Glynn Gomes developed a report to support Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s (DFO’s) and the United States Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) collaboration on the management of interactions between farmed and wild fish relating to genetic interactions and pathogen transfer. For more information on DFO’s and NOAA’s regulatory cooperation on marine aquaculture, see the agencies’ Regulatory Cooperation Council Regulatory Partnership Statement and work plan. This project relates to Work Stream B (cooperation on farmed to wild fish interactions) in the work plan. Glynn conducted interviews of key government and industry stakeholders in Canada and the United States to collect information and perspective on relevant issues.

Glynn compared and assessed legislations, regulations, policies and other instruments used to manage genetic, pathogen and pest interactions between farmed and wild fish in Canada and the United States. This included discussion of the following issues:

• Genetic Interactions – biocontainment, marine mammal interactions, and monitoring programs for genetics issues;
• Pathogens and Pests – fish health management, monitoring for pathogens and pest issues, and geographical approaches (i.e., siting and area approaches); and,
• Overall Regulatory Risk Assessment Framework – for potential genetic interactions and potential pathogen transfers.

Glynn considered the feasibility of developing a joint message statement on equivalence of Canadian and American marine net pen aquaculture regulatory programs. He also explored areas for cooperation on escape management and codes of containment to identify potential areas of regulatory alignment on management of farmed and wild fish interactions for senior management consideration at DFO and NOAA.

The final deliverable was an 85-page report (plus two appendices) that focused on the following jurisdictions:

• Canada – federal, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nova Scotia; and,
• United States – federal, and primarily Maine and Washington, but also Hawaii.

• Glynn updated the Canadian aquaculture risk profile to facilitate improvements in business risk management practices used in the Canadian marine and freshwater finfish, and shellfish, aquaculture industry. He conducted a consultation of key aquaculture stakeholders from the West coast, Central Canada, and the East coast, who provided important perspective on these sectors. Glynn described the main business risk management strategies used in Canada in each of the noted regions.
• Glynn also described a range of business risk management programs from Europe, the United States, Chile and Asia, and a multinational aquaculture company. This included a review of various private, public or mixed strategies.
• Glynn summarized available historical information on aquaculture insurance premiums and payouts. He also summarized compensations through various government programs (e.g., payments made by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the Disaster Relief Fund, and the East Coast Salmon Aquaculture Compensation Association).
• He described Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada business risk management programming and its applicability to Canadian aquaculture. This included review of Growing Forward 2 (AgriInsurance, AgriInvest, AgriRecovery, AgriRisk Initiatives, AgriStability), and its successor Canadian Agricultural Partnership (2018–2023), Advance Payments Program, Farm Income Stabilization Insurance (Québec), Dairy Livestock Insurance Program and Poultry Insurance Plan (Nova Scotia).
• He offered several recommendations on aquaculture business risk management options and trade implications.
• The final deliverable is a 46-page report, plus an appendix that describes aquaculture risks identified during information sharing sessions with the aquaculture industry in 2005.

This project was done under subcontract to LinHR Consulting Inc.

Glynn reviewed documentation that provided formal advice and recommendations on finfish and shellfish aquaculture in Canada. This work supported the work of Canada’s Chief Science Adviser who was leading an independent expert panel on aquaculture science. The panel’s purpose was to advise Government of Canada on: consideration of scientific evidence in risk-based aquaculture decision-making; priority setting for DFO’s aquaculture science work; and, how to improve communication of aquaculture science findings and decisions to Canadians. He prepared a 43-page report that summarized the information in tabular format organized by theme, recommendations relating to aquaculture, jurisdictional management response, timeline of responses, region of applicability, and information source.

Glynn summarized 71 recommendations and reported government jurisdiction management responses. Key themes considered included:

1. Fish Health and Fitness
2. Escapement
3. Environmental Effects / Ecosystem Health
4. Risk-based Decision-making
5. Enforcement and Compliance
6. Governance / Program Administration
7. Pubic Engagement / Consultation

This project involved conducting a consultation of Habitat Management officials from Fisheries & Oceans Canada (DFO) Regions and National Headquarters, and reviewing documentation provided by these officials. The purpose of the project was to summarize and compare current approaches to administering the fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act in relation to new and existing open-water finfish and shellfish aquaculture operations in all DFO Regions (six regions: Pacific, Central & Arctic, Quebec, Gulf, Maritimes, and Newfoundland & Labrador).

The project described the approaches used in each Region to address the following issues:

• Baseline information requirements for site proposals (i.e., information DFO asks proponents to provide);
• Decision criteria used to make fish habitat decisions (e.g., siting criteria, show-stoppers, baseline data thresholds, predictive models, etc.);
• Regulatory tools used to indicate Habitat Management approval and/or impose fish habitat conditions on operators (e.g., federal or provincial licenses, permits, leases, authorizations, letters of advice, operational statements, class assessments, etc.); and,
• Monitoring protocols and information requirements, and mechanisms used to ensure monitoring is completed (i.e., information DFO requests and how it ensures that it receives the information).

Common practices and those that differ significantly among the Regions were identified. We also conducted an interview process that explored the rationale for noted differences in practices. The study included analysis of how each regional approach linked to respective provincial regulatory processes. Deliverables included: a comprehensive report and slide show summarizing findings. This work expanded on the project described below.

This project summarized current approaches in three DFO Regions (Pacific, Maritimes, Newfoundland & Labrador) to administering the fish habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act in relation to new and existing open-water marine finfish aquaculture operations. This was achieved by interviewing and liaising with Habitat Management Program officials from these three DFO Regions and from DFO National Headquarters, and reviewing relevant documentation. The investigation described:

• Siting criteria (e.g., depth considerations, distance between aquaculture facilities, avoidance of fish habitat or marine resources, and models, GIS or other electronic tools) to avoid negative effects to fish and fish habitat when locating new marine finfish aquaculture facilities;
• Tools or methods to predict the potential effects to fish and fish habitat (e.g., habitat assessment surveys, monitoring, baseline data collection, DEPOMOD modelling) from new or existing facilities;
• Mitigation of potential fish habitat effects from new or existing facilities;
• Fish habitat monitoring requirements (e.g., benthic monitoring, habitat compensation monitoring) for proponents; and,
• Relevant regulatory and administrative tools (e.g., federal acts, Fisheries Act Section 35 review process, provincial and other instruments).

The work also included an analysis of similarities and rational for differences in practices, including an overview of major socio-economic and ecological differences among the three DFO Regions.

This project reported on the engagement of DFO’s National Habitat Management Working Group on Aquaculture, and representatives from Aquaculture Management Directorate and the Centre for Integrated Aquaculture Science, in strategic discussion and work-planning related to Habitat Management Program’s regulatory role in aquaculture. The workshop involved National Headquarters and several DFO Regions: Pacific; Central & Arctic; Maritimes; Gulf; and, Newfoundland & Labrador. Outcomes included the following:

• Overview of Habitat Management Program’s current knowledge and practices associated with regulatory review of Canadian aquaculture;
• Identification of gaps and areas requiring improvement of effectiveness, efficiency and coherence of Habitat Management Program regulatory practices; and,
• A work plan for the Working Group to: improve Habitat Management Program’s tools and approaches with respect to aquaculture management; and, build on successes and current knowledge as well as address challenges and gaps.

The summary report described key presentations and associated discussions relating to successes and challenges for regional Habitat Management Program, Aquaculture Management Directorate and Centre for Integrated Aquaculture Science initiatives in aquaculture. It also described workshop discussion on development and improvement of the Aquaculture Management Framework, which resulted in: identification of administrative action items; and, summary of priority approach issues. The summary report helped facilitate further discussions in development of aquaculture management.

The purpose of the study was to assist the Habitat Protection Division and the Finfish Aquaculture Fish Habitat Committee in updating the existing Newfoundland & Labrador Region Finfish Aquaculture Fish Habitat Monitoring Program. We reviewed and summarized benthic fish habitat monitoring methodology associated with multi-jurisdictional marine finfish aquaculture operations. The focus was on operations over hard bottom substrates, but protocols associated with soft substrates were also considered. This work investigated Canadian regions (i.e., Newfoundland & Labrador Region, Pacific Region and Maritimes Region) and various international locations (i.e., Scotland; Norway; Maine, United States; and Southern Australia, Australia).

Results of the investigation included:

• Identification of regulations, administrative tools or other approaches used to manage potential fish and fish habitat impacts from aquaculture facilities;
• Identification of mitigative measures, tools and practices being implemented;
• Identification of tools or methods used to predict potential fish and fish habitat impacts from the operation of marine finfish aquaculture facilities;
• Description of common and diverging fish habitat monitoring approaches among jurisdictions; and,
• Summary of the main components of each monitoring program:
  1. Purpose (i.e., regulatory versus proactive);
  2. Function;
  3. Prediction tool or method;
  4. Timing of data collection;
  5. Spatial sample design;
  6. Sampling intensity;
  7. Sampling methods and tools;
  8. Ecological components;
  9. Biological indicators;
  10. Thresholds and criteria; and,
  11. Mitigative and management measures or tools.

Download the full report, Review of Marine Finfish Aquaculture Benthic Fish Habitat Monitoring Programs, in PDF format. A special thank you is extended to Fisheries & Oceans Canada for permission to post this report.

Glynn implemented the pilot State of the Great Lakes Beach Advisories reporting model. This is a Microsoft Excel model.

Glynn revised the model organization and calculations, and populated it with Ontario Public Health information to characterize and update the Great Lakes Beach Advisories Sub-indicator for the Canadian side of the Great Lakes.

Glynn prepared analysis and reports on each Canadian Great Lakes (Lake Ontario, Lake Erie, Lake Huron and Lake Superior) as well as the Canadian Great Lakes as a whole. The pilot model will allow for more robust assessment of Canadian Great Lakes beaches, including 10-year trend assessments, and information produced will be reported through the 2020 State of the Great Lakes binational reports.

Glynn conducted an international jurisdictional review of recreational beach water quality health indicators (e.g., Canada, Ontario, United States, Europe and Australia). He summarized this information and compared it to the indicator used in the Canadian side of the Great Lakes and analyzed the potential for proposing simplified metrics for a science-based health indicator report (mainly based on E. coli concentrations).

Glynn prepared a 76-page report on the jurisdictional review that discussed: the state of the Canadian and U.S. Great Lakes Beach Advisories Sub-indicator; and, beach water quality assessment approaches in Canada (nationally and Ontario), United States (nationally, Great Lakes states, other locations), and internationally (World Health Organization, European Union, Australia). He provided 11 recommendations on: annual status, trends, and standards; data sources; sampling and other methods; and, graphics used for reporting.

Glynn analyzed a large dataset of new and historical water quality and beach advisory data, which included comparing it to recent changes in provincial water quality guidelines. This work involved extracting data received from Public Health Units across Ontario, consolidating the information into a master Excel spreadsheet, and displaying the data with tables and graphs. The dataset included data from 12 Public Health Units, nearly 200 beaches per year, the swimming seasons from 10 years, and sampling results from monitoring frequencies ranging from daily to monthly. Glynn also developed pivot tables (Microsoft Excel) to assist in understanding, analyzing and displaying the data. The pivot tables allowed users to easily summarize the data by year, lake, Public Health Unit and beach.

Glynn provided a 23-page draft indicator report on two subsets of the data for Canadian beaches on the Great Lakes: all beaches from 2010; and, all beaches from the jurisdiction of one Public Health Unit from 2010 to 2019. This included assessing status for each data subset, assessing the trend (for the 10-year subset), and exploring better ways to graphically report the results.

Glynn updated a 19-page Standard Operating Procedure to ensure ECCC staff know how to: organize and integrate new data as it becomes available; work with the master spreadsheet; and, update draft sub-indicator reports over future reporting cycles.

Glynn reviewed documentation detailing workshops and recent progress towards developing a partnership initiative amongst federal, provincial, regional and municipal governments to assist in work to promote water quality and ecosystem objectives in the western region of Lake Ontario. He conducted a jurisdictional review of collaborative initiatives to describe best practices and lessons learned to promote collaborative working relationships. Glynn conducted interviews with key stakeholders who have expressed interest in participating in an Advisory Committee to manage this initiative. Further liaison with stakeholders was also conducted to gain their perspectives, understand their priorities, and learn about relevant initiatives.

The goals were to gain perspective from these reviews and interviews to develop and build consensus for:

• A Terms of Reference/Management Framework for the partnership to work together; and,
• A Demonstration Project to demonstrate and refine the partnership.

The final deliverable was a report that described the Terms of Reference/Management Frameworks, as well as the proposed Demonstration Project and related tasks and timing to implement it.

Fisheries & Oceans Canada (DFO) and the Canadian Coast Guard, along with the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami announced, in October 2018, the creation of Arctic Regions to be developed with Indigenous and Northern partners. Glynn Gomes assisted DFO in developing a (draft) report to inform DFO of issues to be considered as it implements its new Arctic Region. The report discussed DFO’s engagement with Indigenous, government, industry and other partners since the announcement, feedback received, considerations for science administration and tracking, an overview of DFO programs, and other issues relevant to administration of the new Arctic Region.

Glynn Gomes assisted DFO by preparing annual reports for two consecutive years on the status of the Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) program in Central & Arctic Region in support of program reporting requirements to National Headquarters. These projects involved liaising with Department staff to collect, collate and analyze information, and/or identify science issues, staffing/training, and program management priorities. In the first year, we also assisted Central & Arctic Region in doing mid-term reporting, as well as prepared a regional annual summary report that described status and highlighted priority issues and recommendations for managing the FCSAP program in Central & Arctic Region (i.e., a report to assist in program management). In addition to the next annual report, in the second year, we prepared a summary of program challenges and recommendations to assist with the FCSAP Expert Support Role program in Central & Arctic Region.

Download the final report in English or French in PDF format.

A special thank you is extended to Environment Canada for permission to post this report. This report, Scan of Current and Emerging Environmental, Social, Cultural and Economic Issues across Canada’s North, is © Environment Canada, 2006.

While employed at Environment Canada, Glynn Gomes researched and produced a report that described the atmospheric change impacts to the Toronto-Niagara Region for Environment Canada, Adaptation and Impacts Research Group (Downsview). He assessed, at the regional scale, how potential atmospheric change may impact biodiversity in the Toronto-Niagara Region. The report was organized into sections discussing: climate change impacts, including changes to water levels; effects of increased ultraviolet radiation (UV-B) from stratospheric ozone depletion; effects of acid deposition; and, effects of air pollutants. This work involved a traditional literature search to identify information to complete the report.

Glynn Gomes conducted several consultations for Environmental Standards and Reference Materials. The work involved conducting information telephone and in-person interviews to collect data, other information or perspective. These interviews were supported by emailed or faxed questionnaires. Work with ESRM required the design and distribution of four comprehensive questionnaires. Extensive qualitative and quantitative analyses of survey response data were conducted to summarize results and provide recommendations for action (e.g. for future interlaboratory studies, etc.). Deliverables included four reports that detailed:

1. Laboratory capabilities and program details of laboratories and organizations that contribute analytical data to a federal government program (i.e., Northern Contaminants Program). This report profiled the organizations, their areas of expertise, analytical capabilities, services provided and their involvement in Quality Assurance programs.
2. Availability and suitability of external national and international Quality Assurance programs pertinent to the Northern Contaminants Program. This report also recommended specific Quality Assurance programs for particular analytical programs and described the need for development of a new Quality Assurance program.
3. Demand for a proposed organic interlaboratory Quality Assurance program from Environment Canada’s regional and research laboratories, and assessed specific Quality Assurance elements that would need to be addressed by such a program.
4. Environment Standards and Reference Materials’ customer needs (i.e., the needs of distributors of ESRM’s products such as “Reference Materials” and “Certified Reference Materials”). This involved contacting these customers (world-wide) and asking them what they needed from Environment Canada in order to facilitate sales of ESRM’s products. This report assisted ESRM maximize sales and cost recovery for its products.

Glynn Gomes researched and prepared an information brief describing socio-economic impacts associated with the Three Gorges Dam (in China) for a senior Ontario Hydro staff’s business development visit to the region. This work was conducted under subcontract to Hardy Stevenson & Associates Ltd.

Glynn Gomes has conducted socio-economic research on several other projects (e.g., road extension, gas pipeline development, water pipeline development, and municipal water use). In addition, many of the other projects we have done have included socio-economic research.