A Tundra Buggy with tourists watch a polar bear in Churchill, Manitoba, Canada. Much of the area around Churchill is under protection as a national park and tourism company Frontiers North Adventures has limited their growth to minimise impacts. Credit: Stephen Leahy/IPS

By Stephen Leahy
CHURCHILL, Canada , Nov 26 2018 (IPS)

It’s almost always cold in Churchill, Manitoba, a remote coastal community on Hudson Bay in Canada’s subarctic region. Today, a month before winter officially begins, it’s -25 degrees C with a fierce wind coming off Hudson Bay which is thick with slabs of ice. Situated in the middle of Canada, it’s the world’s largest saltwater bay. And even though frozen solid eight months of the year, the bay sustains the nearly 800 residents of Churchill which is known as the “Polar Bear Capital” of the world.

Tourism and ecotourism are the major contributors to the local economy, with the polar bear season being the largest. The cold waters of Hudson Bay bring polar bears into the area in October and November, while the mouth of Churchill River brings thousands of five-metre-long, pure white Belgua whales in June and July. Summer also brings birdwatchers to the treeless tundra region. In winter people from all over the world brave the bitter cold to view the spectacular aurora borealis, also known as the northern lights.

Living with polar bears isn’t easy. They’re fierce predators, double the size of  the largest lions or tigers, and always hungry when on land where they find little food. Seals are their main food source but the bears can only catch them when the bay is frozen. Fifty years ago any bear near Churchill would be shot on sight. Their numbers fell dramatically and conservation measures were put in place. Although there are no roads to Churchill, it is less than three hours by plane from Winnipeg, Manitoba’s international airport, making it relatively easy to see polar bears in the wild.

In the late 1970s a tourism operator built Tundra Buggies, school-bus-sized, four-wheel-drive vehicles with two-metre high wheels to navigate the roadless tundra while safely allowing tourists to see polar bears in their natural habitat.

“We don’t call our business ecotourism,” says John Gunter, President and CEO of Frontiers North Adventures, the main tourism operator in Churchill with 14 Tundra Buggies. “I’m not sure what ecotourism really means in practice,” Gunter told IPS. However Frontiers North is committed to sustainable tourism and has followed the Canadian Business for Social Responsibility guidelines for ten years. They issued their first sustainability report in 2016 based on the Global Reporting  Initiative.

The company plans to release a new sustainability report in 2019. “It takes time to do this kind of reporting and some things are really hard to measure,” Gunter said. While some of Frontier’s customers are keen to know about the company’s practices, the report is mainly for employees and the local community he said.

Much of the area around Churchill is under protection as a national park and Frontiers has limited the companies’ growth to minimise impacts. Polar bears need sea ice to survive, however global warming has dramatically reduced the amount of sea ice in the Arctic. To reduce its carbon footprint, the company makes sure flights in and out of Churchill and their Tundra Buggies are as full as possible. The company launched a recycling program that the local authorities  now run and eliminated use of plastic water bottles. Frontiers North buys from local suppliers and employs as many Canadian and local-to-the-north guides as possible. They also support Churchill’s Junior Canadian Ranger Program that offers young people in isolated communities opportunities to build their outdoor and traditional skills.

“Our guests come for the polar bears but they end up learning about our community, the indigenous culture, environmental issues affecting the region,” he said.

“Frontiers are a tremendous partner in our conservation and education efforts,” said Kt Miller, of  Polar Bears International (PBI), a world-renowned non-profit organization dedicated solely to the conservation and protection of wild polar bears, and the sea ice they depend on. The company has provided the permanent use of a Tundra Buggy for PBI’s research and education programs. Those programs include webchats with polar bear scientists from the buggy and live web cameras of polar bears that anyone with an internet connection can access.

“We want to share the experience of seeing a polar bear in their natural setting with everyone,” Miller said. In summer PBI is involved in research on belgua whales and there is an underwater web camera on their boat which is very popular.

Bear safety is an important part of Churchill culture says David Allcorn, an expedition leader who has worked throughout the Arctic. The bears often wander near or into town looking for food but instead of shooting them, residents call a 24-hour “Bear Alert” hotline. Conservation officials respond to drive the bears away.  If they persist, they are live-trapped and put in the a holding facility known locally as ‘Polar Bear Jail’. When Hudson Bay is frozen, the bears are released.

No one is allowed to feed the bears, and any garbage is either locked up or collected quickly.  We can’t let bears associate humans with food explained Allcorn. When a tourist tossed a sandwich out of Tundra Buggy to lure a bear closer for a better photograph, he and everyone else on the tour were immediately taken back to town, he recalled. The man was then put on the first plane out of Churchill.

• The first global Sustainable Blue Economy Conference is currently taking place in Nairobi, Kenya from Nov. 26 to 28 and is being co-hosted with Canada and Japan. Over 13,000 participants from around the world have gathered to learn how to build a blue economy.

By mid-September, the Royal Dutch Shell Oil (Shell) group hopes to begin exploratory oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean off the coast of northern Alaska, provided it can secure federal permission from the U.S. government and overcome other logistical obstacles. But a prominent environmental group warns that drilling will do “irreparable damage” to the area.

The Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) published a reportMonday urging the U.S. government to oppose Shell’s drilling, citing concern, along with other green groups, about Shell’s inability to clean up and prevent oil spills.

The oil drilling ship Noble Discoverer on April 5, 2012 in the Port of Seattle before its trip to Alaska for the summer Arctic drilling season. Credit: James Brooks/CC by 2.0

Pro-Shell groups and the Republican party criticise these organisations, however. They argue that oil found in the Arctic Ocean will lead to cheaper energy resources for more than a decade for the United States.

Shell has admitted that it cannot effectively clean up oil spills, and that its response barge, Arctic Challenger, may not be able to endure an Arctic storm.

Greenpeace Lead Arctic Campaigner Jackie Dragon was harsh in her criticism of Shell’s proposed venture.

“Shell can’t keep its drill rig under control in a protected harbor, so what will happen when it faces 20-foot swells and sea ice while drilling in the Arctic?” asked Dragon. “The company has admitted its drill rig can’t meet the standards required to avoid polluting Arctic air” and has “broken promises about its oil spill response plan and Arctic storm preparedness”.

“Shell cannot be trusted, and President Obama should not let its Arctic drilling program move forward,” said Dragon.

Shell, on the other hand, is hoping to make the most of a fast-shrinking summer drilling timeline. If the company begins drilling now, it will have to stop by October at the latest, before the advent of the sea ice.

But the U.S. government and Shell are currently embroiled in negotiations, even as environmental groups hope that after the 2010 BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico and a damning inspection that showed Arctic Challenger to be lacking in the electrical, piping and fire departments, Shell will not be granted permission for the summer drilling.

The NRDC report outlined  eight primary reasons why Shell should not be drilling for oil in the Arctic Ocean.

First and foremost is that the oil industry has a deplorable track record for oil spills that are never effectively cleaned up. One need not look far for examples. The British Petroleum, Gulf Coast oil disaster in 2010 is a vivid reminder of how wrong an oil spill can go, and how far-reaching its effects are.

Lawrence Neil, a spokesperson for the NRDC, pointed out that oil production is statistically almost guaranteed to lead to spills. Furthermore, “there is still no proven way to keep a drilling rig on location in the shifting pack ice of an Arctic winter,” so drilling in the Arctic presents even greater risks than those of a normal spill.

Marine noise created by production will have adverse impacts on marine mammals, added Neil. In addition, production will “create huge pressure for a pipeline to carry the oil (that could) lead to bisecting extraordinary wild lands and vital wildlife habitat.”

“The history of development shows that the camel’s nose is a real phenomenon:  the more you spoil pristine places, the less resistance there is to additional development,” he told IPS.

The lack of rapid response and infrastructure in the area is further cause for alarm for green groups, as well as the fact that an oil spill or even disturbance within the area could lead to the migration of wildlife. Among the species that would be threatened are endangered bowhead whales, female polar bears and birds, all of which depend on the icy ecosystem for survival.

But if Shell finds oil, a barrage of oil and energy companies will descend upon this pristine area. The NRDC report outlines many more drawbacks to the proposed drilling, including a rise in greenhouse gases.

Still, not everyone believes that the risks outweigh the gains.

If oil is found in this icy tundra, dependence on foreign oil could drastically decrease. Republicans say that an oil discovery in the region would create thousands of jobs and provide a much needed boost to the lagging U.S. economy.

Lobbyists and politicians are pushing for an extension the deadline for summer drilling, and Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is at the forefront. She is also a senior official at the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

But Lawrence and other green group activists claim that the risks outweigh any political gain.

For Lawrence, it’s simple. “There are certainly more direct ways to reduce dependence on foreign oil than drilling our last pristine ocean,” he pointed out.

“Arctic drilling is a huge investment, including an investment of federal resources to regulate, police, and provide emergency services; every such investment detracts from – and undercuts – investment in sources of energy that don’t contribute to the risk of catastrophic climate change,” he concluded.