Oil and water a bad mix for B C Ferries

They may try to sail through the latest controversy over the Queen of the North, but it would appear that BC Ferries is in for a bit of a fight over its handling thus far of the wreck at the bottom of the waters off of Gil Island. The Ferry Corporation isn’t particularly inclined to remove any remaining fuel from the sunken ferry, nor it seems are they rushing to enact a plan of action that will be warmly received by those impacted the most, the people of Hartley Bay.

On that horrible night over a year ago, it was the quick response of the people of Hartley Bay that helped to avert a greater tragedy, to think that they’ve been left in the dark over such an important issue in their own waters is something that must be addressed promptly. Why the provincial government hasn’t taken on a more pro active role on behalf of the residents is a rather puzzling question.

The local MLA Gary Coons has been quick to take up the cause of the village, suggesting that the Ferry Corporation needs to be more involved in the community and with its concerns over the potentially ecological problem sitting on the village’s doorstep. He has frequently been bringing up the matter to the attention of the Ferry Corporation as well as the provincial government, keeping the issue front and centre when it seems that far too many would like it to just go away.

His efforts took on a more urgent tone this past weekend as reports of upwelling of fuel from the wreck began to cause much consternation in the community, as traditional food supplies could be at risk due to the toxic film that is spreading across the waters in the area.

Considering the amount of money (61.3 million dollars) the Ferry Corporation received in an insurance settlement earlier this year described as an extraordinary gain, there surely could be much more to be done for the people of Hartley Bay, who outside of the those passengers, victims families and crew of the vessel from the Queen of the North have suffered the most.

Of that 6o some million, 20 million was supposed to be ear marked for local initiatives in the Hartley Bay area to facilitate a proper clean up and salvage at the site of the sinking. Judging by the current climate from Hartley Bay’s officials, it would seem that the Ferry Corporation isn’t making much of a dent in that account.

There is no reliable summary of expenditures made public yet regarding that clean up, BC Ferries which has been identified by the Coast Guard as the sole body responsible for the marine accident, has a duty to provide frequent updates to Hartley Bay including one would think a financial statement that provides details on their efforts. An action plan needs to be formulated as well as a more open and public review of the incident from an environmental point of view should be priorities from both the provincial government and the Ferry Corporation.

There seems to have been a bit of friction between BC Ferries and the Coast Guard over the issue, judging by the tone of a column from Vaughn Palmer of the Vancouver Sun last week, in which Palmer reviews an exchange of letters between the two organizations. In the end, a suggestion of working towards an environmental monitoring process seems to be the common ground they have found, after dismissing the topic of a fuel recovery program, which has apparently been dismissed as an unworkable project it seems.

So with the idea of fuel recovery apparently a non starter, the need for quick action on the environmental protection front is clear. It is something that should be done in consultation with officials in Hartley Bay, who after all have to live in the unfortunate spot that the ferry sunk.

There have been a number of recommendations made about the impact that the sinking might have on the area, such things as:

Designing and putting into place a long-term environmental monitoring program, one that will examine the effects of further contamination by fuel oil from the ferry.

In addition to that there was the recommendation that officials look into relocating aquaculture sites in the area, as well as providing for a dedicated supply of pollution response equipment for Hartley Bay.

There is probably a lot more that could and should be done on this file, but at least those three recommendations address the immediate need. They are three relatively simple solutions, which would provide for a little good faith from a corporation that seems to need to be spurred to action from time to time.

The Daily News has been looking into the issue over the last couple of days, and provided an indication of the frustrations brewing in Hartley Bay in their headline story in Wednesday’s paper.

Village demands answers as ferry fuel worries rise
By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Page one

The community of Hartley Bay is not willing to wait until a significant upwelling of fuel comes out of the Queen of the North to find out there was fuel on board.

Bob Hill, chief councillor, said they are negotiating with B.C. Ferries to get more training for their people and will continue to push for an independent review of the amount of fuel left on the wreck.

"We are very concerned, no one knows when the next upwelling or burp will happen," said Hill.
The ferry sunk in March 2006 next to Gil Island, near the First Nations community, and it has been discharging fuel into the waters around Hartley Bay ever since.

When it went down, it was carrying more than 240,000 litres of fuel and oil.

On Friday, a large fuel slick 15 metres wide and five miles long was spotted just north of Hartley Bay, raising concerns about the community's inability to respond, especially during the middle of the traditional harvest season. The Gitga'at rely on traditional food sources such as shellfish and seaweed.

Hill said when Burrard Clean was first sent out after the sinking to try to prevent the oil from impacting the environment; they laid the booms at the wrong sites because they had no traditional knowledge of the sensitive areas around Hartley Bay. Nor do the villagers want to sit by and wait 24 hours for Burrard Clean to arrive on the scene before they take action.

"We are pushing for the local expertise to do that and it is crucial we do that. We are concerned and we are still pressuring B.C. Ferries as a corporation," said Hill.

B.C. Ferries has trained 10 people in the village to deploy booms in case of a fuel upwelling, but Hill said the village wants more expertise.

In addition, they do not agree with the assessment provided to the Canadian Coast Guard that implies most of the fuel in the vessel's tanks would have been forced out into the environment following the impact of the sinking and is already gone.

Hill said they are striving for an independent review.

"We completely disagree with all that. We have three trained individuals that are divers within the community. We have another six that are going to be coming on stream and we have a fair idea of what happens to any container at certain depths. One of the principles of science is that you cannot compress a liquid in a confined container, at any depth," said Hill.

B.C. Ferries has pointed to the report prepared for the Canadian Coast Guard as a reason not to pursue removing any remaining fuel. It was exactly what leadership in Hartley Bay hoped would not happen.

North Coast MLA Gary Coons is also calling on B.C. Ferries to do more to ensure the people of Hartley Bay can protect their traditional food sources.

"The company is not moving quick enough to ensure that an upwelling of fuel can be dealt with as quickly as possible," said Coons. "The residents of Hartley Bay still haven't been given all the equipment and training they need to alleviate environmental damage that would be caused by a large upwelling of fuel."

The Coast Guard made several recommendations to B.C. Ferries on how to deal with the sinking in the absence of fuel recovery. One of those recommendations was for the company to establish "a cache of pollution response equipment in the area of Hartley Bay as a contingency should any recoverable fuel be released from the Queen of the North."

They also said that "the establishment of such an equipment cache would necessitate training for a portion of the Hartley Bay community."

However, B.C. Ferries has said in its response to the Coast Guard suggestion that "since professional pollution response capability already exists in British Columbia, the benefit of training and maintaining a local response capability beyond the equipment already established at Hartley Bay is unclear, making it unlikely that this option will be pursued".