Changes to Shipping Lanes off Massachusetts Rankle Some in the Bay State

A decision to shift busy shipping lanes off the coast of Massachusetts for the purpose of protecting the endangered North Atlantic right whales is being described by scientists as the right thing to do. The move, if approved, could eliminate up to 80% of whale strikes off the coast of New England. The International Maritime Organization (IMO), a London-based arm of the UN, is expected to approve the change in traffic patterns this week. Back in Massachusetts, some shipping experts and mariners are calling the move ill-advised and say that they were not consulted or given adequate time to voice their opposition to the move.

(Captain) Gregg Farmer is the President of the Boston Harbor Pilots Association LLC and one of ten such pilots commissioned by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to guide deep draft vessels in and out of the port of Boston. While Farmer is sympathetic to the plight of the right whale, he also says that the process used to arrive at the proposed solution was flawed. “No mariner wants to hurt a right whale. But the current option on the table was never presented to the stakeholders to be properly vetted before being submitted to the IMO.”

According to Farmer, the Coast Guard did perform the required Port Access Route Study (PARS) to the traffic separation scheme (TSS) to Boston, which included three possible options for changes to shipping lanes. The Boston Pilots and other local industry players followed the process closely and submitted comments and suggestions, as required.

In April and at the last possible moment, the Coast Guard filed what they called option four to the IMO, which Farmer says is disguised as a better route for the Right Whale. He continues, “The only viable option for safety of navigation and the Right Whale is Option 1.” But, option 1 calls for the shipping lanes to pass directly over the proposed, but not yet approved offshore LNG facility. And Farmer insists that both the Boston Pilots and the local district Coast Guard office were unaware of option 4.

Farmer says that he does not have a position, one way or the other, on the viability or wisdom of placing LNG facilities in offshore Massachusetts waters. He did say that another LNG player, Neptune LNG, has chosen a site to the north which does not impede the TSS. Both facilities are in the permitting phase. He also asserts that “No one except the USCG and NOAA in Washington ever saw option 4 until they asked for public comment in May, well after already jumping the gun with IMO.”

The official position of the Boston Pilots is that option 1 is the best solution to protecting right whales. Specifically, Farmer says that Option 4 creates a hazardous situation for ocean traffic because it narrows the traffic lanes by one mile, forces traffic to the south boundary of the Boston precautionary area, and also channels traffic departing Boston Harbor directly into a head-on situation with less maneuverable barge and tug traffic leaving the Cape Cod Canal. This, he says, will increase the chance for vessel collisions, especially for foreign mariners who are unfamiliar with the local waters. In a letter sent to the U.S. Department of Transportation in November, Farmer declared, “Increasing ship traffic concentration is unwise to begin with, but to do this so close to an LNG facility simply makes no sense.”

While Farmer may not be able to stop IMO approval of option 4, he still has strong opinions on - and a vested interest in - marine safety in and around the port of Boston. “Ship collisions are simply no good for the environment, let alone for the local economy or for maritime safety,” Farmer told MarEx today. He went to say, “The effects of the Gateway LNG project’s location on vessel safety cannot be dismissed. For these reasons, the Boston Harbor Pilot Association LLC urges that the responsible federal agencies prevent its being built in its presently proposed location.”

The proposed, first ever shift of a shipping lane in US waters for the purpose of protecting an endangered species will probably save the lives of many whales. It is not the first time this has been done and the IMO issued a similar edict a few years back in the Canadian Bay of Fundy. The proposed move in Massachusetts waters, however, has far-reaching political, commercial and marine safety implications.

Coming soon: MarEx investigates the process of changing commercial shipping lanes, the politics of right whales and LNG and the downstream effects of all three. Stay tuned.

Contact Managing Editor Joseph Keefe with comments, input or suggestions at [email protected].