e 10, Number 2—pp. 309–315309

Learned Discourses: Timely Scientific Opinions

DAKe

yGTe

*K

D

prchprbiwtosemex

lawco

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management — Volum� 2014 SETAC

Timely Scientific Opinions

In a Nutshell. . .

Learn

ed

Disco

urse

s:Tim

ely

Scie

ntific

O

Intent. The intent of Learned Discourses is to provide a forum for opendiscussion. These articles reflect the professional opinions of the authorsregarding scientific issues. They do not represent SETAC positions orpolicies. And, although they are subject to editorial review for clarity,consistency, and brevity, these articles are not peer reviewed. The LearnedDiscourses date from 1996 in the North America SETAC News and,when that publication was replaced by the SETAC Globe, continuedthere through 2005. The continued success of Learned Discourses dependson our contributors. We encourage timely submissions that will inform andstimulate discussion. We expect that many of the articles will addresscontroversial topics, and promise to give dissenting opinions a chance tobe heard.

Rules. All submissions must be succinct: no longer than 1000 words,no more than 6 references, and at most one table or figure. Referenceformat must follow the journal requirement found on the Internet athttp://www.setacjournals.org. Topics must fall within IEAM’s sphere ofinterest.

Submissions. All manuscripts should be sent via email as Wordattachments to Peter M Chapman (peter_chapman@golder.com).

SETAC’s Learned Discourses appearing in the first 7 volumes of theSETAC Globe Newsletter (1999–2005) are available to members onlineat http://communities.setac.net. Members can log in with last name andSETAC member number to access the Learned Discourse Archive.

Learned Discourses EditorPeter M. ChapmanGolder Associates Ltd.200-420 West Hastings StreetVancouver, BC V6B 1L1peter_chapman@golder.com

EVELOPMENTS AFFECTING NORTHERN LAKES:LITTORAL PERSPECTIVElly Hille,*y Katherine Harris,y and Zsolt Kovatsyolder Associates, Calgary, Alberta and Yellowknife, Northwest

rritory, Canada

elly_Hille@golder.com

OI: 10.1002/ieam.1516

Aquatic effects monitoring programs for diamond mineojects in the North are required to monitor project-relatedanges to lake productivity. To date, these monitoringograms have focused on characterizing the chemical andological conditions at pelagic (open-water) locations (e.g.,ater chemistry, chlorophyll a concentrations, phytoplank-n, and zooplankton). Pelagic monitoring programs makense in deep lakes, with little to no littoral zones, but theajority of small northern lakes are shallow and havetensive littoral zones.Littoral productivity can have a substantial influence on

ke ecosystems. Shallow lakes possess large littoral zonesith an abundance of surfaces available for attached algallonization. Although productivity on a cellular basis is

Aquatic Ecology

Developments affecting northern lakes: a littoral perspective,by Kelly Hille, Katherine Harris, and Zsolt Kovats

Littoral monitoring requires easily tested hypotheses thatfocus on specific characteristics of the attached algal commun-ities.

Environmental Relevance

Environmental relevance: a necessary component of exper-imental design to answer the question, ‘‘SO WHAT?’’, by ChelseaM Rochman and Alistair BA Boxall

Why do some investigators continue conducting irrelevantexposures and measuring irrelevant endpoints?

Monitoring

Using terrestrial mammalian carnivores for global contaminantmonitoring, by Esmarie Jooste, Clayton K Nielsen, and Da Chen

Terrestrial mammalian carnivores have innate characteristicsthat make them ideal for contaminant monitoring in terrestrialecosystems.

Management

Changes in environmental attitudes of industry: past motivationand future direction, by Gordon R Craig

Two major environmental catastrophes in the US provide agraphic example of recent diametric changes in the corporatemindset.

DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1531

similar between phytoplankton and attached algae, the largesurface area available for colonization in shallow lakes allowsfor a high contribution by attached algae to the totalproductivity pool. Bjork-Ramberg and Anell (1985) observedhigh attached algal densities in subarctic Swedish lakes, whereattached algae constituted 70% to 83% of the total lakeprimary production. In addition, Lodge et al. (1998) deter-mined that attached algal productivity accounted for 95% ofwhole-lake production in oligotrophic Greenland lakes.

Attached algae play an important role in the structure andfunction of aquatic food webs and are often considered the‘‘engine of production’’ in shallow lake ecosystems. Althougha wide array of fish species rely on C fixed by both attachedalgae and phytoplankton, aquatic researchers often under-estimate the attached algal C contribution to higher trophiclevels in most aquatic systems (Vadeboncoeur et al. 2001).

The littoral zone provides a link between the catchmentarea and the open water, acting as both a source and a sink fornutrients. It also has the capacity to recycle and retain aninternal nutrient load, which effectively increases theresidence time of nutrients within this zone. In contrast, theopen-water zone typically requires a sustained input of

pinions

310 Integr Environ Assess Manag 10, 2014—PM Chapman, Editor

nutrients for algal growth. Attached algal communitiespossess taxa with well defined growth patterns along definednutrient gradients (Thomas et al. 2011). This enables them toassimilate and intercept new nutrients within a useful timescale (weeks to months rather than days, typical forphytoplankton), which allows the use of attached algae as auseful biological monitoring tool.

Attached algal biomonitoring protocols in rivers havebecome well established over the past 20 years, but theseprotocols have not been widely adapted for use in lakes(Thomas et al. 2011). Biomonitoring protocols cover aspectrum in level of effort and costs required, and vary inthe precision of results. Rapid visual assessments, chlorophylla and ash-free dry mass analysis, coarse taxonomic levelidentification, and pigment assessment by high-performanceliquid chromatography (HPLC) require lower sampling andanalytical effort than high resolution taxonomic identifica-tions, but the results are less precise and often inconsistent(Thomas et al. 2011). There is evidence that the mostsensitive method for detecting changes in littoral attachedalgal communities is species-level diatom counts. However,all of these existing monitoring methods examine biomassor standing stock of the attached algal community ratherthan overall primary productivity. Therefore, assumptionsmust be made, that any changes in standing stock equate tochanges in primary productivity, which in turn will affectsecondary production. Careful and clear explanations of theseassumptions are necessary when making inferences aboutoverall lake productivity and productivity within the littoralzone.

The high energy, effort, and expertise required to sample inthe littoral zone has often discouraged its monitoring;however, taking the following into consideration during thedesign of monitoring programs can minimize the difficultyinvolved in sampling in this area of a lake:

1. What you measure depends on the question; therefore, itis important to identify the key ecosystem properties, i.e.,what is valuable to the ecosystem and to humans.

2. Effort should be based on habitat; define the habitat that isgermane to the question of interest and value of theecosystem.

3. Both energy and effort should be expended to emphasizeproperties important to understanding ecological thresh-olds and foodweb linkages within the specific system beingmonitored.

4. The inclination to scale up to whole-lake estimates basedon narrow sampling programs should be avoided, unlesssufficient resources and energy are expended to deal withthe heterogeneity of the littoral zone.

One particular diagnostic community that has provenuseful in both river and lake ecosystem studies is theepilithon, which is the natural biofilm on rock surfaces. Thepredominance of rock as a substrate within shallow northernlakes makes the epilithic community a potentially preferablestudy component for 2 reasons:

1. The rock substrate allows for low-impact, direct measuresof community composition and biomass estimates to beperformed in situ with minimal disturbance to the area.

2. The inertness of the rock substrate restricts nutrient inputsto the epilithon through the biofilm-water interface rather

than leaching through the substrate, which is possible forattached algae growing on plants, downed woody debris,or in the sediment.

Limitations are associated with the epilithic community.Epilithon is not strictly algae, but consists of a biofilm ofbacteria, fungi, metazoans, and detritus. Therefore, assump-tions must be made about the contribution of algae to theoverall response pattern. Epilithon developing on verticalsubstrata or within areas with considerable wave action ismore likely to exhibit nutrient limitation and scouring. Thisleads to selection for firmly attached taxa, which can biasoverall biomass estimates because loosely attached taxa areunderrepresented. To match research methods, samplingshould be limited to level (<108 slope) surfaces (Turner etal. 1994). In addition, attached algal community compositionand biomass vary significantly in time and space, bothhorizontally and vertically; therefore, detailed baseline studiesto establish existing variability are required prior to projectdevelopment.

To collect an in situ epilithic sample, proper techniquesmust be used. Turner et al. (1994) refined a scuba-basedtechnique that uses a specially designed scraper to collect aquantitative epilithic sample. The scraper is designed to allowcollection of both firmly and loosely attached material from a5-cm2 area, which allows a more accurate communityassessment. In addition, an adequate volume of eplithicmaterial can be collected and analyzed by a variety oftechniques (e.g., chlorophyll a, HPLC, and high taxonomicresolution), which may be desirable to determine the mostappropriate protocol for monitoring development-relatedchanges. One drawback to this in situ sampling method isthe need for skilled, commercially certified scuba divers,which may be costly.

In summary, littoral monitoring requires easily testedhypotheses that focus on specific characteristics of theattached algal communities. To this end, some form ofguidance on developing a scientifically defensible studydesign, implementation of littoral monitoring programs, andstandards of good scientific practice are required. Ultimately,responsibility for developing such guidance rests withregulatory agencies. However, development of guidanceshould be a collaborative effort between regulators andproponents, ideally following preliminary site-specific studies.

REFERENCESBjork-Ramberg S, Anell C. 1985. Production and chlorophyll concentration of

epipelic and epilithic algae in fertilized and nonfertilized subarctic lakes.

Hydrobiologia 126:213–219.

Lodge D, Blumenshire S, Vadenboncoeur YM. 1998. Insights and application of

large-scale, long-term ecological observations and experiments. In: Resetarits

WJ, Bernardo J, editors. Experimental ecology: Issues and perspectives. Oxford

(UK): Oxford University Press. p 202–235.

Thomas KE, Kluke A, Hall R, Paterson AM, Winter JG. 2011. Assessment of benthic

algal biomonitoring protocols to evaluate effects of shoreline development on

the nearshore zone of Precambrian Shield Lakes in Ontario. Lake Reserv

Manage 27:398–413.

Turner MA, Howell TE, Robinson GGC, Campbell P, Hecky RE, Schindler EU. 1994.

Roles of nutrients in controlling growth of epilithon in oligotrophic lakes of low

alkalinity. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 51:2784–2793.

Vadeboncoeur YM, Lodge DM, Carpenter SR. 2001. Whole-lake fertilization effects

on distribution of primary production between benthic and pelagic habitats.

Ecology 82:1065–1077.

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEVANCE: A NECESSARYCOMPONENT OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN TOANSWER THE QUESTION, ‘‘SO WHAT?’’Chelsea M Rochman*y and Alistair BA BoxallzyAquatic Health Program, University of California Davis, Davis,

California, USA

zEnvironment Department, University of York, York, UK

*cmrochman@ucdavis.edu

DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1515

As Paracelsus said, ‘‘the dose makes the poison.’’ Put in thecontext of ecotoxicology, this infers that the presence of achemical in the environment (i.e., contamination) does notnecessarily equate to an impact in wildlife. Instead, it is thelevel of exposure of the chemical in the environmentcombined with its inherent toxicity that determines theimpact. Although several cutting-edge ecotoxicologicalexperiments are now being done, the large majority are stillcarried out at unrealistic exposure concentrations andconditions and using endpoints not considered ecologicallyrelevant. This begs the question ‘‘are we as ecotoxicologistsdoing ourselves, and society, an injustice by not carefullydesigning hypothesis-driven experiments that determine theeffects of a chemical in the real environment?’’

HANGING ONTO OLD HABITSOver the years, many publications have questioned the

relevance of standardized testing approaches, so why do wecontinue conducting irrelevant exposures and measuringirrelevant endpoints? One reason may be that, for somecontaminants, we simply do not know the concentrations innatural systems. Another reason may be that we arecomfortable carrying on with the business-as-usual approach:standard recipes and exposure methods have existed and weare content using old models and paradigms. Moreover,regulatory frameworks are fairly inflexible regarding recog-nition of new methods and techniques when protocols are notyet standardized.

This issue of relevance is particularly acute for many ofthe emerging contaminants (ECs) such as nanoparticles,microplastics, and pharmaceuticals and personal care prod-ucts (PPCPs). For some ECs, as has been suggested fornanomaterials (that include nanosized microplastics andsome ingredients of PPCPs), traditional ecotoxicity tests aresimply not applicable and could in fact assess a completelydifferent material than will occur in nature (Park et al.2014). For nanomaterials, we lack quantitative knowledgeand appropriate methods for detecting and characterizingthese in the environment (Gottschalk et al. 2013). More-over, many ECs are more sensitive to environmentalfluctuations than many traditional contaminants (e.g.,affecting how they aggregate and dissociate), and theirtoxicity depends not only on exposure concentrations butalso on factors such as their size, shape, and physicochemicalproperties in the environment (Park et al. 2014). Emergingcontaminants often fall outside the predictive space ofexisting models.

Despite such challenges, policy-makers are demanding thesame old information regarding their environmental impacts.We argue that it is time to rid ourselves of our bad habits andbegin to design intelligent experiments that are as environ-mentally relevant as possible.

TIME TO CHANGE OUR WAYSWe can begin to use some of the new tools available to

design relevant research that can allow us to understand theimpacts of the contamination of a substance in the environ-ment. First, it is critical to identify the exposure concentrationin the environment (USEPA 1998). Data from environmentalmonitoring should ideally exist or be collected. However, asmentioned, for nanomaterials environmental detection ischallenging (Gottschalk et al. 2013). In the absence ofenvironmental monitoring data, environmental exposuremodels can be used to predict potential environmentalcontamination (Tiede et al. 2009; Gottschalk et al. 2013).Thus, even with a deficiency of data, environmental relevancecan and should be applied. Environmental exposure modelshave recently been applied for nanoparticles to predictexposure concentrations (Gottschalk et al. 2013) and inseveral cases these models reveal that predicted exposureconcentrations are significantly smaller than exposure con-centrations often used in laboratory toxicity studies (Tiede etal. 2009). This discrepancy suggests that results from many ofthe currently published studies are not environmentallyrelevant.

Aside from the necessity of discovering and using environ-mentally relevant concentrations, it is important to considerenvironmentally relevant exposure conditions, including:environmental test media (e.g., salt- or freshwater), testorganisms (e.g., choosing ones with varying feeding strategiesand life-history traits), frequency and duration of exposure(e.g., chronic or acute exposure), mechanism of exposure(e.g., dissolved in water, mixed into diet), and timing (e.g.,considering the life cycle of the organism) (USEPA 1998).Decisions regarding exposure conditions should be madeaccording to the environmental fate of the substance ofinterest. This includes the fact that for some substances, suchas nanomaterials, environmental fate and toxicity may beinfluenced by properties including particle size, state ofaggregation, charge and chemistry, shape, and surface area(Tiede et al. 2009; Rochman 2013; Park et al. 2014). Forexample, nanoparticles tend to aggregate in the watercolumn, becoming negatively buoyant. As such, exposure insediments using benthic organisms may be more appropriatethan in the water column with pelagic species (Tiede et al.2009). Additionally some nanomaterials, as has been shownfor microplastic debris (Rochman 2013), will accumulatelarge concentrations of chemical contaminants from aquatichabitats, and thus dietary exposures should be conductedwith particles deployed in the field to achieve environ-mentally relevant exposure conditions.

Because toxicity and contamination are, by themselves, oflittle consequence if there is no ecological effect, choosingecologically relevant toxicity endpoints is important. As such,it has been recommended to measure individual survival,growth, and fecundity. These endpoints can help predict howpopulations may persist and thrive in the wild (Chapman2007). However, laboratory studies tend to be simplisticwhen compared to the real environment. Thus, laboratoryconditions should mimic natural habitats as much as possibleand results should be used alongside data on environmentalcharacteristics of the real world (e.g., GIS maps of keywater parameters) and data from field studies comparingreference populations to exposed populations (Chapman2007). Overall, designing studies that integrate these 3components, environmentally relevant exposure concentrations

Integr Environ Assess Manag 10, 2014—PM Chapman, Editor 311

312 Integr Environ Assess Manag 10, 2014—PM Chapman, Editor

and conditions and ecotoxicological endpoints, will produceenvironmentally relevant results relevant to regulatory com-munities (Figure 1).

ENVIRONMENTALLY RELEVANT RESEARCH ISPOLICY-RELEVANT RESEARCH

As the clock ticks, new chemical substances are producedand many are later detected as emerging contaminants in theenvironment. The quicker we ecotoxicologists produce envi-ronmentally relevant information regarding the hazards of suchcontamination, the faster that it can be used by regulatorycommunities in a risk assessment framework, a process thatmay ultimately lead to clean-up, mitigation, and/or prevention.

REFERENCESChapman PM. 2007. Determining when contamination is pollution—weight of

evidence determinations for sediments and effluents. Environ Int 33:492–501.

Gottschalk F, Sun T, Nowack B. 2013. Environmental concentrations of engineered

nanomaterials: Review of modeling and analytical studies. Environ Pollut

181:287–300.

Park S, Woodhall J, Ma G, Veinot JGC, Cresser MS, Boxall ABA. 2014. Regulatory

ecotoxicity testing of engineered nanoparticles: Are the results relevant to the

natural environment? Nanotoxicology 8:583–592.

Rochman C. 2013. Plastics and priority pollutants: A multiple stressor in aquatic

habitats. Environ Sci Technol 47:2439–2440.

Tiede K, Hassellov M, Breitbarth E, Chaudhry Q, Boxall ABA. 2009. Considerations

for environmental fate and ecotoxicity testing to support environmental risk

assessments for engineered nanoparticles. J Chromatogr A 1216:503–509.

[USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk

assessment. Washington DC: US Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/630/R-

95/002F.

USING TERRESTRIAL MAMMALIAN CARNIVORESFOR GLOBAL CONTAMINANT MONITORINGEsmarie Jooste,*y Clayton K Nielsen,y Da ChenyySouthern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois, USA

*ejooste@siu.edu

DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1514

Contaminant monitoring and detection of toxic substancesin the environment is essential to the health of humans andwildlife. Thus, bioindicators are widely used to understandspatial and temporal trends of environmental contaminantsand their risks to ecosystems. Although aquatic mammalshave been widely used as bioindicators, terrestrial mammalianspecies are much less used. Hence, knowledge about thedistribution of environmental contaminants in terrestrialecosystems remains relatively limited. This has been, and stillremains, a major information gap in contaminant research.Many recommendations have been made regarding character-istics that biological indicators may possess, including wide-spread distribution, high trophic status, sufficient samplingnumbers, restricted home range, and a well-known biology.

Here, we contend that terrestrial mammalian carnivorescan be used as efficient bioindicators for monitoring contam-inants in terrestrial ecosystems. Because of the presence ofmultiple stressors in the environment, we do not proposeusing these carnivores to monitor the physiological effects ofcontaminants, but rather use them to detect the presence andquantify the bioaccumulation and biomagnification of con-taminants on a global scale.

Carnivore species that have been proposed as suitablemonitoring species include among others, mink (Basu et al.2007), red fox (Corsolini et al. 2002; Heltai and Markov

Figure 1. Diagram showing the recommended components for the design of environmentally and ecologically relevant research programs that can produce

data relevant for regulatory communities.

Integr Environ Assess Manag 10, 2014—PM Chapman, Editor 313

2012), and raccoons (Burger and Gochfeld 1999). However,rather than identifying one focal species for global monitoringof contaminants, we suggest using similar or related species ofterrestrial carnivores among continents to enhance globalcomparison of contaminant exposure. For example, in theUnited States, bobcats (Lynx rufus) are widespread andabundant in many areas, occupy a high trophic position, andhave well-defined home ranges. However, they are absent inthe rest of the world. Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) areclosely related to bobcats with similar behavioral and feedinghabits, thus providing an excellent analogous opportunity. Inaddition, more than 10 000 Canada lynx are harvestedannually (Hunter 2011) creating an opportunity for temporalmonitoring projects. Similarly, caracals (Caracal caracal) insouthern Africa are widespread, abundant, and frequentlykilled on roads and by farmers, thereby creating sampling andmonitoring opportunities.

Among the canids, a similar analogous trend exists withcoyotes (Canis latrans) and their African equivalent, theblack-backed jackal (Canis mesomelas). Both of these terres-trial carnivores are resilient to anthropogenic pressures, arewidespread and abundant on their respective continents, havesimilar physiological systems, and are intensely harvested andpersecuted. Likewise, foxes (e.g., red fox [Vulpes vulpes], grayfox [Urocyon cinereoargenteus], hoary fox [Pseudalopex vetu-lus], and Arctic fox [Alopex lagopus]) exist on almost everycontinent and, given their physiological similarities, wouldprovide an excellent focal species for standardizing globalcontaminant monitoring.

Terrestrial mammalian carnivores have innate character-istics that make them ideal for contaminant monitoring interrestrial ecosystems. They exist on every continent, includ-ing the Arctic and, as a group, are therefore suitable for globalcontaminant monitoring. To identify a terrestrial carnivore(or group of carnivores) as a potentially suitable biologicalindicator species, we provide a straightforward and simpleguideline of factors to consider below and a list of potentiallysuitable species in Table 1.

1. The focal species should be widespread, abundant, andharvested, thereby enabling carcass collections from legal

trapping, road kills, or even culling. We emphasize that wedo not propose trapping or killing carnivores in areaswhere they are vulnerable, declining, or threatened, butrather opportunistic collection of carcasses from legalannual harvesting and road kills. The successful collectionof carcasses would require a cooperative effort betweenresearch laboratories, field researchers, hunters and trap-pers, transportation agencies, and the general public.

2. When identifying a suitable global biomonitoring species,it should have similar or related species in other regions oron other continents. This similarity should extend tophysiological equivalents, as well as to behavioral andfeeding habits. Given this consideration, feral cats (Feliscatus) and feral dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), respectively,likely represent the ideal biological indicator species,having a worldwide distribution with nearly identicalphysiological systems. However, these species may notbe useful for wilderness areas where feral dogs and cats arelikely to be of low abundance.

3. As proposed by previous researchers, we agree that giventhe bioaccumulation and biomagnification potential ofpersistent organic pollutants along food chains, biomoni-toring species should exist at a relatively high trophic level,because high trophic levels will be susceptible to thehighest accumulation of contaminants.

4. We agree with previous researchers that biomonitoringspecies should have a well-defined home range, therebyeasing the task of identifying potential point sources forcontaminants. Although birds of prey are excellentbioindicators in terrestrial ecosystems, great travel dis-tances when foraging might prevent detection of contam-inant point sources. However, they may reflect anintegrated exposure level over a large geographical range.Thus, we advise selecting a biological indicator speciesbased on research questions, as well as contaminantsstudied.

REFERENCESBasu N, Scheuhammer AM, Bursian SJ, Elliot J, Roevinen-Watt J, Chan HM. 2007.

Mink as sentinel species in environmental health. Environ Res 103:130–144.

Table 1. An example of potentially suitable felid and canid species as bioindicators for environmental contaminants at continental scales

North America Europe Africa Asia South America Australia Arctic

Felids Bobcat(Lynx rufus)

Eurasian lynx(Lynx lynx)

Caracal(Caracalcaracal)

Leopard cat(Prionailurusbengalensis)

Geoffroy’s cat(Leopardusgeoffroyi)

Canada lynx(Lynx canadensis)

Canids Coyote(Canis latrans)

Red fox(Vulpesvulpes)

Black-backedjackal(Canismesomelas)

Raccoon dog(Nyctereutesprocyonoides)

Chilla(Pseudalopexgriseus)

Dingo(Canislupusdingo)

Arctic fox(Alopexlagopus)

Red fox(Vulpes vulpes)

Golden jackal(Canis aureus)

Culpeo(Pseudalopexculpaeus)

Wolf(Canislupus)

Gray fox(Urocyoncinereoargenteus)

Hoary fox(Pseudalopexvetulus)

314 Integr Environ Assess Manag 10, 2014—PM Chapman, Editor

Burger J, Gochfeld M. 2001. On developing bioindicators for human and ecological

health. Environ Monit Assess 66:23–46.

Corsolini S, Burrini L, Focardi L, Lovari S. 2002. How can we use the red fox as

bioindicator of organochlorines? Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 39:547–556.

Heltai M, Markov G. 2012. Red fox (Vulpes vulpes Linnaeus, 1758) as biological

indicator for environmental pollution in Hungary. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol

894:910–914.

Hunter L. 2011. Carnivores of the world. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.

240 p.

CHANGES IN ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES OFINDUSTRY: PAST MOTIVATION AND FUTUREDIRECTIONGordon R Craig*yyGR Craig & Associates, Schomberg, Ontario, Canada

*gordon@grcraig.com

DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1520

After centuries of relative consistency, our environmentalconsciousness has evolved rapidly over the last few decades.Although this Learned Discourse focuses on Ontario’s(Canada) industrial and public sector developments, parallelevents in other Canadian provinces and American states likelyreflect similar changes in attitude. Two major environmentalcatastrophes in the United States provide a graphic exampleof recent diametric changes in the corporate mindset.

The first European corporate enterprises in North Americawere created specifically to harvest the natural resources ofthe continent. Le Compagnie des Cent-Associes was foundedin 1627 by Cardinal Richelieu to expand the French Empireof New France from Florida to the Arctic. Their charter wasrevoked in 1663. King Charles II of England created a RoyalCharter in 1670 establishing the Hudson’s Bay Company,granting it access to all the resources within the Hudson’s Baydrainage area.

During the 18th century the British Royal Navy drew onCanadian forests for ship building. Later, forests were viewedas an impediment to developing arable land as settlementsgrew. Rivers and streams were principal timber conveyancechutes and transportation routes and were dammed to powerlumber and grist mills. The 19th century experiencedsubstantial population growth that required taxes onharvested resources to finance governance and administration.Britain’s war of 1812 increased the country’s financialdemands, which were partially met by Canada’s bounty.The confederation of Canadian provinces in 1867 created anew country to govern and sustain. Industry flourished withthe first pulp mill established in Ontario in 1841; by 1885,steamers moved goods among the Great Lakes, chemicalproduction was in place, and the last spike of the CanadianPacific Railway was driven home to connect the country fromcoast to coast.

The 20th century began with 2 great wars separated by adepression from 1914 to 1945. The focus for government andindustry was resisting imperialism and surviving financially.Government prioritized commerce and the utilization ofnatural resources, but the environment was of little impor-tance.

A pivotal shift in the value of the natural environmentoccurred in 1946, when the Kalamazoo Vegetable andParchment Company (KVP) reactivated a pulp mill on theEspanola River in northern Ontario. The mill was closed by

Abitibi in 1930. Over the intervening 16 years, the riverrecovered and tourist fishing camps appeared along the river’scourse to Georgian Bay. The reactivated mill discharge killedfish, depleted O2, and made the river water undrinkable fordownstream residents. Fishing camp owners charged thatKVP violated their riparian rights and the courts fined KVPand issued an injunction to ‘‘redirect its waste’’ (effectivelyshutting it down). The Ontario government leaped to KVP’sdefense to protect newly created jobs and support a weakeconomy. Ontario Premier Leslie Frost passed the KVP Act in1950 to overrule the court’s decision (Chapter 4, Brubaker1995). Public sentiment and the courts were on a collisioncourse with government policy.

Ontario did, however, recognize the importance ofproviding quality drinking water and proper sewage treatmentin a growing economy and formed the Ontario WaterResources Commission in the late 1950s to regulate treat-ment plants. The Ontario Ministry of Environment replacedthe Commission in 1972 and developed a range of drinkingwater and aquatic life objectives by 1979. The Ministry drewheavily on criteria developed by the US National Academy ofScience (NAS-NAE 1972) and the USEPA (1976) QualityCriteria for Water. These objectives led to effluent chemicallimits for industry and protected surface water quality foraquatic life. A standard trout toxicity test for effluents waspublished by Ontario in 1983 and later by EnvironmentCanada in 1990.

The role of the courts grew, using developed chemical andbiological criteria to enforce Canada’s national Fisheries Actand the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Substancesthat killed fish or altered habitat were defined as ‘‘delete-rious.’’ The Regina v. McMillian Bloedel (1978) court case inPort Alberni (BC, Canada) established that even ‘‘a drop’’ of achemical violated the Fisheries Act. The directors of BataShoes in 1992 were found ultimately responsible for lack ofdue diligence in the storage of chemicals and paid personalfines (Mansell and Prill 2003). Significantly, corporatedirectors were now individually liable and could be incarcer-ated for environmental offenses.

Until 1950, environmental protection was inconsequential,but by 2000 it became a major factor in resource use andmanagement. Global climate change reinforced the theme ofconnectivity as discussion progressed from debatable in 1970,to credible by 1988, and quantifiable by 1990. Nobel laureateAl Gore made this complex global issue understandable to thegeneral public with graphic examples in his 2006 documen-tary ‘‘An Inconvenient Truth.’’ By the dawn of the 21stcentury, the health of every living creature was foreverconceptually linked to the quality of its environment.

Two graphic examples, occurring 20 years apart, demon-strate a major shift in corporate environmental attitude: theExxon Valdez oil spill of 1989 and the Deepwater Horizonevent in 2010.

The Exxon Valdez spill exposed poorly prepared andexecuted crisis management plans (Holba 2010). Cleanup didnot begin until 2 weeks after the incident. Recovery andcapture equipment were buried under snow; booms wereinadequate and barges, to collect skimmed oil, were absent.Global coverage by newspapers and broadcasters stirredpublic concern but an underdeveloped Internet limited accessto information. Exxon’s stock price recovered a 4% loss in4 weeks and a year later was up 4% from the prespillperiod. Although Exxon experienced landmark fines for the

Integr Environ Assess Manag 10, 2014—PM Chapman, Editor 315

time, the impact on share price and market capital was nil(Figure 1).

The Deepwater Horizon incident in April 2010 wasrecorded by smart phones connected to the Internet withinhours of the explosion. Social media mushroomed withreports and video coverage. British Petroleum (BP), theprincipal party, was in immediate contact with regulators, andthe expanding physical and visual impacts were broadcastdaily. The BP share price dropped repeatedly as reports ofcrew fatalities, fishing bans, the volume of incrementalleakage, shoreline impacts, and failures to cap the well headwere released. Consumers boycotted BP service stations andproducts globally and revenues fell as expenses skyrocketed.The market capitalization of BP stood at $210B before theevent and plummeted to $60B 9 weeks later. Stock prices ofcompetitors dipped but recovered to finish a year later 20% to40% above their April price when the rig exploded. The BPshare price recovered and stabilized but remained 20% lowerthan before the spill (Figure 1); BP allocated $42B for costsand fines, but fines may increase by up to another $18B.

The new reality that has evolved since 1950, after 3centuries of exploitation, is that environmental protection isnow a critical component of today’s business model. In thefall of 2012, BP released a number of public relation videos(Quick Response codes in Figure 1) directed to thepublic appealing for understanding and forgiveness. Thisappeal was vastly different from other previous corporatecrisis responses. Acceptance of responsibility, commitment to

restore local economies, acknowledgment of environmentalimpacts, environmental remediation, and support of researchto restore ecosystems are all key themes of the videos.

The imperative for corporations to diligently reduce theprobability and severity of environmental damage is now thenorm. Corporations and directors who ignore the consequen-ces of environmental impact will be punished by a widerrange of stakeholders than ever before—including consumers,investors, regulators, the courts, and competitors.

REFERENCESBrubaker E. 1995. Property rights in the defence of nature. Toronto (ON):

Earthscan Publications Limited and Earthscan Canada. 328 p.

Holba C. 2010. Exxon Valdez oil spill—FAQs, links and unique resources at ARLIS.

Anchorage (AK): Alaska Resources Library of Information Services (ARUS). [cited

2013 October 1]. Available from: http://www.arlis.org/docs/vol2/a/EVOS_

FAQs.pdf

Mansell R , Prill B. 2003. Beyond environmental compliance, with a view to the

best interests of the company. In: Sarra J, editor. Corporate governance in

global capital markets. Vancouver (BC): University of British Columbia Press.

400 p.

[NAS-NAE] National Academy of Sciences-National Academy of Engineering.

1972. Water quality criteria 1972—A report on the committee on water

quality criteria. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences. 594 p.

Regina v. MacMillan Bloedel. 1978. Canadian trial record, 42 CCC (2d) 70

(Common Court) at 73-74.

[USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. Quality criteria for water.

Washington DC. 534 p. EPA 440976023.

Figure 1. Comparison of Exxon and BP share prices after respective oil spills; BP public relation video QR codes.