Animal telemetry: Follow the insects.

OIL AND GAS interests and the government recently offered a First Nation in the Skeena River estuary (BC, Canada) $1 billion to consent to construction of a controversial terminal to load fossil fuels onto tankers (1). The proposal highlights a troubling blind spot in Canada’s environmental decisionmaking. This gap could enable decisions that insufficiently consider risks to both environment and people. Science can help decrease these blind spots. The second-largest salmon producer in Canada, the Skeena River has supported First Nation fisheries for 5 millennia (2). Its estuary is a nursery for hundreds of millions of young salmon annually as they graduate from freshwater to sea (2). It is also situated between fossil fuel reserves in interior Canada and ocean-access to Asian markets. Multinational companies have proposed pipelines to and terminals in the estuary, and are currently assessing the environmental impacts on constitutionally protected (3) aboriginal fisheries. Previous research indicates that industrialized estuaries depress salmon survival (4). Although terminal proponents and the government have recognized interests of First Nations from the estuary during environmental assessment, they have ignored interests of upriver First Nations who also harvest salmon (5). Salmon migrate thousands of kilometers during their life. We have shown that the proposed development area supports particularly high abundances of juvenile salmon from more than 40 populations that are harvested in at least 10 First Nations territories throughout the Skeena watershed and beyond (6, 7). This is twice the number of First Nations groups that industry proponents identified as needing to be consulted (5). These data reveal a striking mismatch between the narrow consideration of aboriginal rights and environmental risks and the true scale of environmental connections, which needs to be addressed by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) and industrial proponents. The terminal application is being evaluated by CEAA without consideration of upriver First Nations (5). Moreover, despite the resounding rejection of the $1 billion by the estuary First Nation due to environmental and cultural concerns, the government has ratified fiscal agreements with terminal proponents (8). The Skeena Watershed is united by salmon; First Nations throughout the watershed should be involved in decisions that could damage their fisheries. Identifying the proper spatial scale for environmental decision-making is a fundamental challenge for environmental policy and ethics. Whether it is migratory animals like salmon that transmit impacts, hydroelectric dams that deprive downstream farming communities of water (9), or carbon emissions from industrialized countries that raise ocean levels and threaten low-lying islands (10), decisions can impact distant ecosystems and people. Science can and should inform the scale at which environmental decision-makers weigh risks to the environment and human rights against potential economic benefits. Jonathan W. Moore,* Charmaine CarrHarris, Allen S. Gottesfeld, Donna MacIntyre, David Radies, Mark Cleveland, Chris Barnes,† Walter Joseph, Glen Williams, Jennifer Gordon, Bill Shepert Earth2Ocean Research Group, Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada. Skeena Fisheries Commission, Kispiox, BC V0J 1Y4, Canada. Lake Babine Nation, Burns Lake, BC V0J 1E0, Canada. Takla Lake Nation, Prince George, BC V2L 2Y9, Canada. Gitanyow, Kitwanga, BC V0J 2A0, Canada. Gitxsan Watershed Authorities, Hazelton, BC V0J 1Y0, Canada. Wet’suwet’en, Smithers, BC V0J 2N1, Canada. Lax Kw’alaams Fisheries, Lax Kw’alaams, BC V0V 1H0, Canada.