultural/subsistence value for numerous Aboriginal communities, but limited commercial exploitation value. A program designed to manage the exploitation of one will not address the conservation issues of the other. In Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the administrative body for ocean and ocean resource issues, is focused primarily on conserving diverse fish stocks for industry. Thus, absent an economic rationale as the driving force for the conservation of marine mammals, such industry concerns will necessarily take precedence over domestic conservation concerns. International treaties often lack provisions for seals because it is assumed that their conservation is a domestic issue, even though many are highly migratory. Thus, domestic legislation is particularly important for the reason that seals normally reside within coastal waters and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of a nation. For the above reasons, special legislation for marine mammals is warranted as the basis for enhanced management and protection. The United States, Australia, and New Zealand have enacted legislation for the protection of marine mammals that is separate from the legislation pertaining to fisheries, and each nation has deliberately avoided considering them as fish. For example, the now repealed 1952 Australian Fisheries Act explicitly excluded all cetaceans from the definition of fish, and by 1991, under the Australian Fisheries Management Act, all marine mammals were excluded from the definition. Canada\u27s continued adherence to this definition has been detrimental because it defines the way government, including fisheries and wildlife managers, perceive marine mammals, and influences the way humans use marine mammals in Canada. This article examines the limitations existing within Canada\u27s policy and legislative initiatives for the conservation and protection of marine mammals, as compared with other selected nations. The United States, Australia, and New Zealand are the jurisdictions chosen for comparison, because these nations possess the most advanced marine mammal legislation, regulations, and programs in the world, and because they are similar to Canada in terms of commitment to the environment and conservation. International conventions relating to marine mammals were reviewed, and special emphasis was placed on Canada\u27s obligations under these conventions. The main components integral to effective marine mammal conservation in those jurisdictions were used to mold a revised framework to increase marine mammal protection in Canada, and to further enhance the Canadian legislative and regulatory structure. Recommendations stemming from this framework fit both the current legislative structure and an ecosystem approach to marine conservation under Canada\u27s Oceans Act

Historical and modern invasions to Port Phillip Bay, Australia: The most invaded southern embayment?

Port Phillip Bay (PPB) is a large (1900km2), temperate embayment in southern Victoria, Australia. Extensive bay-wide surveys of PPB have occurred between 1803 and 1963. In 1995/96 the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) undertook an intensive evaluation of the region with the aims of developing a comprehensive species list of native and introduced fauna and contrasting previous bay-wide assessments with a current field survey in order to detect new incursions and discern alterations to native communities. Two methods were used to meet the aims: a re-evaluation of regional museum collections and published research in PPB to identify and determine the timing of introductions; and field surveys for introduced benthic (infauna, epifauna, and encrusting) organisms conducted by CRIMP between September 1995 and March 1996. The historic component of PPB invasions groups into four periods based on significant shifts in trade activities: exploration/colonization (pre-1839), immigration (1839-1851), Gold Rush (1852-1860), and modern mechanisms (including aquaculture; 1861-present). Invasions within PPB appear to be increasing, possibly due to an increase in modern shipping traffic and an increase in aquaculture (historically associated with incidental introductions); however, the records of extensive biological surveys suggest that this may in part be an artifact of sampling effort. As expected, the majority of introductions are concentrated around the shipping ports of Geelong and Melbourne. Recent incursions into the region include Undaria pinnatifida, Codium fragile ssp. tomentosoides, Asterias amurensis, Schizoporella unicornis, and Pyromaia tuberculata. Port Phillip Bay is presented as one of the most invaded marine ecosystems in the Southern Hemisphere

The relative contribution of vectors to the introduction and translocation of invasive marine species

Whether intentional or not, humans have been responsible for the translocation of invasive marine species. The indicative representations of association suggest that biofouling has been the most prevalent mechanism contributing to such invasions across the globe. Biofouling is one of the oldest mechanisms of human-mediated transport of marine species, beginning with early human movements on small scales and eventually leading to world explorations with the European Expansion from 1500 AD onwards. The most common means of biofouling is marine species attaching themselves to any part of a vessel, or any equipment attached to or onboard the vessel, aquaculture equipment and mooring devices. In contrast, ballast water is a relatively new vector of transport, with the earliest ballast water use recorded in the late 19th century. Ballast water – water (including sediment that has been contained in water) held in tanks and cargo holds of ships to increase stability and manoeuvrability during transit – represents an expansion of transport opportunity to the vast majority of the benthic species associated with biofouling. This project assessed the relative contributions of known marine pest vectors in terms of the introduction and translocation of marine invasive species on a national basis (in Australia) through a review of the National Port Survey Database (NPSD) and on a worldwide basis through a literature review. The information represented by the global dataset and the NPSD provide a useful tool for identification of species associations with modern vectors of transport, and the opportunity to identify likely relationships for future entry. Analysis of the global dataset indicated that more species have life history characteristics associated with biofouling (55 per cent) than any other vector. The second highest association was with ballast water (31 per cent). A similar relative contribution was found in the Australian context through analysis of the NPSD, with biofouling contributing 60 per cent of species association and ballast water 24 per cent

Protection And Conservation Of Marine Mammals In Canada: A Case For Legislative Reform

The twentieth century was the century of modem whaling, as new technologies allowed whalers to exploit enormous numbers of whales from all oceans for processing into various products for industry and trade. Seals and sirenians (manatees and dugongs) were also heavily exploited in the 1900s, adversely affecting the populations of certain species. On entering the twenty-first century, numerous governments and organizations, and much of the general public now regard marine mammals, especially cetaceans, as having aesthetic and economic importance as well as intrinsic value outside the realm of exploitation. During the past decade, general awareness of the need to study the natural world at the ecosystem level has heightened, and it is recognized that threats to the survival of marine mammals go beyond that of commercial exploitation. Potential threats include habitat degradation, noise and chemical pollution, accidental strikes by ships, and incidental catch by commercial fisheries. Strategies for resolving these problems include the creation of marine protected areas to protect critical habitat, international cooperation in the development of conservation programs, and an increase in biological research to enhance management. The formulation of strong conservation policies and legislation at the national level is necessary to provide guidance for the implementation of these potential solutions. There is precedence at the international level for the types of protection needed. One example is the global moratorium on commercial whaling initiated in 1982 and implemented in 1986 by the International Whaling Commission (1WC). Despite the moratorium, however, a number of large whale species, including the right, Eubalaena glacialis; bowhead, Balaena mysticetus; blue, Balaenoptera musculus; sperm, Physeter macrocephalus; and humpback, Megaptera novaeangliae, are still considered endangered by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), the U.S. Division of Endangered Species, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). International whale sanctuaries were declared by a large majority of IWC members; for example, in 1979, in the Indian Ocean to 550S latitude; and in 1994 in the waters of the Southern Hemisphere, south of 40°S latitude. The prohibition against commercial whaling activities in these waters illustrates strong international support for the protection of whales. Since the declaration of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) in 1946, other international environmental conventions have been established. Several of these conventions have had implications for marine mammals and have set the stage for global conservation activities, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development Agenda 21 action plan, the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention), CITES, and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). While some nations have enacted legislation and taken policy stands on the protection and conservation of marine mammals, national legislative protection for marine mammals is far from universal. Canada, a nation normally recognized for its strong environmental and natural heritage initiatives, largely views marine mammals as a resource to be exploited. Canada was a signatory to the ICRW and a member of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), but in 1982 withdrew its membership stating it no longer had an interest in whaling. However, aboriginal whaling in Canada continues with annual takes of approximately seven hundred beluga, Delphinapterus leucas; and three hundred narwhal, Monodon monoceros, respectively. Since 1991, there has been a renewed interest in bowhead hunting in the western Arctic by native communities after some sixty years of not hunting this species. In 1996, after a twenty year pause, communities in the eastern Arctic also resumed bowhead whaling. The eastern bowhead stock is considered highly endangered-less than five hundred are thought to remain-and the international community has responded strongly to this problem. Walrus, Odobenus rosmarus, and up to ten species of seal can be taken by aboriginal peoples in Canada; harp, Pagophilus groenlandicus; and hooded seals, Cystophora cristata; are all hunted commercially by non-aboriginals. Canada has maintained a firm pro-commercial sealing policy, which has strengthened over the years despite public and international opposition. Currently, there are no comprehensive conservation programs or initiatives for marine mammals, and no deliberate legislative or policy commitments for their protection. Under the Canadian system, marine mammals and other marine animals are included in the definition of fish in the Fisheries Act. The definition of fish first appeared in the Fisheries Act in 1927. Despite numerous amendments of the Fisheries Act, this biologically invalid definition has been retained. Because of the lack of a comprehensive conservation framework, and the biologically inaccurate classification of marine mammals as fish, marine mammal management has suffered. Marine mammals should not be defined as fish, and arguments against this definition can be made on the basis of science, values, and management. The great biological differences between these two taxa, at both the physiological and behavioral levels, lead necessarily to different management requirements. Societal attitudes toward fish and marine mammals are different, and they are valued in different ways for different reasons. For example, fish is a primary food resource that represents a major basis of revenue, and a significant contribution to the economies of many communities. Marine mammals have intrinsic value, non-consumptive tourism value, and cultural/subsistence value for numerous Aboriginal communities, but limited commercial exploitation value. A program designed to manage the exploitation of one will not address the conservation issues of the other. In Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the administrative body for ocean and ocean resource issues, is focused primarily on conserving diverse fish stocks for industry. Thus, absent an economic rationale as the driving force for the conservation of marine mammals, such industry concerns will necessarily take precedence over domestic conservation concerns. International treaties often lack provisions for seals because it is assumed that their conservation is a domestic issue, even though many are highly migratory. Thus, domestic legislation is particularly important for the reason that seals normally reside within coastal waters and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of a nation. For the above reasons, special legislation for marine mammals is warranted as the basis for enhanced management and protection. The United States, Australia, and New Zealand have enacted legislation for the protection of marine mammals that is separate from the legislation pertaining to fisheries, and each nation has deliberately avoided considering them as fish. For example, the now repealed 1952 Australian Fisheries Act explicitly excluded all cetaceans from the definition of fish, and by 1991, under the Australian Fisheries Management Act, all marine mammals were excluded from the definition. Canada\u27s continued adherence to this definition has been detrimental because it defines the way government, including fisheries and wildlife managers, perceive marine mammals, and influences the way humans use marine mammals in Canada. This article examines the limitations existing within Canada\u27s policy and legislative initiatives for the conservation and protection of marine mammals, as compared with other selected nations. The United States, Australia, and New Zealand are the jurisdictions chosen for comparison, because these nations possess the most advanced marine mammal legislation, regulations, and programs in the world, and because they are similar to Canada in terms of commitment to the environment and conservation. International conventions relating to marine mammals were reviewed, and special emphasis was placed on Canada\u27s obligations under these conventions. The main components integral to effective marine mammal conservation in those jurisdictions were used to mold a revised framework to increase marine mammal protection in Canada, and to further enhance the Canadian legislative and regulatory structure. Recommendations stemming from this framework fit both the current legislative structure and an ecosystem approach to marine conservation under Canada\u27s Oceans Act

Final Report: CoTS Control Program Independent Review

This Report provides an independent assessment of the CoTS Control Program under the coordination of GBRMPA between 2012/13 – 2018/19, reporting against the Terms of Reference..

Special Invasive Alien Species Issues: Challenges for the marine systems

On a global scale, introduced marine species pose a significant threat to marine environments. Within this paper four challenges to delivery of marine biosecurity outcomes are identified, with a brief discussion on how these challenges are being met within the New Zealand context. Currently within New Zealand, only 3% of the total biosecurity funding is expended on the marine environment. To be effective with such a small component of the total budget, marine biosecurity has directed research into six programmes: 1) risk profiling; 2) compliance monitoring of ballast water exchange; 3) alternative management tools for marine vector threats; 4) baseline information to support border control; 5) surveillance for marine pests; and 6) incursion response options and systems. At present, the marine biosecurity system developed in New Zealand offers a good example of an outcome-oriented system that balances costs and benefits across economic, environmental, social and spiritual values. The short-term costs to establish such a system may be significant however; the long-term benefits far outweigh the initial investment

Vectors, shipping and trade

The link between introduction of exotic species into new bioregions and the release of ballast water from shipping is well documented (Smith and Carlton 1975; Carlton 1979; Carlton 1985; Simberloff 1986; Carlton et al. 1995; Ruiz et al. 1997; Shigesada and Kawasaki 1997). Despite the current recognition and acknowledgment of marine introductions via modern vectors, the historic movements of species by vessels may have led to the introduction of species prior to biological surveys

A bay-wide survey for introduced species in Port Phillip Bay, 1995-96

Thirty-three years have passed since the last extensive (benthic and fouling) bay-wide survey of Port Phillip Bay (Port Phillip Bay Environmental Study, Phase One, 1968- 1971) although additional work has been conducted by the Victorian Marine and Freshwater Resources Institute (MAFRI, formerly the Victorian Fisheries Research Institue: VFRI) and the Museum of Victoria (Mo V)

Conflict between International Treaties: Failing to mitigate the effects of introduced marine species

Humans have changed the face of the earth - we have intentionally altered the locations of species in order to achieve food and economic security (eg, aquaculture of the freshwater fish Tilapia and the marine algae Kappaphycus) while also appealing to our cultural and aesthetic values (eg, the introduction of gorse to New Zealand and Australia)

Biotic and abiotic factors affecting the Tasmanian distribution and density of the introduced New Zealand porcelain crab Petrolisthes elongatus

Petrolisthes elongatus (Milne-Edwards, 1837) was first introduced into southern Tasmania in the late 19th century putatively associated with live-oyster transfers from New Zealand. In the last century P. elongatus populations have expanded, inoculating rocky intertidal zones around Tasmania. We initially identified the scope of P. elongatus introduced range around Tasmania by visiting 57 sites to identify presence. Density of P. elongatus and populations of two native grapsid crab species was assessed at 12 sites around Tasmania to identify any biotic resistance. Abiotic factors including substrate availability and preference, and wave stress, were identified at each of the 57 sites. Our results indicate that P. elongatus has successfully invaded a large proportion of the southern and northern coasts of Tasmania, with a small number of sites on the east and none on the west coast supporting P. elongatus populations. Densities were found to be higher in southern Tasmania compared to the eastern and northern coastlines. Petrolisthes elongatus presence was found to be positively correlated with native grapsid crab presence, however, no statistically significant relationship was found between densities at scales of site or quadrat. Abiotic factors have been identified as the primary drivers of Petrolisthes distribution pattern