HR: 1340h
AN: PA33A-1024    [Abstracts]
TI: Termination of the Batholiths marine seismic experiment: the scientific method loses to hearsay
AU: * Hollister, L S
EM: linc@princeton.edu
AF: Princeton University, Dept. of Geosciences, Princeton, NJ 08544, United States
AB: The marine seismic component of the NSF-Continental Dynamics funded project Batholiths was terminated by Canadian authorities due to environmental concerns. Socioeconomic benefits of the project were not taken into account, nor were findings by the National Research Council on effects of ocean noise on marine mammal populations. The marine seismic component of Batholiths was to have been done using sound from airguns towed behind the R/V Langseth in order to seismically image the geologic structures below the Coast Mountains of British Columbia. The project was nearly identical in timing, location, and scope to the ACCRETE project, which was successfully permitted and done in the early fall of 1994, with no detected or known damage to the environment. However, what changed in the last 13 years was a dramatic increase of concern by eNGOs (environmental non- government organizations) that airguns produced sound that might be harmful to marine species, marine mammals in particular. The marine noise concerns were amplified by eNGO agendas and campaigns to prevent oil exploration along continental margins and to shut down naval exercises involving sonar to detect submarines. Compared to these agendas, Batholiths was an easy target because the PIs (Principal Investigators) did not have the manpower or financial or legal resources (in contrast to the Navy and oil companies) to push back against an organized campaign set on stopping Batholiths. The main concern used to mobilize public opinion against Batholiths was that, if we were permitted, then oil exploration in the nearby region would be permitted; and, if oil were found, drilling would proceed: the slippery slope argument. Thus, by stopping Batholiths with the speculation that airgun noise, as used in a marine seismic study, might damage marine life, the eNGOs believe they have stopped oil exploration in British Columbia coastal waters. It is widely recognized that everything was done right to get the permits for Batholiths; we now know that it is a near impossibility to get this type of research permitted. The eNGOs have their "victory," but a consequence of this victory is the loss of use of marine seismic techniques in coastal waters. These techniques are used to evaluate earthquake hazards, to increase knowledge of past climate changes, and to understand the origin and evolution of Earth's crust. Those who have witnessed the time and effort my colleagues and I have put in to try and get Batholiths permitted will not want to go down this road. University-based scientists have other things to do that give more dependable returns for our students and for the future of our disciplines. In order to get permits, PIs who attract funding for their projects need organized, proactive, and skilled support from the granting agencies. This is necessary if controlled source marine seismology is to continue as a research tool. We need to have the socioeconomic benefits of this type of research spelled out in a way that PIs can use for the permitting process and that the public can understand. The risks for not doing the research need be weighed against the environmental risks in doing the research; in most cases, the latter risks are small to negligible compared to the losses due to the interruption of basic research.
DE: 6309 Decision making under uncertainty
DE: 6620 Science policy (0485)
SC: Public Affairs [PA]
MN: 2007 Fall Meeting