Terms of Reference

National Advisory Meeting on
Pathways of Effects

October 19-23, 2009

Location: Ottawa

Co-Chairs: Jay Parsons and Mike Chadwick

Context

A Federal-Provincial-Territorial (F-P/T) Working Group (supported by the Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers and the Aquaculture Task Group) is developing a national Framework for Aquaculture Environmental Risk Management (FAERM) to provide the basis for a coherent national approach to support the sustainability of the aquaculture sector (suspended and bottom culture of finfish and shellfish in freshwater and marine environments) in Canada. This same framework is expected to provide the baseline for demonstrating how Canadian regulation responds to emerging market-driven sustainability certification expectations as they relate to aquaculture.

This framework addresses environmental effects associated with respect to 4 aquatic ecosystem components: fish habitat; water quality; fish health; and fish communities. Pathways of Effects (POEs) are being developed as one of several initiatives under the Framework to support aquaculture risk identification and risk assessment.

Scientific peer-review is required to ensure that the environmental risk identification and analysis components of the FAERM are underpinned and informed by science. At this stage, draft POE diagrams and accompanying risk descriptions have been developed to outline potential linkages between aquaculture activities and environmental stressors and effects. The POE diagrams need to be peer-reviewed, and state-of-knowledge descriptions of stressor-effects need to be developed and peer-reviewed. These components of the FAERM have been developed based on the professional and technical knowledge of federal, provincial and other experts. The POE diagrams and descriptions are structured to identify the aquaculture risks related to the four ecosystem components identified that are relevant to government regulators.

The DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS) process has been identified by the F-P/T Working Group as the best approach for peer-reviewed science information and advice on the stressor-effect linkages identified in the POEs, identification of measurable endpoints for effects, and areas of uncertainty or knowledge gaps. This scientific peer-review, focused on the environmental risk identification component of the FAERM, will inform the development of the overall FAERM and will also be a stand-alone tool that can be used by regulators in carrying out their responsibilities. Further CSAS processes may be undertaken in support of various components of the FAERM, including indicators and risk response (mitigation).

Issue Requiring Science Advice

Scientific papers will be structured and developed to address the following questions:

1a. Is there evidence in the literature that supports or challenges the existence of the stressor-effect linkages identified in the Pathways of Effects?

• Elaborate as to evidence that supports or challenges the existence of the stressor-effect linkages, and where further information/knowledge could lead to a more complete understanding of the stressor-effect linkages.
• Qualify the strength of evidence that supports or challenges the existence of the stressor-effect linkages.

1b. Are the Pathways of Effects diagrams comprehensive? If not, identify missing stressor-effect linkages.

2a. Describe state of knowledge with respect to each stressor-effect linkage, including:

• A description of each effect and its associated ecological outcomes (effect profile).
• The factors and conditions that influence the expression of an effect (including exposure profile, receiving environment profile, etc.).

2b. For each stressor-effect linkage with scientific evidence described above, describe the documented biological implications of the effects on overall ecosystem function.

3a. Identify specific areas of uncertainty and knowledge gaps respecting the stressor-effect linkages.

• Which of the uncertainties or knowledge gaps hinder us most in terms of gaining a more holistic understanding of the effect profiles and the biological implications on overall ecosystem function?

Workshop Objectives

The CSAS workshop participants will review and discuss the prepared scientific papers with the intention of:

1. Providing feedback to authors on the content of the scientific papers relative to the questions posed by the Aquaculture and Habitat Management Directorates.
2. Identifying the scientific advice that should be captured in the CSAS workshop output documents (science advisory documents), including the identification of knowledge gaps and research needs/priorities.

CSAS workshop participants will also discuss the following points:

1. Is the coverage of the available information (primary publications, grey literature, professional technical sources, traditional knowledge, etc.) on the topic comprehensive?
2. Is the author’s treatment of the available information balanced?
3. Are the author’s conclusions supported by the literature review?

Workshop Outputs

Scientific advice will be provided in the form of peer-reviewed scientific papers, a Science Advisory Report and CSAS proceedings.

Participation

DFO and non-DFO scientists, regulators from Aquaculture Management Directorate, Habitat Management Directorate and the Provinces and Territories, as well as scientific experts from industry, environmental and First Nations stakeholders.