Evidence of meeting #28 for National Defence in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was arctic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Quickly, why are the sediments a measurement? Are they assuming that the sediment came from the closest land and that's why the depth of sediment is important in the determination? Why are sediments one of the measurements they're looking for in UNCLOS?
12:50 p.m.
Director General, Central and Northern Canada Branch, Geological Survey of Canada, Department of Natural Resources
Yes, the sediments are eroded material that's sliding off the land mass, and the thickness of the sediments decline as you move away from the land mass. There has been a definition, based on the scientific consensus of the thickness, that people take as the edge of the area that you can submit a claim for.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
When Mr. Bachand was asking about no man's land in the middle of the Arctic, that's like the land in the middle of the Pacific Ocean or the Atlantic Ocean. It simply falls under UNCLOS for anyone in the world to use.
The part of UNCLOS that talks about the 350 miles as the limit, that part is a bit confusing. Are there not different interpretations to which the 350 miles may not apply to some extent, and it could go on even farther than that?
12:50 p.m.
Director General, Central and Northern Canada Branch, Geological Survey of Canada, Department of Natural Resources
Marc, do you want to talk to this?
12:50 p.m.
Senior Research Scientist, Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources
Sure. It's a very good question. It pertains to the Lomonosov Ridge, I suppose.
UNCLOS seems to differentiate between what you would call a ridge and what you would call an elevation. If it's a ridge, then the 350 limit applies as the maximum amount you can claim. If it's an elevation, then there is no limit. So yes, that's a point about which I would expect some confusion down the road. The Russians have suggested that the Lomonosov Ridge, in spite of its name, should be considered an elevation. Normally, the definition of elevation elsewhere is reserved for oceanic plateaus, non-linear features.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
Why did UNCLOS say the Russian data was not sufficient the first time they put in their claim?
12:50 p.m.
Director General, Central and Northern Canada Branch, Geological Survey of Canada, Department of Natural Resources
I actually couldn't say. They were a group of scientific experts who examined it and I guess they didn't feel that the evidence was sufficient for demonstrating the UNCLOS formulas. You'd have to ask the people who were involved in the analysis of it.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
Could you explain a bit more what an elevation is? An elevation is another way of claiming your continental shelf, other than unlimited--
12:50 p.m.
Senior Research Scientist, Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources
That's right.
12:50 p.m.
Senior Research Scientist, Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources
UNCLOS doesn't define it, but they refer to ridges and to elevations. Ridges are viewed as linear submarine features that have topography. Elevations are submarine features that also have topography but aren't necessarily linear. For example, a plateau, a whole area that is high, would be considered an elevation as opposed to a ridge, which would be long and narrow.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT
If the interpretation comes out that there's an overlap where they both fit under the UNCLOS definition, my understanding is the UNCLOS rules suggest that has to be determined bilaterally between the two countries involved. Do you foresee that happening in the science that's been mapped so far?
12:55 p.m.
Director General, Central and Northern Canada Branch, Geological Survey of Canada, Department of Natural Resources
I'm not sure yet. We haven't got all the data. I don't think there is a major period or space that overlaps. I think you're right. Where there is any overlap, it's dealt with in the same way as there's overlap now. In many places around the world people are claiming the same territory, and it is a bilateral discussion. I couldn't actually say if I have knowledge that there would be a significant overlap.
We'd have to try to get you that answer. You have to recognize that some of the data collection is incomplete. We're still taking a look at what's going on.
12:55 p.m.
Senior Research Scientist, Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources
Yes, off the west coast of Alaska.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maxime Bernier
Thank you very much.
I will give the floor to Mr. Boughen for five minutes.
June 16th, 2009 / 12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ray Boughen Conservative Palliser, SK
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, gentlemen, for sharing part of your day with us.
I have just one question about the map. Does the map give any idea of the concentration of minerals at their various levels, such as surface minerals or deep-seated ones? Or are there any indications of gas reserves and those kinds of things, and whether it's economically feasible to go after some of them because of their depth?
12:55 p.m.
Senior Research Scientist, Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources
It's not part of this map database. The map certainly documents on the energy side, for example, what might be considered source rocks, reservoir rocks, cap rocks, and things of that nature. But it doesn't document the depth of the resource.
We have a new compilation project that began this year focused specifically on Canada, the three northern territories. So it's a tri-territorial compilation on a much more detailed scale, again including onshore and offshore projects, during which we plan to expand the digital database to include more variables and attributes—and that would be one of them. So it's a work in progress.
12:55 p.m.
Director General, Central and Northern Canada Branch, Geological Survey of Canada, Department of Natural Resources
If I could add, we're not actually trying to look for resources, but to evaluate where resources might potentially lie. The private sector would take this information and become much more detailed and put a lot more effort into trying to delineate actual resources. One analogy is that we try to point out where the haystack is, and it's the private sector that goes in and tries to find the needle.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maxime Bernier
Thank you very much.
Our last member to have the floor for four minutes, or maybe five, is Mr. Paillé.
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Pascal-Pierre Paillé Bloc Louis-Hébert, QC
Thank you. In any case, my questions will be brief.
As part of this research, are you able to identify fairly clearly all of the seabed on your map? You go even lower than the seabed.
Earlier, I expressed my concern about maritime shipping of hazardous goods. We were told that the seabed must be clearly mapped to ensure an increase in maritime traffic.
Are you able to provide us with a detailed map, like this one, of the seabed for the entire Arctic region?
12:55 p.m.
Senior Research Scientist, Regional Geology, Department of Natural Resources
There is a Natural Resources Canada program called Seabed Mapping designed to provide the information that you are requesting. It is true that in Canada, the seabed is now mapped to this scale, but in terms of knowledge for vessel skippers, there are certain areas that are well known, like the St. Lawrence River, but many regions remain uncharted.
So the department has this program that allows us to study this issue and produce detailed maps, which will be necessary with a view to increasing traffic.