If a Fuel Oil Spill occurred in Cowichan Bay
Issue:
A fuel spill in Cowichan Bay would devastate the economy and environment for years to come.
Background :
Cowichan Bay is home to a diverse population of marine and shore based animal life including deer ,bear , otter, cougar, whales, heron ,many species of water fowl, seals ,sea lions, octopus, two species of salmon in addition a tremendous variety of shellfish and two species of crab. One spill of even a small portion of the fuel held by a capsize vessel would devastate all of this nature as well of as the property (and property values) of the Cowichan Bay community who live or work along this shoreline. Several groups, as well as politicians, the CVRD, and many volunteers have expended and donated considerable time and expense to clean up the bay to the point where shellfish will soon be edible, as the toxic mess left in the bay by the last big industry users is being remediated, through their hard work. Additionally much effort has gone into re-establishing eel grass along the shore line in recognition of the fact that much marine life spends its infancy in it A spill of the this sort would mean that all these efforts have been for naught
As outlined in the CBSWS paper on anchorage distances from shore a greater chance of a fuel spill exists in Cowichan Bay than is credited by Port of Vancouver or Chamber of Shipping websites due to this exceptional proximity to shore. The Capesize class bulk freighters hold 4300 metrescubed (1,135,200 gallons US) of bunker C fuel. If a freighter does come to shore the chance exists that the hull would be ruptured. Bunker C is similar in composition to tar sand bitumen which is being proposed for transport through Prince Rupert. As such the effects of a spill have been well studied. Studies by most nonpartisangroups have concluded that the fuel would immediately sink to the bottom of the bay and create a marine desert in the bay for generations.Almost none of the fuel would be recoverable.
A spill would additionally destroy the crabbing industry in the bay as it has done to shrimp in the recent BP disaster off the coast of Florida.Eco-tourism has begun to take hold as an industry in the bay with kayak rentals becoming ever more popular; with the consequent attraction of tourist dollars this fledgling industry would receive a death blow from a spillThese points serve to outline a few of the impacts a spill of fuel in such a small but vibrant body of water would entail.
The BC Chamber of Shipping states that their incident rate is less than 1 percent and therefore our coastline is safe in their hands. On review however all is not as rosy as advertised Arno Kopecky in his book The Oil Man and the Sea, details the argument put forward by Enbridge and the Federal Government that with newimproved technology and regulations; spills are now down to one in 15,000 years. This claim was scrutinized by a group of three risk assessment engineers who found that many of the factors used for this analysis were inaccurateor based on data from other coasts.COS and PPA are both very bullish that a spill won’t occur ever; the sad truth is however accidents have happened and do happen. In 2013 for example approximately 40 ships visited the shores of Cowichan Bay and spent a total of 400 days anchored, there have been some incidents of anchor dragging in high winds and residents have observed ships having difficulty with securing anchors, these near misses go largely unreported, do we really want to wait for the real thing before taking action. In such a tight body of water (approximately 2 miles wide) sooner or later a problem will occur that brings one of these behemoths into shore, the risk of this occurring in Cowichan Bay is much higher due to the extremely short reaction time required if an emergency arises. The chances of a fuel spill in the Bay therefore are much higher than the claims by others would suggest.
In a study done in 2001 a bunker C spill was revisited in Tampa Bay to look at the effects eight years after a 1993 spill of 1.2 million liters by the tanker Bouchard in an alision(legal term for the collision of two ships). The beach areas still contained nodules of tar which were giving of PAH (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) even after this amount of time. It is expected that a spill in our more frigid waters would take longer to break down the constituents of bunker C.
A recent ad by Captain Brown the CEO of COS states that our shorelines are safe because during the recent spill scare off HaidaGwaiian Alaskan vessel was found that held the freighter offshore long enough for a tug to arrive and safely tow the ship to harbour. The fact that there was no plan in place for such a disaster and the lucky happenstance that a suitable ship was nearby shows that the disaster planning by the powers that be is by guess and by gosh; hardly a statement that would make one feel Chamber of Shipping is on top of the situation when it comes to things going wrong, not to mention that there would be at best 5 minutes to find and redirect a vessel should a similar problem occur in the Bay.
The main point I wish to emphasis here is that due to the environmental ,commercial, and social impacts of a spill in as busy and narrow a harbour as Cowichan Bay the tolerance for a spill should be exactly 0, as its occurrence will have adverse effects for generations. The only possible way to reduce the risk to zero is by not allowing the ships in satellite channel period.
To summarize the existing state of affairs the Port of Vancouver has decided that due to its inability to schedule ships to arrive in a timely manner to pick up and drop off their cargo, a free parking lot has been created in the Gulf Islands (note that parking is not free in Vancouver harbour) which puts at risk the communities and coast lines of the Gulf Islands, and drives the less scrupulous marine companies seeking to save costs to park their freighters in a place that would cause more devastation in the event of an accident than anywhere else on the ocean.
Conclusion
Given the above mentioned considerations it seems clear that any reasonable person who is aware of the tremendous risk involved in the anchorages in Cowichan Bay (and one purpose of this paper is to make them aware) and the lack of time to react to an emergency situation, that anchorages in the Cowichan Bay are a completely inappropriate location for the anchoring of freighters, or large sea going vessels. The environmental risk is just too great.
References:
Arno Kopecky, The Oil Man and the Sea.2013.See chapter “Every precious drop” for a review of the spill claims of Enbridge and the Federal Government.
Naomi Klein, This Changes Everything,2014. See chapter “Blockadia” for a through treatment of what social license can do.
DSpace at Mote Marine Laboratory for full report follow link
With the consequent attraction of tourist thus in addition to the destruction of the marine environment, the economic lifeblood of this region would also be severely impacted.