A former Fisheries and Oceans Canada scientist is accusing his former employer of skewing research to allow for the continued operation of Nova Scotia Power’s Annapolis Tidal Turbine.
“The Fisheries Act says you shouldn’t destroy fisheries habitat,” said Michael Dadswell, who worked for Fisheries and Oceans Canada for nine years before his career as a professor in Acadia University’s Department of Biology.
“DFO has been complacent for year after year after year when it comes to hydroelectric companies.”
On Wednesday, members of a Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat panel tasked with reviewing existing scientific literature to help determine whether the tidal turbine is violating the Fisheries Act were supposed meet at Acadia University to review their draft report.
The review was commissioned by Fisheries and Oceans Canada after The Chronicle Herald revealed in 2017 that Nova Scotia Power was not relaying reports it received from the community of Atlantic sturgeon allegedly killed by the turbine to the federal regulator.
And that despite research conducted by its own scientists showing that the turbine killed large amounts of American shad, contributed to the extirpation of striped bass from the river and continues to kill sturgeon, it was allowed to operate by Fisheries and Oceans in apparent violation of Section 35 of the Fisheries Act.
That section prohibits “any work, undertaking or activity that results in serious harm to fish that are part of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery, or to fish that support such a fishery” unless an exemption is provided by the minister.
No such exemption has been provided for the 20-megawatt Annapolis Tidal Station since it began operation in 1985.
Report pending
The report — originally slated to be considered Wednesday — has not yet been made public, but Dadswell has seen it and intended to provide his response at the meeting.
“They had better let me speak,” said Dadswell, who studied the turbine’s effects on American shad during the nine years he worked for Fisheries and Oceans before moving on to Acadia.
“... The (Secretariat Report) is full of unqualified and unsupported statements to say that there’s nothing wrong with the turbine.”
His response presentation, of which The Chronicle Herald does have a copy, takes aim at three main claims by the science advisory report with regard to the turbine’s potential effects on American shad, sturgeon and striped bass:
- “There is weak evidence that there may be a population of Atlantic sturgeon native to the Annapolis River but its existence is not definitely known.”
- “The decrease in the size of striped bass caught in the recreational fishery are not evidence of a population-level change attributed to the turbine because many of the fish that were caught were native to populations in New England.”
- “... it would be disingenuous to attribute the observed population-level changes (on American shad) solely to the construction and operation of the Annapolis TiGS.”
On a point-by-point basis Dadswell argues that regularly finding egg bearing female sturgeon chopped in half downstream of the turbine is proof that the Annapolis River does host a population of the species listed as threatened by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.
That the claimed striped bass found in the Annapolis River were actually from New England rivers is based upon eight tagged fish caught there over a 30 year period, while multiple studies have shown the majority were from that river prior to the turbine’s operation. And that there was, he argues, evidence of breeding striped bass population in the river after installation of the causeway in 1960 but prior to the turbine becoming operational in 1985.
With regards to American shad, he points to research acknowledged by Fisheries and Oceans that the turbine kills about 23.4 per cent of juvenile and 21.3 per cent of adult fish.
“The fact is DFO wrote this document and they don’t have the brains to add the two numbers together — come on boys and girls you’re supposed to be fisheries scientists,” said Dadswell.
“What stock is there where DFO allows you to take 45 per cent out of it annually?”
Fisheries and Oceans Canada was not able to provide a response by late Tuesday.
At about 5 p.m. on Tuesday, members of the panel were notified by Fisheries and Oceans Canada that the meeting scheduled for Wednesday would be rescheduled.
A protest had been planned by citizens opposed to the turbine to take place outside the meeting.
Related stories:
Protestors on Annapolis Royal causeway want end to fish kills
Claim that Annapolis tidal turbine violates Fisheries Act puts science under review
OpenHydro sought over $17 million in tax credits for failed turbine project
