Polycyclic aromatic compounds in a northern freshwater ecosystem: Patterns, sources, and the influences of environmental factors.

Polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs) - a large group of organic chemicals naturally present in petroleum deposits (i.e., petrogenic) or released into the environment by incomplete combustion of organic materials (i.e., pyrogenic) - represent a potential risk to the health of aquatic ecosystems. In high latitude freshwater ecosystems, concentrations of PACs may be increasing, yet there are limited studies in such systems to assess change and to understand threats. Using 10 years of contemporary data from passive samplers deployed across five regions (n = 43 sites) in the Mackenzie River Basin, we (i) describe baseline levels of PACs, (ii) assess spatiotemporal patterns, and (iii) evaluate the extent to which environmental factors (fire, snowmelt, and proximity to oil infrastructure) influence concentrations in this system. Measured concentrations were low, relative to those in more southern systems, with mixtures primarily being dominated by non-alkylated, low molecular weight compounds. Concentrations were spatially consistent, except for two sites near Norman Wells (an area of active oil extraction) with increased levels. Similarly, observed annual variation was minimal, with 2014 having generally higher levels of PACs. We did not detect effects of fire, snowmelt, or oil infrastructure on concentrations. Taken together, our findings suggest that PACs in the Mackenzie River are currently at low levels and are primarily petrogenic in origin. They further indicate that ongoing monitoring and testing of environmental drivers (especially at finer spatial scales) are needed to better predict how ecosystem change will influence PAC levels in the basin and in other northern systems.

Bridging science and traditional knowledge to assess cumulative impacts of stressors on ecosystem health.

Cumulative environmental impacts driven by anthropogenic stressors lead to disproportionate effects on indigenous communities that are reliant on land and water resources. Understanding and counteracting these effects requires knowledge from multiple sources. Yet the combined use of Traditional Knowledge (TK) and Scientific Knowledge (SK) has both technical and philosophical hurdles to overcome, and suffers from inherently imbalanced power dynamics that can disfavour the very communities it intends to benefit. In this article, we present a 'two-eyed seeing' approach for co-producing and blending knowledge about ecosystem health by using an adapted Bayesian Belief Network for the Slave River and Delta region in Canada's Northwest Territories. We highlight how bridging TK and SK with a combination of field data, interview transcripts, existing models, and expert judgement can address key questions about ecosystem health when considerable uncertainty exists. SK indicators (e.g., bird counts, mercury in fish, water depth) were graded as moderate, whereas TK indicators (e.g., bird usage, fish aesthetics, changes to water flow) were graded as being poor in comparison to the past. SK indicators were predominantly spatial (i.e., comparing to other locations) while the TK indicators were predominantly temporal (i.e., comparing across time). After being populated by 16 experts (local harvesters, Elders, governmental representatives, and scientists) using both TK and SK, the model output reported low probabilities that the social-ecological system is healthy as it used to be. We argue that it is novel and important to bridge TK and SK to address the challenges of environmental change such as the cumulative impacts of multiple stressors on ecosystems and the services they provide. This study presents a critical social-ecological tool for widening the evidence-base to a more holistic understanding of the system dynamics of multiple environmental stressors in ecosystems and for developing more effective knowledge-inclusive partnerships between indigenous communities, researchers and policy decision-makers. This represents new transformational empirical insights into how wider knowledge discourses can contribute to more effective adaptive co-management governance practices and solutions for the resilience and sustainability of ecosystems in Northern Canada and other parts of the world with strong indigenous land tenure.

Scale, assessment components, and reference conditions: issues for cumulative effects assessment in Canadian watersheds.

Recent years have witnessed an increase in the use of watershed-based cumulative effects assessment (WCEA) in Canada; however, several challenges remain regarding its effective implementation and execution. Fundamental to WCEA is the establishment of linkages between environmental stressors and particular and measurable components of the aquatic environment. Dynamic and often synergistic relationships between the multiple physicochemical stressors in the landscape can affect water quantity, quality, and the health of aquatic species. Essential decisions must be made about what to measure to characterize both stressors and aquatic effects, what scale is appropriate for measurement, and to what the measurements should be referenced. This review presents lessons learned from case studies conducted in 6 different watersheds across Canada, each focused on advancing the science behind WCEA, but with varied objectives and approaches. Issues of scale, selection of aquatic environmental components or indicators for assessment, and reference conditions were compared and contrasted to highlight common challenges that can affect the implementation and outcome of a WCEA. The lack of long-term monitoring data and data inconsistencies were identified as frequently limiting factors for the advancement of WCEA science and the application of WCEA. Recommendations were made for developing a comprehensive and integrated methodology for WCEA in Canada.